How the West Is Winning Battles and Losing the War With Islam

As Europe is overrun by migrants from the Third World, it is increasingly clear that the West is an empire in rapid disintegration, and that the racial, cultural and religious identities of its constituent peoples will soon to be almost wholly obliterated.

The point is made nicely in a piece by Colin Liddell on the stupidity of liberals.

the idea that the Muslims are backward and need to catch up with us is clearly wrong. Indeed, it is entirely the other way round. In terms of demographic effectiveness, the Muslims are streets ahead of us, as are Non-Islamic Africans, Hispanics, and Indians. This might be one tiny little point lost in the great big bundle of Western technological, cultural, and consumerist superiority, but come back in a hundred years and see the difference it makes.

In response to which there is the comment:

 Nature endowed us with sex for a purpose: to replicate ourselves. We have an education system, a media and an entertainment industry dedicated to disguising this basic [fact]. Perhaps we should stop listening to the hostile elite that controls those institutions and return to our traditional value system that developed the West, Christianity, and start listening to the Pope and his Protestant counterparts in these matters. They are at the very least promoters of policies that will energize us in the race war being waged against us. 

Precisely. Why is so hard for liberals and leftists like Richard Dawkins, the late Christopher Hitchens and their vast army of admirers to understand that simple biological reality. Or are they all self-hating racists intent on the genocide of their own people?

On the whole, the latter seems quite possible. Certainly during the interwar years, there was a vogue for genocide among the leftist elite in Europe, as exemplified by the appeal of Fabian socialist George Bernard Shaw to the chemists "to discover a humane gas that will kill instantly and painlessly. Deadly by all means, but humane, not cruel," for use in the disposal of the unemployed and other useless eaters.

Since then, Hitler's use of gas chambers has given the wholesale liquidation of supposed undesirables a bad name, so genocide has to be conducted by other means. Social manipulation and brainwashing now provide a slow but sure means to destroy the nation states of Europe, and replace them by a mongrelized population of Third Worlders and demoralized remnants of the original ancient peoples.

UK Government proposes law to cover up Iraq war crimes

UK soldiers 'beat innocent Iraqi men in black ops jails but new secret justice law means their torture will be hidden forever.'

The Mail on Sunday can today reveal devastating new claims of abuse by British soldiers carried out at a secret network of illegal prisons in the Iraqi desert.

One innocent civilian victim is said to have died after being assaulted aboard an RAF helicopter, while others were hooded, stripped and beaten at a camp set up at a remote phosphate mine deep in the desert.

The whereabouts of a separate group of 64 Iraqi men who were spirited away on two RAF Chinooks to a ‘black site’ prison, located at an oil pipeline pumping station, remain unknown.

Read more

Egyptian President, Mohamed Morsi, American Satrap

By Aangirfan

USA TAKES OVER EGYPT

Morsi, who worked at NASA on the development of space shuttle engines. Only American citizens can work at NASA. Morsi's children are American citizens. (The US /Egyptian Chronicles!)

The USA has got its candidate into power in Egypt.

Mohamed Morsi, 62, a US-trained engineer, has been declared president of Egypt ...

Read More

Rampant Racism at the University of Minnesota

Lendley Black, President of the University of Minnesota believes white people should be ashamed of being white, or so one must assume from this video, sponsored by the University, which seeks to shame and demoralize white people for the mere fact of their being white.

In the video, to be white is said to be a privilege. And it's not just said, it's written over the faces of the rather stupid white people who volunteered to be in the video, or the rather despicable white people who accepted payment to appear in the video.

Why is it a privilege to be white?

Because, according to some poor child who probably means everything for the best:

"people see us, Not (double underlined) a color."

Think about that. What she's saying, and what's written on her face (a nice humiliating touch that), is that American white people are incapable of acknowledging those of color as people with a personality, with rights, etc., to be judged on their merits, but see them only as objects.

That's blatant nonsense. It's also a blatant anti-white racist slur.

The slur is repeated in different words by a young witless white male saying:

"We're privileged because we don't get stared at when we walk into the room."

Meaning, clearly, that all white Americans are so crassly ill-mannered as to rudely stare if a colored person walks into the room, which in any case flatly contradicts the claim of the girl that white people see a non-white only as a color, i.e., as a person of no account, someone at whom one has no reason to stare.

Then there's the middle aged female agent of political correctness intoning the words written on her face:

"We're privileged we don't get followed by security when we go shopping."

But what is the assumption here? That white people should be ashamed that their behavior provides no statistical basis to indicate they are a special security risk?

Then there's a female complaining that:

"We're pulled over when we're in the wrong neighborhood."

Does she really likes the idea of getting into the wrong neighborhood and being mugged, raped, or what?

Then there's some dopey guy saying:

"We're privileged because society was set up for us."

Really. It's hard to believe George Washington, John Adams, James Madison or Tom Payne would have done anything for the benefit of this brainwashed moron whose ancestors were probably still hoeing turnips in the old country long after America's founding.

Then he tells us:

"And our silence, keeps it in place."

What it keeps in place, he fails to mention. Presumably the white American tradition (alleged) of staring rudely at a non-white person when they walk into the room.

Then to end it, there's the same simple-minded innocent that the video began with saying:

"We're privileged. And that's unfair."

But a privilege is:

A special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to one person or group of people.

And no such right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to white people has been demonstrated.

This video is simply an expression of white self-hatred. A bizarre pathology that flourishes, apparently, in the intellectual environment of a state-funded institution of higher education.

Students should boycott the University of Minnesota - Duluth as a gesture of solidarity with white people and in opposition to racist hate speech.

Enrollment numbers are all that most university administrators care about. It determines how much taxpayers' money they get to spend on indoctrinating taxpayers' children to hate their own parents, etc., and how much the school president and football coach get paid. Slash the enrollment numbers as an expression of public disapprobation and the universities will rapidly change course.

