Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Taiwan’

The Pentagon Is Behind Pelosi’s Trip

Posted by M. C. on August 5, 2022

by Jacob G. Hornberger

The Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA — i.e., the national-security branch of the federal government — own and control Congress — lock, stock, and barrel, just as they own and control the president and the Supreme Court. 

Joe Biden wanted to make it clear that the Pentagon was opposed to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s trip to Taiwan, a trip that was obviously intended to gin up a crisis with Red China. 

The notion that the Pentagon opposed Pelosi’s trip is sheer nonsense. In my opinion, there is no possibility whatsoever that any member of Congress, and especially the Speaker of the House, would ever buck the Pentagon on anything. The Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA — i.e., the national-security branch of the federal government — own and control Congress — lock, stock, and barrel, just as they own and control the president and the Supreme Court. 

This is not a new phenomenon. Once the federal government was converted to a national-security state, everyone in Washington knew that there was a new sheriff in town, one that wielded omnipotent, totalitarian-like powers, including the power of assassination. Given the overwhelming power of the new national-security branch of the government, the other three branches went into passive-and-support mode, especially after the Kennedy assassination in 1963. 

But this phenomenon clearly existed prior to that assassination. That was reflected by the term that President Eisenhower initially planned to use — “the military-industrial-congressional complex” — in the warning he issued to the American people in his Farewell Address in 1961.

Longtime readers of my blog know that for the past few years, I have been recommending a book entitled National Security and Double Government by Michael J. Glennon, who is professor of international law at The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and who served as counsel to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Everyone in America should read Glennon’s book. It is a true eye-opener as to how the federal government is run, especially in foreign affairs.

Glennon’s thesis is a simple one: The national-security establishment is in charge of the federal government. But it permits the other three branches to have the appearance that they are actually in control. The Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA don’t care about appearances. It’s fine by them that Americans maintain the belief that the president, Congress, and the Supreme Court are in charge. What matters to the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA is that actual power of being in charge. 

If Glennon is right — and I have no doubt that he is — then there is a good possibility that it was the Pentagon that put Pelosi up to making her trip or at least quietly supported it, even while creating the false appearance that Pelosi was acting against the wishes of the U.S. military establishment.

Why would the Pentagon do such a thing? For the same reason the national-security establishment has been ginning up crises around the world practically since its inception. The more crises, the better, because then Americans get afraid and get convinced that a national-security state is necessary to keep them safe. More crises mean more power, influence, and tax-funded largess for the national-security establishment. 

That’s what their old Cold War racket was all about — a perpetual crisis ostensibly based on a supposed international conspiracy supposedly based in Moscow in which the Reds were coming to get us. The more they made Americans afraid of the supposed communist threat to take over America, the more Americans supported them with power and warfare largess.

As I point out in my new book An Encounter with Evil: The Abraham Zapruder Story, President Kennedy, having achieved a gigantic breakthrough after the Cuban Missile Crisis, decided to put an end to their Cold War racket and to move our nation in a totally different direction. He is the only president to have done so. No president since Kennedy has dared to take on the national-security establishment. Kennedy’s different vision for America’s future was why they needed to eliminate him and elevate Vice President Johnson, who had the same Cold War mindset as the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA.

When they lost their perpetual Cold War racket, they turned to deadly and destructive interventionism in the Middle East, knowing that that would produce a new crisis, one that would be based on terrorist blowback. The initial blowback — e.g., the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center and the attack on the USS Cole — was not sufficient to produce a gigantic crisis. But the 9/11 attacks did prove to be sufficient. At that point, the national-security establishment had a new, big, perpetual crisis, one based on “terrorism.” They were now off to the races again. That’s when they invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, killing hundreds of thousands of people and wreaking massive destruction in those two countries — and producing what seemed to be a perpetual crisis based on a never-ending supply of new terrorists. 

But they knew that their war on terrorism might ultimately begin to fizzle. The rather ho-hum reaction among many Americans to their assassination of 71-year-old al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri this week reflects the fizzling out of their war on terrorism. They need another big terrorist attack on American soil to get it ramped up again.

