ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, November 02, 2018

The end of the neo-liberal world order

For all its global reach, the neo-liberal world order will likely prove to have been exceptionally short-lived in the historical sense:
Though the press is obsessed with President Trump defining a change we are seeing, that is a classic case of mal-educated Amerocentrism. The shift started before him. He is just a symptom, not a cause. It isn’t even an American phenomenon. If anything we are lagging the global trend.

What period started to come to an end at the start of this century? The end of the post-Cold War as a period by itself? I don't quite buy it. There is a lot of talk of an end to the post-WWII, “Liberal World Order” (LWO). I think that might be right.

The LWO began at the end of WWII. The period after the fall of the Soviet Union that people call as the Post-Cold War Era wasn't really an era. It was either the final or the penultimate chapter of the long running LWO that the Cold War was just a longer chapter of. Even while the Soviet Union was on its death bed we saw the next chapter, AKA Bush41’s “New World Order” (NWO).

One could argue the NWO was the penultimate chapter, and 2001-2008 the final chapter of the LWO.

Hard to say right now, but if forced, I’d put my chips on that argument.

The NWO lasted less than a decade, if that. It was a period of unchallenged American dominance, but that rode on the back of the “The Liberal World Order” built in the post-WWII period.

What I would call the final chapter, somewhere from the attacks of September 2001 and the newly elected President Obama's apology tour and welcoming of a rising China, I'm not sure - but it marked a shift to something new. The pivot is not yet complete - it is a slow turn that took awhile to get here.

The last two chapters of the LWO saw the falling apart of those structures – the EU, ascendency of Western culture, extra-national international legal bodies, American dominance of the high seas - that defined the success of the old age. The vacuum left behind by them, and the fragility of remaining ones like NATO, is feeding change.

This new era is a movement of returns, reckoning, and realization. Strangely, end of the LWO can probably can be traced back to the Muslim world. They were an the early adopter or canary in the coal mine of the structural culmination of the LWO. There you find the first place where the assumptions of the ruling Western elite began to fail.

Just look at the pictures of Cairo and Kabul in the 1960s and 1970s. Western dress, cultural norms, secularism, and political systems (socialist, capitalist, or a mixture of both) dominated. At the end of the 1970s the wave crested first there when you saw decades of progress for women in the public space begin to retreat from Islamabad to Alexandria.

Those were indications that the West had lost its confidence and its appeal. Once that support goes soft, everything it underpins weakens. Much of the weakening started with the anti-Western efforts in our own universities and popular culture. Jesse Jackson’s “Hey, hey, ho, ho; Western Civ has got to go” was just one of a long series of notes to the outside world that things were well along the way to being not quite right.

If you value Western values of tolerance and progress, how do you expect them to grow and expand abroad when you cannot support them at home? In their absence, something will fill the void.
I don't believe there is any difference between the LWO and the NWO. Both were aspects of the neo-liberal world order championed by the same people. Globalism was always the objective of certain elements behind the neo-liberal world order, and the ongoing rise of nationalism represents the inevitable reaction to globalism that is described in the old Chinese aphorism.

 The empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide. Thus it has ever been.

But remember, what fuels the drive for global institutions is the result of widespread failures at the national levels. As we have seen in the USA, when centralization fails, the response is not to abandon it, but to try to salvage it through expanding its reach. As fast as the neo-liberal world order has failed, any globalist order would fail even faster due to the greater stresses upon even more fragile bonds.

Labels: ,

40 Comments:

Blogger Salt November 02, 2018 7:55 AM  

As the west chased globalism, China was but a rising future star. It should be interesting with China now a quasi first-world global player that it runs up against a rising nationalistic west.

Blogger Peaceful Poster November 02, 2018 7:59 AM  

"If you value Western values of tolerance and progress

(((Western values)))

Blogger Mr.MantraMan November 02, 2018 8:08 AM  

#2 that is what I thought as well. After reading that piece which is something I have read on the (dis)respectable right for years if not decades I wanted the author to define "West" for me. Which is a trap question because I'd bet a good fiat dollar the first thing out of the pie hole would have been "tolerance." And then a no doubt lengthy heartfelt plea for Muh Magic Dirt.

Blogger James Dixon November 02, 2018 8:10 AM  

I've been thinking about this for quite a while now. And I've come to some conclusions. Allow me to express them here, to the best of my ability.

One thing that has to be understood is that the LWO was built on the backs of the American people. We provided the financial and physical currency which was used to build it. It was our money, our people, our blood. Europe could never have done it. The Soviets could never have done it. China could never have done it. How many American lives were given to the world over that time frame? How much American money was spent?

Now, we're exhausted. Both financially and physically. It's not even a question of whether we want to maintain the global empire that was built. We no long have the capability to do so. And no one else can. And thus, the liberal world order will fall. What will replace it is unknown, but something will.

Our attention, our gaze, is turning inward. We have to retreat and rebuild ourselves. We have no choice in the matter. And we are going to do so. Any attempts to force us to do otherwise will fail. Part of that will involve reclaiming our heritage and our birthright. That is part of why the alt-right is inevitable. Part of it will be forcing out the incompatible elements, the incompatible ideologies and people. It may be peaceful, it may be violent, but it will happen, because it has to. We can no longer continue on our current path, and in order to find another we must first re-find ourselves. Those who are unwilling to accept that will not find a place amongst us, and will be forced to leave.

There is always a chance that we will fail. No people lasts forever. But at a basic level we as a people have accepted these facts and are beginning to act on them. With God's grace and mercy, we will succeed. And eventually, after we've rebuilt, there may come a time when our gaze can turn outward again.

This is part and parcel of the generational cycles, or turnings as others have called them. No empire lasts forever. The rise and fall of same is a given, and the cycles have been documented and commented on here many times. This cycle is ending and a new one will start. Such is the story of life and civilizations.

Blogger tz November 02, 2018 8:36 AM  

It starts as a perfectly reasonable idea and when it is clear because of reason and evidence it fails, then theft and violence are used because the elites and their utopian dreams can't be wrong, it must be that there are evil people.

That is how the USSR and Eastern Europe went, until it catastrophically (suddenly) failed, and is how the USA is going. The theft and violence in the USA are from big Tech, Wall Street and similar elite, and AntiFa right now. And the right is not unarmed or defenseless.

Blogger Hammerli280 November 02, 2018 8:43 AM  

I think we tend to lose track of one thing...the Cold War ended nearly thirty years ago. The Post-Cold-War era is drawing to a close. That is a normal, natural process. History goes on.

What surprises me is the number of people who are surprised. I always figured that the American Unipolar Moment would not endure...not when the United States was busy gutting its military to buy more welfares.

Blogger CM November 02, 2018 8:43 AM  

And then a no doubt lengthy heartfelt plea for Muh Magic Dirt.

And yet he skates by some things without critically looking at it - there's some observation of it here:

There you find the first place where the assumptions of the ruling Western elite began to fail.

So very close. He observes something failed and then he goes off on a tangent. It's true, our loss of confidence in our culture is causing serious failure, but I'm not convinced it would have kept us as influential as we were in the 1950s.

Liberalism in the middle-east was a fad and fads come and go in little time.

What freedom the west embraces (and really, it's only the island culture of the Brit islanders) was embedded for hundreds of years. It had twists and turns and introductions from other fiercely independent cultures, but the underlying assumptions have been there for a long time.

Blogger CM November 02, 2018 8:47 AM  

What surprises me is the number of people who are surprised. I always figured that the American Unipolar Moment would not endure

I'm not as surprised as I am concerned that the greatest takeaway from the cold war era in the last 30 years was that nationalism = evil incarnate and socialism = utopian answer to all our problems.

I rather feel we needed a bit more time in the corner before exiting...

Blogger David Ray Milton November 02, 2018 9:04 AM  

Yes. And the passing of the world order coincides with the passing of a generation that thought on global terms due to being engaged in a global Cold War.

I think it should be interesting to see how my generation of Millenials responds to a new era. I’m not particularly hopeful. However, as a generation that was taught to think globally but was never given an enemy (besides whitey) it should be no surprise that many suffer from a nihilistic purposeless-ness.

Could a healthy tribalism and nationalism fill that void? It might be too late and too many nice/weak boys are already stuck in their ways, but good things are worth hoping for. If nothing else, Gen Z looks more promising.

