Merkel A Double Agent And Other Stories:

Putin should have become known as a  genocidal tyrant after he killed one Chechen out of six. However, Germany made itself fully dependent upon the genocidal tyrant, years after the genocide. Now Germany and other European genocidal collaborators are sending more than a billion dollars a day to feed the genocidal tyrant’s war crime factory.

In light of this, and her personal, murky history, one may wonder whether Angela Merkel was not a double agent (truly working for Putin’s KGB). She declared that, when the KGB approached her, she brushed them off by telling them that “she talked too much”. This sounds like disinformation to me: Merkel knew that the fact that the KGB tried to recruit her would come up, so she planted plausible denial. She made do with junior dictatorial positions and becoming spokesperson for the Stalinian East German state.

Putin calls Ukrainian nationalists, “Nazis. The pseudo-left in the US or Europe smear its nationalist opponents by calling them tribal (“ethnonationalists”). This flies in the face of common sense: “Ethnonationalism” is hard to come by in very multi-ethnic societies such as the US, UK, or France; ethnonationalists just can’t get elected. Another trick of the pseudo-left is to demonize its “populist” opposition by calling it “terrifying” (a label the NYT smears Le Pen with).

The French political system is similar to the US one: it’s Congress which passes laws. One could imagine (it won’t happen because Macron will be re-elected) a situation where Le Pen is president and her PM is Macron, and he does what he wants (this happened before: Mitterand-Balladur). Le Pen was a European MP for 13 years, she will not dismantle Europe (I will probably vote Macron; but calling her “terrifying” makes me feel like voting for her…). 

All of French politics, including its most extreme right, is on the left of Sanders and AOC. That may be terrifying to Americans, indeed.

One has to make a distinction between “oligarchy” (rule of the few) and “plutocracy” (evil-power). A junta is oligarchic, but not necessarily evil. Lenin, Stalin, Hitler and those who financed them (many of them from the US) were plutocrats. Autocracy is the power of one, it necessarily entails plutocracy, as the innate sense of justice of the species makes such a rule unbearable, so it can only be maintained by force. Autocracy was enshrined by Nicholas I in the Russian constitution, and followed by Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, and now Putin.

[A shorter version of this teaching comment was published by NYT after 20 hours delay.]

Patrice Ayme

P/S: Here is the context of the preceding. NYT and its Nobel Krugman find French presidential candidate Le Pen “terrifying”. I think what is terrifying is that the truth of Merkel and other collaborators of Putin (Schröder; ecologists, other politicians), cannot be looked in the face. Krugman wrote:

“Now, it’s important to understand the context. France provides social benefits on a scale beyond the wildest dreams of U.S. progressives: universal health care, huge family benefits and more. Macron isn’t challenging the fundamentals of that system. He is, however, trying to trim some benefits… Le Pen, by contrast, actually wants to reduce the retirement age for some workers.

… If she wins, the consequences for France, Europe and the world will be terrifying. But there is some genuine populism — advocacy of policies that might actually help workers — in her platform.”

Krugman does not describe why Le Pen is “terrifying“. Not even one element of “Le Pen terror” is rolled out. Actually he does not even bother with one element of disagreement he may have with Le Pen. The 53 year French blonde lawyer turned European and French elected representative, just “terrifies” the world, while Krugman and the New York Times still sing the praises of Obama, who “reset with Russia“, after Putin invaded Georgia, to empower Putin for eight years, inviting him in Syria and Ukraine, while Obama himself was killing thousand of civilians in emerging countries… Krugman insinuated that Le Pen was an “ethnonationalist“, a tribal nationalist:

“Ron DeSantis would be Florida’s Orban if he could, state governors don’t have as much repressive power as rulers of sovereign nations.

Still, the comparison of European and U.S. ethnonationalists raises some interesting questions. In particular, as the G.O.P. has become a full-on antidemocratic party, why has it also remained the party of plutocrats and the enemy of any policy that might help its many working-class supporters?

To understand the puzzle, consider the policy positions of Marine Le Pen, who has a serious chance of becoming France’s next president. Her party, National Rally — previously called the National Front — is often described as right-wing. And on social issues it is; in particular, the party is largely defined by its hostility to immigrants and the alleged threat they pose to France’s national identity. On economic policy, however, Le Pen is if anything to the left of President Emmanuel Macron.“

Orban, elected four times Hungarian Prime Minister, is the bête noire of the US pseudo-left, which is heavily financed by the plutocrat Soros, one of the world’s wealthiest person, a currency manipulator and frontrunner, with philosophical pretense, of Jewish and Hungarian origin (I own books of Soros murky Popper pseudo-philosophy, his fig leaf). Anybody from the US pseudo-left is supposed to hate Orban… So Krugman hates Orban, and Fox News’ Tucker Carlson loves Orban (I am more nuanced than either, but hate Orban’s Putinophilia). DeSantis is of Italian descent on both sides. Does that make him an “ethnoitalian”? The terror of eating pasta?

So I sent the comment, in a simpler version, and, naturally, it was delayed 20 hours. (My lawyer told me that my assertion about Merkel was legally problematic!) In the end, it was published,

Europe’s Best Friend: Donald Trump

Donald Trump is trying to wake up European democracies about defending themselves, thus The Donald is viewed as extremely bad: ‘how do you dare waking me up, you really evil aren’t you? whines sleepy, prissy and fussy princess Europe. And she adds: ‘Aren’t you in charge, you dirty US capitalist? Can’t a girl get her beauty sleep?’‘

Things were the other way around during most of the 20th century, in spite of the dreary fact that most of the Plebs and the intellectuals who instructed it, believe the opposite:

The USA “Protected” Europe Too Late in the 20th Century, twice, and it was by well crafted plutocratic and imperial design: ‘Oh, oops, princess Europe, you all broken up, didn’t see that coming, let Uncle Sam and Uncle Joe help you by taking care of your properties, and placing you under tutelage.’

In 1937, the University of Chicago historian Dodd, US ambassador in Berlin, who saw the Nazis for what they were, had to talk at the zoo (“Tiergarten“), far from Nazi mikes, and spies, with the French ambassador, on how to fight Nazism (see the excellent book, “The Garden of the Beasts”). 

German generals and admirals informed the US ambassador, in 1937, that they were ready to make a coup and kill Hitler. All the USA had to do, was to warn the Nazi government that the USA would stand with the French Republic in its opposition to Nazism. (The British were similarly informed.) Knowing that the USA stood with France against Hitler, would enable the German High Command to justify their coup to the German Volk: because there would be no way that Germany could win another war, if the USA were allied to France (and a fortiori if the UK joined!)

Instead the USA and the UK governments, at the highest level, informed Hitler that his own High Command was plotting against him. The US president fired his anti-Nazis ambassadors in Berlin and London, and replaced them by pro-Nazi ambassadors.

Most people know the rest of the story: by chance (mostly), 157 German divisions defeated the 110 divisions, six million soldiers French army in May-June 1940. (Germany had mobilised 4,200,000 men of the Heer, 1,000,000 of the Luftwaffe, 180,000 of the Kriegsmarine, and 100,000 of the Waffen-SS.) Encouraged, Japan and Italy, the allies of the Nazis, also attacked the world, Nearly 5% of the world population died from the war. Entire communities, like European Jews got mostly wiped out.  At the time, the British army was 200,000 men, and the US army, even smaller.

All this because US leaders in the 1930s and early 1940s, from the presidency to Congress, to intellectuals, to even US Jews, felt, deep down inside, that a big mess in Europe would improve the status of the USA, as it did, indeed: the European empires collapsed, and the USA smoothly replaced Europe all over. Now, when there is corruption in Malaysia (say) it is US actors (in two senses of the word) who profit… Not British ones… (The election in Malaysia, where the 92-year-old PM of way back got re-elected is a healthy reaction to this world corrupt plutocracy, this corruptocracy, of US origin…)

***

Deliberately Clueless Germany Confuses the Issues:

So it is rather hilarious that Angela Merkel, Thursday May 10 2018, enunciated that:

“It’s no longer the case that the United States will simply just protect us,” Merkel said to applause in a speech honoring French President Emmanuel Macron, who sat behind her at a prize ceremony in Aachen, Germany. “Rather, Europe needs to take its fate into its own hands. That’s the task for the future”.

Emmanuel’s Workers-Unite Fist? Or Roman-Imperial Fist? Both are needed, anyway. And here she is, ready for her punishment, a chastised Angela herself!

Well, Angela Merkel, typically clueless German politician, in the old style who brought us the Kaiser and the Hitler, in their cluelessness, let me teach you: the USA simply didn’t protect Europe, in the greater scheme of things, far from it. The US nasty plutocracy is in command for more than a century, and it’s no friend of Europe. The US rescued Europe from wars it enabled discreetly!

***

A Little Bit Of True History Not Found In Pluto Textbooks and Pluto Universities:

The USA leadership has long just played friend of Europe, the Europe of the 1%, in the media (which it owns). The USA encouraged the Kaiser Wilhelm II to go berserk in 1914. Some will say it’s my opinion, a matter of taking at his own word what happened when Colonel House, right arm of US president Wilson, a racist “Democrat” visited with the Kaiser in Berlin, June 1, 1914. (I documented this in other essays.). However, it is plainly visible that the USA, with the complicity of the Netherlands and its corrupt (yet much admired) queen, broke the Anglo-French blockade of the Kaiser, and thus extended the First World War by several years... until Wilson saw fit to finish the Kaiser… (a blockaded Germany would have had to capitulate quickly).

Emmanuel Macron, the 40-year-old president of France: “Nous ne pouvons plus laisser d’autres décider pour nous.” (We can’t let others decide for us.)

The French Republic, led by Socialist PM Leon Blum (a Jew) wanted to go to war in Spain in 1936, to oppose the Nazis there. Instead France let the opposition of Britain and the USA to anything French, or anything to break their Anglo-Saxon idyl with Nazism, decide for France. Conclusion, when war with the Nazis started for real, the French airforce and army were untrained, uncoordinated, and incapable of communicating with itself. The French and the British learned fast, in a week or two: by the time of Dunkirk. But then the Battle of france had been lost. If France had not let US plutocrats decide the Republic should not attack the Nazis in 1936, it would have been ready in 1940… Probably the world war would not even have happened… German generals would have killed the Nazis…

US unemployment at 3.9%, North Korea making peace, after 67 years… Yes, well, how does Trump do it? Trump, as many presidents before him, decides to spend, as needed, and the hell with it. In March 1933 plutocrat-president Franklin Roosevelt (FDR) came to power, closed all banks, devalued the dollar, defaulted on US debt… And FDR decided to build a giant 24 “FLEET” Aircraft Carriers fleet. For comparison, Nazi Germany planned to launch two “Fleet” aircraft carrier by 1945. Yes, just two. Japan scrambled to build eleven, but their carriers were less advanced, and often just rededicated heavy cruisers: they didn’t have armored decks and steam catapults.

So Trump does it as FDR did it, or Darius, or Caesar, or Diocletian, or Peter the Great, did it: a sovereign, truly sovereign state, spends, orders and organizes, as vitally needed. This is how Stalin and its USSR could defeat the Nazis (with major help from US materiel, UK intelligence, and Hitler’s personal incompetence).

***

Rebellious Macron? Correct Trump? Yes!

I have described Macron (and all other politicians) severely in the past. But the aim is to think and encourage correct drifts, not to rage, just because rage feels good… Emmanuel Macron is aware of the damage that Germany’s obsession with what is advertised as “budget discipline” is doing to the European Union. It is advertised as “budget discipline” but it is actually cheating: all too many local German banks are bankrupt, thus subsidizing German industry; what’s the motivation? I know personally, they are friends, some small German plutocrats, I see how they profit from the present Teutonic “budget discipline”… They are familiar with various tax havens, and things are swell for them, they even bought massive land in… Hawai’i… 

“Germany can’t have a perpetual fetish about budget and trade surpluses, because they come at the expense of others,” Macron said as he received the annual “Charlemagne Prize” from the city of Aachen (Aix La Chapelle, Charlemagne’s capital, in front of a public including the German chancellor.

As the French leader was celebrated for his contribution to European unity, he, thankfully, dared to make it official that German policy is selfish. Macron called for a Eurozone budget to stabilize the bloc’s economy and bring its members closer together, a key plank of his vision which Germany has so far refused to support. In particular, one can’t expect the French Republic’s war against Islamist terrorists in more than half a dozen African countries, to be financially supported by… Saudi Arabia as much as it is by much more wealthy and concerned, Europe…

(As it is Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates gave $150 millions for the African force organized by the French military operations, whereas Europe gave only 116 million Euros!) Meanwhile German plutocrats and industry get financed, while the French army goes starving…

So yes, Trump is angry at Germany, and right to be so: the defense of the West shouldn’t be just a Franco-American affair, especially when Germany prevents France to have the force democracy and civilization really needs. If Germany wants to extract a full

It is known that much more than 350,000 illegal immigrants going to Europe went through the country of Niger alone, in 2017. They were all ready to get to Europe… or die. Think about this: Europe, or death! It is that bad, that post-colonial order (no individual from subsaharan West African country fought for independence in any sense: independence was thrown at them, to get rid of them, so here we are…)

Post-colonial, plutocratic order, ladies and gentlemen…

The USA has roughly the same number of troops in Africa as France does (the numbers don’t look large, but these are modern elite troops, with lots of expensive equipment, and much of the aerial part of the forces operates out of France or the USA directly).

***

Nasty Neutral Enabled The Nazi Holocaust:

Another lesson from the past is that small “neutral” countries, such as Sweden, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Ireland, Belgium, even Denmark, even Portugal (!), crucially handicapped the French Republic in its 1914-1945 war against fascist Germany. The actions of these countries were varied: some supplied weapons and top grade iron (as Sweden did, giving Germany its most useful weapon the 88 gun… and the iron for building all Nazi weapons), others enabled testing and smuggling of illegal weapons and materiel (Portugal).

A country, even if small and neutral is not really neutral. There should be, there is, no neutrality, when democracy and civilization are threatened. If present-day Germany, a Republic, wants to play Belgium, 1940 style, let it be reminded that Belgium is a monarchy, and that Nazi armor went, mostly undetected and unopposed, through Belgium and Luxembourg in May 1940: the result was that millions of French elite soldiers, and the enormous French armor (3,000 tanks, three times the number of vastly inferior German-made tanks), found itself, stabbed in the back (with the tiny but very well-trained British army).

Democracy has a serious problem in Africa: it is high time to re-establish civilization there! As it is, Africans prefer to risk dying, rather than risking not trying to make it to Europe (and especially, France). To solve this extensive collapse of democracy, or even collapse of basic well-being, requires to defeat the European, but also global plutocratic system which has taken advantage of Africa, and to impose the rule of law… and that means force, military force. And putting billionaire plutocrats in prison, as France just did with Vincent Bolloré (for added fun, the Wall Street Journal certifies no such thing ever happened under US law… an unwitting double entendre in the land of LLC, Foundations, and other plots and conspiracies…)

And yes, Merkel, to enforce democracy means deficit spending, just ask The Donald, how it’s done, or then read about another dozen or two successful US presidents who did it, and now an empire you contemplate (but an US empire, as Macron pointed out implicitly). And yes, plutocrats, even German plutocrats my friends, may have to pay a little bit more taxes, or see their treasury bonds lose value: I don’t give a damn, actually, I rather relish the perspective…

The USA, or, rather a leading, manipulative class in US leadership, leveraged a sort of German fascist madness during 1914-1945, that Nietzsche, and others, had fully diagnosed. Of this the USA is not responsible, except as a racist and imperialist invasive metastasis of greed, all too highly successful as a bad example. The Prussian leadership and its love-hate imitators (Hitler and fellow Nazis) didn’t understand that the glorious American holocaust would not be repeatable: they had been led astray by the British support for Prussia in the Seven Years World War (1756-1763), when, against all odds, Prussia stuck it out, and won against Russia, Austria, France… (Hitler, to the bitter end, imagined himself as a new Frederik II…)

It is a refreshing change that Donald Trump is not playing that game, where the US leadership supports ideas, ways and means highly detrimental to its mother civilization, Europe… A nasty game Obama was playing, when he claimed in Cairo (!) that Islam was the best thing for civilization, or so (Obama has never heard of Pirenne’s thesis).

Trump is telling the Europeans: time to defend your values, if you really care about them. Forced we are to see that Germany still doesn’t completely get it! Angela Merkel is in her last bout as Kanzler: she should use the occasion to get herself more civilized, and not just play one on TV!

… I don’t want to have to call Angela “Merkler” again… Following in the footsteps of Emmanuel Macron de Rothschild should the sort of revolutionary act that even a Conservative could agree to…

Patrice Ayme

Macron Needs To Declare War On Germany

Declare war to German policy, as it is, because it is not just driving us to war, but is already part of the increasing war against civilization we are experiencing in so many ways… The refugee problem, and the terror problems are, basically, military problems, and German, and pseudo liberal, or pseudo-leftist obscurantism have been the drivers (as they profit global plutocracy!) Fundamental French problems are global. And global starts next door with a selfish wealth captured German policy. Those global problems which affect the French Republic severely have to be solved, otherwise, la République se retrouvera en marche arrière….

The Need To Teach Those Who Are Supposed To Think, and Act, For Us. Whether we like it, or not:

Merkel, although she was endowed with a physics PhD, although she was raised in East Germany, the child of a pastor who emigrated there, in spite of all this, her world vision is limited (so is Macron’s, although he went to Nigeria as part of ENA in 2002). Nowadays, in this world endowed with lots of immigrants, some, like yours truly, have experienced, and have been raised in maximally opposed cultures (I was raised in Muslim countries with Islams wildly superior to the abominable Islam presently promoted by Middle East plutocrats, and their obsequious servants).

***

Wars, Colonialism, Built Civilization, That’s Who We Are:

Actually Macron basically said this, while… Macron expressed a childish, uninformed, wild hatred of colonialism (“a barbarity, a crime against humanity“). Clearly, Macron didn’t think, when he said that, that exhibiting a knowledge of history in-depth was crafty at that point. In truth, we live in a colonial world. Even basic European agriculture is a product of colonialism: Middle-Easterners migrated to Southern Europe, bringing wheat and the like. The Celts were also colons. Estruscan and Greek colons taught cow herders called Romans that reading and writing had its merits. Without Etruscans and Geeks to come around and teach greater intelligence, the Romans would still be living in thickets. Without higher and higher civilization propagating, cannibalism would still be the way.

Most of the world population descend from colons, all the way down to Bantu South Africa. Colonialism is not, per se, evil. The devil is in the details. German colonialism in present day Europe is complete self-destroying nonsense. It’s an economic war, in alliance with global plutocracy, and it’s destroying not just European civilization, but civilization itself.

Notice the explosion of German production after introducing the Euro. It has been a war, and a counter-attack is on the way. Brexit, in a sense, however nonsensical, is part of it. The rise of US production under Obama is related to spending freely money the USA created out of very thin air. Those who really don’t like it, and try to do something about it, will be shot out of the sky. Any question?

***

The French Are Getting Angry, The Last Warning against Pluto Europe Was Proffered:

In the last presidential elections, more than 46% of the French voted against Europe as it is. They are not “anti-European”, they are against plutocratic Europe. The official political establishment, the “Socialists” and the right were kicked out. Macron is the eighth president of the Fifth Republic. Why five republics? Because France is in the middle of Europe, across the three easy trade routes between the Mediterranean and the boreal regions. Thus France became the head of the European empire (which itself consisted of up to hundreds of states competing with each others, under complex treaties… Treaty, in Latin Foedus, gave the name of the period, Feudalism. It was launched by the Roman imperial State in the Fourth Century). On and off, France was the largest state, the most organizing, and the most involved in continual wars.

***

The pursuit of civilization has been indistinguishable with that of just and correct, successful wars, over the last six millennia:

This has to be said to Merkel. That poor know-nothing of much importance person, is blinded by pacifism, an inhuman streak. European leaders, in general, have learned an erroneous feel-good vision of the world, where all which feels good is best. Fundamentally, it’s a sort of hedonism.