But it is now clear that they never gave up hope of restoring Russia and China as renewed official enemies. That’s what the Pentagon’s use of NATO to absorb former members of the Warsaw Pact was all about. The Pentagon knew that if NATO ultimately threatened to absorb Ukraine, it could get Russia to react, which Russia ultimately did with its invasion of Ukraine.  

But clearly that’s not enough for these people. They need to ramp up another Cold War crisis with Red China, which would enable them to reinvigorate their old Cold War anti-communist crusade. That would enable them to trot out all of their old anti-communist mantras. That’s what President Trump’s trade war against China was all about. That’s also what Pelosi’s trip to Taiwan is all about. U.S. officials are dead-set on ginning up another crisis in that part of the world against another of their old Cold War official enemies. Don’t be surprised about additional crises involving North Korea, Cuba, and maybe even Vietnam.

The biggest mistake the American people have ever made — even bigger than having adopted the socialism of a welfare state and the federal income tax to fund it — was to permit the conversion of the federal government to a national-security state. So long as that conversion is permitted to stand, Americans will continue to live lives that are besieged by crises. To get our nation back on the right road — the road toward liberty, peace, prosperity, and harmony with the people of the world — it is necessary to restore our founding government system of a limited-government republic, which necessarily means the dismantling and termination of the national-security establishment. 

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Ukraine and Taiwan

Posted by M. C. on April 6, 2022

Let Americans who prefer Ukraine to Russia and Taiwan to China, or Russia to Ukraine and China to Taiwan, put their money where their mouths are. There is nothing stopping them from individually taking sides in civil wars, territorial disputes, controversies, or military conflicts and sending their own resources to the country of their choosing or volunteering to fight on its behalf. But they have no right to expect the U.S. government to pick a side, send billions of American taxpayer dollars, and offer security guarantees that obligate U.S. troops to bleed and die for some foreign government.  

See the rest here

This post was written by: Laurence M. Vance

Laurence M. Vance is a columnist and policy advisor for the Future of Freedom Foundation, an associated scholar of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, and a columnist, blogger, and book reviewer at He is the author of Gun Control and the Second Amendment, The War on Drugs Is a War on Freedom, and War, Empire and the Military: Essays on the Follies of War and U.S. Foreign Policy. His newest books are Free Trade or Protectionism? and The Free Society. Visit his website: Send him e-mail.

be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Death Wish: Fighting a Cold War With China

Posted by M. C. on February 9, 2022

However, the fact that making a joke about 9/11 being a good thing to these same people would likely be massively offensive to them is a perfect example of the cognitive dissonance that drives American foreign policy. When those people go out and vote, they are voting for politicians who think exactly the same way they do and decide American policy towards China. Thus, the sarcasm becomes reality.

by Starte Butone

Recently, there has been an increased desire among the military establishment in the United States to intervene in the event of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Such a push has been made by politicians, public figures, and talking heads from both sides of the political spectrum. Massive spending bills aimed at “countering” China tend to pass through Congress with ease, with the only real opposition coming from congressmen who don’t think they’re strong enough. Promises by the Biden administration to defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion have brought tensions with China to their highest point in generations.

Of course, as anyone reading this article should know, the foolishness of going to war with China over Taiwan is virtually incomprehensible. China, as of the time of this writing, has hundreds of nuclear warheads in their arsenal, the majority of which are fusion weapons. China has promised to declare total war on the United States, even potentially escalating to the use of nuclear weapons, if the U.S. does so much as dock a warship in Taiwan.

To fully understand the way Chinese people look at this topic, one must first understand a little history. In the 1930s, China was involved in a civil war between two main groups: the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), led by Mao Zedong, and the Nationalist Party, or Kuomintang (KMT), led by Chiang-Kai Shek. The human rights violations perpetrated by Mao Zedong and the Communist Party are well known by most in the West, having starved people to death by the millions in the later “Great Leap Forward” period and executing countless political opponents.

However, the human rights violations of Chiang Kai-Shek are not as well known. Chiang executed his political opponents by the millions during the Civil War period. Additionally, the scorched-Earth policies used by the KMT during the Civil War and World War II killed millions more, in addition to even more millions of people who died as a result of corruption within the agricultural system and mis-allocation of food. Given that the KMT ruled over the majority of China at this point in time, it is reasonable to assume that the Chinese people would be willing to accept any alternative to their rule, even from people as unethical as the Communist party.

