Showing posts with label World War II. Show all posts
Showing posts with label World War II. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

The Myth of Military Keynesianism

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

Military Keynesianism is another myth of dubious origins. In 1933, John Maynard Keynes wrote an open letter to President Franklin Roosevelt urging the new President to borrow money to be spent on public works programs:
“Thus as the prime mover in the first stage of the technique of recovery I lay overwhelming emphasis on the increase of national purchasing power resulting from governmental expenditure which is financed by Loans and not by taxing present incomes. Nothing else counts in comparison with this.
In a boom inflation can be caused by allowing unlimited credit to support the excited enthusiasm of business speculators. But in a slump governmental Loan expenditure is the only sure means of securing quickly a rising output at rising prices. That is why a war has always caused intense industrial activity. In the past orthodox finance has regarded a war as the only legitimate excuse for creating employment by governmental expenditure. You, Mr President, having cast off such fetters, are free to engage in the interests of peace and prosperity the technique which hitherto has only been allowed to serve the purposes of war and destruction.

--Keynes, John (1933). "An Open Letter to President Roosevelt". Retrieved 2011-08-01.
How many people do you know build 'tanks' for a living? You've heard of beating swords into plowshares: how often do you suppose plow-shares become tanks and what is --in fact --the effect on farming when that occurs?

A nation that believes it can sustain a viable population by the mere production of arms is deluded. Moreover, if 'we' can build tanks --why are we no longer leading the world in the production of automobiles?

Why are we no longer leading the world in the production of steel?

Why are we no longer the world's breadbasket?

Why does Detroit look like a Ghost Town?

When was the last time you heard about the thriving steel manufacturing town of Pittsburgh?

If you believe that these things are trivial, check out the CIA's own World Fact Book. At the very top you will find CHINA with the World's largest Positive Current Account Balance!

Now ---scroll down!

Keep scrolling!

A little more!

Ah --at last --there is the United States at the very bottom of the list with the World's largest NEGATIVE Current Account Balance [formerly called, in our case, the Balance of Trade deficit]. In a word --CHINA owns us and keeps us fat and happy --like cattle! We have to be kept afloat! Otherwise, where would China dump its cheap crap.

One wonders how many American jobs have, in practice, been exported to China? How and why has this come about? This trend is traced to Nixon's trip to China; the groundwork for his historic trip was laid by one George H.W. Bush with whom I spoke on this very topic years later! Somewhat simplistically, Bush sold out American labor. It was the high price we paid to get out of Viet Nam.

'Reaganomics' bears NO resemblance to Keynesian economics in either theory or result! Keynesianism works; Reaganomics never worked and never will. Arthur Laffer, himself, may have regretted the sorry fraud! Laffer called it a "theoretical curve". Whether or not it was drawn on a napkin (as legend has it) matters not. It was assumed that tax cuts would stimulate purchases and sales generally. The reverse happened because only the very rich, an elite in fact, benefited from the tax cuts. The needs of the very rich were already met; the elites had simply squirreled away their winnings in offshore bank accounts, beyond scrutiny. The 'tax cuts' were a windfall easily tucked away. As a result, no jobs were created as a result of the infamous Reagan tax cut.

"Supply-side' economics is simply a failure, perhaps a PR stunt. The term 'trickle down theory' describes it perfectly; but the term originated earlier, with Will Rogers who said that money was "...appropriated for the top in hopes that it would trickle down to the needy."

Laffer's curve never described reality. Had he been alive, Keynes would have denounced the reduction of growth in the money supply. The slowing of growth, indeed, the actual 'shrinkage' of the economy overall combined to create the 'perfect storm better known as the recession of 1981–82! It was the worst recession since H. Hoover's 'great' one! It is Reagan's legacy of failure and dimming hopes for all but the very, very, very rich.

Thus --the Reagan years are recalled as the era of huge budget deficits, low interest and inflation rates, and a depression of some two years, the deepest, longest since H. Hoover. The 'wrong' people benefited from GOP largesse --a depression resulted. One wonders how many $millions wound up in offshore tax havens following Reagan's 'welfare for the very rich'! We may never know. It was wealth forever lost to the U.S. economy.

Neither Laffer's curve nor Reagan's tax cut were Keynesian; Keynes is famous (or infamous) for his hypothetical about which he said the govt should bury pound notes in a landfill and let the people dig them up! Indeed --Reagan would have done much, much better had he done precisely that! Alas --he did not!  His 'tax cuts' did not benefit those whose expenditures would have 'stimulated' the flagging economy. Nor did the ruling elites invest them as Keynesian economics might require; certainly they were not invested in ways that create jobs or spending. Rather --they were banked offshore, representing a contraction/depression/a net loss of jobs and GDP, i.e, a depression of some two years, the worst such depression since H. Hoover's Great Depression of the 1930s.

'Wealth inequities/disparities' are the result of Reagan's tax cuts which benefited only the top 20 percent! Subsequently, the top 20 has, at last, become the ruling elite of just 1 percent which owns more than the rest of us combined. That's because however the rich are taxed, the 'tax burden' they experience is less than that experienced by the middle and poorer classes. That is the case because a flat tax of any 'percentage' is a greater burden to those who must always spend a much larger percentage of their income on mere necessities --not the least of which are roof and food!

'Necessities' are a much smaller percentage for ruling elites for whom the 'size' of a mansion is not a necessity but a luxury, for whom the swimming pool is not a necessity but is expected of his/her 'class', etc etc etc. Items most often indulged by 'elites' are unlikely to stimulate a domestic economy in any case. And as the number of very rich persons declines, their impact on the economy declines.  In the mansions of the very rich may be found luxury items the purchase of which will not improve the lot of a steel-mill worker or the men and women who used to make cars in Detroit.

Many credit WWII with ending the 'Great Depression". In fact, as it was waged WWII was NOT a 'massive stimulus' nor was it Keynesian. When demand is low, there is always the risk of 'gluts', over-production, expanding inventories. Some have proposed that during these times, a 'convenient' war may 'pump-up' demand!

