Archive for the ‘civilization.’ Category

REEVALUATION OF ALL VALUES By Coronavirus

February 28, 2020

Desires, values, practice, ways, ideas and feelings are all entangled. Considering the state of the biosphere… collapsing as it is, a reevaluation is all values is required.

To avoid future, otherwise ineluctable megadeath: please humanity, gain gravitas.

No, COVID19 will not cause ultimate megadeath: the coronavirus is just a warning (following SARS, MERS, and Ebola, all aslo coronaviruses), COVID19 may cause dozens of millions of dead (HIV killed 35 millions, so far…), but that’s not billions. A full collapse of the biosphere and attendant human civilization would kill billions. Now this can all be avoided by changing our present ways… and desires. 

We have long said that what is happening would happen… Much of the world GDP is consumed by useless consumption. Plastic all over, most travel useless. Why are business jets subsidized? They emit 1% of US CO2. What is the best way to learn about Florence? The Florentine Republic? Going there? How do you go back seven centuries? By reading intelligent essays about it? Or going there, stuffed like coughing sardines breathing onto each other.

Unrestricted travel was fashionable: people thought knowing of going to the other side of the world to go to a place one was supposed to feel great to have gone to. It could be a beach, a club, a hotel, a city, a wave, a climb, a marathon: there they went on cheap airfare, “private” yet subsidized by governments.

Big meetings, huge stadiums full of gawking, brainless “supporters”. They should support themselves, not multimillionaire players.

Universitarians, again subsidized by governments, going all around the world, sometimes for just one day, to meet and greet each other… Sometimes even in expensive business class (I was direct witness, more than once).

Alaskan Forest hemlock Sawfly damage: parasites occupy forests which are not genetically adapted to them. All these will burn, contributing to world CO2… NONLINEARLY.

All over, when we talk about the biosphere being in a state of collapse under the assault of humanity, reasonable people have been nodding… and changing nothing about their lives, and, more importantly, knowledge base. 

We have long said that what is happening would happen… Mutation of all sorts of microbes, viruses, bacteria, mushrooms, parasites going faster than humanity, let alone evolution, could react. But not just this. Sea level rise and ice melting predictions depend upon optimistic hypotheses scientists keen to preserve their careers are anxious not to make. If one goes as pessimistic as possible about sub ice shelf melting by warm currents, and if one predicts that methane hydrates will erupt, then one talks about sea level rise many times greater than the most pessimistic official predictions.

Right, healthcare is the basic human right.

But, in particular, this means that a non-collapsing biosphere is a basic human right too. Much of this collapse is caused by the fact that wealth has had too much power. Not just the wealth of highly visible plutocrats like Bezos, the Walmart family, Bloomberg, etc. The main problem is the less visible wealth of trusts, foundations and influences of heirs which induce universities such as Harvard, and countless “foundations”, and “institutes” to teach or preach an erroneous world picture, from the departments of humanities, english, philosophy, history, economics, etc.

The imposition and inducement of an erroneous world picture happens not just in the USA. Places such as Britain, France or the EU are also rotten through and through: consider the Brexit debate, or the very perplexing attitude of the French elite regarding so-called pedophilia (truly raping children, no love there). Of course the rest of the world tends to be even worse of, and it’s no accident the virus came from China… but the fish rots by the head.

And the erroneous world spirit is not just a question of individuals: replacing the so-called “leaders” would not be enough. Beyond incarnated “leaders”, there are leading feelings, moods and ideas. Most of the MENTAL INERTIA which drove Nazism, was fully in force, before Hitler’s grandmother was employed by a wealthy Jew.

COVID 19 is another little warning. It’s still a disaster we can do something about. If Antarctica collapses, or LOW fails[1], that will be another story… Then there will be little we can do… Aside from Armageddon like solutions [2].

Patrice Ayme

***

***

[1] Launch On Warning: automated first strike thermonuclear rocket forces… presently deployed. Please aske “Democrat’ speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi about it, she is a self-described “Catholic”, and she prays for the president everyday (she says).

***

[2] So, besides increasing military budgets of the permanent members of the UNSC (who keep the peace)… What can we do? We can, and should, redeploy the economy is a way which promotes the survival of civilization.  So we need more research in what reality was, and is. Thus revisiting history… and not just the face of well-known fascist regimes such as Lenin’s, Stalin’s, Hitler’s, Mussolini’s etc…. But also the real forces behind them. We should also push science and teaching as much as possible.

 

 

FUNDAMENTAL REASON FOR DEMOCRACY: BETTER THINKING

February 26, 2020

It’s never optimal for a society when a small oligarchy is in command, monopolizing power and knowledge. Arguably, it’s even diabolical, and it’s exactly what “plutocracy” means.
Arguably, monopolizing power and knowledge is even diabolical. This is exactly what the concept of “plutocracy” means. Being ruled by such oligarchies is tightly connected to civilization, which provides with the power, and the Dark Side, the evil, self-inflicted divinity, which has always, counterintuitively, keeps humanity in check.

As the world is now a village, a village with many ways and weapons of mass destruction, any subdistrict of the village living under dictatorship is bad for the rest of the village. Evil and incompetence can’t be isolated. Anymore.

A recent example? The Chinese dictatorship delayed the alert on the danger of the coronavirus COVID 19 by at least one month relative to what would have happened if the pandemic had started in an advanced democracy… And Chinese dictatorship employees actively suppressed whistleblowers with advanced medical knowledge, who tried to alert authorities and public about the danger. This certainly caused the death of thousands and impacted severely the world’s economy (causing in turn more death and destruction!)

To defeat the enemy, one has to know the enemy. And a world without enemies can’t exist, because our opportunity creates them, whether we like it, or not.

Ignorance comes from not knowing facts. In the most acute form, ignorance crystallizes itself by clinging to dogma: a rigid set of beliefs is supposed the know-all, be-all, can-all. This is what happens with any tribalism or religion, even when the religion is the cult of a leader… such as Stalin, or Xi… Or G W. Bush, invading Iraq.

Ignorance is never safe. Secrecy can rarely be justified on the part of those entrusted with power. Generally secrecy fosters the grip of those in power helping them to keep their power… And sometimes those who love power so much will do anything not just to keep that power, but to exact vengeance on all others alive, in the name of their reduced fate, should their power wane (Hitler’s obstinacy to kill as many as he could as long as he could is a striking example of such madness).

We are now a world village. Such a village has been increasing enforced since 1945, thanks to the United Nations and its enforcers. We want to keep it that way. Increasing democracy, by sharing knowledge and power is how to do so.

Our primary objective should be to make the world safer and better for all, and that requires debating well, to find better solutions. And debating optimally requires optimal information. Also debating everybody with everybody gives their chance to the most unexpected ideas, the more people take part in it. This capability, getting ideas from all over, to enrich debates maximally is the deepest, most fundamental reason for democracy. The more democracy, the more a people is forced to learn to think by itself, including forced to learn how one suspects, and gathers the most important facts. Once again, it’s not just a matter of choice, national preference, but of safety of spaceship Earth we all live on.

Patrice Ayme

PERVERSITY of BAD, Mad GLOBALIZATION: Proof By Coronavirus

February 25, 2020

Plutocracy can kill children, massively:

I was reading a (fictionalized) round-up of Jewish children in France during World War Two; the SS ordering, and forcing the French police to raid orphanages of mostly foreign, mostly Jewish children. I know the subject all too well. It’s one of the rare subjects I find hard to read about (my family really saved real Jewish children, and I heard the stories as a child). 

This has of course everything to do with evil-rule, pluto-kratia: Germany was ruled by evil and the problem was the German soul, which tolerated this all too much. 

I am not trying to compare China to Nazi Germany… and I am not even advocating that China would not be ruled by the Communist Party… simply real free elections and free media should exist there (but neither really exist in the West, in full, especially the media, as Trump Derangement Syndrome amply proved). 

However, a fact remains: Nazism was a form of plutocracy, and it was rendered possible by global, mostly US based plutocracy (and yes, FDR was on it, whether he admitted it to himself or not!) Another fact, even more important is that the leverage of evil at our disposal now is much greater than in 1933… Right, the progress we have now is that the good guys, namely the good dominant cultures of 1945 and their military arms, are in control of the planet now, through the UN Security Council…

It’s nevertheless extremely important to understand that plutocracy has absolutely no limits: the bottom line is that it rests on the instinct which views the solution of all the world’s problem in the annihilation of the human race. Nazism is a perfect illustration of this. Those who didn’t understand this, didn’t understand Nazism… or plutocracy, pushed to its limit: global, deliberate, most cruel death, defined as the very essence of divinity. Yes, the definition of criminal insanity.And how humanity got it done (to use Bloomberg’s revealing slogan) [1].

