We're Conflicted about our Conflicts

The American Way of War, Pt. 1 -- Michael Shurkin

Shurkin discusses wars of annihilation and wars that are less than annihilating -- and less than won. In the process he misses an important point.

Selling a war to the US population requires a moral justification. A National Interest argument won't do because that would be called "neo-imperialism" and get the anti-colonialists all riled up. This prevents the formulation of clear goals for military actions. Believing your own BS is never a good idea. Our adversaries can pursue their clear interests, which gives them an advantage.

Then there's the "Pottery Barn"  principle, where you go into the pottery barn, smash all the pottery, clean it up, and "make it better" after chasing off the proprietor to a comfortable retirement in Dubai. However, if you have a good reason to smash up the Barn, you can leave it that way. After 9-11, smacking the Taliban made sense but sticking around to build schools was a form of self-flagellation. Let Pakistan and India arm their Afghan proxies after leaving -- that'll be punishment enough.

The Iraq war was a mistake based on faulty intelligence or outright lies, your choice.

The Prisoner of Zenda Election II

Can Former President Trump 'Make Felonies Great Again'? || Peter Zeihan

President Trump is a man of convictions -- 36 of them.

I don't expect "the Donald" to realize this, but the way he wins is by making sure the Democrats lose. Should his poll numbers crater, he has a good reason to leave the race and pick a replacement. In the meantime, he should take the high road and pledge to pardon "the Big Guy" for those corrupt dealings with Ukraine and China. Besides, it's like the Special Prosecutor said, the current occupant of the Oval Office is too frail for jail.

The Democrats spent 2020 convincing half of the nation that our justice system is unfair and all the years since convincing the other half of the same (that being the half that supported Federal Law Enforcement). This verdict can be seen as confirmation. And who caused the cratering of faith in our system of justice? The Democrat Party.

And remember, they tried to frame Trump as a spy and a traitor in 2016 (and seventeen and eighteen) and he got 10 million more votes in 2020. So-o-o.

The Prisoner of Zenda Election

Institutional End Points

Google’s AI turns ‘perverts into heroes’: Gutfeld

A couple decades ago, I read of an Old Washington Hand who worked in Congress, the bureaucracy, and lobbyist groups who, upon his retirement, described the DC inner workings as "nerds working for sociopaths." At first, I thought this an exaggeration, but came to embrace its explanatory power.

Unfortunately, that descriptor now applies to most of our major institutions. Given time, it seems that manipulative sociopaths rise to the top, surrounded by an attached train of conspiratorial dependents who -- in Elon Musk's memorable words -- pretend to be good while doing evil. Are Sociopaths framing Donald Trump as a Russian Spy? Nerd journalists are there to help! Should we believe "the Science," as political hacks demand, even when it is no longer believable? Of course!

Artificial intelligence lacks human empathy -- in other words, it's legitimately psychopathic. Now we have "Nerds working for Sociopaths" creating an information system to malevolently manipulate the population for the benefit of psychologically unfit institutions. A few missteps along that road should be expected, but the intended destination remains the same.

Stop giving them money.

Show me a Nazi, Gemini

Don't know much about History?

The ethical situation is politically complex.

Sino-US Realestate Relations

Should We Worry About Chinese Land Purchases in the US? || Peter Zeihan

For a while I've thought the hype about China overtaking the US was overwrought because it's the over-rot in the US we should worry about. In fact, the ones who wanted to promote the rot were the ones promoting China.

There was a year during the Obama administration when DC came up with 90,000 pages of new regulations -- that's what they mean by an increase in productivity. Does this add to inflation? No. Because it all makes things better. When you factor in the qualitative improvements this quantitative improvement has brought about, there is no inflation (see car prices). Since Sputnik, the Federal government has injected itself (and our money) into the education of our children, and achievement scores have gone way down. But when you factor in that the young folks are much better people these days (ask'em), well, it's all good. And now that the Federal Government is in charge of the climate, Wall Street will only be flooded with cash.

