Russia, China, and the American Experiment

Something new is happening on the American political scene.  Self-identified conservative Americans, mostly younger conservatives, are open to the “influence” of Vladimir Putin, or at least the Russian stance on the Syrian civil war and in Eastern Europe.   Younger Americans do not have a personal history with the Cold War, no do they identify Russia with the “old” Soviet Union like many Boomers do.  While they see China as a self-identified “communist” state, they also see it as communist in name only.  There is no larger capitalist state in the world, the USA included. China’s government may be authoritarian, perhaps even totalitarian, but it is very far from a Marxist/communist state in any classical definition.Those with no education in political philosophy, as well as the “low information voter” may be forgiven for assuming that communist is simply another word for authoritarian, but it certainly doesn’t make it true.

Both Russia and China have a distinct advantage over the United States regarding reaction to fast-moving international situations.  Both nations can react at almost any speed required to take advantage of any international situation.  In the United States, not only is this not the case, but there is a great chance that opposition members within the government can actually stall or completely negate the ability of the government to act.  In the United States, we call these “checks and balances”, but are they?

Recently, one well-known political pundit stated on a nationally broadcast television news program that “(T)he Chinese are eating our lunch in the South China Sea and the Russians are doing so in the Middle East because the United States does not have a foreign policy”.  Think about that for a minute.  The greatest, presumably the richest and most militarily powerful in the world  does not have an effective foreign policy.  I will make no attempt to explore how this happened, as I probably do not have the life expectancy to complete such a mission.  Succinctly, our nation is devolving.  All nations do.  Some, like the Russian Federation, are born out of the devolvement of the Soviet Union and the chaos of unchecked capitalism that followed during the Yeltsin era. China could be said to have devolved and resurrected at least twice, once after the collapse of the Manchu Empire in 1911, and again with the death of Mao Zedong which opened the current era of state capitalism.  The United States of America has been in existence realistically since 1787.  While our civil war did tear the nation apart for four years, after its conclusion, there was no great change in government or society, except in the South.  No devolution or collapse took place.

The United States is now facing events that the nation has never faced before.  There is an almost 50/50 split between Americans who want the nation to remain, or return to, a nation that honors individual liberty and economic and religious freedom, and Americans who want a socialist state in which cradle-to-grave governmental services requires the death of classical individual liberty and the imposition of an atheistic, authoritarian regime.  “Equality” has become much more desired than liberty, even though it is the equality of the Left only.  There is no presumed or implied equality for non-Leftists.

the United States has often been referred to as the “American experiment”.  All experiments end – that is the nature of experiments.  The question is, what will our nation be reborn as?



An American Deep State?

In the following, I am assuming that the reader is more or less unfamiliar with current Alt-Right theory and writing.  In fact, I must caution that when I use the term Alt-Right, I am no way referencing Donald Trump, Stephen K. Bannon, or Breitbart News.  None of these people or organizations are Alt-Right, although they may from  time to time have some mild Alt-Right  tendencies.  For true Alt-right commentary, you must read Oswald Spengler, Julius Evola, Sam Francis, Richard Spencer, and Jack Donovan.   I’m sure that you’ve probably never heard of any of these people,and there is no reason that you should have.  They certainly aren’t taught in any American public schools.  However, these are the founders of the modern Alt-Right movement.  You will never find them on Breitbart, and I doubt Trump knows them either.

Deep State: The concept of a “state within a state”.  While elected governments come and go, the Deep State – the infrastructure of the military, security and intelligence, as well as the judiciary and corporate structure, are intact, molding the elected officials to its aims and needs.

There have been several Leftist authors in the United States over the past fifty years who have written that the United States has a “deep state” which prevents politicians from truly altering the political life of America.  While this may seem to be true in certain snapshots of time, it has never been effective, or even truly existed in the United States as it has in other nations.  There could be said to have been evidence of a deep state during the Carter Administration (1977 – 1981), when the altruistic views of Carter were completely undermined by the military and intelligence operations the nation.  While I certainly don’t deny that (I was there), I see it as a “one-off” – a reaction to the dire circumstances to prevent clueless and perhaps unhinged Chief Executive from totally crippling the nation’s ability to defend itself or its national interests.  So while the Leftist press  – or at least those knowledgeable enough to be aware of the concept, claim that the United States has, or has had, a deep state, I would argue that our nation has not, but must have a deep state to survive in the future.

A deep state must exist in any nation undergoing severe demographic and social upheavals.  In the United States, for instance, a deep state will maintain order and a functioning government while it is determined how demographic changes would affect the electorate, and therefore how citizenship must be determined.  A deep state is not limited in political philosophy.  A deep state can be Marxist, liberal democratic, or any other political philosophy.  An Alt-Right deep state may differ in some functions from others, but the mechanics of sustaining the “continuity of government” would not be significantly different whether Marxist or “conservative’.  With the media completely confused about the definition of Alt-Right, it would be difficult for the informed citizen to determine and identify if there was an Alt-Right component in their political milieux.  The media assumes that the Alt-Right is a purist form of American conservatism.  The Alt-Right is NOT conservative.  There is almost nothing left worth conserving.  The biggest difference is that the foundational conservative idea is “limited government”.  The Alt-Right is interested in saving Western Civilization, and both limited government and the U.S. Constitution are not top considerations.  In fact, “individual liberty” has often devolved into total anarchy.  The greatest laboratory for “individual liberty” is America’s urban inner-cities, where law-enforcement is more of a concept than a fact, and a private small businessman may spend up to 50% of his gross profits for “security”.

As a nation, we have about a two-year window to make significant changes and modify governmental infrastructure to preserve them.  A deep state will greatly increase our chances of survival in the face of changing demographics.


Donald J. Trump Won – Now What?

[For about two weeks, I have had two manuscripts on my desk:  “Trump Won”, and “Clinton Won”.  You get the first one.]

With a surge of White, blue-collar men and women – yes, women – and more than a smattering of Latinos and Blacks looking for more than the same old, warmed-over Democratic Party dollars for dindus crap, Donald J. Trump became the President-Elect of the United States this morning.  The Clinton crime family is over as a power in American politics.  Due to the unsavory residue left by her parents, any notion that Chelsea Clinton would attain national office has ended.  The Democrats, as they say, will “move on”.

So what can we look forward to?  First and foremost, Trump must, above all else, keep his word about building a wall on our southern border.  There is no alternative, unless Trump wants to lose the support of 90% of the Americans who supported him.  While he is building the wall, he must create American jobs for American citizens.  This can be done partially by identifying and punishing corporations – all corporations – that knowingly employ illegal aliens.   Illegal agricultural workers, busboys, roofers, and lawn maintenance workers must be “let go”.  This will, as Mitt Romney famously said, lead to “self-deportations”.  American workers will take those jobs.  Why am I sure?  Because the dollars for dindus programs will be scaled back to near zero.  Section Eight housing will require some actual cash every month.  EBT cards will be eliminated in favor of the surplus food products that cannot be easily exchanged for nail salon services or cheap convenience store alcohol.  Womb-to-Tomb care will be a thing of the past.  Subsidized housing will be reduced to those over 65 who simply don’t have the income for market-based housing.

Hopefully, international trade agreements will be readdressed.  To those who say that cannot be done, I say “Watch”.  America is a huge market, and can actually do pretty much whatever it pleases in international trade.  Feelings may be hurt.  Boo-hoo-hoo.

If Trump is to be successful, he will have to hold strong to the idea that America, and Americans come first, last, and always.  The President of the United States is not the “big daddy” to the world.  We have seen for eight long years what kind of weak, pathetic creature that requires.  Some nations may have gotten used to the United States bending over (forwards) to “accommodate”  nations that would not give the time of day to the U.S.   They will, I am sure, get used to a United States doing exactly what it needs to do for its own people, and not much caring if other nations like it or not.


How Public Education Led to Economic Stupidity

I entered the American public school system in 1960.  Dwight D. Eisenhower was President.  Man had not yet entered space, and the nation had approximately 900 troops in a place called Viet Nam.  American public education was placing an emphasis on math and science.  Universities were beefing up their engineering programs and high schools were reinforcing the math programs.  All this was the result of the 1956 Soviet entry into space with Sputnik 1, and the resulting American space program, which seemed to rearrange the nation’s government overnight.  I graduated from high school in 1972.  Our nation had placed twelve astronauts on the moon.  America was in the process of withdrawing troops from Viet Nam, from a high of 536,100 in 1968 to a 1972 level of 24,200.  Between the nation’s attitude toward the war and the civil rights struggle for African Americans, public education was changing.  The “60’s Generation” was entering the classroom, and the space program was considered a waste of money that could have been spent on the oppressed and downtrodden.  Education made a 180 degree turn from objective to subjective.  Facts were irrelevant.  feeling were what mattered.  To a great extent, this zeitgeist has held for the last forty plus years.  But in the last fifty-six years since 1960, there is one discipline that has not been showcased, and it shows.  Economics.  Macro, micro, whatever.  The average American, and the college-educated American especially, is amazingly ignorant of economics.

In this election year, I cannot count the number of interviews I have seen with unimpaired (apparently) Americans who have no knowledge of the national debt, or how (or why) it could possibly affect their lives.    They have no idea where “money” comes from, how it is valued, or why debt makes a difference.  Even members of Congress seem to think that the national debt can simply be “fixed” by printing more money (Sheila Jackson Lee).  The average American is even more ignorant, if that is possible.  People with a large pool of disposable income tend to be somewhat more ignorant about microeconomics, simply because they have less to worry about.   Non college-educated Americans have less knowledge of macroeconomics, and that puzzles me, because less than 20% of university students take any economics course these days.  It would interfere with their Gender Relativity class or Deconstructing Western Civilization seminar.  All this has been a great boon to the Democratic Party, which uses economic idiocy to attract huge numbers of voters.

In about twelve hours from the time I write this, we will see if the idiots won.

Why All “Establishments” Eventually Die of Their Own Stupidity

[Note: a great deal of this rant was generated by Patrick J. Buchanan’s “An Establishment in Panic”, published in Taki’s magazine on 10/21/16.  To that end, I have included the link here:  ]
The end stage of every “Establishment” in history is fear.  Fear is born when people who are used to control, who know what’s good for you, even when you don’t, suddenly find that the masses no longer follow them, respect them, or acknowledge them.  I started out political life as a Trotskyist.  In many ways, I still am.  I am no longer a Marxist because I realize that redistribution only makes everyone poor, and that human nature, being what it is, is to do very little until a gun is placed in your ear.  The fabulous Socialist “New Man” of 1890 – 1945 never emerged because he cannot exist, except in the warped and diseased minds of those who would rather live in an imaginary world of their own construction that the actual one mankind lives in.  Robert F. Kennedy’s most adored quote (by progressives) is:Some men see things as they are, and ask why. I dream of things that never were, and ask why not“.   The answer to that is: You can, but that isn’t doing anything to repair, remake, or improve what’s here.  New Man will never appear because this idea is 100% contradictory with human nature.  The fact is, the people who dream of this have something very dysfunctional deep inside them that makes them unable to operate successfully in the “real world”.
For about fifty years, with a few breaks, the United States has been under the guidance (rule) of “liberal democracy”, or, as we see it now “redistributionist authoritarianism”.  If you think that the United States of America has been an actual representative “democracy” since November 22, 1963, I call into question your ability to think rationally.  In a “democracy’ where representatives executed the will of their constituents, would we have a nation in which 72% of the population thought the country was “headed in the wrong direction”?  We are living in an authoritarian state in which a Globalist elite are using minority demands and manufactured “White Guilt” to impose conditions that punish economic producers and reward low IQ denizens who neither contribute to the society/economy, nor are neutral.  The idea of nation-states is frowned upon severely.  “We are all one!”  They proclaim.  Actually, what they mean is: “You are all one!  We are not, and you will be made to like it”.
Establishments – all of them throughout history – believe their own lies.  That is the event that sends them to their graves.  The Democratic Party, in all its factions, the New York Times, Washington Post, Slate, HuffPo, and all the self-important faculty on all of America’s irrelevent college campuses, believe their own lies.  It will lead to their deaths, intellectually, as a social group, and perhaps even personally.  When establishments fail, no matter how much you don’t want it, violence occurs.  In France, from 1789 – 1797, members of the “establishment” who did not emigrate where either executed, starved, or reduced to a state lower than the peasants, never to hold any influence again, even over their own lives.  I’m sure that they never, ever thought it would happen.  After all, France was the most civilized nation on earth.  In a span of 31 years, the British Empire went through a slow-motion suicide that ended with national bankruptcy, the loss of most of its overseas possessions, and along the way, the deaths of 1,587,993 of its subjects by war.  I guarantee you that the “elite” of the British Empire had no idea on the eve of war in 1914 that their nation would, in 30 short years, be reduced, in both gross national product and personal wealth, to the level of a third-world nation.  It took forty years from 1945 for Great Britain to recover, if you can call it recovery.  Was that a revolution?  A fall of elitism?  yes, on a continental scale.  No nation in Europe with the possible exception of Switzerland, exited that period in history with the governing elite it entered with.  Even Sweden, neutral in both world wars, had its elite torn asunder and it’s national character altered.
Those who look to the 2016 Presidential election to “start the revolution” will probably be disappointed.  Whoever wins, I doubt the spark will lie in the election.  It will be something much smaller.  Something less notable.  The assassination of a particular politician, or even a talk-show host.  Perhaps a reaction to a “social justice” demonstration (riot).  It will start very small, like a cigarette butt thrown out of a car window onto parched grass.  Within weeks, the entire nation will be an inferno.

Be Prepared

Let’s be honest – I don’t like Donald J. Trump. I think that Gary Johnson is an addle-brained pothead and that Jill Stein may be a great doctor, but her talents are best suited for the examination room rather than further wrecking the US economy.  Who have I left out?  Oh, yes.  Satan’s spawn herself, Hillary Rodham Clinton.  Ms. Clinton was labeled by one of her “friends” as a “bundle of insecurities”.  I can see that.  She has arrived at this conclusive moment in history on the back of an accused rapist and convicted perjurer.  Convicted!  You can’t erase that, CNN!  As a frustrated Democratic operative said recently, she lies even when she doesn’t have to.  Some people call her a sociopath, but after having read the definitions, I’d label her a psychopath, because she actually displays no conscience at all.  Whatever action benefits Ms. Clinton most is the one she will choose, regardless of anything else.

So being honest again, the American people have only two choices.  We all know that neither Johnson nor Stein will garnish more than low single-digits at the polls.  Petting a unicorn and staring at rainbows will not help.  Reality is reality.  Donald Trump comes across as a bully.  He is in no way politically correct in his language.  Some of his economic policies seem misguided, some even clueless.  We really don’t know what he is going to do.  But that is the point!  We know exactly what Hillary Clinton will do, if we trust her words.  She will bring in far more Syrian refugees than Obama ever dreamed of.  She has said so herself.  Our southern border with Mexico will become simply an archaic line on an old map, as Central American peons flood over the border to drive down wages, bankrupt social services, and introduce diseases America has not seen in generations.  Islamists will be coddled while American Patriots will be investigated as terrorists.  The middle class will be taxed to the limits of their endurance, and beyond.

I have heard several objections regarding Trump.  He’s a bully.  He’s a racist.  He’s against abortion.  Maybe he’s all those things.  I don’t yet know.  But I do know exactly who Hillary Clinton is.  Exactly.  Any vote for anyone but Trump is a vote for Hillary Clinton.  So is a non-vote.  Your future is in your hands, because I can foresee a time when the lives of Clinton supporters and those who supported her by default may be in the hands of American patriots.

Actions have consequences.

Explorations in Povertystan

I don’t know who to attribute the phrase “Poverty-Industrial Complex” to, but my hat is off to you, whoever you are.  It’s the perfect description of the entity that has controlled the federal government’s spending since 1965.  That is the year that Lyndon Johnson started the Great Society, an umbrella of social programs designed to eliminate poverty in America.  Fifty years on, it has shown itself to be anything but great, detrimental to society at large, and will, if left to continue, will snuff out all economic life in the nation within a decade.

“So if the Great Society experiment was/is so awful, why is it still around, and why has it been allowed to grow so much?”  The answers are both simple and predicable.  The typical democratic-socialist / Marxist answer to failure is always the same: We haven’t spent enough money!  Also, consider the fact that after a few short years, there are thousands of people who’s careers depend upon the existence of poverty.  Many of these people have no marketable or transferable skills.  Many are academics (again, no marketable skills).  Their income, as well as their prestige, absolutely depends upon the continuance of these programs.  If poverty is eliminated or reduced to a level easily manageable by local authorities, what would become of the hundreds of thousands (today: millions) of case managers, supervisors, processors, inspectors, and other “social workers”, let alone the consultants and advisors in the academic community to whom the poverty-industrial complex is a free laboratory to further their careers?  If the American automotive industry is too big to fail, how much more so is the poverty industry?

As the decades wore on, it became obvious that “temporary assistance” had become a permanent generational institution.  Beginning with the Clinton Presidency, workfare became a popular buzzword.  The first rumblings of the middle class had begun to be heard.  It had finally hit home that it wasn’t the government paying for these benefits, it was the taxpayers.    Both Republican and Democratic representatives were beginning to hear from their constituents: What happened to the “temporary” part of temporary assistance?  Able-bodied welfare recipients were expected perform some labor to help offset their upkeep.  This was completely gutted from legislation by Barack Hussein Obama and his Democratic henchmen as soon as he took office in 2009.

Now, over fifty years since since LBJ’s Ohio University speech of May 7, 1964, the federal and state governments have over one million Americans employed in the poverty-industrial complex.  This is direct employment only; it does not include consultants, think-tanks, and others paid through grants and stipends to “study’ the poverty problem.  In fiscal year 2013, federal and state agencies together spent 2.3 trillion (yes, trillion) dollars on seventy-nine separate social programs.

In one way, and one way only, the Great Society has succeeded.  It has employed a million people with no apparent skills.  Unfortunately, these recipients of career employment were not the wretched poor the Great Society was created to care for.