Those in Power use Climate ‘Science’ to Expand their Power and Accumulate Wealth

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 29th, 2014

Week in Review

We are continually told that there is a consensus among climate ‘scientists’ that global warming is real.  And that man is causing it.  It’s settled science they say.  But have you ever wondered how real scientists do things?  The kind that don’t take a vote on whether something is settled science?  Here is a look into the world of theoretical physicists.  A group of people that theorize about things far bigger than mere climate (see Physicists say Big Bang theory revelation may be premature by Liat Clark posted 3/25/2014 on Wired).

Three theoretical physicists have penned a paper suggesting last week’s announcement that cosmic ripples from the Big Bang have been identified may have been premature.

The Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics announcement rocked the scientific community with the revelation the South Pole BICEP2 telescope had captured twisted patterns in the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) left behind after the Big Bang. The Smithsonian team believes these are a glimpse of the gravitational waves that were generated by cosmic inflation — an epic distortion of space-time just after the Big Bang when the universe expanded in a trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second.

James Dent of the University of Louisiana at Lafayette, Lawrence Krauss of Arizona State University and Harsh Mathur of the Case Western Reserve University have argued on the open access platform arxiv.org that the claim of definitive proof should not be made until all other possibilities have been ruled out.

Even after a paper has been published claiming definitive proof the subject is still open for debate.  Now that’s science.  And note that part about ruling out ALL OTHER possibilities.  You never hear that kind of language from the climate ‘scientists’.  Have they done that in their research?  Or did they only look at selective data to prove what they want to prove?  Did they rule out sunspot activity and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation?  A warming of the oceans that shifts the jet stream?  Or did they ignore this because it contradicts what they want the data to show?  There is a correlation between the Pacific Decadal Oscillation and recent warming periods.  Which would be one other possibility they need to rule out.  But can’t.  So they simply ignore it.  Proving that ‘climate science’ is more politics than science.  A tool for big-government leftists around the world to do what they’ve always wanted to do.  To use the power of government to create a ruling class.  Of a small group of people that has power over the masses.  And who live quite comfortably while telling us what we must go without.

It’s nothing new.  Since the dawn of time there have been those who seek power.  To create a small ruling elite that lives better than everyone else.  Much better.  As every dictator in history has shown.  North Korea still suffers from famine.  But the ruling powers (currently Kim Jong-un) ate so well that they suffered from a little obesity.  Kim Jong-un lives a privileged life.  He has the best of everything while his people still go hungry.  If that country were free, however, Kim Jong-un would live a less extravagant life.  Perhaps even doing manual labor.  For his only skill was having the right last name to become dictator.

This is why people want power.  For even in the poorest countries those at the top live like kings.  And those on the left, rabid anti-capitalists that they are, have no skill other than political skills.  They want to live like kings.  But they don’t want to work hard to earn it.  So they use politics.  Expand the size of government.  To create as many high-paying posts that do nothing worthwhile as possible.  So there is a place for these people.  Where they can live better than everyone else without having earned it.  This is why they want to nationalize health care.  For that can create many levels of high-paying bureaucratic positions.  And if they can get the economy of every country to bow down to their climate panels they can live better than kings.  They can live as emperors.  Over a vast empire they control.  Living in the lap of luxury.  Accumulating great wealth.  And drunk on the power they can wield.  Where they can get back at anyone that was ever better than them if they don’t bow down and kiss their fanny.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Capitalism gives New York City a Night Life while Communism gives Pyongyang only Night

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 1st, 2014

Week in Review

The American left has long had a love affair with communism.  They loved Joseph Stalin.  Until he made a nonaggression pact with Nazi Germany that allowed Hitler to wage World War II.  Which devastated the left.  For they felt their true love betrayed them.  But they rejoiced when Hitler invaded the Soviet Union.  So they could love Uncle Joe Stalin once again.  Even though some 20 million Soviets died because of Stalin’s nonaggression pact with Adolf Hitler.

All during the Cold War the left urged détente with the Soviet Union.  They wore t-shirts with pictures of Che Guevara.  They carried pictures of Chairman Mao.  They admired Ho Chi Minh.  They wanted to normalize relations with Cuba.  They liked Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua.  And just loved Hugo Chávez in Venezuela.  When it came to communist/socialist regimes nationalizing industries and oppressing their people the left professed their undying love.  Why?  Because they hate capitalism.  Just like these communist/socialist dictators.  Who put their people ahead of profits.  Like they do in North Korea (see NASA photo shows North Korea is in the dark by Dylan Stableford posted 2/26/2014 Yahoo! News).

While you were sleeping, North Korea disappeared.

Well, not exactly. But a recent image taken from the International Space Station shows the mysterious, dictator-ruled country almost completely in the dark…

Even the capital of Pyongyang (population: 3.26 million) is a relatively dark, compared with smaller cities in neighboring South Korea and China.