The racist fascist murderous exploitative streak, culminating in Nazism, which came to rule Germany was not persuaded by flowers, but rendered inoperative by millions of tons of high explosives. Prussia had turned the way of the holocaust again in the Eighteenth Century, encouraged and financed by Britain. Its undoing came when France persuaded its ex-vassal Britain to join in militarily destroying the Axis (Germany, Italy, Japan, and explicitly in the end, the USSR).

Ultimately, the Romans, having become civilized, intelligent and progressive, thanks to them, kicked out their Etruscan and Greek overlords. The Etruscans were no pushovers: they had deliberately migrated to the iron rich region of Italy, from Syria, which they had previously invaded as “Peoples of the Sea”. The Greeks were the fiercest warriors of antiquity, with the most advanced tech.  

To master Greeks and Etruscans, the Romans had to become relative supermen, with a super “mixed” constitution. However, the Romans never reached the mental, intellectual creativity of the Greeks. That stay unsurpassed, until the Franks implemented the master strokes of outlawing slavery, tolerating all religions, making universal education mandatory, and minimizing the fascism needed to manage the state..

In the first two centuries of the Merovingians, the Franks fought wars to defend secularism, tolerance, and defeated the Huns, and other non-Frankish remains of Roman military power. Then Clovis’ Franks crushed the Goths in 507 CE, something the Romans could never do, however hard they tried. Then the Franks extended Roman power into Germany, where the Romans had failed to sustainably stay, and went beyond.

***

Germany Installed a European exploitation scheme:

The snakes around Kanzler Merkel will deny that they injected Europe with poison. But that’s an outrageous lie, just look at the facts: since the imposition of the Euro in 2002, German industrial production has climbed 50% relative to the rest of the Eurozone (contemplate the graph above). Therein a trick. It’s not because the Germans, who are increasingly old and decrepit, mutated into supermen. It’s because they, in cooperation with global plutocracy, instituted a super trick where only the wealthiest of the rich get financed, and the rest of society is left to die.

Not only did Germany practice social dumping for years, forcing slaves to work for one Euro an hour, in exchange for basic social services (this has been lately discontinued by Merkel, as a minimum hourly salary of 15 Euros or so was introduced; suddenly German labor costs are comparable to the French ones.. But there is lots of inertia in the system: once a French company has disappeared, it can’t re-appear…)

A 2017 Bundesbank report supporting what I said about German banks! (See EURO CHEAT)

Last year only 60% of German banks were not bankrupt according to GAAP. That means 40% German banks were bankrupt, but enabled to keep on financing the economy, thanks to hidden local state subsidy. That’s cheating in the same mood as making a fortune out of cheating the Jews out of their properties in the 1930s. Except now the Europeans are the new Jews.

Only 60% of German banks covered thru earnings their cost of lending (estimated at 8%).

Within 32 months, it’s expected that only 20% of the German banks will be profitable…. And it’s the Deutsche Bundesbank which says that… Not an enemy of German Euro Cheat, but a collaborator in setting-up that thievery…

https://www.bundesbank.de/…/2017/2017_01_27_dkp_01.pdf…

***

The Rebellion Clock Is Ticking:

The French have a long rebellious streak, that’s why so much democracy and human rights originated there. Even under the Romans, Gaul revolted, establishing at some point a “Gallic Empire”, complete with legions. Later, in 358 CE, Paris elected the philosopher and Caesar Julian “Augustus” (head of the Roman empire; Julian unfortunately died in present day Iraq, on the battlefield).

Let’s try positivism. Elected King Macron goes see head of Germany Merkel Monday. The Franks elected kings for 12 centuries (300 CE until Jean I in 1315 CE; a baby born a king and poisoned as a king, probably, 5 days later; this is when things went down big time). After that, elections were more sketchy. Hopefully King Macron is going to Berlin not to take orders, but to tell Merkel that she has to change her ways, right away.

Merkel has to start to be told the truth: her antics about refugees caused Brexit. The best way, when confronting an infamous regime, mass violating human rights is not to accept half of the population as refugees, but to go to war and destroy the regime. In other words, France was right to declare war to Hitler September 2, 1939.

I don’t fancy the concept of king. But let’s be positive, there have been good kings. Clovis was certainly a good king: in very difficult circumstances, he scored like 100%, philosophically, politically, religiously, militarily. Bathilde, Charles Martel, Charlemagne, Henri  III and Henri IV were also excellent kings, also in very difficult circumstances. So let’s float (once again!) some ideas which could make Macron a good king.

If Macron does not implement right away the right, and biggest ideas, he will fail, and quickly. In a way, he is well positioned: the biggest most important ideas pass through Berlin. So Macron should give Berlin a very hard time, while going easy on the French population before the legislative elections.

Indeed, the problems of France have to do, first of all, with how the currency and money making finances the entire economy.

Many do not understand this. France SHOULD NOT BE a household with only so much money at her disposal (given by the Gross Mutter somewhere). The American, Indian, Russian and Chinese economies work by creating money where and when needed strategically.

In the USA money is created in many ways. Federal government spending is just one of them.  

Sure enough the German Finance Minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, who is in a wheelchair because he was shot long ago, let it be known that France could get her (Federal) State Deficit below 3% (Euro rule). France is at 3.4%. What Schäuble forgets is that it is the French Republic, not Germany, which is fighting fascism. That costs money. Not just the fighting, but financing the military-industrial complex which makes the weapons.  

In 1940, the French Foreign Legion, then 33,000 strong, disembarked (twice) in Norway, which had been invaded by the Nazis. The French tried to cut the Iron Road”, which was bringing the world’s highest grade iron from North Sweden to Hitler. The french defeated the Nazis, and got ready to cut perfidious Sweden in two. (However France fell then, thanks to the crazy Hitler throwing most of his army, undetected on three small roads in the Ardennes mountains… a performance to be half repeated four and a half-year later!).

***

Germany has to share the economy, and give France the means to ensure the defense of civilization, beyond Trump (and the incoherent Theresa May).

Germany has also to let France have the means of her social policy. One cannot tolerate any longer that US, or world laws which put France at a disadvantage, are tolerated by Europe. For example, the US closes its government markets to EU goods, but not reciprocally. GMO foods of non-EU origin are sold in France, but the French are forbidden GMOs.

In the USA, when money is needed, it is made. By the GOVERNMENT: that’s how the US swallowed French giant Alsthom. Swallow enough French giants and France will become a dwarf, clearing the way for the final victory of plutocracy, 225 years after French guns won at Valmy.

That frre creation of money is called the deficit, and, as Trump would be happy to tweet you (and any US policy makers behind closed doors) debt is OK, as long as you are the one with the gun, and the only sheriff in town. In the USA, the deficit is allowed to run wild.

Germany, of course is different. Like many countries who have done very bad, it prefers to die off, with a dismal reproduction rate. So it’s not friendly to debt.

A French helicopter, the Airbus X3, has the world speed record of 487 kilometer per hour (fast copters generally do not make more than 300 km/h). High technology is where the future of Europe, if any, lays. It has to be fed by the best science (Enrico Fermi who discovered the neutron inches ahead of Irene Curie, later became scientific head of the US nuclear bomb project).

Merkel has no choice. Macron is the last warning. She better listen to him carefully, there is infinitely worse getting mentally ready out there. Next time the patriots are not going to be as dumb and unprepared as Marine Le Pen, or Melenchon were in the last campaign. It’s not just a question of being anti-German, or anti-EU. As it is, the present EU governance and the present German governance are anti-Europe, and pro-global plutocracy. If we explain it long enough, and if official censorship can be turned around (not an easy task!), We The People is going to get the picture. Sparks will fly.

In retrospect, there was nothing terrible about the First French Republic. It was a mistake for the world’s plutocrats to have unified against it (as British PM Loyd George would admit, 120 years later…) However, at the time many (such as the Rothschilds) crowed for all to hear that they acquired government control from it, no less. Alright. But history does not quite repeat itself, when people know about it.

***

Conclusion: Institute Quantitative easing for We The People (instead of the present form, which is only for the wealthiest). Let French deficits run, while feeding the French military money as needed (and lots is needed, because it’s to Europe to re-establish order in its own suburbs like the Middle East, Africa. Accepting 500 million refugees is not the humanitarian solution, the humanitarian solution is just wars, and imperial control by higher civilization). Another interest: it would bring the Euro way down, something needed considering the overall employment crisis.

Block and, or tax, all imports into the European Union from countries doing social dumping. Such as T-shirts made by children in Bangladesh, or Medical Doctors imported from India. Impose a carbon tax, massive (it’s OK with the WTO).

Macron should also impose the referendum habit, by modifying the Constitution (Referenda are what make Switzerland and California rich) . Why not organize pan-European referenda, for example about the carbon tax, or a tax on financial transactions?

Macron can’t make any serious reforms in France in the next month. But he can operate a sickle move, by cutting the grass under queen Merkel’s feet. That would increase Macron’s popularity in France. So what’s not to love?

A man character is his crate. Macron wanted to become king. He is. I believe kings are so yesterday. Meanwhile, advanced philosophy shall collaborate with reality, namely that people want kings, and queen. Since it’s all about the power, make the forces of oppression and regression feel it. The Republic has to march, or it will falter, and so will civilization.

Patrice Ayme

Outlaw Islamist Face Coverings

Islam is founded first on the Qur’an the word of God, as related by Archangel Gabriel to the Messenger, Muhammad. Islam is deeply anti-woman. Don’t insult me, you the ignorant ones: read the Qur’an, or then plenty of quotes from the Qur’an, in context, such as “Islam’s Shame: Lifting the Veil of Tears”. (Astoundingly, Muhammad’s prescriptions for girls and women, was progressive in Seventh Century central Arabia.)

Niqab in Arabic: نِقاب‎‎ niqāb , means “veil”.

