Kim Jong Un turns to Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf for Advice for North Korea’s Economic Ills

Posted by PITHOCRATES - June 22nd, 2013

Week in Review

President Bill Clinton entered into an agreement to help them build two nuclear reactors to produce electric power if the North Koreans agreed to give up their nuclear weapons program.   But they went ahead and built nuclear weapons anywhere.  President Clinton also gave them some satellite knowledge.  Navigational black boxes.  Allowing them to launch a satellite into space.  Which upon launching crashed in the ocean.   Which the North Koreans salvaged.  And got the navigational black box.  Giving them not only nuclear weapons but the knowledge to create an ICBM to deliver that nuclear weapon.  And ever since they’ve threatened us with nuclear belligerency to get what they want.  They agree to stand down on their nuclear weapon program in exchange for food or energy aid.  And when that aid runs out they threaten us with nuclear belligerency again.

President George W. Bush included North Korea in the Axis of Evil.  And was not as friendly to Kim Jong Il as his predecessor was.  But Kim Jong Il is dead now.  And his son Kim Jong Un has taken over.  So how much better did things get with the new Kim?  Not much.  In fact, they may have gotten worse (see Report: Kim Jong Un handing out copies of ‘Mein Kampf’ to senior North Korean officials by Max Fisher posted 6/17/2013 on The Washington Post).

Senior North Korean officials received copies of “Mein Kampf,” Adolf Hitler’s rambling prison memoir, as gifts for Kim Jong Un’s birthday this January, according to a report by New Focus International, a North Korean news organization that sources from defectors and volunteer citizens within the country…

The book was apparently not distributed to endorse Nazism so much as to draw attention to Germany’s economic and military reconstruction after World War One…

“Kim Jong Un gave a lecture to high-ranking officials, stressing that we must pursue the policy of Byungjin in terms of nuclear and economic development,” New Focus’s North Korean source told them by phone. “Byungjin” translates literally to “in tandem” and refers to official policy of developing the nuclear program and economy simultaneously.

The nuclear program is still front and center in national policy.  Some things never change.

So they’re going to take some economic lessons from Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf?  To recreate the economic miracle Hitler had following World War I?  It’s a little too late for that.  For a lot of the things Hitler did North Korea already has done.  Seize private property.  Limit imports.  Abolish trade unions.  Cut wages.  Force people to work longer hours.  Default on debt.  Print money to pay for public works projects.  And military rearmament.  Then plan on using the proceeds from world conquest to fix their balance sheet.

A lot of these are non-options for Kim Jong Un.  For there is no private property to seize.  They don’t have any trade unions demanding higher wages or better working conditions to abolish.  Public work projects?  If they haven’t been able to light up the night after all of these years with a grand public works project chances are they never will.  They already have a military-first national policy like the Nazis did.  They have one of the largest land armies in the world.  And already have nuclear weapons.  Yet they still have a horrible economy.  Proving again Keynesian economics doesn’t work.  For that was basically what Hitler had.  An economic system somewhere between the Soviet Union and the United States.  State capitalism.  Heavy on the state.

But for state capitalism to work you need a large private sector economy to interfere in.  And North Korea just doesn’t have that.  What they have is nothing but state spending.  And state spending just doesn’t work.  If it did North Korea’s economy would be greater and stronger than South Korea’s economy.  But it’s not.  For South Korea has lit up their night.  And they are doing quite well.  So well that they are one of the four Asian Tigers.  Because they embraced free market capitalism.  And when they do stray into state capitalism theirs is a kind that is very heavy on the capitalism.  Not the state.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

North Korea threatens the United States with Nuclear War

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 26th, 2013

Week in Review

For awhile there we had hope that Kim Jong Un might not be like his dad.  Kim Jong Il.   That maybe North Korea would change.  Maybe loosen up a bit.  And not be all about famine and nuclear weapons.  But it appears that the new Kim Jong is as bad as the old Kim Jong.  Perhaps even worse (see China calls for talks after North Korean threat by Barbara Demick posted 1/24/2013 on the Los Angeles Times).

With North Korea openly threatening the United States with nuclear weapons, China called Thursday for a new round of diplomacy and appears to be growing increasingly frustrated with its longtime ally.

Beijing’s calls for intervention come amid a torrent of belligerent language from Pyongyang, angered by a United Nations resolution earlier in the week expanding sanctions over its missile and nuclear program.

The latest escalation came Thursday when Pyongyang lashed out at the United States, which it called the “archenemy of the Korean people.’’

“We are not disguising the fact that the various satellites and long-range rockets that we will fire and the high-level nuclear test we will carry out are targeted at the United States,” North Korea’s National Defense Commission said in a statement released by the official news service.

“Settling accounts with the U.S. needs to be done with force, not with words,” it said.

Not true.  The United States likes the people in Korea.  North and South.  It’s the government in the North that the United States has a problem with.  As do the good people suffering in North Korea.  Who would like to escape the oppression of Kim Jong Un.  And to know life without hunger.  To have a home.  Filled with the modern conveniences of life.

The Americans aren’t a threat to the people in North Korea.  They are a threat to the regime that oppresses these people.  We oppose the oppressive regime.  As we oppose regimes everywhere that oppress their people.  We are their friend.  And they know that.  Which is why the United States is the archenemy of North Korea’s ruling regime.  Because we give their people hope.  The last thing Kim Jong Un wants his people to have.

It is the inevitable destiny that the Korean peninsula reunites.  But as the Germans learned at the end of the Cold War this is not easy.  And is costly.  Once the regime falls, and it will fall, South Korea will have a humanitarian crisis on their hands.  China, too.  Millions of people who need jobs.  And food.  Which is probably why China is in no hurry to see Kim Jong Un go.  Even though they’re losing their patience with their longtime ally.  What we need now is a plan to deal with post-Communist North Korea.

North Korea needs massive infrastructure investments.  If you look at the Korean peninsula coastline at night you can tell where South Korea ends and North Korea begins.  For there will be light and life in South Korea after dark.  And only darkness in North Korea.  Someone has to build up that infrastructure.  Someone has to build housing.  Someone has to build the goods to go in those homes.  And someone has to build the factories to build those goods.  North Korea has a lot of people.  And a lot of things that need to be done.  All they need is a plan.  So they can hit the ground running.  To speed up the unification process.  While minimizing the pain of unification.  And the cost South Korea will have to bear.

Or we can continue this dance forever.  Sanctions.  Nuclear threats.  And aid.  We try to punish them for advancing their nuclear program.  They threaten something nuclear.  We negotiate away the nuclear threat in exchange for more aid.  The same old song and dance we’ve been doing for decades.  It’s gotten so old that even the Chinese are tiring of it.  Perhaps suggesting they may be open to a little regime change.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

Russians still on Edge over Missile-Defense Sites despite Obama’s Promise to Please the Russians after his Election

Posted by PITHOCRATES - May 5th, 2012

Week in Review

Apparently President Obama’s whispered words to Russian president Dmitry Medvedev to tell incoming Russian president Vladimir Putin not to worry about the missile-defense sites did little to assuage Russian angst.  He told Dmitry to tell Vladimir that he’ll have more flexibility once the 2012 election was over.  Because without having to worry about pleasing the people for yet another election he could act with impunity.  Dmitry said he would tell Vladimir.  And yet the Russians are still really upset over the missile-defense sites.  What, do they think Obama’s going to lose the 2012 election?  Perhaps (see Russian General Threatens ‘Pre-emptive’ Attacks by ANDREW E. KRAMER posted 5/3/2012 on The New York Times).

A senior Russian general threatened on Wednesday pre-emptive attacks on missile-defense sites in Poland and elsewhere in Eastern Europe in the event of a crisis, underscoring the Kremlin’s opposition to the Obama administration’s plans and further undermining relations between the countries…

Mr. Vershbow said NATO interceptors would not be able to be launched quickly enough to intercept a Russian intercontinental ballistic missile as it traveled toward the United States, calling it “a question of science and geography.” He noted that some Russian scientists and policy experts agreed with this assessment.

