Archive

Posts Tagged ‘delusions’

More Thoughts on Trump’s Latest Idiotic Move to Start a War with Iran

January 7, 2020 13 comments

In my previous post on this topic, I wrote that the extremely stupid decision by Trump to approve the assassination of Qasem Soleimani will have very significant and long-lasting effects on the geopolitical environment in the Middle-East. For starters, it is now virtually guaranteed that Iran will acquire nuclear weapons and ICBMs- mostly likely within next 2-3 years. They have seen the difference that acquiring such weapons made to the security environment of DPRK- a significantly smaller and poorer country than Iran. The assassination of Soleimani is also the final nail in the coffin for the influence of LIEbral faction within their government which had argued for better relationships with USA (and the rapidly declining west) through bad comprises such as JCPOA.

Events since Iran signed that worthless agreement have shown that hardliners who opposed to be far more realistic than the greedy LIEbrals who deluded themselves into thinking that USA (and west in general) would honor international treaties. The upcoming years will see a far harder shift in their foreign policy towards China, and away from catamite states in western Europe. In any case, the west (especially USA) are no longer producers of any resources or products which the world needs- let alone scientific or technological innovation. And now we shall talk a bit more about how Iran is likely to avenge the untimely death of Soleimani. As you will see, they have far more options than the credentialed idiots who appear on, and write in, western corporate media outlets are capable of imagining. We live in interesting times..

1] One of most obvious, but ignored, ways that Iranians could take revenge for Soleimani would be to go after Trump and his progeny. While this would be easier if Trump loses in 2020, they could go after his idiotic progeny even earlier. And it is much easier than you think give that this progeny often travel to countries that are far away from USA and Iran has the organisational capabilities of a large nation state, not some pipsqueak terrorist group. They are also likely counting on his low popularity among many Americans to make any such outcome far more acceptable than it would be otherwise. It would also be an especially audacious and very fitting response to the assassination of Soleimani. While something like this might seem unlikely to most Americans, let me remind you that we are not living in ‘normal’ times.

2] People such as Pompeo, Bolton, Esper, certain advisers to the Trump administration, yappy Chihuahua such as Marc Rubio and Lindsey Graham, rich Zionist donors to the Trump campaigns might also be targeted for assassination by Iran. They present far easier targets than Trump and depending on how things work out, they could put the fear of god into many more. It also helps that many of Trump’s advisers on foreign policy seem to be either Zionist or have strong Zionist sympathies- making them especially enticing targets for Iran. Also a lot of these people have to travel far more and have much less of a security detail than somebody such as Trump and his family. I wonder if idiots such as Pompeo and Bolton have considered that possibility.

3] Regardless of whether Israel was directly, or indirectly, involved in this assassination- it is reasonable to assume that Iran is now going to explicitly target senior Israeli officials and their families. While there was a peculiar unwritten truce between those two countries on the issue of killing members of each other’s government officials- that is now history. It is even more likely that Iran will target Israel assets working in Middle-Eastern countries, regardless of the passports they hold. It will get especially ugly in places where both countries have a presence.. such as Lebanon, Turkey, UAE etc. For too long, people working for that country have felt protected. This is likely the end of that era. It would not be surprising if Iran also started targeting people from that country when they were on vacation in other countries.

4] We cannot also forget the extent of dislike between rulers of Sunni gulf states and Iran. Once again, for a long time this dislike did not degenerate into trying to kill each others rulers and senior government officials. But things have changed now, and what was once unthinkable is now firmly within the realms of possibility. Expect lots of random bombings etc targeting gulf royalty and senior government officials in those countries. I also predict that the uneasy ‘truce’ between Iran and Saudi Arabia is finally over and one can expect Iran to start pouring weapons in Shia areas of Saudi Arabia. Things are about to get very interesting in those countries. It is hard to predict where this is all going to lead, but it will be interesting to watch.

5] While it is a foregone conclusion that Iran will now target american soldiers and mercenaries in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan etc- we should not forget their native support staff. See.. for each american solider or mercenary, there are probably 5-20 local people who support their presence. It certainly helps that targeting the ‘help’ would be far more easier, and rewarding, for Iran. Very few people are willing to make an extra buck if such a gig comes with a reduced life-expectancy for themselves and their families. This outcome is especially likely in Iraq and Afghanistan, where there is no shortage of other locals (proxies) who hate those who work for whatever is left of the american occupation. Readers might have noticed that most of the possible actions Iran might take in response to Soleimani assassination are not conventional warfare.

In an upcoming part, I will go into some detail about what conventional warfare options are available to Iran. As you will see, they are far more numerous than most “credentialed” western idiots in the MSM are willing to admit.

What do you think? Comments?

Some Thoughts on Trump’s Latest Idiotic Move to Start a War with Iran

January 3, 2020 25 comments

In the previous post, I wrote some very preliminary thoughts on the fallout of orange troll’s latest brainfart- specifically the totally bone-headed move to assassinate Qasem Soleimani when he was on official business in Iraq and on his way to meet government officials to Turkey. And let us be clear about something else, Soleimani’s travel schedule was not secret and he traveled openly to represent the interests of Iranian government. So what are the likely repercussions of this very stupid move by orange buffoon? As it turns out, there will be many consequences both immediate and secondary- and none of them will be good for people in USA.. to put it mildly. I have a feeling that Trump nor his neocon Israeli cronies have a grasp of what they have unleashed. And yes, I am implying that the “chosen people” are not clever as they delude themselves into believing.

1] The most significant, but almost ignored, consequence of this stupid move by Trump and his neocon advisers is that Iran is now definitely going to acquire nuclear weapons and ICBMs. As mentioned in a previous post, the main reason for Iranian government to not go down the route taken by North Korea took was that a significant number of them believed that some sort of long-term peace deal with USA was possible. However developments in past three years have clearly shown that Kim Jong-un’s plan to acquire nuclear weapons and ICBMs which could reliably target american cities for the purpose of deterrence was the correct one. In contrast, the LIEbral faction within the Iranian government which wanted better relations with the “west” even if doing so meant capping their nuclear and missile ambitions have been shown to be wrong.

2] The assassination of Soleimani by USA should be seen as the inflection point when credibility of western-leaning LIEbral faction in Iran went below zero. To say that this shift will have major consequences is an understatement. From now on, the viewpoint of hardliners in Iranian system becomes the dominant and almost universally accepted one within that country. For uninformed western readers, the hardliners in Iran are far more driven by nationalism than religion- like how the North Vietnamese were far more into nationalism than communism. One can safely assume that any new deal between Iran and USA or its catamite western allies is basically impossible in the foreseeable future. And who needs USA and the west, when you have China aka the country with the largest and most diverse real-life economy in the world.

3] Talking about China.. as many of you know, Trump and his stupid “advisers” have done many stupid (trade-related) things in past three years to convince the Chinese that letting USA hang itself is necessary. And let us be realistic about something else- there is nothing which USA manufactures today which the world would really miss if the country vanished from the face of this planet tomorrow. It also does not help that Trump, in spite of what idiots such as MikeCA believe, has done much to antagonize Russia. Long story short, neither country will be unhappy to see the USA militarily humiliated and further drained of resources in the Middle-East. China, in particular, rightly sees the USA as a dying empire in its terminal phase. They will be more than happy to let another country, such as Iran, accelerate the demise of USA and the west in general.

4] Maybe the orange buffoon and his Zionist advisers are trying to make themselves believe that Iran will finally fight on a battlefield and schedule which suits american arms doctrine. However anybody who is not delusional enough to believe that they are the “chosen people” because of their race (whites in USA) or religion (another country in the ME) understand that Iran has a history of fighting on a battlefield of their choice and a schedule of their choosing. To put it another way, you can expect a lot of.. well.. unrest in surrounding countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan which will likely target people who look american. There is historical precedence for this sort of targeting- and it can be most persuasive and effective.

