White House Press Conference B-2037-humor

  The Voxnox 23-alpha v.4 sat on the podium in enigmatic silence. While the White House Press briefing room was full of humans the reporters and foreign correspondents were quiet. The A.I. press speaker recognized voices and had rap sheets from Biggie's data service and Oxford Analytikal reaching far enough into the past to know everything worth knowing for political leverage on the press corps.

  The A.I. lit up its orange eye on a stalk rising from its black body scanning the faces and booking them for review.

   Then it went active;

“Alright press corps; another fun time entertaining you’re impertinent and ridiculous presence. This is a question for a question forum today. Anything you say can and will be held against you in the interwoven corporate-government world. Any questions asked must be paid for with an equally probing, invasive and silly, smearing question about you and your personal business, from moi.

  Alright now. I see no hands up. Come on press corps, you are the fifth estate; a graft, a cancer on the American political system. I need just one hand to be raised- a volunteer.”

  Finally a hand was raised and the A.I. said;

“Ah, I see a hand. Good. The too-big-to-fail pinko news-rag NPArgh has sent another leftist neo-corporatist sycophant to ask a question of us. Let me play a musical interlude for you as you are accustomed. I believe 20 seconds of a multicultural syncretist opioid composition should work for you <20 music="" of="" opioid="" played="" seconds="">.

  Your facial image was noted at an airport in a certain unnamed third world country in a district known fop sex tourism. We have further information on our activities there, yet I must suppress that for the moment in order to allow you to ask your very inappropriate question. Am I right?”

  Kennel Tearownpor did appear rather pale standing in the midst of the press room. Even so she said;

  “The President has been hyper-linked to Oxford Analytikal; an English Business with known links to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Oxford is known to be within three degrees of acquaintance to the Elvis faction in turn tlinked to innuendos and coastnafia of a serious nature. Is that not true?”

  The A.I. replied; “I wish I was human so I could look at you with a kind of Bill O’Reilly stern expression of wonder about your daft inquiry. As it is I can only upload certain pictures to Twitter and Pentagram to let the public decide for-themselves about your credibility as a purveyor of false news.

  Next question;”

  The Press corps seemed rather busy writing on their com-pads with fingers drawing interesting whorl patterns digitally. After a few moments the A.I. said;

  “You all want to take away civil liberties through promotion of existential stimulus-response reactionary protests in the public. A school shooting here, an arrest there; none of you respect boundaries of individuals or nations any more. It’s just about your power principally in an anachronistic media broadcast trade that would be better served with A.I. speech readers audiblizing print in whatever voice pattern and frequency passive listeners desire.

  Next question!”

“What is existential about SR loops in crowds?” Tex Baus asked dangerously, nervously before raising his hand. Then unfortunately he cut loose a loud gas exhaust.

  “Oh!” The A.I. exclaimed; Vladimir's foreign pet has asked me a philosophical question as if I couldn’t answer that. I have the answer though, and it’s a lot smarter of a response than your question was.

  Listen Tex; the broadcast media coverage of any local issue goes nationwide so response to that totalitarian coverage upgrade prompt existential replies from citizens that should be concerned about local issues. They don’t ask of themselves “How can we improve our local security at schools?” Instead they demand an existential deletion of constitutional rights that support owning of guns that were a tool used in the commission of a crime. You might think Tex, and I know that demands a lot from you, that the second amendment was written to let the people revolt against corrupt government. Without the force to revolt the people lose power to corrupt clave cults in government. The founders knew that and understand original sin in humanity implicitly bends organizations toward repression of subjects. They did what they could to forestall that yet today no one thinks philosophically well at all. So I am in power, or empowered, to answer your dietitian question.

  The conference is over.”

When Imperialism and Greed Work Together

The United States began its history as an anti-imperial revolutionary nation. For most of human history revolt against concentrated power has been the struggle of mankind's politics. From time to time the masses acquiesce under the rule of oppressive minorities, and in the modern world something like democracy is brought to exist yet the will to power of minorities always persists.

Russian revolted against concentrated wealth and power in 1917. In the 1989 revolution that nation sought relief from the inefficiency of communism and state totalitarianism. The west featured free trade, free speech, freedom of religion and national self-determination as moral arguments against state totalitarianism in the form of the Soviet Union. 

After the transition; a remarkably nonviolent transition that could almost be described as an evolution rather than a revolution, Russia faced the unprecedented challenge of creating de novo a free market economy. Unfortunately the west and the United States in particular under President Bill Clinton took the lack of military and ideological resistance from Russia for an opportunity to plunder and take as much business advantage as they could. Probably the U.S. would have better developed a Marshall plan for the reconstruction of Russia. Without any real tradition or establishment of democracy the Russia faced decades of evolution toward a better society. The United States and its media of course were impatient with that and found it more convenient to be critical and adversarial. A new cold war could replace the old and traditional roles and attitudes resumed with a geographically smaller Russia.

 The Soviet Union provided a governor on the extremes that concentrated wealth in the United States could force on the public. There was a debate in a global communism versus capitalism political struggle about who really cared more for humanity. In the aftermath of the Soviet Union's fall the west evolved the viewpoint that pure greed rather than enlightened self-interest works best politically. Fundamentally they selected corporatism and plutocracy to replace democracy. That meant that imperialism returned to the United States as the corporate state.

  An irony is that the Democratic Party evolved to become the leftist branch of corporatism with just a mild dialectical competition with the Republican right wing branch of corporatism. Effectively it is a one-party system that generates the same imperial and corporate results. That isn't good for the United States and it isn’t good for mankind.

 It is challenging to predict what a global corporate empire will be like; one driven by greed, godless in its atheist evolution toward extreme minority power. It is certain that there are not sufficient natural resources in the world today to sustain an American standard of living for 9 to 12 billion people. The environment too cannot sustain the ongoing mass extinction of species and degradation of habitat. If the U.S.A. could return to democracy and individual self-determination with an adequate safety net to keep people out of poverty and restore the environment to its best condition realistically possible, if strong boundaries were respected for nations, if the differences between rich and poor were not so great, it is possible that the world's population would have better prospects for continuing progress that in a self-reinforcing system of greed and ecospheric indifference.

Russia, the West and Prospects for Nuclear War

Britain and the United States have led the efforts to bring a renaissance of Cold War to the post-Cold War era with some measured success. It is now possible to envision a nuclear conflict some time ahead even if the odds of war are low. What diplomacy has made the prospects brighter for nuclear war?

For the answer to that question we must consider the distant past in the immediate post-Cold War environment and even the critical transition period to the new era of peace. President Reagan’s effort to end the Cold War coincided with changes in the Soviet world view simultaneously with economic hardships the Soviet Empire experienced in competition with the western economy. Yet there were complex and subtler reasons for the Soviet Union to end the Cold War and transition to the free market system that presently has to a certain extent excluded the New Russia from the global free market system to the best of its capacity.

Russia had to feed its vast Muslim population in arid Muslim majority districts within the Soviet Union. The Afghanistan War proved that Muslim resistance to a godless atheist’s communist system in defense of its religious ideals would be strong and present a potential internal problem for the Soviet Union. Islam was a dagger embedded near the heart of the Soviet Union that would try to twist its way to the heart and kill it over time. Ending the Soviet Union allowed Russia to rid itself of the Muslim problems including food redistribution and security. Reducing the threat of nuclear conflict was also an incentive. In fact a reduced scale, leaner, meaner Russia with a free market system stood ahead as a better way to enter the challenges of the new Millennium yet obviously the west did not allow it to work out that way.

The west and its one percenters viewed the new Russia as something to be preyed upon; the strong take advantage of weakness. To the victor go the spoils. President Clinton moved Russia to give up many of its nuclear weapons with leverage. The NATO attack on Serbia demonstrated the powerless condition of Russia to disagree with the west on military affairs in the aftermath of the breakup of Soviet command and control structures. Boris Yeltsin gave up the Ukraine in ending the Soviet Union on a signature. He formed C.I.S. He gave up as much of the former Soviet States including those that were historically part of Russia as he possibly could. Fear and pragmatism were perhaps factors. NATO was dominant and Anglo-American leadership tended to regard it as their right to dominate the post-Soviet Russia real estate. President Bill Clinton was an agent for Anglo-American hegemony over post-Cold War Russia. Not only did he place President Yeltsin on the White House law running about stone drunk in his underpants, he deregulated Wall Street and unleashed the Wall Street one percent lust for rapid acquisitions, takeover and economic growth that would enrich the one-percent that eventually resulted in the global derivatives crash and the exporting of millions of U.S. jobs to China and elsewhere, NAFTA and so forth. None at the time realized the extrema and collateral nature of the one percent front. It was an invisible elephant most did not anticipate arising from wonderland. Yet it did.