At the end of the Chinese Civil War, the U.S. military built up defenses around Taiwan and prevented the PRC from taking the island, leaving it de facto independent to this day. Given the history of relations between the two countries, one can understand just why the Chinese view Taiwan so negatively. In the eyes of most Chinese (and certainly the CCP) Taiwan is as bad as Nazi Germany is to us. Given Chiang Kai-Shek’s human rights record, they weren’t really all that wrong for a time.

China has promised to invade Taiwan as soon as they declare independence.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

A Porcupine Peace Plan: How An Independent New Hampshire Could Increase U.S. Security | The Libertarian Institute

Posted by M. C. on January 12, 2022

This seemingly magical ability…is the power of armed, individual self-defense…weapons freedom for the private citizen. And it is a power that the government of Taiwan has systematically denied to its people, at grave risk to a nervous world.

by Dave Ridley

To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting.”– Sun Tzu

On March 12, 2006 five U.S. soldiers violated, then murdered, 14-year-old Abeer Hamza in her home at Yusufiyah, Iraq. Then they covered up the killing by wiping out most of her family at taxpayer expense.1

Fifteen years and four days later, several dozen U.S. policy enforcement officers stormed a quiet neighborhood in America’s Pleasantville: Keene, New Hampshire. After using a battering ram connected to an armored vehicle, they flew a drone through the window of a home studio housing the state’s top radio discussion show, Free Talk Live. Washington claimed that some of its libertarian hosts had been selling significant amounts of Bitcoin without government permission and filed charges of “unlicensed money transmission.” The imperial capitol is seeking life imprisonment for at least one of the arrestees, with no credible claim that he even victimized anyone.2

Though different in a hundred ways, each of these federal excesses exemplified the numberless grievances which have sparked a growing pushback against D.C. in the “Live Free or Die” state. Local activists and legislators reacted with the New Hampshire Independence Amendment, also known as CACR 32. This constitutional revision would allow all NH residents to vote in a 2022 referendum on whether the state will continue being governed by Washington.

New Hampshire already has a long history of example-setting. But by striving for independence—and a more humane world security protocol—its citizens may be able to do something better. With your help, and the careful placement of a new idea on the geopolitical board, maybe our tiny new nation could even stop a world war.

NH independence proponents make a simple case. The FedGov, they say, has bloated beyond the point where normal individuals can meaningfully oppose its atrocities with conventional civics. They point to the successes of Estonian and British independence movements as well as the global trend toward “smaller nations.” In 1900 there were roughly 60 countries in the world. Now there are about 200. Meanwhile, thanks to these and other national divorces, the harm-inflicting capacity of various empires is less than it would be if they were still full-sized. Successful independence drives in America, too, should have a limiting effect on U.S. warmongering in faraway places.

But what of, say, Chinese government warmongering outside its​ borders? Whatever cruelties the U.S. government may have imposed, the nations bordering China do seem to generally prefer alliance with Washington over alliance with Beijing; some rely on D.C. for their security more than they should.

One of the main criticisms of NH independence is that it could undermine U.S. defense capability or, more accurately, American capacity for carrying out the existing commitments to NATO and Taiwan. The latter is of special significance, and we’ll use it as the focus of this discussion. But the arguments here apply to every U.S. ally.

See the rest here

This article was originally featured at the Shire Forum

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

TGIF: Pursue Your Happiness and Forget the Rest | The Libertarian Institute

Posted by M. C. on December 31, 2021

How about we do something novel in the new year? Let’s stop worrying about the stuff most politicians, pundits, and activists want us to worry about and instead think about ourselves, our families, our friends, and whatever communities we choose to be part of. Let’s forget about “the country” and the rest of the world. Let’s individually pursue happiness.

by Sheldon Richman

How about we do something novel in the new year? Let’s stop worrying about the stuff most politicians, pundits, and activists want us to worry about and instead think about ourselves, our families, our friends, and whatever communities we choose to be part of. Let’s forget about “the country” and the rest of the world. Let’s individually pursue happiness.