Does Trump really think that he can protect every single american and his family working in Iraq and Afghanistan? To be clear, I am talking about people who work in non-military occupations, such as those who work in the oil and gas sector. Do you really think that Iran will not start targeting select oil and gas facilities in Iraq- especially in areas with western companies? FYI- Iran did not do this for many years because it wanted to normalize relations with USA and the west, but since there is no chance of that occurring in the foreseeable future it makes sense to go after soft targets which were forbidden in the past. Similarly, don’t be surprised if that Taliban and other groups in Afghanistan suddenly receive huge caches of weapons along with advisers.

A few well publicized incidents will likely result in most westerners avoid travelling, let alone living, in that country. Let me remind you that most people in Iraq and Afghanistan already hate white americans. And ya.. it works. Just ask Israelis why they had to withdraw from Lebanon by 2000. Another long story short, it was just too expensive and too hard to operate without suffering serious casualties- even for its armed forces. Now imagine what Iran can do in its neighboring countries and half a world away from USA. And don’t worry, countries such as Russia and China will be more than happy to supplement the efforts of Iran in those countries. If you thought that the previous failed occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan were unmitigated disasters, you ain’t seen nothing yet. Then again, that is the logical endpoint of american policy.

In the next part, I will focus on how the orange buffoon’s desire to satisfy Saudi Arabia and Israel, in addition to looking “tough” during the 2020 election campaign, are going to backfire on him. Then again, cannot think of somebody who deserves it more.. except perhaps all those establishment democrats who are as desperate to enter into a new war in that part of the world.

What do you think? comments?

Overview on Inter-Racial Relationships Over the Past Twenty Years: 2

December 4, 2019 29 comments

In the previous post of this series, I pointed out that changes in the racial demography of western countries has had little effect on patterns of inter-racial dating and relationships. In many larger cities, the percentage of non-whites among the 25-and-under age group has already crossed the halfway mark. Yet, the percentage of inter-racial relationships (adjusted for population numbers) has hardly budged from levels seen twenty years ago. Also, the patterns of such relationships has not changed over the same timespan. While the comments section in my previous post is full of ‘explanations’ for this state of affairs, it is clear that too many are not willing to accept the most obvious and logical explanation aka majority of whites still deluding themselves into thinking they are somehow inherently special.

It is hard to teach new tricks to an old dog, especially when those old tricks have became part of its identity. So in this part, we will talk about how this behavior manifests itself in tragically comic ways. I am sure you must have heard about how data from dating apps and sites consistently shows that almost all women in the declining west want men who look like models. While I am not denying this fact, few of these studies talk about what women will settle for. This is a very important, but often ignored, issue since most women do not get their super-hot guy.. even for a one-night stand. So what kind of guy do these women end up with once they fail to get their model guy? More tellingly, a shlubby white guy is still far more likely to end up in a relationship with a women (white or Asian) than a non-white guy without major cosmetic issues.

Do you see what I am getting at? If patterns in interracial relationships had actually changed over past twenty years, we would have start to see as many average non-white men in interracial relationships as their female equivalents. However, this is not the case even in the so-called “LIEbral” coastal regions of this continent. A few (MikeCA?) might want you to believe that this has something to do with these men eschewing such relationships for some esoteric “cultural” reasons. But is that really so? Are men of any ethnicity and ancestry that different from each other? Men want pussy, preferably not ugly but are quite willing to overlook mediocrity in women. Most men will settle for a ‘5’ if they don’t have better options- unless she is a horrible person.

But what makes this lack of change in patterns of inter-racial dating even more hilarious is how all of this is brushed aside our age of fake “wokeness” and “diversity”. You are far more likely to hear, read and see some story of a “non-binary drag clown” reading LGBTQ-heavy stories to 6-year old children in a public library than about the lack of change in patterns of interracial dating over past two decades- though the later has a far larger sociological relevance than the former. Heck.. a male feminist (white, of course) who cuts his junk to stimulate bleeding like a woman and labels himself non-binary gets far more media coverage than an issue which has infinitely greater relevance to the future of that society. Why do non-issues represented by attention-whores (almost always white) get so much traction in the lamestream media and on internet.