Malthus, as I recall, advocated convenient wars to 'pump up demand'! That makes very little sense. On the one hand, a war-time government urges austerity while it utilizes existing resources to oppose the 'hun'! Thus what happened in the U.S. during WWII was hardly 'Keynesian". In fact, a variety of shortages severely inconvenienced the civilian population. Having spoken with many who lived through it, I have concluded that it was not the so much the war that stimulated U.S. growth but its end. Two 'booms' followed the return home of troops: 1) industry for which the troops were needed 2) a 'baby boom' as a result of families re-uniting.

While war was waged, many imported items were no longer available; the U.S. was at war with nation's that made and exported them to the U.S. Notably --sugar and coffee were very scarce. In fact, COKE (which things go better with) was scarce or unavailable most probably because sugar was scarce. Other things disappeared entirely --silk stockings among them.

In response, salvage campaigns encouraged people to save things like scrap metal, rubber, cooking fat! From these items weapons, ammunition, gas masks and explosives were made. A truly 'Keynesian' expansion of the economy cannot be read into this experience. There are no austerity measures in a Keynesian expansion driven as it is by more money in the hands of more people who will use it to buy more products and services. In war time, many 'consumers' are at war while those left on the 'home front' are expected to practice certain austerity measures. 'Austerity' is rarely Keynesian and certainly not Keynesian in this respect.

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Why U.S. Nukes Did Not Shorten the War with Japan

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

The 'bomb' did not shorten the war, nor did it affect --in any way --Japan's insistence upon retaining its emperor. Absolutely nothing was gained by the wanton murder of some 200,000 civilians.

U.S. President Harry Truman is said to have nuked Japan because he wanted an 'unconditional surrender'! In fact, he got nothing more than what had been offered prior to the use of two nuclear weapons first against Hiroshima and, later, against Nagasaki. The Geneva Conventions which prohibit genocide were not codified until 1948. But it is the purpose of the law to codify prohibitions against acts that are --already --wrong! The law cannot make right a wrong nor can it make wrong acts that are clearly right!
I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that? Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of "face"
--Dwight David Eisenhower
It is said that Truman would accept nothing less than 'unconditional surrender' In fact, he did not get an unconditional surrender. The surrender was conditioned upon the retention of the Emperor, a request that the Japanese had made as it sued for peace.
"The Japanese Government are ready to accept the terms enumerated in the joint declaration which was issued at Potsdam on July 26th, 1945, by the heads of the Governments of the United States, Great Britain, and China, and later subscribed to by the Soviet Government, with the understanding that the said declaration does not comprise any demand which prejudices the prerogatives of His Majesty as a Sovereign Ruler.
PROCLAMATION DEFINING TERMS FOR JAPANESE SURRENDER, (2) OFFER OF SURRENDER FROM JAPANESE GOVERNMENT, The Department of State Bulletin, Vol. XIII, No. 318, July 29, 1945
The bombing --the deliberate elimination of some 200,000 people --was in vain. Estimates of 150,000 killed and wounded in Hiroshima and some 75,000 at Nagasaki may be conservative. Clearly --these deaths were avoidable.

Eisenhower is vindicated by history. Indeed, as Eisenhower made clear: Japan sought terms which changed not a bit by the the use of the bomb.

The use use of the bomb is --in either case --an act of genocide against a civilian population. Genocide is now prohibited by by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948.

Japanese leaders --military and civilian, including the Emperor --were willing to surrender in May of 1945 if the Emperor could remain in place.
The Japanese government wanted to surrender; its leaders, military as well as civilian, rationally understood that the war was lost. President Truman was fully aware? of the situation as early as May of 1945. A peace treaty could have been effected and the dropping of the bomb avoided.
But they had a determined attachment (irrational?) to? the emperor. Japan would have surrendered, very possibly as early as June 1945, had its ruling establishment received guarantees of the emperor's personal safety and continuance on the throne. This should have been the first step in an American surrender strategy.
--Journal of American History
Therefore, the U.S. use of nuclear weapons of mass destruction upon a civilian population changed absolutely nothing!

President Truman was fully aware of the situation as early as May of 1945. A peace treaty could have been effected and the dropping of the bomb avoided. Churchill and Stalin went along with the 'unconditional surrender' policy --but only reluctantly.

U.S. policy demanding an unconditional surrender was rendered moot by the fact that the surrender was not unconditional but contingent upon Japan retaining its emperor. In any case, it does not ameliorate U.S. targeting a civilian population. Japan's major cities were devastated. Casualties were already in the millions. Millions more were refugees. The fleet was lost. Merchant shipping could not leave home waters or sail from the few possessions still held by Japan.
U.S. policies and actions following the de facto defeat of Japan:
  • Targeted a civilian population, an action not yet covered by the Geneva Conventions of 1948.
  • Achieved NOTHING that Japan had not ALREADY agreed to.
As Japan, in fact, retained its emperor, it would appear that it was the U.S. --not Japan --that made concessions after the bombing.

Addendum:

Following is my response to a comment on facebook:

Someone had posted:
"An invasion force would have still have to go in at the cost of 1000's of American lives. Ask any vet who landed at any island we captured."
1) Thousands of American lives were already lost to Japanese fighting from caves.

2) The point missed is that peace terms agreed to had already been agreed to by Japan before the bomb was dropped. There was, then, no point in dropping the bomb if the intention was to effect a un-conditional surrender. In any case, the U.S. did NOT get an un-conditional surrender. There is no ex post facto justification for this war crime.

THE BOMB HAD NO EFFECT ON PEACE TERMS.

3) There is no evidence that people fighting in caves were in any way dissuaded by the bomb! None! Japan had already agreed to the terms that were --in fact --signed after the bombs were dropped. The bombs were dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima --huge cities of civilians, not caves full of 'terrorists'!

