No deal Brexit = Trump deal
For those of you not Anglophile, not Macroeconomic, non-International Foreign Relations types, too frustrated with the current governing political party, or exasperated by all the endless anti-human drama, let me carefully and simply explain what we have just seen in the United Kingdom:
Russia, international power elites and domestic corrupt forces all decided and colluded to accept Moscow’s offer of weaponizing our democracies against the interest of the proletariat majority for which they were best designed.
The British political scene, after Trump’s false election, left to a hardworking female Minister, Teresa May, a need to attempt to lead the shambolic powers that forced Trump and Brexit on our democracies.
The hamstring that these non-native forces created have deadlocked both nations in socio-political turmoil ever since. Be clear: Russia loves it!
This left May unable to effectively deal with an impossible situation of panic negotiating a deal for which there was no true mandate or very real will politically.
Rather than Tory’s or Republican’s recognizing a national threat, and responsibly handing power back to the People for further instructions; the selfish principle of absolute power corrupting absolutely has then shown the elected powers the rest of the way, probably just as the Communists designed this anti-democratic process.
May’s dithering, premised upon missing actual national zeitgeist, brought a bad deal that UK government roundly rejected. If your facts or hypothesis is wrong, then you don’t have a viable theory. Russia has planted billions if not trillions of misinformations seeds to sprout confusion everywhere.
BREXIT, the British Exit from the very complicated and carefully constructed EU, was a rush job. Logically, if the British people voted on a majority referendum to undue five generations of hard work, blood, sweat, tears and literally world war(s), then it would be logical that their government returns to the people with a full recommendation to implement that directive. So, in democracy, throwing it to the people, there would have automatically been another vote once Brexit won, and May had a complete process defined, and accepted by Parliament.
But that’s not what happened at all, and that is why Russia loves it. They tasked a government with no initiative, without natural logic or rhetoric, to wreck a process that one could argue has been ongoing in Europe since Charlemagne (9thcentury CE).
BREXIT is an impossible task, with unreasonable expectations, and sponsored by oligarchic ideas coming from foreign influence about what is best for our domestic citizenry. It is time to BRAY:
BRitish stAY
That is also the sound a Donkey makes, and so by now Americans, who would prefer a Democrat, even if they themselves are not a registered Democrat, also are probably ready by now to bray a “Hee-Haw.”
‘Take that Napoleon,’ the Russian counter intelligence officer most possibly said probably hoping we elect even more incompetents. It’s understandable.
It isn’t that citizens were not expressing themselves, or voting their minds, three years ago, rather that at the margins, an old Soviet program designed to destroy any enemy socio-political system during warfare, was redesigned and implemented in the New Russia against adversaries, if not enemies.
Russia has shown: You only needed to trick about 2% of the populous from democratic nations, in this case either USA or UK population in 2016, and opposite to what Lincoln observed, “you can then fool most of the people.”
And the Communist weaponized democracy plan (from the earnest Cold War around the 60’s & 70’s probably) worked!
Right to Work
So why are our citizens (and the power elites) accepting this Faustian bargain?
One thought is that the “1%” are setting up systemized and semi-permanent destruction of labor, working poor, and the disenfranchised.
In 2013, I worked in the Bakaan in ND as a back-office manager for a construction company. North Dakota and the state I moved to and have now lived in for five years non-stop, Colorado, have “right to work” laws.
Let’s be clear: This is an Orwellian title.
I eventually sorted out the accounts (receivable / payable) for this company with ~$50MM annual payroll. Right as things began to line up, I was terminated from my department (I was 43 then) by the twenty-something, who had been running the department, my Supervisor, and for no reason given was dismissed.
Without any further information, these last years, I deduced that ‘right to work,’ actually means the right to be fired by the inefficient, corrupt or reckless Supervisor, who you may discover their poor work that will fire them from company, against whom you may actually have more experience, skill, and right to be retained over as the good worker in the Company. However, under this arrangement, your company has the right to be played by a corrupt actor, and you as a worker have the right to be kept in the dark, permanently, so as to be even further played.
