Friday, June 29, 2007

The Eagle has Landed

After many days, weeks, months of political morass, yesterday, June 28, 2007, was a good day for the Republic. The Bush/Kennedy immigration bill - which would have solved nothing and was a de facto surrender to illegal immigration - was killed in the Senate. The Supreme Court ruled that children couldn't be bused across town to fulfill a school district's race quota in the name of diversity. News reports read yesterday were that 'Fast Track' trade authority at the executive level is set to die on Saturday(and for god's sake make certain it has an eternal death this time!)...the state of Kansas has made English the official language, and America's national symbol, the Bald Eagle, has been removed from the endangered species list. For those of us inclined to believe in meaningful coincidences(synchronicity) perhaps this last phenomena was the most important of all.

True, all of these above are quite minor in the grand scheme of things, the fight for the Republic. The work ahead remains gargantuan and there is no call for popping champagne corks yet. But, let's take it. Yesterday was a good day, and hopefully the date signifies the beginning of the end of globalism, multicultural Identity politics, free-trade, and the USA is no longer on endangered nation's list as the Bald Eagle is no longer an endangered species.

We need to craft an authentic immigration bill that addresses the Why of undocumented workers, and more needs to be done - much more - to promote a color-blind society based on citizenism within the Republic. Having the individual states of the Union pass laws making English the official language will just be mere symbolism if energy is not enforced.Work is ahead and it is a towering stack.

Why the social-liberals took so much offense at the High Court's ruling is rather silly. If they look at it, all Justice Roberts was doing was echoing the spirit of Brown vs. the Board: one cannot discriminate against school admission based on race or national origin. That include Americans via all races. Just as laissez-faire is the dogma of some, multiculturalism is the Nicene Creed with others. Few besides social liberals are more obsessed with race, bean-counting based on skin color and hyphenated names than they are. Being good citizens is not on their draftboard apparently. They need to check themselves and recall that recently departed liberal icon, Arthur Schlesinger Jr., was one of the first to be an opponent of the multicultural agenda of the 68ers who despised 'National Liberals' such as himself and derided them as "social-fascists"(which was the old Moscow line against Western social-democratic reformers). Liberals need to promote color-blindness and chuck all of this diversity, multicultural crap, which only makes the citizenry of the United States more divisive, if anything.

Nevertheless, the Bald Eagle is back!

Wednesday, June 27, 2007

Oh well...

The GOP Senate leadership spared their lameduck embarrassing President a veto by doing what they said by killing off the Union Card Bill - voting to forbid it from coming up for a vote(and some of these guys like to wear democracy on their sleeves). Talk about throwing red-meat to the Dems. Feature that this is the exact time that the Corporate-Feudalist Party needs to distance themselves from those imbeciles in the White House and they are standing by the Shrub (and also the US Chamber of Commerce) and have revved up their Class Warfare another notch at the time when they will need any vote that they can get come '08. Oh well.

Anyone with a degree of common sense knows that the Bush/Kennedy immigration bill is nothing less than amnesty for undocumented workers in the United States and it is made to fail, and it doesn't address remotely the reason WHY we have this catastrophe. Conservative supporters of said amnesty do not want to offend their rich friends who make money from illegal immigration , and/or step away from the Wall Street Journal's open borders dogma, "faith-based economics"; liberal partisans do so in the name of 'political correctness',their Third World spirituality, or are afraid of sounding like "right-wing racists" for opposing this sell-out. Keep in mind that most of these cloaked amnesty people are both Free Traitors and TINA pimps. 'Nuff said. Oh well.. if this amnesty bill passes, the implementation of the *North American Union* is no longer a matter of 'if 'but 'when' and what is left of the US Constitution will go ass-up end into the dustbin. This is what Alexander Hamilton - who did more to ratify the Constitution than anyone else - generally warned about over 200 years ago: if energy is not put into said Constitution it will remain a token parchment of paper. If we do not build our own national economic infrastructure and maintain it, we will lose it. Ben Franklin was so succinct - "A republic, if we can keep it."
Most annoying is that the herd of US citizenry do not really care or even give this dire crises much thought. Just as long as they have their consumer-credit power to buy their toys, knick-knacks and have their Bread n' Circuses - the fall of the Republic, you say?? Oh well...

And every politician in DC knows this collective 'oh well' , oh so well.

Sunday, June 24, 2007

The dictatorship of the High IQers

Browsing about YouTube on one of the days when I had much, too much time on my hands, I came across a three-part video series regarding the billed 'Most Intelligent Man in America', Chris Langan. Mr. Langan's story is that he was working as a bar-bouncer when he took an IQ test offered in Omni magazine and his resulting score was off the scale. Said personal IQ was accessed at 190-210. Hence, he had his fifteen minutes of fame and was featured in magazines and on the newsprogram, 20/20.

I was very keen to learn more about what this IQ Titan had to say about this thing called life and his theories, so I watched the entire video series. The third-part segment is where Mr. Langan goes into his 'Unified Theory of Knowledge' spiel, also his pitch for eugenics - something that he believes that if conducted on a national scale will solve all the nation's problems. Simply have high IQ people(to be a member of Langan's internet group one has to have a verifiable IQ of 150+) breed with one another which is straight out of Brave New World; every female born would have birth-control devices implanted and later as an adult, said female would have to have permission to be impregnated with a human fetus. Only a high-IQ mate will be approved by this Baby Control Board. Mr. Langan goes on to narrate that he is distressed at the low IQ people that are running things and thinks that we lesser mortals should put him directly in charge of his eugenics operation....

Where do I begin deconstructing all of this noise?

One, though I am reticent to use the label of 'fascist!' to any political and socioeconomic view that I dislike, this is what immediately popped into my own organically average IQ brain when watching Mr.Langan's big head spew this tripe. Well, we have heard this all before, the axiom of high IQ humans running the the Show. It is not necessarily a dreamy utopianism either, but actually it has been tried before in a primitive and varying degree: the feudalist rule of titled-nobility, the 'Divine Right of Kings'. This aristocracy, the alleged best and brightest, produced a whole slew of petty tyrants, ignoramuses, incompetents, hedonistic self-serving autocrats as a whole for generations. There were few enlightened and wise ones out of the lot. Proof that having the alleged intelligent elite breeding with one another will not produce spawn that are likewise, a chip off the old block of Mom &Dad Big Head.

