Softpanorama

Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Skepticism and critical thinking is not panacea, but can help to understand the world better

Neoclassical Pseudo Theories and Crooked and Bought Economists as Fifth Column of Financial Oligarchy

There is no economics, only political economy, stupid

News Casino Capitalism Recommended Links Bookshelf Neoliberalism as Trotskyism for the rich Number racket Neoliberalism 101: 12 best articles on neoliberalism Economism and abuse of economic theory in American politics
Supply Side or Trickle down economics Invisible Hand Hypothesys Efficient Market Hypothesis Monetarism fiasco Financial Sector Induced Systemic Instability of Economy Hyman Minsky Samuelson's bastard Keynesianism Greenspan as the Chairman of Financial Politburo
In Goldman Sachs we trust: classic example of regulatory capture by financial system hackers GDP as a false measure of a country economic output Mathiness Audacious Oligarchy and "Democracy for Winners" Ayn Rand and her Objectivism Cult Think Tanks Enablers Twelve apostles of deregulation Bill Clinton, the founder of "Vichy left"
Free Market Fundamentalism Friedman --founder of Chicago school of deification of market Lawrence Summers Corruption of Regulators Glass-Steagall repeal Small government smoke screen Rational expectations scam Free Markets Newspeak
The Iron Law of Oligarchy The Deep State Neoliberal Brainwashing -- Journalism in the Service of the Powerful Few Introduction to Lysenkoism Republican Economic Policy Libertarian Philosophy    
John Kenneth Galbraith     History of Casino Capitalism Casino Capitalism Dictionary :-) Elite [Dominance] Theory And the Revolt of the Elite Humor Etc
Is it really necessary for every economist to be brain-dead apologist for the rich and powerful and predatory, in every damn breath?

Bruce Wilder in comments to Clash of Autonomy and Interdependence

Smith briskly takes a sledgehammer to any number of plaster saints cluttering up the edifice of modern economics:

"assumptions that are patently ridiculous: that individuals are rational and utility-maximizing (which has become such a slippery notion as to be meaningless), that buyers and sellers have perfect information, that there are no transaction costs, that capital flows freely"

And then...papers with cooked figures, economists oblivious to speculative factors driving oil prices, travesty versions of Keynes's ideas that airbrush out its most characteristic features in the name of mathematical tractability.

And then...any number of grand-sounding theoretical constructs: the Arrow-Debreu theorem, the Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium model, the Black-Scholes option model, Value at Risk, CAPM, the Gaussian copula, that only work under blatantly unrealistic assumptions that go by high falutin' names - equilibrium, ergodicity, and so on.

The outcome of this pseudo-scientific botching is an imposing corpus of pretentious quackery that somehow elevates unregulated "free markets" into the sole mechanism for distribution of the spoils of economic activity. We are supposed to believe that by some alchemical process, maximum indulgence of human greed results in maximum prosperity for all. That's unfair to alchemy: compared with the threadbare scientific underpinnings of this economic dogma, alchemy is a model of rigor.

How Unenlightened Self Interest Undermined Democracy and Corrupted Capitalism

How many others are being paid for punditry? Or has the culture of corruption spread so far that the question is, Who isn't?

PAUL KRUGMAN, NYT, December 19, 2005

"MIT and Wharton and University of Chicago created the financial engineering instruments which, like Samson and Delilah, blinded every CEO. They didn't realize the kind of leverage they were doing and they didn't understand when they were really creating a real profit or a fictitious one."

Paul Samuelson


Introduction

When you see this "neoclassical" gallery of expensive intellectual prostitutes (sorry, respectable priests of a dominant religion) that pretend to be professors of economics in various prominent universities, it is difficult not to say "It's political economy stupid". Those lackeys of ruling elite are just handing microphone bought by financial oligarchy.  Here is am Amazon.com review of  ECONned How Unenlightened Self Interest Undermined Democracy and Corrupted Capitalism eBook Yves Smith that  states this position well:

kievite:
Neoclassical economics as a universal door opener for financial oligarchy

There are many good reviews of the book published already and I don't want to repeat them. But I think there is one aspect of the book that was not well covered in the published reviews and which I think is tremendously important and makes the book a class of its own: the use of neoclassical economics as a universal door opener for financial oligarchy. I hope that the term "econned" will became a new word in English language.

Neoclassical economics has become the modern religion with its own priests, sacred texts and a scheme of salvation. It was a successful attempt to legitimize the unlimited rule of financial oligarchy by using quasi-mathematical, oversimplified and detached for reality models. The net result is a new brand of theology, which proved to be pretty powerful in influencing people and capturing governments("cognitive regulatory capture"). Like Marxism, neoclassical economics is a triumph of ideology over science. It was much more profitable though: those who were the most successful in driving this Trojan horse into the gates were remunerated on the level of Wall Street traders.

Economics is essentially a political science. And politics is about perception. Neo-classical economics is all about manipulating the perception in such a way as to untie hands of banking elite to plunder the country (and get some cramps from the table for themselves). Yves contributed to our understanding how "These F#@king Guys" as Jon Steward defined them, economics professors from Chicago, Harvard, Columbia, Princeton and some other places warmed by flow of money from banks for specific services provided managed to serve as a fifth column helping Wall Street to plunder the country. The rhetorical question that a special counsel to the U.S. Army, Joseph Welch, asked Senator McCarthy: "Have you no sense of decency?" applies.

The main effect of neoclassical economics is elevating unregulated ( "free" in neoclassic economics speak) markets into the key mechanism for distribution of the results of economic activity with banks as all-powerful middlemen and sedating any opposition with pseudo-mathematical mumbo-jumbo. Complexity was used as a powerful smoke screen to conceal greed and incompetence. As a result financial giants were able to loot almost all sectors of economics with impunity and without any remorse, not unlike the brutal conquerors in Middle Ages.

The key to the success of this nationwide looting is that people should be brainwashed/indoctrinated to believe that by some alchemical process, maximum level of greed results in maximum prosperity for all. Collapse of the USSR helped in this respect driving the message home: look how the alternative ended, when in reality the USSR was a neo-feudal society. But the exquisite irony here is that Bolsheviks-style ideological brainwashing was applied very successfully to the large part of the US population (especially student population) using neo-classical economics instead of Marxism (which by-and-large was also a pseudo-religious economic theory with slightly different priests and the plan of salvation ;-). The application of badly constructed mathematical models proved to be a powerful tool for distorting reality in a certain, desirable for financial elite direction. One of the many definitions of Ponzi Scheme is "transfer liabilities to unwilling others." The use of detached from reality mathematical models fits this definition pretty well.

The key idea here is that neoclassical economists are not and never have been scientists: much like Marxist economists they always were just high priests of a dangerous cult -- neoliberalism -- and they are more then eager to stretch the truth for the benefit of the sect (and indirectly to their own benefit). All-in-all this is not unlike Lysenkoism: state support was and still is here, it is just working more subtly via ostracism, without open repressions. Look at Shiller story on p.9.

I think that one of lasting insights provided by Econned is the demonstration how the US society was taken hostage by the ideological views of the neoclassical economic school that has dominated the field at least for 30 or may be even 50 years. And that this ideological coup d'état was initiated and financed by banking establishment who was a puppeteer behind the curtain. This is not unlike the capture of Russia by Bolsheviks supported by German intelligence services (and Bolshevics rule lasted slightly longer -- 65 years). Bolsheviks were just adherents of similar wrapped in the mantle of economic theory religious cult, abeit more dangerous and destructive for the people of Russia then neoclassical economics is for the people of the USA. Quoting Marx we can say "History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce".

That also means that there is no easy way out of the current situation. Ideologies are sticky and can lead to the collapse of society rather then peaceful evolution.

So it's no surprise that there is a strong evidence that neo-classical economics is not a science, it's a political ideology of financial oligarchy masquerading as science. Or a religious cult, if you wish.

So it's no surprise that there is a strong evidence that neo-classical economics is not a science, it's a political ideology of financial oligarchy masquerading as science. Or a religious cult, if you wish.

The cult which served as a Trojan horse for bankers to grab power and wealth by robbing fellow Americans. In a way this is a classic story of a parasite killing the host. The powers that be in academia put their imprimatur on economic ‘theory,’ select and indoctrinate its high priests to teach it, and with a host of media players grinding out arguments pro and con this and that, provide legitimacy sufficient for cover of bankers objectives. Which control the disposition and annuity streams of pension fund assets and related financial services. In his new documentary Inside Job, filmmaker Charles Ferguson provides strong evidence of a systematic mass corruption of economic profession (Yahoo! Finance):

Ferguson points to 20 years of deregulation, rampant greed (a la Gordon Gekko) and cronyism. This cronyism is in large part due to a revolving door between not only Wall Street and Washington, but also the incestuous relationship between Wall Street, Washington and academia.

The conflicts of interest that arise when academics take on roles outside of education are largely unspoken, but a very big problem. “The academic economics discipline has been very heavily penetrated by the financial services industry,” Ferguson tells Aaron in the accompanying clip. “Many prominent academics now actually make the majority of their money from the financial services industry, not from teaching or research. [This fact] has definitely compromised the research work and the policy advice that we get from academia.”

... ... ...

Feguson is astonished by the lack of regulation demanding financial disclosure of all academics and is now pushing for it. “At a minimum, federal law should require public disclosure of all outside income that is in any way related to professors’ publishing and policy advocacy,” he writes. “It may be desirable to go even further, and to limit the total size of outside income that potentially generates conflicts of interest.”

The dismantling of economic schools that favor financial oligarchy interests over real research (and prosecuting academic criminals -- many prominent professors in Chicago, Harvard, Columbia and other prominent members of neo-classical economic church) require a new funding model. As neoliberalism itself, the neoclassical economy is very sticky. Chances for success of any reform in the current environment are slim to non existent.

Here is one apt quote from Zero Hedge discussion of Gonzalo Lira article On The Identity Of The False Religion Behind The Mask Of Economic Science zero hedge

"They analyze data for Christ sakes"

Just like Mishkin analyzed Iceland for $120k? a huge proportion in US [are] on Fed payroll, or beneficiaries of corporate thinktank cash; they are coverup lipstick and makeup; hacks for hire.

Like truth-trashing mortgage pushers, credit raters, CDO CDS market manipulators and bribe-fueled fraud enablers of all stripes -- they do it for the dough -- and because everybody else is doing it.

It's now a common understanding that "These F#@king Guys" as Jon Steward defined them, professors  of neoclassical economics from Chicago, Harvard and some other places are warmed by flow of money from financial services industries for specific services provided managed to serve as a fifth column helping financial oligarchy to destroy the country. This role of neo-classical economists as the fifth column of financial oligarchy is an interesting research topic. Just don't expect any grants for it ;-).

As Reinhold Niebuhr aptly noted in his classic Moral Man and Immoral Society
Since inequalities of privilege are greater than could possibly be defended rationally, the intelligence of privileged groups is usually applied to the task of inventing specious proofs for the theory that universal values spring from, and that general interests are served by, the special privileges which they hold.

I would like to stress it again: they are not and never have been scientists: they are just high priests of dangerous cult -- neoliberalism -- and they are more then eager to stretch the truth for the sect (and that means their own) benefits. Fifth column of financial oligarchy. All-in-all this is not unlike Lysenkoism: at some point state support became obvious as financial oligarchy gained significant share of government power (as Glass-Steagall repeal signified). It is just more subtle working via ostracism and flow of funding, without open repressions. See also Politicization of science and The Republican War on Science

Like Russia with Bolsheviks, the US society was taken hostage by the ideological views of the Chicago economic school that has dominated the field for approximately 50 years ( as minimum over 30 years). Actually the situation not unlike the situation with Lysenkoism is the USSR. It's pretty notable that the USA suffered 30 years of this farce, actually approximately the same amount of time the USSR scientific community suffered from Lysenkoism (1934-1965)

Rules of disclosure of sources of financing for economic research are non-existent


"Over the past 30 years, the economics profession—in economics departments, and in business, public policy, and law schools—has become so compromised by conflicts of interest that it now functions almost as a support group for financial services and other industries whose profits depend heavily on government policy.

The route to the 2008 financial crisis, and the economic problems that still plague us, runs straight through the economics discipline. And it's due not just to ideology; it's also about straightforward, old-fashioned money."

Peter Dormat noticed amazing similarity between medical researchers taking money from drug companies and economists. In case of medical researchers widespread corruption can at least be partially kept in check by rules of disclosure. Universities are being called out for their failure to disclose to public agencies the other, private grants researchers are pulling in. This is not perfect policing as the universities themselves get a cut of the proceeds, so that the conflict of interest exists but at least this is theirs too.

But there is no corresponding policy for economics. So for them there are not even rules to be broken. And this is not a bug, this is  feature.  In a sense corruption is officially institualized and expected in economics. Being a paid shill is the typical career of many professional economists. Some foundations require an acknowledgment in the published research they support, but that's all about “thank you”, not disclaimer about the level of influence of those who pay for the music exert on the selection of the tune. Any disclosure of other, privately-interested funding sources by economists is strictly voluntary, and in practice seldom occurs. Trade researchers can be funded by foreign governments or business associations and so on and so forth.

In this atmosphere pseudo-theories have currency and are attractive to economists who want to enrich themselves. That situation is rarely reflected in mainstream press. For example, there some superficial critiques of neo-classical economics as a new form of Lysenkoism (it enjoyed the support of the state) but MSM usually frame the meltdown of neo-classical economic theory something like "To all you corrupt jerks out there: shake off the old camouflage as it became too visible and find a new way misleading the masses...". At the same time it's a real shocker, what a bunch of toxic theories and ideologies starting from Reagan have done to the US economy.

That suggests that neo-economics such as Milton Friedman (and lower level patsies like Eugene Fama ) were just paid propagandists of a superficial, uninformed, and simplistic view of the world that was convenient to the ruling elite. While this is somewhat simplistic explanation, it's by-and-large true and that was one of the factors led the USA very close to the cliff... Most of their theories is not only just nonsense for any trained Ph.D level mathematician or computer scientist, they look like nonsense to any person with a college degree, who looks at them with a fresh, unprejudiced mind. There are several economic myths, popularized by well paid propagandists over the last thirty years, that are falling hard in the recent series of financial crises: the efficient market hypothesis, the inherent benefits of globalization from the natural equilibrium of national competitive advantages, and the infallibility of unfettered greed as a ideal method of managing and organizing human social behavior and maximizing national production.

I would suggest that and economic theory has a strong political-economic dimension. The cult of markets, ideological subservience and manipulation, etc. certainly are part of neo-classical economics that was influenced by underling political agenda this pseudo-theory promotes. As pdavidsonutk wrote: July 16, 2009 16:14

Keynes noted that "classical theorists resemble Euclidean geometers in a non Euclidean world who, discovering that in experience straight lines apparently parallel often meet, rebuke the lines for not keeping straight --as the only remedy for the unfortunate collisions. Yet in truth there is no remedy except to throw over the axiom of parallels to work out a non-Euclidean geometry. SOMETHING SIMILAR IS REQUIRED IN ECONOMICS TODAY. " [Emphasis added]

As I pointed out in my 2007 book JOHN MAYNARD KEYNES (Mentioned in this ECONOMIST article as a biography "of the master") Keynes threw over three classical axioms: (1) the neutral money axiom (2) the gross substitution axiom, and (3) the ergodic axiom.

The latter is most important for understanding why modern macroeconomics is dwelling in an Euclidean economics world rather than the non-Euclidean economics Keynes set forth.

The Ergodic axiom asserts that the future is merely the statistical shadow of the past so that if one develops a probability distribution using historical data, the same probability distribution will govern all future events till the end of time!! Thus in this Euclidean economics there is no uncertainty about the future only probabilistic risk that can reduce the future to actuarial certainty! In such a world rational people and firms know (with actuarial certainty) their intertemporal budget constrains and optimize -- so that there can never be an loan defaults, insolvencies, or bankruptcies.

Keynes argued that important economic decisions involved nonergodic processes, so that the future could NOT be forecasted on the basis of past statistical probability results -- and therefore certain human institutions had to be develop0ed as part of the law of contracts to permit people to make crucial decisions regarding a future that they "knew" they could not know and still sleep at night. When the future seems very uncertain, then rational people in a nonergodic world would decide not to make any decisions to commit their real resources -- but instead save via liquid assets so they could make decisions another day when the future seemed to them less uncertain.

All this is developed and the policy implications derived in my JOHN MAYNARD KEYNES (2007) book. Furthermore this nonergodic model is applied to the current financial and economic crisis and its solution in my 2009 book THE KEYNES SOLUTION: THE PATH TO GLOBAL PROSPERITY (Palgrave/Macmillan) where I tell the reader what Keynes would have written regarding today's domestic crisis in each nation and its international aspects.

Paul Davidson ghaliban wrote:

July 16, 2009 15:34

I think you could have written a shorter article to make your point about the dismal state of economics theory and practice, and saved space to think more imaginatively about ways to reform.

A bit like biology, economics must become econology - a study of real economic systems. It must give up its physics-envy. This on its own will lead its practitioners closer to the truth.

Like biological systems, economic systems are complex, and often exhibit emergent properties that cannot be predicted from the analysis of component parts. The best way to deal with this is (as in biology) to start with the basic organizational unit of analysis - the individual, and then study how the individual makes economic decisions in larger and larger groups (family/community), and how groups take economic decisions within larger and larger forms of economic organization. From this, econologists should determine whether there are any enduring patterns in how aggregate economic decisions are taken. If there are no easily discernable patterns, and aggregate decisions cannot be predicted from a knowledge of individual decision-making preferences, then the theory must rely (as it does in biology) on computer simulations with the economy replicated in as much detail as possible to limit the scope for modeling error. This path will illuminate the "physiology" of different economies.

A second area of development must look into "anatomy" - the connections between actors within the financial system, the connections between economic actors within the real economy, and the connections between the real and financial economies. What are the precise links demand and supply links between these groups, and how does money really flow through the economic system? A finer knowledge of economic anatomy will make it easier to produce better computer simulations of the economy, which will make it a bit easier to study economic physiology.

"Markets uber alles" or more correctly "Financial oligarchy uber alles"

In her interview What Exactly Is Neoliberalism  Wendy Brown advanced some Professor Wolin ideas to a new level and provide explanation why "neoclassical crooks" like Professor  Frederic Mishkin (of Financial Stability in Iceland fame) still rule the economics departments of the USA. They are instrumental in giving legitimacy to the neoliberal rule favoured by the financial oligarchy:

"... I treat neoliberalism as a governing rationality through which everything is "economized" and in a very specific way: human beings become market actors and nothing but, every field of activity is seen as a market, and every entity (whether public or private, whether person, business, or state) is governed as a firm. Importantly, this is not simply a matter of extending commodification and monetization everywhere-that's the old Marxist depiction of capital's transformation of everyday life. Neoliberalism construes even non-wealth generating spheres-such as learning, dating, or exercising-in market terms, submits them to market metrics, and governs them with market techniques and practices. Above all, it casts people as human capital who must constantly tend to their own present and future value. ..."

"... The most common criticisms of neoliberalism, regarded solely as economic policy rather than as the broader phenomenon of a governing rationality, are that it generates and legitimates extreme inequalities of wealth and life conditions; that it leads to increasingly precarious and disposable populations; that it produces an unprecedented intimacy between capital (especially finance capital) and states, and thus permits domination of political life by capital; that it generates crass and even unethical commercialization of things rightly protected from markets, for example, babies, human organs, or endangered species or wilderness; that it privatizes public goods and thus eliminates shared and egalitarian access to them; and that it subjects states, societies, and individuals to the volatility and havoc of unregulated financial markets. ..."

"... with the neoliberal revolution that homo politicus is finally vanquished as a fundamental feature of being human and of democracy. Democracy requires that citizens be modestly oriented toward self-rule, not simply value enhancement, and that we understand our freedom as resting in such self-rule, not simply in market conduct. When this dimension of being human is extinguished, it takes with it the necessary energies, practices, and culture of democracy, as well as its very intelligibility. ..."

"... For most Marxists, neoliberalism emerges in the 1970s in response to capitalism's falling rate of profit; the shift of global economic gravity to OPEC, Asia, and other sites outside the West; and the dilution of class power generated by unions, redistributive welfare states, large and lazy corporations, and the expectations generated by educated democracies. From this perspective, neoliberalism is simply capitalism on steroids: a state and IMF-backed consolidation of class power aimed at releasing capital from regulatory and national constraints, and defanging all forms of popular solidarities, especially labor. ..."

"... The grains of truth in this analysis don't get at the fundamental transformation of social, cultural, and individual life brought about by neoliberal reason. They don't get at the ways that public institutions and services have not merely been outsourced but thoroughly recast as private goods for individual investment or consumption. And they don't get at the wholesale remaking of workplaces, schools, social life, and individuals. For that story, one has to track the dissemination of neoliberal economization through neoliberalism as a governing form of reason, not just a power grab by capital. There are many vehicles of this dissemination -- law, culture, and above all, the novel political-administrative form we have come to call governance. It is through governance practices that business models and metrics come to irrigate every crevice of society, circulating from investment banks to schools, from corporations to universities, from public agencies to the individual. It is through the replacement of democratic terms of law, participation, and justice with idioms of benchmarks, objectives, and buy-ins that governance dismantles democratic life while appearing only to instill it with "best practices." ..."

"... Progressives generally disparage Citizens United for having flooded the American electoral process with corporate money on the basis of tortured First Amendment reasoning that treats corporations as persons. However, a careful reading of the majority decision also reveals precisely the thoroughgoing economization of the terms and practices of democracy we have been talking about. In the majority opinion, electoral campaigns are cast as "political marketplaces," just as ideas are cast as freely circulating in a market where the only potential interference arises from restrictions on producers and consumers of ideas-who may speak and who may listen or judge. Thus, Justice Kennedy's insistence on the fundamental neoliberal principle that these marketplaces should be unregulated paves the way for overturning a century of campaign finance law aimed at modestly restricting the power of money in politics. Moreover, in the decision, political speech itself is rendered as a kind of capital right, functioning largely to advance the position of its bearer, whether that bearer is human capital, corporate capital, or finance capital. This understanding of political speech replaces the idea of democratic political speech as a vital (if potentially monopolizable and corruptible) medium for public deliberation and persuasion. ..."

"... My point was that democracy is really reduced to a whisper in the Euro-Atlantic nations today. Even Alan Greenspan says that elections don't much matter much because, "thanks to globalization . . . the world is governed by market forces," not elected representatives. ..."

 


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

Home 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section

I find an attempt to elevate academic finance and economics to sciences by using the word "scientism" to be bizarre. Finance models like CAPM, Black-Scholes and VAR all rest on assumptions that are demonstrably false, such as rational investors and continuous markets.

May 11, 2012 at 1-40 pm

[Jan 19, 2021] The US seems to have gone completely crazy these day.

Jan 19, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

vk , Jan 19 2021 18:40 utc | 2

The U.S. seems to have gone completely crazy these day.

Mutazione dello Stato.

We were born and raised in the 20th Century or the 21st Century, so we're accustomed with the idea that deep changes in society can only happen through revolutions. That's not true: Marx delineated in which conditions change happens through revolution, but he never stated all societal changes are revolutions.

A society can change positively or negatively. Positively when it is in an ascendant phase of its mode of production. Negatively when it is in a declining phase of its mode of production (every mode of production has an entropy, so this is always the case).

When it is changing negatively, it can do so mainly in two ways: sectarianism (decay through division and fragmentation) and/or withering (decay through shrinking of economic base and the rise of better systems).

In my opinion the USA is decaying through sectarianism.

We can observe today collapsed by sectarianism in the Middle East (Shia vs. Sunni; destruction of Iraq; destruction of Libya etc. etc.).

A famous example of collapse by withering is Ancient Sparta, which refused to reform and successfully crushed all the revolution attempts that rose against it. But in the end its own system reached its logical conclusion and, by the time the Roman Legions arrived to conquer it, it already was an insignificant village.

So, yes: even societies that successfully crush the revolution attempts against it are condemned to change and eventually disappear. Conservatives from all around the globe should not feed themselves the illusion they can live in their little worlds forever.


William Gruff , Jan 19 2021 20:57 utc | 24

vk @2

The American empire is massive and cannot really be compared with Sparta. It is entirely reasonable to assume that its demise involves both withering and fragmentation. That said I had previously assumed that the empire's vassal states would fragment away while the core withered, but given how unhinged America and its leadership have become we could see the cracks in the USA become chasms surprisingly soon. The empire's vassal states could be left orbiting around a debris field.

Mario , Jan 19 2021 21:09 utc | 28

After the USSR, the USA collapses

by Thierry Meyssan:

"Everything has an end, so do empires, both the United States and the Soviet Union. Washington has outrageously favoured a small camarilla of ultra-billionaires. Now it has to face its old demons, prepare for secession and civil war..."

"...Part of the power has already tipped democratic institutions into the hands of a few ultra-billionaires. The United States that we knew no longer exists. Their agony has begun."
https://www.voltairenet.org/article211982.html

[Jan 17, 2021] "79% of Americans think the US is falling apart" those not accounted for are possibly homeless or illiterate and don't have the opportunity of putting their view forward

Highly recommended!
In the reality the USA is not falling apart. It is neoliberalism that is falling apart and this is just how common people feel during the collapse of neliberalism.
Jan 17, 2021 | www.rt.com

OneHorseGuy 1 day ago 15 Jan, 2021 02:17 PM

"79% of Americans think the US is falling apart" those not accounted for are possibly homeless or illiterate and don't have the opportunity of putting their view forward.
RTaccount 1 day ago 15 Jan, 2021 02:22 PM
There will be no peace, no unity, and no prosperity. And there shouldn't be.
TheFishh RTaccount 1 day ago 15 Jan, 2021 03:38 PM
The US regimes past and present have worn out their bag of tricks. A magician is a con-man. And the only way they can entertain and spellbind the crowd with their routines is if everyone just ignores the sleight of hand. But people are starting to call the US out for the tricks it is pulling, and that's where the magician's career ends.
SJMan333 23 hours ago 16 Jan, 2021 01:02 AM
America as a whole is now reaping the fruits of its decades of exceptionalism complex. Through its propaganda machine, Americans as individuals and collectively as a society, have been brainwashed into believing that laws, rules and basic human decency do not apply to themselves. These are only sweetened poisons for them to shove down the throats of other lesser countries, especially those in Africa, Latin America, Middle East and Asia ((bluntly put, non-white countries)) when it suited America's global resource thievery and daylight wealth grabbing. Habitualized into bullying every other countries with no resistance, Americans are now showing their ugly faces on each other. The same exceptionalism delusion "the laws apply to you, not me'' is driving every American (except the colored Americans probably) to blame all the ills of the country on everyone else except himself. Nancy Pelosi advocated total lock-down but treated herself to a total grooming in a hair saloon is just one example. For the sins it has committed over the decades, I guess the time is right for USA to have a dose of its own medicine. Except in this case, America never thought it necessary to develop an antidote.

[Jan 15, 2021] Trump supporters are pushed into underground

I am strongly against balkanization of the country. The example of the USSR shows where it leads -- misery of common pople and dramatic drop of the standard of living, while new gand of ruthless oligarchs emerge from the ruins.
Jan 15, 2021 | www.rt.com

Pushing the Trump-inspired populist movement underground may only cause it to resort to more drastic measures. As the leftist libertarian reporter Glenn Greenwald observes ,

"these people know they are scorned and looked down upon... and the more you humiliate and make them feel powerless, the more you take away their ability to organize and express that rage, it's gonna find an outlet in more destructive ways."

As a former professor at a top-ranking university, I favored a Trump re-election, not because I support Trump so much as abhor what the opposition represents and is proving itself to be. In response to the social media threat to expression, I have inaugurated a new group on Telegram called 'Thought Criminals'. There, fellow 'thought deviationists' like me are able to express views that are effectively proscribed on mainstream social media platforms. No one among us advocates violence or the overthrow of the government. None of us is 'racist'. We advocate only the rights enshrined in the US Constitution.

But some groups, no doubt, are intent on violence. Yet the violent extremists consist mostly of Antifa and related 'activists', who will unfortunately trick Trump supporters into another error during the inauguration, like some appeared to do when involved in the Capitol siege. It's not as if violent extremists among the Trump base were always there, ready to pounce on any opportunity to express their "racist," "white nationalist" views.

Rather, as the rising party has already demonstrated, these people stand to lose the most under a Biden-Harris regime, whose Big Tech and mainstream media allies act as governmental enforcement apparatuses.

Trump supporters have been hated and demonized simply for wanting to live without being reprimanded and punished for their whiteness, their middle-Americanness, or their values. They face an anti-white, anti-native, anti-middle-America extremism that is set to silence and crush them into submission.

These and others will form a new underground under the prevailing ideological and political hegemony. This banishment of millions, and not Trump, is why the nation will fall apart, if indeed it does.


JJ_Rousseau 5 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 02:58 PM

The best thing that could happen is for USA to "balkanize". For the rest of the world, and for Americans too. The founding fathers intentionally put restraints on the federal government's power to prevent the situation we now face. Both parties (actually the duopoly) are guilty of breaching the constitution, on so many levels we have lost count
Ronj14848 JJ_Rousseau 1 hour ago 15 Jan, 2021 07:23 PM
The USA have more American in uniform outside America than civilian Americans inside America. You bleed yourself dry trying to be the boss of the world.
chert JJ_Rousseau 3 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 04:52 PM
Right, states should have more power than the federal government. Case in point: North Dakota is trying to pass a law to sue Facebook and Twitter for those who have been censored on those platforms. But federal law under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act will supersede because federal law wins.
apothqowejh 4 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 04:17 PM
As an American, I can't say a reckoning hasn't been overdue. The myopia in this country, and the tolerance for evil, was bound to rebound. From a refusal to honestly look at 9/11, a refusal to accept responsibility for Iraq, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan and a host of other insanely brutal blunders, to an acceptance of such horrors as the USAPatriot Act and the COVID scam, everyday Americans have obliviously sleepwalked into a totalitarian dystopia. Tyranny abroad inevitably leads to tyranny at home, and we have well-earned it by refusing to vote for peace and non-interventionism; for limited government, for responsible spending. Now our votes no longer matter, and we are caught helpless in the whirlwind of our own destruction.
newagerage apothqowejh 4 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 04:33 PM
The CIA, NSA, Pentagon... all these corporations lead to disaster as the employees have to keep causing trouble to justify their jobs and spend, spend like crazy, the Army and intelligence agencies spending the hard worked money from Silicon Valley and other sectors. The country just doesn't make sense, first outsource jobs to China and then when they see that Chinese people are smarter than them outsource those to India? are Indians idiots? I don't think so... both countries will rule the World by the end of the century. And the most important of all... where is your public education system? you can live without a proper health system, China does, but without a decent public education system? most Americans don't know where Portugal or Belgium is placed, no matter black or white...
ceshawn 6 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 02:31 PM
Trump didn't do this. The irrational reaction to Trump did this. It started with the now-fully mythological Russia-gate nonsense (that started with an almost ridiculously made up FISA warrant application). Continued through constant over-the-top challenges by Democrats of Trump following Obama-era laws (separation of children and adults for illegal border crossings) and the clear obstruction used by opponents during his entire Presidency. Trump was a disaster, Biden will be a nightmare (or a complete liar), but the left shouldn't be complaining when the reaction to their candidate is equally as disturbing as their reaction to the right (and yes, the circus that was the "raid" at the Capitol is just as bad as the intel community doing shady things against a sitting President).
Ronj14848 ceshawn 1 hour ago 15 Jan, 2021 07:27 PM
Trump didnt start new wars......but he has created a situation that foriegn wars will spring from his actions. He has created hate for a country that during the second world war was a much loved country.
billy brown ceshawn 4 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 03:36 PM
What could the 'rioters' do? We aren't going to let them poison us anymore. This election will not be stolen and the new patriot act isn't going to get passed quietly. They are going to have to crush us or allow a partition of the country
ceshawn 5 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 02:36 PM
If I were Russia or China, I would be watching carefully. Biden almost HAS to go after Russia over the Crimean disaster of Obama and China will be his easy-out enemy if things are complicated otherwise. North Korea will somehow become a big deal again as well. Let those missiles fly, because the incoming administration has a proven track record of blowing up innocent women and children for "funsies" (drone strikes on "suspected" terrorists...oh and their families) without any form of due process or care for the safety of collateral damage.
Ronj14848 ceshawn 58 minutes ago 15 Jan, 2021 07:36 PM
True...the media support the military industrial complex. Their friends own the miltary industrial complex . See who they support politically and avoid them like the plague.
Ronnie Spelbos ceshawn 2 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 06:04 PM
if I was Russia or an Eastern European nation I would offer asylum to white heterosexual men and their families who want to leave the US. Take advantage of the brain capital and work ethic of this group. The US is no country for white men.
Ohhho 6 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 01:41 PM
The Evil empire felt vulnerable so it lashed out with vengeance! None if it helps to fix the issues behind the problem so I expect to see more of it in the near future!
TheFishh Ohhho 5 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 03:32 PM
There are literally just a few things the US can do to rebound as a decent country, but the establishment doesn't want to make those moves. They rather see everything collapse than see their wealth and power decreased by any amount.
OneHorseGuy 6 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 02:17 PM
"79% of Americans think the US is falling apart" those not accounted for are possibly homeless or illiterate and don't have the opportunity of putting their view forward.
Ronnie Spelbos OneHorseGuy 2 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 06:02 PM
102% think the US is falling apart - cites Dominion.
newswithoutbord OneHorseGuy 6 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 02:31 PM
Spot on, mate!
RTaccount 6 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 02:22 PM
There will be no peace, no unity, and no prosperity. And there shouldn't be.
TheFishh RTaccount 4 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 03:38 PM
The US regimes past and present have worn out their bag of tricks. A magician is a con-man. And the only way they can entertain and spellbind the crowd with their routines is if everyone just ignores the sleight of hand. But people are starting to call the US out for the tricks it is pulling, and that's where the magician's career ends.
omyomy RTaccount 5 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 02:54 PM
We the sane people know who is picking a fight. No matter what the propaganda outlets decree.
Tor Gjesdal 6 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 02:18 PM
79%,sure? OK. Very soon 85% of Westerners will understand their Countries are heading for failures. They have been deceived for way too long.
Twenty Tor Gjesdal 5 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 03:23 PM
The alternative to western governments is dictators, one party rule. Yes, most western governmental concepts are idealistic, but we wouldn't trade for anything else because we know better.
JIMI JAMES Tor Gjesdal 6 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 02:31 PM
0 covid cases,i dont think so.
soumalinna1 4 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 03:36 PM
Correct. America will never be the same again. Democrats and CNN destroyed a once great nation.
Ronnie Spelbos soumalinna1 2 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 06:06 PM
The 1965 Immigration Act destroyed the US. A country too diverse with little in common was always bound the fall apart.
Drayk soumalinna1 3 hours ago 15 Jan, 2021 04:42 PM
How did they do that?

[Jan 15, 2021] Replacement of the Bill of Rights, with the Bill of Don'ts

Jan 15, 2021 | www.rt.com

In their efforts to expunge the Trump movement from memory let alone existence, these neo-Stalinists are hellbent on nullifying constitutionally guaranteed rights – freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and the right to bear arms are under assault.

In place of the Bill of Rights, they would impose a Bill of Don'ts:

Don't say what we don't want to hear.

Don't gather where we don't allow, especially if you are a 'deplorable'.

Don't bother petitioning for grievances, because we don't care. Don't own weapons and don't defend yourself when you or your property are attacked, even as the police are defunded.

Don't tell us about your right to privacy because our right to surveil you supersedes it.

Don't tell us you have the right to confront the witnesses aligned against you, or see the evidence alleged against you, or to present evidence and witnesses in your own defense. That's your white privilege speaking, and we will not tolerate hate speech.

Don't expect us to be bound by due process or the rule of law. Feelings and desired outcomes trump facts and rules, both of which are tools of oppression, relics of the fascist patriarchy.

Don't object, or we will cancel you entirely from these Disunited States of Woketopia.

And first and foremost, don't dare have the temerity to question election results that have handed us uncontested power.

Only authoritarians sanction this state of affairs. The harm they will do, as they neglect and inflict further pain on the Republic, will be immeasurable. The nation is failing, not merely because it is divided, but because a contingent has rejected its foundational principles. That contingent is now in control.

[Jan 15, 2021] Blaming all its problems on foreign actors is the scapegoating and smoke screen over endemic US problems. Especially the vast social and economic inequality caused by neoliberalism and the destruction of the New Deal capitalism. Both parties seem unwilling or incapable of understanding what needs to be fixed in a fundamentally broken system.

Jan 15, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Jan 15 2021 19:31 utc | 115

Strategic-Culture 's Editorial is the best journalistic reporting on the political split within the Outlaw US Empire I've come across. One short telling excerpt:

"This [blaming all its problems on foreign actors] is the ultimate scapegoating and destructive denial over endemic U.S. problems. Those problems are topped by the vast social and economic inequality that has been presaged by decades of neoliberal capitalism overseen by both Republicans and Democrats. Both parties seem unwilling or incapable of understanding what needs to be fixed in a fundamentally broken system . The rise of Trump was something of a diversion from addressing the root problem. And blaming Russia for ongoing problems is also another futile diversion. This systemic denial of reality by the American political class is why the U.S. crisis will continue to deteriorate because blaming everyone else but itself avoids the necessary ways and means to fix it ." [My Emphasis]

At least we're informed as to why there're no attempts to fix the problems as the Neoliberal Parasites don't want them fixed as they profit greatly as the turmoil shrouds their activities. The Editors agree with most of us at MoA in their prescription for a solution:

"The solution will require mass popular mobilization for democratic rights."

But that's just the sort of action that will be resisted by the Neoliberal Parasites. Will it take a reenactment of the Kent State shootings to galvanize the public? Unfortunately, I think that's very much the case, and there'll be more than one massacre.

Johannes Vermeer , Jan 15 2021 19:51 utc | 116

In the old ages in Greece Sparta oppressed the Helots with brute force during more than 400 years. This historical exmaple proves that rule through violent oppression can be quite stable. I doubt the elites in the USA have enough 'Spartan qualities' to organize the same violent oppression that long, my point is however that it is a proven possibillity

[Jan 14, 2021] After the illegitimate elections, the task is to consolidate power and suppress all those who reject what happened. This is what happened in Ukraine after the Maidan 2014

Highly recommended!
And that's what false flag with Capitol ransacking accomplished. It fives Clinton/Obama/Biden clique card blank for suppressing the dissent
This false flag operation like shooting protesters by snipers during Ukrainian Maydan is a logical end of American Maidan and pursued the same goals -- deposing the current president, hijacking political power and consolidating it via repressions.
Notable quotes:
"... That is why we are witnessing the fussy, aggressive actions of the Democrats - a ridiculous re-impeachment of the president, who will leave the White House in a week, the most severe censorship and suppression of dissent. There is no need for the real winners of fair elections to behave like that, as they are aware of their legitimacy and are confident in themselves (relying on the real, not imaginary, support of the majority of the population). ..."
Jan 14, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org
alaff , Jan 13 2021 20:31 utc | 7

From the "Biden Exploits His Capitol Gains" article:


Joe Biden's own language certainly sounded less like a magnanimous winner uniting his people than like that used by autocrats and dictators to hold onto power, argues Diana Johnstone.

Diana Johnstone's opinion is quite reasonable. In fact, a "creeping"/"bureaucratic" coup d'etat took place in the United States. And it wasn't Trump at all, but Biden & Co. The fact that "Joe Biden's own language sounded like that used by autocrats and dictators to hold onto power" is further confirmation of this.

If you are in the majority and you win the election honestly, then there is no need to act the way the Democrats did. The current aggressive rhetoric of Biden (and other Democrats) is evidence that the elections were stolen/falsified. Biden knows this very well, and therefore his language is as cruel, irreconcilable and repressive as possible. After the illegitimate elections, the task is to consolidate own's power and suppress all those who reject what happened. In fact, this is what happened in Ukraine after the Maidan 2014.

That is why we are witnessing the fussy, aggressive actions of the Democrats - a ridiculous re-impeachment of the president, who will leave the White House in a week, the most severe censorship and suppression of dissent. There is no need for the real winners of fair elections to behave like that, as they are aware of their legitimacy and are confident in themselves (relying on the real, not imaginary, support of the majority of the population).

Wrote some thoughts on this issue.

Leftraru , Jan 13 2021 20:33 utc | 8

Globalization has made the United States a hollow giant. It has produced an enormous wealth gap, and this inequality is producing a breakdown in social cohesion. They have faced crisis before in the form of political polarization, economic hardship and racial tensions, but the situation now is a combination of every one of the mentioned before amplified by orders of magnitude by the pandemic.
The power of the MIC, Wall Street and Big Tech along with their MSM minions acting in a concerted way is the only thing preventing an implosion of the country. Either that or the notion of "American Exceptionalism" is truly implanted in the hearts and minds of the people, whether they realize it or not.

[Jan 11, 2021] Is America's Future a Civil War, by Paul Craig Roberts -

Notable quotes:
"... The military would support whomever pays their salary and their pensions, i.e. the Establishment. However, as Iraq and Afghanistan has shown, the U.S. military, while possessing remarkable firepower when taken on directly and openly, is quite vulnerable. The U.S. military is essentially mercenaries. Mercenaries work for pay. Mercenaries are not willing to die for a cause. You can't spend money if you're dead. ..."
Jan 11, 2021 | www.unz.com

As a person who grew up in the glorious aftermath of World War II, it never occurred to me that in my later years I would be pondering whether the United States would end in civil war or a police state. In the aftermath of the stolen presidential election, it seems a 50-50 toss up.

There is abundant evidence of a police state. One feature of a police state is controlled explanations and the suppression of dissent. We certainly have that in abundance.

Experts are not permitted forums in which to challenge the official position on Covid.

Teachers are suspended for giving offense by using gender pronouns.

Recording stars are dropped by their recording studios for attending the Trump rally. Parents ratted on by their own children are fired from their jobs for attending the Trump rally. https://www.rt.com/usa/512048-capitol-riot-employees-fired/ Antifa is free to riot, loot, intimidate and hassle, but Trump supporters are insurrectionists.

White people are racists who use hateful words and concepts, but those who demonize whites are righting wrongs.

Suppression of dissent and controlling behavior are police state characteristics. It might be less clear to some why dictating permissible use of language is police state control. Think about it this way. If your use of pronouns can be controlled, so can your use of all other words. As concepts involve words, they also can be controlled. In this way inconvenient thoughts and expressions along with accurate descriptions find their way into the Memory Hole.

With the First Amendment gone, or restricted to the demonization of targeted persons, such as "the Trump Deplorables," "white supremacists," "Southern racists," the Second Amendment can't have much life left. As guns are associated with red states, that is, with Trump supporters, outlawing guns is a way to criminalize the red half of the American population that the Establishment considers "deplorable." Those who stand on their Constitutional right will be imprisoned and become cheap prison labor for America's global corporations.

Could all this lead to a civil war or are Americans too beat down to effectively resist? That we won't know until it is put to the test.

Are there clear frontlines? Identity Politics has divided the people across the entire country. The red states are only majority red. It is tempting to see the frontiers as the red center against the blue Northeast and West coasts, but that is misleading. Georgia is a red state with a red governor and legislature, but there were enough Democrats in power locally to steal the presidential and US senate elections.

Another problem for reds is that large cities -- the distribution centers -- such as Atlanta, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Philadelphia, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles -- are in blue hands as are ports and international airports. Effectively, this cuts reds off from outside resources.

What would the US military do? Clearly, the Joint Chiefs and the military/security complex are establishment and not anti-establishment Trumpers. With the soldiers themselves now a racial and gender mix, the soldiers would be as divided as the country. Those not with the Establishment would lack upper level support.

Where are the youth and younger adults? They are in both camps depending on their education. Many of the whites who went to university have been brainwashed against themselves, and regard white Americans as "systemic racists" or "white supremacists" and feel guilt. Those who did not go to university for the most part have experienced to their disadvantage the favoritism given to people of color and have resentment.

What about weapons? How can the reds lose when guns are a household item and blues would never dirty themselves by owning one? The answer is that unlike the War of Northern Aggression in the 1860s, today the weapons in the hands of the military are devastating compared to those in the hands of the public. Unlike in the past, it is impossible for a citizens' militia to stand against the weapons and body armor that the military has. So, unless the military splits, the reds are outgunned. Never believe that the Establishment would not release chemical and biological agents against red forces. Or for that matter nuclear weapons.

What about communications? We know for an absolute fact that the tech monopolies are aligned with the Establishment against the people. So much so that President Trump, in the process of being set-up for prosecution, has been cut off from communicating with his supporters both in social media and email.

The American Establishment is doing to President Trump exactly what it did to Ukrainian President Yanukovych in Washington's orchestrated "Maidan Revolution," called "the Revolution of Dignity" by the liars at Wikipedia, and precisely what it did to Chavez, Maduro, and would like to do to Putin.

Suppose an American civil war occurs. How is it likely to play out? Before investigating this, first consider how the Establishment could prevent it by bringing the red states to its defense. The Trump supporters are the only patriots in the American population. They tend to wear the flag on their sleeve. In contrast, blue state denizens define patriotism as acknowledging America's evils and taking retribution on those white racists/imperialists who committed the evils. In blue states, riots against the "racist system" result in defunding the police. If the Antifa and Black Lives Matter militias were sicced on the Biden regime, red state patriots might see "their country" under attack. It is possible that the "Proud Boys" would come to Biden's defense, not because they believe in Biden but because America is under attack and he is "our president." Alternatively, an Antifa attack on the Biden regime could be portrayed as an unpatriotic attack on America and be used to discourage red state opposition to the police state, just as "Insurrection" has resulted in many Trump supporters declaring their opposition to violence. In other words, it is entirely possible that the patriotism of the "Trump Deplorables" would split the red state opposition and lead to defeat.

Assuming that the Establishment is too arrogant and sure of itself or too stupid to think of this ploy, how would a civil war play out? The Establishment would do everything possible to discredit the case of the "rebels." The true rebels, of course, would be the Establishment which has overthrown the Constitutional order, but no media would make that point. Controlling the media, the Establishment, knowing of the patriotism of its opponents, would portray the "rebels" as foreign agents seeking to overthrow American Democracy.

The "foreign threat" always captures the patriot's attention. We see it right now with Trump supporters falling for the disinformation that Switzerland and Italy are behind the stolen election. Previously, it was Dominion servers in Germany and Serbia that did the deed.

On whose head will the Establishment place the blame for "the War Against America"? There are three candidates: Iran, China, and Russia. Which will the Establishment choose?

To give Iran credit conveys too much power to a relatively small country over America. To blame Iran for our civil war would be belittling.

To blame China won't work, because Trump blamed China for economically undermining America and Trump supporters are generally anti-China. So accusing the red opposition with being China agents would not work.

The blame will be placed on Russia.

This is the easy one. Russia has been the black hat ever since Churchill's Iron Curtain speech in 1946. Americans are accustomed to this enemy. The Cold War reigned from the end of World War II until the Soviet Collapse in 1991. Many, including retired American generals, maintain that the Soviet collapse was faked to put us off guard for conquest.

When the Establishment decided to frame President Trump, the Establishment chose Russia as Trump's co-conspirator against American Democracy. Russiagate, orchestrated by the CIA and FBI, ensured for three years that Trump was accused in the Western media of being in cahoots with Russia. Despite the lack of any evidence, a large percentage of the American and world population was convinced that Trump was put into office by Putin somehow manipulating the vote.

The brainwashing was so successful that three years of Trump sanctions against Russia could not shake the Western peoples back into factual reality.

With Russia as the historic and orchestrated enemy, whatever happens in the United States that can be blamed elsewhere will be blamed on Russia. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, former US Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul, and former Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes have already associated "Trump's insurrection" with Russia. https://www.rt.com/russia/512071-capitol-violence-consequences-fear/

Suppose that an American civil war becomes intense. Suppose that the Establishment's propaganda against Russia becomes the reigning belief as propaganda almost always becomes, how can the Establishment not finish the insurrection threat by attacking the country responsible? The Establishment would be trapped in its own propaganda. Emotions would run away. Russia would hear threats that would have to be taken seriously.

You can bet that Biden's neocon government will be egging this on. American exceptionalism. American hegemony. Russia's fifth column, the Atlanticist Integrationists, who wish absorption into the degenerate and failing Western World, will echo the charges against Russia. This would make the situation a serious international incident with Russia as the threatened villain.

What would the Kremlin do? Would Russia's leaders accept yet another humiliation and false accusation? Or will the anger of the Russian people forever accused and never stood up for by their own government force the Kremlin into awareness that Russia could be attacked at any moment.

Even if the Kremlin is reluctant to acknowledge the threat of war, what if another of the numerous false warnings of incoming ICBMs is received. Unlike the past, is it believed this time?

The stolen election in America, the emerging American Police State, more vicious and better armed than any in the past, could result in American chaos that could be a dire threat to the Russian Federation.

What Trump and his supporters, and perhaps the Kremlin, do not understand is that real evidence no longer counts . The Establishment makes up the evidence that it needs for its agendas. Consider how easy it was for the Capitol Police to remove barriers and allow some Antifa mixed in with Trump supporters into the Capitol. This was all that was required to create a "Trump led insurrection" that terminated the presentation of evidence of electoral fraud and turned the massive rally of support for Trump into a liability. Trump now leaves the presidency as an "insurrectionist" and is set up for continued harassment and prosecution.

As I previously wrote, the stolen election and its acceptance abroad signifies the failure of Western democracy. The collapse of the Western world and its values will affect the entire world.


Joe Stalin , says: January 10, 2021 at 5:16 pm GMT • 23.4 hours ago

How long did it take for the mighty USA military to restore electric utilities in the face of insurgency in Iraq?

https://www.youtube.com/embed/gg-Zd193j60?feature=oembed

No member of the State wants to be picked off one by one, be it military, cops, leadership or functionaries.

What has been overlooked in the debate over the combat potential of violent extremists is the diffusion of something much more rudimentary and potentially more lethal: basic infantry skills. These include coordinated small-team tactical maneuvers supported by elementary marksmanship. The diffusion of such tactics seems to be underway, and it may generate serious concerns for U.S. security policy in the future if ignored.

https://warontherocks.com/2018/02/shock-of-the-mundane-the-dangerous-diffusion-of-basic-infantry-tactics/

Imagine if fuel pipe lines to urban areas were hit, railroad tracks hit, water processing facilities hit; the vision of an easy victory over Red America would quickly come home to the city dwellers.

Harry Huntington , says: January 10, 2021 at 6:02 pm GMT • 22.6 hours ago
@Joe Stalin /p>

Elections in the US are not about picking winners. They are about making voters complicit in governance by their having voted. The most recent election failed to make the Red voters "complict" because there was no transparency and everyone believes there was fraud. No election with mail in voting in the US will every work because everyone will assume fraud.

In a nation as large as the US with as much concentrated city living, logistics are a nightmare. The next time the lights go out, you may wonder. When your grocery chain runs out of meat, you may wonder. When sewers in your city keep breaking, you may wonder. Thus truly scares me.

Vidi , says: January 10, 2021 at 6:13 pm GMT • 22.4 hours ago

today the weapons in the hands of the military are devastating compared to those in the hands of the public

True enough. However, the weapons and the ammunition don't magically appear; they need to be manufactured somewhere, and those places (and/or their suppliers) can be destroyed.

TG , says: January 10, 2021 at 6:19 pm GMT • 22.3 hours ago

I must disagree. There will be no "civil war" in the United States. The establishment controls the levers of power and all communications and all organized structures. There may be a bunch of disaffected citizens, but they will remain a disorganized mob. Any apparent emergent rival for power will be ruthlessly suppressed, deplatformed, villified, or co-opted. The working class has been effectively divided and will waste its energy fighting itself over crumbs ('diversity').

Disorganized mobs do not fight civil wars.

No, the fate of the United States will be the sort of chaotic autocracy we see in places like Mexico and Brazil. Verging on being a failed state, the rich will nonetheless live lives of great luxury secure in their walled estates. Meanwhile the average person will be crushed into poverty, criminal gangs will flourish, and there will be a tension between the central police and local gangs, but gangs are rarely organized enough to truly challenge centralized states, and life will muddle on. There will be little social cohesion and no real trust of central authorities, but that only matters if you want a strong and unified society. The rich will do fine.

On the other hand, the overall national power will decline, and other powers like China (which for all its flaws has not declared war on the working class, nor does it routinely excuse or celebrate incompetence in leadership) will rise and take its place both on the world stage and as the cutting edge of science and culture.

Wyatt , says: January 10, 2021 at 6:48 pm GMT • 21.8 hours ago
@Vidi

And the people making them don't tend to want those weapons used against their friends and neighbors.

Notsofast , says: January 10, 2021 at 8:03 pm GMT • 20.6 hours ago

to me the biggest outcome of this faux coup/insurrection is the splintering of the republican party. with this schism the trump "populists" have been cleanly pared off of the party and thrown overboard and the remaining party will meekly do the bidding of the neocon deep state that now totally controls both of these sock puppet parties. we will now see both parties calling for a unification of our "indispensable nation". more than likely some false flag will provide the necessary impetus to bury the hatchet and focus us all on our new/old enemy. the only hope i see is an outside chance that so many republicans have been redpilled that the party becomes the new whigs and fades into obscurity, leaving room for new parties to rise from the ash. the dems are ripe for a schism themselves with aoc champing at the bit to kick the boomers to the curb and the bernie bros finally realizing that three card monty is a rigged game. i would love to see the destruction of both of these hopelessly corrupt parties but the deep state cthulhu has its tentacles thoroughly wrapped around our poor planet and anything emerging out of this toxic mess would most likely be even worse. the situation reminds me of voltaire's candide and his sage advice to cultivate your garden.

Anon [912] Disclaimer , says: January 10, 2021 at 8:26 pm GMT • 20.2 hours ago

I'd advise the young to develop a "plan B". Pick another country you find bearable amd study it. Find out what jobs are in demand there. Develop those skills in your spare time (computers, electricians, mechanics, etc.). Practice their language an hour or two per week with online resources/dvd's/books. Research their immigration laws and perhaps contact their embassy.

If it gets really awful for whites here, you may be able to take your family some place more hospitable. Hopefully none of this will be neccessary and the rhetoric will tone down. Trump personally really got under the left's skin. Don't umderestimate Hillary's supporters influence here. They were ticked off. The Obama's too. Perhaps they will calm down a notch now. Have a plan B though young whites.

Citizen of a Silly Country , says: January 10, 2021 at 11:17 pm GMT • 17.4 hours ago

Another insightful article by PCR. However, I must somewhat disagree on some points.

What would the US military do?

The military would support whomever pays their salary and their pensions, i.e. the Establishment. However, as Iraq and Afghanistan has shown, the U.S. military, while possessing remarkable firepower when taken on directly and openly, is quite vulnerable. The U.S. military is essentially mercenaries. Mercenaries work for pay. Mercenaries are not willing to die for a cause. You can't spend money if you're dead.

Think of the Troubles in Ireland.

The Establishment absolutely can deliver a punch to an identifiable opponent, but it can't take a punch. Low level violence directed at officers and politicians would bring them to their knees.

Controlling the media, the Establishment, knowing of the patriotism of its opponents, would portray the "rebels" as foreign agents seeking to overthrow American Democracy.

I agree that they will try. However, I suspect that PCR is underestimating how little faith many whites have in the media.

The Establishment will never be more powerful than it is today. They have inherited institutions, the people to man those institutions and a generally functioning economy. Basically, they stole the keys to car that they didn't create. But the Establishment run those institutions and economy into ground. They will slowly start to show cracks.

Whites need to stay low, start forming small groups and begin preparing for the openings that will come.

Dr. Robert Morgan , says: January 11, 2021 at 1:34 am GMT • 15.1 hours ago

The racial right has been fantasizing about a civil war since forever, but I can't see it. Too many people have too much to lose, there's no real desire for blood, and the people are anyway too soft to initiate or withstand the violence real war would unleash upon them. Further, and in stark contrast to the SJWs and antifa, the few racially conscious whites who fantasize about this are mostly too old to make good soldiers. Also, just like the "God emperor" himself, Trumpers are some of the stupidest people on the face of the earth, largely down with their own enslavement, nauseatingly fond of "law and order", sporting "Blue Lives Matter" badges, etc. Despite being preyed upon by blacks and browns for decades now, they still refuse to become racist. Most of them are Bible thumpers who really believe that race is just skin color, that all are equal before their imaginary friend called God, and that Israel is America's greatest ally. Then too, vast numbers of whites work for the government or its many offshoots such as education, law enforcement, the military, and the defense industry. Civil war would mean they'd be revolting against themselves.

Will America become a police state? In case you haven't noticed, Americans already live in a police state, and have for decades. PCR should know this as well as anyone, as he was part of it during the Reagan years. America is an open-air prison Americans built themselves, and they rat each other out and betray each other to keep themselves ideologically in line. When someone white is doxxed and fired for having bad thoughts, who do you think does the enforcing? For the most part, it's other white people. Fake president and China asset Biden is just the new warden.

Harold Smith , says: January 11, 2021 at 3:45 am GMT • 12.9 hours ago

As a person who grew up in the glorious aftermath of World War II, it never occurred to me that in my later years I would be pondering whether the United States would end in civil war or a police state. In the aftermath of the stolen presidential election, it seems a 50-50 toss up.

In a very meaningful sense we already have a "police state." Why do we have a police state? Because our masters realize that they can't run the whole world from anything resembling a constitutional republic (as the Founders and Framers envisioned it). It's the agenda for complete world domination and control that's driving the domestic oppression. As they continue to squander everything of value on the agenda and take more risks, etc., while the corruption and rot continue to take a toll and the country crumbles, the boot will need to come down ever harder on the neck.

And please stop kidding yourself about Trump. It wasn't for the benefit of Joe and Jill Sixpack that he seized Syrian oilfields, tried to start a war with Iran, tried to overthrow the Maduro government in Venezuela, tried to stop Nord Stream 2, started a trade war with China, pulled out of all the nuclear treaties, etc. Trump wasn't just fully onboard with the agenda, he pursued it enthusiastically.

If Trump's nuclear brinkmanship and aggressive foreign policies aren't promptly reversed, the U.S. may end as a pile of nuclear ash. Comments coming out of Moscow recently seem to suggest that Russia is finally losing its patience with interminable U.S. hostility and may soon start responding more forcefully to U.S./NATO provocations (and Biden's tough talk on Russia isn't helping matters any).

Neither Russia, China nor Iran are going to surrender to the USraeli empire and start taking orders, so either the U.S. "government" must back off and accept a multipolar world or WW3 is still on the table, even by accident.

tanabear , says: January 11, 2021 at 5:45 am GMT • 10.9 hours ago

From Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War.

The Civil War in Corcyra

"So savage was the progress of this revolution, and it seemed all the more so because it was one of the first which had broken out. Later, of course, practically the whole of the Hellenic world was convulsed, with rival parties in every state – democratic leaders trying to bring in the Athenians, and oligarchs trying to bring in the Spartans. In peacetime there would have been no excuse and no desire for calling them in, but in time of war, when each party could always count upon an alliance which would do harm to its opponents and at the same time strengthen its own position, it became a natural thing for anyone who wanted a change of government to call in help from outside.