Source

More about UM's hate whitey campaign here.

The Kahn Academy: The Future of Education?

Thinking of Universities and how toxic their mix of alleged education and politically correct indoctrination can be, prompts mention of the Kahn Academy. If you learn nothing else useful from this lousy blog, you may well find Salman Kahn's educational resource of real value.

Kahn is a hugely well educated and hugely gifted instructor who has developed an approach to online learning that offers promise of eliminating much of the ruinously expensive and politically corrupting bureaucratic educational establishment that is one of the most destructive state elements sucking the life-blood from Western nations.

Here, on 60 Minutes, Kahn explains his approach to on-line learning. What Kahn has developed is the mechanism for the kind of flexible, personalized, non-politicized and cost-effective education system we argued for here.

In essence, the process is this. Instead of teachers lecturing students and giving them homework assignments to test their learning, Kahn's approach has online instructors lecturing students at home in short, manageable segments, while teachers monitor and assist students in exercises to test how well they have assimilated the lessons viewed.

According to this paradigm of learning, the teacher serves as a tutor, checking to see that assigned lessons have been learnt, trouble-shooting when students run into difficulties in understanding, and directing students to appropriate material to take them to the next stage.

This scheme of education eliminates the lock-step advance of an entire age-group, for the lecturing is one-on-one, over the internet. Each student can thus take whatever lessons that logically follow from what he has successfully mastered so far. The teacher, as tutor, assists each student with whatever part of the program he happens to be working on now. By the time of high school graduation, some kids will have mastered advanced university or even post-graduate material, while others will have attained only a much lower standard. But that lower standard will have been fully mastered, because the student has been tutored at every step of the way and not advanced from any stage until that stage has been mastered.

University administrators like Lendley Black, President of U Minnesota, Duluth, who think it the role of the university to brainwash students instead of teach them to be self-confident and accomplished young adults, will soon be redundant. New media are making the traditional university, with its astronomical costs, its rampant political corruption and its remarkable educational inefficiency increasingly insupportable.

Bloomberg News: How the US Government spends more subsidizing banks than on education

When JPMorgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon testifies in the U.S. House today, he will present himself as a champion of free-market capitalism in opposition to an overweening government. His position would be more convincing if his bank weren’t such a beneficiary of corporate welfare.

To be precise, JPMorgan receives a government subsidy worth about $14 billion a year, according to research published by the International Monetary Fund and our own analysis of bank balance sheets. ...

Read more

Obama: American Tyrant

Rachel Maddow: Obama the two-faced: Abandoning the rule of law in the name of the rule of law.

Obama's Harvard Law Professer, Roberto Unger:

President Obama must be defeated in the coming election.

He has failed to advance the progressive cause in the United States.

He has spent trillions of dollars to rescue the monied interest and left workers and homeowners to their own devices.

He has subordinated the broadening of economic and educational opportunities to the important but secondary issue of access to healthcare in the mistaken belief that he would be spared a fight.

He has surrendered the politics of democracy to the rule of money.

He has reduced justice to charity. His policy is financial confidence and food stamps.

Unless he is defeated, there cannot be a contest for the reorientation of the democratic party as the vehicle of a progressive alternative...

Joseph Curl: Obama: enemy of the US Constitution.

From the very beginning, the president and his administration made clear they had no intention of enforcing laws they didn’t like. Mr. Obama and his minions decided that they would simply stop enforcing the Defense of Marriage Act, no longer prosecute growers of “medical” marijuana, and let some states walk away from provisions in the No Child Left Behind law (which, by the way, was co-authored by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, and passed the Senate by a 91-8 vote).

Mr. Obama’s Justice Department has even more flagrantly flouted the laws of the land. Out of the blue, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., the nation’s chief law enforcement officer, reinterpreted America’s gambling laws (and dumped the decision on Christmas Eve so as to avoid scrutiny). More recently, Mr. Holder has decided to thwart congressional oversight by refusing to release documents on the disastrous “Fast and Furious” gun-running scheme, and he is actively fighting Florida for trying to expunge dead people from its voter rolls.

Now comes Mr. Obama’s decision to stop enforcing America’s immigration laws. The new policy states that illegal immigrants who were younger than 16 when they entered the country are eligible for a two-year exemption from deportation. Of course, the “deferred action process,” as Homeland Security Secretary Janet A. Napolitano called it, will apply to illegals up to age 30. (Think when they legally get their driver’s licenses they will also be handed a voter registration card?)

Rachel Cohen: Obama decrees that law-abiding illegal immigrants need not obey immigration law

Judge Andrew Nepolitano: Obama claims the right to incarcerate persons even after a jury has found them not guilty

Jesse Ventura: When You Go To ANY Airport In The U.S. You Are NOT Protected By The Constitution Or Bill Of Rights. John Whitehead: Barak Obama: a Law Unto Himself?

How liberals truly hate England

The gratuitous denigration of things English – the reign of Elizabeth I

By Robert Henderson

England Calling, June 14, 2012

Allan Massie, a Scot be it noted, decided to celebrate the Diamond Jubilee of Queen Elizabeth II  with a deprecating piece on her great predecessor and namesake, Elizabeth I designed to pour  cold water on the idea that hers was a glorious reign. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/9307110/Lets-not-overlook-the-gory-details-of-Gloriana.html). He complains of the general treatment of Catholics, the use of torture on Catholic priests and those who harboured them,  nudges the reader to consider the likes of Francis Drake to be hovering on or going over edge of piracy and in best liberal bigot fashion invokes the ultimate condemnation of English adventurers of the time by dwelling on Sir John Hawkins’ involvement in the slave trade. In addition, Massie belittles the defeat of the Amada and Elizabethan military exploits on the continent, bemoans English involvement in Ireland and stands aghast as he considers the Earl of Essex’s execution of one in ten of his army after they failed to press hard enough in battle.  As for the great intellectual glory of the reign, the  sudden flowering of literature symbolised by Shakespeare,  this is dismissed of being only a tailpiece to the Elizabethan age.

