Archive

Posts Tagged ‘gun control’

Quick Thoughts on the 4th Democratic Presidential Candidate Debate

October 19, 2019 6 comments

I had originally intended to post this on the day after the latest democrat debate, but decided to wait for a couple more days. In retrospect, that turned out to be a good decision as subsequent events have further bolstered my initial conclusions about that farce. And yes.. the show was just another piece of bad political theater. While you can find tons of hot takes, paid hackery, outright lies and bullshit about that debate in the “respectable” corporate MSM, I prefer to focus on the relevant stuff. So without further ado, let us go into the many reasons why that debate (like its predecessors and political theater in general) was a big steaming pile of shit.

1] If you were drunk or masochistic enough to watch that entire show, you might have reached the conclusion that banning semi-auto guns and RUSSIA are the dominant issues for american voters. Let us start by talking about the incredibly stupid idea of banning guns aka ‘gun control’ as pushed by multiple candidates in that debate. As I have written in numerous older posts, the democratic party has an unfortunate obsession with “gun control” which has cost them important national and state elections in the past and will likely cost them the 2020 election. But why is the push for “gun control” such a bad political move? Well.. I have also previously explained the many and interlinked reasons for that outcome, but let me summarize them once again.

It goes like this.. people who see “gun control” as a major issue are a small minority who already vote for democrats. Raising the specter of gun confiscation aka “gun control” does, however, reliably energize a much larger block of pro-gun voters, many of whom are not regular voters. To make matters worse, states with high rates of gun ownership have seen considerable expansion of gun rights in past two decades without an increase in rates of homicide by guns. Indeed, many have seen significant reductions in rates of crime and homicide during that period. Selling gun confiscation to voters outside a few pockets in coastal states is a losing proposition.

And yet, democratic candidates are trying to outdo each other when it comes to supporting gun confiscation aka “gun control”. While the idiot from Texas aka ‘Beto’ is the worst offender, others are not far behind. It is not an exaggeration to say that all democratic candidates for 2020 have vociferously supported some level of gun confiscation. What makes this especially odd is that “gun control” is not an important issue during national or even state elections in most parts of the country. It is as if democrats are pushing an unpopular solution in search of a problem. Pushing “gun control” is not going to help them win all those so-called ‘swing’ states during the 2020 presidential election. Way to go.. losers.

2] Moving to the second obsession of democrats aka RUSSIA/Putin/Ukraine or anything which will lead to the promised land of a Trump impeachment. While I am certainly not the only one to see the long-term problems associated with the deep-state trying to pull off a “legal” coup against a duly elected president, most gloss over the even larger problem associated with such a course of action. See.. every minute devoted to masturbating about the latest useless revelations in the current scandal du jour is one minute less devoted to talking about issues which matter to voters. In a country where more than half the population have less than a few hundred dollars on them, are an illness away from bankruptcy, trapped in usurious student loans and employed in unstable and poorly paid jobs, wasting their time talking about superficial “decency” in politics is a surefire way of not getting them to vote for you in elections.

In other words, the most important reason to not focus on bullshit made-up “scandals” is that they take time and effort away from convincing voters to vote for you because you can deliver them a better life. Of course, neoliberals in both political parties definitely don’t to improve the living standards of their voters. So ya.. it is understandable why democrats focus on bullshit “scandals” rather than put out credible plans to significantly improve the lives of those who vote for them. I cannot resist the irony of pointing out that the allegedly totalitarian Communist Party of China has done infinitely more for people in that country than allegedly “democratic” parties have done for their voters in the allegedly “liberal” west for the past forty years.

And let us be clear about something else.. in 2016, more than 60 million people voted for the orange troll in spite of his lack of political experience, lecherousness, propensity for corruption and numerous other character flaws because they felt that the option (aka HRC) would be worse for them. Think about it.. what would make 60 million people choose the orange troll over HRC except for their complete distrust and contempt for the system? And why should they trust HRC or other establishment democrats and republicans when almost everything they have done in past four decades has slowly destroyed their quality of life? Would you trust establishment politicians if you lived in the de-industrialized Midwest? Would you trust them if you lived in the south, parts of which now have a lower quality of life than Mexico?

3] Now let us move on to a couple of related events which have occurred since that “debate”. The first concerns that stupid photo of Nancy Pelosi appearing to stand up to Trump. While that photo gained a lot of traction in the circle-jerking class of DC, the sad reality is most voters are too busy with their daily struggle to care about posed photos of multi-millionaires pretending to stand up to billionaires. It is as if establishment democrats did not learn a single useful lesson from their humiliating defeat in 2016. Then again, what do you expect from a degenerate and incestuous ruling class who are serviced by an equally inbred and out-of-touch bunch of flunkies credentialed from few “prestigious” universities?

These dumbfucks are delusional enough to believe that people outside their incestuous circles are fans of sad bullshit shows like “The West Wing”. To be fair, they are not alone as numerous “actors”, “celebrities” and other talking heads have also succumbed to the Trump Derangement Syndrome. But guess what.. their public opinion don’t matter, because if it did Trump would not have won in 2016. Yet for some reason (maybe peer approval) these multi-millionaires living in the few remaining affluent parts of coastal states act as if they are personally affected by the Trump presidency. Of course, these delusional attention-whores don’t seem to understand that vast majority of people do not see them as anything other than entertainers aka paid clowns.