So revolutions broke out in city after city, and in places where the revolutions occurred late the knowledge of what had happened previously in other places caused still new extravagances of revolutionary zeal, expressed by an elaboration in the methods of seizing power and by unheard-of atrocities in revenge. To fit in with the change of events, words, too, had to change their usual meanings . What used to be described as a thoughtless act of aggression was now regarded as the courage one would expect to find in a party member; to think of the future and wait was merely another way of saying one was a coward; any idea of moderation was just an attempt to disguise one's unmanly character ; ability to understand a question from all sides meant that one was totally unfitted for action. Fanatical enthusiasm was the mark of a real man, and to plot against an enemy behind his back was perfectly legitimate self-defence. Anyone who held violent opinions could always be trusted, and anyone who objected to them became a suspect. To plot successfully was a sign of intelligence, but it was still cleverer to see that a plot was hatching. If one attempted to provide against having to do either, one was disrupting the unity of the party and acting out of fear of the opposition. In short, it was equally praiseworthy to get one's blow in first against someone who was going to do wrong, and to denounce someone who had no intention of doing any wrong at all. Family relations were a weaker tie than party membership , since party members were more ready to go to any extreme for any reason whatever. These parties were not formed to enjoy the benefits of the established laws, but to acquire power by overthrowing the existing regime ; and the members of these parties felt confidence in each other not because of any fellowship in a religious communion, but because they were partners in crime. If an opponent made a reasonable speech, the party in power, so far from giving it a generous reception, took every precaution to see that it had no practical effect.

As the result of these revolutions, there was a general deterioration of character throughout the Greek world . The simple way of looking at things, which is so much the mark of a noble nature, was regarded as a ridiculous quality and soon ceased to exist. Society had become divided into two ideologically hostile camps , and each side viewed the other with suspicion. As for ending this state of affairs, no guarantee could be given that would be trusted, no oath sworn that people would fear to break; everyone had come to the conclusion that it was hopeless to expect a permanent settlement and so, instead of being able to feel confident in others, they devoted their energies to providing against being injured themselves."

Just another serf , says: January 11, 2021 at 6:04 am GMT • 10.6 hours ago

Whether civil war as we may imagine it, or something equally unappealing to our every day lives, something bad is about to happen.

I'm curious though, regarding what I do believe was unprecedented election fraud. How is it possible, after watching the Georgia State Farm arena video, that the President of the United States, with all the power that office should hold, could not force the woman identified in that video, one Ruby Freeman, to answer questions about what we saw? Ruby Freeman was never questioned as far as I can find. How is this possible? Nothing makes sense. Before we begin killing one another, can we do two things; 1. Interrogate Ruby Freeman and 2. Interrogate the killer of Ashli Babbit?

Zarathustra , says: January 11, 2021 at 6:24 am GMT • 10.2 hours ago

Little bit feverish article. And I do have to say no.
Civil war can happen only after hyperinflation accompanied with lawlessness.
And that will happen only if US looses its international position.
Everything depend now on Germany.
If Germany joins China Russia camp than US as a world leader will not mean anything anymore.
China now is courting Europe intensively. Particularly is courting Germany.
Nothing is set yet.
So everybody can relax.
.
Biden is out of his mind. In his speech he said that he wants to increase minimum wage and reestablish unions. That could be a little help also.

shylockcracy , says: January 11, 2021 at 6:58 am GMT • 9.7 hours ago

People living in the core areas of Ziocorporate globalism, like the US/EU, remain mostly oblivious about the nature of their ruling regime than those living in the direct periphery of globalist power. Take Colombia for an example, like Mexico's, all its presidents are subservient to US Ziocorporate power. Last one, a Nobel peace prize winner under whose pre-presidential stint as "Defense" minister oversaw the US-serving Colombian military's systematic massacre of tens of thousands of lower class Colombian youths who were then disguised as guerrillas to cash in rewards paid US Plan Colombia dollars, proceeded, now as president, to negotiate the disarmament of the actual guerrillas under the Obama/Biden regime's orders. Massmurder and massacres maintained an average level.

Then, in 2018, right after the Trumpet, a shamelessly pro-US regime, even for Colombian standards, took over and massacres and massmurder picked right up again, to an average of 2 or 3 per week, with exploding cocaine production even for Colombia standards as well, and extreme political polarisation, and all the while the Ziocorporate mother ship in Washington, with its Qtard and MAGA bullshit, looked the other way except to accuse Venezuela of being undemocratic and of human rights violations.

If Americans weren't so stupid and daydreaming like fucktards that they live in "muh democracy/republic" instead of the Ziocorporate conglomerate regime that rules over them, they could take a clue or two from their own regime's foreign policy, not only did Trumpet do things like transferring $400 billion in weapons to ISIS/al-Qaeda royal Salafi patrons in Ziodi Wahhabia, he doubled-down on the Obama/Biden policy of Venezuela "is a national security threat to muh democracy and freedom"; to start pondering about the kind of manipulation and radicalisation Ziocorporate agents Trump/Republicans and Biden/Democrats have in store for them. Cointelpro certainly mutates far faster than Covid-1984.

Happy New World Order and Great Reset.

shylockcracy , says: January 11, 2021 at 7:17 am GMT • 9.4 hours ago
@catdog i-deep state" character is actually the opposite of:

"White House teams up with Google to build coronavirus screening site"
https://techcrunch.com/2020/03/13/white-house-teams-up-with-google-to-build-coronavirus-screening-site/

What do Qtarts and the like need to realise this simple, evident facts? That the Trumpet himself comes on national TV telling you all "I and the Democrats have been playing divide and conquer with you dumbfucks for 4 years"?

Feeling that anti-deep state MAGA magick yet?

Miro23 , says: January 11, 2021 at 7:25 am GMT • 9.2 hours ago

The American Establishment is doing to President Trump exactly what it did to Ukrainian President Yanukovych in Washington's orchestrated "Maidan Revolution," called "the Revolution of Dignity" by the liars at Wikipedia, and precisely what it did to Chavez, Maduro, and would like to do to Putin.

What Trump and his supporters, and perhaps the Kremlin, do not understand is that real evidence no longer counts . The Establishment makes up the evidence that it needs for its agendas.

Their playbook "Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals" by Saul D. Alinsky, makes it clear that it's necessary to play dirty. This covers all aspects of their Regime Change projects and the current US project surely isn't any different.

It's a cocktail of lies, fabrications, subversion, threats, blackmail, false friendships – in fact any means to advance themselves.

For example: From Alinsky – "Means and Ends" His take on morality:

Rule 10) You do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral garments.

Rule 11) Goals must be phrased in general terms like "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity", "Of the Common Welfare, "Pursuit of Happiness" or "Bread and Peace".

So yes, this is why the most unpatriotic Patriot Act is called the Patriot Act and they operate from patriotic sounding places like the American Enterprise Institute.

If traditional America is going to get anywhere in the upcoming conflict they have to get used to playing by the same rules – difficult for them – but they have to do it. It's inevitably going to be a dirty war.

Abdul Alhazred , says: January 11, 2021 at 8:01 am GMT • 8.6 hours ago

Point of order- Russia is not the historic enemy, but the orchestrated one, rather it was the Soviet Union which is the historic enemy, as the sponsors of the destruction of Russia are behind the destruction of America.

Carlos22 , says: January 11, 2021 at 8:09 am GMT • 8.5 hours ago

We are already in a police state and you can kiss goodbye to the 1st and 2nd amendment soon as free speech becomes hate speech just like they did in Europe.

So this site and many others in the alt news universe will soon be gone.

There's not going to be a civil war as the current generation of young people are too weak and distracted and have been brainwashed into hating themselves.

There's a big elephant in the room and wild card that's been missed too and that's the new covid vaccines who's long term effects on health are unknown.

Vaccines need to be studied for about 10 years before their safety can be guaranteed.

If tens / hundreds of millions are willing to be injected with a new untested genetic engineered substance that could make them disabled or kill them in 5 years to save them against something with a 99% survival rate what does that tell you about the mental state of the Population?

The US as you once knew it is finished it's just that many are still in denial or haven't realized it yet.

noname27 , says: Website January 11, 2021 at 8:34 am GMT • 8.1 hours ago

I see no civil war in the USA. I see no organisation amongst the people in order to carry it out. They have no leader, they have no Hannibal, Boadicea or Adolf to rally them together for a major insurrection against The Beast Empire. Unless of course something is brewing secretly.

A French style form of resistance, as previously mentioned in these comments, also takes a lot of planning and organisational skills, and I see no inkling of that taking place amongst American patriots.

I also believe many do not realise how serious the matter is, they still, being bogged down in irrelevant party politics.

If however a large swathe of the police and US Military including officers were to desert their corrupt masters, things would look very different and a civil war could happen.

Ilya G Poimandres , says: January 11, 2021 at 8:39 am GMT • 8.0 hours ago

The civil was has been on since Crossfire Hurricane, the usurpers of the constitution simply kept it cold because they thought they could enforce their tyranny silently.

And if Trump surrenders then they would have been proven right, at least for the leadership fight.

Biden will likely launch a war because he already has his bay of pigs with his graft, and will need a moonshot for the misdirection.

I don't think they can fight half the nation (and the military will split), and Russia at the same time, so the only question is on whom the war will be launched. I still think the odds are higher that it will be a civil war, but the Russia option looms strong for sure.

TKK , says: January 11, 2021 at 9:39 am GMT • 7.0 hours ago

The US military is the most "woke" diverse incompetent organization in America.

Remember- contractors do all the heavy lifting "in theater"- from cooking to plumbing to firefighting to IT to combat.

This knowledge is hidden from view- kept on the down low.I only know because my brother has worked in Iraq and Afghanistan for KBR for the past 15 years. I have seen him accumulate well over Half a million in cash. What does he do? He makes sure the troops have water and food. He is in logistics. For the past decade I have heard hundreds if not thousands of stories of the jaw dropping incompetence, insouciance and laziness of the American military.

Rank-and-file Americans, indeed no one, talks about this very real infrastructure that props up every dumb, overweight enlisted. About 4 contractors to every enlisted.

Most of the contractors in theater are from Eastern Europe and sub Sahara Africa. If they were given orders to release biological or chemical weapons on the American populace, as long as the huge checks were hitting their account they would do it in a heartbeat

More than the military- fear the shadow military that knows the systems, does the work .. And will do whatever it is asked as long as they are paid.

Their mother doesn't live here.

Everywhere we turn, diversity and hiring people from the "other" never works out.

*** Side note: My brother revealed that when blacks came back from their R&R after the George Floyd insanity, most of them became more aggressive and entitled. Unable to do their work because they could not stop going to report others for incidence of racism.

This includes the American black contractors and enlisted.

These are dumb young black men and women who are making $92,000 a year to move pallets around. If they were asked to stop calling in sick every day, they would run to report their supervisor for-

Racism.

Many whites have lost their lucrative positions or been subject to discipline for having the audacity to ask blacks to come to work.

It's over. It's too far gone.

[Jan 10, 2021] Trump's Last Stand, by Israel Shamir

Highly recommended!
Trump run his election complain of 2016 as champion of common Americans. After he won the office the betrayed them all and governed like Bush III with his own cabal of neocons and neoliberals. \
He betrayed his followed again on Dec 6, when he first incited them for the action but did not provide organization, security and the plan needed to press Congress to appoint the commission for investigation of election "irregularities" for then days before Biden inauguration. He is now completely spent politically and his enemies and first of all, Ms Pelosi, are after him. Moreover he gave a shot in the arm for the gang of Russiagaters who were pursuing him since his inauguration.
The fact that Trump leaves the political scene is good. While useful as a wrecking ball for the neoliberal empire and neoliberal establishment he proved to be completely inept as a politician and lack courage necessary for the national leader. Which he proved again on Dec 6. Famous quote from Friedrich Schiller's play Fiesco "The Moor has done his duty. The Moor can go." is probably applicable. What is interesting is that Zionists betrayed Trump.
But the fact hat he will be replaced by neocon warmonger and staunch neoliberal Biden means that there is no light at the and of tunnel for the common people.
Like Trump, Biden was never Presidential material. He a a mediocre politician, by all accounts. And extremely corrupt in addition to that.
Notable quotes:
"... Donald Trump denounced the people whom he personally called to protest. His close political allies withdrew their support. ..."
"... The deck was stacked against President Trump from Day One. His orders were ignored. The US courts, judges, police, the whole system of law enforcement was against him; his orders were blocked or overturned, while the media made fun of him and the opposition relentlessly delegitimised him. ..."
"... On January 6, a massive demonstration in his support gathered in Washington, DC. Hundreds of thousands Americans came to the capital to demand justice after the election fraud became obvious. They hoped that the Republican representatives would refuse to certify the fraud and appoint a commission to check and recount the votes. ..."
"... The horror and outrage of the Dem politicians and media were as faked as their news. During last year, many government buildings were taken over by Dem-sponsored BLM activists, and in not one case did the police use lethal weapons or even rush the protesters out of buildings. ..."
"... For them, it was an honest and funny way to express their indignation. But the real gambit plotters intended to frame them. They even murdered four protesters hoping they would respond with violence, but in vain. ..."
"... White American protesters are exceptionally non-violent lot; as with Occupy Wall Street a few years back the January 6 Capitol protesters were timid and obedient as lambs. For this reason, BLM was invented, for Blacks are able to riot violently, as opposed to well-trained whites. It is not a race thing: lily-white French Yellow Vests and Ukrainian nationalists have fought the police all right. But US whites are not prone to riot, not since the Civil War. ..."
"... Anyway, their non-violence didn't help them. The president-elect Biden begrudged them even the name of protesters: "Don't dare call them protesters. They were a riotous mob, insurrectionists, domestic terrorists." Indeed, the name should be preserved for Deep State-authorised looters and their brethren all over the world, whether in Hong Kong or Minsk, in Seattle or Portland. ..."
"... researchers will argue whether duplicitous Biden's minions organised it or just capitalised on the Trumpers' sincere protest. ..."
"... There is no doubt that to an objective observer the 2020 elections were profoundly unfair. I won't trouble you with too many published details about the statistically impossible results, but here is one example of fraud. The city of Detroit gave 95 per cent of its vote to Biden/Kamala, a number that Mr Kim Jong-un would view with slight envy, while Mr Lukashenko would murmur, "How can it be done?" It is highly likely this mind-boggling result was achieved in the following way. ..."
"... The problem is, Trump was a poor organiser. He could win elections, if he could prevent Cynthia Stephens's kind of legislation, outlaw postal ballots, enforce obligatory IDs for voting, mobilise his people for election control. A formidable task, but not impossible, while dealing with a prone-to-cheat adversary. He could even do a revolution on January 6, tasking the right people to act, forming a revolutionary HQ, planning a strategy of takeover, but he didn't do anything of the sort. He probably thought Congress would see the vast crowds and allow for the checking of election results. ..."
"... Alternatively, he was so naïve that he believed revolutions just happen by themselves, as in the movies. They do not. Behind every successful revolution, there is a lot of planning, armed force, weapons ready for use, supply lines, logistics, media support, and communications. Trump had none of that. It was enough to turn off Twitter to make him deaf and dumb. ..."
"... There was no coup attempt, as correctly stated by Tyler Durden : "Trump has never had the concentration, organizational acumen, or ideological coherence to mount a bona fide "coup," and a mob intrusion which was swiftly dispersed by armed agents of the state doesn't change that. ..."
"... Many Trumpists believed in the QAnon and Kayfabe conspiracies; they posted reports of bad guys being arrested, of servers snatched by the FBI, of Clinton and Biden waiting for rough justice behind bars. This belief disarmed people who would otherwise have fought to achieve this very result. That is the problem with conspiracies: imaginary conspiracies prevent real action. ..."
"... He succeeded against enormous odds in improving the lot of American workers: for the first time since the 1970s, their incomes rose in relation to the other classes. He stopped mass migration to the US: legal immigration went down to a trickle. He avoided new wars; he tried to make peace with Russia. He refused to bomb Iran even in the last days of his presidency, though some pro-Israel supporters promised him a second term if he would. ..."
"... His fight against the corona madness was his great achievement. He was against the lockdowns that are about to destroy our world so completely that few things will survive. The last great US ruler who didn't wear the cowardly mask will be remembered. He could not defeat the mighty medical complex, or FAGMA, or the Masters of Discourse, but he tried. ..."
"... Israel Shamir can be reached at ..."
"... The Unz Review ..."
Jan 10, 2021 | www.unz.com

President Trump was decisively beaten, if not fair and square. The hopes of millions of American voters were squashed and extinguished. The saga of the Orange Man is over. The victors used a gambit: they sacrificed the sanctity and security of the Capitol, allowed intruders in, permitted them to take selfies in the Speaker's office, and then faked horror and outrage. The attempted calls for electoral transparency were deflated in real time as huge crowds were dispersed, electors were confirmed, and the ascendancy of Biden was assured, while Trump followers were branded 'domestic terrorists'.

Donald Trump denounced the people whom he personally called to protest. His close political allies withdrew their support. Within hours, or even minutes, this ruler of the world admired by millions became a non-person. Like a boy who posted an obscenity, he was banned by Twitter and Facebook. Time will tell whether he will go to prison, as so many Dems pray for, but his political life seems to have ended, even if his cause may live.

The deck was stacked against President Trump from Day One. His orders were ignored. The US courts, judges, police, the whole system of law enforcement was against him; his orders were blocked or overturned, while the media made fun of him and the opposition relentlessly delegitimised him. He was blocked even by Fox News. Dem-run states adjusted their laws to assure the elections' result. Trump was a lame duck from the very beginning of his presidency to its bitter end. He was kept on a short leash by the almighty Deep State, and when he tried to free himself, they pulled the leash.

On January 6, a massive demonstration in his support gathered in Washington, DC. Hundreds of thousands Americans came to the capital to demand justice after the election fraud became obvious. They hoped that the Republican representatives would refuse to certify the fraud and appoint a commission to check and recount the votes. Some of the protesters managed to break into the Capitol, or were let in by the police. This peaceful Occupy Capitol action, the exercise of a natural right to protest, was met with lethal fire, and a young female protester from San Diego, Ashli Babbitt, was murdered by the plainclothes police. The Republican representatives were cowed and surrendered; Biden was confirmed to take office.

The horror and outrage of the Dem politicians and media were as faked as their news. During last year, many government buildings were taken over by Dem-sponsored BLM activists, and in not one case did the police use lethal weapons or even rush the protesters out of buildings.

"Shortly after 8 p.m. Wednesday, hundreds of protesters gathered outside the locked King Street entrance to the Capitol, chanting "Break down the door!" and "General strike!" Moments later, police ceded control of the State Street doors and allowed the crowd to surge inside, joining thousands who had already gathered in the Capitol to protest the votes. The area outside the Assembly, which is scheduled to take the bill up at 11 a.m. today, was crowded with protesters who chanted, "We're not leaving. Not this time."

Department of Administration spokesman Tim Donovan said although protesters were being encouraged to leave, no one would be forcibly removed. Mayor Dave Cieslewicz said he had instructed Police Chief Noble Wray not to allow his officers to participate in removing demonstrators from the building."

This was what happened in Madison, Wisconsin in March 2011, as Steve Sailer reminded us. Indeed, this is what the protesters expected; some were dressed in flamboyant carnival attire; they behaved well and peacefully, within acceptable limits. It was not an insurrection; they didn't try to take over the Congress in any meaningful sense. For them, it was an honest and funny way to express their indignation. But the real gambit plotters intended to frame them. They even murdered four protesters hoping they would respond with violence, but in vain.

White American protesters are exceptionally non-violent lot; as with Occupy Wall Street a few years back the January 6 Capitol protesters were timid and obedient as lambs. For this reason, BLM was invented, for Blacks are able to riot violently, as opposed to well-trained whites. It is not a race thing: lily-white French Yellow Vests and Ukrainian nationalists have fought the police all right. But US whites are not prone to riot, not since the Civil War. Being a foreigner, I do not understand why the Americans want to keep their guns if they never use them, but that's the way they are.

Anyway, their non-violence didn't help them. The president-elect Biden begrudged them even the name of protesters: "Don't dare call them protesters. They were a riotous mob, insurrectionists, domestic terrorists." Indeed, the name should be preserved for Deep State-authorised looters and their brethren all over the world, whether in Hong Kong or Minsk, in Seattle or Portland.

Russian social networks were comparing the Washington DC events with those nearer to home and complained of 'double standards'. The US media expressed no indignation when their appointee Boris Yeltsin shelled the Russian Parliament in 1993. The New York Times and the State Department had encouraged the nationalist mob to storm Ukrainian government offices in 2014. They cheered on the opposition in Minsk in taking over their parliament after failing to win elections. The Belarus protesters claimed their country's election results were rigged, just like Trump supporters did for the US elections, but Biden didn't call them "domestic terrorists". (Actually, neither did President Lukashenko: he called them 'protesters', and their violent demos were dispersed without a single shot fired.) In such cases, Jews respond with "How can you compare?!"

The Russians compared the Capitol 'coup attempt' with their own semi-staged 'coup' of 1991, a partly pre-planned provocation. In 1991, the feeble coup organisers could not detain Yeltsin and surrendered as if on cue; the wave of indignation removed Gorbachev and the Communist party from power. In the Capitol, too, police waved the 'invaders' in, as you can see on this video forwarded by the BBC. More videos suggesting Capitol police involvement in the ostensible provocation are presented here . The orchestrated indignation allowed the victors to censor and purge the defeated Trump and his followers. Just as the USSR went down in August 1991, Trump's America went down in January 2021, and the liberal elites representing the big corporations came to power. It was achieved by a provocation, but ordinary Trump followers were really angry with the Election Steal. Likewise, 1991 was a provocation, but ordinary Russian citizens were angry at Gorbachev's perestroika, while the liberal elites used it to dismantle the Soviet state and transfer all assets to their oligarchs.

People with a good knowledge of history refer to the Reichstag Fire of February 1933, the arson contrived by the newly formed Nazi government itself to turn public opinion against its opponents and to assume emergency powers. Alternatively, other researchers have contended that there was no proof of Nazi complicity in the crime, but that Hitler merely capitalised on the Dutch Communist van der Lubbe's independent act. The fire is the subject of continued debate and research, says the Encycopaedia Britannica . Probably the same will be said about the Capitol "invasion", and researchers will argue whether duplicitous Biden's minions organised it or just capitalised on the Trumpers' sincere protest.

There is no doubt that to an objective observer the 2020 elections were profoundly unfair. I won't trouble you with too many published details about the statistically impossible results, but here is one example of fraud. The city of Detroit gave 95 per cent of its vote to Biden/Kamala, a number that Mr Kim Jong-un would view with slight envy, while Mr Lukashenko would murmur, "How can it be done?" It is highly likely this mind-boggling result was achieved in the following way.

Detroit Dems outsourced ballot harvesting to local drug lords, offering them as a prize – recreational marijuana business licenses. These licences are the best thing since a licence to print money . Having such licenses is like having your own ATM. Here you can read about their profitability and the lengths criminals will go to obtain them. Detroit Dems had changed local laws allowing the sale of marijuana in their fine city (it was forbidden until November 2020). They changed local laws prescribing the issuing of marijuana licences to drug dealers with previous convictions for drug dealing. They let drug lords out of jail . They changed local laws to allow ballot harvesting; that is, collecting postal votes and assisting with the filling in of ballots. After that, the drug dealers went around collecting postal ballots and filling them in immediately, if they were conscientious, or just filling them in at their leisure, if feeling lazy. They had a judge at their disposal, Cynthia Stephens , who single-handedly changed Michigan election laws, and then rejected Trump's claims of fraud.

Yes, Virginia, there was election fraud in many American states. They are used to gambling; they aren't surprised by a beautiful hand of four aces, as Mark Twain suggested. Usually the two parties deal in turns, and cheat in turns. Only this time, Trump convinced many people that it is different; that this is their last chance.

The problem is, Trump was a poor organiser. He could win elections, if he could prevent Cynthia Stephens's kind of legislation, outlaw postal ballots, enforce obligatory IDs for voting, mobilise his people for election control. A formidable task, but not impossible, while dealing with a prone-to-cheat adversary. He could even do a revolution on January 6, tasking the right people to act, forming a revolutionary HQ, planning a strategy of takeover, but he didn't do anything of the sort. He probably thought Congress would see the vast crowds and allow for the checking of election results.

Alternatively, he was so naïve that he believed revolutions just happen by themselves, as in the movies. They do not. Behind every successful revolution, there is a lot of planning, armed force, weapons ready for use, supply lines, logistics, media support, and communications. Trump had none of that. It was enough to turn off Twitter to make him deaf and dumb.

There was no coup attempt, as correctly stated by Tyler Durden : "Trump has never had the concentration, organizational acumen, or ideological coherence to mount a bona fide "coup," and a mob intrusion which was swiftly dispersed by armed agents of the state doesn't change that. Shortly after the breach, he released a video instructing his followers not to take Senators hostage or imprison Mike Pence, but to "go home." No factions of the federal government joined the mob on Trump's orders, because he didn't bother issuing any. The whole episode never stood the remotest chance of preventing the certification of Joe Biden, much less overthrowing the government. It was just another goofball charade, and in that sense, a fitting end to the Trump presidency."

Conspiracy theories played their disappointing part in the debacle. Many Trumpists believed in the QAnon and Kayfabe conspiracies; they posted reports of bad guys being arrested, of servers snatched by the FBI, of Clinton and Biden waiting for rough justice behind bars. This belief disarmed people who would otherwise have fought to achieve this very result. That is the problem with conspiracies: imaginary conspiracies prevent real action.

Still, I do not want to finish this piece on such a sad and disappointing note. President Trump was a great leader. He succeeded against enormous odds in improving the lot of American workers: for the first time since the 1970s, their incomes rose in relation to the other classes. He stopped mass migration to the US: legal immigration went down to a trickle. He avoided new wars; he tried to make peace with Russia. He refused to bomb Iran even in the last days of his presidency, though some pro-Israel supporters promised him a second term if he would.

His fight against the corona madness was his great achievement. He was against the lockdowns that are about to destroy our world so completely that few things will survive. The last great US ruler who didn't wear the cowardly mask will be remembered. He could not defeat the mighty medical complex, or FAGMA, or the Masters of Discourse, but he tried.

The day of his defeat, January 6, was the Epiphany, or Adoration of the Magi, of the Three Wise Men who came to worship Jesus in his cave. It was also Christmas Eve for the Eastern Church. It is the darkest time of the year; from now on, the day will increase and so will our hopes.

Israel Shamir can be reached at adam@israelshamir.net

This article was first published at The Unz Review .

[Jan 09, 2021] What we are seeing in the US is an ongoing coup. This is a coup against the US people by the US corporate and financial oligarchs.

Jan 09, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

killwallstreet , Jan 9 2021 18:50 utc | 3

The DNC mafia is about to complete the process of assimilation of the progressives, exactly as predicted

Blue Dotterel , Jan 9 2021 19:08 utc | 12

I have tried to explain over the past while, that what we are seeing in the US is an ongoing coup, This is a coup against the US people by the US corporate and financial oligarchs. Clearly, they are benefiting by not simply enriching themselves at taxpayers expense, but securing their own criminal amoral behaviour through the supression of human rights and what is left of the freedom of speech in the US. This is accelaerating exponentially and has been going on long before Trump came on the scene.

Avoid paying attention to the distractions, and keep your eye on the ball.

[Jan 09, 2021] The line of investigation initiated by Upton Sinclair into the shared Board memberships at key elite universities within the USA that erased the traditional teaching of political-economy and replaced it with the mathematical economics which lie at the root of Neoliberalism's Junk Economics

Jan 09, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Jan 9 2021 0:37 utc | 124

Digital Spartacus @105--

I've been following her work for several months now and think her premises much sounder than Matthew Ehret's, who are actually on the same Canadian team. Generally, the three of us are working on exposing the rise and spread of what's now known as Neoliberalism. And of course, there's Dr. Hudson who's ahead of us all.

The line of investigation initiated by Upton Sinclair into the shared Board memberships at key elite universities within the USA that erased the traditional teaching of political-economy and replaced it with the mathematical economics which lie at the root of Neoliberalism's Junk Economics

I see as very promising as they're also prominent bankers and Old Money with social connections to England's Royalty and Nobility--the primary members of Europe's Rentier Class . When I look over the comments, many have forgotten just what Class owns the Duopoly and controls the federal government. Trump was never allowed into their circle but was used by some of its members in the pursuit of interests that are still shrouded in fog. My working hypothesis there is they were quite worried that too much industrial capacity had been foreclosed and moved such that it caused a real threat to national security; thus the need for MAGA.

With the rise of the Eurasian Bloc, the "threat" isn't military; it's economic. As I wrote earlier today, an economy based on consumerism will collapse when the consumers can no longer consume. Hudson's 100% correct that debt's that can't be repaid won't. The current degree of economic polarization is miniscule compared to what might ensue if the Bidenites don't forestall it--200 Million people bankrupt while 100 Million have good paying jobs and can afford their debts--the remaining 40-50 Million are mostly impoverished children. This time the part of the public that gets shafted as in 2009 under Obama isn't going to sit still, and what happened in DC will be repeated elsewhere with meaning this time. A genuine MAGA Fascist wanting control will need to disarm the Rentier Class and the Swamp thus ousting the current "Friendly Fascist" regime--and that would require a paramilitary since that's basically what composes the Swamp--Civil War between two Factions of Reaction that would also split the military. Wonder what barflies think of all that?

karlof1 , Jan 9 2021 1:11 utc | 135

Earlier in the week I linked to the latest Renegade Inc program which had Dr. Hudson as one of the guests. That show's transcript is now available. Here's an excerpt with Ross Ashcroft asking a question:

"Ross: What do you think are the megatrends that we should be looking at in 2021? What do you think is the direction of travel, if you like, for so-called developed economies?

"Michael Hudson: Well, the big trend in any economy is the growth of debt, because the debt grows exponentially. The economy has painted itself into a debt corner. We can see that in real estate. We can see that for small business. There's also almost no way to recover. The Federal Reserve has been printing quantitative easing to keep stock and bonds high. But for the real economy, the trend is polarization and lower employment.

"The trend also is that state and local finances are broke, especially in the biggest cities, New York City, San Francisco and Los Angeles. They're not getting income tax revenue from the unemployed or closed businesses. They're not getting the real estate tax with so many defaults and mortgage arrears. In New York City there's talk of cutting back the subways by 70 percent. People will be afraid to take the subways when they're overcrowded with people with the virus. So you're having a breakdown not only in state and local finances, but of public services that are state run – public transportation services, health services, education is being downsized. Everything that is funded out of state and local budgets is going to suffer.

"And living standards are going to be very sharply downward as people realize how many services they got are dependent on public infrastructure."

And this one I must also include:

"Ross: What is the one thing that has really surprised you in 2020? What have you laughed at? What has given you a chuckle?

"Michael Hudson: The surprise – that I really shouldn't have been surprised at – is how naive Bernie Sanders supporters were in thinking that they were going to get a fair deal and that the elections were going to be fair. The illusion is that people were actually going to have a fair election when the last thing the vested interests wanted was Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren or any kind of reformer. So what happened to Sanders is what happened to Corbyn in Britain and the Labour Party's neoliberal leadership.

"So what's for laughs? I guess, Tulsi Gabbard's takedown of Kamala Harris was absolutely wonderful. Everybody just broke out laughing, cheering for her. And of course, that's why she was marginalized, and now we have Kamala Harris as the senior vice president."

Of course, none of the dire economic news is being reported with the focus instead on Wall Street's markets, with much of the public just as brainwashed about it as Trump. The last third focuses on politics, which is what most barflies want to read about. So, click the link and read what Dr. Hudson sees in the tea leaves.

[Jan 03, 2021] George Monbiot got it half-right- There is a capitalist civil war, but not exactly the kind of war he describes

Jan 03, 2021 | failedevolution.blogspot.com

As Monbiot points out:

The only way really to understand Brexit is as the outcome of a civil war within capitalism. There are two dominant forms of capitalism. One you could describe as house trained capitalism. This is corporations and rich people who are prepared to more or less go along with democracy, as long as democracy doesn't get out of hand and actually represent the interests of the people, but as long as it's a sort of thin and narrow form of democracy, they'll go with it. What they want is stability. They want regulations which protect their market position from rougher and dirtier companies who would otherwise wipe them out. They're happy with the administrative state.
And then there's another faction who could be described as capitalism's warlords. These are people who don't want any constraints in their way at all. They see taxation as illegitimate, they see regulation as illegitimate. In their unguarded moments, they reveal that they see democracy as illegitimate. People such as Peter Thiel, the guy who founded PayPal says actually democracy and market freedom are incompatible. The conflict should be resolved in favor of this thing he calls the market. Τhe market is an euphemism for the power of money. And they believe that that power should be unmediated, that it should be able to do whatever it wants without anyone standing in its way. And they see as their enemy house trained capitalism. And this is really where the power lies within.

The whole Brexit debate, is on the one side, the august institutions of capitalism, like the Confederation of British Industry, saying this is terrible, we don't want this to happen at all. And on the other side, the oligarchs from the City, very powerful people who are funding dark money think tanks and other lobby groups, saying we want to clear it all out of the way. In Steve Bannon's words, " we want the deconstruction of the administrative state ". And it's a second group, the warlords of money who have won.

First of all, both capitalist factions in this civil war seek the " deconstruction of the administrative state. " And actually, the administrative state could be deconstructed much more efficiently through super-national formations like the European Union. The European Union institutions have been taken over by powerful banking and corporate lobbies. And these are taking advantage of the legislative power of those institutions in order to promote more deregulation and destroy the administrative power of nation-states. As the Corporate Europe Observatory reported in 2016:
Since Jean-Claude Juncker took office as President of the European Commission in November 2014, there has been an even greater deregulation push, not just on specific rules and laws which should be scrapped, but on how decisions are made about future laws. Under Juncker, fundamental changes in policy-making are being introduced which will put major obstacles in the way of new regulations aimed at protecting the environment or improving social conditions. When David Cameron was renegotiating the terms of the UK's membership of the EU with European Council President Donald Tusk, a greater European emphasis on deregulation was one of the four priority areas. To pile on the pressure, Cameron and the UK government spearheaded an appeal from 18 other member states, demanding quantitative targets, meaning that for every new regulation put in place, a certain number of other regulations should be removed. [...] As presented here, Cameron and the European Commission – together with big business - share a common approach on the deregulation agenda.

That's why the "house trained capitalism", as Monbiot describes it, wants the UK to remain member of the EU. And, in fact, it's rather contradictory to say that this capitalist faction is "happy with the administrative state" when at the same time supports a super-national organization whose ultimate goal is to eliminate the administrative power of the nation-states.
Monbiot describes the pro-Brexit capitalist faction as " capitalism's warlords ... people who don't want any constraints in their way at all. They see taxation as illegitimate, they see regulation as illegitimate. In their unguarded moments, they reveal that they see democracy as illegitimate. " Yet, these are common characteristics with the "house trained capitalism" faction. That's because both capitalist factions in previous decades were functioning as a united force through the complete domination of neoliberalism. A domination which was evident not only in an economic and a political level, but also in a cultural level, especially in the Western world. And that's why, as we wrote recently, both the liberal elites and the far right (as representatives of the capitalist factions), are seeing the real Left as the primary threat which must be dealt at all costs, after all.
We need to understand that this civil war between the capitalist factions does not come out of any substantially different ideological or political approach. Essentially, it's only a tough bargain. Capitalists just pick sides to negotiate terms and secure their position in the post-capitalist era, which already looks like a kind of 21st century corporate feudalism. Yet, we would completely agree with Monbiot's remark that " What happens to us, to the citizens of the UK, is of very little interest. We're just the grass that gets trampled in this civil war. "
As we already pointed out , the level of ruthlessness of this capitalist war can also be identified in the behavior of the US political class against the American people. It's astonishing that, inside this terrible situation, where thousands die from the pandemic, millions lose their jobs and live under extreme insecurity, no one is willing to offer anything. Both Democrats and Republicans have turned the oncoming election into a political bargain and they don't even try to hide it.
Inside this ruthless capitalist war, people have become almost irrelevant. What only matters for the political puppets is to secure the interests of the capitalist faction they represent. The rampageous bulls of capitalism are fighting each other in an arena in which democracy has now turned into dust under their violent clatters. Therefore, we would also certainly agree with Monbiot's conclusion: We need a political economy which is good for the people, the people who live today, the people of future generations, good for the rest of the living world and is actually governed by the people themselves. Not by this kind of capitalism or that kind of capitalism. These corporations or those oligarchs. A democracy which responds to people not just once every four or five years, but every day, when we have participation as well as representation. We need a system that transcends both of these warring factions, and puts the people in charge.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/s5VgkCb8lYI Related: Brexit: let there be blood among capitalists and may the real Left finally

[Jan 03, 2021] The USA is on the path to techno-feudalism

Jan 03, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

LetThemEatRand 10 hours ago (Edited)

Most people don't know what feudalism is/was. It is a form of slavery. The serf works for the Lord. He is technically free, but he cannot own land and if he ventures out from the area where he works (owned by the Lord), he will starve. China is a neo-feudal society. There is a technical middle class, who are the people who work for the lords.

El Vaquero 10 hours ago

You get it. Global neo-feudalism is the goal. The commies and socialists are just useful idiots.

sun tzu 10 hours ago

Capitalism for the elites and slavery for masses

El Vaquero 10 hours ago (Edited)

Slavery for the masses. You will be their property if you allow it. A possession. Chattel. Livestock.

philipat 10 hours ago (Edited)

If people don't stand up against this Reset and say NO now, it's over. ("You will own nothing and you will be happy", f**k that thanks, I'm still a great believer in free market capitalism and private property rights) The problem is, the sheep are distracted and terrified by "Covid", part of the plan of course. These people are evil but not stupid.

And I think everyone should keep in mind those Deagel population projections for the US of 100 Million in 2025. That's a BIG drop which isn't going to came about "naturally"!!

El Vaquero 10 hours ago

They're going to fail at the end of the day, but the damage they're going to do on the way out is staggering. They're like crack dealers who sample their product a little too often. They're ignoring things like the laws of physics, which unlike criminal laws, no matter how hard you try, you cannot break. They're also ignoring some biological principles.

Ofelas 6 hours ago (Edited)

2015 interview with a top manager from the Bank of England "the reset will happen 2020" At the time we did not understand the full extent, but expected a stock market reset.

https://youtu.be/BShR0pExJq8

I recommend you see this contribution, he speaks for the outcome of being connected to the cloud (ai), essentially they control your thoughts thus "No children, population drops to the level of 500mn in decades" Who those chosen 500mn will be, have a guess.

Scorpion Shooter MBA PREMIUM 2 hours ago

The program is well underway already; I see it everyday simply by the numbers of masked zombies. Much damage has already been done, but there is more to come.

Many people are still comfortable, however, and won't resist until they begin to lose things.

LetThemEatRand 10 hours ago

Which is what Marx predicted. He was right about the problem, but not the solution. The solution was 1776. Took a few years to revert back.

El Vaquero 10 hours ago

1776 was somewhat of an anomaly. A lot of revolutions are "meet the new boss, same or worse than the old boss." IMO, if we 1776 again, there needs to be a lot of militia guerrilla action as a deterrence against that.

PrideOfMammon 8 hours ago

1776 was a coup d'etat as was 1917 and almost 100% killed the wrong people. The Schwabs and Gates always get away.

Ofelas 5 hours ago

Since 1776 only 200 families rule France, nothing changed

philipat 10 hours ago

Actually, it's the other way round. Communism (And bailouts) for the Elites and Capitalism (You lost it all? Tough) for the masses..

philipat 7 hours ago

Maybe. There's a lot of sheep who have been programed and propogandized to obey who are literally fat, lazy and clueless.. As demonstrated by "Covid". America isn't what it used to be.

carpman 7 hours ago (Edited) remove link

Thought I'd throw this into the mix since a lot of terms are getting thrown around, this is regarding the WEF's Great Reset:

" This is more the dystopian wet dream of a neo-feudal, corporate plantation owner; a kind of technocratic serfdom. At its root however, is global, centralised state-capitalism (i.e. global fascism). " ( source )

I'll just quote some concerns of US workers in the 1840's:

"When you sell your product, you retain your person. But when you sell your labour, you sell yourself, losing the rights of free men and becoming vassals of mammoth establishments of a monied aristocracy that threatens annihilation to anyone who questions their right to enslave and oppress. Those who work in the mills ought to own them, not have the status of machines ruled by private despots who are entrenching monarchic principles on democratic soil as they drive downwards freedom and rights, civilization, health, morals and intellectuality in the new commercial feudalism."

Here's Richard Werner in 2018 (The Monetary Institute Conference) talking about Central Bank plans. Eerily similar to the Great Reset Agenda and pre-Covid-19 (the whole thing is worth a watch, but jump to 12:50): https://youtu.be/IzE038REw2k?t=769

C.

Falcon49 3 hours ago

Actually....just about everybody has been conned into being useful idiots. Even those that are not commies or socialist. They have unlimited resources, control the narrative, and have a near monopoly on the use of force. (Divide, distract, deceive, and delude)

hegger 10 hours ago (Edited)

The lord was paid a tithe so you could live on his land, but for that tithe, he also protected you.

Today, you effectively and overall pay more than a tithe and are protected less. You also pay multiple lords (you pay the bank cartel for using a private currency pretending to be federal, you pay a bank or a landlord to live in a building, you pay local, state and federal taxes, you indefinitely pay property taxes and inflation indirectly taxes you more and more by the second). Those preying upon you lobby (bribe) those "in charge" so that they do nothing.

Seems to me like somewhere along the line, one lord was simply exchanged for many.

We're lucky humans have come further along in terms of expanding consciousness and reducing violence, because in strictly contractual terms, the relationship between subject and ruler hasn't improved as much as I wish it had.

Much of the "perks" people see in modern forms of government are faked. Behind the facade, the attempt to enslave body and mind continues.

The White Rabbit 9 hours ago

MUST WATCH NOW & SHARE! Catherine Austin Fitts exposes their "Agenda". There's still time to stop this insanity, but not much.

https://youtu.be/C1-0XKYAZII

philipat 7 hours ago (Edited)

Yes, I watched that a few days ago. She is very smart, on the right side (the Government came after her when she saw the light and left HUD and she spent 5 years and $7 Million defending herself against all sorts of crap in the usual attempt by Government to destroy her) and very well connected. And she's VERY good at connecting dots. The revelations here about the association between the location of Fed Offices and the location/type of properties that got destroyed in the pre-election "BLM/Antifa" are staggering.

Svendblaaskaeg 5 hours ago

Thank You!, very informative, this Lady is gold!

Razor_Edge 4 hours ago

Look up her online book: "The Aristocracy of Stock Profits". The roots of what is unfolding today are there on full display. This lady is amazing, truly one of the good guys, but with deep insight from having seen the beast from the inside. It's past time for us all to wake up, come together and act powerfully to throw off the yoke of evil throttling our world. We can do this through prayer and righteous living. Do not give their schemes oxygen by participating in them. Let us reimagine our societies with the beasts left outside.

`And these words shall then become Like Oppression's thundered doom Ringing through each heart and brain, Heard again -- again -- again--

91 `Rise like Lions after slumber In unvanquishable number-- Shake your chains to earth like dew

370 Which in sleep had fallen on you-- Ye are many -- they are few.'

Oliver Jones 3 hours ago

Thanks for the suggestion. I have some reading to do.

Alan Cruiser 5 hours ago

Absolutely a must see!

Oliver Jones 3 hours ago

Yes, I must agree with The White Rabbit: I would even go so far to say that watching that Catherine Austin Fitts video will be the best 49 minutes you ever invest in 2021, and we're not even a week into the New Year.

I just subscribed to her Solari Report - she talks a lot of sense , and we need to support more people like her.

PrideOfMammon 8 hours ago

China is better off in its form of feudalism. The USA will be much worse off. It is a meaningful difference.

Grandad Grumps 38 minutes ago

Feudalism worked on the farms in Europe until the plague killed 100 million people. The serfs migrated to better paying jobs in cities and the "lords" were left to tend their own fields.

The White Rabbit 9 hours ago

MUST WATCH NOW & SHARE! Catherine Austin Fitts exposes their "Agenda". There's still time to stop this evil & insanity, but not much.

https://youtu.be/C1-0XKYAZII

mtndds 9 hours ago

Great Video

PrideOfMammon 8 hours ago (Edited)

C A F is a great lady. She is one of the chief fighters against the real plague, the plague of Talmudo-Satanists which are the enemy in WW3. But this video is a CIA production to discredit her I think.

The graphic behind her is insanely creepy, as is the interviewer and the camera-work.

Oliver Jones 3 hours ago (Edited)

I am forced to agree. The video is a bombshell, and it neatly ties together all those little strands linking currencies, the economy, international banking, the COVID scamdemic, vaccines, biotechnology and space weaponry. Her delivery is also very calm, matter-of-fact reasoning - and not at all Alex Jones.

Moreover, she exposes what these bastards have in store for us: George Orwell, boot, stamping, face, the rest of your life. Oh yes, and your DNA will be permanently modified so you can't resist them.

xious 10 hours ago (Edited)

They are banning all gender words for congress. Covid checkpoints are coming soon.

mtndds 10 hours ago

If true then this is some really sick satanic sh!t they have planned.

El Vaquero 10 hours ago

You can go read the WEF's articles and watch their youtube videos. They'll tell you exactly what they're about.

Mike Rotsch 10 hours ago

If history is any indicator of what's about to happen, the toughest thing to figure out from here is, in which order all of these assholes are going to inevitably end up with their heads on pikes.

PrideOfMammon 8 hours ago

Nowhere in their plan is the word 'human', except with the word 'trans' in front of it.

convid21 10 hours ago (Edited)

What happens if they can't fulfill their Great Pandemic dream and Bankrupt the Economy ?

It looks like now the Great Pushback against Lockdowns is gathering momentum to combat the Governments Pushback for more Lockdowns. It's Pushback vs Pushback.

rsnoble 8 hours ago

Bankrupt the economy? Lol. Only a million job losses per week since last March or the better part of a million.

BURNtheMSM 8 hours ago

I wonder what their plan is for all these evictions waiting to happen. They gonna f'ing "hero up" somehow? There's gonna be some real pain in the near future, on a grand scale.

Boondocker 8 hours ago

Look at what it is doing to middle-class rental owners...draining their wealth...all part of the plan

convid21 6 hours ago

We're in Act 2 of a 4 part play.

If you want to know what's going to happen next in the USA,

it's already started in the UK and Australia, it's reached total nonsense.

Alan Cruiser 5 hours ago

But something has to give at some point. People are reaching their limits, and that is by design. But if the masses start moving, they better start hiding.

convid21 4 hours ago

At the moment there is just peaceful protests, so the NWO is just laughing their asses off.

4Celts 10 hours ago

If enacted, such plans would fail, but their adoption would nevertheless exact a price.

Yes. I don't think the majority will submit to this Collectivist Utopia being sold/ forced . But in the meantime , the financial , emotional, and societal damage, will be almost impossible to repair.But just as with their brutal wars, they....don't...GAF.

hugin-o-munin 9 hours ago

The time for these holier-than-thou elites to steer and control the world is coming to a close. People are born to be free and express their ideas, wishes and dreams. That is a concept completely alien to these lost souls and their constant push to create conflict, despair and suffering only proves how morally bankrupt they are.

Being able to freely create and affect other people in a positive way and be rewarded for it is what all people want. It is an innate and natural force to be life promoting, creative and constructive. I feel sorry for people like Bill Gates, George Soros and Klaus Schwab because they are clearly lost souls whose existence must be very cold and lifeless.

Pardalis 9 hours ago

Dead souls lost in utter darkness.

hugin-o-munin 9 hours ago

They're not dead they're just encrusted. In a weird way and on some level they serve a purpose to help the rest of us.

JZ123 9 hours ago

Sadly I dont think so. 2020 was the final kill blow for the elites. Most people probably dont even want to be free at this point..

Mad Muppet PREMIUM 9 hours ago

The next time you go to the market, look at all the maskholes and rethink whether they really want to be free. Most of them do not.

hugin-o-munin 8 hours ago

Eventually their state of fear and obedience to this death cult will subside and they too will wake up. Nobody can make them or even speed the process up, they have to discover this on their own.

PrideOfMammon 8 hours ago

It took the Bolshevik **** who raped and pillaged Russia after the 1917 Coup d'Etat (known as the first Color Revolution- Red) 80 years to destroy and steal everything. Then they moved to the West and the USA. I hope that you stop them. Eighty years is a long time to wait for them to tired of abusing you and your children and wives.

hugin-o-munin 8 hours ago

I hope you've read Antony Sutton's book :

Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution: The Remarkable True Story of the American Capitalists Who Financed the Russian Communists

https://www.amazon.com/Wall-Street-Bolshevik-Revolution-Capitalists/dp/190557035X

If not I highly recommend it.

dont stare at the beam 8 hours ago (Edited)

they have to discover this on their own.

They never will, they have no free will, the people that started the pandemic scam know it.

BURNtheMSM 8 hours ago

Yup. They'll just don their mask and go about their ********, hoping things will soon "get better." The writing is clearly on the wall at this point mfers. How are so many almost unfazed by how this is all unfolding? We can't just roll over. Rolling with the punches will not work out much longer.

hugin-o-munin 8 hours ago

Getting over cognitive dissonance takes courage and time. We've all been there. Don't judge the ones who are being silent but punch those who are attacking you with their gestapo demands.

Wayne 2 hours ago

Any wonder why Bitcoin is going to the moon?

Every time I look at the chart, it's higher. Bitcoin, gold, silver, land, garden, water is freedom.

https://www.coinbase.com/price/bitcoin

gonediving 10 hours ago

REWATCH V for VENDETTA if you can....viruses let loose by their own govt...prophetic!!

You wear a mask for so long you forget who you were beneath it.

JAN 6 you are invited.

Nessa 9 hours ago

https://www.bitchute.com/video/z7B6mLIjxVpf/

This video was removed from the World Economic Forum website.

"YOU'LL OWN NOTHING, AND YOU'LL BE HAPPY"

PrideOfMammon 8 hours ago

They are afraid. When a few of them are found floating in the river, they will be even more afraid.

But it will have to be done without planning or discussion as everything is overheard and surveiled.

Mad, rash acts of poetry is what will work.

BURNtheMSM 8 hours ago

Wtf do they think we're going to be renting???

LetThemEatRand 10 hours ago

2021 Jeopardy:

"I'll take silly questions for $400 million Alex."

Here's the answer.

"I don't think the virus is that dangerous, and I'm worried about the vaccine. Can I travel?"

Al Jolson 3 hours ago (Edited)

The Great Reset means reduced incomes and carbon use

And there it is in a nutshell- the hyper privileged elites know full well what time it is. Oil, or should i say CHEAP and EASY oil, is running scarce as 2019 saw the year that fracking, with its woefully upside down energy spent to return ratio, finally puked (list of major fracking companies that went bust here ). The hyper privileged have been grooming the public for years in preparation for this with the fake climate change narrative. Whatever oil happens to remain that is accessible at a reasonable cost belongs to the hyper-privileged elites. It doesn't matter what side of the political paradigm you're on, if you're not one of the few elites, YOU ARE a deplorable and you will certainly be subjected to "reduced carbon use" while they themselves make no carbon use reductions whatsoever.

peterZ 2 hours ago

these same people could bring in new and viable energy tech but they won't

Cloud9.5 2 hours ago

Hopium is not a plan.

5onIt 2 hours ago

Such garbage. They been talking about peak oil for DECADES and here is the dirty secret or just you burying your head in the sand: oil is a renewable resource.

Oil is being found in wells that were capped 50 years ago, that were presumed dry. Franking, while presumed to be bad for the earth, has led to major leaps forward in the drilling industry.

Al Jolson 2 hours ago

you couldn't be more wrong if you tried a little harder.

Cloud9.5 2 hours ago

Sorry but production numbers do not support your hypothesis. When oil companies start drilling in the artic and steam cleaning tar sand, that should give you a clue. We have an abundance of gasoline right now because of demand destruction and shale oil. Shale oil was only possible because of cheap credit. Shale oil has not made a profit.

smacker 2 hours ago

Get real.

Peak Oil was always said to be known by looking in the rear view mirror.

If you do that, you will see Peak Oil occurred around 2005-6 (recall $150 oil?). The current price of oil only remains low because the global economy is on its knees and demand is low. If the global economy ever recovers, the price of oil will soon rise and will continue rising and then it's another global recession.

Rinse & Repeat.

Luce 1 hour ago

The price of oil adjusts to supply and demand.

The supply is there, the geinie is out of the bottle (fracking) and as soon as the price is there, production can quickly ramp up to profit on it.

Yes, credit used to support the ramp up in fracking caused a glut because companies could not afford to stop production until the prices returned. Instead, had to ramp up to pay the notes driving the price to nothing.

smacker 7 minutes ago

Fracking will not bridge the gap between conventional fossil fuel and demand.

Fluff The Cat 2 hours ago

There's no shortage of oil, which is the second most abundant liquid on earth besides water. The Rockefellers met with world leaders early in the 20th century and decided to create the illusion of artificial scarcity by redefining oil as "fossil fuel" so that they could jack up the market price.

CatInTheHat 54 minutes ago

Climate change= the excuse the elite need to tax the air you breathe.

It was always a joke.

The US MIC is the biggest polluter on the planet

Canoe Driver 3 hours ago

Obviously, a fair amount of the steadily regurgitated descriptions of the so-called Great Reset amounts to ********, but the real objectives of the plan, already made clear, are Chinese hegemony and a world communist State, which will simply be called by another name. This is why a glorified flu is being exaggerated so severely that even taxi drivers, some of them with virtually no formal education, are openly saying there must be something, apart from public health measures, going on.

taglady 3 hours ago

Those with "formal" education are often the stupid ones taught to ignore common sense and their own conscience in deference to indoctrination.

Faeriedust 19 minutes ago

The public education system is dedicated to finding those among the peasants with enough brains to cause trouble for the elites, and indoctrinate them with lies before they are old enough to know better. The best and least scrupulous are selected out to become trusted servants; the rest are turned into schoolteachers to indoctrinate the next generation.

Hero Zedge 9 hours ago

Let me guess, they confiscate everyone's wealth and we get $600 per quarter?

Mad Muppet PREMIUM 8 hours ago

Well they did say you won't own anything. I think that's exactly what they want.

PrideOfMammon 8 hours ago

At first. There is a sliding scale and it points downwards.

IridiumRebel 10 hours ago

FAH-Q and your Faukin communism.

Oh-Globits 10 hours ago

declare martial law and exterminate all of the communist/bolshevik filth that has infested America

The White Rabbit 9 hours ago

MUST WATCH NOW & SHARE! Catherine Austin Fitts exposes their "Agenda". There's still time to stop their evil & insanity, but not much.

https://youtu.be/C1-0XKYAZII

PrideOfMammon 8 hours ago

A fish rots from the head down. The head is what you need to 'fix'.

GoldHermit PREMIUM 10 hours ago

I envision many telling these people to stick it and going back to a simpler way of life. I think they are willing to fight for this freedom.

PrideOfMammon 8 hours ago

I await the sweet sound of gunfire from all 325 million American firearms.

DurdenRae 4 hours ago

With the onset of their own personal flavor of neo-feudalism, the wef does nothing else than killing the golden goose and genocide the white race. Looks like after having been expunged from Russia, Bolshevism made a fantastic comeback in what were once believed to be the freeest countries of the world.

Faeriedust 1 minute ago

One more time. FEUDALISM is a system built on PERSONAL, one-on-one relationships between the ruler and the governed. Each person knows the person he/she is responsible to, and commits to a personal relationship of trust and reciprocal obligations . Feudalism is like the Godfather: the Lord may be a crook, but he's a crook you know personally, you can talk to, and you can ask for favors or try to persuade, and because you know him, you even know what kind of persuasion might work.

What Schwab and his cronies are pushing is centralized, automated, bureaucratic TOTALITARIANISM . It has NOTHING in common with genuine feudalism. In totalitarianism, there are NO personal relationships. There are no mutual obligations. There is Ruler/Nation/Leadership, and there are proles. Proles don't know the Leader, never speak to the Leader, only see images of the Leader everywhere. They are addressed by Leadership as a mass, by media. The Leadership never sees them and never hears a single thing they say . He/She/It merely gives orders, which are to be obeyed.

Feudalism has been given a bad rap by Enlightenment-era writers who as members of the Renaissance mercantile class never had a personal, feudal relationship with a lord in their lives . It's been the subject of centuries of negative propaganda, with the result that it's now used to refer to any social system that isn't a modern democracy. Modern democracy has its own flaws. To describe them as feudalism, however, is to ascribe outmoded negative criticism of a long-ago era to something that has no factual similarity to it. It's part and parcel of the mindset that sees Catholicism as paganism or demon-worship because it doesn't subscribe to radical Puritan sensibilities.

Target Practice 4 hours ago (Edited)

I took a different road to you.

Do you believe in "Fake News" now? I guess "a global conspiracy" don't seem so far-fetched anymore?

This 3 minute short comedy film will introduce the channel. The other 56 videos lay it out for you, and No, I don't have all the answers. But it is really big .

"Bigger than anyone can imagine" ..

VACCINATE: Mommy. The TV Turned Daddy into a Robot Nazi.

HDRCFX Full Channel.

I don't sell T-Shirts, Hats, Coffee-Cups or Key-rings. There are no adverts, I don't want your money, I am trying to wake people the fuc up, including my own family. Most won't believe it, until the TV tells them to believe it, but a good number of you will be able to think for yourselves.

taglady 3 hours ago

It's not that people do not see what is happening. They do, but if they acknowledge the truth they will then have to do something about it. They are cowards. No problem, that is the way it has always been. It's only ever a very small percentage of people who change the world. Forget the cowards you don't want them at your back in battle anyway. It's time for those willing to do what it takes to unite and fight the parasites.

Cloud9.5 2 hours ago (Edited)

People are stockpiling food, fuel, and weapons on a scale we have never seen before. A third of the population is awake. They sense the collapse, and they are quietly getting ready for it.

Onthebeach6 6 hours ago

Klaus and his coven of economic vampires want to suck the rest of humanity dry whilst living forever as "Great Elders".

Sharpened stakes will work fine - just like in the movies.

PrideOfMammon 8 hours ago

Nothing wrong with Dr [sic] Schwab that a mineral supplement of nine grams of lead would not fix.

JZ123 9 hours ago

If you are into the conspiracy theorist subculture all of this "reset" bio-techno-feudalism deep state stuff isnt news. The enigmatic Alex Jones has been talking about it for years. As looney as Jones is, he gets a lot of things right eventually.

hugin-o-munin 8 hours ago

There are many books on these subjects. You can choose to go down that rabbit hole but I think there are bigger rewards looking forward instead and work on new ideas and solutions.

PrideOfMammon 8 hours ago

Jones' style is irritating to some, his substance is solid.

pparalegal 10 hours ago

Generation Z are you listening.

sun tzu 10 hours ago

They're too brainwashed by schools and social media

taglady 3 hours ago

Interesting that those calling for a great reset are the very ones who profited massively from the old system and were instrumental in the destruction of the natural world for their obscene profits.

10LBS_SHIT_5LB_BAG 1 hour ago

The great reset is their way of keeping their ill gotten gains while shutting us out of upward social mobility.