Blogger Desdichado November 02, 2018 9:06 AM  

Peaceful Poster wrote:"If you value Western values of tolerance and progress

(((Western values)))

No, those are Hajnal Line western values. They've been perverted, true, by some very special people with willing partners of our own, but those are still western values, and any society without them wouldn't much resemble western civilization.

Blogger Wanderer November 02, 2018 9:21 AM  

At the end of the 1970s the wave crested first there when you saw decades of progress for women in the public space begin to retreat from Islamabad to Alexandria.
Please. Muslims going on thot patrol in their countries is one of the few things they do right. Given the amount of damage western women have done I would say White Sharia would be too kind.

Blogger Daniel November 02, 2018 9:40 AM  

You missed the point, Wanderer.

Blogger pyrrhus November 02, 2018 9:55 AM  

When the West lost the muscular Christianity of the 18th and 19th centuries, the Hajnal line people were left defenseless against the invasion of parasitic groups without Western values...They created the LWO, and Communist infiltration of all Western institutions...But now that the host is collapsing, a new world will emerge.

Blogger Azimus November 02, 2018 9:58 AM  

"what fuels the drive for global institutions is the result of widespread failures at the national levels" - this articulates like nothing else something I have long felt - that it is not a coincidence that the left and, to a lesser extent the right, intentionally sends buffoons to Washington. I had thought it was because ambitious fools were simply easier to control (Cory Booker for example). But the way gov spends and spends in one worthless program after another, it makes more sense that it is being done on purpose - that the pilot we hired is intentionally crashing our plane. I get the same vibe from World War I - that the leaders of the west hired buffoons for generals and intentionally created a miserable meat grinder to destabilize and destroy their nations. Someday when I hit the lottery I will research and write a groundbreaking book on the topic, called "Family of Death: The 8 Cousins Who Decided To Burn The World" or something like that.

Blogger Tars Tarkusz November 02, 2018 10:02 AM  

It's kind of funny how the "new world order" phrase has long fallen out of use. What they were calling the NWO is what we are calling "Globalism"

Looks like they were right after all, even if only to an extent.

Blogger John Calla November 02, 2018 10:21 AM  

The Bretton Woods framework no longer makes sense. So out it goes.

Peter Zeihan has some decent analysis about it.

Blogger Hammerli280 November 02, 2018 10:49 AM  

I also think we're seeing inflection points of several curves, not one political event.

First, we've got a shakeup in the Great Power standings. China is up, Russia is down. In many ways, Putin is the Russian Charles de Gaulle - leader of a country that has taken a massive hit in the Great Power standings, but can't quite bring himself to admit it. And will make trouble. And China is behaving in a manner reminiscent of Wilhelmine Germany, a rising Great Power seeking tokens of respect...with hamfisted diplomacy. They won't deliberately start a world war, but might well blunder into one.

On top of this, the Great Globalist Experiment attempted after the Second World War is collapsing. Go read Heinlein's novels, particularly Starship Trooper and Glory Road. Note the copyright dates...well BEFORE the social catastrophe of the political 1960s. Heinlein was the most perceptive social observer of his time, and saw the sickness early. Anti-national (in general) and anti-American (in particular) sentiment was being encouraged. Partly by Soviet propaganda, partly from a sense that nationalism had fueled the World Wars.

The third issue is a loss of confidence in the Ruling Class. Trump marked the end of a 28-year period when every American President was the product of Harvard or Yale. And their governance ran from mildly competent to complete disaster. Both the United States and most other Western countries are being run by a transnational elite who have more in common with each other than with the common citizens of their nations...and one of the things they have in common is that they despise the citizens of their nations.

And all three issues are coming to a boil at the same time. Hold on to your hats.

(And buy stocks. As Baron Rothschild said, "Buy when there's blood in the streets.")

Blogger justaguy November 02, 2018 11:54 AM  

#17, I agree with #17 and VD's thesis on Western Civ-- you need Christianity. What the West lost first was Christianity or at least the ruling/elite class lost it and then lived off of the cultural capital of the predecessors. Now that culture (Greco-Roman rule of law) has decayed due to the lack of morals behind the ruling class so everything is in decline. There used to be revivals in the US large enough to affect the ruling class-- or least enough to impact the voting males. My crystal ball for the future is cloudier than VDs, but I agree with him on the causes.

