Thread: Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall - CYCLES OF A NATION CALLED AMERICA

CYCLES OF A NATION CALLED AMERICA
PART 1 of 4

By Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall
July 29, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

In October 1990, Alvin Toffler accurately pointed out in his book PowerShift, that ideals inherent to traditional wealth in the world as we have known it are changing. We have slowly moved through currency stages... from coin to currency to plastic to knowledge. Toffler correctly points out that today's new wealth is knowledge. And though Toffler was right, he did not sufficiently explain the difference between information and knowledge.

As Toffler said, though, without knowledge in today's status of economic change, one cannot maintain – let alone achieve – wealth. We live in a nation wherein the economy is based on information, technology and service – and the last two in that list are dependent on the first: Information.

Knowledge should not be confused with "information" – and that is what the nations of the world are doing… possibly on purpose. In our information age, never before has so much information been available to people by a simple click of something called a “mouse.” And people tend to think by soaking up information they have gained knowledge when, indeed, they have only gained information.

Some very unscrupulous people realized this and began massive campaigns to distribute disinformation. It is the latest, most up-to-date methodology devised to exercise power over the masses. Disinform them, divert their attention from real problems by misinforming them about issues.

Keep them focused on the wrong issues so they totally overlook the real problems (problems are bigger deals than issues because they represent the core from which all issues derive). It’s called Psychological Operations – or, Psy-Ops.

It is a subtle but mystical conundrum that in the midst of an economic base change rooted in technology and information, few really understand the value of the information they hold. Fewer still appear to know what to do to maximize the value of accessible information. Only when people apply information and understand whether it works or doesn’t work for the good of society or to achieve specific objectives (not good for society) does information become knowledge. Information requires experience to become knowledge. Until then, it is just information. Many people believe this is a major part of what is wrong with the Obama Administration… it has information experts that have no idea they must first test information and understand how it works before it becomes knowledge. My personal opinion is that this administration knows precisely what it is doing.

I, for example, am very knowledgeable about certain things… I spent my life gathering information and putting that information to work, testing those “certain things.” As a result, I have a lot of knowledge about banking, for one thing. On the other hand, I am a functional idiot when it comes to anything involving mechanics. I could digest all of the information in the world about how the transmission on a car works, but my inability to put that information to work precludes my ever having knowledge about motors and transmissions – and all things mechanical. I might even be able to give someone else directions on how to repair that transmission (based on the information I have in my head), but my inability to understand it, build it, and test it will forever preclude me from having knowledge about it.

Understanding what I just said is the beginning step each of us must take to understand the difference between information and knowledge. Is it important for you to know that fact? Only if finding the truth is important to you.

That is the same process one uses to find truth… information to knowledge to wisdom. One does not find solutions to important questions with information; solutions require knowledge. Without knowledge, it is impossible to know which questions to ask when you come to a crossroads. “Should I go forward? Should I turn left? Should I turn right?

Do I need to backup a bit and start over?” And, if you do not ask the right questions, you rarely get the right answers.

Part of the reason for the confusion enveloping our society today – and it is a worldwide problem, not just American – is the lack of understanding about the differences between information and knowledge. We went through this same phenomenon when we moved from an economy driven by agriculture to an economy driven by manufacturing. To people who had traveled by horse and buggy all their lives, the Model T Ford looked like a huge leap into the future.

It was just the beginning. No one realized the many products that would emerge as we went through the 100 years (from 1860 to 1960) of the industrial/manufacturing economic cycle. We moved from the horse and buggy to jumbo jets during that time. As one new product was created from information, knowledge was gained and another new product resulted… and another, and another, as that process repeated itself over and over again. We are only halfway through our technology, information and service economic cycle… there is much yet to come – and we should all hope what comes is based on knowledge, not information.

And then, of course, there is step three: Turning knowledge into wisdom. Very few people achieve that objective… and even fewer public servants.

What is wisdom?

There are many words that define wisdom… but defining it and gaining it are two different things. Probably the most well rounded explanation is that wisdom desires goodness for the total of society. But there are provisions in that sentence. One must be able to define goodness, for example. Is it to give a man a fish? Or is it to teach the man to fish? Is it a combination of both – to give him a fish while making sure he learns to fish… to understand the weaker side of human nature sufficiently to know that if it is allowed, the man will let you give him a fish as long as you are willing, even if it means weakening him.

