Cult of Personality

Posted by PITHOCRATES - February 20th, 2014

Politics 101

Hitler received the Iron Cross for Bravery which carried a lot of Currency in a Militaristic Germany

Adolf Hitler could give a speech that fired up the masses.  People loved him.  The Nazis rose to power by winning elections.  People elected them because they liked what the Nazis were saying.  Things were not that good in Germany.  The victorious Allies blamed World War I on them even though all nations jumped in enthusiastically.  And then to add insult to injury the Allies made Germany pay reparations.  Burdening Germany with the cost of World War I.

This was especially galling as Germany didn’t lose the war.  The war ended in an armistice.  Which is a mutual cessation of warfare.  Not unconditional surrender.  And yet here was Germany.  Being treated as if they surrendered unconditionally.  It made a lot of people feel angry.  And betrayed.  Enter Adolf Hitler.  Who could tap into that anger and feelings of betrayal.

Hitler was a war veteran.  He served as a dispatch runner in World War I.  Wounded by artillery.  And blinded temporarily by mustard gas.  He even received the Iron Cross for bravery.  Although it may have had more to do with spending so much time with senior officers at headquarters that issued those dispatches.  But for a militaristic Germany an Iron Cross carried a lot of currency.

When the Reichstag burned down Hitler blamed the Marxists and turned Germany into a Police State

So Hitler was a brave war hero.  Even though he didn’t actually use a weapon.  Which was a good foundation to build on.  For war heroes don’t stab people in the back after fighting bravely for them in war.  Which is how many Germans felt about the politicians.  Betrayed.  Victims of the evil, conniving politicians.  So the people felt victimized.  And they were looking for someone to stand up for them.  To right these wrongs.

Hitler wanted to be an artist.  But when that didn’t work he turned to politics.  And learned what a good speaker he was.  He even studied how to become a better speaker.  How to look.  How to use his hands.  How to inflect his voice.  His speeches became very moving.  Very dramatic.  He made the defeated Germans feel better.  For he told them that it wasn’t their fault.  It was the politicians, and the Marxists, that stabbed Germany in the back.  And he was the one man that could do something about it.

When the Reichstag burned down he blamed the Marxists.  Who the Nazis shared power with in the Reichstag.  But didn’t want to.  It’s still debated who started the fire (the communists, the Nazis, others) but what it did was allow the newly appointed chancellor, Adolf Hitler, to urge President Hindenburg to suspend all civil liberties so they could hunt these communists down like the dogs they were.  President Hindenburg did.  And the government rounded up the communists.  With them out of the government the Nazis no longer had to share power.  And turned Germany into a police state.  To keep that power.

The Equation Brutal Dictators use to stay in Power is Victimization + Demonization + Emotion = Power

Hitler was charismatic.  He could give a powerful speech.  And after the Reichstag fire he controlled the people.  Using censorship and propaganda he made himself god-like.  The war hero.  The savior of the German people.  To undo all the injustice of the Versailles Treaty.  Standing up to the Allies.  Punishing those who stabbed Germany in the back (first the Marxists and then the Jews).  And restoring German pride.  Because he got even with those who wronged the German people.  The people loved him.  He could do no wrong in their eyes. No matter how much wrong he did.  Which he could hide from the people.  Thanks to his censoring of the free press.  And his state propaganda machine.  Which is why people packed stadiums and the sides of roads.  Showering him with their adoration.

Adolf Hitler was Germany.  Germany was Adolf Hitler.  His national socialism provided for the people.  In return the people were subservient to the state.  Germany was more important than the individual.  And Adolf Hitler was more important than Germany.  So anything he did was okay.  For he could do no wrong.  As there was nothing more important than Adolf Hitler.  For Hitler was a cult of personality.  Above the law.  And god-like.  Where people believed he was the only one that could save the nation.  And would do anything for him.  With the most devout joining the SS.  Fighting with unbounded fanaticism in combat.  And carrying out the Holocaust with ruthless efficiency.  They pledged their loyalty to Adolf Hitler.  Not Germany.  And would do anything for him.  Anything at all.  Even torture and kill their fellow Germans.  If that was what their Führer wanted.

This is how dictators were able to do some of the things they did. Because they were a cult of personality.  Mao Zedong.  Saddam Hussein.  Benito Mussolini.  Muammar Gaddafi.  Kim Il-sung.  Kim Jong-il.  Kim Jong-un.  These brutal dictators were/are all worshipped by their people.  At least the people they weren’t/aren’t torturing or killing.  For they had an equation they used to remain in power.  Victimization + Demonization + Emotion = Power.  Similar to the equation the Democrats use to win elections.  Victimization + Demonization + Emotion = Democrat Votes.  Where they victimize the people.  Find someone to demonize for this victimization.  Such as Marxists and Jews in Nazi Germany.  Or Republicans in the United States.  Then use state propaganda to disseminate their lies.  Like Joseph Goebbels did in Nazi Germany.  And like the mainstream media in the United States disseminates Democrat talking points.  And then use fiery rhetoric to incite the people’s emotions.  Like Hitler, Hussein, Mussolini, Gaddafi, Kim Il-sung, Kim Jong-il, Kim Jong-un and every other cult of personality did.  Like these ‘god-like’ people still do today.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin and the Soviet Union

Posted by PITHOCRATES - February 18th, 2014

History 101

Marx called for a Dictatorship of the Proletariat where the Workers controlled the Means of Production

Karl Marx did not like capitalism.  Or middle class people that used money to make money.  The bourgeoisie.  Who exploit the working man.  The proletariat.  The bourgeoisie used their capital to exploit the labor of the working man (i.e., taking a risk and investing in land, factories, machinery, labor, etc.) to make money.  While the working man slaved away at slave wages creating all the great things we have in the world.  Of course, the proletariat could not do any of this unless others took risks and invested in land, factories, machinery, labor, etc.

This was just not fair to Karl Marx.  Because the industrial bourgeoisie had all the power.  And their exploitation of the proletariat was nothing more than a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.  So Marx created a socio-economic philosophy to address this dictatorship.  Marxism.  And called for a social transformation.  For working men everywhere to unite.  And break the chains that bound them in the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.  Calling for a dictatorship of the proletariat.  For the workers to control the means of production.  In a new system that replaced capitalism.  Socialism.  Until they could usher in the true ideal.  Communism.

In capitalism the bourgeoisie get rich creating neat things people discover and want to buy.  In communism there would be no bourgeoisie using the means of production to make a buck.  Instead, wise and selfless people would determine what was best for the people.  Instead of free markets allocating scarce resources economic planners would.  And they’d do it better.  Because they are selfless.  Creating large surpluses that would go not into some rich capitalist’s bank account.  But they would fairly distribute this surplus among the working class.  So society as a whole would be better off.  Sounds great.  But if the market didn’t make the decisions of what to produce who did?  As it turned out for Marxism that was a very difficult question to answer.

Leon Trotsky was a Like-Minded Marxist and the number two Communist behind Lenin

The Russian people were growing tired of World War I.  And Tsar Nicholas.  In fact they had it with the Russian Empire.  Even before World War I.  Although serfdom was abolished in 1861 the lives of peasants didn’t improve much.  There was still famine.  And the serfs had to pay a lot to their former landlords for their freedom.  So there was revolutionary fervor in the air.  And a few peasant uprisings.  As well as a few revolutionaries.  Such as Vladimir Ilyich Lenin.  Who was a Marxist.  His anti-Tsarist political activity got him arrested and exiled a few times.  In fact, during World War I he was living in exile in Switzerland.  Hoping that the Germans would weaken Tsarist Russia enough to kick off a socialist revolution in Russia.

When revolution did break out Lenin was anxious to return to Russia.  But being in Switzerland posed a problem.  It was surrounded by warring countries.  Lucky for him, though, the Germans were anxious to close the eastern front of the war.  And a little revolution in Russia could do just that.  So they transported Lenin through Germany and helped him return to Russia.  They travelled north.  Took a ferry to Sweden.  Then by train to Petrograd.  Formally Saint Petersburg (Peter the Great’s new capital on the Baltic Sea).  Which was later renamed Leningrad.  And then later renamed Saint Petersburg.  Where he would lead the Bolshevik Party.  And the world-wide socialist revolution against capitalism.

