Tag: decline and fall

The 4GW challenge in America

What many people who were either upset about my observations concerning Dallas or are completely mystified by my assertion of the need for the US police to demilitarize and deescalate fail to grasp is that the current approach of intimidation and overwhelming force is absolutely doomed to failure in the situation in which they find themselves.

While Bill Lind’s perspective on the police is, understandably, outdated, it only underlines the vital importance of the police ceasing to act more like occupying military force and less like the traditional Officer Friendly.

Remember, this is the guy who literally wrote the book on USMC tactics, and if we apply his observations, it is eminently clear that the US police are doing nothing more than setting themselves up for defeat in the long term.

From “Understanding Fourth Generation War”, 4th Generation War Handbook.

In Fourth Generation warfare, the weak often have more moral power than the strong. One of the first people to employ the power of weakness was Mahatma Gandhi. Gandhi’s insistence on non-violent tactics to defeat the British in India was and continues to be a classic strategy of Fourth Generation war. When the British responded to Indian independence rallies with violence, they immediately lost the moral war.

Operations David and Goliath show a strong military force, with almost no limits on the amount of violence it can apply to a situation, versus a very weak irregular force. The weaker force has the moral high ground because it is so weak. No one likes bullies using their physical superiority in order to win at anything, and unless we are extremely careful in how we apply our physical combat power, we soon come across as a bully, i.e. Goliath.

Most important, we see the central role of de-escalation. In most Fourth Generation situations, our best hope of winning lies not in escalation but in de-escalation (the “Hama model” discussed in the next chapter relies on escalation, but political factors will usually rule this approach out). De-escalation is how police are trained to handle confrontations. From a policeman’s perspective, escalation is almost always undesirable. If a police officer escalates a situation, he may even find himself charged with a crime. This reflects society’s desire for less, not more, violence. Most people in foreign societies share this desire. They will not welcome foreigners who increase the level of violence around them.

For state militaries in Fourth Generation situations, the policeman is a more appropriate model than the soldier. Soldiers are taught that, if they are not achieving the result they want, they should escalate: call in more troops, more firepower, tanks, artillery, and air support. In this respect, men in state-armed forces may find their own training for war against other state-armed forces works against them. They must realize that in Fourth Generation war, escalation almost always works to the advantage of their opponents. We cannot stress this point too strongly. State militaries must develop a “de-escalation mindset,” along with supporting tactics and techniques.

There may be situations where escalation on the tactical level is necessary to obtain de-escalation on the operational and strategic levels. In such situations, state-armed forces may want to have a special unit, analogous to a police SWAT team, that appears quickly, uses the necessary violence, then quickly disappears. This helps the state servicemen with whom local people normally interact to maintain their image as helpful friends.

Proportionality is another requirement if state militaries want to avoid being seen as bullies. Using tanks, airpower, and artillery against lightly armed guerrillas not only injures and kills innocent civilians and destroys civilian property, it also works powerfully at the moral level of war to increase sympathy for the state’s opponents. That, in turn, helps our Fourth Generation enemies gain local and international support, funding and recruits.

De-escalation and proportionality in turn require state-armed forces to be able to empathize with the local people. If they regard the local population with contempt, this contempt will carry over into their actions. Empathy cannot simply be commanded; developing it must be part of training…. Each of these points touches a central characteristic of Fourth Generation war. If we fail to understand even one of them, and act so as to contradict it, we will set ourselves up for defeat.

Remember, for any state military, Fourth Generation wars are easy to lose and very challenging to win. This is true despite the state military’s great superiority over its Fourth Generation opponents at the physical level of war. Indeed, to a significant degree, it is true because of that superiority. In most Fourth Generation wars, state-armed forces end up defeating themselves.

What is very difficult for most people, even those with considerable military experience, to understand is that 4GW is a different type of war and it utilizes very different metrics. As Lind and LtCol Thiele point out, the central dilemma of 4GW is that what works for you on the physical level often works against you at the moral level.

“It is therefore very easy to win all the tactical engagements in a Fourth Generation conflict yet still lose the war.” 

The US police are in very much in the same position as a state military occupying a foreign nation. Therefore, 4GW principles and tactics very clearly apply to the situation.

