Not the result of military expansionism :
Maybe  the original 13 colonies / states, although there was a ( military ) 
 revolution
that dragged along with it a good number of local communities that were  
loyalist.
 
the Louisiana purchase
 
the Gadsden purchase
 
the Virgin Islands
 
the state of Washington, although there was threat of military action at  
the time
 "      "      "   Hawaii            "             "       "       "      " 
      "           "      "   "     "
 
Alaska  
 
Everything else was the result of military expansion
 
 
 
Causes of WWII ?
 
# 1 and far away most important, the Depression
# 2 the rise of totalitarian  ideologies, Fascism / Communism
# 3 dysfunctional European political policies in GB, France, etc
      plus policies of various colonial   powers in the Pacific
 
WWI created the conditions for a military industrial complex ? ? ?
After WWI  we demobilized almost completely.
 
We had an army of about 250,000 in 1940, the smallest for
a country of our size of any nation in the world.
We were, except for the Navy, ridiculously unprepared for WWII.
There was NO  military-industrial complex in 1940, that idea is  unfounded.
 
Where does that idea come from, if I may ask ?
Whoever  came up with it is anything but an historian and  simply
does not know what he / she is talking about.
 
If you are going to make historical generalizations it would be
a really good idea to actually study relevant history.
Liberal Fascism is a really interesting book with a lot to  say,
but it is anything but the last word on many of the subjects
it covers.
 
Billy
 
 
-==================================================
 
12/20/2011 12:14:54 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected]  writes:

It all went South with entry into WW1  when America sent millions to fight 
overseas.  That created the  conditions for WWII and the military industrial 
economy and we have been stuck  in the interventionist mindset ever since.
 
Kevin

----- Original Message ----- 
From:  _Kevin  Kervick_ (mailto:[email protected])  
To: [email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected])   
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 3:05  PM
Subject: Re: [RC] [ RC ] Military  Expansionism


Perhaps we are talking about  degree.  Kevin

----- Original Message ----- 
From:  [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected])  
To: [email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected])   
Cc: [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected])  
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 2:22  PM
Subject: [RC] [ RC ] Military  Expansionism



Actually, James Polk, no 20th century liberal, was responsible for  the War
with Mexico that added the SW, California, and Texas to the USA, and  that 
was the 1840s.
But military expansionism dates to the Revolution itself even if our  
various
attempts to conquer Canada fell flat, both then and in 1812. There  also was
a threat of war with Canada as late as "54-40 or fight," also under  Polk.
 
BTW, Ben Franklin favored military expansion. So did other  Founders,
not least George Washington.
 
So did TR, then a Republican , in the 1890s, and for quite a while we  had
the Philippines,  and still have Guam and PR from that  era.
 
 
These are established facts that are not in the least dispute.
 
Billy
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
12/20/2011 11:09:48 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected]  writes:

I agree with that Chris.  To me conservative = classical  liberal or 
constitutionalist.  Military expansionism is actually a  liberal idea that 
began 
in the early 20th Century.
 
Kevin




If Paul  is the most conservative candidate, how do you define  
conservative?  I don’t resonate well with either label, liberal  or 
conservative.   
Both terms are bloated with contradictory  meanings that are in the eye of the 
beholder. 
Chris   
 

 
 
From: [email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected])   
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kevin  
Kervick
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 11:36  AM
To: [email protected]
Subject:  Re: [RC] Age of Ron Paul

 
I like to use the term, Independent Conservative to  show that he is 
conservative.  He has the most conservative  voting record in the House.  The 
Independent label refers to the  fact that he does not toe the line with 
neoconservatives and  Progressives who say they are conservatives.  His 
opponents 
and  the media use libertarian to paint him as something other than  
conservative.  I believe paul is the most conservative candidate  in the race, 
bar 
none.
 

 
Kevin

 

Kevin, 
>From  your article, “Why  are they so afraid of Ron Paul? They are afraid 
because his message  does not fit their increasingly outdated and tired 
narrative. If  people begin to embrace Paul’s independent conservative message, 
 
many of them will undoubtedly stop listening to dinosaur  Conservatives on 
the airwaves.” 
First  sentence is great and I think true.  Second sentence, I am  confused 
by your use of the term “conservative” to define  Paul.  To me, he doesn’t 
fit into the normal bi-polar  liberal-conservative box.  Why bother to put 
a conservative  label on him?   
Chris 
 
------------------------------------------
Christopher P. Hahn, Ph.D. 
Constructive  Agreement, LLC 
[email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected])  
P.O. Box 39,  Bozeman, MT   59771 
(406)  522-4143 (406) 556-7116  fax
------------------------------------------ 

 
 
From: [email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected])   
_[mailto:[email protected]]_ 
(mailto:[mailto:[email protected]])   On Behalf Of Kevin Kervick
Sent: Tuesday, December  20, 2011 11:10 AM
To: [email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected]) ;  [email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected]) 
Subject:  [RC] Age of Ron Paul

 
_http://www.examiner.com/independent-in-manchester/the-age-of-ron-paul-panic
s-the-conservative-and-gop-establishments_ 
(http://www.examiner.com/independent-in-manchester/the-age-of-ron-paul-panics-the-conservative-and-gop-establ
ishments) 
 

 
Discovering Possibility: A Common Sense  Conservative Manifesto (For 
Classical Liberals Too) is available at  _www.discoveringpossibility.com_ 
(http://www.discoveringpossibility.com/) .  The book offers a sociological 
perspective and corresponding culture  change approach, that relies on the 
principles 
of classical  liberalism and a Deistic spirituality and promotes four 
pillars of  community - freedom, personal responsibility, neighborliness, and  
thrift.  All proceeds from Discovering Possibility go toward  the furtherance 
of our mission at A Place for Possibilities, 
_www.aplaceforpossibilities.org_ (http://www.aplaceforpossibilities.org/) ,  a 
501 (c) 3 educational 
nonprofit corporation.
 

 
Also, check out my writing about Independent  politics on Examiner.com at 
_http://www.examiner.com/independent-in-manchester/kevin-kervick_ 
(http://www.examiner.com/independent-in-manchester/kevin-kervick)   
-- 







-- 





-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to