Tags: champion | of | liberty | award

Andrew Jackson Champion of Liberty Award

Thursday, 27 Sep 2007 02:23 PM

By Lev Navrozov

  Comment  |
   Contact  |
  Print   |
    A   A  
  Copy Shortlink

On Sep. 17, Constitution Day, I came to the Holiday Inn Rosslyn in Arlington, Va., to be presented with this year’s Andrew Jackson “Champion of Liberty” Award.

My wife, Muza, accompanied me — she is my editor (she was a senior editor at McGraw-Hill for years), and my helpmate, since she has a strong everyday practical sense, of which I have none.

Below is the gist of my acceptance speech.

When I was a child in Russia, we sang the “German Communist Song”: “The two worlds are in the final clash: Our motto is a world Soviet land!”

Well, the world did not become a world Soviet land. The result? The collapse of the Soviet dictatorship in 1991 despite all of its world’s largest armed forces and its diabolical secret police. There is no doubt that in their choice of the political order the Russian rebels emulated the free West.

That is, without any subversive actions on its part, the free West subverts dictatorships by the very existence of its Western liberty, which, owing to the development of global communications, can be concealed less and less from, let me put it bluntly, “the state slaves” of a dictatorship.

In this respect, the plight of the China dictatorship is much worse than was that of the Soviet dictatorship in 1991. There has appeared the Internet, through which a Chinese dissident émigré magazine like “The Epoch Times” can have its 8 million itemized articles on every Chinese computer within China and outside it. Just choose an article of interest to you and read it. No censorship can detect every Chinese reading every Internet article. Tiananmen might have pulled down the dictatorship of the “Chicom land” just as the Soviet rebellion pulled down the dictatorship of Soviet Russia two years later. Tiananmen? But about 100,000 Tiananmens, of every size and form possible, occur annually in China today.

The world domination may be infinitely pleasant per se to the totalitarian owners of a country. Totalitarian ownership may have all that money can buy — and more. When Beria, an ugly old Georgian, was in charge of Stalin’s secret police, he would point to a woman he found attractive, and she would be delivered to him. The entire world could have become his harem — free of charge.

But in today’s world, the world domination is not only infinitely pleasant, for the dictators of China, but it is the only way to survive Tiananmens: Our motto is a world Chicom land!

Last year I read in the Howard Phillips Bulletin that according to the former U.S. secretary of the Navy, “China is building their 600-ship navy, while we are on the way to a 150-ship navy.”

Unlike the United States, China does not lie between the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. Except for its one eastern edge, it is tucked away deep into Asia. And yet its Navy is expected to have four times more ships than does the Navy of the United States!

Yet these are only visible weapons. Post-nuclear weapons may be invisible. Here is for example a nano weapon, described by Eric Drexler, the founder of nano technology, way back in 1986. But there is a good saying: “A prophet is without honor in his own country” (St. John 4:44). The photographs of Drexler were displayed in research institutes in China, and all of his books and articles were posted on the Chinese Internet in English, with Chinese explications.

In the United States? In 1938, nuclear weapons were only scientific dreams. It took the Manhattan Project to develop this dream into a product — an actual weapon, which was a total surprise in 1945 for Japan, and Japan, a country of samurai, obligated to kill themselves in case of cowardice in an especially horrible manner, and of suicidal kamikaze, surrendered unconditionally.

Had Hitler allowed to be regarded after 1938 as a cofounder of that Munich “peace in our time,” while continuing secretly to develop nuclear weapons and had developed them ahead of the United States, the world would be his! But instead, he ran out of resources to continue his development of nuclear weapons because he had launched conventional war (“in the rump” of Czechoslovakia, in Poland, in France, against Britain in the air and on high seas, and finally, in Soviet Russia). He even declared war on the United States, thereby facilitating the Manhattan Project. Thus, he perished owing to his own geostrategic stupidity.

Nuclear weapons became obsolete due to Mutual Assured Destruction. A nuclear country — be it the United States, China, or Russia — conceals a certain nuclear arsenal in, for example, submarines submerged deep under water. Suppose an attacking nuclear country has “nuked” another nuclear country. The hidden submarines of the attacked nuclear country surface and destroy the attacking country.

Nuclear weapons can only blast large areas — cities, for example. They cannot seek out secret enemy nuclear arsenals. This is what nano weapons can do, according to Drexler.