President George W. Bush proposed the system for Eastern Europe after withdrawing from the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty over Russia’s objections. President Obama first stalled the Eastern European program as part of the so-called reset in relations and then revived it in a new format, called the Phased Adaptive Approach.

Russian generals floated a number of objections to the revised plan. General Makarov, in his speech, said the United States was refusing to offer written guarantees that the interceptor missiles directed at Iran would not have the capacity to hit a Russian ICBM in flight as it streaked toward the United States with a nuclear warhead. American officials have said the proposed system will not have that capability.

Remember the days of Ronald Reagan?  When we were working on plans to put an antimissile defense system into space?  Over Soviet protests?  Those were the days.  When we did things to protect the United States.  And not try to be nice to people who weren’t playing nice with us.

The Left called Ronald Reagan a cowboy.  Not in a romantic way.  But as an insult.  The Left said he was too swaggering and putting the U.S. into danger with all of his anti-communist talk.  That we needed to talk to the Soviets.  Like Carter talked to the Russians.  And who, incidentally, caused the Soviets to change their nuclear policy.  Because of Carter’s displayed weakness the Soviets established a first-strike nuclear option.  That they came close to using during the Carter administration.  Because they were sure they could get away with doing it.

The Left didn’t like George W. Bush either.  For the same reasons.  Which is why the Obama administration sent Hillary Clinton to Russia with a ‘reset’ button to reset U.S.-Russian relations.  To undo all the damage George W. Bush, another cowboy, did.  Meanwhile Vladimir is riding around shirtless.  Showing his people, and the world, what a cowboy he is.  But for some reason, the Left doesn’t mind when Putin swaggers.

So apparently cowboys are bad unless they’re Russian cowboys.  And nuclear weapons are bad unless they’re Russian nuclear weapons.  And American and NATO defenses are good when they can’t intercept Russian nuclear ICBMs. 

What is wrong with this picture?

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

North Korea uses its Nuclear Leverage to shake down the United States for some Food Aid

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 4th, 2012

Week in Review

What’s the difference between North Korea and Iran?  The Iranian government is on a mission from God.  The Stalinist government of the North Koreans just wants to feed their people enough to keep them from rising up and challenging their autocratic power.  So they can continue to live in extreme comfort and plenty while the North Korean masses often mark time by the most recent famine (see U.S. announces diplomatic breakthrough with North Korea by Laura Rozen posted 2/29/2012 on Yahoo! News).

Under an agreement reached in direct talks in Beijing last week, North Korea has agreed to allow the return of nuclear inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency, and has agreed to implement a moratorium on long-range missile tests, nuclear tests, and nuclear activities  at Yongbyon, including uranium enrichment activities, the State Department said. In return, the United States will provide North Korea with a large food aid package…

Arms control experts welcomed the signs of progress in U.S. efforts to engage Pyongyang. But U.S. North Korea experts and foreign policy hands advised high caution in assessing Pyongyang’s intent, given its track record of abrupt reversals.

“These steps are modestly significant,” Richard Bush, director of Northeast Asian studies at the Brookings Institution, said in a statement Thursday. However, he noted, they “are only what negotiators call ‘confidence-building measures.’ They could indeed be an initial step on a path towards serious negotiations … Or they could simply be a ploy to get nutritional assistance and meddle in South Korean politics. North Korea’s record suggests the latter, but we shall see.”

This is the little dance we do with North Korea.  Their people starve.  They play with their nuclear toys.  And use their nuclear leverage.  We come in and offer them food aid if they put down their nuclear toys.  They do.  We give them food aid.  Then when the next famine rolls along they pick up their nuclear toys again.  And we resume our little dance.  It won’t be like this in Iran. 

The radical Islamists have a plan.  And it is a twofold plan.  First they want to incinerate Israel.  Then they want to reestablish their caliphate and rule the world.  And they will use a unique form of gunboat diplomacy.  Where they’ll back their diplomacy with the awesome destructive power of their nuclear weapons.