Massie, a professional historian so he has no excuse, has committed  the cardinal sin of historians by projecting the moral values and customs of his own time into the past. For a meaningful judgement Elizabeth’s reign has to be judged against the general behaviour of European powers of the time and that comparison , ironically, shows   Gloriana’s England’s   to be considerably nearer to what Massie would doubtless consider civilised values than any other state in Europe.

There were no terrible wars of religion as there were in France ; no Inquisition as there was in Spain.; no burning of those deemed heretics as there was under Mary Tudor.  Torture was used  in Elizabeth’s England, and in the reigns which immediately followed,  but sparingly and  only for cases which had national importance,  normally involving treason,  such as those involved in the Gunpowder Plot which took place only two years after Elizabeth’s death .  On the continent it was a commonplace of judicial process.  English law, by the standards of the time, was generally remarkably fair, not least because of the widespread use of juries. Those who gasp with horror at Essex’s execution of his troops should bear in mind that in the First World War several hundred British soldiers were shot for behaviour such as desertion and failing to go forward when ordered  over the top.

In Elizabeth’s reign the first national legislation anywhere in the world to provide help to the needy was passed, a legislative series which began in 1563 and culminated in  the Poor Law of 1601. This legislation put a duty on every parish to levy money to support the poor and made it a requirement to provide work for those needing to call on the subsistence provided by the Poor Law.   Educational opportunities, whilst far from universal, increased substantially.  Despite , by pre-industrial  standards,  very high inflation and the inevitable bad harvests, which included a  series of poor years in the late 1590s,  the population grew  substantially, possibly  by as much as a third from 3 to 4 million (http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/tudors/poverty_01.shtml). London expanded  to be the largest city in Europe by the end of the  Elizabeth’s reign with an estimated  population of  200,000 by 1600 (http://www.londononline.co.uk/factfile/historical/ ).

Read more

Oregon State U fires Author of Slide Show: "Global Warming Cracked Open"

Oregon State University chemist, Dr. Nickolas Drapela, who created the slide show Global Warming Cracked Open has been summarily fired from his position as a “Senior Instructor” in the Department of Chemistry.

According to Gordon Fulkes, writing at WUWT "The department chairman Richard Carter told [Drapela] that he was fired but would not provide any reason. Subsequent attempts to extract a reason from the OSU administration have been stonewalled. Drapela appears to have been highly competent and well-liked by his students. Some have even taken up the fight to have him reinstated."

Dr. Drapela's slide show is concerned not with the science of global warming, or lack thereof, but with the politics. It asserts that under the leadership of Piss Prize winners such as Barack Obama and Al Gore, the World is being driven to accept a fascist New World Order that will mean the destruction of the nations of the World, Israel apparently to be excepted, with the elimination of most of the World's population through cultural, psychological and economic means.

I agree. Naturally, Dr. Drapela had to go.

 Via WRH

This Depression Created and Perpetuated by Keynesian Economists

Maynard Keynes obtained a doctorate from Cambridge University for a thesis entitled A Treatise on Probability. In it, he argued that the probability that the cover of a book you have not seen is black is exactly 50%. How so? Because either the cover is black or it is not. Since you know nothing else, the probability of it being either one or the other must be 50%.

To convince the Cambridge dons of that, whether correct or not, one had to be a smart fellow. Keynes was. Following WW1 he wrote The Economic Consequences of the Peace, which convinced many that the Versailles Treaty which concluded the Great War was unfair to Germany, a perception that did much to consolidate support in the 1930's for Britain's policy of German appeasement.

Most importantly, Keynes figured out the cause of the 1930's Great Depression. Business was bad, so business laid off workers and axed plans for new investment. Laid off workers spent almost nothing at all, so business got worse. The result? a vicious cycle of reduced consumption leading to reduced hiring and investment leading to reduced consumption.

The solution? Government deficit spending financed by borrowing the funds capitalists were hoarding for lack of investment opportunity. Nazi Germany provided the first verification of Keynes' theory which, as Keynes noted in the Preface to the German edition of his most famous work, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, was "easily adapted to the conditions of a totalitarian state".

Hitler brooked no delay in setting the wheels of German industry humming with the construction of autobahnen, Volkswagens, tanks and Stuka dive bombers financed with ingenious Erzatz money devised by finance minister Hjalmar Schacht. The rearmament boom in response to Germany's aggressive stance, first in Britain and later in America, verified the counter-cyclical efficiency of deficit government spending.

Thus vindicated, Keynesianism became the basis for post-war economic management throughout the West. If business was bad, governments had to do whatever was necessary to stimulate employment and consumption. Thus did capitalism triumph intellectually over communism. Not only did capitalism not impoverish the masses, as was fundamental to Marxist theory, it in fact could survive only by ensuring that the masses continually consumed more and more.

So why does the Keynesian solution no longer work? What went wrong? The 1994 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), now embodied in the World Trade organization (WTO), is what went wrong. The WTO, opens the West to unrestricted competition from four billion Third Worlders working for pennies an hour under what by Western standards are conditions of gross exploitation tantamount to slavery.

The impact of global free trade, or globalization, has been gradual. In 1994, the Third World lacked the capital, the technology and the trained workforce to constitute a great threat to Western industry. But following the GATT agreement, things changed rapidly. Western corporations worked diligently to develop manufacturing bases and service centers throughout the Third World to exploit cheap Third World muscle and brain power.

For the West, the most significant results of globalization have been twofold. First a huge increase in profits of globalized corporations such as IBM, Microsoft, and Apple, which have seen their market capitalization increase ten-fold or more over the last decade during which they have out-sourced and off-shored more and more manufacturing and service work from the West to the Rest. Second, a slump in investment and hiring in the West. Hence the Second Great Depression

Image source.

