Defining the Empire
I have always been a science fiction nut. My idea of great movies was the Star Wars trilogy. It’s great to lose yourself in a futuristic time where the line between good and evil is so defined. Who could confuse Darth Vader and the evil of the dark side with the goodness of Luke and the Princess?
One of the thoughts I have always had, when watching something like the Star Wars, has always revolved around the evil side. How did the leaders, con every human in the white uniforms to defend the evil Empire? You’d have to agree the average human being must have been an OK kind of guy; he must have believed he was doing the right thing. I had the same thoughts as a child growing up during World War II. How did Hitler con an entire country into following his evil?
In Star Wars, the Empire represents the evil side of civilization throughout the entire universe. So then, how did the Empire become the Empire?
If a potential Empire started on Earth, where the idea of individual freedom exists, it would have to evolve from something that, in the beginning, was considered good by all the people of earth. It would have to slowly grow in strength and power and have a change in ideology that would convince its leaders that the new ideology is for a greater good than individual rights.
In the history of Earth, the idea of power and strength has evolved from an individual caveman, to a clan, to a tribe, to a kingdom, and finally to a country. The obvious next step would be, to a world. So, before our hypothetical Empire could launch itself into the galaxy, it would have to take over the world it started on.
In the beginning it would have to seem a benefit to mankind. It would have to unite the countries of the world. It might even be called, let’s say, the United Countries. For it to become the Empire it would have to undergo an internal mutation that would convince the members that the needs of the world were more important than those of an individual country or the rights involved with a country’s sovereignty.
The evil leaders would wait for the right time or create a crisis or catastrophe to give them the opportunity to prove how correct they are. A possible candidate, to convince the earth’s population that they must give in to the Empire control, could be to convince the populace that resources are limited and only a world government can dole out the resources in a way as to insure sustained development. Another would be to create a belief that, as humans, we are doing great damage to the planet that can only be curtailed with world government and worldwide regulations. After all, we all breathe the same air.
In the beginning, to show its concern for the people of the world, the Empire may not call itself the Empire. But how can the Empire breach the idea of a country’s sovereignty? It would need a test case.
Before it could take any action to breach a country’s sovereignty it would have to be perceived as the “right thing to do” by all other countries. Perhaps the United Countries could initiate a humane effort to distribute food to a starving nation. How could anyone get mad at the Empire for crossing a country’s border and delivering food? No one would complain about that, because it’s the right thing to do.
Who would protest anyone going into another country to arrest an evil president who is dealing with drug kingpins or not supporting human rights. That is, human rights as defined by the Empire.
Who would protest if any action were taken for the good of America, they would cheer a humanitarian invasion of a sovereign country. In fact the entire organization of countries would support such a mission. And once done, the die has been cast. There are now reasons to cross a country’s border. Now all the Empire has to do is come up with more reasons.
The next one could be to stop a civil war in some country because there have been reports of mistreatment of prisoners by one side or the other. Or how about reports of women being raped? That would surely give the Empire a reason to invade a country’s sovereignty. Pretty soon, the reasons could be because a country was killing too many trees or building too many dams. It makes no difference that the United Countries Charter would not give the Empire that authority. It would still be a test the world would have to pass. Remember, as far as the Empire is concerned, it’s not what is true, it’s what the people believe is true.
Then the true test of power would come on the day the people of a sovereign nation would initiate a war to defend themselves, (think Isreal) without the Empire’sapproval. It would be a test to see if the Empire has indeed become the Empire. If the people were to initiate military action against a considered enemy (think Iran), without the Empire’s approval, the Empire could declare the invading nation as committing an illegal act.
The Empire would also encourage the use of pseudo-science, exaggeration and down right lies to create a worldwide crises, with regard to environmental catastrophes, from global warming to the earth’s population. They would have to turn their back on true science and adopt a position that dictates if something is possible, even if it can’t be proven, we must act on the possibility. With that kind of science they could manufacture any crisis that would require the relinquishing of rights humans have fought for, for centuries.
The Empire’s leadership would call the idea of property rights a primary cause of world environmental destruction. They would call for the elimination of property rights for the good of all. They would promote the redistribution of wealth for the good of all.
Under the flag of environmental catastrophe, they would call for a world government that would show the organization for what it is, a very successful center for world socialism. Who do you think would pay the lion’s share for this assault on our freedom? The US taxpayer!
With the environmental model, the extremists would have what they have been looking for, a way to convince the average human to give up his rights in the name of saving the planet. Who could disagree with that? I don’t think I would, if it were true. And that’s the point, it’s not true and it’s not needed. It’s just a way to further the socialists’ agenda.
Coincidentally, Hans Blix, the UN’s chief inspector at the time, revealed his green roots when he was interviewed on MTV and said he thought global warming was a greater problem than war with Iraq.
This is not to say we shouldn’t be good stewards of our planet, of course we should. But the environmental problems we have are ones that can be corrected locally. There are NO global catastrophes that are based on scientific fact. Don’t accept my word for it, find out for yourself. But as always, I suggest you not learn from CNN or any other media outlet. And for sure, not from environmental organizations whose paid scientists exist with your money convincing you we are a world in crisis.
There are those who would say I am wrong to connect the United Nations with the word evil. To those people I would say no matter how good your reasons may seem to you, any idea that uses a lie to achieve that “good,” is evil.
I would also remind you of this news brief from 1995:
“The International World Court of Justice, the legal arm of the United Nations is hearing arguments on a charge brought forth by 22 countries, and the World Health Organization. The question raised is, “In view of health and environmental effects, are nuclear weapons in violation of international law?” The UN general assembly referred the question to the court.” From Court TV
Who gave the world court any authority over our country, over our Constitution? Anyone who professes to subordinate our Constitution or our people to any other authority is UN-American.
American’s must be very careful, the new edition of Star Wars may become very real.