The French Republic (Parliament, Senate, President) banned the integral Niqab (= Burqa, Hijab), on the ground of public safety (face coverings are unlawful in France, except for excellent secular reasons, such as bike riding, skiing, etc.) Islamist organizations went, screaming incoherently, to the French Constitutional Court, which approved the law. Other European countries are following France. Angela Merkel just suggested to ban the niqab.

The Economist, a plutocratic newspaper, plutocratically owned, complete with tax avoidance through Luxembourg, and other tax havens, pontificated that banning the niqab was a “mistake”. I agree that The Economist should say that: if you are a plutocratic entity or person, anything that decreases the rule of Pluto, decreases the plutocracy, and thus is an act adverse to the owners of The Economist, and, thus to the little scribes at The Economist who earn their lives by pleasing their wealthy masters. 

Covering Women With Black Junk As If They Were Garbage Is A Terrible Thing, and Message, For Children. It Tells Children A Woman’s Face Is A Terrible Thing, & It Deprives Children From Learning The First Language Of Man, Facial Expression

Not only are faceless women terrible for children. A problem with Islam is that stupid women brought up stupid children, making for stupid adults we now have to try to make intelligent, a hopeless tasks, when the networks and synapses are plain not there…

What is The Economist going to suggest next? That those who want to be treated as slaves in public, chains, whips and al. be allowed to do so? That we conduct public auctions to sell people if some want to take part in these? Just because some people feel so “modest” that they don’t want to be free, anymore

Literal Islam as found in the Qur’an is sexist (women are worth half of men in court, etc.) Aisha, who married the middle age Prophet, when she was just six insisted that the version of the Qur’an which the Third Caliph, Uthman, imposed was sexist, and not at all what her husband, the Messenger of God had said the message of God was. From what we know of the life of Muhammad, she was right (she herself had great freedom, even by contemporary modern standards).

Uthman imposed a Qur’an which was so controversial, a Muslim religious war started, which is still going on, and explains why Islam is divided in 100 Islams keen to kill each other.

Uthman’s Qur’an, the one we have now, is actually full of lethal orders (read the Qur’an or:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2009/06/22/some-violence-in-holy-quran/

Uthman’s Qur’an has to be outlawed, just as the Aztec or the Celtic religions were, and for the same overall reason: calls to murder of various categories of people cannot be tolerated. The god in Uthman’s Quran orders to kill unbelievers, apostates, pagans, homosexuals, those who disagree with “Allah” or his “Messengers”, and, in remote places of the book, even Christians and Jews (the Hadith says all Jews have to be killed so that the Last Judgment can happen).

The calls to murder of Literal Islam are insults and attacks against human ethology (that is, normal human behavior).

Not only the Qur’an says nothing about women being covered like pestilential garbage, but forbidding the showing of human female faces was explicitly forbidden by Muhammad!

Some Hadith clearly state that women must not veil (niqab) their face and hands/ It was taught by the Prophet Muhammad himself to his companion Abu Bakr’s daughter Asma’ bint Abu Bakr:

“O Asma’, when a woman reaches the age of puberty, nothing should be seen of her except for this and this; the hands and the face.” [ Prophet Muhammad, (Narrated by Sunan Abu Dawood]

Another Hadith which forbids (haraam) for women to veil (niqab) their face during Hajj and Umrah that was taught by the Prophet himself in accordance to his Sunnah: “It is forbidden for a woman who is in the state of Ihram to cover her face.”

— Prophet Muhammad, (Narrated by Sahih al-Bukhari)

So why has it become so important for the proponent of today’s Literal Islam? Because veiling the face of women is an attack against human ethology, thus civilization, and advantages the demonic side. Indeed, in normal human behavior, there is little difference between males and females (that’s called low sexual dimorphism).

By pretending that there is a huge difference between human females and males, a religious difference, the partisans of Literal Islam, including The Economist, are asserting that human nature is wrong, and that there is a religious reason for violating said nature.

Let me rephrase this slowly: partisans of Literal Islam are making a religion of violating human nature.

In a way, it makes sense: the dozens of categories of people which the Qur’an orders to murder occur naturally. Paganism, homosexuality, not believing in Islam, or not believing in Islam anymore, and all sorts of religions, some much older than Islam by dozens of centuries, all occur naturally. They are part of what humanity naturally is, or gravitates towards. Literal Islam orders to kill them all: that’s an extreme violation of human ethology. The fundamentals of human ethology are indeed love, care and solidarity (say, against wild beasts).

Murdering other people because of what they believe is not just un-natural to humans, it is an attack against the need, for humans, to think better. To think better, one has to tolerate different beliefs, and one has to tolerate debating these beliefs, that means, one has to tolerate, and even enjoy debate between contradictory beliefs.

However the dictators that Literal Islam enables with its Fascist Principle want to violate human nature. “O YE WHO BELIEVE! Obey Allah, and obey the messenger and OBEY THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE IN POWER.” (Qur’an’s fascist principle, Sura 4; verse 59)

Civilization is itself a balance act between freedom, human creativity, and the sacrifices and duties that living in cities constrain us to enjoy.

Literal Islam is financed by dictators and plutocrats. They want to violate human nature. But they know they have to start small. So they start by covering women’s faces, as if women had to be modest, ashamed of themselves, and objects of revulsion so great, they have to be hidden.

Covering female faces is a foot in the door, or rather a foot in the face of civilization and the face of woman.

It looks innocent, to the unintelligent, but it is a Trojan horse against humanity.

Literal Islam has rendered what used to be the world’s richest area, the cradle of civilization, into one of the poorest, most conflict laden zones, where civilization goes backwards.

Let’s start by refusing its Trojan horses. I have called to outlaw Literal Islam completely: anybody preaching it, or defending it, should be condemned under anti-hatred laws.

All religions justify a particular self-elected elite’s evil ways. This is why 99.9% of religions are now outlawed. Civilizational progress is pretty much identical with outlawing obsolete systems of thought, including evil religions tied to ways that progress came to consider evil.

And why are so many in the West pushing on us this anti-human, anti-civilizational religion? Precisely because that is what it does: the Main Stream Media in the West are held by plutocrats who fear both civilization, and its bedrock, humanity.

Patrice Ayme’

P/S: 1) In other news, Hillary Clinton condemned “Fake News”. That’s amusing, as her and Obama claimed for years, that the companies which profited from TARP reimbursed all of it. Right. But also FAKE NEWS: the companies, mostly banks and their ilk, got much more money, from Quantitative Easing, courtesy of the Federal Reserve, another branch of the government. Those recipients of QE then used QE money to pay TARP. Fake news, yes, and important ones (only me has ever noticed that little detail, it seems…)

2) The South Korean president. Park, was impeached. Daughter of a Korean dictator, she was into Shamanism and corruption. When that came out, her popularity, once towering, collapsed to less than 5%… After the French president Hollande announced he will not be candidate to his succession, and Renzi, the Italian PM, a piece of establishment trash, was thrown out.

Euroskepticism’s Awakens Not

I have said it many times before, I will say it many times again: the Europe Union was set-up to avoid war. This is what Euroskeptics who claim to love Europe should be reminded of. Especially the British.

Of course there won’t be war, or even disagreements, between the French republic, and Britain. There is not the problem. The problem is in Eastern Europe.

A popular Polish magazine published a cover portraying five leading EU politicians – led by the German chancellor, Frau Angela Merkel – in Nazi uniforms beneath the headline “These People Want to Control Poland Again”.

Nice Uniforms. Poland & Hitler Became Allies In 1934. Poland Turned to France ONLY in 1939, After Spain Fell, and So Did Britain Agree to Follow France Against Hitler, After Poland Did, In 1939. Too Late.

The image on the front of the weekly Wprost showed Merkel, the European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, (Socialist, SPD) European parliament president Martin Schulz, EU commissioner Günther Oettinger, and Guy Verhofstadt, the former Belgian prime minister, leaning over a map, from a wartime photograph of Adolf Hitler and his generals. (By now there should be more pictures of Merkel in Nazi uniform than of Kanzler Adolf Hitler himself!)

Germany is paying vast amounts of money to support the sustained and astounding expansion of the Polish economy since 2008. Some Germans of influence are starting to grumble (and they should).

Verhofstadt, who leads the liberal Alde group in the European Parliament, called the image  “outrageous”, adding that the EU was a “community of values” and that it was “the duty of all of us – commissioners, chancellors or not, to raise our voice when a government is endangering these principles and attacking democratic institutions”.

The Germans Schulz and Oettinger, have been critical of the conservative, severely Catholic Law and Justice (PiS) party, in power since October. It strengthened government control over the constitutional court, civil service and Polish public radio and television. Other Europeans are not amused. This problem arose with Austria’s flirting with the extreme right and Hungary’s Orban before. Both became non-sequiturs (Orban took measures many other European states adopted since, so Orban is not that bad).

The Francophone Martin Schulz described the Polish government’s actions as a “dangerous Putinisation of European politics”, while Oettinger proposed that Poland should be put under rule of law supervision, a (new) legislation designed to deal with “systemic threats” to EU values.

Meanwhile the war against Islam goes on (yes, because that’s what it is, sorry to break the news…). The Islamists attacked in Istanbul, Djakarta, Ouagadougou. There, in the Burkina Fasso capital, two famous Swiss humanitarians were killed by the local subsidiary of Al Qaeda (the USA announced in the past, erroneously it turns out, that they had killed its leader, who had made an attack on an Algerian refinery… Among other things).

This shows, once again, that humanitarianism, while not being exactly nothing, is clearly minor relative to militarism: humanitarianism is possible only when an empire has been set-up. Humanitarianism is possible only when a modicum of law already rules.

The Islamist State lost 20% of its territory in Syria in a year. The Islamist State is losing ground to Kurdish forces. However the Islamist State still controls 60% of Syrian oil production.

The price of a woman on the slave market of the Islamist State was 150 Euros. Holy Islamist script sanctifies slavery, alleluia. Meanwhile, the price of oil is the lowest in 12 years.

If we want humanitarianism in Europe, we need an empire first. A republican, democratic empire. Extreme, aggressive localization, fragmentation, nationalism, closing of the borders, competitive devaluations a la Friedman-Krugman, can only lead to war.

