Tuesday, March 26, 2019

Liberalism, Fascism.Conservative are Non-Rigid Designators

Like Confucius one should begin with a rectification of names. Politically the terms liberal and conservative are variables that take on given meanings in different historical times and circumstances. They are not rigid designators to use Kripke’s terminology. The end justifies the means political rationale become the end-in-themselves occasionally.
Imperialists may be regarded as conservatives by supporters of the crown. Those for free trade may be regarded as liberals. Nazi political philosophy was founded on national socialism. The Storm Troopers mostly were made of former socialists and communists who believed mistakenly that Hitler would lead toward a national socialist state after getting rid of the remaining aristocrats that were deposed in a social revolution after the loss/armistice of the first world war.
Fascism is more of a means of taking political power than a stable political condition. Like Marxism it works best as a revolutionary ideology rather than a stable economic system. Aristotle preferred particulars over universals. Applied to politics that might mean than functioning egalitarian economic and political structures can be arrived at through intelligent, particular measures rather than grandiose, King Canute declarations of a topical form as the Utopian state with bureaucratic loyalists filling in the details.
There isn’t a way that stupid, corrupt politicians and legislators will bring into actuality a smartly designed governing structure nor policies that are optimal. democracy fails because of stupid corrupt leadership and collapses into tyranny (or dictatorship in the modern world). At that point liberals seeking liberty from the junta, tyrant etc. Liberal and conservative are more like verbs than nouns.

Dr Dre Donates $70 Million to Southern Cal

For a 70 million dollar donation to a University Dr Dre should get a building named for him. Even if he doesn't the donation was remarkable for someone from the music business. It wasn't spent on building Neverland II.

I took Bachelor's degree from Albany's Excelsior College for five easy payments of $19.95 (actually it was a little more) and was quite happy about it. Actually I only wanted an Associate Degree and got railroaded into getting a B.A. because I was having a hard time getting a couple of classes I needed to finish that program in Alaska, so I got the B.A. and the A.A. at the same time eventually.

In my opinion college education ought to be free. It could be structured like the Excelsior programs with passing grades counting and non-passing not. A college needn't provide all the courses itself. College courses that are accredited can be transferred in to complete the program slots that are required for graduation. The other way is a result of somewhat old program structures that arose when a college had to provide everything itself. It could not afford, nor could most students, to continue in programs in which they were failing. Those structures were unwieldy, inefficient and yet possibly necessary in order to pay educator salaries and physical plants costs (buildings and lights; not staff).

Dr. Dre's daughter was admitted to the college. Some controversy followed the Dr's tweet about her deservingness in comparison to those in the cheating scandal. College exclusivity and cost are a function of unnecessary and anachronistic, persistant college structures designed to be exclusive rather than inclusive. I got a year of college credits with CLEP tests. Any poor yet bright math student should be able to get credits by examination too-on line and transfer them about.

College costs could be drastically reduced and reformed, and exclusive colleges with deep pockets like Harvard might lose some of their gang turf status relationship to government jobs such as the Supreme Court of the United States. Law school costs could be made very low on-line for those willing to spend three years in pursuit of a traditional Cambridge civil and canon law LLD, Society could be made more efficient and egalitarian in many ways rather than dominated by corrupting cliques and exclusive gangs. If people were as publicly spirited to contribute to the betterment of society as Dr. Dre was in his donation to U.S.C. it might be possible to evolve a balanced economic edge of progress.

Monday, March 25, 2019

Why the Monroe Doctrine Is Relevant Today

The Monroe Doctrine of 1823 opposed European colonization in the western hemisphere. Military force was used to enforce the doctrine. Today the new application of the doctrine is to not allow eastern hemispheric military activity in the west.

The Eastern hemisphere has wars all the time throughout its history. That hasn't changed, and keeping the eastern militaries from causing mischief, war and death in the west is a worthwhile use of the Monroe Doctrine that Russia violated recently in sending 100 troops to Venezuela.