What effect on cave guerillas did U.S. Military 'geniuses' think dropping bombs on civilian concentrations would have? Read Che Guerrilla. You may conclude that NUKES are powerless against a well-organized guerrilla force. IF folk were fighting in caves, what effect would bombs have? Clearly --no concessions were made as a result of NUKING the civilian populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki! NONE!

Today the US has been mired in Afghanistan for almost a decade! Guerrillas are fighting from caves, we are told! Do you propose that we NUKE Kabul because a rag tag band of guerillas are holed up in same caves some 100 miles away?

It would seem that if the US cannot 'win' a war against folk living in caves, then the U.S. would be well advised to get the fuck outt the war business.
Why I moderate comments
  • SPAM: 'comments' that link to junk, 'get rich' schemes, scams, and nonsense! These are the worst offenders.
  • Ad hominem attacks: 'name calling' and 'labeling'. That includes the ad hominem: 'truther' or variations!
_______________________________________________________________________________

Sunday, November 04, 2007

How to be free when all about you are enslaved by an evil, GOP machine

Political "evil" allows people to assuage their consciences in numbers. A person who might never lynch a man himself, might do so in a mob. Lynchings and torchings of black people were most often done by groups -not by individuals. The Holocaust required a "Reich". The Reagan regime required only an increasingly bourgeois populace only too willing to believe the lies it told itself. No member of such a group is truly free. No "good Republican" is free! No member of a mob is free. No group is free!

While psychologists may diagnose individuals as "psychotic", the more harmful effects are sustained when a group exhibits symptoms and acts upon them. There are no un-motivated choices. Motivation follows from our very existence which precedes essence, in this case, the manifestation of character, the gestalt of our choices. I propose that we choose to be free. We become free when we accept responsibility for what we make of ourselves.

Hollywood script-writers say that motive precedes character. Many, perhaps most, will act upon what is believed, in good faith, to be true but others will act knowingly upon a lie. Bertolt Brecht addressed inauthentic" people when he said: "A man who does not know the truth is just an idiot but a man who knows the truth and calls it ia lie is a crook!". To act knowingly upon a lie is to act upon bad motives. Jean-Paul Sartre would call it mauvaise fois.
For if indeed existence precedes essence, one will never be able to explain one’s action by reference to a given and specific human nature; in other words, there is no determinism – man is free, man is freedom. Nor, on the other hand, if God does not exist, are we provided with any values or commands that could legitimize our behaviour. Thus we have neither behind us, nor before us in a luminous realm of values, any means of justification or excuse. – We are left alone, without excuse.

That is what I mean when I say that man is condemned to be free. Condemned, because he did not create himself, yet is nevertheless at liberty, and from the moment that he is thrown into this world he is responsible for everything he does. The existentialist does not believe in the power of passion. He will never regard a grand passion as a destructive torrent upon which a man is swept into certain actions as by fate, and which, therefore, is an excuse for them. He thinks that man is responsible for his passion.

Neither will an existentialist think that a man can find help through some sign being vouchsafed upon earth for his orientation: for he thinks that the man himself interprets the sign as he chooses. He thinks that every man, without any support or help whatever, is condemned at every instant to invent man.

--Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism Is a Humanism

In some cases, a lie may not be a true motivation, but only a "cover" for a truth that dare not be revealed. In such cases, there is the "truth" that is acted upon, and the lie that is publicly professed. The intention is to deceive. The GOP is, thus, enslaved by its own web of lies --the lies it tells the world, the lies it tells itself. Only those who can accept the truth of their own existence and take responsibility for it are truly free. The GOP is the party of blame, a party for whom everyone but itself is blamed for its failures at home, in Iraq, throughout the world.

In some cases, a lie is told oneself and the world. In other cases, the truth is known and ignored; a cover story is told the world. Trickle down theory is just such a lie --a falsehood of convenience told publicly to justify economic policies intended to enrich the very few while impoverishing the many.

It is often possible to convince oneself that a lie is true and, in those cases, truth is forever covered up. It is a rare culprit who accepts his own villainy. Most will excuse a crime with a lie, a rationalization. "I was only righting the wrong that had been done me". "I was mistreated as a child". "The money should have been mine".

"Republicanism" itself is a gestalt of lies of many sorts. Republicans embrace "trickle down theory" not because it is true but because it conveniently justifies piggish, often criminal behavior. There are perhaps two kinds of people in this corrupt White House -those who really believe the lies and those who know them to be lies but cite them, in bad faith, to promote the GOP agenda. Motives so assiduously disguised cannot be benign.

It is easy enough invoke a blanket "political motive" ie, if Bush had been honest and up front about the many ways in which his cronies would be enriched by war with Iraq, the nation would never have backed the war. But many would have backed the war and would have espoused the same specious arguments and for the same reasons. Bush lied about WMD because he dared not make public the other, hidden reasons to wage aggressive war.

Evil, and the hypocrisy it inspires, springs from a deep well. Hypocrisy and mass psychoses are only mechanisms by which evil objectives are achieved. Dr. Gustav Gilbert, the American psychologist charged with keeping the Nuremberg criminals alive until they could be duly hanged, identified evil with the primary symptom of "psychopathic personalities" ie, the "utter lack of empathy".


Human, All Too Human (BBC) - Jean Paul Sartre: Part 1


Human, All Too Human (BBC) - Jean Paul Sartre: Part 2


A Short Based upon my interview with a survivor of Auschwitz

An update from my friends at Bad Attitudes:

Even for Texas

Texas, a perennial frontrunner in the stupidity stakes, is about to auction off a state wildlife preserve bordering Big Bend National Park:

The property, which could be sold as soon as Tuesday, is the Christmas Mountains Ranch, a 9,270-acre tract abutting Big Bend National Park near the Rio Grande. It was given to the state in 1991 and leased to the nonprofit association of local residents to patrol

The dispute pits the donors of the land, the Conservation Fund and the Richard King Mellon Foundation, against a pistol-packing commissioner adamant about preserving hunting and firearms rights on the property, even at the cost of denying the land to the National Park Service, although Texas ranks 44th in park land.
Bigbend.jpg

Posted by Jerome Doolittle







WWII




Spread the word:

yahoo icerocket pubsub newsvine

Sunday, July 15, 2007

Is This World War III?