***

This is a small part of the Bronze Age Collapse events. For example, we know from Egyptian sources that the “Sea People” invasions came from the Mediterranean islands (Sicily, Sardinia, Corsica, etc.), but also from the Black Sea (they had conspired said Pharaoh Ramses III). A tremendous drought preceded, to the point the Hiites asked Egypt, earlier their main enemy, for grain shipments… an early example of international, global aid… We have the letters… Egypt helped. But then the Sea People invaded and destroyed everything. Egypt barely stopped them. The etruscans first invaded Syria, before navigating en masse to where the Iron was, between Elba and Tuscany… Centuries before the village known as Rome was created…The Bronze Age collapse seems to have been propelled by natural disasters (we are working hard on the greatest “natural” disaster in 66 million years right now)… Followed opportunistically by massive war fruit of a Nazi-like conspiracy (which mostly worked, 32 centuries ago!) What do I mean? When the Hittite empire got extremely weakened by drought, it could be militarily destroyed by the “Sea People” conspiracy (I didn’t make up those words and concept, Pharaoh did, 32 centuries ago…)

When Globalization Serves Plutocracy First, It’s Real Bad:

The rise of China served China, but would not have happened, without serving the West’s plutocrats. To some extent, the entire “West” (including Japan, Taiwan) did with China what the US plutocracy did with Germany after World War One. 

Just as Germany, and especially Nazi Germany, was a dream boat for US plutocracy, a wild east where everything was permitted, as long as one pleased the dictatorship, so was China a dreamboat for global Western plutocracy.

The USA Deep State and Deep Political Culture was hell bent to create a world empire, and part of that hell was the hellish USSR, or hellish Germany, 1914-1945. At least, so I claim. The Harriman brothers, hereditary plutocrats who led the “Democratic” Party by the nose for decades, got maximally decorated by both Hitler and Stalin (the latter for developing the crucial Caucasian and Baku oil fields…)

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2009/12/14/nazism-a-consequence-of-vibrant-plutocracy/

***   

Coronavirus is a ‘game changer’ for seeing the truth about the sort of globalisation we have been suffering from: 

The French economy and finance minister so declared. The new coronavirus is a “game changer” that will require a rethink in global supply networks, especially for health and medicine, he said.

The coronavirus epidemic is a game changer for globalisation,” Bruno Le Maire said during a visit to Athens, noting that the outbreak has highlighted an “irresponsible and unreasonable” reliance on China. “We cannot continue to rely on China for 80 to 85 percent of pharmaceutical active ingredients“… Lemaire said, pointing out what I viewed as obvious for two decades…

***

Good Globalization was crucial to the rise of civilization:

A casual look at the world shows that civilization was centered on centers of trade, and especially the Middle Earth, where the two largest continents collide, and the “Central State” (China). Those two areas have also traded, not just goods but also people for four millennia as civilizations… West Eurasian mummies were found in Western China, and they carried civilizational elements (horses, metallurgy, jade tech). More deeply, even, way back, when Denisovans were running the show, more than 50,000 years ago, they were found from Spain to east of the Wallace line (Australia).

Clearly globalization is very old, much older than civilization itself. It is not different from long range trade. There is evidence of the latter before even the Neolithic in Australia. Different parts of the world had different resources, and those could only be traded. Thus globalization was more important for prehistoric people than for modern people: if one didn’t live in a region with obsidian, flint, or even stones, one had to trade them. 

***

Globalization can collapse in mayhem:

The usual civilizational mayhem to roll out is the collapse of the Roman State, under the invasions from Germans, Huns, Muslims… But there was another collapse, roughly two millenia prior… In the same area. 

The Bronze Age Middle Earth civilization was a globally trading world… it collapsed suddenly around 32 centuries ago (from a number of simultaneous factors: drought, quakes, and a vast conspiracy by the “People of the Sea”, bringing devastating wars of invasion…)

It is never nice when nations move over and replace others: examples are legions, the Sea People invasion the first historical case of wholesale replacement…

The formation of world-empires by European nations came in several shades of sadistic grey: from nearly innocent white in the formation of French colonies such as Canada, India and in Africa, to the darkest black with the conquest of Congo by the Belgian King. The conquest of Central and South America by Spain was a strange mix of deliberate massacres and unvoluntary holocaust. The re-invention of slavery, or quasi-slavery by European colonists (     

Or was it when the USA stealthily took control of Germany after World War One? More like the latter case.

When did globalization start then? Was it when Phoenicia founded Carthage, nearly 3,000 years ago, or later when Carthage imported fish from Senegal? Or when Athens became dependent of the Black Sea shores for her wheat? Was it when Rome imported silk from China? Was it when Europe created gigantic empires overseas? Or was it when refrigeration was invented and ships could bring frozen mutton to Britain from Australia and New Zealand? Or was it when the French government taught the USA how to mass produce the 75mm gun France depended upon in World War One? (France’s resources were overstretched). 

When globalization started is not the most significant question: it had to be as old as humanity. The most significant question is when does globalization turn perverse? As when the Mongols submitted Russia, or annihilated Baghdad, with the help of their Christian allies

***

Dependency On China Makes Much Evil Sense… for Global Plutocrats:

Aside from blatant dictatorship, nowadays China doesn’t have anything the “West” doesn’t have… Indeed, Constantinople learned to make silk in the Sixth Century. Other Chinese inventions had equivalents in the West (as for porcelain), or were quickly duplicated and improved (gunpowder, deep drilling for gas). All the other things China has now (such as “rare” earths) are mostly due to Western laziness.

Globalization made sense for China, as China became the world’s factory, thus creating a dependency similar to that of a drug trafficker to drug addict. Globalization made sense for plutocrats, as it enabled them to escape the world’s most advanced taxation and legislation, ensuring huge profits for all plutocrats.

So now we are in a situation where much of drugs and equipment to fight a pandemic made in China are made in China. How smart was that? Not smart, but following the orders of crafty plutocrats owning all media, thus all hearts and minds of the bleating sheep.

Want more stupid attitudes which the future will contradict? What about predicting only a two meter sea rise by 2100? With a rise of temperatures of ten degrees Centigrade in Antarctica?

The planet is one global spaceship. North Korea closed its border to… its sponsor, China. Iran got infected, and because of Shiite holy tourism, spread the disease around, although, in theory, Iran was pretty much isolated… If it’s one global spaceship, it means the global plutocracy is a global problem. Global plutocracy weaponized China… to the point the global health response to global disease is globally impaired. 

It’s high time to weaponize democracy against plutocracy.[2]

Patrice Ayme

***

***

[1] This is one of my master ideas… Not to say common obsession…

***

[2] Hyper Pluto mastermind Bloomberg spent already half a billion dollars, inventing in the process would-be quotes from Sanders praising dictators… But financial plutocracy is the dictatorship, and Bloomberg its pope!

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/feb/25/mike-bloomberg-bernie-sanders-dictator-tweets-twitter

However, so much mentally impaired by the media and its Trump Derangement Syndrome, many “Democrats” view Bloomberg favorably, and the more he spends feeding their addiction, the more they like him!

Iraq US Crime Against Humanity: Why No Inquiry?

December 31, 2019

Pelosi said she had to impeach Trump for his crimes, namely talking to the Ukrainian president about corruption and going to Court instead of obeying Congress right away (all presidents have always gone to Court when ordered by Congress, it’s part of check and balances, as the Legislative branch can’t order around the Executive branch without arbitration by the Judicial Branch). Pelosi said “Our democracy is what is at stake, the president leaves us no choice but to act.“ 

But the crimes in Iraq were much higher and greater than those alleged from Trump: millions died. And the war there is still going on. How come no inquiry? Could that be because Pelosi and Biden were principals in that iraq invasion abomination?

Could it be that Democrats impeach Trump, following the strategy pure religious types, such as the Puritans, always followed, impeaching others for crimes they themselves committed, on a far greater scale? The greatest US crime committed in the last 30 years was the war against Iraq. Among other gifts, it brought us the Islamist State.

Pelosi and Bush are now among those politicians world history will forever spite. Differently from Nero, whose culpability was sometimes unclear, Pelosi has admitted to crimes against humanity and conspiring to implement them. With Bush. Just listen to the tape. The CNN tape. All Americans who thinks that’s all right have sunk to the level of Germans thinking it was alright to invade Poland in 1939.

Right now the US is reviled in Iraq. New York Times itself, a shill for the US establishment, and a proponent of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, makes that assessment (see footnotes for quotes). How come there was no inquiry? How come there is still no inquiry? Because the guy, the criminal suspect, more exactly, who authorized the Iraq War is running for president? And has the highest probability, at this point, to succeed Trump?  