The western hemispheric nation just don't have as many wars or repressive regimes as the eastern hemisphere. That is because all of the nations of the west left the structural problems of the east, except for imperialism and colonialism, in founding anew in the west. The very distance from the structural problems of the east and its millennial old problems enabled revolution from those regimes. Simon Bolivar, George Washington and others led the way to creating new nations that had thrown off their colonial regressors. Russia has been one of the prime violators of the new Monroe Doctrine in the western hemisphere with its history of communist political philosophy and military support for that delusional neo-utopian vision.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has been given super-powers constitutionally to administer Russian foreign policy. He lawfully has the power to veto any decision by the Russian government that he deems wrong and injurious to Russia. Yet what if the problem causing injury to Russia is himself? Therein is a serious flaw in the new Russian constitution.

President Putin fundamentally misunderstands the history of the western hemisphere and its progress in liberating itself from the corruption, class and racial supremacy and pervasive evils of the eastern hemisphere. Jesus Christ was the primary good that existed in that hemisphere and he recognized the worldliness as satanic. President Putin needn't export that satanism to the west and believe he is doing anything besides gangsterism.

Perhaps President Putin was merely sending troops to guard shipments of gold and assets that President Maduro would like to send to Russia before he leaves office. In that case the Monroe Doctrine wasn't violated in spirit even if in practice. However it appears that President Putin is simply trying to prop up Karl Marx's corrupt follower and secure itself some turf in the western hemisphere in the bargain. That is a blunder.

China did not violate the spirit of the new Monroe Doctrine principal when it bought control of the Panama Canal. Economic investment is fair dinkum. That was not a military invasion, even if it made the U.S.A. appear somewhat confused or dense regarding its own opportunity to engage the Panamanians with a new contract they would be satisfied with. Maybe the President should have sent George Steinbrenner as his special envoy to negotiate.

President Putin's Maduro Blunder




President Putin has made a tactical blunder in sending 100 troops to Venezuela. The implication of military escalation as a possibility where U.S. forces would directly encounter Russian soldiers in battle is offensive to sensibilities, not to mention the long standing principle of the Monroe Doctrine*. It is practically an invitation for regime change in Moscow.

It was a tactical blunder because the conclusion of the Mueller investigation into Russian collusion to elect President Trump meant that the President would have better opportunity to start to end sanctions on Russia. President Trump recently reversed some sanctions imposed on North Korea. President Putin should withdraw his military component in Venezuela directly. To do otherwise would influence the 2020 election to favor a saber-rattling Democratic hawk as used to exist who is willing to intervene in Venezuela to fight Russians and anti-democracy forces.

One hundred Spetznatz (special forces) can work a lot of mischief in Venezuela. They can act as enforcers that have no hidden allegiance to the Democracy forces, they can act as hit-men to liquidate Democracy cadre, and they can train and lead socialist-communist elements into jungle and urban war. President Putin has enfiladed his own true sentiments regarding political philosophy in trying to prop up a neo-communist regime that represses its people. President Putin may put on the black-eye patch and enter speak like a pirate contests after the Venezuela intervention.

With the very loud and offensive Russian presence in Venezuela to support the battle against democracy in that nation there is little chance or opportunity for Americans to recognize any Russian claims on the Ukraine- even if they are somewhat justified. With the deployment of Russian soldiers to Venezuela it is likely that any progress toward a settlement in favor of Russia such as recognizing a Dnepr demarcation line will end. The Ukraine probably will receive support for all of their claims on land filched away from Russia during the Yeltsin era. Instead war planning for Venezuela and Russia may occur to select politicians and soldiers.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics/russian-air-force-planes-land-in-venezuela-carrying-troops-reports-idUSKCN1R50NB

*The Monroe Doctrine of 1823 opposed European colonization in the western hemisphere. Military force was used to enforce the doctrine. Today the new application of the doctrine is to not allow eastern hemispheric military activity in the west.

