4/21/22

Cold War 2.0 and Conservatives; The New, the Old and the Ugly

During Cold War 1.0 popular conservatives and aristocratic conservatives had common cause against Communism atheism. Today that relationship is dysfunctional for popular conservatives and practical for elitist 1% conservatives. The white middle class from which popular conservatism built its base were beneficiaries of President Roosevelt’s (F.D.R.) progressive taxation policy that continued until the end of Cold War 1.0 in reasonably good form. When Cold War 1.0 ended in December 1989 they failed to adapt and adjust their political relationship to the rich conservatives they were loyal to.

 Capital increases faster than wages. Capital in the 21st Century by Dr. Thomas Piketty- a French economist, examined that facticity historically.  All things being equal, wealth concentrates as capital compounds and increases faster than the rise of wages. For example, if capital rises 7% a year, wages simultaneously average increases of 2 or 3% a year. If one inherits a couple million dollars and invests it in a market index fund the value rises faster than worker wages, So one may never need to work, and if one does work in a good-paying job and invests capital in an indexed stock fund, the capital increase beats average worker wages in a landslide fiscal levitation updraft. The largest capitalists tend to buy up the lesser with the pace of wealth increasing faster with greater concentration of capital. In other words, modern popular conservatives are sold out by their rich political patrons.

 During Cold War 1.0  when the entire principle of free enterprise was being defended by most people in the west, as well as traditional, non-communist-atheist social values, popular conservatives could find political support from elites who in turn were paying higher progressive tax rates that kept the differences between the rich and middle class more or less in check.

  With the end of Cold War 1.0 popular conservatives continued to support political causes of elite conservatives such as tax cuts for the rich while the elite conservatives tended to move toward formerly communist moral values (not economic values) such as abortion, homosexuality, equality of women in the workforce in regard to wages, dope use for the masses. Promiscuous sex (communists had tolerated the concept of the commonality of women for sexual use outside of the parameters of marriage). Popular conservatives did not understand the function of capital increasing faster than wages concentrating wealth to the elites and continued to support the Republican party platform of tax cuts.

  Democrats like President Biden and President Obama permitted tax cuts for the rich and were in agreement with most moral paradigms of the formerly elite conservatives that became known in some respects, as Rhinos (Republicans in name only). For example, while popular conservatives might be strongly in opposition to illegal migration to the United States, Democrats and 1% Elite Republicans tended to support it for different reasons; Democrats because it brought in support for an anti-white conservative voter base, and the rich because it brought in cheap labor that increased  corporate profit while undermining popular conservative ability to have political influence that might  keep wages for conservatives high and rising proportionately as they were in the golden post-World War 2 era economies with high Roosevelt tax rates on the rich.

 Democrats were able to characterize popular conservatives as racists and fascists after Cold War 1.0 concluded and bringing more political power to masses they could mobilize to support their political agendas that included race rights, expropriation of marriage from heterosexuals to homosexuals and bi-sexuals and lately, efforts to re-unionize the corporate world. During the initial modern era of integrating the national economy labor unions had been in decline. With the availability of a world of cheap labor after the Cold War 1.0 the logic of unions competing against foreign cheap labor where formerly American made products where relocated for production to became even less. Unions took over most U.S. Government operations for their primary residence, and apparently media broadcasting and Hollywood too that in turn served as platforms to promote a leftist agenda that also was an agenda useful for elitist conservative economic ideas concerning American labor and political power control of the mass electorate.

 Interestingly the seeds for starting Cold War 2.0 were sewn by a Democrat President Bill Clinton when he supported seizing the traditional Russian Ukrainian homeland as a settlement with Boris Yeltsin to end the former Soviet Union. Russians would never accept the loss of their homeland to the west even as an independent nation.  Soviet President Boris Yeltsin, like Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, gave up land for peace to end hostilities and buy time for his nation to reorganize, kicking the can down the road. The recent war in Ukraine formalized ossification of Cold War 2.0 that had pre-started with Russian annexation of Crimea. I never anticipated that a line up of Clinton-Obama and Clinton would be on the same sheet of music regarding Ukraine as the Kaiser, Molotov and Hitler. History does have its ironies; in Hebrew the transliterated word ‘ha’ means ‘the’. Tripling that for the Ukraine conflict fails to make anything funny about it, though the Ukrainian President is a comedian.

In dividing up the world economies between East and West, union labor will experience diminished foreign competition and possibly factories relocating to the United States from abroad as the U.S. and European Unions sanctions regimes compel nations to choose to align with east or west and to not remain neutral and trade with both sides. Overall though, a unified world economic system with careful checks on the over-concentration of wealth through progressive taxation and investment in public goods such as ecology and atmospheric restorative mediation and basic welfare programs eliminating poverty, providing free public education through graduate school is a better bet.

 Popular conservatives in the developing Cold War 2.0 zeitgeist may find it easy to align with the elite conservatives that share leftist moral values such as anti-Christian atheism, illegal migration to the U.S.A., tax cuts for the rich and so forth. Democrats will continue to excoriate popular conservatives as racists, dinosaurs with anachronistic ideas about fossil fuels and God (lumping God in with fossil fuels is a notable enormity for evolutionists) and find tacit support from the elites that continue to draw on declining popular conservatism for political support. Because the social media and broadcast media are controlled by leftists and financial elites too happy to demonetize (demonize) and censor or delete antipathetic authorship expressions, a phenomenon of political software programming the masses in closed, limited, finite loops of political development is a dark polluting mists enshrouding national American democracy. Free and new political directions or reforms are precluded from the stank cloud of control.

 The historical problem with political labels and their use in controlling mass opinions and ideas is present today stronger than ever. Hitler’s 3rdRreich Storm Troopers were comprised initially mostly of former socialists. National Socialism of which Hitler became the leader is regarded today as the most conservative of organizations of the modern era to which national populist conservatives are forever compared. The Germany the 3rd Reich developed in was a Weimar Republic with weak moral values that followed a popular German revolution to end the first world war that forced the Kaiser to abdicate and ended the German royal aristocracy. The former aristocrats sought to recover lost ground in alliance with Hitler-led national socialists that used Mussolini's new political economy of corporatism. Those political elements are present today in the United States in many ways though the comparison is no ,more than 50% accurate. New technology and demographics have made the old labels fairly dysfunctional and serve more to antagonize the labeled, motivate opposition to keep the masses politically stupid than anything else.

No comments:

Imperfect Character is Universal

The question of why anything exists rather than nothing was a question that Plotinus considered in The Enneads. Why would The One order anyt...