Let me wrap up this post by talking about something that blew up on Twitter yesterday. As some of you know, the establishment media and political class are most unhappy with Tulsi Gabbard being a candidate in the democratic primary. To this end, they have gone to considerable extents to smear her with false accusations. Yesterday (or day before that) HRC went on some podcast and suggested that Tulsi was a “Russian Asset”. Of course, she never explained how a person who had served multiple tours of duty in middle-east and is currently an elected representative in house could be a “Russian Asset”. Apparently, things like evidence and reason are irrelevant.

Long story short, Tulsi fired back on Twitter and rightly called HRC “the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long”. Of course there was a reaction from the Clinton network and her paid bots, which was met with an even bigger reaction by Tulsi supporters. While I found the exchanges to be most entertaining, something caught my attention by its absence. See.. nobody in the Clinton network who tried to smear Tulsi further were able to provide any evidence for their assertions. Even more tellingly, HRC supporters did not try to counter Tulsi assertions about HRC. These two things, in a nutshell, tells you everything you need to know about the present generation of incompetent and delusional political “elites” and their underlings in this country.

What do you think? Comments?

How the Democratic Party Could Lose in 2020 Elections and Beyond: 5

September 25, 2019 12 comments

In the previous part of this series, I promised to finally go into why support for certain superficial liberal causes is going to backfire on democrats during the 2020 elections. I also made the point that most allegedly “popular” causes in liberalism, such as “gun control” and “LGBTQ” issues, are secular religions in all but name. So let us ask the next question- which traditional religion does modern liberalism most closely resemble? While modern liberalism displays some similarities to Christianity, especially its Catholic variant, it differs from from the later in some very important aspects. Specifically, liberalism is heavily dependent on the use of identity politics, constantly changing taboos and a peculiar form of abstract “spirituality” to enforce its writ among followers.

In other words, modern liberalism cannot function without increasing inter-group factionalism, constantly changing taboos and overt public displays of abstract “spirituality”. Enumerating all the stuff it ignores is even more revealing. For example- liberalism does not care about gross income inequality, horrible working conditions, shitty personal lives and many other issues that actually affect most people living in post-industrial societies. In contrast to liberalism, many traditional religions such as Christianity and Islam try to increase group cohesion, get new members, keep taboos clearly defined and to a minimum in addition to (at least) giving lip service to ideas such basic human equality, dignity and charity. So.. is there a closer match for Liberalism?

As it turns out.. Hinduism is a far closer match to modern Liberalism than almost any other major traditional religion. As I repeatedly mentioned in a previous (and still incomplete) series, almost every major problem that has plagued the India and its people since about 300 AD can be traced back to Hinduism- specifically the spread and consolidation of the ‘jati’ system throughout India. It would not be an exaggeration to say that Hinduism, as has existed since about 300 AD, is nothing more than an excuse to perpetuate the ‘jati’ system. So what makes Hinduism the traditional equivalent of modern Liberalism? Well, let us start by talking about how both use identity politics to divide society into ever smaller groups that hate each other.

Some of you might want to believe that white liberals invented identity politics, but that is simply not true. The ever fragmenting ‘jati’ system in India pioneered and refined identity politics many centuries before white liberals were a thing. The core of Hinduism (as understood and practiced by most believers) is identity politics. That is why most Indians still make important decisions, from voting to marrying, almost exclusively based on whether the other party is of the same or similar ‘jati’. But why are ideologies that preach social fragmentation bad? The simple answer is that societies which accept such fissiparous ideologies end up becoming unable to get stuff done. There is a reason why China was able to achieve in 30 years what India appears unlikely to get done anytime in the foreseeable future.

This is also why India was colonized by followers of two foreign monotheistic religions for over a thousand years. Long story short, societies which are based around identity politics lose their ability to get stuff done and become vulnerable to domination by more cohesive ones. But what does any of this have to do with the democratic party losing the elections in 2020 and beyond? As mentioned in previous posts, the public image of democrats is increasingly defined by being part of the top 10% or aspiring to join that group. But why is that a problem? Think about it this way.. the number of eligible voters who did not vote for either candidate in the 2016 election was larger than the number who voted for either HRC or Trump. Also the plurality of vote cast by the non-professional or credentialed class go to republicans.

Some of you might attribute this to racism and there is some truth to that viewpoint. However a far larger issue, which I have alluded to in a previous post, concerns how each party treats its voters. Republicans do not insult their voters while they are fucking them over unlike their democratic counterparts. To put it another way, the republican religion is a noticeably more inclusive than its democratic equivalent. But isn’t their appeal restricted to white voters? Well.. yes, but as many of you saw in 2016- democrats were unable to motivate enough young non-white voters to go out and vote for them.

A secular religion centered around “gun control”, “forced diversity”, “manmade climate change”, MeToo”, “gender fluidity”, “wokeness” and numerous other fashionable causes and ever changing social taboos simply cannot compete with another which is far more straightforward, inclusive (as long as your are white) and does not require you to debase yourself quite that much. The secular religion of democrats also does not provide solutions to far more prevalent problems such as inadequate healthcare, poor job security, ever increasing cost of university education etc. Their democratic brand of secular religion is simply too exclusive and full of useless and ever-changing rituals to appeal to the majority of voters across this country.

Will write more about this point of view in next part of this series.

What do you think? Comments?

How the Democratic Party Could Lose in 2020 Elections and Beyond: 4

September 20, 2019 14 comments

In the previous part of this series, I wrote about how politicians who dutifully recite their allegedly traditional beliefs and pieties can no longer compete with those willing to push beyond previous boundaries of what was considered “routine”, “polite” or “acceptable”. We have reached this point because, over the past four decades, living standards for the vast majority of people have either stagnated or deteriorated. The majority, therefore, no longer feel that a better future is possible. This is why the stale and canned pseudo-populist antics of people such as Reagan40, Clinton42, Bush43, Obama44 and their ilk are no longer sufficient to win elections. Now, we will go into why the current democrat party obsession with “gun control”, “LGTBTQ issues” and other supposedly “woke issues” fashionable with the incestuous and effete “elite” of modern day america.