One can summarize the core anti-4GW strategy in a single sentence: Either kill them all or don’t kill anyone.

The Great Rebellion

Joel Kotkin tries to explain why the world is rebelling against the experts claiming the right to lead it:

The Great Rebellion is on and where it leads nobody knows.

Its expressions range from Brexit to the Trump phenomena and includes neo-nationalist and unconventional insurgent movement around the world. It shares no single leader, party or ideology. Its very incoherence, combined with the blindness of its elite opposition, has made it hard for the established parties across what’s left of the democratic world to contain it.

What holds the rebels together is a single idea: the rejection of the neo-liberal crony capitalist order that has arisen since the fall of the Soviet Union. For two decades, this new ruling class could boast of great successes: rising living standards, limited warfare, rapid technological change and an optimism about the future spread of liberal democracy. Now, that’s all fading or failing.

Living standards are stagnating, vicious wars raging, poverty-stricken migrants pouring across borders and class chasms growing. Amidst this, the crony capitalists and their bureaucratic allies have only grown more arrogant and demanding. But the failures of those who occupy what Lenin called “the commanding heights” are obvious to most of the citizens on whose behalf they claim to speak and act.

The Great Rebellion draws on five disparate and sometimes contradictory causes that find common ground in frustration with the steady bureaucratic erosion of democratic self-governance: class resentment, racial concerns, geographic disparities, nationalism, cultural identity. Each of these strains appeals to different constituencies, but together they are creating a political Molotov cocktail.

It’s moderately amusing that Kotkin first asserts that nobody knows where the Great Rebellion is leading before promptly explaining where it is going to go. He doesn’t know. No one does, but the idea that someone whose sympathies clearly lie with the dishonest, predatory elite that has met with such a visceral rejection from widely disparate people suggests that he will no more be able to anticipate its direction than he was able to see it coming in the first place.

What “Independence” day?

I don’t celebrate the 4th of July. I don’t celebrate “Independence Day”. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas eloquently expresses my feelings towards the Imperial USA and its regime in his recent opinion in WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH v. HELLERSTEDT, 136 S. Ct. 1001 (2016)

“The majority’s embrace of a jurisprudence of rights-specific exceptions and balancing tests is ‘a regrettable concession of defeat—an acknowledgement that we have passed the point where ‘law,’ properly speaking, has any further application.”

John Wright has more on this from his lawyer’s perspective on his site. And in case you missed the vital phrase there, I’ll point it out: we have passed the point where ‘law,’ properly speaking, has any further application.

Now, this isn’t news to me. I wrote back in 2004 that the country formerly known as “America” was dead. Today is perhaps the most fitting day on which to remind everyone that the iUSA is not America, and that one cannot fix a corpse.

Tibetan religious tradition has it that when the Dalai Lama dies, the Buddha of Compassion leaves his body and incarnates in the body of a young child. The monks immediately go out in search of this blessed child, and when they find him – as they inevitably do – he is tested by a group of high lamas and enthroned as the reincarnation of his successor.

Imagine, however, if the lamas refused to recognize that the Dalai Lama was, in fact, dead. Suppose that instead of going in search of the Buddha’s new carnal home, they hooked up the corpse to a life support machine and waited patiently for the Holy One to awake and rise up. It’s not hard to see that they would be doomed to disappointment, and furthermore, would fail to find the next Dalai Lama as well.

This is precisely our dilemma today, for America, as envisioned by the Founding Fathers, is dead. By every measure, large and small, the original vision of limited government by, for and of the people has been folded, spindled and mutilated beyond recognition. When one reads the Constitution, one simply marvels at the distinct difference between its words and our present reality.

Our paper Federal Reserve Notes are not Congress-issued gold and silver coins. Our direct taxes are not apportioned. We are entangled in a veritable web of foreign alliances, Congress shamelessly makes laws regarding speech, religion and guns, and the judicial branch has arrogantly assumed for itself unchecked supremacy over the other two branches.

Regardless of whether one see these changes as blasphemous treason against the Constitution, or as reasonable and necessary modifications to what was designed to be a living document that evolves with the times, it is impossible to deny that they have been made. It is likewise impossible to assert that a massive central government possessing eminent domain, owning over a third of the land, and claiming more than a third of all income is either limited or small.

For many years, conservatives and other freedom lovers have placed their trust in the Republican Party, hoping that it would fulfill its promises to return America to its national birthright of freedom and individual liberty. Those promises, unsurprisingly, were broken by the party of Abraham Lincoln, who is most famous for converting what had been a voluntary Union of free association into a forced Union made by military might.

Any last vestiges of hope in the Republican Party have been shattered by the current regime, wherein a Republican President, Republican House, Republican Senate and Republican-nominated Supreme Court have demonstrated that they have zero interest in the timeless vision of America’s founders. Supporting them in the hopes that they will revive American liberties is akin to hoping that shock paddles will suffice to revive a month-old corpse. American freedom is not only dead, it has been rotting for some time.

There are those who say that a vote for a third-party candidate, such as the Libertarian Party’s Michael Badnarik or the Constitution Party’s Michael Peroutka, is wasted. Nothing could be further from the truth. Indeed, these are the only votes that are not wasted, for positive change will only come from those outside the corrupt bi-factional system. After all, it was neither the Tories nor the Whigs who fought for American independence.

Like the Tibetan lamas, we must go in search of those in whom the spirit of freedom and liberty burns. The revival of American liberty is still in its infancy, as only 482,451 people voted for the Libertarian and Constitution presidential candidates combined, 0.96 percent of those who voted for the victorious Republican, George W. Bush. But that is 482,395 more people than the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence, and as for those who believe our present bipartisan system is eternal, well, tell it to the Whigs.

Or, for that matter, to the optimates and populares of Rome. The choice is simple, if not easy. A revival of liberty or the continued stink of an extinct republic as it decomposes into dictatorial empire.

America is dead. Let us go, then, and find her.

The corruption continues

As if we needed more confirmation that there is no rule of law in the USA:

According to sources that are familiar with the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton‘s use of a private email server, the former Secretary of State is not expected to face charges in the probe. This, according to CNN’s Senior Producer Edward Mejia Davis, who took to Twitter shortly ago to indicate the likely announcement of “no charges”:

Edward Mejia Davis @TeddyDavisCNN
Sources tell CNN’s Evan Perez: expectation is that there will be announcement of no charges in Clinton email probe w/in next two weeks or so

The world of the 1980s appears to have gone full circle. The Americans are evil totalitarians bent on global conquest through their third-world proxies, the Russians are good guys defending Christianity, and Italy’s politicians are less criminal and corrupt than their US counterparts.

The mask comes off

Remember, the EU proponents always swore up and down that it was not a political project. Of course, as some of us always knew, they lied. Now they’re not even bothering to pretend otherwise anymore, as in reaction to Brexit, two foreign ministers propose eliminating all the other national member-states before any other nations are able to escape globalist rule.

The foreign ministers of France and Germany are due to reveal a blueprint to effectively do away with individual member states in what is being described as an “ultimatum”. Under the radical proposals EU countries will lose the right to have their own army, criminal law, taxation system or central bank, with all those powers being transferred to Brussels.

Controversially member states would also lose what few controls they have left over their own borders, including the procedure for admitting and relocating refugees.  The plot has sparked fury and panic in Poland – a traditional ally of Britain in the fight against federalism – after being leaked to Polish news channel TVP Info.

The public broadcaster reported the bombshell proposal would be presented to a meeting of the Visegrad group of countries – made up of Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovakia – by German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier.

In the preamble to the text the two ministers write: “Our countries share a common destiny and a common set of values that give rise to an even closer union between our citizens. We will therefore strive for a political union in Europe and invite the next Europeans to participate in this venture.”

The revelations come just days after Britain shook the Brussels establishment by voting to leave the European Union in a move some have predicted could leave to the break-up of the EU.

A number of member states are deeply unhappy about the creeping federalism of the European project with anti-EU sentiments running high in eastern Europe, Scandinavia and France.

I can’t think of anything that will bring about Fixit and Frexit and Nexit, and any number of additional exits faster, than the EU doubling down on political integration. It’s prodigiously stupid in any event; it could not be more obvious that economic integration has completely failed. But, as we know, SJWs always double down, and apparently there is no amount of failure and democratic rejection that will even slow down the globalists in their mad grasp for international power.