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's IQ has been accessed by some as high as Chris Langan's, and Chris is obviously no Goethe. Goethe's own son was said to be a worthless wastrel. And have we ever heard about the musical genius of Mozart's children? What classical music aficionado ever claimed that JS Bach's composing kids were better than dad? Einstein's son turned out to be a schizophrenic. One Nobel Laureate(I forget his name) when asked to be a Sperm Bank donor replied that they needed to instead solicite his functional illiterate street-peddler grandfather:his own son was a dope-smoking amature guitar player.

It's obvious that incredibly intelligent people can believe in cranky,stupid, and lethal things, and average and low IQ human brains have their 'eureka!' moments. For instance, I don't know of anyone who ever stated that Vladimir Illich Lenin was an idiot savant(his big brain was never in question) but his world-view was something else in statecraft; the kulak with perhaps a low IQ had a more cerebral approach to agriculture in Soviet Russia than the philosopher-kings sitting in the Moscow politburo conducting their genocidal collectivization program. Few have ever dismissed Hitler as "stupid" either;he was just a sharp-knife who believed in stupid and insane things. Einstein could dazzle us with his Relativity but the man couldn't understand the rules and dynamics of a simple game of Baseball....and so on, yadda-yadda...

Chris Langan could be the Poster Child refuting Bell Curve conservatism,Nature determinism. High IQ is no guarantee for socioeconomic success and Chris is a living walking example for most of his existence. He's a Blue Collar guy from a typical dysfunctional American family and if he would had never taken the Omni IQ test, we would had never heard of him. If Chris would had had a bourgeois Ward & June Cleaver parentage, perhaps his star would had flickered before it did unto the world? Nurture does matter. For prime example, does anyone think for a moment that George W. Bush's posterior would be sitting in the White House if he wasn't spawned from a Brahmin elite New England family?? Would Ted Kennedy be Massachusetts' 'Senator for Life' if born in South Boston to Irish millworker drunks instead of in ritzy Hyannisport? Even one of my personal icons, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, I doubt that he would had got to Home Plate if he wasn't born on Third Base. How many of those on the Fortune 500 list would be there if they all began with an idea, a pick-up truck and no money to commence their road to riches? Very few.

It is also obvious that possessing copious brain-folds is not an indicator of originality. Chris Langan's world-view is nothing new. We heard from Plato, Nietzsche with a dose of Ayn Rand and slipped in 19th Century Social Darwinism(though he is hooked into Dembski's *Intelligent Design* racket); perhaps he has read Frank Herbert's Dune SciFi novels religiously. Langan takes a semi-pantheistic view that we are all plugged into the Mind of God( Chris appointed himself as chief interpreter of the Mind of God,btw) and he can logically prove his thesis via mathematical formulas(shades of Bertrand Russell & others). The Lesser IQ folks such as myself can easily figure out his eclectic pathways. To sum up Chris Langan,I'll utilize Nietzsche , contra Langan's elitist high IQ hubris -

"Menschen - alles auch Menschen"

But Nietzsche didn't have as high IQ than Chris Langan, so why should he pay attention.....;-)

People need to ascertain that IQ testing were initially the passion of progressives in the 19th Century. British Fabians endorsed IQ testing in tangent with their class consciousness: they wanted proof - and got it - that the Ladies &Gentlemen, the Dukes and Barons, the Sirs and Dames that ran the British Empire were as a whole dumber than dirt despite their 'Public School' and Cambridge/Oxford educations. Look at the Windsors today. Why the British citizenry loves these worthless cretins of Buckingham and do not demand a Republic is quite beyond me...

Besides, what these arrogant IQ Ones have never questioned is themselves: maybe they are freaks, accidents, or the spawn of Lucifer. Eh? Why hasn't this *Mind of God* made every human with a high IQ? Let's face it: Jesus, Buddha,Krishna, Mohamed and other 'avatars' didn't hang-out with the elitist organic geniuses. They took their message to the 'People' - the losers, the 'scum' of their society. When geniuses talk about knowing 'God', it makes me laugh and vomit at the same time. My druthers are to listen to some illiterate Hillbilly snake-handler rather than some neoPlatonist , self-proclaimed Uebermensch, arrogant twit ,when the subject of 'God' comes into play.

Now, it is not that I am a blank-slater and think that society/ environment determines everything. Environmental determinists annoy me as much as the genetic ones do. My own Weltanschauung is heavily influenced by sociobiology and I'm fascinated by the Human Genome. 'Tis common sense that nature and nurture together makes us what we are - human beings - and it is not an exact measured science and is variable from people to people. In politics, I fear having folks with IQs above 150 running the country as much as the prospect of having a society ran by social engineers does. It wouldn't bode well for the rest of us, us lesser neocortex bipeds. That one has a high IQ is hardly indicitive that he or she is of benign substance and wishes the rest of humanity good will.

Thursday, June 21, 2007

The Prize of Illegal Immigration

The largest segment of the American population who wants to thwart any real illegal immigration reform, is naturally the predator overclass that benefits from it the most. Some conservatives obsessed with undocumented workers in the United States overlook the fact that without NAFTA, without thousands of jobs offered at poverty level and below wages and without the Corporate union -busting lobby that buys our public officials - there perhaps wouldn't be an illegal immigration problem.

La Raza, Hispanic interest groups, the ACLU and other cultural Marxists are not the ones who are 'softest' on illegal immigration, it is the upper income 20 percent within the United States. And it is particularly this class who should be footing the bill for whatever public services that illegal immigrants accumulate and not burden the middle and working class. Illegal immigration is a major tool in the Overclass's economic warfare and it will only abate when the wealthy are directly charged for it via specialized 'Undocumented Worker Tax' on the upper brackets of affluence, the tiny elite who owns most of the wealth of the United States. Fences and mass deportation will not solve the situation:you have to follow the money and hit it at its source. These 'Minutemen' are conducting vigils in the wrong places.