Money-Liberty 5 hours ago

The key to defeating these nutcases and their cohort elites is the collapse of this rotten fiat monetary system; without debt creation they cannot increase their control. A return to gold, silver, decentralized crypto for smaller P2P transactions , barter and localization will help redress the balance of power. I firmly believe there will be a 'Great Awakening' as the covid pandemic passes and the bill has to be paid. http://www.money-liberty.com/gallery/greensqueeze.pdf

Propaganda Ripper 4 hours ago (Edited)

That's precisely because they know the current fiat system is going to collapse that they want this Great Reset with the introduction of a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC).

Cloud9.5 2 hours ago

The problem lies with cascading collapse. There is a lag time between the death of the old system and the birth of the new. We are 9 meals away from total chaos. Digital currency is a long way from being able to buy a cabbage at a farmers market, especially with a shaky grid.

shadow541 5 hours ago

What this globalist elite envisions as a great future is nothing more than a bad science fiction movie.

A dystopia where their greed and megalomania is endlessly rewarded via the slavery of nearly everyone else.

It is sad that most of our world leaders in many areas can't conceive of a balanced and inclusive future for humankind.

People like Bill Gates think they can do world changing things like block out the sun based on a climate hoax.

They are psychopaths that cannot grasp that humanity, nature itself have a right to exist outside of their control.

CatInTheHat 44 minutes ago

And that lack of EMPATHY AND CONSCIENCE will be their down fall

dark pools of soros 5 hours ago

the great reset should be removing jooos from controlling money

Maghreb2 5 hours ago

Replace them with totalitarians AI designed to maintain a caste system. I ******* guarantee you the AI will end up anti-semitic at some point when the whole system goes into a tailspin because of Dominque Strauss Khan and some prostitutes.

Waiting for the day some rabbi shouts "shut it down the golem know!"

SomethingClever 8 hours ago

You will own nothing and have zero privacy but you will be happy.

Which means the billionaires will own everything and spy on you and make sure you don't interfere with their plans for what you used to own.

Horace Walpole 9 hours ago

Rarely do I find myself aligned with Austrians, but this article keenly identifies many of the more odious objectives of the shady cabal behind this shift.

Having said that, it's safe to say that the people attempting to initiate this "Great Reset" are mentally retarded, and thus incapable of implementing their absurd agenda. In my estimation, their stupidity and senility will lead to a state of chaos on an international scale as they inevitably overplay their hand.

PrideOfMammon 8 hours ago (Edited)

They are not so much mentally retarded as otherwise-minded. They are Talmudo-Satanists and want a world in the image of their master, Satan.

Propaganda Ripper 7 hours ago (Edited)

In my estimation, their stupidity and senility will lead to a state of chaos on an international scale as they inevitably overplay their hand.

Let's hope they are not able to implement their real agenda.

Wayne 2 hours ago

They are indeed retarded on many levels. The in-breeding among the aristocracy is mind-boggling. I wouldn't be surprised if some of these billionaires bang their own daughters and have kids.

peterZ 2 hours ago

exact a price.

Yes, the price will depend on how long they are able to carry this out. With people being dragged from their homes by police what is next?

Yamaoka Tesshu 2 hours ago

The "people " I've seen "dragged from their homes" are most likely crisis actors. By letting it play out on TV, real people and real courts are avoided. Think of all the dodgy "shootings". They don't stand up to even cursory scrutiny. As long as the general population maintains a degree of credulity they can continue to spin tales out of whole cloth. And they will have the same effect as "real" events. They have been at this forever.

CatInTheHat 56 minutes ago

True.

Well said.

[Dec 30, 2020] Fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt by Brian Gallagher

Notable quotes:
"... "Some people's own incompetence somehow gives them a stupid sense that anything they do is first rate. They think it's great." ..."
"... Extreme views often stem from people feeling they understand complex topics better than they do. ..."
"... David Krakauer, the President of the Santa Fe Institute, told interviewer Steve Paulson, for Nautilus , stupidity is not simply the opposite of intelligence. "Stupidity is ... where adding more data doesn't improve your chances of getting [a problem] right," Krakauer said. "In fact, it makes it more likely you'll get it wrong." ..."
Dec 30, 2020 | getpocket.com

Why aren't there more people studying the science behind stupidity? Nautilus

On this past International Holocaust Remembrance Day, I reread a bit of Bertrand Russell. In 1933, dismayed at the Nazification of Germany, the philosopher wrote "The Triumph of Stupidity," attributing the rise of Adolf Hitler to the organized fervor of stupid and brutal people -- two qualities, he noted, that "usually go together."

He went on to make one of his most famous observations, that the "fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt." Russell's quip prefigured the scientific discovery of a cognitive bias -- the Dunning -- Kruger effect -- that has been so resonant that it has penetrated popular culture, inspiring, for example, Russell's quip

"Some people's own incompetence somehow gives them a stupid sense that anything they do is first rate. They think it's great."

No surprise, then, that psychologist Joyce Ehrlinger prefaced a 2008 paper she wrote with David Dunning and Justin Kruger, among others, with Russell's comment -- the one he later made in his 1951 book, New Hopes for a Changing World :

"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision." "By now," Ehrlinger noted in that paper, "this phenomenon has been demonstrated even for everyday tasks, about which individuals have likely received substantial feedback regarding their level of knowledge and skill." Humans have shown a tendency, in other words, to be a bit thick about even the most mundane things, like how well they drive.

Stupidity is not simply the opposite of intelligence.

Russell, who died in 1970 at 97 years of age, probably would not be surprised to hear news of this new study , published in Nature Human Behaviour : "Extreme opponents of genetically modified foods know the least but think they know the most." The researchers, led by Philip Fernbach, cognitive scientist and co-author of The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone , analyzed survey responses from a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults.

They obtained similar results, they write, "in a parallel study with representative samples from the United States, France and Germany, and in a study testing attitudes about a medical application of genetic engineering technology (gene therapy)."

It was nevertheless consistent with prior work exploring the Dunning -- Kruger effect and the psychology of extremism, he Fernbach called their result "perverse." It was nevertheless consistent with prior work exploring the Dunning -- Kruger effect and the psychology of extremism, he said . " Extreme views often stem from people feeling they understand complex topics better than they do. " Now as ever, societies need to know how to combat this. But what exactly is stupidity?

David Krakauer, the President of the Santa Fe Institute, told interviewer Steve Paulson, for Nautilus , stupidity is not simply the opposite of intelligence. "Stupidity is ... where adding more data doesn't improve your chances of getting [a problem] right," Krakauer said. "In fact, it makes it more likely you'll get it wrong."

Intelligence, on the other hand ... allows you to solve complex problems with simple, elegant solutions. "Stupidity is a very interesting class of phenomena in human history, and it has to do with rule systems that have made it harder for us to arrive at the truth," he said.

... ... ...

Brian Gallagher is the editor of Facts So Romantic, the Nautilus blog.

[Dec 28, 2020] The biggest shakeup to my world view came with Russiagate.

Dec 28, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

librul , Dec 27 2020 14:58 utc | 2

I will elaborate.


The biggest shakeup to my world view came with Russiagate.

I had previously believed that intelligence sat at the top of the hierarchy for how people process information and get their belief systems.

Now I know that intelligence is a sub-layer in the hierarchy, and not even second.

Levels:

1) People identify with groups and get their beliefs from that group - herds.
2) People mimic their herd.
3) People apply intelligence to rationalize the beliefs that they already hold.


Trying to deprogram a headline-reader or ingestor of the MSM (aka MIC-mouthpiece)
by interacting with them at level #3 is like "spooning against the tide". You are not even getting close to level #1.
This is actually reinforcing people's delusion that they are operating primarily from an intelligence level - a catch-22.
You are telling them that their beliefs originate from intelligently gathered information. That isn't helping them.

Start paying attention to how often you trigger a mimic's cliche function.
It can be amusing. Then notice that you yourself were under the delusion that their beliefs originated intelligently.
That is why you are interacting with them in intelligent conversation, isn't it?
You believe that something that was birthed from intelligence can be untangled with your intelligent argument. Think again.

They have their beliefs that they mimic and then "confirmation bias" cements it,
and cementing it is the function of the endlessly repeated lies of the MIC-mouthpieces.
The repeated lies are kept fresh by putting them into new forms - Russiagate became Ukrainegate became Bountygate became Vaccinegate
(with occasional side trips into such places as MH17-gate, Skripal-gate and Assange-gate, etc).
You can spend your time showing them, for example, that the Skripal false-flag was a clown performance at best - the facts are out there for all to read.
But then, even if successful with that one, "what about this-gate and that-gate" - you haven't even scratched the surface of their
collective McCarthyism and thus by informing them about Skripal-gate "you are defending Russia". Good luck with that.

People are mimics that let their herd do their thinking for them. They have various skill levels at rationalizing to themselves the beliefs that they already hold.

p.s.

Put the three-level hierarchy to the test by considering people's religious beliefs.

People are typically born into those religious groups - level 1. They will consistently mimic the same cliches, for example, "G-d will curse those that do not support the Jews", "Jesus will throw you into a Lake of Fire", "Have a Blessed Day".

Do you think they all independently discovered these identical "Truths" on their own, and so, so many more, by their own personal study of the Bible?

They are mimicking - level 2. Now go and approach them at level 3 - the intelligence level - but don't neglect to carry a barf bag with you. Maybe you can succeed in reinforcing their delusion that their religious beliefs are intelligence based, but you will not even nudge them from their identity group - level 1. And you will only get for your trouble an ear full of mimicry.

---
I wrote the above last summer. Since then there have been more "-gates" such as the latest Multiple-US-agencies-Solarwinds-hack-gate. I mentioned Vaccinegate above and I had to stop and think about what that had been about as the public is being hosed with so much crap these days. Vaccinegate - supposedly the Russians had hacked our vaccine research.
---
recommended reading:
https://woodybelangia.com/what-is-mimetic-theory/


c1ue , Dec 27 2020 18:53 utc | 22

@librul #2
I think you overegg your view.
A significant part of the "me too" views these days is "rice bowl religion" - that is, belief maintained because the holder think they have to, in order to continue the economic prosperity.
Another significant part comes from the pervasiveness of mainstream media - both traditional and social media.

migueljose , Dec 27 2020 21:04 utc | 33

librul @ 2
Thanks Librul. Very insightful and accurate framing and description. Caitlin Johnstone also lays out the same perspective but yours stands alone as impressive.
Hope we're in the same herd! LOL!

[Dec 27, 2020] The comical and impotent figures of Comey, Mueller, Clapper, Rosenstein, Barr, Schiff, Nader, and such filled the stage during a production of the Russiagate farce.

Dec 27, 2020 | www.unz.com

annamaria , says: December 26, 2020 at 8:41 pm GMT • 4.2 hours ago

@Supply and Demand 'progressive' MeToo had disappeared. The MeToo activists love Bill Clinton and his various acquaintances, such as the badly aged idiots of Russian Pussy Riot and the Maxwells family. This is so progressive! See also the "progressive" Google/FaceBook/YouTube blanket censorship over anything that can be qualified as 'antisemitic' by the ADL (created in memory of a rapist and murderer Leo Frank). The 'progressives' have been taken for a ride by zionists.

The 'deplorables,' unlike Clintons, have a sense of dignity. As for the half-wit 'progressives,' they will undoubtedly have their chance to learn more about their most important tutors, the Trotskyists.

[Dec 20, 2020] Escobar- When Deplorables Become Ungovernables - ZeroHedge

Dec 20, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

China, Russia and Iran are the top three existential "threats" to the U.S., according to the National Security Strategy. Three features distinguish the top three. They are all sovereign powers. They are under varying degrees of sanctions. And they are the top three nodes of the 21st century's most important, evolving geopolitical process: Eurasia integration.

What do the three sovereigns see when they examine the dystopia that took over Exceptionalistan?

They see, once again, three – discombobulated – nodes in conflict:

  1. the post-historic Pacific and Atlantic coasts;

  2. the South – a sort of expanded Dixieland;

  3. and the Midwest – what would be the American heartland.

The hyper-modern Pacific-Atlantic nodes congregate high-tech and finance, profit from Pentagon techno-breakthroughs and benefit from the "America rules the waves" ethos that guarantees the global primacy of the U.S. dollar.

The rest of America is largely considered by the Pacific-Atlantic as just a collection of flyover states: the South – which regards itself as the real, authentic America; and the Midwest, largely disciplined and quite practical-minded, squeezed ideologically between the littoral powerhouses and the South.

Superstructure, though, is key: no matter what happens, whatever the fractures, this remains an Empire, where only a tiny elite, a de facto plutocratic oligarchy, rules.

It would be too schematic, even though essentially correct, to assert that in the presidential election, invisible campaigner Joe Biden represented the Pacific-Atlantic nodes, and Trump represented the whole South.

about:blank

about:blank

me title=

Assuming the election was not fraudulent – and that remains a big "if" – the Midwest eventually swung based on three issues.

  1. Trump, as much as he relied on a sanctions juggernaut, could not bring back manufacturing jobs home.

  2. He could not reduce the military footprint across the Greater Middle East.

  3. And, before Covid-19, he could not bring down immigration.

Everything that lies ahead points to the irreconcilable – pitting the absolute majority that voted Dem in the Atlantic-Pacific nodes versus the South and a deeply divided Midwest. As much as Biden-Harris is bound to isolate the South even more, their prospects of "pacifying" the Midwest are less than zero.

Whose ground control?

Beyond the raucous altercations on whether the presidential election was fraudulent, these are the key factual points.

  1. A series of rules in mostly swing states were changed, through courts, bypassing state legislatures, without transparence, before the election, paving the way to facilitate fraud schemes.

  2. Biden was de facto coronated by AP, Google and Twitter even before the final, official result, and weeks before the electoral college vote this past Monday.

  3. Every serious, professional audit to determine whether all received and tabulated votes were valid was de facto squashed.

In any Global South latitude where the empire did "interfere" in local elections, color revolution-style, this set of facts would be regarded by scores of imperial officials, in a relentless propaganda blitz, as evidence of a coup.

On the recent Supreme Court ruling, a Deep State intel source told me, "the Supreme Court did not like to see half the country rioting against them, and preferred the decision be made by each state in the House of Representatives. That is the only way to handle this without jeopardizing the union. Even prominent Democrats I know realize that the fix took place. The error was to steal too many votes. This grand theft indicts the whole system, that has always been corrupt."

Dangers abound.

On the propaganda front, for instance, far right nationalists are absolutely convinced that U.S. media can be brought to heel only by occupying the six main offices of the top conglomerates, plus Facebook, Google and Twitter: then you'd have full control of the U.S. propaganda mill.

Another Deep State source, now retired, adds that:

"the U.S. Army does not want to intervene as their soldiers may not obey orders.

Many of these far right nationalists were officers in the armed forces. They know where the nuclear missiles and bombers are. There are many in sympathy with them as the U.S. falls apart in lockdowns. "

Meanwhile, Hunter Biden's dodgy dealings simply will not be made to vanish from public scrutiny. He's under four different federal investigations. The recent subpoena amounts to a very serious case pointing to a putative crime family. It's been conveniently forgotten that Joe Biden bragged to the Council on Foreign Relations

that he forced Ukraine's chief prosecutor Viktor Shokin to be fired exactly when he was investigating corruption by Burisma's founder.

Of course, a massive army of shills will always invoke another army of omniscient and oh so impartial "fact checkers" to hammer the same message:

"This is Trump's version. Courts have said clearly all the evidence is baseless."

District Attorney William Barr is now out of the picture (see his letter of resignation). Barr is a notorious Daddy Bush asset since the old days – and that means classic Deep State. Barr knew about all federal investigations on Hunter Biden dating back to 2018, covering potential money laundering and bribery.

And still, as the Wall Street Journal delightfully put it, he "worked to avoid their public disclosure during the heated election campaign".

A devastating report (Dems: a Republican attack report) has shown how the Biden family was connected to a vast financial network with multiple foreign ramifications.

Then there's Barr not even daring to say there was enough reason for the Department of Justice to engage in a far-reaching investigation into voting fraud, finally putting to rest all "baseless" conspiracy theories.

Move on. Nothing to see here. Even if an evidence pile-up featured, among other instances, ballot stuffing, backdated ballots, statistical improbabilities, electronic machine tampering, software back doors, affidavits from poll workers, not to mention the by now legendary stopping the vote in the dead of night, with subsequent, huge batches of votes miraculously switching from Trump to Biden.

Once again an omniscient army of oh so impartial "fact checkers" will say everything is baseless.

A perverse blowback

A perverse form of blowback is already in effect as informed global citizens may now see, crystal clear, the astonishing depth and reach of Deep State power – the ultimate decider of what happens next in Dystopia Central.

Both options are dire.

  1. The election stands, even if considered fraudulent by nearly half of U.S. public opinion. To quote that peerless existentialist, The Dude, there's no rug tying the room together anymore.

  2. Was the election to be somehow overturned before January 20, the Deep State would go Shock and Awe to finish the job.

In either case, The Deplorables will become The Ungovernables.

It gets worse. A possible implosion of the union – with internal convulsions leading to a paroxysm of violence – may even be coupled with an external explosion, as in a miscalculated imperial adventure.

For the Three Sovereigns – Russia, China and Iran – as well as the overwhelming majority of the Global South, the conclusion is inescapable: if the current, sorry spectacle is the best Western liberal "democracy" has to offer, it definitely does not need any enemies or "threats". 111,246 644

[Dec 20, 2020] America outsourced because of the decline in profitability of domestic manufacturing. Capitalism did exactly what it was supposed to do and investors sought out better returns on their investments, which meant moving production elsewhere.

Dec 20, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

William Gruff , Dec 18 2020 16:43 utc | 97

NemesisCalling @92: "...we would be much better without trading so much in SE Asia..."

And the morbidly obese couch potato with severe heart disease and diabetes and a number of other lifestyle-related ailments would do much better to get up and get some exercise. Unfortunately a point exists beyond which efforts to reverse the atrophy of the body's systems become deadly and restoring health a near impossible task. America passed that point many years ago.

...has our trading relationship with China brought anything good to the people of the U.S.? (Beyond the obvious cheap consumer products which we all know only benefit the elite in this arrangement)

Many, if not most, Americans would not even be able to afford clothes if they were not cheap stuff made in China or Bangladesh. I would say those products being cheap certainly benefited those people who want to remain clothed.

"America is showing decline due in large part to our outsourcing"

You have that backwards. America outsourced because of the decline in profitability of domestic manufacturing. Capitalism did exactly what it was supposed to do and investors sought out better returns on their investments, which meant moving production elsewhere.

From a strictly pragmatic perspective, how would you propose to prevent market forces from directing investment to parts of the world where manufacturing is more profitable? Would you un-free the market and dictate to investors what they are to invest in?

If you look at all of the decisions between the late 1960s and the present that impacted outsourcing you will find that they are all quite understandable and very pro-capitalist. Particularly far-sighted people might have noted that the day of reckoning was just being delayed and the can kicked down the road, but kicking that can almost half a century down the road made a lot of sense back then. After all, that gave America decades to come up with a Plan B. It only became a problem after we had gotten down the road to where the can ended up only to discover that someone else had taken the can.


uncle tungsten , Dec 18 2020 21:36 utc | 113

William Gruff # 97

If you look at all of the decisions between the late 1960s and the present that impacted outsourcing you will find that they are all quite understandable and very pro-capitalist. Particularly far-sighted people might have noted that the day of reckoning was just being delayed and the can kicked down the road, but kicking that can almost half a century down the road made a lot of sense back then. After all, that gave America decades to come up with a Plan B. It only became a problem after we had gotten down the road to where the can ended up only to discover that someone else had taken the can.

Thank you brother Gruff, that is a perfect analogy. It always pays to have a Plan B that is immediately able to be implemented. My guess is that the USA Plan B was - invade some poor nation and plunder both the homeside taxpayers and the victims resources. In the case of the Saudis and Sunni occupied Gulf States all they had to do was bribe them with dazzling wealth and power (both economic and religious) and profit from the refined oil barrels.

The past two presidents have been looking for the can, the next one might have to create a better plan B fast or repeat the past Plan B just to be seen to be doing something. They sure don't look subtle/inventive enough yet to come up with a sophisticated, peaceful plan. Hint look at FDR / Henry Wallace as a start toward a socialist alternative.

Bemildred , Dec 18 2020 22:22 utc | 115

William Gruff # 97
Posted by: uncle tungsten | Dec 18 2020 21:36 utc | 113

The 70s was when they started selling the good redwood saw logs to Japan instead of cutting them up here because they could get more profit that way. At the time I do not think it was considered that the Japanese would be able to compete with us as well as they did, and I think the same applies to the other sellouts of our working class to foreign cheap manufacturing centers. You have to remember these people really do think they are better. They do think in class terms even if they avoid that rhetoric in public. The problem is they thought they could control China like they did Japan. That was dumb then and it looks even dumber now. You can see similar dumbness in their lack of grip on any realisitic view of Russia. Provincials really. Rich peasants.

[Dec 20, 2020] The American ruling class has failed on pretty much every issue of significance for the past several decades

Neoliberals as an occupying force for the country
Notable quotes:
"... The bottom line is the true enemies of the American people are no foreign nation or adversary---the true enemy of the American people are the people who control America. ..."
"... This way of thinking points to a dilemma for the American ruling class. Contrary to a lot of the rhetoric you hear, much of the American ruling class, including the "deep state" is actually quite anti-China. To fully account for this would take longer than I have here. But the nutshell intuitive explanation is that the ruling class, particularly Wall Street, was happy for the past several decades to enrich both themselves and China by destroying the American working class with policies such as "free-trade" and outsourcing. But in many ways the milk from that teat is no more, and now you have an American ruling class much more concerned about protecting their loot from a serious geopolitical competitor (China) than squeezing out the last few drops of milk from the "free trade." ..."
Dec 20, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
Bemildred , Dec 19 2020 2:00 utc | 124

This is awesome, he nails the dilemma which our owners are confronted with;

I'll put it this way: It is not as though the American ruling class is intelligent, competent, and patriotic on most important matters and happens to have a glaring blind spot when it comes to appreciating the threat of China. If this were the case, it would make sense to emphasize the threat of China above all else.

But this is not the case. The American ruling class has failed on pretty much every issue of significance for the past several decades. If China were to disappear, they would simply be selling out the country to India, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, or some other country (in fact they are doing this just to a lesser extent).

Our ruling class has failed us on China because they have failed us on everything. For this reason I believe that there will be no serious, sound policy on China that benefits Americans until there is a legitimate ruling class in the United States. For this reason pointing fingers at the wickedness and danger of China is less useful than emphasizing the failure of the American ruling class. The bottom line is the true enemies of the American people are no foreign nation or adversary---the true enemy of the American people are the people who control America.

This way of thinking points to a dilemma for the American ruling class. Contrary to a lot of the rhetoric you hear, much of the American ruling class, including the "deep state" is actually quite anti-China. To fully account for this would take longer than I have here. But the nutshell intuitive explanation is that the ruling class, particularly Wall Street, was happy for the past several decades to enrich both themselves and China by destroying the American working class with policies such as "free-trade" and outsourcing. But in many ways the milk from that teat is no more, and now you have an American ruling class much more concerned about protecting their loot from a serious geopolitical competitor (China) than squeezing out the last few drops of milk from the "free trade."

The Zürich Interviews - Darren J. Beattie: If Only You Knew How Bad Things Really Are


Grieved , Dec 19 2020 3:12 utc | 129

@102 karlof1 - "By deliberately setting policy to inflate asset prices, the Fed has priced US labor out of a job, while as you report employers sought labor costs that allowed them to remain competitive."

I never heard it said so succinctly and truly as this before. That is what happened isn't it? The worker can't afford life anymore, in this country.

And if the worker can't afford the cost of living - who bears the cause of this, how follows the remedy of this, and what then comes next?

I really appreciate your point of view, which is the only point of view, which is that the designers of the economy, the governors of the economy, have placed the workers of the economy in a position that is simply just not tenable.

No wonder they strive to divide in order to rule - because they have over-reached through greed and killed the worker, who holds up the society.

How long can the worker flounder around blaming others before the spotlight must turn on the employer?

uncle tungsten , Dec 19 2020 3:12 utc | 130

Bemildred #115

You have to remember these people really do think they are better. They do think in class terms even if they avoid that rhetoric in public. The problem is they thought they could control China like they did Japan. That was dumb then and it looks even dumber now. You can see similar dumbness in their lack of grip on any realisitic view of Russia. Provincials really. Rich peasants.

Thank you, they certainly DO think in class terms ALWAYS. + Rich peasants is perfect :))

Thankfully they are blinded by hubris at the same time. The USA destroyed the Allende government in Chile in 1973. After the Nixon Kissinger visit to China in 1979 they assumed they could just pull a color revolution stunt when they deemed it to be the right time. Perhaps in their hubris they thought every Chinese worker would be infatuated with capitalism and growth.

They tested that out in the People Power colour (yellow) revolt in the Filipines in 1986 following a rigged election by Marcos. In 1989 only 16 years after China had been buoyed up with growth and development following the opening to USA capitalism, they tried out the same trick in Tienanmen square in China but those students were up against the ruling party of the entire nation - not the ruling class. BIG MISTAKE. The ruling party of China was solidly backed by the peasant and working class that was finally enjoying some meager prosperity and reward a mere 40 years after the Chinese Communist Party and their parents and grandparents had liberated China from 100 years of occupation, plunder, human and cultural rapine and colonial insult. Then in 2020 it was tried on again in Hong Kong. FAIL.

The hubris of the ruling class and its running dogs is pathetic.

We see the same with Pelosi and the ruling class in the Dimoratss today. They push Biden Harris to the fore, piss on the left and refuse to even hold a vote on Medicare for All in the middle of a pandemic. Meanwhile the USAi ruling class has its running dogs and hangers on bleating that "its wrong tactic, its premature, its whatever craven excuse to avoid exposing the ruling class for what they are - thieves, bereft of compassion, absent any sense of social justice, fakes lurking behind their class supposition.

They come here to the bar with their arrogant hubris, brimming with pointless information some even with emoji glitter stuck on their noses. Not a marxist or even a leftie among them. Still its class that matters and its the ruling class that we must break.

chu teh , Dec 19 2020 4:00 utc | 131

@102 karlof1 and Grieved | Dec 19 2020 3:12 utc | 129

I did not understand inflate-assets/suppress-workers and forgot to return to it to clear it up. Grieved sent me back to Karlof1. I just got it.

That viewpoint indeed explains method of operation to accomplish the results I observed. When Nixon was forced to default on Bretton Woods use of Gold Exchange Standard* [the USD is as good as gold], then printing fiat solved the problem [threat to US inventory of gold]....but printing fiat [no longer redeemable as a promise convert to gold] became the new problem [no way to extinguish the promises to redeem/pay].

So how to proceed? Aha! Steal from the workers; squeeze 'em, entertain and dazzle 'em!.. Such an elegant solution...slow, certain and hardly noticeable...like slow-boiling frogs...an on-going project as we blog.

Now I'll read Karlof1's link.

[Dec 10, 2020] The Transnational Financiers as aliens hell-bent of conquering the Earth population

Dec 10, 2020 | zerohedge.com

Dec 4, 2020 10:14 PM Reply to Le Chat Noir

The wonderful world you talk about was not experienced by the peoples of Guatemala, Iran, Chile, Honduras, Nicaragua, Mexico, Argentinia, Haiti, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria and many of the homeless and destitute in the US, UK, Japan etc. The wonderful world you describe is an illusion.

There is a line from the 1960s Science Fiction series called the Invaders from another galaxy who wish take over the world. At the beginning of each episode the narrator says " they wish to take over the world and make it their world".

The Transnational Financiers have been working towards that goal for centuries!!!!

[Dec 05, 2020] WATCH- Trump's Censored Speech OffGuardian

Notable quotes:
"... The billionaire owners of the media are deciding what you can and cannot see. Granting themselves a monopoly on "truth" and usurping the power of the ordinary citizen to inform themselves and make a reasoned decision ..."
"... 'I'll drain the swamp' ..."
"... 'I'll show you aliens' or 'I'll release the JFK truth' ..."
"... 'data rigging that wasn't policed ' ..."
Dec 05, 2020 | off-guardian.org

WATCH: Trump's Censored Speech The media refusing to air the President's allegations of vote rigging is an open display of who REALLY runs the country

https://www.youtube.com/embed/RFzTuaVS8Kk

On Wednesday, December 2nd Donald Trump – the sitting President of the United State of America – released a 46 minute recorded speech. In an alarming display of co-ordinated censorship, much of the media simply refused to air it.

In the speech (embedded above) he details all the suspicious behaviour surrounding the November 3rd election, as well as showing charts of evidence of peculiar activity in the vote counts of key swing states.

None of the major networks aired it in full. CNN simply refused to broadcast even clips, instead letting the millionaire son of a political dynasty lecture the viewing public in a bizarre ten-minute long abuse-laden rant .

Twitter and Facebook stuck "fact-check" warnings under anyone attempting to share it while papers like the Guardian or Independent post mocking summaries without ever showing – or even linking to – the original.

If you want to actually see the speech in full you have search out smaller youtube channels, or go to C-SPAN . (We would suggest downloading a copy while you can, it is likely to become hard to find. There's also a transcript here .)

Their defense of this overt censorship is that Trump is "endangering lives" and/or "encouraging violence" by calling the legitimacy of the vote into question. Such claims were never made about claims Putin's Russia had rigged the vote for Trump. In fact, Russiagate nonsense was spouted nightly by every major news outlet in the country, if not the world.

However they justify to themselves there's no denying the hard truth of it: The mainstream media are actively and openly engaged in the wholesale censorship of an elected head of state. Deliberately crippling the ability of an elected leader to communicate with the public.

Whether or not the vote was rigged – and there is more than enough reason to think that it was – the behaviour of the media is verging on the kind of co-ordinated gagging you would expect to happen during a palace coup.

Even if you hate Trump and love Biden, even if you don't care about the vote and count all modern democracy a sham, there's a coup going on here that's bigger than just who gets to sit in the Oval office:

The billionaire owners of the media are deciding what you can and cannot see. Granting themselves a monopoly on "truth" and usurping the power of the ordinary citizen to inform themselves and make a reasoned decision

Rigged vote or not, what's left of our crumbling democratic freedoms has never been in more danger.


John Goss , Dec 5, 2020 12:08 AM

I know Savorywill below would like to see this. The fight is not over yet. This is election fraud of the worst kind. The problem is those who did not get caught in this corruption but were still a part of it. The actual alleged turnout at the polls is highly questionable – the biggest ever. Now some might think that Joe Biden has that kind of charisma. Others have actually seen him perform.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQ9YGSMY2xg

It's no wonder the US is always questioning other countries' elections. It thinks its system is the model for the world.


Tom
, Dec 5, 2020 12:00 AM

They didn't really censor it. They just show his face, and tell you what they think of it before you even hear him. Pretty usual SOP for them I guess. Dec 4, 2020 11:44 PM

Thank you for publishing this article, and enabling people to watch the speech. At least 70 million Americans did vote for Trump (probably many more than that, if their votes had been counted). They are decidedly not happy to see what is taking place, to say the least. I went to Paddy's gambling side to see the odds of Trump winning late Tuesday, when normally the election is called, and Trump was indisputably odds on favorite (you would have made a fortune betting on Biden at that time!). Then the polls close, the election monitors are told to go home and the mail-in ballots are rolled in and counted in secret, with Republican monitors either not present or, if they were, not allowed to see what was going on.

If Biden does prevail, which seems highly likely, sadly, at this stage, his pick to be the Secretary of Defense, is Michèle Flournoy , a woman (of course!), but a woman who thinks that US troops should remain in Afghanistan to protect Afghani women from the Taliban !

You can't make this up! Trump stated in every rally, to tremendous applause, 'end the endless wars'. The Democrats are the war party now and they are filling government positions with sociopaths such as Madeleine Albright, famous for saying the death of 500,000 children in Iraq was 'worth it'. Worth it for what, I wonder. One thing is sure, though, those millions who did vote for Trump are not going to be pleased by what is going on. How they will express their displeasure is the big question, I guess. However, if it actually happens that the Supreme Court did rule in favor of Trump and invalidated enough mail-in votes to swing the election back to Trump, there would a shit storm of dissent from MSM and the deranged mobs of Trump haters that would likely wreak havoc on the whole country, nightly rampages of BLM and Antifa types terrorizing cities, others bringing out guns to defend themselves, possibly devolving into almost civil war conditions. Perhaps it is better to let Biden's minders have their way, make half hearted efforts to actually reduce CO2 emissions to 0% by 2025 (as Biden solemnly proclaimed in the final debate), give free health to all, allow people from south of border easy or unfettered access to come to the USA (of course, tear down that hateful wall), renew the practice of exporting jobs to other countries where the wages are lower so products can be made more cheaply, resulting in lower employment options for American workers. Then, obviously, the economy will tank and Trump, or someone on the same page, can run again in 2024 and save the day

George Mc , Dec 4, 2020 11:14 PM

I think you have to see the bigger picture. All politicians ultimately serve the most powerful forces i.e. the monied class. It's not a unified group but there is at any time a general direction which this class will take.

The Western world has lived in a comfortable boom bubble after WW2. Our society embodied an unprecedented affluence. And it could afford to project an image of "capitalism for all" or "capitalism with a friendly face".

It was a time of seeming celebration where the Western populace were in the happy position of being like eternal children – mesmerised by an increasingly glamourous entertainment field. And we got to act out a pretence at political participation every few years. The spectrum of potential political leaders effectively boiled down to two – which were merely two faces of the same force.

This comfortable theatre has lasted all our lives. But the underlying situation has changed through a downward economic spiral through which, up till now, we have "weathered the storm". The ruling class has gradually siphoned off more and more wealth to feed its insatiable hunger. And it has managed to do this while still maintaining that basic paradigm of "smiley face capitalism".

But we have reached a moment of crisis. The ruling class is now facing up to the fact that it can no longer maintain its power and luxuriance within the paradigm of a universal security. Thus we have the most transformative point since WW2. That vast majority of happy eternal children will find their hitherto comfortable lifestyles slipping away so that they will become a new peasant class.

And so the glamorous vision of capitalism for all must now give way. The image that is now in the ascendant is that of a war economy i.e. the old war economy. This is very different from the grand bellicosity which can be projected for a protected populace who, as it were, get to watch a televised image of war which is happening comfortably elsewhere. This time, the population itself is on the receiving end.

It is in this sense that the word "socialism" or even "Marxism" may be applied – not because the society we are headed towards is actual socialism. But because the old cold war image of communism with its seedy deprivation will indeed became reality for the vast majority.

So where does Trump fit in all this? Well – that aforementioned communist image is obviously more connected to the Left than the Right. In American terms, that means the Democrats are the ones "for the job".

And what is "the job"? Well it is the most efficacious path towards the slump i.e. the path that will generate the least resistance and the most docility. Hence: the pandemic. Trump's "Make America Great Again" rhetoric was not only obsolete but a positive obstacle to this great deprivation.

No longer the carrot but the stick. No longer prophets of hope but doom merchants. That is what the rulers need now if they want to preserve their position. And preserving their position is all they care abo

Lost in a dark wood , Dec 4, 2020 10:36 PM Reply to Brianborou

Trump is the counter coup against the central banking system, and it's why he has a portrait of Andrew Jackson overlooking his desk (see below). The war against the "invisible enemy" started in 2016 and what we are witnessing now is perhaps the beginning of the end. Probably the best rolling updates come from the X22 Report:
https://rumble.com/c/X22Report
--

https://www.salon.com/2019/10/02/donald-trumps-favorite-president-andrew-jackson-as-father-of-the-white-republic/
I don't know much about the detailed history, but I assume the above is at least a partial attempt to trash Jackson. However, it makes the point (perhaps inadvertently) that the British were always a serious threat, and the actions by Jackson should be viewed in the context of addressing that threat.

Brianborou. , Dec 4, 2020 11:47 PM Reply to Lost in a dark wood

Really, so how do you explain the most powerful bankers in the world bail him out of most of his business failed ventures ?

JuraCalling , Dec 5, 2020 12:00 AM Reply to Lost in a dark wood

Andrew Jackson was an intelligent and politically astute man.

Donald Trump is a billionaire property developer and celebrity.

Do you think Jackson would have had a picture of Trump anywhere( that doesn't include a dartboard )

George Mc , Dec 4, 2020 8:29 PM

One thing that this video gives the lie to is that Trump is a present day version of Hitler. Whatever you think of him, he puts his point forward with poise and dignity. Dec 4, 2020 8:25 PM

Trump's speech should've been broadcasted on MSM. That being said, anyone who foolishly supported sellout Bernie is well aware of how the Dems rig elections. It's done all a time by both parties. All elections are rigged.

In any event, this election was critical. The establishment Republicans, Democrats, and the security state wanted Trump out. They were all in on it.
The person involved (Trump) as usual is always the last to know. Trump, was purposely not given good advice–it was a set-up. Trump's team should've only consented to the "COVID mail-in election," if the mail-in ballots were "solicited" and signatures were matched to existing documentation. These solicited ballots needed to be counted as they came in. They all should've been required to be mailed out early way before election day. After those mail-in ballots were tabulated, then they would only have to count the ballots which were cast on election day.

However, this is what probably happened–the security state was stunned by Trump's popularity. They had no idea he was going to secure so many votes. That's why the counting was stopped and they needed to regroup. They had to keep the results solid for Biden so Trump would have no recourse. It was planned for a very long time.
Biden-Harris evolved into the ticket when Harris "their favorite" turned out to be a loser during the Dem primaries. That's why they pulled sleazy Joe out of the coffin to run with the Indian/Zionist Hillary puppet.

Geoff , Dec 4, 2020 7:42 PM

Apart from the fact it's outrageous that they rig elections, but the outcome is still the same, in the UK if the great socialist QC leader of the ludwick parry should win the next election what happens nothing never has never will, we must be the only country where you have to work a two year probationary period before you have any employment protection, give seven days notice for any industrial action , why not make it three months? As someone put it on here last week , putting a piece of paper into a ballot box is a grown up version of sending Santa a letter, after the last election, I'm finished never vote again it's a fuckin charade and I'm not joining in.

Joerg , Dec 4, 2020 7:42 PM

WATCH: Video footage from Georgia shows suitcases filled with ballots pulled from under a table AFTER supervisors told poll workers to leave room and 4 people stayed behind to keep counting votes

https://t.co/AcbTI1pxn4

Joerg , Dec 4, 2020 7:43 PM Reply to Joerg

The video itself has the direct:link:
https://twitter.com/TeamTrump/status/1334569329334083586

crank , Dec 4, 2020 7:40 PM Reply to JuraCalling

If this speech we can see hear was banned from reaching the public because of it's truth- why are we able to watch and listen ?

Of course none of us know. My 'take' is that it is part of a fairly elaborate bifurcation strategy. We are 'able to watch and listen' because of the pluralility and cross referencing of the internet. There is only one meaningful divide in Western politics now : those who hang on to the corporate media as a thread back to a believeable account of the world around them, and those who are thinking and do not. The PTB saw this divide coming. The corporate/state media ran Operation Trump as a bout featuring a bad wrestler character, knowing full well that a lot of what he says is, in fact, true. That he is the one saying it though, tar babies the truth with because it is his weird mouth uttering it. Lies then continue to prevail amongst the managerial classes.
None of this is about Donald Trump ulitmately, but electoral politics confuses several things in people's minds : the honesty of character of the individual standing as representative, the stated political objectives/ philosophies of the representative, the unstated objectives/ philosophy of the representative, the values and interests of those who get them into power, the capacity for that representative to work the system to get their objectives enacted etc.
The issue here is about the 70+ million voters who voted for what they think Donald Trump offers them. That they have not got what they seemed to want back in 2016, and that Trump had ample chance to push that along, reminds me that his "America First" declaration is the key (and perhaps only) lie in this speech.
The swing toward a renewed national conservatism in America is a problem for the global elites. So they set up a fake nationalism, sometimes referred to as 'Finkelthink', after its mastermind Arthur Finkelstein. There is a lot on this for anyone open minded enough to look into it.
The stage is being set by the Democrats and Trump together, to maximise chaos layered upon chaos. We all know why, because America (the dollar) is going down:
https://www.corbettreport.com/interview-1604-john-titus-on-central-bank-digital-currencies/

S Cooper , Dec 4, 2020 8:08 PM Reply to JuraCalling

"Not the most gracious loser is Donald."

"That is precious. Liars, cheats and charlatans lecturing anyone about "sportsmanship." They should first get some integrity. Oh wait, they can't. Because they have none. They have not only cheated Orange Hair Bozo, they have cheated the general public as well."

JuraCalling , Dec 4, 2020 8:24 PM Reply to S Cooper

I think a big part of this is a bit like the Roadrunner carton. No matter how 'wily' Wile E Coyote was, he always ended up with his own bomb exploding in his hand or getting stuck in his own trap.

Four years ago Trump tried to tap into the niche we know and love as 'alt'. He tempted with 'I'll drain the swamp' and 'I'll show you aliens' or 'I'll release the JFK truth' nuggets. Once he was in he developed a 'bromance' that looked like a terrible, terrible acid trip with Alex Jones.

Then there was a mass sweep of 'conspiracy theories' that had been prompted by Obama's blood lust. Suddenly we had Trumps attempt at Orwellian doublespeak as he called whatever he didn't agree with 'fake nooz'. Anyone asking the president a question- as has been protocol for 100 years- was ok if they asked ones he wanted to be asked; any others were branded as ' fake nooz '.

We were still hearing about 'Pizzagate' and the Clinton cartel of psychopaths 2 years into his reign. And even now Russiagate or Hackgate won't go away. So here we are. Trump has found another mixture of conspiracy to call 'fake nooz' .

But this one( according to him) has been to oust him from power.

We've never seen a public figure scrutinised so closely 24/7 in our time. Nobody has. I thought that kind of thing with Lady Diana was the peakt. But the Trump obsession has been off the scale from day one. I think it's down to his numerous cameo appearances on tacky sitcoms or public appearances at the square garden for the big fights. We all knew him in the UK. We never thought of him as a politician, just a slightly wacky billionaire with interesting hair and funny suits.

That the race was between him and Hilary was bad enough. In the UK, we had a complete dickhead who looks like he'd struggle in a job interviewer as the car park attendant end up the PM.

As Dystopia sets in, as the decks are cleared for a NWO and as politicians ready themselves to step aside and let the future structure's rulers- Scientists – take over, Democracy has to be seen as untrustworthy, along with the democratic process.

We can hope the vote -rigging talk goes away ( it's dull already, and less and less people buy the system anyway) but it's serving it's purpose. That being to demonstrate the lack of credibility of any system has that allows us plebs to have a say.

They won't blame us; they'll blame 'data rigging that wasn't policed ' . But we'll be told we'll have to vote by digital means after this. And that's not voting at all. It's pressing keys and a mouse. The results are already decided ahead of the game. Like now.

Captain Birdheart , Dec 4, 2020 6:16 PM

Here is a video version (12 minutes) of the Martin Geddes article 'The digital coup & the great exposure.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/LEFTSJkitYM?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en-US&autohide=2&wmode=transparent

Tom Larsen , Dec 4, 2020 7:15 PM Reply to Captain Birdheart

I doubt anybody living in the Biden media bubble would ever hear this.

TheCrow , Dec 4, 2020 6:22 PM Reply to Lisa

Trump is the political wing of the military industrial complex, and it looks like they are going to go for it.

Sandy Sanders , Dec 4, 2020 6:08 PM

But let's be honest about the US electoral system. Just concerning post WW2, It's a two-team battle much like a professional football league with just two franchises: playing, making the rules, running the game, refereeing, promoting, providing media and "journalistic" coverage, administering funding, policies, budgets and arenas, controlling ancillary business franchises; and literally charging, controlling behavior of and dictating every aspect of the event an attendance. The public's only power is to buy (being taxed) a ticket or watch the commercialed event on TV. Same two teams, same basic play, same outcome for everyone. The owners & 1% players and support franchises make out fabulously and the public sit in the serf's seats powerless and obedient. As ratified in 1789 and functioning in 2020, it's a rigged game from the start.

In the last 100 years we've had the incredibly popular socialist Henry Wallace, VP to FDR, sabotaged by internal Dem politics giving us the most incompetent Truman; JFK thru Chicago ballot rigging; internal sabotage of McGovern and Carter; the Anderson split sabotage of 1980; Gore in Florida 2000 w/SCOTUS & Dem sellout; Kerry Sellout in Ohio 2004; and the 3 million plus majority popular loss to the archaic Electoral College in 2016. For me the only solution for a survivable future was Wallace in 1948. But as 2020 was rigged, it has always been rigged by the system which is the Deep State to get what it wants: 1) a plutocracy that provides for the Commerce operations of the 1%; and 2) thwart, block & erase any functional democracy or potentiality of democratic socialism that allows the 99% to self-govern-provide for the social needs of humanity.

Gwyn , Dec 4, 2020 6:07 PM

And they'll still have the brass neck to bang on about "exporting democracy" to other countries. The USA is a bad joke of a country. A rogue state.

Which makes it the ideal henchman for the transnational financiers who run the world. A big, stupid bully with unlimited military spending at its disposal that can bomb countries that can't defend themselves into submission. Very courageous, those servants of illegitimate power from the Home of the Brave.

It's also called the Land of the Free, of course – which is slightly at odds with the fact that it's the proud possessor of the highest per capita rate of incarceration in the world. And they say the Yanks don't do irony!

Ross Hendry , Dec 4, 2020 6:41 PM Reply to Gwyn

"USA is a bad joke of a country."

Make that a sick joke. Americans on the other hand are mostly fine people (albeit amazingly oblivious/uncaring about the outrages that are done in their name).

Gwyn , Dec 4, 2020 8:04 PM Reply to Ross Hendry

The greatest outrage started on the day settlers landed there. A bit of humility, a bit of contrition, about the fate of the American Indians wouldn't go amiss (instead of all the idiotic, infantile bombast about the USA being the greatest country in the world).

Watt , Dec 4, 2020 8:44 PM Reply to Gwyn

Maybe some 'reparations' wouldn't go amiss! Major precedent is already in play, so to speak.

JuraCalling , Dec 5, 2020 12:10 AM Reply to Gwyn

It's Orwellian doublespeak Democracy.

Le Chat Noir , Dec 4, 2020 6:03 PM

We have all globally lost democracy and freedom in a very sinister and well co-ordinated revolution without a shot being fired, apart from the one they'll give you in the arm. I feel very sad for the young people, they'll never grow up in the wonderful world I knew.

[Dec 05, 2020] Lockdown lead to atomization of labour

Dec 05, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Jen , Dec 3 2020 22:56 utc | 76

VK @ 24:

"... Lockdowns as being inherently against the working class is a capitalist (liberal) falsification: if you pay them while they're kept safe in their homes, you'll have the best of the two worlds for the working class (being paid without working). This option is only an anathema for the middle class and the capitalist class - who can't imagine a world without the proletarians serving them ..."

We all live in an interconnected world and middle class, capitalist class (whatever that's supposed to mean) and proletarians alike supply goods and services to one another. Money is the medium that facilitates such exchanges. It follows then that proletarians also serve one another and ditto for the other classes.

If working classes are paid to stay in their homes, who then supplies their needs? In spite of Jeff Bozo's efforts and those of Elon Musk, not all transport is self-automating and robots in Amazon warehouses still need some human inputs to operate quickly and without hitches.

One could also argue that working fulfils other, non-monetary needs. Karl Marx actually foresaw this when he wrote about anomie in capitalist systems of production, in which workers are denied control over their lives and the work they do by being denied any say in what they produce, how they produce it, the resources and environment needed to produce outputs, and maybe even whether they can be allowed to work at all.

Lockdowns can be viewed as another method in which to deny people control over their work and work environments. People socialise at work and lockdowns may be a way to deny workers a place or a means to connect with others (and maybe to form unions). Is it any wonder then, that during lockdowns people's mental health has become an issue and public health experts became concerned at the possibility that such phenomena as suicide and domestic violence could increase?


foolisholdman , Dec 3 2020 22:59 utc | 78

foolisholdman | Dec 3 2020 22:21 utc | 68


You can understand this from this quotation. It is the internal contradictions of the wesern capitalist system that is driving the changes we observe, not "pressure applied by China", which I would say is a myth.

"The fundamental cause of the development of a thing is not external but internal: it lies in the contradictionariness within the thing. This internal contradiction exists in every single thing, hence its motion and development. Contradictionariness within a thing is the fundamental cause of its development, while its interrelations and interactions with other things are secondary causes."

"It (Materialist dialectics) holds that external causes are the conditions of change and internal causes are the basis of change, and that external causes become operative through internal causes. In a suitable temperature an egg changes into a chicken, but no temperature can change a stone into a chicken, because each has a different basis."
Mao Zedong. "On Contradiction" August 1937. Selected Works, Vol.1, p.315.

Mark2 , Dec 3 2020 23:09 utc | 80

Lockdowns are a medical protection to eradicate a contagious virus.
The lock downs we have had are fake and we're designed to fail. For political reasons.
The very people who complained 10 months ago, were responsible for them not working,
10 months later those people are still complaining. They are the ones who have prolonged the contagion.
They are to blame. That includes the polatians and duped public.
It's deliberate !

[Dec 02, 2020] Under neoliberalism the US is hollowing itself out politically, economically, spiritually, and morally; the power structures have mutated to a corporate owned dictatorship.

Dec 02, 2020 | www.unz.com

Biff , says: November 30, 2020 at 1:57 am GMT • 1.5 days ago

In America, infrastructure ages, trains look like something from a Fifties movie, transportation deteriorates as all the money goes to the military . Since the US doesn't do much civil engineering, and hasn't for many years, it would probably have to hire foreign firms should it decide to modernize. (See TSMC above.)

Regardless of what China is doing, or India, Iran, Russia or Botswana, the U.S. is hollowing itself out politically, economically, spiritually, and physically. This is due to how power structures have mutated from a government controlled republic to a corporate owned dictatorship.

The fake bureaucracy's and infighting about equality, gender rights, and racism are distractions while the corporate dictatorship rules by decree, and it is transferring more wealth and power day by day, year by year. Freedoms and choices are being systematically reduced to zero.

The day Johnny Carson died should be the swan song.

Notsofast , says: November 30, 2020 at 3:02 am GMT • 1.4 days ago

20 years ago, when the neo-cons were able to strongarm their way into power, this country had such a huge advantage in terms of technology and military might, they felt they had no equal and never would. their hubris and megalomania launched us on the disastrous path that in a scant two decades has led us to the brink of destruction as a society. both russia and china have eclipsed us in terms of military and civilian technologies. my greatest fear is that these same neo-cons have stolen this election as well and will now flip the chessboard rather than face the humiliating defeat that is the result of their corruption, stupidity and hubris.

TomSchmidt , says: November 30, 2020 at 4:05 am GMT • 1.4 days ago
@Biff ot fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter with a half-million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people.
Alfa158 , says: November 30, 2020 at 4:18 am GMT • 1.4 days ago

...The parasites who dismantled the US think it's not a problem because they can just shift operations to China as the new host and repeat that trick.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website November 30, 2020 at 5:37 am GMT • 1.3 days ago

You can't argue with the real engineering going on over there, especially the Civil Engineering. When you don't have a thousand tax-payer-supported bureaucrats from a hundred different agencies and even "Non-Governmental Organizations" blocking every thought you have, it's hard to get things done. There's no doubt that the huge military spending on "democracy for the world" and the squandering of the huge amount of goodwill and power accumulated at the end of the Cold War is part of America's problem (thanks NotSoFast). Mr. Reed never mentioned the increase in regulation and taxation by the Feral Beast that has turned America into a Can't-Do country.

It's a great photo essay on the amazing engineering advances out of China, but, as usual, Fred gets major things wrong.

I don't know what the deal is with Mr. Reed's repetitive harping on Americans' concern for intellectual property rights. The Chinese will do fine without our help now, but it's the theft of the IP of American engineering that has gotten them this far so fast. Why would you not be concerned with your ideas being stolen? Not giving your stuff away for free is not the same as trying to "cripple development. That's water under the bridge now but stupidity by Mr. Reed nonetheless.

[Nov 28, 2020] Fratelli tutti (3 October 2020) - Francis

Nov 28, 2020 | www.vatican.va

38. Sadly, some "are attracted by Western culture, sometimes with unrealistic expectations that expose them to grave disappointments. Unscrupulous traffickers, frequently linked to drug cartels or arms cartels, exploit the weakness of migrants, who too often experience violence, trafficking, psychological and physical abuse and untold sufferings on their journey". [37] Those who emigrate "experience separation from their place of origin, and often a cultural and religious uprooting as well. Fragmentation is also felt by the communities they leave behind, which lose their most vigorous and enterprising elements, and by families, especially when one or both of the parents migrates, leaving the children in the country of origin". [38] For this reason, "there is also a need to reaffirm the right not to emigrate, that is, to remain in one's homeland". [39]

39. Then too, "in some host countries, migration causes fear and alarm, often fomented and exploited for political purposes. This can lead to a xenophobic mentality, as people close in on themselves, and it needs to be addressed decisively". [40] Migrants are not seen as entitled like others to participate in the life of society, and it is forgotten that they possess the same intrinsic dignity as any person. Hence they ought to be "agents in their own redemption". [41] No one will ever openly deny that they are human beings, yet in practice, by our decisions and the way we treat them, we can show that we consider them less worthy, less important, less human. For Christians, this way of thinking and acting is unacceptable, since it sets certain political preferences above deep convictions of our faith: the inalienable dignity of each human person regardless of origin, race or religion, and the supreme law of fraternal love.

40. "Migrations, more than ever before, will play a pivotal role in the future of our world". [42] At present, however, migration is affected by the "loss of that sense of responsibility for our brothers and sisters on which every civil society is based". [43] Europe, for example, seriously risks taking this path. Nonetheless, "aided by its great cultural and religious heritage, it has the means to defend the centrality of the human person and to find the right balance between its twofold moral responsibility to protect the rights of its citizens and to assure assistance and acceptance to migrants". [44]

41. I realize that some people are hesitant and fearful with regard to migrants. I consider this part of our natural instinct of self-defence. Yet it is also true that an individual and a people are only fruitful and productive if they are able to develop a creative openness to others. I ask everyone to move beyond those primal reactions because "there is a problem when doubts and fears condition our way of thinking and acting to the point of making us intolerant, closed and perhaps even – without realizing it – racist. In this way, fear deprives us of the desire and the ability to encounter the other". [45]

THE ILLUSION OF COMMUNICATION

42. Oddly enough, while closed and intolerant attitudes towards others are on the rise, distances are otherwise shrinking or disappearing to the point that the right to privacy scarcely exists. Everything has become a kind of spectacle to be examined and inspected, and people's lives are now under constant surveillance. Digital communication wants to bring everything out into the open; people's lives are combed over, laid bare and bandied about, often anonymously. Respect for others disintegrates, and even as we dismiss, ignore or keep others distant, we can shamelessly peer into every detail of their lives.

43. Digital campaigns of hatred and destruction, for their part, are not – as some would have us believe – a positive form of mutual support, but simply an association of individuals united against a perceived common enemy. "Digital media can also expose people to the risk of addiction, isolation and a gradual loss of contact with concrete reality, blocking the development of authentic interpersonal relationships". [46] They lack the physical gestures, facial expressions, moments of silence, body language and even the smells, the trembling of hands, the blushes and perspiration that speak to us and are a part of human communication. Digital relationships, which do not demand the slow and gradual cultivation of friendships, stable interaction or the building of a consensus that matures over time, have the appearance of sociability. Yet they do not really build community; instead, they tend to disguise and expand the very individualism that finds expression in xenophobia and in contempt for the vulnerable. Digital connectivity is not enough to build bridges. It is not capable of uniting humanity.

Shameless aggression

44. Even as individuals maintain their comfortable consumerist isolation, they can choose a form of constant and febrile bonding that encourages remarkable hostility, insults, abuse, defamation and verbal violence destructive of others, and this with a lack of restraint that could not exist in physical contact without tearing us all apart. Social aggression has found unparalleled room for expansion through computers and mobile devices.

45. This has now given free rein to ideologies. Things that until a few years ago could not be said by anyone without risking the loss of universal respect can now be said with impunity, and in the crudest of terms, even by some political figures. Nor should we forget that "there are huge economic interests operating in the digital world, capable of exercising forms of control as subtle as they are invasive, creating mechanisms for the manipulation of consciences and of the democratic process. The way many platforms work often ends up favouring encounter between persons who think alike, shielding them from debate. These closed circuits facilitate the spread of fake news and false information, fomenting prejudice and hate". [47]

46. We should also recognize that destructive forms of fanaticism are at times found among religious believers, including Christians; they too "can be caught up in networks of verbal violence through the internet and the various forums of digital communication. Even in Catholic media, limits can be overstepped, defamation and slander can become commonplace, and all ethical standards and respect for the good name of others can be abandoned". [48] How can this contribute to the fraternity that our common Father asks of us?

Information without wisdom

47. True wisdom demands an encounter with reality. Today, however, everything can be created, disguised and altered. A direct encounter even with the fringes of reality can thus prove intolerable. A mechanism of selection then comes into play, whereby I can immediately separate likes from dislikes, what I consider attractive from what I deem distasteful. In the same way, we can choose the people with whom we wish to share our world. Persons or situations we find unpleasant or disagreeable are simply deleted in today's virtual networks; a virtual circle is then created, isolating us from the real world in which we are living.

48. The ability to sit down and listen to others, typical of interpersonal encounters, is paradigmatic of the welcoming attitude shown by those who transcend narcissism and accept others, caring for them and welcoming them into their lives. Yet "today's world is largely a deaf world At times, the frantic pace of the modern world prevents us from listening attentively to what another person is saying. Halfway through, we interrupt him and want to contradict what he has not even finished saying. We must not lose our ability to listen". Saint Francis "heard the voice of God, he heard the voice of the poor, he heard the voice of the infirm and he heard the voice of nature. He made of them a way of life. My desire is that the seed that Saint Francis planted may grow in the hearts of many". [49]

49. As silence and careful listening disappear, replaced by a frenzy of texting, this basic structure of sage human communication is at risk. A new lifestyle is emerging, where we create only what we want and exclude all that we cannot control or know instantly and superficially. This process, by its intrinsic logic, blocks the kind of serene reflection that could lead us to a shared wisdom.

50. Together, we can seek the truth in dialogue, in relaxed conversation or in passionate debate. To do so calls for perseverance; it entails moments of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently embrace the broader experience of individuals and peoples. The flood of information at our fingertips does not make for greater wisdom. Wisdom is not born of quick searches on the internet nor is it a mass of unverified data. That is not the way to mature in the encounter with truth. Conversations revolve only around the latest data; they become merely horizontal and cumulative. We fail to keep our attention focused, to penetrate to the heart of matters, and to recognize what is essential to give meaning to our lives. Freedom thus becomes an illusion that we are peddled, easily confused with the ability to navigate the internet. The process of building fraternity, be it local or universal, can only be undertaken by spirits that are free and open to authentic encounters.