I have never been more certain that the EU will collapse, hopefully sooner rather than later. Socionomics always predicted the EU’s failure to be inevitable, but now we’re actually beginning to see it happen.

The price of speaking out

SJWs will always try to force you to pay for standing up to the Narrative and speaking out against it, lest others do likewise.

Never go full racist. A Tennessee congressional candidate learned that lesson this week after his campaign took out a billboard ad exhorting voters to “Make America white again.” From local ABC affiliate WTVC:

Rick Tyler told WTVC he owns Whitewater Grill in Ocoee, but in the coming months will transition to campaigning to represent Tennessee’s 3rd District in the U.S. House of Representatives. Tyler says his “Make America White Again” sign, which plays off of presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan, was taken down on Tuesday evening.

The decision to take the billboard down came after Tyler’s business became the target of a boycott.

As if his submission will be sufficient to permit him to be forgiven for the sin of speaking out against the New “America”. Is it not remarkable that those who claim to love America are so determined to wipe out literally every last vestige of it?

Whatever this multiracial empire is, it is not the same nation that for its first 130 years required all new citizens to be “of good character” and “white”. And it is remarkable how many people who lament the fall away from the U.S. Constitution, designed to benefit the Founders and their posterity, don’t make the connection between the abandonment of all three things.

The reality is that the only way to Make America Great Again is to Make America White Again. The two slogans are synonymous. The SJWs know it, which is why both slogans terrify them.

Be prepared this summer

The attacking antifas ended up getting their asses handed to them despite having a 6-1 advantage when they attacked a small nationalist rally in Sacramento, but next time they might be better prepared. This is still pretty tame, as civic violence goes, but outside of the occasional inner city rioting, it is nearly unprecedented in the last 45 years.

Note how the attack quickly breaks down into skirmish mode; even a modicum of discipline would be sufficient to rout either side. If you’re going to a rally this summer, go in groups and have attack, defense, and retreat plans in mind. And if your friends don’t have your flanks or back, keep your head on a swivel!

Notice that the antifas attacked the media too.

Apparently everyone is a Nazi now; “voxday” is listed as #8208 in the TrumpenReich.

A lost faith

Even some of the EU’s most instinctive supporters are turning from it in disgust:

 I actually used to be a big proponent of the EU. I was aware of the obvious problems, but I thought the achievements (long-term peace in Europe, war between Germany and France having become unthinkable, EU aid helping make the likes of Spain and Ireland more prosperous, and EU-required reforms making Eastern European countries modernize) more than made up for the organization itself being notoriously undemocratic. Europe was for a long time peaceful and prosperous, and the EU seemed to be a contributing factor to that.

However, during the last 10 years it has become very clear that the EU is simply not working. Take the Euro for example. While it’s very convenient to able to use the same type of money in many different EU countries, forcing vastly different countries (ranging from Cyprus and Ireland to Slovakia and Germany) to share the same currency basically imposed a rigid one-size-fits-all model on economies that had very little in common. As a result of losing monetary sovereignty, Eurozone countries could (and did) struggle mightily economically while lacking many of the monetary options for stimulating their economies that countries with their own currencies have at their disposal – like cutting interest rates. Member states are instead at the mercy of the European Central Bank, and good luck exerting influence over that behemoth if you’re a small country!

But losing monetary sovereignty is peanuts compared to what has happened to EU member Greece – a country in crippling debt and with a broken economy that instead of getting vital debt relief, or being allowed to go bankrupt in a controlled fashion, has been forced through a torturous journey of repeatedly cutting spending and raising taxes in return for short-term loans that hardly even benefit the Greek people. Forget about the fact that Greece is NEVER going to be able to repay its debt, and that forcing it to continue to try doing so only prevents the Greek economy from growing and adds to economic uncertainty in the EU as a whole. Germany, under the leadership of Angela Merkel (who is also the de facto leader of the EU), demands that Greece keep destroying its economy and society, while impoverishing its people, in order to set a good example to the rest of Europe/be made an example out of. It’s a Sisyphean task if I ever saw one.