US policy under Bush I, Clinton (extensive blockade, including of medical drugs), Bush II, arguably resulted in the death of at least one million Iraqis… Even before 2003

But then in 2002 the US government accused Iraq, in blatant contradiction with evidence, to be an allied of Al Qaeda (which had destroyed the World Trade Center in New York, but was also initially created and sustained by US agents (CIA) and their pawns (SIS), for many years, committing atrocity after atrocity in Afghanistan to expel Russian and French influence, in the hope of mastering Afghan mineral wealth, and preventing others to rise).

As this was not enough, the US disingenuously accused Iraq of having Weapons Of Mass Destruction (WMD), including sci fi biological weapons developed inside trucks, as demonstrated with kiddie drawing by Sec of State Powell at the UN. The lies were horrendous and insulted the world community’s intelligence. Oil man Bush was more motivated by oil and personal vengeance (because his dad had cut short the first Iraq war, and may have been targeted by Iraqis later))

The number of casualties in the Iraq War remains disputed, however a recent estimate, using the best information available, shows a catastrophic estimate of 2.4 million deaths since the 2003 invasion, including more than 5,000 dead US soldiers… and countless numbers of US soldiers reduced to suffering vegetable status (I know one US marine personally who goes from painful brain operation, to the next; he may as well be living nailed on a cross. The only clear thing is that he will die from it soon…) 

In the end it prevented durably Iraq to export oil. In turn, that, and shorting out Iran for oil exports too, enabled the US to  develop fracking on an enormous scale under Obama (who called US fracking the “fuel bridge to the future”).

Where is the inquiry in all this? How come US policy makers, some candidates for supreme office right now, were not asked formally the proper questions? Ever? War of aggression as Bush II engaged in, without proper UN mandate (and strong opposition by France) is a crime against humanity. However, as there was bipartisan support to devastate Iraq, here we are. This is no way for a democracy to operate. Foreign war should be engaged only when it seems there is no alternative, and the decisions leading to the engagement should be systematically examined later, to make sure no crime was committed, and to become an example, not just to the world, but to history and to create templates for progress and civilization. 

Unpunished crimes only encourage further corruption, not just in other countries, but in the US themselves, where power of money has never been stronger. We just learned that the Shah of Iran was able to flee to the USA, escaping Iranian justice, thanks to the influence of a major bank on the Carter administration. Never any official inquiry on this, perpetrators went on as influencers. 

Patrice Ayme

***

***

New York Times:How a Chase Bank Chairman Helped the Deposed Shah of Iran Enter the U.S.
The fateful decision in 1979 to admit Mohammed Reza Pahlavi prompted the seizure of the American Embassy in Tehran and helped doom the Carter presidency.

….“as the jet touched down, the only one waiting to receive the deposed monarch was a senior executive of Chase Manhattan Bank, which had not only lobbied the White House to admit the former shah but had arranged visas for his entourage, searched out private schools and mansions for his family and helped arrange the Gulfstream to deliver him.

“The Eagle has landed,” Joseph V. Reed Jr., the chief of staff to the bank’s chairman, David Rockefeller, declared in a celebratory meeting at the bank the next morning.

Less than two weeks later, on Nov. 4, 1979, vowing revenge for the admission of the shah to the United States, revolutionary Iranian students seized the American Embassy in Tehran and then held more than 50 Americans — and Washington — hostage for 444 days.”

***

Joe Biden Is A Perpetually Lying War Criminal Lying About His Crimes Against Humanity From 2002 To 2019:

There are two sorts of war criminals; those who deny they did anything wrong, and the others. Biden aspires to be of the first sort. However, like Pelosi, he has a videotape problem. As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee when the authorization vote was cast, Joe Biden was at the forefront of the machine to destroy Iraq (which profited to US frackers, their Wall Street backers, and fossil fuel plutocrats, all over the world, especially the USA). Biden could have blocked in 2002 the use of war against Iraq. Instead he authorized it.

The day the Iraq war was launched by Bush II, Biden told CNN: “There’s a lot of us who voted for giving the president the authority to take down Saddam Hussein if he didn’t disarm. And there are those who believe, at the end of the day, even though it wasn’t handled all that well, we still have to take him down.

Many Iraqis feel that it is the USA which has to be taken down. (The Biden quotes about Iraq are many; he tried to lie about them in 2019… then admitting he “misspoke”…)

Further on Biden said: ….”what you are sensing from some Democrats, as well as Republicans, is a frustration relating to the lost opportunities of maybe being able to do this with others, maybe, if we had others with us, not even having to go to war. So I don’t think it’s anything other than a frustration.

But I think it’s time we stop all that. We have one single focus. And that is, we’re about to send our women and men to war. The president is the commander in chief. We voted to give him the authority to wage that war. We should step back and be supportive.”

***

New York Times, December 31, 2019. in “Protesters Attack U.S. Embassy in Iraq, Chanting ‘Death to America’: “The United States has about 5,200 troops in Iraq — down from a peak of 170,000 in 2007 —  in addition to an unclear number of civilian contractors. The troops — stationed primarily at a base in Al Anbar Province, northwest of Baghdad, and at another in the Kurdish-controlled north of country — are tasked with training Iraqi security forces and helping to prevent a resurgence of the Islamic State.

After years of military and political investment in Iraq, the United States finds itself in a position where few powerful Iraqis are willing to stand up for it and its role in the country.

Condemnation of the recent airstrikes continued on Tuesday. Mr. Mahdi, the Iraqi prime minister, announced an official three-day mourning period for the men killed in the strikes, which he called an “outrageous attack.”

***

Iraq war Carnage:

Officially admitted on the US side, more than half a million Iraqis died during the Iraq War. So did 5,000 American troops. The war strengthened the radical extremism it was supposed to fight while costing American taxpayers more than $2.4 trillion, much of which went to defense contractors like then-Vice President Dick Cheney’s former company Halliburton. And George W. Bush started the war based on the lies that Saddam Hussein was helping Al Qaeda, and sitting on an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.

But Nancy Pelosi doesn’t think that was impeachable. Right Nancy voted against the Iraq war then and September 2004, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi called the war in Iraq a “grotesque mistake”. However, she could have done more.  

In a CNN video, Nancy Pelosi says that she knew George W Bush was lying to the public to start a war, but she did not feel this was an impeachable offense.

Nancy Pelosi: I Knew Bush Jr Was Lying About WMD To Start War, But Didn’t See It As Impeachable

Incredible. In footage from a CNN Town Hall, Pelosi said she knew that the infamous WMD-narrative created by the Bush administration wasn’t real. She was one of four on the Intelligence Committee, as the “Ranking Member”, and she knew there was none of what the elected officials of the Bush administration claimed there was. But ‘they had made a representation”, and “they were elected”. So be it. 

Actually, only Bush II had been elected. All the other officials, including Cheney the Vice, were on his coattails. Nancy just had to impeach Bush… And Cheney. Interestingly, then she would have become president:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_line_of_succession

So lying to We The People of the World is OK, and it’s cool (even if one doesn’t become president in the process, although one could have been). That should be unsettling on its own, and Nancy should be prosecuted on this ground alone. 

There is no expiration date for crimes against humanity, and complicity therewith. So Bush, Cheney, Biden (the authorizer of the 2003 Iraq war), and accomplice Pelosi should be prosecuted for lying to We the People, and killing 2.4 million.

But the candor and casualness with which the Speaker reveals her crimes is astounding. This poorly educated girl has no moral backbone whatsoever. Even on live television in 2019, it doesn’t occur to Pelosi just how bad her high crimes against humanity sound. In an orgasm of wanton hypocrisy, she chalks up her passiveness in pursuing Bush’s impeachment to “not wanting to make [impeachment] a way of life” for Americans. Her decision to allow the president to continue an illegal war (started because of a lie she was aware of) was therefore rational because it spared us another impeachment debacle.

Pelosi’s reasoning doesn’t make sense—starting a war based on a coordinated conspiracy by dozens of the highest elected officials to imprint upon the public a Hitler sized lie is illegal. It is more than enough grounds for impeachment. The total number of Iraqis killed by US policy since 1990 may be as high as 3.4 million, and Pelosi as a top US political operator and influencer is fully responsible. So is Biden. 

***

Bush, Oct. 7, 2002: “After eleven years during which we have tried containment, sanctions, inspections, even selected military action, the end result is that Saddam Hussein still has chemical and biological weapons and is increasing his capabilities to make more. And he is moving ever closer to developing a nuclear weapon.”

Latest Pluto Brexit Outrage: Dictator Johnson Suspends UK Parliament

August 28, 2019

BORIS JOHNSON WILL SUSPEND U.K. PARLIAMENT, HINDERING BREXIT REBELS

LONDON — Unelected Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Wednesday announced plans to lengthen an upcoming parliamentary break, an expected maneuver that would make it harder for lawmakers to prevent Britain from exiting the European Union without an agreement with the Union.

