home > archive > 2003 > this article
The real world series
By Henry Lamb
For sports fans, October is a feast: football season is well underway; basketball season is just getting started; and the World Series is only days away – with the Cubbies still in the hunt. But the real world series is a year away. The teams are known, but ill-defined. The first elimination round begins in January, 2004, in Washington D.C., Iowa, and New Hampshire. Champagne will flow for some teams; defeat will agonize others. The last contest in the real world series will take place November 2, 2004, in every village, town, city, and state across the nation.
There is no trophy for the winner, only trouble. A world of trouble. The winner of the presidential election in 2004 will have the weight of the world for his reward. Like it or not, the United States of America leads the world. The President of the United States charts the course the rest of the world will follow.
The course President Bush has charted is different from his predecessor's. Whether he is able to continue on this new course, will be decided by the real world series on November 2, 2004. Ultimately, the American people, by the votes they cast, will decide which direction the world pursues in the future.
Sadly, the hoopla surrounding the real world series rarely discusses the goals, or the relative benefits of the alternative courses available to the world. Instead, voters are fed a steady diet of petty, personal attacks. Voters need to be hearing, and evaluating what really is at stake in the real world series.
What is at stake, is the system of self governance guided by the principles of freedom set forth in our founding documents. Never before have these principles been so clearly defined, or so effectively proven, than through the experiment launched by the United States Constitution.
These principles of freedom – individual freedom, free markets, private property rights, and government limited by the consent of the governed – are under attack by a community of European nations that champion the principles of socialism – limited freedom, managed markets, state control of the sources and means of production, and absolute government power.
The European Union, in particular, and most of the rest of the world, want the United Nations to be that absolute government power which defines, imposes, and enforces the principles of socialism on the world – including the United States of America.
President Bush's predecessor embraced this world view, by promoting the U.N.'s Kyoto Protocol, by implementing the unratified U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity, and by embracing and implementing the U.N.'s Agenda 21.
President Bush said "no" to the Kyoto Protocol, and has slowly begun to undo some of the damage done by the unratified U.N. treaty, and by Agenda 21.
When President Bush accepted his responsibility to go to war against terrorism, he invited the world to join the battle. Most of the world – and Bush opponents – want the war to be waged by the United Nations, not by the United States.
This desire to put the U.N. in control has nothing to do with winning the war on terrorism. It has everything to do with establishing the U.N. as the world's absolute governing authority – including authority over the United States.
The winner of the real world series in 2004 will either continue to resist this pressure to make the U.N. a global governing authority, or again embrace the vision of a system of global socialism under U.N. direction.
Voters have a year to choose which team they will support in the real world series. Campaigners will not likely carry signs that read "Support world Government," or "Socialism for the whole world." But when candidates say "We must get the support of the U.N.," or bash President Bush for not yielding to the U.N., they are saying the same thing.
The United States leads the world only because the principles of freedom on which it is founded – are valid principles for self governance. The United States should not try to impose these principles on any other nations, unless, as in Afghanistan and Iraq, the United States is forced to eliminate a government that is a threat to the U.S. In such cases, it would be ludicrous to use U.S. military and economic resources, and then allow the U.N. to install its system of U.N.-compliant national governance.
Whoever wins the real world series will lead the world toward freedom, or socialism. American voters will decide.
Get weekly updates about new issues of ESR!
© 1996-2013, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.