The Eastern hemisphere has wars all the time throughout its history. That hasn't changed, and keeping the eastern militaries from causing mischief, war and death in the west is a worthwhile use of the Monroe Doctrine that Russia violated recently in sending 100 troops to Venezuela.

The western hemispheric nation just don't have as many wars or repressive regimes as the eastern hemisphere. That is because all of the nations of the west left the structural problems of the east, except for imperialism and colonialism, in founding anew in the west. The very distance from the structural problems of the east and its millennial old problems enabled revolution from those regimes. Simon Bolivar, George Washington and others led the way to creating new nations that had thrown off their colonial regressors. Russia has been one of the prime violators of the new Monroe Doctrine in the western hemisphere with its history of communist political philosophy and military support for that delusional neo-utopian vision.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has been given super-powers constitutionally to administer Russian foreign policy. He lawfully has the power to veto any decision by the Russian government that he deems wrong and injurious to Russia. Yet what if the problem causing injury to Russia is himself? Therein is a serious flaw in the new Russian constitution.

President Putin fundamentally misunderstands the history of the western hemisphere and its progress in liberating itself from the corruption, class and racial supremacy and pervasive evils of the eastern hemisphere. Jesus Christ was the primary good that existed in that hemisphere and he recognized the worldliness as satanic. President Putin needn't export that satanism to the west and believe he is doing anything besides gangsterism.

Perhaps President Putin was merely sending troops to guard shipments of gold and assets that President Maduro would like to send to Russia before he leaves office. In that case the Monroe Doctrine wasn't violated in spirit even if in practice. However it appears that President Putin is simply trying to prop up Karl Marx's corrupt follower and secure itself some turf in the western hemisphere in the bargain. That is a blunder.

China did not violate the spirit of the new Monroe Doctrine principal when it bought control of the Panama Canal. Economic investment is fair dinkum. That was not a military invasion, even if it made the U.S.A. appear somewhat confused or dense regarding its own opportunity to engage the Panamanians with a new contract they would be satisfied with. Maybe the President should have sent George Steinbrenner as his special envoy to negotiate.


Secure Border and Secure Citizenship Were Lacking in Hoover Administration

 Apparently President Hoover authorized the deportation of Mexicans that were believed to be illegals during the depression. Economic panic stimulated state and local governments to enact an ethnic cleansing policy of Mexican foreign nationals. However a large percentage (60%) were birthright U.S. citizens. Fortunately that could not recur because everyone now has good I.D. and on-line birth records.
The issue underscores the need to have secure borders and citizen ship accounts so people may know who is and isn’t a U.S. citizen. The spaced out way benefits drug traffickers and Democrats that value corruption as a normal, desirable condition.
The Mexican Government did not declare war on Nazi Germany until very late in the war. They seemed to be recalcitrant, and might have hoped that a German victory would give them a new deal for retaking land from the United States that formerly belonged to Spain. Clear citizenship would help to disambiguate issues of where people have a lawful right to live, and serve to avoid hurt feelings that can exacerbate international conflict relations.

Trump Acquitted- Congress May Quit Chasing Its Tail

With he end of the Mueller Non-Alien Probe there is renewed hope that the congress may stop chasing its tail and get its oars in the waters of unmixed metaphors (actually one hopes they will utilize a scientific approach with good engineering analysis of modular means of reducing Greenhouse gas emissions that will be published, peer reviewed and understood by the public with feedback to politicians before any legislation is packaged). Personally I am skeptical.