It is academic that the notion that illegals "do work that American Blacks wouldn't do"(Vincente Fox) is a big myth. Americans will work at meatpacking plants, construction, the agricultural realm etc. for a decent wage and rights - not the poverty Permanent Peasant Wage that is paid to undocumented workers. And the wealthy do not have an interest in amnesty or even the Wall Street Journal's "open borders" dogma: take the illegal out of immigrants and they would be of no use to this upper class. Mandating that all immigrants learn English will rob the wealthy of a cowed and ignorant feudal peasantry. Hell, they might even form(gasp) Unions.

If you're against illegal immigration and want true reform, you should therefore champion a Tax - a big one - on the Predator Class in the USA. Fences, a army of Border Patrol and targeting the illegals themselves is not the answer. If Corporate America pays the burden of illegal immigration as they should, watch them beat down the doors of their politicians wanting to do genuinely something about the situation. It is time, high time, to end this conservative Nanny State and attack socialism - Affluensa Socialism - that is.

Monday, June 18, 2007

On Unions and Jesus

The Corporate Feudalist Party, a.k.a the 'GOP', are continuing their Class Warfare with their usual hubris and energy. Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky has vowed not to let the current Union Bill out of the Senate, and the Corporate Feudalist leadership is mobilized not to even let even come up for a vote via the filibuster. Said proposed Bill will grant US workers further leverage to form labor unions based on card signature instead of having the usual vote at the plant which allows a company to identify who is who, fire the ringleaders and use intimidation and threats to keep an employee from voting for a union. Same old trick straight out of the thing we will see is return of Pinkerton goons and National Guardsmen(oh, they are all in Iraq) firing on strikers.

The Corporate Feudalists do not want to appear to be directing a war on the working class that they are doing, so their public reasoning for using the filibuster (the most anti-democratic tactic of legislative bodies) to block the Bill is that card pledge votes are "anti-democratic" and they "want to protect workers from Union intimidation". Don't the Blue Collar guys and gals feel so lucky to have these stooges for the Overclass looking out for them?? This is the same party that wants to also do away with overtime laws and bring back the 12 hour workday if need be.

August Senators like McConnell want to spare their President a veto of the Bill that he has vowed to do if it reaches his desk;instead they filibuster it, which is a dumb tactic: Bush is a lameduck and is no longer answerable to the electorate - the Senate still is. Why not let the Bill come up for a vote and certain passage and let Bush take the heat for the veto? Goes to show that not only are the Corporate Feudalists' ideas bankrupt, so is their political savvy. If they keep up their War, they will discover that pandering to social conservative issues will no longer get them any votes from the working class.

The problem with the Corporate Feudalist Party is not that they have abandoned the principles of conservatism, is that their current leader has embodied everything about it and notably the worst aspects(NeoCon thuggery&theocracy&predator-economics). Many candidates feel that they have to out-Right Bush, which is appalling since he makes their patron saint, Ron Reagan ,appear 'liberal 'on many things to compare. But let them do it and I am not complaining:if they get a Party Platform that makes Dennis Kucinich look moderate, that is the more the better and hopefully they will suffer a '32 and '36 type of burial come November 2008(if Dick Cheney doesn't start WW3 in Iran first).

The GOP's sole hope at the moment is that the Democrats will trip themselves up by pulling out 'progressive' social issues to head their train, and there is a danger of this. Instead they can neutralize social issues by hammering economics/trade: demonstrate clearly that the the GOP, this proclaimed party of *Family Values* and Jesus Christ, is anti-family with their Free Trade/Union busting/tax-cuts for the rich/imperialist foreign policy. And I always thought that this fellow Jesus Christ didn't like rich folks very well and liked to hang-out with 'losers'?? The Dems can afford to inject a bit of old William Jennings Bryan's 'Social Gospel' into their panache; revive FDR's Inaugural Address phrase of vowing to drive the moneychangers from the temple, without getting nutzy religious like the GOPers are. I personally am a staunch secularist&agnostic and think that *Family Values* is just a Machiavellian power-phrase political con. But they, the Dems, can beat the Christocrats at their own game if the play their cards correctly on the Jesus thing. Reiterate that Jesus wouldn't had beat the workers down by preventing them from organizing a labor union since he was the dude who said - "Blessed are the poor."

Sunday, June 17, 2007

No sainthood for Milton and Ayn

The benevolence about National System economics is that those who still advocate it do not promise a Rose Garden(along with the sunshine) if re-enacted. There will be problems as there are problems with any economic or political program, and utopianism is not the agenda of the American School of economics and it never was. The other competing economic theories and formats such as the Vienna School are steeped in gnostic utopian thinking as much as Marxists are/were; as stated countless times before, these promotors of it are actually right-wing Marxists, and the tragedy, I guess, is that few of its ideologues realize it.

Foraging about at the Uni library I found an oldie but goody book , Not So Free to Choose (Elton Rayek) picking apart the laissez-faire economics of its recently departed guru, Milton Friedman. Rayek demonstrates that in true Stalinist fashion Friedman engaged in revisionist and cavalier history to promote the Vienna School/Chicago Outfit economics such as inventing a "golden age" that never existed of Free Market/Free Trade. 'Classical economics', according to Friedman, had its hay-day from 1815-1914 and gushes in his magnum opus, Free to Choose, that this 99 year period was blessed with "peace, freedom and free market and trade internationally". Such assertions are on par with Rousseau's notion of the 'noble savage'. Anyone who has read an elementary school textbook regarding the history of the 19th Century knows it was anything but one on Pax. European colonialism was quite busy denying freedom and choices to a large part of the globe during the 1800s and fought countless wars to do so. Friedman applauds Great Britain's repeal of the Corn Laws as the epicenter of great liberty and omits that this produced an induced in famine in Ireland to coincide with the repeal. The Chicago Guru also spins a tall one regarding Japan's Meiji Restoration and claims that Japan became a modern power overnight by embracing laissez-faire. Everyone, except for Friedman, knows that Japan has always had heavy statist influence in their economy from day one and Japan built themselves in the late 19th Century up via protectionism and also engaging in colonialism in Manchuria, Korea and Taiwan - denying these people freedom. I could go on about Friedman's cavalier and selected approach to history - its like reading a capitalist version of Pravda. The real bonanza period of classical 'liberalism' is what we are experiencing today which is the corporate feudalist globalizing of much of the planet and the rape of public infrastructure of national economies and their attendant political autonomy.