Germany’s dominance over the EU under Merkel has generally been a complete disaster – whether it comes to her insistence of perpetually prolonging the Greek Crisis, imposing excessive Austerity across the EU in the name of reigning in budget deficits, stifling job growth and economic growth in the process (never mind that Germany itself ran significant budget deficits to boost employment and get its economy growing again little more than a decade ago) or her borderline treasonous refugee policy, Merkel’s stubbornness and stupidity has done incalculable damage to Europe as a whole. And the EU has only served to enable and amplify her madness.

For example, instead of trying to prevent Merkel from flooding Europe with Muslim migrants, the EU is looking for ways to fine and otherwise punish poor Eastern European countries (the kind of member states the EU of old would be trying to support and develop) for not letting themselves be “culturally enriched” by 3rd world Muslims. Instead of letting the people have their say about how the Establishment’s policies are hurting all of Europe, the EU is leading the charge to Censor the internet, one of the last remaining bastions of free speech. And instead of trying gradually fix their multicultural mistakes, the EU Elites are pledging to prevent the “far right” (the only force in Europe actually willing to prevent Suicide by Muslim Immigration) from ever taking power.

As socionomics would have it, the EU is an artifact of the psychological mood that accompanies economic good times, the result of collective intoxication on the heady stimulant of a massive credit bubble. It should come as no surprise to anyone who is socionomically aware that the financial crisis of 2008 has, after eight years of increasing turmoil, led to the political crisis of 2016.

Since these events tend to follow a certain pattern, and they tend to pick up speed rather than slow down, we can reasonably anticipate that the political crisis of 2016 will lead to the political collapse of 2020, followed by the first war to take place in formerly EU territory in 2022.

So, I don’t think “reform” is an option for the EU anymore. It can be dismantled in an orderly fashion or in a violent and disorderly one, and considering the haughty, delusional self-importance of its unelected leaders, I anticipate their desperate attempts to hang onto power will bring about the latter.

After all, you can take the East German girl out of East Germany, but you can’t take the DDR out of her.

Angela Merkel says EU must act to stop countries “fleeing” EU.”

Perhaps she could build… a wall? (raises pinky to corner of mouth)

The decline of entrepreneurship in America

The media is beginning to notice that there are fewer and fewer startups in the USA every year:

If you look at what’s happened in big cities around the U.S. in recent years, it’s easy to think we’re living in Startup Nation. Thanks to the plummeting cost and increased availability of digital tools, as well as greater access to early-stage funding, we’ve seen what the Economist has called a “Cambrian moment,” with digital startups “bubbling up in an astonishing variety of services and products.” The number of companies in Silicon Valley that got seed funding from investors, for instance, more than doubled between 2007 and 2012. Venture capital funding in the U.S. over the last five years has totaled a remarkable $238 billion, and 200 companies today are so-called unicorns, privately valued at more than a billion dollars each.

Meanwhile, though, a host of economic researchers have been telling a much bleaker story: American entrepreneurship is actually on the decline, and has been for decades. As the economists Ian Hathaway and Robert Litan documented in a 2014 Brookings Institution paper, the percentage of U.S. firms that were less than a year old fell by almost half between 1978 and 2011, declining precipitously during the recession of 2007-’09 with only a slow recovery after. According to the Commerce Department, the number of new businesses started by Americans has fallen sharply since 2000, and so too has the percentage of American workers working for companies that are less than a year old. Indeed, in 2013 Americans started fewer businesses than they did in 1980, when the country’s population was much smaller. This decline isn’t just due to the aging of the U.S. population—Americans of all ages just seem less likely to open new businesses than they once were. And, as Hathaway and Litan put it, the decline “has been documented across a broad range of sectors in the U.S. economy, even in high-tech.”

Speaking as a successful entrepreneur who left the country, who is the son of a very successful entrepreneur who is presently in prison, it’s not exactly difficult to understand why Americans are considerably less inclined and less able to start businesses than they were 36 years ago.

