I didn’t believe it. I actually scoffed at those who suggested it. In truth, I didn’t want to even consider the possibility. I have always shunned conspiracy theories and wild claims of any kind, but here I am faced with a reality that I can no longer ignore: there are forces in our nation that are pushing us into a death spiral.

In our innocence, most of us could never have imagined such a thing, but unfortunately, it is true. I didn’t arrive at this realization by listening to talk radio, by reading blogs, by watching Glenn Beck, or by being politically active. I came to it through a life-long study of history, observation of current events, and sufficient personal time to think seriously about our position in the world.

From history I learned that no nation lasts forever. Of course, most of us already knew this; but few to wanted  to face the demise of  our beloved country. Nations die when their citizens lose the ability—or the will—to maintain their independence. Some nations are simply overwhelmed by outside force despite their best efforts to defend themselves. Probably more often, citizens become so self-satisfied, and so dependent on their leaders that they will no longer exert themselves for the hard tasks of supporting their nation. In either case, the results are the same. Which threat does America face?  Both: In reality, these two threats are the ends of a continuum.

Dependency saps the strength of countries, making them more vulnerable to attack. A strong citizen stake  in the government  provides for greater defense from attack

Let’s look first at our ability to defend ourselves from foreign enemies. We have excellent and loyal military forces; probably among of the best in recent centuries. But military forces cost money, and insolvent countries cannot provide for a strong military. Nations, such as Britain in WWII, that have a capable military force—but that are weak economically—will face bankruptcy and internal strife from defending themselves. Even the mighty Soviet Union went broke and disintegrated because it could no longer support its military pretentions.

Widespread dissension in a country sets the stage for the takeover of new leaders. Some of these leaders strive to find a common ground that brings (most of) the citizens together for the public  good. This group might include Winston Churchill in Britain, and Washington and Lincoln in the United States, and others. A different kind of leader rides the wave of partisan  aspirations to gain control of a country and implement drastic economic and social conditions that few of the original supporters would have desired.

This is not a political party problem, it is a problem of the government shortcutting itself. The senate’s “reconciliation” procedure might have been a way to avoid government shutdown over appropriations, but now has been extended apparently to be used for almost anything. In effect, it will probably render the for 60 vote requirement obsolete. Just how often is speed in enacting laws a positive effect?

Every shortcut in the legislative process creates a greater opportunity to dissolve
the checks and balances of the Constitution.

In the French Revolution; In Germany under Hindenburg and Hitler; in Venezuela under Chavez; Russia under Lenin, and in many other countries, popularly elected leaders have succeeded in corrupting legitimate governments into dictatorships. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Many people missed communism because it had provided “jobs” for everyone. But they weren’t real jobs and couldn’t be maintained over a long period.

We are not yet at a tipping point, but rather on a slope of events that the further we go along the path, the steeper the decline becomes. In some ways, this path is  the more fatal to travel because there  is no obvious action denoting  our falling into an abyss.

Which would do the least damage to the country; a shortage of broccoli, or congress staying home for a year? Tipping points are "the levels at which the momentum for change becomes unstoppable." "the moment of critical mass, the threshold, the boiling point.

It is very easy to make laws… but much more difficult to make sense.

What does it take to pass a law? First find a condition that you want to change and which you think will  bring you votes for reelection. Then you development a justification for the change, usually consisting of  how some group is in dire need or is being treated “unfairly.” Next you seek others who can see personal advantage of plugging this change; you develop a name for the program that is catchy, and tries to reveal what you really want to accomplish. The commercials to sell your bill come next, paid for by the people who expect to benefit financially. Bribery and arm twisting  are used to get a majority to vote  for the bill. There is no requirement to read or understand  the bill or to show that it will do what it is claimed to do.

Road to survival: decrease the power of arbitrary government