We are just a group of retired spooks that discuss things that you’ll not find anywhere else. It makes us unique. Take a look around. Learn a thing or two.
This man was a great artist. Luigi Crosio was an Italian painter who lived and worked in Turin, Italy. He died in Turin and is recorded as having been born in Alba, but the town of Acqui Terme, a few miles south of Alba, claims Crosio was born there.
Luigi Crosio was born in Alba, Italy in 1835 and died in Turin, 1915. He often painted religious works for the Kuenzli Brothers in Switzerland. This company specialised in religious and pious works for printing and distribution. There was a legal case in the 1890s regarding his painting Refuge of Sinners. This was his most successful image and another artist claimed the copyright for it. However, the Kuenzli Brothers produced photographs that showed the face of the Virgin was based on the face of one of Crosio’s daughters. The last work that Crosio is recorded having painted for the Kuenzli Brothers was in 1911.
He was survived by Annette Crosio, one of several daughters, who is known to have been still living in Turin in 1923.
The Beautiful Slave
This is an “Orientalist” painting that depicts a man buying a female slave. One of my favorite art genres is the “Orientalist” imagery as depicted by the romantic painters of Europe one hundred years ago.
78.7 x 54.6 cms | 30 3/4 x 21 1/4 ins
Oil on Canvas
Here, we see the relationship between the older sister and the younger sister as she arrives home. Note the possessive guardian stance of the loyal dog, and the open book of poetry next to the chair.
Oil on canvas
91.4 x 67.3 cms | 35 3/4 x 26 1/4 ins
New Friends
Paintings of ancient Greece, Rome, and Egypt were always popular with these period painters. As an artist, I really enjoy the cool darkness of the nearby shrine, and the impression of a lovely day of moderate temperature.The goat is a nice touch, but I do love the rendered folds on the black woman’s dress.
Oil On Panel
A visit to an Art Museum
When was the last time that you visited an art museum? Be honest. It’s not the kind of thing you do every day. And unless you live in a city, it’s maybe a once every decade event.
In America, of course, all of the museums have turned into a for-profit model. So if you want to look at some art, sculptures, and walk around in the galleries, you must pay an entrance fee. Not so in China. Most are open to the public. Though, Hong Kong, in deference to the influence of the British Empire has also adopted the for-profit model.
All museums (well most) have a discount or “free” day. And you can go visit the museum and not have to worry about the fees. When I lived in Woonsockett, RI there was a historical museum of the city nearby, and they wanted $35 per person to go in. That’s pretty steep, and that was maybe 25 years ago.
To see what “specials” or events that the museums have, you just go to their web page. You might be surprised. I will tell you that going out to a museum is a great activity and a heck of a lot of fun. Then afterwards go out and eat a nice meal. Always a great activity.
Art museums tend to be fun. You go into the new progressive art section and will laugh at what people think is art, while you might go up and down corridors with nothing but tranquil landscapes. I always loved the statues, and that section of the museums.
In today’s really crazy world…
…perhaps a nice visit to a museum might be in order.
Types of Museums
There are different types of museums. Here are some of them:
Archaeology museums. They display archeological artifacts. They can be open-air museums or they can exhibit items in a building.
Art museums. Also known as art galleries. They are spaces for showing art objects, most commonly visual art objects as paintings, sculpture, photography, illustrations, drawings, ceramics or metalwork. First publicly owned art museum in Europe was Amerbach-Cabinet in Basel (Now Kunstmuseum Basel).
Encyclopedic museums. They are usually large institutions and they offer visitors a wide variety of information on many themes, both local and global. They are not thematically defined nor specialized.
Historic house museums. A house or a building turned into a museum for a variety of reasons, most commonly because the person that lived in it was important or something important happened in it. House is often equipped with furniture like it was in the time when it was used. Visitors of the house learn through guides that tell story of the house and its inhabitants.
History museums. They collect objects and artifacts that tell a chronological story about particular locality. Objects that are collected could be documents, artifacts, archeological findings and other. They could be in a building, historic house or a historic site.
A county historical museum.
Living history museums. Type of a museum in which historic events are performed by actors to immerse a viewer and show how certain events looked like or how some crafts were performed because there is no other way to see them now because they are obsolete.
Maritime museums. Specialized museums for displaying maritime history, culture or archaeology. Primarily archaeological maritime museums exhibit artifacts and preserved shipwrecks recovered from bodies of water. Maritime history museums, show and educate the public about humanity’s maritime past.
Military and war museums. Museums specialized in military histories. Usually organized from a point of view of a one nation and conflicts in which that country has taken part. They collect and present weapons, uniforms, decorations, war technology and other objects.