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/435553-muellers-end-a-conclusion-on-collusion-but-confusion-on-obstruction

Sunday, March 24, 2019

Windows 10, i core Gen 9 Effective Collusion (coincidence)

Upgrade and security support for Windows 7 (except for business if they pay for extended support available three more years) ends in January 2020. Microsoft could sell or contract out Windows 7 to people that would upgrade it and provide security patches indefinitely. Of course they don't want to compete against themselves. Windows 10 doesn't easily allow dual booting an open source operating system; one needs to go through bios to set it to legacy systems, and then Windows 10 isn't available; it's either/or.
Open source operating systems are actually better than Windows i.m.o., without the invasive ads and requirements for security scans and updating with the computer off. Debian, Ubuntu and Mint work quite well and are free. People became reliant on windows when it was about the sole system after it killed off Navigator. One can keep Windows 7 and dual or triple boot it with Mint and Ubuntu and just use windows 7 off line in order to use MSoffice 2010 and MSword.
Corporate collusion to force consumers to buy new computers and operating systems has most intel icore gen 6, 7 and 8 cpu chips soldered to the motherboard and difficult to upgrade. Sockets were changed after gen 5 Broadwell architecture and after Skylake, Kaby lake and Coffee lake the sockets for the cpu changed again, so one can't put a gen 9 or 10 cpu into prior computer sockets. Lenovo computers aren't bad, yet one can't buy a three year old model and put a gen 9 cpu in it. Even the communists are gouging consumers.
Major computer manufactures should at least sell computers without an installed OS for $150 less without Windows 10. Free operating systems are very easy to get and install.

Saturday, March 23, 2019

President Trump's Reasonable Criticism of the Late Sen. John McCain?

President Trump recently renewed criticism of the late Senator John McCain's neo-liberal yet synthetic policies and persona. That elicited a vigorous chastisement from the media including the usually supportive Fox News. As the leading political officer of the Republican party President Trump has an implicit right to criticize what he views as fundamentally wrong political policy. The late Senator McCain was famous for 'maverick' political positions developed over a long period of time in close association with his fellow brain cancer sufferer the late Senator Ted Kennedy. The two seemed to share many positions. Senator McCain definitely did not qualify as a true conservative, except in cases of war, where he sought to enter conflict wherever possible.

Senator McCain seemed to personify the one-party state. For the senator, being a maverick seemed to mean taking up liberal causes while being a big spender on defense. Senator McCain's Cold War history led him towards finding conflict with the new Russia rather than finding or creating opportunities for increased closer ties with it. That was a huge sea change away from the Reagan years for developing increasingly closer ties.

Senator McCain received much reverence from the media for being a war hero. President Trump said McCain wasn't a hero; that being a p.o.w. isn't heroic. Yet no one would want to be a p.o.w. except perhaps if the alternative is death (unless one was a WW II Japanese soldier where the dishonor might be worse than death). That raises a difficult point about the late Senator McCain's Vietnam War record.

Some question the way John McCain became a prisoner of war. His father was the commander of all naval pacific forces. Some sailors probably hated him for that, especially draftees. He was a fighter pilot. Sitting in his aircraft on the flight deck of the Forestal a missile from a plane broadside to him launched and shot his. A firing pin was missing allowing a missile to be fired. At any rate, the ensuing fire and bomb cook-offs killed 134 sailors. McCain was transferred to Saigon to be a liaison officer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enHEr7SsPes

Then he requested transfer to another carrier to fly again. He agitated aboard the carrier to fly right away before getting situated. He insisted on flying a mission to bomb Hanoi. During the mission he disregarded instructions about flight operations, about flying to low, and was shot down. He said a SAM missile shot him down though the other pilots flying with him said they saw no evidence of a missile. He broke his jaw ejecting from the jet fighter and then landed into the unsympathetic arms of his captors for the better part of the next decade. Then he returned to the United States with the war's end and was elected Senator. Is that all heroic?

The Vietnam action had a million heroes and stories. It is difficult to say that one was more heroic than another sometimes. I met a Sgt Benevidez in Texas while attending theology school. He was awarded a medal of honor and operated a garage in El Campo Texas. Carlos Hathcock was another one of those guys with extraordinary performance in battle, Unquestioned courage deserves respect. That is why some people found Senator McCain's record and description as a hero suspect.