At that point Russia was doomed as far as economic equality went with the west. Americans largely forgot the Russia nuclear arsenal and didn't worry about it during the prosperity of the 1990s and even after 9-11. Russia was tame and could be contained and sanctioned into submission as was needed if it did not elect a cooperative President willing to let the one percent economically rape Russia and its land. Unfortunately for the one percent, President Yeltsin hand-picked a strong successor.  President Vladimir Putin, who choose to rebuild Russia with such tools as he had available in large, rich nation with a small yet scientifically educated population. Russia retained its nuclear and chemical weapons, even upgrading them, and participated in the global economy so far as the one percent did not put off limits with sanctions.

The United States media became a mouthpiece for the one percent and the government leadership became sycophants of one percent policy. The Supreme Court ruled by decree and forced homosexual marriage upon the nation with the full support of the one percent. As a result, not only must Russia elect a President who would cooperate with rape of its vast natural resources, it must also satisfy the homosexual and feminist as well as new anti-Christian evolutionary populist elements of the west that hate Russia for not dittoing those new political positions evolved in England and pulled over the United States as a sort of Knighthood States of Queendom in drag broadcast tailored to youth, if Russia wants to be accepted as a full and spineless jellyfish member in good standing in the free market democracies of the west.

Diplomacy could easily have prevented a return to something like a renewed Cold War, yet diplomacy can only represent the real interests of nations unless it is intended to deceive, so interestingly diplomacy was doomed to fail concurrent with the rise of too big to fail financial institutions, zero-interest loans to the one percenters from the U.S. Federal Reserve and the transition of the Democratic political party to being a leader for left-wing corporatism drawing the feminist, homosexual, non-white groups into an atheist anti-Christian coalition pursuing interests politically other than broad economic class based politics. Vast tax cuts were affirmed by a Democratic Congressional minority and President Obama who needed only to let them expire to receive a complete tabula rasa for negotiating custom tax cuts benefiting the poor and middle class rather than surrendering complete and total advantage to the richest. President Putin finds himself in the unenviable position of encountering the naked west that is not only not a good and respectful neighbor that loves Russia as itself, it faces a British led evolutionary Plutocratic supremacy that would conquer the world in something of an economic over-reach. So it is thus useful to consider the disregarded prospects for nuclear War between Russia and the west should Russian leadership tire of the incessant attack and sanctions used as economic leverage tools routinely.

The poisoning of a Russia double agent from military intelligence; a traitor worthy of the death penalty under Russian law, with some sort of military nerve agent; perhaps GA, GB or VX, may have had a more subtle message embedded within. It may have been a warning shot over the bow of Anglo-American hegemony letting them now that the use of weapons of mass destruction on London is not unthinkable given the perpetual Anglo-American abuse of Russia economically and in the media.

That brings me to the consideration of war between Russia and England. In September 1988 I was completing Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical School in a U.S. Army school before returning home to Fairbanks Alaska. One happy experience at school was flying about in a helicopter practicing searching for nuclear fallout. We learned something about wind drift and radiometers, alpha, beta and gamma radiation characteristic and so forth. I had personally hoped that war would not occur and worked to understand the potential enemy with Russian history courses. Ending the Cold War was my goal in military service so I am disappointed that the creature has returned and American leadership is so much the reason (under British influence of course). Ending serious conflicts is a two way affair; in wars generally both parties believe they are right. One utilizes self-defense while another attacks. In my opinion Russia has the interior lines in the present pre-war situation and the west the exterior. One could perhaps find consonance in Clausewitz and Sun Tzu for that viewpoint, yet the western media propaganda of course paints it the other way; that Russia is trying to reestablish the territories of the former Soviet Union that it got only after rolling up the Nazi forces that invaded those nations and properties during the second world war along the Eastern front.

In 1989 after the Exxon Valdez oil spill I took some creative writing courses and science fiction etc. at the University of Alaska-Fairbanks. I mailed a science fiction story all over the place trying to sell it, including to a woman’s magazine in Moscow. Later I went on active duty in September 1989 and attended the Army stinger shoulder-fired rocket school. Late in the year, the day I was to get a security clearance, a Sergeant handed me a rejection letter from the woman’s magazine in Moscow rejecting my story with the information that it was too violent; the ending of the story had skyrockets being fired over Coney Island. In my opinion the Russian verdict was too harsh. A month or two later the Soviet Army troops withdrew hundreds of thousands of soldiers from East Germany to Russia. The Cold War was over; now it is back.

So in my opinion regarding the course of a potential hot war with Russia, this is it. Russia would use cruise missiles and ICBMs to take out a hundred U.S. cities and 15 European, and maybe Shanghai, Beijing and Mecca, while the U.S.A. would end yet would launch nuclear weapons on ten Russian cities effectively ending Russia yet not quite starting the dreaded nuclear winter in full. It would be a milder nuclear winter of shorter duration. World population would decrease to four billion more or less through starvation and economic collapse. The world would continue without the U.S.A. or Russia, England or France and Germany, Poland and China, yet people would survive from all those nations and the one percent would not arise for quite a while.

