When it rains, it sometimes pours.

We USA Americans still have a little time to think about what is important internationally, as in worth fighting for. Here’s a primer for the discussion.

We inherited our old world striped pants diplomat's nation-states, mostly European and colonial in nature. Some of the ideas have extended to far east Asia, but they too have their own histories of temporary nation-states usually more like tribal fiefdoms. That some of the tribal chiefs have included amalgamation with domination is a tribute to their good political instincts. Today it is called winning the hearts and minds of the intended populations. Back then it was called killing off the opposition, and often intermarrying.

Thanks to Islamic fascist types, who are after all a very small minority of Islam, but dangerous as to their killing instincts and liberal funding for various reasons, to include payoffs, the whole idea of nation-states has come up again, and for good reason, since it may not be the future history of humanity. The general objection is the bad idea of trying to get multi-cultural groups to recognize their commonality when thousands of years of human experience suggest otherwise. The specific objections are more pointed, as in why should we send in the militaries of the USA, the U.N., or NATO to reinforce old time ideas since these people want to kill and dominate each other anyway.

Ah, if life were so simple!

Many idealists support the glorious ideas of people groups gaining independence and control of their lives and lands. Today’s consequences are not so idealistic. Local mafias and gangs and all things not so democratic is what really and usually arises to rule and manage the land and people. A world reduced to tribes and city-states is not what we Americans think is the way things should go, many think. When infrastructure is reduced to the local area, and there is little interaction other than old river steamers in the Congo, and below the falls, for example, then we USA Americans have choices about what is important to us. Or should we let our government support the Kosovo independence declaration knowing its economic weakness and history of Ottoman Empire machinations. Is this an idealistic stance, or a realistic stance? Most importantly, should we let out federal politicians, including those presently running for offices, spend our money and send our children in their causes as they sort this out. This is not a silly question, though it should be. The example of how USA Americans and politicians think about protecting us on our southern boundary is a most recent example. We new world people and our leaders can still lead, and the whole world will probably benefit.

End of the promised primer. The world is full of new ideas of promised tribal lands, like Kurdistan, Baluchistan, or even Tibet. One might say the world has not been fair, since the pin-striped diplomats of old have delivered us to our present state. But don’t discount their logic and confidence at their time. Perhaps they knew more than is being reported today?

So if and when turmoil and confusion seems to reign supreme, as if the media reporters are confused and out of work, consider this primer as to future courses of action that benefit our American Nation. And by golly, we do have other courses of action, if we choose to vote these ways. And we voters can think and vote domestic and foreign issues, just about equally. This is why, whatever our future deals us, the new world we USA Americans live in is also the course of actions for our whole world.