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

There is no question that John McCain was a fighter; a guy that would enter a brawl to help an embattled friend. It may be wrong though to ascribe to his record such valor as to cover a plenitude of bad political choices in the Senate.

Friday, March 22, 2019

Shouldn't President Trump Fire General Neller?

Shouldn't President Trump fire Marine Corps Commandant General Neller for insubordination? The General's stupid remarks that defending the border against illegal immigration poses an unacceptable risk to the Marine Corps are nearly treasonous. He might be a fan of Beto O’Rourke who wants no border security at all so billions of people can volkerwanderung around the United States as they feel the feet move them. 

General Neller may not comprehend that defending the land area of the Unitied (crumbling?) States and the properties of rights and real property is the sole reason for the existence of the Marine Corps. Its purpose isn't to have high pay and benefits with lots of war gaming and fine equipment to sometimes go kill people in third world countries.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/830588/marine-corps-commandant-warns-sending-troops-border-poses-unacceptable-risk

If defending the southern border poses an "unacceptable risk to Marine Corps combat readiness and solvency", it isn't good to consider what might happen if the Corps faces a tougher opponent.

Gold Value After Economic-Government Apocalypse

Gold is the simplest identity-value item in existence. Gold and bullets might continue to be valued in a society with complete social breakdown. Philosophical value theories (axiology) may serve to offer numerous alternative value-objects or even behaviors and constructions as valuable instead of money. In the event of economic collapse depending upon what the demographic facts are and who leads if anyone, new values may arise to replace that which formerly existed.

If the American Midwest evolves into a desert like the Sahara within two hundred years as some people predict because of global warming, water may become more valuable. If there are epidemic lethal diseases, vaccines for immunity may be most highly valued. The answers to what future value theory will be are speculation and even fiction, yet interesting to consider. They are limited only by social and individual intelligence. If people are as dumb interactively as ants and follow the meat stimulating scent of the fetish of value perhaps some ecospherically profitable variable value will need to be usefully invented so the workers accomplish something productive rather than counterproductive for the environment.

Thursday, March 21, 2019

Oppophobia Hits Democrat Fellow Travelers Hard



Fellow travelers of Democratic Party antiphobists such as militant Muslim propagandists have a renewed vigor for increasing Muslim attack on American political inside-lines through the mechanism of opposition to Islamophobia. Islamophobia is a vanguard tool of the renewed post-OPEC annexation of wealth of Middle- Eastern oil fields that brought a formerly arrested civilization to a new age of expansion and attack on the dar al harb (zone of war) through a variety of means.

The western world today is supposed to have a psychological disorder if it aware of history and of Islamic history being that of a rival civilization to the Western (and now Eastern) civilization since its beginning in the 7th century. For a time, after the last Muslims were expelled from Iberia at Granada in 1492, Muslims attacked from Turkey and on a broad Eastern flank with Islamafied former horde cadres of Genghis Khan. As the west prospered and technologically grew the Muslim world stagnated. Hence Arnold Toynbee described Islam as an arrested civilization. However that status change with the billions and billions of dollars of cash from oil sales. Several Muslims terror organizations including state sponsored terrorism began a renewed attack on the west through a variety of means. Some of those had plausible deniability- while the expansion of Madrassas and mosques continued.

In spite of decades of terrorism and even destruction of the world trade center towers in New York the Muslim hegemony on the west through growth of Islamic migrants and communications, propaganda in support of Islam can claim the west has some sort of unhealthy psychological aversion to its culture, Shria (Islamic legal code) and religion. Those interested in the health of civilization would be incompetent if they were not aware of the challenges Islam presents to a decadent morality of the west, synergy with leftist polemics of attack on conservative America, and history of the liberal use of terrorism accompanying the Muslim return to prosperity and internationalism.