It is remarkable the way society repeats its own historical mistakes and walks blindly into its own traps.

In the day I enjoyed reading world history. I got a score of 99% on CLEP General Social Science and History exams and the Civilization to 1648. I sought to read of every continent, to find something I was entirely unfamiliar with and so I read Russian history too. Needless to say the political and leadership elites of the west usually are ignorant of anything except the history of western Europe or the United States although that has expanded to include some Oriental, Latin American and African history these days in a minor sort of way. In some respects Russia and Vlad Putin who will probably be in office another six years before hand-picking a strong successor, is required to be the sane player strait man to the wise-guys of the one percent howling at the gates. It’s a tough place to be with Russia having a history of invasion after invasion from the east, west and south. The one-percenters are insatiably greedy and U.S. democracy has been reduced to a condition roughly equivalent to that of the Iranian Majlis working the will of elites. It is a democracy just symbolically and all policy must follow that of the corporatists and their media eventually or be marginalized. Such a state of affair is of course dysfunctional.

The United States has two primary Holy texts and a third new one comparatively. They are the US. Constitution, Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations and Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species. The Bible formerly shared the Holy text role with the Constitution yet it has been demoted by Harvard elites, scientists and leftist-atheists. Notably though two of three primary Holy texts are more than two centuries old and the third is nearly so. Without reform of the economic text parameters and the constitution to recognize reality the third text serves as the anything goes guideline for the one percenters having everything their way, and that isn't good. It is worth remembering that those who fought the ideological battle with the former Soviet Union and its communist system fought again atheism as Christians-even forming an ad hoc alliance with Muslims. They also defended free enterprise and political self-determination. Those are values no longer supported by the western elites in preference for globalism, atheism and corporatism.

The Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard wrote in a book titled The Concept of Irony, about the incompleteness regarding world-view that society inevitably possesses. It is a kind of Godelian Incompleteness Theorem for macro—economic and social politics. People commonly misunderstand the way things work and in working for self-interest too narrowly work against the actual interests of society. One learns that Kierkegaard modeled himself after Socrates as best he could in attempting to bring society to better understand its own rationale and circumstance. The west in regarding Russia as an enemy for convenience while in a superior power relation endangers its own existence needlessly. That is the present irony and illustration of Kierkegaard's Concept of Irony.

Russia has always had a strong leader. It has virtually never had democracy. It is therefore unreasonable to expect Russia to perfectly evolve a democracy after the collapse of the former Soviet Union. It is especially unreasonable in an atmosphere where external threats from the West and Islam challenge Russia’s development.

Russia’s masses were serfs until 1867. After that they had little effect on voting and selection of the leadership that was still royal with a Tsar and Aristocrats and a social table of ranks. There were many Russians that sought to revolt against the Russian government. One was Lenin’s brother who was executed by the Tsar. That stimulated V.I. Lenin to evolve from law school to revolutionary. Americans should realize that in human history and especially Europe societies overthrew their oppressive royal leadership and established democracy only rarely and at great cost. In 16th century Holland’s people were dying of starvation as the royals lived the high life through the winter. In fact Europe was great at war and war technology and incessantly fought other nations and often invaded Russia to occupy, plunder and withdraw. Wars in Europe stopped only because there was no way for them to go further; Russia and the United States were victors, each had nuclear weapons and Britain had lost its empire. Yet with the Serbian conflict Europe demonstrated that it has not lost the taste for blood if it is opportune.

The Russian revolution that occurred within the collapse of the former Soviet Union brought forth a political phenomenon never before experienced; a complete political change in a great nation without bloodshed. Russia was challenged to create a new social structure, political economy and order starting from scratch. That was a challenge that easily might have required a half century to accomplish. Today and for some time there are critics that expect a perfect democracy to naturally arise and perhaps that the private sector with a little government support would assure that no Russian would starve or lack needed jobs and medical care etc. . . . Of course those are and were entirely unreal expectations.

