The Dis Unite States Of America

By Julio Camino

If you think that you know what happen with the economic political chaos of the Century 21th, this new book of Julio Camino is certainly not for you. But if, on the contrary, you have doubts, questions and concerns, rather than elaborated opinions, or if you are not very sure about them, this book is for you. Especially if you want to learn about what is going on in the USA and some parts of the world: what is happening and why?
Generally, in the United States, upon hearing the word "secession", most people think of Abraham Lincoln, the "deep South" and the Civil War. But there are currently other secessionist movements gaining strength in the U.S., and not only in the South, but in the entire territory, because the same "Big Government" federal emerged from the War of Secession, has gone out of control, causing many States huge frustration and discontent.
Along these pages you will find something that you need, even if you are not very conscious of what is missing: information, good information from not well-known but truthful and liable authors.

• Language: English
• Publisher: thelittlefrenchzoho.com
• Release date: Sep 12, 2015
• ISBN: 9781310387081

Julio Camino

Julio Camino comes from a political family and since his youth was a member of a major political party in Venezuela. Julio Camino was a member of the Venezuelan Congress and a leader in the International Parliamentarian Organization. He has Executive Branch and private sector experience in Venezuela. In journalism he has worked for major mass media outlets in Venezuela and abroad. The author has been focusing on the American issues for a long time. Julio Camino (1950), venezolano nacido en Maturín, edo. Monagas. Internacionalista, periodista y columnista, ex Congresista y militante del Partido Acción Democrática desde su juventud.

Book preview

For my Grandsons:

Maximilian Julio and Dimitri Alberto.

image.png

F rom Gue r rillas to Nation Leaders Have they changed their politics ideas, or only strategies?

a nEw century

nEw socialisms

A l b e r t o M a n s u e t i

Prologu E

I f y ou think that y ou k n o w what hap p en with the e c onomic- p oliti c al chaos of the C entu r y 21th, this n e w b ook of Julio C amino is c e r tainly not for y o u . but I f , on the c ont r a r y , y ou ha v e doubt s , questions and c on c ern s , r ather than ela b o r a t ed opinion s , or if y ou a r e not v e r y su r e a b out them, this b ook is for y o u . Es p ecially if y ou w ant t o learn a b out what is going on in the USA and some pa r ts of the w orld: what is hap p ening and why?

Along these pages y ou will find something that y ou nee d , e v en if y ou a r e not v e r y c onscious of what is missing: information, go o d information f r om not w ell- k n o wn but truthful and liable author s .

latin america: when we were happy

T he 20 th c e n tu r y w as quiet f or us c ompa r ed t o wh a t w e h av e al r eady had of the 21 st c e n tu r y . He r e the r e w e r e neither t r enches nor musta r d gas du r ing W o r ld W ar I. A lso the r e w e r e not at omic bombs in the W o r ld W ar I. W h a t w e ha d , in both case s , w e r e e xpo r ts of r a w m at e r ial, e v en with inc r eases in p r i c e s . F r om the Holocaust and the Gulag w e k new almost only the name or pho t o s . T hen, in the ‘50, w e hea r d of the Ko r ean W ar on r adio and in the ’70 w e s a w the V ietnam W ar on t elevision.

F or most of the t w e n tieth c e n tu r y , especially in the first hal f , they came t o our abunda n t c oasts and v e r y gene r ous fl o ws immig ra tion and capital f r om e v e r y whe r e , a tt r a c t ed b y the r el a ti v e calm and p r ospe r i t y w e had in c ompa r ison with E u r op e , only i nt e r rup t ed b y occasional gasp of the C r isis of ‘29.