Mr. Johnson said Britain will leave as French Napoleon Macron scheduled on Oct. 31, with or without a deal. Economists say such a “no-deal” exit would be chaotic and economically damaging, and could plunge Britain into a recession, but Mr. Johnson and the hard-line pro-Brexit faction in Parliament insist that it would be fine.

Opposition politicians — and some of Mr. Johnson’s fellow Conservatives — reacted angrily to the news.

Dictator Boris needs the approval of the dictating hereditary Queen to enact his plot. The two miscreants need to conspire together.

Brexit was a non-binding referendum, whereas the referendum for entry of the UK in the European Community, 45 years ago, was first legislated to be a binding legislation. Brexit was retrospectively made binding, a blatantly anti-democratic measure. Had the Brexit referendum known to been binding to start with, many would not have voted for it. Instead, Brexit was interpreted as a non-binding protest vote, so many voted to “leave” when they didn’t mean it.

In front of Westminster, the UK Parliament (above), is a statue of Richard the Lionheart. King Richard, symbol of England, spent more than 90% of his life in France (aside of time he spent in the Middle East, much of it representing his suzerain and companion of arms, Philippe Auguste of France). Richard was born and died, in France, and became king with the help of Philippe. Europe is one, that’s what the Lionheart statue in front of Westminster means. Brexit idiots don’t know this.

Now two unelected individuals, a hereditary (non-elected) queen, and an ex-journalist are going to act together to prevent any semblance of debate by elected “representatives”, while the UK decides to make economic, financial and fiscal war to its neighbors. 

Notice in passing that when Germans and Franks were led by kings, 15 centuries ago, those  were elected. Non-elected monarchs appeared relatively recently in European history, while wars augmented,

Some may not understand what I just said, let me explain in more details: the UK is a major tax haven. The EU was, increasingly, squeezing out tax havens. UK based plutocrats, coming from all over the world, but nominally based in Britain or its tax-free “dependencies”, couldn’t take it, and decided to have their tax haven, Britain and more than 15 tax-free dependencies, sail away.

So now we can contemplate what “representative democracy” has become: not even a fig leaf for raw global plutocracy anxious to keep its tax-free status.

What the world needs is real Demos Kratia, People Power, and that means People directly voting, and being clear on what they vote for (and not packs of lies like Brexit).

Patrice Ayme

***

***

P/S: Does the preceding means I am a Remainer foaming at the mouth? No. (Some Brexit fanatics have told me I inspired them to launch Brexit, believe it or not…)

Actually, Brexit may help Europe, if it results of a bit of competition Europe needs. Let me explain: Direct Democracy in Switzerland has made Switzerland wealthy, productive and innovative. In the best possible Brexit strategy, Great Britain would mimic Switzerland (as the EU should do). That, in turn, would force the European Union to do the same…

Moreover, the UK will have to keep on cooperating militarily with France.

So Brexit doesn’t mean all the bridges are cut with the other side of the Channel… Far from it. In catastrophic scenarios where Scotland leaves the UK, because the UK left the EU, British nuclear subs, presently based in one spot in Scotland, are supposed to be based in France (France has four strategic nuclear subs based in their special base in Brest; and six 100 meters long attack nuclear submarines based in the deep rade of Toulon; the UK has three strategic “Trident” nuclear subs… the USA has 14 “Trident” nuclear subs, core of US Defense)…

Big History View Of China, How It Relates To Hong Kong

August 18, 2019

How did China get united, 22 centuries ago? Under the rule of law. The state of Qin grew, over the centuries, from relentless application of the law, just like the other greatest civilization, Rome. This mood, of the rule of law being paramount, is why the generals of the First Emperor were able to conquer China… Very similarly to what the Roman Republic did, at exactly the same time, and for the exact same reasons: Rome won, and Qin won, because people accept to be ruled by law, if it is fair and clairvoyant. The Mission Civilisatrice is no lure: it wins wars. Superior war fighting capability comes from superior philosophy. Inferior philosophy brings extinction. 

In the end, the First Emperor slipped, and led China astray, for millennia to come, when he ordered the books of 100 philosophy schools destroyed. Right, records, science, medicine were preserved… So the disaster was not as great in China as the Christian generated destruction of the Greco-Roman heritage in the West. (Yet, in the West, the Franks, a minority, took over, and, as a minority, they had to be smarter, and thus domesticated Christianism, rendering it innocuous… for the next five centuries… before it rose its ugly snout again…)

However, that Qin instigated wanton destruction of higher thinking, and the respect thereof,  set-up in China a mood of embracing a lack of wisdom and tolerance for exotic thinking, which, in the end, had ethical consequences (and from there, social, economic, and ultimately, military). That mood of irreverence for higher thinking out of the box, prevented China to learn to treat individuals as well as they were in the West.

In Francia, in 655 CE, the government of the Imperium Francorum led by queen Bathilde, a former English slave, outlawed slave trading; this was imposed all around Europe. For example in 1066 CE, when the Franks conquered England… and freed the slaves, 20% of the population. As Aristotle pointed out, if one had no slaves, one would need machines. The Franks developed those machines. European visitors to China. around or before Marco Polo, were struck by the fact that cutting trees in China involved hundreds of people carrying those trees around… when similar tasks were accomplished by a few in Europe, thanks to various tech tricks. 

What Xi wants to be, when he grows up? Hopefully, the Present Masters of China Will Learn That This Is All Over Now: Xi Can’t be Qin Shi Huang!

(Huang, emperor, maybe, Shi, first, certainly not…)

Treating individuals better in the West, as was imposed under the Merovingians and Carolingians, brought up a technological, and even bioengineering explosion: human muscle and multitude had to be replaced by mechanical advantage or specially bred animals (for example hydraulic hammer to forge huge iron beams, hence the cathedrals… and, a bit later, field artillery). [1]

An indirect result of this tech explosion was Western military superiority, which was so great, even the Mongols left Western Europe alone (after conferring among each other about why their ancestors the Huns had been defeated in France, eight centuries prior). Thus Western Europe was unconquered, for two millennia, insuring independent ferocity of thinking and self-worth, spurring inquiry of the indomitable human spirit, with more freedom than occupied China.   

Indeed, in contrast, in the last millennium, China spent most of its time ruled by foreigners (Jurchen, Mongols, Manchus). Mongol generals even proposed to annihilate China, demographically (holocaust) and even ecologically (turning northern China into a steppe) The rule of law, intellect and science suffered in China, from this foreign occupation.

In the Twentieth Century, China reacted, mostly by adopting Western ideologies: rule of law, then Marxism, then the sort of mercantilist, tech led development leading Western powers, used in the Nineteenth Century; powers such as the USA, Germany, UK, France… even Japan (a new honorary Western power!)

So far, so good. 

However to lead, one needs to create ideas, not just mass produce goods. Western European supremacy was born out of human rights (when the Franks put back monotheism in its place, by replacing Christianism by tolerance and pushing back Islamism, after outlawing slavery). If China doesn’t learn to drive the rule of law from human right, it will just become one more dangerous super power, like Prussia, and the Second, and Third Reich of Germany.

Democracy and Human Rights are not just fair. Humanity in full, is made for fairness, and blossom fully that way. Democracy and human rights are how one maximizes mental creativity… And thus military superiority. Hence, should the Chinese dictatorship decide to crush democracy, once again, it is Chinese security that it is also crushing, long term.

Hong Kong is an irreplaceable gift to China, an antidote to Chinese intellectual and governmental fascism: it forces China to learn to become more tolerant to thinking outside of the particular box which pleases at this moment the present emperor (right now, Mr. Xi). [2]

Destroying that gift would instill an even more ignorant mood.

But ignorant moods are exactly what plutocracy loves.

Lack of construction for homes and dearth of living wages, have been a chronic disaster, throughout the West. It’s particularly bad in Hong Kong, but also in all top producing metropolises, such as Paris, San Francisco Bay Area, Tokyo, etc. Not only are homes unaffordable for the jobs at hand, but the economy suffers from the unaffordability crisis.

Then We The People, observing the collusion between plutocrats and government, revolt… by asking for more (real, that is direct) democracy. And that goes through decreasing the power of tycoons, so precious to governments. Ironically enough, what is Xi, but a super-tycoon, a super-typhoon putting equality to waste?

OK, Xi was an abused child, an abused princeling, abused by the Cultural Revolution. Xi suffered a past of violence. But that’s a diagnostic, not an excuse.