In the 1980s I read that the USSR's rate of capital investment was growing yearly and way higher than in the USA, and I thought "Uh-oh for us." Then I read that all that capital investment was producing a negative return -- that they weren't just running on a treadmill to get ahead, but running on a treadmill and falling behind -- and I thought "Uh-oh for them." As regards Communist China, we've transitioned into the "Uh-Oh for them" stage but we are still in the "Uh-oh for US."

The Chinese leadership blamed political reform in the USSR for the collapse of the communist regime and vowed not to make that mistake. This is like blaming the cancer on the desperate remedies used to slow its spread. Now they've tossed that politically convenient "two systems" pledge (allowing limited political and economic freedom) onto the Ashheap of Chinese History. What desperate measures will Xi Jinping use to avoid that same fate?

How Long Was Rome on the Rhine?

Europe Goes Nuclear: Is America Leaving NATO? || Peter Zeihan

While hitchhiking through West Germany in 1971, a young German picked me up and wanted the US to end its occupation -- he might have meant "of Native American land" but, since the US had 200,000 troops staring down the Red Army at the Fulda gap, I figured he was talking about Germany. I told him to look at a map of the USA: everyone outside of NYC and DC would easily agree to leave -- if it was about occupation rather than preventing the next horrendous war.

I mentioned that "The Red Army" was a two-day drive -- by armored division -- from the Rhine. If the West Germans didn't want tank tracks down their backs, they'd have to replace those 200,000 American "occupiers" (and the accompanying security guarantee) with half a million Germans in jackboots. Then the rest of Europe would build out their militaries, not because they feared Russia but because they feared Germany. (I'd made some Dutch friends and they told me that they were so fond of Germany they loved having two of them.)

President Trump asked the Germans to stop starving their military while gobbling up Russian energy and they laughed at him (literally, there's video) -- that's some costly laughter. He provided Ukraine with the stingers and Javelins that stalled Putin's drive on Kyiv. If I remember correctly, the Biden administration paused "lethal" aid (for a lengthy and thorough process of review) when assuming power. That's like ringing the dinner bell for someone like Putin. I swear, Washington DC is so overrun with self-centered, self-dealing fools that Donald Trump looks good.  Ditto the Capital of Europe -- is it really Defacto Brussels or just Defacto?

At some point, the American military guarantee for Europe will end. Since the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, it's wise to ask: How will Europeans prevent the internecine slaughters that lay ahead? And at what point will the US get dragged in?

Them Spears need Warheads

The Grater of Empires State.

 'LOSER STATE'

 Governor of New York -- The Empire State -- Democrat Kathleen Hochul argues the political targeting of Republican Donald Trump by a rogue prosecutor and Judge was a "One and Done" deal -- in effect admitting that it was political. Kevin O'Leary, Chairman of O'Leary Ventures, begs to differ. There were no victims in the case and seeing a radical leftist prosecutor jump to the defense of international bankers would be amusing but for the likely "decline and economic fallout" that follows as money flows out of the city and state to fairer lands. 

If the judge had dismissed the case instead of (rather gleefully, it seems) slapping The Donald with a $355 million fine (and 9 percent interest), the "one and done" argument may have gained some traction.  Not now. It used to be "the process is the punishment" but now the punishment is followed by more punishment. A corrupt politician can get his loser son-in-law -- let's call him Hunter -- a high-paying job by threatening a businessman with the "Trump Treatment."  It would be an equity hire. You see, the corrupt pols now have equity in your business -- otherwise known as a protection racket.

Making small fortunes in New York

Come to think of it, nothing!

Andrew Sullivan: What I got wrong about Trump 

Conclusions are often reached -- with a jump, sometimes a leap.

I've read some of Andrew's considerable punditry over the decades. Born in the UK, he was a Gay supporter of the 1980s Super Conservative, Magaret Thatcher -- a rather select demographic in the USA, but the Labor Party had screwed up so badly in the 60s and 70s (with help from a rather timid Tory establishment) that he may have had considerable company at Oxford. After his move to America, he joined The New Republic -- a not-quite far-left magazine -- and branded himself a "gay conservative" who was also a principled anti-communist (The Cold War was still on). But when you live among progressives, it's easy to think you are a conservative. Progressives have a two-step program: 1) Give Us Power! 2) Wonderful Things Happen!