Drexler’s scientific vision of nano weapons (a growing hurricane cloud of self-replicating, virus-like, nano sized computers — one-billionth of a meter) needs a Manhattan Project even more than did the scientific visions of nuclear weapons. But Congress did not give a cent to Drexler’s Foresight Institute, since nano businessmen, wishing to get all the nanotechnological allocations of Congress for the production of their peaceful, profitable, and otherwise admirable nano goods, assured Congress that Drexler’s nano weapons are not worth a penny — not one cent of the cost of a Manhattan Project.

Nay, Drexler has been thrown out of the Foresight Institute he founded in 1986. He was born in 1955. Too young to be discarded under the pretext of old age. Yes, a prophet is without honor in his own country and even without his own research institute he founded 20 years ago, at the age of 31.

The biography of this man of genius shows how eager is a dictatorship (as in China) to acquire a weapon capable, as the Chinese strategist Sun Tzu put it, to win a war without fighting it, and how nonchalant is the constitutional and democratic West in matters of its survival. Note that neither the current U.S. president, nor the 18 presidential contenders for 2008 whom CNN showed this summer as much as mentioned any danger the China dictatorship presents (in cooperation with Putin’s Russia?) to the countries of Liberty.

Is the free West doomed? Today I have spent several hours with one of the presidential candidates in the 2000 election. This man struck me with his absolutely retentive memory, political acumen, and powerful intelligence in general. You must have guessed that I am referring to the Hon. Howard Phillips, who organized this meeting today, and as soon as I told him that Robert Morton, editor and publisher of WorldTribune.com, was among those present, he immediately recalled that Robert had been the editor-in-chief of “The New York City Tribune” (in the 1980s) and said that it was the best newspaper in the United States.

Yet in 2000 Howard Phillips did not win the presidency which was gained — hold to your chairs! — by George W. Bush! Why and how on earth?

I will not say a word about Bush since I ran out of my sarcasm on the subject in 2000, 2003, and 2004.

As for Howard Phillips, he has been engaged in academic subjects that most voters do not understand or are not interested in.

But if Howard Phillips makes the dictatorship of China and the Western defense against this mortal danger the subject of prime-time television . . . I hear the cry: “Where is the money? Bush and his father and his vice-president are oil men!”

Nowadays presidential candidates collect for their campaigns dozens of millions of dollars not as lump sum contributions, but by collecting millions of donations of several dollars each.

Television also has a commercial advertising potential if it attracts sufficiently large audiences.

Let me quote two short paragraphs from the “Final urgent commentary” of Lt. Col. Thomas E. Bearden (U.S. Army, retired), concluding his study of post-nuclear super weapons: “Oblivion: America at the Brink”:

“The darkest days in the history of our republic lie immediately ahead of us.”

“If we are to survive, we shall need the most strenuous and rapid effort in our history, now.

I am sure that the majority of the Western electorate will follow the advice of Lt. Col. Bearden and will elect the Honorable Howard Phillips as the U.S. president rather than will submit to a general holocaust of the West to perpetuate the dictatorship of China.

* * *

You can e-mail me at navlev@clou9.net.

© 2014 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

  Comment  |
   Contact  |
  Print   |
  Copy Shortlink
Around the Web
Join the Newsmax Community
Please review Community Guidelines before posting a comment.
>> Register to share your comments with the community.
>> Login if you are already a member.
blog comments powered by Disqus
 
Email:
Country
Zip Code:
Privacy: We never share your email.
 
Follow Newsmax
Like us
on Facebook
Follow us
on Twitter
Add us
on Google Plus
Around the Web
Top Stories
You May Also Like

Learning Russian in the Womb

Tuesday, 26 Feb 2013 15:44 PM

I recently saw an article posted on a website and couldn’t agree more with the author’s premise as some states , includi . . .

Welcome to Soviet America

Thursday, 29 Nov 2012 09:40 AM

“Lev, this is Julie. Do you remember me?” The voice on the phone sounded familiar. She went on: “Almost 40 years ago, I  . . .

Romney Won't Look at Russia with Rose-Colored Glasses

Tuesday, 30 Oct 2012 15:50 PM

I was watching Fox News, when an image of President Barack Obama delivering a message flashed on the screen for a mere s . . .

Most Commented

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

 
NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
©  Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved