American Empire: Before the Fall

The Campaign for Liberty’s first-ever book, American Empire: Before the Fall (written by former Reagan associate deputy attorney general Bruce Fein), has officially been released. This important new work will be a great educational tool to share with family, friends, coworkers, and neighbors.

Check out this video from Bruce explaining why he wrote the book:

“The United States was born as a Republic. The individual was the center of society and rule of law was King. Neutrality and non-entanglements were the North Stars of foreign policy. Preemptive wars were feared as precursors to executive tyranny. The Republic would not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. Transparency was the rule and secrecy the rare exception. And the thrill of self-government was the utmost good. Since the emergence of Manifest Destiny and the Mexican-American War, the United States has progressively degenerated into an arrogant, swaggering Empire featuring hundreds of military bases abroad with defense commitments to foreigners. The degeneration was accelerated by the disintegration of the Soviet Union and 9/11. Bush, Cheney, and Obama are a philosophical triumvirate in national security matters. The Empire is earmarked by perpetual and global warfare unilaterally initiated by the President for the sake of domination; unchecked executive power; the crucifixion of the rule of law on a national security cross; the diminishment of Congress to a constitutional ink blot; secret government; unsustainable trillion dollar budget deficits; and, a craving by the public for risk-free lives more than freedom itself. The Republic can be regained if a President emerges who renounces executive usurpations and secrecy, terminates all U.S. military bases abroad and revokes all defense treaties or executive agreements, immediately ends the Afghan, Iraq, international terrorism wars, and makes the rule of law the nation’s civic religion.”

  • It’s not that I want to copy your web page, but I really like the style and design. Could you let me know which design are you using? Or was it tailor made?

  • Glad to be one of the visitants on this awing site : D. cpanel reseller | best reseller hosting |

  • Yvonne

    Attacking the Barbary pirates was a good move on our part. But what happened next? Did we go into the Middle East and set up bases in a pre-emptive effort to end piracy? No. No we didn’t.
    What if our answer to those attacks had been to ignore the boats and pirates on the waters and set up a base in the Middle East? What if co-incidentally the army bases helped protected miners? What if we had army bases protecting miners in the mid-east while pirates in the open seas were left un checked?
    That’s akin to what is happening now.

  • Ben

    “Neutrality and non-entanglements were the North Stars of foreign policy… The Republic would not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy.”

    Uh, yeah…in a sense. I’m well aware of Washington’s Farwell Address and all, but did you ever ask yourself why we went to war with the Barbary pirates on two occassions? Those were the original Islamic terrorists. We went all the way to North Africa (an incredible distance in those days before airplanes) and stomped their guts out. That’s the way we should do things these days. In any case, that’s not “non-interventionism”. That’s killing bad guys, a foreign policy I whole heartedly agree with and Ron Paul wholeheartedly opposes.

    I wouldn’t say that we currently have a stance of neutrailty and non-entanglement. Not in this day and age. If that were the case, we wouldn’t have any allies. Are we not supposed to have allies or something? There’s nothing in the constitution about it. That’s Washington’s philosophy and not necessarily a principle of American law or policy.

    In any case, we aren’t looking for enemies abroad. The enemies are there, they are real, and we can ignore them at our own peril.


  • The founding fathers were also opposed to intervention of other countries because of the long term impact it has casued this great nation of ours to police them.

    • Forest

      Really. So you are saying, for one quick example, Jefferson was opposed to intervention? Or are you saying that he wasn’t a founding father?

      Letting his residence in France to be used as a meeting place for rebels during the French Revolution is considered non-interventionist?

      “Jefferson reached the limits of his influence when he attempted to intrude republican principles in Russia, Poland, Greece, and the emerging South American nations.”

    • Forest

      By the way, the Native Americans might also disagree with your little starry-eyed belief that our Founding Fathers didn’t completely agree in non-intervention.

      • Yvonne

        During the gold rush many if not most of the wars were perpetrated against american indians. Think of that. It wasn’t the Founding fathers of New England it t was oil diggers…um….I mean gold diggers….
        Think about it.

        • You go Yvonne! Gee I wonder what history tale told you that you little “FOREST” TROLL?

    • Ben

      Really? All of them? Can you back that up?

      They weren’t opposed to French interventionism on our behalf.

      • Yvonne

        They weren’t opposed to French interventionism on our behalf?
        Ok. True enough.
        At the time though; England was an empire building ,war mongering nation which was running out of cash and imposing taxes on us to pay for it. Sound familiar?
        I don’t think that being an under dog in the war and accepting help from another of the English empire’s enemies, is the same thing as becoming and empire builder ourselves.
        Also the fact that Jefferson had residence in France and let American’s use it is not exactly policy making. That was just the personal actions of one man who had residence in two countries.

  • Machine

    Excellent…There is more than enough info out there…Start with and/or share with others:

    The Declaration of Independence
    The U.S. Constitution
    The first Ten Amendments (your Civil Rights)

    And if that doesn’t say enough…
    Then venture on to these books by Howard Zinn:
    A Peoples History Of The United States
    Passionate Declarations; Essays on War and Justice (Previously titled Declarations of Independence; cross examining American Ideology)
    A Peoples History of American Empire ( which you can watch comentary on…on the above video)

    Kingdom of Fear by Hunter S. Thompson

    Creating True Peace by Tich Nhat Hanh ( not political)

    The Law and the Lawers by Gandhi

    Any book that offers lessons on the rise, reign, and fall of Empires, Dynasties, and Kingdoms certainly couldn’t hurt with helping teach the future generations why over expansion (empire building, Nation building, etc.) jeapordizes our freedom, is hypocritical of our Declaration of Independence, but more than anything is a danger to all of Humanity.

    We cannot go back and change the past, but what history shows us is that Governments do decline from healthy ideas, which in time are tread upon. The lesson – when we study it objectively – is that we do not have to continue down a destructive and fatal path, thus changing direction when we see ourselves headed towards collapse. It’s simple logic of survival. This is the only way History bennefits us. To date we have ignored those lessons. This is our demise.

    • David

      I do like your posts Machine, well thought out and full of reason and common sense.

      You are right as well, a simple examination of history is all that it takes in order to determine what can work and what will not, and what i’ve found is that any society which has tolerated any form of banking system or private control over its economy and means of exchange has eventually collapsed with absolute power and all of the wealth resting in the hands of a few, and the remainder being subjected to lives of abject poverty and servitude to that power. Alternately, in the very few instances where an economies means of exchange was freely produced as a public asset, with the single and only purpose of facilitating trade and production those societies grew and became ever more prosperous for as long as this condition was in effect, and until banks figured out a way to gain power and control over that currency which they have been progressively doing here until that control was absolute.

      The collapse has already begun, and their power and control over our political system is as absolute as their power and control over our currency by now, but by mass action by the population it would still be possible to destroy that power at this point and restore things to what they should be and as Franklin did prior to the revolution, where we would not only regain the freedom and prosperity which has been taken from us, but multiply it to many times more than it has ever been. Freedom and power cannot exist in the same space as one can only exist at the expense of the other, and eventually only one can remain. Kill the banks, we kill the power along with all of the problems they create to maintain and increase it, and only freedom and prosperity can remain in its place.

      This is what we need to motivate, and what many of us are trying to motivate at this point as well.