What is a CZAR?

The definition of a Czar in Merriam Webster’s dictionary is the following: “One having great power and authority.” [18].  According to Wikipedia,  the title Czar (derived from Caesar) meant Emperor in the European medieval sense of the term, that is, a ruler who claims the same rank as a Roman emperor, with the approval of another emperor or a supreme ecclesiastical official (the Pope or the Ecumenical Patriarch). [13].

 

America’s fascination with power and supreme dominion over the world has hatched up an unquenchable need for titles and wars, in a country with a new aristocracy personified by the corrupt leaders of large corporations who turned politicians.                                           

 

The need for identity has thrusted America into unfettered yearning for its colonial English masters.    Titles and wars help evoke in people a pseudo-sense of majesty and power, which in turn help create a thirst for the new royalty and nobility. Royal events are incessantly covered by our corporate media reviving a fake sense of nostalgia to the good old times where kings and Czars ruled with an iron hand. Our alleged democratic leaders have purposefully reincarnated the old Roman Czar system in order to create a mental nexus of the American Empire to the Roman one into the gullible minds of the proles. This strategy has rendered the ignorant and the nostalgic population into desperate herds that will follow their shepherds into the abyss. As a result, the public is directly endorsing the return of these futile titles and costly positions.                                                                                                                          

 

"There've been so many czars over last 50 years in America , and they've all been failures," said Paul Light, an expert on government at New York University . "Nobody takes them seriously anymore." He pointed to officials placed in charge of homeland security and drug policy.                                         

The problem is that "czars" are meant to be all-powerful people who can rise above the problems that plague the federal agencies, Light said, but in the end, they can't. [10].                        

 

On the other hand, the rise of the czar can be traced to the rising concentration of power in the White House, said Leon Panetta current CIA Director and Clinton’s former chief of staff. [10].

Meanwhile, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), the longest-serving Democratic senator, criticized President Obama’s appointment of White House “czars” to oversee federal policy, saying these executive positions amount to a power grab by the executive branch. In a letter to Obama, Byrd complained about his decision to create White House offices on health reform, urban affairs policy, and energy and climate change. Byrd said such positions “can threaten the Constitutional system of checks and balances. At the worst, White House staffs have taken direction and control of programmatic areas that are the statutory responsibility of Senate-confirmed officials.” [14].