I n c o n t r as t t o th e blood y independen c e an d civi l w ar s o f th e nine t ee n t h c e n tu r y , th e t w e n tieth- c e n tu r y politic s f o r u s , o r s o u n ti l th e 70 s , w a s a civilia n g o v e r nme n t s al t e r n a tin g wit h milita r y , a s quai n t an d useles s a s eac h othe r . R e v olution s ? Oh , y es ! W e ha d ma n y r e v olution s , galo r e , al l th e tim e , bu t onl y change d som e o f th e f igu r e s f o r othe r r uler s (no t e v e n al l o f them) , an d r e v o k e d th e c onstitution , bu t ha r dl y a n y on e r ea d i t a n y w a y s ! A n d th e r e v olutiona r ie s soothe d thei r a r do r a s soo n a s th e y w e r e admit t e d t o th e S ocia l C lu b an d d a t e d goo d loo k in g gi r l s wit h w ealt h y pa r e n t s .

general disinterest in politics

In these r el a ti v ely calm c onditions and v e nt ed d a y s , our c ou n t r ies had a widesp r ead disi nt e r est in political a c tivities and ele c tion s . T he v ast majo r i t y did not get i n v ol v ed in politics and had no i nt e r est a t all in it; the r e f o r e they did not look f or fu r ther in f o r m a tion. W h a t f or? W h y w ould it be ne c essa r y?

E v e r y on e w a s f ocuse d o n thei r o w n c on c e r n s . P olitic s w a s r ese r v e d f o r sta k eholder s engage d i n r e v ealin g thei r i n t r icacie s , milita r y i n g r oup s an d pa r tie s hea r th e gossi p wa t e r e d i n th e mos t no t o r iou s gossi p , e v e n r ea d book s o n thes e subje c t s , an d a t t endin g endles s meeting s . W e’ r e r unnin g som e ele c ti v e in f lue n tia l f r iend s , an d w e n t outsid e t o se e s o f r eque n t r e v olution s an d w e r e i n v ol v e d i n a n y civil-milita r y c onspi r a c y o v e r loo k in g a c ou p d ’et a t .

T he bulk of the peopl e , h ow e v e r , w e r e not in f o r med of the political issue; he r emained outsid e , dedic at ed t o his w o r k, study or busines s , y our famil y , chu r che s , spo r t s , a r t , fun or wh at e v er ... less political, which loo k ed v e r y dull thin g .

Hyperinflation , recessions , gue r rilla s an d dictatorship s

Y ou will find th a t just in the last qua r t er of the 20th c e n tu r y , things became agit at ed with su b v ersi v e urban and ru r al gue rr illa s , milita r y di c t at orship s , and de t e r io ra ting e c onomie s . C hanges th a t a rr i v ed in the

‘70 s , and in the ‘80s w e r e ba d .

W e did e nt er the C old W ar (which w as not so c old) when M a r xist gue rr illa s , led f r om La H av ana, and mo r e or less c o v e r tly suppo r t ed b y M os c o w , challenged and c onf r o nt ed an a r med f o rc e th a t w as not p r epa r ed f or w a r , much less an ideological and un c o n v e n tional on e .

I n thos e y ear s , th e nonsens e o f c epalis m ( C omisio n Ec onomic a P a ra A me r ic a L a tina ) i n th e e c ono m y bega n to ta k e it s c a tast r ophi c ef f e c t s , hittin g ha rd th e v as t majo r i t y an d , f o r th e f irs t tim e , i t st r ongl y hi t th e middl e clas s . W e suf f e r e d h ype r in f l a tio n li k e th e on e th at t oo k pla ce i n G e r ma n y an d A ust r i a i n th e ea r l y ‘20 s f irsthan d , an d c r ise s an d e c onomi c d o w n tu r n s suc h a s th e on e o f 192 9 an d th e subseque nt y ear s . A l l thi s af f e c t e d u s all , an d much , bot h th e i nt e r es t e d i n politic s an d thos e wh o w e re not .

and what happened in the ‘90s?