The latest Star War movie, episode VII, “The Force Awakens” does not hit on that idea. Instead it represents a “New Order” rising to destroy “The Republic”. This was indeed the situation between the “New Order” of the Nazis and the Italian fascists, against the FRENCH REPUBLIC, in the 1930s. But, at the time, the fascists had the help of a deus ex machine, the Anglo-Saxon plutocracy. It’s only the latter, and the influence it exerted on the British and American governments, making their behaviors at best ambiguous (Britain, Belgium), if not downright treacherous (USA).

Many Euroskeptics affect to present the meek and weak and inchoating European Union Federal structures as a “New Order” full of strength and evil. But the exact opposite is true.

When the Huns in the Fourth Century and the Mongols, a millennium later, bore onto Europe, it is the division, confusion, multiplicity and weakness of the European political structures which made their assaults possible.

Earlier the German invasions into the Roman empire (fascist, but peaceful and rich inside) had also be made possible by confusion and weakness. Especially military weakness. The latter was made possible by a lack of means consecutive to plutocratization (the hyper rich refused to pay taxes, hoping that, somehow, weaker official armies would still be able to weaken the enemy enough to make their own private armies able to control the situation…).

We are in a similar situation: a raid with a 15,000 men armored thrust by the French, and, or the Americans, would get rid of the Islamist State capital of Raqqa.

But, of course, the real problem is Riyadh, the Saudi capital. Why should the West tolerate those outrageous deviants? Because we are led by deviants ourselves. Lesser deviants, maybe, but still deviant.

So what of this Star Wars’ The Force Awakens’? Well, I did not fall asleep, thanks to the special effects, which are better than ever (as they should). But, contrarily to the rave reviews I read, the story was boring, an already swallowed, now regurgitated food, we had been served before. Contrarily to the (much decried) “prequels” it did not break any philosophical new ground. The Islamist State writes much better, much more innovative scripts, which dig much deeper in the human condition.

What should France and Germany do? Keep on unifying with each other, and forget the noise of those out to distract them from the imperial task at hand…

Patrice Ayme’

 

 

Don’t Feed the Bear: All Putin Needs Is Comfy War

YOU WANT PEACE? MAKE WAR COSTLY

The French and German leaders are meeting again with Putin to make him recover reason: it reminds me of Munich, 1938, when the French and British leaders were trying to make Hitler reasonable.

France and Germany together have a slightly larger population than Russia, but three and a half time the GDP. (By the way, what happened to Britain? Well London is full of Russian plutocrats and banking institutions keen to make Assad and Putin possible; hence the British discretion.)

An Ukrainian in the street interviewed by German TV said it was out of the question to give territory to Putin: if one gives him a finger, he will take the entire arm.

Putin Wants “The Big Country” Back, & Its Prospect of Endless War

In the West, cowardly pacifists say: do not provoke Putin, do as he says, he has nukes and will attack, if lethal defensive weapons are sent to Ukraine. That makes them collaborators of evil.

This is rather curious that pacifists use a fundamentally bellicose argument: don’t try to stop the mad man, he may get offended, and kill everybody.

Indeed, a mad man’s madness with criminal insanity overtones, makes the case for the greatest severity. So the essence of the pacifist whining call for the greatest severity to be applied on Putin, right away.

Because what are pacifists saying? Putin is the most dangerous Leader, ever. So let’s be nice to him.

It is now known that, had the USA and Britain be as firm as France against Hitler in the 1930s, Hitler’s own generals would have made a coup against him.

But, instead, Britain and the USA made concession after concession to Hitler. So Hitler flew from success to success, undermining any mood critical of him. How can one criticize a winner? Clearly, it was unpatriotic. It made the top German generals and marshals who thought that the dictator was completely crazy, and a danger to Germany look like traitors.

Something similar is developing with Putin. As he occupied and annexed territory in Georgia, Moldavia, and now Ukraine, and the West proved incapable to stop him, he looks ever more like a winner. Putin’s avowed goal is to bring back what he calls the “New Russia” (half of Ukraine) and the “Big Country” (the USSR). Pacifists say that the fundamental strategic interest of Russia is at play, so . di, Putin flies from success to success.

So where does Putin stop? This is what pacifists have to know, if they do not want to be simple collaborators of evil.

But of course, they don’t know.

Should we then keep our fingers cross, and hope for the best?

Why?

Because Putin killed only 100,000 in Chechnya? Because Catherine the Great stopped 80 kilometers from Berlin? Not a safe bet: Catherine did not have nukes.

Behaving now as nothing will stop Putin, but for the application of overwhelming force is not safe, but it is the safest strategy. If Putin is completely crazy, overwhelming force won’t stop him. But nothing will anyway, especially after he has fully armed himself, as he is presently doing, Hitler-like.

If Putin is not completely crazy, the threat of overwhelming force will stop him.

Not trying to stop him, if he is not completely crazy, will certainly make Putin completely crazy. Be it completely crazy with greed.

As I tried to explain, Putin, like Hitler before him, and Napoleon, and many (not all) conquerors before him, has discovered that war unites the People behind him, and make all the People think as one, and the name of that one, is Putin. This is what I call the fascist instinct. It is crucial to enable a (relatively) weak primate, far from any tree, to conquer the Savannah and Steppe, heretofore ruled by formidable predators.

Putin’s rule has been a disaster. Thus he needs to activate the fascist instinct in the Russian People. Thus he needs war.

Thus, if pacifists give him Ukraine, Putin will be deeply unhappy: he did not want Ukraine. He wanted war. War gives him fascism, thus the ability to rule. In this light, the reign of Louis XIV of France can be better understood.

After millions of Protestants had left France, and France has lost considerable territory in continuous wars, Louis XIV of France, the self-described “Sun-King” (“Roi-Soleil”) feebly bleated that his advisers had poorly advised him about Protestants: it had not been a good idea to have harassed, despoiled, and submit them to “Dragonades” (occupation of Protestant households by elite troops called “Dragons”).

However, Louis XIV, a dedicated fascist, hater of the “Republic”, lied (as fascists are wont to). Louis XIV had continual wars, and particularly against innocent civilians, because he needed continual wars, because that justified his fascist, personal rule.

Louis XIV was not afraid of war, he was afraid of peace, because peace meant the Parliament may want to re-establish the Republic again (which is what the “Fronde” was all about).

Napoleon faithfully executed the same scheme (because De Sade, one of the Revolution’s principals, had criticized the aggressive, expansionist war making, Napoleon put him in a mental asylum).

The same exact mechanism caused the First World War, with the Kaiser playing the role of Louis XIV. The Jews played the role of the Protestants under Louis XIV.

Soon Stalin would institute continual internal war, to justify the dictatorship of the Politburo which he headed. Hitler repeated the method.

So are we condemned to repeat history? Not so, if we learn how it works.

Putin got his 85% approval rating, from his activation of the fascist instinct.

However, the very latest polls show that the Russian People is getting wary of Putin’s protest of innocence about the war: 70 percent stated that Russia was assisting the breakaway rebels of Donetsk and Luhansk. Good. However, the same polling show that now most Russians think that establishing “Novorossia” (“New Russia”) is a good idea.

In other words, Russians are turning t the Dark Side: they know their dictator is making war in a foreign nation, but they are starting to approve the invasion of that nation, and its annexation.

Why?

Same story as what happened in the German collective psyche after Hitler annexed the Republic of Austria. Then the Germans became favorable to other annexations (Czechoslovakia, some Baltic states, much of Poland, etc.) Because Hitler had proven to be a winner.

As far as the Russians are concerned, Putin is a winner, so he has got to be right. Not right on the facts, but morally right: Ukraine, like Georgia or Moldova, is Russian property.

Want to turn Putin into a loser? Do it on the battlefield. And do like him: play dirty, send efficient weapons stealthily first.

Patrice

Pacifist Disease: Kneeling To Evil

Merkel and Hollande went together to see the president of Ukraine and the Russian dictator, in a last ditch effort before Putin sends his tanks across southern Ukraine (after a barrage of Russian rockets killed scores of civilians in the large Ukrainian town of Mariopol).

The meeting with Putin was icy. Defeated by the Russians, the Ukrainians have to negotiate. Tens of thousands of Ukrainian refugees are evacuating. Putting requested a meeting with Merkel and Hollande alone. He wants the large city of Mariopol (so that, in a few months, he can dash towards Crimea, and then Odessa). Putin also wants twice the territory his agents control in Ukraine. We have seen this sort of methods in Munich, 1938.

OK, let’s be the devil’s advocate. Let’s talk in the name of peace. What does peace fear? War. The president of France just said there was war in Ukraine (the definition of a war is 1,000 killed; more than 6,000 were killed in the war in Ukraine, so far).

What Putin Wants: Russia, the Big Country. World War Would Be Even Better

“Pacifists” pontificate that no French, German or American, should die for Ukraine: Putin wants Ukraine, let him have it. Who cares about Ukraine? Sounds good, elevated. Peace will follow. If it sounds good, peace ought to follow: that’s pacifying logic. Logic done with a pacifier.

Then “pacifists” preen, deeply self-satisfied with their own goodness, friendliness, generosity, and general standing as higher human beings. They look themselves in the mirror, they love what they see. They call themselves progressive, and view others as imperialists, hopeless colonialists, violent serial offenders. If only the rest of humanity could be so detached, as they, the pacifists, themselves are.

But then the job of the philosophers is to be critical. It is never to opt for the easy way out. Philosophers never follow the herd, stampeding towards happiness. Philosophers ask: why does Putin want Ukraine so much? Putin says Ukraine was always Russian, that Russia owned all of Ukraine, or, at least, half of Ukraine, etc.

These are enormous lies: Ukraine was highly civilized, a millennium ago, and owned Crimea then, when Moscow was not even on any map. Moscow literally did not exist then. Descendants of Ukrainians and Vikings had not gone that far to the east.

In truth, it’s the other way around: demographically, civilizationally, linguistically, historically Russia is a colony of Ukraine. Russia is a poorly educated brat.