How have Western Governments responded to this undermining of Western prosperity? With bubbles and Third-Worldization.

Financial deregulation created an explosion of financial innovation including a derivatives bubble that, at ten times the size of the World's GDP, is still expanding. The result has been an increase in financial industry profits from less than 20% of domestic US profits in 1990 to to 45% in 2002.

Following the bust in the tech sector and stagnation in the stock market, which occurred at the turn of the century, financial industry profits stagnated, but real estate and real-estate-linked finance became the engine of Western economic expansion. Fueled by low interest rates, property boomed throughout Europe and the United States, then busted, taking much of the finance industry with it.

Throughout the bubble economy era, Western governments have pursued an aggressive policy of Third Worldization, or national self-genocide through mass immigration. The United States has tens of millions of illegal, mainly Hispanic immigrants, contrary to the wishes of most Americans, while Western Europe is flooded with Asians, Africans, Middle Easterners and East Europeans (most of them good people, no doubt), with the full connivance of the ruling elites in London, Paris, etc.

The policy of Third Worldization of the West serves both to discipline the indigenous people by subjecting them to massive competition from energetic, immigrants eager for work even at minimum or sub-minimum wages that far exceed what they could earn at home, and to complete the Bilderberger-Liberal-Left plan for global governance and the destruction of the nation state.

Now that the finance and real estate economies are busted, Western governments continue with the project of Third Worldization, Britain for example, absorbing a near record 550,000 immigrants in the first nine months of 2011. In addition, they have fallen back on the old policy standby, Keynesianism, which is to say subsidies for windmills, electric cars, and solar panels, plus food stamps and welfare paid for with money either freshly printed, or borrowed in large part from the the developing Third World and the oil states.

The results are as you'd expect. Third Worldization is going well, and leading to massive unemployment, since as Cambridge economist Ha-Joon Chang -- no that's not an English name -- points out, for every low-skilled Englishman in need of a job, there's a more competent immigrant ready to take whatever job he might otherwise have had. Meantime, the Keynesian "stimulus" spending does little for the unemployed, but instead pulls in more shoes and shirts and computers and car parts from the Third World, where wages have risen from about 3% of those in the West in 1994 to about 5% of those in the West today.

Keynesians like to quote Keynes' retort to a questioner who charged him with changing his position: “when the facts change, I change my mind.  What do you do, sir?” It's time for Keynesians to take Keynes' advice and review the facts that now prevail. The West is in a depression not for lack of demand but for lack of competitiveness. That means stimulus spending on more school teachers, on roads and bridges, windmills and solar panels is counter-productive. It makes the West less competitive, not more so, thus further reducing the incentives for investment and hiring in the West. 

What Keynes would recommend now, would be quite different from the prescription of the Keynesians. His advice would be to end mass immigration, eliminate tax disincentives to investment, i.e., the corporation tax, and cut consumption spending, particularly wasteful government programs many of which contribute nothing to the public welfare -- in America the TSA's blue-gloved goons and the entire apparatus of Homeland Security comes to mind, not to mention the war for global empire.

In the meantime, to mop up surplus labor, the necessary solution is either a tariff, or as I have advocated, state-funded wage subsidies distributed by competitive auction, which would eliminate unemployment at less than the cost of welfare, while providing a huge affordable labor resource to Western entrepreneurs. Once again workers in America and Europe could then make stuff for one another, instead of being dependent for almost every manufactured product on the slave plantations of the Third World.

The European Atrocity You Never Heard About

By R.M. Douglas

In the largest episode of forced migration in history, millions of German-speaking civilians were sent to Germany from Czechoslovakia and other European countries after World War II by order of the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union.

Hoover Institution Archives, June 11, 2012: The screams that rang throughout the darkened cattle car crammed with deportees, as it jolted across the icy Polish countryside five nights before Christmas, were Dr. Loch's only means of locating his patient. The doctor, formerly chief medical officer of a large urban hospital, now found himself clambering over piles of baggage, fellow passengers, and buckets used as toilets, only to find his path blocked by an old woman who ignored his request to move aside. On closer examination, he discovered that she had frozen to death.

Finally he located the source of the screams, a pregnant woman who had gone into premature labor and was hemorrhaging profusely. When he attempted to move her from where she lay into a more comfortable position, he found that "she was frozen to the floor with her own blood." Other than temporarily stanching the bleeding, Loch was unable to do anything to help her, and he never learned whether she had lived or died. When the train made its first stop, after more than four days in transit, 16 frost-covered corpses were pulled from the wagons before the remaining deportees were put back on board to continue their journey. A further 42 passengers would later succumb to the effects of their ordeal, among them Loch's wife.

An estimated 500,000 people died in the course of the organized expulsions; survivors were left in Allied-occupied Germany to fend for themselves.

During the Second World War, tragic scenes like those were commonplace, as Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin moved around entire populations like pieces on a chessboard, seeking to reshape the demographic profile of Europe according to their own preferences. What was different about the deportation of Loch and his fellow passengers, however, was that it took place by order of the United States and Britain as well as the Soviet Union, nearly two years after the declaration of peace.

Between 1945 and 1950, Europe witnessed the largest episode of forced migration, and perhaps the single greatest movement of population, in human history. Between 12 million and 14 million German-speaking civilians—the overwhelming majority of whom were women, old people, and children under 16—were forcibly ejected from their places of birth in Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Yugoslavia, and what are today the western districts of Poland....

Read more

Clueless Krugman?

Paul Krugman is a Nobel Prize winner, and a Professor or economics at Princeton University. He is also a blogger and, in his book End This Depression Now, the proclivities of the blogger show. The derisive partisanship, the "of course" this and "of course" that, the breezy self-reference to "yours truly", the typographical emphasis of statements that remain to be demonstrated, and the occasional resort to the one-sentence paragraph all combine to give the work a bloggishness that detracts from an argument that Krugman is perfectly well able to present in plain unaffected English.