B y 1989, when the end of the B e r lin W all and the c ollapse of the USSR cam e , the milita r y had ba r ely w on, and with v e r y high c ost s , the c ou nt e r insu r gen c y w a r ; but they w e r e not in f o r med th a t in an ideological w ar the decisi v e f r o n t is the cultu r al on e . T hey did not imagine th a t su r vi v ors and losers on the milita r y f r o n t w e r e going t o heal and t r ain st r ongly in o r der t o c ome back a f t er t w o decades t o win the ele c tions and g o v e r n — their o wn w a y , of c ourse — . M ilita r y ended up being c onstitutional subo r din at es of the ones who had been their persecu t ed and p r isoners; they did not imagined either th a t they w ould be submit t ed t o all k inds of media and judicia r y t r ial s , and lynchin g .

T he e c onomists in the 90 ’ s w e r e not in a much bet t er situ a tion: they t r ied t o fig h t against both stagfl a tion and endemic p o v e r t y , but the W ashing t on C onsensus w as al r eady insufficie n t and it r emained th a t w a y . Nor them neither populist politicians who hi r ed them w e r e equipped because they w e r e not in f o r med about the r ealities of the true f r ee ma r k et theo r ies or policie s . Nothing had been taug h t t o the C hicago B o y s on the A ust r ian School of E c onomic s .

T he milita r y de f e at ed the a r med M a r xism t o be l at er o v e rc ome b y the cultu r al M a r xism in educ a tion, newspapers and magazine s , in popular songs pl a y ed in sh o w s , r adi o , the T V , and also in the pulpit of the chu r che s . T he g o v e r nme n ts of the 90 ’ s applied a W ashing t on C onsensus th a t w as i nt e r p r e t ed their o wn w a y t o c o r r e c t mac r o imbalan c e s (with v e r y high c osts) b y p r i v a tizing t o c r onie s , and le a ving the mic r o r e f o r m s t o the futu r e . But the futu r e a rr i v ed… long ago: the politics of the C onsensu s , n o w called Ne o libe r alism, do not e xist a n ymo r e and cannot handle the p r essing needs th a t gene rat e dis c on f o r mi t y and t ension, pe r f e c t b r eeding g r ound f or the S ocialism of the 21 st C e n tu r y .

M ic r o r e f o r m s , also k n o wn of se c ond (or thi r d) gene ra tio n , h av e , so fa r , no news or v e r y c onfusing one s . I t seems th a t neo-libe r al e c onomists h av e no idea about them. E v en less idea about those r e f o r ms h av e the politician s , ma n y of whom abandoned the le f t , but still h av e not f ound the r ig h t. T hey a r e in a k ind of ideological v e r y c onfusing limb o . T he peopl e , who h at es a n ything th a t smells or looks li k e f r ee ma r k et or is similar t o ne o libe r alism, k n o ws e v en less about such r e f o r m s , and the r esult is th a t political cannot e v en talk about it . T he r e f o r e , people do not get in f o r m a tion and cannot in f o r m the r est.

Existentialism and ignorance

M a n y of y ou will be su r p r ised with the n e x t r eading because of the fa c t th a t the r e is a p r edominan c e of the e xis t e n tialist philosop h y , the one th a t nobody k n o ws but its findings and r e f e r r als a r e v e r y influe n tial.

I t has imposed us the p r ejudi c e th a t if y ou h av e not had a di r e c t e xpe r ien c e of somethin g , y ou cannot talk about it. T h a t i s , if y ou h av e not been t o C uba or A f r ica, y ou cannot talk about those c ou n t r ie s . T his limits us a lot. A p r o f essor of ast r ono m y c ould not talk about M ars or Jupi t er because he has not been the r e . With th a t philosop h y no one ali v e c ould talk about de a th.

A nd p o v e r t y is a widesp r ead evil, t o which politicians must p r o vide a ans w er and solution, but it has been st at ed th a t y ou cannot talk about it if y ou a r e not poo r , or a t least y ou w e r e not e v en bo r n poo r . F or this r eason, in the ele c tion s , most people r eje c t high-class loo k in g candid at e s , suspe c t ed of h a ving been bo r n in the middle class and guil t y of h a ving had educ a tion. T he public p r e f er candid at es th a t look li k e the m and w a n ts t o talk li k e them . C ampaign c onsulta n ts and ad v e r tisers ma k e much ef f o r t with ma k eu p , but the most authe n tic is a r eal igno r a n t jac k ass! A nd th a t is the one w e choose in the ele c tion s .

ne o -liberals and ne o -conse r vatives

A lso this book will t ell y ou h o w in L a tin A me r ica the r e is c onfusion with the Neo-libe r alis m ; in A me r ica the r e is also c onfusion, of the same n a tu r e , with the Neo- c onse r v a tis m .