And not just that: Russia is, arguably, a degenerate form. Ukraine resisted the Mongols, and got defeated and devastated by them. Moscow then made peace, and collaborated, with the Mongols, and became like them. Just look at Putin, and in particular his slanted eyes: obviously his ancestors were in the sack with Mongols. Maybe Putin is so anxious to show himself a Russian patriot, because, like Lenin, he has slanted eyes? Maybe he wants to show that he is of pure, Russian, white essence?

This mock racist argument is not funny anymore when Putin’s most savage behavior is contemplated. Annexing territory is exactly what Mongols did.

If pacifists want to give Ukraine to Putin, they have to answer this: why?

Just because he wants it? So when the next Mafioso comes along and wants to kill ten million people, just because he wants it, they are going to agree?

At this point, our friends the pacifists look rather criminal. Let’s press them on. Let’s ask: ‘Does Putin wants all this property for the same reason as Hitler wanted the property of the Jews in 1938?”

What, say our friends the pacifists: history is not their forte. Indeed, Hitler attacked the Jews because his massive militarization program had impoverished Germany. He needed wealth and to look victorious.

So Putin is stealing Ukraine, because he wants to look like the one who brings, gifts, the one who augments. This is so true, Octavian, Caesar grand nephew, and heir, was named “Augustus”, the one who augments.

Putin augmented Russia, already Earth’s largest country, by a very long shot, by annexing Crimea. That made him “Augustus”. And 85% Russians now love him, because Putin has augmented their tiny minds. In part thanks to relentless propaganda.

We have seen that before, when all Germans loved Hitler, the more he used his propaganda on them. And even after millions of Germans had been killed, thanks to Hitler.

To be loved more, maybe Putin should kill more people, and even more Russians.

What else? Putin is remaking his entire military, all the way to nuclear forces, as if he knew world war was coming. It cost a gigantic amount of resources. So Russia is getting impoverished, and Putin has to look as the “Augmenter” the hard way: through massive theft.

This is exactly the politico-psychological process Hitler went through.

“Pacifists” said: let Hitler have the Jews, that’s what he wants. No French, British, let alone American, should die for Jews.

Hitler wanted the Austrian Republic? Let him have it. After all, Austria spoke German. Austrian Jews such as Freud could always go live in England. Less fortunate ones could go to Italy, or France.

So hear this, pacifists: there was a matter of principle: can we let the leader of a great nation use massive lethal force to steal massive property? Can we tolerate crimes against humanity?

And think a bit, pacifists: if stealing other countries alleviate the pain the attacking dictator would otherwise suffer, where does it stop?

Putin is the first to annex territory in Eurasia, since Hitler.

Some warn: don’t make Putin mad, he is Hitler, with nukes. Those who give the mad man a reason to attack are maniacs, culprit of war mongering.

Such pacifists are not really even arguing they are pacifists, just that they are cowards, and that cowardice is a most admirable strategy. Those peace mongers are not just dumb and self-satisfied, as usual pacifists are, but they aggravate their case by being cowardly, to the point of unreason.

Not provoking a mad man is no strategy. The question is why is the mad man becoming ever more mad? As I said above, it’s because the economy of his militarizing dictatorship is going down. He has to militarize, to create the impression that Russia, by far the largest country on Earth, is under attack: that activates the fascist reflex. All the Russian baboons then gather behind their chief, and do exactly what their chief is telling them to do. This insures the power of the chief.

Putin is sick, he has to be cured.

Question: why was Putin not acting like Hitler before? Because, before, he was afraid. Afraid of the power of the West. Now he is not. (I explained it had to do with not eliminating the criminal Assad personally; that too, let to the rise of extreme Islam fanatics; but there are other factors, such as a diminution of the military capability of the West, greatly caused by USA stealth planes not working, and Europeans doing austerity on defense… Except for neutral Sweden, which noticed Putin’s madness).

Thus, to make Putin stop, one has to scare him.

Pacifism means to look scary. The Romans put it this way: Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum.

Some will say it’s too scary to try to scare Putin.

Why?

Because, because, because, well, Putin behaves like Hitler, whine the “pacifists”.

Then the question is this: did appeasers not learn history? Trying to make friends with evil does not just endanger peace, it’s a crime.

ELECTING EVIL IN ISRAEL? NOT CLEAR:

Israel is a case in many ways opposite to Russia. Israel is tiny, Russia 70% larger than the three largest countries after it (Canada, USA, China). Israel was founded by people whose country (Israel) was stolen by the fascist Roman state, as punishment for rebellion… But then the Catholics, such as “Saint” Augustine made a morality from what was meant as non-permanent situation.

Netanyahu (nicknamed “Bibi”) is running for re-election, and may well win. With his reassuring baritone. His brother, a crack commando commander, was the only fatality in the hyper daring Entebbe raid he led. Bibi is sort of extreme, he tends to King David’s Israel, the Greater Israel, with all the pesky Palestinians somewhere else. If wars come long and thick enough, the Greater Israel may well become a reality.

Differently from Putin’s mad dream of reconstituting what he calls the “Big Country” makes survival sense. Israel, as it is, is 1,100 times smaller than the empire Putin dreams aloud of.

Bibi can be a baby, as long as Arabs stay even more infantile. As it is, this cannot end well, so the party of Armageddon may as well rule. As long as some participant(s) is(are) looking for a final solution, the others may as well. One cannot make peace alone. But one can make war alone. Bibi is occupying a vacuum.

As long as Israel has good reason to fear for its survival, Bibi and, or, his ideas, and moods will rule. It’s a matter of survival, the best reason there ever was, for most people, most of the time.

Jordan got seriously angry against Daesh (aka “Islamic state”) and conducted air raids against it, after its young F16 pilot with green eyes got burned alive.

Jordan’s anger is healthy. It’s a change of values. The Middle East will bloom, if it aligns its values on the best ones the West ever offered. Look at China: why does it do so well? Because China adopted the high performance aspect of learning long championed, and monopolized, by the West.

Ultimately, the Chinese effort will fail, or, as in Germany a century ago, will have horribly deviant consequences, if it does not embrace the learning of criticism, that is, the learning of going meta, relative to the knowledge we have.

In either case, the West has to remember history, and roll back an educational system where real data is shown, and absorbed (especially at the meta level).

Much of the rise of plutocrats (including increasingly crazed maniac as Putin) is caused by an overall lack of education and a decrease capability to ascertain causation.

When pacifists believe that burrowing their heads in the sand works best to remove threats, they just lack education. There cannot be moralization without education.

Patrice Ayme’

Direct Democracy: Crucial Counterbalance To Vital Security State

So Obama was too scared to go to Paris (that’s the charitable explanation; the non-charitable theory is that he listens to dimwits too much). What when the self-declared leader of the Free, is a scared rabbit? Here is one drawback of Representative Democracy, “democracy” through “representatives”, or so-called “leaders”. Have you see a rabbit lead? When I run in the mountains, I see dozens of rabbits leading straight to the bushes (as in George W. Bush).

Not everybody can be as courageous as Israel’s Netanyahu (the only leader with

Franco-Germania Faces Hard Philosophy Ahead

a personal guard in Paris, at his side always), Abbas (Palestinian president), Angela Merkel, David Cameron, Renzi (Italia), Rajoy (Espana), the Malian, Ukrainian presidents, and tens of other heads of state, who were also demonstrating in Paris. Even Russia sent to the Paris demonstration its fiercest specimen (short, maybe, of Putin), the Siberian hard man, Putin’s mentor, Ukrainian thirsty Foreign Minister Lavrov. Hopefully, Lavrov’s heart learned something.

The attack against Charlie Hebdo was, philosophically speaking, worst than 9/11: bin Laden was surprised that the towers fell, and 9/11 was construed by some hearts of stone, as a counter-attack against big capital, Wall Street, and the exploitative system of the Middle East financiers had helped to set-up.

But clearly the attack against satire is a direct attack against intelligence, and cannot be construed as an attack against exploiters (or an anti-racist attack: several collaborators of Charlie Hebdo were “Muslim”, two got assassinated, two survived). And the attack was planned by a collaboration of Al Qaeda and the Islamist State: the terrorists themselves said it. A video shot by one of the criminals AFTER killing a black policewoman, and grievously wounding others, was edited by ISIS, and put on the Internet two days later… From the Middle East.

The Security State cannot be avoided: as technology keeps exponentiating (a good thing), more and more lethal power can come in the hands of lunatics (a bad thing).

Thus the need to prevent mighty weapons to get in bad hands, and even very bad ideas to get installed in otherwise innocent minds. Hence the need for THOUGHT CONTROL (this means that Islam has to be put on rails which are defined by the Republic; it also means Internet control; some countries, such as the UK, already have it, France will get there within 6 weeks).

“Thought Control” is, of course, a very delicate problem: imagination, irreverence, satire have to be allowed, but not systems of thought leading to lethal issues.

Who is going to watch the watchers?

Well, We The People, directly.

Some of the commenters on this site rolled out the usual objection to Direct Democracy: the so-called “Madness Of The Crowds”.

Wisdom Of Crowds: Paris, 01/11/15.

Hazxan from the UK said: “Patrice, what really is “Democracy”? All my life, every day, it was programmed into me that we had a “democracy” that it was a rare and special thing that meant we lived in the best of possible worlds. Even that those who didn’t have this Democracy should be bombed and crushed until they had this Democracy whether they chose it or not (we chose it for them – begin to see the paradox?)”

Agreed that seems a paradox, but, when people do not live in democracy, they live in plutocratic dictatorships. It starts with dictators, but dictatorship is not stable, if it does not use demonic means, hence the adjective “plutocratic”.

This is not just theory, but practical considerations: look at Egypt now. Chief of the Army All Sissi had to make a coup against the Islamists. He went from military dictator (bad, but necessary) to elected president (re-establishment of representative democracy).

If Al Sissi had stayed a dictator (instead of becoming an elected president), he would have had to use more demonic means (because all those who voted for him would have been more or less against him, thus they would have had to be repressed).