Wisdom is being able to logically define the end of a behavior pattern (like the man/give a fish/teach to fish dilemma) based on true empathy for others – which involves an awareness of our own self weaknesses (our egos which sometimes enjoy having others dependent upon us). To achieve that, we must have self awareness (which means we must investigate our own psyches). Few people do that willingly. It’s a painful process. Wisdom means caring enough about those things dear to you to accept responsibility for your successes and your failures in life. When people have the capacity to reflect on life and find within that reflection the serene, and realize the importance of integrity and ethics, they develop compassion. Without compassion, it is impossible for human beings to exhibit wisdom. But again, one must be careful how the word “compassion” is defined.

As I said, there are many words that define wisdom. The question is, how does one get from knowledge to wisdom? Moving from knowledge to wisdom is a bit like moving from information to knowledge… but it’s a far more personal journey that requires a person to question every opinion held, every decision made, analyze every hope, and be willing to risk failure when to not take that risk would be damaging to the whole. It’s part of the reason soldiers are willing to lay down their lives for their countries.

One then utilizes the above standards to evaluate those things in life about which one has gained knowledge. It’s a lengthy process and usually requires a lifetime to achieve it… which is why so many tribal peoples hold the aged in such great respect. Not all aged people are wise – and they know that – but they also know it is rare for youth to achieve wisdom. They may have great information and, over time, great knowledge… but it takes a lifetime of living to develop wisdom.

My point is this: Conservatives and liberals see things differently – usually diametrically opposite one another. Why is it that people can see God’s reasons for almost anything they find distasteful, but conservatives see no reason for liberals, and liberals (even more vitriolic towards conservatives) see no reason for conservatives. Each has an immense dislike for the philosophies of the other, seeing no sense in them whatsoever. Do you really believe God put both philosophies here with no good purpose?

The next four articles in this series will explain what each group believes and why the other group finds it harmful. It explains the cycles through which America (and all nations) goes and points to the reasons for them. Did you know that liberals rule for 50 years to be followed by 50 years of conservative dominance? Take a look at American history – which is what the next four articles will do – and you will understand the reason for the opposing beliefs which dominate America’s 50 year cycles.

Problems with this philosophy arise only when one group does not stand up for the standards associated with the two personality styles… liberal and conservative. And that’s where we find ourselves today. That is where the madness of today’s society has taken us… where liberals aren’t liberals, they are socialists/communists, and where conservatives aren’t conservative, they’re fascist one-worlders.

We need to get back to basics. Or, we need to do away with the two political parties we currently have and create two others where liberals dominate their party and conservatives dominate theirs. If we do not, we, as a nation, are lost.You probably won’t enjoy or find amusing this series of articles. They aren’t easy reading… but they can explain a great deal (if you’re willing to listen).

© 2012 Marilyn M. Barnewall - All Rights Reserved

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall began her career in 1956 as a journalist with the Wyoming Eagle in Cheyenne. During her 20 years (plus) as a banker and bank consultant, she wrote extensively for The American Banker, Bank Marketing Magazine, Trust Marketing Magazine, was U.S. Consulting Editor for Private Banker International (London/Dublin), and other major banking industry publications. She has written seven non-fiction books about banking and taught private banking at Colorado University for the American Bankers Association. She has authored seven banking books, one dog book, and two works of fiction (about banking, of course). She has served on numerous Boards in her community.

Barnewall is the former editor of The National Peace Officer Magazine and as a journalist has written guest editorials for the Denver Post, Rocky Mountain News and Newsweek, among others. On the Internet, she has written for News With Views, World Net Daily, Canada Free Press, Christian Business Daily, Business Reform, and others. She has been quoted in Time, Forbes, Wall Street Journal and other national and international publications. She can be found in Who's Who in America, Who's Who of American Women, Who's Who in Finance and Business, and Who's Who in the World.