T he ne o p r efix be f o r e a n y -is m means th a t in the -is m something is c o r r e c t ed or a t least upd at e d . C onside r ing thi s , a neo- K a n tia n w ould find in the K a n tia n something th a t is w r on g , or a t least ou t d at e d , and will be change d . A nd the same happens with a neo- C h r istiani t y or neo- M a r xism. I t means th a t the r e will be something dif f e r e n t.

I t m a y e v en be a de f o r m a tion th a t la r ge th a t it c ould be c ome the opposi t e . A nd th a t is wh a t happens he r e with neo-libe r alis m , and with the neo- c onse r v a ti v e s in A me r ica. W h a t has changed? Libe r alism and C onse r v a tism a r e r igo r ously a n ti-st a tis t , and the neo-libe r alis m and neo- c onse r v a tis m a r e st a tists!

(1) T he libe r alism of A dam Smith, F r ede r ic Basti a t , C obden and B r ig h t is the do c t r ine of e c onomic f r eedom and the absen c e of the S t at e in t e r ms of busines s , indust r y and c omme rc e: the g o v e r nme n t is not t o do business or suppo r t them; it is only r equi r ed th a t it does not i nt e r f e r e , f or e xampl e , p r omoting SOE s .

In c o n t r as t , the ne o libe r alism e xp r essed in the W ashing t on C onsensu s st at es th a t f r ee t r ade is so goo d , th a t it dese r v es g o v e r nme n t suppo r t! A nd they mean suppo rt with the opposi t e of the f r ee ma r k et : mo r e debt t o k eep bu r eauc r a c y and mo r e r egul a tions t o justify i t , mo r e ta x es t o p a y the deb t , the c e n t r al bank issuing pu r e paper mone y , and p r i v a tiz a tion t o the c r onie s . T h a t has nothing t o do with libe r alism, despi t e wh a t socialist s a y t o disc r edit the c on c ept. F or these r easons is th a t the p r esc r iptions of the W ashing t on C onsensu s , which w e r e adop t ed b y milita r y di c t at orship s , a r e also f oll ow ed b y some le f tist g o v e r nme n t s , v e r y n a tu r all y .

(2) T he C onse r v a tism of E dmund Bu r k e , Russell K i r k and Ba r r y G old wat er suppo r ts r eligious f r eedom, based on the similar p r inciple of the absen c e of the S t at e in m a t t ers of r eligion and mo r al s , and in chu r che s , their do c t r ines and issues: the g o v e r nme n t is not mea n t t o suppo r t ethical canon s , c r eeds or chu r ch a c tivities; it is only r equi r ed th a t it does not i nt e r f e r e p r omoting bad habits or immo r alitie s . C onse r v a tism suppo r ts the p r inciple of pea c e and c omme rc e with all n a tion s and opposes f o r eign poli c y a c tivism.

T he neo- c onse r v a tism in the Uni t ed S t at es is r efle c t ed in the faith- base d initi a ti v e s , i n v e nt ed b y C li nt on, but d r i v en mostly b y G. W . Bush: those a r e not based on faith but on the g o v e r nme n t mone y . T hey a r gue th a t F aith is th a t goo d , th a t it dese r v es official suppo r t! I t p r omo t es a c tivism in f o r eign poli c y . I t has nothing t o do with the c onse r v a tism of the F ounding F a ther s . T h a t is w h y le f tist politicians li k e Ba r ack Obama c o n tinue with neo- c onse r v a ti v e policies and ma k e it v e r y n a tu r ally!