North Korea is dangerous.  But more in a scenario where the supreme ruler might go crazy.  Or get backed into a corner.  Where he has no options to keep himself in power.  And in a life of comfort and plenty.  Then like a child who can’t have his way he will launch his nuclear weapons so no one can have their way.  Of course the retaliation will be swift.  And there will be no more Stalinist government left in North Korea.  Hopefully without harming the good people of North Korea.  The suffering masses.  Whereas any retaliation against a strike from a nuclear Iran will be answered by an angry Islamist uprising in countries throughout the world. 

So is a nuclear North Korea dangerous?  Yes.  But manageable.  At least, so far.  Is a nuclear Iran dangerous?  Yes.  So dangerous that we really don’t want to get to the ‘North Korea’ stage in Iran.  Because radical Islamists don’t care about anything but their mission from God.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

Bachman and Paul do Well in Iowa, Obama goes on Bus Tour

Posted by PITHOCRATES - August 13th, 2011

Bachman wins Iowa Straw Poll with Ron Paul a very Close Second

All eyes were on Iowa.  At least the eyes that were interested in the Ames straw poll.  For after great mirth, merriment, food and entertainment, we have a winner (see Bachmann wins Ames straw poll; Ron Paul takes second place by Michael O’Brien and Cameron Joseph posted 8/13/2011 on The Hill).

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) emerged victorious Saturday in an influential straw poll of Republican voters in Ames, Iowa, cementing her status as the early frontrunner for February’s caucuses in the state…

A House member has never finished in the top two at Ames; extraordinarily, two House lawmakers finished nearly neck-and-neck toward the top. Bachmann is the first woman to ever win the straw poll.

And here’s how the other candidates did.  Note that those marked with an asterisk did not participate in the straw poll.  Still they garnered some write-in votes.

  1. Michele Bachmann (4,823 votes)
  2. Ron Paul (4,671 votes)
  3. Tim Pawlenty (2,293 votes)
  4. Rick Santorum (1,689 votes)
  5. Herman Cain (1,520 votes)
  6. Thaddeus McCotter (35 votes)
  7. Rick Perry* (718 votes)
  8. Mitt Romney* (567 votes)
  9. Newt Gingrich* (385 votes)
  10. Jon Huntsman* (69 votes)

Michelle Bachman won.  But Ron Paul was a close second.  One is a Reagan conservative.  The other is a libertarian.  There are similarities between these positions.  Both believe in a solid, anti-Keynesian monetary policy.  And there are differences.  Such as the use of military power.  Paul is okay with Iran getting nuclear weapons and wouldn’t use the military to prevent this from happening.  Bachman is not and would use the military.  With Iran being one of the major sponsors of terrorism, the people may side with Bachman on this one as the primaries unfold.  It will be interesting to watch how this develops.

History has Shown the Iowa Straw Poll is not the Strongest of Indicators

So is Bachman now the Republican frontrunner?  Perhaps in Iowa.  But history has shown the Iowa straw poll is not the strongest of indicators (see Bachmann triumphs at Iowa straw poll as Perry joins Republican presidential race by Mike Glover and Philip Elliott, Associated Press, posted 8/13/2011 on the Toronto Star).

The straw poll has a mixed record of predicting the outcome of the precinct caucuses.

In 2008, Romney won the straw poll, but the big news was the surprising second-place showing of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee. Huckabee won the Iowa caucuses, but dropped from the race soon after. Sen. John McCain, who eventually won the nomination, didn’t compete in the straw poll and finished in 10th place.

So the straw poll probably doesn’t mean a whole lot. Other than who had the best food and entertainment in their tents.  Perhaps this is why Romney didn’t participate this year.  Because winning didn’t help him last time.

Maureen Dowd apparently doesn’t like Mitt Romney or Corporations

And speaking of Mitt Romney, Maureen Dowd wrote a slam piece on him in today’s New York Times (see Power to the Corporation! By Maureen Dowd posted 8/13/2011 on The New York Times).

At the fair, Romney — whose net worth is between $190 million and $250 million — once again went manly by flipping a pork chop on a grill and facing down hecklers worried about cuts in Social Security. When a man in the audience yelled that corporations should be taxed more, Romney replied, “Corporations are people, my friend…”

Of the corporation, by the corporation, for the corporation. We the corporation. Corporations who need corporations are the luckiest corporations in the world. Power to the corporation!

Interesting this hostility to corporations.  For she works for a corporation.  The New York Times Company.  In fact she’s one of those ‘people’ Romney referred to.  Those are people who work for corporations.  Those are people who manage corporations.  Those are people who own the stocks of corporation.  And corporations make things for the people.  Like The New York Times publishes a newspaper for the people.  I mean, without corporations, there’d be a lot less stuff in the world.  A whole lot fewer jobs.  And a lot less pay for Maureen Dowd.  Guess she just doesn’t understand how business works.

Obama takes a Page from the Sarah Palin Handbook and goes on his own Bus Tour

And here’s someone else who doesn’t know how business works.  President Obama.  After some two and a half years in the White House he doesn’t have much to show after making jobs job one.  Remember that laser-like focus on jobs?  Well he failed miserably.  The economy is in the toilet.  So he is going on a bus tour (ala Sarah Palin) of states important for his reelection.  Where he is losing popularity.  From Independents.  And even from those on the Left (see Obama sets sights on rural America to talk jobs by Ken Thomas, Associated Press, posted 8/13/2011 on The Washington Times).

Yet Obama also finds himself under pressure from the left to generate jobs and raise taxes on the wealthy.

Most Democrats, said MoveOn.org’s Justin Ruben, “have not been offering a clear prescription for actually getting the economy moving.”

Obama told workers in Michigan that he plans to roll out more economic plans “that will help businesses hire and put people back to work.” That’s an approach Democrats hope will set the tone for next year’s election in the Midwest and beyond.

More economic plans?  You mean like all you did these past two and half years, Mr. President?  Shutting down the oil industry and pouring money into green energy?  To subsidize cars people don’t want to buy and aren’t buying?  More stimulus for ‘shovel ready’ jobs?  When that last stimulus was approximately 88% pork and earmarks?  And your signature accomplishment?  Obamacare?  That pushed spending in the next decade so high that S&P downgraded our credit rating?  Gee, thanks but no thanks.  We’d rather weather this without any more help from you thank you very much.

The Only Thing Important now is the 2012 Election

Everyone is focused on the 2012 election.  The Republican presidential candidates.  And the president.  Who has apparently fixed all of the nation’s problems that he can take a leisurely bus ride through the Midwest.  And why not?  It’s not like there’s any pressing business back in Washington.

No, everything is super fine.  The only thing important now is the 2012 election.  So it’s time to go out there and get some pats on the back.  And tell everyone how he’s going to make things even better.  The best is yet to come.  And you don’t want to miss the second act.  So remember to vote for me.  Especially if you want more of the same.  Oh, and anything you’re not happy with?  It’s George W. Bush‘s fault.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

LESSONS LEARNED #26: “If we need Big Government to protect us from ourselves, then our public schools can’t be the best place to learn.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - August 12th, 2010

WE ARE WHAT they teach us.  And here is a little of what our teachers taught us.  And a little of what we learned by observation.

WHEN I WAS in grade school, our teachers went on strike.  It was great.  Another week or so of summer vacation.  But I saw a curious thing.  Some of my classmates were carrying picket signs.  And there they were, walking with the teachers.  I could not understand why anyone would want to help to end an extended summer vacation.  That’s all I knew about a teacher’s strike.  I had no idea why they didn’t want to go back to work.  I just knew it meant I didn’t have to go back to school yet.

The signs my fellow students carried said something about making our schools better.  As kids typically don’t like being in school, I couldn’t imagine they thought much about improving the educational system.  Other than greatly shortening the school day.  And school year.  But giving a pay raise to our teachers?  Giving them more benefits?  How, exactly, was that going to make school better?  I mean, if they got more pay and benefits, our education would get worse, not better.  They would just transfer money from the classroom to the teachers.  Unless the city raised property taxes to replace the classroom money that was given to the teachers.  And that would only increase the household costs of these kids’ parents.  Meaning less presents at Christmas.  Couldn’t these kids see the folly of their ways?

Of course they couldn’t.  They were just useful pawns.  They hadn’t the foggiest idea why teachers go on strike.  The teachers told them what to say.  What to think.  And they lied to these kids.  They weren’t striking because they wanted more money and better benefits.  Which they were.  No.  They told these innocent children that they were striking so they could have a better art department.  A better music department.  Better field trips.  That’s why these teachers were on the picket lines.  For the children.  And that every time there were cuts in the classroom, it was because of the greed of their parents who didn’t approve a millage.  Or who bitched about rising property taxes.  It was never their OWN greed.  Never that.

WE HAD A mock election when I was in 7th grade.  It was an ‘exercise in democracy’.  I remember voting for the Democrat candidate.  I don’t know why.  I knew nothing about politics.  I had only recently quit playing with my toy cars.  I was still reading The Hardy Boys mystery novels.  And thinking about the pretty girls in class.  What I don’t remember was spending much time thinking about the presidential election.  But there I was, voting for the Democrat candidate.  Who won in our little mock election.  But how did I, as well as my fellow students, know enough about politics to vote for the Democrat candidate?

Obviously, they taught us what to think.  That the Democrat candidate was the better candidate.  Because he was for the working man.  And cared about the little people.  That the Democrats cared about education.  Not profits.  All these touchy feely things.  Which was about all a kid could understand.  A kid can’t understand monetary or fiscal policy.  The intricacies of foreign policy.  They don’t have a clue about those things.  But kids do know that they should play nice.  And that’s what the Democrats are all about.  Playing nice.  And providing political muscle for the teachers’ unions in exchange for votes.  And obedient little minds of mush that will one day become voters.

I HAD A speech/debate class in high school.  Our teacher used the latest in progressive teaching methods.  A lot of touchy feely stuff.  Feel more than think.  We often did these exercises where the class as a whole debated the pros and cons of a particular position.  One day we went through a list of five or so.  I found the last one interesting.  It was about a ‘death ray’.

I had recently watched a program about nuclear weapons.  I learned that the size of their warheads was a function of the accuracy of the weapons.  They needed a big radius of destruction to guarantee the destruction of the target.  This is true for all weapon systems, conventional or nuclear.  The less accurate they are, the bigger the destructive force required.  (Whereas smart weapons today can have smaller warheads because they can be steered onto target.)  The more accurate the weapon, the less destructive it can be.  The less collateral damage there would be.  Less civilian dead.  The lesson described the ‘death ray’ as a weapon of pinpoint accuracy.  Based on what I just recently learned, I thought that it would be very interesting to discuss the pros of such a weapon.

When we finished discussing the position before the ‘death ray’, he said something like it was obvious that no one would argue for such a weapon system.  So there was no point in discussing it.  And then, as an afterthought, he said “unless someone does” with a condescending smirk.  I raised my hand.  I began to make some positive points.  He cut me off.  There was to be no discussion in favor of any weapon system in his class.  Turns out he was anti-war.  Free speech was one thing but not when you disagree with the program.

TWO BOOKS THAT that stand out from high school that were required reading are The Grapes of Wrath and Johnny Got His Gun.  You couldn’t find a couple of more depressing books if you tried.  The Grapes of Wrath was about the plight of a family who lost the farm during the dust bowl of the Great Depression.  In it you learned that bankers were evil.  Rich people were evil.  That Big Business was evil and exploited the poor.  Whereas poor people were virtuous.  And only poor people helped other poor people.  That Big Government was good and helped the poor people.  That FDR’s New Deal was good and helped the poor people.  That unions are good and protect those who Big Business exploits.  You get the picture?  Democrats good.  Republicans bad.  Because the Democrats take care of the little guy.  And evil bankers and fat cats are all Republicans.  Or so we were taught.