Web site: http://marilynwrites.blogspot.com

E-Mail: marilynmacg@juno.com

Marilyn M. Barnewall -- Cycles of a Nation Called America, Part 1

Problems with this philosophy arise only when one group does not stand up for the standards associated with the two personality styles… liberal and conservative. And that’s where we find ourselves today. That is where the madness of today’s society has taken us… where liberals aren’t liberals, they are socialists/communists, and where conservatives aren’t conservative, they’re fascist one-worlders

and there we have it... thats why they can all kiss my third eye where the sun dont shine

Say it ain't So Joe .... or ... Speak O' Toothless One

both have the same effect

CYCLES OF A NATION CALLED AMERICA
PART 2 of 4

By Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall
August 5, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

In a 2010 article titled “APES: Active Passive Energy Syndrome,” I explained the two different personality types that dominate American culture. Well, they dominate culture everywhere, but my research applied the concept to America. It was a series of two articles that explained why some of us are liberal and why some of us are conservative.

APES has definite application to American history. It has important connotations as to what decisions we will make for the future, and why.

A brief overview of the two personality styles is:

1. An Active is a person who comes by wealth by actively managing the risk of loss of one’s own assets to achieve it. Those assets may be money, they may be lifestyle, they may be a home and children, and they may be a job or profession. Wealth is made up of many elements. The character of the person determines the decisions made in life and the decisions made will characterize each person as either Active or Passive.

Thus, Actives are the shopkeepers of America, the independent business owners and the inventors. They are the free enterprisers.

2. Passives are people who come by wealth by allowing others to manage risk of loss for them. Rather than managing the risk of running their own businesses, they become part of a big corporation, for example. Thus, most teachers, professors, corporate executives (yes, even Lee Iacocca… he didn’t lend/risk his own money to save Chrysler; he risked the money of taxpayers), bureaucrats, media types – are Passives.

One good example of the differences between these two groups is their investment habits. Actives invest in themselves… in their ideas, in their businesses. Passives invest in the stock market or their partnership with other CPAs and lawyers (Actives usually have their own, independent practices). Passives create investment products that spread (rather than manage) risk… hedge funds and mutual funds (and life insurance).

Please remember the reference – these explanations represent a brief overview, not an in-depth explanation of a highly complex concept. Four pages of one sentence personality descriptions accompany the research (two pages for each group).

Why am I revisiting this subject? Because most Americans feel the fight between one group and the other; many consider it a fight between good and evil (and it is). Others consider it a fight between political parties (and it is). Still others see it as a fight between freedom and slavery (and it is).

In truth, it is a fight between the preferred lifestyles of Actives (who are motivated by control) and Passives (who are motivated by power). Actives want to control their own destinies (which is why they invest the majority of assets in themselves – something they can control – not the stock or bond markets). Security-motivated Passives invest in stocks and bonds, insurance, hedge and mutual funds – things controlled by others which spread the potential risk of loss. Most people think power and control are the same things. They are not. Control is something one does behind one’s own nose; power is something one exercises behind the noses of others. For a more in-depth explanation, I suggest you read the 2010 APES article.A look at six Active/Passive energy cycles in American history offers good insight into how each of these groups weave threads into a beautiful blanket resulting in a capitalist country called America. During the 1600s through the mid-1700s, our nation was known as British North America. Diaries written by early American residents describe local economies as almost totally dependent for survival upon agriculture.

There being little accommodation for visitors, tourism contributed a minuscule portion to local economies. There was minimal trade with European nations, but no delivery system existed from one American community to another. Thus, until the mid-1760's, America had village economies driven by agriculture.

In 1760, the colonies entered a state of unrest. They also entered their first economic cycle driven by Active energies. Those energies motivated the Revolutionary War of the 1770's that ended in 1781. A rag-tag group of America’s colonial soldiers defeated the most dominant military in the world at that time.

Patrick Henry’s cry of “Give me liberty, or give me death,” tells of a man motivated by the management of risk to achieve the moral objective of his right to self-destiny. His cry is the theme song for Active/self investors. To freedom-loving people, there is nothing more exciting than a positive possibility and the desire to make it a reality.Prior to the Revolutionary War (which gathered momentum from 1760 until the infamous tea party and resultant war over taxation without representation), the American economy and its political structure was controlled by the Crown... by outside forces.