Friedman's Big Sister and ally was the the emigre novelist, Ayn Rand, with her so-called philosophy of 'Objectivism'. There was nothing objective about it. Rand, despite her atheism, had a Manichean and gnostic view of the world. According to her, at one time the 'Individual' was born free and selfish with a natural inclination to free-market economics but was corrupted by "collectivists" and "mind-blown mystics". Besides Ayn Rand herself, the only thinkers in the Western world who were benign were Aristotle, St. Thomas Aquinas ; just about everyone else - especially Plato and Kant - were evil. This political cult's influence on the libertarian movement is profound and hardly will one meet a libertarian today who doesn't have a gold-bound edition of Atlas Shrugged on the bookshelf. She is also popular in the NeoCon ranks. There is a Vienna -Chicago connection with about all of these players in the Predator Economics globalizing game: Friedman, Leo Strauss both taught at Chicago Uni in the same period, for instance. Rand just merged the economics of Hayek and von Mises(who brought Vienna to Chicago) with her infantile philosophy, though she had little understanding of them herself. It's analogous to self-proclaimed Biblical fundamentalists who never bother to read their sacred text extensively or with an open-mind.

'Classical' promoters. whilst they be of the economic,educational, religious, political or musical types, all have their Edens - a golden age that never existed except in their own minds. This is odd since none of their historical classical heroes thought that they were being 'classical' in their own day - they all believed themselves to be moderns apparently. These reactionaries in the 21st century need to get with the program, and the program is that we are all post- moderns now. The classical Western canon needs to be respected, and traditions can be quite good, reference points that even self-heralded 'progressives' utilize. But a utopia it is not - never was, never can be - and they need to halt their revisionist historical nonsense.

Wednesday, June 13, 2007

I hate PJ O'Rourke(I really hate him)

I've been picking on 68ers turned conservative a great deal lately, and thus far the need to do so has not abated. Next character who meets this above criteria is PJ O'Rourke - former hippie turned stooge for the Cato Institute. 'Libertarians' love him as much as I hate his friggin guts and it is beyond me how anyone would think this idiot is a master satirist in the same league as HL Mencken and an authority on 'classical economics'. Like a lot of New Leftists from the Sixties, O'Rourke could see where his money could come from by making a right-turn later on.

Never did I pay much attention to this man at all until I seen an interview of him on PBS shuckstering his latest book, a revisionist take on Adam Smith. The meat of said interview is O'Rourke pandering his Trade-Deficit Denial gnosticism and claimed that Adam Smith would agree with him if he were alive today. O'Rourke failed to mention Smith's famous exceptions to Free Trade dogma, and everyone of them would be applicable to the current United States's de-industrialist, outsourcing trade policies. Actually,Smith would be smeared by PJ as a "protectionist/collectivist" if the man had ever bothered to read his exceptions to laissez-faire in the Wealth of Nations. Verily, I felt the urge to jump through the television screen and gangster-slap this burned-out druggie, 'Hip-Capitalist'(he has a stupid looking face anyway).

PJ O'Rourke, and those 'libertarians' like him, need to actually work in a factory somewhere. And then subsequently outsourced from that job. Rather, they need a occupation in the McJob service sector which is quickly becoming "the only job in town". This is the same thing that they say about armchair socialists and it is applicable to these Rand-roiders like O'Rourke as well: 'libertarians', few of them, have ever had to do any real work for a living. Despite their spiritual dedication to capitalism, many have never operated a legitimate business of their own and doubt half of this many couldn't balance their own checking accounts.

Free Market economics has been good for PJ O'Rourke - especially since he has never had to work and slug out in the marketplace. Like a lot of suburban chic leftists need a Holiday in Cambodia, the image of PJ sentenced to life as a Walmart Greeter beats counting sheep on insomniac nights...

Sunday, June 10, 2007

Kommisar David and his Crusade

'Academic Freedom' is the banner cause of Trotskyite turned NeoCon, David Horowitz, and he's going about Uni campuses ranting and raving about "leftist totalitarianism" in higher-education. For starters, Horowitz is only giving publicity to these marginal lefty kooks that few has ever heard about it until he began his campaign to bring his own conservative counter-revolution to university faculties. Secondly, few conservative oriented people chose the liberal arts anyway; righties usually go in for the hard sciences, Business. One will meet few if any liberals in Engineering schools if they are political at all, for instance. How about turning academic 'freedom' on its head and require the University of Chicago to accept Market-Socialist professors at their Economics Department, hmm?

What Horowitz is up to really, is anyone's guess. Some conspiracy oriented paleocons believe that Horowitz is actually an unrepentant Sixty-Eighter New Lefty who attached himself to the NeoCon movement to garner notoriety and also it is a big cash cow for him; Horowitz's books tell the NeoCons and their fellow-travelers what they want to read and hear, and they admire the fact that he is an "ex-Marxist"('ex'?), so he should know what he is writing and ranting about when he assails lefties, liberals, Muslims and 'self-hating Jews'( their phrase for any Jewish person who is not in lock-step with the Likud Party of Israel). He does seem to have a personality-cult about himself, Horowitz does, and perhaps has a goal of being the Noam Chomsky for Rightists.

Again, who ever heard of Ward Churchill until Horowitz made him a poster-child dartboard in his 'Academic Freedom' crusade? If anything, Horowitz is enabling these 'kooky-lefty professors' and getting what he dubs the 5th Column all fired up. It is a big duh! that there are Leftists who hate the United States, but as I pointed out in a previous post here - there are plentiful Right wingers who loathe the Republic as well - more than Left 'Fifth Columnists' in my judgment. Seldom will you hear Horowitz blasting them, partially because they are his fellow-travelers, politically.

