We live in an interdependent world, we're told. We should not only acknowledge it, but we should revel in the fact, for some reason.
Recently, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown used the word. Brown loves "interdependence." He thinks it's a wonderful thing.
In his first foreign policy address in the U.S., he called on America and Europe to lead a new era of "interdependence."
"We urgently need to step out of the mindset of competing interests and instead find out common interests, and we must summon up the best instincts and efforts of humanity in a cooperative effort to build new international rules and institutions for the new global era."
To most people, this sounds good – maybe even hard to argue with.
That's the appeal.
It sounds good. But it is not good. In fact, it is evil.
Keep in mind, this country was founded on the notion of independence – a very good principle. It was good enough for our heroic Founding Fathers, and it is good enough for me.
They believed a nation could only be free if it was sovereign. As colonists, they understood what it meant to live under the yoke of domination by a foreign power.
Brown continued, citing John F. Kennedy's Independence Day speech in 1962 in which the president called for a "new and global declaration of interdependence."
It was a bad idea then, and it is a bad idea now. The only difference is that in 1962 the New York Times accused Kennedy of virtually calling for the repeal of the Declaration of Independence. Today, the New York Times and the rest of the captive media have fallen in line with the internationalist pleas for interdependence.
Here's what I want you, as an American, to remember about interdependence. It's just another name for "dependence." If you are interdependent, you are dependent. Instead of being dependent on one entity, you are simply dependent on multiple entities. That's not an improvement over dependence, it's actually worse.
What does interdependence mean in the real world? What does it mean to Brown and its proponents in the Council on Foreign Relations and the Bilderbergers and the Davos gang?
It means bleeding U.S. taxpayers for welfare-like programs not just for Americans – but for the whole world. It means throwing billions, probably trillions, at the poorest nations run by some of the worst tyrants.
It means making the reduction of "greenhouse gases" the No. 1 environmental agenda item for the developed world – even though the planet is not really warming up as a result of anything mankind is doing.
It means tying the hands of countries like the United States when it comes to defense – mandating only "multilateral" military actions with the consensus of those who hate America.
I don't know about you, but if the choice is between busybody internationalism or isolationism, I think I will choose isolationism every time.
I don't want to live in an interdependent world. I want to live in freedom. I want to live in a nation that protects its sovereignty. I want to live in a nation that reveres its independence.
Sadly, there are few "leaders" in the U.S. who appreciate what made America different and great.