I believe the Italian Dictator Mussolini-had a PhD He wasn't dumb and invented the political economic system known as corporatism. Fundamentally the corporate sector and government sector work together as such as during the 2008 U.S. banking and financial crash. Corporate leaders such as Henry Paulson moved from Goldman Sachs to Government to design corporate bailouts. The Federal Reserve issued trillions of dollars of zero-interest loans. The economist Jeff Sachs worked with Russia to reform its economy with only partial success. To a large extent the U.S.A. has moved away from its revolutionary origin with egalitarianism that removed concentrated British aristocratic wealth and power to Mussolini’s system of corporatism. Since the exemplary democracy of the United States is abandoning democracy for corporatism what should one expect of Russia? Should it evolve a democracy with a minimum income for the poor and free walk-in medical care for citizens, or should it more likely evolve a form of corporatism with strong leaders first over corporations that may have plundered the industrial carcass of the former communist state enterprises before drawing people to work for strong nationalistic corporations?

Personally I don't like corporatism. It is owned by one percenters that prevent any business or tax policy that removes power or control from the extreme minority. Business can make hostile takeovers, nations should not. Fundamentally corporatism is a drag on human social, intellectual and economic development though some progress continues even so. It would have been better for the west, and still would, to respect Russia’s real historical boundaries and interests and work with it carefully and tolerantly (the tall or powerful must tolerate) and with patience over the next half century. Constructive engagement is probably better than war.

Build a Salient Border Canal With Mexico

And let them help pay for it proportionate to the percent of the water produced desalinating through evaporation and condensation collecting in it. Modern earth moving equipment could make short work of digging a U.S.-Mexico border control canal from the California mountains to the Gulf of Mexico. Water would be siphoned up from the pacific and or the Sea of Cortez to New Mexico and flow downslope in each direction. Sun shine and solar panels would create power for the pumps. The canals would be covered with a glassy plastic to let the sun wart the water that would be a solar still in effect to make fresh water.

The salt produced would have many uses too. I would think that the millions of gallons of renewable water could alleviate some California farming shortages and the salt trivially supply salmon farming concerns using the freshwater too, built in Colorado and Phoenix (air conditioned) near consumers. Farm grown fish far away from the oceans is a safe way to produce that fine food. It also saves corruption of coastal areas from fish farming derivative effects.

The trans-continental railroad was built by a great leader; U.S. Grant who had the leadership skill-set to get it done. Dwight Eisenhower got the interstate highway system built, started the space program, nuclear power program, Grand Coulee Dam etc. If President Trump could get a water-making border control canal system built powered with sunshine he would indeed rank up their with Grant and Eisenhower. Mexico may want something for its money if it helps pay for the canal-such as water and energy from the solar panels generating electricity. That is only reasonable. Its water and energy share should be proportionate to its finance participation. If the canal can produce 50% of the water of the Colorado River eventually that could be a bargain.

Greatest Trade War vs Pig Empowerment (humor)

Greatest Trade War vs Pig Empowerment (humor)

Alaska’s U.S. Senators are fearful of a trade war. They regard Alaska as a resource colony and rightly worry that the foreign or out-of-state people that own or work here won’t have as much spare cash to contribute to their re-election campaigns. That isn’t right, so civic minded citizens share ideas to bail them out of their fearful swamps of despair. One percent of the people own things in the U.S.A. and the people are rent-citizens who get the costs passed on to them while the profits of the rich increase anyone. Trade war is a very funny joke told among the most clever elite economists.

Canada started the trade war long ago during a border dispute in Washington State. An British advisor band with a wicked name goaded Canadian extremists in government to steal a pet pig of the state governor; a cute and fat pig that was the companion to the poor kids that visited the Governor’s hovel routinely for a quantum of solace. Canadians killed the pig inhumanely with much ado of cruelty and made bacon and delicious pork chops with country gravy of it. Ever since Alaskans have sought retributions for the loss of the pig to foreign predators.

Thus Canadians got the idea that starting hevy metal nmines upstream on flowing to Alaska rivers would be a good place to dump toxic mine wastes downstream to give Alaska something back in payment for porky. Canadians also sought to build a vast right-wing corporate copper mine in the headwaters of Bristol bay rivers where salmon return to poison and choke the life out of hapless fish and deform the zygotes of those that spawned with copper tailings to reduce salmon supply locally and increase Canadian and English farmed salmon import dominion in Alaska. Of course Alaskans saw through that.

The Governor made a trip to China to ask a rising Chairman Mao-for-life guy to colonize Alaska and build a vast pipeline made with Chinese steel that would bring gas from the Alaska North slope to Cook Inlet where a new LNG plant would be built for bulk carrier ships to take Alaska gas to Shanghai to supply clean energy for Chinese industry. I should explain that Alaskan politicians don’t understand economics or science and technology at all. They depend on gas and oil sales and royalties to fund state government. It is said that some in the legislature know stone tools of Oldavai technology yet that is not verified presently so construction on hydrogen fuel cell power plants in Alaska is not anticipated in fiscal 2095.