FORMS OF SUBJECTION AND OF SELF-CONTEMPT

51. Certain economically prosperous countries tend to be proposed as cultural models for less developed countries; instead, each of those countries should be helped to grow in its own distinct way and to develop its capacity for innovation while respecting the values of its proper culture. A shallow and pathetic desire to imitate others leads to copying and consuming in place of creating, and fosters low national self-esteem. In the affluent sectors of many poor countries, and at times in those who have recently emerged from poverty, there is a resistance to native ways of thinking and acting, and a tendency to look down on one's own cultural identity, as if it were the sole cause of every ill.

52. Destroying self-esteem is an easy way to dominate others. Behind these trends that tend to level our world, there flourish powerful interests that take advantage of such low self-esteem, while attempting, through the media and networks, to create a new culture in the service of the elite. This plays into the opportunism of financial speculators and raiders, and the poor always end up the losers. Then too, ignoring the culture of their people has led to the inability of many political leaders to devise an effective development plan that could be freely accepted and sustained over time.

53. We forget that "there is no worse form of alienation than to feel uprooted, belonging to no one. A land will be fruitful, and its people bear fruit and give birth to the future, only to the extent that it can foster a sense of belonging among its members, create bonds of integration between generations and different communities, and avoid all that makes us insensitive to others and leads to further alienation". [50]

[Nov 26, 2020] The historic Trump presidency emasculated globalism by Patrick J. Buchanan

Nov 26, 2020 | www.wnd.com

The historic Trump presidency emasculated globalism Pat Buchanan notes how the elite Bush-type Republicans have been silenced Patrick J. Buchanan By Patrick J. Buchanan Published November 26, 2020 at 6:39pm Share on Facebook Tweet P Share Email Print In the first two decades of the century, President-elect Joe Biden's choice for secretary of state supported U.S. wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen. He was an ever-reliable liberal interventionist.

This same Antony Blinken could spend the first years of a Biden presidency helping extricate our country from the misbegotten wars he championed. What establishment Democrats like Biden and Blinken helped to do in previous administrations, they will likely now have to undo.

Who effected this sea change in national thinking?

Donald Trump. Much that was said and believed before he came down the escalator in 2015 is no longer said or believed by the majority of Americans.

And no institution has been more altered than the Republican Party.

How I beat election fraud in America's most corrupt state TRENDING: Employees melt down after learning company is publishing prominent conservative Jordan Peterson's book: Report

George H.W. Bush's vision of a "New World Order," launched at the after-party of his Gulf War victory, died with his presidency.

George W. Bush's crusade for global democracy to "end tyranny in our world" has been forgotten. Bush Republicans no longer speak for the party on foreign policy, trade or immigration.

NATO will never be the same again after Trump rudely demanded that freeloading nations pay their fair share of the collective defense or the Americans would pack up and come home from Europe.

Former Defense Secretary Gen. James Mattis may call for the ash-canning of the phrase "America First." He will fail. For, as both national motto and national policy, the slogan has put down roots in American soil because it comports with the will of the silent majority.

Whatever the establishment believes, in the clash between nationalism and globalism, globalism has lost America.

Moreover, the world is going this way.

Does not Xi Jinping put his own country first as he claims for China all the waters and islands for hundreds of miles into the East and South China seas? Does not Vladimir Putin put his own country first as he seeks to bring back under Moscow's wing the former republics of the Russian federation?

Does not President Erdogan put Turkey first as he sends arms and troops to pursue his country's interests in Libya, Syria, Cyprus, the South Caucasus and the Eastern Mediterranean in clashes with Greece?

What does Bibi Netanyahu put first, if not his own country, Israel?

If country and nation are not first in the hearts and minds of Americans, what should replace them? Some nonexistent New World Order? The U.N.? NATO? A multilateral caucus of global institutions?

Under Trump, economic nationalism has displaced free trade globalism as the trade policy of the party and government.

The GOP elite that backed Bill Clinton on NAFTA, supported a new transnational World Trade Organization, invited China to join the club and accorded Beijing most-favored-nation trade status is now silent.

Tariffs to force open foreign markets and punish predator-traders who take advantage of American workers have replaced the free trade fundamentalism that had been dogma since Dwight Eisenhower's days.

Nor is the Republican Party likely to return to free trade, as long as "China First" is the undeclared policy pursued by the nation that has now displaced us as the world's leading manufacturing power.

The George Bush-John McCain Republican Party was for amnesty for illegals and open borders for new migrants. Today's GOP supports the deportation of illegals and the 30-foot Trump Wall on the Mexican border.

[Nov 25, 2020] "Social" media as a cancer: it creates tightly insulated echo chambers which masturbate our confirmation bias and hide any information which might cause us cognitive dissonance

Nov 25, 2020 | caitlinjohnstone.com

ROUNDBALL SHAMAN / NOVEMBER 24, 2020

"social media is notorious for the way it creates tightly insulated echo chambers which masturbate our confirmation bias and hide any information which might cause us cognitive dissonance by contradicting it. Whole media careers were built on this phenomenon "
.
So-called "social" media is a cancer eating away at our humanity and our sense of community with every passing moment. It is a devil's brew of the worst of human thought and behavior that seeks to lower the level of human interaction with every click and toxic retort. It may be the tool that actually does us in even more than the other big threats to our existence.
.
"Splitting the public up into two oppositional factions who barely interact and can't even communicate with each other because they don't share a common reality keeps the populace impotent, ignorant, and powerless to stop the unfolding of the agendas of the powerful."
.
People today have short attention spans. They don't have any depth of thinking and they certainly don't want shades of grey. The Dark Powers successfully exploit this weakness to their benefit with little pushback from an easily amused public. Those who love simplicity don't want anything more challenging and they certainly aren't the least bit concerned about those who are actively doing them in.
.
"You should not be afraid of your government being too nice to China. What you should worry about is the US-centralized power alliance advancing a multifront new cold war conducted simultaneously against two nuclear-armed nations for the first time ever in human history. "
.
We should indeed be concerned about Empires measuring the size of their manhoods against each other but since that has nothing to do with reporting on our neighbors for not wearing masks or the speed of our internet connections or the latest video of some fool acting the fool on the web we won't be concerned about it. You gotta have priorities, you know.

[Nov 25, 2020] Biden is to the extreme right of Trump on the issue of the US's endless neocolonial wars. And Biden is already laying the groundwork for the deconstruction of Social Security, work he began as VP to Obama. That makes Biden to the extreme right of Trump on foreign domestic issues...all thanks to the "blue no matter who" crowd.

So what Biden is trying to achieve is to stem the collapse of neoliberalism and with it the global US-controlled neoliberal empire.
Notable quotes:
"... IMO, all three of the turn-of-the-century free-market-neolibral model, the hypothetical Trump(ish) nationalist model, and the revised technocratic-neoliberal schemes, are fatally flawed. Despite the political rhetoric of US Republicans, there's no real prospect of an even mildly leftist (i.e. inclusive, egalitarian, and internationalist) alternative anytime soon in the US. I suspect the same is true in most neoliberal countries. ..."
Nov 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
S Brennan , Nov 24 2020 17:14 utc | 10

The man is a war mongering psycho:

Blinken surprised some in the Situation Room by breaking with Biden to support military action in Libya, administration officials said, and he advocated for American action in Syria after Obama's reelection. These sources said that Blinken was less enthusiastic than Biden about Obama's decision to seek congressional approval for a strike in Syria, but is now -- perhaps out of necessity -- onboard and a backer of diplomatic negotiations with Russia. While less of an ideologue than Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations (a job for which he was considered), he not surprisingly shares her belief that global powers such as the United States have a "responsibility to protect" against atrocities.

He has since shown no remorse about those foreign policy failures:

Blinken maintains that the failure of U.S. policy in Syria was that our government did not employ enough force. He stands by the false argument that Biden's vote to authorize the invasion of Iraq was a "vote for tough diplomacy." He was reportedly in favor of the Libyan intervention, which Biden opposed, and he was initially a defender and advocate for U.S. support for the Saudi coalition war on Yemen. In short, Blinken has agreed with some of the biggest foreign policy mistakes that Biden and Obama made, and he has tended to be more of an interventionist than both of them.

Jake Sullivan will become National Security Advisor. He is a Hillary Clinton figure :

If you can't quite place Jake Sullivan, he's was a long-serving aide to Hillary Clinton, starting with her 2008 race against Barack Obama, then serving as her deputy chief of staff and director of the State Department's Office of Policy Planning when Clinton was Obama's secretary of state. (...) In 2016, during her failed presidential campaign, Sullivan once again teamed up with Clinton, and he was widely expected to have been named to serve as her national security adviser or even secretary of state had she won.

Since 2016, and since the creation of NSA, Sullivan has emerged as a kind of foreign policy scold, gently -- and sometimes not so gently -- criticizing those who reflexively oppose American intervention abroad and who disparage the idea of American "exceptionalism." Indeed, in an article in the January-February issue of The Atlantic, "What Donald Trump and Dick Cheney Got Wrong About America," Sullivan explicitly says that he's intent on "rescuing the idea of American exceptionalism" and presents the "case for a new American exceptionalism".

Sullivan send classified documents to Hillary Clinton's private email server. He wrote to her that Al Qaida is "on our side in Syria." He also hyped fake Trump-Russia collusion allegations.

It is yet unknown who will become Secretary of Defense. Michèle Flournoy is the most named option but there is some opposition to her nomination :

[B]ackers of Michèle Flournoy, his likely pick for defense secretary, are trying to head off a last-minute push by some left-leaning Democrats trying to derail her selection, with many progressives seeing her nomination as a continuation of what critics refer to as America's "forever wars."

I expect that the progressive will lose the fight and that either Flournoy or some other hawkish figure will get that weapon lobbyist position.

Progressives also lost on the Treasury position. Biden's nomination for that is Janet Yellen who is known to be an inflation hawk. She is unlikely to support large spending on progressive priorities.

As usual with a Democratic election win the people who brought the decisive votes and engagement, those who argue for more socialist and peaceful policies, will be cut off from the levers of power.

In three years they will again be called upon to fall for another bait and switch.

As I said over at Ian Welsh's blog

"this is brought on by the "blue no matter who crowd" who can't understand that guaranteeing their vote at the outset without extorting any firm quid pro quo a priori guarantees that [working people] can be safely ignored. And yet, almost everybody here [reminder, posted at Ian's] argued for just that and will the next time and the next.

Why will something like that happen

If the polls are to be believed, Biden is the most popular Democrat of all time and by a large margin. If polls are to be believed, the DNC denying the Sanders wing was the smartest thing the DNC has ever done. If polls are to be believed, Biden strode through battle unscathed while lessor Democrats were squashed. The DNC was right, the Sanders people are fools, if polls are to be believed. The immense Biden vote proves once and for all, that any who diverge from DNC dictata should be ignored for all time.

That was the message sent in 2020"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Biden is to the extreme right of Trump on the issue of the US's endless neocolonial wars. And Biden is already laying the groundwork for the deconstruction of Social Security, work he began as VP to Obama. That makes Biden to the extreme right of Trump on foreign & domestic issues...all thanks to the "blue no matter who" crowd. Meanwhile, the election "make 'em scream" ploy Pelosi employed will toss millions off federal extensions of unemployment midnight 31 Dec 2020 until congress reconvenes.

And for all those who claimed Trump to be evil incarnate, worse than Hitler...in a few weeks, facts will show those people to be clownish frauds.


ptb , Nov 24 2020 18:20 utc | 25

yep. sad. Yellen for Treasury is interesting, and a crucial position to watch. Mnuchin basically ran the Trump administration's economic policy, as far as there was one.

One of the watchwords of the coming era is the "Great Reset", i.e. a limited shift in the direction of a technocratic planned economy. In a way, this began after 2008 when the FED intervened in stock and bond markets to such a degree that its interventions became the dominant driving force. With that, "market forces" couldn't plausibly remain a reflection of free competition as the theory postulated. The fact that this measure had to be taken (i.e. markets had to be overtly "fixed"), is an implicit admission that the thesis of the free-market purists, the dream of the Reagan-Clinton era, has been falsified.

The proposed solution, at least the version coming from the high business class (and exaggerated further still by right-wing critics of Great Reset) seems like a recipe to worsen the problem of "regulatory capture" above all else. I.e. the agents and beneficiaries of the neoliberal era making an effort to adapt, without giving up the benefits of the prior economic regime. Likelyhood of fixing inequalities is nil. The emphasis is on reinforcing the stability of the system, holding on to power, perhaps competing with threatening alternatives from the "outside", although that would seem to be a second priority.

Trump did put up a facade of a nationalist alternative, which had the effect of acknowledging the inequalities and failures of the neoliberal system, but offering an equally harmful solution. Besides that, if you look at who was making economic policy in the past 4 years (Treasury Dept), the nationalist facade was false, as far as domestic economic matters were concerned.

IMO, all three of the turn-of-the-century free-market-neolibral model, the hypothetical Trump(ish) nationalist model, and the revised technocratic-neoliberal schemes, are fatally flawed. Despite the political rhetoric of US Republicans, there's no real prospect of an even mildly leftist (i.e. inclusive, egalitarian, and internationalist) alternative anytime soon in the US. I suspect the same is true in most neoliberal countries.

So Biden comes into this moment, with a clear mandate -- from the sponsors -- to reinforce the status quo. He brings Yellen into this moment in a the crucial position.

Lex , Nov 24 2020 19:08 utc | 38

Of course Biden's foreign policy team and the policy itself will be shit. As it was for the trump admin, the Obama admin, the Bush II admin, the Clinton admin, the Bush I admin, the fucking Reagan admin, then there's carter and Nixon. Look, I can take this back all the way to Washington. Biden's not special. It's always been an empire; trump did nothing to dismantle it; but now it's a failing empire.

And don't try the "Trump's instincts were dashed by the deep state". Dude constantly bragged about how much he spent on the DoD. If he could find a way to personally profit from the empire he would have.

karlof1 , Nov 24 2020 22:25 utc | 62

Here's an interview given by acclaimed Canadian International Law lawyer Christopher Black who is rather pessimistic given the team members and its chief. While I disagree on a few minor points, I agree with his overall assessment:

"The Americans proclaim they are all for competition but we know that means only when it puts them in the superior position; and to maintain their position they are willing to threaten and attack the world if necessary; and there are a myriad of domestic problems in the USA which they have no way out of, since the two ruling parties have no solutions to offer, except war."

I would disagree with war being a solution; rather, it exacerbates many already existing problems. However, war would make revolution more likely. Since it's highly unlikely the Empire could make the "Moderate Rebel" ploy work again, to escalate in Syraq as Biden's nominee wants would require a direct assault by Imperial Stormtroopers, and that would be a huge domestic error during the continuing pandemic.

oldhippie , Nov 24 2020 23:32 utc | 65

Mark2 @ 63

Your buddy was born in Havana and grew up in Miami's Cuban hole. And he's Jewish. I'll eat my hat if the family was not personal friends/business partners with Meyer Lansky and Myer Schine. Wonderful, Homeland Security has been given to the Mafia.

Expect more of same from Biden.

vk , Nov 24 2020 23:42 utc | 67

It reminds me very much Khrushchev's government. He went in guns blazing, accusing Stalin as outdated and promising a whole new paradigm (economic and geopolitical). He failed miserably in both. He was toppled in 1964 and substituted by a figure of the "establishment", Leonid Brezhnev, who basically restored what existed during Stalin and effectively gave up making the USSR better. The first proletarian State would disintegrate soon.

Not saying Yellen-Biden will be the American Brezhnev - they are much lesser historical figures than he was - but pay attention to the pattern.

Trisha , Nov 25 2020 0:00 utc | 68

Should come as no surprise that where it matters, Biden is Trump wearing a smiley face, just like Pelosi is Trump in a wig. Actually, considering actual body count and misery inflicted on vast populations, Biden's record is WORSE than Trump.

[Nov 23, 2020] The Coronavirus Pandemic Has Killed America's Reputation for Competence

Mar 23, 2020 | foreignpolicy.com
Washington's reputation for expertise has been one of the greatest sources of its power. The coronavirus pandemic may end it for good.

... that's not the only damage the United States will suffer. Far from making "America great again," this epic policy failure will further tarnish the United States' reputation as a country that knows how to do things effectively.

For over a century, the United States' outsized influence around the world rested on three pillars. The first was the its awesome combination of economic and military strength. The United States had the world's largest and most sophisticated economy, the world's best universities and research centers, and a territory blessed with bountiful natural resources. These features eventually enabled the United States to create and maintain military forces that none of its rivals could match. Taken together, these combined assets gave the United States the loudest voice on the planet.

The second pillar was support from an array of allies. No country every agreed with everything Washington wanted to do, and some states opposed almost everything the United States sought or stood for, but many countries understood that they benefited from U.S. leadership and were usually willing to go along with it. Although the United States was almost always acting in its own self-interest, the fact that others had similar interests made it easier to persuade them to go along.

A third pillar, however, is broad confidence in U.S. competence. When other countries recognize the United States' strength, support its aims and believe U.S. officials know what they are doing, they are more likely to follow the United States' lead. If they doubt its power, its wisdom, or its ability to act effectively, U.S. global influence inevitably erodes. This reaction is entirely understandable: If the United States' leaders reveal themselves to be incompetent bunglers, why should foreign powers listen to their advice? Having a reputation for competence, in short, can be a critical force multiplier.

[Nov 22, 2020] 'The Real Looting in America Is the Walton Family'- GAO Report Details How Taxpayers Subsidize Cruel Low Wages of Corporate G

Nov 22, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

'The Real Looting in America Is the Walton Family': GAO Report Details How Taxpayers Subsidize Cruel Low Wages of Corporate Giants Posted on November 19, 2020 by Jerri-Lynn Scofield

By Jon Queally, staff writer, Common Dreams. Originally published at Common Dreams

Pinpointing a reality denounced as " morally obscene " by Sen. Bernie Sanders, a new government study shows how some of the nation's largest and most profitable corporations -- including Walmart, McDonald's, Dollar General, and Amazon -- feast upon taxpayer money by paying their employees such low wages that huge numbers of those workers throughout the year are forced to rely on public assistance programs such as Medicaid and food assistance just to keep themselves and their families afloat.

According to a statement from Sanders' office, the study he commissioned the Government Accountability Office to carry out -- titled " Millions of Full-time Workers Rely on Federal Health Care and Food Assistance Programs " -- found that an estimated 5.7 million Medicaid enrollees and 4.7 million SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) recipients who worked full-time for 50 or more weeks in 2018 earned wages so low that they qualified for these federal benefits. In addition, an estimated 12 million wage-earning adults enrolled in Medicaid and 9 million wage-earning adults living in households receiving SNAP benefits worked at some point in 2018.

Upon the study's release Wednesday, Warren Gunnels, staff director and policy adviser for Sen. Sanders, tweeted: "The real looting in America is the Walton family becoming $63 billion richer during a pandemic, while paying wages so low that 14,541 of their workers in 9 states need food stamps -- all subsidized by U.S. taxpayers. Yes. The Walton family is the real welfare queen in America."

According to the Washington Post :, based on the GAO report:

Walmart was one of the top four employers of SNAP and Medicaid beneficiaries in every state. McDonald's was in the top five of employers with employees receiving federal benefits in at least nine states.

In the nine states that responded about SNAP benefits -- Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Nebraska, North Carolina, Tennessee and Washington -- Walmart was found to have employed about 14,500 workers receiving the benefit, followed by McDonald's with 8,780, according to Sanders's team. In six states that reported Medicaid enrollees, Walmart again topped the list, with 10,350 employees, followed by McDonald's with 4,600.

In Georgia, for example, Walmart employed an estimated 3,959 workers on Medicaid -- an estimated 2.1 percent of the total of non-elderly, non-disabled people in the state receiving the benefit. McDonald's was next on the list, employing 1,480 who received Medicaid, or 0.8 percent of the total of non-elderly, non-disabled people on the program. "

"At a time when huge corporations like Walmart and McDonald's are making billions in profits and giving their CEOs tens of millions of dollars a year, they're relying on corporate welfare from the federal government by paying their workers starvation wages," said Sanders in a statement. "That is morally obscene."

With the individual wealth of high-ranking executives and members of billionaire families like the Walton's, who own Walmart, soaring even as front-line, minimum wage employees and their families struggling to stay afloat amid the devastating Covid-19 pandemic, Sanders argues that the stark contrast should be a wakeup call for those who have refused to see how unjust and economically backward it is for the federal government, meaning taxpayers, to subsidize the cruel wages that massive profitable companies force their workers to accept.

"U.S. taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize some of the largest and most profitable corporations in America," said Sanders. "It is time for the owners of Walmart, McDonald's and other large corporations to get off of welfare and pay their workers a living wage."

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=yvessmith&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1329208075790807041&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nakedcapitalism.com%2F2020%2F11%2Fthe-real-looting-in-america-is-the-walton-family-gao-report-details-how-taxpayers-subsidize-cruel-low-wages-of-corporate-giants.html&siteScreenName=yvessmith&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

No one in this country should live in poverty," Sanders added. "No one should go hungry. No one should be unable to get the medical care they need. It is long past time to increase the federal minimum wage from a starvation wage of $7.25 an hour to $15, and guarantee health care to all Americans as a human right."


fwe'theewell , November 19, 2020 at 11:44 am

These looters at the top don't just rely on welfare for their workers: they also rely on government assistance in other ways, such as favorable tax treatment and other goodies to bring their boondoggles to town, and of course trillions in infusions/ giveaways like we saw this year. Not to mention golden parachutes in corporate bankruptcies, facilitated by the "way things are done."

AGKaiser , November 20, 2020 at 9:50 am

don't forget: Walmart and others also profit by the food stamps spent in their grocery and Medicaid in their pharmacy.

fwe'theewell , November 20, 2020 at 8:51 pm

Dang, yes!

nycTerrierist , November 19, 2020 at 12:40 pm

more galling, if that's possible, Alice Walton postures as a 'philanthropist'

artwashing ill-gotten gains as the benefactress of lavish vanity museum Crystal Bridges:

https://thebaffler.com/salvos/hoard-doeuvres

""There is no document of civilization which is not at the same time a document of barbarism," wrote Walter Benjamin. In precisely this vein, Walton's new Crystal Bridges museum offers American-made art to strategically cover up the ugly reality Walmart has created. Spanning the colonial era to the present, the exhibition space's fulsome celebration of the American spirit eulogizes the nation of shared confidence and abundance, sustainable mortgages, and worker dignity that Walmart has brutally demolished. The notion that Walton's supremely self-satisfied kunsthalle might serve as a balm, let alone a monument, to the market-battered American spirit is analogous to, say, Genghis Khan inviting survivors of his Mongol hordes to admire an installation of his plunder "

fwe'theewell , November 19, 2020 at 12:51 pm

This piece simply couldn't be written without a reference to Mongol hordes, of course.

Harry , November 19, 2020 at 4:59 pm

I suppose. Although no one relied on food stamps in the Great Khan Chingis' army.

Louis Fyne , November 19, 2020 at 1:30 pm

please don't forget Bezos even though he owns the WaPo

Same tactics. But I guess it's social acceptable to poo on the Waltons and Wal-Mart, but let us sweep Whole Foods and Amazon Prime under the rug

TimH , November 19, 2020 at 2:04 pm

Your 2nd para wins the straw man of the day award!

Louis Fyne , November 19, 2020 at 2:19 pm

As Amazon uses a network of subcontractors and contractors for everything for logistics to making toilet paper, all those employees will never show up on "official" stats re. Amazon.

it's called Lying with Statistics.
ymmv.

drumlin woodchuckles , November 19, 2020 at 3:31 pm

No, his second paragraph does not straw man. It merely invites us to widen the scope of our vision.

mileyvirus , November 20, 2020 at 12:56 pm

I agree, I did not interpret that as a straw man. Amazon is just as damnable as Walmart in terms of corporate welfare/employee wages

TimH , November 20, 2020 at 9:34 pm

I called it a straw man because " but let us sweep Whole Foods and Amazon Prime under the rug" suggested that the piece had done that, when they weren't mentioned.

Basil Pesto , November 20, 2020 at 11:20 pm

I believe that is what 'sweeping under the rug' entails.

(I get your point, and am actually
pretty sympathetic to it. couldn't resist the snark tho.)

Objective Ace , November 19, 2020 at 1:54 pm

An equally accurate storyline could be–"Workers in at least 9 states would be forced to live off even more government handouts without Walmart's employment".

Its tough to give companies grief here simply for paying what the market dictates. I'm all for going after the route of the problem–monopsony power–but noting the symptoms without actually raising awareness of the underlying problem is a distraction that keeps the plebs anger directed where it can't have much effect on the bigger picture. Being mad at Walmart instead of the government policy that has destroyed unions and made it easier/cheaper to move jobs overseas isn't serving middle America. Ironically, this distraction serves Walmart quite well. They actually champion hire minimum wages as it stifles competition

Its an interesting thought experiment to imagine absolutely no minimum wages but a UBI and universal healthcare so that no one needed a job just to survive. Then Walmart could pay its employees any low amount and no one would bat an eye (although I suspect wages actually wouldnt fall because walmart would lose its monopsony power)

fwe'theewell , November 19, 2020 at 2:23 pm

Government policy doesn't write itself: lobbyists guide the pen, and donors/ owners like Walmart pull the guides' puppet strings. "Personal responsibility" goes both ways.

To use yesterday's metaphor, I'd say that the PMC is like the human being co-driver in a "self"-driving car programmed by capital.

Objective Ace , November 19, 2020 at 3:40 pm

Definitely. And focusing on those issues (which are the actual issues) is better than focusing on the symptoms

drumlin woodchuckles , November 19, 2020 at 10:17 pm

Though if we can get people to admit they feel the symptoms by describing the symptoms, some of those people might then be ready and willing to hear about the disease which is giving them the symptoms.

fwe'theewell , November 20, 2020 at 8:52 pm

A good point

bulfinch , November 19, 2020 at 3:12 pm

Tempting as it might be to shape the narrative so that the Walmarts of the World appear more like hapless innovators, shrewdly capitalizing on a crooked playing field, it only works if you blinker yourself to the fact that the WotW have at least 8 of the ten fingers on the hands architecting those same playing fields.

Objective Ace , November 19, 2020 at 3:43 pm

Don't get me wrong–I'm not trying to say Walmart is hapless. Maybe I'm too cynical, but I actually think they're so shrewd they want you to focus on these press releases about how they pay so little. If the only thing that stems from that is increasing the minimum wage, they come out big time winners

drumlin woodchuckles , November 19, 2020 at 3:28 pm

Here's what the market dictates. " I can get 10 interns who will pay ME to LET them do your job. Now shut up and get back to work." The way to stop the Market Dictatorship of what wages will be is to impose a Legal Dictatorship on the market of what wages will be.

That's what the Wages and Hours Act was about to begin with. Make it a long-sentence hard-time felony to pay less or to take less. Abolish Free Trade in goods , services or people. That means Sealing the Borders to create zero immigration for as long as necessary to use the labor shortage to torture the employER class into raising wages and conditions upward. And to weld shut the "illegal immigration escape hatch" by which employERS ( including limousine liberals) pay less than the legally imposed minimum wage.

BlakeFelix , November 19, 2020 at 5:56 pm

Ya, I agree. Providing health care and making sure kids have food and education are subsidies that help businesses in a healthy way. And a UBI is a great idea as well! Toss in a Carbon tax, and you have my ideal policy.

Carolinian , November 19, 2020 at 11:12 pm

We've had this debate here for years so the above article is a bit of a recycled chestnut rather than an original thought.

And perhaps the answer for the "outrage" of those Walmart heirs is to reestablishment a meaningful inheritance tax since receiving billions through death is indeed an entitlement and not just for the Walmart heirs but also for plenty of mansion owners dotting the Northeast.

As for the company itself, yes it's a crappy and low paid place to work but they are hardly unique in that and one reason they top those mentioned lists, along with McDonalds, is that they are the number one and number two employers by number of employees in the country. And the reason they are so large is that they give their custormers what they want and can afford which cannot be said of so many competing looters that the author ignores.

There are lots of worse companies than Walmart but in the battle of the coastals versus the deplorables they have always made a fat juicy target for those who probably pay their hired help less than Walmart does its "associates."

Kirk Seidenbecker , November 19, 2020 at 2:34 pm

$15/Hr.? Thought it was more like $22/Hr. if minimum wage had kept pace with the rise in productivity.

https://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/min-wage1-2012-03.pdf

LC , November 19, 2020 at 9:28 pm

Right!?
I keep thinking about how at 15/hour people will lose what small piece of our social safety net that keeps them "making it". No family is purchasing health insurance on that increase. And really the few dollars per hour might not even make up the food benefits for a medium sized family. It's scary to get a raise where you end up worse off then before.
I mean I guess that's just the messed up reality when a whole bunch of household costs have been introduced or increased since policies using means testing (income and asset thresholds) to determine access. Actually I am sure ok not sure but it would make sense that these companies know exactly how much pay will kick these employees off benefits. So the employee community is less likely to make a fuss for small increases in pay which is the norm we have come to accept as workers. I'm all for real talk minimum/ living wages for the communities people actually live in.

Carla , November 20, 2020 at 6:38 am

That's why expanded, improved Medicare for All has to be implemented ALONG WITH the $15 (or $22) minimum wage.

Chauncey Gardiner , November 19, 2020 at 2:42 pm

"Corporate welfare queens" As others have noted, it isn't just Walmart and the Waltons. Trying to think of an appropriate term to describe the outcome of the decision by a majority of the US Supreme Court justices in the Citizens United case that not only enabled but tacitly encouraged One Percent, corporate, Wall Street, executive branch, legislators' and central bank behavior that, although still a cycle, has led to the opposite of a "virtuous cycle". "Morally obscene", corrupt and corruptible, and dishonorable are some descriptions of resultant behavior that come to mind. Too bad "The Swamp" wasn't drained, but has been further expanded and left both legacy political parties tarnished. It is said that a fish rots from the head down. That may be so, but that doesn't mean the rot cannot be allowed to set in. Follow the Money.

drumlin woodchuckles , November 19, 2020 at 3:21 pm

It turns out that when the TrumpAdmin used the phrase " the Swamp", what they strictly specifically and only meant were the impartial scientists at the various departments , bureaus and agencies. And they have done all they could to drain out the impartial scientists and stop the science. Which is all they ever meant by "drain the Swamp".

howseth , November 19, 2020 at 6:10 pm

Citizens United decision was a display of right wing insanity in all it's glory: I suppose insanity was either baked into the Constitution – or in 1780 – was not yet insanity?
Still can't get over that decision – ever since, my thought: term limits for friggen federal judges – and certainly the SCOTUS crew and throw in Congress and the Senate as well.

drumlin woodchuckles , November 19, 2020 at 10:21 pm

We have term limits for state officeholders in Michigan. All that mostly gets us is cynical amateurs who view their limited term as a chance to make contacts and audition for lobbying/law/etc. jobs after leaving office.

And the non-cynical amateurs who want to make things better are term-limited out of office just when they are finally learning where all the hidden levers, ropes, pulleys, secret trap doors are. Meanwhile, the lobbyists are not term limited.

Term limits for national office would make some things worse while making nothing better.

howseth , November 20, 2020 at 12:39 am

Ah, those immortal lobbyists! Term limits for politicians – combined with limits on lobbyists. One can dream. No? I'd like to try it. How can we actually drain the Swamp/
Oh. Crap. We have a Supreme Court. Freedom to Lobby infinitely. Freedom of bribery – I mean freedom of speech.
OK, So nothing can be done. Perhaps state office holders are a different thing then National politicians? (Yeah, maybe not) But Do you want to remove the term limits on our President then? No? I'd keep that limit.
Should we just resign ourselves to be stuck with this stuff till the Sun expands and swallows the USA? The future colony on Mars will have a better way? Not likely.

Carla , November 20, 2020 at 7:18 am

We have term limits. They're called elections. If/when there's something wrong with Democracy, fix Democracy. If/when there's something wrong with the Constitution, fix the Constitution

In most cases, artificial term limits don't do either. I would say there are two exceptions: limiting the presidency to two terms, and limiting the tenure of federal judges. In the latter case, 18-year term limits have been suggested, and that could be the right number, I'm not sure.

Now, with respect to fixing Democracy and the Constitution, for a First Step, please see HJR-48: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States providing that the rights extended by the Constitution are the rights of natural persons only -- oh, by the way, stating that money does not equal speech.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-joint-resolution/48/text

drumlin woodchuckles , November 19, 2020 at 3:18 pm

Every looting is real looting. Little looters in the streets are real looters. Big looters in the suites are real looters.

Since the big looting is currently legal in many cases, laws would have to be changed to stop the big looters looting. Its worth trying to do. It won't happen with Joemala and McConnell conspiring together to stop it from happening.

We need to elect a Red Gingrich minority of officeholders into the House and into the Senate. The "squad" could be the nucleus of that if they decide to center economic justice instead of critical race wokeness.

Burn down the House. And the Senate too.

Carla , November 20, 2020 at 7:19 am

"Joemala" -- Love it!

Watt4Bob , November 19, 2020 at 4:00 pm

If China didn't have the Waltons, they would have found another family glad to help them destroy our small retailers.

Our government gave tax breaks to corporations moving manufacturing to China, and to Walmart, and others peddling what used to be made here.

And now, to add insult to injury, they're telling you to " Learn to code" because the problem is, you don't have any employable skills.

polecat , November 19, 2020 at 6:26 pm

Congrease had/has the legal power to enact legislation with which to reign in what has become the early 21st century gilded age .. but they refuse to .. Nearly ALL of them have their dirty proboscii harpooning the lowly constituents who elected them ..too busy sucking any and all of plebian bodilyeconomic liquidity whilst paying deference to the know-it-all, BigTime-parasitic Oligarchic Brainbugs!

drumlin woodchuckles , November 19, 2020 at 10:23 pm

Abolish Free Trade and we could dry up the tidal wave of cheapest things which floats Walmart's boat to wealth and power.

sharonsj , November 20, 2020 at 12:57 pm

Not gonna happen. Apparently Biden will likely sign the TPP.

drumlin woodchuckles , November 21, 2020 at 2:24 am

If Biden does that, then Trump himself could very well win again if he runs in 2024. If that scenario plays out that way, I hope Trump picks Ivanka to be his VP running mate. That way, Ivanka would be on track to be America's first woman president. I just hope Hillary would live long enough to see that happen.

PeasantParty , November 19, 2020 at 4:38 pm

I used to dread the Friday news drops. The unemployment numbers, employed people in minimum wage jobs, workers at home working away, and major inflation in the grocery stores are hitting people extremely hard coming up to Holiday season. I really can't wait to see the Friday news drops now. Not just the Trump temper tantrum stuff, but the economic quips they make. Then what is totally mind blowing are the comments on social media. Some people that are not hurting much, or at all seem to think that all things are fine as wine in the rest of the country. I know this reply does not specifically comment on your article, but it is a wide view of the current situation.

Shiloh1 , November 19, 2020 at 6:19 pm

Walmart and Bezos are the symptoms of two generations of Congressional criminality.

Exhibit A: "I say to the Walton Family..,"

cynical observer , November 19, 2020 at 10:41 pm

With the computers and big data, the simplest solution is to claw back the benefits paid to the employees from the corporations, call it humanitarian tax.

But, it would be hard to find a lobbyist to write it, even harder to find a sponsor in the congress.

edmondo , November 19, 2020 at 11:30 pm

That would destroy the ability of these people to get jobs and to receive benefits.

I think you might have the cause and effect mixed up. In my state, anyone who gets SNAP benefits has to work at least 20 hours a week. These "bad" employers are the ones with flexible schedules and because the jobs are so crappy, they are readily available. Maybe it's not that WalMartb workers need benefits, it's that the benefits recipient needs WalMart and McDonalds.

sharonsj , November 20, 2020 at 1:00 pm

Every state is different. I just have to show proof of income (which I have, though I don't have a job). But the amount of SNAP you get varies widely. I am 150% of poverty level and the state of Pennsylvania just raised my monthly benefit to $16.50.

Ook , November 19, 2020 at 10:45 pm

Another way to put it: Walmart, McDonald's, Dollar General, and Amazon are really government stores with outsourced management and labor.
Socialism American-style.

drumlin woodchuckles , November 21, 2020 at 2:25 am

Life in the CSSA. ( Corporate Soviet States of America).

sharonsj , November 20, 2020 at 1:05 pm

Whenever I am in Walmart or any supermarket with automatic check out, I avoid automatic check out completely and only go to regular check out, no matter how long the line is. Automatic check out is a precursor to eventually firing all human cashiers. In my "larger" town, where I often end up in Walmart for the cheaper pet food, an Aldi's was built precisely opposite it, across the road. I heard an Aldi's employee saying they get paid better than Walmart. And lots of their prices are the same or better. So I will be spending a lot more time there.

Elaine Williams , November 21, 2020 at 10:37 am

This is not new news. We are too used to Walmart's superlow prices to do anything about it. This will continue long after I'm gone.

[Nov 16, 2020] Four More Years Of by Andrew Joyce

Highly recommended!
There are two different things here. Trump betrayal of his voters is one thing, but election fraud is another and is unacceptable no matter what is your opinion about Trump. We should not mix those two topics.
Notable quotes:
"... Anarchy and Christianity ..."
"... Le meutre d'un enfant ..."
"... homo economicus ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
Nov 16, 2020 | www.unz.com
ANDREW JOYCE NOVEMBER 14, 2020 3,100 WORDS 77 COMMENTS REPLY Tweet Reddit Share Share Email Print More RSS

All our political forms are exhausted and practically nonexistent. Our parliamentary system and electoral system and our political parties are just as futile as dictatorships are intolerable. Nothing is left. And this nothing is increasingly aggressive, totalitarian and omnipresent.
Jacques Ellul, Anarchy and Christianity (1991)

Look at them! Look at them, will you? Behold our politicians' horrible languid maws!; the courtier-like faces of department managers. They are indeed salesmen, for the very power of nations is measure in relation to their own mercantile activity.
Jean Cau, Le meutre d'un enfant (1965)

"What's going to happen now?" I was asked earlier today. "Nothing and everything," I replied. Immigration, largely unchallenged and unscathed (excepting the incidental impact of COVID-19 on population movement) from four years of Trumpism, will now continue to accelerate unabated . Zionism will continue to enjoy the expansion of American institutional and military support, this time with the blood interest of Jared Kushner replaced with the Jewish spouses of all three of Biden's children. And the momentary Obama-era delusion of a post-racial America will continue to dissolve in the reality of the increasing awareness and importance of race throughout the West, not solely as a result of mass migration but also of the increasing ubiquity of the ideologies of racial grievance and revenge. There will, of course, be a dramatic change for the worse in tone and spirit, and some smaller legislative victories like the banning of federal anti-racism training will likely soon be reversed. The defeat of Donald Trump is also hugely demoralizing to many decent American people, and emboldening to their bitterest enemies. This is to be sorely regretted. But it is in the shared qualities of Trump and Biden, rather than the election and sham ballots, that the real nature of our political systems and their future can be perceived. And it is in these shared qualities that our true problems lie.

Parliamentary electoral democracy is merely a representation of the general system in which it operates. Slavoj Zizek comments:

At the empirical level, of course, multi-party liberal democracy "represents" -- mirrors, registers, measures -- the quantitative dispersal of different opinions of the people, what they think about the proposed programs of the parties and about their candidates, etc. However, prior to this empirical level and in a much more radical sense, the very form of multi-party liberal democracy "represents" -- instantiates -- a certain vision of society, politics, and the role of the individuals in it: politics is organized in parties that compete through elections to exert control over the state legislative and executive apparatus, etc. One should always be aware that this frame is never neutral, insofar as it privileges certain values and practices.

The truth of the system, in terms of its non-negotiable aspects, is thus revealed in the "values and practices" privileged and ring-fenced under both Trump and Biden. What are these non-negotiables? Zionism, GloboHomo ideological capitalism and its "woke" leftist correlates, and the neoliberal promotion of GDP as the benchmark of human success and happiness.

Zionism

Jews have little to fear from a Biden presidency, which is presumably why Haaretz is claiming that the "American Jewish vote clinched Biden's victory and Trump's ouster. American Jews decided the outcome of the U.S. elections." Donald Trump might have been hailed as the "most pro-Israel President in U.S. history," but Jews are notoriously unreliable in their partnerships with non-Jewish elites. Fate, it must be said, has not been kind to those gentile elites that have exhausted their usefulness to Jews. And Trump is surely exhausted, having spent a busy four years fighting for Jews in Israel and in the United States. He reversed long-standing US policies on several critical security, diplomatic and political issues to Israel's favour, including the Iran nuclear accord, the treatment of Israel at the UN, and the status of Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. In December 2019, he announced his Executive Order on Combatting Anti-Semitism , promising to fight "the rise of anti-Semitism and anti-Semitic incidents in the United States and around the world." One wonders what else he could possibly have done for these people -- apart from a war with Iran -- a question that appears to have been answered by Jews with a resounding "Nothing." One can only imagine Trump's facial expression on seeing Benjamin Netanyahu's emphatic congratulations to Joe Biden, punctuated with the loving refrain: "I have a personal, long and warm connection with Joe Biden for nearly 40 years, and I know him to be a great friend of the State of Israel."

Biden and Harris, replete with their immediate familial ties to Jews, are viewed in Zionist circles as being at least as reliable as Trump, although not as exuberant and bullish. Biden has been known as a staunch supporter of Israel throughout his 36 years in the Senate, often cites his 1973 encounter with then-Prime Minister Golda Meir as "one of the most consequential meetings" of his life, and has on more than one occasion regaled audiences with a tale about his father telling him that "You don't need to be a Jew to be a Zionist." While some modifications are likely in the American approach to Iran, few reversals are expected on Trump's four years of pro-Israel activism. Biden, for example, has weakly criticized moving the embassy to Jerusalem but said he would not pull it back to Tel Aviv. Michael Herzog at Haaretz describes both Biden and Harris as "traditional Democrats, with a fundamental commitment to Israel whose roots are in part emotional in nature (in contrast to Obama)."

The change in relationship between America and Israel will be, in meaningful terms, restricted to the personal. Netanyahu, for all his fawning, is likely to undergo a personal demotion of sorts, with David Halbfinger of the New York Times pointing out that we can expect a Biden presidency to diminish Netanyahu's "stature on the global stage and undercut his argument to restive Israeli voters that he remains their indispensable leader." Palestinian leaders, probably the best-positioned to offer a perspective on the potential for an improvement in their condition under the new presidency, have been sombre to say the least. Hanan Ashrawi, a senior PLO official, responded to the question if she expected United States policy to continue tilting heavily in Israel's favor: "I don't think we're so naïve as to see Biden as our savior." Contrast this with the cheerfulness and confidence of Israel settlers who have grown accustomed to the perennial nature of American support for Zionism. David Elhayani, head of the Yesha Council, an umbrella for Jewish settlements in the West Bank, said the party of the U.S. president ultimately doesn't matter so long as the baseline commitment to support Israel persists: "Under Obama, we built more [settlement] houses than we have under Trump I think Biden is a friend of Israel."

The fact that the grassroots of the Democratic Party are drifting away from Zionism is no more consequential than the fact the grassroots of the Republican Party wanted major action on immigration reform. The former, like the latter, have been equally ignored by the real power brokers and influencers. Regardless of the radical appearance of Democrat-affiliated movements like Black Lives Matter, the fact remains that all of the leftist aggression and rhetoric of the summer of 2020 has resulted in the putative election of an establishment Zionist and political pragmatist who is sure to execute a more or less formulaic neoliberal scheme for government. In one sense, the bland, forgetful, and familiar Biden, who lacks any hint of genuine or novel ideology and was elected purely as a symbol of "not Trump," is the fitting response to Trump, who was equally devoid of ideological sincerity or complexity beyond the symbolism of "not Establishment." And so, while the media proclaims, as Heraclitus, that "all is in flux," from a different perspective we could argue, like Parmenides, the opposite -- "there is no motion at all."

GloboHomo

If I retain one abiding, surreal, memory of the Trump presidency in the years ahead it will be the Don dancing to the Village People in the wake of his numerous drives to legalize homosexuality in various African backwaters. That the Red State Christians comprising so much of his base could maintain their self-adopted blind spot on this issue is a remarkable testament to the power of personality, because no world leader in history has done more in recent history than Donald Trump to export what E. Michael Jones has so aptly termed "the Gay Disco" -- the double-barrelled shotgun of unbridled finance capitalism and the superficial freedom of sexual "liberty." As the pastors and preachers of South Carolina and Texas urged their huddled congregations to pray for the President, Trump was busy dispatching new missionaries, like U.S. Ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell, to the corners of the earth in search of converts to the Church of GloboHomo.

In February 2019, the U.S. embassy indulged in some nostalgia for Weimar when it flew LGBT activists from across Europe to Berlin for a strategy dinner to plan to push for decriminalization in places that still outlaw homosexuality -- mostly concentrated in the Middle East, Africa and the Caribbean. For my part, I can think of many social problems in these parts of the world, but it really takes a special kind of mind to arrive at the opinion that one of the most pressing is that they need to become more gay. Grenell, however, horrified that Iran has the audacity to execute its own convicted homosexual pederasts, was not to be deterred, and was instrumental in the blackmail of lesser nations, promising they would be denied access to terrorism intelligence if they don't legalise homosexuality. All of which has left the far corners of the American cultural-military empire questioning whether they could better live with suicide bombers or sodomy.

Against such manoeuvres, Biden's apparent claim to be one half of the "most pro-equality ticket in history" seems a little overstated. That being said, there's no question that Biden is going to step up the domestic nature of GloboHomo significantly as soon as he assumes office. Biden has pledged to sign the Equality Act, thus far opposed by the Trump administration, within his first 100 days in office, a piece of legislation that will amend "the Civil Rights Act to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing, public accommodations, public education, federal funding, credit, and the jury system." Biden has pledged to appoint significant numbers of homosexuals and transsexuals to positions of influence, and has promised to allow transsexuals to join the military. Experienced in advancing global LGBT+ dogma as part of the Obama-Biden administration, Biden will also once again take up the global mantle, expressing his "hopes to reverse Trump's efforts and expand queer rights internationally by making equality a centrepiece of US diplomacy," and condemning Poland's "LGBT-free zones." Stunning and brave indeed.

There is a certain sense in the cases of both Trump and Biden that, for all the flamboyance of their efforts in this area, there is a performative aspect to this politics. I don't get the impression that either has been especially personally committed to these ideas or actions, but that, as pragmatic-symbolic politicians, they have been made aware that this is the direction the broader System is moving in and they should comply and support it. The longevity and gradual acceleration of these trends, beginning in earnest with the presidency of Bill Clinton, would suggest a systemic movement underlying, and entirely untethered to, specific political parties or figures. Throughout the West, and much as with Zionism, GloboHomo, or hedonistic credit-based capitalism and its sexual correlates more generally, is to be accepted and promoted as an essential part of the role of neoliberal government. In the context of declining basic freedoms at home, for example the obvious decline in free speech and the creeping criminalisation of meaningful dissent against the status quo, the international promotion of homosexuality and transsexual identities offers a cost-free and PR-friendly method for increasingly authoritarian neoliberal regimes to posture as crusaders for freedom. The trucker in Ohio is, logical flaws notwithstanding, and whether he wants it or not, thus assured of his place in the Land of the Free via his government's emancipation of the gays and transvestites of Uganda. Engaged politically only at the most superficial level, the masses play along with this ruse, often in blunt denial, possessing only fragmentary realisations of the fact their countries are changing around them while the petty "rewards" of Americanism are meagre and peculiar, if not insulting.

GDP!

Along with frequent reassurances that he was "giving serious consideration" to doing something, Trump's presidency was marked by regular updates on the performance of American GDP. Unfortunately the GDP, like the Jewish vote, appears to have stabbed him in the back, with around 70% of American GDP represented in counties that (putatively!) voted Democrat. Trump's tragicomic belief in GDP performance as a form of politics in its own right is perhaps the quintessential example of the mentality of homo economicus and the tendency of neoliberals to view countries as mere zones, or economic areas, where everything is based on rationalism and materialism, and national success is purely a calculation of economic self-interest. Writing pessimistically of Trump's expected nomination in 2015 , I issued a stark warning about the influence of Jared Kushner, but also added:

For all his bluster, Trump is a creation and product of the bourgeois revolution and its materialistic liberal ideologies. We are teased and tantalized by the fantasy that Trump is a potential "man of the people." But I cannot escape the impression that he is a utilitarian and primarily economic character, who seeks a social contract based on personal convenience and material interest. In his business and political history I see only the "distilled Jewish spirit."

I don't think I've seen anything over the last four years that has made me question or revise that assessment. Trump's dedicated tweeting on GDP in fact had the opposite effect.

The disturbing reality, of course, is that GDP is only one side of a national economy. Another crucial aspect is government borrowing, and current projections suggest that the United States is " condemned to eternal debt ." According to The Budget Office of the United States Congress (CBO), "the US economy would enter the first half of this century with a public debt equivalent to 195 percent of its GDP. In the next 30 years the debt of the most powerful economy on the planet would more than double." The first significant jump occurred in the wake of the subprime crisis, in which Jewish mortgage lenders were especially prominent. The subprime crisis forced public debt to 37 percent of GDP, which then rose steadily to 79 percent between 2008 and the outbreak of COVID-19. It now stands at 98 percent, and is accelerating. Although the United States has reached comparable levels of debt in the past, there has almost always been an accompanying war, or wars, which acted as a financial pressure valve -- a fact that does not bode well for isolationists but may be encouraging news for Zionist hawks.

Joe Biden has claimed recently that "a Biden-Harris Administration will not be measured just by the stock market or GDP growth, but by the extent to which growth is raising the pay, dignity, and economic security of our working families" -- while at the same time welcoming millions of new immigrants and legalizing the ~20M+ illegals into the workforce .The American economy is in fact extremely unlikely to change direction, with Biden reassuring his billionaire donors gathered at the Carlyle Hotel in Manhattan in June 2019 that "no one's standard of living will change, nothing would fundamentally change." I believe him. Biden was part of an administration that looked on as 10 million working Americans lost their homes. Matt Stoller at the Washington Post has described Obama-era Democrat economic policies as "in effect, a wholesale attack on the American home (the main store of middle-class wealth) in favor of concentrated financial power." Biden was part of a team that outright rejected prosecuting major bankers for fraud and money laundering, and that represented one of the most monopoly-friendly administrations in history:

2015 saw a record wave of mergers and acquisitions, and 2016 was another busy year. In nearly every sector of the economy, from pharmaceuticals to telecom to Internet platforms to airlines, power was concentrated. And this administration, like George W. Bush's before it, did not prosecute a single significant monopoly under Section 2 of the Sherman Act. Instead [under Obama] the Federal Trade Commission has gone after such villains as music teachers and ice skating instructors for ostensible anti-competitive behavior. This is very much a parallel of the financial crisis, as elites operate without legal constraints while the rest of us toil under an excess of bureaucracy.

Biden is the product of funding from forty-four billionaires , including six hedge fund speculators, seven real estate barons, and five in the tech sector. Of the top 22 donors, at least 18 are Jews (Jim Simons, Len Blavatnik, Stewart Resnick, Eli Broad, Neil Bluhm, David Bonderman, Herb Simon, Daniel Och, Liz Lefkovsky, Steve Mandel, Bruce Karsh, Howard Marks, S. Daniel Abraham, Marc Lasry, Jonathan Tisch, Daniel Lubetsky, Laurie Tisch, and Robert Toll). The Jewish consortium behind Biden is almost identical in its financial composition to that behind Trump which, as I've explained previously , was notable for its embodiment of "usury and vulture capitalism, bloated consumerism, and the sordid commercial exploitation of vice." Biden's transition team , meanwhile, is comprised of "executives from Lyft, Airbnb, Amazon, Capital One, Booz Allen, Uber, Visa, and JPMorgan." In short, expectations that Biden is going to break up Big Tech, or any monopoly for that matter, are the fantasies of the deluded, the ignorant, and the duped.

Conclusion

While the drama and recrimination surrounding the election are unquestionably fascinating, I hope you'll forgive for being less agitated than most. My reasons for lethargy are simple: I knew that regardless of outcome we'd get four more years -- four more years of Zionism, GloboHomo, and the standardized, rationalized machinery of economic escalation that now provides the apologetic engine for mass migration. Behind the abortion debates, Supreme Court picks, culture wars, and media theater, these are the non-negotiables of the System. You don't hear about them, and you can't talk about them, because you can't vote on them. And this is the biggest electoral fraud of all.


Jack McArthur , says: November 14, 2020 at 7:37 pm GMT • 1.9 days ago

I feel particular sorrow for ordinary decent Americans, in what today should be the land of plenty for all, who are having to witness this horrible implosion of their country and values. Other than divine intervention there is no hope. The media, money markets and political classes are either directly run by the same children of a devil or by loathsome gentiles who have taken the Judas coin or who are cowards in fear of their miserable life's.

What is life if it means cowering down in the face of evil? An ancient voice trying to tell this strange world that you are controlled by an evil power and that your eternal fate is determined by how you respond to it i.e. join the freak show or stand up like a true man or woman and tell them no.

The writer of this essay is a man of culture, with wide interests. There are not many left. Compare him to the moronic voices of today with their narrow perverted interests and weep for what faces you.

Craig Nelsen , says: November 14, 2020 at 9:30 pm GMT • 1.8 days ago

I feel particular sorrow for ordinary decent Americans, in what today should be the land of plenty for all, who are having to witness this horrible implosion of their country and values. Other than divine intervention there is no hope. The media, money markets and political classes are either directly run by the same children of a devil or by loathsome gentiles who have taken the Judas coin or who are cowards in fear of their miserable life's.

Particular particular sorrow for the young. As for divine intervention, we used to have a saying about God helping those who help themselves. Surely there must be some action we can take.

https://jailsoros.com/

Realist , says: November 15, 2020 at 3:30 pm GMT • 1.1 days ago

While the drama and recrimination surrounding the election are unquestionably fascinating, I hope you'll forgive for being less agitated than most. My reasons for lethargy are simple: I knew that regardless of outcome we'd get four more years -- four more years of Zionism, GloboHomo, and the standardized, rationalized machinery of economic escalation that now provides the apologetic engine for mass migration. Behind the abortion debates, Supreme Court picks, culture wars, and media theater, these are the non-negotiables of the System. You don't hear about them, and you can't talk about them, because you can't vote on them. And this is the biggest electoral fraud of all.

Exactly correct. As early as mid April 2017 I could see that Trump had no intention of keeping his promises to middle Americans I wrote a comment to this blog saying as much.

Trump is a minion of the Deep State.

The Deep State doesn't care about the unimportant internecine squabbles of the two parties as long as their important issues are advanced (wealth and power). As a matter of fact it strengthens the false perception that there is a choice when voting.

Trump and the Deep State do not care what the American people want. They know that most American people are inane fools and will believe anything. Most Americans would rather watch America's Got Talent, Dancing With The Stars or The Masked Singer than be informed about important issues.

AReply , says: November 16, 2020 at 6:05 am GMT • 11.1 hours ago

The only discernible values espoused in this rambling crypfic article is dog-whistling to bigots of yore.

There is no study of history, no analysis, no insight and no meaning beyond blathers about jews and homos.

The tone is hatred and despair with the judgement that others are to blame and there is nothing to work towards.

The Zizek quote offered a word-salad refrain that everybody comes to power under some bias, to themselves, if nothing else. But Zizek's actual point has be de-contextualized. Here is what Zizek was saying:

Biden is Just Trump With a Human Face
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rt.com/op-ed/504705-slavoj-zizek-biden-trump/amp/

//Let's remember that [Hannah] Arendt said this in her polemic against Mao, who himself believed that "power grows out of the barrel of a gun" – Arendt qualifies this like an "entirely non-Marxist" conviction and claims that, for Marx, violent outbursts are like "the labor pangs that precede, but of course do not cause, the event of organic birth." Basically, I agree with her, but I would add that there never will be a fully peaceful "democratic" transfer of power without the "birth pangs" of violence: there will always be moments of tension when the rules of democratic dialogue and changes are suspended.

Today, however, the agent of this tension is the Right, which is why, paradoxically, the task of the Left is now, as the US politician Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has pointed out, to save our "bourgeois" democracy when the liberal center is too weak and indecisive to do it. Is this in contradiction with the fact that the Left today should move beyond parliamentary democracy?

No: as Trump demonstrates, the contradiction is in this democratic form itself, so that the only way to save what is worth saving in liberal democracy is to move beyond it – and vice versa, when rightist violence is on the rise, the only way to move beyond liberal democracy is to be more faithful to it than the liberal democrats themselves. This is what the successful democratic return to power of the Morales's party in Bolivia, one of the few bright spots in our devastated landscape, clearly signals.//

In other words we must be conservatives who are willing to progress!

And hey, crypto-fascists: Zizek is not on board with you just because RT runs him on their version of Fox News.

A New Kind of Communism

https://www.youtube.com/embed/QARALafdWUI?feature=oembed

The world is never going back to the old-timey dayz of white settlement of an eden America. So move forward or croak of old age or both.

As to the idea that "decent Americans" are in any way demoralized by Trump's loss:
BULLSHIT!

If you are demoralized by Trump's loss, you have been ejected from decency. But Luckily for you, it so happens USA is a happy-enough home for all stripes of perverts.

Meimou , says: November 16, 2020 at 6:10 am GMT • 11.0 hours ago
@Verymuchalive the Occidental Observer writers in prison, you have zero reason to think Trump won't crack down on free speech in 2020.

Another 4 years of Trumpstien means a very large % of the right will continue to sleep, something Biden could not get us to do. Biden could never get the right to support vaccines or martial law.

No Trump apologist besides Alex Jonestien gives an excuse why Trump is backing a unsafe, hastily made vaccine for a disease with a 99% survival rate. No Trump cultist will provide a credible one. (Wally will not be the first)

Consider.

GreatSocialist , says: November 16, 2020 at 6:22 am GMT • 10.8 hours ago
@Realist rs.

And what happened? She was raped and kicked in the butt by him. He always does that to everybody. He did it to his dad, he did it to his brothers and sister, he did it to his family ..and now he has raped America.

Trump's only ability is to find out what others fear or desire, then overpromise on everything and deliver nothing or even the opposite after u have given him your support or money. That's how he operates in business, and that's how he has conducted his fake presidency.

I am surprised that so many seemingly intelligent people have been taken in by this well-known conman.

Clay Alexander , says: November 16, 2020 at 6:44 am GMT • 10.4 hours ago

Great article. What I find strange is a businessman from New York second only to Israel in population of Jews could be so easily duped by them. Loyal only to themselves. In the words of Harry Truman "Jesus couldn't do anything with them, what am I suppose to do with them?".

geokat62 , says: November 16, 2020 at 8:26 am GMT • 8.7 hours ago

I think it needs to be emphasised that the "homo" in globohomo stands for "homogeneity" and not "homosexuality":

Globohomo

(adj) A word used to describe a globalized and homogenized culture pushed for by large companies, politicians, and Neocon/Leftist pawns. This culture includes metropolitan ideals such as diversity, homosexuality, sexual degeneracy, colorblindness in regard to race, egalitarianism, money worship, and the erasure of different individual cultures, among other things.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Globohomo

Miro23 , says: November 16, 2020 at 10:28 am GMT • 6.7 hours ago

My reasons for lethargy are simple: I knew that regardless of outcome we'd get four more years -- four more years of Zionism, GloboHomo, and the standardized, rationalized machinery of economic escalation that now provides the apologetic engine for mass migration. Behind the abortion debates, Supreme Court picks, culture wars, and media theater, these are the non-negotiables of the System. You don't hear about them, and you can't talk about them, because you can't vote on them.