Patrice Ayme

***

***

[1] The cognitively challenged friend of monopolist plutocrat Bill Gates, Jared Diamond (author of Guns, Germs, and Steel; Collapse) didn’t understand any of this, that the husbandry of Europe over nature was not the product of chance, but human will, deployed over millennia (although in his latest book, Diamond shows flickers of progressing wisdom, as he ponders successful cases of government intervention… more or less mangled by his data management…) All the riches of Western Europe were greatly the fruit of will, indeed. The same holds for China (or Kerala)… But, as I point out above, and why, to a smaller extent. And the Beijing hysteria about Hong Kong is a case in point, that Chinese governmentalism, however glorious, fundamental and effective, can’t be the whole story:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/synthesis-found-governmentalism/

***

[2] France is another example where centralism, and the accompanying governmental, social and intellectual fascism has run havoc. Louis XIV, a bloody stupid monster, threw 10% of the French population out, so that it could better terrorize the rest, and please his fascist god. That was aggravated by his grandson, Louis XV, and Napoleon…

Zhōngguó, Central State, is the most common Mandarin name for China in modern times. The first appearance of 中國 on an artifact was in the Western Zhou on a ritual vessel. It is formed by combining the characters zhōng () meaning “central” or “middle”, and guó (/), representing “state” or “states”; in contemporary usage, “nation”. Prior to the Qin unification of China “Zhongguo” referred to the “Central States“; the connotation was the primacy of a culturally distinct core area, centered on the Yellow River valley, as distinguished from the tribal periphery. Hence the common mistranslation as “Middle Kingdom”.

Dispelling Lies Exalting 1776 To Smear 1789.

July 5, 2019

It’s traditional among Anglo-Saxon historians and pundits of the sort who get on the payrolls of the “best” (that is, wealthiest, most plutocratic) universities, and top media, to spite the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen of 1789, and propagandize against it…

While celebrating the US Declaration of Independence of 1776. It’s condemning apples to celebrate death caps. 1776 was anti-plutocratic, right, yet tribal: it didn’t free the slaves. 1789 is universal, and did free the slaves. Ironically, the US Constitution also appeared in 1789… but was not as universal as the French constitution, so that US ersatz has been hardly mentioned ever since as a competitor to France 1789… Most US citizens, pundits and propagandists don’t realize the French and US Constitutions were elaborated simultaneously in 1789… And everybody knows about the French one, because of its universal claims.  

Typical of the plutocratically inspired spite for 1789, is this from the New York Times, July 4, 2019: Robespierre’s America

We need to reclaim the spirit of 1776, not the certitudes of 1789.

You mean we should forget the certitudes of the United Nations’ charter? And the New York Times to insist: 

“Armed with the ‘truth,’ Jacobins could brand any individuals who dared to disagree with them traitors or fanatics,” historian Susan Dunn wrote of the French Revolution. “Any distinction between their own political adversaries and the people’s ‘enemies’ was obliterated.” 

Amusing, if said in elementary school, by an exalted toddler, but not funny if considered to be serious scholarship. And even less so when it is used, as it is, to smear the entire French Revolution. When one speaks of the Terror one speaks of a period during which the French Republic was at war with the rest of Europe, which was controlled by bloody plutocrats threatening to kill millions, and boasting of it, to further their rule of terror. The counter-terror of the Republic festered only during a short period in 1793, and part of 1794… and it arose for reasons exterior to France. The word “Jacobin” was initially an insult, and was invented well after 1789.[2]

Pseudo-humanists can say whatever catches their fancy, completely irrelevant to any sort of reality: this is how the United Nations Charter was born, at Valmy, September 20, 1792… Thanks to superior French explosives… And the Republican élan…

The French Revolution of 1789 was such an excellent thing that the Charter of the present day United Nations is founded on it. However, in their will to hatred, and plutocracy, many smear the Human Rights and Citizen Rights Proclamation of 1789 with what happened in 1793: total war, invasions by several monarchies, the Jacobins tearing each other up, the Terror, 17,000 executed. They also omit to say that, in the meantime, all of Europe monarchies had attacked France in 1792, promising Paris “military execution”, and that the king and queen had betrayed the country, France, that they had been put in charge of leading. [1]

Smearing 1789 with 1793, omitting 1792, is conducive to… hatred. Hatred for progress, human rights, etc.. Thus smearing 1789 is to embrace the love of plutocracy, inequality, fracking, excess CO2, over-exploitation of resources, disregard for human rights, or even human lives (see US life expectancy going down, ever since the latter rule of Obama the Great), etc. Exactly the agenda the English North American colony leaders tended to exhibit and cherish since 1610 CE.

Patrice Ayme

***

***

[1] On the Valmy Battle, September 20, 1792: After threatening Paris with “military execution”, the coalition plutocratic army invaded France. France was still a monarchy, and France was still led by the king who launched the revolution, Louis XVI, who had been king for EIGHTEEN (18) years.  

The military execution threat was made in July 1792, raising the stakes of the total war of plutocracy against the Rights of Man and the Citizen.

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2012/01/07/how-genocide-starts/

Just over half of the French infantry were regulars of the old Royal Army, as were nearly all of the cavalry and, most importantly, the artillery,[3][5] which were widely regarded as the best in Europe at the time.[6][7] These veterans provided a professional core to steady the enthusiastic volunteer battalions.[8]Combined, Dumouriez’ Army of the North and Kellermann’s Army of the Centre totalled approximately 54,000 troops.[9] Heading towards them was the Duke of Brunswick’s coalition army of about 84,000, all veteran Prussian and Austrian troops augmented by large complements of Hessians and the French royalist Army of Condé.[9]

 

The invading fasco-plutocratic army of proto-Nazis handily captured Longwy on 23 August and Verdun on 2 September, then moved on toward Paris through the defiles of the Forest of Argonne.[6] In response, Dumouriez halted his advance to the Netherlands and reversed course, approaching the enemy army from its rear.[3] From Metz, Kellermann moved to his assistance, joining him at the village of Sainte-Menehould on 19 September.[6] The French forces were now EAST of the Prussians, behind their lines. Theoretically the Prussians could have marched straight towards Paris unopposed, but this course was never seriously considered: the threat to their lines of supply and communication was too great to be ignored. With few other options available, Brunswick turned back and prepared to do battle.

 

When the Prussian manœuvre was nearly completed, Kellermann advanced his left wing and took up a position on the slopes between Sainte-Menehould and Valmy.[6] He centered his command around an old windmill, which he quickly razed to prevent enemy artillery spotters from using it as a sighting location.[11] His veteran artillerists were well-placed upon its accommodating ridge to begin the so-called “Cannonade of Valmy“.[3] Brunswick moved toward them with about 34,000 of his troops.[9] As they emerged from the woods, a long-range gunnery duel ensued and the French batteries proved superior. The Prussian infantry made a cautious, and fruitless, effort to advance under fire across the open ground.[3]

The French troops sang “La Marseillaise” and “Ça Ira“, and a cheer went up from the French line.[12] Confronted to this discouraging and thoroughly unexpected élan, to the surprise of nearly everyone, Brunswick broke off the action and retired from the field. The Prussians rounded the French positions at a great distance and commenced a rapid retreat eastward.

Never doubt the efficiency of the Marseillaise…

The First French Republic was proclaimed the next day in Paris, as the news of the victory arrived.

French troops soon struck forward into Germany, taking Mainz in October. Dumouriez once again moved against the Austrian Netherlands and Kellermann ably secured the front at Metz…

***

[2] I studied on the exact street from which the word “Jacobin”, initially a put-down, comes from. There was an old Catholic institution partisans of the secular Republic took over, to work from. It was on rue Saint Jacques… So the enemies of the Republic called the secularists that way, to make fun of them, as if they had embraced Saint Jacques (now, as in 1789, French topmost high school and the Sorbonne bracket the rue Saint Jacques).. 

French, Mandarin, Indo-European Languages; Why Multilingualism Brings Higher Wisdom

June 14, 2019

Multilingualism is a basic human capability, long honed by biological evolution. It may be necessary to achieve the highest mental capabilities, as multilingual speakers learn to adjudicate between modes of expression, the most advanced form of thinking.

So which languages? Excellent article by my frenemy Mehdi Lazar, summarizing well most of the situation with French:”The New Dynamic of French In The World.”. To point out that French and Mandarin are the most important languages (with English, de facto lingua franca) is crucial. Indeed, French is basically the core language of Europe: it is grammatically impoverished Latin bastardized with German prepositions, where many words have been phonetically and alphabetically simplified from the Latin originals. English was an afterthought. French is a fast evolving language (hopefully to go with fast minds).

This understates reality: for example North Africa spoke Latin for 900 years before the Arab invasion. Modern Latin, that is French, is widely understood, practiced and spoken in the Maghreb (in spite of efforts by local dictators of Islamist inspiration to kill it). Africa, light green, has to speak Latin derived languages (including English), because there are way too many native languages (or slave derived languages like Swahili)

Compare say the French “opital” from the original Latin “hospitalis”… English, which is actually more conservative than French, is in between with “HoSpital”: the H and S are still pronounced in English, not in French. The french found that the aspired H in the beginning, the S in the middle, and the “IS” at the end, were all useless, so they dropped them!