Are we in the midst of World War III? Or is this merely the third global battle in a One Hundred Years' War? The debate had already begun by the time Newt Gingrich recently opined that the current conflict is World War III. More recently, Media Matters for America noted that CNN Headline News host Glenn Beck began his program of July 12 with a discussion with former CIA officer Robert Baer by saying "we've got World War III to fight"! He warned of an impending apocalypse. On July 13, in a similar discussion, Beck said of World War III: "It is here."

Gingrich says it's World War III

Former US House Speaker Newt Gingrich says America is in World War III and President Bush should say so. In an interview in Bellevue this morning Gingrich said Bush should call a joint session of Congress the first week of September and talk about global military conflicts in much starker terms than have been heard from the president.

"We need to have the militancy that says 'We're not going to lose a city,' " Gingrich said. He talks about the need to recognize World War III as important for military strategy and political strategy.

Gingrich said he is "very worried" about Republicans facing fall elections and says the party must have the "nerve" to nationalize the elections and make the 2006 campaigns about a liberal Democratic agenda rather than about President Bush's record. ...

Some background on the road to World War III. The 20th Century proved to be the most tragic, the most horrific century in human history --an outcome that might have been avoided had we but listened to a single voice, the economist John Maynard Keynes. Keynes (1883-1946), an important English economist, wrote the prescient The Economic Consequences of the Peace. He attacked the effects of Versailles Settlement for its disastrous effects on Germany. It is widely believed that the Settlement contributed to beginning World War II.

Keynes revolutionized economics with The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money (1936), generally regarded as the most influential social science treatise of the 20th Century. It changed the way the world looked at economics and the role played by government in society. Few books have had such impact. We are still not paying attention to Keynes! Pete Seeger asked: "...when will they ever learn? When will they ever learn?"
If the European civil war is to end with France and Italy abusing their momentary victorious power to destroy Germany and Austria-Hungary now prostrate, they invite their own destruction also, being so deeply and inextricably intertwined with their victims by hidden psychic and economic bonds.

--John Maynard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1919

Keynes understood as perhaps no one else the long term effects that punitive reparations would have on Germany and, eventually, the rest of the world.

The 21st Century promises to be at least as horrific, at least as tragic. For the same reasons, Bush's campaign of atrocity, torture and oil theft lays the ground work for an endless series of future wars. It is the self-fulfilling prophecy of those who have seen in the Middle East a powder keg. Unless Bush can scrape off the tar baby, the quagmire will morph into a wider war. This may have been what Bush had in mind when he urged Israel to attack Syria during Israel's recent incursion into Lebanon. Certainly, that action would have led to a longer, wider war. Possibly World War III.

Fight against terror could take 15 years

By Patrick Hennessy, Political Editor
Last Updated: 1:46am BST 09/07/2007

Britain faces a 15-year battle to end the threat posed by Islamist terrorists, the Government's new security supremo has admitted.

Admiral Sir Alan West, the former First Sea Lord, said the overall danger facing the country, from both home-grown and foreign terrorists, was at its greatest ever level and that a new approach was badly needed to tackle it.

In his first interview since his surprise appointment by Gordon Brown as security minister, Sir Alan called on people to be "a little bit un-British" and even inform on each other in an attempt to trap those plotting to take innocent lives.

"Britishness does not normally involve snitching or talking about someone," he said. "I'm afraid, in this situation, anyone who's got any information should say something because the people we are talking about are trying to destroy our entire way of life."
Talk about World War III risks becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. This war has already lasted as long as World War II and there is no end in site. Bush policies are wedded to the ruthless ambitions of big oil --Bush's partners and sponsors. There is no chance that Bush will change his policies. Impeachment and removal are our only options.

We had been promised a different kind of war, a shadowy war in which "evil doers" would be smoked out and brought to justice. Typical of a "bait and switch" administration, we got a quagmire! Promised limited government, we got Big Brother. Promised no "nation building", we got "nation destruction". Promised "faith based initiatives", we got a half-assed theocracy based on junk theology and claptrap!
This war will be more ambiguous, more shadowy. In at least one respect, it will resemble the French and Indian War of the 18th century, fought in the wilderness by small, mobile forces. It will be more like the war on drugs, or the war on poverty, or the ongoing war against crime, in that it is unlikely ever to be won decisively. Unconditional surrender by the terrorists is an unreasonable expectation, and the defeat of "every terrorist group of global reach," as promised by Bush, is a hugely ambitious goal.

--Is this WWIII, how will we know who's winning?

Bush's war began with a crisp new look and soon morphed into tired old Viet Nam, a bog of discredited ideology and even less effective strategies. Certainly, Viet Nam portended the future of warfare. In Viet Nam, the US took on the un-winnable task of defending a "string of faceless generals" none of whom had real legitimacy or the widespread support of the people. Despite CIA skullduggery, the US eventually lost because it never found a legitimate government to defend. Nor has it in Iraq.

Failed Presidents are most likely to kick off World War III. Bush is most certainly a failed President who sees in military adventure some "cover". When Israel attacked Lebanon, Bush encouraged the Israelis to take on Syria as well. Had Bush seen in a wider conflict some relief from his deteriorating position at home? There is a special place in hell reserved for Bush, indeed, anyone who finds in universal suffering and tragedy his own wasted "salvation".
In the latter stages of the war all the belligerent governments practised, from necessity or incompetence, what a Bolshevist might have done from design. Even now, when the war is over, most of them continue out of weakness the same malpractices. But further, the governments of Europe, being many of them at this moment reckless in their methods as well as weak, seek to direct on to a class known as 'profiteers' the popular indignation against the more obvious consequences of their vicious methods. These 'profiteers' are, broadly speaking, the entrepreneur class of capitalists, that is to say, the active and constructive element in the whole capitalist society, who in a period of rapidly rising prices cannot but get rich quick whether they wish it or desire it or not.