This may be great for The US' Jewish plutocracy, but the United States is still in economic competition with countries that don't give 2 cents for ZioGlob world (for example China – which has just signed the RCEP – Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, covering 15 Asian countries, after 8 years of negotiation and covering 2.2 billion people).

So the rest of the world looks on with interest, same as it did in 1923, when the German Weimar Republic collapsed in an orgy of sleaze, corruption, debt and worthless money.

sethg , says: November 16, 2020 at 10:38 am GMT • 6.5 hours ago

990. Jews are the scapegoats for all the deficiencies of low-IQ whites just as whites are the scapegoats for all the deficiencies of low-IQ non-whites. Let me explain how that works.

Why do we observe Jews at the forefront of many cutting-edge industries? (for example the media/arts and financial industries are indeed rife with them). The low-IQ answer is, of course, a simplistic conspiracy theory: Jews form an evil cabal that created all these industries from scratch to "destroy culture" (or at least what low-IQ people think is culture, i.e. some previous, obsolete state of culture, i.e. older, lower culture, i.e. non-culture). And, to be sure, there is a lot of decadence in these industries. But, in an advanced civilization, there is a lot of decadence everywhere anyway! It's an essential prerequisite even! So it makes perfect sense that the most capable people in such a civilization will also be the most decadent! The stereotype of the degenerate cocaine-sniffing whoremonging or homosexual Hollywood or Wall Street operative belongs here. Well, buddy, if YOU were subjected to the stresses and temptations of the Hollywood or Wall Street lifestyles, maybe you'd be a "degenerate" too! But you lack the IQ for that, so of course you'll reduce the whole enterprise to a simplistic resentful fairy tale that seems laughable even to children: a bunch of old bearded Jews gathered round a large table planning the destruction of civilization! Well I say enough with this childish nonsense! The Jews are simply some of the smartest and most industrious people around, ergo it makes sense that they'll be encountered at or near all the peaks of the dominant culture, being overrepresented everywhere in it, including therefore in its failings and excesses! This is what it means to be the best! It doesn't mean that you are faultless little angels who can do no wrong, you brainless corn-fed nitwits! There's a moving passage somewhere in Nietzsche where he relates that Europe owes the Jews for the highest sage (Spinoza), and the highest saint (Jesus), and he'd never even heard of Freud or Einstein! In view of all the immeasurable gifts the Jewish spirit has lavished on humanity, anti-semitism in the coming world order will be a capital offense, if I have anything to say on the matter. The slightest word against the Jews, and you're a marked man: I would have not only you, but your entire extended family wiped out, just to be sure. You think you know what the Devil is, but he's just the lackey taking my orders. Entire cities razed to the ground (including the entire Middle East), simply because one person there said something bad about "the Jews", that's how I would have the future! Enough with this stupid meme! To hell with all of you brainless subhumans! You've wasted enough of our nervous energy on this stupid shit! And the same goes to low-IQ non-whites who blame all their troubles on whites! And it's all true: Jews and whites upped the stakes for everybody by bringing into the world a whole torrent of new possibilities which your IQ is too low to handle! So whatcha gonna do about it? Are you all bark, or are you prepared to bite? Come on, let's see what you can do! Any of you fucking pricks bark, and we'll execute every motherfucking last one of you!

From http://orgyofthewill.net

Zarathustra , says: November 16, 2020 at 10:44 am GMT • 6.4 hours ago

Blah, blah, blah. Cat circling the hot plate. Trump was galacticly stupid. He should have told the Jews that I will give you Jerusalem and Golan heights in my second term. He would have a second term.
The only point is here is this:
Jews see Iran as a mortal threat. Jews want Iran to be destroyed. For Biden the first point on the agenda is destruction of Iran. Biden did promise Jews that he will destroy Iran.
That is why Biden did win.
Trump hesitated with his promise to destroy Iran that is why he lost.
So here is the conclusion question:
Was Biden serious when he promised to Jews destroy Iran, or he was only making fools from them Jews.
That is the only outstanding question

The Spirit of Enoch Powell , says: November 16, 2020 at 4:11 pm GMT • 58 minutes ago
@Trinity

From my understanding, the term "Globohomo" was originally meant as a shorthand for "globalised homogenisation", wherein all national cultures would be eliminated in favour of a universal culture, promotion of homosexuality is just one of the components of GloboHomo, with things like rampant consumerism, substance use and liberalism being some of the other things.

If you go to the newly built sections of Europeans cities, you will notice how they are all the same (homogenous) with the same American fast food outlets and the same architectural style.

[Nov 09, 2020] Gridlock Biden May or May Not Win, but Trump Remains 'President' of Red America -- Strategic Culture

Notable quotes:
"... No matter what the final result, there will be substantial doubts about its legitimacy by one side or the other, perhaps both. And no deranged conspiracy thinking is required for that. An electoral system suffused with this much chaos, error, protracted outcomes and seemingly inexplicable reversals will sow doubt and distrust even among the most rational citizens. ..."
"... Divided We Fall: America's Secession Threat and How to Restore Our Nation ..."
"... The Great Reset ..."
"... "This is in fact the dual story of Rome in the last century of the Republic, and it tracks very well -- with the transformation going on today [in the U.S.] -- and it is a transformation The society which emerged at the end of the Roman Revolution, and civil war had too, a totally dominant élite class. ..."
"... "This was a new world, in which the great landowners, with their latifundia [the slave-land source of wealth], who had been the 'Big Men' leading the various factions in the civil wars, became the senatorial archons that dominated Roman life for the next five centuries -- while the People, the Populares, were ground into a passive -- not helpless -- but generally dependent and non-participating element of Roman governance: This sapped away at the creative life of Rome, and eventually led to its coming apart. ..."
"... " today American inequality is as great as in the period right before the French Revolution, and is mirrored in what was happening to Rome in that long century of transformation. The problem we have right now, and which is going to make this revolution more intense, is I think, the cynical conclusion and agenda of Blue to just leave behind the Americans they do not need [in the New Economy] – which is to say all of Red America, and to put them into a situation of hardship and marginalization, where they cannot coalesce, to form a rival -- as it were -- Popular Front. ..."
"... "What I think what we are seeing here [in the U.S.] is profound: American society – emerging from this passage, is going to be completely different. And frankly, it already feels different. It already feels – as it has felt for the past four years – that we are in a rolling civil war norm now, in which deep societal strife is now the normal way in which we handle transfers of power. Issues will be [momentarily] resolved, with the path of society [painfully] staked out through violent conflict. That is likely to be our path for decades ahead. ..."
"... "The problem with that in the shorter term, is that there is still enough of the nation aroused and ready to fight this process. The problem: Can the last energies of the Old Republic still be harnessed against this seemingly inevitable, transformation?" ..."
Nov 09, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org

One clear outcome of the U.S. election was the collapse of the promised 'Blue Wave' – an implosion that marks the 'beginning of the end' to a powerful spell enthralling the West. It was the delusion which Ron Chernow, the acclaimed U.S. presidential historian, gave credence, as he contemptuously dismissed America's "topsy-turvy moment" as purely ephemeral, and a "surreal interlude in American life": No longer can it be said that there is one 'normal'. Win or lose the White House, Red Trumpism remains as 'President' for half America.

Biden, by contrast, served as the prospect for Restoration – a return to a hallowed consensus in American politics – to a reassuring 'sanity' of facts, science and truth . Biden, it was hoped, would be the agency over-lording a crushing electoral landslide that would terminate irrevocably Trump's rude interruption of the 'normal'. Biden supporters were rallied, Mike Lind, the American academic and author has observed , around the idea of America moving toward a 'managed' society – based on 'science' – that would be essentially finessed and controlled by a managerial, expert class.

Over time, Lind suggests, American society would begin to depart more, and more easily, from its republican roots, through a process already underway: via attempts to alter the Constitutional order, and other rules, to bring about a change in the way America is governed.

The notion however, of what America – as Idea – now constitutes, has fractured into two tectonic plates, moving apart in very different directions – and likely to move even further apart as each 'plate' remains convinced that 'it won' – and the sweetness of victory has been stolen.

The fracturing of the 'One Normal', by contrast, provides some kind of respite to much of the globe.

The fact remains that the election has produced a result in which it is abundantly clear that one half of the American electorate precisely voted to oust the other half. It is gridlock – with the Supreme Court and Senate in the hands of one party, and the House of Representatives and White House (possibly) in the hands of the other. As Glenn Greenwald warns :

No matter what the final result, there will be substantial doubts about its legitimacy by one side or the other, perhaps both. And no deranged conspiracy thinking is required for that. An electoral system suffused with this much chaos, error, protracted outcomes and seemingly inexplicable reversals will sow doubt and distrust even among the most rational citizens.

Though the maths and maps suggests Biden will likely reach 270 Electoral votes, the old saying 'It ain't over 'till it's over', holds true. The electoral vote scenarios in the key 'swing states' would only apply if there is no litigation, fraud or theft. However all three are in play – If you are stuffing the ballot box, you first wait to see what the regular vote is, so that you know how many votes you 'need' ( mathematical anomalies aside) to push your candidate over the top. Trump, somewhat rashly, gave out the GOP vote calculations at 02.30 on Wednesday, and hey-presto, loads of absentee ballots suddenly arrived at certain polling stations at around 04.00. That seems to have happened in Wisconsin, where over 100,000 Biden votes appeared seemingly out of nowhere on a flash drive delivered by hand from a Democratic district. That put Biden ahead in Wisconsin – but litigation is in process. Likewise, it appears that a huge "absentee ballot" dump appeared in Michigan that heavily favored Biden.

This is just the beginning of a new and more uncertain phase that could go on for weeks . It may be that ultimately Congress will have to certify and make the final determination in late January. Meanwhile, there are some things we know with much higher certainty: The Republican majority in the Senate may hold until the 2024 election. So, even if Biden wins, his agenda will not hold through 2024.

A President may emerge, but it will not be, as it were, a settled one: He or she cannot make claim to the 'will of the majority'. Whomsoever is certified by Congress cannot truthfully say they represent 'the nation'. Consensus is fractured, and it is difficult to see any leadership that can bring Americans together as a 'united people'.

"There is not a single important cultural, religious, political or social force that is pulling Americans together more than it is pushing us apart," David French notes in a new book Divided We Fall: America's Secession Threat and How to Restore Our Nation . French -- an anti-Trump conservative -- argues that America's divisions are so great, and the political system so poorly designed to handle them, that secession may eventually be the result: "If we keep pushing people and pushing people and pushing people, you cannot assume that they won't break", he writes. (A 2018 poll found that nearly a quarter of each party – Democrat and Republican – characterized the opposing party as "evil").

An ideological split, and the concomitantly contested America as Idea has huge geo-political implications, reaching well beyond America itself – and principally for Europe's élites . European leaders did not see it coming when Trump was elected in 2016. They misjudged Brexit. And this year, they misread U.S. politics once again. They yearned for a Biden win, and they (still) fail to see the connection between the popular rebellion of Red under Mr. Trump, and the angry protests occurring across Europe against lockdown.

Separating tectonic plates – more strategically – usually signal a kind of dualism that betokens civil conflict. In other words, their separation and moving apart turns into an ideological struggle for the nature of society and its institutional fabric.

Historian, and former War College Professor, Mike Vlahos warns (echoing Lind), that, "there is, here: more of a hidden – and thus in a sense, occult struggle – by which over time, societies begin to depart more, and more easily, from their roots. The western dominant élites presently are seeking to cement their hold over society [moving towards a 'managed' society]: To have full control over the direction of society, and, of course, a framework of rule that protects their wealth."

"Quite to the surprise of everyone, and given that the Republicans are being represented by a billionaire who has a great many friends in Manhattan – the Wall Street donors to the two campaigns, outnumber Trump's donors for Biden by 5-to-1".

Why, Vlahos asks, would Wall Street invest in a man – Biden – and in a Party, ostensibly seeking to move America toward this 'managed' progressive society? Is it because they are convinced of a need radically to restructure the world's economy and geopolitical relations? Is this then Vlahos' occult struggle?

Many of the élite hold that we are at that monumental inflection point at this moment – In a nutshell, their narrative is simply this: the planet is already economically and demographically over-extended; the infinite economic expansion model is bust; and the global debt and government entitlement expenditure bubble too, is set to pop at the same moment.

A 'fourth industrial revolution' is the only way by which to 'square this circle', according to this mindset. The Reset is purposefully aimed to disrupt all areas of life, albeit on a planetary scale. Shock therapy, as it were, to change the way we humans think of ourselves, and our relationship with the world . The Great Reset looks to a supply-side 'miracle', achieved through full-spectrum automation and robotics. A world where the money is digital; the food is lab-grown; where everything is counted and controlled by giant monopolies; and everyday existence is micromanaged by ever-monitoring, ever-nudging AI that registers thoughts and feelings before the people even get a chance to make those thoughts.

Mike Vlahos notes that in a curious way this American story mirrors that of ancient Rome in the last century of the Republic – with on the one hand, the élite Roman class, and on the other, the Populares , as Red Americans' equivalent:

"This is in fact the dual story of Rome in the last century of the Republic, and it tracks very well -- with the transformation going on today [in the U.S.] -- and it is a transformation The society which emerged at the end of the Roman Revolution, and civil war had too, a totally dominant élite class.

"This was a new world, in which the great landowners, with their latifundia [the slave-land source of wealth], who had been the 'Big Men' leading the various factions in the civil wars, became the senatorial archons that dominated Roman life for the next five centuries -- while the People, the Populares, were ground into a passive -- not helpless -- but generally dependent and non-participating element of Roman governance: This sapped away at the creative life of Rome, and eventually led to its coming apart.

" today American inequality is as great as in the period right before the French Revolution, and is mirrored in what was happening to Rome in that long century of transformation. The problem we have right now, and which is going to make this revolution more intense, is I think, the cynical conclusion and agenda of Blue to just leave behind the Americans they do not need [in the New Economy] – which is to say all of Red America, and to put them into a situation of hardship and marginalization, where they cannot coalesce, to form a rival -- as it were -- Popular Front.

"What I think what we are seeing here [in the U.S.] is profound: American society – emerging from this passage, is going to be completely different. And frankly, it already feels different. It already feels – as it has felt for the past four years – that we are in a rolling civil war norm now, in which deep societal strife is now the normal way in which we handle transfers of power. Issues will be [momentarily] resolved, with the path of society [painfully] staked out through violent conflict. That is likely to be our path for decades ahead.

"The problem with that in the shorter term, is that there is still enough of the nation aroused and ready to fight this process. The problem: Can the last energies of the Old Republic still be harnessed against this seemingly inevitable, transformation?"

[Nov 09, 2020] First gaslight, then calls for unity: Why should Biden get any more unity than Trump four years ago? by Wayne Dupree

So neoliberal Dems gaslighted everybody with Russiagate for four years, staged Ukrainegate, and now cry for unity. Funny, is not it
For four years, Democrats branded Donald Trump an illegitimate president and treated him as such. Then-President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden plotted with FBI Director James Comey a way to oust Trump's pick for national security advisor, Michael Flynn.
Now they face the results of the attempt to depose Trump via color revolution (aka Russiagate), the result of neo-McCarthyism hysteria and cry uncle. To paraphrase Tolstoy: all happy democracies may resemble one another, but every unhappy democracy is apparently unhappy in its own way.
Nov 09, 2020 | www.rt.com

Wayne Dupree has been to the White House to talk to President Trump about race relations and appeared at election events for him. He was named in Newsmax's top 50 Influential African-American Republicans in 2017, and, in 2016, served as a board member of the National Diversity Coalition for Donald Trump. Before entering politics, he served for eight years in the US Air Force. His website is here: www.waynedupree.com . Follow him on Twitter @WayneDupreeShow I've participated in eight elections including this one, and I've never before witnessed the open hostility and vitriol that's been aimed at President Trump.

No president was ever abused like Trump was from day one. The Republicans didn't cooperate with Barack Obama at all, but any thinking person can see the difference between the way Obama was treated and the way Trump has been treated. The past four years have set a dangerous precedent, and you know what they say about karma.

Representative Nancy Pelosi and Senator Chuck Schumer refused to work with President Trump on anything, but now the socialists want the Republicans to work with them. Interpretation: we want the Republicans to work with us as long as they believe everything we believe and do everything to help us, even if, in their eyes, it destroys America. No dissent will be accepted.

You really have to wonder about this arrogance from the Democrats and their call for unity, don't you? Joe Biden is calling for unity because he doesn't want to face the constant scrutiny the Trump administration faced. After all, do you think the hundreds of millions he received in campaign contributions didn't come with strings attached?

READ MORE Wayne Dupree: Why I, as a black man, am voting for Trump, along with a large number of people who consider themselves Democrats Wayne Dupree: Why I, as a black man, am voting for Trump, along with a large number of people who consider themselves Democrats

Right now, there's not enough critical thinking for unity to happen; our emotions govern too many of us. The media have played on that for four years. They convinced millions of Americans they would have to be insane to consider re-electing Trump, even though most Americans are sick of the establishment politicians and their big empty promises, sick of their endless and expensive foreign wars, sick of a sluggish economy, and tired of the outsourcing of American jobs.

How can unity happen when the rift between liberals and conservatives is larger than ever, and the two sides envision this country's future in vastly different ways? How will half of the American population ever again trust their sources of news and information when nearly every outlet has lost all pretense of objectivity? Every bit of reporting has become an opinion piece.

In marriage, they call these irreconcilable differences. It may not happen in my lifetime, but this country would do well to consider a peaceful separation.

Our national media have failed us. And that's all media, including social. They caught us all hook, line, and sinker. Why? Money. We are such a gullible species. The more people hear an idea promoted, the more it sounds true. This is why our country is divided. We rely too heavily on our media for information, true or not. They manipulate us with their words like modern-day bards. Journalism is indeed dead, and it's been replaced by sensationalism. But it all boils down to who's really at fault. To find that out, look in the mirror. Yes, we all let this happen to us.

I wouldn't blame people for believing phony news. Think about it: why do companies spend literally billions of dollars on commercials? Companies use commercials to change our buying habits, and they work extremely well on a subliminal level. Likewise, the mainstream and social media use misinformation, distortions, deceptions, and omissions to change people's voting behavior on that same subliminal level. The only way to ensure legitimate elections in the future is to destroy mainstream and social media's hold on our country.

ALSO ON RT.COM Bitter election aftermath suggests that US democracy really is in its death throes

In the past four years, the behavior of the Democrats has been that of junior high school bullies with no adult supervision. What all men want most is power, and the Democrats will do anything to get it. We can't take their low road, but should stand against their further attempts to turn this into a one-party nation. We need a broad spectrum of ideas to keep our country strong and our citizens cared for.

One party does not have all the answers, nor can they dictate to the other parties how to worship, think, or even eat. When I was young, I was a Bill Clinton Democrat. I walked away before the Obama administration and never looked back. I believe more and more people are doing that, and, by the 2022 midterms – well, watch out, Dems!

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.


[Nov 08, 2020] Michael Hudson on Financialization and Deindustrialization -

Nov 08, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Paul Jay: So Trump made all kinds of promises and is still blowing his horn about this issue of returning jobs and the rebirth of American industrial manufacturing. But he hasn't succeeded. Why? And there are some bigger reasons for that, aren't there?

Michael Hudson: Well, we've talked about these bigger reasons for quite a few years now. And my point is that the economy's been in a slow crash. The reason is that to become an industrial economy, you have to lower the cost of living and lower the cost of doing business. That's what the whole fight of classical economics was all about. But the economy has become more and more financialized and polarized. It's impossible to cut costs.

You mentioned the pandemic. Health care now absorbs 18 percent of the GDP. If you look at the other costs, if you're a wage earner, 15 percent of your income right off the bat goes to Social Security and medical insurance. You have regular taxes, anywhere from about 20 percent. You have mortgage debt that is up to about 40-43 percent of average income. At least that's what the U.S government is willing to guarantee when bankers make a loan. You have other loans; you have student debt to pay for an education in order to get a job, you have automobile debt to get to the job.

Paul Jay: Add credit card debt to that.

Michael Hudson: Absolutely. Credit card debts have been stable. As people are falling further and more into arrears, their interest rate jumps from about 18 percent to 29 percent or more. So the same amount of debt now absorbs a much larger part of your income. So the result of all this is that if American workers in the industry got all of their food, all of their clothes, all of their transportation, everything, all of the physical goods and services they use for free, they still couldn't compete.

In fact, if they just had to pay their wage withholding for Social Security, medical care, and overall health insurance alone, that is larger than the wage levels in Asia where we're importing things from. So the fact is that the United States has made itself uncompetitive because of this idea that, well, if one wants to get rich and the way to get rich is to go further and further into debt to buy houses that are rising in price. But as houses rise in price, then you have to pay more and more debt service or more and more rents to the people who buy the same houses on debt.

The result is that America is priced out of the market. Well, this is what Ricardo talked about in his free-trade theory way back in 1817. He said that industrial capitalism was not going to be able to take off in England if British workers had to pay rising rents as food prices rose behind the agricultural tariffs that England had. And there was a 30-year fight to finally repeal the agricultural tariffs, the corn laws. Ricardo said, if you don't stop the economy from having to pay the rentier class at that time, the landlords, then you're going to have the Armageddon of capitalism. You're going to have the day of judgment that our rents are going to rise to take so much of the wage earners income and the industrialist's income that there's no room left for profit.

Basically, if you're going to compete with other countries and try to sell or buy American goods instead of imports, then you're going to have to pay enormously high costs to pay the rentier class, which is basically the one percent: the finance, insurance, real estate sector, and the fire sector. Instead of becoming an industrial economy, the United States has become a fire sector economy. And Trump has not done anything at all to reduce that. The economy is getting obviously sicker and sicker, once again. Medical costs are going up. The states and municipalities are broke. Small businesses have been going out of business. So, where is the demand going to be for domestic American manufacturing? And why would one pay for manufacturers with labor that cost 10 or 20 times than what it costs abroad? When you add up all of these rentier costs into the equation, it can't be done.

Paul Jay: Well, there seem to be different parts to the argument, and they kind of all lead to the same conclusion, a continued lack of industrial jobs in the United States. In the article, in spite of the tariffs against Chinese imports, these American corporations on the whole that we're producing in China, a lot of them just moved to other cheap wage economies. They're talking here in Vietnam and Mexico. So the actual balance of trade didn't change at all.

Michael Hudson: That's right. American corporations are going after global and multinational, and they're going to hire labor wherever it's cheaper than American labor. And that's almost everywhere in the world because no other country in the world has to pay American style health insurance. No country in the world has to pay residential rents that are charged in the United States. Other countries just don't have the heavy financial overhead structure that the United States has. So there's no way in which these countries, these multinational firms are going to produce in the United States.

Paul Jay: The Trump plan and the Republican plan, in spite of all the demonization of China, of being the source of all evil, including the virus itself, never mind taking away industrial jobs, which is all a process. Outsourcing was obviously all an American driven process, American corporations. It leads to this kind of dead-end because the more American workers' wages and living standards go down, the less they can buy. So even if you're producing cheaply abroad, your market is still getting smaller in the United States.

Michael Hudson: Yes, the living standards are going down, but not the wages.

Paul Jay: And not the cost of living, just the standard of living. We see this even in the fight over what to do in the pandemic. The Republicans are against another big stimulus plan. The Democrats supported the original plans, but they also supported only so much of those plans actually going to defend the cost of assets or the value of assets of the rich, and more went that way, if I understand it correctly, than actually went to workers and working families.

Michael Hudson: We're talking about eight trillion to the one percent, two trillion to the rest of the population. Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats made a deal with the Republicans. They both agreed that they wanted to pay their respective campaign contributors, the financial sector, and the real estate sector. They were realistic. We can't save the economy. We can save the stock market. Let's put eight trillion into the stock market and the bond market, and let's save the banks. Let's have the Federal Reserve use some of this eight trillion to buy the packaged mortgage loans, the packaged oil industry loans, the loans that are going bad. So let's bail out the rich people. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats really cared about the working-class. I think Trump had some care for the working-class, but other Republicans didn't. The Democrats said, will promise the workers that we'll get to the fact that we know that the states and local localities are broke. We know that the subways are running at a deficit. We know that the cities are broke, and they're going to have to lay off people. But we really can't deal with that. Let them go under. Nancy Pelosi said, well, we'll get to all that later. She knew very well that she wouldn't get to that later. She wouldn't even agree when Trump said, well, let's at least send out another two trillion and the twelve hundred dollar checks to everybody, she wouldn't even agree to that.

So the Democrats have come out really to the right of the Republicans, or they've made a right-wing shift.

Paul Jay: Yeah, I don't think you can say to the right of the Republicans.

Michael Hudson: It's almost impossible to say. You're right. Let's just say nobody really cared about labor or how it's been doing. Nobody has made any proposals because, in order to deal with the employment problem and the industrial problem, you'd have to restructure the economy. The economic structure now isn't simply a question of not having enough money to live or enough money to buy goods and services or enough profit. It's so male structured that the industrial economy and the wage-labor has been absolutely flat for decades now. All of the growth of income, certainly since 2008, all of the growth and wealth has accrued just to the top ten percent. It's accrued in the form of rising stocks and bonds and housing prices. But rising housing prices don't make it easy for wage earners because no workers have to pay more and more for the homes that go up.

So instead of making the economy richer, the boom in stock prices and also the stock and bond market is making the economy more debt-strapped. If you're a worker expecting a pension, the pension funds are only able to make less than one percent on risk-free capital. So they're taking a lot of risks, and they're usually taken advantage of by the Sharpies of Wall Street that sell them derivatives, as to which occurred with CalPERS, the California pension fund group.

I don't see any way out of it without either writing down the debts, certainly for the debts run up during the pandemic, writing down the rents. If you leave the last six months of rent in place and debts in place, then you're going to try to start any kind of recovery after the virus is over with this huge backload of rent hanging over you, the huge backload of debt service.

There's no way that a lot of companies can stay in business, the fracking industry, for instance.

There's no way that a lot of workers can avoid being laid off, especially if they're public employees for cities and states or public agency employees. The New York City Transit Authority says, well, we're going to have to lay off our transit workers because we don't have enough money to pay because people haven't been taking public transit during the pandemic. We've had to pay labor, we've had to pay our bondholders. Obviously, something has to give. And I think the Democrats and Republicans are in agreement that what give this is going to be is in labor, whose economic conditions, not those of their respective campaign contributors.

Paul Jay: Well, let's say you got a phone call, and I have absolutely no doubt, and there are very few things I have no doubt about, but I have no doubt you will not get this phone call. But let's say you do.

Biden calls you and said, OK, I've been listening to you, and you're talking about restructuring. So what should I do? And I know Biden's not going to call you, but what should a Biden administration do? It's a very critical, dangerous moment in so many ways.

Michael Hudson: Well, you're personalizing it. And the problem is, what could any president do? The tax laws are made by Congress. And you've seen with Donald Trump; it doesn't matter what he tries to do, it wouldn't matter who's president coming in, because one of the things that are needed to be done is to write down the debts that are owed to the banks. The economy cannot recover when it's working under this debt burden. Many people have talked about at least starting by writing down student loan debt with the huge default rates there are now. As long as you leave the student loan debt in place, students are not going to be able to qualify for mortgage loans. So they can't buy houses of their own because they're already pledging too much of their income to pay student loan debts.

Paul Jay: Student Loan debts are around a trillion dollars?

Michael Hudson: Yeah. It's larger now than credit card debt. Thanks to the bankruptcy law that Mr. Biden put in, you can't wipe out the student debt with bankruptcy. I mean, it was really Mr. Biden more so than Donald Trump that has screwed up the economic system by what he did in sponsoring the laws. He was the senator from Delaware, New Jersey, which is basically the corporate banking state. They called him the senator from the credit card companies. He represented the credit card companies against labor. His whole career has been fighting against labor. And it's inconceivable that he would ever call someone like me any more than what he said on 60 Minutes on Sunday. He said people think that I'm going to be like Bernie or AOC, but I beat those guys. You'll never call me a socialist.
When Kamala Harris was asked if she was a socialist or a left-winger, she just laughed and laughed and said, how could anyone possibly believe that? And of course, if you look at what she did in California by supporting Mnuchin in all of his fraudulent evictions, she supports the real estate owners even when they're illegally acting against the renters. So neither of them is a friend of labor. So what they would call me to say is what we need is a patter talk from you, Mr. Hudson.

Paul Jay: Don't take the phone call thing too seriously. But what I'm getting at is a progressive people's movement and the progressives that have been elected to Congress, what should they be demanding? What do real solutions look like?

Michael Hudson: What they should be demanding is something that cannot be done within the existing two-party system. First of all, the way to keep down housing prices and to get the cities and states out of their deficit is to tax unearned income. Tax the land, have a real estate tax that'll collect all this rent that is being paid right now to the banks as mortgage interest. Either you pay the banks the contractual interest that they're due on all of these loans, and you go broke. Or you realize the banks have become averse to economic welfare. You have to let the financial system go and replace it with banking and credit as a public utility.

That's what makes China so competitive. Why is China able to outstrip American labor? The Chinese have almost; I'd say, an equal standard of living from everything that I've seen there. Well, the reason is that China is doing exactly what the United States did to become an industrial power in the late 19th century. China has public utilities, public enterprises providing basic needs, and basic public services at a subsidized rate or freely, such as education, it's free. Foreign labor doesn't have education debt like the United States. Education is free. Health care is public. It's provided freely. There's no huge limit.

Paul Jay: Let me say, I think that's not quite as rosy as it appears. My understanding is that while health care is supposed to be free and public, that you actually have to wind up having to pay doctors some cash, or you really can't get in to see them.

Michael Hudson: Yes, that is fair. I do acknowledge that fact. But the most important public utility to answer the question that you brought up, the important thing is that banking and finance in China is a public utility. The government is the creditor. When there's a pandemic like this and companies cannot afford to pay the debts or have to lay off labor, the government, as a banker, can say, OK, we're just not going to collect the debt and force you to go under and force you to lay off your labor force.

It's easy to cancel debts when you, the public, and the government are the creditor. Because you're canceling debts owed to yourself, and that's one of the main reasons why banking should be a public utility.

Paul Jay: Well, in some ways, banking is a public utility if you're a big bank or if you're a big corporation because the Fed actually did essentially give corporations and banks so much cash during the pandemic, they were able to pay off their debts. So it kind of is a public utility if you're in the one percent.

Michael Hudson: Yes, you're right, what I meant as a public utility serving the public interest. Obviously, who is going to control the state? And that really is the key. Will it be progressives that control the state, or will it be the one percent? And right now, you mentioned what progressives in Congress could do?

Paul Jay: Well, before you do that, let me just add one thing to what you just said. The ability of the major financial corporations and large corporations, although I think finance is by far the dominant force because if you look at who owns almost all of the major corporations, the majority owners are big financial institutions. The majority of shares are held by big banks and, in particular, by asset management companies like BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard. But not only them, but there are also others.

The power that the financial institutions wield over government is what Roosevelt defined as fascism. He said that when one sector of the economy, one group of companies essentially controls or owns the government, that's fascism. And we are virtually, or we are there.

Michael Hudson: You're quite right. You're absolutely right.

That is the problem, we are in a centrally planned economy, but central planning is done on Wall Street, not in Washington. Now that you've essentially privatized and financialized the political process, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations are people, and corporations can buy control of the political process. So that's basically what the problem is.

Let's get back to fascism because that's very important. Around the time that Roosevelt made that comment, Trotsky analyzed fascism in Germany and Italy, and he said that fascism is what occurred when the socialists don't have a solution to the problems.

I think we are indeed emerging in that kind of fascism today because you don't have the left or the progressive interests really coming up with a solution to the problems. And that's because the only kind of solution is so radical that it can't be solved within the existing political framework and the existing legal framework. There has to be the equivalent of a revolution. It's not going to be an anti-fascist revolution; then it'll be a fascist revolution. What we're seeing is that kind of a slow revolution.

Warren Buffett said there is a war and we're winning, but we seem to be the only people that know that the wars on. The war is on, and we're moving towards an economy ruled by the one percent. And I mean, fascism basically is the integration of corporations and the state leaving out the voters and the working class. It's a corporate state. And as you pointed out, we're not simply a corporate state here. Otherwise, the industrialists would be trying to run the economy to promote the industry. We're in a financialized state, and that's finance capitalism, which is very different from industrial capitalism. Many of the Left, especially the Marxists, still talk about industrial capitalism as being the problem. And yet industrial capitalism is being phased out in the United States, as you pointed out at the beginning of this show. And it's being phased out by finance capitalism. And that isn't even being discussed here, either by the media or even on the left; there's not much discussion of it.

Paul Jay: I wouldn't say, from what I understand, industrial production is being phased out.

Michael Hudson: That's the dynamic of industrial capitalism.

Paul Jay: But there are certain areas of the economy that are still very industrialized, and the amount of industrial production is still not great. But it's only in very specific kinds of areas, the higher-tech areas and such, anything that can be farmed out, offshore gets farmed out. But this issue of public banking is critical, and I think it needs to be focused on because it's not nearly enough in the focus of the demands of the progressive movement, in the Green New Deal, and other places.

It is breaking the hold of finance over the government. And I don't see how that happens without public banking. There's still a lot of talk about breaking up the big banks and regulation. Breaking up big banks probably is a good thing. But it only really works if, at the same time, you build public banking on a large scale. Diverse ownership, it could be owned at federal level states, cities, regions, cooperatives, co-op banks. But you need something on a scale that when the big banks try to threaten, too big to fail, a government needs to be able to say, well, you're not to go off and fail. You can't blackmail us anymore because we have a real public banking system. I don't see it happening within this Democratic Party.

On the other hand, the demand needs to be raised far more forcefully.

Michael Hudson: Well, the problem is what kind of banking are you going to have? And the whole tradition of American and British banking has been to lend against assets. So banks will not make a loan unless you have collateral to pledge. And the collateral is going to be assets and property that's already in place, mainly mortgages on real estate, but also it could be stocks and bonds or other assets. Banks don't lend the finance industry building a new capital. They'll lend to corporate raiders who buyout industry. They will lend to the industries you cited, and that includes high tech industries. This isn't the old kind of industrial capitalism industry; these are monopolies. Amazon, Apple, and Google make their money from monopoly rents, if not really profits. That's why they sell it for nearly a trillion dollars.

The economy is geared towards not only land rents and interest but monopoly rents. And when I talked about industrial capitalism, I was talking in the Marxist sense of the dynamic of industrial capitalism, certainly, as it was developing in the 19th century, was to cut the cost of living, to cut the cost of doing business by getting rid of all rents. It was the business class in the United States. It was the industrial class; it was the Republicans and the 1880s and 90s that pressed for public enterprises. And Simon Patten, who was the first economics professor at the Wharton School of Economics, said public enterprise is a fourth factor of production. Unlike business investment and industrial investment, it's not there to make a profit. It's there to provide basic services at a low price to subsidize the cost of living and the cost of doing business so that industrialists can minimize what they have to pay the basic wage to labor and what they have to pay to do business with. They can afford to undersell their rivals.

Now, that's exactly what China is doing by having the public enterprises headed by public banking to provide credit. That's exactly what Germany did. Its banking was very different from American banking and British banking. German banking would actually create credit to finance capital investment by heavy industry, especially the war industries, but also steel. All the big industries got their financing from the banks that also organized the stock investment not to support stock prices, not to get quick dividend payouts, but to keep reinvesting the earnings and capital expansion.

That, again, is what China has done, as Germany did and as the United States did in the 19th century. But that was the whole dynamic of industrial capitalism to keep economic rents at a minimum. But now we're in a rentier society backed by financial interests. And you're absolutely right. It's the banks that are the mother of Monopoly. It's the banks that are protecting the large monopoly industries. It's the banks that are pressing for states and municipalities to sell off their assets, like how Wall Street forced Chicago to sell its sidewalks to put parking meters up to vastly increase the cost of driving around, in Chicago. When Goldman Sachs lent against that.

So it's the banks and the financial sector that are turning regular highways into toll roads. And now they're coming to New York and say, well, maybe your subways are broke. Well, we don't think they're really creditworthy, but why don't you privatize them. We'll do what Margaret Thatcher did with the transportation in England. And of course, once it's privatized, they're going to build debt service and interest rates, management fees, and stock buybacks all into the cost of providing subway service or bus service or road service. And the economy is on the same trajectory that England was on under Thatcher and Tony Blair. And that's really the problem. What kind of capitalism are we going to have?

Paul Jay: If you look at the critical problems facing our society and societies around the world, really, the solutions are socialized solutions. There's no way that you can deal with the climate crisis without some kind of central planning, without government driving it, and without socialized solutions. Just the way Medicare for all makes perfect sense. Medicare for all makes perfect sense. The same principle can be applied in other areas of the economy, certainly starting with banking.

But the more problems cry out for more socialized solutions. If you want, you can use this terminology of a mixed economy for the more socialist characteristics of the economy to come more to the fore. It's so obvious that's what needs to be done, or the society is not going to last.

But even when you read some of the documents, I follow BlackRock, and I read their research papers. They even recognize, at least in words that the urgency and danger of the climate crisis, but it's obvious from what they say, they don't reach a conclusion, but they come right up to the edge of the conclusion that the marketplace on its own will never allow or force investors to change the way they actually invest. BlackRock claims they're getting out of coal, but it's smoke and mirrors. If people want to see the analysis, I did, of that, and I have an article on the website about BlackRock.
But the market mechanism will never change the course to phase out fossil fuels relatively quickly, have a massive investment in green, sustainable energy. That doesn't happen when the model of the financial industry, which is quickest maximum return on their capital investment, that only government can do that. But the government can't do that when it's controlled by finance.

So this issue of a more socialized solution like you asked, is what version of capitalism solves it. I think the version of capitalism is no version of capitalism. In the sense that the socialistic characteristics of capitalism really have to come to the fore, that there really has to be a transition to far more public ownership.

Michael Hudson: Well, a century ago, everyone thought that capitalism was leading to socialism, and that was shared by large industrial firms. They wanted to socialize the costs of the economy. They wanted to socialize the land. It was the industrialists, Ricardo and John Stuart Mill, who were the industrialists that wanted to get the land tax and to get rid of the landlord class in England.
Now and all throughout Europe, it was the upper house of government, the House of Lords, or the Senate that tried to block any kind of reform, not only leading to socialism, but that helped capitalism. There had to be a political revolution strengthening the House of Commons relative to the House of Lords. And that occurred in 1909-10 in England. Now, here you're going to have a similar constitutional crisis in order to do the socialist policies that you mentioned. The crisis is not only because there's federalism in the United States, states' rights that are written in the Constitution, to have an economy that can rescue the American industry, and rescue the American working class, you need to rewrite the Constitution.

But the efforts to make plans for a constitutional convention have all been done by the ultra-right, by the Federalist Society, and by the people that you and I have made fun of for many years. And I don't see any movement on the left to say the situation is so serious that we need a radical rewrite of the Constitution in order to become really a parliamentary democracy that can provide the political context in order to introduce socialist policies.

So the problems not only economic; the problem is that to solve the financial and rentier economic problem, you need to restructure the political problem here along the lines that were restructured in Europe and obviously in China.

Paul Jay: Well, I don't want to get too much into China because I find it too complicated, and it's a whole other conversation.

But that said, we're in a moment where we don't have much time climate-wise. We're talking less than a decade. The truth is, given the way the politics is right now, we're not going to make the kind of moves that need to be made in less than a decade.

But at least, I have to say, with a Biden administration, as much as I agree with your critique of the Democrats and Biden, at least it's a conversation about what a climate policy should be. I think four more years of climate denial will be a complete disaster.

But there is something about the 19th century, which I think is informative about what might be possible here, and this is a bit of a Hail Mary, but anyway. When it came to child labor, I guess we're in the mid 19th century; the section of the capitalist class understood that if the mines and mills and factories continued to exploit child labor as intensely as they were, they were actually going to prevent the reproduction of the working class. There weren't going to be enough workers. They were literally wiping out the working class of England. Those voices that saw the systemic interests of the class interests of capitalists was served with laws prohibiting child labor, and it won.

Of course, the working class was still just getting organized into unions and fought for these laws as well. But the systemic interest asserted itself, and they did outlaw child labor. Well, we're in that kind of moment now; the systemic interest, the threat of climate disaster is going to demolish much of the assets of the capitalists. Maybe not tomorrow, but certainly it's within sight, 10, 20, 30 years.

Every time you look at the scientists' assessment of what's happening in terms of climate change, it always seems to be changing faster than they thought it would. The estimates of the IPCC always turn out to be conservative, and it's actually more dangerous than people thought.

So the problem is we don't have time to politically win the power to rewrite a constitution, and we also don't have the time to have a kind of political revolution, the way Bernie Sanders even talks about. To the point where you can develop these socialist characteristics or socialistic side of the economy, even though it has to happen.

There has to be a way that a mass movement can both force, persuade, demand that at least some sections of the elites, and it's going to be hard for finance because they are in an orgy of profit-making. But they need to get they're not going to be able to reproduce their own wealth the way this is going because the climate is going to destroy it.

Michael Hudson: But, Paul, they don't care. The Financial Times is short term. What you're talking, in reference to climate change does not exist within this year. And this year is where their perspective ends. Finance lives in the short run. They think they can always take their money and run. And as long as they live in the short run, they only care about their bonuses. They care about the stock price. What you're talking about is something that's going to happen in more than 12 months. Just as politicians usually don't care more than the four years, presidential term or the six-year Senate term. Their time frame is a mentality, and the mentality of the one percent being financialised is the financial mentality of living in the short run. When you criticize the market, as you correctly did before, the problem is that the market is short term. The market is a cross-section at a given moment of time, and you're talking about where it's all leading in the future. This is what business economists call an externality. Statistics will treat global warming as an externality, external for their economic models.

In other words, it doesn't matter for the things that they care about. The one percent cares about quite different things than the 99 percent and progressives care about. So it's that mentality that you're dealing with, and the mentality is not going to change. Even on the interview on 60 Minutes on Sunday night, Vice President Biden said, don't worry, he's not going to cut back fracking. It's more important to support fracking profit, even if it pollutes all of the water sources. Even if it pollutes the water and destroys the environment, we're going to be for it because Wall Street lent money against it. And we're supporting the banks that support and rely on fracking, or the banks will be in trouble.

I mean, that's where we are right now. Nobody is making a move to save the environment apart from global warming, the water supply, the air supply, nobody. I don't see any way of introducing this in an economy where the whole mentality of the powerful people who make the laws are short term.

Paul Jay: Yeah, I know they once asked Marx what the mentality of a capitalist is? He said, 'Après Moi, le déluge,' which means 'after me comes the floods.' It's a quote from King Louis XV.

Michael Hudson: They're going to buy houses in New Zealand if they can get there, somewhere high up.

Paul Jay: I don't have any great hope that it happens. I certainly don't have any great hope that it happens other than a few individual cases. But whatever might happen only happens if there's a very large scale, well-organized, progressive mass movement with a political agenda. Within those conditions, it may be the science gets clearer. The threat gets clearer on climate.

There is a point where the effects of climate change would get so profound, so serious that finance would see it in their interests. And I think there are some sectors, I'm told by people that know people high up in finance, and quite a few of them are getting the urgency and danger of it, but they can't break out of their business model.

Michael Hudson:That's the problem. I mean, what surprises me, all you need are a few billionaires. A few rich people to endow a progressive movement. Even in the Roman Empire, as it was collapsing and leading into the Dark Ages, you had members of the elite saying this is a hell of a way to make a living or make an empire. Things have to change. And of course, that led to such a revulsion against wealth and short-termism that you had Christianity spreading. People just revolted at the selfishness and the greed and the short-termism of the Roman Empire.

I would have thought something would happen here in the Senate. But that takes individuals. If you look at what wealthy people are giving donations to, it's not the foundations that are what you and I would call progressive.

Paul Jay: All right, we'll continue this conversation. Thanks for joining us, Michael.

Michael Hudson: Good to be here, Paul.


Tom , November 6, 2020 at 11:12 am

Yes but I wish we could have more discussion about the kind of economy we want.

I'm not convinced that a production-consumption economy is desirable even if it leads to full employment with decent income for every household. I think we need an economy that supports people while minimizing consumption because environmental degradation. We need more caring, repairing and maintaining and less producing, creating, innovating, disrupting and travel. We need to reconsider our consumer economy and all the ideology supporting it, including individualism.

digi_owl , November 6, 2020 at 10:29 pm

This seems to harken back old man Marx.

His basic vision, after observing capitalism in action, was for the workers to take over the means of production (factories etc) and run them for the best of the many rather than the few.

But that meant that the communist takeover had to come from inside a industrialized nation, something it has seldom done thus far.

He also observed that during a crisis, it would be better for industrial capitalists to side with the workers against finance, but that if they ever do so they do it far too late.

I must say i also love Steve Keen's little thought model on why private debt paired with a government surplus is bad news btw. The money to pay for living expenses, interest and taxes has to come from somewhere. And the two available sources are ultimately private debt (mortgages, credit cards, etc) and the government running a deficit.

And frankly the problem of excess production have been with us since the dawn of industrialization, leading to the creation of marketing after the great depression in order for people to switch from a needs to a desires mentality around buying.

Never mind that in the end, we are all living beyond our means geologically speaking. The only reason Malthus was "proven" a fool was the introduction of industrially made fertilizer. But that fertilizer is directly or indirectly coming from fossil fuels. And thus we are still slaves of thermodynamics.

Susan the other , November 6, 2020 at 11:32 am

I'd just like to submit that everyone in this country, regardless of their "wealth" feels trapped. It's the main reason I'm so concerned Biden, or even Trump, will take us off to war. It's the ultimate distraction, no matter how irrational it is. And I disagree with Hudson that there is no way to change the constitutional foundations of democracy to serve democracy. I believe there is a pretty quick way to do it and it is to make the Federal Reserve the Fourth Branch of Government with a mandate to maintain Democratic Money. It would be the quickest reform we could pass; it would solve all the ridiculous intransigence caused by debt; it could happen within one session of Congress. I do agree we don't have time to mess around with convoluted and contested ideologies – but we do all have this sense of urgency. If Neoliberalism as we know it – financialized economics – is now the fabric of the entire economy like the fabric of space, then we should fight fire with fire, fabric with more fabric. Spend the money we need to turn global warming around and restore society – just spend it. It's so very simple. And that circumvents more financialization – in fact it will dry up the well – as it provides what society needs. All it is is money: It is meaningless unless it is democratic. Give the Fed the power to make social decisions. Things would be off and running just that fast.

Terence Dodge , November 6, 2020 at 12:07 pm

That is a very interesting idea. I cannot imagine how it would done as it is so alien to our political process. Thanks for expressing it.

juliania , November 6, 2020 at 12:42 pm

It is not alien to our political process! I was reading the lecture given by Chinese Professor Zhang Weiwei at the Schiller Institute in Germany ( can be accessed by using those search terms; excellent presentation!) which gave a link to US tradition -- Abraham Lincoln's famous quote concerning government of the people, by the people, for the people. That is, or should be, the basis of the US political process, our heritage in this country.

What has China done to become the success it is? I submit that with all the national and unique heritage differences it presents, it has taken up this core value and made it China's fundamental priority. We can argue did it always have this commitment? Doesn't matter one twig if it always did. Somewhere along its path it has come to incorporate this truth, that the people's livelihood is the first priority for government; it is sovereign.

Seems to me the US Constitution is all about that.

John Rose , November 6, 2020 at 8:45 pm

I have been writing to whomever I thought would listen, futilely so far, urging the Fed to offer monthly loans to any citizen asking for them, no interest, no term and callable only at the same monthly rate instead of the Fed making the necessary trillion dollar a year increases in the money supply through the banks. Same process, different actors.

With the ability to call were inflation to arise, the Fed would no longer be limited to pushing on a string and feeding money at such a retail level would be immediately stimulative as were those $1200 checks and boosts to unemployment insurance.

Given the creative efforts the Fed has employed recently, they could well do it on the basis of their current mandate.

tegnost , November 6, 2020 at 9:09 pm

except that everyone would pay off their student loans with that money and where would 100 billionaires park their ill gotten gains? 10 year treasuries?

Thor's Hammer , November 7, 2020 at 10:35 pm

juliana
re the American Political Tradition
Tell it to the First Nations -- -

"Violence is as American as Apple Pie" -- - H. Rap Brown, Black Panther leader

Uncle Warren says there is a class war and his class is winning, His flagship company Berkshire Hathaway purchased Burlington Northern Railway from Denny Washington to gain monopoly price control over the mile long coal trains heading to the Midwest. A logical business decision, exactly what we should expect from one of the Deciders, and exactly why his class and it's values must be overthown lest it destroy the future of the planet..

The Malignant Overlords of American "Capitalism" have a monopoly, not only over Capital but the means of Power -- - Propaganda and armed force. Elections are merely circuses held for the entertainment of the rabble and change nothing except perhaps the division of spoils among the .001%. The Deep State bureaucracies do their bidding without any concern for the commoners. Warfare is a permanent feature of State policy designed to keep the engines of Demand Creation whirling.

All the logical economic arrangements a Michael Hudson may propose will vanish into a black hole until the Power of the financial Overlords is broken. The pace of climate change tells us we do not have a century to evolve new economic and political systems. The instrument of terror for the French Revolution may have been the guillotine, or In the USA it may be the AK47 and the 50 caliber machine gun. Or if we still retain a measure of civilized behavior it could be a culling of the Trillionaire Malignant Overlords, stripping them of every possession, and banishing them to a peaceful retirement in a cinder block house somewhere in the outer Bahamas.

Gulag , November 6, 2020 at 2:06 pm

Doesn't the Fed already have the power to make crucial credit/money/social decisions?

And isn't the Federal Open Market Committee of the New York Federal Reserve Bank already one of the most powerful and undemocratic entities in the United States.

How exactly are FOMC decisions subject to democratic control? The last time I looked the FOMC doesn't even have to take complete minutes of its committee meetings–a privilege I believe is granted to no other institution of government, including the intelligence services.

As Alan Binder noted in the 1990s this makes FOMC decisions, for all practical purposes immune from reversal.

I

Susan the other , November 6, 2020 at 3:33 pm

Not completely sure, but I'd say the problem is that our banking system is quasi-private but completely controlled by private capitalist interests which are frequently at odds with social interests. Especially now that everything is so completely out of whack. So we generously funnel sovereign fiat money through the private bankers whose charter probably ends with admonitions to maintain price stability and full employment (which is impossible but never mind) – and all sorts of things that have proven themselves to not and never work. And to that ridiculous end we immediately – hot off the press – we give private banks the ability to allocate money (we actually just" back" them as we let them create money by writing up debt obligations (which can no longer be serviced but also never mind) by the old English methods based on collateral (Hudson above) which leads to monopoly capitalism – it should now be our first clue – the first thing we need to change. Not so much change (as change is such an intrinsic process we might never achieve it) but go around it. Just tell the banks "whatever". If you think this is a loan that the private economy can service then go for it. Otherwise and in the meantime public, democratic, socially responsible money will fund our social well being by spending sovereign fiat directly into the social economy. If we passed new legislation to this effect the Fed would indeed have the power to make economic decisions based on social necessity and etc.

Gualg , November 6, 2020 at 6:56 pm

Hi Susan:
What I don't understand is why you believe that our present Central Bank and its capacity to create fiat money is in alignment with the interests of the average U.S. citizen?

Shouldn't the nature of its emergency lending over the past 12 years, in itself, indicate that this entity has little interest in supporting your average working stiff in any way, manner or form?

How can "public, democratic, socially responsible money" ever emanate from such an institution?

It seems to me that the primary purpose of the Federal Reserve is to absorb as many reserves of sovereignty as possible via a combination of relatively esoteric knowledge and irrevocable policy-making power.

Susan the other , November 7, 2020 at 11:57 am

Central banks do make me nervous too. Their latest push for an international digital currency is clearly an attempt to make them more efficient payment settlement providers. To make the world of neoliberal capitalism go around and around smoother, imo. I'm not against digital currencies, I'm in favor of efficient banking, certainly – but I keep up my wishful thinking that central bankers cannot deny reality much longer. That reality is now social/environmental well being. So if the bankers do go international in an effort to maintain neoliberal capitalism they will fail miserably if they do not become realistic enough to provide a source of demand. Demand as it is now has been devastated by giving all the money to the supply side and none to the consumer and further indebting the consumer to poverty and hopelessness because both society and the environment have been ruined. Main Street knows this first hand. Corporations themselves know this. Banks know this. Central banks know this. The people playing desperately fast and loose with easy money and derivatives and tax foolery also know this. So I don't think it is a stretch to expect a change in the institution we casually refer to as "money". It's a no-brainer, no? The wrong choice to my thinking is to trust Congress. That's a disgraceful track record if there ever was one – and nobody can "police" Congress even though they need it more than any other organization. Voting, as we are seeing as we comment, is a joke.

Susan the other , November 6, 2020 at 3:39 pm

I think the "deep state" is as hapless as the rest of us. Maybe more so at this point.

Gulag , November 6, 2020 at 4:41 pm

Does this summary of the capabilities of the NSA, by Barton Gellman, make it sound like its a hapless entity?

"By the years 2000 most of the world's communication traveled as pulses of light over strands of spun glass the width of a human hair, arranged in ribbons and then twisted into braids. Fiber optic cables revolutionized data in transit. Digital storage revolutionized data at rest. The NSA had to remake itself from the ground up. When it learned to master its new domains, it maintained a span of control over information that no human endeavor had ever aspired to reach."

gulag , November 6, 2020 at 1:23 pm

" what I meant as a public utility serving the public interest. Obviously who is going to control the state? And that really is the key. Will it be progressives that the control the state or will it be the one percent.

"We are a centrally planned economy but centralized planning is done on Wall Street not in Washington."

It would be really interesting to hear your personal description of the apparatus of power which you believe actually runs this country.

Would you include the system of mass surveillance centered in the National Security Agency and tightly coupled to the CIA, the FBI, the Pentagon as well as the monopoly power firms in Silicon Valley?

Would you include our present Federal Reserve System which has successfully integrated private financial markets into the practice of Government and has become a key entity used for the management of both the U.S. and the international economy?

Why should these cartel-like entities be allowed to exist if you actually want to reform our institutional structures to serve the average citizen?

Glen , November 6, 2020 at 2:42 pm

Yeah, watched this earlier and figured you would post it along with a transcript.

Basically it seems that without massive government involvement, we are not going to be able to revitalize our country. I knew that Michael Hudson paints it in some stark terms

What do you think of the ideas for fixes being pushed by these guys? They are proposing some creative stuff.

The Economics of Anger: How We Got a Rigged System (w/ Mark Blyth and Eric Lonergan)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGpaxYsLqiE

Sound of the Suburbs , November 6, 2020 at 5:14 pm

Banks – What is the idea?
The idea is that banks lend into business and industry to increase the productive capacity of the economy.
Business and industry don't have to wait until they have the money to expand. They can borrow the money and use it to expand today, and then pay that money back in the future.
The economy can then grow more rapidly than it would without banks.
Debt grows with GDP and there are no problems.
The banks create money and use it to create real wealth.

Tom Pfotzer , November 7, 2020 at 12:59 pm

The assertion that banks extending credit (creating money) results in additional wealth creation has been true in the past in the U.S., and it's true in some parts of the world today.

It is much less true in the U.S. today.

If it was still true here in the U.S., then the gargantuan increase in commercial and public debt over the past 2 decades should have resulted in a great deal of new wealth being created. That hasn't happened. Wealth has been transferred from the middle class toward the top of the economic pyramid, but there hasn't been any big-bang wealth creators (like electric motors, automobile, telecomm did, for ex) of late, and that hasn't been due to lack of "liquidity".

Middle class increases in wealth have recently occurred in several other countries lately, but the U.S. – in spite of all the credit creation – isn't one of them.

Why do you think the net world investment flows are generally moving to Asia and the developing world? Because that's where much of the new wealth is being created.

I'm not confident that Mr. Hudson's solution of "canceling debt" is going to work. After the cancellation, one must still answer the question of "where in the U.S. does one invest money to create new wealth?". Cancelling debt just transfers wealth from one player-set to the next. It doesn't create anything.

Let's solve the problem where it actually is: Middle class U.S. households need to create new wealth. What new capacity(ies) do HHs need in order to create wealth? Let's invest in that.

If we're going to do stim-bucks, let's get something for our (newly devalued) money.

McWatt , November 6, 2020 at 5:22 pm

I believe that what Michael is saying is that in our debt burdened economy the lenders have made bad loans. They have made loans to people who can not pay them back. Ultimately who are the lenders? The stock and bond holders.

In order to move the economy back to health the bond and stock holders need to take a haircut. They should not be bailed out by the government as they have been so many times before. If they don't take a haircut, then the debts stay in place, and so begins a slow decline that will eventually creep into everyone's economic lives.

You can't have a system where one group of people never loose and the other, larger group of people, always loose.

I think of one of my old neighborhood kids. Just a kid. 28 years old. He has $250,000.00 of medical debt,
credit card debt, student debt (never was able to graduate, so no degree) and runs from job to job until the creditors catch up to him and begin garnishment. I think this probably is not an uncommon story. If his debts are left in place, he will be in debt his entire life and when he is eligible for social security they will be garnishing that. And this whole scenario started with the discovery of a heart problem.

Michael Hudson calls this debt peonage. Which is true.

Others might call it criminal.

Telee , November 6, 2020 at 6:20 pm

One of Michael Hudson's basic positions is that a recovery for the Real economy (goods and services) is not possible unless the big banks are left to fail and debt from bad loans is restructured or forgiven.

politicaleconomist , November 6, 2020 at 8:35 pm

Wall Street forced Chicago to sell its sidewalks to put parking meters up to vastly increase the cost of driving around, in Chicago.

Not quite right. Mayor Daley made a deal of a lifetime to raise money thereby avoiding raising taxes in the short term. A Spanish firm bought most of the meters–they already were there–of course it raised parking meter rates, making the deal very lucrative for it and Daley t of thought well this way I won't have to raise the rates and take the blame for it. But Chicagoan–surprise, surprise–understand parking meters. He did not run again. It seems obvious that some people connected to Daley did well on that deal. Daley could hardly show his face after that and his successor, Emanuel, squelched all investigating into the deal. He himself had a difficult time gaining reelection and after the Laquan McDonald video was released did not run for a third term.

But he is one of a number of disgraced politicians you might see on Sunday morning TV.

John Anderson , November 6, 2020 at 10:46 pm

Nobody gets it! All this economy baloney is really about live people grabbing for as much as they can from their neighbor. Case in point: The stock market is a farce. It's all about absentee ownership. They don't care about the product-all they want is profit and that comes from the workers, who for the most part, do not have ownership (read stocks). It a particular stock doesn't pay, the stock owner goes somewhere else for money. Get it! The stock market is what it is, a crap shoot.
Not to mention the super high bill for military-and the super high bill for medical-and the super high bill for credit card debt-and the super high bill for private health insurance. What did I miss?
Jay and Hudson oughta know this. The one thing they seem to know is that the scheme cannot go on.