So, really, it’s the right to be randomly fired for no reason without any documentation. This helps cronyism, corruption, dishonesty, illegality, and general poor management.
Not what you want in the Annual Report of your publicly traded company, is it? But for mid-sized non-publics this improves their profits, even if it disimproves their quality and business model.
This feature of NO-DEAL BREXIT, preferred by PM Johnson, et. al., and situation in our “Red State” America, is really the right for employers to destroy the labor market in any state where such a priority supposedly exists. Hence paying lower overall wages in exchange for poorer quality work.
WWII Triumvirate and the Naughty piece of paper
At the Yalta Conference, 1945, Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt had the situation at hand, and had to agree to work together to put an end to full-fledged international warfare. For what?Y
So, what you don’t like Hitler, or Nazis, or whatever…. What do we get for helping?
Churchill referred to a ‘naughty small piece of paper’ the three had secretly negotiated, wasn’t declassified until the 80’s. It gave Russia everything in Europe East of West Germany.
Roosevelt was satisfied with USA mandatory financial opportunism and participation in rebuilding (Marshall Plan), Spanish claims from victory in 1915 Spanish-American war, and general control of Atlantic/Pacific dominance provided by ‘our’ Panama Canal.
Churchill and UK were given command of everything in Europe West of East Germany.
1960’s – 80’s European Common Market harmonization (also last time wages grew in USA)
As a youth studying WWII, it was amazing to behold the European Common Market, which took decades to coordinate.
And yet with a simple majority, of less than a majority of the entirety of the UK voters, deciding to trash seventy pus years of careful multilateral coordination, put all that effort in the rubbish bin of history?
In the USA, wages in terms of real inflation have not moved significantly since Regan.
90’s post Communism Unilateralism
The Berlin Wall fell, precisely because the Soviet Union had absolutely lost its mandate from the people (that Communism aspires to represent the People better than any other).
Yet, Berlin, Beijing, and now even North Korea, want the spoils from modern economies of scale, international finance, and mass distribution of the economy and world resources. That indicates an era that would be inclusive, International, and premised upon capitalistic free trade with reasonable regulatory apparatuses.
We have been the only unilateral power for under three decades and have failed in the USA to truly enshrine our role as liberator of the free world. Instead, we ran a smash and grab job. It was so “easy,” we are still in those conflicts 18 years later, and unfortunately like Korea, Germany, and Japan we will have servicemembers of our nation stationed there probably for generations. That is not peace.
00’s Republican False War
When we were attacked 18 years ago by a dusty bunch of misogynist terrorists, because, well, we were the Unilateral Power. We had a huge target on our back.
Had Bush the younger only focused upon Afghanistan, left us out from full warfare with Iraq, and instead prosecuted a straight forward conflict with clear goals and objectives, the war ought to be well over.
Except, even Obama had to remain for two terms in both Iraq and Afghanistan, because resources were not brought to bear judiciously by his predecessor, goals and objectives too ambitious, diffuse and unrealistic, and no full consensus for war.
In the 90’s, before Colin-Powell nonnerated (-90%) his reputation by selling the war to the UN with fake evidence, he had a military policy that won us the Gulf War— 1. Only go in with an exit strategy! & 2. If you break it fix it!!
Maybe, USA ought to think about being less adventurous, interventionist, and manipulative in matters of the military?
10’s Aftermath
So, now we are trying, very ex-post-facto, to finally fix it?
With no real strategy to exit, then we have yet to exit—it still is the original SNAFU FUGASI. Had Bush treated Al-Qaeda and the Taliban like Obama did ISIS, then we would be much less involved by now.
Yet, Bush the Younger insisted that we must take Iraq (sigh, yes, for the oil). This is a hangover from 1948, and the British claims from Empire. There was no real stated cause, justifying further access to those specific Natural Resources.