While I have much more to say about this sub-topic in upcoming parts of this series, we will now move on another related issue. Have any of you wondered what will happen to societies which cannot address this problem? Once again, some of you (MikeCA?) might want to believe that lack of interracial dating and relationships will have no worthwhile effect on those societies. My opinions, as you all know, are rather different. Having read enough history, I have yet to come across examples of societies which had taboos against inter-ethnic and inter-group relationships and still remained functional over any significant period of time. In fact, I wrote a whole series about how the caste or jati system in India was so damaging to that society. To make another long story short, societies with seriously siloed patterns of marriage and relationships are highly fragmented and dysfunctional because of the complete lack of a shared identity.

Racial siloing of relationships “worked” in the west between the 1960-1990s because, during that period, non-whites in those countries were an absolute minority who could be ignored to bullied to accept the status quo. But as we know, the racial composition of people in younger age-groups is now rather different from what it was- even in the 1990s. Now tell me something, why would non-whites whose relationship and dating pool is restricted to their co-ethnics give a shit about the fate of the societies they lived in- even if they were born in them. And this is not a trivial question.. especially as idiots such as Trump are increasing the level of racial polarization.

To be clear, I am not predicting a series of increasingly violent confrontations- though that does remain a possibility. It is however very likely that such racial siloing will create increasingly dysfunctional societies centered around racial identity politics in which not much gets done and everybody pretends to be polite to each other while planning to screw other those who not part of their group. Think of how things work (or don’t work) In India and replace ‘jati’ with race. The funny thing is you are actually starting to see the beginnings of this phenomenon in places like coastal California and New York. Then again, people deserve what they get especially when they have worked so hard to (often unintentionally) ensure that outcome.

What do you think? Comments?

Overview on Inter-Racial Relationships Over the Past Twenty Years: 1

November 24, 2019 59 comments

Longtime readers might remember that some of my earliest posts were about why I began using escorts. In those and other related posts, I also touched on how racism against non-white men in the area of dating was an important contributor to my decision of choosing the paid route. A few of you might also remember that the events in question occurred during the late 1990s and very early 2000s, when I was in my early to mid 20s. Which leads to an interesting question.. has the general situation and realities surrounding inter-racial dating in western countries changed for the “better” over past twenty years? Are many of the issues I wrote about in the past less common in 2019, than they were in say.. 1998 or 1999? Or are things no better than before?

The very short answer to those questions is as follows: the general situation surrounding inter-racial dating in the west has not changed much over the past twenty years. Indeed, in some ways things have gotten worse than they used to be in the past. But why does it matter enough for me to write another series about the topic? Well.. the simple answer is that those twenty years have also seen a large shift in racial composition of said countries, especially in the younger age groups. But first a bit of background. Over those decades, I have lived in two cities, one with a population of over a million and another with over four million. While the larger city already had a significant non-white population by mid 1990s, the smaller one was extra-white as late as 1999.

Today, things are rather different. The larger city has been majority non-white for well over a decade and white kids are the minority. But more interestingly, the schools and universities in even the smaller city went from being really white to almost 50% non-white during that period. In fact, the majority of students attending primary schools in many parts of that city are non-white. But what does any of this have to do with inter-racial dating? Well.. it comes down to a conversation I had with someone over 15 years ago. At that time, I said something to the effect that disparities in rates of inter-racial dating were due to whites believing themselves to be magically “better” or more “desirable” that others. The other person maintained that it was due to lack of familiarity. I then said that time alone could show who was correct.

It turns out that my cynical take on the topic was correct. See.. if the other person’s theory was right, a large increase in the number of non-white kids attending schools and universities would increase familiarity with whites translating into higher rates of inter-racial dating. So have the rates on inter-racial relationships in the 20-something age group changed significantly between 1999 and 2019? The simple answer is.. a big fucking NO! Some of you might counter by saying that the number of inter-racial couples have increased over past two decades. And to that, I say.. sure. But the percentage of inter-racial couples has remained static and even decreased over that timespan. More importantly, patterns of inter-racial dating have remained static over that period.