The reason? According to a recent report by the Korea Institute for National Unification, electricity in North Korea is “sporadic and unreliable, with homes that have electricity often receiving just a few hours per day.” About half of North Korea’s 24 million people live in extreme poverty, with most homes and apartments “heated by open fireplaces burning wood or briquettes.” And many “lack flush toilets.”

The North Korean regime hates capitalism.  Just like the American left. Because capitalism puts profits before people.  Which is why New York City has an incredible night life unlike Pyongyang (or any other North Korean city).  Not to mention cellular networks and smartphones.  Broadway and night clubs.  Times Square and Greenwich Village.  Saturday Night Live and The Tonight Show.  Trains and air planes.  Allowing anyone to get where the party is.  New York City.  Things they don’t have in North Korea.  Because North Korea doesn’t have capitalism.  Like New York City.  The city that never sleeps.  Thanks to electric power lighting up the night.  Something North Korea doesn’t have.  Because North Korea doesn’t have capitalism.  Or lights.

The American left loves liberal New York City.  It is the center of their world.  Even though it was built with capitalism.  But the left loves socialism.  And communism.  Where they put people before profits.  And those people sit in the dark doing nothing once the sun sets.  And defecate in holes in the ground because they have no flush toilets.  Something else you can do all night long in heated buildings throughout New York City.  Because New York City has capitalism.  Which makes life better.  At least according to the American left.  For their favorite city is a city that capitalism built.  Unlike that communist city they’re not flying to for a good time.  Pyongyang.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FT204: “The young and dumb vote liberal while the old and wise vote conservative.” —Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 10th, 2014

Fundamental Truth

Having the Ability to give Beautiful Young Women Nice Things helped Charlie Harper get them in Bed

On the show Two and a Half Men there was an episode where Charlie (played by Charlie Sheen) was having a conversation with someone where he was trying to defend himself and the choice he makes in women.  In broke off in mid sentence and said something like, “Yeah, you got me.  Young and dumb.  That’s how I like them.”  Or something like that.

Charlie Harper was about 40 years old.  Rich.  He drank to excess.  Smoked cigars.  Gambled.  Enjoyed strip bars and prostitutes.  And he womanized.  Getting beautiful young women back to his Malibu beach house for one night of passion.  Which was all he wanted.  One night.  The ladies thought he wanted more.  Because of the lies he told them to get them to his Malibu beach house.  And when they left in the morning they expected Charlie to call them.  But he never did.  Which is why he liked his women dumb.  For it was easier getting them into bed.  And out of it.

Charlie was skilled in the art of picking up women.  And what to do with them after picking them up.  Skill gained over years of experience.  And being rich helped, too.  Because being able to give beautiful young women nice things (expensive dinners, going to the best clubs, spending the night at a Malibu beach house, gifts, etc.) got their attention.  They liked that life.  And wanted more of it.  So they went to his bed with him.  Thinking that by doing whatever he wanted there would be more of this glamorous life to come.  But before that could happen Charlie was telling his lies to another young and dumb woman.

Every Communist Dictator that promised a Utopia to their People made their lives Absolutely Horrible

Charlie was engaged a few times.  The last time he was engaged to Chelsea (played superbly by Jennifer Taylor).  Who was a little older than most of the women he took to his bed.  Smart.  And wise.  She had a career.  Though he had a long engagement (for him) it did not last.  Because she could do better.  Eventually leaving him for someone more mature.  In fact, every age-appropriate relationship he had failed.  Because he did not do well unless they were young and dumb.  As Chelsea said one time when leaving after a breakup, “We both knew you were going to blow it eventually.”

You can learn a lot by watching Two and a Half Men.  For the world is full of Charlie Harpers.  People that lie and manipulate people to get what they want.  Who depend on people being young and dumb.  This is how liberals have risen to power.  By selling their utopian world view to the young and ignorant.  Before they get old and wise.  And learn the truth of their liberal utopia.

There was an article in Rolling Stone saying what America needs is full-blown communism.  The author is a young guy.  An academic type.  Knows everything.  But has experienced nothing.  His head was filled with communist ideals from his leftist professors.

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world…

But what John Lennon doesn’t sing about in Imagine is that every communist dictator that promised these things to the people made their people’s lives absolutely horrible.  Where people lived in fear of the secret police.  Were tortured at the hands of the secret police.  And died at the hands of the secret police.  Communism as an ideology has killed more people than any other dictator or ideology in all of history.  Yet college kids everywhere still imagine a world where all the people live as one.  Under the boot of an oppressive police state.  That forces the people to live in a brotherhood of man.  Or die.

Liberals are in a lot of ways like Charlie Harper because they like their Electorate Young and Dumb

Joseph Stalin terrorized his people with the KGB.  The East Germans shot their own people who tried to escape climbing over the Berlin Wall.  Cambodia’s Pol Pot killed a greater percentage of a nation’s population than any other dictator in history.  Cubans risk their lives to float from Cuba to the United States.  The masses in North Korea still suffer famine because of their oppressive Stalinist state.  Where it’s the military first.  Then the people.  And so on.  Yet college students still wear shirts with pictures of Che Guevara wearing his beret.  This hero of ignorant college students.  A guy who had urged the Soviets to launch their nuclear missiles at the United States during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

And when the secret police wasn’t killing their people the people were going without the most basic necessities.  For their planned economies could not keep their store shelves stocked.  So people went without many of the things people in Western capitalist economies take for granted.  Things even ignorant college students take for granted.  Things they just couldn’t get in their beloved communist utopias.  Ronald Reagan won the Cold War not by waging nuclear war.  He won it by creating an arms race that the Soviet economy could not keep up with AND feed her people.  Like the Americans could.  In fact, the American economic output was so great that they could feed all Americans with enough left over to export to the Soviet Union.  So the Soviet people did not die from famine.

All throughout history free market capitalism provided a better life than any planned economy.  Even in the United States.  When FDR increased government spending to end a recession it only stretched out that recession into the Great Depression.  Excessive government spending didn’t work in the 1970s for Nixon, Ford or Carter.  Nor did it work during the Great Recession for Obama.  But cuts in tax rates provided explosive economic growth for Warren Harding/Calvin Coolidge in the 1920s, JFK in the 1960s, Ronald Reagan in the 1980s and even George W. Bush in the 2000s.  Yet the young and dumb buy the liberal lie that government spending can provide a better life for all despite history proving otherwise.  And keep voting liberal.  Until they get old and wise, that is.  And start voting conservative.

Liberals are in a lot of ways like Charlie Harper.  For they like their electorate young and dumb.  So they can more easily lie to them.  To get what they want.  By making promises they never intend to keep.  Such as that brotherhood of man sharing all of the world.  For after a century or so of promising this the only people who ever enjoyed the liberal/communist utopia were those few in power.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Soft Tyranny of National Health Care

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 14th, 2013

Politics 101

Nazis and Communists acquired Power by Promising their People a Generous Welfare State

Adolf Hitler did not tell the German people that he wanted to wage world war.  Install an oppressive police state.  Or commit genocide.  Joseph Stalin did not tell the Russian people that he wanted to install an oppressive police state.  Starve millions of his people to death.  Or export communist revolution around the world.  Fidel Castro did not tell the Cuban people that he would make life so unbearable for them that they would rather risk dying in the ocean to reach America than staying in Cuba.

These dictators did not say these things.  And if anyone ever asked them of their true intentions they lied.  Especially to their people.  They lied about wanting to brutally oppress their people so they could expand their power.  Instead they told them they were going to take care of the people.  Unlike the evil capitalists.  Hitler’s National Socialism was going to give the people everything they could possibly want.  A job.  Mandatory vacations.  And national health care.  A person would be a fool not to want to give Hitler more power as he was going to make their lives so much better.  Freer.  And more pleasant.  Like a welfare state is supposed to be.

The communist promised that there would be no bourgeoisies exploiting the working man.  Instead everyone would be equal.  A utopia where everyone was each other’s brother.  Or comrade.  There would be no private property.  The people would own everything.  And there would be national health care.  This is the communist utopia Stalin promised his people.  And what Castro promised his people.  Neither meant it.  As no communist dictator meant it.  But by promising the people these things they were able to acquire power.  And the more power they acquired the more the people suffered.  This is why dictators and dictator wannabes lie.  To get the people to give them things the people would never give them if they told the truth.

The Affordable Care Act is a Pathway to the Soft Tyranny of National Health Care

The American left has always wanted the Holy Grail of the socialist state.  National health care.  For it gives them massive power.  As a person’s health is the most important thing in their life.  And once dependent on the state for their health care there is no new tax they won’t approve.  If it’s for their health.  This is why the left wants national health care.  This is why all dictators give their people national health care.  It makes people dependent on government.  And it makes people fear their government.  For if the government doesn’t get what it wants they could withhold health care.  Which could result in their death.

Now the Hitlers, Stalins and the Castros of the world don’t need to withhold health care to kill their people.  Their people feared them because they know their leaders could kill them outright.  The kind of thing that just doesn’t happen in Western democracies.  Which is what makes national health care so attractive.  For it offers a soft tyranny.  For you heard the left’s dire predictions of what would happen if the Republicans shut down the government.  But national health care?  Imagine the fear they could put into the people the next time the Republicans talked about tax cuts. 

The Affordable Care Act (i.e., Obamacare) is a pathway to this soft tyranny.  National health care.  While Canada and the United Kingdom struggle under the weight of their state health care systems the American left thought long and carefully of how to bring that same failed system to the American people.  With the health care industry totaling one-sixth of the U.S. economy that was just too great a tax hike to impose on the American people.  Even Democrats would be reluctant to impose such high taxes on people they needed to vote for them.  So they couldn’t go that route.  At least, not yet.

President Obama breaks the Law Again as he Tells Insurers they can still Sell Policies the People Liked

There is one thing standing in their way.  The private health insurance industry.  For with this there is an alternative to massive new taxes.  Which makes massive new taxes politically unattractive.  So they have to destroy the private health insurance industry first.  By lying to them.  Teasing them with government mandates that will give the health insurers a lucrative windfall of business.  While actually sealing their demise.

If you like your health insurance plan you can keep it.  Period.  That was the big lie.  Because you can’t.  Secretary Sebelius quickly wrote out the grandfather clause in the Affordable Care Act.  Especially for the individual market.  Where a lot of young and healthy people had only catastrophic policies.  Because they are young and healthy.  If the government was going to mandate the insurers pay for everything under the sun from free birth control to senior care they needed these young and healthy to lose their current policies and replace them with more costly policies with higher deductibles.  Basically forcing them to pay for costly health insurance but never using it because of those high deductibles.  Which transferred the cost of senior care to the young and healthy.  Something the young and healthy would never have been onboard with if the Democrats had told the truth.  Which is why the Democrats lied to them.

With the implementation of Obamacare the lies have become real.  They’re touching people’s lives.  And not in a good way.  Millions of individual policy holders are losing their insurance.  And those with employer-provided insurance will start losing theirs next year.  They’d be feeling the pain today but President Obama broke the law and ordered his administration not to enforce the employer mandate of the Affordable Care Act.  Giving the employers a year reprieve until they, too, have to drop their non-compliant health insurance policies.  But being caught in the lie the year before the 2014 midterm elections has caused the president and the Democrats a lot of heartburn.  So much that the president is once again breaking the law.  And telling health insurers that they can still offer the health insurance policies the people liked.  When it is virtually impossible for them to do.  For they spent 3 years preparing for Obamacare and calculating insurance premiums based on the mandates bringing in enough money in premiums to pay for everything under the sun they now must cover. 

If they reinstate the old ‘substandard’ policies the young and healthy will buy these instead of buying the more costly Obamacare policies.  While the old and sick will buy the far more generous Obamacare policies.  Which will be a bargain for them as they will consume far more health care dollars than they pay in premiums.  But without the young and healthy subsidizing these policies the insurers will go bankrupt quickly as their benefits paid will far exceed their premiums collected.  Forcing them to increase their premiums to pay for the higher than expected benefits paid.  Until health insurance is so costly no one is buying it.  Putting them out of business.  So they can’t do this and hope to remain in business.  And, therefore, they will not reinstate the old ‘substandard’ policies.  Which is what the president wants.  For he gets to blame the insurers.  While accelerating the demise of the private health insurance industry.  By bankrupting them as planned.  AND getting the people to hate them even more.  A win-win for the Obama administration.  As they lie that they care about the people they are harming to expand their power.  Just like every other tyrant and tin-pot dictator has done throughout history.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Venezuela may put People before Profits but they have no Toilet Paper

Posted by PITHOCRATES - May 18th, 2013

Week in Review

The American left wants to have the economic system they have in Venezuela.  Where they put people before profits.  To prevent evil corporations from getting rich.  While exploiting their workers.  And overcharging their customers.  You see, that kind of thing just doesn’t happen in Venezuela.  Because they put people before profits (see So, Venezuela Has a Toilet-Paper Shortage (Don’t Laugh. Seriously.) by Jordan Weissmann posted 5/16/2013 on The Atlantic).

Venezuela is now suffering from a government-induced toilet paper shortage. The situation has become politically dire enough that the government has promised to import 50 million rolls to calm shoppers.

For those familiar with the Bolivarian Republic’s less-than-sterling economic record of late, this won’t come as a surprise. The country, while relatively wealthy by developing-world standards, has been suffering through a chronic shortfall of everything from groceries to asthma inhalers, resulting in desperate lines of shoppers and a healthy black market trade in kitchen staples like flour.

In the United States about the only toilet paper shortage people are familiar with is when they drop trou in a public restroom without looking to see if there was toilet paper first.  Why do people do this in the United States?  Because we take toilet paper for granted.  And always expect it to be there.  Because we are not socialists.  We’re capitalists.  And being a capitalist means you never have to see an empty shelf when buying toilet paper.

So why do socialists have such a difficult time buying toilet paper?  Because they put people before profits.  Which sounds good but is only code for dictatorship.  Where the dictator lives well.  As there is always enough for the privileged few.  But to sustain this privileged position a dictator has to steal from his people.

In 2003, then President Hugo Chavez slammed currency controls into place to prevent money from fleeing the country while government seized land and corporate assets. Those rules have made it harder to buy imports. Meanwhile, price caps meant to make basic staples affordable to the poor are so low that, for many products, they don’t pay for the cost of production.