So, it is no wonder that by now more than half of veteran personnel who had fought in these conflicts consider them foreign adventures, not defensive wars.
2016 Russia
What would you say if Churchill, Roosevelt, or Stalin decided to not punish Germany for Annexing the Sudetenland or invading Poland?
Putin’s Russia has Annexed Crimea and invaded Ukraine, exactly like Hitler (not an ad hominem)!
So, why would they want to disrupt geopolitics? Just to get a pipeline from Crimea to Paris??
Regardless of their endless motives, Russia attacked the US, UK, and lord knows who else by 2016. We must stop denying this attack has happened.
There is nothing that suggests anything has been cleared up, or that it isn’t still an ongoing situation to be mitigated.
What is a Socialist?
A socialist is someone who believes that although government is formed by people for common defense often with rights of citizenry abrogated, but in exchange additional or improved rights inure to every citizen, without expectation of quid pro quo.
Every government that has had a ‘society’ to be designed, run and supported by the resources of that entity, then by definition is ‘socialist.’ Genghis Khan, Hitler and Stalin employed social-ism when they redirected resources away from normative distribution based on laws of supply and demand--- ONLY!
So, “Socialist,” is more a derogatory term referring in American ‘dog-whistle’ to what would have been McCarthy Communists, not ‘socialists.’
There has been no pure Capitalist system in the world—ever. And “free-trade” is a myth, because now we know we need to peg price to carbon dioxide production with some taxation, tariff and/or trading system that accounts for industrial pollution rapidly consuming the Earth we know and understand. Therefore, there will never be a rational or logical escape by Society from small “s” socialism.
Gandhi, FDR, and Reagan were also all Socialists.
It is pretty hard without socialism to defend and/or operate a society without people, or a system to enhance people away from ‘the law of the jungle.’ All societies have always been socialist by definition of the word social.
What is a Communist?
A Communist on the other hand is someone who believes in magic thinking about the world. Were we developmentally stunted by ages four years old, then Communism might sort of work. We would be psychologically stuck in the Dependency Phase of our lives.
But by the time we are nine or ten years old our comparative minds deduce that, ‘society is not always in my favor.’ So, we learn discretion, and that pinky promises are rarely kept eternally.
This is the perfect parent theory. A top down elite fully control production and distribution of resources. Thanks mommy.
But nanny-state, what color dress should I wear today to my Communist Party?
(Hopefully, I won’t be arbitrarily or capriciously punished or detained for guessing the wrong outfit, today.)
If you ever meet a Communist here is their rhetorical dismissal in favor of liberal democracy:
“So, as a Communist you believe in full faith for the State to determine everything and anything about your life no matter how orderly, arbitrarily or capriciously?”
‘Yes.’
“Ok, so today were giving you a choice, when do you want to schedule your execution?”
The Communist in total faith leaves all sense of responsibility to the state, until such time as the command and control distribute to you your responsibilities. You said you love pure top down love, so that includes arbitrary and capricious executions of the (potentially very compliant yet vital) citizens. In this example, it would become that Communist’s responsibility distributed by the state as a citizen to die!
Why “liberal” democracy is worth saving from the 10thlargest economy?
So, what is a liberal?
A liberal means that you do not believe only the elite have a right to resources, power and access to capital. Everyone who can take and pay a business loan, ought to be not only allowed to ‘fair consideration,’ but with equanimity to all citizens that they may be better able to deploy capital from the reasonable distribution of such funds.
Everyone who does not believe that a King, Queen or Emperor should make all their housing, employment and/or clothing decisions is then a sort of liberal. Everyone who also believes that people should be allowed to vote instead of complying with “mandates from heaven,” is then a ‘liberal democrat.’
Show me the American who wished King George’s great grandchildren were running the USA to their whim and fetish, and I will say that citizen may not be a liberal democrat, otherwise…. Now tell that person they cannot vote to have a say, and then they are only a liberal without a vote.