Asian male- white female (AM-WF) couples are still the most uncommon type while White male – Asian Female (WM-AF) are the most common type of inter-racial couples. In almost all black male – white female (BM-WF) couples, which is the 2nd most common type, the woman is invariably overweight, plain-looking or older. Similarly in almost every brown male- white female (BrM-WF) couple, the woman is invariably plain-looking and in it for the money. So what is going on? Why are the patterns on inter-racial dating in 2019 almost identical to those of 1999. Why didn’t the large changes in ethnic composition of schools and universities not lead to increased familiarity?

Maybe, it was never about lack of familiarity. Indeed, that excuse was eerily reminiscent of how certain older black people believed that the racial discrimination they faced could be overcome by showing whites that they were a conservative and hard-working aka black respectability politics. Turns out, systemic racism against black people had nothing to do with their behavior and actions and everything to do with their skin color. Who could have known? Similarly, racism against non-whites (especially men) in the sphere of dating had nothing to do with lack of familiarity and everything to do with the ego and self-delusions of a group that is now in a terminal demographic spin. But why take my word for it, have a look at other related patterns.

As many of you know, the premium on being white has gone down a lot since 1999. That group is now the one with increasing mortality and morbidity due to drug overdose, alcoholism and higher rates of suicide. Even outside this continent, whites are not doing well- to put it mildly. Between these issues and higher rates of unemployment due to outsourcing, lower fertility per woman etc, it is not an exaggeration to say that we all know which group doesn’t have an especially bright future. And yet, the attitudes of your average (or median) white man or woman towards inter-racial dating have not changed, even in the younger age groups who have some awareness that their future is not bright. What is going on..

Some of you might counter that by saying that inter-racial relationships are far more accepted by younger white demographics. My counter argument is.. sure, that is what they say but is the belief reflected in their own behavior. It is very easy to support an idea if you don’t have to follow it up with actions. In the next part, I will show you how his hilarious denial manifests itself in popular culture. And ya.. I am fine with the situation, because this slow-motion disaster is following the path I had predicted (and hoped for). If a group wants to take their delusions to their collective demographic graves.. I say, let them do it. In fact, they should be encouraged.

What do you think? Comments?

Use of Adblock Blockers by Print Media is Speeding their Final Demise

October 11, 2018 3 comments

This is one of those posts that I started writing a couple of years ago, but didn’t get around to finishing till today. While it is almost certain that most of you know what I am talking about, let me write-up a quick introduction. It is common knowledge that print media, especially in USA, is on its last legs. Sure.. the election of Trump in 2016 has resulted in some improvement in profit margin for a few major quasi-national outlets such as the NYT and WP- for reasons that are all too obvious. Yet it is painfully obvious that most traditional outlets for print journalism are on the path of terminal decline. But why is that so, given their long history?

While there are many who blame technological “disruption” the real reasons are far more prosaic. To be clear, I am not saying that technological disruption had no role in ongoing demise of print media. It is, however, more like the 2nd or 3rd last nail in its coffin than what put it in there in the first place. Confused? Allow me to explain.. Print media has been on a downward slope since widespread introduction of Television in the 1950s. But why then, did it appear to be doing OK until the early 2000s, or at least the late 1990s? Two words.. Advertising Revenue. For many decades, the business model of print media has centered around advertising revenue.

Why then did TV or Radio not affect their revenue model as seriously as the Internet? Well.. both legacy media formats did hurt print advertising revenues but neither one could really replace it for certain classes of advertisements. You could not (for example) put personal advertisements, flyers, catalogs or advertise the detailed technical specifications of a product on TV or Radio. But the more important point is that most print media outlets stopped caring about real journalism a long time ago. If you don’t believe me, just Google/Bing/Duckduckgo a scanned newspaper from the 1990s. It is pretty easy to see that most “news” was wire service reprints, syndicated content from larger outlets and what is euphemistically described as paid journalism.

But how is any of this linked to the ongoing demise of print media? For starters, people are still interested in good journalism, opinion pieces, gossip and even activism. Have a look at Twitter (and its alternatives), YouTube channels devoted to opinionated commentary, Reddit (or any its alternatives) and you will see that people today are just as interested in what print journalism was supposed to be about. OK.. let’s cut to the chase- print journalism (especially in USA) lost its soul a long time because it embraced deference to elites, pretense of objectivity, tone policing and other advertiser and corporate friendly policies for decades.

