A Letter to My Great Grandchildren

I hope this finds you, and your Grands, well and happy. With all my heart I have been concerned for you all.

If you are reading history then you know that, as I write — here at the end of Oil — humanity is in a particularly volatile time, fraught with danger. If you are, then I hope you have read some of my writings about our family — they were written for you. If you are not reading, my heart breaks. It was the end of more than Oil.

I began to write more about politics during the 2016 U. S. Presidential race. Now a populist regime with autocratic tendencies has come to power. The friends that I have lost because of my writings were more fun than the ones I have gained, but action can be painful. We are at war for our humanity, but that is the nature of human existence. I am writing to you about my country in your world and I will describe for you the political climate here, as I see it, as I write.

The U. S. Two Party System

The United States has a two party political system, the result of a “winner-take-all” voting system.

One, the American Democratic Party, gained the Presidency with Franklin D. Roosevelt in the aftermath of the 1929 economic crash and led the nation out of the Great Depression, and into and out of World War II. Harry Truman succeeded President Roosevelt and served two terms ending in 1952. Since the “New Deal” programs of the Roosevelt administrations in the 1930s, the party has been said to promote “a social-liberal platform supporting social justice“.

The other, the American Republican Party (GOP), gained the Presidency in 1952 with the election of Dwight D. Eisenhower. The GOP held the office until 1992 except for the combined 12 years of John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and Jimmy Carter. George W. Bush regained the Presidency for two terms in 2000. Barack Obama, a Democrat, became the first African American to win the presidency in 2008 and won reelection in 2012. The GOP has been known for economic liberalism, social and fiscal conservatism, and is considered by some to be the party of the rich (Harry Truman referred to the GOP as “Guardians Of Privilege”).

Although the two parties are avowed enemies ideologically, there are similarities. They each behave as if they have been bought and paid for by Corporate interests. They each favor policies that favor Corporations such as those in the oil and coal, insurance and finance, petrochemical, and pharmaceutical business sectors. War is really good for Corporate business so the U.S. recently led the world into adventures in the Middle East and North Africa. This interventionist-hawk Corporatism is called Neo-Conservatism (“NeoCon”) if Republican. Some call the Democratic Party equivalent Neo-Liberal but it may be more appropriate to refer to these Democrats as interventionist hawks (“NeoDems”). The two parties differ as to social platform, but sometimes not so much — Neo Con George W. Bush referred to himself as a “compassionate conservative”.

President Clinton provided synergy for this amalgamation of the two parties when he moved the Democrats to the center in order to defeat George H. W. Bush (and Ross Perot) in 1992, and gained Corporate financial backing in the bargain. Now Corporations contribute money to legislators of both parties and so own the politicians no matter which party wins. The result has been called government gridlock but that is not accurate unless you are one of “we-the-people” and you expect progress. If you are a Corporatist then you got what you wanted. Even with 60% of the people in favor of universal healthcare, in favor of taking action against climate change, in favor of banking reform, and in favor of doing more at home and less around the world, government still goes the way of the corporations and against the 60% of we-the-people.

The establishment leadership of each party has abandoned the social and economic well being of the common people. You might ask why not a populist uprising? Well, what do you know? There was a populist uprising in each party in 2016. The Populist Donald J. Trump won the Republican nomination. The Populist Senator Sanders very nearly won the Democratic nomination but the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”) intervened. The DNC has its own “electoral college” (called Super Delegates) that can effectively override the “democratic vote of we-the-people”. These Super Delegates are not elected but are tagged by the policies and procedures of the DNC, and account for about 15% of all Delegates to the Democratic Convention. Their job is to block a candidate that is not suitable to the party establishment. There was also a “dirty tricks” campaign by the DNC, as documented by leaked DNC emails. This DNC conspiracy against Senator Sanders even provided Secretary Clinton with debate questions in advance. So Senator Sanders was squelched by the DNC. The Democrat Party could have fielded a popular candidate in Senator Sanders, or others, but stacked the deck to choose an establishment politician with 30 years of baggage. Many voters viewed Secretary Clinton as part of the problem. The only “populist” left in the race, the only choice for change, the American plutocrat Donald J. Trump, became President of the United States.

The two parties spent a half-century developing the environment that produced the two Presidential candidates in 2016, and they should each be ashamed.

Russia

Some say the United States cannot function without an enemy. War is good for business — the only thing worse than a cold war is no war at all.

Russia is a very large Eastern European country that was a founder and the keystone of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The USSR failed economically and collapsed after 45 years of Cold War with the United States of America.

Russia is not the USSR. It is a nation struggling with a post-Communist economy and a post-KGB government. The Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, is a KGB trained bureaucrat, has become the world’s leading nationalist “politician”, and seems to get what he wants. He is allegedly a killer, but as President Trump has pointed out, who isn’t? Again, Russia is not the same as the once USSR, the enemy in the Anti-Communist Cold War of Eisenhower, Nixon, and Reagan.

President Trump initially seemed to favor a more brotherly relationship with Russia than was the case with President Obama and Secretary Clinton. There may be disagreement among his advisors, and he seems now to talk less of his vision of detent.

The Trump Administration

We are now almost 60 days into the term of Donald J. Trump and it is not going well for anyone except some of his base who believe that he is speaking truth to liars. These believers exclaim undying love — but his approval numbers are going down. One major distraction is the Russia matter.

During the campaign there was news that Trump and or members of his staff might have had ongoing dealings with Russia and Vladimir Putin. This story resulted in the August 2016 removal of his campaign manager Paul Manafort by Trump. There is conjecture that one reason that Trump refused to release his tax returns is that the returns would provide detail of his business involvement with Russia. Then about 3 weeks after the inauguration, Trump asked for the resignation of his national security advisor General Michael Flynn, who had allegedly misled Vice President Pence, and perhaps the FBI, about conversations that he had with the Russian Ambassador to the U.S. during the transition period. There are allegations that others, including Attorney General Sessions and President Trump, had such conversations. Allegations made public after several months of leaks and allegations suggesting Russian involvement in the Presidential election had benefited Trump.

At this writing, the administration and the Republican congress seem in disarray but are lashing out at others while moving to attempt to disassemble the administrative functions of government, especially social, health, and environmental services, while ramping up military spending and border security. The promise of infrastructure projects has disappeared along with most other election promises made to the nation’s workers.

U. S. Security Establishment

It appears the information regarding the Russia matter is being provided openly, or through leaks, by the U. S. security establishment, primarily the Central Intelligence Agency. What is now the CIA began to take shape at the end of 1945 and was assembled from the remains of the various World War II intelligence operations that included ex-Third Reich agents. Some say the agency was developed under the influence of Allen Dulles, who then served as Director for eight years under President Eisenhower and eleven months under President Kennedy. Dulles continued to provide the CIA with behind the scenes operation management after his retirement at the end of 1961.

The CIA evolved in the extreme anti-communist atmosphere that developed at the end of World War II. During World War II, the USSR was the ally of the USA and Great Britain. After the war it was discovered that the USSR had infiltrated the government of the USA. This was viewed as treachery and resulted in the “Red Scare” fueled by the spy trials of the late 1940s and the McCarthy hearings of the early 1950s. The anti-communist focus did not die with Stalin in 1953, or with the fall of the USSR at the end of 1991.

The CIA is considered by many to be the pillar of the system of behind the scenes U. S. Government known by analysts as “Shadow Government”, “Deep Politics” or, most recently, the “Deep State”. The concept of a Deep State seems to include non-appointed leadership staff in agencies that dominate the U. S. Government, influenced by business interests, no matter who wins elections. The CIA, by the nature of the espionage business, is assisted by underworld elements worldwide. This “Deep State” would be, then, an osmotic system of governmental control made up of business interests, government leaders, the CIA, and other clandestine elements (the underworld).

The CIA rapidly grew in size and influence during the Cold War, focused on the stated USSR goal of world dominion, and has been arranging regime change around the world for many years — some successful, some not so. Think about Cuba, Patrice Lumumba, Iran, etc. Read David Talbot, Peter Dale Scott, et al.

Two years to the day after President Kennedy fired Dulles as Director of the CIA, he was appointed by President Lyndon Johnson as one of seven members of the Warren Commission to investigate the assassination of President Kennedy. Because of his legal training and background in espionage he was relied on by the Commission in guiding the investigation and influenced the drafting of the controversial report that concluded that the hapless Communist ex-Marine Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. Talbot says that Nikita Khrushchev cried when he was told of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Think about that. What would the world be like now if Kennedy and Khrushchev had made inroads to détente between their countries? Would that prospect have seemed threatening to the Dulles CIA?

Current events are déjà vu. It seems now as if the “Deep State” is defending their establishment Corporate clients, and their “NeoCon” and “NeoDem” clients. Defending them against the impudent populist Trump who, like John F. Kennedy, threatens to ruin everything by establishing detente with “NeoCommie” Russia.

Where Are You My Children?

I cannot begin to imagine what your world is like. I do not know whether to picture you in a Neo-Medieval age, or the moon, or Mars, or in between. Therefore I cannot begin to advise you accept to say be brave and active in the defense of a Just society.

I can tell you what mistakes I think were made that led us to this, and hope you can adapt them to your purpose. I think that our mistake is primarily that, as a matter of course, we didn’t exercise our responsibility to make our voices heard. We did not have the habits of organizing in our communities and volunteering for leadership and for charitable action. Therefore, when the urgent need arose we had no discipline and no structure to support early resistance.

The result is that the electorate, both conservative and liberal, gradually relinquished the power of the people. Political party establishment hacks and government bureaucrats at all levels filled the resulting void. The leadership of we the people atrophied to the point that the current President was elected by the votes of only about 25% of the people who are eligible to vote. Accordingly we have reached the point of having a profoundly unpopular Congress and President. There presently is great geopolitical risk to freedom, and great physical risk to the people. I believe that if we can survive the physical risks until the mid term elections in 2018, then a reawakening and reorganization of the people that is currently in process will come to bear at the polls and the correction will begin.

I hope you are flourishing in freedom. Flourishing in a post consumption economy and a society of local community. Is that too much for hope? I will try with all my heart.

Yours,

An Old One