Let's take Horowitz at his word and entertain that his political conversion is genuine. If so, his agenda is worse than it appears, and his goal may be to purge all the leftist professors from the Campus and replace them with right-wing nuts. So much for 'freedom'. This would be exactly the Weimarization of academia. In the 1920s the German university system was dominated by political thought of the Conservative Revolution, a force that openly hated the Republic, democracy and liberalism. Pro-democratic and liberal professors were few and far between. Though today's conservative intelligentsia in America claim they are all for democracy and the Republic, some are attached to the anti-democratic Vienna School of Economics(look at Chicago Uni, Nevada-Las Vegas) and other anti-republican, authoritarian think -tanks and what have you. Horowitz himself, though he claims to be a secular agnostic, makes common cause with the Religious Right that has a strong Dominionist/theocratic influence. If it wasn't for their crack-brained belief that Israel will convert to Christianity at the "end of Time", these are the very people who would champion the expulsion of Jews and then some from Christian America. I know that politics makes for strange bedfellows( myself included...I'm a New Deal liberal who likes Buchanan's trade protectionism and most of his foreign policy), but Horowitz crosses the line into zany wackiness;his fellow-travelers are something else to behold. Just read the comments at his Sheesh!

Horowitz wallows in his own form of McCarthyism. Noted is that he accuses often critics of Neoconservatism of being motivated by Anti-Semitism; the word 'NeoCon', Horowitz and his pundits say, is a 'code-word' for Jew, and this is how Anti-Semites communicate with one another. This is the worst straw-man argument that I have heard in quite sometime, and it brings up shades of 'Thought Crime' - the same thing that NeoCons accuse the leftist Politically Correct commisars of engaging in. And when NeoCon critics get defensive and retort it is just about ideology and that some of their favorite people happen to be Jewish - the NeoCons say "I toleja so!". NeoCons even accused Radical Centrist,Michael Lind(who's father is Jewish) of Anti-Semitism because he named names of the Neoconservative movement, many who had Jewish surnames like his. That's like saying anyone who hates Rap and Hip-Hop is anti-Black, though many of the older Black people can't abide the cacophony either;when they get defensive and retort that they like other Black oriented music like Jazz, Motown, 70's Soul - they are accused of engaging in the "some of my best friends are Black" spiel. You can't win with some mind-blown ideologues.. It is best not to even try.

Returning to the main theme, what is needed in higher education are more engineers/technocrats, physical economists, anyway, regardless of their politics. That the Left has the hold on University liberal arts is really of no grand consequence. Having a bunch of right- winger Classical scholars running the departments sets off a more dangerous thing and is not what I would call freedom.

Friday, June 8, 2007

Imagine a Kucinich-Buchanan Ticket in '08;-)

Let me begin with trivial news about a trivial person: Paris Hilton's weeping fest about being returned to jail for violating probation. It's academic to state that if Ms. Hilton wasn't an heiress from the Overclass, she would had been long in jail and not had that preferential treatment that was granted to her already. You(if you are a Commoner) and I wouldn't be granted such leniency if we were convicted of driving while intoxicated....and everyone knows that if OJ Simpson and Phil Spector were truck-drivers by occupation they'd be both on Death Roll right now. The Justice System in America is not racist - it is classist. Wealthy dumb-assed athletes, pedophile musicians and Hollywood thespians can get away with murder regardless of their race, color, national origin. This is the reason that I have qualms about capital punishment though I remain a token supporter of it. The affluent aren't held to the same legal standards. Duh. If they change the laws that makes Enron executives and other corrupt CEOs - Economic Predators - on par facing capital punishment for their egregious crimes with commoner sexual predators & other violent predators - then I will be gaga on the Death Penalty. If we stick the needle in the arms of corrupt politicians - I'll be campaigning to make Capital Punishment a Constitutional Amendment. Until then, though I personally support it in principle, I'd be willing to seek it's federal abolition in exchange for economic/foreign policy concessions. Because, Paris Hilton weeps -

"It's not fair!!"

[Shoot a dozen convicted corrupt corporate lawyers, and even the most activist anti-death penalty folks will drop their spiel....:-) ]

Wow, I had a cerebral and polite comment in yesterday's posting from a Ron Paul supporter. I believe that I have spoken enough to what I think of Dr. Paul, but I'll nutshell it again here: his foreign policy is enlightened nationalist in the Federalist Tradition of the United States, yet Congressman Paul definitely is not an economic nationalist. That is my #1 Core Issue here, economics/trade, and Paul is not what I am looking for. The dark horse I'm wasting a bet on is Dennis Kucinich because 2008 is the Democrats to lose. Kucinich, though stereotyped as a *looney lefty* is both an economic- nationalist(via the 'New Deal') and also for a return of "good neighbor" non-aggressive foreign policy - just as much as Ron Paul is. The other GOPers are laughing at Paul, and I doubt he will have any influence on the Party Platform - the GOP is dominated by Christo-crats and imperialist NeoCons. Just because Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld have departed from the BushII Administration, it doesn't mean that neoconservatism is dead. Rather, they are regrouping and are cultivating Giuliani and McCain. Paul's best splash is to return to the Libertarian Party and maybe pick up 3% of the vote. With the likely Democratic nominees, Hillary or Obama, Kucinich can make himself heard in their platform with help, I do believe.

If an authentic economic-nationalist seeks the GOP nomination, I may give him or her support, though I regard myself as a liberal and get turned-off when they talk about social issues and 'God'. In fact, I love to shock my liberal friends by speaking moonshine &roses about Pat Buchanan's magnum opus, The Great Betrayal. Not a greater contemporary text has ever been written in regards to economic nationalism and trade protectionism than this, above. And this is a core issue with Pat unlike his other conservatives in the GOP. Yup, I'd vote for Buchanan over Ron Paul in a heartbeat. I may be a liberal(and proud), but I am flexible. The very existence of my beloved Republic is at stake. This amour I share with *good guy conservatives* and we need to work together, somehow.

Thursday, June 7, 2007

An oxymoron: The 'Republican' Party

The GOP Presidential Debates are resembling a comedy tour; it is just appalling and humorous how stupid these men vying to replace Bush are. Mike Huckabee had to roll out the Reagan personality-cult from the get go by stating that last night was Bonzo's birthday(actually it is February 11); the word 'God' was mentioned over twenty times and ' Constitution' had three appearances.Vienna School adherent and neo-Confederate Ron Paul was the lone dissenter when it came to the topic of religion and stated that people needed to read the 1st Amendment. Paul is also against the Iraq War - he just wants to concentrate on making Class Warfare on working people in the United States. No time for foreign entanglements for Dr. Paul; he has a national economy to destroy if elected.