A couple of years ago, I first wrote about how “wokeness” is largely driven by neoliberals trying to show that they are morally superior to the rest. Since then, we have seen a concerted push by the effete managerial class and every politician who wants to pretend that they too are somehow morally superior to push “solutions” for problems which do not exist. Even worse, in almost all cases their “solutions” either make things worse, cause public backlash and provide ammunition to their equally despicable opponents in the so-called ‘culture wars’. There is a reason why almost everyone in this country, other than those who live in a few exclusive zip codes, see ideas such a “plastic straw ban” or unrealistic fuel consumption guidelines for cars as bad and stupid. And in case you are wondering, the recent proliferation of crossovers in USA has a lot to do with how such automobiles are classified for the purpose of fuel economy standards.

So what does any of this have to with the promotion of electorally disastrous issues such as “gun control”, LGBTQ issues and environmentalism by the democratic party? Well.. a lot. But before we go there, let me clear about a couple of things. While republicans screw their voter-base as much as democrats, they do so without insulting them like the later. Secondly, seemingly unconnected issues promoted by many democrats such as “gun control, LGBTQ issues and environmentalism are closely related, but not for the reasons most of you might have guessed. This is not to say that virtue display has no role in the promotion of such bullshit policies. But while virtue display can explain behaviors such as adopting non-white children, being vegetarian or vegan, driving a Prius and donating to certain charities, it cannot explain the deep obsession of core democrat constituencies with issues such as “gun control” and promotion of LGBTQ.

But what is the difference between adopting a non-white child or going vegetarian and pushing for “gun control” and promoting LGBTQ. Well.. it comes down to doing something yourself versus trying to manipulate of force others to do things your way. For example, almost nobody who has adopted an African child or driven a Prius is forcing you to do the same. But those who allegedly believe in “gun control” and “gender fluidity” want to take away the guns of other people and castrate their children, all in the name of “social progress”. Most of the enduring, and unpopular, hobbyhorses of the democratic party center around top-down control of the lives and behaviors of those “other” people. That is right.. most issues animating the core white constituency of democratic party are about credentialed types and managers trying to control other people.

But to what end? And why are establishment democrats so tone deaf to the unpopularity of their hobby horses. Sure.. focusing on such cultural issues also allows them to ignore real issues such as the desperate need for affordable healthcare, post-secondary education, housing stock etc. Having said that, it mostly comes down to the need to exert power (for its own sake) over other people, not unlike what is presented in George Orwell’s’ 1984. Promoting issues such as “gun control”, “gender fluidity” and environmentalism is about using the framework of a traditional religion to push for its secular equivalent. Did I mention that all religions are about making other people go along with lies and bullshit fairytales to further your control over them.

Religions have another feature that is relevant to this discussion. All the “truths” and “causes” espoused by any given religion cannot be disproved or questioned. This is why establishment democrats who cannot tell the difference between a semi-automatic and select-fire rifle will never change their mind on that subject. It was never about “facts”, “truth” or anything approaching reality. Belief in the righteousness of “gun control” is part of the gospel of coastal american liberalism. Similarly, belief in the validity of “wokeness”, “gender fluidity” and other similar new sacraments of american liberalism has nothing to do with acting in the best interest of other people or children. Do you really think they care if tens of thousands of gender-atypical children get wrongfully castrated and suffer permanent psychological damage because of their beliefs?

Some of you might remember that I recently posted a series about how belief in anthropogenic climate change is a form of secular apocalyptism. In it, I also made the case that the belief in man-made climate change has massive parallels to Catholicism. The part relevant to this post is who benefited from religions such as Catholicism. To make a long story short, the only groups and institutions who really benefit from Catholicism (or any other religion) are the clergy, church, contemporary ruling elites and their stooges. Everyone else suffers necessary deprivation and immiseration. But this, you see, is a central feature of all organized religions- not a bug.

Since we are at almost 1000 words, I will wrap up this post. In the next part, I will go into why support for these liberal causes is going to backfire on democrats during the 2020 elections. Yes.. I am aware that it was supposed to be in this part.

What do you think? Comments?

The NRA is Finally Experiencing a Much Needed Membership Revolt

July 2, 2019 4 comments

As regular readers know, I have long held the belief that trying to implement “gun control” or ban them is a stupid idea. It is also my opinion that democratic party has an unfortunate obsession with gun control, which will likely cost them the 2020 election. Curiously, I have also said that the NRA, in its current form, does not have a viable future in spite of internet activism against the NRA being counterproductive. At this point, some of you might be confused about what I am trying to say. So let me quickly restate the obvious. Firstly, any attempt at “serious gun control” is unlikely to have any significant effect on incidence of homicide by firearms, largely because violence in any given society is a factor of massive inequality and (often racial) polarization. That is why countries such as Mexico and Brazil have far higher numbers and rates of homicide by guns than USA, while its is very low in others such as Vietnam and India.

Secondly, even though successful suicide attempts accounts for the majority of firearm deaths in USA, banning guns is unlikely to change its incidence. Indeed countries such as Japan and South Korea have far higher rates of suicide than USA, even though both have ridiculously stringent laws against civilian gun ownership. Having said that, the NRA is a dying organization (for more than one reason) and is increasingly at odds with the views of most gun owners in USA today. That organisation, as it exists today, is stuck in the political landscape of 1980s-2000s. But what does that mean? What was so different about those 2-3 decades. Time for a quick history lesson.. the ‘gun control’ movement in USA as we know it today started in the late 1960s in coastal cities and was racist. It reached its peak in the late 1980 and early 1990s and started dying out after the electoral disaster caused by that infamous 1994 bill about “assault weapons”.