Conservative Progressives also have a two-step program. 1) Give Us Power...2) Wonderful things happen? If you change the exclamation mark into a question mark, while sounding a bit less sure of yourself, you have the difference. Don't ask too many questions, though, because the answers might make you an actual, Constitutional Conservative. Defending constitutional interpretations that help your political movement doesn't count (Trump's an Insurrectionist, yay! So take their guns away!).

In 2016, I told progressive friends, who seemed too confident about Hillary Clinton's chances, to watch a Trump rally on YouTube rather than just repeat a Trump "quote" ad infinitum. Rather than making a prepared speech, he spoke extemporaneously. He would wander off-topic for a few minutes and then, almost magically, pick up where he left off. Often the "quote" was a spontaneous remark that got twisted by a Trusted Commentator with Reliable Sources (certified by The Political Commentator Cartel). It is like taking a vaguely complimentary remark Trump made about Vladimir Putin and using it to prove he's a Russian Spy (oh, wait, they did that). But as you watched Trump at his rallies, you actually felt like you knew him. He certainly was not trying to fool anyone.

I feared Trump would leave a lot of Obama's people in place and they would undermine his presidency, which is what happened (he left office with a dozen knives in his back). As a businessman, he assumed the people would do their jobs and not do him dirty. Obama put ideologues in place, and they were loyal to the movement, and their knives were out. The bureaucracy voted 97 percent for Hillary (some voted for the Green Party), so thinking Trump could become a dictator is delusional. When I watched Trump rallies, I didn't get those Mussolini vibes (who was, by the way, a socialist). 

Trump was immediately framed as a Russian spy by the Clinton Campaign and Democrats in the bureaucracy and Congress (OK, some were pretending to be Republicans). Somehow, that doesn't make Congressman Adam Schiff, who lied daily to the voters about Trump's supposed "Russian Connections," a threat to Democracy.  Indeed, the Democrats think that qualifies him for the Senate.

After these efforts fizzled, Nancy Pelosi impeached Trump because he wanted to investigate obvious Biden family corruption in Ukraine. Meanwhile, the Biden family took millions from Ukraine, and are now giving billions back -- but that's no reason to question their motives.

Trump deported thousands of ruthless gang members here illegally, who no doubt promptly returned when Biden opened the border. Who cares more about actual minority Americans?

If Andrew really worries about Dictatorship he would worry about the Democrats who went after Trump supporters and locked people up without trial. The DC Dems are actively defending their Democracy by destroying America's.

Will Trump's assuming office in 2025 entail risks? Of course. But endorsing the course the Statist Democrats have set, with their fake frame jobs and divide and conquer tactics, entails much greater risks. So, on balance, I'll go with the Donald.

He could have implicated Tucker, too

I recommend watching Taras Bulba, the 1962 movie based on Gogol's novel, before watching Vladimir Putin's interview with Tucker Carlson. He begins with a History lesson that is more of a his-story lesson. The movie is more entertaining and only a little longer. Tony Curtis plays a Cossack who grew up in Brooklyn, New York. 

Illustration for the novel by Pyotr Sokolov, 1861

Das Flick

Here is how Vladimir should have started his presentation:

"Tucker, Donald Trump really is my puppet in the USA. Unfortunately, he lost his value due to the heroic efforts of Hillary Clinton, the Obama Administration, and the New York Times. We recruited him in High School, and our entire investment in him went down the drain!

"Also, I want to thank you, Tucker, personally, for your help in our massive disinformation campaigns. You are worth your weight in gold, my friend. But instead of gold, you'll get rubles. I hear the Chinese like them."

What a missed opportunity! If he gave that little speech, he would be hailed as a great truth-teller. Then the Davos crowd would give him Ukraine, they'd be so happy. Oh, well.

Under the Leadership of Comrade Stalin...