--John Maynard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace

Why the United States will continue to threaten the entire world:
So, I see a customer I hadn't seen in a couple months. He's ex-Navy, Republican, NRA member, mid-fifties. I've known him 15 years and he's always been a decent enough guy. Yeah, he watches Fox 'News' but he'd always listen to reason. He's really pissed off about the way Iraq was botched and about how it's all gone to Hell over there. So I ask him today, "I bet you're gonna vote Democrat next year."

"Nope," he says. "Republican across the board."

So I gotta ask. "Even after all this horseshit in Iraq?"

"Yup," he nods.

"How come?" I ask.

"Niggers and spics," he replies.

My jaw drops open. "What?"

"Niggers and spics," he says again. "The Republicans don't like 'em and neither do I."

--Alternate Brain
The fault lines run deep.

Send Liberals to "Gas Chambers."... Astonishing Right-Wing Extremism!

A good investigative journalist, if needed, can hide aboard a cruise full of white supremacists and manage not only to escape without punching someone and thereby blowing their cover, but also get out with one hell of a story. That is exactly what Johann Hari did when he joined the National Review cruise and their motley of hate. The result is breathtaking and incredibly frightening. One has to wonder how Jewish travlers aboard this hate vessel did not recognize the rhetoric and make way directly to the nearest inflatable device.

From the masterful Hari article, I give you The Ship of Fools:

"I am standing waist-deep in the Pacific Ocean, both chilling and
burning, indulging in the polite chit-chat beloved by vacationing Americans. A sweet elderly lady from Los Angeles is sitting on the rocks nearby, telling me dreamily about her son. "Is he your only child?" I ask. "Yes," she says. "Do you have a child back in England?" she asks. No, I say. Her face darkens. "You'd better start," she says. "The Muslims are breeding. Soon, they'll have the whole of Europe.""

If you are concerned that the hate constituency hates only Muslims, don't worry, they hate everyone who is unlike them and suggest not so novel ideas for taking care of undesirables (emph mine):

"I am getting used to these moments – when gentle holiday geniality bleeds into... what? I lie on the beach with Hillary-Ann, a chatty, scatty 35-year-old Californian designer. As she explains the perils of Republican dating, my mind drifts, watching the gentle tide. When I hear her say, " f course, we need to execute some of these people," I wake up. Who do we need to execute? She runs her fingers through the sand lazily. "A few of these prominent liberals who are trying to demoralise the country," she says. "Just take a couple of these anti-war people off to the gas chamber for treason to show, if you try to bring down America at a time of war, that's what you'll get." She squints at the sun and smiles." Then things'll change.""

The gas chamber, eh? Executions for fellow citizens? Is that where we are now?

Looks like the "cultural war" has gone psycho! The GOP is a crime syndicate. The right wing exemplifies institutionalized psychosis. However repugnant this notion is for liberals, it is time that we armed. If someone tries to "gas" you or herd you into a gas chamber, shoot to kill the sonovubitch!

Saudis’ Role in Iraq Insurgency Outlined

Although Bush administration officials have frequently lashed out at Syria and Iran, accusing it of helping insurgents and militias here, the largest number of foreign fighters and suicide bombers in Iraq come from a third neighbor, Saudi Arabia, according to a senior US military officer and Iraqi lawmakers. ...
Bill Moyers’ Roundtable On Impeachment Of Bush & Cheney

Naturally, you can expect the Faux Network to censor one of the most brilliant TV programs ever:

Additional ResourcesDiscoveries






Why Conservatives Hate America




Spread the word:

yahoo icerocket pubsub newsvine

Saturday, July 07, 2007

Lessons Bush Learned from Hitler

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

Bush learned how to slaughter civilians. In Iraq, US troops, commanded by Herr Bush slaughter some 10,000 Iraqi civilians per month. Bush will cite that as proof that his war crime is "winding down" but that's an absurd right wing spin.

The US slaughter rate in Iraq had been as high as 30,000 Iraqis per month, 1,000 per day. It was earlier this year that the Lancet study was made public by the British Guardian, which reported the extent to which Bush is "winning" the war against Iraqi civilians.

A monstrous war crime

With more than 650,000 civilians dead in Iraq, our government must take responsibility for its liesRichard Horton
Wednesday March 28, 2007
The Guardian

Our collective failure has been to take our political leaders at their word. This week the BBC reported that the government's own scientists advised ministers that the Johns Hopkins study on Iraq civilian mortality was accurate and reliable, following a freedom of information request by the reporter Owen Bennett-Jones. This paper was published in the Lancet last October. It estimated that 650,000 Iraqi civilians had died since the American and British led invasion in March 2003.

Immediately after publication, the prime minister's official spokesman said that the Lancet's study "was not one we believe to be anywhere near accurate". The foreign secretary, Margaret Beckett, said that the Lancet figures were "extrapolated" and a "leap".
Not surprisingly, Bush responded: "I don't consider it a credible report". Recent updates to the report now estimate the number of civilian dead at well over one million. Bush calls that "kickin' ass". I call it mass murder, a capital crime perpetrated by George W. Bush. Meanwhile, Sydney Blumenthal says Bush knew Saddam had no WMD.
Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction

Salon exclusive: Two former CIA officers say the president squelched top-secret intelligence, and a briefing by George Tenet, months before invading Iraq.

Sept. 6, 2007 | On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam's inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.