In the te x t bel o w , Julio C amino e xplains th a t be y ond the label s , these a r e the r ealities:

(1) F r ee t r ade and e c onomic f r eedoms cannot be p r omo t e d b y the S t at e; wh a t it does is i nt e r f e r e , and thus w ea k en, spoil or dest r o y them. T he r e f o r e , it is bet t er th a t the C ong r ess and the E x ecuti v e k eep their hands out of the p r i v at e e c ono m y , unless a c r ime has been c ommit t ed; then the judicia r y i nt e r v ene s .

(2) Simila r l y , faith, and mo r al vi r tu e , or educ a tional or cha r itable w o r k of r eligious bodies a r e things th a t cannot be p r omo t e d b y the S t at e; wh a t it a c tually does is i nt e r f e r e , and so w ea k en, spoil or dest r o y them. I t is the best not t o do i t , and th a t the g o v e r nme n t k eeps its hands of f , unless someone has c ommit t ed a c r im e .

The do c t r ine of r adical sepa ra tion be t w een the S t at e and the e c ono m y , and be t w een the S t at e and faith is only one and it is v e r y old: the no i nt e r v e n tion of the S t at e in c omme r cial and business m a t t ers r el at ed t o r eligion. H o w do w e call the do c t r ine of limi t ed g o v e r nme n t th a t p r omo t es individual f r eedom, p r i v at e p r ope r t y , honest money and local g o v e r nme n t? C lassical libe r alism or c onse r v a tism? W e c ould call it either one of them or e v en both w a y s , but they a r e the opposi t e of their ne o !

A nd of c ours e , this do c t r ine is f r om the r ig h t. On its w a y t o socialism, the L e f t has demoni z ed capitalism, e v en the w o r d itsel f , and the r ig h t , which is the poli c y th a t p r omo t es capitalism in the e c ono m y . S ome politicians k n o w the truth, but they a r e such c o w a r ds th a t they r efuse t o e v en me n tion w o r ds such as capitalis m or r ig h t , with which they do a g r e a t f av or t o the le f t because silen c e gi v es c onse n t , and b y not being claime d , both w o r ds a r e i n ta c t with their poison, r eady t o be used as deadly w eapons and ta k e out of the game the de f enders of f r ee ma r k e t , p r ope r t y and limi t ed g o v e r nme n t.

The le f ties took us again by surprise and off guard

In the first book of Julio w e tal k ed about thi s . T he w av e of socialist gue rr illas of the 70 ’ s and 80 ’ s , t r igge r ed b y F idel C ast r o and C he Gue v a r a du r ing the T r i C o n tine n tal C on f e r en c e in La H av ana, in 1966, t ook us b y su r p r is e , off gua r d . N o w , the w av e of cultu r al M a r xism unleashed b y L ula Da Sil v a and his L a tin A me r ican c olleagues f r om the S ao P aulo F orum established in 1990, also t ook us b y su r p r is e , w e w e r e not r ead y .

W e li v e in a sea of c onfusion about the poli c y . A lthough w e li k e t o gi v e our opinion on socialism and capitalism, w e r eally do not k n o w about it. W e fall i nt o the c ommunist t r ap of cha r a c t e r izing Nazi socialism and fascism as e x t r eme r ig h t when they a r e not r ig h t: they a r e socialist s , then, they a r e: le f t.

T a k ing ad v a n tage of all these c onfusion s , the le f t milita r ily de f e at ed adop t ed the M a r xism of the F r ankfu r t School and f ocused on putting th r ee deadly t r aps f or u s . W h a t they do n o w is:

(1) T o blame all the ills t o libe r al capitalism of un f et t e r ed f r ee ma r k e t , although th a t figu r e ne v er appea r ed th r ough he r e , it has ne v er been among us; but in th a t w a y , with a st r ong p r opaganda against capitalism, the ma r k et and the r ig h t av oid stru c tu r al r e f o r m s , and e v en go back s t eps in the little p r og r ess th a t had been mad e , c ompounding and multiplying the evil s .