The NRA, as we know it today, can be best understood as manufactured opposition to stop anti-gun laws aimed at non-white people from accidentally infringing on the rights of white people. That is also why it supported many “gun control” laws which preferentially disenfranchised non-whites and went along with cosmetic laws that allowed politicians to claim that they were “doing something about guns”. In other words, the NRA was never meant to be an effective organization for defending 2nd amendment rights. And their scam worked for almost three decades, allowing that organisation to grow by increasing its membership. Then a confluence of trends exposed their impotence and growing irrelevance. The first one was decline of the democratic party in non-coastal parts of the country. Once democrats became irrelevant in many non-coastal states, the coastal hardline “gun control” types became far more prominent in that organization.

To make a long story short, the NRA appeared strong for 2-3 decades only because it colluded with both parties. Beginning in the mid-2000s, the national political landscape changed to the point it could get by with republican party support. And ya.. the much diminished democratic party increasingly became the extreme anti-gun rights party. Some of you might have noticed that, during the last decade, NRA increasingly became a mouthpiece for all sorts of economic right-wing bullshit which had little (if anything) to do with gun rights. It also became a bloated organization full of incompetent parasites who used its financial resources to live a cushy lifestyle- not unlike NGOs, most “non-profits”, charities, universities and political parties. This went on for a decade or so and then November 8, 2016 happened.

The election of Trump and the nature of those in the so-called “resistance” (coastal establishment types) caused a renewed push to ban guns among democrats. A few large mass-shootings in the first two years of his presidency did not help things. To make another long story short, a number of events driven by coastal elites and SJWs such as deplatforming gun-rights people on social media, denying them certain banking services, getting chain stores to stop selling ‘scary looking’ guns, banning novelty items such as bump stocks etc exposed the impotence of NRA. While this would have no consequence if the affected people were black or brown, they were not. Add to this internal fights over monetary issues between Wayne LaPierre vs Oliver North and their cronies. It all came at around the same time and made that organization look corrupt and impotent to its membership and many other gun owners.

As a consequence of this, the NRA has been experiencing a pretty serious membership revolt and disengagement over past few months. But coastal liberal idiots should not rejoice. The gun-right organisations which will replace it are going to be much more demanding than the NRA. Even a rebooted NRA will be far more ideologically rigid and unwilling/ unable to compromise than its predecessor. Furthermore, the proliferation of liberal post-modern bullshitters, SJWs and other assorted ‘virtue display’ peddlers in large corporations has actually hardened the resolve of people to defend their gun rights. And all of this is going to play out during 2020 election season, which promises to be quite the shitshow.

Relevant Clip #1

and

Relevant Clip #2

What do you think? Comments?

2019 and 2020 Will be Much Bigger Shitshows than 2015 and 2016

May 30, 2019 14 comments

As regular readers know, I often make predictions on a number of topics which later turn out to be right (or pretty close) with a high rate of success. More importantly, I am able to accurately identify the underlying dynamics, trends and forces responsible for the ultimate outcomes. Now let me make another seemingly obvious prediction, but with far greater insight and details than possible for quacks.. I mean credentialed “experts”. My prediction is that 2019 and 2020 will be far larger and more problematic shitshows than 2015 and 2016. Some of you (MikeCA?) might argue that every day since the election of Trump has been a shitshow.. and that is technically sorta true. But if you think that 2017 and 2018 were shitshows, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

There are many reasons why this period of 1.5 years will be an epic meta-shitshow of the likes we haven’t witnessed in living memory. However, it is not simply the sheer number or magnitude of individual shitshows that will make this period memorable, but how one shitshow will feed into another and so on.. you know, synergy. But before we go there, let us talk about why 2015 and 2016 marked the beginning of our current era of shitshows. It all began with an orange Buffoon riding down a gaudy escalator alongside a trophy wife with a face pumped full of cosmetic Botox. Initially it seemed that his campaign for the republican presidential nomination was just another publicity stunt to obtain a larger payout from the reality show in which he was starring.

However it became obvious to me within 4-6 weeks that his outrageous and colorful persona had far more public support than effete Washington DC ‘insiders’ realized. And yes.. I never changed my opinion on that issue and turned out be right. And ya.. I also predicted he would win against Hillary in early 2016, even at times when even the most radical presstitues.. I mean journalists.. thought that HRC might somehow prevail against him on election day. I also explored the real reasons why HRC would lose to that buffoon– before the election took place. FYI- majority of my accurate predictions have been about issues and topics other than Trump. But enough about the orange buffoon. Let us now talk about Brexit- more precisely, why the ‘remain’ side lost.

MSM news outlets in that rapidly decaying country (UK) want you to believe that Brexit was due to the stupidity of poorly educated people in that country. However a simple look at the geography of that vote tells you all you need about Brexit. Long story short, post-2008 austerity measures in UK hit parts of the country that are not London pretty hard. People who live in those regions, aka most of that country, got progressively disillusioned with the shitty status quo. They expressed their discontent by voting against something which stood as a placeholder for the widely reviled status quo. You know.. just like people in the Mid-West finally got tired of Obama’s 8-year long lie about “Hope and Change” voted for Trump over the symbol of continuity aka HRC.