Blogger Jack Amok November 02, 2018 12:40 PM  

...when centralization fails, the response is not to abandon it, but to try to salvage it through expanding its reach

I call it failing outwards. It's a symptom of a parasitical "management" class who have almost no chance of getting it right at any level, but talk a good game and are always ready to point out the external factors that hampered their fabulous plans. So it's necessary to bring those external forces under their control to continue. City fails out to region, region fails out to state, state fails out to nation, nation fails out to global.

The question is why it gets tolerated. The answer is letting too many people vote. I estimate maybe a third of adult males are psychologically capable of truly accepting responsibility for decisions, and almost no women are capable of it. Regardless of what they say, psychologically they really want someone else to make the call and tell them what to do. So they fall for the smooth talking con man and vote him into office.

There is a very direct correlation between countries that allow women a large say in public affairs and countries that are on the globalization train.


Blogger LP999-16 November 02, 2018 12:46 PM  

I adore how the media, the enemy of the people took off their mask to show how much disdain they have for the country and just regular everyday people.

It is wonderful the media cannot resist being trolled by the troll master GE POTUS, its EPIC fun. its their own projection, they create resistance protests, resist this, resist that, great, keep doing that. Very effective optics before midterms.

CNN to other tv head outlets are comedy central, its such fun, it is truly winning, winning and more winning. Globalism can't work for people and those promoting it cannot bear it anymore. I've heard the commericals in Ohioland, even they are suffering from immigration in their sanctuary hellhole cities.

Blogger James Dixon November 02, 2018 12:50 PM  

> And buy stocks.

That depends on whether the stock ownership infrastructure survives the changes. There's no guarantee of that.

But since the currencies will almost certainly fail at some point, I agree that owning stocks is probably a good idea; as are land, gold, and silver.

Blogger Jack Amok November 02, 2018 12:55 PM  

But, like James, I've been thinking about this for a while too, and it goes beyond any one simple cause. There are many things converging, and though I think I see the overall shape, I haven't sorted it out into something I can clearly articulate yet. And, as Vox occasionally reminds us, Europeans aren't just American's with funny accents. There are common stresses in both halves of the Western World, but differences too. I have a better understanding of America's troubles than I do of Europe's, and while there is overlap, I don't know exactly where the overlap ends.

But the list of some of the suspects (or maybe gang members) is:

-failure to teach and appreciate virtues
-universal suffrage
-fiat money
-large scale immigration
-too much prosperity (rags to riches to rags)
-rootlessness
-2 ruined generations (Silents and Boomers)
-ruination of our education system at every level

Obviously there are forces behind most of these.

Blogger LP999-16 November 02, 2018 1:00 PM  

The LWO sent how many men to die in wars while turning a blind eye to what happened when China killed its nationalists. Now what? The Silent Generation or our grandparents whom are about 90 into the 110's in age, they allowed too much but they did try to maintain the family unit, God but they gave us baby boomers and look what happened later.

19 Estrogen based creatures are best not running for office, ideally I wish we or women were merely happy with what our design is, its family, home, dainty nice things, little stresses not the examples of many women in high office, its just no good.

I only say this because women or we are displaced from our natural roles, women voting historically harms women and children, it too was all a plan of globalism and a world order that is ok with killing the unborn, no God in schools, now our youngest men are brainwashed into hating the 2nd amendment, historically, that means very bad things happen in a disarmed nation.

Blogger Robert Pinkerton November 02, 2018 1:08 PM  

@11, Wanderer: "... I would say White Sharia would be too kind."

How about Gor?

Blogger Lance E November 02, 2018 1:24 PM  

when centralization fails, the response is not to abandon it, but to try to salvage it through expanding its reach.

A certain well-known executive of a certain well-known transnational corporation with certain well-known ties to a certain failed presidential candidate is known for the mantra: "Revenue solves all known problems."

Really gets the old noggin joggin'.

Blogger James Dixon November 02, 2018 1:51 PM  

> "Revenue solves all known problems."

Someone should tell him to tell that to Standard Oil and AT&T. I think he may get a lesson in same eventually.

Blogger Brick Hardslab November 02, 2018 2:02 PM  

Confidence,mandate of heaven, whatever you want to call it, we lost it.

Blogger tublecane November 02, 2018 2:51 PM  

People have short memories. Most people deal with what's in front of them, what they happen to encounter. Some of which could be world news. Others are aware of the events of the world filtered through the MSM, and are up to date on what they're supposed to think. But they forget what they were have supposed to think once the news has changed.