(2) T o p r omise social plan s (in e x change f or v o t es), as la r ge solution s t o the e c onomic p r oblem s .

(3) F or all other ailme n t s , r eal or i n v e nt ed one s , t o d r i v e t ons of l a ws and politically c o r r e c t r egul a tions dec r eed b y the offi c es and agencies of the Uni t ed N a tion s , and ta k en f r om the multiple agendas of cultu r al M a r xism: e n vi r onme n talism, f eminism, indigenei t y , politically c o r r e c t political language and homos e xuali t y , c o r po rat e social r esponsibili t y (CSR), and so on.

T he goal: T o c omple t e the r ealiz a tion of the p r og r am of the C ommunist M ani f es t o of 1848, in the pa r t th a t goes against ma rr iag e , family and school, sin c e in almost all the e c onomic pa r t and has been al r eady established in the t w e n tieth c e n tu r y th r ough S t at e c o n t r ol of mone y , ban k in g , c ompanie s , busines s , and p r odu c tion a c tivitie s . T he e c ono m y is al r eady in their hand s . W h a t else w ould they n a tionali z e? W h a t else w ould they c o n t r ol an d r egul at e ? W hich other ta x es w ould they ena c t?

i have the right to express myself

W e hear this widesp r ead e xp r ession v e r y o f t en and the book th a t y ou a r e about t o sta r t r eading t ells y ou th a t , as a r esult of bad policie s , ma n y new gene ra tions n o w a r e living w orse than their pa r e n ts di d , something th a t has ne v er happened be f o r e . A w av e of frust ra tion runs th r ough our c ou n t r ie s , especially among y oung (and not so y oung) middle class peopl e , who a r e or c onside r ed themsel v es t o be the most af f e c t ed; and among e n t r ep r eneurs in the in f o r mal e c ono m y , whose ho r i z ons na r r o w dail y . W e all think about emig ra tin g .

T hese calamities r e v erse the p r evious c ondition of disi nt e r est in politics th a t w as c ommon in the past. N o w almost no one w a n ts t o be outsid e of politics; it is something th a t af f e c ts them much and neg a ti v el y , and people f eel th a t it ne c essa r y t o pa r ticip at e .

Bu t , un f o r tun at el y , the bulk of the popul a tion, mostly in middle class

— or wh a t r emains of it — has no in f o r m a tion. M uch w orse: they a r e unin f o r med; they h av e their heads stuf f ed with lie s , vi c tims of all M a r xist campaigns of b r ain w ashin g th r ough educ a tion, the p r es s , the cle r gy and the media in gene r al. T hey a r e blinded b y the fu r ious postmode r nist r el a tivism, f or which the r e is no truth, and the r e f o r e , no e r r or or falsehoo d . F or th a t r eason they che r ish in their minds and hea r ts c ou n tless slogan s , pa r adigms and lethal, highly destru c ti v e c on c ept s , th a t , h ow e v e r , they belie v e and ta k e as cle v er and suc c essful idea s .

W e c ould s a y th a t 99.99% of ou r ideas a r e not our o wn, they a r e bo r r ow ed and r epe at e d . E v en if y ou think th a t y our r eview s a r e y ours and o r iginal, it is li k ely th a t y ou a r e r epe a tin g , in cruder w o r d s , the same ideas e xp r essed b y a theologian, philosophe r , e c onomis t , poe t , n o v elist and political w r i t er in a mo r e sophistic at ed language c e n tu r ies ago without y ou k n o wing it.

M ost a c tivists fall i nt o t r aps th a t they do not se e . T hey shout their heads off tal k ing against c o r ruptio n , and they do not see th a t c o r ruption is inhe r e n t t o st a tism, and the a n ti- c o r ruption struggl e is the g r e at est T r ojan Horse of the le f t . T his is h o w the r opes with which they a r e bound and gagged a r e wo v en and k not t ed t o ensl av e them, and with which they will be hanged t omo r r o w , when they a r e no longer useful.

E v e r y one w