How many Americans do you think want to make that trade with Putin and his people??
Why “Free Trade,’ is preferable to Trade War
Ideally, free trade makes a certain load of sense, but again then you turn twelve years old. You recognize that people say things that don’t always match their deeds. So, anyone who is a pure free-trader has a simplistic fantasy of distribution of resources, and is a poor business-person, because of no working knowledge of capitalist competition.
Good, competitive and open markets will always need impartial regulation and neutral enforcement mechanisms, until such time as all people agree to never cheat, steal or swindle one another, ever again. And then without compunction still choose in perpetuity not to take advantage of the situation, even after the agreement was made.
That is almost the opposite definition of capitalism and sounds suspiciously like the justifications for the Trade War. Beggar thy neighbor.
Capitalism thrives on opportunitism, I get 90% of resources because I tricked 98% of the people, is not a reasonable long-term method of managing International Macro-economies.
The ideal of Free Trade amongst international partners, rather, is that the starting premise that the negotiation is of mutual respect and fair cooperative distribution of resources between the macroeconomies, simultaneously, to better manage resources including competition.
No part of that statement seems like there would then follow a righteous recommendation for no rules, regulations nor enforcement mechanisms.
A free-trader is someone who respects wholeset economies of scale and chooses to improve their efficiencies and distribution. That in practice is the opposite of lawbreaking.
Why Democracy Works
When the zeitgeist of the UK citizenry was reminded of their diminished status, compared to USA and Russia, there was a logical rhetoric, “hey, what about Malta?”
Churchill probably left the meeting and this life imagining that the UK would be at the permanent head of the EU, or other such arrangement. But 75 years of cooperation and compromise will inevitably stir such fundamental statist greed. Britain as an equal amongst European States created some resentment, probably unconsciously.
This may only be one of the many spices from the flavor of BREXIT, but it bears out as one potential valid historical avenue of public discontent.
It is an ongoing question to the EU governors to demonstrate the great and general value of an united Europe, as opposed to having Europe dispositioned to become, yet again, subject to another Cesar, Napoleon or Hitler.
VOTE
Tell me, what is it called when a Corporation gets a tax break or other government incentive?
That is called ‘socialist redistribution of national resources.’ Otherwise, why does Amazon.com pay low to no tax every year as one of the largest operations?
So, every major and most minor American companies are socialist. They freely petition, ask and receive resources distributed by the government. That is capital “S” Socialist!
So, the big game in the USA (less able to say much further about UK) is blame individuals, workers, poor, disenfranchised, and others for state failure, and consider a huge government handout to corporation a capitalist event. No part of that is not Socialist.
Since, 2008, The Great Recession, we have seen policy set by the elite for their own purposes and end games for the market. The Economy does good, but how about the workers, downtrodden and disabled who already poured their troth to the nation, their state, city and company on behalf of growth of national GDP?
In 2009, TARP outright saved businesses but was also a greater (a) hand over of National Wealth to private parties, and (b) public transfer of private wealth than that 1917 Russia—very Commie. We nationalized Wall Street failure, and Bank of America is a benefactor from Communist allocation of resources.
We ignore at our very real risk as a (USA) nation the threats deployed and operated to this day against our society. Enough is really enough!
No matter who you are, no matter what you believe, the most important thing for you to do is to consider all problems in your nation, see what solutions may exist, and vote, every time, for the person who most and best represents your actual interests. The perverse Wisdom of Crowds (corollary, The Masses are Asses).
At the very least, this democracy promises to end these foolish self-inflicted wounds by eventual operation of the vote. But let’s be clear, everyone who wants you to be able to be fired at will, total worker disempowerment, also doesn’t want you to ever vote in your nation again so that we may still have Russian Troll Farms screwing with national cronyism, nepotism and corruption.
I hope and “BRAY” for our deliverance.
No comments:
Post a Comment