Nor was the intelligence included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which stated categorically that Iraq possessed WMD. No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD.
As Salon broke that exclusive, we learned elsewhere that Bush was yucking it up with another right wing seed pod --Australia's PM, John Howard.
Today the US President will visit the National Maritime Museum to view the bell. It could be construed as an act of symmetry, given if Howard loses the election, this week would be the last time he and Bush see each other in their respective roles.

This was obviously apparent to Bush, who arrived in Australia in a chipper mood.

"We're kicking ass," he told Mark Vaile on the tarmac after the Deputy Prime Minister inquired politely of the President's stopover in Iraq en route to Sydney.
--By George: now it's all the way with Howard J
Bush deliberately defrauded the troops, the nation, the Congress, the world. He calls it "kickin' ass". I call it a capital crime!

Bush is now criminally culpable, subject to prosecution for capital crimes for the deaths of his every victim on either side. Words cannot describe the venal idiocy of this cretin so at ease with his disconnect with common sense and morality, so comfortable wallowing in the misery his lies have caused and continue to cause. Psychologists use the term "lack of empathy" to describe this pathology, better known among the volk as pure "evil"!

From the Third Reich, Bush learned how to exploit "terrorism" to consolidate his dictatorship. Bush is on the Hitler end of the political spectrum opposing the very principles of our founding. What Bush knows he most surely learned by way of his Grandfather's old trading partner --Adolf Hitler. Hitler's Lesson Number he summed up himself in one sentence.
Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death.
--Adolf Hitler
Bush learned how to rule ruthlessly. Hitler never got more than 37 percent of the vote in several elections called over a short period of time ending with an act of terrorism that Hitler would exploit to consolidate his dictatorship. That act was the Reichstag Fire, Hitler's 911.

It's hard to imagine that anyone would dare go back to the well given the press "Reichstag" gets. Nevertheless, the tactic, having proved successful for Nazis, would be tried again. No one ever accused Bush of being imaginative. His gang would simply repeat a tired, old Nazi tactic and expect the people to go along. And, for the most part, the people did precisely that.

On February 27, 1937, Hitler was having dinner with Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels when the phone rang to inform the future Fuhrer: "The Reichstag is on fire!" At the scene, Hitler and Goebbels, found Hermann Goring, later Hitler’s air minister, shouting "at the top of his lungs", blaming communists for an act of terrorism.

How Hitler became a dictator is recounted in many sources but William Shirer's Rise and Fall of the Third Reich is still among the very best.
From Goring's Reichstag President's Palace an underground passage, built to carry the central heating system, ran to the Reichstag building. Through this tunnel Karl Ernst, a former hotel bellhop who had become the Berlin S.A. leader, led a small detachment of storm troopers on the night of February 27 to the Reichstag, where they quickly scattered gasoline and self-igniting chemicals and then made their way quickly back to the palace the way they had come. At the same time a half-witted Dutch Communist with a passion for arson, Marinus van der Lubbe, had made his way into the huge, darkened and to him unfamiliar building and set some small fires of his own. This feeble-minded pyromaniac was a godsend to the Nazis. He had been picked up by the S.A. a few days before after having been overheard in a bar boasting that he had attempted to set fire to several public buildings and that he was going to try the Reichstag next.

The coincidence that the Nazis had found a demented Communist arsonist who was out to do exactly what they themselves had determined to do seems incredible but is nevertheless supported by the evidence. The idea for the fire almost certainly originated at the top with Goebbels and Goring. Hans Gisevius, an official in the Prussian Ministry of the Interior at the time, testified at Nuremberg that 'it was Goebbels who first thought of setting the Reichstag on fire' and Rudolph Diels, the Gestapo chief, added in an affidavit that 'Goring knew exactly how the fire was to be started' and had ordered him 'to prepare, prior to the fire, a list of people who were to be arrested immediately after it.' General Franz Halder, Chief of the German General Staff during the early part of World War II, recalled at Nuremberg how on one occasion Goring had boasted of his deed.
At a luncheon on the birthday of the Fuehrer in 1942 the conversation turned to the topic of the Reichstag building and its artistic value. I heard with my own ears when Goring interrupted the conversation and shouted: "The only one who really knows about the Reichstag is I, because I set it on fire!" With that he slapped his thigh with the flat of his hand.
The Rise and Fall of The Third Reich (Touchstone Edition, 1990, p. 192-)
Hitler ordered a round up of the usual suspects, in other words, his opposition, consisting largely of communists whom the Nazis could, with but a shred of credibility, blame for an act of bloody terrorism.

Nazis knew what goppers know now --that frightened and anxious people will willingly surrender the blessings of liberty. From Hitler's experience, Bush learned how to use a "Patriot Act" to crack down on dissent.

Hitler wasted no time. The very next day, he was in President Hindenburg's office urging the aging statesman to issue a patriot act, a decree entitled, “For the Protection of the People and the State.” Justified as a “defensive measure against Communist acts of violence endangering the state,” the decree suspended the constitutional guarantees pertaining to civil liberties:
Patriot Act vs, German Enabling Act:
The Decrees of 1933
(a) The February 28 Decree. One of the most repressive acts of the new Nazi government, this one allowed for the suspension of civil liberties ....The president was persuaded that the state was in danger and, hence, that the emergency measures embodied in the decree were necessary. Even though under Art. 48 of the constitution, the decree would have been withdrawn once the so-called emergency had passed, any hope of this happening was prevented by the establishment of Hitler's dictatorship following the Enabling Act (see below). It was in fact never withdrawn and remained until the end as an instrument of Nazi terror against ordinary citizens who ran foul of the regime.


ARTICLE 1. In virtue of paragraph 2, article 48,* of the German Constitution, the following is decreed as a defensive measure against communist acts of violence , endangering the state:
Sections 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124, and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. Thus, restrictions on personal liberty [114], on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press [118], on the right of assembly and the right of association [124], and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic, and telephonic communications [117], and warrants for house-searches [115], orders for confiscation as well as restrictions on property [153], are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.