But both these shocks to the Establishment, their aftermath and colorful rhetoric accompanying both those changes are nothing compared to what we will witness in 2019 and 2020. While I will restrict my predictions to USA, things are also likely to get interesting in other parts of the world- maybe a bit too interesting. But before we go to the list, a word of caution. The most obvious reasons are unlikely to be the most consequential. The less glamorous reasons, further down the list, carry far more weight than the shiny but superficial ones which are obvious. So let us start by listing them in order of apparent obviousness.

1] Ever since Trump won the republican nomination in mid-2016, democratic establishment and deep state types have been trying to find enough dirt to stop his victory in the 2016 presidential election (which they failed) or impeach him. As things stand today, they have not uncovered anything more scandalous than Trump getting his disgraced lawyer to pay hush money to two women he had sex with while married to his current wife. While this revelation does provide fodder for supermarket tabloids, it is totally unsurprising and in line with Trump’s past behavior. More importantly, the Mueller investigation has not uncovered evidence of “collusion” between Trump and Russia or Putin. Nor has it shown any definitive evidence for obstruction of justice by Trump. And I know MikeCA will have something to say about my characterization of that report.

But these severe setbacks have not stopped an increasing number of democrats from demanding his impeachment, because face it.. they always knew he was “guilty” of something impeachable. Today, the patron saint of pro-impeachment brigade aka Robert Mueller came out and all but openly encouraged democrats to start the impeachment process, even though his report does not contain enough evidence to prosecute Trump for either “collusion” or obstruction of justice. And ya.. I am aware of the legalese bullshit about not being able to exonerate him- but let us get real, people are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. It also helps to be rich and white, but that is a topic for another post. My prediction is that democrats will initiate pre-impeachment proceedings against Trump, irrespective of potential negative effects it might have on their electoral prospects in 2020. But how does this translate into a nasty shitshow?

Well.. for a few reasons. Firstly, it is unlikely Trump will be impeached, tried and made to resign before November 3, 2020. Secondly, the pre-impeachment investigation is going to be long and highly contentious. It will also overshadow democratic primaries and possibly the presidential election to such an extent that other issues will be effectively sidelined. So be prepared for a democratic primary in which candidates offer endless paeans to bipartisanship, civility in politics, reestablishing “norms” and impeaching Trump at the expense of all the other stuff most voters in the general election actually care about. You know.. stuff like antitrust action against various monopolies and oligopolies, medicare for all, doing something about student debt etc. Think of HRCs “what will the children think” 2016 campaign on steroids. But in some ways, this will be smallest shitshow of them all.

2] Stupid old losers who constitute a majority of democratic primary voters in large states seem to be enamored by “gun control” aka banning civilian ownership of guns. Given that everyone in the packed clown car of democratic candidates is expected to appeal to them, one should expect increasingly shrill and strident anti-gun ownership rhetoric. While appealing to these losers might help one win the primary and a few coastal states in general, it is almost guaranteed to backfire in swing states- especially those with large rural and semi-urban populations. Now add in a few random mass shootings (almost inevitable?) between now and Nov 3, 2020 and you can imagine how nutty this could get. Expect the Democratic house to pass one or more atrociously written anti-gun ownership laws and a few high profile court cases.

To make matters worse, if that is possible, we have seen a recent trend by private corporate monopolies/ oligopolies based in heavily democratic states to deny services based on ideology. Here are a few recent examples.. Software Maker Salesforce Tells Gun Retailers to Stop Selling AR-15s, YouTube Alternatives for Gun Videos & Content Creators and Bank of America to Stop Financing Makers of Military-Style Guns. I, for one, don’t see how pissing off millions of well-armed and single-issue voters who live in gun-ownership friendly jurisdictions is a smart idea when your party has to win their votes in 2020. Then again, this is the same party which think that Joe Biden in 2020 would make the best general election candidate. Or maybe the Democrats don’t want to really win national elections. Who knows..

The large number of democratic candidates vying for the party nomination will make things even weirder than the republican field in 2016. We have all seen how small campaigns which use far less costly traditional advertising and advisers can prevail over larger “mainstream” operations. Between this and the proliferation of small donors, expect far more candidates to remain in the race even after the first major primaries are over. And the DNC and other party establishment are going to try hard, and ineffectually, to stop Bernie by hook or crook. Don’t be surprised if the 2020 democratic convention is held under even more acrimonious circumstances than 2016. And there will be anonymous leaks, just like last time. It is going to get real ugly by mid 2020.

3] Let us now turn to the less obvious, but far more consequential, trends which promise to make 2019 and 2020 the biggest shitshows in living memory. Long story short, we are due for at least three independent nasty blowbacks from Trump’s foreign and trade policies. Let us start by talking about Iran or more precisely how his stupid policy towards that country has the potential to backfire in a spectacularly disastrous manner. It is no secret that idiots such as Pompeo and Bolton, urged on by Zionists and Saudis, are trying to start a war. What they don’t understand, or are willing to understand, is that any war with Iran in addition being unwinnable would make the Iraq misadventure look like quaint in comparison. The outcome of such a war would include Iran finally developing nuclear weapons (perhaps with Chinese assistance), prolonged and massive oil shortages with resultant price hikes and many other bad long-term effects (on USA).

Moving on.. Kim Jon-un has repeatedly conveyed to USA that unless economic sanctions are at least partially removed by end of 2019, he will restart testing ICBMs. My guess is that DPRK will demonstrate an entirely solid-fueled ICBM in early 2020, unless Trump and the idiots running “foreign policy” in USA openly abandon the idea of DPRK giving up its nukes and ICBMS- because the later ain’t going to happen. Which means that sometime in 2020, Trump will have to decide on how to respond to new ICBM and perhaps even nuclear tests by DPRK. To make matters even more interesting, this escalation will likely occur around the same time as Iran is likely to finally leave the JCPOA and restart its uranium enrichment program at maximum capacity. But wait.. it gets even better, or worse, depending on your viewpoint.