Have momentously decided not to refer to the GOP as the 'Republican Party' at this blog anymore. It is ridiculous that they call themselves Republicans when their entire agenda is to dismantle the republican-nation-state with Jesus at their side. Lincoln was a Republican. Teddy Roosevelt could wear the label. So could good 'ole Ike Eisenhower. But not any of these idiots in public office with an 'R' next to their names today can call themselves 'Republicans' with a straight face.' Corporate Feudalist Party' would be more truthful as the Warmonger-Chickenhawk Party would as well. Today's 'Republicans' are about as republican as Michael Jackson is the archetype for virile manhood......

The criteria for being a republican in a Republic is that you seek to protect it, both defensively and economically. The WOT is not in the national interest of the United States and neither is globalist 'free trade'. A republican puts energy into a harmony of interests and doesn't favor one over the many. A republican thrives for a dynamic citizenry across the board and not bet on apathy, divisiveness, and play on fear to get elected. This constitutional Republic is founded on freedom of religion and from religion as well; Bible Beating should be confined to home and church on Sunday. The political podium is not the pulpit. The American republican tradition is based on a foreign policy of good intentions to all, 'special relationships' with none. We use troops only when we are attacked and directly threatened. Exporting 'democracy' and 'freedom' is not in the republican format or interest. Besides, we here are not a democratic society anyway. We might as well be a coffee exporter or market abroad American made TVs, radios, and textiles....

I still won't take the GOP seriously if they change their Party moniker to something more fitting to their current political tastes and (cough) ideals. But at least these clowns would be more honest.

Wednesday, June 6, 2007

Ban All Protectionism

Proponents of outsourcing naturally do not care much about the factory drone losing his or her job because of it. The Republicans, the party of Haves and Have-Mores, would rather not hear about it and want the working class to take a hike, period. The upper-crust liberals, what economist Dean Baker calls *loser liberals*, at least want the wealthy to compensate somewhat for job loses in the form of higher corporate taxes and what not. Yet these type of liberals blame the working-class themselves just as much as the GOP does for their plight via outsourcing. They want everyone to go back to school, as if this would solve the problem.

Very remarkably is that both Republican and Democratic cheerleaders for outsourcing are under the umbrella of protectionism themselves. Yes, the so-called professional class - doctors, lawyers and politicians - are protected from the leveling of outsourcing that they advocate, so Free Trade does them no harm. It's sanctimonious that they cry 'Protectionists!' at working and middle-class economic nationalists, when they are the most spoiled and coddled class there is (they're also practicing socialists since the conservative nanny State supports them).

A modest proposal would be for absolute outsourcing and Free Trade: no longer will there be restrictions on foreign lawyers, doctors and elected officials. Any professional from India or China could do their jobs just as well and also for less salary. The rich want tax-breaks, they say? That's socialism! No more tax dodges and rebates, and the private Defense industry will get no more contracts from the Pentagon. That is socialism and "government interference in the market". Everybody regardless of job or class will have to compete for their positions on a global scale just as American manufacturing and construction workers do. All elected officials will have to forfeit their jobs if some person from the Third World puts in a bid for a lower salary, and so will all other 'professionals'. Life is tough, isn't it? That is what they have always told laid-off factory workers and bankrupted small farmers. Now they shall experience the globalism that they so much cherish.

For now on I am taking my medical care when needed to a foreign born doctor, and I'm writing my Congressmen and two Senators that they should give up their jobs to a guy named Habib or Desi. How dare they discriminate against the global market by being Americans in an American job! These aren't citizens, you say? So what! Hell, the Wall Street Journal says we need open borders and open markets, so politicians shouldn't be immune.They're damned protectionists, and so are the American journalists at the Wall Street Journal.

Morale of this satire: 'Professionals, put your own jobs on the world market or shut up.'

Tuesday, June 5, 2007

The Cold War is Ended! Long Live the Cold War!

The Bush Administration not only advocates and practices total war, they are architects of re-creating Cold War conditions in Europe by insisting on their Maginot Line in Space, or the BMD locales in the Czech Republic and Poland. Bush insists that they are protecting Europe from a missile strike from Iran, yet they pledge that Iran will not be allowed any nuclear weapons, and Iran has yet to have the ballistic capability as of yet. Really, who can blame Putin?
This Administration has put US vs. Them everywhere on the globe and if anyone feels more secure with Bush and Cheney running foreign policy they must be comatose. It is humorous that Bush belongs to the GOP that brags that their icon, Ronald Reagan, 'won the Cold War'(which is poppy-cock). Well the GOP re-started it. The Republican Party erroneously boasts as well about being frugal with tax-money but wastes billions on a useless missile defense system. That's your *fiscal conservatives* at their finest......

Many bemoan the violence at the G-8 summit in Rostock -which is over-inflated by the news media anyway. The violence is by a few token groups and most are peaceful. Regardless, violence is understandable. The young people of the globe have been lied to, conned, and shat upon by these political leaders whose policies are taking away their future. The political parties do not represent their views as they should so protest is about their only way to convey their anger and frustration. These heads of governments at the G-8 and WTO summits are the real criminals and it is right that they are shown to be so.....

Dennis Kucinich has about 1% approval rating in the Democratic Party poll so he is a long, long, shot, the darkest horse of them all. Still, with unified anti-globalist support from both sides of the political spectrum, at least perhaps greater attention to the core issues will be picked up by the media and the other candidates still searching for their soul. Kucinich can still be a player in the party's platform organizing if he shows better than expected in next year's primaries......

Monday, June 4, 2007

On the current candidates

Lately, some wingnuts are presenting Congressman Ron Paul as the savior of the Republic and the only decent fellow in the GOP running for the top spot. Perhaps these Paulophiles aren't looking beyond his other agenda and criteria besides his opposition to the Iraq War and the Patriot Act. It is my opinion that Paul is one of the worst of the lot of the Republican Party hopefuls, and he symbolizes just as much as the NeoCons what is wrong with the GOP and the nation at large.