Jeremy Grimm , November 7, 2020 at 2:02 pm

Grabbing a couple of quotes from this post from Michael Hudson:
"Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats made a deal with the Republicans. They both agreed that they wanted to pay their respective campaign contributors, the financial sector, and the real estate sector. They were realistic. We can't save the economy. We can save the stock market. Let's put eight trillion into the stock market and the bond market, and let's save the banks. Let's have the Federal Reserve use some of this eight trillion to buy the packaged mortgage loans, the packaged oil industry loans, the loans that are going bad. So let's bail out the rich people. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats really cared about the working-class."

"So instead of making the economy richer, the boom in stock prices and also the stock and bond market is making the economy more debt-strapped."

And the stock market is not a "crap shoot" if you own the Government and control the Fed.

Steven , November 7, 2020 at 2:20 pm

There is a twist to Wall Street's short-termism that is going to be a huge problem for Biden – or anyone else serious about doing something about climate change. People the world over, not just in the United States, can only think about wealth in terms of money. As long as the numbers keep going up in their 401ks they think they and the country are getting 'wealthy' – and don't need to worry about people who aren't. Wall Street and the West's financial capitalists have been off-shoring the West's real wealth so they can create ever-more money to keep stock and real estate prices rising.

The problem of course is what happens to those account balances when the needed 'creative destruction' bites, when monetarily wealthy people discover they can't buy what they need to enjoy life.

The pandemic SHOULD have been a lesson in what constitutes real wealth. It was China, not the U.S., that could produce everything needed to test its people and control the COVID 19 outbreak – because China had or could produce the wealth required to do it. But it probably won't be. People will still keep looking at their financial portfolios and assuming all is well – until the rest of the world, the people who possess or produce real wealth refuse to exchange it for yet more of the West's unpayable debts.

[Nov 07, 2020] The result of this election can be summarized with one phase "Strange non-death of neoliberalism."

Highly recommended!
Nov 07, 2020 | crookedtimber.org

>
(
)

The result of this election can be summarized with one phase "Strange non-death of neoliberalism."

Joe Biden win is a win the tech companies, the big banks, Beijing, as well a PMC class.

likbez 11.07.20 at 5:37 pm (
)

It's entirely possible that Biden will be a 1 term President, and this is something that Democrats should have given some thought to. But they had other, sillier, things on their mind, and, well, here we are.

They don't care. It is return to business as usual -- classic neoliberalism with the classic neoliberal globalization on the agenda. And this is all that matter to them.

The people behind Joe Biden are Clinton classic neoliberals. Who ruled the country since 1990th with a well known result.

It is unclear what will happen in 2020 as Biden is a weak politician clearly unable of dealing with the current crisis the country faces. He is kick the can down the road type of guy.

And some start speculate that Dems the might get Tucker Carlson in 2024 as the opponent to Kamala.

(2) From an American perspective, Republican control of the Senate means that the Dems have limited scope to carry out grandiose economic and social experiments. Which I doubt Biden is much interested in anyway. (Incidentally, the idea that Biden or Copmala is in any way a "socialist" is yet another far-fetched MAGA fantasy just ask the folks at Chapo Trap House ). The idea that he came to power via fraud will not be quite enough to delegitimize the Biden Presidency – it's not like George W. Bush's narrow and contested victory over Al Gore in Florida remained much of an issue after a couple of months – but it certainly wouldn't hurt Republicans to have that as an additional rhetorical tool.

(3) Most consequentially, this substantially discredits American soft power and its "democracy promotion" efforts.

[Nov 07, 2020] Knowing what's wrong with the social system is different from being able to fix it: just because you are correctly diagnosed with stage 4 cancer it doesn't mean your doctor will be able to cure you. Sometimes, the problems are insoluble and terminal;

Nov 07, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

vk , Nov 7 2020 14:44 utc | 48

6) Americans know what's wrong with their economy. Both sides - Trump and Biden (I watched both political commercials) - know the USA must reindustrialize. They both know the debt is a problem. They both know they're relatively declining vis-a-vis China. The problem is that they can't solve their problems because those problems are problems of the capitalist system itself, not of who is in charge. If we read the documents of the end of the USSR, we can see a lot of intelligent people in charge correctly diagnosing what was wrong with the nation: the Soviets knew what was wrong with their system. But knowing what's wrong is different from being able to fix it: just because you are correctly diagnosed with stage 4 cancer it doesn't mean your doctor will be able to cure you. Sometimes, the problems are insoluble and terminal;

7) The frauds that happened in these elections are normal, inherent to the system and happen in every elections. I don't see the results overall as fake. Biden did receive more votes than Trump, and he deserves to be the new POTUS. That's who the American people are - look yourself in the mirror.

[Nov 07, 2020] Moral is is them, money is for us

Nov 07, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

malchik ralph , Nov 6 2020 19:23 utc | 118

Americans preach family values and are publicly prudish while privately consuming porn en masse

Americans preach capitalism and free market values while privately approving monopolization of vital sectors

[Nov 07, 2020] Both Democrat and Republican voters want much the same things and that is more collectivism. They want more collectivism on social matters and they want more collectivism on economic matters. They want society back from neoliberal capture

Nov 07, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Altai , Nov 6 2020 13:28 utc | 19

This is the essence of it. When you actually drill down, the things both Democrat and Republican voters want much the same things and that is more collectivism. They want more collectivism on social matters and they want more collectivism on economic matters. They want society back.

Both the social 'conservatism' and economic 'progressivism' on offer tend to be welded to highly unpopular opposites. If you want immigration control (Which is both a social and economic issue but only framed in social terms effectively) and an end to insane post-modern SJW identity politics, you're obliged to also vote for people who will further deregulate the economy and give tax cuts to the wealthy. If you want social democrat politics you're obliged to vote for people who will further promote insane anti-social solidarity post-modern SJW politics and unending mass migration that are counter-productive, perhaps fatality so, to their social democratic agenda. (See AOC and her wishes for literal open borders and full Nordic-style social democrat welfare state)

The currency of a system of economic redistribution within a democracy is the willingness of those with resources to give to those without. The 'progressive' Democrats in the US are hooked on this ideal of expanding welfare but that doesn't empower the poor because they're depended on those with resources to support taxes to give them it. Industrial policy and immigration restriction (Both to decrease job competition and to make the recipients of resource redistribution more sympathetic to those with resources) to actually shift the real wealth and power in society is far more important.

A synthesis on at least immigration restriction and progressive economic policies like banking regulations, trade reform and industrial policy would be highly popular and is entirely open ground to take. In 2016 Trump became the first person to make that offer in stark form in 40 years and despite all the ammo the media and intellectual class were able to throw at him, he beat Hilary Clinton. Bernie and Corbyn both understand this synthesis and have spoken of it in the past but now are trapped in political apparatuses that make any mention of immigration and the economic and social interests of the native working class totally impermissible. Worse, they wed them to an ideal of ever expanding immigration that will rip apart any social solidarity needed for socialist or social democrat policies since the new group interests of the native working class will be battling the newcomers for social and economic space.

A great deal of American 'Libertarians' are actually quite community oriented and are infact just not in favour of their taxes being redistributed to outgroups whom they don't have any sense of social solidarity with. Ask them what should be done in their community and they start sounding like Bernie Sanders. They view the Federal government as an alien thing that will take from them and give to alien outgroups.People will say they're being 'duped' but I think those people just don't understand that people are born out of ethnic groups not class groups, ethnicity is more important and we might expect it to be so given human evolution.

[Nov 06, 2020] the Professional, Managerial class.

Nov 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

c1ue , Nov 5 2020 20:24 utc | 144

@vig #85
Sorry: PMC refers to the Professional, Managerial class.
It could be considered the Petit Bourgeoisie in the Marxist sense except these aren't shopkeepers. They're the middle managers, doctors, lawyers, MBAs, tenured professors, finance types and what not who are divorced from the actual hands-on labor.
They mostly work for large corporations and government/non-government institutions like state governments (at the higher levels), think tanks and nonprofits.

c1ue , Nov 5 2020 20:37 utc | 148

@vig #85
And to clarify further: there is a professor at Stanford University named Victor Davis Hanson. He is both a tenured professor in early Western history (Greek) and also a farmer - 4th or 5th generation in the San Joaquin valley in California.
What Hanson has talked about at length was that the urban elite - the people in the cities and along the East and West Coasts of America - have been enjoying a different reality than the rest of the country.
In particular, the opening up of the American economy to China, India and the rest of the world has created new markets for companies like Boeing, Facebook, GE and the like - which benefits these areas and demographics.
However, this same action has also exposed American farmers, manufacturers, non-MBA/PhD/Master's/etc to low priced labor and mercantilist economic policies in these other countries.
The example Hanson uses is his own farm. In the 1980s, the price for raisins was $1200/ton and the market was largely in Europe.
With the advent of the EU, Greek farmers got subsidies from the EU such that they took over the EU market for raisins. The price for raisins fell to $400/ton.
Hanson doesn't say that this could/should be prevented; what he says is that it is a travesty that there were no voices in the US at least pushing back against these obviously anti-competitive economic policies. The lack of such voices meant that the forces of globalism could run rampant and destroy entire sectors of the American economy at amazing speed. In particular, the US leadership = oligarchs plus PMC class chose to sell out the rest of the country in order to enrich itself.
This is 100% obvious to anyone who looks at the details of what has happened in the last 30+ years: China went from 6% of the US GDP in 1984 to near parity (or beyond) in purchasing power terms today.

[Nov 06, 2020] If neoliberal state collapses what will come next?

Nov 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Vasco da Gama , Nov 5 2020 19:26 utc | 136

@vinnieoh | Nov 5 2020 17:12 utc | 96

But I don't believe we are a nation of children and idiots. I believe the political class is completely corrupt and does not serve its citizens, but they are not us; they have been captured by the wealthy and the powerful. A few observations. I saw the long lines on Tuesday and how orderly and patient those in line were, socially distancing and wearing masks, and those were - in the main - Trump voters. This morning I took a little drive around my locale, and like magic all of the yard sign litter - like an aggressive fungus - was almost completely gone. Halle-fuckin-leujah! Seems that everyone here, as partisan as they may be, really want to put this season behind them.

I understand the desire by non-Americans and expats to see rioting, violence, and societal collapse here in the US. To be expected after decades of crimes against humanity that are globe-spanning. But, be very careful of what you wish for: that sort of breakdown can only result in a fascist totalitarian state, and if you think that the US can't bring more pain than has already been caused, you may find yourself very mistaken.

Thanks for both the first hand report and the warning. Hopefully what you have witnessed was less anecdotal, more generalized. Regarding the warning I would replace all the misguided wishes you mentioned as the collateral of an actual expectation that a Trump administration would have spoilt the opportunity for the US Outlaw Empire to bring further global misery. Your point stands of a system breakdown potentially bringing a fascist totalitarian state...

As an external observer I am since recently inclined to recognize that a 2020 Biden election would fulfil the role the 2016 Trump election represented beyond the domestic purpose. Trump brings down Empire's Mask, beyond the ability of their true political representatives to sanitize it back globally. Trump being the industrial air-bag, and Biden eventually whizzing the Empire in its, hopefully "soft" but, inevitable crash-landing. Where Trump Would Not, Biden Can Not. Wishes..

In truth I have no idea, that's USAians mess to clean up, not mine.

[Nov 06, 2020] USA Hegemony and Decline

Mar 01, 2010 | www.eurasia-rivista.org

Issue 3/2010 of the review of Geopolitics "Eurasia", entitled USA: HEGEMONY AND DECLINE , has been released. This 288-page volume contains 24 articles about the USA, a still-hegemonic power in decline, on the scene of the transition from unipolarism to the new multipolarist order. Here follows a list and a short synthesis of each article.

Tiberio Graziani, USA, Turkey and the crisis of the western system

After history put an end to the unipolar moment, the western system led by USA seems to have entered an irreversible crisis. The economic and financial downfall and the loss of a secure pillar of the western geopolitical scene like Turkey mark the end of the US driving force. The USA, today, have to take an epochal decision: either shelving the project of world supremacy, which means sharing decision-making regarding international politics and economics with other global actors, or insist on their supremacy plan and even risk their survival as nation. One or the other will be motivated by the relationships that will be built, on the middle and long term, between the lobbies which are conditioning American foreign policy and by the evolution of the multipolarist process.

T. Graziani is managing editor of "Eurasia".

Fabio Falchi, The mirror of knowledge. Giorgio Colli and Eurasianism

This essay aims to show, also through a short exposition of Giorgio Colli's theoretical philosophy, not only that he has the merit, thanks to his talent of "pondering philologist", to have caught the deep relation between mysticism and logic in the "Greek knowledge", but above all that the way he is interpreting the thought of the "pre-Socratic" – an interpretation characterized by several and meaningful references to the Indian philosophy – is extremely important for the Eurasianism, if it's true that "Eurasia" is in the first place a "spiritual concept". In this perspective, it's not important that Colli cannot be defined an "Eurasiatist" or the fact that probably he himself had refused to define himself this way. What matters is the path pointed out by his philosophical speech, so that it's possible to leave behind obsolete and "incapacitating" dichotomies.

F. Falchi is a contributor to "Eurasia".

Phil Kelly, Geopolitics of the United States

The scope of this essay is to identify the different and typical elements of the traditional US geopolitics. In its path is reflected on the most relevant spatial characteristics in order to delineate the traditional aspects of North American geopolitics, rather than focusing on current international affairs; in spite of this, it comes to conclusion with some observations about the present American and global geopolitics.

P. Kelly is teaching at the University of Emporia (Texas, USA) and member of the Scientific Committee of "Eurasia".

Daniele Scalea, How an "empire" has risen (and how it will crumble soon)

Today's United States, in origin, were an united group of colonies of a small underdeveloped island; nevertheless, in a few centuries, they have become the first and the only world superpower. In this essay are retraced the geopolitical and strategic reasons that led to the rise of the original thirteen colonies, to their independence and expansion in North America; the rise of the USA and their informal empire are analyzed and how the passage from isolationism to hegemonism, that was not ineluctable, is leading them to lose it.

D. Scalea is editor of "Eurasia".

F. William Engdahl, The USA's geopolitical position today

At the end of the first decade of the 21th century it's time to locate the United States in the political, economic and above all geopolitical world context. It's clear to every impartial observer that the emerging giant, proclaimed in 1941 by Henry Luce, "the Time-Life" publisher, as the dawn of the "American Century", is today, in 2010, a nation and a power whose foundations themselves crumble. In this short essay are analyzed the particular nature of this disintegration and its implications.

F.W. Engdahl is associate director of "Global Research" and member of the Scientific Committee of "Eurasia".

Fabio Mini, Projects and debts

The Americans are no more able to recognize their deficiencies and vulnerabilities: they act as if they still controlled the entire world, when in reality they have lost great part of their autonomy relating to multinationals which control the economy and to national or transnational bodies they are indebted to. To the debt financing must be added the political debts, acquired to nations which are not secure thanks to the US politics of force: Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Palestine, Somalia, Rwanda and even Europe. This essay explains how power is the destroying drug of the USA, and how the "New American Century" has come to an end before coming to life.

F. Mini is a retired Lieutenant General of the Italian Army, he led the KFOR and the NATO's Command Allied Forces Southern Europe".

Eleonora Peruccacci, The evolution of USA-Russia relationships after the downfall of the bipolar system

The idea – to which Keohane already drew attention – that power is now based on the influence of ideas, on using cleverly skills like persuasion and cooptation, on the ability to manipulate mass communication as well, rather than on the traditional attributes of military force and wealth, is useful for the analysis of this essay, in which it is tried to comprehend how, after the end of the bipolar system, the relationships between the two ex world superpowers, USA and Russia, developed and changed, going through the stages of 4 treaties on nuclear disarmament.

E. Peruccacci, MA in International Relations, contributes to "Eurasia".

Spartaco Alfredo Puttini, China, the sea and the United States: the Sino-American naval antagonism

The development of a modern military fleet in the People's Republic of China has given rise to serious concerns in Washington and adds an element of tension to their relations. On the horizon beckons the danger of a naval antagonism between the two giants that could represent one of the more serious and meaningful elements for the international order of the 21th century. In this essay is talked about the Chinese willingness to develop marine force, about the stages of the fleet modernization, about the importance that Sino-American naval antagonism can assume in the near future.

S.A. Puttini, MA in History.

Chiara Felli, A miracle for Obama's "new beginning"

Israeli-American relations seem to be at a crossroads again: new negotiations in order to achieve the much desired peace in Near East hold the balance of power. In Washington, the atmosphere is tense, in contemplation of twelve months of negotiations the danger of a possible immediate bankruptcy outcome is reduced but concerns about the current state of the international comparison raise. Will the USA be finally able to play on their strong position as influential mediators? Does Israeli regional isolation risk worsening following the blind pursuit of nationalistic strategies? Are we really close to the "great compromise" and to the calm after a decade-long storm?

C. Felli, MA in International relations, contributes to "Eurasia".

Francesco Brunello Zanitti, American Neoconservatism and Israeli Neo-revisionism: a comparison

The G.W Bush Jr. Presidency has been strongly influenced by a political movement, commonly known as Neoconservatism, which started at the beginning of the '60s and was already significant during the Ronald Reagan Presidency. The neoconservatives have inspired in particular the recent North American politics in the Near East. The last decade, concerning Israeli politics, has been characterized by the strengthening of the right-wing party, the Likud, which, since its origins, has been not prone to any form of compromise with the Arab world. This essay offers a comparison between American Neoconservatism and Israeli Neo-revisionism, identifying various similarities.

F.Brunello Zanitti, MA in History of society and contemporary culture.

Julien Mercille, The fight against drugs in Afghanistan: a critical interpretation

This article offers a critical interpretation of the "fight against drugs" waged by the United States in Afghanistan since 2001, in contrast to the conventional view proposed by some of the most representative authors. While the conventional interpretation takes for granted that the US are leading a fight in Afghanistan against drugs in order to reduce their consumption in the West and to weaken the Taliban, who are closely linked to narcotics traffic, in this article it's argued that in fact there are few signs from Washington of a real and concrete struggle against drugs . The rhetoric of the fight against drugs is largely motivated by the need to justify military intervention in Afghanistan and the fight against insurgent groups opposing to American hegemony in the region, rather than by a genuine concern about drugs themselves.

J. Mercille is Professor at the National University of Ireland.

Matías Magnasco, Geopolitics of the United States in the Southern Cone

The South American region is nowadays a geostrategic scenario of great importance and will grow in importance in the future because of the race for raw materials (oil, gas and drinking-water) and the rise of Brazil as a regional and world power. South America must look with concern to US withdrawal from those difficult regions, such as Iraq and Afghanistan, and from those where Russia and China have virtually overcome their influence, because this reopens the possibility of looking back at their "backyard" and their "mare nostrum" ( the Caribbean Sea).

M. Magnasco is Director of the Argentine Centre of International Studies.

Jean-Claude Paye, The euro crisis and the transatlantic market

The offensive against the euro, implemented by the financial markets during the months of April and May 2010, is not simply an episode in the economic war between the two continents. It is indeed the symptom of a geopolitical change.

The American initiative aimed to weaken the EU was led with the participation of European institutions themselves, that sacrificed euro in order to recover the Greek debt. This convergence confirms the choice of both protagonists which was already made to integrate the EU into a great future transatlantic market.

J.-C. Paye is a sociologist and essayist.

Ivan Marino, "Nabucco" versus "South Stream"

The US-backed Nabucco pipeline is a choice which sprang from political and economic reasons, and, in substance, aims to avoid the Russian territory and consequently to contrast the interests of Moscow; but the choice of "Nabucco" may be dangerous for the same energy safety of European Union.

Italy's choice of supporting the "South Stream" has a strategic and objective value. The essay evaluates the strategic importance of this option on the long-term in the dialogue between EU and Russia.

I. Marino coordinates the Observatory on the Constitutional Political System of the Russian Federation.

Fabrizio Di Ernesto, US and NATO bases in Europe

More than 60 years after the end of World War II, Europe struggles to regain its political and military autonomy. This is mainly due to the forced occupation set on by USA through NATO, the military alliance started in 1949 and that with the passing of time has become the real armed wing of the Pentagon. During the years of the Cold War Washington justified this presence with the need of defending its interests against possible attacks of the Red Army and of the Warsaw Pact. Now that this pretext is becoming ever more anachronistic, the White House continues to support the need for this forced militarization hiding behind the scarecrow represented by Islamic terrorism. This presence also leads to various problems, summarized in this essay.

F. Di Ernesto is a journalist and essayist.

Stefano Vernole, The strange story of the "International Money Orders"

According to some sources, during the first months of 1992 the U.S. government developed a sophisticated financial-economics operation, using US taxpayers' funds, for secret aims. The money, nominally allocated for a "humanitarian" operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, would have been mainly used to finance Bill Clinton's election campaign and to pay debts acquired by the Saudi financier Adnan Kashoggi to the procurement office of the JNA (Yugoslav People's Army), but later it was put back in circulation to be used in the most various financial-economics operations.

S. Vernole is editor of "Eurasia".

Tomislav Sunic, In Yaweh we trust: the "divine" US foreign policy

The North American aspiration to "guarantee the democracy in the world " is above all originated by the biblical message. Whatever many European critics of US may say, US military interventions have never had as their sole purpose economic imperialism, rather the desire to spread the U.S. democracy all over the world. Anyone who dares to defy the US military, incurs the risk of being declared out of humankind, or at least of being branded as terrorist. Once someone is declared a terrorist or out of the human race, it's possible to dispose of a person or of a nation at one's pleasure. The ideological element in the history of US foreign policy is described in this essay, a revised version of a chapter, named after it, of the book Homo Americanus: Child of the Postmodern Age (2007).

T. Sunic was Croatian diplomat and University Professor in the USA.

Kees van der Pijl, Transatlantic ideology and neoliberal capitalism

In this essay we deal with three issues: the first concerns the origins of western ideology, an ideology marked by possessive individualism, free enterprise and intensive nature exploitation and that, with zeal of protestant missionary, claims universal validity for these principles. After that, we observe how neo-liberalism has emerged as the most radical western ideology and allowed capitalism to become a machine scam into which the world economy of the last thirty years has been drawn and that just now has suffered a setback.

Finally, some lines of development are drawn, through which Ukraine, and perhaps Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and others, could break with the present strategy of slavish adaptation to the neoliberal economy, which has damaged them so much, and stop to absorb the western ideology so different from their traditions, to implement a common strategy that combines their unique experience with the form of a multinational State and with elements of planned economy, whose strengths and weaknesses they know better than anybody else.

K. van der Pijl is Professor at the University of Sussex.

Paolo Bargiacchi, Is international law really law? A critique to John Bolton's negationism

In the US the (minority) idea that the international law does not exist and the (most common) one that customary international rules only bind States that accept them find a common root in the improper comparison between International context (and International law) and internal context (Internal law). This comparison, in turn, is direct consequence of the Austinian positivism, that, not catching the autonomy of the political and juridical international context compared to the domestic one, mistakenly uses logics, methodologies and categories of internal law to analyze the international law. An example of this modus procedendi comes from J. Bolton, who wonders if "Is There Really "Law" in International Affairs?" and concludes that "International law is not law". In this essay a general-theoretical and empirical critique of his thesis is developed.

P. Bargiacchi is Professor at the University Kore of Enna.

Alessandro Lattanzio, US nuclear forces

U.S. strategic forces, that since 1990 are no longer the backbone of US Army, a role now appertaining to the force projection (aircraft carrier, airborne troops and marine divisions, tactical air force) have undergone a significant downsizing in quality and above all quantities. But this reduction has been sold successfully at the table of international negotiations about nuclear disarmament. With the recent ratification of the START II Treaty, US strategic forces are kept on 500 ICBMs single-warheads, 14 SSBNs each carrying 24 SLBMs, and finally 96 strategic bombers. The budget deficit, the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the priorities for other programs, including the so-called theatre ballistic missile (THAAD), and the US financial-economic crisis will probably stop the last modernization programs of the U.S. strategic arsenal.

A. Lattanzio is editor of "Eurasia".

Claudio Mutti, Pietro Nenni against the Atlantic Pact

Interjecting into the parliamentary debate in accordance to the Italian democracy rules for enter the NATO, the secretary of the PSI (Italian Socialist Party) pointed put how the inclusion of Italy among the countries bordering the Atlantic was a violation of the basic elements of geography and history. He also contested the political justifications of this accession: partnering with the American superpower, Italy, which "compared to the US is like San Marino compared to Europe", instead of securing her independence would have further reduced her sovereignty, already harshly limited by the international treaties imposed by the winners of the Second World War.

C. Mutti is editor of "Eurasia".

Erika Morucci, 1991-2003: rehearsal of a superpower

In the twenty years since the first Gulf War to the present, different administrations came one after the other at the White House, giving different directions to American foreign policy. Apart from that, these were crucial years of a new historical course, that after the Cold War has opened up a reality whose facets were hidden for a long time and was fed by the iron curtain that divided the world. For the US widened its perspectives: they behaved as if they knew they can reach for primacy, pushing it to the manic search for global power. The multipolarity on the international scene has strongly emerged with the presence of other actors, including Russian, Chinese, European, and so the perspective is now to defend their lead and not lead the world.

E. Morucci, MA in International Relations.

Antonio Grego, Interview with Robert Pelo

Roberto Pelo is the director of the Moscow office of Italian Institute for Foreign Trade (ICE) and coordinator of the ICE office-network in Russia, Armenia, Belarus and Turkmenistan.

Antonio Grego, Interview with Livio Filippo Colasanto

Livio Filippo Colasanto is the first Director-General of RusEnergosbyt-Enel.

[Nov 03, 2020] Elections as a continuation of color revolution run by intelligence agencies against Trump

Notable quotes:
"... It is almost as if the Deep State vampire squid would prefer to bring the Republic that threatens it to 3rd world status in order to protect the oligarchy. ..."
"... Cheating has always happened in elections, by both sides. 2016 was unprecedented in the use of the intelligence agencies to thwart the Constitution. This election cycle the MSM has shown itself for what it is with it's large scale censorship and blackouts - totalitarian. Cheating has always happened in elections but this 2020 election cycle the Democrats will take cheating to another level - to the STRATOSPHERE. ..."
Nov 03, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Paul Damascene , Nov 3 2020 20:13 utc | 52

It is almost as if the Deep State vampire squid would prefer to bring the Republic that threatens it to 3rd world status in order to protect the oligarchy.


Down South , Nov 3 2020 19:43 utc | 43

Trump is going to win it. They only question is by how much.

The cities are not boarding up because they expect Trump to lose. They're boarding up because the left will not accept a Trump win under ANY circumstance.

Hillary Clinton has urged Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden to "not concede under any circumstances," in November's presidential election, as she believes the results are "going to drag out," because of mail-in voting.

https://www.google.co.za/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election/hillary-clinton-joe-biden-donald-trump-us-election-2020-a9688361.html%3famp


Rutherford82 , Nov 3 2020 20:14 utc | 53

@32 EoinW

Voting in the U.S. is manipulated at all levels. Fortunately the results probably don't matter due to the financial stranglehold on politics so, except for the those employed by the political candidates, it isn't worth losing sleep over. But if there was a functional government in place then it would be a big deal.

The truth is that the facade of the Democrats is falling while the Republican brand has not changed very much in a long time. Democratic support is an all time low and it is getting harder and harder to spin that brand to a society which is not stupid enough to believe everything anymore, especially in the face of two consecutive Presidential elections rife with internal DNC corruption.

The donors really just want the electorate divided, so any real vote manipulation is inconsequential in the scheme of things if all policy trends in the direction of finance and that sort of thing.

I predict you will see more scandal and spectacle over elections on television and every issue will have its emotional appeal magnified to try and bolster support for a feckless Left, while policy continues to feel like it was written by Count Dracula. Ultimately, violence will be stoked by news media in this subtle way until the "violent left" is used as an excuse to enact law and order policies aimed at shutting down protests of all types.

William Gruff , Nov 3 2020 21:02 utc | 71

JohnH @65

In 2016 the establishment knew their pick was going to win by a landslide. They had absolute certainty, so why bother with the extra work of cooking the tallies? After all, how could many of the American people possibly vote for the joke candidate who was reveling in playing the part of the Great Orange Ogre? It was inconceivable.

I am sure the establishment does have its contingency plans activated this time, but things are a little different now. Real discussions of election fraud (as opposed to voter fraud) were far outside the Overton Window back in 2016. Now the risk has been raised by the establishment itself, validating the possibility of widespread election tampering and making it part of the national discourse. Suspicions and evidence of tampering will be impossible to dismiss as "conspiracy theory" , so the establishment's freedom of action has been significantly constrained by their own accusations against Trump. As a consequence, they may be hesitant to doctor the vote counts as much as they would like.

dee , Nov 3 2020 21:05 utc | 72
Really funny to see people peddling their favorite pronostics on the eve of being probably proven dead wrong ...
winston2 , Nov 3 2020 21:06 utc | 73
70 He has been under their control from the chocolate cake surprise murder of that 24 year old Syrian radar
tech,no going back once you become a member of the war criminals club.
teri , Nov 3 2020 21:10 utc | 74
Wait, so Trump is the one who is sending armed poll watchers out to the states, stopping the post office mailings, already suing in court for ballots to be tossed out, actively telling supporters that any votes not counted by 8 pm tonight are invalid, telling his followers that Democrats are such "socialists and communists" that they are enemies of the state, and he is the one talking about having all his political opponents (and some of his own administration) arrested right after the election, but somehow it is the spineless Democrats who allow all this shit to go on without much complaint that are the ones trying to instigate a color revolution in the US.

Everyone is completely gonzo, inside out and upside down. And now even MoA.

William Gruff , Nov 3 2020 21:18 utc | 75
teri @74: "Russia! Russia! Russia!"

Come on, fess up, you've been chanting that for the last four years. Don't lie and say it ain't so.

The Dims have been gonzo since they turned on their TVs on the morning of November 9, 2016 to see how much Clinton had won by. They lost their minds then and have not yet found them again.

Paul Damascene , Nov 3 2020 21:19 utc | 76
Karlof1 @59
Thanks for giving this some thought.
Saracen's head , Nov 3 2020 21:29 utc | 77
It's very one sided to focus on Biden team's color revolution while denying Trump's. Both of them are evident. But, since media attention on Trump's had been overwhelming and quite muted on Biden's, let's count this as a venial sin...
Where this post is right is that it is the after struggle that matters. How far it goes and the damage it inflict on US' standing and power will reverberate everywhere.

In the end someone (not necessarily Trump or Biden) will win and will have to patch up this country on the rubble of the coming disaster. The question of how to reunite the USA after that, on what basis, for what purpose. For instance, during the election season, a lot of commentators argued that opposition to China was the only common ground in foreign policy.
China's patience at political, economic and tech attacks by the US is running to its end. The next "leader of the free world" will most likely have a very narrow window of opportunity to bring the relationship back to normalcy before China retaliates.

Old and Grumpy , Nov 3 2020 21:29 utc | 78
Democrats are so cute. First you had your divisive resistance in 2016, but the divisiveness wasn't your fault. Then you moved on to Russia, Russia, Russia. I get the Clinton machine and bipartisan cronies had unfinished business in the raping of post Soviet Russia. Damn that Putin for demanding legitimate tax payment. I always thought you guys loved taxing the rich. Guess not, but the bigger question are you getting any kickback from the global predatory crony system? Probably not. Now it is Trump won't leave. He will. Trump will suppress the vote. No he wants a big turnout. Here in PA our dear AG Josh Shapiro has said a couple days ago that Biden has the early votes to win the state. Kinda sounds like Josh plans on suppressing election day voting...no? Why can't you just win the vote with your positions? Why can't you accept when people don't like your positions? More importantly when did you decide to hate working class people, especially the white ones? They use to be your base. Everyone please stay safe from the deep state's planned insanity.
Paco , Nov 3 2020 21:38 utc | 79
Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 3 2020 21:02 utc | 71

High time to send observers, otherwise the international community shall not recognize the legitimacy of the results.... A US Guaidó is needed, then the MSM can tell the world that over fifty countries call him president,

JohnH , Nov 3 2020 21:38 utc | 80
Gruff@71: The problem is that you have a perfect situation: undercover services and a secret activity with no auditing possible in many cases. I'm sure that the intelligence services understand full well what the margin of error is, and know how to work within it in the places where it can tip the balance.

Heck, they might even be the secret owners of many of these voting machine manufacturers.

In addition, we know that some intelligence services went for Hillary in 2016–former CIA Director Mike Morrell helped kick off RussiaGate with an op-Ed in 2016. CIA Director John Brennan led the interagency charge against Trump's unproven collusion. Now Trump has vowed to make a lot of heads roll if he wins.

Lots of motivation and lots of secret tools, along with a perfect opportunity...

EoinW , Nov 3 2020 23:18 utc | 101

Old and Grumpy @ 78

They don't have any positions! They are the Democratic Party, therefore entitled to rule America forever. What support they have is from the Looney Left who, spoiled by winning every issue in the culture war, will throw a temper tantrum any time they don't get their way. Because they get there way practically all the time, they freak out if you just look at them the wrong way. No wonder we've had a 4 year meltdown since Trump appeared on the scene. And they'll double down on their hissy fit as we begin another 4 years.

Funny, I used to be left leaning. Certainly could find common ground with Liberals on many issues. Now all you get from the activists and the left wing media is a monotonous virtual signal.

librul , Nov 3 2020 23:25 utc | 103

Cheating has always happened in elections, by both sides. 2016 was unprecedented in the use of the intelligence agencies to thwart the Constitution. This election cycle the MSM has shown itself for what it is with it's large scale censorship and blackouts - totalitarian. Cheating has always happened in elections but this 2020 election cycle the Democrats will take cheating to another level - to the STRATOSPHERE.

Trump and his people saw it coming and so made attempts to thwart the NEW BEFORE SEEN OUTRAGEOUSLY MASSIVE cheating by Democrats and their allies.

Some see Trump's efforts as "distorting the electoral process" - what a laugh!!

WHAT A LAUGH !!!

[Nov 02, 2020] Archbishop Says Trump Is Only One To Save Humanity From 'The Great Reset'

Nov 02, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

He is deeply mistaken ;-)

The Italian archbishop best known for confronting Pope Francis over the Vatican's willful blindness to priests who abuse boys has written a letter in which he lashes out at the "global elite", prompting some to accuse him of sympathizing with the "QAnon" movement of conspiracy theorists.

The letter, penned by Archibishop Carlo Maria Vigano, formerly the Vatican's ambassador to the US, attacks a shadowy "global elite", that is plotting a "Great Reset" intended to undermine "God and humanity".

This same group, the archbishop argued, is also responsible for the lockdowns that have restricted movement and freedom around the globe, eliciting protests in many European capitals.

"The fate of the whole world is being threatened by a global conspiracy against God and humanity," Viganò wrote in the letter, which comes just days before the US election, which the archbishop wrote was of "epochal importance."

"No one, up until last February," Viganò writes, "would ever have thought that, in all of our cities, citizens would be arrested simply for wanting to walk down the street, to breathe, to want to keep their business open, to want to go to church on Sunday. Yet now it is happening all over the world, even in picture-postcard Italy that many Americans consider to be a small enchanted country, with its ancient monuments, its churches, its charming cities, its characteristic villages." Viganò adds: "And while the politicians are barricaded inside their palaces promulgating decrees like Persian satraps, businesses are failing, shops are closing, and people are prevented from living, traveling, working, and praying."

Working to protect the world from this group of elites seeking to recast society in a secular, totalitarian model, Viganò portrays President Trump as "the final garrison against the world dictatorship". Viganò cast Trump's opponent, Vice President Joe Biden, as "a person who is manipulated by the deep state."

Analysts who monitor "QAnon" conspiracy theories and their spread online warned the mainstream press that the letter had been widely discussed on various QAnon message boards, and had been disseminated in languages including Portuguese, Spanish, French, German and Italian, according to Yahoo News.

Over the summer, Trump tweeted an earlier letter penned by the archbishop, and encouraged his supporters to read it.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1270842639903006720&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Farchbishop-warns-trump-must-save-humanity-global-conspiracy-against-god&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890

In the past, Viagnò has accused Pope Francis of sweeping the child abuse crisis under the rug, and moving to protect homosexual priests, part of a "homosexual current" flowing through the Vatican.

Read the full letter below:

* * *

DONALD J. TRUMP

Sunday, October 25, 2020

Solemnity of Christ the King

Mr. President,

Allow me to address you at this hour in which the fate of the whole world is being threatened by a global conspiracy against God and humanity. I write to you as an Archbishop, as a Successor of the Apostles, as the former Apostolic Nuncio to the United States of America. I am writing to you in the midst of the silence of both civil and religious authorities. May you accept these words of mine as the "voice of one crying out in the desert" (Jn 1:23).

As I said when I wrote my letter to you in June, this historical moment sees the forces of Evil (read neoliberalism) aligned in a battle without quarter against the forces of Good; forces of Evil that appear powerful and organized as they oppose the children of Light, who are disoriented and disorganized, abandoned by their temporal and spiritual leaders .

Daily we sense the attacks multiplying of those who want to destroy the very basis of society: the natural family, respect for human life, love of country, freedom of education and business. We see heads of nations and religious leaders pandering to this suicide of Western culture and its Christian soul, while the fundamental rights of citizens and believers are denied in the name of a health emergency that is revealing itself more and more fully as instrumental to the establishment of an inhuman faceless tyranny.

A global plan called the Great Reset is underway. Its architect is a global élite that wants to subdue all of humanity, imposing coercive measures with which to drastically limit individual freedoms and those of entire populations. In several nations this plan has already been approved and financed; in others it is still in an early stage. Behind the world leaders who are the accomplices and executors of this infernal project, there are unscrupulous characters who finance the World Economic Forum and Event 201, promoting their agenda.

The purpose of the Great Reset is the imposition of a health dictatorship aiming at the imposition of liberticidal measures, hidden behind tempting promises of ensuring a universal income and cancelling individual debt. The price of these concessions from the International Monetary Fund will be the renunciation of private property and adherence to a program of vaccination against Covid-19 and Covid-21 promoted by Bill Gates with the collaboration of the main pharmaceutical groups. Beyond the enormous economic interests that motivate the promoters of the Great Reset, the imposition of the vaccination will be accompanied by the requirement of a health passport and a digital ID, with the consequent contact tracing of the population of the entire world. Those who do not accept these measures will be confined in detention camps or placed under house arrest, and all their assets will be confiscated.

Mr. President, I imagine that you are already aware that in some countries the Great Reset will be activated between the end of this year and the first trimester of 2021. For this purpose, further lockdowns are planned, which will be officially justified by a supposed second and third wave of the pandemic. You are well aware of the means that have been deployed to sow panic and legitimize draconian limitations on individual liberties, artfully provoking a world-wide economic crisis. In the intentions of its architects, this crisis will serve to make the recourse of nations to the Great Reset irreversible, thereby giving the final blow to a world whose existence and very memory they want to completely cancel. But this world, Mr. President, includes people, affections, institutions, faith, culture, traditions, and ideals: people and values that do not act like automatons, who do not obey like machines, because they are endowed with a soul and a heart, because they are tied together by a spiritual bond that draws its strength from above, from that God that our adversaries want to challenge, just as Lucifer did at the beginning of time with his "non serviam."

Many people – as we well know – are annoyed by this reference to the clash between Good and Evil and the use of "apocalyptic" overtones, which according to them exasperates spirits and sharpens divisions. It is not surprising that the enemy is angered at being discovered just when he believes he has reached the citadel he seeks to conquer undisturbed. What is surprising, however, is that there is no one to sound the alarm. The reaction of the deep state to those who denounce its plan is broken and incoherent, but understandable. Just when the complicity of the mainstream media had succeeded in making the transition to the New World Order almost painless and unnoticed, all sorts of deceptions, scandals and crimes are coming to light.

Until a few months ago, it was easy to smear as "conspiracy theorists" those who denounced these terrible plans, which we now see being carried out down to the smallest detail. No one, up until last February, would ever have thought that, in all of our cities, citizens would be arrested simply for wanting to walk down the street, to breathe, to want to keep their business open, to want to go to church on Sunday. Yet now it is happening all over the world, even in picture-postcard Italy that many Americans consider to be a small enchanted country, with its ancient monuments, its churches, its charming cities, its characteristic villages. And while the politicians are barricaded inside their palaces promulgating decrees like Persian satraps, businesses are failing, shops are closing, and people are prevented from living, traveling, working, and praying. The disastrous psychological consequences of this operation are already being seen, beginning with the suicides of desperate entrepreneurs and of our children, segregated from friends and classmates, told to follow their classes while sitting at home alone in front of a computer.

In Sacred Scripture, Saint Paul speaks to us of "the one who opposes" the manifestation of the mystery of iniquity, the kathèkon (2 Thess 2:6-7). In the religious sphere, this obstacle to evil is the Church, and in particular the papacy; in the political sphere, it is those who impede the establishment of the New World Order.

As is now clear, the one who occupies the Chair of Peter has betrayed his role from the very beginning in order to defend and promote the globalist ideology, supporting the agenda of the deep church, who chose him from its ranks.

Mr. President, you have clearly stated that you want to defend the nation – One Nation under God, fundamental liberties, and non-negotiable values that are denied and fought against today. It is you, dear President, who are "the one who opposes" the deep state, the final assault of the children of darkness.

For this reason, it is necessary that all people of good will be persuaded of the epochal importance of the imminent election: not so much for the sake of this or that political program, but because of the general inspiration of your action that best embodies – in this particular historical context – that world, our world, which they want to cancel by means of the lockdown. Your adversary is also our adversary: it is the Enemy of the human race, He who is "a murderer from the beginning" (Jn 8:44).

Around you are gathered with faith and courage those who consider you the final garrison against the world dictatorship. The alternative is to vote for a person who is manipulated by the deep state, gravely compromised by scandals and corruption, who will do to the United States what Jorge Mario Bergoglio is doing to the Church, Prime Minister Conte to Italy, President Macron to France, Prime Minster Sanchez to Spain, and so on. The blackmailable nature of Joe Biden – just like that of the prelates of the Vatican's "magic circle" – will expose him to be used unscrupulously, allowing illegitimate powers to interfere in both domestic politics as well as international balances. It is obvious that those who manipulate him already have someone worse than him ready, with whom they will replace him as soon as the opportunity arises.

And yet, in the midst of this bleak picture, this apparently unstoppable advance of the "Invisible Enemy," an element of hope emerges. The adversary does not know how to love, and it does not understand that it is not enough to assure a universal income or to cancel mortgages in order to subjugate the masses and convince them to be branded like cattle.

This people, which for too long has endured the abuses of a hateful and tyrannical power, is rediscovering that it has a soul; it is understanding that it is not willing to exchange its freedom for the homogenization and cancellation of its identity; it is beginning to understand the value of familial and social ties, of the bonds of faith and culture that unite honest people. This Great Reset is destined to fail because those who planned it do not understand that there are still people ready to take to the streets to defend their rights, to protect their loved ones, to give a future to their children and grandchildren. The leveling inhumanity of the globalist project will shatter miserably in the face of the firm and courageous opposition of the children of Light. The enemy has Satan on its side, He who only knows how to hate. But on our side, we have the Lord Almighty, the God of armies arrayed for battle, and the Most Holy Virgin, who will crush the head of the ancient Serpent. "If God is for us, who can be against us?" (Rom 8:31).

Mr. President, you are well aware that, in this crucial hour, the United States of America is considered the defending wall against which the war declared by the advocates of globalism has been unleashed. Place your trust in the Lord, strengthened by the words of the Apostle Paul: "I can do all things in Him who strengthens me" (Phil 4:13). To be an instrument of Divine Providence is a great responsibility, for which you will certainly receive all the graces of state that you need, since they are being fervently implored for you by the many people who support you with their prayers.

With this heavenly hope and the assurance of my prayer for you, for the First Lady, and for your collaborators, with all my heart I send you my blessing.

God bless the United States of America!

+ Carlo Maria Viganò

Tit. Archbishop of Ulpiana

Former Apostolic Nuncio to the United States of America



holgerdanske , 33 minutes ago

Here is a man who seems to get it spot on!

Richard Chesler , 3 minutes ago

What's his ZH alias?

Sparehead , 29 minutes ago

I'd lost all hope for the Catholic church, but this guy is stepping up.

Crash Overide , 25 minutes ago

First saw the letter here... just saying.

dogbert8 , 11 minutes ago

I was just telling my brother that it was likely the best thing that ever happened to me when my parents decided to move me from Catholic school to public school, and that I never was an alter boy when in Catholic school. Who knew the priests were diddling the alter boys at the cyclic rate?

Slaytheist , 32 minutes ago

I left the church long ago, for the obvious reasons. If Carlo Maria Viganò was Pope, and the kid touchers burnt at the stake, I'd consider going back.

sixsigma cygnusatratus , 29 minutes ago

Leftism is an inverse form of theocracy. Destroying the Church and replacing it with government is also part of the plan of globalism.

Nation States and Christianity represent a threat to globalists and leftists.

Cabreado , 36 minutes ago

I appreciate the Archbishop's efforts, but...

Trump can't "save" it; he can only throw a wrench in the velocity.
(plenty worthy of a vote, I'd add)

Saving anything -- that's on the People.
That's per Design.

[Nov 02, 2020] Today, neoliberal is used to refer to someone who bills themselves as a liberal but promotes ideas that actually inhibit individuals' well-being. In the 1930s, the neo- in neoliberal meant "new." But with this new meaning, the neo- prefix takes on a more specific connotation: "fake."

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Recently, the essayist George Scialabba described neoliberalism as "the extension of market dominance to all spheres of social life, fostered and enforced by the state," a rather nefarious-sounding proposition, including "investor rights agreements masquerading as 'free trade' and constraining the rights of governments to protect their own workers, environments, and currencies." ..."
"... Washington Monthly ..."
"... "neoliberal" quickly took on the heartless, Hooverian odor that "conservative" already had. ..."
"... checklist of neoliberal principles, which includes "the rule of the market," "cutting expenditures for social services," "deregulation," "privatization, and "eliminating the concept of 'the public good' or 'community.'" ..."
"... Between neoconservative and neoliberal, then, the neo prefix means not "new" but "disingenuous." ..."
"... The "neo" prefix now also carries a whiff of racist, in that both neoliberals and neoconservatives dissent from the liberal consensus on race issues, with neither in line with the idea that whites are stained by "privilege." ..."
May 30, 2017 | www.theatlantic.com

... Today the word is generally used as a critique from the left to refer to capitalism run amok. Recently, the essayist George Scialabba described neoliberalism as "the extension of market dominance to all spheres of social life, fostered and enforced by the state," a rather nefarious-sounding proposition, including "investor rights agreements masquerading as 'free trade' and constraining the rights of governments to protect their own workers, environments, and currencies."

... In the early '80s, Charles Peters, the editor of the Washington Monthly , helped usher in the new flavor of the word, as well as its reception from the left, with his aggressive "A Neo-Liberal's Manifesto." Those New Republic writers also brandished their self-appellation as neoliberals , in contrast to the mockingly termed paleoliberals . It furthered the sense of neoliberals as conservatives in sheep's clothing that they also opposed the basic liberal position on race issues -- Bill Clinton's welfare-reform policy, for example, was an outgrowth of neoliberal positions established in the 1980s, heartily espoused by, for example, The New Republic . Overtones, then, took effect -- for liberals, "neoliberal" quickly took on the heartless, Hooverian odor that "conservative" already had.

Since the Great Recession put the free market in an especially bad light, the new sense of neoliberal as a stain has settled in for good. Those familiar with the term through the writings of Lippmann, Hayek, or Friedman, once treated as "respectable" by many liberals, might now be confused by tart descriptions of neoliberalism such as the immigration activists Elizabeth Martinez and Arnoldo Garcia's flinty, contemptuous checklist of neoliberal principles, which includes "the rule of the market," "cutting expenditures for social services," "deregulation," "privatization, and "eliminating the concept of 'the public good' or 'community.'"

...Today, neoliberal is used to refer to someone who bills themselves as a liberal but promotes ideas that actually inhibit individuals' well-being. In the 1930s, the neo- in neoliberal meant "new." But with this new meaning, the neo- prefix takes on a more specific connotation: "fake."

... ... ...

Between neoconservative and neoliberal, then, the neo prefix means not "new" but "disingenuous." The neocon cloaks right-wing barbarism to make it seem less threatening; the neoliberal poses as a liberal while actually being a right-winger. The "neo" prefix now also carries a whiff of racist, in that both neoliberals and neoconservatives dissent from the liberal consensus on race issues, with neither in line with the idea that whites are stained by "privilege." From "new" to a moralist sneer -- this is how meanings evolve. The original ideological positions survive, and impose their meanings on the words created to move beyond them.

JOHN MCWHORTER is a contributing writer at The Atlantic. He teaches linguistics at Columbia University, hosts the podcast Lexicon Valley , and is the author, most recently, of Words on the Move .

[Nov 01, 2020] The global neoliberal elites see politics as such, and any mode of economy other than that which is strictly regimented and controlled by the US government, the oligopoly MNCs and a handful of globalization entities, as antiquated obstructions to its power and profit.

Notable quotes:
"... From the point of view of the Earth and especially humanity it's essential to obstruct the globalist-technocratic elite as much as possible. ..."
"... So it follows that anything which sustains and multiplies the number of obstacles any globalist actor has to traverse is a good thing, while anything that streamlines, unifies, renders more "efficient" is bad. This includes the character of US foreign policy. Although it will remain aggressively imperialist for as long as this government exists, it makes a significant difference how disciplined and superficially "kinder and gentler" the facade is, as opposed to how wayward, openly brutish and gratuitously insulting to everyone in the world. ..."
"... Trump's election was a monkey-wrench in the works, and although the elites were able to make lemonade by turning anti-Trumpism into an organizing principle among the bewildered masses, they certainly want to return to having a reliable, fully pliant figurehead in the White House. With Biden/Harris they'd get the best of both worlds - they either get the obedient Biden or the even more aggressively obedient Harris who would be all the more controllable since she has no political support of her own and wouldn't have been elected even if Biden became president and then had to be retired. ..."
Nov 01, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Russ , Nov 1 2020 7:53 utc | 123

The globalist "Great Reset" wants to overcome the diverse rising obstacles to globalism's perpetuation, especially the intensifying centrifugal political and economic forces which directly oppose it or which hinder it. The global elites see politics as such, and any mode of economy other than that which is strictly regimented and controlled by the US government, the oligopoly MNCs and a handful of globalization entities, as antiquated obstructions to its power and profit. From the point of view of the Earth and especially humanity it's essential to obstruct the globalist-technocratic elite as much as possible.

So it follows that anything which sustains and multiplies the number of obstacles any globalist actor has to traverse is a good thing, while anything that streamlines, unifies, renders more "efficient" is bad. This includes the character of US foreign policy. Although it will remain aggressively imperialist for as long as this government exists, it makes a significant difference how disciplined and superficially "kinder and gentler" the facade is, as opposed to how wayward, openly brutish and gratuitously insulting to everyone in the world.

Real anti-globalists always have known this, and the need never has been more critical than now. From this point of view Trump is vastly preferable. The across-the-board hatred of the elites for him is the best recommendation.

Trump's election was a monkey-wrench in the works, and although the elites were able to make lemonade by turning anti-Trumpism into an organizing principle among the bewildered masses, they certainly want to return to having a reliable, fully pliant figurehead in the White House. With Biden/Harris they'd get the best of both worlds - they either get the obedient Biden or the even more aggressively obedient Harris who would be all the more controllable since she has no political support of her own and wouldn't have been elected even if Biden became president and then had to be retired.

So it follows that gratuitous US imperial belligerence is in fact being "creatively destructive", to use one of capitalism's own religious terms, in spite of the US empire's own long-run goals and interests. The worst thing would be for US foreign policy to become less Kaiser and more Bismarck. The more chaos the better. It may seem more painful in the short run than running home to hide under adult mama's skirts the way almost all former anti-imperialists, anti-globalists, "radicals", "leftists" have done, since they all were frauds all along who can't take the slightest pain or hardship and would rather die than do any movement-building work, but for the long run good of the Earth including humanity there's no other option.

[Oct 30, 2020] Chile's referendum rejecting the Pinochet-era constitution shows that the world is entering a new, anti-neoliberal age by Bradley Blankenship

Oct 07, 2020 | www.rt.com

The result, 78 percent in favor of a new constitution, is a damning indictment on the neoliberal system adopted under the right-wing junta in 1973 that was used as a launch pad for similar programs around the world.

On Sunday , almost exactly a year after protests over inequality erupted in the country, Chileans voted in a landslide to adopt a new constitution that will ditch the one enshrined in 1980 under the military dictatorship of General Augusto Pinochet.

As Robert Packenham and William Ratliff wrote in a 2007 Hoover Institution paper , "The first country in the world to make that momentous break with the past – away from socialism and extreme state capitalism toward more market-oriented structures and policies – was not Deng Xiaoping's China or Margaret Thatcher's Britain in the late 1970s, Ronald Reagan's United States in 1981, or any other country in Latin America or elsewhere. It was Pinochet's Chile in 1975."

ALSO ON RT.COM The coup didn't take: Socialists' victory in Bolivia shows more unity than foreign meddlers would like

This system was adopted in plain defiance of the will of Chilean voters who democratically elected socialist leader Salvador Allende as president in 1970. Washington, which had long been subverting Allende's candidacy, wanted Chile to remain under its thumb and not pursue an independent development path or foreign policy direction, which an Allende presidency guaranteed.

During his first year in office, real wages increased dramatically as his administration began to nationalize key industries. However, the Chilean economy was hit hard by aggressive US sanctions imposed by former President Richard Nixon. Inflation hit an annual rate of 150 percent in 1973, which added serious internal pressure to Allende's government and set the stage for the CIA-backed coup in September of that year that installed General Pinochet – the commander-in-chief of the military – into power.

It was the 'Chicago Boys', a group of Chilean graduate students who were invited to study at University of Chicago in the 1950s directly under neoliberal mastermind Milton Friedman and his protege, Arnold Harberger, that crafted Pinochet's economic policies, exacerbating inequality like never before seen. It was they that helped create the Pinochet-era constitution in 1980.

This era of Chile's history was a social experiment for the theoretical work of Friedman and his supply-side contemporaries that promised to create sustained economic growth and "trickle down" this newly created wealth to workers.

Scholars had disagreed over the success of these neoliberal policies to achieve these goals, with some crediting Chile's relative economic success in Latin America to these neoliberal policies and others citing the deep cleavages in society exacerbated by these policies.

The self-evident failure of these policies came in 1982 when the gravest economic crisis the country faced since the Great Depression caused GDP to fall 14.3 percent and unemployment soared to 23.7 percent . While it is attributed by some to the Latin American debt crisis of the 1980s, Chile's disproportionate backslide during this time was unique amongst its peers and its radical shock therapy was no doubt to blame.

Even after the crisis subsided and the country's growth began to outpace its peers in what Milton Friedman called the "Miracle of Chile," this growth was achieved due to a less radical version of the neoliberal program in a sort of mixed system during the center-left Concertación governments between 1990 and 2010.

While economic growth has accelerated and inequality has decreased to some extent, Chile remains one of Latin America's most unequal societies and prevailing policy does little to address it, not in the way Chileans obviously want. Poverty still remains, the general cost of living is rising and top earners continue to pull in the lion's share of newly generated wealth. Chile's inequality issues, as voters understand, are systemic.

Even by Friedman's own analysis of the country's history his professed policies were indeed a failure because of their rejection in Sunday's referendum. He lauded the economic program of Pinochet's regime, though claimed to have less admiration for its political repression. It was the freeing of Chile's markets and the reorientation of the economy toward privatization that allowed democracy to flourish when Pinochet exited in 1988 after failing to win a referendum on the extension of his presidency, according to him.

Yet it is now democracy, which had doubtless already existed in Chile before Pinochet came to power, that has undone the skeleton of the neoliberal political program. To be sure, reactionary elements exist within Chile and the exact details of a new constitution are yet to be seen. It is foreseeable that these elements could advance a similar or even more radical neoliberal program in a new constitution, but the results of Sunday's referendum speak to the success of the social movement that pushed for the vote in the first place – the movement against neoliberalism. They are the ones poised to lead on the new proposals.

ALSO ON RT.COM WATCH Chileans celebrate as voting signals end of Pinochet-era constitution

The worldwide movement against neoliberalism has actually won two recent victories in Latin America: Sunday's constitutional referendum and the victory of Luis Arce and the Movement for Socialism (MAS) in Bolivia's election on October 18. The former represents the wholesale rejection of neoliberalism while the latter represents the fact that replicating the 1973 coup that created the conditions for neoliberalism to first enter the material world cannot happen again. The similarities between what the US-backed interim regime of Jeanine Añez tried to make happen in Bolivia this year and what the Pinochet regime did are extensive.

Neoliberalism has remained the world's preeminent economic and ideological paradigm since at least the 1970s, but as one popular Chilean protest slogan states, "Neoliberalism was born in Chile and will die in Chile." What happens in the adoption of a new Chilean constitution may be a useful barometer for what may be the world's next ideological realignment, just as it was in 1980.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Bradley Blankenship

Bradley Blankenship, Prague-based American journalist, political analyst and freelance reporter. He has a syndicated column at China Global Television Network where he writes about politics in the United States, Latin America, the Middle East and Europe, he's also a freelance reporter for international news agencies including Xinhua News Agency. Follow him on Twitter @BradBlank_ ECO SOLUTIONS 1 day ago The author is right when he describes that Chile was used as a pilot country to fine-tune neoliberal model. I also believe that his assessment that Chilean society rejected as a whole this imposed model via this referendum results is correct. And also I think that he is right in extrapolating the Chilean experience on what will happen soon in other countries where the neoliberal model has been imposed by coercion. I would add that Chile was also used as a pilot country to test the privatization model that benefits big Corporations at the detriment of sovereignty, civil rights and national resources. Furthermore, Chile was also used as a pilot to test US' foreign meddling CIA's coverted operations in partnership with its key Corporations, for toppling sovereign countries with practices that later became so common in US' foreign policy, including also military direct intervention/occupation.
shadow1369 ECO SOLUTIONS 12 hours ago The unholy alliance of US regimes and big business has been operating since the 19thC. Reply 1 Sergio Weigel ECO SOLUTIONS 1 day ago Everything right, except for the latter. They had gained that kind of experience already in Iran 1953, and many other ways elsewhere. Besides, they learned this tactic from the British. fazul 1 day ago "While economic growth has accelerated and inequality has decreased to some extent, Chile remains one of Latin America's most unequal societies and prevailing policy does little to address it," Those are the little things that show how people are conditioned to accept false narratives as given. False narrative: Inequality has to be decreased (by using socialism or socialist policies) Truth: Ineqality is not inherently wrong. People are not born equal and never will be. Some people are tall and dull. Other people are short, bald and smart. Some skills are much better paid than other skills. Not everyone is born a diamond. However currently inequality is created by government interventions: too big to fail, government bailouts, covid lockdowns. We dont need a government to "address ineqality", we need a government that doesnt create it anylonger. Reply 13 7 Tango fazul 9 hours ago It's not inequality per se, but the degree of inequality which is disproportional. There used to be a 10x or even 20x salary differential between the highest paid and the lowest paid person in a company. Over time, that has skyrocketed to 300x or even 3000x. Also, the market for labour gives distorted price signals because the price of capital is distorted. There is no reason for a senior trader at a bank at a too big to fail bank to be paid 100x what a schoolteacher or nurse is paid simply because the bank is showered with money from a central bank. Jai Nepal 18 hours ago Pinochet was exited when even his most ardent supporters in USA and CIA, could not keep the mass murders and torture under wraps , forced adoptions of thousands of orphans created by disappearance of political opponents and academics . This same methods used against Allende now being used against Maduro Government in Venezuela , The American state will never learn. Rob M 1 day ago The US coup in Chile in 1973 happened on Sept. 11. Ironic or planned? AlvaroMarfan827 1 day ago Yes. But Concertación was not center-left but outright right with the Chilean Christian-Democrats exerting dominance over the whole political spectrum, with the Socialists faux-left à la Europe headed by Camilo Escalona dancing to the tune. Reply 5 lectrodectus 20 hours ago An excellent summation of Chile, didn't Bush Jr describe Chile as being an example of an " IDEAL DEMOCRACY" (with the usual Smirk on his face) when he was giving an address at some elite business dinner ... he made another remark to his wealthy audience something similar to.... here we are.... The Haves and Have More....... Murph_718 1 day ago It looks like the world is rejecting the neo liberal/neo fascist one world agenda of the IMF,and World Bank.Even in the heart of the US,as we speak,the majority of people are taking a stand against the white supremacist,imperialist agenda of the Evil Empire. Ironmanx 1 day ago Neolibernatzi shadow1369 12 hours ago Seems to me that a number of Latin American states are suffering from a severe lack of cookies. Time for the CIA to step up. But of course we know that the days of US tyranny are numbered, for every mole they whack, four more pop up to take its place. Thinking about Adolf Bolton and Herman Pompeo frothing with impotent outrage fills me with delight. With any luck both will suffer lethal strokes.