*Article 48 of the German Constitution of August 11, 1919: If public safety and order in Germany are materially disturbed or endangered, the President may take the necessary measures to restore public safety and order, and, if necessary, to intervene with the help of the armed forces. To this end he may temporarily suspend, in whole or in part, the fundamental rights established in Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124, and 153 ...........
Patriot Act:
Section 218 which amends the "probable cause" requirement before conducting secret searches or surveillance to obtain evidence of a crime;
Sections 215, 218, 358, and 508 which permit law enforcement authorities to have broad access to sensitive mental health, library, business, financial, and educational records despite the existence of previously adopted state and federal laws which were intended to strengthen the protection of these types of records;
Sections 411 and 412 which give the Secretary of State broad powers to designate domestic groups as "terrorist organizations" and the Attorney General power to subject immigrants to indefinite detention or deportation even if no crime has been committed; and
Sections 507 and 508 which impose a mandate on state and local public universities who must collect information on students that may be of interest to the Attorney General.
Bush learned how to suspend civil liberties after a terrorist attack. It must be noted that Representative Dennis Kucinich of Ohio is the only candidate for President calling for a repeal of the Patriot Act. That tells me that the Democrats are not up to the challenge of restoring American democracy. The question now is one of some urgency: is it too late to save our nation? Is it too late to stop Bush? Are Americans screwed?

Just as Karl Rove spoke wistfully of a "permanent Republican majority", Hitler planned to establish a "permanent" majority of elected Nazis in the Reichstag. That body would later become Hitler's rubber stamp, passing whatever laws he desired, making all his crimes perfectly legal. Bush's lesson: make legal all the crimes you want and plan to commit; bully Congress into absolving you ex post facto for crimes already committed. Hire Alberto Gonzales to be the "enabler".

Two weeks after the Reichstag fire, Hitler requested the Reichstag to temporarily delegate its powers to him so that he could adequately deal with the crisis. Hitler denounced his opposition, shouting at them "Germany will be free, but not through you!” Hitler won the vote 441 to 84. It gave him a two-thirds majority needed to suspend the constitution. On March 23, 1933, the “Enabling Act”--a patriot act -- made Hitler dictator of Germany. It is not recorded whether he said, as did Bush much later: this would be a whole lot easier if this was a dictatorship ...just as long as I'm the dictator!

Just as Hitler cut a deal with Thyssen, Krupp, I.G. Farben et al, the DUMB-umvirate of Cheney/Bush/Rumsfeld carved up the map of the Middle East with big oil and Halliburton. Just as the Middle East is rich in oil, Poland was rich in coal from which synthetic fuels (to drive the Panzers) could be produced.

Bush used Hitler's play book. And, as it was then, it's all about energy. The esteemed historian John Keegan has written that Hitler might have won WWII had he kept Rommel supplied to seize the oil fields of the Middle East, rather than invading Russia. It would have all been over --save for an "insurgency" that most surely would have opposed Rommel.

Bush learned from his grandfather that there is big money -- a killing in fact --in the industrial murder business. Our own Treasury Department is the source for the following information about how US corporations, primarily US Steel, for whom Prescott Bush was banker, helped Hitler arm and wage war on the world while carrying out mass murder throughout Europe. US steel made it possible for Hitler to arm for war, producing the following percentages of war munitions for Hitler and his Nazi war lords: Pig iron 50.8%; Pipe & tubes 45.5%; Universal plate 41.4%; Galvanized sheet 38.5%; Heavy plate 36%; Explosives 35%; Wire 22.1%.
George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.

The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.

His business dealings, which continued until his company's assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz and to a hum of pre-election controversy.
--
How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power
In effect, Prescott Bush was Hitler’s American banker.

Bush also learned how to outsource murder and atrocity in ways that benefit his right wing supporters. Called "private enterprise", it is, in fact, corporatism, Mussolini's word for farming out the work of killing to partners, robber barons, death merchants and hired murderers like Blackwater! Blackwater is a gang of paid thugs whom National Public Radio charges has strong connections with America's radical, religious, fascist right wing.
NPR: The war in Iraq has been partly outsourced to private military contractors which are performing many of the services that used to be done by the military. My guest, Jeremy Scahill, has written a book about one of those companies, Blackwater, which he describes as "the world's most mercenary army and the embodiment of the Bush administration policy of privatizing military functions." The company, which was founded in 1996, made headlines in 2004 when four of its men were ambushed and set on fire by Sunni gunmen in Fallujah. The charred remains of two of the men were hung on a bridge for public display. The families of the four men are suing Blackwater for wrongful death, raising a lot of questions about accountability and oversight when private contractors play a major role in war. Jeremy Scahill is a Polk Award-winning journalist who is a frequent contributor to The Nation and a correspondent for the radio and TV show, "Democracy Now." Jeremy Scahill -- if you wanted to write about a private military contractor, why did you focus on Blackwater?
Bush is ideologically allied with Hegel, for whom the "state" is "God". That notion opposes every "American" value, including that of truly religious folk who find the equation of "God" with the "state" a blasphemous notion. And so it is, not merely of religion but of reason.

Bushism is anathema to American ideals espoused by real patriots like Thomas Jefferson whom Bush and Dick Cheney would have derided as "pro-French". James Madison who wrote the first draft of our Constitution would have been demonized as "quaint" by idiots like Gen. Hayden and Al Gonzales.

Bush must surely hate our Declaration of Independence. In it, Thomas Jefferson sides generally with "insurgencies" against despots. Bush will, of course, have missed or dismissed obvious analogies to Iraqi civilians upon whom the US has waged not a war --but a crime punishable by death under our own federal statutes!

It was William Pitt, Earl of Chatham in England who denounced the British position in our war of independence. His words ring so very true today, words that Bush must surely hate:
If I were an American, as I am an Englishman, while a foreign troop was landed in my country, I never would lay down my arms -- never! never! never!