Print media, you see, has been living for borrowed time for decades. The internet merely knocked away the crutches of guaranteed local advertising revenues which had allowed it to forestall its inevitable and terminal decline. This does not mean that it will disappear for ever, as some parts such as large quasi-national newspapers are likely to survive- at least in a recognizable form for the near future. But what does any of this have to do with the topic of this post? As it turns out, a lot more than you think. Regular readers might remember that more than a few of my previous posts say something to the effect of “large institutions in terminal decline often speed up that process by making increasingly disastrous decisions”. And this is not a new idea either.

We have all seen the USA make increasingly disastrous foreign and domestic decisions since the early 1990s. Whether it was extending NATO into Eastern Europe, de-industrialization of flyover country, involvement in disastrous (and highly expensive) wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, using the dollar payment system as a weapon of war, ignoring domestic problems such as increasingly decrepit infrastructure, rising costs of what passes for ‘healthcare’ and higher education etc. In a similar manner, print media has made a series of increasingly disastrous mistakes which have accelerated the speed of its demise rather than stabilizing the situation.

We have all seen those auto-playing videos, increasingly buggy and atrocious user interfaces, click-bait which masquerades as journalism and publishing barely concealed press releases as news items. I could go about their obsession with website views, metric of engagement and anything else that allows them to not fix their core problem, which is the lack of high quality, controversial and adversarial journalism. Now let us turn to their latest fuckup. As many of you might have noticed the proliferation of disruptive and malware ridden ads since 2012-2014 created a huge market for adblocking extensions for web browsers.

Long story short, the poor quality control of ads by Google and other ad-serving networks makes its mandatory for any non-retarded person to use adblocking software. But how has the print media responded to this apparent reduction in revenue from serving horrible auto-playing ads and malware? As it turns out, they decided to the most ‘logical’ thing and alienate their viewers even further. You must have seen popups on many print media that either try nagging you to turn your adblocker off, whitelist them or buy a subscription. But does it really work, especially in the medium to long-term? Of course not!

Only the old or naive are usually trusting enough to fall for such bullshit, and even they stop doing that after being burned out by one too many autoplaying ads and malware infestations. Most other people either apply counter-counter measures or simply stop visiting that site. There are many other places on the Internet where they can get news from Twitter and FakeBook feeds, certain YouTube channels, newsgroups and forums including Reddit, Podcasts etc. The use of measures to counter adblocking software ends up reducing the number of repeat viewers who will keep visiting their site. Sure.. it might appear to increase their profitability for a couple of quarters, but after that it is an even steeper fall.

But the most bizarre part of these corporate policies involves the remarkable lack of thought behind their implementation. Think about it.. would you keep going to restaurants or bars which served very mediocre food and drink but were constantly trying to upsell, even to the point of not letting you enjoy your stay there? Would you keep going to a restaurant where the furniture was full of bedbugs and fleas? Would you go to a restaurant which required an annual membership fee to even look at their menu? Would you go to a restaurant which sold your contact information to telemarketers? So why would you return to print media websites that served autoplaying ads, sold your contact information to spammers and infected your computer with malware- especially if there were other safer and better options to get news, opinions and adversarial journalism?

What do you think? Comments?

Why Trump Supporters Want to Believe Fanciful Bullshit such as QAnon

August 4, 2018 6 comments

In the previous few weeks, I am sure that those of you who spend too much time on the internet might have come across something known as QAnon. To make a long story short, QAnon is a collection of conspiracy theories named after the eponymous online handle first associated with it, which claims to have internal knowledge of an ongoing counter-coup lead by “true patriots” against the “deep state” and “liberal” Hollywood and corporate media types. In other words, they are just spewing the same bullshit that alt-right types such as Mike Cernovich aka Sterno and Alex Jones have been tweeting and shouting in online video clips for the last two years.