Don't Know Much about History

I attended a "Renaissance Weekend Lite" in 1970 sponsored by young progressives for the benefit of some idealistic young folk from our Steel Town. The presentation included a panel of Stalinists -- followers of the infamous Communist Dictator. They self-identified as Stalinists, proudly out-of-the-closet (if they were ever in). Their predictable presentation left me unsurprised and unimpressed. I thought we'd all listen politely and pass on. Instead, I was amazed by the questions from the crowd.

It was Social Justice Warrior softball stuff. The answers were ripped from the pages of Pravda circa 1952, prefaced with "Under the Leadership of Comrade Stalin." Yep, all sorts of wonderful things were achieved in the USSR for the workers or the environment or racial tolerance, which pleased almost everyone but...me. I raised my hand and said, "I can't believe what I'm hearing here..." followed by a brief summary of, you know, what actually occurred (including a dead Caspian Sea as well as a lot of dead Ukrainians).  My little rant brought a hostile frown to the face of the panel and immediately ended the questioning period. I guess I pooped The Party.

Later the organizers told me they were quite impressed by what I said. They explained they wanted to provide a variety of viewpoints. I said, "Did I miss the Young Republicans?" I guess I came mighty close to being one because they never invited me back.

The Prisoner of Zenda Election

 If Trump Is Convicted of a Crime, How Much, If Any, Support Would He Lose?

Up to 55 percent, apparently.

In 2015 I wasn't a Trump supporter and told those who were that the Media went after Trump to increase his support in the Republican base (who dislike the media for good reason) and assure his nomination, while driving away the middle, resulting in a huge win for Progressives. They probably had polls showing this.

Obviously, the progressive's use of the MSM to defeat Trump didn't work. The use of the Justice system in 2024 could have a similar result, elevating the Democrats' abuse of the courts to a major campaign issue that could significantly damage the Party's reputation. They convinced a lot of people that the Justice system was unfair and ripe with abuse in 2020. They've convinced a lot more since -- making it an issue most Americans can agree on.

The Democrats focus-group everything. I'm sure their focus groups on Impeaching Trump brought them great Joy. In the end, having to stand on the stage with Dr. Anthony Fauci may have hurt him more.

Who is that masked Beauracrat?

If Trump's polls are running high in the run-up to the election, we'll hear how Hitler also spent time in jail (but nothing about Nelson Mandela).

When They Ain't Failing You, They're Flailing You

 Why Hollywood is FAILING - The Devil's in The DEI

As a steelworker in the 1970s, some progressive friends convinced me to attend union meetings with them because they needed the vote. At first, I voted the way I was told. Basically, they wanted to take over so they could do good. After the meeting, we would stop for pizza and beer and talk politics. I realized they were more interested in the "world revolution" than what was happening in the rolling mill.  As much as I liked my friends, I had to ask myself: Do I want them fixing my car or running my Uion? Ah, no. So I stopped voting with them and they no longer wanted me to attend the meetings.

One of my friends, Mike, was a follower of Joseph Stalin -- the infamous dictator of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (That's the failed USSR that Vladimir Putin loves). A Soviet is, supposedly, a workers' collective. The workers collectively do what they are told. The DEI-infused Writers Guild of America qualifies. Mike took tours of the USSR and thought things were going just fine until that a-hole Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev showed up. My friend took the slogan "Forward" quite seriously. For him, it was all about the journey, not the destination.  

Not the Soviet Savior 

The far left wants to create a disciplined and committed militant core -- the vanguard of revolution. It's about grabbing power, not doing good. They will champion bizarre causes and deploy underhanded tactics because that helps them recruit passionate and unquestioning people (pseudo-intellectuals, useful idiots, and opportunists flock to the banner). They become members of an activist movement the Vanguard leads. Societal upheaval helps the Vanguard to recruit. Societal collapse helps them take power. That's a disaster for the rest of society. But it is a disaster for members of the movement as well. Regardless of the announced idealistic aims, Sociopaths -- who love to ruthlessly manipulate others -- take over that core group and will, one way or another, eliminate anyone who actually believes in "Social Justice," whatever that is.