English, although technically classified as a “Germanic” language is mostly poorly pronounced French, and the more so, the more sophisticated the vocabulary is (85% + of words in common). Naturally, per its central position in Western Europe, French is then a happy medium between English and the other “romance” languages.

Now the baby elephant in the porcelain shop is that unruly child of Great Britain and France, the USA. Ironically enough, the dreaded “Anglo-Saxons” contribute to French by often going back to the Latin, that is, the original French, and creating words that way.

Here is an example: impact. The word appeared in English circa 1600, for “press closely into something,” from Latin impactus, past participle of impingere “to push into, drive into, strike against”. The word appears in French science and technological vocabulary only in 1824. But not just that, it’s an extremely important word, as it expresses the transmission of force (= how things act upon each other). Thus, in US English it has come to be used, since the 1990s as a… verb. As in: this essay impacts linguistics hard.

Thus it’s only a matter of time before the French verb “impacter” appears… and it would be a very useful verb… created as words should be created in French, going to the original Latin.

Another view: this time more of Africa shows up. Erroneously, but it’s a traditional error, English is not viewed as a Greco-Roman language (although it is fundamentally Greco-Roman, with more than 85% sophisticated words basically French…

Multilingualism is natural, humanity evolved as multilingual: our brains are made to learn several languages, and it enables us to better learn to adjudicate thoughts and forms of expression.

How so? Transportation was extremely difficult in the world of the past, except in those few places with steppe (like the Eurasian steppe, which goes from Hungary to Korea, that enormous freeway in the middle of Eurasia). Thus people evolved many languages even over very short distances. An example is Senegal: in this small countries, seven languages evolved, and some are tonal (Serer) and others not (Wolof). This is typical of the past, so human beings had to be multilingual.

However, there are only that many languages one can learn: French and Mandarin are the great linguistic anchors of the world, a continent apart.

But not just this: except for deplorable episodes such as the ephemeral collapses of the Greco-Roman and Chinese states under the invasions of various savages, Western Europe and China have long been at the forefront of civilization, spearheading progress. Learning basic Chinese arithmetic is fascinating: the Chinese found more rational ways to do it.

The state of Qin and the contemporaneous Roman Republic were remarkably based on the same principles of law, reason and technological progress… and that’s why they founded great empires (alive and well to this day, as descendant regimes). Actually the present inchoate world government embodied by the United Nations rests on Roman Republican legal principles, or even the letter of the Roman law (that’s similar to the Qin obsession with law… which was even applied to one of its most ardent proponent, a famous Qin PM who finished quartered by horses, as the law prescribed for the sort of corruption he had unfortunately engaged in…)

China understood the importance of intellectualism (the “Mandarin” examination system) and science… And that is why China was so successful, and the anchor civilization of East Asia (Japan and Vietnam used to employ Chinese character… Although the French switched Vietnam, and japan evolved a bit on its own…) Thus, from all this will to advanced thinking, China invented many technologies the world uses now. Even in the Nineteenth Century, Chinese drilling for natural gas, one kilometer down, or more, was the world’s most advanced.

The Frankish empire, both Merovingian and Carolingian, soon renamed itself “Renovatio Imperium Romanum”. Indeed, it “renovated” Rome on way better principles: no more terrorizing, stupidifying, sordid Christian fanaticism… and, soon enough, no more slavery: Saint Queen Bathilde outlawed the slave trade in 655 CE… Throughout much of Western Europe. So when the Franks invaded England in 1066, they freed the 20% of slaves there. These philosophical changes had huge economic, social and military impacts… 

Thus learning French and Mandarin is not just about speaking what many speak, and will speak. It’s about learning what made civilization what it has become… including learning the grave errors which made it so much better.

The “mission civilisatrice” is not over, it’s just starting. It’s not just a matter of feeling, and being, superior, it’s a matter of surviving. And not just for this species, but for the entire biosphere. You all will learn to think better, or you will learn to die, sordid. Go multilingual!

Patrice Ayme

Trump Was A Warning To Plutocracy. Warren Is What Is Really Needed!

May 5, 2019

EINOs: Elite In Name Only. This is the entire problem. No more than 10,000 people decide of the fate of the USA, the West, Civilization, eight billion people, and even the fate of the biosphere. 10,000 have captured the planet. Who are these experts in heist? Who are these gods? Mostly a self-nominated elite. OK, not all from the same place: after all, Putin was nominated by the KGB, and Xi Jinping is the son of Xi Zhongxun, nominated by the Politburo.

Yet certainly China’s elite became part of global plutocracy. Here is an example: corrupt armies ransacked Congo for rare earths enabling China to make phones for Apple, which “optimized” its own taxes into quasi-nothingness, by a combination of Caribbean tax havens and an EU-illegal deal with Ireland.   

It is this global plutocracy which rules the world. It talks one way… precisely to be able to act the opposite. Biden is the centerfold of this, even more than the transparent Obama, and the blatant Clinton. In the 1990s, time and time again, Biden fostered the plutocratic coup against civilization, the crux being the destruction of the Banking Act of 1933, thus giving free reins to the world financial plutocracy.

All is tied up: Obama fostered a fracking rampage thus the US produces twice more fossil fuels than Russia or Saudis, poisoning Earth… But 1% of US CO2 is from US subsidized private jets.

Only one way out: as the Roman Republic did. Put an ABSOLUTE limit on wealth. As Warren suggests to do (de facto). Warren’s revolution can defeat Trump’s revolt.

***

The preceding commented on the New York Times Joe Biden and the Party of Davos

As a pillar of the ancien régime, Biden is ill-placed to overturn Trump’s revolution, opined Roger Cohen in the New York Times.

My, my, my… How the Times they are changing. Just a little while ago, Trump was reviled, and not hating him, a grave moral failure, let alone a revolution. Calling Biden and the revered Obama ancien régime was a sin. Biden was arguably the most prominent engineer of plutocratic legislative installment in the 1990s: he reversed women rights, instituted mass imprisonment, demolished the Banking Act of 1933. [1]

 

Obama: “Can you believe those idiots? They really think we are not on the same side! I just smile, and they believe me!” Trump:”yeah, well, we better give those losers a bit of slack!”

Truth is Trump is not that bad, especially considering what the ancien régime has done, and not done. The US unemployment rate just reached (May 2019) a 50 years’ low. Trump brought tariff on 200 billion dollars worth of Chinese goods to 25%. Seeing those facts, global plutocracy screams high treason. I say: why doesn’t the European Union not do the same? Because it’s neither European, nor an Union?

Cohen goes on:

“Is Donald Trump an aberration? If he is, Joe Biden is the perfect Democratic candidate to defeat him next year, the steady hand that can restore decency, steer a middle course between Wall Street and Main Street, and reinvigorate the shaken liberal democratic order.

I don’t think Trump is an aberration. On the contrary, he’s the face, however duplicitous, of a revolution against the Party of Davos, the network of elites whose economic and cultural prescriptions came to be seen by myriad voters across the United States and Europe as camouflage for a self-serving heist. Biden has been a regular attendee at Davos.”

The present economic expansion is the longest ever. Trump has argued with the Fed about letting the economy run; the Fed has argued it “wants to take the punchbowl away”. The Fed is clearly wrong in a globalized economy… Now, of course, Trump has been de-globalizing more than a bit… As needed…Now here is Cohen going on with more of what I have been saying for a few years. Actually I said it, years before Obama enraged Trump enough, and made him realize anybody could become president, as long as they lied big enough, deep enough, and frequently enough, that Trump decided to run for president. As I pointed out in August 2016:

USA As A Police State

Many rage against Donald Trump, while singing the praises of Obama. They overlook that the Donald duck is what the Obama cat dragged home.”

Therein the graph of the incarceration rate in the USA, much of it having to do with Biden’s work, as the head of the relevant Senatorial committee in the 1990s:

Thanks to Biden’s reforms, incarceration doubled. Under Reagan, it’s the Democrats who passed the laws to incarcerate, as all the end all, be all laws needed…

Here is Roger Cohen again: [Trump] “could say the unsayable. He could disrupt. He could restore violence to a wan political stage of PowerPoint slides. He could take on the China that had put millions of people to work on the cheap in its factories and so, from the Midwest to the British Midlands, de-industrialized much of the West.

If people felt like nobodies, felt abandoned, felt there was not only growing inequality in wealth but inequality of recognition, felt their very language had been anesthetized by all-knowing elites more at home in global capitals than in the provinces of their own countries, then somebody could speak for liberalism’s disappeared — and maybe even win. Steve Bannon saw this. Trump grasped this and did win, not as the creator of a movement but as the media-savvy messenger of a groundswell.”