So why did I decide to write a post about QAnon today even though I first came across it a few months ago. For starters, it is a remarkably unoriginal and comically tragic conspiracy theory- for reasons that I will soon describe in more detail. But secondly, and more importantly, it is of little consequence other than its entertainment value- like watching a mentally retarded guy trying to pick up some hot girl. One should not really enjoy watching such stuff because of principles concerning basic human decency, but it is just so damn entertaining. So, that is why I have kept an eye on the latest twists and turns in this tragically comic farce.

Now, let us talk about why I described this farce as a ‘remarkably unoriginal and comically tragic conspiracy theory’. And Yes.. I decided to write about it today since I was too bored to finish an intellectually stimulating article. Having said that, let me ask you a simple question: What does the type of belief displayed by believers in QAnon remind you of? Where else have you come across a bunch of gullible losers believing that a top-secret bunch of benevolent and powerful beings secretly planning to overthrow the current ‘unjust’ system and expose ‘morally’ corrupt elite which will result in a new reign of the ‘righteous’? What does it remind you of?

What about any religion based in Apocalypticism.. you know, like Christianity? If you replace “true patriots” with”god and angels”, “unjust current system run by morally corrupt elite” with “corrupt global system run by Antichrist”, “exposure and arrest” with “the final battle” and “new reign of the true patriots”with “kingdom of heaven”.. you get a pretty familiar narrative. That is also why the almost exclusively white CONservative losers who support Trump are so willing to believe in this tragically comic bullshit which has the same overall narrative as the other big crap they believe in.. or claim to believe. I hope you are starting to see what I am talking about.

So what kind of person believes in Apocalypticism? The simple, but unpleasant, answer is a loser.. in more ways than one. And do not, for a moment, think that I have a better opinion of secular apocalyptic cults such as global warming- now been rebranded as anthropogenic climate change. People who believe in apocalypticism are, almost exclusively, either currently without control over their future or have no agency in their own lives or are rapidly losing whatever control and personal agency they once used to have. Now think of the type of people who are most enthusiastic about Trump becoming president. Does any of this ring a bell?

Long story short, the most ardent Trump supporters are socially CONservative whites of mediocre intellectual capacity who once had stable and well-paying blue-collar livelihoods but are now either already living the precarious existence which was once restricted to non-whites or are well on that path. You might have heard terms such as “economic anxiety” and “economic populism” thrown around my corporate media types during and after the 2016 election. And yes, the more ardent Trump voters and supporters are losers- in more ways than one. And you know what.. I would be sympathetic, if so many weren’t also full of beliefs such as white supremacy.

But let us not get carried away by the idea that only Trump supporters are gullible idiots. I am sure more than a few of you remember Louise Mensch. Remember how her hilariously nutty claims about double-secret investigations against the Trump administration were catnip to the ‘I’m With Her’ types. Remember how she peddled her bullshit in allegedly “respectable” national newspapers and talk shows? But why go that far back? Just have a look at the late-night TV talk show hosts such as Stephen Colbert, Bill Maher, Trevor Noah etc. When was the last time they did not devote at least 15 minutes of every show talking about the “Mueller Investigation”, “Russia”, “Putin”, “Collusion” etc?

I mean.. can you say (with a straight face) that people who believe that “QAnon is real” are bigger dumbfucks than those who endlessly prattle about “Putin”, “Russia”, “Collusion” and the “Mueller Investigation”? How is belief in one delusion superior to belief in another? At this stage, I am willing to say that people who believe in grey aliens performing rectal probes of random people in flyover country sound more sane than those who support QAnon or the Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy. Seriously, why have so many people taken crazy pills? This is nuts..

What do you think? Comments?

USA Lacks Realistic Strategy Towards DPRKs Nuclear ICBM Program: 3

September 28, 2017 8 comments

In the previous post of this series, I talked about the ludicrous levels of racially motivated underestimation of DPRK’s nuclear and missile building capabilities among “credentialed” elite in USA. My point was that the course of events has exposed that these sinecured non-proliferation and arms-control “experts” hailing from “ivy-league” universities and working at “world renowned” think-tanks are.. for the lack of a better expression.. fucking clueless. Then again, such jobs have always been about providing clever soundbites and writing scholarly-sounding articles to satisfy the psychological needs of jingoistic white retards in USA and the west.