If I may paraphrase Barak Obama, "The Arc of Progressivism bends towards shortages and famine." You can take that to the state-run bank and put it with the funny money.

It's all that Stuff They Did Before

The Real Reason China’s Economy Is In Crisis

When Tom Friedman at the New York Times praised the "China Model," I took it as a leading indicator that its economy would hit the wall in a decade or so. He was orgasmic over all those High-Speed Electric Trains! But after getting the State Run Railway to start building them, getting them to stop proved even harder. Now they're riding the High-Speed rail to nowhere. But what's an extra Trillion Dollars or so of debt? Certainly, the U.S. Congress would agree.

Similarly, getting them to stop building buildings (they could house half the planet) proved harder than convicting Donald Trump of something.

A centralized "Industrial Policy" can work well in the "catch-up" phase of economic development. If it proceeds too long -- which it almost always does -- it becomes the "ketchup phase," with lots of blood on the market floors as various bubbles burst.

In the 1980s I thought Japan's Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI -- 1949-2001, RIP) was going to prove me wrong until, quite suddenly, it didn't. Currently, Japan's stock market approaches the high set in...1989. And that's thanks to the capital fleeing China and looking for a home.

As a result of the Cultural Revolution, the CCP was on its back in 1980. That is a big reason why "Socialism with Chinese Crony-Capitalism Characteristics" could succeed as long as it did -- with a big helping hand from Walmart, Amazon, and Wall Street. Now that the Giant has awakened, they need to knock it over the head again if they want to get back on the growth track.

I'll Take that One-in-a-Million Chance!

New documents strengthen—perhaps conclusively—the lab-leak hypothesis of Covid-19’s origins.

Gee, who knew.

I used to tell people that the Wuhan China Lab-Leak conspiracy theory started in the Wuhan lab. I wonder if the original conspiracy theorists became involuntary organ donors. The "they doth protest too much" reaction of Officially-Designate-Scientific Opinion everywhere suggested an embarrassing level of American involvement at the lab, if not in the specific research that may have resulted in the COVID-19 pandemic. It was the sort of experimentation that was banned in the US.

And now I read:

The DEFUSE proposal was authored by Peter Daszak, head of the EcoHealth Alliance in New York, with partners including Shi Zhengli of the Wuhan Institute of Virology and Ralph Baric of the University of North Carolina. The grant proposed to “introduce appropriate human-specific cleavage sites” into SARS-related viruses, a procedure that could have led to the creation of SARS2, with its distinctive furin cleavage site, depending on the starting virus used for the manipulation.

Oh, OK. Of course, there is still that one-in-a-million chance it originated "in nature" in a cave 500 miles from Wuhan, so don't believe everything you read.

Lab-Leak Leak Links Lab to Lab-Leak

Jarring or Canned?

'Jarring' New Hampshire results are a 'warning sign': Thiessen

Marc Thiessen, the token Republican at the Washington Post, proves that you don't need much evidence or even make much sense when you go after Donald Trump. No worries, spouting nonsense in that noble cause can only help your reputation.

He thinks Trump's performance in New Hampshire was weak ("only" winning by 12 points over Nikki Haley) and compares it to his performance in 2020 when, as President, he crushed an opponent no one has heard of (Quick -- who was it?). 

New Hampshire has an open primary system. In 2020 there was a competitive Democratic primary that attracted anti-Trump voters. Maybe this year's "Haley Democrats" were that year's "Kamala Republicans." It was, quite simply, a different set of voters. In fact, with mail-in votes and vote harvesting, it was a different electorate in the general election.

I'm not much of a Trump fan, but when Thiessen touts Haley's performance against Biden in the polls, I'm skeptical. She is not well known outside the party, so it's like choosing the "generic unnamed opponent" who often beats the incompetent in the off-year polls. The voters know the slouch that is in there and think anyone's preferable to that jerk. Once they get a look at the actual candidate, a lot of them have a change of heart and "come home."