Nobody’s going to make toilet paper if they’ll lose money selling it.

Price caps make things cost less than the prevailing market price.  Which encourages people to over consume.  Just as Nixon’s price controls led to gas shortages in the United States.  While at the same time the price caps force suppliers to sell below the prevailing market price.  Which is often below their costs.  So while people are clearing shelves off suppliers are not replenishing those shelves.  Leading to shortages.

To buy imports you have to first exchange your currency for the currency of the country you’re buying from.  For U.S. companies accept the U.S. dollar for its exports.  Not the bolívar fuerte.  Venezuela’s currency controls prevent Venezuelan businesses from exchanging their currency.  Making it impossible for them to buy the imports they need.  So they have to throttle back production.  Making it more difficult to restock those empty shelves.  Forcing the people to go without toilet paper.  While Hugo Chavez died a billionaire.

This is what happens when you put people before profits.  You make it possible for a charismatic dictator to impoverish the people he champions.  Which is impossible under laissez-faire capitalism.  For businesses can buy the imports they need.  And they can sell at a price that covers their costs.  Which keeps the shelves in capitalist countries overflowing with the goods people want to buy.  While wannabe dictators can’t seize land and corporate assets.  But have to work for a living.  Like everyone else.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Barack Obama Attacks a Muslim Country with Oil. Just Like George W. Bush.

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 20th, 2011

Bombs for Humanity

So we’re bombing Libya.  Why?  What’s the mission?  And our exit strategy?  Vietnam protester, John Kerry, explains on Meet the Press (see Kerry, Levin Defend Timing and Scope of Libya Response by David M. Drucker posted 3/20/2011 on Roll Call).

Senate Foreign Relations Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.), appearing on NBC’s “Meet the Press” from Cairo, described the activities of U.S. military forces in Libya as a “humanitarian initiative” that was wholly unconcerned with removing Gaddafi from power…

 “The goal of this mission is not to get rid of Gaddafi,” Kerry added. “That’s not what the United Nations licensed, and I would not call it going to war. This is a very limited operation that is geared to save lives. … It is not geared to try to get rid of Gaddafi, he has not been targeted.”

So the mission is NOT to get rid of the guy that’s doing all the killing.  Yet we want the killing to stop.  Interesting.  And we’re making this information public.  So Gaddafi knows this.  That we’re not targeting him.  Or trying to remove him from power.  So his choices are surrender and die.  Or keep fighting and live.  Seems to me like he has an incentive to keep on doing what he’s doing.  And not to stop killing his own people.  Like I said, interesting.

As far as plans go, this sounds like a pretty bad plan to me.  In fact, it sounds pretty FUBAR.  Because it ignores how dictators stay in power and do the horrible things they do.  Dictators are protected by an inner circle.  Each has a vested interest in the other.  The inner circle keeps the dictator in power.  And the dictator keeps the inner circle living well.  As long as the dictator lives, the inner circle lives.  So if they are fairly certain he will live, they know their best future is with him.  And there’s only one way to make that happen.  By crushing the rebellion.

 “We’re not policing Libya,” Kerry said. “We are engaged in a humanitarian initiative to prevent the slaughter of innocent people, to prevent a dictator from dragging people out of hospital beds and they disappear.”

“What you’re missing here,” [Karl] Levin added, “is this is the world that has made a decision. … It is not just we the United States. The president has taken the time to put the world community together.”

The president put the world community together?  Hillary Clinton was talking to the French president (Nicolas Sarkozy) and the British prime minister (David Cameron).  Obama was doing his NCAA brackets.  And planning his vacation to Brazil.  Even Clinton was growing frustrated with Obama’s inaction.  It’s almost as if he wants plausible denial when this war, his war, fails.

Obama was for Removing Qaddafi from Power before he was Against It

So what if the plans go as planned?  We blow up a lot of stuff.  Kill a lot of people.  But leave Gaddafi in power.  What then?  What is the endgame?  What will it be like after our military involvement is complete.  If our military involvement ends (see U.S. stresses limits to military role in Libya by David Morgan posted 3/20/2011 on Reuters)?

Gates spoke amid growing concern among U.S. politicians over the scope and nature of the Libya mission and after an acknowledgement from the top U.S. military officer that the assault on Gaddafi’s forces could lead to an impasse…

President Barack Obama has called in recent weeks for Gaddafi to step down but U.S. officials have emphasized that is not the goal of the United Nations authorized attacks on Libya. The United States is eager to avoid similarities to the 2003 invasion of Iraq and ouster of President Saddam Hussein.

An impasse?  Hell, we can have that without the mission.  So why bother?  And what about the mixed message?  Obama said Gaddafi had to go.  But U.S. officials say he doesn’t?  Is anyone driving this bus?  Does anyone know what we’re doing?  And why?  An astute military man would sense all this indecision.  And see opportunities.  Even a lowly colonel.  Who hasn’t been promoted in decades.