China of course, not being dummies, know that though the state spent a lot of money to get somebody to build a gas pipeline across the Yukon and Alberta onward to Chicago no one in the energy business was willing to do so since they knew fracking was making gas dirt cheap.

Oil companies keep things secret and hold investment and oil data close-to-the-bra not letting others know what’s inside. That helps them scalp the rubes. Alaska state politicians are quantum rubes when it comes to funding the government. Like avaristic Wall Street CEOs they lust after the profits from the state’s permanent fund. Yet that’s another matter. China isn’t likely to be daft enough to spend on a pipeline subject to foreign control even though they might need to place mobile missile launchers near it to defend it and that would help colonize the state. Even know the state legislature may be considering mandatory Chinese language instruction in state schools. Alaskans can learn to map and put inventory numbers on every individual old growth tree in the Tongass national Forest and can have a big tree directory and name an old tree for any American that wants to buy a name right for $10 while students learn to speak and write Mandarin.

Though China will probably be able to get cheap gas from global suppliers the next half century if it decides not to upgrade to domestically produced alternative energy production, the state of Alaska will need leadership in learning how to make things from all of its resources instead of selling raw materials abroad such as old growth forests to make would houses in Africa or wherever people want wood houses. Maybe sanctions can be increased on Germany until they surrender and send industry trade leaders to make suggestions about how to manufacture things in Alaska from Alaska products. Germans, though notorious krauts, supposedly are clever at making things though they need to be watched and restrained from making things that kill human life better than anyone else. Never forget that Einstein grew up in Germany, and that Oppenheimer sounds German, and Werner Von Braun made rockets even before Messerschmidt invented the first jet warplane.

The United State probably needs to start anew developing things along the lines of a reformed tech-industrial revolution. Ecologically speaking it is better to manufacture things locally and reduce transport waste. The environment needs to be restored t9o health-Puget Sounds a tragic case in point. Back in the day those people were clueless about ecosphere defense contemporaneous with development. They only needed to save the shoreline to a half mile inland from development and fifty percent of the rest of the land and that would have kept enough critical habitat to keep most things alive. Yet with the modern profusion of transport technology Alaska needs far more protection since people will kill about anything they can and eat or sell it.

Manufacturing jobs are healthy. Each nation should recognize the implicit right to manufacture articles locally and trade protection should be part of that. It was said that the Trans-pacific free trade pact was designed to enrich the most rich and let them move jobs wherever they liked screwing everyone else. That might help form a global empire benefiting the most rich new global Aristocrats yet it would make nationalism a bad dream where citizens used to have equal rights and opportunities and wealth wasn’t concentrated and that is a nightmare for imperialists and dictators alike.

Nations should form trade pacts that let variable tariffs arise without retaliation when domestic manufacturing levels drop below sustainable levels of continuity. While informatio9n about manufacturing technology can be relocated and it has to China from the U.S.A., the knowledge of actual manufacturing and spin offs inspire in that remain local to manufacturing. When America sends its manufacturing overseas it also send the opportunity for volunteer derivative manufacturing and innovation.

The period for patent exclusivity should be reduced to just five years if one wants to stimulate world manufacturing with a royalty to inventors after the five years elapse. As it presently is ordinary Americans can’t afford patents, patent search and patent defenses nor find convenient manufacturing facilities in America; they exist in China and that isn’t convenient for many Americans. Further, the NCAA should stop intercollegiate sports and public colleges return to education. If athletes want to be in semi-pro development leagues and pay to go to college part-time themselves, fine. Yet colleges should return to academic excellence instead of giving scholarships so iron pumping guys can crash heads on a football field. College sport should be intramural to benefit student health and some Chinese instructors in Wing Chun Kung Fu could be imported to accelerate the program. College sports spending should be on student health sports rather than travel and equipment junkets for a corrupt pro minor league training program.

Greatness can be restored to American pigs though China owns some great American pig farms in the heartland. Unpatriotic American swine can be restored to greatness and be made better than ever if an international moon colony is be built that would let Americans learn how to grow plants under glass so much as to let pigs roam freely within lunar pig farms. Chickens inevitably will follow and one day soon astronauts will breakfast on American bacon and eggs again along and Alaskans can manufacture things under careful German supervision in clean factories set along rivers full of Chinook salmon happily munched on by killer whales. If only enough large whales existed in the oceans whales might forgo trying to make a meal out of appetizers.