This revolution is not an American phenomenon. It is much wider…”

Roger Cohen observes the obvious:

There’s been a movement in people’s minds, a radical change in the way people live, perceive and conduct their politics. The old paradigm won’t work… whatever Biden’s early lead in polls. He’s ill-placed, as a pillar of the ancien régime, to overturn the revolution. This is not personal. It’s societal.

For all his Scranton blue-collar beginnings, Biden will be pilloried as a faithful servant of the Party of Davos that secured impunity for the financiers behind the 2008 meltdown, a heady growth in inequality, China appeasement and the arrogance of money-wooed Democrats estranged from their working-class constituency. Unfiltered politics, technology’s dubious gift, will hurt him. These politics prize agility more than honor. The world has moved on. Whither I’m not sure, but it has. Things shift. That’s the way of the world — inexorable as biology.

One of the most significant exchanges so far of the fight for the 2020 Democratic nomination came in the last few days when Biden said of China: “I mean, you know, they’re not bad folks, folks. But guess what? They’re not competition for us.” To which Bernie Sanders shot back that the United States had lost three million manufacturing jobs to the 2000 China trade deal. “It’s wrong,” he tweeted, “to pretend that China isn’t one of our major economic competitors.”

Not only economic, I would add. China is set on an implacable course to run the world in the second half of this century. If that is not precisely what you want for your children, thinking that “they’re not competition for us” is precisely the wrong place to start. It’s lazy thinking

Cohen then evokes Macron, who went one carbon tax too far. Macron was preoccupied by the end of the world. The Gilets Jaunes replied they were preoccupied by the end of the month. Cohen, optimistically said that Macron learned. Our banker learned? Of course not really. All Macron learned was to fly, one burning cathedral at a time, just dumping enough Pluto baggage, to get over the next hill.

And finally Cohen draw the conclusion I have drawn in the past:

“…among Democratic contenders, Elizabeth Warren is listening most closely. Her proposed tax on the super wealthy reflects that — while billionaires, like China, get a pass from Biden. Trump is not an aberration. Only the innovative will beat him.

***

From Repression To Barbarization:

Other opinion makers at the New York Times are also condemning Biden, even if they don’t say it aloud, but use euphemisms. In “Imprisoned for Trying to Save His Son. Mass incarceration was America’s biggest mistake over the last half-century.” Nicholas Kristof, Opinion Columnist, on May 4, 2019,

America’s biggest mistake over the last half-century arguably had nothing to do with the war in Vietnam or Iraq, or with Watergate or Donald Trump. Rather, I’d say that it was mass incarceration, fueled by the war on drugs.

The United States used to have incarceration rates similar to those of Europe — and then, beginning in about 1970, we increased the number of people behind bars sevenfold. About as many Americans now have a criminal record as have a college degree. Mass incarceration shattered America’s family structure, magnified race gaps, left millions of people marginalized — and has been brutally unfair.

Years ago I wrote about a case that still haunts me. Dicky Joe Jackson was a Texas trucker whose 2-year-old son, Cole, needed a bone-marrow transplant to save his life. The family raised $50,000 through community fund-raisers, but this wasn’t enough — so Jackson tried to earn the remainder by transporting meth in his truck for a distributor. He was caught and sentenced to life in prison.

The prosecutor himself thought the sentence unjust, saying of Jackson: “He didn’t know of any other way to take care of his kid.”

***

Mass incarceration was itself a manifestation of a much deeper disease: the control of the USA by its wealthiest class, even when civilization was. and is, at stake. Those who know too little history will say the USA declared war TO Hitler. No. Hitler declared war TO the US (Dec 11, 1941). The USA had the plan to NOT go to war in 1942. Fortunately, the stupid fascists couldn’t resist.

USA’s worst lie, and worst mistake, for those who care about lives, humanity,  and its standards: not to recognize the value system which led it to fight too late against Nazism, or even more basic, that the deepest flaws of US society, still in power today, led it to not declare war to Hitler. Obscuring this vile story hides US Pluto power (US plutocracy!

It’s all tied up together into an all too evil mood…

No more than 10,000 people decide of the fate of the USA, the West, Civilization, eight billion people, and even the fate of the biosphere. 10,000 have captured the planet. Some could argue that they are busy destroying the planet, precisely to hide their heist, by fostering great destruction, making it impossible to understand who, what, started the holocaust, the burning of everything…

Anyway, good to see the Times they are changing…

Patrice Ayme

***

***

[1] Relative to Biden, Obama was just a poser: his Obamacare, however helpful it has been to the healthcare plutocracy, pales in insignificance relative to Biden’s hellish reforms of the 1990s… 

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2013/11/03/obamascare/

Of course TARP was very much in the spirit of Biden’s finance reforms of the 1990s:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2009/01/25/tarp-transfer-of-assets-to-rich-people/

European Union Should Extent Brexit (Article 50) Two Years. Without UK European Parliament Privileges!

March 29, 2019

Indeed, as I will explain more below, the European Parliament doesn’t create laws, just approve them. Great Britain is already out ot the European Council (which launches laws).

The House of Commons, the UK Parliament, rejected the UK government’s “Withdrawal Agreement from the European Union“, for the third time. According to the EU’s ultimatum to Great Britain, the UK will be thrown out of the EU on April 12, in 14 days. This expulsion is unwise, and no civilized way to proceed. I will thereafter suggest a different course: extending massively Article 50, putting Brexit on the European backburner, a slow simmer in the background, leaving time for Great Britain to figure out its existential issues, its Brexistential issues… Shile Europe is allowed to reconsider the future, the planet, civilization, progress, democracy, and other things which have disappeared from the Brexit debate…

The interminable Brexit process is paralyzing Europe (both UK and EU). The temptation is to expedite it, in the hope of being done with it. That will not work: instead, it will make the situation way worse. If Brexit happened on April 12, 2019, in two weeks, ten years of divisive negotiations would ensue. How to avoid that? Forget about it! Forget about Brexit, send it to the purgatory of the House of Commons, under the good care of its weaker, the excellent right honorable gentleman, Speaker John Bercow.

Another new NO, the ninth, was added on Friday. The Third No on the withdrawal agreement.

***

How And Why LEGALLY EXCLUDE the UK From The EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT (Until the UK Decides to Revoke Article 50, & Remain In the EU):

Europeans have to let the British Parliament find a solution and have it ratified by the British People, in a referendum. That will take at least a year. Meanwhile, the rest of the European Union has to protect itself from the pathology known as Brexit. That means that Great Britain should be EXCLUDED from taking part in the next European Parliament.

I don’t care what the legalistically minded come up with, mumbling that EU member nations have to be represented in Parliament, that we can’t have a precedent, bla bla bla. Right, the EU is very legally minded, a French characteristic, now permeating the EU. However, sticking to the law causes rigidities which, in turn can only be removed by those periodic revolutions shaking France.

The spirit of the law always beats the letter of the law. The letter of the law has already been broken: Article 50 extended only until tomorrow, March 29, 2019, the appartenunce of the UK in the EU.  Hence the letter of the law (24 months!) has been broken. Yet the spirit survives.

So, in a way, the UK is (sort of) out: the European Council, after one meeting with UK PM Cameron, four days after the fateful Brexit, never met as 28 members again: the UK got excluded. So the new spirit of the law is that the UK is partly out of the EU. The European Council is really the government of the EU (the European Commission just implements what the EC wants).

The European Council is more important than the European Parliament (European Parliament vote laws, but doesn’t suggest them). So, no EU Parliament for the UK. Instead UK in an indefinite Article 50: all rights and duties of membership, except for voting. In many democracies, convicts don’t vote for a while. Hey, Britain self-convicted.

The solution above, extending Article 50 by two years, but no Parliament for the UK, will free the EU from Brexit. The EU will be free to progress, pass laws mitigating plutocracy, climate change, foster research, education, etc. In particular financing of UK science and advanced tech by EU budgets will proceed. Also Eurosceptics will be informed that leaving the EU, and activating Article 50, has a democratic cost, and gives a forerun of what it means to be out of the EU: no more European legislating possible.  

***

And what will happen to Great Britain? Polls show the UK would vote for Remain at this point. Within two years, the British People will come to its senses, in spite of the shrill shrieking propaganda of its plutocratic media (the EU should pass laws to limit plutocratic propaganda). So We the British People will vote to stay in the EU. Then a special EU Parliament UK election can be held.

The non-participation of the UK in the EU Parliament will prevent Parliamentary sabotage, which would otherwise paralyze Europe some more. However, if legal minds of the stupid kind insist on having that… the fact is that Article 50 should be extended 2 years, while Speaker Bercow and the House of Commons figure Brexit out.

Why? No bad feelings, looking forward… In the end no Brexit.

***

Enough, children, who go by the self-glorifying name of “leaders”! Learn from history!