As most of you know by now, Trump is involved in an unwinnable trade-war with China. And here is why.. China’s economy and manufacturing capacity is far larger than USA in real terms. While the american economy and system will implode without Chinese imports, the converse is not true. There is also no other country in the world that has as large, varied and sophisticated a manufacturing base as China. Did I mention that USA and rest of the “West” are economically stagnant, demand saturated and in overall decline. China is not going to compromise on Huawei, give in to demands of american corporations or basically change anything significant about how it works or does business. It is the USA and rest of “West” that will have to ultimately eat crow. And they will start hurting USA by screwing over Boeing and make life interesting for every american corporation which does significant amounts of business there or dependent on its exports.

Tensions with Russia could exacerbate further given the current political climate in USA and provide opportunity for yet another shitshow. Did I mention how conflicts between internet monopolies and right wingers could spill into the real world with potentially disastrous results for the former. To summarize, the rest of 2019 and whole of 2020 will almost certainly witness far larger and problematic shitshows than anything in living memory. Even worse, many of these shitshows could feed into each other to create meta-shitshows.

What do you think? Comments?

Democratic Zeal for ‘Gun Control’ and ‘Mueller Report’ Has Same Root

April 9, 2019 3 comments

In previous posts, I have written about the obsession of democratic party with gun control, why it is doomed and futile in addition to being an important factor in them possibly losing the 2020 election. A couple of years ago, I started to notice similarities between obsession of establishment democrat with ‘Gun Control’ and the ‘Mueller Investigation’- which recently concluded to produce the ‘Mueller Report’. There are, of course, some obvious similarities between the two, such as the very high degree of overlap between strong supporters and peddlers of ‘Gun Control’ and the Mueller Investigation’. But the similarities between those who support and promote these two causes run far deeper and are deeply linked to their worldview.

Let me begin by pointing out the demographic similarities between those who support and peddle both causes. Their supporters are almost always from certain parts of coastal USA or aspiring to move there, often come from or are associated with families who made their money via legalized corruption and scams, were “credentialed” at a few “respectable” educational institutions, have first or second order connections with the now dying mass media and corporate entertainment sectors, tout themselves as social progressives but are (in reality) strong supporters of continued economic immiseration of all those ‘other people’ via neoliberalism. A certain ethno-religious minority is also represented at high levels in supporters of both causes. But why would support for ‘Gun Control’ and ‘Mueller Investigation’ co-localize with “woke” neoliberalism?

The answer is a bit complicated and requires us to first understand why ‘Gun Control’ in USA only became a thing after the 1970s. As I wrote in a previous post, the obsession of democratic party and moderate republicans with gun control is strongly associated with their upper ranks being filled by “credentialed” professional class types. Have you noticed the correlation between rigid social class structure and support for gun control in modern nation states? Ever wondered why dying nations with a rigid social class system such as UK, Japan, Mexico, South Korea and Brazil have much stricter gun laws than less socially stratified countries such as Lebanon, Finland, Switzerland and yes.. USA. The observant among you might have noticed that Mexico and Brazil have far higher rates of homicide by guns than countries with far more permissive laws. Also, South Korea and Japan have significantly higher rates of successful suicide than USA, in spite of civilian gun ownership being essentially illegal in those countries.

But what does any of this have to do with support for ‘Gun Control’ and the ‘Mueller Investigation’ in USA having the same root. The short answer is- a whole fucking lot! Have you noticed that a lot of people who were praying for Trump to be found guilty of “collusion with Russia and Putin” happened to live in coastal California, New York and DC? Isn’t it odd that this same group of “famous credentialed” people who rose to their current socio-economic status due to “meritocracy” happen to also be strong proponents of ‘Gun Control’? And why would they be concentrated in California, New York, DC, Massachusetts and New Jersey. Also, why is the ‘Gun Control’ movement much weaker in other coastal states such as Florida, the two Carolinas, Louisiana or even Maine? What is the real difference between coastal states such as NY, CA, MA and FL, SC, NC, LA and ME? And ya, I know DC is not a state.

Did you notice that degree of economic inequality in a given state correlates rather well with the number and extent of ‘Gun Control’ laws passed and enforced in it. Yes.. that is correct. Economic inequality rather than absolute wealth or poverty of a state correlates far better with its effete elites pushing for ultimately ineffective ‘Gun Control’. And there is one more interesting tidbit about ‘Gun Control’ in USA, namely that almost all initial attempts to pass modern ‘Gun Control’ laws were made by old money WASPs living in certain parts of coastal USA. The ethno-religious minority often associated with ‘Gun Control’ in contemporary USA did not get into that game until the 1970s and 1980s, which is oddly enough when they overtook old money WASPs as elites.

But what does this to do with support for the ‘Mueller Investigation’ and why were a majority of establishment elites in USA so incensed by Trump winning the 2016 election. While we can all agree that orange buffoon is a pathetic human being, what makes him worse than any previous person elected to that office? Think about it.. Nixon was responsible for millions of deaths in Vietnam, Las and Cambodia and he still lost the Vietnam War. Carter was a sad wimp whose term saw the rise of neoliberalism. Reagan presided over beginning of american de-industrialization. Bush41 and Clinton42 were responsible for a lot of deaths in Iraq during the 1990s. Clinton42 also oversaw financial deregulation, rise of mass incarceration and many other neoliberal policies. Bush43 oversaw beginning of the end for American empire by getting involved in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama44 got us involved in many unnecessary conflicts in Africa and bailed out the 1% while fucking over everybody else in 2009.. so like a black Clinton42 or Reagan40.