What kinds of people leave a secure, well-ordered society in Europe for the insecurity of unsettled foreign shores? Part of the answer lies in the promise of land ownership and the right to self-destiny. The answer to the question? Actives, the risk managers of the world, leave the security of a well-ordered society for the insecurities of building a new nation.

In the America of old, our ancestors had no control over laws passed to govern them. During the first fifty year cycle (1607/Jamestown to 1660), there were so few people on the continent, so little wealth, so much disease and discomfort, the American colonists were relatively free to pursue their own destinies. A difficult, high-risk destiny it was. There was no “economic drive.” There was no “social agenda.” There was no “political agenda.” The agenda was survival. It was a high-risk environment -- but it offered land and wealth to those who could tolerate and manage risk.

Settling a wild, undeveloped land attracted those with Active energy whose high tolerance for risk management made them willing to wager their lives for freedom from religious persecution and the right to own their own land. There were other benefits – and downsides – too. They may have been taxed by the British Crown, their laws may have come from foreign soil, but until the 1700's, there was not a great deal of interference from the British King’s military in the lives of American settlers.

The “nation” was so young during this time it could not really be defined as having an economic force with a primary drive. As I said, the primary drive was survival.

From 1660 to 1710, that changed. Wealth began to increase. Free enterprisers established modes of transportation ... stage and shipping companies. Entrepreneurs built small inns and hotels for travelers and tourists. Farms were plentiful. Shipping created an industry of its own with foreign nations of the world.

Security and wealth attract ... what? The Passive energy group. By 1710, the risks of survival on American soil were reduced as the risk-takers completed their jobs. Actives had established a functional social base. Opportunities for the wealth of future generations by land accumulation and the need for products and services in the new country were broadened.

Those with a lower tolerance for risk, motivated by the security of being able to own land, were attracted to American shores. The immediate objective changed from the risk management of establishing a workable social base and the daily life challenges involved in doing so, to making things bigger and more secure.


Remember, bigger is safer than smaller and Passives are security-motivated people who like the security of “big.” Thus, we can see from our own history (though it has been the same in all nations of the world) how Actives have a specific role to create and innovate and Passives have a specific role to enlarge what Actives begin. There is a purpose for each group… though Actives have no respect for Passives and Passives fear where the risks being managed by the Active group will lead. They are not compatible groups. They weren’t then and they certainly are not today. Perhaps they were never intended to be compatible… but each has a purpose in a capitalist free enterprise economy.

Members of the Passive energy group began to move from their homes in lands ruled by monarchies to the new land. The thrust of this 1710 to 1760 fifty-year cycle was to secure and stabilize what the founders of Jamestown and Plymouth had begun. It was dominated by those who sought power, and by those who curried the favor of the powerful… at that time, it was still the King of England. Politics and the power that goes with governments that exercise control over the people had begun.

During the 1710 through 1760 fifty-year cycle, Passives brought stability and comfort to the rough-hewn Active American society created from 1660 to 1710.

New Englanders traded freely among themselves as did the colonists who had settled beyond the original Jamestown (or, James Cittie) colony. Thus, when the Active energy cycle of 1760 began, America’s economy was driven by agriculture and was regional (no longer village, or local) in nature. It was still ruled by a foreign monarch.

By 1760, individualistic Actives found themselves losing control of self-destiny. In 1773, the Boston Tea Party occurred. The Active cycle was a teenager. Three years later, Americans began the fight to gain control of their own destinies. They understood the risk-taking involved in forming a new nation. Citizens fought a war to change circumstances dictated by the Crown. They willingly risked their lives, their property, and their wealth to gain independence.

Some historians estimate the Revolutionary War was supported only by about forty percent of the people and was opposed by an equal number. Society today tends to be made up of similar percentages of Actives and Passives... about forty-forty. The remaining twenty percent are non-involved, non-political people who appear to have little drive, Active or Passive.

