The “sovereign debt crisis” simultaneously afflicts the US government and the governments of a significant number of other major nations/economies. In essence, the “sovereign debt crisis” means that a “sovereign” (a government) is so deep in debt that it can’t possibly pay all of its bills. That means that such governments are insolvent and technically bankrupt.
What happens if such governments actually default and become overtly bankrupt? That’s hard to imagine, but it might mean that the alleged “sovereign” wouldn’t merely be embarrassed but might actually cease to exist. What would replace it?
What happens when governments are so prone to pushing more regulations and a greater police state, that their people come to loath their own governments? Would a people who’ve come to loath their own government be more open to some other entity that sought to replace their constitutional governments? Is the modern police state intended to increase the powers of government? Or is it secretly intended to so alienate the people that they’ll come to hate constitutional government and cheer its destruction?
Is it possible that the Powers That Be are intentionally driving the sovereign governments so deep into debt that they must inevitably collapse in bankruptcy? Is the real purpose for today’s growing police state to extend the powers of government? Or is the purpose to cause people to so despise their own sovereign (“constitutional”) government that, if and when it collapses in bankruptcy, the people will cheer and make no significant effort to revive it?
Could it be that the combination of the “sovereign debt crisis,” a growing police state, and growing public animosity to government is happening intentionally for the purpose of destroying sovereign (constitutional) governments? If the “sovereign” (constitutional) government not only goes bankrupt but also alienates so many of its people with an obnoxious police state, will that open the door to the imposition of an entirely new form of government that will ultimately be even more tyrannical? And if so, what kind of alternative authority might be waiting in the wings to claim power when the constitutional government collapses?
Could the answer be a conglomerate of private corporations and banks, itching to “privatize” and thereby “own” the world?
Ann Barnhardt apparently thinks the answer to those questions is Yes, Yes, and Yes.
If she’s right, should we be attacking whatever remains of our constitutional government? Or should we be seeking ways to support and defend it against destruction by private corporations?
If our government finally collapses, what will replace it? Should we devote less of our time to beating the “dead horse” that our constitutional government has become and more of our time and energy to laying the foundation for the next government that will follow?
P.S. and here’s a clip from the 1976 movie Network. I wish I’d had brains enough back then to understand the insight and warning that the film offered.