Leon Trotsky was a like-minded Marxist.  And an anti-militarist.  He had a falling out with Lenin but eventually reunited.  With Trotsky becoming the number two communist behind Lenin.  Trotsky addressed a problem with Marxism for Russia.  Socialism was to be the final step AFTER capitalism.  Once there was a strong industrial proletariat.  Russia didn’t have that.  For it was one of the least advanced countries in the world.  An agrarian nation barely out of the Middle Ages.  So Russia had to industrialize WHILE the proletariat took over the means of production.  Which brought up a big problem.  How could a backward nation industrialize while having a revolution?  How could they do this without other advanced capitalistic countries coming to the aid of the bourgeoisie?  Which Trotsky answered with his Permanent Revolution.  For the Russian socialist revolution to be successful there had to be socialist revolutions in other countries, too.  Thinking more in terms of a worldwide revolution of industrialized states.  And not just in Russia.  Something another Marxist disagreed with.  Joseph Stalin

Communist States have Guards on their Borders to prevent People from Escaping their Socialist Utopia

During these revolutionary times workers’ councils were appearing throughout the country.  Soviets.  Which helped stir up the revolutionary fervor.  In 1917 the imperial government fell.  The Bolsheviks killed the Tsar and his family.  And Russia fell into civil war.  Which the Bolsheviks won in 1922.  And formed the Soviet Union.  Or the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR).  That stretched from Eastern Europe to the Pacific Ocean.  Under the rule of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin.  Until he died in 1924.  Then Joseph Stalin took over after a brutal power struggle.  Even exiled Leon Trotsky.  And established totalitarian rule.  Stalin created a planned economy.  Rapid industrialization.  And collectivization.  As well as famines, forced labor, deportation and great purges of his political enemies.  To strengthen his one-party rule.  To protect the socialist revolution from a return of capitalism.

The Russian Revolution was the only successful socialist revolution in Europe.  The dictatorship of the proletariat did not happen as Lenin and Trotsky had envisioned.  So Stalin abandoned the idea of Permanent Revolution.  And adopted Socialism in One Country instead.  To strengthen the Soviet Union.  And not support a world-wide socialist revolution against capitalism.  In direct opposition of Trotsky.  To aid in the USSR’s industrialization Stalin made a pact with the devil.  Adolf Hitler.  And entered an economic agreement that would allow Hitler to build and test his war machine on Soviet soil that he would use in World War II.  Then came the Treaty of Non-aggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.  And the secret protocol.  Where Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union agreed to conquer and divvy up the countries located between them.

Trotsky did not like what the Soviet Union became under Stalin.  An oppressive dictatorship of Joseph Stalin.  Not the dictatorship of the proletariat envisioned by Karl Marx.  And he didn’t like that pact with a militarist Nazi Germany.  He predicted that Stalin’s USSR would not last.  Either suffering a political revolution like Tsar Nicholas suffered.  Or it would collapse into a capitalist state.  Stalin disagreed.  And killed him and his family.  Getting rid of the last of the old Bolsheviks.  Leaving him to rule uncontested until his death in 1953.  Exporting communism wherever he could.  Where it killed more people than any other ideology.  Until the great and brutal socialism experiment collapsed in 1991.  For Trotsky was right.  It could not survive when a better life was just across a border.  Which is why all of the communist states have guards on their borders.  To keep their people from escaping their socialist utopia.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

Nero, Hitler and Obama and the Lies they Told

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 29th, 2013

History 101

Nero used the Great Fire of Rome to rebuild Rome to his Liking and to Persecute Christians

Roman emperor Nero does not have the greatest of reputations.  For instance, a popular story about him is that he fiddled while Rome burned.  Of course he didn’t fiddle.  For the fiddle didn’t exist yet.  But the lyre did.  And he could play the lyre.  In fact, he even composed music for the lyre.  But the historical record is a little sparse to say definitely what happened when Rome burned.

That said Nero was not all that dismayed that Rome burnt.  Because he didn’t like the way the city looked.  And he wanted to rebuild Rome into a glorious city befitting him.  And the fire allowed him do just that.  For to build the city Nero envisioned required that he first destroy the city that was there.  And the fire conveniently did that for him.

But it did more.  The year was 64 anno Domini.  In the year of our Lord.  Being that Jesus of Nazareth lived temporally until His thirties that puts the Great Fire of Rome about 30 years after His death.  And during the rise of those pesky Christians that Nero really didn’t like.  Who worshipped Jesus as God.  And not him.  Nero.  Putting crazy thoughts into people’s heads.  That Nero wasn’t God.  So Nero blamed the Great Fire of Rome on the Christians.  Allowing him to torture them.  And execute them.  Earning the moniker of the first persecutor of Christians.  So Nero profited well from the Great Fire of Rome.  He got his new city.  And he suppressed the ascendancy of those pesky Christians.

Adolf Hitler used the Reichstag Fire to make the way Clear for the New Nazi Germany

After World War I Germany was reeling.  Reparations were crippling her.  There was hyperinflation.  Germans were struggling for food and heat.  Creating the perfect political climate for a guy like Adolf Hitler to rise in politics.  After a failed attempt to seize power—the Beer Hall Putsch—he turned to legal channels to secure power.  Winning elections.  In time the Nazi Party rose in prominence.  But it could not win a majority in the German Parliament.  Until, that is, the Reichstag fire.

Following World War I Europe was being pulled between two political ideologies.  Fascism.  And communism.  Both were brutal dictatorships.  While both proclaimed to be for the people.  Well, Adolf Hitler’s Nazis were fascists.  Who were sharing power with the communists.  But they didn’t want to share power with the communists.  Which they didn’t have to do after the Reichstag fire.

Hitler blamed the communists for the fire.  He persuaded President Hindenburg to pass an emergency decree.  Suspending civil liberties.  And then turned the power of the state against the Communist Party.  Clearing the way for the rise of the Nazis to power.  Historians still debate who set that fire today.  But one thing it did was clear the last obstacle in the way of the Nazis.  The communists.  With the Communist Party outlawed the Nazis no longer had to share power with them.  Allowing them to rise to a majority in Parliament.  And from there it was but a short path to Hitler’s absolute power.  Thanks to a fire that got rid of the old.  And made way for the new.

President Obama is On the Record saying that he is a Proponent of Single-Payer Universal Health Care

The American left has longed wanted national health care.  For it is the Holy Grail of socialist/communist states.  As it touches everyone.  And makes everyone dependent on the state.  All brutal dictatorships have/had national health care.  Cuba.  North Korea.  The Soviet Union.  Nazi Germany.  These states also were/are anti-capitalist.  So anti-capitalism and national health care go hand-in-hand.  That is, the only way to have national health care is to give up some capitalism.

Which is a problem for the proponents of national health care.  For people like their capitalism.  And the liberty and high standards of living it gives them.  So proponents of national health care can’t be honest when they’re trying to take away people’s health insurance.  So they lie (see ‘Keep Your Plan’ Vow False; Media Knew It by Investor’s Business Daily posted 10/29/2013 on Yahoo! Finance included here in its entirety).

NBC News on Monday claimed to have uncovered evidence that President Obama knew all along that his promise that “you can keep your health plan” under ObamaCare wasn’t true. The story came out just as millions across the country are getting cancellation notices from their insurance companies.

“Buried in ObamaCare regulations from July 2010,” NBC said, is an estimate that shows “the administration knew that more than 40% to 67% of those in the individual market would not be able to keep their plans, even if they liked them.

Although ObamaCare included a provision meant to grandfather health plans sold before 2010, regulators defined what “grandfathered” meant so narrowly that most plans wouldn’t qualify.

Yet Obama went on repeating this promise, saying, as he did in June 2012, that “if you’re one of the 250 million Americans who already (has) health insurance, you will keep your health insurance.

That the administration knew this wasn’t true is troubling.

But the mainstream press also knew — or should have known — that Obama’s “you can keep your plan” promise was phony. It just didn’t bother to report on it at the time.

As far back as early 2010, health reform experts, Republican lawmakers and conservative policy analysts had been citing the same 40% to 67% figure that NBC News claims to have unearthed: The Commonwealth Fund, a favorite source for health care reporters, pointed out in a June 22, 2010, blog post that the administration “estimated that between 40% and 67% of health plans will relinquish grandfathered status” by 2013, meaning that millions of plans would get canceled.

An October 2010 article in the widely read Health Affairs said that, in addition to those losses, “the Obama administration has projected that between 39% and 69% of employer group plans” and “up to 80%” of small business plans would be canceled.

On Sept. 22, 2010, Sen. Mike Enzi , R-Wyo., said forcing 80% of small firms to change plans “breaks the president’s promise” about keeping your health plan.

In May 2011, a PricewaterhouseCoopers survey found that 51% of employers said they would have to drop plans and buy new ones because of ObamaCare.

An Aug. 29, 2011, memo by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor noted that “by the administration’s own estimates, 40% to 67% of individual insurance plans” will be canceled.

In a December 2011 paper, the Galen Institute’s Grace-Marie Turner noted that “millions of people are losing the coverage they have now, and tens of millions more will surely follow.

(IBD also covered this extensively at the time.) In addition, the Congressional Budget Office had reported in March 2010 that ObamaCare could cause 4 million to lose their employer-provided health insurance. It later raised that to 7 million, and admitted the number could be 20 million.

And years ago, Republicans like Enzi and Cantor pushed ObamaCare changes that would have prevented the massive cancellations going on today.

But with a few rare exceptions, the mainstream press completely ignored evidence that millions would be forced to drop their current insurance.

Now news reports are rife with stories of angry families getting insurance cancellation notices, learning that ObamaCare-approved plans will cost far more, and wondering why they didn’t know this was coming.