But presented in plain English the argument would hardly fill a book, for in essence, all that Krugman is saying is that the Obama administration failed to provide an adequate Keynesian antidote to the contraction in demand that has driven the US economy and that of much of the rest of the Western World into depression.

That antidote is massive government deficits and stimulus spending. The Obama administration did enact the American Recovery and Reinvestment act, a stimulus package of $787 billion, but, says Krugman, this was "far too small."

So what exactly does Krugman want to End This Depression Now? He wants a multi-trillion-dollar Federal government deficit to be financed by borrowing and money printing, which will deliver cash to the States to enable rehiring of laid off public sector employees, to finance infrastructure such as more and better roads and bridges for the diminishing number of cars actually driven in America, and to provide debt relief to homeowners in the hope, presumably, of restarting house price inflation and all the stimulative economic consequences that could have.

To demonstrate the workability of his scheme for rebooting the economy with a flood of borrowed or printed money, Krugman draws a parallel with the United States following WW2. At that time, returning war vets borrowed to buy houses, cars, etc. and the economy boomed with the growth in consumer debt. But the analogy is absurd. In 1945 America was the workshop of the World supplying the tools and materials that the countries devastated by war needed to restore their shattered economies. At the same time the quantity of private debt in the US was abnormally low.

Image source

Today, the situation is totally different. First, because Americans are loaded to the eyeballs with debt, which they are desperately trying to shed and succeeding at the rate of about a trillion dollars a year. Second, because America is no longer industrially supreme. On the contrary, America is losing jobs by the tens of millions as manufacturing, IT and many other services are off-shored and out-sourced to the Third World where wages are small fraction of wages in the US.

So Krugman offers a time when Americans were pre-eminently creditworthy and prosperous due to the abundance of well paid jobs in productive industries as a parallel to today when Americans are mostly not creditworthy, having lost 40% of their net worth since the housing market peaked, and who's best hope of a job is in the public sector feeling up passengers at the airport or some other occupation adding only very questionably to the real wealth of the nation.

Amazingly, Krugman totally ignores the elephant in the room, which is the tremendous competitive weakness of the West versus the Rest, i.e., four billion Third Worlders earning pennies an hour, which was mandated by the 1994 GATT agreement. For example, the index to Krugman's book contains no entry for "globalization;" no reference to "trade deficit" only one reference to the "balance of trade" (that concerning the balance of trade among Eurozone nations); and no references to "outsourcing," "off-shoring," or mass immigration.

Krugman thus altogether fails to acknowledge the most prominent cause of  the present economic crisis in the West, i.e., the competitive failure of the West against the Rest. Oddly, he does recognize competitive failure of the Southern European states as a cause of financial crisis within the Eurozone and he acknowledges that a solution to the Eurozone crisis can only come from either wages cuts in the failing economies or what would be equivalent in terms of real incomes, a breakup of the Eurozone to allow the non-competitive states to adopt independent currencies that can be devalued until national competitiveness is regained.

But for some reason Krugman is unable to see that the crisis of the Eurozone is precisely analogous to the crisis of the West in competition with the Rest. To maintain that these crises are not comparable because the Western states have their own currencies that can be devalued against currencies of Third World competitors overlooks the fact that the Western currencies are not being devalued against those of the industrializing Third World, or at least not sufficiently rapidly to provide the necessary relief to the Western workforce. And the reason that the US dollar, for example, is not being devalued sufficiently rapidly is that competitor nations are hoarding those currencies. Japan and China, for example, between them hold around $2 trillion in US Treasury bonds.

Those foreign held dollars represent tens of millions of lost US jobs. At minimum wage, those $2 trillion unspent dollars earned through sales of goods and services to the US represent the loss of approximately one hundred million man years of labor at the minimum wage. Enough, in other words, to provide every unemployed American a job for three or four years.

This is the issue that Krugman does not discuss, either because he is clueless, or because he knows that the truth about globalization, which as a liberal he must support, if known to the people would set off a revolution.

But if Krugman's argument is irrelevant, what then is the way to end the depression now? The answer is exactly that which Krugman offers in the case of the Eurozone crisis. Specifically, he mentions two options. One is an across the board wage cut, undertaken in the manner I outlined here, which would restore competitiveness to the West and make it possible once again for Americans and Italians and people throughout the West to make shoes and shirts and car parts and computers for one another, thereby regaining and enhancing their industrial skills and hence the value of their labor.

The other option is to force a devaluation of Western currencies, which in turn will force China, Japan, the oil states and other nations that have hoarded paper denominated in Western currencies to spend the cash fast before it loses much, say 50 to 90%, of its value.Ultimately, that spending will stimulate demand for goods and services in the West.

In fact, Option 1 is the official but unacknowledged policy. Wages are to be ground down during a long-drawn out depression during which the plight of the Western worker will be greatly exacerbated by a mass influx of Third Worlders with no tradition of civil rights or the rule of law and who are generally more capable than the least competent members of the native workforce. This is the genocidal liberal policy of globalization, which necessitates the destruction of the the nations of the World as racial, cultural or religions entities -- Israel apparently excepted. 

To be fair to Krugman, it must be acknowledged that his preferred means of ending the depression would have the combined effects of forcing a devaluation of Western currencies and driving down wages in the West as a result of the price inflation caused by massive government deficit spending and money printing. This is not an efficient solution, however, since the deficit spending would mostly go on more government of which the Western nations already have more than they can afford. The danger in Krugman's solution is thus that it would lead to massive social unrest while achieving little if anything in the way of increased Western competitiveness.