Trump got 10 million more votes in 2020 than he did in 2016 and it was only that 93 percent turnout in Milwaukee (where the largely black electorate was far more excited by Joe Biden than by Barack Obama -- nothing fishy there) and other Democratic strongholds (where nothing fishy happened -- it was the fairest election in the history of the Universe!) that got him out of office.

California Finds a Use for New Mexico

The SunZia Wind Farm: How To Do Greentech Well || Peter Zeihan

Time was I would ask, "Do you want windmills along every ridgeline in your area with high power lines running through your backyard that will ship the energy to some far-off metropolis?"  Answer: "No, but if it's somebody else's neighborhood and the power comes to my city, I'm all for it."

That's the kind of conversation I had about green tech back when I bothered talking about green tech.  After Biden won in 2021, a friend asked me about the move to Electric Vehicles. I commented that we should not underestimate DC's ability to bankrupt an entire industry and then botch the creation of the touted replacement. The old "Lemon Laws" were aimed at preventing the sale of cars that are lemons to unsuspecting consumers. The new Lemon Laws are about making every car you can buy a lemon, which you will suspect and will later be proven right -- but hey, you might get a tax credit.

So we now learn New Mexico is being gifted a vast array of windmills and accompanying power lines that will keep the lights on in Los Angeles. Yay for L.A! Eleven Billion dollars magically appeared to finance this one small step on the long journey to save the planet. Given the history of these sorts of projects, one must ask: will they be coming back for more money or a lot more money? Will it cost the traditional three times the estimate or the new traditional six times the estimate? I know, I know, my skepticism is misplaced.

Elon Musk might actually make this stuff work in a practical and self-sustaining manner.  And who do they hate? Elon Musk. You see, if you give a person fish that you have taken from another person at gunpoint, he's going to need you to keep giving him fish and work to keep you in power. If the person can get his own fish, well, it's time to take fish from him at gunpoint and give it to someone who will help you stay in power. Simple.

It's called redistribution. Now they are redistributing New Mexico's wind to L.A. because they don't want no 1,000 ft. tall windmill off Santa Monica -- let alone a whole bunch of them.

New Mexico needs a windfall wind-tax.

Scotty Rants

Here's Why America Just Went Bankrupt and All Our Savings are Gone!!!

Scotty Kilmere's been an auto mechanic for 50 years and his car videos can be quite entertaining, informative, and humorous. Apparently, he found out about the National Debt. It's 34 Trillion dollars, which is 34,000 Billion dollars (trillion is just another word for "many"). He says it's unsustainable, on account of how they keep running it up by a couple trillion every year. He's not too fond of electric cars, either.

Foreign nations sell us cars (and steel and lots of other stuff) and buy US government debt. They call this an "industrial policy." DC politicians like this because they can dish out money and not raise taxes. Wall Street likes this because they can sell foreigners our assets. Banks like this because the dollar is the world trade currency backed by American Real Estate -- which foreigners can buy as a safe haven when things go bad. It's good for everyone but American workers.

He's down on Capitalism, which he confuses with stupidity, and calls Communist China a Capitalist nation. Maybe, but it is not a free-market economy. They practice Crony Capitalism or, if you prefer, State Capitalism (Fascism). 

The Modern Madame Missionary

Drinker's Chasers - Oh No! She-Hulk Season 2 Cancelled

The crowd discusses the difference between the classic "She-Hulk" comic book and the Disney+ attempted "feminist sitcom" reinterpretation that fell flat.

I can do anything better than you

I didn't watch the show or read the comics, which allows me to be objective. In my objective opinion, the Disney+ creators (Jessica Gao et. al.) are doing missionary work for the woke religion.

Traditionally, missionaries go to where their fellow believers are to get money and then go to where the heathens are to make converts. Repeat as needed. Such inventions as the internet, zero interest rates, and rampant financial speculation make it possible to do this at scale and at a distance (limiting risk and discomfort while improving pay) -- but the basic approach remains.