[Oct 30, 2020] Chile's referendum rejecting the Pinochet-era constitution shows that the world is entering a new, anti-neoliberal age -- RT Op-ed

Oct 30, 2020 | www.rt.com

Chile's referendum rejecting the Pinochet-era constitution shows that the world is entering a new, anti-neoliberal age Bradley Blankenship Bradley Blankenship

Bradley Blankenship, Prague-based American journalist, political analyst and freelance reporter. He has a syndicated column at China Global Television Network where he writes about politics in the United States, Latin America, the Middle East and Europe, he's also a freelance reporter for international news agencies including Xinhua News Agency. Follow him on Twitter @BradBlank_ 27 Oct, 2020 19:53 Get short URL Chile's referendum rejecting the Pinochet-era constitution shows that the world is entering a new, anti-neoliberal age Demonstrators supporting the reform of the Chilean constitution celebrate while waiting for the referendum official results at Plaza Italia square in Santiago on October 25, 2020. © AFP 84 Follow RT on RT The result, 78 percent in favor of a new constitution, is a damning indictment on the neoliberal system adopted under the right-wing junta in 1973 that was used as a launch pad for similar programs around the world.

On Sunday , almost exactly a year after protests over inequality erupted in the country, Chileans voted in a landslide to adopt a new constitution that will ditch the one enshrined in 1980 under the military dictatorship of General Augusto Pinochet.

As Robert Packenham and William Ratliff wrote in a 2007 Hoover Institution paper , "The first country in the world to make that momentous break with the past – away from socialism and extreme state capitalism toward more market-oriented structures and policies – was not Deng Xiaoping's China or Margaret Thatcher's Britain in the late 1970s, Ronald Reagan's United States in 1981, or any other country in Latin America or elsewhere. It was Pinochet's Chile in 1975."

ALSO ON RT.COM The coup didn't take: Socialists' victory in Bolivia shows more unity than foreign meddlers would like

This system was adopted in plain defiance of the will of Chilean voters who democratically elected socialist leader Salvador Allende as president in 1970. Washington, which had long been subverting Allende's candidacy, wanted Chile to remain under its thumb and not pursue an independent development path or foreign policy direction, which an Allende presidency guaranteed.

During his first year in office, real wages increased dramatically as his administration began to nationalize key industries. However, the Chilean economy was hit hard by aggressive US sanctions imposed by former President Richard Nixon. Inflation hit an annual rate of 150 percent in 1973, which added serious internal pressure to Allende's government and set the stage for the CIA-backed coup in September of that year that installed General Pinochet – the commander-in-chief of the military – into power.

It was the 'Chicago Boys', a group of Chilean graduate students who were invited to study at University of Chicago in the 1950s directly under neoliberal mastermind Milton Friedman and his protege, Arnold Harberger, that crafted Pinochet's economic policies, exacerbating inequality like never before seen. It was they that helped create the Pinochet-era constitution in 1980.

This era of Chile's history was a social experiment for the theoretical work of Friedman and his supply-side contemporaries that promised to create sustained economic growth and "trickle down" this newly created wealth to workers.

Scholars had disagreed over the success of these neoliberal policies to achieve these goals, with some crediting Chile's relative economic success in Latin America to these neoliberal policies and others citing the deep cleavages in society exacerbated by these policies.

The self-evident failure of these policies came in 1982 when the gravest economic crisis the country faced since the Great Depression caused GDP to fall 14.3 percent and unemployment soared to 23.7 percent . While it is attributed by some to the Latin American debt crisis of the 1980s, Chile's disproportionate backslide during this time was unique amongst its peers and its radical shock therapy was no doubt to blame.

Even after the crisis subsided and the country's growth began to outpace its peers in what Milton Friedman called the "Miracle of Chile," this growth was achieved due to a less radical version of the neoliberal program in a sort of mixed system during the center-left Concertación governments between 1990 and 2010.

While economic growth has accelerated and inequality has decreased to some extent, Chile remains one of Latin America's most unequal societies and prevailing policy does little to address it, not in the way Chileans obviously want. Poverty still remains, the general cost of living is rising and top earners continue to pull in the lion's share of newly generated wealth. Chile's inequality issues, as voters understand, are systemic.

Even by Friedman's own analysis of the country's history his professed policies were indeed a failure because of their rejection in Sunday's referendum. He lauded the economic program of Pinochet's regime, though claimed to have less admiration for its political repression. It was the freeing of Chile's markets and the reorientation of the economy toward privatization that allowed democracy to flourish when Pinochet exited in 1988 after failing to win a referendum on the extension of his presidency, according to him.

Yet it is now democracy, which had doubtless already existed in Chile before Pinochet came to power, that has undone the skeleton of the neoliberal political program. To be sure, reactionary elements exist within Chile and the exact details of a new constitution are yet to be seen. It is foreseeable that these elements could advance a similar or even more radical neoliberal program in a new constitution, but the results of Sunday's referendum speak to the success of the social movement that pushed for the vote in the first place – the movement against neoliberalism. They are the ones poised to lead on the new proposals.

ALSO ON RT.COM WATCH Chileans celebrate as voting signals end of Pinochet-era constitution

The worldwide movement against neoliberalism has actually won two recent victories in Latin America: Sunday's constitutional referendum and the victory of Luis Arce and the Movement for Socialism (MAS) in Bolivia's election on October 18. The former represents the wholesale rejection of neoliberalism while the latter represents the fact that replicating the 1973 coup that created the conditions for neoliberalism to first enter the material world cannot happen again. The similarities between what the US-backed interim regime of Jeanine Añez tried to make happen in Bolivia this year and what the Pinochet regime did are extensive.

Neoliberalism has remained the world's preeminent economic and ideological paradigm since at least the 1970s, but as one popular Chilean protest slogan states, "Neoliberalism was born in Chile and will die in Chile." What happens in the adoption of a new Chilean constitution may be a useful barometer for what may be the world's next ideological realignment, just as it was in 1980.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

ECO SOLUTIONS 1 day ago The author is right when he describes that Chile was used as a pilot country to fine-tune neoliberal model. I also believe that his assessment that Chilean society rejected as a whole this imposed model via this referendum results is correct. And also I think that he is right in extrapolating the Chilean experience on what will happen soon in other countries where the neoliberal model has been imposed by coercion. I would add that Chile was also used as a pilot country to test the privatization model that benefits big Corporations at the detriment of sovereignty, civil rights and national resources. Furthermore, Chile was also used as a pilot to test US' foreign meddling CIA's coverted operations in partnership with its key Corporations, for toppling sovereign countries with practices that later became so common in US' foreign policy, including also military direct intervention/occupation.
shadow1369 ECO SOLUTIONS 12 hours ago The unholy alliance of US regimes and big business has been operating since the 19thC. Reply 1 Sergio Weigel ECO SOLUTIONS 1 day ago Everything right, except for the latter. They had gained that kind of experience already in Iran 1953, and many other ways elsewhere. Besides, they learned this tactic from the British. fazul 1 day ago "While economic growth has accelerated and inequality has decreased to some extent, Chile remains one of Latin America's most unequal societies and prevailing policy does little to address it," Those are the little things that show how people are conditioned to accept false narratives as given. False narrative: Inequality has to be decreased (by using socialism or socialist policies) Truth: Ineqality is not inherently wrong. People are not born equal and never will be. Some people are tall and dull. Other people are short, bald and smart. Some skills are much better paid than other skills. Not everyone is born a diamond. However currently inequality is created by government interventions: too big to fail, government bailouts, covid lockdowns. We dont need a government to "address ineqality", we need a government that doesnt create it anylonger. Reply 13 7 Tango fazul 9 hours ago It's not inequality per se, but the degree of inequality which is disproportional. There used to be a 10x or even 20x salary differential between the highest paid and the lowest paid person in a company. Over time, that has skyrocketed to 300x or even 3000x. Also, the market for labour gives distorted price signals because the price of capital is distorted. There is no reason for a senior trader at a bank at a too big to fail bank to be paid 100x what a schoolteacher or nurse is paid simply because the bank is showered with money from a central bank. Jai Nepal 18 hours ago Pinochet was exited when even his most ardent supporters in USA and CIA, could not keep the mass murders and torture under wraps , forced adoptions of thousands of orphans created by disappearance of political opponents and academics . This same methods used against Allende now being used against Maduro Government in Venezuela , The American state will never learn. Rob M 1 day ago The US coup in Chile in 1973 happened on Sept. 11. Ironic or planned? AlvaroMarfan827 1 day ago Yes. But Concertación was not center-left but outright right with the Chilean Christian-Democrats exerting dominance over the whole political spectrum, with the Socialists faux-left à la Europe headed by Camilo Escalona dancing to the tune. Reply 5 lectrodectus 20 hours ago An excellent summation of Chile, didn't Bush Jr describe Chile as being an example of an " IDEAL DEMOCRACY" (with the usual Smirk on his face) when he was giving an address at some elite business dinner ... he made another remark to his wealthy audience something similar to.... here we are.... The Haves and Have More....... Murph_718 1 day ago It looks like the world is rejecting the neo liberal/neo fascist one world agenda of the IMF,and World Bank.Even in the heart of the US,as we speak,the majority of people are taking a stand against the white supremacist,imperialist agenda of the Evil Empire. Ironmanx 1 day ago Neolibernatzi shadow1369 12 hours ago Seems to me that a number of Latin American states are suffering from a severe lack of cookies. Time for the CIA to step up. But of course we know that the days of US tyranny are numbered, for every mole they whack, four more pop up to take its place. Thinking about Adolf Bolton and Herman Pompeo frothing with impotent outrage fills me with delight. With any luck both will suffer lethal strokes.

[Oct 26, 2020] The Pope wanted to convey some very precise words about the risks involved in an excess of political and ideological polarization

Oct 26, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

H.Schmatz , Oct 25 2020 13:26 utc | 70

Reported by a center-conservative newspaper, curiously, in yesterady´s hearing with Spanish President, Pedro Sánchez, Pope Francis made a similar analysis to this one from the left, on the similarities of this moment with Weimar, and the need to low the level of political twitching, which only benefits those who seek the destruction of nation states. He referred also to what country, nation and homeland would mean ( and in this, one would say he is on the same line as Putin...)

What the Holy See could know that we do not...?

Francis talks about Weimar

H.Schmatz , Oct 25 2020 16:44 utc | 82

@

[Oct 25, 2020] Whose Great Reset- The Fight For Our Future Technocracy Vs. The Republic -

Oct 25, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Whose Great Reset? The Fight For Our Future – Technocracy Vs. The Republic by Tyler Durden Fri, 10/23/2020 - 23:40 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Authored by Joaquin Flores via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

People living in the western world are in the greatest fight for the future of pluralist and republican forms of governance since the rise and fall of fascism 75 years ago. As then, society had to be built up from a war. Today's war has been an economic war of the oligarchs against the republic, and it increasingly appears that the coronavirus pandemic is being used, on the political end, as a massive coup against pluralist society. We are being confronted with this 'great reset', alluding to post-war construction. But for a whole generation people have already been living under an ever-increasing austerity regimen. This is a regimen that can only be explained as some toxic combination of the systemic inevitabilities of a consumer-driven society on the foundation of planned obsolescence, and the never-ending greed and lust for power which defines whole sections of the sociopathic oligarchy.

Recently we saw UK PM Boris Johnson stand in front of a 'Build Back Better' sign, speaking to the need for a 'great reset'. 'Build Back Better' happens to be Joe Biden's campaign slogan, which raises many other questions for another time. But, to what extent are the handlers who manage 'Joe Biden', and those managing 'Boris Johnson' working the same script?

The more pertinent question is to ask: in whose interest is this 'great reset' being carried out ?

Certainly it cannot be left to those who have built their careers upon the theory and practice of austerity. Certainly it cannot be left to those who have built their careers as puppets of a morally decaying oligarchy.

What Johnson calls the 'Great Reset', Biden calls the 'Biden Plan for a Clean Energy Revolution & Environmental Justice'. Certainly the coming economy cannot be left to Boris Johnson or Joe Biden.

How is it that now Boris Johnson speaks publicly of a 'great reset', whereas just months ago when those outside the ruling media paradigm used this phrase, it was censured by corporate Atlanticist media as being conspiratorial in nature? This is an excellent question posed by Neil Clark.

And so we have by now all read numerous articles in the official press talking about how economic life after coronavirus will never be the same as it was before. Atlanticist press has even run numerous opinion articles talking about how this may cut against globalization – a fair point, and one which many thinking people by and large agree with.

Yet they have set aside any substantive discussion about what exists in lieu of globalization, and what the economy looks like in various parts of the world if it is not globalized. We have consistently spoken of multipolarity, a term that in decades past was utilized frequently in western vectors, in the sphere of geopolitics and international relations. Now there is some strange ban on the term, and so we are now bereft of a language with which to have an honest discussion about the post-globalization paradigm.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890 Technocracy or Pluralism? A Fight Against the Newspeak

Until now, we have only been given a steady diet of distancing, of lockdown provisions, quarantining, track and trace, and we have forgotten entirely about the fact that all of this was only supposed to be a two or three-week long exercise to flatten the curve. And now the truth is emerging that what is being planned is a new proposal being disguised as a 'great reset'.

One of the large problems in discussing the 'great reset' is that a false dichotomy has arisen around it. Either one wants things to be how they were before and without changes to the status quo, or they promote this 'great reset'. Unfortunately, Clark in his RT article falls into this false dichotomy, and perhaps only for expedience sake in discussing some other point, he does not challenge the inherent problems in 'how things were before'. In truth, we would be surprised if Clark did not appreciate what we are going to propose.

What we propose is that we must oppose their ' new normal ' 'great reset', while also understanding the inherent problems of what had been normalized up until Covid.

The way things were before was also a tremendous problem, and yet now it only seems better in comparison to the police state-like provisions we've encountered throughout the course of politicizing the spectre of this 'pandemic'.

Oddly this politicization is based in positive cases (and not hospitalizations) ostensibly linked to the novel coronavirus. Strangely, we are told to 'listen to the consensus science' even as these very institutions consist of politically arrived at appointments. Certainly science is not about consensus, but about challenging assumptions, repeatability and a lively debate between disagreeing scientists with relatively equal qualifications. As Kuhn explains in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions , science is always evolving, and by definition potentially overturns consensus paradigms. This is a debate we have not seen, and this fact by itself represents an illiberal cancer growing on an already defective pluralist society – ironically, all flying under the banner of liberalism.

Decisions that a society decides to take should be driven by reason, prudence, and justice. What is or isn't scientific plays a role, but cannot be the deciding factor. Science clearly says that we may eliminate cross-walk injuries by banning street-crossing or by banning driving, but what policy makers must do is account for the need to have both cars and crossing the street, in deciding how – if it's even possible – to reduce or eliminate such injuries. Science is only one part of this equation.

But isn't economics also a science? Is sociology not a science? What about psychology and psychiatry – as in the known effects of social isolation and, say, suicide prevention? What about housing and urban planning? The great sociologist Emile Durkheim explains how these are sciences – they adopt and apply the scientific method in their work. Universities have been awarding doctoral degrees in these sciences for a century or more, do these expert opinions not count when managing a public catastrophe?

It is, and always has been, a political and politicized position to listen to some scientists, and not others.

And so what of our term 'reset'? Indeed, it is itself misleading, and we would propose it is intentionally so if we understand Orwell's critique of the use of language – newspeak – in technocratic oligarchies.

A 'reset' textually refers to going back to something once known, erasing defects or contradictions which arose along the way, which carries with it the familiar, and something we had previously all agreed to. A 'reset' by definition means going back to how things were before – not just recently, but before at some point farther back. Its definition is literally contrary to how Boris Johnson means it in his shocking public statement at the start of October.

The term 'reset' was therefore arrived with extraordinary planning and thoughtfulness, with the intent to persuade [manipulate] the public. It simultaneously straddles two unique concepts, and bundles them together at once into a single term in a manner that reduces nuance and complexity and therefore also reduces thinking. It does so while appealing to the implicit notion of the term that it relates to a past consensus agreement.

If understood as we are told to understand it, we must hold two mutually contradictory notions at the same time – we are incongruously told that this reset must effectively restore society to how it was at some point before because things can never be how they were at any time before. Only within the paradigm of this vicious newspeak could anything ever have the public thinking that such a textual construction makes any bit of sense.

What are Our Real Options? Whose Reset?

Those who understand that this 'reset' is not a reset but rather a whole new proposal on the entire organization of society, but being done through oligarchical methods and without the sort of mandate required in a society governed by laws and not men, are – as we have said – reluctant to admit that a great change is indeed necessary.

Rather, we must understand that the underlying catastrophic economic mechanisms which are forcing this great change exist independently of the coronavirus, and exist independently of the particular changes which the oligarchs promoting their version of a 'reset' (read: new proposals ) would like to see.

You see, the people and the oligarchs are locked into a single system together. In the long-term, it seems as if the oligarchs are looking for solutions to change that fact, and effect a final solution that grants them an entirely break-away civilization. But at this moment, that is not the case. Yet this system cannot carry forward as it has been, and the Coronavirus presents a reason at once both mysterious in its timing and also profound in its implications, to push forward a new proposal.

We believe that technology is quickly arriving at a point where the vast majority of human beings will be considered redundant. If the technocracy wants to create a walled civilization, and leave the rest of humanity to manage their own lives along some agrarian, mediaeval mode of production, there may indeed be benefits to those who live along agrarian lines. But based in what we know about psychopathy, and the tendency of that among those who govern, such an amicable solution is likely not in the cards.

That is why the anti-lockdown protests are so critically important to endorse. This is precisely because the lockdown measures are used to ban mass public demonstrations, a critical part of pushing public policy in the direction of the interests of the general public. A whole part of the left has been compromised, and rolled out to fight imaginary fascists, by which they mean anyone with conventional social views which predate May of 1968. All the while the actual plutocrats unleash a new system of oligarchical control which, for most, has not been hitherto contemplated except by relatively obscure political scientists, futurists, and science fiction authors.

Certainly the consumerist economic system (sometimes called 'capitalism' by the left), which is based in both globalized supply chains but also planned obsolescence, is no longer feasible. In truth, this relied upon a third-world to be a source of both raw materials and cheaper labor. The plus here is that this 'developing world' has largely now developed. But that means they will be needing their own raw materials, and their own middle-classes have driven up their own cost of labor. Globalization was based in some world before development, where the real dynamic is best explained as imperialism , and so it makes sense that this system is a relic of the past, and indeed ought to be.

It increasingly appears that the 'Coronavirus pandemic', was secondary to the foregone economic crisis which we were told accompanied it. Rather, it seems that the former came into being to explain-away the latter.

Another world is possible, but it is one which citizens fight for. In the U.S., England, Scotland, Ireland, and Germany, there have already been rather large anti-lockdown demonstrations. These, as we have explained, are not just against lockdown but are positively pushing to assert the right to public and political association, to public and political speech, and the redressing of grievances. This is a fundamental right for citizens in any republic where there is any sort of check on the oligarchy.

We have written on the kind of world that is possible, in our piece from April 2020 titled: " Coronavirus Shutdown: The End of Globalization and Planned Obsolescence – Enter Multipolarity ". That lays out what is possible, and what the problems of pre-corona system were, in economic terms more than political. Here we discuss the problems of globalization-based supply chain security in a multipolar world, and the larger problem of planned obsolescence, especially in light of 3D printing, automation, and the internet of things.

We posed the philosophical question as to whether it is justified to have a goods-production system based upon both the guaranteed re-sale of the same type of goods due to planned obsolescence and the 'work guarantees' that came with it. In short, do we live to work or to we work to live? And with the 4th industrial revolution looming, we posed the question of what will happen after human workers are no longer required.

Pluralist society is the compromise outcome of a ceasefire in the class war between the oligarchy and the various other classes that compromise the people, at large. Largely idealized and romantic ideas that form the basis of the liberal-democratic ideology (as well as classical fascism) are used to explain how it is the oligarchy that is so very committed to that arrangement of pluralism, and that this very arrangement is the product of their benevolence, and not the truth: that it was the fight put up by common people to fight for a more just future. No doubt there have been benevolent oligarchs who really believed in the liberal ideology, of which fascism is one of its more radical products. But the view that the class struggle can be acculturated or legislated into non-existence is similar to believing that the law of gravity can be ruled unlawful in a court.

Perhaps we have forgotten what it takes, and perhaps things just have not gotten bad enough. Decreases in testosterone levels in the population may be leading to a dangerous moment where vigorous defiance to injustice is much less possible. Critical now is to avoid any artificial means to opiate ourselves into thinking things are better than they are, whether by way of anti-depressants or other self-medication. Only with a clear assessment of the real situation on the ground can we forge the necessary strategy.

The great political crisis now is that a pandemic is being used to justify an end-run around constitutional rights, an end-run around pluralist society, and so the vehicle – the mechanism – that the general public might use to fight for their version of a 'reset' is on the verge of disappearing.

In many ways this means that now is the final moment. We ask – whose great reset, ours or theirs?

[Oct 21, 2020] Like rise of the Praetorian Guard in Rome, the rise of political role of US intelligence agencies and an ominous sign by cynthia chung

Notable quotes:
"... When the matter of truth is depicted as a possible threat to those that govern a country, you no longer have a democratic state. True, not everything can be disclosed to the public in real time, but we are sitting on a mountain of classified intelligence material that goes back more than 60 years. ..."
"... From this recognition, the whole matter of declassifying material around the Russigate scandal in real time, and not highly redacted 50 years from now, is essential to addressing this festering putrefaction that has been bubbling over since the heinous assassination of President Kennedy on Nov. 22nd, 1963 and to which we are still waiting for full disclosure of classified papers 57 years later. ..."
"... These intelligence bureaus need to be reviewed for what kind of method and standard they are upholding in collecting their "intelligence," that has supposedly justified the Mueller investigation and the never-ending Flynn investigation which have provided zero conclusive evidence to back up their allegations and which have massively infringed on the elected government's ability to make the changes that they had committed to the American people. ..."
"... Just like the Iraq and Libya war that was based off of cooked British intelligence (refer here and here ), Russiagate appears to have also had its impetus from our friends over at MI6 as well. It is no surprise that Sir Richard Dearlove, who was then MI6 chief (1999-2004) and who oversaw and stood by the fraudulent intelligence on Iraq stating they bought uranium from Niger to build a nuclear weapon, is the very same Sir Richard Dearlove who promoted the Christopher Steele dossier as something "credible" to American intelligence. ..."
"... In other words, the same man who is largely responsible for encouraging the illegal invasion of Iraq, which set off the never-ending wars on "terror," that was justified with cooked British intelligence is also responsible for encouraging the Russian spook witch-hunt that has been occurring within the US for the last four years over more cooked British intelligence, and the FBI and CIA are knowingly complicit in this. ..."
"... "The Central Intelligence Agency violated its charter for 25 years until revelations of illegal wiretapping, domestic surveillance, assassination plots, and human experimentation led to official investigations and reforms in the 1970s." [emphasis added] ..."
"... On Dec. 22, 1974, The New York Times published an article by Seymour Hersh exposing illegal operations conducted by the CIA, dubbed the "family jewels". This included, covert action programs involving assassination attempts on foreign leaders and covert attempts to subvert foreign governments, which were reported for the first time. In addition, the article discussed efforts by intelligence agencies to collect information on the political activities of US citizens. ..."
"... Largely as a reaction to Hersh's findings, the creation of the Church Committee was approved on January 27, 1975, by a vote of 82 to 4 in the Senate. ..."
"... In addition, the Church Committee produced seven case studies on covert operations, but only the one on Chile was released, titled " Covert Action in Chile: 1963–1973 ". The rest were kept secret at the CIA's request. ..."
"... Among the most shocking revelation of the Church Committee was the discovery of Operation SHAMROCK , in which the major telecommunications companies shared their traffic with the NSA from 1945 to the early 1970s. The information gathered in this operation fed directly into the NSA Watch List. It was found out during the committee investigations that Senator Frank Church, who was overseeing the committee, was among the prominent names under surveillance on this NSA Watch List. ..."
"... According to Garrison's team findings, there was reason to believe that the CIA was involved in the orchestrations of President Kennedy's assassination but access to classified material (which was nearly everything concerning the case) was necessary to continue such an investigation. ..."
"... Though Garrison's team lacked direct evidence, they were able to collect an immense amount of circumstantial evidence, which should have given the justification for access to classified material for further investigation. Instead the case was thrown out of court prematurely and is now treated as if it were a circus. [Refer to Garrison's book for further details and Oliver Stone's excellently researched movie JFK ] ..."
"... On Oct. 6th, 2020, President Trump ordered the declassification of the Russia Probe documents along with the classified documents on the findings concerning the Hillary Clinton emails. The release of these documents threatens to expose the entrapment of the Trump campaign by the Clinton campaign with help of the US intelligence agencies. ..."
"... Trey Gowdy, who was Chair of the House Oversight Committee from June 13th, 2017 – Jan. 3rd, 2019, has stated in an interview on Oct. 7th, 2020 that he has never seen these documents. Devin Nunes, who was Chair of the House Intelligence Committee from Jan. 3rd, 2015 – Jan. 3rd, 2019, has also said in a recent interview that he has never seen these documents. ..."
"... Reprinted with permission from Strategic Culture Foundation . ..."
Oct 20, 2020 | ronpaulinstitute.org

"Treason doth never prosper; what is the reason? Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason." – Sir John Harrington.

As Shakespeare would state in his play Hamlet, "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark," like a fish that rots from head to tail, so do corrupt government systems rot from top to bottom.

This is a reference to the ruling system of Denmark and not just the foul murder that King Claudius has committed against his brother, Hamlet's father. This is showcased in the play by reference to the economy of Denmark being in a state of shambles and that the Danish people are ready to revolt since they are on the verge of starving. King Claudius has only been king for a couple of months, and thus this state of affairs, though he inflames, did not originate with him.

Thus, during our time of great upheaval we should ask ourselves; what constitutes the persisting "ruling system," of the United States, and where do the injustices in its state of affairs truly originate from?

The tragedy of Hamlet does not just lie in the action (or lack of action) of one man, but rather, it is contained in the choices and actions of all its main characters. Each character fails to see the longer term consequences of their own actions, which leads not only to their ruin but towards the ultimate collapse of Denmark. The characters are so caught up in their antagonism against one another that they fail to foresee that their very own destruction is intertwined with the other.

This is a reflection of a failing system.

A system that, though it believes itself to be fighting tooth and nail for its very survival, is only digging a deeper grave. A system that is incapable of generating any real solutions to the problems it faces.

The only way out of this is to address that very fact. The most important issue that will decide the fate of the country is what sort of changes are going to occur in the political and intelligence apparatus, such that a continuation of this tyrannical treason is finally stopped in its tracks and unable to sow further discord and chaos.

When the Matter of "Truth" Becomes a Threat to "National Security"

When the matter of truth is depicted as a possible threat to those that govern a country, you no longer have a democratic state. True, not everything can be disclosed to the public in real time, but we are sitting on a mountain of classified intelligence material that goes back more than 60 years.

How much time needs to elapse before the American people have the right to know the truth behind what their government agencies have been doing within their own country and abroad in the name of the "free" world?

From this recognition, the whole matter of declassifying material around the Russigate scandal in real time, and not highly redacted 50 years from now, is essential to addressing this festering putrefaction that has been bubbling over since the heinous assassination of President Kennedy on Nov. 22nd, 1963 and to which we are still waiting for full disclosure of classified papers 57 years later.

If the American people really want to finally see who is standing behind that curtain in Oz, now is the time.

These intelligence bureaus need to be reviewed for what kind of method and standard they are upholding in collecting their "intelligence," that has supposedly justified the Mueller investigation and the never-ending Flynn investigation which have provided zero conclusive evidence to back up their allegations and which have massively infringed on the elected government's ability to make the changes that they had committed to the American people.

Just like the Iraq and Libya war that was based off of cooked British intelligence (refer here and here ), Russiagate appears to have also had its impetus from our friends over at MI6 as well. It is no surprise that Sir Richard Dearlove, who was then MI6 chief (1999-2004) and who oversaw and stood by the fraudulent intelligence on Iraq stating they bought uranium from Niger to build a nuclear weapon, is the very same Sir Richard Dearlove who promoted the Christopher Steele dossier as something "credible" to American intelligence.

In other words, the same man who is largely responsible for encouraging the illegal invasion of Iraq, which set off the never-ending wars on "terror," that was justified with cooked British intelligence is also responsible for encouraging the Russian spook witch-hunt that has been occurring within the US for the last four years over more cooked British intelligence, and the FBI and CIA are knowingly complicit in this.

Neither the American people, nor the world as a whole, can afford to suffer any more of the so-called "mistaken" intelligence bumblings. It is time that these intelligence bureaus are held accountable for at best criminal negligence, at worst, treason against their own country.

When Great Figures of Hope Are Targeted as Threats to "National Security"

The Family Jewels report , which was an investigation conducted by the CIA to investigate itself, was spurred by the Watergate Scandal and the CIA's unconstitutional role in the whole affair. This investigation by the CIA reviewed its own conduct from the 1950s to mid-1970s.

The Family Jewels report was only partially declassified in June 25, 2007 (30 years later). Along with the release of the redacted report included a six-page summary with the following introduction:

"The Central Intelligence Agency violated its charter for 25 years until revelations of illegal wiretapping, domestic surveillance, assassination plots, and human experimentation led to official investigations and reforms in the 1970s." [emphasis added]

Despite this acknowledged violation of its charter for 25 years, which is pretty much since its inception, the details of this information were kept classified for 30 years from not just the public but major governmental bodies and it was left to the agency itself to judge how best to "reform" its ways.

On Dec. 22, 1974, The New York Times published an article by Seymour Hersh exposing illegal operations conducted by the CIA, dubbed the "family jewels". This included, covert action programs involving assassination attempts on foreign leaders and covert attempts to subvert foreign governments, which were reported for the first time. In addition, the article discussed efforts by intelligence agencies to collect information on the political activities of US citizens.

Largely as a reaction to Hersh's findings, the creation of the Church Committee was approved on January 27, 1975, by a vote of 82 to 4 in the Senate.

The Church Committee's final report was published in April 1976, including seven volumes of Church Committee hearings in the Senate.

The Church Committee also published an interim report titled "Alleged Assassination Plots Involving Foreign Leaders", which investigated alleged attempts to assassinate foreign leaders, including Patrice Lumumba of Zaire, Rafael Trujillo of the Dominican Republic, Ngo Dinh Diem of Vietnam, Gen. René Schneider of Chile and Fidel Castro of Cuba. President Ford attempted to withhold the report from the public, but failed and reluctantly issued Executive Order 11905 after pressure from the public and the Church Committee.

Executive Order 11905 is a United States Presidential Executive Order signed on February 18, 1976, by a very reluctant President Ford in an attempt to reform the United States Intelligence Community, improve oversight on foreign intelligence activities, and ban political assassination.

The attempt is now regarded as a failure and was largely undone by President Reagan who issued Executive Order 12333 , which extended the powers and responsibilities of US intelligence agencies and directed leaders of the US federal agencies to co-operate fully with the CIA, which was the original arrangement that CIA have full authority over clandestine operations (for more information on this refer to my papers here and here ).

In addition, the Church Committee produced seven case studies on covert operations, but only the one on Chile was released, titled " Covert Action in Chile: 1963–1973 ". The rest were kept secret at the CIA's request.

Among the most shocking revelation of the Church Committee was the discovery of Operation SHAMROCK , in which the major telecommunications companies shared their traffic with the NSA from 1945 to the early 1970s. The information gathered in this operation fed directly into the NSA Watch List. It was found out during the committee investigations that Senator Frank Church, who was overseeing the committee, was among the prominent names under surveillance on this NSA Watch List.

In 1975, the Church Committee decided to unilaterally declassify the particulars of this operation, against the objections of President Ford's administration (refer here and here for more information).

The Church Committee's reports constitute the most extensive review of intelligence activities ever made available to the public. Much of the contents were classified, but over 50,000 pages were declassified under the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992.

President Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas on Nov. 22nd, 1963. Two days before his assassination a hate-Kennedy handbill (see picture) was circulated in Dallas accusing the president of treasonous activities including being a communist sympathizer.

On March 1st, 1967 New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison arrested and charged Clay Shaw with conspiring to assassinate President Kennedy, with the help of David Ferrie and others. After a little over a one month long trial, Shaw was found not guilty on March 1st, 1969.

David Ferrie, a controller of Lee Harvey Oswald, was going to be a key witness and would have provided the "smoking gun" evidence linking himself to Clay Shaw, was likely murdered on Feb. 22nd, 1967, less than a week after news of Garrison's investigation broke in the media.

According to Garrison's team findings, there was reason to believe that the CIA was involved in the orchestrations of President Kennedy's assassination but access to classified material (which was nearly everything concerning the case) was necessary to continue such an investigation.

Though Garrison's team lacked direct evidence, they were able to collect an immense amount of circumstantial evidence, which should have given the justification for access to classified material for further investigation. Instead the case was thrown out of court prematurely and is now treated as if it were a circus. [Refer to Garrison's book for further details and Oliver Stone's excellently researched movie JFK ]

To date, it is the only trial to be brought forward concerning the assassination of President Kennedy.

The Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) was created in 1994 by the Congress enacted President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992, which mandated that all assassination-related material be housed in a single collection within the National Archives and Records Administration. In July 1998, a staff report released by the ARRB emphasized shortcomings in the original autopsy.

The ARRB wrote , "One of the many tragedies of the assassination of President Kennedy has been the incompleteness of the autopsy record and the suspicion caused by the shroud of secrecy that has surrounded the records that do exist." [emphasis added]

The staff report for the Assassinations Records Review Board contended that brain photographs in the Kennedy records are not of Kennedy's brain and show much less damage than Kennedy sustained.

The Washington Post reported :

Asked about the lunchroom episode [where he was overheard stating his notes of the autopsy went missing] in a May 1996 deposition, Finck said he did not remember it. He was also vague about how many notes he took during the autopsy but confirmed that 'after the autopsy I also wrote notes' and that he turned over whatever notes he had to the chief autopsy physician, James J. Humes.

It has long been known that Humes destroyed some original autopsy papers in a fireplace at his home on Nov. 24, 1963. He told the Warren Commission that what he burned was an original draft of his autopsy report. Under persistent questioning at a February 1996 deposition by the Review Board, Humes said he destroyed the draft and his 'original notes.'

Shown official autopsy photographs of Kennedy from the National Archives, [Saundra K.] Spencer [who worked in 'the White House lab'] said they were not the ones she helped process and were printed on different paper. She said 'there was no blood or opening cavities' and the wounds were much smaller in the pictures [than what she had] worked on

John T. Stringer, who said he was the only one to take photos during the autopsy itself, said some of those were missing as well. He said that pictures he took of Kennedy's brain at a 'supplementary autopsy' were different from the official set that was shown to him. [emphasis added]

This not only shows that evidence tampering did indeed occur, as even the Warren Commission acknowledges, but this puts into question the reliability of the entire assassination record of John F. Kennedy and to what degree evidence tampering and forgery have occurred in these records.

We would also do well to remember the numerous crimes that the FBI and CIA have been guilty of committing upon the American people such as during the period of McCarthyism. That the FBI's COINTELPRO has been implicated in covert operations against members of the civil rights movement, including Martin Luther King Jr. during the 1960s. That FBI director J. Edgar Hoover made no secret of his hostility towards Dr. King and his ludicrous belief that King was influenced by communists, despite having no evidence to that effect.

King was assassinated on April 4th, 1968 and the civil rights movement took a major blow.

In November 1975, as the Church Committee was completing its investigation, the Department of Justice formed a Task Force to examine the FBI's program of harassment directed at Dr. King, including the FBI's security investigations of him, his assassination and the FBI conducted criminal investigation that followed. One aspect of the Task force study was to determine "whether any action taken in relation to Dr. King by the FBI before the assassination had, or might have had, an effect, direct or indirect, on that event."

In its report , the Task Force criticized the FBI not for the opening, but for the protracted continuation of, its security investigation of Dr. King:

"We think the security investigation which included both physical and technical surveillance, should have been terminated in 1963. That it was intensified and augmented by a COINTELPRO type campaign against Dr. King was unwarranted; the COINTELPRO type campaign, moreover, was ultra vires and very probably felonious."

In 1999, King Family v. Jowers civil suit in Memphis, Tennessee occurred, the full transcript of the trial can be found here . The jury found that Lloyd Jowers and unnamed others, including those in high ranking positions within government agencies, participated in a conspiracy to assassinate Dr. King.

During the four week trial, it was pointed out that the rifle allegedly used to assassinate King did not have a scope that was sighted, which meant you could not have hit the broad side of a barn with that rifle, thus it could not have been the murder weapon.

This was only remarked on over 30 years after King was murdered and showed the level of incompetence, or more likely, evidence tampering that was committed from previous investigations conducted by the FBI.

The case of JFK and MLK are among the highest profile assassination cases in American history, and it has been shown in both cases that evidence tampering has indeed occurred, despite being in the center of the public eye. What are we then to expect as the standard of investigation for all the other cases of malfeasance? What expectation can we have that justice is ever upheld?

With a history of such blatant misconduct, it is clear that the present demand to declassify the Russiagate papers now, and not 50 years later, needs to occur if we are to address the level of criminality that is going on behind the scenes and which will determine the fate of the country.

The American People Deserve to Know

Today we see the continuation of the over seven decades' long ruse, the targeting of individuals as Russian agents without any basis, in order to remove them from the political arena. The present effort to declassify the Russiagate papers and exonerate Michael Flynn, so that he may freely speak of the intelligence he knows, is not a threat to national security, it is a threat to those who have committed treason against their country.

On Oct. 6th, 2020, President Trump ordered the declassification of the Russia Probe documents along with the classified documents on the findings concerning the Hillary Clinton emails. The release of these documents threatens to expose the entrapment of the Trump campaign by the Clinton campaign with help of the US intelligence agencies.

The Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe released some of these documents recently, including former CIA Director John Brennan's handwritten notes for a meeting with former President Obama, the notes revealing that Hillary Clinton approved a plan to "vilify Donald Trump by stirring up scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service."

Trey Gowdy, who was Chair of the House Oversight Committee from June 13th, 2017 – Jan. 3rd, 2019, has stated in an interview on Oct. 7th, 2020 that he has never seen these documents. Devin Nunes, who was Chair of the House Intelligence Committee from Jan. 3rd, 2015 – Jan. 3rd, 2019, has also said in a recent interview that he has never seen these documents.

And yet, both the FBI and CIA were aware and had access to these documents and sat on them for four years, withholding their release from several government-led investigations that were looking into the Russiagate scandal and who were requesting relevant material that was in the possession of both intelligence bureaus. Do these intelligence bureaus sound like they are working for the "national security" of the American people?

The truth must finally be brought to light, or the country will rot from its head to tail.

Reprinted with permission from Strategic Culture Foundation .


[Oct 20, 2020] America At The Point Of No Return: in their disdain of ordinary people neoliberal elite starts to resemble Busheviks elite

Oct 20, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

... ... ...

Anton notes that the founders believed that the American Revolution was grounded in universal truths, "but they did not expect their declaration to revolutionize the world - nor were they under any illusion that it, or they, had the power to do so... America is - in the words of John Quincy Adams - 'the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all' but also 'the champion and vindicator only of her own.'"

Those who wish to restore these principles face a challenge of unprecedented severity. Anton argues that an elite based in certain blue states disdains ordinary Americans.

" The core message of the meta-Narrative is that America is fundamentally and inherently racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, transphobic, and so on. The flaws and sins of America derive directly from those of its founding stock, who are natural predators, inherently racist, and malevolent."

Elite policy is at its worst in California, now under the near-total domination of the left wing of the Democratic Party.

"In modern California, hypocrisy and double-standardism aren't merely part of the business climate; they're endemic to the whole society ...

Sam Francis dubbed this system 'anarcho-tyranny': complete freedom - even exemption from the gravest laws - for the favored, maximum vindictive enforcement against the pettiest infractions on the disfavored."

Anton fears that if President Trump isn't reelected, the Democrats will seek actively to suppress whomever in the red states challenges them, and they will prove very difficult to dislodge from power.

Who are the ordinary Americans the elite disdains, and who are the elite? The ordinary Americans are those whom Hillary Clinton called "deplorables," i.e., white males who value their family, their religion, and their property, including their guns.

"Funny thing, too: a core tenet of modern liberalism is supposed to be the sanctity of 'one man, one vote.' Except, you know, not really. The barely concealed presupposition of denouncing Republicans as 'racists' simply because whites vote for them is that all votes are not created equal. Votes of color are morally superior to white votes, which are inherently tainted. Which is why the left holds any election won by a Republican to be morally if not (yet) politically illegitimate. "

The elite consists at its core of wealthy financiers and business interests allied with government. It is buttressed by professionals who have attended top universities, especially those of the Ivy League. In a way that readers of Hunter Lewis on "crony capitalism" will recognize, Anton writes:

" So-called 'public-private cooperation' will increase. This benign-sounding phrase -- who could object to 'cooperation,' to government and business 'solving problems together'? -- masks a darker reality. What it really describes is the use of state power to serve private ends, at private direction. Hence foreign policy...will be further reoriented around securing trade, tax, and labor 'migration' patterns and paradigms that benefit finance and big business."

If elite dominance continues, Anton predicts that those of us who dissent will be rigidly restricted.

" Free speech as we have known it - as our founders insisted was the bedrock of political rights, without which self-government is impossible - will not survive coming leftist rule. The playbook is already being expanded to include banking and credit. Getting on the wrong side of elite-woke opinion is increasingly to find oneself locked out of the financial system: no bank account, no credit card, no ability to get a loan or pay a mortgage. Pay cash? The move to a 'cashless society'...will obviate that option right quick. "

lay_arrow 1

Izzy Dunne , 3 hours ago

Whoever wins this election, America loses.

That which has been started will never go away.

Agenda 21 and The Great Reset.

Trump or Biden? Both will bend the knee.

Best Satan in Town , 2 hours ago

It's looking that way. I'm waiting to see what side of this Trump ultimately takes. On the one hand he's in bed with serious criminals of 9/11 like Rudy Gulliani and arch-spooks like Michael Flynn (who co-wrote a book on psychological operations with satanist Michael Aquino) who have been made into heroes because of the "post postmodern bead game" known as QAnon.

[Oct 20, 2020] What if neither Democrats nor Republicans want to win in 2020- No one wants the task of changing the full diaper of US Empire -- RT Op-ed

Oct 20, 2020 | www.rt.com

What if neither Democrats nor Republicans want to win in 2020? No one wants the task of changing the full diaper of US Empire Helen Buyniski Helen Buyniski

is an American journalist and political commentator at RT. Follow her on Twitter @velocirapture23 18 Oct, 2020 20:23 Get short URL What if neither Democrats nor Republicans want to win in 2020? No one wants the task of changing the full diaper of US Empire "Vote for that guy!" "No, vote for that guy!" © Reuters / Brian Snyder 126 Follow RT on RT Watching the many stumbles of both President Donald Trump and Democrat challenger Joe Biden on the campaign trail, one can't help but wonder if either really wants to win. Who'd want the thankless job of cleaning up such a mess?

Whoever wins the 2020 election will be immediately confronted with a full plate of thorny political issues, from impossible national debt to unwinnable (and apparently unendable) foreign wars to artificially-amplified racial strife to metastasizing income inequality to a pandemic that seems determined to put the last nail in the coffin of the US Empire.

No matter his actions, the winner will be blamed for everything that happens on his watch – never mind that these catastrophes have been decades in the making, and a single man stopping them is no more possible than halting an avalanche. In this light, Biden's doddering-old-man persona and Trump's own bewildering missteps make perfect sense. What sane candidate would want to be left holding the bag of crumbling American hegemony?

ALSO ON RT.COM Trump-Biden debate put US democracy on display – we're now little more than the world's laughing stock armed with nukes World War III

" President 46 " may see the long-threatened start of World War III. Thanks to decades of overspending on unwinnable foreign wars against a vague conceptual enemy (" terrorism ") that the mighty wurlitzer of the US propaganda establishment has tied to countries that pose no legitimate threat to the American people, the US is has all but bankrupted itself destroying the Middle East. Despite promising to end the devastating quagmire in 2016, Trump poured ever more resources into the region to exert " maximum pressure " on Iran, the one country left standing of the " seven countries in five years " General Wesley Clark infamously claimed the Bush administration's bloodthirsty neocons had targeted for regime change.

The US spends more on its military than the next seven countries combined – or than 144 other countries put together, according to 2018 figures, but somehow can't keep from arming its enemies too. Perhaps the Pentagon just feels sorry for them and wants to try to ensure a fair fight, but this ill-thought-out policy has equipped groups like Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) to stage false-flag attacks that can then be blamed on governments like Syria or Iran and used to justify the expansion of the never-ending war.

After taking millions of dollars in donations from rabid pro-Israel ideologues like Sheldon Adelson and Paul Singer, Trump basically owes them their war on Iran, as they've made it clear that merely tearing up the JCPOA Iran nuclear deal wasn't enough. But his reluctance to actually follow through beyond round after round of devastating sanctions suggests he doesn't have the stomach for a full-on ground invasion. And Biden worked under Barack Obama, who actually defied the US' Middle Eastern taskmaster to sign that nuclear deal in the first place. Neither really wants that war, but it seems inevitable.

Beating Big Tech READ MORE How is the US election going to be any more legitimate than the 'rigged' Belarus vote? How is the US election going to be any more legitimate than the 'rigged' Belarus vote?

Whoever wins in 2020 will face a reckoning with a technology sector that has become in many ways more powerful than the government itself. Twitter and Facebook have taken to poking the president in the eye by shadowbanning or even removing his posts, rubbing their power in Trump's face, and Google and Amazon have so much dirt on the CIA, FBI, and DHS they could take down the whole system if some crusading president (or prosecutor) crosses them.

And what can Washington do? Government agencies have been using Big Tech as a workaround to skirt the First and Fourth Amendments for years. Constitutionally barred from censoring political speech themselves, they have merely leaned on Facebook, YouTube and Twitter to shut down 'conspiracy theories' and other wrongthink and used specially-built backdoors to poke around in users' private lives without the hassle of warrants. Companies that allow these abuses are rewarded with protection of their monopoly status and billions in profits.

Despite an executive order and a lot of bluster threatening Big Tech's Section 230 protections, Trump has not made any real efforts to halt the ongoing censorship by social media of his most vociferous supporters – perhaps realizing these firms are de facto military contractors whose participation in the information war propping up US empire is vital to that empire's continued existence. And while Biden has been treated relatively well by Big Tech thus far, he needs the support of progressive Democrats in order to beat Trump, a group that has been subject to the same censorship as the pro-Trump conservative Right. The likelihood that he will stand up to Big Tech to win over this group is approximately zero.

My Pet Rioters

So much hype has come out of both parties about a stolen election or " coup " that, whatever the result in November, violent street clashes are inevitable. If the winner tells the rioters to sit down and shut up, he'll be seen as capitulating to the system he was supposed to bring to heel. If he cheers them on, he risks losing the support of law enforcement and the military - which could really hasten the collapse of the empire. Neither Trump nor Biden – both old men a decade past traditional retirement age – want that kind of trouble.

ALSO ON RT.COM US politicians are too old and the short-term philosophy this encourages creates a vicious circle that is dooming the country

Record levels of income inequality, plus the economic fallout of suicidally-stupid government responses to the Covid-19 pandemic, have pushed the American public into a state of panicked desperation. More than ever, they're wondering where their next meal will come from and how they'll pay the rent. But thanks to decades of dumbing-down imposed in the guise of public schooling, most lack the vocabulary to articulate these problems or trace them to their proximate causes (namely, a rapacious ruling class that is frantically asset-stripping the nation in the hope of getting out with the cash before the whole thing blows sky-high). Neither party's rhetoric is helping: Biden's " team " blames white supremacy, while Trump's blames crypto-communists.

Whoever gets elected has to follow through on the absurd fantasy they've spun to explain the nation's problems to their followers while unwinding their opponent's reasoning – not an enviable task. The Democrats have so amplified the " threat " of racism that a white person declaring him- or herself " not a racist " is actually deemed racist in itself, and Republicans have bizarrely declared anyone to the left of Ronald Reagan to be " radical leftists " bent on turning the US into Venezuela at a time when most Americans could desperately use some socialist-style government programs to get them back on their feet.

As November 3 looms, both candidates have seemingly been campaigning for their opponent. Biden urged voters who thought they were better off under Trump to reelect him earlier this week), while Trump recently threatened to hold cash-strapped Americans' Covid-19 aid hostage until after the election, only reversing course in the face of public outcry. Whoever is left holding the potentially-explosive hegemonic hot potato, their job as chief rearranger of deck chairs on the rapidly-sinking Titanic of empire is nothing to envy.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Geraldmu 1 day ago The mess that the US is in, is home made. The SARS cov 2 virus is not so dangerous, when you consider that many deaths are those of people already close to the grave and next year there will be a deficit of deaths vz a normal year. Some countries have reacted much better than the US or the UK or most European countries: Taiwan, South Korea, Sweden that have not torpedoed their economy and rather test and isolate instead of lockdowns, partial or total. Reply 21 Winter7Mute 1 day ago Divided States of America, its been this way since when i entered the world in 1970's. And its still divided now in 2020. Americans enjoy rationalizing, instead of seeking the truth in all facets of life. That is why they embrace that saying "the truth hurts". I like the truth, even if it hurts emotionally. Its simple and requires very few words.
Juan_More Winter7Mute 1 day ago Stephen Colbert when he had the "Colbert Report" came up with a word that truly typifies the American experience. He coined the word truthiness /ˈtro͞oTHēnis/ noun - the quality of seeming or being felt to be true, even if not necessarily true. fazul Winter7Mute 1 day ago It was around that time when the US presidency lost control over the MIC and the deep state. Like it or not, around that time America was an obstacle to the new world order, so division and a demoralization campaign was performed. Iris15 1 day ago Great article. The fact that Biden isn't eager to win the presidency was visible many times. Trump often appears exhausted from all the criticism lobbed his way and close to a feeling "why should I care if this turns out right". Which means, no matter who wins, it will be Netanyahu and the Zionists who govern US policy in accord completely with the deep state. There is nothing to win in this election for the voter and people know it. Iris15 Iris15 1 day ago Antifa was used to stage race riots as a distraction from the vacuum in the Dem party: racism is all it has to offer but no solution on how to overcome it. There are no great economic solutions in the making and short of just such an economic miracle, misery will be long and desperate. And people know it. The election lost its luster as neither candidate has any real agenda and solution to deal with the pandemic and the tanking economy. Juan_More 1 day ago A well written OpEd piece. But she has left out the egos of these two clow . . er . . . politicians. Neither of them will settle for anything less than a scorched earth victory. We see it in themselves and in their parties. My crystal ball keeps coming up armed insurrection in the US regardless of who wins and the imposition of martial law in many states and possibly the entire country. As always there is an unasked question, "What will the Generals do?" Will they mobilise the troops to restore order (martial law), under Congress or will the restore order under a military junta? Good luck to all my American friends, you are going to need it over the next few months if there is no clear winner.

[Oct 19, 2020] Hunter Biden's Laptop -Is Not Some Russian Disinformation Campaign-; DNI Ratcliffe Slams Schiff

Oct 19, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

It appears the "Russia, Russia, Russia" cries from Adam Schiff and his dutiful media peons is dead (we can only hope) as Director of National Intel John Ratcliffe just confirmed to Foxx Business' Maria Bartiromo that:

"Hunter Biden's laptop is not part of some Russian disinformation campaign."

As Politico's Quint Forgey details (@QuintForgey) , DNI Ratcliffe is asked directly whether accusations leveled against the Bidens in recent days are part of a Russian disinformation effort.

He says no:

"Let me be clear. The intelligence community doesn't believe that because there is no intelligence that supports that."

" We have shared no intelligence with Chairman Schiff or any other member of Congress that Hunter Biden's laptop is part of some Russian disinformation campaign. It's simply not true. "

"And this is exactly what I said would I stop when I became the director of national intelligence, and that's people using the intelligence community to leverage some political narrative."

"And in this case, apparently Chairman Schiff wants anything against his preferred political candidate to be deemed as not real and as using the intelligence community or attempting to use the intelligence community to say there's nothing to see here."

"Don't drag the intelligence community into this. Hunter Biden's laptop is not part of some Russian disinformation campaign. And I think it's clear that the American people know that."

Of course, this 'fact' from 'intelligence' is unlikely to stop the "emails are Russian" narrative growing ever louder as MSM attempt to distract from the actual content of the emails. As Caitlin Johnstone noted:

So "the emails are Russian" narrative serves the interests of political convenience, partisan media ratings, and the national security state's pre-planned agenda to continue escalating against Russia as part of its slow motion third world war against nations which refuse to bow to US dictates, and you've got essentially no critical mainstream news coverage putting the brakes on any of it. This means this narrative is going to become mainstream orthodoxy and treated as an established fact, despite the fact that there is no actual, tangible evidence for it.

Joe Biden could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and the mainstream press would crucify any journalist who so much as tweeted about it. Very little journalism is going into vetting and challenging him, and a great deal of the energy that would normally be doing so is going into ensuring that he slides right into the White House.

If the mainstream news really existed to tell you the truth about what's going on, everyone would know about every questionable decision that Joe Biden has ever made, Russiagate would never have happened, we'd all be acutely aware of the fact that powerful forces are pushing us into increasingly aggressive confrontations with two nuclear-armed nations, and Trump would be grilled about Yemen in every press conference.

But the mainstream news does not exist to tell you the truth about the world. The mainstream news exists to advance the interests of its wealthy owners and the status quo upon which they have built their kingdoms. That's why it's so very, very important that we find ways to break away from it and share information with each other that isn't tainted by corrupt and powerful interests.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890

* * *

As we detailed previously, as the Hunter Biden laptop scandal threatens to throw the 2020 election into chaos with what appears to be solid, undisputed evidence of high-level corruption by former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter, the same crowd which peddled the Trump-Russia hoax is now suggesting that Russia is behind it all .

To wit, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, who swore on National television that he had evidence Trump was colluding with Russia - now says that President Trump is handing the Kremlin a "propaganda coup from Vladimir Putin."

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1317432785070706688&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fhunter-bidens-laptop-not-some-russian-disinformation-campaign-dni-ratcliffe-slams-schiff&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) has gone full tin-foil , suggesting that Giuliani was a 'key target' of 'Kremlin constructed anti-Biden propaganda.'

2/ Russia knew it had to play a different game than 2016. So it built an operation to cull virulently pro-Trump Americans as pseudo-assets, so blind in their allegiance to Trump that they'll willingly launder Kremlin constructed anti-Biden propaganda.

Guiliani was a key target.

-- Chris Murphy (@ChrisMurphyCT) October 17, 2020

Headlines in major publications are perhaps even more conspiratorial:

And of course, propagandists are doing their thing...

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-3&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1317443500330373120&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fhunter-bidens-laptop-not-some-russian-disinformation-campaign-dni-ratcliffe-slams-schiff&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Yet, if one looks at the actual facts of the case - in particular, that Hunter Biden appears to have dropped his own laptops off at a computer repair shop, signed a service ticket , and the shop owner approached the FBI first and Rudy Giuliani last after Biden failed to pick them up, the left's latest Russia conspiracy theory is quickly debunked .

* * *

Authored by Larry C Johnson via Sic Semper Tyrannis (emphasis ours)

This is the story of an American patriot, an honorable man, John Paul Mac Issac, who tried to do the right thing and is now being unfairly and maliciously slandered as an agent of foreign intelligence, specifically Russia. He is not an agent or spy for anyone. He is his own man. How do I know? I have known his dad for more than 20 years. I've known John Paul's dad as Mac. Mac is a decorated Vietnam Veteran, who flew gunships in Vietnam. And he continued his military service with an impeccable record until he retired as an Air Force Colonel. The crews of those gunships have an annual reunion and Mac usually takes John Paul along, who volunteers his computer and video skills to record and compile the stories of those brave men who served their country in a difficult war.

This story is very simple – Hunter Biden dropped off three computers with liquid damage at a repair shop in Wilmington, Delaware on April 12, 2019. The owner, John Mac Issac, examined the three and determined that one was beyond recovery, one was okay and the data on the harddrive of the third could be recovered. Hunter signed the service ticket and John Paul Mac Issac repaired the hard drive and down loaded the data . During this process he saw some disturbing images and a number of emails that concerned Ukraine, Burisma, China and other issues . With the work completed, Mr. Mac Issac prepared an invoice, sent it to Hunter Biden and notified him that the computer was ready to be retrieved. H unter did not respond . In the ensuing four months (May, June, July and August), Mr. Mac Issac made repeated efforts to contact Hunter Biden. Biden never answered and never responded. More importantly, Biden stiffed John Paul Mac Issac–i.e., he did not pay the bill.

When the manufactured Ukraine crisis surfaced in August 2019, John Paul realized he was sitting on radioactive material that might be relevant to the investigation. After conferring with his father, Mac and John Paul decided that Mac would take the information to the FBI office in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Mac walked into the Albuquerque FBI office and spoke with an agent who refused to give his name. Mac explained the material he had, but was rebuffed by the FBI. He was told basically, get lost . This was mid-September 2019.

Two months passed and then, out of the blue, the FBI contacted John Paul Mac Issac. Two FBI agents from the Wilmington FBI office–Joshua Williams and Mike Dzielak–came to John Paul's business . He offered immediately to give them the hard drive, no strings attached. Agents Williams and Dzielak declined to take the device .