Johnny Got His Gun is an anti-war book.  It’s about a U.S. veteran of World War I.  Joe Bonham.  He lost about every part of the human body you could.  And yet they kept him alive.  I read it in the 10th grade.  Young and impressionable, I saw the folly of war.  War hurt good, young men like poor Joe Bonham.  (Incidentally, the name ‘Bonham’?  It’s from the French ‘bon homme’, good man.)  A pity only the anti-war crowd read it.  Apparently no one read it in Germany or Italy or the Soviet Union.  Maybe if their citizens did read it World War II would not have broken out.  Thankfully for the free world, though, men did serve in the armed forces despite what happened to poor Joe Bonham.  And they saved liberty.  And the burning of books did not spread further.  And books like this, because of men who did pick up a gun, remain in the public school curriculum.

Of course, you know why they (the public school teachers) are anti-war, don’t you?  It’s simple.  Any money spent on the military is money not spent on them.

I HAD AN electronics teacher in high school who was really cool.  He let us drink coffee in class (or, should I say, cream and sugar with some coffee).  He’d send a student across the street to buy donuts to eat with our coffee.  And he taught us how to build little black boxes that could unscramble scrambled television.  He was also a pretty good teacher.  A PNP transistor symbol?  The arrow was P-N (peein’) on the base.  (An NPN transistor symbol pointed away from the base.)  The resistor color code?  Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.  The whore.  (Hey, this stuff was funny when you’re only 16 years old.)  He even set up an interview for me at an electronic repair shop.  He liked being a teacher.  But he enjoyed doing concrete flatwork, too.  One of those things he did to pay the bills while in college.  And kept doing after college.  And that’s what he did during the summer, the peak of the construction season.  And made good money doing it.

MY MOM WORKED as a volunteer at my grade school.  She got to know the teachers pretty well.  She even went to their homes.  One lived not too far away from us.  I went with her once or twice.  Talk about surreal.  Seeing your teacher outside the school.  Acting so un-teacher-like.  Wearing something she doesn’t wear to school.  Having fun.  Laughing and joking.  And seeing her being a mom to her own kids.  That was weird.  We treated her politely and with respect in school.  Her kids whined “maaaa” at home just like I did when I was at home.  My teacher was just a normal person.  Human, almost.

But what really struck me then was that though they lived in the same general area as we did, they had more.  Bigger house.  With nicer stuff.  A newer car in the driveway.  More presents under their Christmas tree.  And in bigger boxes.  It was a ‘blue-collar’ neighborhood.  Her husband was a ‘blue-collar’ worker.  Just like my dad.  But my mom volunteered.  My teacher was, well, a teacher.  The ultimate second income in a two income family.  Good pay and benefits.  And no child care to worry about.  Teachers are off when their kids are off.  Holidays.  Breaks.  Snow days.  And, of course, summer vacation.  It just didn’t get better for a working mom.

IT IS INTERESTING that people become more conservative with age.  They may start out Democrat.  But after working awhile or raising a family, they often become Republican.  Not all of them.  But a lot.  The net number of people changing from Democrat to Republican far exceeds those changing from Republican to Democrat.  If there are any.  Other than for political reasons (in a desperate attempt to get reelected by switching parties).  That’s why the Democrats depend on the youth vote.  Because the youth vote is an uninformed voted.  They haven’t been deprogrammed yet.  They still toe the party line.  Because they don’t know any better.  Yet.

As we work and live in the real world, though, away from the insulated life of home or the college campus, things change.  We get older.  And wiser.  Less naive.  Less idealistic.  Less ignorant.  That’s why there is a net change from Democrat to Republican.  We grow up.  And start thinking for ourselves.  And try as they might during our public school indoctrination, we stop being sheep.  Eventually.  We strop bleating their mantra.  ‘Big Government good.  Private sector bad’.  Why?  Because we see that public school teachers and government workers live a lot better than we do.  This privileged few, this ruling elite, continue to take from us and respond with condescending arrogance when we complain.  Angry that we don’t mind our place in the lower strata of society.  Where we belong.

And they are nervous.  They can only maintain their elite status as long as we pay for it.  The more we learn, though, the less we are willing to support this aristocracy.  And they know it.  So they try to keep us dumbed down.  For an educated constituency is the greatest threat to Big Government.  And the public school system.  This self-proclaimed aristocracy.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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