There are more select groups who learn about things from a variety of sources or maybe a few unusual sources. They tend to forget things, too.

Rarest of all are people who maintain or try to maintain a longview all the time, and reflect upon previous thoughts when updating them. But in our culture such people are still prone to forget.

But it's not chauvinism alone which makes Americans ignore it forget indicators of neoliberal fragility. We have our own empire to remember. We know, if but we'd remember, after the fall of the Soviet empire a new crop of economic powerhouses failed to bloom. We know instead of history ending Russia turned into a boogeyman.

Then there's the Mid-East, and the less said about that the better.

Which isn't to say the liberal order had to be dying because it wasn't expanding. But Americans have an innate sense of grow or die, so if they thought about it they'd know. Just like we know the U.S. has been in a general funk since the Vietnam era, with optimistic interludes. That was when the Establishment became suspect. The Establishment being the ruling liberal order.

Blogger eugenius November 02, 2018 2:51 PM  

Who gains from destroying both Western confidence and Arab prosperity?

Blogger tublecane November 02, 2018 3:05 PM  

"when centralization fails, the response is not to abandon it, but to try to salvage it through expanding its reach"white

Which is more centralization. We have all, I assume, experienced firsthand in some form the strength of institutional liberal failure. Failure makes them stronger, for many reasons but also because they think they're the only ones who can manage themselves.

There's a book called Crisis and Leviathan by Robert Higgs which tracks the centralization of power in U.S., and he finds a repeating pattern whereby some sort of crisis is met with a Do Something response. Then, when the crisis is over, things don't go back the way they were. The Something Done stays, and there is what he calls a "ratchet effect."

Of course, the crises aren't always acts of God. More often they are screwups by those whose power derives from previous centralization after previous screwups.

Blogger Garuna November 02, 2018 5:11 PM  

Scott Adams has been mocking critics of the neo-liberal world order, George Soros, and the open borders agenda. A recent example.

SCOTT ADAMS: Question of the day: If Soros is controlling the groups to which he donates, why do others donate to the same groups? Do they share his evil views or are they idiots who are wasting their money? Discuss.

RESPONSE: Soros' evil views are shared by 8% of the population (26 million people), including lots of other US millionaires and billionaires.

SCOTT ADAMS: What would be an example of one of those evil views? Type it and then read it. Does it look rational?

RESPONSE: His views and actions go against national sovereignty and those who still believe in it. If you're a globalist Scott there's nothing wrong with it. If you're not he's automatically an adversary

SCOTT ADAMS: Are you making the assumption that some of his globalist ideas have a chance of happening? I put the odds at close to zero. I don't care about his intentions so much as his real impact.

RESPONSE: It's not like there's a world union of all governments, or a world bank, or any global organizations running the world financial system, or . . ..

SCOTT ADAMS: Which of those things is more problem than they are worth?

RESPONSE: All of them. This conversation is going all over the place, but you're the one consistently saying crazy things.

SCOTT ADAMS: I'm okay with you thinking I'm crazy if you're okay with me thinking you haven't made an argument worth evaluating.

RESPONSE: Hey, Scott. Why do you think other countries like Hungary decided to ban Soros if he's a great man? Discuss.

SCOTT ADAMS: Why don't you tell me why you think they did so and then read what you wrote to see if any reasons are in it. To be clear, I'm not defending Soros. I'm simply asking for a coherent argument about his evil global influence. I don't rule out its existence. I could easily be convinced. But I'd need an argument first.

RESPONSE: Soros funded groups. What do they support? Socialism. Open Borders. Mass Migration without restraint. You need a list of all the groups he supports and what they actually do. I know a few, but not all. And its dressed up as "Supporting Democracy".

WHITE KNIGHT: What would be the reason Soros supports Mass Migration without restraint?

SCOTT ADAMS: Nailed it.


https://twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/1058026592029442048


What a ridiculous attitude. Just because Scott doesn't understand Soros' motives doesn't mean that they're not worth addressing. And whenever someone points out to Scott that Soros is acting on his motives, he backpedals into "Who cares?" and a dishonest attitude of "I'm just trying to understand".