The Qaddafis call Obama Hitler, Brutus

And what about Colonel Gaddafi?  How’s he taking this?  Is he ready to surrender?  To hand over power to the opposition forces?  To go forward in peace because he saw the error of his ways?  Not quite (see A Call from the Colonel: Gaddafi and His Bunker by Howard Chua-Eoan posted 3/20/2011 on Time).

“We defeated Italy when it was a superpower like you,” he said comparing Washington to Rome, Libya’s former colonizer. “You will be defeated like Hitler and Mussolini… You are the new Hitler.” He brought up America’s defeats in Vietnam and its self-debilitating invasion of Iraq. He raised the image of Osama bin Laden “that weak man” who he said defeated the U.S. “We will be victorious. You will die…”

“We have been wronged,” he declared. “Those who have been wronged will always win. There is no justification for this attack. It’s a colonial crusade. Islam will win. Libyans will win.” “We will not let these Christian nations take our oil… We are now giving Libyans weapons, machine guns. Every citizen will be armed…You will not be able to land here… We will destroy those who support you in Benghazi…. We will defend our own country, inch by inch… We will be victorious. The coalition of the devil will be defeated.”

And there is the perfunctory Western criticism.  We’re Christian Crusaders trying to take and colonize Muslim land so we can have their oil.  You know, the usual shtick.  Of course, this carries a lot of weight in the Muslim Middle East.  It will resonate with the masses.  Well played, Colonel.  Perhaps his son will be more reasonable (see Qaddafi’s son: Airstrikes are “big mistake” by CBS/AP posted 3/20/2011 on CBS News).

“One day you’ll wake up and you will find out that you were supporting the wrong people,” Saif al-Islam Qaddafi told ABC’s “This Week…”

Saif said if the U.S. wanted to help the Libyan people, they should “liberate Benghazi from the militia and the terrorists.”

“It was a big surprise that, finally, President Obama – we thought he’s a good man and friend of the Arab world – is bombing Libya,” Saif told “This Week” host Christiane Amanpour.

When asked whether Libya would retaliate against the strikes by attacking civilian airliners, Saif said this was not their “target.”

“Our target is how to help our people in Libya, especially in Benghazi,” he said.

So we’re supporting the wrong people.  Gee, I hope not.  That would be embarrassing.  Of course, if the Muslim Brotherhood rises from the ashes to lead Qaddafi-free Libya into the Iranian camp, we’ll know that we did.  Time will tell. 

And how about that personal dig?  At Obama?  That good man and friend of the Arab world.  Et tu, Barack?  Et tu?  I guess that Apology Tour really resonated with the anti-American elements of the Middle East.  At least they’re not going to target civilian airlines in retaliation.  This time.  Unlike that other time.  When they blew up Pan Am Flight 103.  Over Lockerbie, Scotland.

The Arab Coalition Faltering because Obama is just another George W. Bush

Not having Gaddafi be more open to surrendering and dying may complicate things a bit.  He seems willing to sustain the bombing damage until we grow tired of the war and go home.  Or until the coalition falls apart (see Arab League condemns broad bombing campaign in Libya by Edward Cody posted 3/20/2011 on The Washington Post).

The Arab League secretary general, Amr Moussa, deplored the broad scope of the U.S.-European bombing campaign in Libya and said Sunday that he would call a league meeting to reconsider Arab approval of the Western military intervention…

Moussa’s declaration suggested that some of the 22 Arab League members were taken aback by what they have seen and wanted to modify their approval lest they be perceived as accepting outright Western military intervention in Libya. Although the eccentric Gaddafi is widely looked down on in the Arab world, the leaders and people of the Middle East traditionally have risen up in emotional protest at the first sign of Western intervention.

A shift away from the Arab League endorsement, even partial, would be an important setback to the U.S.-European campaign. Western leaders brandished the Arab League decision as a justification for their decision to move militarily and as a weapon in the debate to win approval for a U.N. Security Council resolution two days before the bombing began.

It’s a delicate line our friends in the Middle East must walk.  They may want to help the West.  But they cannot really look like they are.  Or, if they are, they can’ t look overly enthusiastic about it.  Because many of our friends have populations they have to appease to prevent civil war.  And if you think it’s hard for us in the Middle East, try to walk a mile in their shoes. 

So this could be a little posturing on their side to save face in the Arab world.  Or, perhaps, they just didn’t know establishing a no-fly zone requires gaining air supremacy.  Meaning we can fly wherever we want.  But they cannot.  And to do that we have to take out all of their air defenses.  So Qaddafi may pick off a member or two of the Arab coalition disturbed by the intensity of the bombing.  And he always has his friends.  Those darlings of the liberal left.

As U.S. and European military operations entered their second day, however, most Arab governments maintained public silence, and the strongest expressions of opposition came from the greatest distance. Presidents Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua and Evo Morales of Bolivia and former Cuban president Fidel Castro condemned the intervention and suggested that Western powers were seeking to get their hands on Libya’s oil reserves rather than limit the bloodshed in the country.

You gotta love this.  The liberal left’s guy, President Obama, gets us into another war.  And if that wasn’t bad enough, their idols in Latin America have to stick up for the bad guy in this war.  It’s like the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact all over again.  When the Left had to stop loving their idol, Joseph Stalin, because he made a deal with Adolf Hitler.  The Left just must be beside themselves.  Because even their idols are saying Obama is going into Libya for the oil.  Just like George W. Bush in Iraq.

Islam Lutfi, a lawyer and Muslim Brotherhood leader in Egypt, said he opposed the military intervention because the real intention of the United States and its European allies was to get into position to benefit from Libya’s oil supplies. “The countries aligned against Libya are there not for humanitarian reasons but to further their own interests,” he added.

Even the Muslim Brotherhood says Obama is after Libya’s oil.  Just like George W. Bush in Iraq.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry, which previously criticized Gaddafi’s crackdown, on Sunday expressed “doubts” about U.S. and European intentions. Like the Latin American critics, it suggested that the claims of wanting to protect civilians were just a cover for a desire to install a more malleable leadership in Tripoli and make it easier to exploit Libya’s oil.

Even Iran says Obama is after Libya’s oil.  Just like George W. Bush in Iraq.

Christians Attacking Muslims on Land with Oil

So much for the Apology Tour.  If they treat a guy that has bent over backwards to the Muslim community like this, it’s obvious that the Obama approach in the Middle East was wrong.  And naive.  Not only has he damaged relations with our friends and allies, but he got zero goodwill for the effort.

And here we are.  Another ‘Christian’ coalition attacking another Muslim country with oil.  Already the Muslim anger is building.  And the question that begs to be asked is this.  How did we not see this coming?

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

LESSONS LEARNED #39: “Socialism is easier said than done.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 11th, 2010

The Bolshevik Revolution Gave Russian Peasants Freedom.  And Famine.

Russia was one of the most backward nations at the turn of the 20th century.  Feudalism was still the economic model.  The only European nation still using it.  There were two Russias.  Hungry and impoverished peasants.  And a rich and well-fed ruling elite.  Then World War I came.  Russia bled on the Eastern Front.  There was a lot of discontent.  Germany took advantage of this by returning the exiled Vladimir Lenin to Russia via Germany.  And it worked.  Marxist revolutionary fervor forced Tsar Nicholas II to abdicate.  Russia pulled out of the war.  Lenin led the Marxist Bolshevik Revolution against capitalism.  White and Red Russia plunged into civil war.  And a few assassination attempts later, Joseph Stalin launched the Red Terror to kill all enemies of the Soviet state.  Including the Romanov family.  When Lenin died, Stalin consolidated his power.  Through terror.  And he would rule by terror.

With capitalism suppressed, Stalin was ready to build the new socialist/communist state.  He industrialized the state (with foreign engineering and machinery).  He collectivized farms to increase output.  Soviet industry made a great leap forward.  But the cost was devastating.  Famine.  Forced deportations.  Terror.  Millions died.  And the quality of life for the common Russian peasant went into the toilet.  Anyone who complained was an enemy of the state.  There were chronic grain shortages.  Which were blamed on farmers hiding grain to force prices higher.  The solution?  Stalin deported or executed these farmers as enemies of the state.  But they never found any ‘hidden’ grain.

Dictators rise to power through terror and violence.  And they hold power by even more terror and violence.  To silence their enemies.  These enemies of the state.  You see, if you disagree with the dictator, you disagree with the state.  For they are one and the same.  So they get a little testy when their policies fail.  They blame others.  Attack those who are clinging to capitalism and liberty.  Who don’t submit themselves completely to the state.  And herein lies their fatal flaw.  Slaves don’t willingly work for the greater good.  They only do the bare minimum to minimize their pain and suffering.  Either the work or the state will kill them.  They know that.  So they work hard enough to keep the state from killing them.  But not too hard that the work does.  It’s a bleak world.  But that is the life of the slave.

China’s Great Leap Forward Resulted in Even Greater Famines

The communist/socialist movement spilled over into China from Russia.  Mao Tse-tung rose to power much like Stalin.  Ruthlessly.  He industrialized China.  And collectivized their farms into giant collective communes.  He forced peasant farmers into these communes.  Which lowered the quality of life for millions.  The result?  China’s industrial output did increase.  But, like in Russia, the cost was devastating.

The Great Leap Forward was their second five-year plan.  The plan was to increase grain harvests by using the power of the state to collectivize and direct giant farming communes.  Party members (i.e., career politicians who kissed communist ass) ran these communes.  They reported to Mao.  None of them were farmers, though.  But they acted like they were.  Trying some screwy new ideas that only reduced the harvest.  But, being good party men, they lied.  They reported record harvests.  As the lying went up the party chain of bureaucracy, party leaders made decisions based on the lie.  They took so much of the harvest for party members, cities and for export that the peasant farmers working on the communes starved in history’s greatest famines.  Note that ‘famines’ is plural.  Yeah, it was that bad.  Tens of millions starved to death.  All in the name of helping the poor and oppressed.

Everyone lives in fear in a totalitarian state.  Even members in the ruling elite.  The communes were supposed to increase the harvest.  So those responsible for that increase lied.  To minimize their own pain and suffering.  For they knew if they failed the greater common good, the state would come after them.  So they protected themselves.  At the expense of the peasant.  The life of the peasant/proletariat only got worse.  The Bolshevik Revolution was supposed to free them from the oppression of the bourgeois capitalists.  It only oppressed them more.

Using Capitalism to Attack Capitalism

The socialists/communists learned some valuable lessons.  Although they may be good at terror and violence, they didn’t have any real talent or ability.  And though they hate capitalism (because they lack any real talent or ability), they understood that they needed capitalists to be their bitch.  They couldn’t kill them.  Because if they did, nothing would get done.  No wealth created.  And they needed these people to create wealth.  Because they can’t take wealth if the wealth creators don’t create it.  With no wealth to take, they have nothing to give the masses.  To keep them dependent.  And subdued.  So this was the next phase in the socialist/communist revolution.  To exploit the wealth creators for state gain.

The social democracies followed the same general plan.  Attack capitalism.  Oppress the poor by making them dependent on the state.  But instead of using physical fear and intimidation, they used psychological fear and intimidation.  At election time.  They, the compassionate state, wanted to give them stuff.  The mean, cold-hearted capitalists wanted to take away their Social Security.  Eat their children.  And other nasty things.  It worked.  It got votes.

The problem they ran into was that populations grow.  And costs go up.  That meant the social democracies had to give more and more people these ‘benefits’.  While at the same time the costs of these ‘benefits’ kept going up.  And herein lies their fatal flaw.  To keep the people dependent (and docile) you have to keep raising taxes.  But if you raise taxes too much, you kill the golden goose.  Because you can push the wealth producers only so far.  If the state makes them work harder for less so others can enjoy the fruit of their labors, the state is for all intents and purposes enslaving these wealth producers.  And what do we know about slaves?  They don’t willingly work for the greater good.  They do the bare minimum to minimize their pain and suffering. 

Communist China Concerned About the United States’ Anti-Capitalistic Behavior

There are all sorts of ways they can do this.  If the cost of hiring employees is too great, businesses will hire fewer employees.  If taxes are too high, people will cut back on their spending and businesses will lay off workers because of the weaker demand.  If the investment climate is too unfavorable (say, because of a high capital gains tax), investors will invest their money where the climate is more favorable (and not create jobs).  If taxes get too high, the economy will go underground where people pay no taxes.  As more of this happens, the government collects less and less in taxes.  They get to a point where they simply can’t raise them anymore.  So they borrow.  And when they borrow to excess and cannot borrow any more, they have to do the unthinkable.  Cut the benefits that have so successfully enslaved so many people to the government.  And when governments try, the enslaved fight back.

Following the financial crisis of 2008, some debt-ridden nations tried to do just that.  Cut benefits to avoid bankruptcy.  Greece tried.  France, too.  Both had riots.  Other nations are at the tipping point.  Great Britain is making draconian cuts that the people aren’t too happy with.  Ireland is staring down bankruptcy and may need a Greece-like bailout.  (Interestingly, Ireland’s problems don’t stem from a fat social welfare state.  Their troubles resulted from a real estate bubble fueled by the European Central Bank keeping interest rates low.  They, like the U.S., saw no downside in cheap, risky mortgages.)  And, of course, Communist China is lecturing the United States about the evils of currency devaluation as a solution to our problems.  Which we’re doing.  In a last-ditch attempt to stimulate our economy.  A weaker dollar would help.  It would make our exports cheaper.  And make our massive debt cheaper to pay off.  Which really concerns the Chinese as they’re holding the majority of that debt.  So they are not going to sit idly by while we slash the value of their U.S. holdings.  They’ll fight back.   And do whatever it takes (capital controls, tariffs, etc.) to protect their investment.

Whether by physical fear and intimidation or by bribery and deceit, socialism ends the same.  In failure.  For it to work people have to work hard so others can live better.  And people just don’t willingly submit to slavery.  When they’re forced into it, they do the bare minimum to minimize their pain and suffering.  And when people do, the economy will never reach its full potential.  Which is why the United States won the Cold War.  Capitalism encourages people to do their best.  Socialism encourages them to do the least they can get away with.  And you just don’t achieve greatness with mediocrity.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,