Here we go again … the old world cauldron

We voters have choices as an American nation. We can lead the new world, or be drawn back into the old world conflicts, some of which go back thousands of years.

It is tempting to be the do-gooder super power nation with the best of intentions to fix all the old world problems. And maybe we can do it without military impositions, and more sarcastically using peace and love and example to erase millenniums of racial, religious, and cultural discriminations and atrocities and egotistical expansions. Maybe billions of taxpayer dollars expended by politicians will do the trick. To say this old world brew is a cauldron is being kind. And is much of trying to solve it even in our National Interest? The correct answer is only when it threatens our National Interest, which may include being dragged in to some latest version of the “cauldron”. When our kid’s blood gets involved, then the National Interests go up.

Being a new world nation provides many advantages to the future. This includes ignoring much of the old world cauldrons. The new world future is some combination of “don’t tread on me”, benign neglect, and “lady liberty” being a bright shining light to those seeking the same with a fresh start. This is a choice that politicians and those that vote for them can make.

Americans are inherently isolationists and somewhat anti-war. But the preceding is not this, or even a head-in-the-sand policy. It is a new world realistic policy that transitions all the old world problems. And the new world is bigger than the USA, counting North, Central, and South America. It is the combination that can make us collectively strong, if uncoordinated, in being the beacon for the whole world.

Some ruthlessness in is order to be the beacon. This is not a love-in. In the USA, control of the borders is the best and most current example for the new world asserting itself. We are in charge, not any of the old world or other do-gooder ideas that will drag us down. So as always, balance is required in being a new world leader.

The best example of this today is the Arab-Israeli conflict (recent in historical terms), which is clearly part of the old world cauldron. To try fix it gets us back thousands of years and even brings in the Gypsies. Do we want to go there? Or should we more carefully and conservatively promote our new world values, and defend against any old world types who come after us. Iran is a good example of coming after us, today.

Being in the new world, and promoting this throw-off of the old world, puts us on the winning side of history. Many think we can talk-the-talk. Now can we walk-the-walk? And to give credit to fellow Americans who have done their best on dealing with “bad people from the old world”, thank you. Now will USA politicians and bureaucrats consider a “new world” policy? Again the idea of a new world future is some combination of “don’t tread on me”, benign neglect, and “lady liberty” being a bright shining light to those seeking the same with a fresh new world start.