Why Germany Can't Fix the Euro Crisis

By HANS-WERNER SINN
New York Times, June 12, 2012: ALTHOUGH Europe may seem far away from the economic life of the average American, the fate of the euro zone weighs heavily on the United States economy. Pension funds have invested in bonds issued by southern European states, while banks and insurance companies have underwritten a sizable fraction of the credit-default swaps protecting investors against default.

 It’s no wonder, then, that President Obama is urging Germany to share in the debt of the euro zone’s southern nations. But in doing so, he and others overlook several critical facts.

For one thing, such a bailout is illegal under the Maastricht Treaty, which governs the euro zone. Because the treaty is law in each member state, a bailout would be rejected by Germany’s Constitutional Court.

Moreover ...

Read More

America's Obsession With Cosmetic Surgery

All You Need to Know About 9/11, Democracy and the MSM

Via WRH

Ending This Depression Now

A central argument of Paul Krugman's book, End This Depression Now, is that calls for the imposition of austerity by heavily indebted governments are based on the mistaken belief that governments and individuals must respond to indebtedness in the same way. This is the fallacy of composition, the belief that what is true of individuals is necessarily true of the class to which those individual belong. To say that atoms are colorless, cats are made of atoms, therefore cats are colorless, is an example of such fallacious reasoning. [Actually, atoms are not colorless, they're just too small to see.]

Refuting such logic, Keynsians point out that, unlike individuals, governments may in some circumstances improve their finances through increased expenditure. If, for example, a government increases expenditure during a period of high unemployment in such a way as to stimulate investment, unused labor and capital will be re-employed, thereby generating increased output and tax revenue. [Actually, this is no less true of individuals or households. If you get a bank loan, invest in a truck and a ladder and spend the weekends cleaning gutters and washing windows, then you may improve your household budget.]

But to suggest that boosting the government deficit in Greece, for example, would be a solution to the government's insolvency is utterly daft. The Greek government, to name one of many governments in a similar situation, has bankrupted itself by over-investing in the public sector while failing to make taxpayers shoulder the full cost of the services -- many of doubtful value -- thus provided. Any arrangement to enable corrupt politicians, Greek or otherwise, to continue buying votes by overpaying and over-staffing the bureaucracy will only worsen a country's financial difficulties.

In any case, the problem for Greece and most other Western nations is not that there is a need for a wee bit more investment in productive sectors of the economy. The problem is that the West has been priced out of too many markets by four billion Third Worlders working for pennies an hour. The solution to that problem is either to give everyone in the West a 60 to 80% pay cut or to return to a closed market protected by tariffs. In the meantime, it would be a good idea to stop importing Third Worlders to the West to take what job opportunities exist from the least competent section of the Western work force.

Of the alternatives, tariffs and a return to protectionism are totally unacceptable to the Bilderbergers and others of the monied interest who dictate the course of affairs. Cutting wages sharply, immediately and across the board, though a perfectly effective solution, presents certain political difficulties. So we appear to be in for a long grinding down of expectations in the West. But give it a generation or so, and we may be as willing as the Chinese to work 12 hours a day, seven days a week for three hundred bucks a month.

By that time, unfortunately, much of our workforce will be essentially without skills due to years of enforced idleness. By then it will be the formerly low-wage, Third World nations that will have the industrial workforce skills, the technology and the capital to dominate the high-wage manufacturing sector of the World economy.

So although our economic problem is not theoretically insoluble, it is effectively insoluble because of the self-serving control of the plutocratic elite and the pathetically blinkered vision of the elite-owned economists at the Ivy League universities and elsewhere who are, with few exceptions, incapable of articulating novel solutions to novel problems.

The West is being beaten at its own game. The West achieved the first the industrial revolution and profited mightily from it. The Rest have now launched their own industrial revolution and are eating our lunch. The Western nations have gone from a position of overwhelming competitive superiority into a competitive decline that is accelerating because the leadership will neither acknowledge, nor deal with, what is happening.

To restore competitiveness we need austerity throughout the public sector, meaning wage cuts for public sector workers, and cuts to welfare, healthcare, pensions and education, the money saved to be returned to the private sector through tax cuts. In particular, the corporation tax must go. Higher net profits will mean more investment. The income tax must also be cut to bring offshore wealth home to be taxed -- moderately -- and invested at home.

Then, to make the least skilled of the Western workforce more competitive with workers in the Third World, employers must be provided with wage subsidies. Sold by competitive auction, such subsidies would cost less than welfare and the other costs associated with unemployment, including the costs of increased crime increased policing and an increased prison population.

The number of subsidies offered would be adjusted to achieve full employment. That way, Western workers would be available once again make to shoes and shirts and car parts for one another at a competitive price, rather than living a demoralized or degraded existence on welfare or by crime because the jobs that should be theirs by right have been outsourced to the Third World.

See also:

Canspeccy: State-Financed Capitalism and the End of Western Hegemony

Ron Paul, Bilderberg and the New World Order

A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. Cicero, 42 B.C.

The Bilderberg Group, founded in 1954 by the likes of ex-Nazi Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, David Rockerfeller, Dean Rusk, who was both a top official of the Council on Foreign Relations and head of the Rockerfeller foundation, provides the very rich and their political adjuncts the chance to get together in private to discuss how to rule the World in the interests of the very rich and their political adjuncts.

Among members of the Bilderberg's steering committee is the youthful, gay, billionaire, Peter Thiel, who just happens to be Ron Paul's largest presidential election campaign contributor.

A connection between Ron Paul and Bilderberg should be no surprise. Peter Thiel is a libertarian and like most very rich people hates the income tax, the corporation tax, welfare, healthcare and publicly funded education. Ron Paul, as his supporters ought to know, is if not very rich, at least a multimillionaire and a libertarian who would like to scrap the income tax, the corporation tax, welfare, healthcare and publicly funded education.

So what's the fuss about Ron Paul being backed by Bilderberg-steering-committee member Thiel?