It is safe to say the period from 1760 through 1810 was dominated by the Active energy group. Most of the founding fathers believed in risk management, (which is a totally different concept than is risk elimination, the stated objective of socialism). Modern Americans appear to have forgotten what motivated (and won) their freedom-loving (often self-gratifying) lifestyles. Risk management, not risk elimination, is the rock upon which freedom is founded. The Revolutionary War was fought by conservatives with Active energy.

Their reason for fighting it was to gain and maintain the rights of self-destiny. Passives who were loyal to the Crown did not support the war.

Our early patriots were willing to risk life and limb... provided they controlled the risks taken (a trait among all Actives… the reason in 2012 the Obama Administration is unable to get new jobs created; he wants to dictate the risks independent business owners will take.. and they want none of it). As we neared the end of the fifty-year Passive cycle in 1860, industry and manufacturing, was in its infancy and was beginning to replace agriculture as the driving economic force in America’s northern states. Agriculture (particularly cotton) remained the strength of the south. The nation’s economy was still regional, but the regions expanded in size as industry solidified its toehold.

Click here for part -----> 1, 2, 3,

© 2012 Marilyn M. Barnewall - All Rights Reserved

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall began her career in 1956 as a journalist with the Wyoming Eagle in Cheyenne. During her 20 years (plus) as a banker and bank consultant, she wrote extensively for The American Banker, Bank Marketing Magazine, Trust Marketing Magazine, was U.S. Consulting Editor for Private Banker International (London/Dublin), and other major banking industry publications. She has written seven non-fiction books about banking and taught private banking at Colorado University for the American Bankers Association. She has authored seven banking books, one dog book, and two works of fiction (about banking, of course). She has served on numerous Boards in her community.

Barnewall is the former editor of The National Peace Officer Magazine and as a journalist has written guest editorials for the Denver Post, Rocky Mountain News and Newsweek, among others. On the Internet, she has written for News With Views, World Net Daily, Canada Free Press, Christian Business Daily, Business Reform, and others. She has been quoted in Time, Forbes, Wall Street Journal and other national and international publications. She can be found in Who's Who in America, Who's Who of American Women, Who's Who in Finance and Business, and Who's Who in the World.

Web site: http://marilynwrites.blogspot.com

E-Mail: marilynmacg@juno.com


Marilyn M. Barnewall -- Cycles of a Nation Called America, Part 2

CYCLES OF A NATION CALLED AMERICA
PART 3 of 4

By Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall
August 12, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

[Note: This is article 3 of a four part series. You can read part 1 here, part 2 here. The original article explaining the differences between Actives and Passives is here.]

Though the 1760 – 1810 cycle was definitely Active driven (Passives start wars, but prefer them to be on foreign soil and that those other than themselves fight in them), the attraction of power to political office already made itself felt through the influence of Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton was the one who recommended the first central bank (The Bank of the United States). He said the money needed to start the bank would come from the sale of $10 million in stock. The United States government would purchase the first $2 million in shares and the other $8 million would be available to the public as an investment in their new nation – and those abroad (like the Rothschilds) – could invest too.

Hamilton was aware that the U.S. didn't have $2 million and proposed the government borrow the money (how Passive/liberal is that?) it needed from the central bank. The loan would be repaid in ten equal annual installments. One-quarter of the purchase price had to be paid in gold or silver. The rest could be paid in bonds or acceptable scrip.Few people today would argue that support for a central bank is a Passive/liberal concept designed to minimize the need for Congressional risk management by passing it on to a central bank.


Today, we call it the Federal Reserve System… unlawfully legislated by Congress in 1913. Unlawfully? The U.S. Constitution says in Article I Section 8 that "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States…" It takes an Amendment to the Constitution to change Article I Section 8; and that requires a vote of the American people. This did not happen when the Federal Reserve came into being… Congress merely passed legislation. Congress, then, passed legislation called the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. It was unlawful and it violated the Constitution of the United States each member of Congress had taken an Oath to uphold. Too, there was much skullduggery involved in how the FRA of 1913 was passed.