My point is that a lot of people elected to the presidency in living memory have been disastrous fuckups- at least for the majority of those who voted for them. In that respect, Trump is no worse than Obama, Clinton or the two Bushes. So why are establishment elites getting their panties in a knot over the orange buffoon. Haven’t most of his policies and actions, thus far, been faithful to standard Republican-style neoliberal bullshit? Tax cuts for the rich, continuous increasing the military budget, bellicose behavior on the international stage, hiring racists and religious zealots- you know, the works. But for not starting a new major war or two, the Trump presidency is remarkably close to that of Bush43. And yet, establishment types never went after that retarded loser.. I mean Bush43.. like they did to Trump. But why is that so?

Well.. it comes down to a few simple facts about the composition of elites in USA and to be fair, elites throughout human history. The thing is.. elites almost never reach their position because they are hard workers, honest, intelligent, competent or any of the other bullshit things they like others to believe about themselves. Almost every single person who became an elite achieved that by being born to the right set of parents or being at the right place at the right time aka luck. In other words, the became elites by getting lucky. So how do they try to maintain their position? Well.. by trying to con other people that they became rich and powerful because they were deserving, somehow special, super-intelligent, chosen by god etc.

So how does this play out in the real world? Once again.. that depends on circumstances beyond human control. Non-elites will tolerate and even trust elites as long as things are generally getting better. That is why average British people looked up to their elites between the early 1800s and end of WW1, and is also why the aftermath of WW2 saw large changes in the role of hereditary elite in that society. The same is true for american society where the power of WASPs declined once it became obvious by the 1960s that they were nowhere as competent and smart as they portrayed themselves. Did you notice a trend? If not, let me spell it out for you. The ability of elites to remain in their positions is totally dependent on all those ‘other people’ willing to go along with the charade. This is also why elite replacement is often abrupt and almost total.

Now let us talk about the post-1960s elites of USA. As some of you might have guessed, it does include a rather large number of people from a certain ethno-religious minority. But there is much more to this story than that fact. See.. unlike pre-1960 era elites, their post-1960s era equivalents are different, and not just as far as their skin color and last names are concerned. Let me put it this way.. unlike their older equivalents, they are a much more atomized group. It is far easier to fall out of being an elite today (for most) than it was as late as the 1950s. So how does one maintain their social position in such a precarious and competitive marketplace.

For starters- they can marry among themselves, attend the same schools and universities, hang out with the same groups of people and build networks of mutual patronage. But all of this is no longer enough. They have to do something else.. something at which they suck. Today’s elites have to cosplay as hard-working, supremely competent and well spoken geniuses. That is a huge problem- because they have none of the qualities they pretend to possess. The only way they can partially achieve that goal is via institutional capture and trying to remove any threats to the status quo. This is why these new elites are so obsessed with ‘Gun Control’, censoring ‘Hate Speech’, promoting “woke” neoliberal ideology etc. The world however keeps evolving and what these idiots though would last forever does not. Even worse, events such as Brexit in 2015 and the election of Trump in 2016 demonstrate their utter impotence.

And that, you see, is the underlying connection between establishment democratic zeal for ‘Gun Control’ and the ‘Mueller Investigation’. Real world events have exposed them to be stupid, greedy, short-sighted, incompetent and impotent. However they lack the willingness, let alone ability, to change their modus operandi. They simply double down on the only things and pathways they have ever known. This is also why so many establishment democrats pretended (even to themselves) that Trump could be impeached by evidence uncovered by the ‘Mueller Investigation’. That is also why they delude themselves into believing that voter support for ‘Gun Control’ is far stronger than it is, or how they imagine that all those new voters are going to vote for ‘Gun Control’. Some of you might think they can change, however everything we know about the behavior of elites throughout human history suggest otherwise. There is a reason why the phenomena of almost total elite replacement exists.. you know.

What do you think? Comments?

Democratic Party Obsession with ‘Gun Control’ will Cost Them in 2020

November 18, 2018 16 comments

Some of you might remember that just over a year ago, I wrote a post about why establishment democrats seem to obsessed with “gun control”. And yes.. there is a reason I put that term in quotation marks because, let us be honest about it, they do want to ban all guns and criminalize civilians who owned them. In case you are wondering how that could happen, let me direct you to how SWAT teams became an integral part of the “law enforcement” in USA or how petty criminals and retards are now charged under the hilariously-named PATRIOT act. My point is that history definitely shows us that powers given to large and unaccountable institutions (public or private) will always be abused, regardless of under which socio-economic paradigm they claim to operate.

It has long been my stated belief that the seemingly excessive number of deaths attributed to guns in USA are really due to the misery and hopelessness caused by living in a decaying, dying and imploding society- not unlike the deaths due to opioid overdoses and alcoholism. Also, most (almost 75%) deaths due to guns are suicides. If you add up them up, somewhere between 100-150 thousand people In USA kill themselves each year due to the high and endemic levels of despair and hopelessness caused by late capitalism aka neoliberalism. Did I mention that we have seen something similar happen in Russia after the collapse of USSR in 1991. Then again, there is something darkly funny about USA following in the footsteps of USSR.