All I’m saying is that it’s finally time for the politicians, bureaucrats, and know-it-all intelligentsia, left or right, to get out of the way and let us set our own agendas.

Too self-centered? Well, too bad. Much evil results from people failing to mind their own business. But what I have in mind does not involve wishing other people ill or seeing life as a zero-sum game in which you can win only if others lose. On the contrary, we benefit from other people’s, including distant strangers’, good fortune because at the very least it opens up opportunities for mutual gains from trade. (“The division of labor is limited by the extent of the market,” the wise Adam Smith pointed out some time ago.) In reality, it opens up so much more.

There’s little chance this sort of world would result in what is often stigmatized as “selfishness.” The vast majority of us understand that truly caring about oneself necessarily means caring about other people in a variety of proper ways. In fact, the person who claims to care only about himself actually cares little even about himself. That’s why mutually beneficial social arrangements have been bottom-up affairs. As Thomas Paine recognized in The Rights of Man:

Great part of that order which reigns among mankind is not the effect of government. It has its origin in the principles of society and the natural constitution of man. It existed prior to government, and would exist if the formality of government was abolished. The mutual dependence and reciprocal interest which man has upon man, and all the parts of civilised community upon each other, create that great chain of connection which holds it together. The landholder, the farmer, the manufacturer, the merchant, the tradesman, and every occupation, prospers by the aid which each receives from the other, and from the whole. Common interest regulates their concerns, and forms their law; and the laws which common usage ordains, have a greater influence than the laws of government. In fine, society performs for itself almost everything which is ascribed to government.

Yet the policy elite and much of the ideological left and right don’t want us to understand this. They have other plans for us. They always do, don’t they? So they can’t let us get it into our heads that their agendas are illiberal impositions.

The ruling establishment and its mouthpiece media try to keep us agitated by a variety of threats. As Ted Galen Carpenter notes,

In recent years, U.S. executive branch officials and members of Congress from both political parties have routinely portrayed Russia or China (and frequently both countries) as existential threats to the United States. It also is becoming increasingly common to find news articles or opinion pieces that adopt the same theme. Moreover, a significant number of politicians and analysts put smaller powers, especially Iran and North Korea, and even non-state actors, such as Al Qaeda and ISIS, in that category. The concerted campaign on the part of opinion-shaping elites to hype the danger from such sources is leaving an indelible mark on public attitudes. Many Americans now believe that their country faces multiple, horrifying threats.

More sober reflection should cause the public to conclude that the dangers are greatly exaggerated, and that the individuals, agencies, and organizations that foster such hysteria are not doing the country any favors. (“Paranoid Superpower: Threat Inflation is the American Way.”)

Do the real or imagined threats to Ukraine or Taiwan really represent existential threats to the world including the American people?

Then there’s the so-called climate emergency, which doesn’t exist. After more than 40 years of the most ridiculously bad predictions of the imminent catastrophe, it’s time for those who still take the doomsday scenarios seriously to realize that “Wolf!” has been cried too many times. The same goes for other “crises,” like the ones supposedly presented by immigrants, global free trade, and the allegedly rampant racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, and the assortment of imagined phobias.

We can also tell the “woke” left and the national conservative right that we have our own lives to live, thank you very much. And, no, we don’t have too much freedom, no matter what they may think. They can include us out of their culture wars.

The point of freedom is to be left unimpeded in our own individual and voluntary cooperative pursuits. It will forever be remarkable that the Declaration of Independence specified “the pursuit of happiness” in its examples of unalienable rights. Let’s never forget it.

Meanwhile, Happy New Year!

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Why Should American Soldiers Die for Taiwan? – 19FortyFive

Posted by M. C. on November 4, 2021

Until we have more concrete evidence that the Taiwanese are doing all they can for their own defense, all talk of America risking war with China for their benefit needs to come to a halt. There is no justification for sending American men and women to die on the seas and in the air around Taiwan when the citizens of Taiwan are themselves cool to the idea of dying for their own country.

Concrete evidence or not, there is no reason.