Probably, although I have not seen this articulated clearly, the reaction is due to the apparent inconsistency between Ron Paul's avowed opposition to the American war for global empire and the Bilderberger's ideological closeness with the imperialistic Council on Foreign Relations.

However, the difference is not fundamental. The American drive for global empire aims at the creation of a world safe for very rich people, which means global governance owned by very rich people. Bilderbergers share this objective with the most insanely warlike NeoCons. As a libertarian, Ron Paul shares this objective.

Although Paul may sincerely disagree with the present US approach to the destruction of the democratic nation state, including the United States, as the fundamental unit of political power, he is not opposed to the overriding goal, which is the creation of a world without borders, where the nations states, their identities, their distinctive cultures and their religious traditions are to exposed to the impact of unrestricted human migration, and flows of capital, goods and services.

The libertarians, like the Bilderbergers, the CFR and the Trilateral Commission are united in a campaign for universal genocide and the mongrelization of humanity. National cultures and religious traditions are to be trashed in the process and replaced by a universal culture consisting in little more than a byproduct of the commercial system.

The emergence of this World, the New World Order, announced by George H.W. Bush in 1991, will inevitably lead to the division of humanity into two species, the Eloi and the Morlocks of HG Wells dystopian novel the Time Machine, i.e., an elite class, the Eloi, living completely apart from the slave class, the Morlocks.

It will be a simple matter to genetically engineer both classes to (a) prevent inter-class breeding and (b) to give each of the resultant species the appropriate characteristics: beauty, longevity, etc. for the Eloi, servility, and brevity of existence for the Morlocks, who will have only what physical or mental powers they require to fulfill their allotted tasks.

As this genocidal scheme unfolds, most of the existing wonderful human physical and cultural diversity will be trashed. Whether, as Wells predicted, the Eloi will become decadent and feeble minded remains to be seen. More likely, they will break into competing tribes, engaged in a furious technological competition to breed the most useful slaves, including intellectual slaves, and to advance their own path to human perfection. 

Wells predicted this development in the year 802,701 AD, in which estimate he seems to have been about eight hundred thousand years out.

So Paulists beware: you may get what you wish for.

State-Financed Capitalism and the End of Western Hegemony

According to the CIA World Factbook, the United States has the World's largest economy with a GDP of $15.0 trillion, unless that is, you count the EU economy (GDP, $15.4 trillion) as a single entity. The US is followed closely by China (GDP $11.3 trillion), if you measure GDP on the basis of purchasing power parity, with India a long way behind at $4.4 trillion, the same as Japan.

The numbers seem to suggest that despite the extraordinary dynamism of the Asian economies, the West, with its Asian ally Japan, is still comfortably on top of the heap economically, and thus presumably, in technology and military power.

Things look rather different, however, if you consider rates of investment and growth. China, again according to the CIA, invested 54% of GDP in 2011, versus 18% in the European Union and 12% in the US. Converting those percentages to dollar amounts at purchasing power parity shows that China's total investment was $6.1 trillion in 2011, one third more than that of the US and the EU combined.

What does this mean for the future? The answer depends on how investments in China and the West are deployed. On the one hand, China, it is said, is a highly corrupt country where investment capital is channeled via government-controlled bank lending into all kinds of unprofitable businesses and infrastructure boondoggles, the loans being rolled over indefinitely, with new loans being made to cover business losses and infrastructure project overruns.

In the West, on the other other hand, we are supposed to have the most efficient and incorruptible capital markets, so our relatively low investment rate is more than sufficient to maintain competitiveness with China. Trouble is that China's economy grew at the astonishing rate of 9.2% in 2011, according to the CIA, whereas America's grew by only a paltry 1.5% in the same year, albeit a great improvement over the contraction of 3.5% in 2009.

A difference in growth rate of 8% in economies of comparable size, means a doubling of the one versus the other within a mere 9 years. Let me put that another way: in less than a decade, China's economy could be twice as large as that of the US, and equal to that of the US and the EU combined.

If the CIA and the US administration are not worried about that, then Western global hegemony will surely end sooner than later.

And even if the CIA and the US administration are thinking about it, what can they do about it?

One possibility is to emulate China, by redirecting 30 or 40% of the nation's GDP from consumption to investment.

But how?

China, it appears, ensures a massive rate of capital investment in two ways. First, through direct control of major industrial concerns, income from which can be reinvested, rather than paid out, in whole or in part, as dividends to investors, as would be the case with privately owned companies. Second, by printing renminbis, thereby imposing an inflation tax on workers, which can be directed through state-controlled banks into private or public investments. Such arrangements, we may call state-financed capitalism.

How, in the West, can a similar result be achieved? After the failure of the Soviet Union and Britain's post-war experiments with state ownership of the means of production, there is no faith in the West in the capacity of the state to run anything sufficiently well to generate consistent profits for new investment. Which leaves money printing and the inflation tax as the only apparent means to institute a system of state-financed capitalism in the West.

So how is the inflation tax to be deployed to this end?

One way is to print money and give it to those who will invest it. Europe's large scale investment in windmills and solar power is an example of this method in action. The result is to despoil the landscape with thousand of highly unprofitable windmills that do little to lift the GNP.

Backstopping banks and other entities that engage in risky financial engineering with massive public bailouts is another method of injecting capital into the private sector. But in this case the aim is merely to make up losses rather than to generate new profits, so the impact on the GDP must be limited.

Last, but not least, the Western states can use money printing to hold interest rates at or below the inflation rate. That is what they are doing and have vowed to continue doing. The result is essentially the same as that achieved by the Government of China. For those who wish to invest, capital is essentially free. The cost of borrowing is less than the rate of currency depreciation.

In the US, cheap credit in the early years of the millenium led to a property bubble, i.e., a consumption boom. However, since the property crash, the chief beneficiaries of cheap credit in the US appear to be corporations with plans for investment.