The British Parliament voted No No No No No No No No, No, on all the possibilities of Brexit, a wide spectrum selected by the very interesting Speaker Bercow. A European ultimatum expires April 12. On that date, Great Britain is supposed to have decided to leave, and how. (If if with a deal then the effective day will be in May.)

You may not know this, you children who are called leaders, because you studied just what was Politically Correct, but war is a serious thing, and a seriously sneaky thing. Apparently innocuous indifference and turning-away can turn into alienation, and war. The personal history of my family has helped me know these emotional truths. I was graced by a family which harbred resistance fighters, more than 100 Jews, which was chased by the Gestapo, while my dad arrived in France in combat, fighting Nazis… In my lifetime, I have known what it feels like to be bombed by fascist racists, and to have a young uncle who was an elder brother to me, killed by Islamist  terrorists (crucially helped by a double dealing French government).

Also I spent decades studying history, in particular of the European kind. It is not as simplistic as usually depicted. The first battle of Fontenoy (around 50,000 killed by arrows, lances, swords, and axes, in a few hours of hand to hand combat) was an enormous butchery, Franks against Franks. There was a second, even more famous battle, in the same place of Fontenoy, 1,000 years, a millennium, later, this time English against French. As one can see, French military history is rich, unparalleled… These two battles of Fontenoy were pretty much brothers against brothers, not civilization against savagery, and should never have happened.

Yes, Europe had plenty of civilization against savagery battles. France was involved in all of them (the Mongols gave up their conquest of Europe, when the top Mongol generals argued that the heavy losses they had suffered in Hungary were a foretaste of suffering again the same fate as their ancestors the Huns in France). In the Eight Century, the Franks repelled three invasions of Europe by the savage Arab Islamists, over a period of thirty years. Of course, Islam would never have happened if Catholic fascism had been defeated at the Battle of the Cold River, three centuries before Muhammad’s birth.  At the Cold River, the Western Emperor, Eugenius, a secular professor promoted by the head of the Occidental Roman army, Arbogast, confronted the catholic bigot, Oriental emperor Theodosius (originally a Spaniard). Arbogast, a Frank, controlled, for many years, a Roman army full of Romanized Franks. Theodosius was allied with the Goths. Theodosius and his goons had invented the notion of “heresy”, and laws, decrees, making “heresy” punishable at the pleasure of the government.

There is a direct line between this, and the government of Brunei establishing the death penalty for homosexuality in 2019, according to Sharia. Indeed, at the Cold River, the Frigidus river, unexpectedly, Arbogast was defeated and those who wanted heresy to be punishable by death, and Catholicism to pursue its reign of terror, won. Not only that, but, left without an army, the Occidental Roman empire promptly fell to the invading barbarian hordes, 14 years later (406 CE).

The millennium of European wars started when the French of West Francia turned their backs on the rest of the “Roman” empire (actually the west of present France, the most occidental third of the “Francia” of the Franks from 500 CE to 950 CE, including Paris had very good reasons to reject the empire… which had failed to protect them against the Viking; instead the count of Paris, soon to be duke, did the work, battling back from the ramparts, with 200 men, 10,000 bloody Vikings… while the Roman/Carolingian emperors prefered negotiations with the Viking). That turning of all French backs was, to some extent, justified. However it caused alienation between Europeans. By 1200, all of Europe was united against the French-Paris monarchy (and lost the battle and war against the “French” king Philippe Auguste, at Bouvines).

***

Treat The British Well, They Don’t Have To Be Too Punished, This Is Not Versailles:

The interminable Brexit is paralyzing Europe. The temptation is to expedite it. That would be a mistake for the British: once they inspect the situation in all details, they will come to the conclusion, except for a few vested interests, like plutocrats and media moguls, and the odd deluded fisher, that staying in the EU is the less bad of all bad possibilities.

I am of the opinion that Germany was treated very well by the Versailles Treaty (contrarily to common opinion). That’s because I studied the situation in details, and I didn’t buy the Nazi opinion about Versailles. However, there is definitively a risk of mistreating a deluded Britain about Brexit. OK, the British have the wrong mentality about the European Union. This is a particular bad case of “fake news”. Just like Islamophilia is a particularly bad case of “fake news”.

So yes, there is “fake news” problem. But does that mean that British or Muslims should be mistreated? As individuals? No. The problem is that Brexit would hurt most british and European citizens, So the rest of the European Union has to be patient.

Not having the UK NOT sit in the EU Parliament will have the advantage that a lot of laws of the pro-plutocratic, anti-federal, and unequal laws, in particular the monstrous British rebate, and the even more monstrous Swiss rebate, can be legislated out.

Yes, president Macron is understandably viewing this Brexit tragicomedy as something to flush down the toilet, ASAP. However, apparently innocuous and inconsequential acts in history have resulted in immense tragedies.

Don’t forget the present system in Britain was mostly created by a succession of French adventurers, warriors, magnates and plutocrats, with a few queens and duchesses in the mix (William of Normandy, the barons of Magna Carta, Eleanor d’Aquitaine, Yolande of Aragon, Isabelle de France, Edouard III/Edward III, Lancaster/Lancastre, de Montfort come to mind; the House of Normandy was succeeded by the House of Anjou). The estrangement between England and France was the fruit of personalities more than anything else. A striking example is Yolande of Aragon, who financed Joan of Arc’s army and the illegal kinglet (the “Dolphin”) connected to them, who got the “100 Years War” relaunched all by themselves. (Yes, now there is a lamentable cult of Joan of Arc amplifying that idiotic nationalism and bigotry.)

Small things can have big consequences: models supposedly show weather systems can be created by a butterfly flapping its wings, three weeks earlier.

Macron, the French president, doesn’t want to become that butterfly of doom, flapping Europe into division and thus oblivion. Macron doesn’t want to flap all wrong. Let Macron beat on French Yellow Jackets, if that’s his won, he does that well, the French love to be beaten up, so they can beat back. Revolutions make French law progress. But Macron shouldn’t beat on the British. That could lead to war.  

The European Union will be optimal if it acts as an empire of the highest aspirations. That includes, first of all, bending over backwards not to mistreat European Peoples or nations. Europe should focus its energy on thermonuclear fusion and the space race now engaged between the USA, China, India, maybe Russia to be first (back) on the Moon. (The European thermonuclear reactor JET is based in the UK, it’s crucial to ITER, and its financing has been compromised by Brexit.)

Oh, by the way, Boris Johnson, ex-mayor of London and co-leader of the Leave (the EU) campaign, voted for the EU Withdrawal Agreement of May, today (his colleague had adopted the same position a week ago). Why? Because for the UK to leave the EU without a deal is an unfathomable catastrophe.

So, question, if the Leave campaign leaders can be that reasonable, surely the European leaders should be? Or are the leaders of the European Council truly that childish that they risk European strategic disaster, medium term? Jut on the basis of legalistically justified resentment? 

Taking away Parliament from a EU country which has left the European Council, which originates European laws, only makes sense. Beating the Brits when they are down doesn’t. Give Great Britain time to rethink Europe. Two years. No Parliament.

Patrice Ayme

***

***

The opinion of the British on Brexit has already changed a bit. It will change some more. Hey, even the New York Times is realizing it had Trump Derangement Syndrome. Here is a New York Times editorial on Trump today:, operating a U-turn on its opinion of Trump:

Opinion

“Maybe the president brilliantly played the media. Or maybe we just played ourselves.

By Bret Stephens,  Opinion Columnist

“Maybe we’ve had this all wrong.

Maybe Donald Trump isn’t just some two-bit con artist who lucked his way into the White House thanks to an overconfident opponent. Or a second-rate demagogue with a rat-like instinct for arousing his base’s baser emotions and his enemies’ knee-jerk reactions. Or a dimwit mistaken for an oracle, like some malignant version of Chauncey Gardiner from “Being There.”

Thanks to Robert Mueller, we know he isn’t Russia’s man inside, awaiting coded instruction from his handler in the Kremlin.

Maybe, in fact, Trump is the genius he claims to be, possessed — as he likes to boast — of a “very good brain.”

***

Here is the full statement from the European commissionfollowing the vote in the Commons.

The commission regrets the negative vote in the House of Commons today. As per the European council (article 50) decision on 22 March, the period provided for in article 50(3) is extended to 12 April. It will be for the UK to indicate the way forward before that date, for consideration by the European council.

A “no-deal” scenario on 12 April is now a likely scenario. The EU has been preparing for this since December 2017 and is now fully prepared for a “no-deal” scenario at midnight on 12 April. The EU will remain united. The benefits of the withdrawal agreement, including a transition period, will in no circumstances be replicated in a “no-deal” scenario. Sectoral mini-deals are not an option.

The final two sentences refer to a claim often made by Brexiters at Westminster that, in the event of a no-deal departure, the UK and the EU would in practice negotiate a series of mini-agreements to mitigate the worst consequences. This is sometimes referred to as a managed no deal.