ByDaniel Davis

Calls by U.S. leaders to extend security guarantees to Taiwan against an aggressive China are on the rise. American pundits have likewise been eager and disturbingly casual about offering up U.S. service members to go and die for Taipei.  Before taking another step down this dangerous path, however, these leaders need to consider just how willing Taiwanese are to die for their own country.

Until we have more concrete evidence that the Taiwanese are doing all they can for their own defense, all talk of America risking war with China for their benefit needs to come to a halt. There is no justification for sending American men and women to die on the seas and in the air around Taiwan when the citizens of Taiwan are themselves cool to the idea of dying for their own country.

First is the classic “show me your checkbook and I’ll show you your priorities.” The United States places great value on protecting its citizens and global interests, as evidenced by the fact that we spend more on national defense than any nation on the planet, upwards of 3.5% GDP annually.

As recently as 2016, Taiwan was spending an anemic 1.6% GDP on defense, and next year is expected to be only slightly better, at 2.1%. Evidence suggests that constant boasts by U.S. opinion leaders that the United States should give security guarantees to Taiwan leads the island’s leaders to conclude they don’t have to spend money on their own defense because they believe we will provide it for them.

Second is the extent to which the citizens are willing to serve in the armed forces and risk their lives in defense of their country. In the United States, our all-volunteer force constantly produces sufficient numbers of service personnel to fully man the Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines, and Coast Guard. We don’t always meet the recruiting goals but we always have sufficient numbers of personnel.

In Taiwan, by contrast, the armed services are significantly understaffed. So few Taiwanese are willing to sign up for military service, in fact, that earlier this year frontline combat units in the Taiwan military were assessed as being manned at a shockingly low 60%.

The Taipei Times newspaper conducted research a few years ago into the attitudes of the recruitment-age youth in Taiwan, finding that large numbers were “(a)pathetic toward the military and averse to service.”

One former Taiwanese Marine seemed to capture the reason for the apathy well: “I think it’s unlikely that we will go to war. If there’s no real enemy to fight against, I don’t know why military training is necessary.” Reuters reported in 2018 that 1,000 reservists over the previous three years had been charged for “dodging mandatory training.”

It is clear that considerable numbers of Taiwanese people either do not believe the threat from China is real, don’t believe their country could defeat China if it did attack, or just don’t want to “waste time” serving. Such a dynamic harkens back to the recent situation in Afghanistan where large numbers of Afghan troops would rather make deals with their enemy than to fight to the death in a fight they don’t think they could win. It therefore made no difference to the outcome that American troops did fight for them over a 20 year period.

Similarly, when the Russians annexed the Crimea in 2014, they did so without firing a shot because, like the Taliban did earlier this year, the Russians made deals with the defenders of The Crimea and likewise told them it would be pointless and futile to die fighting – when they could instead come to work for the victorious Russians. There is little reason to think some version of the same dynamic would not also exist in Taiwan if the Chinese were to attack.

If the government of Taiwan is not willing to adequately fund its military, if the Taiwanese men and women whose lives would be on the line in a war with China aren’t willing to fight for their country, it would frankly be immoral to force American men and women to die in their place for Taiwan’s defense. It is time U.S. opinion leaders and government officials stopped being so eager to offer up American troops to go into harm’s way for the benefit of another country and start being concerned for the welfare of our troops’ lives.

Now a 19FortyFive Contributing Editor, Daniel L. Davis is a Senior Fellow for Defense Priorities and a former Lt. Col. in the U.S. Army who deployed into combat zones four times. He is the author of “The Eleventh Hour in 2020 America.” Follow him @DanielLDavis1

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

‘Will Biden Start Nuclear War with China Over Taiwan?’ – Ron Paul’s 25 Oct Column

Posted by M. C. on October 26, 2021

It was left to the “Chemical Ali” of this Administration, White House Spokesman Jen Psaki, to “clarify” that when the President signaled a major shift in US policy – a shift that could well lead to nuclear war with China – he was just kidding. Or something.

Oct 25 – President Biden’s “townhall” meeting this past week was a disaster. From his bizarre poses to the incoherent answers, it seemed to confirm America’s worst fears about a president we are told was elected by the most voters ever. Though he didn’t bother campaigning, we are to believe he somehow motivated the most voters in history to pull the lever in his favor. Or mail in a ballot in his favor. Or something.