  1. The rapacious and criminal tax agencies. You would probably not believe the shenanigans and outright lies these agents habitually engage in if you did not see it in black-and-white documents right in front of you. Even those who think my father merited an amount of jail time for his actions are aghast when they find out what actually happened, and how absurdly egregious the behavior of the various agencies was.
  2. The increasing regulatory and reporting burden. Why go to the effort of building up a company when doing so is the equivalent of painting a big red target on your chest? As one of my entrepreneurial friends said after shutting down his company and taking a job for a big tech firm, “it’s so nice not having to deal with all that shit anymore.” In the USA, self-employment often feels more like working for the government as a paper-pusher. Just trying to get your head around why part-time external contractors who are clearly not your employees must be treated as employees for various compliance purposes is enough to give anyone a headache.
  3. The criminalization of commerce. These days, it’s more work to file the paperwork required to get paid by a big corporation than it is to do the work itself.
  4. The dumbing-down of the populace. Thanks to post-1965 immigration, Americans are 4-6 IQ points less intelligent than they were back in 1980. Less intelligent people are less inclined to start jobs.
  5. Emigration. Many of the American expats I meet around the world are highly intelligent and entrepreneurial. Few of them have any desire or intention to return to the USA. This is a fairly small group of people, but they are a statistically significant percentage of the entrepreneurial class.
  6. International competition. The Internet and semi-free trade means that one no longer needs to live in the USA to have access to its markets. So, would-be American entrepreneurs are much more likely to be beaten to the punch by foreign entrepreneurs exploiting American markets than was the case in 1980.
  7. The politicization of culture. Why start, say, a bakery, if you know you’re going to be forced to choose between being sued into oblivion and violating your conscience as well as your right to free association?
That being said, the situation isn’t much better elsewhere. The worse the global economy gets, the more desperate the various governments are for tax revenue, and the more intensely they go tax-hunting among the successful entrepreneurial class. The first country to offer legal protection and operational assistance to the international entrepreneurs being preyed on in this manner is going to do very well indeed, and do so at the expense of the other countries.

Just wait, Germany

I don’t think the German leadership has yet understood the lesson of #Brexit:

German Leadership Aghast at a Brexit It Helped Cause

Germans – especially German politicians – are waking up this morning to the Brexit reality, and their initial reactions are predictable.  Shock appears to be the overwhelming emotion, followed closely by sadness, anger, and then subdued panic.

The Social Democratic Party, a partner in the governing black-red coalition, has called for an emergency session of the Bundestag today.  (One wonders what this would accomplish except perhaps to issue a statement aimed at shoring up EU solidarity in other wavering member states, or maybe just express petulance.)  Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier spoke of a “sad day for Europe and Great Britain,” while the leader of the Left faction, Sahra Wagenknecht, used the occasion to lambaste the influence of corporations and lobbyists in Brussels (a non-factor in the British vote, as far as I know).

One of the more thoughtful commentaries today is from Torsten Krauel in the right-of-center Die Welt.  Krauel asks whether German Chancellor Merkel is partially to blame for the Brexit and concludes her asylum policy almost certainly played a major role.  And indeed, the spectacle of Germany unilaterally deciding to change the face and future of the European Union by announcing Berlin had opened the doors to all comers – regardless of the wishes of or the impact this would have on other EU states – has been a powerful symbol of elite disconnect with the concerns of average Europeans and an uncomfortable reminder that Germany has come to dominate the union.  Krauel also points out Dover, the British end of the Channel Tunnel to the continent, voted 60 percent to leave.  Maybe this has something to do with the thousands of North African migrants seeking to storm the tunnel and cross to England?

While loathe to admit it, Germans at some level suspect their country’s role in the discontent in Britain.  Speaking to German friends over the past several years, it’s been difficult not to come away with the sense many view the EU as an extension of Germany policy and as a respectable outlet for German nationalism that has been suppressed since the end of World War II.  A new path to German greatness, if you will, camouflaged by warm and fuzzy words about “Europeaness” and immune to complaints of skeptics, all of whom immediately are labeled as right-wing extremists – the kiss of death in German politics.

For me, one of the takeaways from the referendum is the reminder that people care deeply about things other than pure economic interest.

Imagine how surprised the German elites will be when their own nationalists throw them out of power, and if justice is served, put them on trial for their crimes against the nation.