This is a mystery in the midst of an Active cycle. Actives were the dominant power from 1760 – 1810, yet Passives exercised great power in the establishment of the financial system that would run the new nation's economy by implementing the nation's first central bank in 1791. Actually, this is the first giant clue about the appeal of the power found in government – particularly in finance – to the he liberal faction of our population. Few Americans would argue with the idea that a large percentage of Republicans who call themselves conservative (or, Active) can spell the word, let alone define it or legislate like a conservative. Actives are motivated by control of self destiny; Passives are motivated to gain power over others (and that is why so many Passives who call themselves Democrat or Republican) are attracted to that ballpark.

In the midst of Hamilton's drive for a central bank – and we must sympathize with the fact that this was the first Congress and they were struggling to find their way – Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson and Representative James Madison believed the centralization of power away from local banks was dangerous to a sound monetary system and would mostly benefit business, not the people (and they were correct).


They also opposed the central bank on the basis that it violated the Constitution which gave responsibility for monetary policy to Congress. Jefferson argued that the bank violated traditional property laws. Madison did not believe Congress had the power to incorporate a bank (or any other government agency). George Washington was hesitant to sign the bank into existence. His attorney general, Edmund Randolph of Virginia, said such a bank was unconstitutional, but Washington signed the bill on April 25, 1791 giving America its first central bank. The bank only had a 20 year charter and it expired in 1811 without being renewed. In the end analysis, entrepreneurial Actives of the 1760-1810 cycle did exercise their majority by preventing a renewal of the bank's charter – and a great effort to renew it (including bribery) was implemented.

In 1810, the Passive cycle made us expansionary (expansion is related to Passive power – Actives innovate and Passives expand the innovation). The United States declared war on Great Britain in 1812.


It began with a failed American invasion of Canada (we surrendered Detroit – perhaps we could do so again?), and ended when we won the battle of New Orleans, fought after the Treaty of Ghent was signed. The Passive cycle would last until 1860 and liberals would dominate until that time.

A funny thing happened on the Passive way to their powerful political forum… those pesky Active inventors began leading us into the early phases of the industrial revolution. The threat of war sounded. The lifestyle of the South – the sense of power enjoyed by those who exercised it – was strong. It motivated a "fight to preserve our way of life and keep things as they are" response.

People motivated by power – Passives – will fight to preserve it. The War Between the States (Civil War), unlike the Revolutionary War nearly a hundred years before, was motivated in the south by the need to maintain power over others. Their economy, as they knew it, was dependent on it. Northerners fought to free a race of people from their bonds. At least, that's what we were taught. In reality, Eli Whitney's cotton gin made it possible for northern industry to process more cotton more quickly and less expensively than slave labor could. The innovation of Actives was just the beginning of what was to come; a long line of Whitneys and Fords and Edisons would follow. For those readers who will point it out to me, I am aware that the inventions of Nicola Tesla were kept hidden from the public eye and realize that many questions exist as to whether Thomas Edison or Nicola Tesla invented many items that were patented by Mr. Edison. That's another story. At the time the Active cycle began in 1860, the nation stood divided on the issue of slavery. Because of the cotton gin, America could become more competitive in world markets. This economic consideration was part of what motivated the Civil War. So, too, was the drive to keep the Union in tact.

The War Between the States began at Fort Sumter. It was very similar in purpose to the Revolutionary War if one views the freeing of humans to seek and control their own destinies the sole objective of the war. But it was not the sole objective. Nor was the war fought by slaves seeking their rights to self-determination. It was fought for them by those who value personal freedom… and money to fight the war was made available by greedy bankers who saw the industrial revolution coming and who profited from it in many ways.

Thus far in our history, we have fought two wars… both during 50-year cycles when Actives were in control. Are conservatives the purveyors of war?

We need to remember our history. Prior to William Jefferson Clinton, only four Democrat presidents in the 1900s served two terms in office: Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, and Lyndon Johnson (though President Johnson served only one elected term). These Passive liberal presidents initiated American involvement in the five major wars of this century: the War of 1812 (fought on American soil), World Wars I and II, and the Korean and Vietnam conflicts. In WWII alone, the total military dead (all nations) was from 22 to 25 million plus deaths in captivity of about 5 million prisoners of war.