The left and Muslim polemicists over-use the pejorative psychological jargon for aversion; phobia. Political opposition is fine. Democrats and fellow travelers have an aversion to opposition; an oppophobia, that makes the truth harder to find and work with as it should in order to invent better social relations that respect cautiously the ways of others. That cannot occur on a one-way street. Democrats need to lose their oppophobia.

There are a lot of variables in politics. Democrats tend to like to mash them all together and say nothing matters. Politicians should address particular variables differently as they should be managed in order to work toward a more optimal line of development rather than an entropic one. Of course it is easier to just be loose and for anything politically because that requires little or no competence.

Wednesday, March 20, 2019

Sanders, Putin and Warren; Similar Opinions?

Bernie Sanders on socialism may share some opinions about politics with Russian President Putin. Mr. Putin may be semi-socialist as he goes about reforming Russia with a Super-Presidency invented by Boris Yeltsin. President Putin said that the U.SS.A. isn't a democracy because of the electoral college. I think he might misunderstand the way the electoral college is representative of formerly independent states that created a Union while keeping some independence in proportional representation, The system keep a heavily populous state like N.Y. or California from taking federal power and ordering everyone's resources brought to their own.

President Putin should not do as American politicians do, he should try to keep up working on the the good U.S. constitution says; U.S. politicians do not really get it sometimes. Presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren is for abolishing the electoral college. Hopefully President Putin is not providing collusion with or for either Mr. Sanders or Ms. Putin.

Abolishing the electoral college would allow a dominating federalism elected by a geographic minority to legislate and execute laws diverting rivers to California and natural resources from one state to the minority for disposal. That might be desirable in Russia that has a tradition of strong Moscow centrist rule, yet for the United States centricism and rule by the most populous states would pervasively corrupt what democracy still survives in the corporatist political ecosystem. The national capital could be relocated to New York or Los Angeles, or both seasonally and the government could be run directly by Wall Street-Government partnership.

Two-Sex Wombmates Balance Probably an Evolutionary Success

Recent reports have shown that female and male twins born together (one male and one female) diminish the abilities of the female twin. Evolution has found a winning formula that doesn't work so well for modern urban female opinion. The latter would think the female twin should be equal in ability and worldly success.

Male babies mature reproductively later than females, so a more stable social environment is requisite. During tough times more female babies are born. Select male advantages of sharing a womb with a female are interesting, yet the female will find reproduction easy even with lesser ability- maybe- than her brilliant twin brother.

There are likely to be numerous reasons why evolution has structured a slight advantage for male twins over their female womb-mates that will be discovered. It is an irony that what people want isn't necessarily what evolution and/or God would regard as the best course for human events. What is wisdom to man is foolishness to God.

https://www.sciencealert.com/sharing-the-womb-with-a-twin-brother-can-have-a-huge-detrimental-effect-on-girls

Congress Should Establish Non-Binding National Referenda

The Congress should establish non-binding national referenda and permits perhaps three per year to poll voters actively on controversial or neglected issues.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-19/climate-challenge-harder-than-it-seems-jpmorgan-executive-warns

Congress should also not try to monkey with the electoral college for it may be the most important recognition and utilitarian expression of state's rights as quasi-independent states within a national union. To alter the electoral college would in effect annihilate vestigial independence of the 50 states, and that is a bad idea, for all of the flumery and corruption by a federal authority that would be likely to follow.

Fiber Optic Skylights

Apparent skylights collecting sunshine and running it through fiber optic cable through a window to an in-room photon disperser should be available on the market sometime soon, if they aren't already, since they should be easy to manufacture and install.

Many rooms that could be lit during the day with sunshine from a skylight instead of light bulbs can't be easily retrofit with a hole cut into the roof (that costs a lot too except for do it you-selfers. With luck someone will manufacture the items and sell them at Home Depot later this year. For pull up windows there should be security screen that fits into the opening and can be made fast to the window and sill securely to prevent easy burglary access.