--William Pitt the elder, 1st Earl of Chatham, Viscount Pitt of Burton-Pynsent , byname The Great Commoner, 1708-1778
Bush is blinded by raw, ruthless ambition. Like Dick Cheney and the robber barons of privilege, they are blind to obvious analogy. America is not fighting for freedom against terrorism in Iraq. Rather, Bush embodies monolithic corporate totalitarianism and the theft of Iraq's natural resources. Never mind that Iraq was a sovereign nation that had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with 911, Bush's ex post facto lies about it notwithstanding. The record clearly proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Bush's quarrel with Saddam had to do with the fact that Saddam favored lower prices for oil while Bush, OPEC, and the Saudis in particular favored higher prices.

Bush is anti-American. Bush is not fighting for Americans in Iraq. He is fighting to further enrich corporate fascist powers who would enslave you! Bush has more in common with Hitler and Stalin than with Madison or Jefferson.

The American republic at the time Thomas Jefferson penned the Declaration of Independence was the latest development in a liberal trend that had begun with the English Civil War. Certainly, Oliver Cromwell dismissed Parliament in a fit of pique; certainly he arrogated unto himself the powers of an absolute dictator but stopped short of taking the title. He was, he said, a Lord Protector. Charles I was most certainly England's last absolute despot in the Hobbesian, Hegelian sense of the word.

Monday, June 18, 2007

Like GWB, Adolf Hitler was in the death business

One of the greatest disasters to befall humankind was triggered by a state crime perpetrated by Adolf Hitler. That crime was The Reichstag Fire. [See: excerpts from The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William L. Shirer ] It led inexorably to the Holocaust, a crime of unimaginable proportions.

In Houston, I spoke with Holocaust survivor Siegi Izakson....

Given what Hitler himself had written in Mein Kampf, it is easy enough to conclude that Hitler's desire to cleanse the "Fatherland" was motive enough to pull off a Reichstag Fire, an act of "terrorism" which Hitler exploited as shamelessly as Bush has exploited 911.
The whole truth about the Reichstag fire will probably never be known. Nearly all those who knew it are now dead, most of them slain by Hitler in the months that followed. Even at Nuremberg the mystery could not be entirely unraveled, though there is enough evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that it was the Nazis who planned the arson and carried it out for their own political ends.

From Goring's Reichstag President's Palace an underground passage, built to carry the central heating system, ran to the Reichstag building. Through this tunnel Karl Ernst, a former hotel bellhop who had become the Berlin S.A. leader, led a small detachment of storm troopers on the night of February 27 to the Reichstag, where they scattered gasoline and self-igniting chemicals and then made their way quickly back to the palace the way they had come. At the same time a half-witted Dutch Communist with a passion for arson, Marinus van der Lubbe, had made his way into the huge, darkened and to him unfamiliar building and set some small fires of his own. This feeble-minded pyromaniac was a godsend to the Nazis. He had been picked up by the S.A. a few days before after having been overheard in a bar boasting that he had attempted to set fire to several public buildings and that he was going to try the Reichstag next.

The coincidence that the Nazis had found a demented Communist arsonist who was out to do exactly what they themselves had determined to do seems incredible but is nevertheless supported by the evidence. The idea for the fire almost certainly originated with Goebbels and Goring. Hans Gisevius, an official in the Prussian Ministry of the Interior at the time, testified at Nuremberg that "it was Goebbels who first thought of setting the Reichstag on fire," and Rudolf Diels, the Gestapo chief, added in an affidavit that "Goring knew exactly how the fire was to be started" and had ordered him "to prepare, prior to the fire, a list of people who were to be arrested immediately after it." General Franz Halder, Chief of the German General Staff during the early part of World War II, recalled at Nuremberg how on one occasion Goring had boasted of his deed.

--William Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich

Those who do not remember the past are condemned to relive it.

- George Santayana, American Philosopher

Sadly, however, we always forget the past. We are in need of constant reminders, especially the corporate origins of fascism and Nazism.


If you have trouble connecting the dots from Hitler's corporate base to the Nazi state to the Final Solution, a reminder: big companies --I.G Farben (manufactuers of Zyklon B), Thyssen, Krupp --all made fortunes at every step of the way. Like Bush today, Hitler was in the death business.
The Wannsee Conference was held on 20 January 1942, in a villa owned by the SS-Nordhav Foundation in the attractive Berlin lakeside suburb of Wannsee. It was presided over by SS-Lieutenant General Reinhard Heydrich, Chief of the Security Police and Security Service. Heydrich summoned fourteen men representing the governmental and military branches most involved in implementing the practical aspects of the Final Solution. Reichsmarschall Hermann Göring had charged him with arranging all practical matters concerning the implementation of the Final Solution of the Jewish question.1 Heydrich was an ambitious and meticulous officer who relished the responsibility of power. One of Heydrich's foremost intentions was to make sure that all these men understood perfectly what duties and responsibilities their office was expected to fulfill.

In the years leading up to World War II, the phrase "Final Solution of the Jewish Problem" had taken on a series of increasingly ominous meanings in the Nazi vocabulary.2 The various implications had included voluntary emigration, confinement to ghettos in cities located along rail lines, forced removal to concentration camps, and finally, extermination. Heydrich wanted to be certain there was no confusion among the group that, now, the term referred specifically to the murder of all European Jews.

Heydrich's assistant, SS Lt-Colonel Adolf Eichmann tells us in testimony at his trial in 1961, that the meeting was relatively brief, lasting only an hour to an hour and a half, and that the atmosphere of the meeting was one of cooperation and agreement.3 These high-ranking members of the Nazi government met at mid-day over a buffet luncheon to discuss the annihilation of an entire people.

The Wannsee Conference

A flash forward to the present day proves that despite Santayana's admonition, we have forgotten the past and we are doomed to repeat it.
We will export death and destruction to the four corners of the earth!

--George W. Bush







Why Conservatives Hate America




Spread the word:

yahoo icerocket pubsub newsvine