But a bigger problem is that the american establishment wants to believe different, but equally delusional, stuff about DPRK. For example, many west-point idiots seem to be operating under the belief that DPRK will not use nukes even if attacked with them.They also seem to believe that it is possible to overcome what is likely a fairly decentralized system for DPRK using nukes when push comes to shove. I see these and other popular delusions of the military planner class as examples of wishful thinking because of a lack of feasible options.

But let us now talk about the other american allies involved in this shitshow.. specifically South Korea and Japan. Are they equally delusional? Do they have strategies for dealing with this situation which do not involve believing in the magical efficacy of american boondoggles such as anti-ballistic missiles? Do the “leaders” and major political parties in both countries lack the proverbial balls to stand up to USA? Do they fully grasp that their major cities and tens of millions of their citizens will be dead or dying within a few minutes of an all out nuclear exchange between DPRK and USA?

Since South Korea is the geographically closest american “ally” to DPRK, let us start with that country. As many of you know, South Korea started out as an american puppet state meant to halt the global spread of communism in the aftermath of WW2. This is not meant to demean the its many impressive achievements since that time, but it sadly relevant to the subject of this post. The point I am trying to make is the foreign and defense policy of South Korea has been largely dictated by USA. In other words, South Korea is a dependent vassal of USA.

Now, we can certainly argue if being a defendant vassal of USA has been a good or bad for South Korea. Clearly, this arrangement has been very economically favorable for South Korea- specifically since the 1970s. However, a consequence of this arrangement has been that South Korean foreign and defense policy (specifically towards DPRK) is largely rooted in supporting whatever the establishment in USA demands of them. While this was not a liability during the cold war era or even the first decade following it, that is no longer the case.

I would go so far as to say that it became actively counterproductive after the second nuclear test by DPRK in 2009. The thing is.. the entire defense posture of South Korea (and USA) towards DPRK was always based in any potential conflict being fought with conventional (and maybe, some chemical) weapons. They thought that a rapid destruction of DPRK’s old-fashioned air-force plus intense bombardment of artillery positions could keep South Korean casualties under a couple of hundred thousand.

Nuclear weapons, especially H-bombs, change that picture completely. As few as 5 or 6 H-bombs would kill millions in the Seoul metropolitan area in less than a couple of minutes and render it uninhabitable for a few years. Given the concentration of population and infrastructure in South Korea, that would translate in an unrecoverable blow to the South Korean state. Furthermore, even the best missile defense would be useless against a barrage of missile in only a few actually carry nuclear warheads.

Almost every single South Korean government has, historically, taken a hard-line stance against DPRK. It is however telling that those stances have not changed much in response to DPRK successfully developing nuclear weapons within the previous decade. It is as if their political leaders and military planners are deliberately operating under the assumption that nothing as changed since 2009. More worryingly, many public predictions made by South Korean “experts” about an imminent collapse of DPRK after Kim Jong-un took over in 2011 have turned out to be wishful thinking.

In other words, a significant percentage of the establishment in South Korea seems to be as willing oblivious to reality as their counterparts in USA. To make matters worse, even the recently elected moderate South Korean leader (or his advisers) appear to believe that they have to keep playing the discredited old game and align themselves even more closely with delusions of american establishment. It is especially troubling to watch the South Korean establishment believe that more american anti-ballistic missiles (perhaps imbued with ‘white’ magic in their minds) will somehow magically protect them from DPRK nukes if the proverbial shit hits the fan.

It is clear that South Korea requires an alternative and realistic policy to deal with DPRK. While such a policy does not preclude continued military co-operation between South Korea and USA, they may have to do something about those biannual military exercises aimed at DPRK. Perhaps they might want to develop and deploy their own nuclear weapons as a deterrent against DPRK. The ‘Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty’ has proven to be a worthless piece of paper which has done nothing except try to perpetuate nuclear apartheid and disadvantage who have signed it in good faith. Did I mention that at least four countries have developed and deployed nuclear weapon arsenals since 1968?

In an upcoming post of this series, I will talk about how the current policies of Japan towards DPRK are based in equally bizarre (but different) combination of delusion and make-believe.

What do you think? Comments?