Fiber optic cable should be in 10, 20 and 30 foot lengths.

Home-Schooling Law Degrees

I thought I would mention that on-line law degrees are well established. One might save some of the costs of residence in a distant state if working on-line from home, while attending law school.

So many fields change. One might even imagine a distant future where 3D printing locally replaces select foreign imported consumer goods.

Concord Law School Global

Expert systems programs for legal training may evolve to bring down the cost of legal education leading to passing a state bar exam. Legal trainees may be able to learn and try to pass law exams at home before taking the official test in order to learn where they need to strengthen upan reinforce weak areas.

One should someday be able to purchase a complete, quality law degree training course for five easy payments of $19.95. Presently even on-line degrees may cost tens of thousands of dollars.

Tuesday, March 19, 2019

Global Economy Ahead; Collapse or Expansion



My opinion about the global economy is that it will change rather than collapse. A philosophical paradigm for economics would be a better criterion for speculating about global economics for me since I am not an economist.

A Petri dish with a growth medium given bacteria tends to grow its economy of being until it consumes all the resources before collapse. Some politicians have more intelligence than some bacteria so one might expect them to have a political economic management style that is more thoughtful of the limits to certain kinds of growth.

For human economics there are extraneous factors that affect policy and practice not within the political control of a sovereign nation. That might be foreign invasion or foreign dumping of product, collapse of foreign sourced materials, competition and so forth. In a global economy there are several economic regulatory agencies with varying degrees of efficiency or lack of. That was a fundamental point I wanted to make concerning management of global economics through regulation rather than exhaustion of resources; regulation that is counterproductive, countercyclical or ineffective may be a cause or stimulus for economic well-being or failure. If regulations lead to economic collapse then reform of economic regulation follows. And if economics falter under the existing state of regulation then the regulations tend to be modified.

Economic cycles have certain courses that occur in relation to growth. Thomas Piketty wrote about the history of those in the well worth reading book Capital in the Twenty First Century. Sometimes economic managers aren’t aware of historical economic relationships perhaps and work against them, as if one was trying to build a sand castle near the water’s edge on an incoming rather than an outgoing tide.

Sometimes economic managers of regulation need to look ahead, such as building a moon base for advanced materials and technical research and support for commercial activity, yet the future isn’t a panacea for present deficiencies in economic method- only a vector of opportunity.

Monday, March 18, 2019

US-Soviet Russia WW II Alliance

Stalin was a sub-optimal military leader and the Soviet dictatorship was cold-blooded in war. If Stalin had not made an agreement with Hitler to take Finland in exchange for neutrality it is possible Hitler might not have started the war. As it was Hitler invaded Poland and so did Stalin in 1939. Then the Soviets captured Finland in the winter war. When the two serpents turned upon one another, the Hitler-Stalin agreement was terminated. War in Leningrad was to develop in 1941-42, by which time Field Marshall Rommel and his Panzer edge was being blunted by the British at El Alemein
If 70% of the storm troopers were not former socialists that believed that Hitler would purge the aristocracy if in power, Hitler might not have taken power in Germany and the war might not have occurred. As it was Hitler declared war on the United States in 1941, after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor and the U.S. declared war on Japan. The United States had to fight a world war on two broad fronts it didn’t want.
The United States had kept England in the fight after western Europe was lost with lend lease and other material support until entering the war itself. Stalin had purged his military of high ranking officers in his paranoia before the war. The Red Army was in a less than optimal condition when Operation Barbarossa was launched upon the Soviet Union.
Hitler had some allies in the Ukraine as well as in other Eastern European nations who would act as fifth columnists in the fight against the Soviets. Eisenhower wanted to directly invade France to attack, yet Roosevelt forestalled that. Rommel and the Panzers in North Africa needed to be addressed. When the Brits and Americans wound up the Wehrmacht, Italy was an obvious place to flow the war. A general pincers attack on two European fronts along with Soviets engaging in a third on the east presented tactical complications for the former corporal.
Britain was able to supply the Soviets with about 700 tanks in 1941 and together with the U.S.A., about 5000 tanks in 1942. During the entire war the Soviet produced about 350,000 wheeled vehicles while the United States supplied more than 500,000. The U.S.A. provided most of the armored troop vehicles the Soviets had for they produced none during the war. U.S. and Britain built 40% of the Soviet Air Force.
There is no question about the value of the Soviet war contribution to defeating Germany and the axis powers. Most Americans do not learn Soviet history- just western history, and learn of their own national contribution in that regard. The allies were a team, rather like the super band Cream that played together for just two years, that accomplished a lot working together.
Questions like; Could the Soviet Union have survived the Nazi invasion if the other allies had not been in the war?, or Could the allies have won the war without Soviet participation? are interesting, yet unrealistic historical speculation or war gaming practice for war theorists. Stalin was about as lethal to Soviet subjects before the war as Hitler was during the war. The kulakization policy alone killed I believe, twenty million people. Red Army soldiers fought well, yet the peasant soldier sleeping on the frozen ground in a greatcoat was a tradition reaching far, far back in Russian history under the Tsars. They were badly used during the Second World War by the communists.