Ron Paul's other track record is his support for States Rights and went on the floor of the House to denounce the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The man is a former Libertarian Party activist and is tied in with the Ludwig von Mises Institute which supports anarcho-capitalism and is part of the neo-Confederate movement. Though Paul is against NAFTA, he is nevertheless for unrestricted Free Trade and vows to dismantle what remains of the social-safety net. Dr. Paul has the support of some rather unsavory characters such as the paranoids who operate Infowars. This man, if elected, would certify the end of the Republic and is hardly a "savior". Trade Protectionists need to forget any Republican Party goon anyway.

Conservative anti-globalists need to get over their phobias of liberal Democrats and support the candidacy of Dennis Kucinich. That would be a titanic leap for them, I know, but regardless of some of his far-left positions and his eccentric character, Kucinich is focused on the core issues that conservative trade protectionists are as well. Kucinich has sworn to dismantle all free-trade treaties including the WTO and has dared to raise the 'T-word' -tariff - in regards to China and other nations that the USA has a towering trade deficit with. And yes, he is against the Iraq War and has at least a plan to get out of there. Kucinich is also for the impeachment of Dick Cheney that none of the other Dems running have the gonads to openly advocate.

This may sound ridiculous that conservatives can find a home in the Kucinich campaign, but conservative anti-globalists aren't going to find their man in any of the GOP stooges running now, including Ron Paul. These paleocons, conservative economic-nationalists and others have been shat on and spit out by the Republican Party. Why should they remain loyal to a party like this? They can go third party in '08 and maybe get 9% of the popular vote. The hope is with the Democrats this time around. I am not gaga on the Democratic Party myself, but I don't see any alternative at the moment. The Good-Guy conservatives need to realize the same and bolt for the people who are core-issues centric. Kucinich may appear strange, and he's a strong social-liberal that turns conservatives off, but if the trade- economy is not turned around soon, none of these social issues will matter anyway. Besides, name one candidate for anything a individual has agreed 100% on their platform? Not going to happen unless someone is brainwashed. Conservative anti-globalists are often conservative on social issues too, but what has the GOP ever did for them either on these things? Not much. Maybe with conservative support, Kucinich will compromise here and there on his social programs. Ron Paul? He's a doctrinaire unbending libertarian, or what I dub as a Right Wing Marxist;one might as well support a bona-fide Trotskyite instead.

Kucinich is a long-shot as it is, but maybe with some other support he can take a good stab at the Democratic Nomination. Both Obama and Hillary Clinton are pure opportunists and some are starting to realize this within the Democratic Party. Time to put energy into a maverick, and Kucinich is a probable candidate that both the liberal and conservative anti-globalists can rally around. There have been stranger bedfellows in politics before.

Saturday, June 2, 2007

The Conservative Fifth Column

If one reads Neocon blogs such as, quickly he or she will notice that they are obsessed with Fifth Columnists. To NeoCons like David Horowitz and his fellow travelers, anyone meets the criteria of being a 5th Columnist for being against the Iraq War, if they're are not knee-jerk pro- Israeli; if they are not Islamophobic and are critics of Predator Economics. Gee, I guess that means me.

FrontPageMag leaves out a vibrant segment of the American ideological population, and that is the anti-American sentiment from the Right. Yes, right-wingers often have not the Constitutional 'general welfare' of the United States at heart and seek it's eradication as a sovereign nation/state. Specifically, the neo-Confederate Movement(the other NeoCons) within the USA hates America more than any Flag burnin', molotov cocktail throwing ,anarchist or commie-pinko Marxist-Leninist ever thought about.

I'll pick on and single out The Ludwig von Mises Institute,once again. This organization's wheeler and dealer is Lew Rockwell Jr., and this paleo-conservative serves also on the board of The League of the South, a traitorous organization that openly advocates secession from the United States. It is fitting that Rockwell advocates the anarcho-capitalism of the Vienna School and names one of his organizations after its avatar. Despite von Mises and Hayek's innocently appearing code-words of 'individualism', 'liberty' and 'freedom' in their texts, what this School aspires for is a return to Monarchy ruled by the Lords, Dukes, Barons and the Vons like it was in the 'good ole days' of feudalism. That is why these Austrian titled nobility snobs have always been attracted to the ante-bellum South of the USA where Master Vs. Slave morality operated fully. Southern Revanchists today kiss up to the Vienna School's mentality for this very reason, likewise. Laissez-faire and Free Trade were the cherished economic memes of the Old South slavocracy, lest we forget.

A individual by the name of Hans-Hermann Hoppe sums it all up and he should be the poster child of Right Wing Fifth Columnists in America. Dr. Hoppe is a Vienna School devotee currently under full-professorship at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas. Hoppe authored a book claiming that democracy is an abysmal failure and he advocates monarchy as the 'alternative'. To people like Hoppe and Kuenhelt-Leddhim, a monarchy is the only way, and secular sovereign republics are the bane to 'liberty'. A King or hereditary ' emperor' is the 'owner' of the realm and he uses many pages borrowed by the pro-slavery philosopher, John Locke, to fit his nonsensical reactionary beliefs. Hoppe is also involved in the League of the South and loves to re-write history by spitting invective at all three of America's Greatest Presidents - Washington, Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt.

Uh...where is the Department of Homeland Security when you need it, pray tell?? Hoppe is a guy who openly hates the very existence of the American Republic and he teaches at a Ami Uni and thus lives off of public taxes paid by hard-working Americans of the state of Nevada. If Hoppe isn't a Fifth Columnist I don't know what is! Instead, folks like ex-Trotskyist, turned NeoCon, David Horowitz, focuses their McCarthyist witch hunts on goofy looney lefty tenured professors like Ward Churchill, who was never a big name until Horowitz made him one in academia. This makes one wonder if Horowitz is actually still a 68er playing like he is a converted conservative(?).