For quite some time the Wealth of the USA has been concentrated in the hands of women -- the sort of fact that is sometimes called "an inconvenient truth," but not in this case since it is never mentioned. Earlier in that period, their wealthy Husbands would die at sixty (thank you, big Tabaco) and they would live to 85, sipping red wine and attending charitable functions. Their considerable wealth, however, would be managed by men to produce the best returns -- while often promoting the interests of men (expanding industry, for example). These days, it is managed by women, oftentimes to promote the interests of women (specifically, the daughters of the well-to-do).  This is labeled "social justice" and has acquired the trappings of a secular religion combating an evil "them" that strongly resembles working-class white males who read comics (it's where the heathens are). When Steve Jobs (the scion of a working-class family) died his widow became a modern-day Joan D'Arc -- a fortune being mightier than the sword. Multiply this a thousandfold and we get all this ESG nonsense.

Money, Money...Money, Money

It's all good until you make a loss -- and during a period when the Fed was underpinning an economy rife with speculation, it was all good. When the missionary work starts shrinking your assets (and no one likes a shrinking asset), the whole approach deserves a re-think.

Call me Chato has a more professional take.

Better or Badder?

The CCP's Olympic Backsliding

We Need To Discuss This China Economic News

In the 1980s I read that the USSR's rate of capital investment was growing yearly and way higher than in the USA, and I thought "Uh-oh for us." Then I read that all that capital investment was producing a negative return -- that they weren't just running on a treadmill to get ahead, but running on a treadmill and falling behind -- and I thought "Uh-oh for them." As regards Communist China, have we transitioned from the "Uh-Oh for us" stage and into "Uh-Oh for them?"

The Chinese leadership blamed political reform in the USSR for the collapse of the communist regime and vowed not to make that mistake. This is like blaming the cancer on the desperate remedies used to slow its spread. Now they've tossed that politically convenient "two systems" pledge (allowing limited political and economic freedom) onto the Ashheap of Chinese History. What desperate measures will Xi Jinping use to avoid that same fate?

Zeihanism

The Breakdown of the Republican Coalition (Trump's Fault?) || Peter Zeihan

As an aside, incumbents should declare the current horrendous budget deficit as part of their re-election campaign expenses.

As for Peter's screed, yeah. I don't know. The anti-Trump crowd is looking a little bonkers -- and that includes almost all of DC. The "outsider" candidate usually has an advantage. When Democrat Progressives are out of power they run as visionaries, painting a bright picture of the future -- which is best not examined too closely because everyone has a different vision of the future. For a Republican, it helps to be a governor who will bring common sense to running an out-of-control Washington when run by visionaries who are mucking up the present. No more gas ranges for you!  It's probably worth five points in each case (I should mention I don't know what I'm talking about).

The Donald ran as an outsider who became an insider (standing on the stage with Dr. Fauci was enough). He's since been re-outsided. In fact, the establishment would cast him into eternal perdition if they could (and are still trying). Recently, I joked that Democrats want convicts to vote and Republicans want to elect one President.

The Democrats were also the cool party. It really had nothing to do with their candidates and everything to do with their control of culture. Lately, it seems Nurse Ratchet has taken over their nanny state and Hollywood sermons are falling flat. Could be a long-term problem for them if Conservative anti-woke becomes the next fad. They can say Trump wants to control access to abortion but they want to control everything else -- and is forcing an "abortion choice" really out of the question? (They used to argue abortion saved money on Welfare and cut down on crime and, anyway, 90 percent of humanity is excess baggage on Spaceship Earth and is best disposed of. Don't worry, Gaia will sort them out.) 

I think Peter's confusing Business with Wall Street. Wall Street will support Biden (a trillion dollars buys a lot of love) but small to medium-sized businesses are thrown into chaos by the massive expansion of the regulatory state. Trump will give them the good stuff without a lot of the bad.

The Military and national-security-minded voters have every reason to go with Trump. The Obama faction made a lot of left-leaning appointments (the CIA director voted for a Stalinist as his third-party choice) and leaked their political hackery to progressive journalists (Traitor Trump!).  This coalition could be an inch wide and an Inch deep but quite loud (or, if you prefer, outspoken).