Through 1992, there were five multi-term Republican presidents. The total number of years Republicans held the presidency during that 92-year period is 56 years. Or, the presidency was held by Republicans 61 percent of the time until the Clinton administration. No Active conservative president ever started a major war on foreign shores. George H.W. Bush, hardly a conservative and a one-term president, initiated action against Iraq in 1991 when Iraq aggressed against Kuwait (probably manipulated into doing so), but American killed in action in the Gulf War totaled only 148. There were 458 wounded, 121 non-hostile deaths, and 11 female combatant deaths.

The evidence is clear that Democrat presidents are far more likely to start major wars on foreign soil than are Republicans. The evidence is equally clear that Passive liberals are motivated by power, Active conservatives by control.

Isn't power versus control the reason behind every war fought since David slew Goliath? Actives learned that little David could slay big Goliath with a very controlled weapon like a sling- shot. During the Revolutionary War Active cycle, Patrick Henry's cry was a slingshot. At the time Abraham Lincoln first pointed to the moral wrong of slavery, his words were a slingshot.

At the end of the Civil War, we began moving from a series of regional agricultural economies to a unified national economy. The new economy was based on industry and manufacturing. Traditional wealth lost its power base. The same thing is happening today, with some critical differences.

As has always been the case during changes of America's economic base, the drive from the previous economy maintained its strong presence. The majority of people were now employed by industry and manufacturing but that did not reduce the importance of agriculture. Nor was agriculture viewed as inferior to industry and manufacturing.


People understood the need to eat was primary to maintaining life. Agriculture was merely in the back seat, riding along in a new Model-T Ford that so exemplified the new industrial economy.

The only era in American history during which we have not maintained the vigor and strength of the preceding economy is the 1990's. Rather, we have allowed our industrial and manufacturing base to be shipped to third world nations in return for cheap labor making inexpensive products. It is one of those historic events that has resulted in a huge lesson… and it was the beginning of multi-national companies that dominate the world and have no allegiance to any nation, including America. Was it a planned event? I have always thought so.

In 1910, the new industrial and manufacturing economy that had been so resisted in the 1860's was in full swing. The economy became expansionary, typical of a security-driven Passive cycle. New fortunes were amassed and new wealth from the new industrial economy was now old enough to be considered respectable. The Robber Baron era ruled the day during this Passive cycle. Though energetically opposed by Actives, a central bank called the Federal Reserve (owned by banks, not the government) was established. This fifty-year wave cycle clearly belongs to the Passive security-motivated group.

Two world wars were fought during the Passive cycle of 1910 to 1960. Both reflected increasing American world power and honoring treaties -- Passive purposes.

The Revolutionary and Civil Wars were fought on American soil under the political oversight of Active conservatives. Both were fought to put a halt to power abuses exercised by one group of people over another and both were fought on home turf.

The new Active wave cycle began to emerge in 1960. The preceding fifty-year Passive cycle motivated the expansion of America's industrial and manufacturing complex. The Great Depression began under Passive dominance during this same time frame.

Click here for part -----> 1, 2, 3, 4,

© 2012 Marilyn M. Barnewall - All Rights Reserved

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall began her career in 1956 as a journalist with the Wyoming Eagle in Cheyenne. During her 20 years (plus) as a banker and bank consultant, she wrote extensively for The American Banker, Bank Marketing Magazine, Trust Marketing Magazine, was U.S. Consulting Editor for Private Banker International (London/Dublin), and other major banking industry publications. She has written seven non-fiction books about banking and taught private banking at Colorado University for the American Bankers Association. She has authored seven banking books, one dog book, and two works of fiction (about banking, of course). She has served on numerous Boards in her community.

Barnewall is the former editor of The National Peace Officer Magazine and as a journalist has written guest editorials for the Denver Post, Rocky Mountain News and Newsweek, among others. On the Internet, she has written for News With Views, World Net Daily, Canada Free Press, Christian Business Daily, Business Reform, and others. She has been quoted in Time, Forbes, Wall Street Journal and other national and international publications. She can be found in Who's Who in America, Who's Who of American Women, Who's Who in Finance and Business, and Who's Who in the World.

Web site: http://marilynwrites.blogspot.com

E-Mail: marilynmacg@juno.com

http://www.newswithviews.com/Barnewall/marilyn185.htm