After the townhall, the Wall Street Journal was early among mainstream media publications to observe that the emperor has no clothes. In an editorial titled “The Confusing Mr. Biden,” the paper wrote, “Even with a friendly audience and softball questions, Mr. Biden’s performance revealed why so many Americans are losing confidence in his Presidency.”

The Journal focused on one of the most shocking and disturbing revelations from the carefully crafted event: asked by CNN’s Anderson Cooper if the United States would come to the defense of Taiwan should it come under attack by the Chinese mainland, he replied, “Yes, we have a commitment to do that.”

Anderson threw him another softball in hopes he might correct this dangerous misstatement, but Biden was not nimble enough to see his gaffe. He doubled down.

It was left to the “Chemical Ali” of this Administration, White House Spokesman Jen Psaki, to “clarify” that when the President signaled a major shift in US policy – a shift that could well lead to nuclear war with China – he was just kidding. Or something.

Said Psaki the next day: “Well, there has been no shift. The President was not announcing any change in our policy nor has he made a decision to change our policy. There is no change in our policy.”

In other words: “Pay no attention to the man who pretends to be the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States.”

But this is not George W. Bush, who was elected in 2000 with zero experience in foreign policy. This is not Trump, who campaigned on a policy of peace then hired John Bolton to carry out that policy.

No, Biden has twice been Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Foreign policy has always been considered his one area of competence. Surely the Biden of even the Obama Administration would have understood the potentially catastrophic implications of his statement.

Strategic ambiguity has been US policy toward Taiwan/China for decades, but the new Biden China policy could be re-named “strategic incoherence.”

The policy of “strategic ambiguity” is foolish enough – who cares who rules Taiwan? – but advancing the idea that the United States is willing to launch a nuclear war with China over who governs Taiwan is a whole other level of America-last foolishness.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Miley was heralded as a hero for betraying his Commander in Chief Trump by seeking to restrict Trump’s access to the US nuclear arsenal. Milley claimed that Trump was so unsound of mind that he could not be trusted with the nuclear football.

Yet when actual unsoundness is there for everyone to see, Milley and the other “woke” generals are silent as the grave. These are dangerous times.

Read more great articles on the Ron Paul Institute website.
Subscribe to free updates from the Ron Paul Institute.
Copyright © 2021 by Ron Paul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

Real Cancel Culture: Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix – by Caitlin Johnstone – Caitlin’s Newsletter

Posted by M. C. on October 11, 2021

Propaganda is the foundation of all our problems, and the us vs them dynamic is the foundation of propaganda. If humans can awaken in a visceral, experiential way to the reality that all is one we can inoculate ourselves against propaganda and begin moving toward health together.

Caitlin Johnstone

“To protect Taiwan we must be prepared to go to war with China.”

~ Imperialists who just lost a war to the Taliban

I’m genuinely disturbed at how many people would be willing to fight a world war over Taiwan’s governmental preferences. The power and effectiveness of the imperial propaganda machine never ceases to amaze me.

The astonishing amount of pushback I’m getting for my very sane and normal “Let’s not fight World War Three over Taiwan” position makes it abundantly clear that many people don’t truly understand that starting a war means you have to actually send actual human beings to go fight that war.

The correct response to someone who supports going to war if China attacks Taiwan is “Are you enlisted?”

The correct response when they inevitably answer “no” is “Then shut the fuck up.”

People who are fine with the idea of increasing aggressions between nuclear-armed nations simply haven’t thought hard enough about what nuclear war is and haven’t learned enough about the many different ways it could occur. It’s a comfort held in place by compartmentalization.

The decision to go to war with China would be the single most important and consequential decision ever made in human history. You’d have to weigh it against millions to billions of deaths. Defending Taiwan’s preference of government clearly wouldn’t weigh enough to justify that cost.

Caitlin Johnstone ⏳ @caitozThe empire’s greatest weapon is not its military, but its propaganda machine. ian bremmer @ianbremmer% of Americans who favor the use of US troops if China invaded Taiwan — going up up up 1982 19% 1986 19% 1998 27% 2002 31% 2004 33% 2006 32% 2008 32% 2010 25% 2012 28% 2014 26% 2015 28% 2018 35% 2020 41% July 2021 52% -Chicago CouncilOctober 9th 2021139 Retweets561 Likes

The empire’s greatest weapon is not its military but its propaganda machine. There’s simply never been anything like the global narrative control provided by the western news media, Silicon Valley, and Hollywood. The military fights wars, the propaganda machine wins them long before they start.

A lucid and well-informed examination of the world’s problems will keep bringing you back to this one fundamental issue: that Earth’s inhabitants are being psychologically manipulated at mass scale into organizing themselves in ways that serve the powerful instead of the people.

Congratulations to those who were awarded the same highly esteemed Peace Prize as Barack Obama and Henry Kissinger.

Conduct critical journalism on an empire-targeted government: get a Nobel Peace Prize.

Conduct critical journalism on the empire: get a CIA plot to assassinate you.

Real cancel culture is when the CIA plots to assassinate a journalist for publishing authentic documents in the public interest.

Caitlin Johnstone ⏳ @caitozWhat? Isn’t that how all whistleblowers are treated? Matt Agorist @MattAgoristwow, so I had to vet this for myself, and it is real. pretty insane how blowing the whistle gets you an instant red carpet on twitter, a blue check, and 56k followers, a podium in congress, and a massive legal team literally overnight. 7th 2021425 Retweets1,549 Likes

It’s very cute how we all think that everyone else is gullible except for us. Even assuming that is true is already very gullible.

Humans are not inherently fucked up, we’re just traumatized and manipulated by an abusive system into doing fucked up things. Very few of the ugly behaviors we see in people would exist if we had conscious and compassionate systems in place for organizing ourselves in this world.

Everyone gets that it’s wrong to blame an entire group on the misdeeds of a few of its members, but few people seem to apply that same logic to humanity as a whole. All our systems are dominated by the worst among us, simply because they’re sociopathic enough to climb to the top.

Really it just boils down to the fact that the majority don’t understand how sociopaths’ minds work or how to counter them, and that the trauma of preceding generations keeps giving rise to sociopaths. I think the initial trauma stretches back to our evolutionary ancestors who literally spent their lives running from giant monsters who were trying to eat them. Our nervous systems still operate that way today, even though those monsters are long gone.

If we could just catch a break for one or two generations to heal that trauma, I think we’d be fine. But we keep passing our trauma on to new generations because the worst among us keep thwarting everyone’s attempts to set up conscious systems.

To compensate for the fact that it won’t ever give the left any economic concessions the empire has been loudly amplifying some concessions on racial and sexual justice, so now even though nothing really changed you still get rightists saying politics moved “too far to the left”. This gives the propagandists a couple of different tools: it keeps discourse tied up on issues that will never hurt the agendas of any plutocrat or warmonger, and feeds into the culture war dynamics which facilitate us-vs-them propaganda tactics.

Propaganda is the foundation of all our problems, and the us vs them dynamic is the foundation of propaganda. If humans can awaken in a visceral, experiential way to the reality that all is one we can inoculate ourselves against propaganda and begin moving toward health together.


My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, following me on FacebookTwitterSoundcloud or YouTube, or throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fiPatreon or Paypal. If you want to read more you can buy my books. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Two Front War? Three Fronts? What’s Biden’s Game in Taiwan, Iran, and Ukraine?

Posted by M. C. on April 13, 2021

The Biden Administration is becoming even more bellicose toward Russia and China over “crises” in Taiwan and Ukraine. Meanwhile US-backed Israel is attacking Iranian nuclear facilities. During the Cold War the hawks always pushed for the ability to fight a two-front war. Can a US military already bogged down for 20 years fight a THREE front war? Will someone in Washington display some common sense?

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

From Taiwan To Iran, US Aggression Overtakes Biden’s Promises

Posted by M. C. on March 2, 2021

The Biden Administration’s promise to embrace diplomacy over Trump’s perceived unilateralism took a blow last week with the US attack on Syria. That is not the only hot spot where diplomacy as we understand it seems to have been abandoned. Today we have a look at the three hot spots. And finally today…Dr. Seuss cancelled???

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »