I have a very good reason for not putting a new post on this blog for awhile, I am editing my new book, “Aesgard Awakening!” As of now, my edited material is almost halfway through the book. So, I am taking a brief break from my book to discuss the latest George Nethercutt editorial. He has spent many a column space discussing civics, and how students in modern classrooms apparently know less about this country’s politicians, and more about memorizing the lyrics of “Frozen.” But if Mr. Nethercutt wants to fancy himself as a “teacher” for this nation’s newest leaders; then those same students have a definite problem.
Seriously, I was going to read his editorial, saw a fraction of it where some dude out of history opined, “Where are the giants?” With reference to Lincoln, Jefferson, and etc. Plus Nethercutt’s personal opinion, that the voters of this country are looking to leaders to unite them. That was when I cracked up, and I have now decided, that will be one column I will skip reading altogether. Question, what made Jefferson, Lincoln, or any other President a “giant?” In the context of their era, of the cultural thinking of their time, not necessarily. Nor did such men, considered to be among the greatest in retrospect, unite an entire country behind them. Quite the contrary, President Washington encountered rebellion from revolutionary war veterans. Jefferson, was annotated as being embroiled in high levels of public and political dissent, over the formation of banks. Lincoln had the Civil War to deal with, and its aftermath would be felt by the rest of this society and by every other succeeding President, through at least the Civil Rights era.
And that is just the rough frame work of events for this entire nation’s history. Now for some of the particulars; do states’ rights arguments unite voters behind a single leader? Of course not. Would hyper partisan politics unite parties behind a single leader? No, and why should anyone think so. Just on those relevant and current facts, it would seem that Mr. Nethercutt is particularly oblivious. It also looks as though he wants to create a mythic president. It can’t be the current White House occupant, you see; he must be blamed for all the hatred and bigotry thrown at him. As though the hatred and bigotry shown by others, “proves” how President Obama has “divided” the country. Well, then Mr. Nethercutt should crack open a few history books; this country has always been divided. And given our diverse partisan and religious differences of opinion, it is highly unlikely that a people would ever unite behind a single man. Unless, and I choose to be snarky here, he’s some kind of anti-Christ.
So what would make a President “great” or a “giant?” I’ll put it very briefly, because they overcame tremendous obstacles and moved this nation forward. In order to be “great” or “giants,” they were also the ultimate liberals. In a word, that would run absolutely counter to Nethercutt’s presumptive political views.
I am also going to briefly discuss a new book I recently acquired: “Love and Capital Karl and Jenny Marx and the birth of a Revolution.” An historical biography written by Mary Gabriel. I am only now getting into this book, briefly in between, further serious editing on my fantasy novel. But what I have already been introduced to, in the book’s opening chapters: socialism was already the outgrowth of the American and French revolutions. Karl Marx did not invent it, he was introduced to it. And in the context of the time that communism had also surfaced as an ideology, the significant difference between itself and socialism, was of course the abolition of private property. Incidentally, these ideas would be floating freely in at least some parts of Europe—specifically France. Long before the Russian revolution, would establish some concept of “property abolition” to the most eastern part of Europe. And create as well, the Soviet Union. Because these ideas were already floating around, for at least a decade before the American Civil War. If anything, Karl Marx became the representative and the face of radical ideas that had already preceded him. And as I had finally learned was correct here, Thomas Paine in his “Rights of Man” had set the stage for radical socialism and communism. Whether his own influence could have been publicly acknowledged or not, some of what he wrote would be similarly quoted in socialist and communist circles. Amazing what people can and will do with the dangerous ideas of their time.