Scott is trying to mock and shut down the discussion because he thinks it makes him look bad to his liberal friends. He has admitted that this was his motivation to attack QAnon followers. This thirst for liberal validation is one of the biggest obstacles to victory.

Blogger Dirk Manly November 03, 2018 1:03 AM  

@7

"What freedom the west embraces (and really, it's only the island culture of the Brit islanders)"

Being islanders is what allowed the British to push for freedom. You'll notice that the real clamping down on British freedom has come from foreign (first Norman, then Norman + Hanovarian) rule. The Hanovarians have been handcuffed, but the Normans eventually managed to disarm the British. It only took them 900 years.

Blogger Dirk Manly November 03, 2018 1:30 AM  

@9

"Could a healthy tribalism and nationalism fill that void? It might be too late and too many nice/weak boys are already stuck in their ways, but good things are worth hoping for. If nothing else, Gen Z looks more promising."

I was a nice, weak boy. Then, after college, I joined the National Guard. And then I voluntarily went, separately from my unit, on a deployment (tail end of Desert Storm). Then I moved to a new state, and having experienced the soap-opera madness of a co-ed combat service support unit, told the local recruiter to find me a combat arms unit (i.e. no women!) to transfer to... and spent 18 years in an infantry battalion (initially, I planned on staying with them for a year, and then transferring to something else. But I found something among those 11B's that I had never experienced anywhere else: True masculinity. Not the weird dominance games of my father (who was a reluctant reservist 1962-68 -- because he didn't want to do 2 years of regular army if his number came up in the draft -- in a unit which was initially infantry, then converted to MP's) who would help me towards a goal, and then, time and again, just before achieving the goal, suddenly withdraw all support, without warning. Like holding a ladder while climbing up to the roof, and suddenly removing the ladder two steps away from the roof, because now I can put my arms on the roof, and, while hanging there, figure out a way to climb up over the overhanging eave, onto the roof. And then belittling me for eventually not being able to hang one, and falling to the ground. And he wonders why I don't talk to him or visit my parent's house any more except for on holidays.

In contrast, these men insisted on high standards, but then did everything they could to get you to achieve those high standards. Teaching, coaching, heckling, whatever it takes to motivate a man to achieve what they know he is capable of doing, even if he doesn't see it in himself.
They will train, test, test again, re-train, test again, and again... whatever it takes, until the man either passes or quits. And no male with even an ounce of self-respect wants to admit that he quit.... quit on himself.
But one thing they NEVER do is sabotage a man.
Help him through the climb the first time. Show him all the steps... then let him go to it. If he screws up, show him where/how he screwed up. Go at it again. NEVER leave a man hanging, who wants to accomplish the task, but just needs more time to figure out how he can to do whatever mental and physical subtasks it takes to do it on his own. One time, I was having trouble learning how to start IV's. I could get the needle into the vein no problem, but when the blood started pouring out, I would reflexively pull the needle out. After 3 sticks on my battle buddy, a medic came over, and said, here, use my arm... you're gonna get it right this time... just leave that needle in there. He spoke with such total confidence.

And that time, I did it right.

That's the kind of dedication to making sure EVERYONE can achieve what he is capable of achieving... that I have never seen outside of the infantry.

During physical fitness tests, they vocally encourage each other to get out one more rep in the push-ups or sit-ups events. In contrast, I'm in a quartermaster unit now. They have the same culture as Fort Lee, which is the home of the quartermaster corps -- during the pushup and sit-up events during the physical fitness test, everyone standing in line has to turn their back on the person at the front of the line being tested. This one detail is all the difference between a combat-arms unit and a combat service support unit -- it's a way of hiding in plain sight if/when leaders (NCO's and officers) are failing in one of the fundamental duties of any soldier -- to keep himself physically fit.

Blogger Dirk Manly November 03, 2018 1:38 AM  

@14

"Someday when I hit the lottery I will research and write a groundbreaking book on the topic, called "Family of Death: The 8 Cousins Who Decided To Burn The World" or something like that. "

Keep that going. I don't have the $ at the moment, but, if some research into a profitable-up-to-the-day-a-minor-catastrophe-closed-it gold mine pans out, I'll fund it.

Make an initial contact by email. Put a subject line on it that will be memorable a couple years from now, like maybe including the words "FUND THIS" in the subject line.

email dirk.gently00@gmail.com

In the meantime, keep whittling away at it.