Another frequent commenter, EugenR Lowy: “I have to disagree with you about direct democracy. Direct democracy is possible only at the local level and not at the level of big states. More than that I do not believe in the wisdom of the masses, as some obscure decision making theories claim. The masses at the end have tendency to turn to certain authority to lead them, when the situation is becoming too unstable and insecure, and we are back in the worst form of political leadership. To make right political decisions, the decision making must be aware of existence of realities as long term processes and not a stand-still state, which can be immediately corrected. How many among the masses understand this? Even the educated ones not necessarily are aware of this.”

I deeply believe in knowledge and wisdom, but I am not sure even a highly professional scientist is aware of the problematics of political and historical processes, knowledge that is necessary to formulate right opinion in the major political issues.”

There is every reason to believe that scientists are no experts at politics. Several Nobel Prize level scientists became Nazi Party members before Adolf Hitler (at least one of these Nobels had worked closely with Einstein).

Eugen’s point of view does not just condemn Direct Democracy, but even Representative Democracy: after all, in Representative Democracy it’s We The People who elects the representatives, all the way to the head of state.

Hitler’s Nazi Party got enough votes to control the Second Reich (!) Parliament. President Hindenburg thought he had no choice but to select Hitler as Chancellor, in a coalition government. Then the Nazis were able, through their “Patriot Act” to mangle German society enough to acquire total control.

Another example is the nephew of Napoleon I. Elected president of France, he made a coup against himself and baptized himself “Emperor”. Hitler actually copied that method, which had been inaugurated by Napoleon I.

Thus, when Eugen says We The People can make bad choices, it’s true, but it condemns all Democracy, Direct or not. It’s easy to make the argument that “Representative Democracy” is more dangerous than the direct form. Indeed, bad legislation can be reversed, whereas really bad leaders can’t be, once they have seized the Security apparatus.

Socrates and Plato had disserted about the subject of leadership ad nauseam. And incompetently. Whereas Pericles, earlier, advised by better philosophers, including his wife, made a splendid exposition of the “Open Society”. So it’s not a question of times long gone: Pericles expressed the thoughts of Progressive philosophers, whereas Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle were of an increasingly fascist and plutocratic persuasion.

Plato’s solution was the “Philosopher-King”. That’s an idiotic notion, because a real philosopher has neither the time, nor the inclination, to be king. Similarly a real king has no time, nor inclination, to be a philosopher.

There were many attempts in the Sixteenth, Seventeenth, Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century, to make philosopher-kings. Those who really contributed to civilization positively were few: mostly Henri III and Henri IV of France (and perhaps Francois I, or, paradoxically Louis XVI). Then, of course, Peter the Great.

Both Henri III and Peter were great because they did not hesitate to assassinate execute whom they viewed as the most potent enemies of the very progressive States they led… Against determined Salafists (The Catholic League for Henri III, the “Old Believers” for Peter).

Aristotle, a student of Plato, wrote quite a bit about politics. Differently from Plato who hypocritically brandished the concept of philosophy, Aristotle went all-out for monarchy. His students, friends, executors of his will, were the plutocrats who destroyed Greek democracies, and launched the “Hellenistic States” (which lost on the battlefield, but later won the battles of ideas with the Roman Republic). So Aristotle Destroyed Democracy.

Modern Solution: The Grand Democratic Synthesis:

Socrates bemoaned that Athens voted on anything, and elected everybody, including generals. That, he said, made people who did not know how to make shoes in charge of making shoes.

The solution to this was found by the Roman State, and blossomed during the Middle-Ages. It was what I called DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS.

Those use the principles of representative democracy and meritocracy inside, while, outside, being strictly subordinated to the government. Guilds, Academic, Medical, Judicial, Engineering organizations are examples. And the Army and Police ought to be foremost.

Example: In the modern German army, soldiers are supposed not just to obey the Military Code, but the German Constitution. In general, all armies ought to take their oath to the Constitution first… Or even its spirit (hence Egypt’s Al Sissi was correct).

Modern Solution: We The People Ought To Legislate:

The model is very simple: Switzerland.

Whereas plutocrats need, with the present system, to just buy 2,000 “representatives” to control the entire planet, they cannot buy billions of people: that would defeat their motivation, which is to rule over We The People, not buy them (that’s the taxation we need to apply to them).

So Who Is The Government?

There, to some extent, Switzerland again comes to the fore: it has an executive council of seven, and the president is elected for a year. The Army has only colonels. Generals are elected in case of imminent war.

The historical model here is the Roman Republic. Its executive system ought to be greatly imitated: A Consul had full powers for just one month (on the following month the other Consul had the powers).

In truth, the Roman Republic worked pretty much as a Direct Democracy, although this system was immensely, and way too complicated.

Instead, we should imitate the Athenian Directly Democratic system. With the Internet, the main problem of Athens, namely that voters found very difficult to come speak, debate, and vote at the National Assembly, can be easily solved.

So what about the objection that We The People is dumb, ill-informed, fickle, prone to madness? As I said, this is Plato-Aristotle objection, and just an excuse for plutocracy (preferably with the “philosopher” on top, gorging himself, as Aristotle did).

Those who do not get educated, and are not motivated for education, stay, indeed, dumb, ill-informed, fickle, prone to madness. But what we see in Switzerland is that the Direct Democracy has made We The People ever more motivated to learn stuff, ever more knowledgeable and wise. One can see the Swiss electorate think and change: as a proposition goes to a “votation”, the polls show opinions changing wildly as the weeks go by, and the debate evolves.

We The People can be educated, learn, and grow in wisdom as children do. Given a chance. The 2,000 individuals who presently rule the world, and their sponsors, who telerobotize them, and increasingly own the planet, quite a bit as the Saudi family does, do not want We The People to be given that chance. So let’s grab it.

Patrice Ayme

Europe Trapped By Masochism, Intellectual Laziness?

Greece, Euro, Algerian FNL, Colonialism, Bullying, Whining and Depression.

Syriza, a Party in Greece, threatens to win elections on January 25. Its leader has announced Syriza was not a danger for Europe, but that Merkel was. His views are those I long held within these pages. “To Save The World, Devalue!”

Some Germans, claiming to have talked with officials, uttered that Greece could leave the Euro. Why don’t those Germans mind their business? The Euro is Greek money. Greeks want to keep their money.

Meanwhile Lithuania adopted the Euro. All European countries are supposed to adopt the Euro. Even the Swiss Frank is locked to it (and is going down accordingly).

If Germans want a clean Europe, they can accept the official French proposal to create a European Banking Union, the equivalent of the FDIC of the USA. Conservative Germans are not anxious to do this.

Indeed the German Landbanks, the local banks, crucial to finance the German “Mittelstand”, the middle companies, are bankrupt, and live on accommodations with the authorities. In other words; disguised subsidies.

“Austerity” in Europe means not enough money to operate the economy. Let Syriza bite Merkel’s well fed derriere!

Euro Still Way Too High:

Politics, when not totally democratic, can be absolutely Machiavellian. The Euro reached 1.45 dollars, a few years ago. Clearly it should rather be half that.

Based on the very long range equivalence of the French Franc with the Dollar, the Euro was made to be worth one Dollar. However, the economy of the USA has been much stronger, for years. Thus the Euro should be lower than its lowest level ever (when Germany was in trouble, a decade ago). That was 83 Dollar cents.

A way out of the European crisis is to boost the economy and lower the Debt/GDP by lowering the Euro. This has been zehr klar, for years. After the article in Der Spiegel saying Berlin wanted to expel Greece (which cannot be constitutionally done), Siebert, spokesman of Merkel, said policy had no changed.

However, the Der Spiegel article may have been planted, just to hasten the lowering of the Euro (which reached 1.18 Dollar, lowest in nine years). If so, it would be in agreement with France (which has to be pushing for a Euro at 80 cents, if still endowed with brains).

It will not escape conspiracy theorists that a collapse of the Euro would be painless, as oil, paid in Dollar, has seen its own price cut quickly by half. Hopefully, Putin is also been cut in half.

Maybe God is a conspiracy theorist?

***

Too Much Mushy Whining, No Action:

Women tears’ smell lower testosterone in human males. In other words, if women want some action, they better act as activists, or even aggressors (“bitchy”) and not as whiners.

Instead of whining about “colonialism”, Europeans ought to have found what was wrong about it, and how to correct it for the best.

Shrinking onto oneself, that’s called depression.

***

Colonialism: Very Bad, Indeed, But the Wrong Notion

What’s the difference between an immigrant, a migrant, a colon, an invader?

I was always a fanatic of cultural, and ethnical mixed background. Why? Because the more cultural ingredients around, the wealthier the minds.

Example. Although I vigorously attack both Bible and Qur’an, my dirty little secret is that I live very faithfully according of some of the elements of both I approve of… For example I don’t touch alcohol (being drunk on my own thoughts all day long, will cynics no doubt notice).

In the 1950s, it was fashionable for French intellectuals to be “anti-colonialist”. This, in turn was amplified worldwide, and became the credo of the left and progressives.

According to the theory, the French had conquered the world, and needed to go back to their barracks. They did, and were replaced worldwide, by American plutocrats, and their GIs. The same was extended to other European colonialists, of course.

Did French intellectuals realize they had been had?

Most died without being officially aware. But some who were the youngest, and most frantically anti-“colonialism” are changing their tune. Decades of history have instructed them forcefully.

Rene’ Vautier, a French movie maker joined the Algerian FNL (to the point he was implicated in factions struggles therein, and got imprisoned because of this). He just died at 86, and gave a final interview.

Interestingly, this FNL fanatic, changed his music in recent years (“before I get senile” he added).

Vautier fought as a teenager against the Nazis in the French resistance. A communist he was sent to Africa. At the age of twenty-one years old in 1949 the Ligue de l’enseignement en Afrique sent him to make a film about life in the French African colonies. It was filmed in the Ivory Coast.

Under French administration, Ivory Coast was peaceful.

(I was left free as a toddler on the beach there; my only fear, whom I had been instructed to have, was of a vicious, roguish wave that would appear from time to time; ever since I have a healthy fear of waves… That does prevent me to surf, occasionally, or even been swept in recent year by a rogue wave in California, and losing a camera, but when I am by the ocean, I worry.)

