Posted on by Nathan Riley

World Government Could Prevent Palestinian Crisis

No matter what happens. Freedom Democrats will grapple with the U.S./Israel invasion of Palestine.

As I write this, police across the nation are arresting protestors angered by the displacement of the Palestinians in Gaza. As you read this, it is clear I am no friend of the Israeli counterattack following the mysterious October 7th massacre by Hamas. I am no expert on the Middle East, and the U.N., which possesses such skills, is being ignored. My gut feeling is that when Israel has moved the Palestinian population Israel will move and rebuild the destroyed neighborhoods in Gaza. With this big difference, Israelis will replace the Palestinians.

My conclusion sees this conflict as a real estate deal. The Palestinians are being replaced, just as settlers replaced the American Indians.

This affects Freedom Democrats because although it is still early in this conflict, it appears that the Democratic coalition could split. The Vietnam War tore apart the Democratic Party and ended the Roosevelt coalition that started during the Great Depression in 1932. The split over Vietnam followed a split between Segregation Democrats and the progressive forces demanding that racial distinctions end and that the U.S. integrate everybody regardless of skin color. In the long aftermath following the Warren Court striking down school segregation and the passage of Civil Rights legislation, the Democrats lost the South. It became Republican, and the Democratic party gained support in the Black and Hispanic communities. Democratic hawks and peaceniks learned how to work together.

Right now, it appears that the Democrats will split over Palestine just before the election in November. Freedom Democrats, like all voters, will have to decide whether to stay loyal to President Joseph Biden, with Donald Trump as the alternative. Their other choices are staying home or hoping that Cornel West will get on the ballot. None of this is good news for Democrats.

The point is that Freedom Democrats would have serious decisions to make and be able to enter into conversations with thoughtful people. It would be a way to expand contacts and win converts.

My perspective is radical. The 250th anniversary of the American Revolution is two years away, and founders like Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and the dozens of other people who created the first European style government without a hereditary ruler are still celebrated. The American colonists who created first the Confederacy and then drafted the Constitution of 1787 devised a system of term limits. Members of the House of Representatives would need majority approval every two years, Senators every six years, and the President every four years. In Europe, many of these positions were inherited, but the U.S. rejected this approach. The leaders of the new nation would be selected by majority rule.

Over the decades, the system has changed dramatically, but the founders of the United States are still prominent figures.

I believe it is time we find new heroes that will make the United Nations a global government. This is a daunting task. If the U.N. is the world sovereign, then the United States government becomes subordinate to this world government. A prospect guaranteed to generate hostility in the United States.

The advantage of making the U.N. sovereign is that member nations would have to hire lawyers to settle their disputes. If Vladimir Putin feels threatened by the changes in Ukraine, he can start a legal action. The United States and Ukraine would, under international law, be compelled to respond.

This is only possible if the U.N. has the troops to enforce its orders. Russia, the United States, and Ukraine lose their ability to ignore U.N. decisions. Member nations, including the U.S., must agree that their troops will be commanded by the U.N.

This is a huge step. But it holds out the promise that missiles and bullets will stop being a way to settle international disputes.

A major and immediate task of the U.N. is to protect people from being removed from their homes. Whether it’s drought, tribal hostilities, or the hope of living better in a rich country, people should not be forced to leave their homes.

The U.N. must have the funds and expertise to create stability in nations all over the world.

The people who do this will become as famous as George Washington and Benjamin Franklin. The reward for the creators of this new world will be that their fame lasts generation after generation.

If the U.N. were running the show, the Israelis would not be able to invade Palestine, and Hamas would be hunted by U.N. police. Their object wouldn’t be to kill Hamas or eliminate it as the Israelis wish. They would have a more reasonable goal: arrest and trial.

In short, giving the U.N. sovereign power would allow lawyers and diplomats, rather than soldiers and drones, to solve problems.  

Posted on by Nathan Riley

Diversity

Diversity is more than a left-wing buzz word meaning respect everyone, no matter how different they are from your family and friends.

Diversity is no panacea: political differences, war and peace, and horrible crimes will spark retaliation.  Being nice has its limits.

Diversity has its serious side; ignoring the need for it has caused gut-wrenching catastrophes. World War II and Hitler’s death camps attempted to banish diversity from Germany with genocide. American soldiers liberating concentration camps were stunned by the ovens mass producing thousands of executions and the ghastly sight of prisoners reduced to skin and bone because their keepers starved them. The ghastly pictures were convincing evidence that World War II was a battle against evil.

Hitler was exterminating Jews, communists, homosexuals and others on his list of undesirables. It was an extensive list including Gypsies and Jehovah’s Witnesses. A catch-all group was accused of “asocial” or socially deviant behavior. There was no judicial review.

This prodigious campaign in Germany to produce political and racial purity abandoned diversity and substituted hate. After the war, for example, it was no longer possible to think that antisemitism was harmless. Diversity demanded that ethical people recognize that we are all different but as humans we have common frailties and strength. This view was embodied in the United Nations’ Declaration of Human Rights. Rights no longer had a nationality; every human being should be protected.

If Hitler’s deadly campaign to create uniformity was crushed by the Allied victory in 1945, it has an idealistic cousin that is harder to recognize. The international principle of self-determination often promoted homogeneity rather than diversity. Dressed up in democratic principles, many thoughtful people tried to create new nations with minimal diversity, especially in the years following World War I. All too often, national boundaries were determined by a common language, even if neighboring peoples had spoken different languages for centuries. German speakers and Slavic speakers had lived cheek-to-jowl. Each preserved their separate identity but satisfied the pragmatic justification for diversity by living and working peaceably.

When Woodrow Wilson and the Treaty of Versailles insisted that these language groups form separate nations, they were creating problems. Differences that should have been resolved peacefully were manipulated to create political differences. Manufactured conflicts allowed Germany before World War II to justify annexing territory because people spoke German.

Diversity is the way people learn to live with each other and avoid hate and terror. It is part of the larger problem of protecting minority rights from majority tyranny.

Freedom Democrats seek to protect people who party, including sex workers and drug users. Groups that face government hostility especially from the criminal law and its agents. They are trying to banish behaviors that have existed for centuries. It is not complicated. These groups should live with others in the U.S. on a peaceful basis. A person who earns his/her living by charging for sexual favors can be just as good a neighbor as a person who leads a more conventional life.

Freedom Democrats believe a person has the right to chose how they get high. A morning pick-me-up from a cup of coffee is a close cousin to a person who uses the currently illegal drugs to get high. Diversity is advanced when people who use substances like opiates and amphetamines receive the same medical care as everyone else. Most significantly, working with healthcare professionals reduces the chance of overdose deaths and related infections.

Currently the law gives the formulations of these medications to criminals. The users have the same right as everyone else to medicine prepared by pharmacists in uniform doses. Do this and the health issues surrounding drug use decline precipitously. With respect for diversity, the drug problem becomes solvable and the health and well-being of persons in this nation will improve. Freedom Democrats offer policy choices while futile attempts to banish drug provide funds to criminals and magnify health problems.

By respecting diversity, we improve the life of people who party and increase the number who make positive contributions, making it easier for kind people to offer a helping hand. Diversity means we come to terms with the idea that some people party and others don’t. We can all live together.