Two weeks later, the intrepid agents called and asked to come and image the hard drive. John Paul agreed but, instead of taking the hard drive or imaging the drive, they gave him a subpoena. It was part of a grand jury proceeding but neither agent said anything about the purpose of the grand jury. John Paul complied with the subpoena and turned over the hard drive and the computer.

In the ensuing months, starting with the impeachment trial of President Trump, he heard nothing from the FBI and knew that none of the evidence from the hard drive had been shared with President Trump's defense team.

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

The lack of action and communication with the FBI led John Paul to make the fateful decision to contact Rudy Giuliani's office and offer a copy of the drive to the former mayor. We now know that Rudy accepted John Paul's offer and that Rudy's team shared the information with the New York Post.

John Paul Mac Issac is not responsible for the emails, images and videos recovered from Hunter Biden's computer. He was hired to do a job, he did the job and submitted an invoice for the work. Hunter Biden, for some unexplained reason, never responded and never asked for the computer. But that changed last Tuesday, October 13, 2020. A person claiming to be Hunter Biden's lawyer called John Paul Mac Issac and asked for the computer to be returned. Too late. That horse had left the barn and was with the FBI.

John Paul, acting under Delaware law, understood that Hunter's computer became the property of his business 90 days after it had been abandoned.

At no time did John Paul approach any media outlet or tabloid offering to sell salacious material . A person of lesser character might have tried to profit. But that is not the essence of John Paul Mac Issac. He had information in his possession that he learned, thanks to events subsequent to receiving the computer for a repair job, was relevant to the security of our nation. He did what any clear thinking American would do–he, through his father, contacted the FBI. When the FBI finally responded to his call for help, John cooperated fully and turned over all material requested .

The failure here is not John Paul's . He did his job. The FBI dropped the ball and, by extension, the Department of Justice. Sadly, this is becoming a disturbing, repeating theme–the FBI through incompetence or malfeasance is not doing its job.

Any news outlet that is publishing the damnable lie that John Paul is part of some subversive effort to interfere in the United States Presidential election is on notice. That is slander and defamation. Fortunately, the evidence from Hunter Biden's computer is in the hands of the FBI and Rudy Giuliani and, I suspect, the U.S. Senate. Those with the power to do something must act. John Paul Mac Issac's honor is intact. We cannot say the same for those government officials who have a duty to deal with this information.

* * *

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-4&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1317486264086560769&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fhunter-bidens-laptop-not-some-russian-disinformation-campaign-dni-ratcliffe-slams-schiff&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

[Oct 19, 2020] The neocon/NATO aggressive expansionism and anti-Russian hysteria has many purposes, but one is surely domestic repression: to gaslight and cause fear-the-foreign-bogeyman trauma among the American and British people

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The neocon/NATO aggressive expansionism has many purposes, but one is surely domestic repression: to gaslight and cause fear-the-foreign-bogeyman trauma among the American and British people as a whole and make most of them become docile and lose their critical thinking skills and their ability to analyze their own societies. ..."
"... One of the best ways to lobotomize the publics of the US and UK is to very gradually impose martial law in the name of protecting national security and ensuring peace and harmony at home. ..."
Oct 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Dao Gen ,

Dao Gen , Oct 17 2020 18:05 utc | 19

The neocon/NATO aggressive expansionism has many purposes, but one is surely domestic repression: to gaslight and cause fear-the-foreign-bogeyman trauma among the American and British people as a whole and make most of them become docile and lose their critical thinking skills and their ability to analyze their own societies.

One of the best ways to lobotomize the publics of the US and UK is to very gradually impose martial law in the name of protecting national security and ensuring peace and harmony at home.

After several color revolutions succeeded, the Russiagate/Spygate op was carried out in the US, with British assistance. This op has been largely successful, though there has been limited resistance against its whole fake edifice as well as with the logic of Cold War2.0. Nevertheless, Spygate has shocked many tens of millions of Dems into a stupor, while millions more are dazed and manipulated by the Chinese bogeyman being manufactured by Trump.

The most dangerous result of the martial law lite mentality caused by Spygate and its MSM purveyors is the growing support for censorship of free speech coming mostly from the Dems, such as Schiff and Warner. The danger inherent in this trend became very clear when FaceBook and Twitter engaged in massive and unprecedented arbitrary censorship of the New York Post and of various Trump-related accounts.

This is the kind of thing you do during Stage 1 of a coup. Surely it was at least in part an experiment to see how various power points in the US would respond. Even though Twitter ended the censorship later, it was probably a successful experiment designed to gauge reactions and areas of resistance.

In November, there could be further, more serious experiments/ops. If so, the current expansionist movements being made and planned by the US and NATO may well be integral parts of a new non-democratic model of "American-style democracy" -- not constitution-based but "rules-based."

[Oct 16, 2020] The Backlash Against the [neo]Liberal World Order

Oct 16, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

The Backlash Against The Liberal World Order

Global liberalism has overreached, and Trump and others are merely predictable reactions. (By Brandon Stivers/Shutterstock)

OCTOBER 15, 2020

|

12:01 AM

ROBERT MERRY

John J. Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago, one of the country's leading scholars of international relations, recently received the prestigious James Madison Award, administered by the American Political Science Association. In accepting the honor Mearsheimer delivered a notable lecture entitled "Liberalism and Nationalism in Contemporary America" (scheduled for publication in a journal called PS ). It's a remarkably penetrating and astute explication of American politics in our troubled times.

The central reality of today's political landscape, in Mearsheimer's view, is that the post-Cold War period of "unbounded liberalism" -- stretching roughly from 1990 to 2016 -- is about to be supplanted by an ascendant wave of nationalism. This is just a little difficult to credit, given the hegemonic force of liberalism in the firmament of American politics since the end of the Cold War and its hearty embrace by nearly all of the country's major elite institutions, including the Democratic Party, prestigious universities, influential think tanks, the popular culture, the big banks, big tech, big corporations, and most of big media.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13045197114175078?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13045197114175078-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&rid=eastwestaccord.com&width=838

But Mearsheimer posits a "core claim" that, when the balance of power in any polity shifts so heavily toward liberalism that it poses a mortal threat to nationalism, as happened in much of the West after the Cold War, a backlash inevitably ensues. Then, says Mearsheimer, "nationalism wins almost every time, because it is the most powerful political ideology in the modern world." We saw this in the watershed year of 2016, when Donald Trump became the American president and Britain voted to leave the European Union. "This upsurge of nationalism," says Mearsheimer, "has continued unabated since 2016."

To understand Mearsheimer's thesis, it's necessary to grasp fully what he means by liberalism and nationalism. Liberalism's first principle is the sanctity of the individual and the individual's "inalienable rights," including the right to pursue one's own concepts of the good life. This leads to a strong norm of tolerance and a stern injunction for people to "live and let live." Liberalism also advocates a national government powerful enough to protect individuals from each other and guarantee their rights, but not so powerful that it encroaches on those rights. The ultimate aim, though, is for individuals to have as much freedom as possible in their personal lives, within the context of civic harmony.

In economic terms, this leads to laissez faire thinking -- the breakdown of economic barriers, free trade, property rights, market forces. In philosophical terms, it includes "a powerful universalist dimension." Liberals strongly embrace the view that their outlook applies to all humankind, everywhere and at all times.

In contrast to liberalism's universalist ethos, nationalists are particularists. They believe that people are "born into and thrive in social groups that mold their identities and command their loyalties." And the most significant of all social groups is the nation. As Mearsheimer says:

me title=

https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.416.2_en.html#goog_345741446

about:blank

Nations need political institutions to help their membes live together peacefully and productively. They need rules that define acceptable and unacceptable behavior and also stipulate how disputes will be settled. Nations also need political institutions to help shield them from other nations that might have an incentive to attack .Since the early 1500s, the dominant political form of the planet has been the state. Nations therefore want their own state, because that is the best way to survive and prosper.

Mearsheimer identifies four features of nationalism that have helped shape the centuries-long era of the nation-state:

It isn't difficult to see that liberalism and nationalism are in many ways contradictory outlooks and hence often "conflictual." Sometimes, though, the two -isms can actually mesh in positive ways, resulting in a harmonious civic balance. Such an equilibrium has existed in much of American history. But liberalism, steeled by its triumphant rise at the end of the Cold War, set out to marginalize or even nullify American nationalism, and that eventually unleashed the potent backlash we're seeing now. In many ways, suggests Mearsheimer, Trump's 2016 election can be seen as "nationalism's revenge."

And we can see from our own recent history, and that of other Western nations, that when liberalism gains near hegemonic power in a polity it poses a severe threat to nationalism. Liberal individualists, viewing themselves primarily as "egoistic utility maximizers," tend to undermine the nationalist sense of oneness. They seek to weaken national identity. Embracing the universalist concept of a common humanity, they seek to break down national borders and the very concept of sovereignty. They hail the emergence of a global elite, "tied together by shared economic interests and social networks, and with its own identity as 'citizens of the world.'" They work to foster an open international economy that further weakens state borders and state identity.

In short, unbounded liberalism inevitably launches a frontal attack on the very concept of a cohesive, hard-shell state. Such attacks serve, as intended, to encourage citizens to lose faith in the state. This erosion of national solidarity in turn unleashes societal tension and even chaos, because nationalism serves as a kind of civic glue that helps hold a society together. Remove the glue, and liberalism loses its ability to uphold national cohesiveness. When that happens, the impulse of liberal leaders is to inject more individualism and more universalism into the polity, thus exacerbating the gathering crisis of "liberalism on steroids," as Mearsheimer calls it.

That's what happened in America during what Mearsheimer calls "liberalism's golden age." The answer to porous borders generating increasing civic tensions was to open the borders further. The answer to a free trade regimen encouraging greater mercantilist aggressiveness among some U.S. trading partners was an even greater commitment to free trade. The growing problem of wealth inequality stirred the elites to embrace laissez-faire economics even more tightly as the rise of gargantuan tech empires further exacerbated inequality. And what was the response to America's awakening to the fact that the country's universalist warmaking was undermining America's cohesiveness and financial stability? Under presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, it was a tendency toward more warmaking.

That's because the liberal tenets of individualism, universalism, the virtue of the transnational elite, and the sanctity of identity thinking were driving politics and policy in America. The liberal moment was embraced to a significant extent by both political parties, and there was hardly a nationalist counterweight of any consequence on the scene.

Indeed, in liberalism's heyday many in the West viewed nationalism as a political corpse. Mearsheimer quotes historian Jill Lepore (a universalist liberal of the first order) as writing, "It appeared to some globalists that nationalism had died."

And then came Trump and Brexit, following nationalist triumphs in Hungary and Poland, along with concurrent nationalist surges in numerous other European nations. "The unbounded liberalism that dominated the political landscape in the United States after the Cold War is in serious crisis," says Mearsheimer, "mainly because it threatened American nationalism, which has reasserted itself under President Trump."

One can question Trump's competence as president, "and I would be among the first to do so," says Mearsheimer, "but there is no question that he has pursued a nationalist agenda from the beginning of his political career and that it helped propel him into the White House." Indeed, Mearsheimer makes clear, in recounting evidence of Trump's nationalist ethos, that the real estate mogul's most significant distinguishing characteristic as a national politician was his understanding, alone among presidential contenders in 2016, that America was in the midst of an epic struggle between liberalism and nationalism. But, if Trump has benefitted from nationalism's resurgence, he didn't cause it. "His election," says Mearsheimer, "was the manifestation of a process that was well under way by 2016."

And it is ongoing. "Although liberalism is here to stay," says Mearsheimer, "the United States will continue to be a liberal nation-state, not just a liberal state. Nationalism remains the world's most formidable political ideology and neither it nor the nation state is going away anytime soon."

That calls into question some prevailing assumptions of our time. Many adherents of liberalism seem to harbor a view that, as soon as Trump is extracted from the political scene (which seems likely to happen soon), then everything can return to normal, meaning back to the days of liberal hegemony. If Mearsheimer is correct, that isn't likely. The struggle between the two -isms will continue, perhaps even more intensely joined than ever, as nationalism seeks to claw its way back at least to parity with the forces of liberalism. One thing can be predicted: we will continue to live through interesting times.

Robert W. Merry, former Wall Street Journal Washington correspondent and Congressional Quarterly CEO, is the author of five books on American history and foreign policy.


Gaius Gracchus 2 days ago

There is need for a liberal state to embrace universalism. That is an aspect of French liberalism more than Anglo-American liberalism. But even that is secondary to the effort by the rich and powerful to break down the nation state and create a global regime that will rule and exploit.

Even more than individualism, liberalism needs the rule of law. When the rules are set up and enforced, it protects the individual and the market, especially from the crony capitalist.

Every time punishment of the rich and powerful is ignored, everyone loses a little more faith in the system. And corruption grows.

For liberalism to work, it must oppose concentrated power, something Adam Smith knew, but the oligarchs and their shills tried to cover up ever since.

Besides, no one is an atomized individual. Everyone is connected to someone or something or somewhere and ignoring that only creates more problems. People need to feel connected and the absence leads to depression and anxiety.

Kenneth_Almquist 2 days ago

The problem with nationalism, at least in its present incarnation, it that it doesn't seem to be about actually advancing the national interest. Bush's justification for invading Iraq didn't actually make logical sense. I guess it made emotional sense to American nationalists.

"Nationalists particularly want their nations to be free from encumbering outside influences." So they voted for Trump, who welcomed Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Trump's major legislative achievement was to cut taxes on the rich. That's his response to "the growing problem of wealth inequality."

As a result of Brexit, the UK will have less power and influence, which I suspect will leave it with less ability to control its own destiny than if it had stayed in, giving it a seat at the table when EU policies that affect the UK are set. But at least the UK theoretically gets an increase in capacity for independent action in exchange for that loss of influence. Nationalism in the United States appears to stand for the proposition that America's interests should be represented by someone who is not interested in advancing America's interests and who would be incompetent to do so even if he were.

In principle, nationalism is not necessarily a bad thing, but I worry that nationalism as actually practiced, as opposed to some theoretical ideal of nationalism, will severely damage the United States.

IanDakar Kenneth_Almquist a day ago

I have a suspicion that the general public, not the HIGHLY vocal extreme or the politicians, but the general voting public that leans right, is very interested in a general nationalistic trend. Much of the same voting public that leans left, while having an interest in being involved in national affairs (by that I mean good relations with nations and/or aid to nations in trouble, not foreign fighting) would be interested in many of the aspects of nationalism, such as lowering the influence of international corporations (more because of the 'corporation' part than the 'international' but still).

The problem is that the vocal side of politics, not just the leaders but the vocal minority of both groups, has a VERY different desire, whether it's military conquest, a racist motive, or a dream of globalism. The voters are then left to choose the least ugliest of the voices to stand behind. I put that for both 2016 on the right and 2020 on the left.

Victor_the_thinker IanDakar a day ago

Lessening the power of corporations is NOT nationalism. That is garden verity left politics.

Bureaucrat IanDakar a day ago

The greatest leader in American history would be someone who can bring both those right/left instincts together in a unifying manner. I fear I won't see that person in my lifetime.

joeo Kenneth_Almquist a day ago

Why is it ok for the US to interfere in Russian affairs but the reverse is unconscionable? The US starts wars all over the planet but North Korea is the warmonger? It is wrong for China to assert itself but we have troops in Japan and Korea with our Navy in the South China Sea. Trump starts no wars and tries to protect industries for which the elite revile him.

patrick Kenneth_Almquist a day ago

We are soon to have president Harris. Seemingly the choice of no one. Whatever nationalistic impulses exist at the moment will be completely erased under the banner of multiculturalism. To combat "white supremacy" we will be urged to cancel ourselves and many will.

Bureaucrat Kenneth_Almquist a day ago • edited

Bush's efforts to remake the Middle East in America's image is a prime example of liberal internationalism, very much the antithesis to nationalism. The foundational core of universalism is that everyone and every society craves the "universal values" on individual rights (vs. social cohesion). This was the animating purpose of Bush Jr.'s foreign policy after 9/11, the ideal that those Middle Eastern people would instinctively embrace our political and social values. What Mearshimer diagnoses is that the post-Cold War mentality amplified efforts to destroy the careful balance every country has struck (between national cohesion and universal values).

Kenneth_Almquist Bureaucrat a day ago

George W. Bush addressing the nation of March 17, 2003: "The United States and other nations did nothing to deserve or invite this threat. But we will do everything to defeat it. Instead of drifting along toward tragedy, we will set a course toward safety. Before the day of horror can come, before it is too late to act, this danger will be removed."

The invasion wasn't justified by an appeal to liberal internationalism. It was justified as a necessary act of self defense. The rhetoric from conservatives was us vs. them. Republican lawmakers started calling French fries "freedom fries" because the French government wanted any WMD possessed by Saddam to be eliminated without a war.

Now, you can make a case that the exit strategy (such as it was) was based on a belief in liberal internationalism, but I think you could equally make the case that it was based a nationalistic belief in the superiority of the American way of life.

Bureaucrat Kenneth_Almquist a day ago • edited

The false messaging on "national interests" via self-defense is a given, another example of political elites trying to reframe their priorities to placate the masses. But if you can't see the lie from the motive, then I can't help you there.

Kessler Kenneth_Almquist 18 hours ago

Of course justifications to get people on board was nationalistic sentiments. But the execution was pure liberal internationalism. A nationalistic foreign policy would have been laser focused on getting people responsible and not doing a bunch of nation building in countries, that had nothing to do with attacks.

Civis Romanus Sum Kenneth_Almquist 11 hours ago

Bush and his journalistic enablers repeatedly said that they wanted to make Iraq into a democracy that would serve as a model for other Arab and Muslim states. You can't get more "liberal internationalist" than that.

Jihadi Colin Kenneth_Almquist a day ago

"Russian interference"

Bwahahahahahahaha.

ekaneti Jihadi Colin an hour ago

In other words election interference

Kessler Kenneth_Almquist 18 hours ago

The current ruling class is liberal to the core - even if their voters want nationalism, they have trouble delivering it. The signal just doesn't transmit from the bottom, through democratic instiutions to the top. That`s why idiotic wars don't end and corporations get bailed out before actual people.

Victor_the_thinker 2 days ago

Another over interpretation of the Trump win in 2016. Trump lost the popular vote. He was only president because of a fluke in our system. People act as if that fluke is the same thing as actually representing a national majority. It really isn't. Now we're seeing the actual majority turn out like never before in living memory to vote against Trump and his administration. People have weeks to vote and yet are choosing to stand in 10 hour lines today because their antipathy to this president is white hot.

C. L. H. Daniels Victor_the_thinker a day ago

If you think Trump is a fluke, you are going to be in for an entire series of rude awakenings in the years to come.

Victor_the_thinker C. L. H. Daniels a day ago

Losing the popular vote yet winning the election has happened 5 times in the entire history of the US. Only 1 of those 5 times has the president who did this, win re-election. Trump is absolutely a fluke. He's never had majority support and his base is dying.

Magua1952 Victor_the_thinker a day ago

The electoral college is not a "fluke in our system". It was designed by the writers of the Constitution. Virginia was the most populated state. Pennsylvania was second. New York was third. The other states didn't want most power centralized in the middle Atlantic states. Two Senators were assigned to every state and the electoral college was devised. This modified the power of the larger states. Without this compromise we might not have the United States. It was a brilliant compromise and it remains so.

Before you celebrate the landslide victory by the anti-Trumpers take a look at political rallies. Trump gets many thousands. Biden attracts a dozen or two. We saw this in 2016. If the Democrats were able to field a credible person for president they might be in a better position. None of their candidates were even adequate. Personally I think Bernie Sanders was the best they had but Americans are not ready for socialism and the Ds knew it.

Pete Barbeaux Magua1952 a day ago • edited

Everything you just said is total nonsense. He wasn't even talking about the entire EC being a fluke. He was saying that thin margin EC victories when you lose the popular vote, are a fluke . Literally. It's only happened 3 times.

Also, Trump's WWE rallies attracting the Cult is totally irrelevant.

ekaneti Victor_the_thinker an hour ago

The EC is not a fluke. It is a feature

ekaneti Victor_the_thinker an hour ago

""People have weeks to vote and yet are choosing to stand in 10 hour lines
today because their antipathy to this president is white hot.""

You polled them on how they intend to vote?

Victor_the_thinker 2 days ago

This is real populism right here. Small dollar donors have raised $1.5 billion for democrats through ActBlue. Regular people around the country donating $10 at a time. All of this fire to be trained on republicans this year up and down the ballot. November is looking like it could be a bloodbath. When the people actually turn out to have their voices heard, they are quite powerful.

https://www.politico.com/ne...

ekaneti Victor_the_thinker an hour ago

So you think that 150 million people gave to ActBlue?

Revanchist a day ago • edited

Let's not beat around the bush. The underlying lynchpin here is race. Those living in the western world who are of European descent are realizing that the multiculturalism imposed by globalism will mean the disinheritance of their own culture and their children's future. Amnesty, affirmative action and race based reparations that favor non-whites will intensify to solidify the globalist coalition. Our elites are at war with the founding stock of the nation. Within the next decade at least 80% of what remains of the white Christian majority will be voting for nationalist parties and policies. It won't be a matter of racism...it will be a matter of survival.

Pete Barbeaux Revanchist a day ago

Shorter Revanchist:
"14 words"

Victor_the_thinker Pete Barbeaux a day ago

Some fool will be on here saying "I've never seen any racism posted at TAC" I'm sure.

ekaneti Victor_the_thinker an hour ago

If Indians were to oppose 100 million Chinese immigrating to India, would they be racist?

Bureaucrat Revanchist a day ago • edited

Again, as I responded earlier, your left-liberal perspective that nationalism is a white supremacist ideology is ironically devoid of understanding the views and history of the Global South and non-Western countries, most of whom reject the notion of liberal universalism. It reminds me of the type of "UNESCO universalist" white liberal that the communist philosopher Slavoj Zizek mocked:

"That's why white liberals love identity politics. It means minorities can have their particular identities, while we renounce our identity but keep the roles as guardians of universality."

Watch the video starting at 1:50:

https://cdn.embedly.com/widgets/media.html?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2F472lCEy4dBw%3Ffeature%3Doembed&display_name=YouTube&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D472lCEy4dBw&image=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2F472lCEy4dBw%2Fhqdefault.jpg&key=21d07d84db7f4d66a55297735025d6d1&type=text%2Fhtml&schema=youtube

Wallstreet Panic Bureaucrat 10 hours ago

Slavoj is drinking vodka out of a plastic bottle. Never a good sign.

Bureaucrat Wallstreet Panic 8 hours ago

Funny! But do you instinctively resort to ad hominem to rebut hard-to-handle truths, or was it a learned character trait?

Pete Barbeaux a day ago

In every place that has Trumpy reactions, those people represent 30% or less of their national population. A loud sycophantic minority.

gVOR08 Pete Barbeaux a day ago

That. These people aren't the silent majority they believe themselves to be, but an annoyingly loud minority.

ekaneti Pete Barbeaux an hour ago

What is a "Trumpy reaction"

RAF a day ago

The central reality of today's political landscape, in Mearsheimer's view, is that the post-Cold War period of "unbounded liberalism" -- stretching roughly from 1990 to 2016 -- is about to be supplanted by an ascendant wave of nationalism.

---------------------------------------------

Not a wave of Nationalism...but a wave of White/Christian nationalism. Big difference.

Revanchist RAF a day ago

The Western nation states were founded by white Christians. So a rise in western nationalism would logically be European and Christian in nature. Just as a rise in Indian nationalism is Indian and Hindu in nature. Or a rise in Mexican nationalism is Latino and Catholic in nature. That is what a nation truly is, a body politic that forms around a community that is rooted in common culture and heritage.

RAF Revanchist a day ago

The Western nation states were founded by white Christians
----------------------------------
The "Founding Fathers" were mostly Deists and Masons. Jefferson was just one example. John Adams was a Unitarian etc. (They were not atheists !)

Re Jefferson who was the primary author of the Constitution...America was NOT founded as a Christian nation.

"""Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;"

the insertion was rejected by the great majority,

in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.

-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT., Jan. 1, 1802

"The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills"
.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, January 24, 1814
________________________________________
Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814

Revanchist RAF a day ago

While Christianity was never the official state religion of the United States it is undeniable that is deeply intertwined with our European cultural identity. Take a look at what book the President places his hand on when sworn in to office.

Charles Revanchist 11 hours ago • edited

"Take a look at what book the President places his hand on when sworn in to office."

Except in the case of Muslim office holders, it's the Koran for instance. I would assume that
officeholders of whatever religious beliefs would lay their hand on that person's religious symbol.

Civis Romanus Sum a day ago

Also important is the fact that liberalism (as defined in the article) is really only popular and powerful in Western countries (i.e. Western Europe and its colonial offshoots like the USA). And even in Western countries, there are serious challenges to it.

Meanwhile, the rising powers of the world (primarily China, but also India, Russia, and so on) are very anti-liberal and highly nationalistic. That's about 80-90% of the world's population. A century where China is hegemonic and these other countries are powerful is likely to be very illiberal. And since the hegemon influences everybody, it is likely that this anti-liberal culture will influence the Western countries as well.

Revanchist Civis Romanus Sum a day ago • edited

After World War II American liberalism was attractive to much of the world because it was centered around freedoms of virtue such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion. The rest of the world yearned for this kind of governance and our country was held in high esteem. The "freedoms" or "human rights" as they are now promoted by the American empire are freedoms of vice such as abortion, pornography and all sorts of sexual deviancy. The world is no longer buying what we are selling...and i can't blame them.

kenofken Revanchist a day ago

And yet no one at all is running toward these virtuous illiberal nations.

For such a horrible perverted place as we are, we sure have a lot of people clawing to get here.

Bureaucrat Revanchist a day ago

I can't believe you're not reading the article and Mearshimer carefully. He is not advocating an EITHER-OR embrace of liberalism and nationalism. The article argues for a balance, where too much of one paradigm can both be destructive. This is what the United States had for most of its history, and indeed is true for non-Western countries like Communist China (embracing elements of Western socialism), Japan (embracing a managed form of democracy, but certainly not free trade/mass immigration), or India (same embrace of some democracy, but restrained by caste and regional differences) have tried to balance. Those non-Western countries, as articulated by former Singaporean autocrat Lee Kwan Yew, believe in the value of collective cohesion as much (if not more) than individual liberty. Those are sentiments of balancing nationalism, far from a full-throated support for universal liberalism.

Hector_St_Clare Revanchist a day ago

People follow the strong horse, once America and other liberal powers are no longer the strongest horse (and that day is coming sooner or later, China is on track to be the world's largest economy within a decade or two), then liberalism is no longer going to look remotely attractive to most of the world.

GaryH a day ago

The weakness of the article is that Imperialism is ignored. Imperialism always eventually destroys most of what is good, positive about any Nationalism. And Imperialism always makes alliance with Liberalism in order to keep the good in Nationalism (both the Nationalism in conquered nations and the Nationalism in the conquering nation become an Empire) from having any chance to revive.

Liberalism without any hint of Imperialism may be tolerable and even pleasant, but outside Switzerland and post-WW2 Scandinavia it may never have existed in any area larger than an homogenous small town/county. Nationalism fueled with Imperialism becomes a Hell of its own.

The great problem is the imperial mindset, the drive for Empire.

TreeofLiberty a day ago • edited

..... " Nations need political institutions to help their members live together peacefull y and productively. They need rules that define acceptable and unacceptable behavior and also stipulate how disputes will be settled. "
- JOHN MEARSHEIMER

This quite succinctly describes that which is failing in the U.S. today.

1. Merely by checking in with the daily news cycle we see that some of us have no intention to " live together peacefully and productively ."
2. Likewise, ' acceptable and unacceptable behavior ," on which there used to be pretty widespread general agreement, has been turned in to relative definitions by the political Left , for their own debauched and highly-politicized purposes; and in the process, has given a sense of license to the un-peaceful.
.
.
..... " This erosion of national solidarity in turn unleashes societal tension and even chaos "
- ROBERT MERRY

Precisely as we witness today, from the purveyors of tension and chaos, the DestructocRAT Party.
.
.
..... " when the balance of power in any polity shifts so heavily toward liberalism that it poses a mortal threat to nationalism . . nationalism wins almost every time "
- R. M.

I looked in vain for Mr. MERRY's historical examples to illustrate this theory, but found only his reference to the current period; 1990 to today.
That seems a bit thin, for such a strong assertion.
.

M Orban TreeofLiberty a day ago

Lithium is not working as well as it once used to.

Woland M Orban 11 hours ago

The problem is that the people who need it cannot be relied on to properly cook their batteries.

WilliamRD a day ago

"In economic terms, this leads to laissez faire thinking -- the breakdown of economic barriers, free trade, property rights, market forces. In philosophical terms, it includes "a powerful universalist dimension." Liberals strongly embrace the view that their outlook applies to all humankind, everywhere and at all times."

There is nothing laissez faire about governments printing money and manipulating their currencies to achieve a trade advantage. Also with the dollar being the reserve currency the FED has to provide the rest of the world with dollars to keep the global economy moving. Thus our producers are always at a disadvantage because the dollar is much stronger against the rest of the world.

WHEN IS "FREE-TRADE" NOT FREE-TRADE? WHEN IT'S DONE WITH FAKE, A.K.A., "FIAT" MONEY

http://fame.org/when-is-fre...

Kent a day ago

I'm not sure I like the use of language in this article. We are using "liberalism" when in the US he is describing "libertarianism". Most of us associate liberalism with the philosophy of redistributing the fruits of capitalism to those harmed by capitalist interests, as a mechanism for maintaining a favorable national attitude towards capitalism.

In the US, it is libertarianism that, philosophically, wants to maximize the autonomy of the individual. That promotes globalism and open borders.

I also see the definition of "nationalism" being pretty much the definition of conservative. So in the end, if you replace liberalism with libertarianism and nationalism with conservativism, the article makes much more sense.

This isn't a left-right issue. It is a right-right issue.

And in my view, the solution is the redistributive liberalism with a healthy conservative view of society that prevailed in the country for much of the 20th century.

[Oct 14, 2020] The Vatican's calculated snub of Mike Pompeo exposes the limits of his evangelical, ideological, China-hating foreign policy -- RT Op-ed

Oct 14, 2020 | www.rt.com

The Vatican's calculated snub of Mike Pompeo exposes the limits of his evangelical, ideological, China-hating foreign policy 30 Sep, 2020 16:19 Get short URL The Vatican's calculated snub of Mike Pompeo exposes the limits of his evangelical, ideological, China-hating foreign policy FILE PHOTO: U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo © Getty Images / Alex Wong 182 1 Follow RT on RT

Tom Fowdy is a British writer and analyst of politics and international relations with a primary focus on East Asia.

His Holiness declining to meet the US secretary of state when he visited the Vatican on his European tour further proves that his misguided America-first chauvinism is alienating more nations than it's winning as friends.

Pompeo, everyone's favourite Cold Warrior and American chauvinist, is on a European tour . Visiting Greece, Italy, Croatia, and notably, the Vatican, the secretary of state is on a roll to win support for American security and energy interests across the region. But he wasn't welcomed by all. Attending the Holy See today, the US' 'top diplomat' found himself snubbed by the Pope as he rolled into town peddling his vitriolic anti-China agenda, and demanding the Church take on Beijing and refuse to renew a deal that gives it a say in the appointment of bishops within that country. Pope Francis wasn't too impressed and refused to meet him accordingly.

The snub is significant, because it reflects more broadly how Pompeo's highly aggressive and evangelical foreign policy agenda is being received around the world. In short, it's a shambles. Rather than respectfully and constructively engage with the interests of other countries, on his watch, the State Department does nothing but pressure other nations. And it does this while parroting the clichéd talking points of American exceptionalism, hysterical anti-Communism, and a refusal to take into account the interests and practicalities faced by its partners. The Vatican has its differences with Beijing, but how would embarking on a collision course help it or the cause of Catholics in China? It wouldn't.

ALSO ON RT.COM US' failure to recognize Cuba's medical efforts during Covid is due to an innate fear of linking socialism with anything positive

Pompeo is repeatedly described by major US newspapers, the Washington Post among them, as " the worst secretary of state in American history," and it's no surprise why. Diplomacy requires the skills of understanding, prudence, compromise, calibration, and negotiation. The current man in charge of America's relations with the rest of the world has none of those in his armoury – only a one-sided diatribe about how every nation Washington holds a grudge against is evil and a threat to the world, and the US' own political system is far superior (as demonstrated by last night's presidential debate, perhaps ?). Pompeo repeatedly positions himself as speaking on behalf of other nations' people against their governments, while pushing a policy that amounts to little more than bullying.

A look at Pompeo and the State Department's Twitter feed shows it to be a unilateral, repetitive loop of the following topics: 'The Chinese Communist Party is evil and a threat to the world', 'Iran is an evil terrorist state', American values are the best', 'We stand with the people of X', and so on, ad nauseam. To describe it as hubris would be generous, and, of course, it does nothing to support the equally inadequate foreign policy of the United States in practice. This is further distorted by the unilateralist and anti-global governance politics of Donald Trump, which place emphasis only on the projection of power to force other countries into capitulating to American demands.

Against such a backdrop, it's no surprise that a toxic mixture of foreign policymaking has led to other countries not being willing to take notice of Washington. It's winning neither hearts nor minds, and it's this that has set the stage for not only the Vatican snub, but the largely fruitless outcomes of his European adventures. Pompeo's visit to Greece produced no meaningful agreements or outcomes of note , and he failed to get Athens to publicly commit to any anti-China measures or even statements. A similar non-result was achieved from his visit to the Czech Republic a month or so ago – the Czech prime minister even came out and played down Pompeo's comments , after he engaged in a spree of anti-Beijing vitriol.

So, what's at stake for the Vatican? Undoubtedly, religion is a sensitive topic in mainland China. The Chinese state sees unfettered religion as a threat to social stability, or as a potential vehicle for imperialism against the country, and thus has aimed to strongly regulate it under terms and conditions set by the state.

ALSO ON RT.COM Oxford University's 'scholarly' RT hit piece has no room for the mundane reality of how the world's news organisations work

This has caused tensions with the Roman Catholic Church, which maintains a strict ecclesiastical hierarchy, answering to the Vatican and not national governments. With China being the world's most populous country, having among its vast population nine million Catholics, this means the Church has had to negotiate and compromise with the Beijing government to maintain its influence and control, and to secure the rights of its members to worship. This has resulted in a 'deal' whereby the Vatican can have a say in the appointment of its bishops in China, rather than the Church being completely subordinate to the government.

But Pompeo doesn't care about these sensitivities – he wants one thing: Cold War. He wants unbridled, unrestrained, and evangelical condemnation of China and, as noted above, is utilizing his 'diplomatic visits' to push that demand. However, building a foreign policy on preaching America First unilateralism, chauvinism, and zero compromise not surprisingly has its limitations. As a result, Pompeo is finding himself isolated and ignored in more than a few areas. Thus it was that, rather than completely squandering the Vatican's interests in diplomacy with China, Pope Francis simply refused to meet him. For someone as fanatically religious and pious as Pompeo, that's a pretty damning indictment of the incompetence within the US State Department right now.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

[Oct 11, 2020] Cover Your Ass-- The Guiding Principle Of Our Time -

Oct 11, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Louis-Vincent Gave via Gavekal Research,

What is the dominant guiding principle of western societies today?

At the risk of sounding crass, let me suggest that it is the "cover your ass" or CYA principle. This principle has always been fairly prominent in participative democracies. But now it has gone into hyper-drive - so much so, that the CYA principle is also now an important driving force even in financial markets.

CYA and Covid-19

Take the response to Covid-19 as an example of the CYA principle in action. Is there any doubt that the rush to lock down economies and suspend normal civil rights -- to go to church, to attend school, to visit friends -- in the face of Covid was driven largely by policymakers' fears that if large numbers of people died, they would be held accountable in the court of public opinion?

Of course, no policymakers want a surge in deaths on their watch. But economies did not get shut down during the 2009 swine flu pandemic, nor during Sars in 2003, the Hong Kong flu pandemic of 1969, nor even the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918. So what changed between the time of Sars and the time of Covid? One obvious answer is the rise of social media.

Now that every policy choice is reviewed and debated in real time by millions of people around the world, CYA has become all-important. Politicians have to put policies in place to hedge against the wildest tail risks imaginable. At the same time, the first instinct of policymakers (and of investors -- but more on this later) is to avoid doing anything that diverges too far from the pack. Any policymaker anywhere looking at the opprobrium heaped on Sweden will surely agree with John Kenneth Galbraith's observation that "it is far, far safer to be wrong with the majority than to be right alone".

Once Denmark and Norway had decided to follow Italy's lead and lock down their populations, any western government that did not follow suit risked being accused of playing Russian roulette with people's lives, regardless of the epidemiological evidence. Unfortunately, we still seem stuck in this mindset, even as the weekly death tolls across western countries have dipped to generational lows, almost regardless of the Covid policies they adopted (see the chart below).

me title=

So, we should all be grateful that Donald Trump appears to be bouncing back from his brush with Covid having taken little harm. Firstly, of course, Trump is human, and it doesn't do to wish harm on another human. Secondly, if Covid were to have taken Trump's life, it would have claimed the highest profile victim possible. And after the death of the US president, who can doubt that anti-Covid measures would become even more liberticidal. Regardless what you think of Trump, that would be a very bearish development, at least for "Covid-victims" such as energy names, airlines, casinos, hotels, and restaurants , all of which are desperate for policymakers to acknowledge that Covid-19 no longer seems to be as lethal as it was six months ago.

CYA and the fiscal and monetary policy mix

Moving on to the far less controversial fiscal and monetary policy responses to the recession, can there be any doubt -- again -- that policy is being driven above all by the CYA principle? What policymaker wants to espouse the Hippocratic principle of "first, do no harm," and let markets and prices find their own footing? None. As Anatole has argued, policymakers are scrambling always to do more, with ever-bigger budget deficits funded by ever-more money printing ( see Will A Keynesian Phoenix Arise From Covid? ).

Can this new enthusiasm for budget deficits and money printing guarantee prosperity? It seems to for some individual stocks. But for the broad market? Perhaps not, or at least not in "real terms". Take the equal-weighted S&P 500 as a proxy for the typical equity portfolio (appropriate now a handful of mega-cap names dominate the cap-weighted index), and discount it by the gold price to get a picture of equity returns adjusted for currency debasement.

When US governments keep spending under control, as Bill Clinton's did in the 1990s or the Tea-Party-led Congress did after 2011, the broad equity market goes through long phases of "rerating" against gold (see the chart below).

And when the government embraces expanding budget deficits funded by the Federal Reserve, as with George W Bush's "guns and butter" policies or Donald Trump's rapid deficit expansion, gold massively outperforms the broad equity market. Where does this leave us today? Since 2014, the equal-weighted S&P 500 has delivered the same returns as a pet rock -- gold. This is because the index has lost a third of its value since making a high in September 2018, and has basically been flat-lining since late April (see the chart below).

This may help to put the current debate on US stimulus into context. First, does anyone doubt that the US government will release a tsunami of new spending after the election? Because of the CYA principle, what policymaker will want to be seen to be blocking recovery? Secondly, will this increase in budget deficits, funded by the printing press, trigger stronger economic growth? If so, why weren't we doing it before? Will it lead to higher asset prices? If so, why are we so far off the 2018 high? Or will it mean further currency debasement? Looking at the ratio between the equal-weighted S&P 500 and the gold price, will a new round of stimulus mean a return to the February 2020 high? Or will it see the March 2020 low taken out?

Another way to look at this problem is through the prism of the US dollar. Will another round of fiscal stimulus be dollar-bullish? Or will it be dollar-bearish? The answer matters greatly to all those foreign investors currently seeking shelter in US equities. For them, the return on US equities has been flat since late May - and going further back, flat since mid-2019.

So, if another round of stimulus weakens the US dollar, as seems likely if the stimulus is funded by the Fed, then foreign investors will have to hope that increased equity values will more than compensate for their foreign exchange losses.

CYA and indexing

This brings me to what is likely the most important element of all this for readers: the CYA principle and investing. Gavekal has written at length about the dangers of indexing (see, for example, Exponential Optimization). We have also argued that indexing is the new in-vogue form of socialism. Capital is not allocated according to its marginal return -- the foundation on which capitalism rests. Instead, capital is allocated according to the size of companies. Just as in the days of the old Soviet Union or Maoist China, the bigger you are, the more capital you get. It is hard to think of a stupider way to allocate one of the key resources on which future growth relies. So why is indexing so popular? Simple: it is the ultimate CYA strategy.

As Charlie Munger likes to say: "Show me the incentives, and I will show you the outcome." In a world where every money manager is told his or her target is to achieve a performance close to that of the index, it is hardly surprising that ever-more money ends up getting indexed ( see Indexation = Parasitism ). As a consequence, over the years the dispersion of results among money managers has become smaller and smaller.

Now, the Holy Grail of money management is to achieve decent long term returns combined with low volatility in those returns. However, in a world where ever-more capital is directed into investments that outperform -- playing momentum rather than mean reversion -- you inherently end up with greater volatility all round. Take the past few years as an example: since January 2018, the S&P 500 equal-weighted index has suffered six corrections of -10% or greater, including one -20% drop and one -40% drop. In contrast, in the preceding two years -- January 2016 to January 2018 -- the S&P 500 did not see a single -10% drop, while the July 2016 to January 2018 period didn't even see a -5% drop. Clearly, something in the environment has changed.

More indexing makes sense from a CYA perspective, but ends up delivering lower returns and higher volatility all round. This stands to reason. If capital is allocated only according to marginal variations in the price of an asset, then the more the asset's price rises, the more capital money managers will allocate to that asset. And the more an asset's price falls, the less capital is allocated to it. Such momentum-based investing inevitably creates an explosive-implosive system, which swings wildly from booms to busts and back again. And in the process, capital gets misallocated on a grand scale.

In the 20th century, the goal of every socialist experiment was for everybody to earn the same salary. In the 21st century, it seems that the goal of indexing is for everybody to earn the same return. As we now know, fixing everyone's return on labor at the same price was a disaster. People stopped working, and economic growth plummeted. Fast forward to today, and why should we expect a different outcome if the end-goal of our investment strategy is to ensure that everyone gets the same return, not on the their labor but on their capital? Isn't the entire world of money management now oriented towards delivering this remarkable ambition?

And should we really be surprised if the growth rates of our economies continue to slip? Why should we expect a positive growth outcome from an epic misallocation of capital? Take the current Big Tech craze as an example: everything is organized for investors to sink ever more capital into those very companies that need it least, and whose best use for this gusher of money is typically to buy back their own shares.

This CYA investment-decision-making process appears to be one of the key drivers behind the recent divergence between the S&P 500 market-capitalization-weighted index, and the S&P 500 equal-weighted index.

But it may also explain an interesting point raised by my friend Vincent Deluard, strategist at StoneX. In a recent tweet (he's well worth following) he noted that each of the last four major market corrections bottomed out in the last week of the quarter, just after the index futures expired. Now, this could be a remarkable coincidence. On the other hand, it might say a great deal about how capital is allocated today.

Conclusion

In A Study Of History, Arnold Toynbee reviewed the rise and fall of the world's major civilizations. He showed that throughout history, when any civilization was confronted with a challenge, one of two things could occur. The elite could step up and tackle the problem, allowing the civilization to continue to thrive. Alternatively, the elite could fail to deal with the problem. In this case, as the problem grew, their failure led to one of three outcomes.

1) A change of elite. An example is the clear-out of the French political class at the time of decolonization. As the old Fourth Republic stalwarts struggled to meet the challenges of Asian and African independence movements, they were replaced by Charles de Gaulle who brought in new personnel and established the institutions of the Fifth Republic.

2) A revolution. Obvious examples include the French revolution, with the bourgeoisie taking over from the aristocracy, and the American revolution, with the local elite taking power from the British king.

3) A civilizational collapse. Examples include the collapse of the Aztec, Mayan and Inca civilizations following the arrival of the conquistadores. Another is the disappearance of the Visigoths in Spain and North Africa following the Arab-Muslim invasions at the start of the eighth century.

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

With this framework in mind, how does CYA as an organizational policy approach help in dealing with challenges? The obvious answer is that if CYA is your guiding principle, the problems you chose to tackle will be those where there is little controversy within the elite about the required solutions.

This explains the constant hectoring about tackling climate change. Here, policymakers can promise to spend lots of money, without leaving their backsides too exposed. This accounts for the dramatic divergence between the performance of green energy producers (who produce energy) and carbon energy producers (who also produce energy).

It may also explain the rush towards ever-more European integration, as if the real challenge facing Europe today is a resurgence of the Franco-German rivalry that tore the continent apart in the 19th and 20th centuries. Policymakers can spend entire weekends in summit meetings debating European integration. This allows them to feel useful and important, even if their debates increasingly seem about as relevant as the debates of the Byzantines over the gender of angels even as the Turks were storming their city. But while pushing for more European integration might not tackle any of the issues European voters actually care about, at least it doesn't leave your behind exposed.

This brings me back to Karl Popper's theory that at any one time, there is a set amount of risk in the system. Any attempt to contain this risk either displaces it to somewhere else, or stores it up for later. If Popper was right, then the extreme aversion of our policymakers to taking risks means that the risk must appear elsewhere. But where? Perhaps in financial markets? It does seem not only that spikes in the Vix have been getting sharper lately, but that the Vix is also staying more elevated than you would expect in the middle of a roaring bull market.

Or, to put it another way, over the past few years, it does seem that the "downside gaps" in markets have started to become more vicious.

So perhaps CYA makes sense in today's financial markets. The challenge, of course, has become finding the instruments that allow you to cover your posterior. In March 2020, as equity markets tanked, government bonds did not diversify portfolios adequately. And in September, as equities fell -10% from peak to trough, bonds also failed to deliver offsetting positive returns.

This new development -- that US treasuries no longer offer CYA protection for equity investors in difficult times -- is an important one. It makes allocating capital to either equities or bonds a lot more challenging. Or at least it becomes a lot more challenging if you are compelled to follow contemporary western society's all-important guiding principle: CYA.

[Oct 06, 2020] -Joe Biden's 'war economy' policies are a radical break with the status quo.- Telegraph - Sic Semper Tyrannis

Oct 06, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

"Joe Biden's 'war economy' policies are a radical break with the status quo." Telegraph


"Bidenomics is a heady brew. The Democrats' $7.9 trillion blast of extra spending is a step beyond Roosevelt's New Deal. It mimics the Keynesian expansion of the Second World War and consciously aims to run the economy at red-hot speeds of growth.

If enacted in full, it is large enough to lift the US economy out of the zero-rate deflationary trap of the last decade and entirely reshape the social and financial landscape.

The stimulus will be corralled inside the closed US economy by Joe Biden's protectionist "Buy America" policies, his industrial strategy, and his carbon border tax (i.e. disguised tariffs against China). This limits leakage.

It is a laboratory of sorts for a post-globalisation experiment in what used to be called "reflation in one country" – before the free flow of goods and capital emasculated sovereign governments.

"It's quite likely that, just as in World War II, when we push down on the economic accelerator, we will find that we have been running on one cylinder up until no w," said the Roosevelt Institute, now advisors to the Biden campaign .

This is why Moody's Analytics estimates that Bidenomics accompanied by a Democrat clean sweep of Congress would lift American GDP by an extra 4.8pc, add an extra seven million jobs, and raise per capita income by an extra $4,800 over the next four years , compared to a clean sweep by Donald Trump. Economic growth would rocket to 7.7pc in 2022." Telegraph ------------- Evans-Pritchard, the author of this piece baldly declares that the Trump tax cut failed to stimulate economic growth and that a clean sweep by the Democrats in November would lead to massive GDP growth and a reduction in present economic inequalities in American society. I will be very interested in your comments. pl

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/10/06/joe-bidens-war-economy-policies-radical-break-status-quo/


Fred , 06 October 2020 at 12:19 PM

That's a fine read Col. Thank goodness that after 47 years as a politician, including 8 years as VP - during which TARP did what? - Biden finally has a plan to Tax and Spend that beats all the Tax and Spend plans that went before this one.

Just what is this getting spent on - the same things Obama-Biden promised, "green" (the color of money) energy, solar charging stations and 1.5 million energy efficient homes (didn't the Housing bubble cause a little economic problem?), 'educaiton'! I wonder if that includes teaching us all critical race theory? and "infrastructure". And here I thought broken records were out of style.

Where's the money coming from? According to Oxfordeconomics, which the Guardian links to, Biden's raising taxes, but it won't lower consumer spending:
".... we estimate an overall multiplier of 0.25 for the individual provisions in Biden's tax package. So, for every dollar of tax increase, households would reduce their spending by 25 cents. As such, while the proposal would generate a substantial revenue inflow, we don'tbelieve it would significantly constrain consumer spending."

So what is the decline in corporate spending if you raise corporate taxes? The economists at Oxfordeconomics conveniently left that out, nor did they eplicitly tell you that a decade of tax revenue will still leave you with 60 years of tax burden from Joe's spending.

"On the corporate tax front, the most significant revenue raisers are:•A 7ppt increase in the statutory corporate tax rate to 28%, which would raise $1.3tn over 10years.•An increase in taxes on foreign earnings.•A 15% minimum tax on global book income.•The elimination of several real estate investment tax preferences." (Oooh look, Trump's screwed! Yeah! I wonder how all those REITs look with that?)

Another unasked question: Who is going to do all that economy stimulating work if there is a national lockdown due to Covid?

GEORGE CHAMBERLAIN , 06 October 2020 at 12:20 PM

what's new?

"LaRouche's comments were prompted by an article published in the Telegraph on May 19 by British intelligence stringer Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, whose experience in orchestrating U.S. impeachment drives for the British goes back to his attacks on President Bill Clinton. Evans-Pritchard, on the eve of Trump's first trip abroad as President, is spreading the black propaganda line that Trump might already be incapacitated, in much the same way as President Richard Nixon was incapacitated by then-Defense Secretary James Schlesinger, who "instructed U.S. military officials to ignore any order from the Oval Office to use nuclear weapons."

Evans-Pritchard asserts that the key to overthrowing Trump is to pull Republican support away from him, which he admits is still strong. But what happens next? He quotes Sir Jeremy Greenstock, former British UN ambassador and now chairman at Gatehouse Advisory Partners: "America can be very powerful if it decides to act hard. Xi Jinping and Putin will probably wait and see whether Trump self-destructs." Evans-Pritchard then raises the question: How will Trump behave "when the special prosecutor [Robert Mueller] starts to let rip with a volley of subpoenas."

Leith , 06 October 2020 at 12:23 PM

I like the idea of a Carbon Border Tax. Or at least the one proposed by the EU, as I have not seen Biden's proposal. It has never made sense to me that we import from countries with low environmental standards when our own manufacturers are handicapped.

But unless Biden can carry Democratic Senatorial challengers against GOP incumbents it ain't gonna happen. It will be stalled in the Senate. There is no way McConnell will even allow it on the Senate floor.

Stag Deflated , 06 October 2020 at 12:40 PM

This thinking has been wrong, repeatedly so, for the last 10 years. The idea that there is just one more pedal to push down to jumpstart the economy belies the truth that we have experienced the most accommodative and expansive monetary policy on a global level in modern times.

Aside from the lack of efficacy, which I may look to discuss at length later on, there is another striking thing about this plan, and that is how it will be paid for. The reason is not the traditional "where will the money come from" I know where it will come from, cheap US debt, but it tells us two key things. The first is that the functional ideas of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) that you can basically just issue debt and have your central bank both monetize it and keep the interest payments low and use that to fund largely unlimited government spending have for the most part been endorsed by those on the left as a mechanism to deliver on their grand plans. The second thing that is striking though is what they want to spend the money on, which is military spending and infrastructure and not healthcare and a green new deal. This calls into question what alignment there is on the cadres of the left or the possibility that starting with infrastructure is a way to run cover to expand these fantasy economics to social projects without reorienting the economy towards their achievement.

Veg , 06 October 2020 at 12:48 PM

Evans-Pritchard's talents are wasted on economic commentary. He writes well, but in the breathless tones of a failed thriller writer. His entire worldview is based on the notion that it is always two minutes to midnight. It's a shame that they put all of his stuff behind a paywall.

Maybe if Biden's plan is approved we will finally see the inflation that Wall Street and its media minions have been whining about for the past forty years.

I have no doubt that the collapsing pocket that is Conservative Inc will luxuriate back on the familiar loser's ground of "fiscal responsibility."

Biden's plan, such as it is, simply marries the essence of Trump's nationalist policies with Great Society spending levels. Like so much of his platform, it is designed to keep the progressives on the plantation until Nov 3 and not one minute beyond.

Deap , 06 October 2020 at 12:51 PM

Sure it will. The devil is in the details. When has any Democrat economic plan ever produced intended results. First they have to confess what went wrong with their trillion dollar "War on Poverty" that now requires another trillion to pretend to clean up that grotesquely distorted mess.

Until they confess to their sins of the past, they are doomed to repeat them. How are they going to remedy their decades of teacher union K1-2 fail turning out entire generations of dysfunctional illiterates who are somehow going to be absorbed into this dynamite economy.

They are sitting in the back room smoking dope and spinning tales. What I hear is wealth confiscation and/or turning on the printing presses. Time for a good recap of Obama's initial "Green Jobs Revolution" from his first term - who did those promise work out and why are we having to undo the piles of excrement Biden First Term left behind.

I have a bad case of deja vu When in fact the Trump Tweaking was paying long term dividends, until the deep state hijacked covid to destroy any possible Trump bragging rights. Never forget Nancy Pelosi tearing up Trump's SOTU address and declaring they were all lies -- and then carrying out her covid porn agenda to make sure she was proven correct.

Remember the three generation rule - all revolutionary and planned economies always fail by the third generation. Soviet Union, Margaret Thatcher's warning, Cuba, etc ......if all the wealth in the world was redistributed, it would be back in similar hands three generations later. Societies always stratify, even since the Sumerians.

America is unique primarily because of the mobility it offers between the strata by its relatively free market system. Don't mess with it. Democrat's heavy handed planned utopia is a nightmare.

j. casey , 06 October 2020 at 01:10 PM

"Bidenomics" is comedy gold, man. Here's another one: President "Printing Press" Harris.

A. Pols , 06 October 2020 at 01:14 PM

Yup, and I've got some ocean front property in Arizona for sale. Sounds very hopey changey to me.

Diana Croissant , 06 October 2020 at 01:17 PM

I am no economist. However, I am not in debt. I am not wealthy, but I have all I need and want. I've worked very hard during my life and enjoyed my jobs because they were suited to my training and kislls. My retirement funds keep me comfortable. My two sons are doing well in our current economy. That's, of course, a self-centered view of the situation.

But, with that in mind, I say this: "beware of Greeks bearing gifts." (I know Biden is not Greek, but I hope you get my point.)

I am also remembering the Obama administration. I may receive only an Obama phone and an EBT card.

blue peacock , 06 October 2020 at 01:27 PM

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard is generally a very astute writer. However, on economics and national fiscal policies and central banking he has bought into the Davos sophistry that defies common sense for over a decade.

An example of this sophistry is this line from the passage in your post - "..lift the US economy out of the zero-rate deflationary trap of the last decade...". Ask an average American if they've seen any price deflation in their rents or house prices, their kid's tuition, their health care premiums, their cost of pharmaceuticals, the cost of tacos at their neighborhood taqueria, the cost of getting their shirt cleaned, over the past decade and they'll laugh at you. The cost of living of average Americans have risen and that is the real living experience. But of course if you're Ben Bernanke or Mario Draghi or Jerome Powell or Ms. Lagarde then we are in a "deflationary trap" and they should print more and more money that gets shipped first to their friends on Wall St. The Party of Davos as Jack called it.

Under the government enforced lockdown, how many trillions has the US federal government under the Trump administration borrowed from future generations in the first and now the second stimulus waiting for approval? How many trillions did Jerome Powell print up and send to his friends at Blackrock and Citadel?

GDP is a useless indicator IMO. Digging trenches and filling them up will raise GDP. A very important indicator however is productivity growth. That has been lagging for many years. Another are median household income & wealth, which has also been lagging. What we've seen in the US is a dramatic increase in wealth inequality between the top 0.1% vs the bottom 80% over the past 50 years and this curve continues to accelerate - second order derivative!! The second is the level of systemic debt across all sectors - individuals, corporate and government at all levels that has continuously risen over 50 years increasing systemic leverage to a point larger than during the civil war and WW II. This has occurred under both parties and the Trump presidency has actually increased it despite the rhetoric. Compare the Balance of Trade relative to the soundbites.

https://d3fy651gv2fhd3.cloudfront.net/embed/?s=ustbtot&v=202010061328V20200908&d1=20101009&h=300&w=600

A systematic restructuring of our economy away from financialization, away from bailouts of the oligarchy, away from unprecedented market concentration, away from untrammeled credit expansion to back previous credit losses and having a monetary authority with a singular focus on sound money is what's necessary. But that's not gonna happen under either Trump or Biden as it will gore the ox of the Party of Davos whose interests is what both sides primarily cater to. More debt-fueled government spending always ends up as socialism for the oligarchy which is exactly what we've had for decades. It is an economic truism that as productivity of debt continually declines, economic productivity also declines. That's the trap we are in!

LondonBob , 06 October 2020 at 01:46 PM

Been very happy with my gold investments these past two years and will stick with them thanks, Biden would supercharge them.

Longer term I am looking to have most of my money in Asia, Russian oil companies also seem to like drilling for oil, rather than desperately trying to be anything else than producing oil like BP and the rest. Demographics are dire for most of the West and the US is likely to continue transitioning in to a Latin American style country. People have been well conditioned in to not talking about such things but no point talking about the increasing economic dysfunction without talking about the underlying cause. A massive increase in immigration will lead to a surge in inequality, anemic economic growth, fiscal deficits and a decline in gdp per capita.

Time to start think about investments the way a well to do Latin would.

BillWade , 06 October 2020 at 01:57 PM

Well, Biden has to get elected first, we'll see. Carbon taxes, hmmm - another way to destroy the middle-class?

Something to think about is the European Central Bank, they are a meeting late this month with "experts" to determine if they will go to a digital currency. The ECB might then decide the "experts" are right and go full digital on Jan 1st, 2021. We might see a whole lot of Euro money coming into the USA, hope so. However, the Federal Reserve has not been printing any new bank notes so you'll have trouble finding crisp bills for Christmas gifts.

Oilman2 , 06 October 2020 at 02:10 PM

IMO, based on the debt current and future we are loading on the backs of our children, it matters not a whit which of the paths are chosen. Both will end in destruction of said debt by some method - because you can only load so much on horseback and still ride. As we stand now, we are walking alongside a swaybacked packhorse already. Closing off the country, where the only growth has been in the services sector for decades, makes sense in what universe?

Raise taxes? They have only ever increased in my lifetime, my fathers and his. At what point does the Boston Tea Party repeat? From where I sit, everything either party does is only adding fuel to a coming conflagration, as nothing is actually paid for - a ledger entry is aggregated and we march on. The piper will get paid, as he has the children...

tedrichard , 06 October 2020 at 02:32 PM

1.socialism and keynesian economics as a viable theory dead dead right now....today and politicians know it
2. central banks are trapped at zero bound interest rates with no way under heretofore main stream economic theories to stimulate their respective economies
3. politicians are largely dumb as a bag of hammers with not a shred of understanding what to do other than to listen to think tanks warmed over rehashed ideas that have not worked in the past and won't now