The risk remains, however, that cheap money will increasingly flow into the stock market, creating a financial bubble that will have the effect of directing resources into consumption, not productive investment. The creation of a climate of fear about investment must help prevent this. So bring on the crash books and wind-up the frenzy for "physical gold," the price of which can be deflated by financial manipulation at anytime to further enrich the financial corporations.

A further benefit of large scale money printing is that it makes it more difficult for China and other cheap labor exporters to the West to maintain their virtual currency peg against the dollar and the Euro. In other words, it allows Western wages to more rapidly approach parity with those of the Rest. Such wage reductions, create opportunities for import substititon in the West and hence promote investment. They also increase corporate profits, which increases the availability of capital for investment.

How successful this Western version of state-financed capitalism will be remains to be seen, but several major obstacles to its success are evident. One is the attitude of worker entitlement bred of decades of liberal-leftist propaganda, which generates huge resistance to economic adjustment to reality as abundantly demonstrated in Greece. Another is the attitude of ruling elites in the West who maintain a genocidal contempt for their own people, preferring to replace the indigenous working class with Third World immigrants less attuned than the native population to the rights of man. Such a neo-feudalist approach to leadership will result in increasing social unrest.

In view of these difficulties, it seems probably that rather than kickstarting a new round of investment, innovation and economic growth in the West, the Western version of state-financed capitalism will lead to more not less off-shoring and outsourcing of jobs and production, with a consequent reduction, not increase, in the economic output of the West. Moreover, it seems unlikely that the social conflict that current policy generates will be indefinitely contained. Instead, the US/EU seem headed for internal disintegration and a transition to a treasonous form of plutocratic tyranny.

U.S. Financial Collapse Is At Hand -- Or Not?

Yesterday we argued that the United States Government had no reason to destroy the US dollar through hyperinflationary money printing. But Paul Craig Roberts, Deputy Secretary to the US Treasury under Ronald Reagan, suggests that no reason for destroying the US dollar is required. Federal Reserve incompetence, US megalomania, and Wall Street greed have combined to create a situation in which the dollar will almost certainly lose its World reserve currency status and in the process much of its value.

Roberts' analysis begins with this question:

How can the Federal Reserve maintain [as it has promised to do for several years more] zero interest rates for banks and negative real interest rates for savers and bond holders when the US government is adding $1.5 trillion to the national debt every year via its budget deficits?

The answer, Roberts gives, is that it cannot do so for very long:

It will not be possible to continue to flood the bond markets with $1.5 trillion in new issues each year when the interest rate on the bonds is less than the rate of inflation. Everyone who purchases a Treasury bond is purchasing a depreciating asset. Moreover, the capital risk of investing in Treasuries is very high. The low interest rate means that the price paid for the bond is very high. A rise in interest rates, which must come sooner or later, will collapse the price of the bonds and inflict capital losses on bond holders, both domestic and foreign.

That the policy is feasible for the time being Roberts attributes to transient factors such as the current focus on the Euro and European sovereign debt and fear among private investors of the equity market, plus collusion by US banks, which "can borrow from the Federal Reserve at zero interest rates and purchase 10-year Treasuries at 2%, thus earning a nominal profit of 2%".

In addition, Roberts asserts, the US banks are keeping up the price of US Treasuries by selling interest rate swaps:

The big banks are positioned to make the Fed’s policy a success. JPMorganChase and other giant-sized banks can drive down Treasury interest rates and, thereby, drive up the prices of bonds, producing a rally, by selling Interest Rate Swaps (IRSwaps).

A financial company that sells IRSwaps is selling an agreement to pay floating interest rates for fixed interest rates. The buyer is purchasing an agreement that requires him to pay a fixed rate of interest in exchange for receiving a floating rate.

The reason for a seller to take the short side of the IRSwap, that is, to pay a floating rate for a fixed rate, is his belief that rates are going to fall. Short-selling can make the rates fall, and thus drive up the prices of Treasuries.

But everyone, including the US banks, Roberts asserts, have an interest in getting out of Treasuries ahead of the crowd when the exodus will become a deluge. What that means is that US Treasuries are bound to crash sooner or later and and, when they do, they will take the dollar with them.

A bond crash will cause a dollar crash because the Fed will be obliged to print dollars to buy up the bonds dumped. Trillions of these newly printed dollars will go to foreign sellers of US assets who will dump them on the foreign exchange markets, thus driving down the dollar's value.

In addition, Roberts suggests, it is not within US power to determine when a trickle of funds out of the bond market turns to a flood.The US, he says, is in the hands of foreign creditors who can unleash a tidal wave of US-dollar-denominated asset sales if sufficiently provoked.China, for example, could drop $2 trillion in US assets.

But, as Roberts admits, dumping US dollar assets will cost China dear, as those assets will lose much of their value before they have all been sold.What's more, dumping US dollar assets will drive down the US dollar renminbi exchange rate, thereby destroying China's largest export market and driving China into recession, if not a socially destabilizing depression.

As for the US banks, they can exit the US bond market without setting off a collapse provided that the Fed buys up the bank-owned bonds for its own portfolio. The dollars that the Fed needs to buy the paper will come back to it as the banks pay down the zero-interest Fed loans with which the bonds were initially purchased.

While, for all I know, the US plan for global financial hegemony may result in the mother-of-all financial collapses, I don't see that that is by any means certain or even likely. By maintaining zero interest rates the US Fed is enabling America's largest corporations to acquire control of much of the World's business, agricultural and real estate assets at zero cost. And if something goes wrong in the process and the dollar collapses in a new gigantic financial crisis, the US will come out of it, as Nazi Germany did after the great inflation, with a vastly more competitive, highly capitalized industrial sector well placed to capture an increased share of World markets.

Jeremy Scahill Charges Barak Obama With Mass Murder