Blogger Dirk Manly November 03, 2018 1:45 AM  

@16

"The Bretton Woods framework no longer makes sense. So out it goes."

Bretton Woods was obviously put together by people with rather short-term interests (20 years or so)... I think all they were interested in was for it to work long enough for them to make a mountain of wealth, and who cares after that. It's really not very rigorous or fault-tolerant, has no internal controls to fight long-term decay of the system, and has no agreed-upon mechanisms for easing out of it if/when it comes to pass that people just don't support it any more. This means that the end of Bretton Woods is probably going to cause catastrophic upheaval unless those with any voice in the matter get together and make an ease out plan. Unfortunately, most of (((those who have enough standing))) in those circles to bring about meetings on the matter, literally don't care what happens if it all just collapses.

Blogger Dirk Manly November 03, 2018 2:03 AM  

@17

"ussia is down. In many ways, Putin is the Russian Charles de Gaulle - leader of a country that has taken a massive hit in the Great Power standings, but can't quite bring himself to admit it. "

Russia was never powerful during the cold war.
(((Russia))) was.

RUSSIA is more powerful than it has been in probably 200 years. They have a navy, which, while not large, is competent for Russia's needs. I don't see another loss on their horizon like the 1905 humiliation at the hands of the Japanese (which, ironically, caused the Japanese navy to learn the wrong lessons, which were fundamental to why they lost the War in the Pacific during WW2, which in turn caused them to lose in their mainland adventure into Korea, China, Vietnam and the Dutch colonies as well. The British, New Zeelanders, and Australians could NOT have forced Japan out of mainland Asia. They didn't have enough ships, especially aircraft carriers. And Japan didn't need to invade Australia... nothing of value for them there that they weren't already getting in mainland southeast Asia and their occupation of Indonesia and Malaysia. Their whole vision of defeating the U.S. Navy was to pull off a repeat of 1905 Battle of Tsushima Straight. Japan defeated the Chinese only a few years earlier, and both times, the "wonder weapon" was the torpedo. The Japs came to see the torpedo as the most invincible naval weapon. And even with a huge advantage in aircraft carriers, they only saw aircraft carriers as a way to get a friendly airbase near enemy territory. They literally never conceived of using aircraft carriers in fleet battles on the high seas. They invisioned such a battle as being won by cruisers and destroyers launching torpedoes at big fat American battleships just waiting to be sunk.

IDIOTS. The only one who saw that it wouldn't work was Adm. Yamamoto, but he was over ruled by the war hawks at the top of the military junta that was ruling Japan. They're also the ones who demanded the failed Midway operation, and when it was wargamed out, showing catastrophic losses when 3 admirals played against a lowly captain, and lost all 3 times to the captain... they completely ignored the results, and were drawing up their post-Midway plans as if there would be NO LOSSES in any category of capital ships. DELUSIONAL!

Blogger Dirk Manly November 03, 2018 2:25 AM  



"Trump marked the end of a 28-year period when every American President was the product of Harvard or Yale."

You forgot the high spot in that mess -- the 8 years under Reagan, whose only post-secondary education is his Bachelors in Economics and Sociology from Eureka College, a private liberal arts school. It's always been a small college with under 1000 students. Even today, the total enrollment is around 600.

Blogger Dirk Manly November 03, 2018 2:30 AM  

"...when centralization fails, the response is not to abandon it, but to try to salvage it through expanding its reach

I call it failing outwards. It's a symptom of a parasitical "management" class who have almost no chance of getting it right at any level, but talk a good game and are always ready to point out the external factors that hampered their fabulous plans. So it's necessary to bring those external forces under their control to continue. City fails out to region, region fails out to state, state fails out to nation, nation fails out to global. "

Sounds like the Lennart Poettering school of systems programming. (I/We didn't screw up! -- It was that outside entity that caused everything to crash and burn!)

Blogger tublecane November 03, 2018 2:45 AM  

@35- Speaking of short-term interests and Bretton Woods, Lord Keynes was the "outstanding personality" at the conference . He was also a homo and famously said "in the long-run we're all dead."

Blogger Dirk Manly November 03, 2018 1:05 PM  

Keynes... that asshole's bones should be dug-up just so whatever is left can be crushed into powder.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts