Archive for March, 2011

Desert Warfare

March 29, 2011

 

HUMANITARIAN VALUES HAVE SURVIVAL VALUE.

***

Desert warfare is fast and fluid. When the British and French were fighting the Italians and Germans in 1940-1943, the war was all over the maps of Tunisia, Libya and Egypt. From one month, to the next. Hostilities started with Mussolini’s million man army in Libya marching into Egypt against the 36,000 men British army, guarding the Suez canal and the oil fields of Arabia.

War in the desert does not hinge on much. The crucial action at Bir Hakeim by a small (but extremely competent) French army, saved from encirclement the entire Eight British army which was in full retreat after Tobruk. If that British army had been encircled by Rommel’s Afrika Korps and the Italian army, it would have been destroyed, Egypt would have fallen, all Jews in Israel would have met their maker, and Hitler would have made it to Arabia’s and Iraq’s oil fields.

The French army, made mostly of professional soldiers, fought so well, because it was extremely motivated. Those who have values are not alone, even in the desert, and having values is the way to not been alone, even in the desert.

Qaddafi, the world’s most experienced dictator, has huge stores of big, advanced weapons all over. In the last few days it was discovered he has sophisticated SA-24s ground to air missiles. He is not supposed to have them, but he does.

At some point, Qaddafi proclaimed his annexation of the country of Chad. More than once, Gaddafi ordered big Tu-22s supersonic Soviet bombers to drop bombs on the capital of Chad, by flying under French radar. Finally the French shot back. The dead crew of a Tu-22 was found to be East German. East German, where Merkel comes from, really? Really. Not a coincidence. (Kadhafi bombed Europe, and the American and French jumbo jets, to avenge himself from his defeat in Chad.)

Libyan pilots refused to confront French pilots, making mercenary pilots necessary.

Once Libya invaded Tanzania. Yes, a country in the southern hemisphere, south of the snows of Kilimanjaro. Tanzania underwent a general mobilization.

In the Tanzanian counter-attack, the Libyans and their (literally) man eating ally, the dictator Idi Amin Dada, were completely defeated. That is how Uganda was rid of cannibalism: the Tanzanians stuck to their guns, down to the bitter end. Here, the bitter end was to do away with cannibalism.

There are many such stories with Qaddafi. Some live for luxury, Qaddafi lives for terror and destruction. With a sense of dark humor.

By the way the friend of Kadhafi, the official cannibal Idi Amin Dada, escaped justice as he retired in wealth. Probably wealthy enough to still enjoy his preferred meal. A man of wealth and taste. Where did Amin flee to? Libya, of course. Then Saudi Arabia.

Germany and Turkey have acted to insure the continuation of the 42 year reign of Qaddafi and his sons. It is no coincidence that Germany and Turkey have been the only countries in the world, which engaged in genocides against (people they defined as) foreigners, in the last 100 years.

I will explain, in essays coming soon, what it is in the history of Turkey and Germany which makes them so sympathetic to fascism of the worst type.

Many Americans long did not understand why cool indifference to mayhem made Auschwitz possible. That cool indifference to mayhem did not instigate Auschwitz. That, the Germans did. But it made it possible. Indeed, facing Hitler, and his hordes of fanaticized youth, the defense of the values of the West was left to France and Britain (which were surprisingly defeated in a confluence of improbable catastrophes in 1940).

Some say: why don’t you fight in Yemen, Bahrain, Somalia, Sudan, etc.? If you feed one of the starving, why don’t you feed them all? Why so discriminatory?

First American and French soldiers died in Somalia and Sudan, respectively. These countries are messes, and they are getting partitioned. Sudan very officially so, since a new country is being created with its southern part, after a UN sponsored referendum.

Second, Kadhafi has used military force against peaceful demonstrators, and has committed war crimes, and crimes against humanity (and that even against the American and the French!) In other words, Kadhafi is Hitler light, whereas many other regimes are just Mubarak like. There is a huge difference between Hitler and Mubarak, as there is a difference between abominable, and bad.

Third, as I said, Libya, an old Greek and Phoenician colony, used to be in the center of the Greco-Roman empire, and a source of great agricultural wealth. In other words, as Obama pointed out not as crudely, its location makes it proximally strategic. Something the UK and France are fully aware of. These two powers expulsed Turkey from the area between the late eighteenth century and the early twentieth century. Turkey relinquished Albania and Crete only in 1913. Turkey  held the entire southern and eastern Mediterranean and Mid East for more than three centuries. If the area is a mess, it’s in part because of this imperialistic possession by the uncivilized (being possessed by the uncivilized is a particularly inferior sort; being possessed by the most civilized, as India was, is more profitable, as Gandhi unwittingly proved).

Who dominates what has economic impact for everybody, including the West: if Turkey had kept on holding Iraq, Arabia, Libya, and Algeria, the West would have had to get the oil, manu militari. But it happened before that, because, before Turkey had time to exploit the oil, it was too liberal in the way in which it exploited piracy, and kidnapping. So the nascent USA attacked that Turkish protectorate, Libya. under Washington’s presidency. So righteous adventures in Libya are of the essence of the USA.

Fortunately Obama knows this, or, at least he knows the part involving values. Obama, confronted to Qaddafi, explained that defending American values is in the strategic interest of the USA (something France and Britain have been persuaded of, since there is civilization, and they defend it). Verily, the day North Korea is starving, and threatens to blow up the USA because it wants food now, this point of view will look very practical.

Obama speaks of "American values", to please his bigoted electorate. But he knows these values are just those of successful sustainable civilization, those humanitarian values which honor the human spirit. HUMANITARIAN VALUES HAVE SURVIVAL VALUE.

If you have a king cobra in your bedroom, that king of kings of snakes, you don’t just poke it a few times. You take it out. And, as far as making a deal with Qaddafi, well, Heinrich Himmler, chief of the SS, following Rudolf Hess, Hitler’s dolphin, thought he could make a deal with the Brits. But the Brits arrested him, and he swallowed poison.

Many tremble, as plutonium looms in Japan again. However mercury does not just looms in the oceans: it is already there, deposited as condensed mercury vapor from coal plants. Plutonium is not yet in the food chain, but mercury already is. Not talking about it, or eating fish just once a month, won’t make it go away. Those responsible are not prosecuted, let alone bothered.

As the world is threatened, or is undergoing by many Fukushimas, and worse, this is no time to tell those responsible of past, present and future catastrophes, that they will be spared from justice, just because they are wealthy and influential.

Justice is justice, and it should apply to plutocrats, just as it applies to the simplest citizens.

Patrice Ayme

Advertisements

DESTROY MAD DOGS

March 22, 2011

 

"ALL NECESSARY MEASURES" MEANS TAKING OUT KHADAFY.

It’s A Matter Of Survival, Thus Justice.

(Reagan called Khadafy the "mad dog of Africa".)

***

Abstract: Why did the holocaust of the Jews happened? Because Germans believed that human rights were less important than other notions. Germans were moved first by these other notions. German culture was organized that way. Denazification could not correct this.

Kadhafi, the Libyan dictator, after gunning with tanks, and strafing with planes his opponents, called them “germs” who he was going to “exterminate without pity or mercy”.

Guess what? Many in Germany still do not get it (and Germany has flouted orders from the United Nations ordering a weapons embargo on Libya).

Before the Second World War, Hitler made himself the advocate of “peace”, and obsequious pacifists flocked to help him set-up the conditions for Auschwitz. Afterwards, they lied that they did not know that Hitler was a bad person, and they swore never to pronounce his name again.

The operation in Libya is to protect civilians from the leadership of a mass murdering criminal, who has been referred to the International Court of Justice by the United Nations. Even nations which, historically spurned the ICJ (USA, Russia, China) voted that way.

The intervention in Libya is more a humanitarian, international police operation than a war. Those who stand in its way are beneath contempt and oblivious to history. 

We can learn a lot from the way that other mass murdering criminal, mad dog Adolf Hitler, was dealt with, or, rather, not dealt with. Then, in 1939 and 1940, and even 1941, and most of 1942, the USA acted badly, as it let France and Britain go to war alone against Nazi Germany. The result was 70 million killed.

In a magnificent contrast, this time the president of the USA acted splendidly, and was deaf to all those indifferent to massacres (thus Obama earned his Nobel Peace Prize retroactively).

Britain, France and the USA united, fighting for human rights, against fascism: no wonder Germans are crying up a river. Those don’t seem to have progressed much since 1939, philosophically speaking. Now pro-fascist, pro-massacre Merkel has withdrawn German ships from NATO command, to avoid helping in the arms embargo on Libya mandated by the United Nations. (How about changing back to the preceding flag?)

The Congress of the USA may not have progressed much since 1939, either. It has to integrate the following notion. The USA’s fate is closely related to that of its parents, France and Britain. France and Britain are not just allies, or “partners”, they deserve to be worshipped by the USA according to an ancestor cult. France and Britain gave birth to the higher principles at the core of what the USA wants to be.

How brain dead or fascist countries feel, does not matter.  Those have to be instructed, rather than consulted obsequiously.

For the basic conventional reasons to get rid of Qaddafi, see for example the New York Times’ "A War In Libya".

In this essay we dig deeper, and spare nought. The planet has shrunk, gunship diplomacy is to be replaced by survival enforcement. And the best way to survive is to enforce human rights, planet-wide.

The leading democracies have counter-attacked in Libya on behalf of the People against the heavily mechanized mercenary force of the self described "King of Kings of Africa". This intervention of civilization against abomination was pretty much launched by a single individual, the French national dandy, the wealthy and gutsy philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy ("BHL", who, from Benghazi, told his friend the French president he should act fast and why; BHL was a friend of president Mitterrand, he is an anti-fascist philosopher).

However one should go further than stopping the mayhem, be it only because it will start again as soon as we turn our back, and we cannot have Combat Air Patrol over Libya ad vitam eternam.

KADHAFI SHOULD BE TAKEN OUT (dragging him and his entourage to the International Court of Justice would be best).

Destroying Kadhafi’s regime has to be the aim of the war, and it has to be done swiftly (for reasons to be made clear below). The most moral way to do away with the regime, is to attack Khadafy personally, and to attack his sons, who are his own personal Goebbels and Himmler. Those individuals, mass murdering terrorists, ought to be the prime military targets.

I use the terror exercised by the Khadafys to reveal shallow and nefarious aspects of Socrates’ philosophy. On the way to demolish Gaddafi, one has to do away with Socrates’ sneaky hypocrisy.

Socrates had to fight for democracy, as a philosopher. He did not. Socrates did not understand the mental superiority of democracy. Just the opposite.

Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, used specious arguments to undermine democracy. They contributed to the occupation of Greece by a succession of fascist regimes for more than 21 centuries. Indeed they undermined the spirit of the Athenian National Assembly, while encouraging Athenian plutocrats to collaborate with fascists (and, ultimately those fascists were the Macedonian led by the presciently named general Antipater).

The small Russian muscle man, the top plutocrat Putin, and the unsophisticated Germans, have expressed their displeasure at the sight of democracy smashing dictatorship. For reminder, Russia and Germany were two fascist dictatorships allied to each other from 1917(de facto!), until June 1941. Some seem to have kept all too fond memories.

When Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, and most of Western Europe were invaded in 1940, Russian oil propelled Nazi tanks. Now Russia and Germany dare collaborate again together against the western democracies?

Russia, to this day, is a half republic, a petro regime riddled by a state directed plutocracy. Russia should learn democracy, and that starts with listening quietly to those who have long practiced it. Now Denmark, Holland and Norway are siding with France and Britain, and have engaged in hostilities against the fascist mass murdering dictator to their south.

It is a time, when in Europe, people and individuals can chose again to do something against fascism in defense of democracy.

In a bitter, and alarming reminder of the atrocious past, Germany is on the other side, the fascist side. Sad, and troubling. German history, and the despicable, uneducated, lying attitude of Germany at the United Nations are scrutinized below, and this enlightens the debate.

Predictably, the major Italian plutocrat, Berlusconi (personal worth above ten billion dollars) is sabotaging the anti-coalition effort, by asking NATO in (when Arabs don’t like NATO, and major members Germany and Turkey are pro-Qaddafi).

Putin maybe an even bigger plutocrat than his comrade Qaddafi. Qaddafi is a plutocrat, Putin orders plutocrats around. Putin sneered that getting rid of Gaddafi reminded him of the crusades, when “one invaded a place to liberate it".  Well, maybe he should learn Soviet history: after all Germany was invaded and destroyed, to be liberated, in 1945.

Russian President Medvedev, a lawyer by formation, walked directly to reporters he had convoked. Chin up, he declared severely that it was "completely inadmissible in such a situation to use such terms, and evoke a shock of civilization". Medvedev was as serious as one could be. He then walked briskly away, after his twenty second press conference. It was very courageous, and even admirable, for Medvedev to condemn, and so brazenly, the former head of the KGB (Putin). Hence one man can stand in the way of plutocracy. Ideally, Putin ought to resign, but he will not, because he is the stealth dictator of Russia.

Putin has sent a task force of extremely wealthy billionaires to take over the French Riviera. Among other places. Today Qaddafi, tomorrow Putin? Clearly, this is what Putin is thinking about, and he worries: where is this assault against plutocracy going to end? Are French philosophers going to attack Putin’s apparent scheme of revolution by corruption?

Physically eliminating Hitler was a moral duty, and would have prevented, or shortened the world war, saving up to 70 million people. It was a massive failure of morality not to have assassinated mad dog Hitler.

The non execution of Hitler was first a German moral failure, and a failure of German collective intelligence. Hitler was the beloved "Guide" of the Germans, and maybe they feel empathy for the African mercenaries madly in love for the bloody tyrant who enriches them (when you have been co-dependent, you justify other co-dependents).

The French were the first to conduct a bombing raid on Nazi Berlin. Ironically, Berlin was less pro-Hitler than many other places in Germany. Any fighter in the anti-Nazi Resistance would have assassinated Hitler, so why did the Allies not try it? They did not try it, because they thought it was against the laws of chivalrous war.

But there was nothing chivalrous about the context. Hitler himself was the biggest outlaw of the twentieth century (Stalin had more excuses, starting with the German threat).

By the Fall of 1940,  French authorities had determined that Hitler was mass exterminating civilians, and had assassinated at least 700,000 Jews in extermination camps (However, by then Metropolitan France was occupied by the Nazis, and the military power of French forces had waned). The French advertised the holocaust widely, but the Anglo-Saxons powers that be decided to ignore those pleas (the Americans had selfish interest to refuse to fight the Nazis, the British were fighting for their own survival, and could not do more than what they were doing).

When a guy grabs a gun and points it at the head of children, does civilization say that he primarily requires respect and due judicial process? The question answers itself.

So why was not mad dog Hitler targeted for elimination personally? Because of a quaint morality, the belief that 80 million Germans could not be that wrong. There was still a modicum of respect for Germany, and its electorally chosen "Guide". It was misplaced.

Hitler deserved less respect than a rabid dog. And so it was for the millions of Germans licking his toes. The collective mind exists, and so does the collective guilt. Especially when it comes from the collective hubris, and a collective facility for lying, and being "apolitical" (namely looking the other way when Auschwitz smokes; many German towns could literally SMELL the burned flesh of extermination, but, for the German mind, smelling a massacre is apparently not evidence enough ).

By 1938, Hitler should not have been viewed by democracies as a head of state anymore. He was a mass murdering gangster, violating all human rights in sight, and calling those violations “laws”. Any government official who forfeits human rights to that extent should lose any human legitimacy in the eye of democracy.

The same considerations, and the same answer, hold for mad dog Kadhafi. Qaddafi was never elected, though, so he has even less legitimacy than Hitler that way. Gaddafi’s mass murdering acts are legions.

Mad dog Qaddafi ought to be treated as Hitler ought to have been treated, the way an armed mass murderer ought to be treated, and generally is. And for exactly the same reasons. If a mass murderer takes children as human shields, snipers aim at his head, in any decent state (it does not even have to be a democracy, it could be a putinocracy).

All too many Germans of influence apparently still consider that using tanks and bombers to kill civilians is no drama, and leaves them cool and collected.

Real democracies should instead insist to bring to justice gangsters who lead countries astray. And to do it in a timely manner.

Some whine, why did we not bomb Bahrain, or Yemen, or Syria, or Jordan? Well neither the threats, nor the butchery has been comparable there. Those countries are not on Europe’s doorstep, nor have threaten to, and mass murdered American or European civilians.

In 1939-1945, Germany disagreed that “Guides” who lead countries astray should be brought to justice, and it still dares to disagree now, having learned apparently nothing.

Germany’s ethical immaturity ought not to matter to France and Britain: they are used to German nihilism, and now the balance of power is clearly not on pathetic Germany’s side. Germany ought to go back to school, and learn history for a change. Meanwhile, France and Britain can teach some more positive history.

Hitler and Qaddafi are not knights in shining morals with whom democracies have legitimate gripes. Instead tyrants such as Qaddafi and Hitler are criminal gangsters with a fanatical devotion to themselves, modern cut-throat highway men, empowered by technology and plutocracy, emboldened by the timidity of the lawmen.

The mere existence of crazed despots such as Hitler and Qaddafi is combat, thus they are legitimate targets. Qaddafi does not even bother to hide his mass murdering principles (contrarily to Hitler, an avowed apostle of peace, a tremendous lie which hypnotized the gullible, ahistorical Germans…hey, who wants to be German, and learn history? Just asking… Crying up a river smears the ink. But notice that, the more the Germans do not feel like learning about history, the more they do more of the same, the more disgusting they get, the less they learn.)

What we are witnessing is the rise of “We The People” against the dictatorship principle imposed on the southern part of the Mediterranean around 16 centuries ago. Yes, Islam associated tyrannies were the second phase of the Roman Christian imperial mass murdering theocracy which had crushed Mid Terra’s in body and mind.

The rise of pro-democracy does not please some who prefer fascism, or who prefer to keep all the riches to themselves (discrete allusion to Germany and Turkey, which see developing the south of the Mediterranean as competition for their own backyard). But the rise of pro-democracy should please those thrilled by the real spirit of the hearth of civilization, that spirit which has made us what we are.

Fascism is not compatible with the continuation of civilization, planet wide. Destroying fascism is the essence of the ultimate morality, survival of humankind (no, Hitler did not subscribe to that morality, because, like the Germans, or Kadhafi, he started a war, just to lose it… As Salvador Dali pointed out).

Doing away with mad dogs help doing away with the mad dog spirit. After doing away with Hitler the mad dog, Germany was well behaved for 65 years, and ten and a half months. If one does away with the mad Libyan mass murderer, humanity will take heed, and learn (that Germany seems incapable of learning comes from its mechanical hubris, other countries will find easy not to fall into that).

Last, but not least. In 1929, plutocracy threw the world in a crisis, a cover for establishing working relationships with all sorts of tyrants (some in place, such as Stalin or Mussolini, or some incubated, such as Hitler). Right now, we have a similar situation. Plutocracy is going to try to start a big bad war. To do so, it needs its strong men. To stop it, democracies need to be pro-active (and not passive, as in the thirties, or cutting deals with the fascists, as the USA and Britain did all too long).

Kadhafi leads perhaps the world’s richest plutocratic clan (140 billion dollars, plus mercenary armies). Short of the Saudis, of course. The Libyan despot thus has many friends among the world wide plutocratic network, and that is why he was able to get away with so much. One can hear influential Americans such as Brent Scowcroft (close associate to Bush I) deeply regretting that one would do away with such a sure value of the existing order as Gaddafi. he was close to tears on the august TV channel PBS. He looks like another one once on Qaddafi’s payroll. Such good money, so much of it.

Disposing of the Libyan despot chops off one of the most vicious and avid heads of the plutocratic hydra. That may encourage those who, like the honorable Obama, have hesitated to take the minnow plutocrats on Wall Street head on (Soros, another plutocrat, in sheep disguise, has partly excused himself for steering a university to serve the Khadafi clan).

***

***

SI VIS VITAM, PARA BELLUM:

A fireman told his wife he was going to the spewing, exploding, burning, tsunami ravaged Fukushima nuclear installation with its 6 crippled, partly melted reactors, and seven fuming, boiling nuclear pools. His wife said:"Go save Japan." This is the spirit. The spirit of democracy. Save the People. In democracy, the People rules, and not just with words. It also rules over the heart, and the notion of ultimate sacrifice.

That fireman, and his wife are heroes. So were the French pilots who destroyed tank columns dashing into Benghazi, even though Kadhafy’s anti-aircraft defenses were still fully functional. Life could not wait, death had to be stopped. By all measures necessary. The planes came out of the dark clouds, just in time. Another two hours, and much of Kadhafi’s tank force would have been completely inside Benghazi, making it impossible to destroy from the air, without killing many civilians.

***

ASSASSINATING RABID DOG HITLER WOULD HAVE SPARED DOZENS OF MILLIONS:

It was a moral duty to execute Hitler. It was a tragedy not to have done so. That tragedy is called "The Holocaust". 70 million killed.

The first plot against mad dog Hitler by the top German generals happened in 1938. They needed a cover-up, namely a reason that even the moronic Germans could understand, demonstrating to them, cognitively impaired Germans, that Hitler was going to destroy Germany.

At the time France was clearly close to declaring war to Hitler, but Britain was not. The idea of general Ludwig Beck (the head of the German army), and his colleagues, was to have Britain send a strong message that one more sign of craziness from Hitler would make Britain join France in declaring war to Germany. So the top German generals contacted the British government, to ask Britain to make very clear that it was going to go to war against Hitler. Unfortunately, pro-Nazi traitors in London warned Hitler instead of warning Germany. Beck lost his job, but he kept on coordinating his ex-colleagues in opposing Hitler. He was forced to commit suicide on July 20, 1944.

In 1943, plotting field Marshalls had contrived to invite Hitler to a fateful breakfast in the Ukraine. Elite aristocratic officers, expert at guns since their childhood, were to shoot the dictator in the face (to avoid Hitler’s body and skull armor). However, Himmler, head of the SS, did not show up, and the commanding Marshall let Hitler have breakfast in peace. It is very unfortunate that the young officers did not proceed nevertheless. Again in 1943, German officers put a bomb in Hitler’s plane, but it did not explode.

In July 1944, courageous German officers tried to kill Hitler while making a coup in collaboration with the chiefs of the Nazi armies in Germany and France. The explosion of the bomb spared Hitler. The coup still proceeded, for a while. However, when despicable German officers learned that their beloved Fuehrer had survived, they arrested the courageous ones, and had them executed. German discipline at its best. Where does it come from? Cowardice. Stupidity. Intense mediocrity.

Oh, by the way, this proves that decapitating a regime led by a criminal leading other criminals who have nothing to lose, can work. If Hitler had died, or had been severely wounded, the many general officers and Marshalls who knew of the plot would have gone along with the coup (the next step was to inform the Western Allies that Hitler was dead, and that Germany wanted to put an end to hostilities).

clip_image001

clip_image002

The Wolf’s Lair conference room soon after the explosion. Four died. Too little, too late.

The 20 July plot of 1944 attempted to assassinate Adolf Hitler, "Guide" of the Third Reich, inside his Wolf’s Lair field headquarters in East Prussia (now in Russia). Hitler was always in hiding, especially from the German army. Similarly, Kadhafi is the self described "Guide" of Libya, and runs a secretive regime even less lawful than Hitler’s.

The plot against Hitler combined most groups in the German Resistance to overthrow the Nazi regime. The failure of both the assassination and the military coup d’état which was planned to follow it led to the arrest of at least 7,000 people. According to records of the Führer Conferences on Naval Affairs, 4,980 people were officially executed.

The organized resistance in Germany was destroyed. Morality? If one does not destroy ruthlessly nihilistic gangsters such as Hitler or Kadhafi, they will destroy you. And the more they destroy, the more they have to destroy, just to see another day (this phenomenon was made famous with the Roman emperors Caligula, then Nero and Domitian, during the fateful half century when Rome got habituated to autocratic fascism).

The coup d’état would certainly have worked if the many general officers who sat on a fence had realized that Hitler would assassinate them ALL afterwards. Instead many meekly hope that, by joining the repression, they would prove their submission to their Guide. The same process is in evidence in Libya. Like Hitler, Qaddafi stands ready to torture the families of his enemies.

The widespread hostility to Hitler in the German’s officer corps was blunted by a set of German character traits which actually violated German military law, let alone basic human common sense and decency. In retrospect, it is pretty obvious that, if the objective was to limit the number of death caused by Hitler, Hitler had to be eliminated, and there was neither honor nor ethics, nor any intelligence in not doing so.

Kadhafi is similar in detailed ways to Hitler. For example, neither trusted their own armies. They preferred to depend upon foreign mercenaries. The French jets killed many non Libyan mercenaries in the attacking tank columns.

Similarly Hitler came to depend upon a mercenary force, the Waffen SS. At its peak, the Waffen SS had more than one million mercenaries, 38 divisions, and many small units besides. By the end of the world war ethnic non-Germans made up approximately 60% of the Waffen-SS. Ironically, in his last few days, Hitler was defended mostly by fanatical French speaking SS. German combatants had given up on him.

After the failure of coup d’état, the Second World War went on, as the half crazed Nazi criminals were still in power, and more crazy than ever. Their obsession was to kill as many as they could as they died themselves. They were all into their destructive madness, posing as Wagnerian heroes, congratulating themselves to have annihilated European Jews. They celebrated the Gotterdammerung (the destruction of the gods and all things in a final battle with evil), the proto-Nazi and great racist Richard Wagner had made an opera on the theme, and the Nazis played it, in a huge solemn occasion at the Berlin opera house, with artillery rumbling in the distance, and a hole in the roof. Self aggrandizing madness. Now one French fuel explosive bomb could have taken care of them all.

Another twenty million or so, died, including maybe seven million more Germans. Still, after the war was over, millions of deluded Germans kept on hating the courageous officers who had tried to kill the rabid dog. As those fanatics, contaminated by the rabies, died from old age, a reconsideration of sort happened. Some German army barracks are named after Colonel Count von Stauffenberg. Merkel should go there, get on knees, pray and analyze what it all means. And how she came short. It’s not enough to go around with a red dress.

***

WE HAVE LAWS BECAUSE WE WANT TO SURVIVE:

Humanity is about the mind. The mind comes from inside the self, and also from others. The spit of a rabid dog cannot infect more than a few, the mind of a rabid human can infect the many. Khadafy has ordered many times to deliberately kill civilians, and boasted about it. Result? Many other regimes doing the same. And the worst, the ones with many nukes, doing it implicitly. Time to call it off.

Socrates talked about the law ad nauseam. Nice, but shallow. What is the deepest reason for the law already? Survival. Socrates fought for Athens on the battlefield, very courageously, saving fellow soldiers at great risk, and killing at least four in hand to hand combat. So he knew about survival. Of the self.

However, Socrates’ survival skills came short in the field he provided the most added value with, philosophy. His work, albeit long term precious, clearly contributed to weaken Athens, lethally, during his lifetime, and the crucial two generations after that. The fascist friendly philosophy of Socrates and his philosophical descendants weakened the People, and emboldened the Athenian plutocrats, who ended up collaborating with Macedonia. Greece was also handicapped with its anti-imperialist mentality, which prevented its unification, whereas the Macedonian were infused with the imperial principle.

Thus, in the big picture, Socrates, at the time, failed completely in implementing the fundamental reason for the law in Athens. His wishy-washy philosophy caused the death of democracy and two millennia of triumphal fascism (often disguised as theocracy).

***

THE PRESIDENT OF THE USA LEARNS, CONGRESS & GERMANY DO NOT:

This time, differently from 1914, 1939 and 1956, the USA is standing with its parents, France and Britain, to fight for their defining principle, democracy, right from the start. At last.

We have to thank Obama’s courage for this. Suddenly we have an immensely courageous Obama. American lawmakers have pointed out that Obama’s action was “illegal”, as it violates the “war powers act’. However, the War Powers Act of 1973 is itself illegal, as it contradicts international law ratified by the USA. Indeed the NATO charter declares that any attack on one of its members is an attack on all. Moreover, of course, the Libyan dictator attacked the USA since 1973, killing much more than in the Lusitania.

It is because of this sort of Americano-American close mindedness, or outright idiocy, that American lawmakers refused to do anything against Hitler, for years. In truth they were objecting because their rich masters were busy doing business with Hitler. The same holds with Qaddafi. 

Verily, the American plutocrats have set-up a giant exploitative machine throughout the Mideast, which provides them with cheap oil. Kaddafi is a fancy wheel in this well oiled device.  Lose him, and the question of Saudi Arabia, for example, arises. It’s not just about oil, but about enormous money flows, recycled inside Wall Street, and, ultimately, the Congress of the USA. Hurting that wealth machine ought to be illegal, say the congressmen, and they repeat their performance with Hitler, an even more important device for enriching American plutocracy, and, thus, Congress. 

The USA underwent an anti-plutocratic revolution as its founding act. It was generated indigenously (with encouragement from French special agents, especially in Philadelphia). What was the founding act of the present German republic? Its invasion by the tank armies of most democracies, and its erstwhile ally, the USSR. Democracy was brought to Germany at the point of a gun. does Germany understand that? Maybe it does understand that all too well, and seethes with resentment.

I have been highly critical of many of Obama’s policies, but, on this most important of all subjects, war in Libya, he is acting perfectly, and much better than any president before him, for at least a century. Even Clinton intervened in the Balkans years after France and Britain did, and only gave logistical support to the French army in Rwanda.

Now Obama was here on day one to fight for democracy, and save the Mediterranean revolution against fascism, an immense change, renewing finally with the spirit that president Washington and his successor showed in the same Libya, then already occupied by a pirate dictatorship of Turkish obedience. Washington attacked, and so doing shamed Britain and then France into taking action. If they had not, slavery and impaling would still be of the essence in North Africa. If you don’t believe me, go to steal a piece of pizza in Saudi Arabia: your hand will be chopped off. The "West" never invaded Saudi Arabia.

It goes without saying that the despicable betrayal of Germany in March 2011 repeats the same hypocritical scheme Socrates inaugurated: collaborating with fascism against democracy under a cloud of specious arguments (most of them so vile they can only be seen below) .

***

NECESSARY TO DESTROY THE RABID MIND:

The UN resolution 1973 calls on "ALL NECESSARY MEASURES" to protect the "Libyan People". The resolution forbids an "occupation" force (but not an intervention force).

Qaddafi has been massacring civilians for 42 years, and was boasting he would do more of the same, massacring civilians Libyan or not, "with no mercy, nor pity", weeks after he was referred to the International Criminal Court, for mass murder and crimes against mankind, by the United Nations.

So, "all necessary measures" to protect civilians means taking out Khadafy. The situation is more explicit with the Libyan dictator than it was with the Nazi dictator during his reign.

As the philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy ("BHL") said on French TV, "before the holocaust, there is the massacre" ("avant l’holocauste, il y a le massacre"). And the massacre is a holocaust warning, as the quake is a tsunami warning.

BHL did extremely well in this crisis (although he woke up very late, like Brad Pitt/Achilles in the movies "Troy", he did what was necessary). According to French officials, "Sans le cinema de BHL, il ne ce serait rien passe’". So BHL was good for Libya as Socrates was bad with Athens. And the reasons are deep and philosophical. Basically BHL’s philosophy is anti-fascist, whereas Socrates’ philosophy was pro-fascist. Fascism is not just political, it goes to the deepest fibers of man, why and how man thinks. Socrates, Plato, Aristotle were pro-slavery, pro-plutocratic, pro-fascist, hence may have undermined Athenian democracy just enough to cause its ultimate defeat by fascist, theocratic Macedonia, changing the course of civilization. Things may have been completely different if a trio of anti-slavery, anti-plutocratic, anti-fascist philosophers had achieved as much fame instead.

Thus there are extremely philosophically sophisticated, global reasons for taking Kadhafi out: do we want fascism and plutocracy to win, thanks to its mercenaries? The deepest of the reason for destroying the likes of the Libyan tyrant is the ultimate one: SHEER SURVIVAL.

The next big war will be fought with nuclear weapons, except if the democracies take out all dangerous regimes, before the conflict go nuclear. (The similarity some will fear with G. W. Bush is only apparent.)

***

A SMALL PLANET REQUIRES BIG HEART, DEEP MIND, SOARING PRINCIPLES:

Post decolonization, something unexpected happened, namely, its exact opposite, total interdependency. Decolonization could not work, should not have worked, and did not work, instead it swept back like a tsunami wave, interfering with itself, and causing even more waves and destruction.

Why? How? The planet has shrunk. Relative to our existing technology, it is now no bigger than a large European county in the Middle Ages. What happens anywhere else in that county is every one’s business.

It is therefore of prime importance to take out the crazies. Not one crazy should escape the wrath of democracy. A fortiori when several Casus Belli exist. Kadhafi is a mass murderer prone to boasting of his disregard of the most basic laws. He was acquiring the capability for making nuclear weapons, from Pakistan, until Bush made a deal with him, exchanging torture and executions for oil. Therefore Qaddafi is an excellent case for drawing the line on tyranny. The Libyan tyrant should not just be nicked, he should be destroyed. This way, he would be made finally useful in some way. Otherwise we would be doing what the Greeks did, namely not destroying Macedonia when they could have, for wishy-washy philosophical reasons arising from blatant neurological laziness.

In earlier times, powers such as Portugal or Spain, and then, later France, Britain, the Netherlands went around the world, looking for riches. Doing so, they created worlds, such as Brazil. OK, the entire process of world entanglement has been disparaged as "colonialism" and "imperialism". Ethnocides happened on the way; however they always have, and precious elements of the ancient cultures survived, as in Mexico, Peru, Bolivia, South Africa, India, Indonesia. Now we are all colonists, and colonized. Some force will be needed to re-establish a modicum of order, lest all we breathe are nuclear fumes.

No, this was not an allusion to the scheming nuclear operator which created a disaster in Japan, but an allusion to the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

***

GERMANY’S RELAPSE IN PRIMITIVE MEDIOCRITY:

On the way to Tripoli, something scary happened: Germany, or more exactly Merkel, disappeared into a hole, and fell back with its old demons.

German politics relapsed into its main problem. Astounding. Does Germany learn? 130 years after being condemned ferociously by Friedrich Nietzsche for getting ready to bring the horrors it brought, Germany is at it again.

Nietzsche condemned German culture for what it was, or, mostly for what it was not. In the nineteenth century German culture made it dangerous to be worthy. (Nietzsche expressed it nearly in these terms, and was forbidden to teach in universities anymore).

This translated this way in the twentieth century: all too many Germans came to feel that it was to be dangerous to be a democrat, or a defender of human rights. Hitler was taught that later. Dangerous to be worthy is a curious trait for a country which aim at disciplined excellence. But so it is when discipline overwhelms excellence.

So here we are, with Germany’s head back to 1933: it is dangerous to fight for democracy, says Germany, not minding becoming again the outcast of Europe, as it exhibits a dry heart, an empty head, and no guts. Well, France and Britain have to teach savages some more. Lesson #1: Democracy is worth dying for, especially as now globalization of high tech means that no democracy entails no regeneracy. Germany should copy that in capital letters 100 trillion times.

Germany’s relapse is a warning that it is very hard for cultures to learn, even when abomination itself taught them. On the positive side, Germany s is offering a snide service to the world, because it warns all cultures that relapsing in mediocrity, or even criminality, often looms, as the culture one sees and understands heavily depends upon a subculture one neither sees, nor understand. Germany has not become fully Cartesian. Hopefully Germany will understand this, and Merkel will realize that a possible electoral defeat is no justification for an ethical collapse.

Some evoke other Arab countries, and wonder why the democracies did not intervene there yet. Well, they did, verbally, and now visually. An objective of crushing Kadhafi is to crush the spirit of dictators.

***

DEMONSTRATING DEMOCRACY AS A PRINCIPLE WORTH FIGHTING FOR:

As French planes bombed tanks even before attacking the air defense system, the heroic message was that democracy is a danger worth defending. When curing gangrene, one amputates the most affected part first. Khadafy ‘s goons had killed at least 8,000 rebels.

***

COLLABORATING WITH HITLER: DESPICABLE SWITZERLAND:

Is a country which does not defend democracy, such as Switzerland, a democracy? Of course not, and that was demonstrated in World War Two, when Switzerland collaborated with Hitler, instead of fighting him. So did Sweden.

By contrast, Finland and Norway, half the size, heroically fought fascism. Treacherous democracies such as Sweden or Switzerland are not really democracies, because they survived only by collaborating with fascists, and depending upon real democracies to defeat said fascists, so they could live to see another day. actually countries which are determined to" stay neutral", namely not to defend democracy, should be banned from the European Union.

The US Air Force had a precision bombing campaign to deprive the Nazis of indispensable equipment, such as ball bearings. However the Nazis kept on having ball bearings for their machinery. That was mysterious.

Finally the US Air Force had to launch a massive raid to smash crucial Nazi factories located in Suisse. With supreme irony, the Americans excused themselves for this "error". Other "errors" involved stealing funds from massacred Jews.

***

COLLABORATE WITH FASCISM, BECOME ALIKE: SUISSE AGAIN:

Is Switzerland still a lamentable, conniving entity deprived of a sense of democracy, as it jiggles below mountains of ignominy? On November 18 2010, four month ago, a Swiss politician was prosecuted by the Swiss Federal Council with a possible sentence of three years in jail, for having called the criminal Khadafy a "criminal" (for "insults against a chief of state").

When one has not learned to defend democracy, one stoops. Swiss neutrality is a sham. Historically, it means that France and Britain have to defend Switzerland, while Switzerland collaborates with the enemy.

The dearth of democracy showed very practically, even inside: Switzerland practiced arbitrary detentions, especially of children, sometimes against their families’ pleas (these were so called “administrative detentions”). A commune, or a canton would secretly decide to jail someone, without even informing either those jailed, nor their families. Something like that would be unimaginable in the French republic next door, a democracy. Detainees would be used for menial work as in the Middle ages (but without the judicial proceedings of the Middle Ages). This included stealing babies and forced adoption. As in fascist Spain and Argentina. Fascist is who fascist befriends.

This happened two generations after Switzerland’s collaboration with Hitler, up to 1980s, showing that one thing leads to another.

Nowadays, not enough democracy out there means nukes over our heads soon. And it can happen in a sneaky way, as when the private company in Japan did not take all measures to cool its crippled reactors, because it was trying to "protect its assets".

So the behavior of a country like Switzerland have now to be questioned. Dearth of democracy is not to be tolerated (But a huge progress now: Suisse helped with Libya. It let 20 British military trucks drive through!)

***

TWENTIETH FIRST CENTURY: GERMANY SAYS, AGAIN, THAT DEMOCRACY IS NOT WORTH FIGHTING FOR:

Germany don’t learn no thinking, as G. W, Bush no doubt proffered. Germany voted against democracy in Libya. Merkel’s despicable non-act, abstaining against action in Libya, as if it were Russia, but without the excuses of Russia was praised by the opposition Social Democrats, Greens and Left Party. We have again a German problem!

The German UN representative, who did not seem happy to read the text he had to read, said it was "dangerous". Ach so. Contradicting Hitler was also dangerous. So Germany did not contradict Hitler, and others, like France and Britain, had to step in, and contradict Hitler. Anything new in the German Weltgestalt und Glaubenswirklichkeit ? (World picture and reality of belief ?) Germany goes from danger to danger. Should it stay in a hole, and never come out? It may be better. If you can’t think, don’t try.

"I can assure you that we had respect and understanding for our position and our decision even from those that voted in favor" of the resolution permitting "all necessary measures" to protect civilians, German foreign minister Guido Westerwelle said, a day after Germany’s abysmal abstention at the United Nation Security Council. Guido the Guide is from the "Free Democratic Party". Apparently free of democracy. Well, he does not get respect from here. Instead he is getting a history lesson, because, obviously he and Merkel need some.

Westerwell added: "I have great understanding for the motives of those that voted for the resolution and the military action. But after weighing up the risks… we came to the conclusion that German soldiers would not contribute to the intervention in Libya and therefore we decided to abstain for this reason, and for other reasons."

Zehr klar. This, that, and the other thing. Jawohl, mein Fuerer. What would these other reasons be?

Merkel had a privileged youth in fascist East Germany, where her father the pastor emigrated voluntarily. Obviously, a strong fascist leader is of her liking, and she would feel sorry to see one more of them go.

There are even more sinister reasons for the Teutonic attitude: raw egoism. Germany is interested by Greater Germany, and by its own Eastern European backyard. As funds and development go there, Germany becomes richer. The PIGS used to get such funds and development. But no more.

Now Eastern Europe gets the funds and the development. If the Arab world on the south side of the Mediterranean becomes democratic, more European funds and development will go down there. They already do. But it is a trickle, and a flood is needed. Thus, Germany has interest to see dictatorships thrive on the south side of the Med.

The same exact reasoning holds for Turkey. On top of that, Turkey views, historically speaking the southern Med as its own playground. Turkey invaded, and occupied the southern side of the Mediterranean, for centuries, until dislodged by the French, and, a century later, Lawrence of Arabia. So not only a lot of the backwardness of the southern Med can be attributed to the Turks rather than the West, but the Turks are possessive about it, as they are possessive about the tremendously ancient land of the Kurds.

France and Britain did a lot of good on the south side of the Mediterranean, and are spiritually entangled there (and many French have North African roots, including yours truly). Whereas the German presence, historically, has been reduced to the Nazi Rommel’s Afrika Korps. Germany and Turkey act out of their national interests. It’s base, it’s obsolete, and even criminal. Modern Europe requires higher standards.

What seems to be missing in the collective German mind is the necessity to order principles according to their importance, and the capability to do it correctly. So let’s recapitulate.

***

WHY FRANCE & BRITAIN GOT IT RIGHT:

Francia was founded around superior human right principles which had eluded the Greco-Romans. Ideally: no sexism, no slavery, equal opportunity. Then Francia founded England, extending the superior philosophy therein. Jews were equal citizens in the Imperium Francorum.

Now, of course, Francia also founded Germania. So why did the latter devolve, and not Francia and Britannia? Well, the rise of Prussia as an increasingly anti-Jewish state starting around 1720 CE has a lot to do with it.

France and Britain took a pro-Jewish turn, while Prussia’s anti-Jewish 19 C legislation (following the well named philosopher Herder), versed into racism and generalized hyper nationalist hysteria (to which even Nietzsche initially succumbed, before realizing his grievous mistake).

The Revolution of 1789 had given equal rights to all, including ex-slaves in the colonies and Jews in Europe, and had become law in Europe, after the counter-attacking French armies conquered it. Thus good Prussians/Germans were supposed to be anti-French, hence anti-1789, i.e., anti-human rights. In other words, as France, Britain and the USA, were moving forward with respect to human rights, Germany was moving backwards. And, to justify that, progressing in reverse, it had to become ever dumber.

A Jewish captain in a small three person counter-intelligence office was accused of spying for Germany (another officer in the office was actually the spy). Anti anti-Semites in France jumped on the occasion to accuse the powers that be, all the way to the president, of anti-Semitism. There were anti-Semites in France, true, and they were severely repressed. Ultimately captain Dreyfus was rehabilitated, and became a general. After some the nastiest anti-Semites acted out during the Nazi occupation of France, many were imprisoned, and executed.

Some French writers were racist and fascist. However, they were drowned in a much louder chorus of contradictory thinkers of great fame. True, Germany had major thinkers such as Marx, and Nietzsche, who were scathing about German culture. But both had to flee Germany, one to London, the other, having become an admirer of France, on the French Riviera. 

The superiority of France (and of the Jews!), especially in comparison to mechanized imperial racist Germany was the subtlety of the mind, said Nietzsche. And where did that come from? Nietzsche would have said good digestion. Good cooking, in other words. Nietzsche would have said good music, thinking of the happiness of Bizet’s Carmen, in comparison with Wagner’s heaviness.

In truth the Gallic superiority comes directly from the charm of France, which is all about paying attention to what make people happy. There is another side to France, of course, that of the nation in arms, but that is to defend the former.

***

HOW DID GERMANY BECOME FASCIST ALREADY?

In 1944, the talented French writer Céline survived the wrath of democrats only by fleeing to Hitler, and then Denmark. Why did Céline, who was wounded in WWI fighting Germany, become rabidly anti-Jewish? Because he did not want another war with Germany. Céline was afraid of another war. Since Germany was rabidly anti-Jewish, so was Céline.

Thus Céline made the same exact cowardly reasoning that Germany as a whole did with the Nazis, and does with the Kadhafi clan: "it’s dangerous not to collaborate with the crazies, especially when they are murderous, so we should appease them by collaborating". Germany collaborated with Hitler, now it’s collaborating with Qaddafi. Did Germany learn anything important yet?

Germany was a fascist country pretty much from the time Bismarck became Chancellor, until the Allies arrested the Nazi government of the Chancellor-President, Admiral Doenitz, a month after Hitler’s suicide. Even after been completely overrun by Allied armies, and well after having surrendered, Germany kept on being Nazi. Not one rebel in sight: that’s Germany. Germany is not Libya, it does not have rebels, just Nazis.Germany was a Nazism that kept on going, even when it was dead.

Why did Nazism happen? Because enough Germans of influence had weighted the risks, and found it was not worth fighting for democracy. Same thing for the unprovoked attack by German generals against democracy in August 1914: Germans of influence let it happen, because after weighing up the risks, they would not contribute to prevent a holocaust (the generals had sent the Kaiser away, incommunicado, lest he tried to stop them).

***

CROSS THE HITLER LINE, GET DESTROYED:

Is the on-going existence of Khadafy compatible with democracy going in the USA, or in Europe? No, not at all. I am not alluding to the massive corruption that the Libyan dictator has sown throughout the West, from politicians, to intellectuals, to universities, and lesser plutocrats. Look: G.W. Bush himself was in Khadafy’s pocket. No, the problem is the example Khadafy represents to the collective human mind (and yes, Putin and his lackey plutocrats could turn into a similar problem, should he persist down the Pluto route).

No, I am not alluding to the fact that If Kadhafi , or his sons, if allowed to survive, would no doubt try to acquire nuclear weapons again. So the Kadhafi clan ought to be smashed, independently of any other consideration. Was not that Bush’s official reasoning about Bush? Sure. But although it was unwarranted at the time, that does not mean it is unwarranted always. Hussein was long an instrument of the west, and conducted an extremely bloody war, against theocratic Iran, in alliance with the West.

Saddam Hussein started to disobey his masters in the West well after Gaddafi got away with mass murder against the West, several times, and blatantly. It was only natural for Saddam to believe he could repeat Khadafy’s performance, and be a real man, like the desert fox.

There is something called psychology, and it teaches by example. Khadafy taught Saddam, and probably bin Laden, and the Pakistani’s ISI (with its 200 thermonuclear bombs!). Khadafy taught the collective mind that a crazy could get away with anything, and the worse which would happen would be a few bombs from the Americans once, and a few decades of low intensity war with the French in various desertic countries. Nothing that did not burnish the reputation of the dictator.

As the UN Security Council was going to vote, Khadafy threatened to bring down civilian airliners and ships, as he has, in the past. "If the world gets crazy with us, we will get crazy, too" Qaddafi’s commented to Portuguese TV. No, you are not just crazy, you are violating the laws of war, and basic human rights, and you are bragging about it.

It’s no empty menace: Kadhafi already brought down US and French jumbo jets, and bombed night clubs (in Germany! But the more you bomb Germans, the more they submit, apparently…). Khadafy’s bluster terrorized Germany, Russia, Brazil, India and China so much, that they abstain from daring to oppose the bloody tyrant.

These attacks on civilians by Khadafy are no detail. When leaders engage in mass murder one can see, it is certain that they engage much more in mass murder that one cannot see. Moreover war is the best way to hide mass murder. Kadhafi called his compatriots "insects" and "germs" he would exterminate. How many hints to do you need, on the way to Auschwitz? German answer: never enough.

The principle that indices of mass murdering behavior ought to be enough for war was long honored by France and Britain, and even the USA. So this why, after 128 American civilians died in the sinking of a civilian ship off Ireland in 1917 by a German submarine, the USA declared war on imperial Germany. The civilian ship, the liner Lusitania, alone and undefended, was struck by torpedoes, without summations, and sank in minutes. 1198 civilians died.

Hysterical germanophiles of the fascist type have whined that the liner was carrying secret ammunition. However, it is pretty certain that the steam generator was hit, and the point was that the laws of war were violated. Khadafy violated the laws of war much more by murdering nearly 500 American, French, British, Germans and other civilians, all the more when there was no war. The USA has had plenty of reason to bring Qaddafi to justice. Time to do it.

***

Conclusion: BEFORE THE RULE OF THE PEOPLE, THE LIFE OF THE PEOPLE: SI VIS VITAM, PARA BELLUM:

"Man was born free, but he is everywhere in chains," Rousseau whined disingenuously. Rousseau argued that the solution was a self-imposed law created by the "general will". That was excellent. However, the sick, resentful Rousseau, following the clueless, resenting Socrates, also accused the "art and sciences". In other words, Rousseau accused the very essence of humanity. By influencing a herd of less gifted thinkers, it led directly to Nazism. Germany has not understood that yet. Rousseau was born in Geneva, and belonged to the highest citizen class in the city-state (yes, there was such a thing: apartheid by the lake; only some citizens had full rights).

In the Discourse on the Origin and Foundations of Inequality Among Men (1754), Rousseau argued that:

"The first man who, having enclosed a piece of ground, bethought himself of saying This is mine, and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of listening to this imposter; you are lost if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody."

Cute rhetoric. Idiotic too: even crows or chimps have personal property and territory, and they did not lose the Earth. Rousseau had not understood the exact nature of the problem.

Personal property is not the problem. Nor is the human mind the problem. Nor are vast human population the problem. civilization is not the problem. The problem is too much concentration of property and mind on the few, out of the multitude. That brings out the worst. It brings Pluto out, instead of leaving it underground, where it belongs.

Thus civilization has to prevent this phenomenon, plutocracy, by all and any means necessary. All the more since Weapons of Mass Destruction are readily made. When Germans and Libyans found themselves goose stepping behind a "Guide", they were lost. And so others, completely innocent, were.

The distance between southern Corsica and Tripoli, 1,000 kilometers, is the same as between Paris and Ajaccio in Southern Corsica. Now the latter already brought us Napoleon, born in Ajaccio, who caused the burning of Moscow. Therefore Khadafy should be destroyed. Socrates used to make this sort of little reasonings, I can do better, using warp jumps. The distance between Tripoli and Malta, in the European Union, is 345 kilometers. Naples, with its urban area of about 5 million, is 878 kilometers away.

As I said, SELF PRESERVATION is more important than any other notion for democracy, and the law which organizes it. Any regime that puts in question the survival of the People should be destroyed. That was the number one reason why the French republic went after Hitler, and it stays good enough a reason.

Democracies such as the French and American republics ought to search and destroy any regime that puts their survival into question. Kadhafi already tried to equip himself with nuclear weapons, while being, beyond doubt, a deliberate mass murderer, and a "Guide". Enough said. Go get him. It’s a matter of survival.

***

Patrice Ayme

***

Note on EU and euro: Europe has bigger problems than a mad man in Libya and his demented brood, playing Hitler of the desert. Considering that suddenly Germany is back to its old demons of finding democracy not worth fighting for and human rights not a data entry, the wisdom of trying to tie Germany down with the European Union, and the euro, shines anew.

Those who refuse to learn history and persist in considering humanity to be a superfluous notion, need to be shackled down.

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/

Whistling A Hurricane.

March 17, 2011

Whistling In A Hurricane.

IDIOCY IS CRIMINAL, LOOKING SOMEWHERE ELSE, EVIL.

****

[18 hours after the essay below was posted, to my very pleased astonishment, the UN Security Council passed a resolution authorizing “all necessary means” in Libya to protect civilians. The vote was 10 for, 5 abstaining. I want to congratulate the farsightedness of India, China and Russia, which overcame their concern about democracy intervening inside devious, democratically challenged countries. There is hope for them.

By contrast, Germany’s attitude was lamentable, anti-democratic, cowardly, symptomatic of a country that does not understand that democracy is worth fighting for, ahistorical, and anti-European. Merkel, who used to be a privileged youth of the fascist East German regime, seems to have returned to her questionable roots.

According to Le Figaro, BHL, Bernard Henri Levy, who climbed very late on the revolutionary train pushed Sarkozy, and then the West to war. Sarko worked on the 15 governments of the UNSC one by one, but the UN Resolution passage was acquired at last minute…. An encouraging case of philosophy in the driver seat.]

****

****

Our civilization is an immensely complicated machine which thinks and feels. And it is getting more complex by the day. We cannot do without it. Without it, we, and all we love, will be dead, or dying. As the leaders exhibit this or that emotion, they drive events. Out of vile emotions, evil events. E-vil, indeed.

This civilizational machine has something in common with the doomed nuclear reactor complex at Fukushima, which could very well entirely melt, explode, burn, and not just force the evacuation of the world’s largest city. That would happen, in the worst possible case. But at this point, the reasonable thing to do is to proceed logically backwards from the worst possible case. So it is in Libya.

Proceeding from the worst often is the most reasonable, and should ever be more so, as we learn to see further, as we need to, as the machine gets ever more complex, and we need to steer the probability waves, just so.

So let’s suppose the worst has happened at Fukushima, with its 6 reactors, and 6 pools of nuclear combustible:

1) What would that worst be? Well, in the worst imaginable case, the pools where barely used nuclear rods are stored, would have dried up, and heated up so much that they caught fire. That’s the worst. The consequence would be "apocalyptic" (as the chief radioactivist in Europe put it in a diplomatic style reminiscent of yours truly).

2) So how do we prevent this worst possible case? Well France flew one hundred tons of boric acid (the element boron, B, stops neutrons, hence nuclear reactions), 10,000 anti-radiation suits, and various other equipment. South Korea will send some of its Boron reserve too. And a USA warship has provided high power water cannons. Anything whatsoever ought to be done to bring water to the pools.

If there is water, there is hope. No water, no hope. And the fall-out could be worldwide.

The crisis in Japan illustrates the necessity for catastrophic calculus. Catastrophic calculus would be employed after usual risk analysis.

For example the Fukushima reactors and pools had three systems for providing electric power to the water circulation system. This is typical of reactors, and other sensitive sites worldwide; pile up the safety systems locally. But if one piles them up all in the same place, they can fail all together.

Nuclear reactor complexes should have off site emergency cooling and anti-reactive systems, with their own autonomous, sustainable power (no pun intended).

The crisis in Japan happened because of idiotic geological analyses, idiotic engineering, idiotic risk analysis, and the amazingly idiotic storage, next to the reactors, of gigantic quantities of nuclear fuel. Yes idiotic is the word, there is no other that fits the perfectly idiotic strategies deployed, with delirious obstinacy over decades.

The attitude relative to Libya, a green light to its Pluto, Gaddafi, is even more idiotic, because it is giving a green light to the most brutish force. Today Libya, tomorrow, the world.

If you think the nuclear crazies in Pakistan and North Korea did not notice that the Libyan dictator and criminal against mankind could not be eliminated, when he could easily have been, I have soon to show you hundreds of nukes heading your way.

Ultimately the democracies will find themselves at war, for real, against immense forces with none of Gadhafi’s comic allure. And hundreds of millions will die, and fingers will be pointed out to today’s democratic leaders, desiccated dwarves apparently deprived of brains, guts,  hearts, and any respect or affection for their children, who will have to fight the war they brought. With their inaction.

Obama went to "fill up his brackets", in public on the sport channel, ESPN, something the rest of the world does not know what it is. In a literally critical situation, he produced himself as a well trained dog of the national mindlessness. Is that all he is?

"Filling the brackets" has to do with projecting team sports results for the rest of the year. You will not see the leaders of major democracies indulging in such circus, when the situation is as critical as it is now.

But this is the USA. The Americans got bread, they have to be given circus, and the joker in chief provides it on the sport channel. No doubt ESPN will know how to reward him someday. Thus the dog comes to the table. By the way, in Europe representing a brand on TV, or even alluding to it is against basic ethics. But, apparently the US president is the under assistant east coast promotion man.

A Roman philosopher and poet, Juvenal, was the first to observe that the backbone of plutocracy was for the emperor to provide " panem et circenses" (100 CE). Some emperors, namely Nero, Caligula, Commodus, entered the arena in person, and made a show of themselves. Obama is the last representative of a long tradition.

Americans are big on this sort of thing, obsessing about sports, so they can be small on the rest. Takes two to tango to Armageddon, People and plutocracy, a co-dependency of victim and torturer.

Instead Obama should have asked his underlings how come the armada the USA has deployed in Japan cannot bring water to the burning nuclear fuels. After all, the army of the USA is the army of Japan (Japan has only a self defense force, which is quite small, 40% of which is mobilized by the quake/tsunami).

But not only that: in the worst possible case, the safety of the USA is engaged (and not just by the evacuation of Tokyo). Obama is commander in chief of the USA, but, also, de facto, commander in chief of Japan. What does he do on this critical day? He "fills up his brackets". Ah, but his unworthy predecessor, emperor Justinian, before he destroyed millions in the name of Jesus, and his triple head, never missed a game. Morons had it easy in history, so far.

Our civilization feels, and thinks out of its feelings. It was one of Bush’s big themes: feel the wrath of democracy, and it will spread. That much was correct. But, of course, Bush was dissembling: he was mostly pursuing aims antagonistic to democracy and civilization. Still is. A general confusion reigns ever since.

It is true that democracy needs wrath to defend it. It is no coincidence that Republican Rome, Britain and France have been among the world’s most aggressive societies. (Interestingly, when Rome became a fascist empire, its wrath on exterior enemies mostly disappeared, proving that the Roman expansion had been propelled, indeed, by the wrath of democracy!)

Don’t expect Germany and Russia to understand that too well: they found themselves at the end of the Franco-British gun all too many times, and they are perhaps a bit too fresh at democracy themselves. Merkel certainly does not seem to have understood well that Germany’s banks and industries profited of the profligacy of the PIGS (Portugal Ireland Greece Spain). And that now Germany has to contribute, having well profited. Russia of course understand that it is its right to torture the Caucasus, just as Gaddafi has the right to torture Libya, Benghazi and the Cyrenaica…

By decisively deciding to be indecisive with Gaddafi, Obama gave a green light to all bloody dictators. Qadhafi has no legitimacy whatsoever; he made a coup, and never conducted even one fake election, and sometimes all his streets killers are paid mercenaries from other African countries (they wear yellow helmets). But, OK, his torturers are first class, and he does whatever it takes to subdue his people, and to provide oil to the West. All notions well appreciated in Washington, DC. Moreover, Kadhafi is a first class plutocrat, adulated by his peers, the world’s financiers of the kleptocratic type.

So Obama winked to Kadhafi, while waging his finger, the sort of ballet of gestures the charming Dr. Saif al Islam al Gadhafi is prone to do, smiling, on TV, as the great showman that he is.

Asked pointed question about the weasel behavior of his administration, Obama’s spokesman blurted out incoherently that they had to consult with "international partners".

I knew the concept of ‘friends", or "allies". But "partners"? Who are these "partners"? Russia, China, India, Libya? Having long been a "partner" to Japan, GE, General Electric, having sold cheap melting, exploding reactors to the land of the rising sun, at Fukushima, among other places, is now "partner" to China… Selling American secrets. And rules behaviors… China now tells us to stay out of Libya? Why don’t we tell China to stay out of Tibet? (Check the distances and the history, on both sides.) And what is exactly India doing in Kashmir? A bit the same as Qaddafi and Russia do with their contradictors?

By giving a green light to Gadhafi, Obama gave a green light for Saudi Arabia to invade Bahrain, and crush the budding democracy there. Which is exactly what Saudi Arabia did. A blood bath ensued.

If Qadhafi, and his family of bloody world class gangsters win, it is not just the Arab spring which dies.  It is not just the awe and respect for democracy which die.

In truth the armed democracies have to lead. If they do not, fascists do, fascists did, and fascists will. Lead.

When democrats become meek and uncertain about morality, as Obama has, fascists start to believe they can get away with anything. That is what happened in 1936, when, in a comparable war, part of the Spanish army attacked the Spanish people.

Democracy did not fight back in 1936. Hitler, Mussolini, fascist Japanese generals, and other fascists, worldwide, got very encouraged.

France and Britain wanted to get rid of Gaddafi. His dangerous presence will have to be extirpated someday, one way, or another, because he is a deadly danger to the neighborhood.

The USA ought to remember that France and Britain are not just allies and fellow democracies. They are who the USA mostly come from. Without France’s massive armed intervention in the fight of the American people against the English king, the USA would not exist.

Does Obama know any of this? He sure acts as if he did not. If he did, Britain, France and the USA would have cratered the Libyan’s dictator’s runways long ago (it’s super easy to do). Democracy does not ask authorization from infamy to proceed decently.

***

Patrice Ayme

***

Note on President as promotion man: One of Confucius’ most famous ideas was:”The gentleman is not an utensil.” By appearing on ESPN, right of a large, capital letters, bright red ESPN logo, intermingled with the Presidential Seal, Obama, showed clearly what his office was all about. In ancient China, the gentleman was not an utensil, in the modern USA, the emperor himself is a utensil. 

In 1965, when Obama was 4 years old, the Rolling Stones made the excellent song: “The West Coast Under Assistant Promotion Man”.

***

Note on the fascist mass homicidal dictatorship in Libya: When Al Qaeda attacked the USA, it was based in Afghanistan. Afghanistan was attacked officially to remove Al Qaeda from there, after an ultimatum to the Taliban to do just that. Then Al Qaeda went to Pakistan. Did the West then attack Pakistan? No. Why? Because Pakistan has nuclear weapons, and a lot of them. The Gadhafi gang is smart enough to understand that. So it will acquire the weapons.

China has looked the other way, according to leaked US state department, when North Korean weapons transited through China. China plays tough, and is determined to use Africa as a commodity backyard (although it is already well endowed with Tibet and Xinjiang, among other vast regions).

***

On storing seven times more nuclear fuel next to nuclear reactors than there are in the reactors themselves: “the vast majority of the fuel assemblies at the troubled reactors are in the storage pools, not the reactors”). (I will write follow up essays on the nuclear and geological idiocies at play, because they will no doubt play an even greater role, looking forward; it will be made clear that it is far from being just a Japanese problem; actually the low cost reactors were made by GE, and the geological absurdity was, and is, global).

Dukes Of Knowledge

March 11, 2011

 

PLUTOCRATS TEACH PLUTO, REAL MEN FIGHT PLUTO.

***

Abstract: Hanging around plutocrats is not educational in the best way. Instead the president of the USA should have some of his minions suggest to raise revenues to feed the civilization he pretends to defend. 27 countries of the EU have a VAT by law for excellent reasons having to do with the philosophical nature of civilization.

Speaking of which, as Saif al Islam Al Gaddafi himself points out: "We are not a mouse". Indeed, plutocrats are no mice. Thus one should roll out the big guns, and fire them on plutocrats, in the name of education.

***

IS SHE HAS WEALTH, SHE HAS GOT TO BE GOOD:

So here we have President Barack Obama frolicking with Melinda Gates. It beats sounding decisive about Libya. Now, of course, Obama has to do politics with the country he has, and not the country he wished he had. But precisely, that is why the Libya tergiversations look so bad. Americans don’t know what to do. A thing they don’t need is the father of nation who looks confused too.

Who is Melinda Gates? Well, the wife of Bill Gates, the well known computer programmer whose father was a founder of one of the USA’s top law firms. Bill and Melinda Gates founded in turn, with dozens of billions of dollars of Bill’s money, something called the Gates Foundation (where some other Gates family members are).

Foundations are a trick allowing American plutocrats to have the advantages of plutocracy without many of its inconveniences, such as paying taxes, and looking dirty. The Foundation Law was passed simultaneously with the Income Tax Law. Plutocrats hiding in foundations are called “philanthropists”, and revered by US politicians and media.

So Obama appeared at a technology-focused Boston "public academy" the Microsoft chairman and his wife helped to start and offered it as an example for the nation. At a time of scarce resources, Obama said, the U.S. should tighten its belt wherever possible but still put more money into advancing such a "21st century curriculum" across the country.

"21st century curriculum"? Does that mean Obama is going to learn calculus, so he can become "21st century"?

"There is no better economic policy than one that produces more graduates with the skills they need to succeed," Obama said, speaking at the TechBoston Academy. "That’s why reforming education is the responsibility of every single American — every parent, every teacher, every business leader, every public official and, yes, every student."

Apparently Melinda Gates had the need to succeed: she married one of the world’s richest men. Who got so rich, mostly because of Microsoft’s monopoly power, building up on software developed by uncelebrated academics (and which IBM had farmed out to Bill).

But back to the point Obama makes that: "There is no better economic policy than one that produces more graduates with the skills they need to succeed." We just saw that a most important skill was to get married to the world’s richest man: then you get to hang around with the president. That’s what Obama just taught us. OK, let’s be game and teach Obama something in turn.

In the Roman empire, (Greek) slaves and freedmen were doing most of the teaching. They had "the skills they needed to succeed". Succeed to do what? Be better slaves? Better submissives? More irrelevant?

As Barack frolicking with Melinda himself shows, the commons are irrelevant, and so they were in the Roman empire, and that is exactly why the empire went down.

Indeed how did the Greco-Roman empire succeed? Far flung legions maintained an increasingly empty shell inside. And the shell was empty for the same reason as the USA is emptying itself. Both imperial Rome and imperial USA have the same disease: PLUTOCRATIC CHOLERA. Melinda ought to be the name of a bacteria.

But here is Obama again, flaunting in a press conference (on 3/12), that he gave the “Medal Of Freedom” to Warren Buffet, the second richest individual in the USA, and that Buffet expressed audaciously his hope about the economy of the USA. A similar audacious outburst of hope in the hyper rich would be viewed with contempt in Europe.  

After a few centuries of increasing fascism and plutocracy, the Roman empire succeeded to produce theocratic terror and the DARK AGES (officially nominated that way around 380 CE by a disconsolate intellectual with top religious, non Christian, duties: I did not make the date up; one of the instrument of propaganda has been that the middle Ages created they dark Ages. no. The middle Ages were the way out of the Dark Ages.).

A serious problem in the USA is that, increasingly, people in position to teach don’t know history.

That makes the weirdest theories possible. That allows the plutocratically financed Tea Party to come out with frightening slogans such as "the government does not create anything". What about law, education, police, army, rescue services, most healthcare (even in the USA already!), and all the rules and regulations holding society together? This is not just about observing, it’s about not knowing what happened when there was no government. And even not even been capable to imagine what would happen without government. That is what a lack of knowledge about history leads to.

All knowledge, even science, is historical. Even science is about what happens, and that means, what happened.

Obama, as a good American, worry about "business leaders". Ah, business "leaders", what would the USA be without them? Does not the USA have by far the richest, most rewarded business leaders in the world? Did not that bring “success”? When the business leaders went bankrupt, the taxpayers were successfully ordered to replenish their coffers. Success, indeed! The skill to be learned to succeed was apparently to have the taxpayers act against their best interest. 

Foundations don’t pay tax, and their officers can frolic first class around the world, in the very best hotels, and as we just saw, with heads of state.

On top of that foundation executives get to be called "philanthropists" because they are free to corrupt whoever they want with a fraction of the money they would otherwise pay in taxes. Beatification in one’s own lifetime. (I don’t mean to imply that all foundations are bad; simply the ones which are obvious tax shelters and oligarchic influence amplifiers).

"Even as we find ways to cut spending, we cannot cut back on job-creating investments like education," Obama said. "We cannot cut back on the very investments that will help our economy grow."

Sounds good. Obama has explained that he wants the USA to "out-educate, out-compete", everybody, etc. Thus all the out-sourcing to the out-house, I guess. Out with them ideas. I have advocated the idea of having ideas a long time myself.

In the 1960s, the French government ran an advertising campaign:"En France, on a pas de petrole, mais on a des idees." ("In France we don’t have oil, but we have ideas".) Nothing new. But as long as, to get to the ideas, Obama has to go through plutocrats, such as the Gates, he will show that the elected government of the People does not even have a brain.

Another Case of the Gates of hell (yes, Steve Case is another major plutocrat advising Obama) is what happened with Qaddafi. The Libyan dictator sent a lot of money to many major Anglo-Saxon think “tanks”. Yes, it is a double entendre: I think we will use tanks to express the people, says Gaddafi, and he chuckles, as he gives money to Western pseudo-intellectuals.

“The best academics Qaddafi’s money could buy”, for example Richard Perle, or Francis Fuckuyama (PhD harvard. Of course Harvard and its professors are there (say professor Nye). The usual tricks are used: Harvard professors get blood money through “consulting firms” such as the “Monitor group” (that one has 30 offices around the world). Then they write learned articles for US mass media, reproduced world wide, on the goodness of Gaddafi, and other “guides”, and “leaders” of the uneducated masses.

Sometimes, it’s even funny; there is even plenty of evidence that Harvard wrote Saif Al Islam al Qaddafi’s thesis.

Such is the plutocratic circus. Kneel oh good people, the plutocrats are here to guide and lead you. Such are the Gates of hell.

***

HOW TO IMPLEMENT MENTAL EXPANSION:

OK, so how should the mental expansion Obama claims to advocate be done?

Germany is headed by a physicist (Merkel). She knows calculus very well. Her conservative credentials are impeccable; she was right hand man and dauphin to Chancellor Helmut Kohl (who had to make himself sparse after his secret financing by his friend, the French socialist president, came to light).

Germany had a severe problem of over-production during the 2008 peak of the financial crisis (there will be other peaks, we need to label them according to the millésime). Germany’s Merkel did not frolic with the richest of the hyper rich, begging for something, and trying to look powerful. Instead the German state INTERVENED. Workers and companies were paid so that the time production workers did not spend producing was spent at school learning higher skills pertaining to their job. A conventional welder, for example, would be paid full time, but some of his time would be spent learning to weld with lasers.

OK, to set up such an emergency plan, country wide, was not as much fun as entertaining plutocrats who pay no taxes. Countries such as China need the world’s most advanced machinery, to make other products in their factories. After Germany had gone back to school, orders came flooding back, for the advanced, high value technologies Germany sells. The German economy came roaring back. Wunderbar. But not surprising.

Oh, by the way, the French government has decided to emulate the German model. In exchange, the conservative, not exuberantly European Merkel has agreed to integrate France and Germany to a level the German governments had not accepted before. British PM Cameron wishes he could jump on that technological bandwagon (he is trying, hence his love for Airbus). Germany is not the only European export power house: the Netherlands is an even more striking example.

So Obama wants to live off intellectual property, in the world’s smartest society. Back to the future, in other words: this is pretty much how the USA lived in the 1960s, before sinking into bottomless plutocracy. However what Obama proposes to do is not enough. As I just said, the sort of educational effort Obama proposes is all glamour, and no welding. Welding allows planes to fly, glamour does not. The effort Germany did in 2008 was educational, but it required business leaders who were really business leaders, thinking about leading their workers, and not plutocrats ruling by wealth, as the later do by definition. .

Before I get started with my usual objections, let me be even smarter than usual, and enlist Paul Krugman saying explicitly something which has long been half understood in Europe. One of his blog post (quoting various others) is reproduced after the break.

The problem of trying to out-smart ("out-educate") everybody is tied to globalization.

The initial problem with globalization was that people cannot be employed, being paid several times more (a fortiori twenty times more) than workers overseas doing the same job.

To go back to an example Socrates loved, the shoemaker in New Jersey cannot compete with the shoemaker in Pakistan. because the later can live well, with a salary a twentieth of that his unfortunate colleague in New Jersey. Fine.

A solution which presents itself is to give up the low added value jobs, and concentrate on the high added value jobs. This is the French approach (now embraced, and better implemented by Germany, as we saw above). It is no coincidence that the French invented the Added value Tax (in 1954). Added value has long been high on their mind.

So Obama wants to do the same now. First the USA is late to the party. Finland (but for some crazed Asian countries and entities) has the best educational system because the Finns, among other Europeans, are all persuaded of the importance of superlative education. Sarkozy wanted to implant the Finnish system in France, until he found out how much it would cost. France, as a great power, has expenses Finland does not have. (And the same for the USA, since the USA is still a great power.)

So Obama says; "Let’s have engineers in New Jersey. So we want kids to learn calculus. Surely the engineer in New Jersey be paid more than the engineer in India?"

Sure, Obambi. And therein the problem. The Indians are plenty smart, and after 35 centuries of erroneous apartheid philosophy, they have adopted, thanks to European (philosophical) rule, the European philosophical system of equal superiority, fraternal ambition, and free debate of ideas. So the Indians have discovered what Obambi did, a few decades ago. If you want your children to make it in India, you try to make it so that they learn calculus. Entering the engineering schools is crazily competitive. And it does not depend upon having relatives therein (as is done in the USA, and the Obamas are in good position to know).

The engineer in India will have several house helpers, a limousine with chauffeur, and a magnificent house with a pool. So young people in India are much more determined to become engineers in India rather than in New Jersey. They look forward engineering, it’s the promised land. Young people in the USA can look up at completely different role models. They don’t know Melinda Gates has a BA in computer science. All what America’s youth see is that the president of the USA goes where the money is.

If you want to make it in New Jersey, you have to become a drug dealer, a politician, or, best of all, a financier. Financiers are the richest, most powerful, and never gets prosecuted: Obama and holder will make sure of that. Only philanthropists heading foundations are higher up in the prestige standings of the USA. (OK, Madoff asked to be jailed, and there is now a major financier on trial, but he is not really a US citizen; obviously a token trial, but it has the potential to get really dangerous for serious plutocratic fish.)

In the USA, employment pays for health, and where you live pays for schools. speak about a weird place. The USA has no global, that is, federal, educational system. Truly Obama controls only a tiny piece of the educational budget. That’s his official excuse with begging for crumbs at the Gates’ table.

So let’s suppose Obama is sincere, and really wants to improve the socio-economy of the USA, with education. What can Obama do? He has no money. Well, at least he could make more prestigious the jobs needed to "out-educate" and "out-compete". The job of plutocrat is not one of them. The USA had to wait a full century for seeing its first billionaire, and then suddenly there were many. Teddy Roosevelt saw that there was a risk that they would confiscate the republic, so he cut them down with anti-monopoly laws.

Right now the so called financial industry confiscates more than 40% of the profits of corporation in the USA. It is a monopoly, the monopole of finance. It produces nothing, except the negative pressure of taxpayers bail-outs.

So one of Obama’s real challenges that he could do something about would be to make the professions envisioned as the most worthy those which are perceived by the youth as the most worthy. He could go at it in two ways:

1) not associate with plutocrats for all to see, as if there was great glory in it. That will decrease the prestige of Pluto.

2) Make sure that plutocracy would be despised by prosecuting some of the plutocratic thieves. A plutocrat or two in jail would certainly curb the prestige of plutocracy. And the prestige of the law.

Matt Damon, the actor, an enthusiastic early supporter of the president during his campaign, candidly expressed his disappointment with Obama:

"A friend of mine said to me the other day, I thought it was a great line, ‘I no longer hope for audacity,’" Damon said, explaining that he believes the president has "misinterpreted his mandate" and has "doubled down on a lot of things."

Well, sure. Sometimes it seems that Obama interprets his mandate as making peace with republicans. some of his supporters claim his mandate should just be to play "black" president with ‘black’ family, etc., and that is good enough. Well, not so.

Matt Damon slammed the education policy that ties teacher salaries to students’ test scores. "That kind of mechanized thinking has nothing to do with higher-order thinking. We’re training them, not teaching them," he said. Damon is right. Finland, which has the best results of the West in high school in reading comprehension, science, mathematics, works the other way around: no tests, only helping those who have difficulties.

And Damon to pound the nail: "I think he’s rolled over to Wall Street completely. The economy has huge problems. We still have all these banks that are too big to fail. They’re bigger and making more money than ever," Damon said in an interview with the U.K.’s Independent.

In Rome, under the Antonine emperors, intellectuals were amazingly successful, in the sense that they became very rich and influential. However, they did not change anything to the mental course of the Greco-Roman empire, which was certainly the largest failure there ever was so far, in the history of the Mid Terra civilization.

in the century preceding, many Roman intellectuals had tried to oppose pacifically the tyrants of Rome. However, they got savagely killed, often with their entire families. Pacific, intellectual, non violent resistance works only with those who have roughly being already won over.

When civilization is confronted to crazed fascism, only a greater force works. That why Obama’s Mickey mouse approach to education in the USa will not work. It is also why the non violent approach will not work with the Qaddafi clan.

As PhD Saif Al Islam, the most verbal of the Kadhafis said: "We are not a piece of cake, we are not a little mouse." No, indeed, you are not, none of the big problems ever were. they need a lot of energy, hence force, to be moved.

And the same holds with most problems facing civilization today. Civilization presents the individuals composing it with many motivations. Only one of them is the financial profit motivation. For the rest, for the other motivations, there are taxes, a conduit from financial profit to those other motivations.

So, of course the USA needs a VAT, a Value Added Tax. The USA does not need Melinda Gates. Gates is part of the problem, not much of the solution.

No modern country can escape a VAT. A VAT taxes consumption, what the USA has too much of. There is no virtue in consumption, there is virtue in savings.

A VAT encourages a country to employ its own citizens, rather than distant aliens. A VAT forces to save, and the Mafia has to pay it too (otherwise it would pay even higher taxes). A minimum 15% VAT is the law in the European Union. It is a better French invention than cheese.

A VAT allows a country to have more motivation than financial profit. A VAT gives a chance to other motives, such as empathy, solidarity, civilization, progress, financing education, free health care, etc. As long as Obama is not talking VAT, he is shooting the breeze. And he is not serious about education.

It is necessary to learn to be tough, in the name of civilization, and Libya is the place to start, in the name of civilization, and the back bone it can do without.

***

Patrice Ayme.

(After the break, graphic analysis that highly educated jobs are becoming less rewarding financially.)

***

(more…)

HUMANISM IS FORCE. No-Fly Over Libya.

March 8, 2011

THE LYING GATES OF HELL: WORLD WAR TWO, AND NOW.

Democracy Has To Use Force Against That Major Plutocrat, Gaddafi.

***

Abstract: Qaddafi’s aviation just bombed the main water tank of the major city and oil terminal of Ras Lanouf, depriving the city of water. Ras Lanouf is held by the freedom fighters. French TV crews on the ground have witnessed, and filmed massive bombing raids by the planes of the tyrant. The freedom fighters find very difficult to hold the front, because of those aerial assaults (they have no defensive anti-aircraft missiles).

Khadafy is one of the world’s top plutocrats. Thus his friends are many, mighty, and they know how to hide their wealth and power.

Qaddafi controls directly 140 billion dollars, mostly in the West (that corresponds to such a hole in official Libyan finances). Just as one does not know how to spell Gaddafi’s name, nor how many people he tortures everyday, one does not know where his financial web is (part of it could be in a TV station next to you, and certainly all over Hollywood). 140 billion dollars make Qaddafi one of the West’s most important masters. Kadafi does not just own Libya, he owns you.

Gaddafi became great friend of the Western leadership under George W. Bush, because plutocrats love each other. Takes one to love one. Especially in these days, when plutocrats lose so many friends among the many, the small, credulous and naive.

Moreover, the USA knew nothing much about the Arab-Muslim world (and still does not, hence the obsession with syrupy celebration of Islam). After 9/11, the government of the USA purchased the Libyan Gestapo to help in these matters, in the best tradition of fascists lending a helping hand to fascists, wherever they are, whatever they are doing. 

So it should come as no surprise that the US Secretary of “Defense” Robert Gates, an old hand of the imperial fascist rule, has been lying about the difficulty of establishing “No Fly” zones over Libya.

According to the trembling Gates, “No Fly” over Libya is too shocking to consider. Why? What happened to your stealthy, supersonic F22s?

Or is it because Khaddafy is the devil Gates knows, and appreciates, part of the worldwide plutocratic conspiracy he serves, and has always served? Or because Gates aspires to cash in with said worldwide plutocracy, within a few months, as many of his predecessors in the Bush and Obama administrations have done? 

Cashing in only works in the framework of the established order. If revolution keeps on spreading, even mainstream plutocrats in the USA could come under examination, and the entire corrupt system could find itself attacked by the middle class…

Moreover Khadafy is destroying the Libyan People, and that can only be useful for those who only love oil, and love even more peoples of the oil rich nations to understand that their reason for being is to respect the oil dictators who send the oil to the West. Those who love order can only love order to re-establish itself. Gaddafi was one of Bush II’s strong elements.

We have seen the will to submit peoples before. OK, the entire Second World War was about that, and this is why the USA waited for the Japanese and German fascists to attack; the devastation the fascists were visiting was as much weakening of potential competitors… of the USA. OK, not all American officials may have acted on this. But only idiots would not have thought about it.

The extravagant aerial “Allied” bombing devastation visited on France in 1944 was another aspect of the same will to submit potential competitors, and extend the reservoir of slaves and freedmen: the bombing of France was not directed at the, by then, completely impotent Nazis, at least inside France (by August 1944, the Nazis were bottled up in ports such as Toulon, Marseilles, Nantes, Brest, La Rochelle, etc… With no submarines able to sneak out, and no boats left, they had only isolated Nazi garrisons watching over the ramparts, besieged, unable to go out, armed just with guns).

So the massive American bombings on French ports and other industrial installations was directed towards the French People, French cities, French industry, should they revolt, or just thrive. Rebuilding out of the rubble should, and did, keep the French busy in the next few decades. And a bit more respectful: if I bomb you, you kowtow thereafter. Well done.

This subject is never approached in this brazen way in France. Except by a close relative of mine, sotto voce, in confidence. He used to be an admiral, and commanded French vessels, including an aircraft carrier. Certainly the complete destruction of, say, Saint Malo, was an anti-French act, not an anti-Nazi act. Saint Malo was in no sense a military asset of the Nazis (Saint Malo was rebuilt identically, stone by stone).

American plutocratic strategists have long thought that not helping democracy was in their best material interest, and they were proven right. It brought on the entire so called “American Century”. But past acts have future consequences, even if delayed.

OK, the “American Century” lasted 56 years… until it fell flat on his head from the towering, tottering, crumbling heights of plots within plots, in great clouds of smoke and destruction.

So the American Century is over. It turns out that it was perverted by plutocracy, as plutocracy has been doing what it always does best: gut the core of the empire, so that no revolt of the rabble at the core, can topple it. Riddled through its core, the empire is imploding, as it did not protect its workers, exactly as plutocracy contrived it. And always does. This is the difference between republic and plutocracy; republic is sustainable, but not so the rule of wealth.

The People of the USA is now in need of all the help it can get from democracy. But, whether the Americans understand this enough or not, the Europeans themselves should understand that it is in their best interest that their own sea, the Mediterranean, the cradle of the civilization we have, would know democracy all around.

It is not a question of making the Libyan revolution in place of the Libyans. Democracy needs to make it a fair fight, just as a matter of justice. None of the fascist air force should be allowed to attack the freedom fighters. France and Britain, or France alone, have the means, and should gather the will to do so, and attack. They should remember what happened when they did not intervene in the (mislabeled) “Spanish Civil War“.

When an army attacks a People, other peoples should intervene. That is what happened in Spain in 1936. That is what is happening in Libya, in 2011.

But there is more than justice involved. It is time to remember that the famous Roman emperor Septimus Severus was born in Leptis Magna (modern Lebda in Libya). His father was of Punic-Libyan origin. Under his son, Roman citizenship was given to all free men.

clip_image001Roman Amphitheater in Leptis Magna (Libya).

*

Rome ended in Libya not out of empire as much as out of survival. Rome had to fight Carthage, and, later, Jugurtha. There is indeed much more a stake. Democracy around the Mediterranean is actually a matter of survival for Europe.

With nuclear bombs, and other WMDs, anything can happen, and real fast. Having fascist regimes a few miles away is not a viable option. The Libyan dictator proved, long ago, that deliberate war crimes were one of his tools (the same argument was made against Saddam Hussein, but the case against Saddam was very murky, to say the least, as responsibilities were shared with the West who was allied to him, and had armed him, when not outright fought for him).

So the Europeans need to intervene in Libya. And that means with more than sending French Direction de la Défense de la Sécurité Civile teams on the ground (which is already happening in Benghazi).

Athens was rid of its tyrant by an intervention of the Spartan army (which is ironical, considering what happened later). The Athenian people could not do it itself. Why? Because armies are made of professional killers, with all the resources necessary to kill multitudes and peoples are not, and do not have the resources. When an army attacks a people, and other peoples just watch, they become accomplices to the mayhem.

The United Nations was initially a French intellectual idea from 1916 as the Société des Nations, the SDN. The United Nations has a lot to learn: Khadafy was put on the Human Right Commission, and was even elected to lead it! More grotesque than that, there is not; by the same token, Hitler would have been elected to head the commission on minorities, and human rights. But calling plutocrats “philanthropic’ is how it’s done, in the USA, and God knows how influential the USA is.

It is high time to remember that the United Nations is an instrument of civilization, but is not civilization itself. The UN is a tool of world governance, and a big classroom, and a place of instruction, but it does not replace civilization. Civilization is a greater force, and it rules because it has a greater force. Brains without force are only the ruin of hope. When civilization forgets that, that the mind thinks, but force rules, not only is the way harder, but it may well bring annihilation.

Go back to 1939: it’s Britain and France which declared war to Hitler. Not the USA. Time for France and Britain to defend democracy again. Make haste.

***

***

GATES OF HELL:

Lies are often technical. That gives them the appearance of truth. Thus, they generally appear, masquerading as the result of expertise to the naive populations, giving them, through an appearance of technicality, an excuse to believe them.

I give here an example: the lying of the US Secretary of Defense, Gates. Gates claimed that to establish a “no fly” zone over (some part of) Libya would require a total attack on Libya, Iraq style. That’s a lie. A related lie is to say that it would be useless. (Well, then give the insurgents SAMs.)

“Let’s call a spade a spade,” Gates said at a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing. “A no-fly zone begins with an attack on Libya to destroy the air defenses.”

Meanwhile Clinton gave a warning that a lot of Al Qaeda fighters came from Eastern Libya. Thanks Hillary for reminding us that Qadafi is on your side in Afghanistan, and presumably, other places! (In other relevant news, white fighters from Eastern America scalped people… and Boston municipal authorities used to pay for said scalps. Is Clinton going to warn us about that too?)

Clearly American ‘leaders’ have probably been reminded by their wealthy masters that what we are observing is the end of the American protectorate in the Mideast, if regimes keep on toppling.

Could that toppling of plutocratically useful regimes extent all the way, all over? Imagine: no more oil from Chavez, or then, oil paid in euros. Imagine: China cracking, and American plutocratic corporations unable to make stuff there, using slave labor there, while killing labor in the West. Imagine: no more so called American order, and next thing you know, the American people could rise in revolt against their true masters (the concept of masters of mankind is from Adam Smith, not Karl Marx).

American oil companies pushed to “normalize” the relationship with Gaddafi. Never mind that was “normalizing” relationships with a regime which had grossly violated human rights, and never mind that the human rights of the Americans and the French (among others) had been violated. For some of the corporate aristocracy, human rights enter no computation.

***

BARBIE & KHADAFY, CRIMINALS AGAINST MANKIND:

Many close to Khadafy have pointed out in the last few weeks that Khadafy personally ordered the bombings of American and French jumbo jets, which were clearly crimes against mankind. No, I am not forgetting the shooting down of Korean and Iranian jumbo jets by Russian and American military, respectively: these were (lamentable) errors, which showed an (abominable) disregard for the possibility of killing civilians. But they were not the deliberate killing of civilians to achieve that aim and that aim alone. So they were not crimes against mankind.

Crimes against mankind show up in the detail. They do not show up in their full glory, because those who commit crimes against mankind want to spread an aura of terror, without provoking enraged despair. Enraged despair would mean desperate resistance (what we have in Libya now). Even tyrants can be damaged by such, so tyrants don’t like to provoke it. Whereas an aura of fear means paralysis by analysis, and ruling with little effort. Only decerebration beats it, as a tool of submission.

Klaus Barbie, who tortured to death about 5,000 people in the Lyon area during WWII, as SS-Hauptsturmführer (rank equivalent to army captain), was later captured by the French in Bolivia. He was condemned to life in prison for the murder of 44 children (and 5 adult supervisors).

The children had been deported, and then gazed on arrival. The reason? They were children of Jewish refugees in France, and Barbie’s forces raided the secret orphanage where they were sheltered. Jewish origin was good enough a reason for the Nazis to kill people, and even children. Now, of course, in Nazi semantics, Jews were not “people” but “Untermenschen” (under-men), or “Unmenschen” (nonhuman).

***

IT’S ABOUT DEMOCRACY, NOT ISLAM:

To those who scoff about me dwelling on Nazi semantics: those classifying Arab speaking people as “Muslim”, are on the same slippery slope, as the Nazis were.

Most so called “Jews” were not Jewish at all: see Albert Einstein, or Hannah Arendt, who were pretty typical of Western European Jews: 100% “Jews” who never practiced any superstition (hence no Judaism). Is a Jew who never practiced Judaism a Jew? Is there such a thing as a Jewish race, as the Nazis believed, and is it defined by religion, even if people do not practice it? The Nazis answered yes, because they were out to kill people, so they grabbed whichever reason they could contrive. It was enough that it made sense to them.

The Nazis defined secular people according to a superstition they did not practice, so that they could paint them with the excesses of the Bible (and traditions attached to the Jews by “Christian” manipulators, such as poisoning wells, killing Jesus, and spilling the blood of Christian newborns). Those defining Arab speaking people according to a religion that they may, or may not feel define them, are on the same exact slippery slope of defining essence by appearance.

So Muslim this, Muslim that, thus “Muslim civilization”, naturally opposed to “Christian civilization”. Those two variants of the same superstition, Judaism, have gods with a different number of heads, so they hate each other. Defining secular Arabs according to their superstition (if any), the Nazis did that before (actually Hitler did: just as he despised the Jews, he admired the Muslims who he imagined as intrinsic warriors, thanks to Islam).

Neither Christianity nor Islam are civilizations. they are just superstition. Democracy, on the other hand, is about the nature of man, there is nothing superstitious about it.

***

DIFFERENT REASONS FOR KILLING CHILDREN:

French justice did not bother to pursue Barbie for the 5,000 he tortured to death, because there would have been arguments back and forth whereas the questioning of so and so tortured to death, was justified or not, or happened by accident or not, (in his memoirs, Barbie gloated about torturing to death secret service agents and resistance fighters, male or female, including some he displayed, dying in his office, draped on an armchair, for days, including Jean Moulin, head of the French resistance, a prefect and excellent artist). George Bush recently argued in ways nearly identical to Barbie, that torture against “terrorists” was justified.

Barbie was employed by the Counter Intelligence Corps (CIC) of the U.S. Army in occupied Germany, and became later a prominent employee of the CIA in charge of secret financing through drug procurement and sale, or even smuggling weapons to Israel: fascism has no Vaterland.

As far as French justice was concerned, killing children was clearly a crime against mankind. This was also another occasion to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that Nazis were scum. By the way, contrarily to what the American web sites have it, the orphanage was for children of Jewish refugees in France. Those children were NOT French and should have been in the USA, but were refused admission in the land of the free-to-be-selfish.

Barbie’s attitude is in contrast with a “deeply sorry” General Petraeus who apologized for the deaths resulting from a dual helicopter assault that mistook a group of 10 children for insurgents. Petraeus apologized to the Afghan government, people and victims’ families for the strike President Karzai condemns as “merciless”.

Nine of the children, aged 8 to 14 year old, were killed in the attack, which took place on Tuesday March 1, 2011, in a remote area of Kunar province. The only survivor, 11 year-old Hemad, hid beneath branches blasted from a tree.

I don’t care about the apology,” Mohammed Bismil, the 20-year-old brother of two boys killed in the strike, said in a telephone interview. “The only option I have is to pick up a Kalashnikov, RPG [rocket-propelled grenade] or a suicide vest to fight.”

In Afghanistan, the West is fighting the wrong war, in the wrong way. The impudent argument has been made that the West should not fight for the Libyans by helping to fight mercenaries paid by oil money. So why should it fight “for Afghans” by bombing whoever is in sight in Afghanistan?

Is it because a strong democratic Libya would bolster Europe, and thus weaken plutocracy?

***

WHEN WAR IS WAGED, BUT NOT AGAINST THE OFFICIAL ENEMY:

Who can blame Mohammed Bismil for wanting to avenge his siblings? So it is, when waging war from the air, against a civilian population, for no necessary reason: one is one step away from war criminality. Aerial bombing does not make peace, nor even war, it makes hatred, so it has to be engaged only when reasons are overwhelming. Aerial war on potentially innocent targets, is excusable if and only if:

1) those, or their ancestors, or descendants, are collectively culprit, and

2) the aerial attacks are necessary to win the war, and, last but not least,

3) said war putting democracy at risk of being extinguished.

Those preconditions of mine would mean that massive British raids on German cities during WWII were justified and excusable (with the exception of the attack against Dresden, since, at the time, the Reich was already defeated, violating 2) and 3) above). But the Nazi attacks on Dutch, French and British cities were not justified, because the Nazis’ self described “total democracy” was not a democracy. It was just a madness (see the definition of Jews above.)

Nor, by the way, were justified the massive attacks on French cities by the “Allies”, in 1944. Then all the preconditions above were violated; the French were not Nazis, they had started the war AGAINST the Nazis, the attacks had no military value, and the war was already won.

Rue Championnet, near Montmartre, on April 22 1944 after an “Allied” bombing raid:
clip_image002

Other views of Paris after “Allied” bombing:

clip_image003

Entire areas of greater Paris were flattened out, by said “Allies”:

clip_image004

Notice that this is a Simone De Beauvoir photo. The famous philosopher knew that preserving the memory of these ravages was important. 80% of that particular suburb, Athis-Mons, was reduced to rubble. There were thousands of devastated French landscapes such as these.

***

WE BOMB YOU, THEREFORE WE ARE ABOVE YOU, AND RICHER BESIDES:

Was this aerial bombing butchery, all over France, really necessary? To win the war against the Nazis, of course not. The war was already won. By June 1944, the Nazis were finished. In France alone, about 17 divisions were necessary, just to fight the French resistance (and the situation was somewhat similar in Yugoslavia); on the eastern front, the Nazi armies could not resist the Soviet juggernaut whatsoever: in a few weeks the Soviet armies advanced hundreds of kilometers, and stopped just in the Warsaw suburbs, to give plenty of time, many months, so that the Nazis could kill all the Polish patriots, intellectuals, etc.

But the Second World War was not just about crazed Nazis. Crazed Nazism was a way to hide the truth, just as an apparently crazed Gaddafi is a way to hide several very rational, deeper truths. Gaddafi is not crazed at all; he just plays one on TV. Nor are his plutocratic sponsors crazed either; they just play ignorant on TV.

The US Air Force systematically flattened out the French ports. Toulon, Le Havre, Saint Nazaire, and many others were completely destroyed. More exactly, they used the excuse of the ports to flatten the cities.

Since, at the time, the Nazis had no more fleet, at least in the Mediterranean and the Atlantic, the only explanation is that some strategists in Washington viewed France as an enemy capable of future hostile action, and had to be destroyed when she was incapable of defending herself (this is why many of these French cities are full of ugly shabby high rises, because they were rebuilt very fast). At least so think Bernard Rue, a retired French admiral (who commanded French carriers). I concur.

The same American strategists had anticipated to occupy France, strike coinage, nominate American made prefects that they were training specially… If Hitler had not succeeded to conquer France durably, the Pax Americana would. Flattening France like crepe batter was a good first step, in that plutocratic recipe. (A similar plan was attempted, and engaged, in Germany, for a few years; in France the plan failed on day one, because the French army was too strong and did not play by American rules.)

I digress not: these same strategists are those who had brought Nazism to start with, and were busy collaborating with the Nazis they could find, as the Reich collapsed. They were serving the system many of the richest “industrialists” (as they used to be called) and financiers had connived with their pawns, Mussolini, Franco, Hitler… And they even helped Stalin, and not just its oil industry. Never saw a fascist they did not love. Mussolini exposed a theory of organic relationship between corporations held by the richest, and the state. It was applied, and not just in Italy and Germany (but also in the USA, and has been central to the “rescue” of Wall Street from itself, in the last few years).

This bombing of French cities could qualify as a crime against mankind, and also a conspiracy. But the subject has been too hot for anyone to come close to it. Even the French will not touch it. So the lessons were not drawn, condemning me to write a lot.

However, deliberately ordering the shooting down of civilian airliners, as Khadafy did, is definitely a crime against mankind, when it is committed by a state.

This is not legalistic: someone who has accomplished such monstrosities is doubly dangerous, as a perpetrator, he may have accomplished worse, unseen. As an example, and a beacon of horror, unpunished, he is an shining beacon of evil triumphant. And this is exactly why, in this inversion of all values, Gaddafi was made chair of human rights at the United Nations, voted in by more than 100 nations (all led by dubious characters, who were delighted to vote for one of themselves, thus normalizing horror).

***

THE “SPANISH CIVIL WAR”; AN ARMY AGAINST A PEOPLE:

An example to remember, a warning to meditate. In 1936, the most ferocious part of the Spanish military, the army from Africa, which held the Spanish Sahara, full of professional African mercenaries, from a land of tribes surviving only by constant war, declared war on the Spanish republic. (The Spanish Navy did not betray, and blockaded the Africans, so Texaco and Hitler flew them over.)

The Spanish African army got help from the Nazis, the Italian fascists, and their puppet masters, the American automotive and oil  companies (the later to befriend the Saudis and Khadafy). The Nazis supplied an air force to bomb the republicans with. Italy supplied a tank army. France did not intervene: the Gallic chicken were too anxious to please, or at least not contradict too much their overlords in Washington, who were much more pro-Nazi, at the time, than they are pro-Chinese now.

The ambassador of the USA to Spain wrote to president Franklin D. Roosevelt that the war will be long, because it’s the war of an army against a people. This is of course exactly what is going on in Libya: an army against a people. But the analogy in horror does not stop here.

Franco and his henchmen finally won in winter 1939 (making the UK a firm ally of France against fascism). Franco killed much more people after winning his war than he killed during the war itself. Keep that in mind with the fascist Khadafy.

 

For more than 50 years, the institutions set up by the tyrant Franco, stole children (yes, up to the 1990s!) The idea was to prevent the potential opponents to have children. Besides there was money to be made, by selling those children. As Neo Conservatives would say, where there is money to be made, there is justice. The Spanish fascists stole up to 300,000 children (and at least 100,000).

After getting away with the atrocities in Spain, the fascists thought the sky was no limit, and that the democracies were so corrupt and cowardly, that they could do whatever they pleased. Hitler was saying so, discourse after discourse. His contacts in England assured him that Britain would never side with France. He found differently on September 3, 1939. After contemplating in enraged silence a soon to be devastated Berlin skyline, Hitler turned around to his ministers, and barked: “NOW WHAT?” His alliance with Stalin and American plutocracy would not save him.

These are as many warnings to heed when thinking about what to do with Libya. The planet is a global village, and global fascism can be as much encouraged as dispirited. If fascism sees that the West has not enough spirit to defend its values, it will come to feel, just as Hitler did, that democracy is a corrupt paper tiger. Fascism will be encouraged. and fascism is not just a political phenomenon, but also an intellectual one: the more fascism develops, the more the fascists obsess about a few, increasingly violent impulses.

Well, let Washington wallop in corruption and confusion: being guided by money is not all it takes. It is time for France and Britain to remind themselves that they pack more of a wallop than in 1939. And to remember 1936.

***

THE NO FLY ARGUMENT DOES NOT FLY:

We hear that some in the Bush Obama administration will push for reform of existing dictatorships rather than pushing to do away with them. No wonder: there is only one god, its name is empire, and Washington is its prophet. The way old hands see it, the American protectorate is being destroyed in plain sight, with the help of Obama.

But they are wrong. Washington better be careful; so far the anti-fascist revolution did not have a whiff of anti-Americanism, but this could change. After all, most weapons sold in the world are sold by Washington, and most dictatorships depend upon them. People know how to observe, and think. Remember the Internet. Washington tried to stop WikiLeaks, but it did not do so fast enough. Amusingly many leaked analyses of American diplomats revealed the extent of plutocracy (The US ambassador to Tunisia compared the ruling clique to a “mafia“).

Gates, an old hand of the American empire, has been subtle about it all. To help his associate Gaddafi, he posed first as a peacenik. He told an assembly of cadets at West Point that “In my opinion, any future defense secretary who advises the president to again send a big American land army into Asia or into the Middle East or Africa should ‘have his head examined,’ as General MacArthur so delicately put it.”

 

Having thus qualified as a no non sense rebellious youth, Gates then used a technical argument to help out old Khadafy, friend of the oil companies, and the best hope to stop the Arab spring before it spreads to, say, Saudi Arabia.

Gates argued that a “no fly zone” over Libya would require massive bombing of SAM sites and radar. In other words, another attack reminiscent of “Shock and Awe” against Iraq.

This is crafty disinformation: we are talking about interdicting the largest liberated zones, where there are no SAMs. To interdict would be easy to do, with AWACS planes staying very far away, with their radar sweeping over Libya (AWACS can be defended, have their own defenses, and would be too far anyway). The refueled fighters could attack. The beauty is that France alone could do it (a fortiori do it with Britain).

***

LET THE FRENCH AND THE BRITS DO IT:

Indeed it’s not all about the USA. If the US navy does not feel up to snuff, with its old fighter-bombers, it can operate Rafales, stealthy supersonic fifth generation fighters. The Rafales M(arine) are equipped with mach 4+ MICA missiles, with a range of more than 60 kilometers. So whatever what Gates is talking about is irrelevant. The MICA missile flies at nearly a mile per second, plenty enough to catch up with Khadafy’s bombers (which fly subsonic when bombing and strafing).

clip_image006

clip_image007

A French Navy Rafale M performing a touch and go on the deck of the American carrier USS John C. Stennis (CVN-74). Most French Navy pilots have their US Navy wings: they can operate off US carriers, just as if they were regular US Navy pilots. They even speak English.

As soon as the pilots of the pseudo crazy Libyan dictator know that Rafales are flying unseen in the distance, with AWACS help, and MICAs 40 seconds away, they will stay on the ground. And carriers are not even needed since Rafales could fly from far away, France or Italy, and refuel in the air.

Notice the refueling probe ahead of the cockpit above; notice also the anti-radar pod on top of the stabilizer: Rafales make electronic anti-noise, an active stealth system to add to the passive one; that allows them to fly much faster than the (future) joint Strike fighter, and carry a huge amount of weapons outside.

How hard is it to shoot down Khadafy’s air force? A French TV team was on the front line at Ras Lanouf, headed by intrepid reporter Martine Laroche Joubert. By the way, here was a French woman, hair flying free among the warriors and massive gun shooting, and there was not a trace of Islamism in sight. So much for Clinton’s snide remark about Eastern Libya being a source of Al Qaeda’s warriors.

So the French TV crew was on the frontline, headed by its fearless woman, and a Libyan bomber showed up, apparently a some sort of supersonic Sukhoi. It was looking for ground targets, that was clear from the French (state) TV footage. The anti-aircraft guns of the rebels fired wildly on its second pass, and soon an enormous mushroom cloud loomed in the sandy, murky skies, not far from a giant refinery. The plane had been shot down, and the French TV crew rushed to the scene, among flaming wreckage, and two freshly killed, bloody pilots on the ground. One of them was Syrian, according to his papers, that the French TV crew inspected.