Oh, yeah, and it's the economy.

The Material is there, but is the Heart of Russia Willing?

The Ukraine War & the Battle of Avdiivka || Peter Zeihan

Will Putin ever tire of his War of Attrition?

Time was the Peasants would have four or five kids expecting to lose a few to one or two of the four horsemen.  When you have one son the calculations change.  If they are drawing heavily from the minority populations -- who might not be pleased by that approach -- and run out of convicts, they may find that war of attrition has become a threat to the regime -- though stopping so far short of the mark is not necessarily the better option.

Thanks to Putin, many of the folks who wanted the Soviet Union to stay together now want the Russian Federation to fall apart. If China gets Vladivostok -- which they claim -- then the US should take the Kamchatka Peninsula and the tiny bit of Russia that lies to the north of it and some of those islands to the south (we can make it all a National Park).

China hits Parkinson's Wall

 50% Crash: Shocking Reports on Wages, Land & Debt | Chinese Economy |

Tony, on his China Update YouTube channel, gives quite level-headed assessments of the Chinese economy. So if he headlines "Shocking Reports," then the reports are shocking to, you know, level-headed commentators. Which doesn't include me. For a while I've thought a few "lost decades" (an extended period of slow growth) going forward was the best-case scenario for China.

Back in 1964, my ninth-grade glee club ushered at a lecture by C. Northcote Parkinson, a humorist, satirist, and inventor (discoverer?) of Parkinson's law. Here it is, as far as I can remember:

1. Bureaucracies expand, regardless of the amount of work.
2. Officials seek to multiply subordinates and neutralize rivals while creating work for each other.
3. Work expands to fill the time available.

Well before Hong Kong returned to China I gave it 20 years (out of the agreed-upon 50) as an international financial center. The CCP wouldn't immediately kill the golden goose because, after the first Cultural Revolution, it needed the eggs. Over time, the "private economy goose" would grow into a rival to the CCP's official economy, where inefficiency is in the self-interest of those in charge. Add in the shake-up and uncertainty at the top of the CCP -- the start of a second Cultural Revolution? -- and stemming the flight of international capital is not a high priority (if it's a priority at all). This is not a peaceful period of "Work Expands" but an ongoing  CCP purge and "Survival Demands."

Economists can propose but Parkinson's law will dispose.

America, After Argentina

Argentina, After America || Peter Zeihan

Peter provides the conventional thinking of the deep-state with a leavening of common sense. His attitude toward Trump reflects this. His comparison of Trump and Peron is off the mark only because it misses the point.  The Obama/Clinton deep-staters tried to frame Trump as a Russian spy. I was never a Trump fan -- I thought him a bloviating braggart (or, more politely, one accomplished in the art of bragging). But a spy? Com'on. Plus, the accusations came from hacks who are highly paid professional liars. It didn't bother me during the campaign. After all, they were trying to keep hold of the many trillions of dollars that flow through DC every year and, as importantly, exercise the power to regulate everything. That kind of power is well worth the lies (apparently, we are still supposed to believe them). If Hillary could have pulled off an Evita, she'd have done so with song and dance.

What did the Donald want to do as the Prez?

1.  Cut illegal immigration and increase legal immigration.
2.  Put tariffs on China.
3. Rebuild our Military. 
4. Pass the Republican tax plan. 
5. Cut some of the more ridiculous regulations.

Sorry, that is not a Peronist program -- in fact, it was a rather moderate return to the political norm after a left-wing administration. The tariffs on China are still in place, and the military still has its budget. What's the Obama-Biden "not at all Peronist" program? They have deliberately re-havoced the southern border for their own political purposes while wildly growing government spending. They have ballooned the national debt and are obsessively regulating everything.

Meanwhile, the Clinton-Obama Democrats use the government to go after the political opposition -- but it ain't Peronist when they do it. Yeah. Sorry. Peron is the "new normal" in DC and it's not Trump's doing.