On Monday, Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., introduced a bill aimed at preventing these cancellations. The one-page bill, “The Keep Your Health Plan Act,” states simply that any health plan sold this year to the individual can also be sold next year.

Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., has a similar bill in the Senate.

The question is whether Senate Democrats will block this bill — as they have almost every other GOP-sponsored ObamaCare bill — in the face of rising public anger about Obama’s misleading and now broken promise.

President Obama doesn’t like the existing health care system.  And is on the record saying that he is a proponent of single-payer universal health care.

So to get what he wants he first has to destroy the old.  Private health insurance.  And then set up the new.  Obamacare.  His pathway to single-payer universal health care.  Something the American people don’t want.  So he lied to the American people.  And created Obamacare to destroy the one obstacle in his way.  The private health insurance industry.  Then he can act against the will of the people.  And get what HE wants.  Power.  Through legal means.  Just like Hitler.  Who was also a good liar.  And, thankfully, that’s where the similarities end.  Well, that.  And destroying their countries.  For awhile, at least.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

President Obama suppresses First Amendment rights at Political Event

Posted by PITHOCRATES - July 28th, 2013

Week in Review

When George W. Bush was president he faced a lot of heckling.  Heck, he even had someone throw a shoe at him.  Tough crowds.  But President Obama doesn’t seem to be suffering these tough crowds like Bush.  Guess that means President Obama is just more loved than George W. Bush (see College Republicans Denied Admittance to Obama Speech by Nathan Harden posted 7/25/2013 on the National Review).

Christopher White of The College Fix reports that students wearing “Tea Party T-Shirts and others who wore patriotic or Republican-inspired clothing” were turned away at the door under the guise of security concerns, despite the fact that they held tickets to the event.

Or it could mean they only allow enthusiastic supporters of the president into these rooms when he speaks.  Suppressing the First Amendment right of free speech.  Sort of like they do in North Korea.  The former Soviet Union.  China under Mao.  Nazi Germany.  Cuba.  And any other nation led by a cult of personality.  Where they use a massive propaganda machine and state oppression to make sure people only cheer at their dear leader.  No matter how much the people may hate him.  Or her.

Love him or hate him George W. Bush was the real deal.  What you saw was what you got.  Unlike with President Obama.  Where his handlers, friends in the mainstream media, Hollywood, television, the music industry, etc., work tirelessly to show their love of the dear leader.  To encourage others to love him, too.  To sustain the cult of personality.  But if you dare criticize him you’ll find yourself getting a colonoscopy from the IRS before you can say “Tea Party.”  Sure, not as unpleasant as it was in Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union, but unpleasant enough.  Enough to make people think twice about criticizing the dear leader.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Nazi Party, Adolf Hitler, Liberal Democrats and Totalitarian Rule

Posted by PITHOCRATES - May 23rd, 2013

Politics 101

Before WWII there were many who Admired the Great Things Authoritative and Charismatic Dictators were Doing

The Nazi Party is one of the most documented rises of totalitarianism.   A system of government where everything and everyone is subordinated to the state.  Where the state comes first.  And the people are expendable.  Ruled by a single person.  A charismatic leader.  Who the people pledge their allegiance to.    And follow obediently to the ends of the earth.  We can learn a lot by studying what happened in Nazi Germany about the quest for absolute power.  For though party ideology may differ the path to that party is eerily similar wherever, and whenever, you look.

Of course, some are infatuated by an all-powerful state.  Not for the crimes against their people.  But what an all-powerful state can do.  Where enlightened individuals can do what’s best for the people without having to deal with a political opposition.  Just read what one beloved world leader wrote about Adolf Hitler prior to the outbreak of hostilities that embroiled the world in World War II:

Other musings concern how great the autobahns were – ‘the best roads in the world’ – and how, having visited Hitler’s Bavarian holiday home in Berchtesgaden and the tea house built on top of the mountain for him.

He declared; ‘Who has visited these two places can easily imagine how Hitler will emerge from the hatred currently surrounding him to emerge in a few years as one of the most important personalities that ever lived.’

This was written just a few years before Hitler invaded Poland.  Up until the war broke out there were many who admired the great things authoritative and charismatic leaders were doing.  Mussolini made the trains run on time.  And FDR was so smitten with Joseph Stalin and the great things he was doing in the Soviet Union that it broke his heart when the Soviets signed a non-aggression pact with the Nazis.  Allowing the invasion of Poland.  And starting World War II.  While splitting up Poland between the Nazis and the communists.  Basically removing Poland from the map.

The Left has used the Expanding Size of the Federal Government to Harass and Silence their Political Enemies

This is why Nazi Germany is so interesting as a study in politics.  For the Nazis rose to power within the political process.  They won elections.  And then used their legitimate powers to expand their power.  Often helped by the clever use of propaganda.  Misinformation.  And brutal criminal acts.  Which becomes easier to do as your powers grow.  And you place yourself above the law.  And become a nation of a charismatic ruler.  Instead of a nation of laws.

With the recent scandals of the Obama administration (Benghazi, the obstruction of free speech, the persecution of conservatives, etc.) some are making comparisons to Watergate.  While some even go so far as to compare it to Nazi Germany.  Of course, President Obama and the Democrats are NOT Nazis.  In fact, they are diametrically opposed to much Nazi ideology.  Just to give one example take immigration.  The Nazis believed in a pure Germanic race and opposed immigration of non-Germans.  While Democrats want to throw open the borders.  So the left are not Nazis.  But if you read the 25 points of the Nazi Party platform of 1920 you will see that the left employs many of the same tools to rise to power as the Nazis—and all totalitarian regimes—used in their rise to power.  Here are some of the 25 points.

9. All citizens must have equal rights and obligations.

12. In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

13. We demand the nationalization of all (previous) associated industries (trusts).

15. We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.

16. We demand the creation of a healthy middle class and its conservation, immediate communalization of the great warehouses and their being leased at low cost to small firms, the utmost consideration of all small firms in contracts with the State, county or municipality.

18. We demand struggle without consideration against those whose activity is injurious to the general interest. Common national criminals, usurers, Schieber and so forth are to be punished with death, without consideration of confession or race.

20. The state is to be responsible for a fundamental reconstruction of our whole national education program, to enable every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education and subsequently introduction into leading positions. The plans of instruction of all educational institutions are to conform with the experiences of practical life. The comprehension of the concept of the State must be striven for by the school [Staatsbuergerkunde] as early as the beginning of understanding. We demand the education at the expense of the State of outstanding intellectually gifted children of poor parents without consideration of position or profession.

23. We demand legal opposition to known lies and their promulgation through the press. In order to enable the provision of a German press, we demand, that:

a. All writers and employees of the newspapers appearing in the German language be members of the race:

b. Non-German newspapers be required to have the express permission of the State to be published. They may not be printed in the German language:

c. Non-Germans are forbidden by law any financial interest in German publications, or any influence on them, and as punishment for violations the closing of such a publication as well as the immediate expulsion from the Reich of the non-German concerned. Publications which are counter to the general good are to be forbidden. We demand legal prosecution of artistic and literary forms which exert a destructive influence on our national life, and the closure of organizations opposing the above made demands.

25. For the execution of all of this we demand the formation of a strong central power in the Reich. Unlimited authority of the central parliament over the whole Reich and its organizations in general. The forming of state and profession chambers for the execution of the laws made by the Reich within the various states of the confederation. The leaders of the Party promise, if necessary by sacrificing their own lives, to support by the execution of the points set forth above without consideration.

Both the Nazis and the left call for an egalitarian society.  For example, everyone should have access to health care.  While everyone is obligated to pay their fair share (i.e., the health care mandate forcing people to buy health insurance).  Both call war a crime against the people and want to confiscate war profits.  Among other profits.  The left wants to get rid of the profit incentive and capitalism while the Nazis wanted to just nationalize private sector industries.  The Nazis wanted to get the elderly dependent on the state by expanding old age welfare.  Just as the left does with Social Security and Medicare (and now Obamacare).  The Nazis wanted to implement price controls to help the middle class.  The left’s solution to the high cost of health care (in part) is price controls.  Forcing doctors and hospitals to work for less.  The Nazis wanted to severely punish those who are injurious to the state agenda.  The left used the IRS and other agencies of the federal government to make life uncomfortable for those who actively oppose their agenda (case in point the recent scandals plaguing the Obama administration).  The Nazis controlled education as “early as the beginning of understanding.”  The left had the government take over the student loan program to get more kids into college where they can further indoctrinate them.  The left controls public education.  That gets out the vote to help Democrats win elections.  And the left is always trying to create/expand state-run childcare.  To start indoctrinating children as “early as the beginning of understanding.”  The Nazis wanted to ban any free speech that did not help the general good.  As the state determined what that general good was.  The left marginalizes the one network (Fox) that doesn’t endorse the left’s agenda.  They’ve tried to muzzle free speech on the one media outlet they did not dominate (talk radio) by trying to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine.  And they’ve talked about extending that to the Internet to shut down any opposition there.  The Nazis called for a strong central authority with unlimited powers to protect the general interest.  The left has expanded the size of the federal government under the guise to protect the general interest.  And the recent scandals show the use of that growing central authority to harass and silence their political enemies.  Conservatives.  Who are today’s scapegoat.

JFK was more Champion of the People than Seeker of Dictatorial Power unlike Today’s Democrat Party

The Nazi party did not do well until the Great Depression.  When the masses were unemployed and suffering under the war reparations of the Versailles Treaty.  The people were angry.  Frustrated.  And felt they were suffering for the crimes of others.  Then along came Adolf Hitler.  And the Nazi Party.  They did not let this crisis go to waste.  The Nazis identified a scapegoat for all of their woes.  The Jews.  With a great crisis and a scapegoat the Nazis started winning elections.  In 1928 the Nazis had 12 seats in the Reichstag.  By September of 1930, after the pain of the Great Depression was being felt, they had 107 seats.  Making them the second largest party.  At the same time the Hitler Youth junior branches started indoctrinating boys and girls as young as 10.  By July 1932 the Nazis were the largest party in the Reichstag.  The Nazis co-ruled the country as part of a coalition government.  In 1933 the Reichstag burnt down.  Another crisis too good to waste.  The Nazis (who probably started that fire) blamed the Communist Party (KPD).  The second largest party in the Reichstag.  The Nazis got the KPD banned.  Giving the Nazis majority rule.  They then suspended basic civil rights.  Because enemies of the people were everywhere.  And the government needed to protect them.  Making Germany a police state.  The Civil Service law of 1933 began the removal of Jews from every office.  The Nazis then abolished trade unions.  Forcing everyone to join the German Labor Front.  Then in March 1933 the government passed the Enabling Law.  Transferring legislative power to Hitler’s cabinet.  Creating Hitler’s dictatorship.  As the future of Germany could no longer be left to the chaos of an elected body.  It needed the strong will of a charismatic leader who knew what was best for the German people.  And the German people followed his will obediently.  Because there were enemies all around.  And they needed someone unhindered by an elected body or law to protect them.

Liberal Democrats are NOT Nazis.  They have more ideological difference than they share.  But they do have one thing in common with the Nazis.  Their quest for power.  And in that quest for power they have used some of the same techniques the Nazis used.  Because all power-hungry people use these techniques.  They identify an enemy (Jews/conservatives).  They champion the people.  And then lie through their teeth.  Using their growing powers to consolidate even more power.  All the while the people enthusiastically support them.  Supporting the oppression of their common enemy.  Until that consolidated power begins to include them in their oppression.  Where all but the most devout Nazis regretted their earlier support of the Nazi Party.  As it was all but the most devout Nazis that suffered from the state’s oppression.

So who was that beloved world leader that wrote so admiringly of Adolf Hitler before the outbreak of World War II?  He was an American.  A Democrat.  Who actually went on to fight in World War II.  Against the Japanese.  Who went on to become president of the United States.  Fierce Cold War warrior.  And, surprisingly, endorsed economic policies that Ronald Reagan would one day endorse.  John Fitzgerald Kennedy (see How JFK secretly ADMIRED Hitler: Explosive book reveals former President’s praise for the Nazis as he travelled through Germany before Second World War posted 5/23/2013 on the Daily Mail).  Who may have had some faults.  But being a Nazi wasn’t one of them.  JFK may have wanted to use the power of government to make America better.  But he was an old school Democrat.  Who was more champion of the people than seeker of dictatorial power.  Unlike today.  Where it appears the Democrats in power use the IRS and other agencies of the federal government to oppress their political enemies.  Conservatives.  Kind of the way the Nazis oppressed their political enemies in Germany.  And like the communists oppressed their political enemies in East Germany.  Where our fierce Cold War warrior spat in the face of that communist oppression by proclaiming, “Ich bin ein Berline.”  I am a Berliner.  But today it is the Democrats that are the oppressors.  Not the ones fighting against oppression.

We’ve come a long way from JFK’s Democrat Party.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

FDR Suppressed the news of the Soviet’s Katyn Forest Massacre so he could give Eastern Europe to Stalin

Posted by PITHOCRATES - September 15th, 2012

Week in Review

World conquest is a lot like real estate.  The three most important things are location, location and location.  And Poland has always been in a prime location.  If you look at a map you can see why.  To the east are Ukraine (bread basket of Europe), Belarus and Lithuania.  All one-time members of the Russian Empire.  As well as the Soviet Union.  To the west is Germany.  And Western Europe.  To the north is the Baltic Sea.  Making Poland the crossroads between Western Europe and Eastern Europe, Russia and the Soviet Union.  Prime real estate indeed.  From the days of Catherine the Great Russia wanted her land.  As did an Austrian about 150 years later.  Adolf Hitler.  Who conspired with another Russian to take her land.  Joseph Stalin.

Hitler and Stalin joined forces to conquer and partition Poland along the Narew, Vistula, and San rivers.  After the Allies gave Hitler Czechoslovakia.  Lying along the southern border of Poland.  So Poland felt the wrath of two of the worst dictators of the Twentieth Century.  As the Nazis invaded from the west and south (via Czechoslovakia).  And the Soviets invaded from the east.  They crushed Poland.  And committed some of the worst atrocities of World War II.  Which the Nazi-Soviet invasion of Poland officially kicked off (see AP Exclusive: Memos show US hushed up Soviet crime by RANDY HERSCHAFT and VANESSA GERA, Associated Press, posted 9/10/2012 on Yahoo! News).

The American POWs sent secret coded messages to Washington with news of a Soviet atrocity: In 1943 they saw rows of corpses in an advanced state of decay in the Katyn forest, on the western edge of Russia, proof that the killers could not have been the Nazis who had only recently occupied the area.

The testimony about the infamous massacre of Polish officers might have lessened the tragic fate that befell Poland under the Soviets, some scholars believe. Instead, it mysteriously vanished into the heart of American power. The long-held suspicion is that President Franklin Delano Roosevelt didn’t want to anger Josef Stalin, an ally whom the Americans were counting on to defeat Germany and Japan during World War II.

Documents released Monday and seen in advance by The Associated Press lend weight to the belief that suppression within the highest levels of the U.S. government helped cover up Soviet guilt in the killing of some 22,000 Polish officers and other prisoners in the Katyn forest and other locations in 1940…

The Soviet secret police killed the 22,000 Poles with shots to the back of the head. Their aim was to eliminate a military and intellectual elite that would have put up stiff resistance to Soviet control. The men were among Poland’s most accomplished — officers and reserve officers who in their civilian lives worked as doctors, lawyers, teachers, or as other professionals. Their loss has proven an enduring wound to the Polish nation.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) loved Joseph Stalin.  It was the era of Big Government.  And Stalin liked what he saw happening in Italy under Benito Mussolini.  And what he saw in the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin.  These were men who thought big like FDR.  And knew the great things the state could do if only not hindered by laws and elections.  He would have professed admiration for another Big Government type had he not made his ambitions clear so early.  Because Nazi Germany was National Socialism.  With a lot of the same kind of make-work programs FDR had in his New Deal.

But FDR was naive when it came to communism.  While others saw the true Stalin FDR lived in denial.  He liked Uncle Joe.  Knew that he could talk to this man.  That he could trust this man.  He was so naive that his own administration contained Soviet operatives.  Something he would refuse to even entertain the possibility of.  Because the future was going to be made by men like Mussolini, Stalin and FDR.  Then that horrible day came.  When FDR suffered his greatest shock and disappointment.  When the Soviets and Nazis entered into their non-aggression pact.  The Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact of 1939.  Where the Soviets agreed not to enter any war Germany started.  In exchange for the Poland Partition and the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.  Also, the Soviets agreed to provide Germany the raw materials she needed for her war industry that the British denied Germany with her blockade.  Making the conquests of Nazi Germany possible.  As well as her crimes.  So Joseph Stalin has more blood on his hands than just that horrible massacre in the Katyn Forest.  He has the blood of all those who died under Nazi aggression.  And Nazi oppression.  Including the twenty million or more Soviets who perished in World War II.  The innocents who paid the price for their leader’s ambitions.  As they always do.

Then the ultimate Polish betrayal came at the Yalta Conference.  Where FDR still trusted Stalin.  And gave him whatever he asked without asking for anything in return.  The part of Poland Hitler agreed to give to the Soviets remained Soviet.  Her western border was moved into Germany.  But the Soviets never left Poland.  Poland fell behind the Iron Curtain that fell from “Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic.”  And all the conquered people behind the Iron Curtain remained oppressed throughout the Cold War.  Stuck in time.  Often hungry and without the basic necessities of everyday life.  Proving the point that presidents with aggressive domestic agendas tend to have inept and naïve foreign policy.  FDR may have won the war.  But he lost the peace.  And the price of losing the peace (44 years of Cold War) was as much if not greater than the cost of winning World War II.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

FUNDAMENTAL TRUTH #83: “Those who don’t pay taxes will always approve higher tax rates on those who do.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - September 13th, 2011

The Allies were Commanded by an American because they had the Greatest Skin in the Game

During World War II, SHAEF stood for the Supreme Headquarters, Allied Expeditionary Forces. This was the top command of the Allies fighting on the Western Front during World War II. In the European Theater of Operations (ETO). The Soviet Union fought on the Eastern Front. Neither front was subordinate to the other in the command structure.

The supreme allied commander of SHAEF was General Eisenhower. An American. Why? Well the Nazis conquered France early in the war. Thanks to blitzkrieg. Which the Allies weren’t ready yet to battle. So the SHAEF commander wasn’t French. But the British were in the war from the beginning. They and their commonwealth put some 11 million into the field of battle. And suffered about a million killed and wounded. But the SHAEF commander wasn’t British either. Even though we couldn’t have defeated Nazi Germany without the British.

No, the SHAEF commander was an American because they put some 16 million into the field of battle. So excluding the Soviets, the Americans had the greatest skin in the game. Literally. And figuratively. It was the American Arsenal of Democracy that furnished the implements of war. Financed by the American taxpayer. Via bonds. Rationing. And inflation.

Those who Risk their Wealth should have a Say in How it is Risked

There were a lot of service flags hanging in American windows during World War II. And far too many of them had gold stars on them. One gold star represented the loss of a son or daughter in the war. There were about 417,000 gold stars in American windows. Not quite as many as the approximately 580,000 British dead. And a long way from the approximately 8,600,000 Soviet dead. But as America entered the war, the sheer numbers of man and material America provided made it America’s war. Which is why there was an American commanding SHAEF. Because even though Nazi Germany didn’t attack America, it was her blood and treasure leading the war against Nazi Germany.

So an American general would lead the Allies. Because the Americans had the most skin in the game. They were now bearing the greatest costs for the war. So they had the ultimate say in how the Allies waged war. I mean, no one would expect a Belgian general to command those 16 million Americans. No offense to the Belgians. I mean, I like their waffles and all. It’s just that Belgium wasn’t America. They didn’t have the resources. Nor the distance from the Third Reich.

Risk and wealth. Those who risk their wealth should have a say in how it is risked. Because it takes wealth (blood and treasure) to wage war. And this goes back to the birth of limited government. The Magna Carta. When the feudal barons of England met King John on the fields of Runnymede. And said, “Look, yeah you’re king and all but that doesn’t give you the right to do as you bloody well please.” I’m paraphrasing, of course. You see, the king was being rather oppressive. And fighting a lot of wars. Costly wars. And the funny thing about kings? They don’t have wealth. They get it from the landowners. The landed aristocracy. Those feudal barons. The men and material to fight wars, and the money to pay for them, came from them. So these barons were saying, “In the future, you clear things with us first, okay?” And constitutional monarchy was born.

Thanks to the Magna Carta those Paying the Taxes would have a Say in How the King Spent those Taxes

In the days of feudalism we defined wealth by land holdings. Because back then the most important industry was growing food. To prevent famine. And you needed land to grow food. So wealth concentrated to the land owners. The landed aristocracy. Who provided the food for the realm. Soldiers. And taxes.

Thanks to the Magna Carta, things changed. Those paying the taxes would have a say in how the king spent those taxes. He couldn’t wage endless war anymore. Or spend it all on royal accouterments. No. From then on, spending would have to be responsible. We take it for granted in the West today. And call it taxation with representation. But it was a BIG deal back then. And mostly only in England. France had an absolute monarchy. And the king did whatever he bloody well pleased. And you see how well that turned out for King Louis XVI. Ask Marie Antoinette. Of course you can’t. Because they were both executed by the people during the French Revolution.

The British took their representative government to the New World. And after the American Revolution, that was one of the British things the Americans kept. At the heart of the American populace was a hatred of taxation. And arbitrary rule. So they kept a tight grip on the government. And their wealth. There were no kings in the new United States of America. But there was still government. And a strong distrust of government power. So they were going to write their constitutions very carefully. And restrict the vote only to those who had skin in the game. Land owners. Who were paying the taxes.

Figuring out how to Amass Power despite the Inconvenience of Elections

Of course this changed over time. Nowadays, people who pay no taxes whatsoever can vote. We’ve come a long way from Runnymede. And returned a lot of power to government. In America, about half of all people pay no federal income tax. Yet they can vote. And they do. For the party that promises them more free stuff. By taxing ‘the rich’ to pay for it. And you know what these non-taxpayers say? “Raise tax rates? Absolutely. I mean, what do I care? It’s not like I’m paying them.” I’m paraphrasing, of course. But you can see the problem.

They have no skin in the game. And the only reason they don’t is because ‘the rich’ have been keeping them down. At least that’s what they believe. Because those in power told them this. So they can keep raising taxes. And keep increasing the power of government.

It’s nothing new. There are those who just want power. Kings often took power by force. When it was clear that the rich barons were more important to the king than the king was to them, though, things changed. There were limits on absolute power. So those who coveted power had to be creative. And figure out how to amass power despite the inconvenience of elections.

Politics Today: Buy Votes with State Benefits and scare the Bejesus out of Old People

The answer was the welfare state. And class warfare. Buy votes. And demonize ‘the rich’. Get the people dependent on government. And anytime there is political opposition, tell the people that the opposition wants to cut your state benefits. To scare the people into voting for you.

We call Social Security and Medicare third-rail issues in America. Because if you threaten to cut them (i.e., touch them), you will die politically. As you would die if you touched the electrified third rail in the subway. Because the recipients of those programs live in fear of losing their benefits. And will always vote for the candidate who promises not to cut them.

And this is how you amass power when saddled with the inconvenience of elections. Buy votes with state benefits. And scare the bejesus out of old people. Telling them the political opposition wants to take your benefits away. Attack the rich. And tax them. To pay for the ever bloating welfare state.

And if at least half of the people pay no taxes, you’re golden. Because when that many people have no skin in the game, you can get away with just about anything you want.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

Daddy Issues and Foreign Policy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - June 18th, 2011

Breaking the Law like Dad Did

It’s good to be king.  And sometimes president (see Obama rejects top lawyers’ legal views on Libya by Glenn Greenwald posted 6/18/2011 on Salon).

The growing controversy over President Obama’s illegal waging of war in Libya got much bigger last night with Charlie Savage’s New York Times scoop.  He reveals that top administration lawyers —  Attorney General Eric Holder, OLC Chief Caroline Krass, and DoD General Counsel Jeh Johnson — all told Obama that his latest, widely panned excuse for waging war without Congressional approval (that it does not rise to the level of “hostilities” under the War Powers Resolution (WPR)) was invalid and that such authorization was legally required after 60 days: itself a generous intepretation of the President’s war powers.  But Obama rejected those views and (with the support of administration lawyers in lesser positions:  his White House counsel and long-time political operative Robert Bauer and State Department “legal adviser” Harold Koh) publicly claimed that the WPR does not apply to Libya.

As Savage notes, it is, in particular, “extraordinarily rare” for a President “to override the legal conclusions of the Office of Legal Counsel and to act in a manner that is contrary to its advice…”

Kind of reminds me of someone.  Someone else who acted against the advice of their own attorney general.  Who was that?  Hmmm.  Let me think.  It’s on the tip of my tongue.  Not a popular guy.  Oh yes.  Now I remember.

[James] Comey explained that, in 2004, shortly after he became Deputy AG, he reviewed the NSA eavesdropping program Bush had ordered back in 2001 and concluded it was illegal.  Other top administration lawyers — including Attorney General John Ashcroft and OLC Chief Jack Goldsmith — agreed with Comey, and told the White House they would no longer certify the program’s legality.

That’s right.  It was George W. Bush.  Gee, President Obama is getting more and more like Bush every day.  He must hold Bush up as a mentor figure.  Even a father figure.  For it sure looks like he’s trying to impress him.  By being like him.  Like every son wants to be like their dad.  What’s that line from that great father/son song?  “He’d say “I’m gonna be like you Dad.  You know I’m gonna be like you.””  From Cats in the Cradle.  And Obama is trying to be like his surrogate dad.  To do as good a job as Dad did.  Military tribunalsGitmo.  Friends to business (albeit only the ones big enough to buy favors).  Attacked some Muslim countries.  Even breaking the law like Dad did.  Looking for his approval.  His love.  And yearning for that ever elusive hug.  From Poppa.

An Afternoon Tea Party in Libya

But the Libyan War is no big deal.  We don’t have combat brigades there.  Granted we blew the snot out of a lot of things.  And killed a lot of people.  But this isn’t a war with hostilities.  It’s an afternoon tea party.  And it’ll be over before we know it.  Even Harry ‘This War is LostReid isn’t bitching about Libya like he bitched about Iraq.  That other ‘illegal’ war (see Harry Reid On Libya: “This Thing Will Be Over Before We Know It” posted 6/17/2011 on Real Clear Politics).

JIM LEHRER:  Senator, welcome.

SENATOR HARRY REID (D-NV):  Thank you very much for allowing me to be on the show.

MR. LEHRER:  Well, first on the Libya military operation, do you believe the War Powers Act requires authorization of further action?

SEN. REID:  The War Powers Act has no application to what’s going on in Libya.

MR. LEHRER:  None?

SEN. REID:  I don’t believe so.  You know, we did an authorization for Afghanistan.  We did one for Iraq.  But we have no troops on the ground there, and this thing’s going to be over before you know it anyway, so I think it’s not necessary.

So, you see, there’s nothing to get your shorts into a bunch about.  These guys know what they’re doing.  And they know foreign policy.  Geopolitics.  And protecting American security interests.  Like in Libya.  We don’t know what those interests are yet.  But the naysayers will learn in time.  And we’ll see that our non-war in Libya was important.  And necessary.  Just like our Egyptian policy will prove one day to be important and necessary in protecting American security interests.  By demanding that our friend and ally, a bulwark against radical Islamism, maintainer of peace and stability in a Middle East with the Jewish state of Israel, had to step down from power.  Sure, he was corrupt and somewhat oppressive.  But all rulers are in the Middle East.  Life was far better in Egypt than in a lot of other Middle East nations.  Especially for women.  Christians.  And Jews.

But the Obama administration said he had to go.  It made no sense.  And it doesn’t now.  Yet.  But I’m sure it will.  For they must know something that the rest of us don’t.  And that post-Mubarak Egypt will even be better.  For women.  Christians.  And Jews.

Hail the Arab Spring

Hey, look.  They’re already forming another political party.  Yeah for democracy (see After fall of Mubarak, group announces intent to form Nazi party posted 6/18/2011 on Al-Masry Al-Youm).

A group of Egyptians have announced their intent to establish a Nazi party with “a contemporary frame of reference,” an independent Egyptian news website said on Wednesday.

Al-Badeel, a leftist news portal, quoted founding member Emad Abdel Sattar as saying the party would bring together prominent figures from the Egyptian society. The party’s founding deputy is a former military official.

The party believes in vesting all powers in the president after selecting him or her carefully, Abdel Sattar said, adding that preparations are underway to choose the most competent person to represent the party.

Oh dear.  Nazis.  This can’t be good.  Is this for real?

Although Al-Masry Al-Youm could not verify the news reported by Al-Badeel, two Facebook pages have appeared recently under the title of “the Egyptian Nazi Party”.

The two pages attracted around 70 followers, who mostly posted questions about the party’s ideas and policies and requested details on how to join.

Hopefully not.  Perhaps it’s just a fringe group.  Like Hitler’s Nazis were in Germany.  Until they started winning seats in the Reichstag.  And Hindenburg had to reluctantly share power with them in a coalition government.  Even appointed Hitler chancellor.  Then Hindenburg died and Hitler became Führer und Reichskanzler.  Increased his powers.  Eventually making Germany a dictatorship.  The rest is history.  And not a good one.

The party has a one-year plan to develop Egypt, unlike the “marginalized liberal parties, which are like dead bodies,” he said.

A source from the proposed party told Al-Badeel the idea to start it came after some fundamentalist religious waves emerged, which, according to the source, created a state of chaos and led to the burning of churches, the destruction of shrines and assaults on unarmed civilians.

It was the radical Islamist elements of the Arab Spring that created the state of chaos.  Not aspiring Nazis.  They’re just looking to exploit the chaos.  Perhaps this fringe group will just pass on into the dustbin of history.  Sure, they share the anti-Semitic views of the big political party.  The Muslim Brotherhood.  And there are Middle East and Nazi Germany ties.  Even Haj Amin al-Husseini met with Adolf Hitler.  And discussed post-war Nazi ambitions outside the Nazi sphere (such as in the Middle East beyond the Caucasus).  The only Nazi interference in Arab politics would be the continued genocide against the Jews.  Which meshed well with al-Husseini’s vision of a Jewish-free Palestine.  Despite this deep Nazi-Islamic history, I’m sure there is no danger with the rise of a fringe Nazi political party in Egypt.  Because post-Mubarak Egypt has to be even better than Mubarak-Egypt.  Otherwise, why would the Obama administration force Mubarak out?

Does the President need a Hug?

American foreign policy is confused at best.  Intervention where there is no U.S. security interest.  Undermining a friend and ally.  While our enemies grow stronger.  And a past evil is coming back to life.  It begs the question is this on purpose?  Is it incompetence?  Or just a desperate cry for a hug from Poppa?  George W. Bush?

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

Remembering D-Day and the Fight for/against Democracy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - June 6th, 2011

D-Day

It happened 67 years ago today.  The beginning of the end of Nazi GermanyJoseph Stalin finally got his second front.   After a couple of years of hell on earth.  The Eastern Front.  Where the war was the cruelest and most savage.  Killing people by the millions.  The Soviet Union fought and sacrificed to throw the Nazi invader out of their homeland.  A horrific price indeed for their nonaggression pact with Nazi Germany that gave Adolf Hitler the green light to launch World War II.

After years of total war most European countries lay in ruins or were conquered.  Yet they still had armies in the fight.  But by 1944, the Americans would take over and lead the fight.  Untouched by war (other than Pearl Harbor), the world’s largest economy was intact.  Took over war production for the Allies.  And American men volunteered to fight.  Including Hollywood greats like Jimmy Stewart who piloted B-24s.  The most dangerous place to be in World War II.  Before the P-51 Mustang entered service with her drop tanks to provide fighter protection all the way to and from their targets.

The second front opened with the greatest amphibious assault of all time.  The Canadians were making their second assault against Fortress Europe.  Their first, at Dieppe some two years earlier, ended badly.  Most were killed or captured.  But the Germans were tested.  And the knowledge put to use in 1944.  They and the Americans assaulted those beaches not to repel Nazi aggression from their soil.  But to help other nations to throw out the Nazi aggressors from their soil.  They didn’t fight to conquer.  They fought to liberate.  A rather new concept.  Even our then ally the Soviet Union didn’t quite do this.  They did liberate Eastern Europe from Nazi aggression, but they paid themselves handsomely for their efforts.  By taking Eastern Europe as spoils.  Exchanging the Nazi oppressor for a Soviet oppressor.

A lot of men died on this day in 1944.  And many more would die in the following year.  Their deaths helped keep liberty alive for millions.  Let’s not forget them today.  Let’s remember their selfless acts of courage.  For we live free today because they gave their lives for an ideal.  General Matthew Ridgeway, commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, reflected on the promise God made to Joshua on the eve of battle.  “I will not fail thee, nor forsake thee.”  The planners projected that 9 out of 10 paratroopers would die in battle on D-Day.  Thankfully, their losses were not that bad.  God did not fail them.  Nor forsake them.  And nor should we.

Recession?  What recession?

Of course, not everyone serves for an ideal.  A lot do it for the money.  As is evidenced during the worst recession since the Great Depression.  Because while the rest of the country suffers, the communities in and around Washington are doing just fine.  Home to 5 of the top ten richest counties in America (see Meet America’s Richest Counties by Nathan Vardi, Forbes.com, posted 5/13/2011 on Yahoo! Real Estate).

It’s No. 1, but it isn’t alone. In fact, four of the top ten richest counties in the nation are concentrated in the Virginia suburbs of Washington, and a fifth, Howard County, Md., is equidistant between Washington and Baltimore.

In recent decades northern Virginia has become an economic dynamo, driven by a private sector that feasts on government contracting. These counties are also home to corporate lobbyists, lawyers and consultants who work in or around the nation’s capital, soaking up federal government spending. And government-related hiring manages to keep the unemployment rate in places like Falls Church City down to 5.7%.

Recession?  What recession?

So while home values continue to fall throughout America and the national unemployment rate hovers at or above 9%, U.S. tax money is still flowing out from Washington as if there is no recession.  Government contracts.  Corporate lobbyists.  Lawyers and Consultants.  Feeding on all of that government spending.  This is not the ideal that men stormed beaches and jumped out of airplanes for in 1944.  To make people rich off of taxpayers struggling through difficult times.  God may not have failed these men.  But perhaps we did.

Inadequate Demand causes Unemployment, not Cheaper Workers in China and India

It would appear that Washington is more interested in the money than the people they represent.  And they’ve grown tired of the people they represent.  That uneducated rabble.  They don’t know how to vote (based on the 2010 midterm elections).  And they don’t understand monetary policy.  There are some who are tiring of this charade we call democracy.  Because what good is a democracy if the people are too stupid to know what’s best for them? 

And it’s just not the voters.  It’s those in Congress with an ‘R’ next to their name, too.  An Obama Fed nominee was shot down by the Republican opposition.  And he wrote an Op-Ed piece about it.  In it you can feel his exasperation of those less smart that he (see When a Nobel Prize Isn’t Enough by Peter A. Diamond posted on 6/5/2011 on The New York Times).

But understanding the labor market — and the process by which workers and jobs come together and separate — is critical to devising an effective monetary policy. The financial crisis has led to continuing high unemployment. The Fed has to properly assess the nature of that unemployment to be able to lower it as much as possible while avoiding inflation. If much of the unemployment is related to the business cycle — caused by a lack of adequate demand — the Fed can act to reduce it without touching off inflation. If instead the unemployment is primarily structural — caused by mismatches between the skills that companies need and the skills that workers have — aggressive Fed action to reduce it could be misguided.

In my Nobel acceptance speech in December, I discussed in detail the patterns of hiring in the American economy, and concluded that structural unemployment and issues of mismatch were not important in the slow recovery we have been experiencing, and thus not a reason to stop an accommodative monetary policy — a policy of keeping short-term interest rates exceptionally low and buying Treasury securities to keep long-term rates down. Analysis of the labor market is in fact central to monetary policy.

Well pahdon me while I play the grahnd piahno.  Nobel acceptance speech.  You can see why Obama nominated him.  He’s a good Keynesian economist that will toe the Obama line.  And encourage government growth.

These Keynesian policy wonks can’t see the forest for the trees, though.  Their answer to every recession is more government spending to correct for the lack of adequate demand.  Despite the fact that it was excessive government spending that gave us the mess we’re in.  Easy money from the Fed.  Which created the subprime mortgage crisis.  Well that and bad policy putting people into homes they couldn’t afford.  There’s the root cause for this never ending recession.  It wasn’t inadequate demand.  Or a mismatch between jobs and worker skills.  It was bad policy.  Fiscal, monetary, regulatory, etc.  This is what sends jobs to China and India.  Not inadequate demand.

Quantitative easing (QE) has not helped.  Unless you were a Wall Street investor borrowing money for free to invest.  They did okay during QE.  But it didn’t help anyone else.  In fact, it hurt everyone else.  Because there is inflation now.  It’s what pushed gas over $4/gallon again.  And made food prices go up.  Inflation courtesy of that QE.

But we should all worry about how distorted the confirmation process has become, and how little understanding of monetary policy there is among some of those responsible for its Congressional oversight. We need to preserve the independence of the Fed from efforts to politicize monetary policy and to limit the Fed’s ability to regulate financial firms…

Analytical expertise is needed to accomplish this, to make government more effective and efficient. Skilled analytical thinking should not be drowned out by mistaken, ideologically driven views that more is always better or less is always better. I had hoped to bring some of my own expertise and experience to the Fed. Now I hope someone else can.

The problem is that there are apparently too many dumb people.  And too much democracy.  Monetary policy and financial regulation should be in the hands of unelected experts chosen by people from the ‘correct’ political party.  Because these people know what’s best for us.  And the economy.

The NLRB goes after Boeing, helping Competitor Airbus

Or do they?

Boeing employs over 160,000 people.  To build all those planes.  Which is the leading export of the United States.  They’re not doing as well as they once did with Airbus on the scene.  Because Airbus doesn’t play fair.  They get government subsidies.  While Airbus claims Boeing does, too.  Planes are expensive to make.  And with Airbus taking such a large chunk of the market from Boeing, one would believe that the reason for this has to be cost.  And if Airbus planes are cheaper it’s probably because their governments subsidize them.

But that’s neither here nor there.  The point is that Boeing is a huge part of the U.S. economy.  It’s an economic juggernaut.  And you’d think government would do everything to help them to keep those 160,000 people employed.  And to keep exporting all of those airplanes.  So what does the Obama administration do?  They’re taking action against Boeing to make them less competitive.  They’re trying to prevent them from using a new factory in North Charleston, South Carolina.  Where they will use non-union labor (see Spat over Boeing plant sparks political firestorm by Allison Linn posted 6/6/2011 on msnbc).

The new factory is set to open in July. But in April the NLRB, a government agency charged with safeguarding union rights, filed a complaint accusing Boeing of violating labor law in its motive for locating the work in South Carolina.

The NLRB isn’t asking Boeing to close the new facility, but it does want the company to make a temporary production line in Washington state permanent.

Yes, Boeing is trying to be more productive.  They’re tired of fighting subsidized Airbus AND the high cost of union labor AND the costs of labor strikes.  Because they’re losing too many sales to Airbus.  Seems like a reasonable thing for Boeing to do.  But the National Labor Relations Board disagrees.  Because union dues support Democrat candidates.  And Barack Obama.  And even though “skilled analytical thinking should not be drowned out by mistaken, ideologically driven views,” it is.  For ideology always trumps analytical thinking when it favors Democrats.

“U.S. tax and regulatory policies already make it more attractive for many companies to build new manufacturing capacity overseas. That’s something the administration has said it wants to change and is taking steps to address. It appears that message hasn’t made it to the front offices of the NLRB,” McNerney wrote.

Boeing spokesman Tim Neale said the editorial should not be read as a threat that Boeing, the nation’s largest exporter and a major domestic employer, will mo[v]e operations overseas.

Moving manufacturing oversees results in higher unemployment.  So higher unemployment can result from U.S. tax and regulatory policies.  Because it moves manufacturing overseas.  Interesting.  Because there are some who believe unemployment is caused by inadequate demand.  Or a mismatch between jobs and worker skills.  And they would never entertain the thought that government policy caused this unemployment.  Because that’s just silly.  For government is full of experts using skilled analytical thinking.  Who know that in the ideal world they would be proven right.  And the only reason their policies fail is because the world isn’t ideal.  Yet.

Again, not quite the ideal that men stormed beaches and jumped out of airplanes for in 1944.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

LESSONS LEARNED #25: “War is costly. Peace, too.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - August 5th, 2010

AT THE HEIGHT of the Roman Empire, the empire reached from North Africa to Britannia (England), from Hispania (Spain) to Mesopotamia (approximately modern day Iraq).  When Roman power ruled the civilized world, there was peace.  The Pax Romana (Roman Peace).  The Romans built empire through conquest.  And Rome grew rich with the spoils of conquest.  For awhile, peace was only those quiet intervals between growth and conquest.  But with secure borders, a uniform government, a rule of law, a stable currency, bustling trade & markets and a military to be the world’s policeman, peace broke out.  For some 200 years.

Life was good for the Roman citizen.  As well as for those living in the empire.  The Romans modernized the provinces they conquered.  Made life better.  Even for the conquered people.  Although there were those who hated being subjugated by a foreign power.

Reg: They bled us white, the bastards. They’ve taken everything we had. And not just from us! From our fathers, and from our father’s fathers.

Loretta: And from our father’s father’s fathers.

Reg: Yeah.

Loretta: And from our father’s father’s father’s fathers.

Reg: Yeah, all right Stan, don’t belabor the point. And what have they ever given us in return?

Revolutionary I: The aqueduct?

Reg: What?

Revolutionary I: The aqueduct.

Reg: Oh. Yeah, yeah, they did give us that, ah, that’s true, yeah.

Revolutionary II: And the sanitation.

Loretta: Oh, yeah, the sanitation, Reg. Remember what the city used to be like.

Reg: Yeah, all right, I’ll grant you the aqueduct and sanitation, the two things the Romans have done.

Matthias: And the roads.

Reg: Oh, yeah, obviously the roads. I mean the roads go without saying, don’t they? But apart from the sanitation, the aqueduct, and the roads…

Revolutionary III: Irrigation.

Revolutionary I: Medicine.

Revolutionary IV: Education.

Reg: Yeah, yeah, all right, fair enough.

Revolutionary V: And the wine.

All revolutionaries except Reg: Oh, yeah! Right!

Rogers: Yeah! Yeah, that’s something we’d really miss Reg, if the Romans left. Huh.

Revolutionary VI: Public bathes.

Loretta: And it’s safe to walk in the streets at night now, Reg.

Rogers: Yeah, they certainly know how to keep order. Let’s face it; they’re the only ones who could in a place like this.

All revolutionaries except Reg: Hahaha…all right…

Reg: All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh-water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?

Revolutionary I: Brought peace?

Reg: Oh, peace! Shut up!

(From Monty Python’s The Life of Brian, 1979.)

Maintaining a peaceful empire is costly.  As people got more accustomed to peace and plenty, they began to complain about taxes.  Citizens refused to volunteer to serve in the Roman Legions maintaining that peace.  Barbarians began to serve in the Legions.  Some rose to command them.  Some Roman commanders came from the very people they were fighting in the border regions.  Soon Rome would rely on mercenaries (hired soldiers) to defend their borders.  All of this cost the empire.  It had to pay more and more to maintain the loyalty of the military.  Ditto for the huge bureaucracy administrating the empire.  And they lost control.  Trouble on the borders and economic collapse ended the peace.  And, ultimately, the empire.  The civilized world broke down and collapsed.  And barbarian leaders on the borders, hungry for conquest, attacked.  Plunging the former Roman provinces into war and instability.

RISING FROM THE ashes of the Roman Empire were the seeds of new empires.  And the ground that proved most fertile was the northern limit of the old empire.  England.

England started to assert herself with the growth of her navy.  With her borders secured, a uniform government, a rule of law, a stable currency, bustling trade & markets and a military to be the world’s policeman, peace broke out.  Again.  For about a hundred years.  During the Industrial Revolution.  After the defeat of Napoleon. 

Imperial Britain stretched across the globe.  The sun never set on the British Empire.  And wherever she went, she brought the rule of law, modernity, a sound economy and political stability.  Her old colonial possessions went on to be some of the richest, most prosperous and peaceful nations in the world.  India.  Australia.  New Zealand.  South Africa.  Canada.  And, of course, the United States of America.  She achieved her century of peace (Pax Britannia) by a balance of power.  She maintained peace by intervening in disputes, often on the side of the weaker nation.  She prevented stronger, aggressive nations from threatening her weaker neighbors.   And she provided a safe environment for the weaker nation to live peacefully in the shadows of stronger, more aggressive neighbors.

For a hundred years Britannia kept the peace.  In large part due to her Royal Navy, the most powerful and potent navy at the time.  If you ate any imported food or used any imported goods, it was thanks to the Royal Navy that kept the world’s sea lanes safe.  But this peace came with a price.  The rise of nationalism, the quest of new empires to establish their own overseas colonies and a change in the balance of power in Europe with the rise of Germany added to that price.  And then a shot fired in Sarajevo by a Serbian terrorist ignited a tinderbox.  The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by Gavrilo Princip started World War I.  The most bloody and expensive war at the time, it bankrupted Great Britain and ended her empire.  And left the world a less safe place. 

From the ashes of World War I rose new leaders with aspirations of world conquest.  Fascist Italy led by Benito Mussolini.  Nazi Germany led by Adolf Hitler.  Communist Russia led by Joseph Stalin.  Imperial Japan led by Hideki Tojo.  And the nation that led the victors in World War II would, by default, become the new world power.  The new world policeman.  The United States of America.

SO WHAT HAPPENED during the inter-war years that led to World War II?  War exhausted Britain and France.  Neither had the stomach for another war.  Britain continued to rely on the Royal Navy for protection (as an island nation, sea power is indispensable).  France built fixed fortifications (the Maginot Line).  Both were primarily defensive strategies. 

In America, General Billy Mitchell demonstrated the vulnerability of battleships to air power by sinking a battleship with an airplane (greatly flustering the naval high command).  Colonel George S. Patton developed an armored doctrine for an unenthused army and eventually transferred back to the horse cavalry.  Meanwhile, Imperial Japan was building aircraft carriers.  And Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Communist Russia developed air and armored doctrine while fighting in the Spanish Civil War.

Fascist Italy attacked Ethiopia in 1935 to rebuild the Roman Empire and make the Mediterranean Sea a Roman lake once again.  Nazi Germany launched World War II in 1939 by an armored assault on Poland with tactical air support.  Poland resisted with horse cavalry.  And lost.  Imperial Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941 to destroy American naval power in the Pacific.  They did a lot of damage.  But the American carriers, their prime objective, were at sea.  They would eventually meet those carriers later at the Battle of Midway.  Where they would lose four of their best carriers and many of their best aviators.  This tipped the balance of power in the Pacific to the Americans.

America was ill-prepared for war.  But American industry, the Arsenal of Democracy, ramped up and built the planes, tanks, guns, rifles and ships that would win the war.   It would come with a heavy price tag.  Global wars typically do.  Had there been a balance of power that would have checked the territorial ambitions of the aggressor nations, it would have been a different story.  Of course, having the power is one thing.  How you use it is another. 

France had more tanks than Germany before the outbreak of hostilities.  But the Nazis quickly overran France.  Why?  Doctrine.  France’s doctrine was to hide behind the security of the Maginot Line.  It was a defensive-only strategy.  She developed no armored doctrine.  The lesson they learned from World War I was that armies killed themselves attacking fixed defenses.  Germany, too, learned that lesson.  So their doctrine called for going around fixed defenses with fast-moving armor spearheads with tactical air support (i.e., blitzkrieg).  Formidable though the Maginot Line was, it could not attack.  And if the Nazis didn’t attack it, it did nothing but concentrate men and firepower away from the battle.

WHEN WE PULLED out of South Vietnam, we agreed to use American air power if North Vietnam violated the terms of the treaty ending that war.  Watergate changed all of that.  Even though JFK got us into Vietnam, it became Nixon’s war.  And a vindictive Congress wouldn’t have anything more to do with it.  The North tested the American will.  Saw that there was none.   Attacked.  And overran South Vietnam.  The message was clear to tyrants.  America will quit in the long run.  Especially after a large loss of life.

Other ‘retreats’ would reinforce this perception.  Especially in the Arab world.  The withdrawal from Lebanon after the bombing of the Marines’ barracks.  The withdrawal from Somalia after the Somalis dragged dead American troops through the streets of Mogadishu.  The Arab world even saw the victory in Desert Storm as a retreat.  The anti-American Arab world said that our invasion was about oil.  That what we really wanted was to topple Saddam Hussein and take his oil.  It was just another Christian Crusade into holy Islamic lands.  When we didn’t do that, the Arab world saw it as another American retreat.  That America didn’t have the will to endure a bloody battle to conquer Iraq. 

So some in the Arab world would test America.  Al Qaeda.  Headed by Osama bin Laden.  They started small and became more daring.  World Trade Center bombing.  Tanzanian Embassy bombing.  Kenyan Embassy bombing.  Khobar Towers bombing.  The USS Cole attack.  And they paid little for these attacks.  America didn’t fight back.  But their luck ran out on September 11, 2001.  Because America finally fought back.

PUBLIC ENEMY NUMBER one, Osama bin Laden, belonged to the conservative Sunni sect of Islam called Wahhabi.  They have a large following in Saudi Arabia.  The Wahhabi have a delicate relationship with the Saudi Royal family.  They disapprove of the Western displays of wealth in the House of Saud. 

Al-Qaeda was a shadowy enemy.  We confronted them in the mountains of Afghanistan where the Taliban gave them a safe sanctuary.  We attacked.  Knocked the Taliban from power.  Drove al-Qaeda underground.  But we could not stop their funding.

Wahhabi money from Saudi Arabia financed 9/11.  And the money continued to flow.  The Saudis would not intervene on behalf of America.  They feared any crackdown on the Wahhabi could unleash a civil war.  So America needed leverage to get Saudi cooperation.  And they found it in an old nemesis, Saddam Hussein. 

A Sunni minority ruled Iraq.  The Saudis did not like Saddam Hussein.  However, they liked the balance of power he offered to Iran.  Iran was Shiite.  As much as the Saudis did not like Saddam, they disliked Shiite Iran more.  This was the American lever.

After some diplomatic gymnastics, the invasion of Iraq was set.  The Saudis thought we were bluffing.  They didn’t believe we would invade Iraq.  Never in a million years.  If we didn’t do it in Desert Storm when we had the force in place to do it and didn’t, there was no way the Americans would amass another coalition and redeploy forces to the region again.  Especially because America doesn’t like long, drawn out, bloody wars.  Which an invasion of Iraq would surely be.

They asked us to remove our forces from the Saudi bases.  We did.  Now they were getting nervous.  That was the political game.  Make some noise to show the Arab world you weren’t an American toady.  But, secretly, you want those American forces to remain.  That American presence did provide security.  And stability.  After the invasion of Kuwait, it sure looked like Saudi Arabia would be next.  It was only that large American force in the desert that changed that inevitability. 

The Americans invaded.  And conquered.  Now the Saudis had a vested interest in helping the Americans.  They needed them to be successful in Iraq.  To contain Iran.  The lever worked.  The Saudis stemmed the flow of Wahhabi money to al-Qaeda.  The invasion of Iraq proved to be one of the most effective battles in the war on terrorism.  

HISTORY HAS SHOWN that a balance of power can lead to peace.  It has also shown that a superpower can enforce a larger peace.  But it also has shown that there is good and bad when it comes to power.  The Romans could be cruel, but so were most in that time.  The road to empire, after all, started out simply as a quest to provide a buffer between Rome and the hostile barbarians on her borders.  Rome, then, expanded in pursuit of peace.  (Initially, at least.)  And then used her power to maintain peace.

Many view Great Britain as the successor to the Roman Empire.  And many view America as the successor to the British Empire.  These powers share many things (rule of law, an advanced civilization, political stability, etc.).  Perhaps the greatest, though, is a powerful military.  And how it was/is used.  As a powerful deterrent to an aggressor nation.  To protect trade routes.  To maintain peace.  Malign these empires/nations all you will, but the greatest periods of world peace were due to their military power.  And their will to use that military power.  Expensive as that was.  Is.

So, yes, wars are costly.  Peace, too.  Sometimes, though, we must fight wars.  But we can avoid a lot of them.  By a peace-time military force that acts as a deterrent.  Because there are bad guys out there.  Who only respect one thing.  And it isn’t diplomacy.  Often the only thing preventing them from waging a cruel war of conquest is a potent military and a willing leader to use it.  If a tyrant knows he will face a military consequence for acting, he may not act.  When he knows that consequence will be devastating, he will not act.  But if he knows a nation hasn’t the military power or the will to use military power, he will act.  Just as Hitler did.  As Mussolini did.  As Tojo did.  And as Osama bin Laden did.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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