Here is the skinny: the Vienna School, although it advocates *classical liberalism* is actually a branch of the Conservative Revolution, primarily birthed following the fall of the House of Hohenzollern in 1918. The minions of this Conservative Revolution in Germany had one abiding aim of undermining and destroying the Weimar Republic, and they accomplished this very well. Though the Conservative Revolution of the 1920s detested Anglo capitalism, and many of the Vienna School's minions were refugees from the Third Reich, they were nevertheless a freak arm of this movement and remains so today. The situation is this that not everyone who fled the Nazis were good people; some were just as bad as the Brownshirts were. Via Hayek and von Mises, the reactionary Conservative Revolution was brought to the United States under the guise of ' liberalism' and free market economics.
The post-WW2 conservative movement in the United States was by and large an intellectual import from across the Pond that merged with the indigenous Jeffersonian memes. Again, the real focal point of the Vienna School and its attendant Mont Pelerin Society was political in contrast to economic. Despite all of their erudite writing endorsing a form of small government localism and laissez-faire, their main aim is for a re-establishment of hereditary monarchy on the shores of North America. This is not any crack-pot conspiracy theory - it is taking the figures involved at their own words. Just read Hoppe's and Kuehnelt-Leddhin's derision of democracy, republics and the common people who inhabit them. Such figures from this group became pundits for William F. Buckley's National Review, later became a major influence on the 'libertarian' contingent who didn't think that conservative Republicans were capitalist enough. The reactionary Conservative Revolution of the 1920s - that helped the most to destroy the Weimar Republik - had a very American face by the 1950s, 60s and to the present.

The aim of the Conservative Revolution was to destroy the New Deal which they ultimately did, and then ending the sovereignty of the USA as a republic, which they are doing quite nicely at. It is what happened to Weimar and they are doing it to America. Weimar's demise in textbooks has been blamed on the Left and this is a gross myth. The Right wingers did in the German Republic and ushered in the Third Reich; leftists and the enlightened bourgeoisie such as Gustav Stresemann supported the Republic(except for the KPD) by and large. The Conservative Revolution with the Versailles international financial system of the 1920s that wrecked the German economy and subsequently the World's - poor Weimar didn't stand a chance.

Perhaps if America doesn't deal with the right-wing Fifth Column NOW, it will suffer a similar fate as Weimar.

Friday, June 1, 2007

No Miracle w/o 'Statists'

For the utopian free-market crusaders with their obsession with privatization, one key way to debunk their alleged economic science is to merely ask an important question:

Name one nation that got to be a world economic power via laissez-faire?

The answer is simply, 'none'.

Pure free-market economics is not designed to be a nation builder from the onset. Excessive privatization and its companion, *Free Trade*, if anything tears down a country's economic infrastructure as it has been historically seen. Many conservatives have been trying to point to post World War 2 West Germany as an economic miracle because of free-market economics when the evidence is that the BRD achieved it's dynamic recovery with much statist interference in collusion with Business and Labor. The West Germans heeded the principles of ordoliberalism which sets the rules of play for both the Public and Private sphere in the economy, theorhetorically a check on one another and never abandoned the Welfare State . One of the planners of this miracle, Wilhelm Roepke, stated what the Vienna School deemed as heresy, and that is that the Market is not everything. Roepke and Alexander Ruestow, though both were critics of socialism, fully well knew that there were people who are outside the Market, and deserved a social safety net. This was and is the *Third Way* - one of the economic ones - that slaps the globalizing strumpet TINA directly in the face.

I read once an article from the conservative economic predator think tank, The Heritage Foundation, that asserted that the German economic miracle was by and large due to reavualting the currency and lifting wage and price controls. The said article also claimed that the Marshall Plan was insignificant. These assertions are half-truths and like the laissez-faire disciples always do, they never present the big picture. One, the new Deutsche Mark created in 1948 was under the Bretton Woods international agreement that the US Dollar would be the hegemonistic fixed-rate currency backed by a percentage of gold reserve that gave the DM the security it needed. Two, though it is true that West Germany recieved little funds from the Marshall Plan, it did help. The Marshall Plan only lasted for a few years anyway, so it is superflous to state that it "failed" as the laissez-fairest insinuate. Plus, the 'Miracle' was plain circumstance given that a nation building up from World War Two's devastation will experience high growth rates in recovery. Even the centralized-planned economies of the Eastern European Leninist States experienced their own post-war recoveries with high growth rates. GNP growth is not always a 100% statistic that prooves a healthy economy either. China has stupendous growth yet the majority of its population still lives in hovels , for example.

Another post-war Economic Miracle was going on in France at the same time W. Germany was experiencing theirs. The French Way was even more statist planned than the German one was through their philosophy of dirgisme; France had many public owned heavy industries , transportation, and utilities. Nationalization and long term Plans weren't a dirty words to them, and the French had decades long growth and general prosperity. The unfettered*Free Market* wasn't for them, and they'd be damned if thinking that any hidden hand could do the job for them. Both the French and German recoveries were within their respective National System tradition, not the Manchester-British globalist one.

Sadly for the French, now that the neocon(?) Sarkozy is at the helm, their Third Way exceptionalism may be coming to a close. Sarkozy is horny for privatization and he also claims that the French 35 hour workweek is "absurd". Sarkozy just rode the anti-immigrant consensus to power and the French middle class will rue the day that they didn't vote for Royal.

Tito's Yugoslavia was another model. Though Tito was a Marxist, he didn't set up a Leninist State and pursued market-socialism in the former Federated Republics of Yugoslavia. It was a failure, some will say? It was only after Tito's death and privatization conditional loans via the IMF to Yugoslavia when it unraveled. 'Tis another chalk-up that Free Market 'solutions 'tear down a nation/state when let to run wild. One will not hear the Heritage Foundation talk about Tito largely because his success employing Market Socialism is a direct contradiction to their dogma of free-market capitalism, that only their way "works". It does work for the affluent, which is, again, a form of socialism for the wealthy at the expense of everyone else. I thought that capitalism was supposed to be competitive?? Well, it is not, and left unfettered it will only evolve into corporate monopolies. And in direct contradiction to capitalist ideologues, business-people, especially Big Businessmen, they are not capitalists themselves. Not one free-market economist has ever realized this. A CEO would just as soon be headquartered in North Korea if the state would guarantee his or her corporation zero competition and keep the unions beat down and extinct.The wealthy , the Predator elite,only pays lip-service (and fund free-market think tanks and politicians) to preserve their own power and increase it. The reality it that they would operate for anyone regardless of ideology. They have no problems with statist interference such as corporate welfare, if one has ever noticed. Corporations love regulations from the government when it benefits them exclusively. They applaud when government uses tax money from working Americans to bail out failing corporations. There is not a CEO one who is a true believer in laissez-faire - they just fund egghead economists and pundits as their useful idiots and they are laughing their asses off.