Opportunity Rover Was Partly to Blame for New Zealand Shooting

When the Mars Opportunity Rover died and transmitted its last image with all of the pathos of the Martian landscape there is no telling what effect it had on the psyche of the New Zealand shooter. When the final images from Mars went blank and the brave little rover was defeated with barely a squeak in the oppressive cold and dirt flung around that inhospitable world marginalized people faced the loss of opportunity and hope. Thus the way of the gun may have presented as a last chance to relive the memories of the good times and lost world.

https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/opportunity-final-image-panorama/

https://thinkprogress.org/mick-mulvaney-forced-to-defend-trump-from-charges-of-white-supremacy-fox-news-new-zealand-mosque-shooting-be151f3256d9/

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/mick-mulvaney-not-fair-to-cast-accused-new-zealand-shooter-as-a-trump-supporter

Alternatively it may have been the prsence of the Opportunity Rover on Mars that enraged the New Zealand shooter and iit last gasp emboldened the shooter to take the headlines for himself. If democrats had financed a manned lunar base with a mass driver constructed to fling supply off world the shooter might have been stifled into peaceful contemplation of the Green New Deal.


Opportunity Catches its Shadow
image credit NASA- Opportunity Rover 

Sunday, March 17, 2019

President Obama Was Far More Aggressive Abroad Than President Trump

President Obama stimulated wars across North Africa and the Middle East. The Syrian war was easily avoidable yet he kept puffing it up with support for revolutionary-guerrilla terrorists that led to more than a million casualties. He ordered a U.S. war on Libya that made room for Al Qaeda and Isis in the wake.

President Obama drove relations with Russia downward to the realm of a new Cold War. His policies were aggressive in support of Europe’s will to annex as much of the former Soviet Union lands as possible, and to create more sales for the defense establishment. Conflict in the Ukraine grew as a possibility. He supplied weapons and intelligence to a region that could have been peacefully joined in prosperous, amicable relations.

President Obama made the Bush II tax cuts permanent when all he needed to do was to let them expire. The tax cuts for the most rich enabled a globe of investments for the 1%ers and Chinese partners too.

President Trump has yet to start a foreign war, increased taxes only moderately (they were already too low), has added just a trillion and a half to the public debt (it should have decreased yet the increase was modest compared to President Obama’s.

President Obama traveled to more foreign countries than President Trump. President Trump has sought to normalize relations with the difficult communist leadership of North Korea. President Obama signed foreign accords such as that of Paris on global warming remediation, while President Trump has not (he should have unilaterally surpassed the Paris accords with innovation).

In my opinion President Obama was far more aggressive.