Since the French left, as with many European ex-“colonies”, from Pakistan to Fidji, Shri Lanka to Somalia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Congo, Cambodia, or the CAR, Ivory Coast was wrecked by a vicious civil war (about who was really an Ivorian).

In his last interview, Vautier, a worldwide icon of anti-“colonialism”, declared he wished the struggle against “colonialism” had not been all in vain.

But in vain it was. In many places, where imperial states had blocked plutocratic excess, now the worst of the worse were free to roam and feast.

In The Trap Again?

Krugman wrote a blog post “Europe’s Trap”. It’s entirely correct. However, Europe fell into the trap when the Kaiser and his generals listened to the songs of Colonel House, right arm of American president Wilson.

Sure that the USA would help, the Prussian (also known as German) army attacked the French Republic in an all-out attack, August 3, 1914, invading and declaring war to secondary countries in the process. A month later, after retreating for three weeks, the French army successfully counter-attacked.

American help to trade with the Kaiser’s dictatorship, through the “neutral” Netherlands, extended the First World War three years. But that was only the beginning of the involvement of the USA in European submission affairs.

However, nowadays, the USA has come to realize that it cannot rule the world alone. So the enlightened ones agree that the European Union is a precious ally, and it needs its own currency. As Keynes had pleaded in 1944, the Dollar cannot do it all.

It’s nicer to have a peaceful union under Franco-Germania, rather than a West fighting itself to death.

If we want peace, we need as little exploitation as possible, and it starts in the neighborhood. To have a strong Europe is in the USA’s best interest.

Example: the disastrous, trillion Dollar price F35 flounders. This is the worst fighter plane ever put into production, and is a threat to the security of the USA (but not to North Korea or Putin).

However Europe has two excellent canard fighter-bombers, the Eurofighter/Typhoon and the Rafale, both armed with the excellent Meteor ramjet missile (Mach 4, 100 miles range). Both have excellent Infrared vision, and can fire infrared long range missiles. The Rafale has active stealth, and that works, whereas passive stealth not only does not work, but cannot work.

An astute U.S. Air Force could ditch the dangerous F35, and build one of the Euro canards, under licence and renovated. Thus Euro strength would profit USA strength. An example of many. At the Las Vegas consumer electronic show, January 2015, the second largest delegation, with more than 100 companies, is… French.

Meanwhile French president Hollande declared that the rise of the Islamist State is directly attributable to the refusal to strike mass bloody dictator Assad (in the end, only the French wanted to attack). Indeed (as I said for years).

Colonialism? No. Where are the colons? And are immigrants replenishing Europe, colons?

Just administering the empire. The worldwide empire we need to run good enough to survive, civilizationally speaking.

… And which is already running, albeit in plutocratic form.

Patrice Ayme’

Depression’s Causes: Righteousness & Viciousness

TODAY’S GREATER DEPRESSION HAS MANY DEEP CAUSES

Slowly rising consensus: in some important ways (evolution of relative GDP; employment rate; public investment; education’s relative performance), the economies of the leading countries are doing worse than during the “Great Depression” of the 1930s.

That’s why I prefer the expression “Greater Depression” to “Great Recession”.

And we have seen nothing yet: the cause of the “Greater Depression” of the 1930s was a chain of errors, which were easy to avoid.

(First a splurging in the 1920s, especially in the USA and Britain, and its unavoidable attending crash compounded by the American Senate’s arrogance that the international economy could be tweaked through tariffs, to profit only the USA, the whole thing followed by collapse of international trade and then by “liquidating everything” (as was said at the time).)

Thus, the roots of Depression of the 1930s were shallow, easy to avoid next time: avoid splurging, keep international trade going, use public money to avoid 9,000 bank failures (in the USA alone), and institute a FDIC (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation: Europe’s “Banking Union” is trying to mimic that).

There are serious problems now, much more serious than in the 1930s. Including a lack of seriousness.

Serious reasons for collapse caused the long decline of the Roman Empire, or struck shortly after 1300 CE, when entangled ecological, climate, demographic, and plutocratic crises, with an attending plague, combined to kill half of Europe, and brought five centuries of war.

Indications are that the world economy, having not really recovered from the 2008 crisis, is stumbling. Especially Europe. Population: more than 750 million (EU + Russia, etc.).

Why? Why not?

In the 1930s, the government of the USA, first under Hoover, and then much more spectacularly under Roosevelt, starting in 1933, made Herculean efforts (in public spending, and legislation). Nowadays, it’s quite the opposite.

Paul Krugman suggests that righteousness is the cause of this decline: see the obstinate Merkel, and the refusal to do away with high debt levels.

In “Revenge of the Unforgiven. How Righteousness Killed the World Economy”, Krugman observes that:”…now [world] growth is stalling, and the specter of deflation looms.

If this story sounds familiar, it should; it has played out repeatedly since 2008. As in previous episodes, the worst news is coming from Europe, but this time there is also a clear slowdown in emerging markets — and there are even warning signs in the United States, despite pretty good job growth at the moment.

Why does this keep happening? After all, the events that brought on the Great Recession — the housing bust, the banking crisis — took place a long time ago. Why can’t we escape their legacy?

The proximate answer lies in a series of policy mistakes: Austerity when economies needed stimulus, paranoia about inflation when the real risk is deflation, and so on. But why do governments keep making these mistakes? In particular, why do they keep making the same mistakes, year after year?

The answer, I’d suggest, is an excess of virtue. Righteousness is killing the world economy.”

Notice that brandishing righteousness diverts attention away from full blown viciousness (which I believe is dominant). Then Krugman presents a small fraction of the problem, affecting to believe naively that high debt is the cause of everything:

“What, after all, is our fundamental economic problem? A simplified but broadly correct account of what went wrong goes like this: In the years leading up to the Great Recession, we had an explosion of credit (mainly to the private sector). Old notions of prudence, for both lenders and borrowers, were cast aside; debt levels that would once have been considered deeply unsound became the norm.

Then the music stopped, the money stopped flowing, and everyone began trying to “deleverage,” to reduce the level of debt. For each individual, this was prudent. But my spending is your income and your spending is my income, so when everyone tries to pay down debt at the same time, you get a depressed economy.

So what can be done? Historically, the solution to high levels of debt has often involved writing off and forgiving much of that debt.”

This is a solution I have advocated since 2008. See “Reforming World Finance”, from November 2008, when I naively still hoped my friend Obama would grab the bull by the horns, as if he were courageous, or something. None of these obvious reforms was implemented, but at least now an economy Nobel was given roughly in this direction (see yesterday’s essay).

The 2011 version is: “To Save The World, Please Default (And Grab Capital From the Conniving Plutocrats)”

Iceland and Greece did write-off some debt. They had no choice.

However, debt forgiveness is only part of the problem (Oh, by the way, full disclosure: I have zero debt, so if I were biased, it would be the other way!)

The nature of the old debt, and the nature of the new debt are the core problems.

Debt because housing prices are through the roof comes from lack of building. Debt because of enormous leverage by public-private banks and companies involved in financial horror to steal We The People, is still something else.

The erroneous nature of the debt has misaligned the entire economy. We live in a world where there are master sommeliers. And where millions of people are tickled pink by the idea of being waited by a master sommelier, somebody who can look through a bottle thanks to the light of a candle, he expertly lighted, to stop exactly before the deposit at the bottom gets into the clear wine.

But then there was not enough money, or interest, to invent an ebola vaccine. Civilization is drunk, Bacchus is god, and Death invited to the party.

The entire debt machinery is stuck. Banks have lent to financial conspirators for decades, and are still doing it ever more. This sort of debt ought not to exist. (Bankers have been conspiring to steal on the currency markets, the administration of the USA claims to have just discovered, hinting that this time some bankers may be prosecuted personally. Maybe. Perhaps. We will see… But that sort of outright criminal activity is different from stealing by giving money only to one’s friends and co-conspirators.) What is needed for civilization to survive, is debt that brings new high Return On Investment for We The People. That could be new tech, or new housing, new, sustainable energy sources (my eye being on thermonuclear fusion, a field where power is growing according to its own “Moore Law”, that means, exponentially; to provide clean BASE energy). Plutocracy naturally is not interested by We The People flourishing. Just the opposite: Pluto thrives on misery. That’s the part of the economy which no one very serious, and part of the oligarchy, wants to see.

Even normal people do not want to see it: it’s too depressing, and they don’t know what to do.

Moreover plutocracy is entangled with a more far-out explanation of the present economic distress: the world is getting old, as the Romans used to say. The Romans needed to transit from the old economy, to a new one. As we do. Paralyzed, mesmerized and occupied by plutocracy, the Romans could not even conceive of the notion (all the more as some zones of the empire, especially in the Orient saw their GDP climbing all the way until the barbarians invaded, archeology shows). Roman mines got exhausted, regions which used to produce lots of food became poor, Return on Investment of many activities collapsed,. there were not enough slaves, nor small farmers to support production, or the army, the economy and security organized until then by the state faltered, from too small tax revenues, and finally the middle class and local government (the “curiales”) were destroyed by taxation, while plutocrats went on a rampage, grabbing most powers. Romans had to make transitions (new tech, no more slavery, less plutocracy!) They didn’t. We are in a similar crisis. ROI is collapsing, so is the biosphere. Robots are threatening to destroy much employment all together. The notion of productive activity, thus productive debt, has to change, forgiven or not.

Krugman himself concludes that the debt crisis will not abate. He does not say why. I will: it’s not just out of mental inertia, it’s out of viciousness.

Some will say I exaggerate. Not so. Look at Italy. The government debt is around 145% of GDP, and pays more than 3% interest. So it augments at the clip of around 5.5% a year. To diminish that debt, nominal Italian GDP ought to grow at more than 5.5% a year. But guess what? Not only is Italy not growing, but Italian GDP is smaller now than 14 years ago (with a larger population).

There is only one way out: default. That is tell the plutocrats that they can forget their money, or, more exactly, treating We The People as if we were indentured servants, or serfs. I rest my case.

Patrice Ayme’