The white haired fighter who had shot down the plane was feted, kissed on the head. He looked like a happy, well fed grandfather. He exulted as he confessed to having no training, and that only one of the guns of the multi-barrel anti-aircraft battery he was using was in working order. He sounded like a real man, capable of honest work, not a weaselly character such as Gates.

***

SO WHAT TO DO? TAKE OUT GADDAFI’ AIR SUPREMACY.

What Gates is saying is that he does not want the oil dictators go the way of Ben Ali, and Mubarak. If they did, Gates is saying the American protectorate will go down the drain. That protectorate works for the worldwide plutocratic web. Gates, a veteran of Iran-Contra, Fidelity Investments, the CIA, Harvard, and countless boards, is little wheel in that vast machine of wealth and taste.

There is another effect at play, namely that the colossal amounts of dictators’ money, and the consequential dictators’ possession in, and of, the West, are part of the worldwide plutocratic system. For example Khadafy owns 7 % of Italy’s largest bank. And 7.5% of the Torino Juventus, one of the world’s most famous soccer club.

If one seizes plutocratic ownership, from one plutocrat, and one starts to dismantle the extremely elaborate shadow banking systems at the heart of the dictators’ web of possession, where does it stop? Is plutocracy going to go? How will Gates cash in? As the Clintons, and countless others, did before him? Even Britain’s Prince Andrews has walloped in the hay with Seif Al Islam, the most notorious of Gaddafi’s sons. They are friends (beats under-age prostitutes).

Thus corrupted, plutocratic forces will do whatever it takes to protect their initiate, and accomplice, Gaddafi, and will try to stop the gnawing away at the dictatorial system at the heart of worldwide plutocracy. Looking foolish by claiming Libya has to be ravaged to be saved does not cost much to Gates. It sounds deep, and humanitarian, to those who don’t know enough. Hitler was very good at sounding human (that’s why Germans goose stepped behind him). 

However, in a greater scheme of things, not doing anything against the Libyan tyrant, is not an option: the entire planet is watching the top democracies. Remember; for that most of the planet, Gaddafi is the leader of human rights. Who is going to teach a lesson to whom?

Weakness now relative to the Libyan dictator, and it means, in particular, that the Pakistani miscreants will be ready to go the whole way, before they try to make sense. The whole way, with Pakistan, means thermonuclear war. Pakistan is a mostly insane country led by criminals, where comparing favorably Jesus to Muhammad leads mothers to be condemned to death, and criticizing this will get you killed.

Weakness now relative to the Libyan monkey in chief also means that others, even larger than Pakistan, may get very unsavory visions of the future. In that frightening future, those emboldened ones may go get oil in the South China sea, and project force to do so. China has been boasting that it could destroy US carriers with ballistic missiles.

Of course, some of the very old, very wise plutocratic hands in Washington may scoff that last time that the plutocrats supported fascism big time, and that the USA did not act in the most timely fashion to help France and Britain, it turned out very well for the USA.

Well, this was then. The USA was a giant, self sufficient island. Untouchable. The world’s largest economic and industrial power. As Europe was wrecked by war with the fascists, Europe became too weak to keep on going as the world’s top imperial power, and the USA displaced and replaced it, bringing great wealth to the USA. The reign of the dollar was just a small aspect, a small consequence of that.

Now is very different though: the day when Pakistani thermonuclear warheads can reach Washington is not so far removed. At some point Washington will have to address the real problems. Financing Pakistani nuclear warheads as the plutocrat Bush II did, was a grotesque and criminal decision, especially in light of 9/11. It was doubly criminal; intrinsically criminal, and criminally encouraging further the crazed maniac in the Pakistani military and Pakistani ‘intelligence’.

In recent years, France intervened unilaterally in several wars all over the Sahel, and in Rwanda (stopping the civil war by dropping a paratroop division), or Ivory Coast. French heavy guns were the first to fire counter-battery at Serb criminals during the siege of Sarajevo (then only France and Britain represented UN muscle).

Actually France, contrarily to her ill deserved reputation in the USA, is the world’s most militarily aggressive country, closely followed by Britain (which dispatched a frigate and ground troops to Libya already, however transiently!)

France and Britain have a glorious past of intervening together, using force (except for their common invasions of Crimea, China, and Suez, or the nascent USSR, which were not well thought out, and of dubious morality). Glory has been invented for some reason.

When Great Britain decided to put back in its place the Argentinian dictatorship, it attacked, facing overwhelming odds. Argentina had plenty of much more advanced weapons, many of them French. The French trained the Brits to defeat them. The Stanley airfield of the Falklands was bombed heroically by a big British bomber refueled by others, which had flown forever. That put the airfield out of order, and so on.

Well, time to renew with these old traditions. Out with fascism. First take the sky away from the Libyan tyrant. don’t tell me he would be harder to defeat than the Argentinian tyrants.

Fighting the Libyan tyranny is an excellent occasion to teach the United Nations what human rights are, and that they are worth fighting for. An occasion to show that those who fight for human rights are invincible, because they are more human, and thus more splendid, strong, and intelligent. And an excellent occasion to show savages who disagree with human rights that savages are irrelevant, and should go back to (primary) school, to learn about the notion of mediocrity, and how bad it is, that they incarnate it so well.

***

Patrice Ayme

***

P/S: China and Russia have proven hard to persuade to neutralize Qadafi’s aviation.  How come so friendly to perhaps the world’s richest man who just killed more than 6,000 of his compatriots?

Distance Beijing to Lhasa: 2559 kilometers. Distance Rome to Tripoli: 989 kilometers. Distance Beijing to Tripoli: 9260 kilometers. So why is Beijing opposed to putting an end to the dictatorship in Libya? Well, could it be that it makes sense that China, which occupies Tibet, is worried when a tyrant is thrown out?

Could the same reasoning apply to the presence of Russia in some places in the Caucasus?

High Speed Rail Versus High Idiocy

March 1, 2011

NO GOD BUT DEATH, AND REGRESSION IS ITS PROPHET.

Will Is Less Important Than Intelligence.

***

George Will, a very well known salaried propagandist of the established American plutocratic order, condemns trains (“Why Liberals Love Trains, Feb 27, 2011). Never mind that most trade in the USA is carried by profitable trains, and that roads get more than 100 billion dollars of subsidies a year. I must admit that only private jets should get government subsidies, in a well designed plutocracy. Whines Will:

“So why is America’s “win the future” administration so fixated on railroads, a technology that was the future two centuries ago? Because progressivism’s aim is the modification of (other people’s) behavior.
Forever seeking Archimedean levers for prying the world in directions they prefer, progressives say they embrace high-speed rail for many reasons—to improve the climate, increase competitiveness, enhance national security, reduce congestion, and rationalize land use. The length of the list of reasons, and the flimsiness of each, points to this conclusion: the real reason for progressives’ passion for trains is their goal of diminishing Americans’ individualism in order to make them more amenable to collectivism.”

Will’s editorial is full of idiocies, and outright lies. For example he claims that only one high speed train lines is profitable in France. That is false. The Paris-Lyon-Marseilles, and Paris-London, and Paris-Brussels-Amsterdam lines are highly profitable. So are well less known lines as Paris-Geneva, etc.

The lines are so profitable that air service between some cities, such as between Paris and Brussels has disappeared. The same phenomenon is observed in other European countries. On Madrid–Sevilla, high speed rail has reduced air travel from 40% to 10%. Air service has also disappeared between some German cities, due to high speed trains, and the Deutsche Bundesbahn high speed trains operate on TGV Est with SNCF… because high speed rail is so profitable. Studies have shown it is more competitive than air on train travel times of less than 5 hours (that’s 1,000 miles at 300 km/h).

Willful idiocy has no limits: in France, high speed rail is expanding from self financing, without subsidy. The national railway, SNCF, is profitable (see note). Besides, although officially France has less than 2,000 kilometers of high speed rail, that is defined there as 300 km/h. If one includes lines at or above 200 km/h there are much more.

Trains are a lot more empowering and individualistic than planes, as anybody who has travelled by both will recognize — and planes, not cars, are the main alternative to high-speed rail. Besides, what is empowering at driving a car? One becomes a slave to the art of avoiding accidents and respecting all laws and regulations.

But of course when the American elite travels by plane, it is driven to said plane by private limousine, and does not have to suffer the indignities the commoners are submitted to, from barked orders to pat-downs. Then air traffic control, a government subsidy, gives private jets priority over the commons, and they pay just a fraction of the cost of a jumbo jet, although they are as big a problem. Verily, Pluto is supposed to be invisible, and so are the reasons of the plutocrats.

Will is a clever man, indeed. He goes where the money is, and serves who Adam Smith called “the masters of mankind” (and smith said that generations before Karl Marx, since he died in 1790). Clever Will is, but not moral. Clever like a power hungry monkey, who wants the banana all to itself, even when he is already stuffed, rather than sharing it, like a man of brains and taste. Morality is the highest intelligence, but will does not know that.

Or then it is this morality of the elite, that Smith or Sade had condemned in the 18C. Adam Smith put it pretty well in his essays on the “Moral sentiment”, 250 years ago: “All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind.”

American individualism, like American exceptionalism, or Hitler’s celebrated attachment to the right of minorities in the name of human rights (one of Hitler’s main electoral platform points, believe it, or not!) are much exaggerated notions. If the American elite is that individualistic, how come most of them think all the same?
By the way, there is a lot of high tech in very high speed trains, especially on steel wheels. Says Krugman: “And there’s the bit about rail as an antiquated technology; try saying that after riding the Shanghai Maglev.”

Maglev has no advantage over steel wheels, but a lot of disadvantages. Maglev uses a lot of light but flammable materials, such as magnesium, little protection against shocks, and extravagantly high magnetic fields. There have been very deadly or spectacular accidents with the two maglev lines (one of them experimental, in Germany; the technology is German; the Germans prefer to use standard high speed rail, with a highest speed of normal trains in normal operations being 400 km/h = 250 mph).

Whereas steel wheels can go wherever there are rails, not so with maglev.
The maglev speed record is just three miles per hour above the (French) high speed, steel wheels, record of 575 kilometers per hour (= 357 mph). At these speeds non trivial shock waves and resonance problems have to be solved. Pantographs maintain contact through electronic piloting.

High Speed Trains are so fast, normal signaling cannot be read. So the trains are robotized: they brake automatically if signaling is not obeyed.

By the way, (the ancestor of) Al Qaeda attacked the French High speed train, when it was going at 300km/h. The bomb shattered a cab, but the train stopped OK, and the fatalities were only caused by the bomb itself. The train did not crash into the ground, for the good reason that trains are already on the ground, a reason that even will may understand.  In 30 years of operation, the French never had a fatality directly caused by high speed train operations. (The Alstom trains are designed to not go on the side, even if they leave the tracks, but to dissipate energy through benign snaking, while staying upright).

At high speed conventional braking is ineffective, and the trains brake electromagnetically, sending back energy where it came from. Electric trains consume a fraction of the energy of any other transportation system, and emits ridiculously small amounts of CO2, relatively speaking, again. A high speed line such as the Tokaido Shinkansen line in Japan carries about 5 times as many passengers per hour per meter of width relative to a road (even when the traffic is maximized on the road; so the land usage of rail is much greater).

An intermediate technology exists, capable of 250 km/h on conventional railroad lines, where the trains lean in the turns (Russia bought it from the French Alstom, which bought it from Italy). The big advantage is not having to build dedicated very high speed lines.

Some will object that train lines work best between concentrated cities, as in Europe. But the USA, like everybody else, has concentrated cities; most of the world population live in cities. Moreover cities have to be encouraged, as their presence relieve the rest of the planet of the human footprint. High Speed Rail is a big advantage for cities, thus for ecology.

The ecological and efficiency advantage becomes crushing when one considers that plane travel is heavily subsidized. It is not just that the plane makers are subsidized, as the WTO found with Boeing and Airbus. The expensive fuel planes are using is subsidized: namely, jet fuel is not taxed, worldwide and the US Army, often seconded by Britain, France and other NATO heroes, insure that miscreants are terrorized into submission (please notice the double meaning…), and keep on sending their oil over.

Oil from fossil fuels, is the most energy intensive fuel, per mass, short of Plutonium, available today. We do not have a substitute we can industrially produce, yet (fuel from GMO algae is an obvious future candidate). Liquid hydrogen has twice the energy per mass… but a serious hydrogen plane has not flown yet, in part because how to store the hydrogen efficiently enough is unsolved. 

It is entirely possible that we will basically run out of oil before planes can be switched to more advanced ways to lift them. So we are stuck, for long range transportation with making big fires with fossil fuel. Just in that regard, it is a matter of strategic and economic precaution to build up a modern electric train network. Such a network makes transportation much cheaper, so it allows to redirect resources away from wasteful economic activities.

The fossil fuel conspiracy has mesmerized greedy little ones such as Will to hate trains. Precisely because trains lead where the fossils don’t want to go.

Notice the attack of Will against “progress”. This is one of the main point of American plutocratic propaganda: progress itself is the problem. Progress is regressive, say the Neo Conservatives, and they congratulate themselves about how profound they are: nobody can understand how they think. And they chuckle, lost in self satisfaction.

Why is progress regression for the masters? Because progress came with laws against slavery, murder and torture all of which handicap the truly wealthy. What’s the point of being that wealthy, if one cannot enjoy all the fruits Pluto provides with? Could not we return to the Middle Ages, get some relief from all this progress? In the Middle Ages, henchmen such as Will could have more fun with the commoners.

But there is more. Ultimately extreme personal wealth, plutocracy, rests on military force, which rests on lack of progress. Savages need savagery to justify their own existence. Progress contradicts savagery itself. Hence the importance of regressive propagandists such as Will, or O’Reilly, as they attack the “progressives” non stop.

At this point, American technological superiority is pretty much reduced to superior people killing technology. Which is indeed by far the best in the world. No wonder neoconservatives are against progress. More than 50% of the weapons sold, worldwide, are American made. An American president said: “The business of America is business“. How quaint. Nowadays, it sometimes rather seem that the business of America has become death.

The regressives detest High Speed Rail, because it’s all about progress. Shall we instead see how far we can regress? Shall we make the infliction of death, or the preparation of the infliction of death, the only business worth having? Have the masters found a maxim even more vile than the one Adam Smith condemned so long ago?

No God but death, and regression is its prophet?

***
https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/

***

More passages from Will, high on delusion: “Generations hence, when the river of time has worn this presidency’s importance to a small, smooth pebble in the stream of history, people will still marvel that its defining trait was a mania for high-speed rail projects. This disorder illuminates the progressive mind…. The automobile encourages people in delusions of adequacy, which make them resistant to government by experts who know what choices people should make.

Time was, the progressive cry was “Workers of the world unite!” or “Power to the people!” Now it is less resonant: “All aboard!”

(Notice Will’s contempt for commoners: he speaks of delusions of adequacy”, even among those who drive!)

*

Note on SNCF profitability: some of SNCF debt was transferred to RFF (which owns the railroad lines, as forced by the EU; thus Deutsche Bundesbahn operates all the way to Paris, on RFF lines).