Security is one of the primary reasons people tolerate government in their lives. It is, therefore, a key indicator of a government’s success. When it comes to homeland security, the legislative process and the enforcement of laws are, of course, an essential part of the equation. The criminal justice system is also a key component. All nations need just laws, the just enforcement of those laws, and punitive measures evenly applied to those who violate Laws. The independence and impartiality of the Courts is a strong indicator of how just and functional a government is. It is easy for average citizens to judge the ability of government to provide security based on their views of law enforcement and the legal system, but the penal system is just as important. In fact, the condition of a nation’s prisons is probably an even greater indicator of a government’s quality.
The Trump Administration is proving rather active when it comes to foreign policy. On the heels of Trump’s historic Singapore Summit, where he met with North Korea’s Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un to discuss the possibility of denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula, the President moved forward with his plans to impose a 25% tariff on Chinese goods. Both moves are sure to upset the geopolitics of Asia. The latter has a greater probability of achieving a lasting change, whether positive or negative, than the former. Although Trump’s aim is to allegedly curb intellectual property theft and narrow the US trade gap with China, the policy shift could also afford non-Chinese imports greater access to the US market and bolster domestic production. A looming trade war is, however, likely to lead to increased consumer prices, at least in the short-term. With that in mind, it is easy to focus on the economic and national security implications of foreign policy decisions, but the moral impact of a President’s policy must also be considered.
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has allegedly agreed to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula at the Singapore Summit where he met with US President Donald Trump. Presumably, this agreement would meet the primary concerns of the US and its allies. It would also help meet the interests of North Korea and its primary ally, China, by halting a Korean and US nuclear buildup. Kim has agreed to immediately freeze its nuclear program as long as the US halts what Pyongyang views as provocative military exercises, which is necessary and proper when engaging in good-faith negotiations. Trump has also said he would be willing to ease sanctions as negotiations progress, which is probably a bit too generous and empowering. Verification and the exact meaning of a “nuclear free Korean Peninsula” will be fiercely debated, if negotiations move forward, but President Trump has managed to add momentum to a longstanding stalemate.
Trump-Kim Summit: A Blunt Assessment of the Implications and the Role of Anti-American Imperialist Sentiments
US President Donald Trump has transformed North Korean leader Kim Jong Un into a geopolitical celebrity by agreeing to meet at the Capella Hotel on Singapore's Sentosa Island. The meeting could be a historic step toward establishing peace between the long-time rivals. Expectations are not high. The cost of failure is no greater than that of maintaining the status quo. The most unexpected developed is the actual proceeding of the event. Trump’s willingness to meet with the Supreme Leader of North Korea only adds to Kim’s prestige at home while Kim’s ability to garner the attention of the US President has evaluated him on the world stage, especially among those who share strong anti-American, anti-American Imperialist sentiments. For Kim Jong Un, concessions from the US will be a welcome bonus, but he has already achieved diplomatic victory. Should Trump or Kim walk away from future talks, the Supreme Leader will simply cast Trump away as a dishonorable liar.
Perpetual dependence on social welfare programs is a personal hardship and tragedy for those who survive in a modern world on the generosity of taxpayers. Not only does their reliance on government handouts and lack of participation in the economy tax the economy, the public welfare system sustains the poor in a state of near-destitution. Instead of capitalizing on their own potential and reaping the personal freedom that comes with financial security, those who rely on public welfare are imprisoned in a perpetual state of personal stagnation. Whether working or not, any need to make up a prolonged financial deficit with public or private support is unsustainable. The existence of social welfare programs and charities do not, however, create the need for these things. Widespread and prolonged need is a symptom of economic dysfunction.
Read old posts