But what does any of this have to with establishment democrats likely losing the 2020 election due to their obsession with “gun control”? Doesn’t having a president as unpopular and pathetic as Trump virtually guarantee a democratic party victory in 2020? Isn’t the possibility of having another 4-year dumpster fire sufficient to motivate democratic voters. Well.. let us have a look at results from the just-concluded 2018 elections. While the democratic party did win a majority in the house, a few governorships and about 300 seats in state legislatures- it has still not recouped the losses suffered during eight years of Obama. In other words, the low popularity of that atrocious orange moron did not translate into a massive pro-democratic party wave.

But why not? Surely, all that wall-to-wall coverage by corporate media of the latest bad decision made by the white house or talking heads communally masturbating over the most recent faux-pas by Trump must have changed some minds.. right? Who in their right minds would say that the Trump presidency is anything but a sad, but highly entertaining, dumpster fire? Why did all that talk about “Mueller”, “Russia”, “Putin” etc have so little effect on the electoral results? As it turns out, I have a theory to explain why the absolutely atrocious performance of Trump had a far smaller effect on the electoral results than many establishment democrats had hoped. And guess what, it connects very well with the subject of this post.

As I intimated in a previous paragraph, the biggest problems facing most people in USA have nothing to do with Trump, Russia, Putin or any other bullshit concocted by establishment types. Instead they are all linked to living in a system caught in a terminal death spiral. Sure.. things have never been better for the top 1% and are still acceptable for next 9%, but they suck for everyone else. Between the ludicrous cost of post-secondary education, ever-increasing levels of non-dischargeable student debt, rapidly increasing cost of what passes for “health care”, lack of stable and well-paying jobs, increasingly unaffordable housing- most people are fixated on issues which matter to them rather than what these so-called “public intellectuals” circle-jerk around.

You might think that any real opposition party in a functional democracy would take advantage of such a situation and make viable promises to fix these problems and thus get swept into power at the next election. As it turns out, there are two problems with that assumption. You see.. the democratic party is not a real opposition party and USA is not a functional democracy. Instead, the establishment wings of both political parties are part of the same party- one which owes it allegiance to the very wealthy and corporations. Both pretend to be opposed to each other so that they can maintain the illusion of a functional democracy- not unlike what one sees within professional wresting leagues. It is all political Kayfabe.

Let me remind you that establishment democrats have always colluded with their republican counterparts to push through legislation and rules which benefited the wealthy and corporations, but hurt everyone else. They colluded with republicans to push every “free-trade” agreement and treaty you can think of. They colluded with them to pass laws which enabled mass incarceration and the overt militarization of police in USA. They colluded with them to deregulate financial institutions and screw over common people. They colluded with them to make student debt non-dischargeable in bankruptcy. They never saw a military project too expensive to approve. In short, establishment democrats are basically republicans with better stylists and speechwriters.

But what does any of this have to with the issue of “gun control” and its adverse effect on electoral prospects of democratic party in 2020? Well.. it comes down to the only two real policy differences between the two political parties. In case you are wondering, access to abortion and gun rights are the only major differences between the two parties. As far as access to abortion is concerned, the democratic party position is going to win out in the future- largely because even republican voters below 40 are majority pro-choice. Gun control, on the other hand, is a different kettle of fish. While that policy had decent amount of public support during the late 1980s and early 1990s, the situation has changed a lot since then.

Many states have made it easier to buy or carry guns since the early 2000s, and this change has not resulted in an increased rate of gun-related crime. In fact, by many measures, rates of violent crime are significantly lower than in the late 1980s and early 1990s. More importantly, the trust of average people in american institutions (public and private) has declined considerably and irreversibly since the early 1990s. To make a long story short, all those bullshit “common sense gun control” laws have far less support in non-coastal states than even thirty years ago. This has however not stopped the democratic party establishment from trying to use every instance of some person shooting up random people to push for more “gun control” laws.

But.. some of you might say.. how is this any of this relevant to the 2020 election season? Here is why.. See, establishment democrats have refused to learn anything from their defeat in 2016, 2014 or 2010 etc. Any why would they? After all, they get paid the same by their rich backers irrespective of whether they win elections or not. It is all political Kayfabe. Anyway, the central rule of Kayfabe is that both parties must keep acting as if the alleged rivalries are “real” and “meaningful”. Also, neither party wants to bite the hands that feed them. Consequently, it is extremely unlikely that democrats will advance (let alone pass) any legislation which actually helps the average person. In any case, the average establishment democrat and republican legislator is far too removed from average people to give a fuck about them.

So forget higher minimum wage, healthcare for all, student loan relief, money for infrastructure, augmenting social security and medicare and say hello to increased spending for weapon systems which do not work, more bases in god-forsaken parts of Africa, more investigations of Trump, “bipartisan” agreements to cutting “entitlements” and nothing more than lip service to all the progressive causes they pretended to support while campaigning. So how do they plan to make up for this betrayal, at least in their minds. Well.. by cynically trying to pass the most insane “gun control” laws which they know will never pass the senate, let alone Trump. But why is this such a bad thing, at least from the point of winning elections?

Because it will energize gun owners to vote against them en masse. But won’t this be balanced by those who vote for tougher “gun control” legislation? To be blunt.. unless you are living in the Bay Area or some parts of NY or NJ, not really. But it get worse. See.. establishment democrats will either dither over or reject any attempt to (let alone actually) pass legislation in line with their progressive and populist pre-election promises. In other words they will disappoint enough people who voted for them in 2018 to an extent where they will not vote in 2020 (like what happened in 2010 after 2008). And you know what.. they don’t care because their rich corporate backers will keep paying them the same whether they win or lose. It is all about keeping this pathetic and now very obvious game of make-believe “functional democracy” going.

What do you think? Comments?