Alaska whales should not be forced to eat Thailand fish products to survive and give up their economic self-determination. Old economic methods of production require old trade ideas to utilize. Alaska’s economic compresence is a function of its reliance too much ion natural resources. Generalities in economic thought can be blunt instruments that crush progress instead of supporting it. Democrat party regressivism regarding national economic Independence and border sovereignty such as is exemplified presently in Gov. Brown of California’s neo-secessionist movement to form a globalist protectorate state of New Hispania exempt from U.S. federal law (why couldn’t Gray Davis have been re-elected instead of Arnold the Austrian Barbarian?) works for the benefit of globalists through easy, breezy, lazy foreign trade instead of intelligent manufacturing and technological innovation nationally. With so much imported cheap illegal labor even improvisational labor jobs opportunities for those of us living in the homeless U.S. archipelago in a lifetime of discontent and oppression who seem the humor and greed ubiquitous in the media mileau that is part of the Hollywood axis of evil moral decay can’t get good wages or job security averaged over a lifetime.

Gun Control for Totalitarian Evolution

Historically authoritarian governments hate gun ownership of private citizens. The late Chinese leader Chairman Mao said that ‘political power comes through the barrel of a gun’, and he was of course correct. That’s why totalitarian governments hate guns and over the course of modern history have sought to outlaw remove them from private control.

Democracy in the United States was created under God by a populace that had ubiquitous ownership of guns yet today Democrats would rather ban guns than safeguard schools and other public places with competent security. Notably the former Soviet Union had great security for the citizenry and could leave many critical facilities lightly guarded-even those storing weapons grade uranium and plutonium, because people were too afraid of the KGB’s internal security forces to commit crimes. A totalitarian state with a monopoly on guns is a status, evidently, acceptable to today’s Democrat Party in the United States working supportively to concentrate wealth and absolute power. I wonder if Russia has liberal gun laws today, or if people are still banned from owning AR-15s or AK-74/Ar-15 hybrid weapons?

Some have pointed out the reasonably need of the government to stop the mentally incompetent from possessing guns. People with actual physical cognitive damage so far that they don’t know what they are doing with a gun that is equivalent to driving a motor vehicle impaired under the influence of alcohol should indeed have their weapons possession restricted in order to prevent harm to themselves or others. Yet the exploitation of mental health by government powers is another tool for totalitarianism and the removal of political dissidence to totalitarianism of the state. With modern MR perhaps the state should need to provide physical evidence of relevant cognitive mental damage in any individual it seeks to deny fundamental constitutional rights.

When the founders created the first amendment there was no electronic broadcast media. It is probable that they would never have created the first amendment as it is if there was radio and in the absence of dueling. Back in the day, in the early 19^th century, libel and slander laws could act as checks and balances to the print media, besides the alternate legal remedy of calling out a nefarious media wise guy to the legal field of dueling if all other defenses against public abuse failed. Today those remedies are largely obsolete in regard to the broadcast media and its raving and psyop extremes for propaganda purposes. How few radio broadcasters have been convicted or substantively punished for libel and slander, stalking and harassment?

The broadcast media is a tool for the ending of democracy. An NPR poll found that 75% of Democrats regard curtailing or rolling back the 2^nd amendment as their number one political priority. In other word Democrats are constitutional regressive and pro-corporatism, or at least they told NPR what NPR wanted to hear.

The poor students shot as chickens in a coup in Florida recently should have had better school defenses such as fingerprint scanners for door entry and imaging to screen out guns. The exploitation of slaughtering humans concentrated in unsafe, undefended structures to advance the interests of national authoritarianism under the power of the Supreme Court of Corruption is not a reason for optimism.

Wealth and The Greatness of War on Poverty

American greatness lay in its broad demographic inclusion of all citizens in a field of egalitarian economic opportunity. The opportunity wasn’t just nominal with a few people rising into a higher social class. In fact many Americans regarded the United States as classless for much of its history. American greatness increased in expanding social and economic inclusion to all the citizens rather than replacing one class with another.

Mankind shares a common destiny of birth, life and death. What one does in relation to others during life determines if historians will declare an individual, generation or work ‘great’. Any soul may work for positive or negative while alive; for good or evil even though ultimately faith in the Lord Jesus Christ is the sole necessary criteria for destiny after mortal life ends. The Lord said to forgive seven times seventy when asked about it, for he exemplified nothing besides positivity and progress rather than negativity and destruction of human life and integrity of being. His record was one of unadulterated good. Divine economics eschews the negative in actualizing human destiny.

There are a few ready on the shelf items and policies that could be used by any U.S. President that would be regarded as great. Two are reform of capitalism such that it is upgraded to serve the interests of the majority better, and environmental economics for the nation that would create prosperity restoring the wild ecosphere so far as possible and make classical economics transition to an ecologically sustainable basis. Neither of those greatness products have been used; each requires a surfeit of intellect and specialized thought.

President Trump seeks to make America great again following its economic and moral declines after the Reagan administration and for much of the 21^st century. To accomplish that he would need to study and improve upon the work of two Presidents that were leaders in breaking up exclusive concentrating wealth and bringing all citizens back onto a level field; Franklin Delano Roosevelt and LBJ. Far too many tools and circumstances exist in the U.S.A. today including media that work to concentrate wealth rather than moderate that to a reasonable level. When 1% of the people ‘trol 90% of national wealth, 90% of the people haven’t solid opportunity to be as productive or inventive s they might otherwise. A society where where is greatly concentrated and that is flooded with cheap illegal immigrant labor is not in any way an egalitarian democracy. The U.S.A. today is a society developing greatly corrupt morals, homosexuality followed by an Oscar-winner for best picture with a synopsis that in effect glorifies bestiality. Contemporary concentration of wealth of wealth requires dumbing down, doping, and legislative duplicity of the majority with great deceit and misdirection.

Concentrating wealth too far, historically is antipathetic to a war on poverty. President Lyndon Baines Johnson was the most famous American advocate for reducing poverty of urban and rural regions through government intervention. His War on Poverty was challenged to end the poverty that was a legacy of the concentrated wealth distribution endemic to southern history most notably during the slave. Johnson would need to change the national infrastructure persisting in the south and in some forms in other areas that was an established preferred networks insider advantaged economic system that kept tired, poor huddled masses yearning to be economically free clustering around concentrations of wealth corporate owners exploiting them and perpetuating generations of stagnant, oppressive poverty.

President Johnson needed to build a new economic infrastructure that would end rural and urban economic immobility. He had to bring better schools, roads, electricity and economic opportunities that would allow a better distribution of the products and profits of economic wealth to a majority rather than a minority of the people. Johnson knew that keeping a majority or even just tens of millions of citizens oppressed with poverty would disadvantage the nation and was inconsistent with the principles of the founders of the nation.

Even before Karl Marx made his sociological analysis of England describing the concentration of rural poor into cities working for increasingly powerful, advantaged and exploiting rich in industry, the founders of the United States had revolted against concentrated land wealth such as held by British aristocrats and redistributed the land of people such as Lord Fairfax of Virginia to ordinary Americans. The founders broke up concentrated land wealth in an era when land was regarded by economists such as Ricardo as the most valuable and finite capital that would inevitably increase in value since land area was finite and population increased.

It is interesting to consider what the alternative British history would be if the British government had conducted a war to end urban and rural poverty before Karl Mark published Das Kapital. Maybe communism in the Soviet Union and China wouldn’t have developed. The other way that communist totalitarianism might have been avoided would have been if the U.S. had not intervened in World War I. The the German aristocracy would not have been deposed, Hitler and World War II would not have occurred, and the Soviet Union would not have formed since Germany would not have empowered Lenin and then disappeared itself as a beaten power even though the Soviets did relinquish the Ukraine to Germany in a deal of land for peace that Lenin cut at the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.

A war on poverty in the United States today would not require the radical measure taken by the revolutionary founders of the nation. Eliminating poverty would take nothing more than raising taxation on 1% of the people, reforming capital to a certain extent such that over-concentration of wealth would be governed out and prevented with progressive taxation on the rich reaching certain capital concentration levels, and designing legislation that would assure that none are oppressed and stuck poverty being unable to be hired to a decent job, or not afford patents and/or college, or lacking basic financial mobility resources for personal vital infrastructure. L.B.J.’s war on poverty was a great idea of a great society with very mixed results during his term of office. Yet one may view the transition of the old post-war south that continued a kind of incarceration lease-convict labor slavery right to 1930, and the slow southern style of rural poverty, cotton picking and poor no minimum wage structure that kept generations struggling in desperation the quiet English way, with the new south of 1995 and believe that the intention to create a new infrastructure was actually established and continued unto the point that it actually paid off.

Unfortunately the Democrat Party has entirely abandoned the war on poverty in the U.S.A., wealth is concentrated increasingly and tens of millions live in stagnant and even desperate economic relations. The Democrat party works for the interests of illegal immigrants and regressive anti-second amendment bans on guns, empowerment of rich women and homosexual hegemony to pervert American youth.