Mobile museums. Museums that have no specific strict place of exhibiting. They could be exhibited from a vehicle or they could move from museum to museum as guests. Also a name for a parts of exhibitions of a museum that are sent to another museum.
Natural history museums. Usually display objects from nature like stuffed animals or pressed plants. They educate about natural history, dinosaurs, zoology, oceanography, anthropology, evolution, environmental issues, and more.
Open-air museums. Characteristic for exhibiting outdoors. Exhibitions consist of buildings that recreate architecture from the past. First opened in Scandinavia near the end of the 19th century.
Pop-up museums. Nontraditional museum institutions. Made to last short and often relying on visitors to provide museum objects and labels while professionals or institution only provide theme. With that is constructed shared historical authority.
Science museums. Specialized for science and history of science. In the beginning they were static displays of objects but now they are made so the visitors can participate and that way better learn about different branches of science.
I like to believe that you will surprised by the large number of museums around you. You simply go to the local library, and go up to the librarian there and ask them where the local museums are. You will find city, state, and country historical museums. Natural museum for such things as local wildlife, and butterflies (great fun that one!). And many more.
Planning
If you did your research, you might discover that the local country historical museum is open to the public and free, but is only open two days a week.
Or you might discover a local national history museum is free but asks for donations.
Just plan out your event. I urge going budget, keeping in mind that the idea is not to tantalize the children, but for you all to have a nice outings with those you care about.
Pick a museum.
Pick a date.
Plan the trip.
Pick an unusual restaurant to make it special.
Special Meals?
What do I mean by special meals? Well, I mean that you go out and find a restaurant to eat in. NOT FAST FOOD.
A family Italian restaurant.
A seafood, or local restaurant that has good cheap prices. (I once found a Cuban restaurant in the middle of nowhere. I ate delicious food that I never had since.)
A diner that is out of one of those old fashioned diner cars.
A place that makes their own ginger beer.
A place that is listed in the local community newspapers as “unique” or “special” or that has a story that is interesting.
Maybe your budget is so slim that you cannot afford a real mean. Then consider an after museum picnic. And just plan where to go, and BBQ some chicken, or meat, And relax in the countryside.
The idea is, of course, to have a low budget fun and special time with those you love and appreciate.
Final thoughts
There is no reason why you can’t have fun regardless of your personal situation. If you are working, then take the time off. If you are not working, then go when no one else is around.
Keep in mind, from a budget point of view, the cheapest meals are breakfasts.
You would be so very surprised at how cheap two eggs, toast, and baked beans (fried potatoes) are with a cup of coffee.
Get up early, have a weekday early breakfast in a diner, then go to the museum.
Have a great time.
Take a ton of “selfies”, and then head home.
All this for just a few dollars. And unlimited coffee refills.
Also, keep in mind that State Parks usually have cabins to rent, and that they are dirt cheap. But you have to reserve them months in advance.
Some of the most remarkable times that I ever had was staying in some of these (bare) cabins, and going out and tromping though the state forest paths at night under a full moon, or attending the local recreation of a log cabin community at night.
Magical times.
And the smells of the wood smoke and the fires were mystical.
Bastrop State Park (Texas) Cabin #14 (Wheelchair Accessible)
Note that the prices can vary from $5 to $35 a night. The cabins will be bare. With just a mattress, and a table and chairs. There will be a nice fireplace, and a cord of wood to use. Some may have electricity. Some might have such things as refrigerators and other amenities, but don’t count on it.
Just check out the local webpage of the park that you are interested in visiting.
Chickasaw State Park Cabins — Tennessee State Parks
Do you want more?
I have more articles like this in my Art Index here…
This is law 45 of the “48 Laws of Power” by Robert Green. Reprinted in it’s entirety. I hope that you all enjoy it. Americans should naturally understand this law, as it defines what America has been now for decades.
Everyone understands the need for change in the abstract, but on the day-to-day level people are creatures of habit. Too much innovation is traumatic, and will lead to revolt. If you are new to a position of power, or an outsider trying to build a power base, make a show of respecting the old way of doing things. If change is necessary, make it feel like a gentle improvement on the past.
Borrow the weight and legitimacy from the past, however remote, to create a comforting and familiar presence.
Humans desire change in the abstract, or superficial change, but a change that upsets core habits and routines is deeply disturbing to them.
Understand: The fact that the past is dead and buried gives you the freedom to reinterpret it. To support your cause, tinker with the facts. The past is a text in which you can safely insert your own lines.
A simple gesture like using an old title, or keeping the same number for a group, will tie you to the past and support you with the authority of history.
LAW 45
PREACH THE NEED FOR CHANGE, BUT NEVER REFORM TOO MUCH AT ONCE
JUDGMENT
Everyone understands the need for change in the abstract, but on the day-to-day level people are creatures of habit. Too much innovation is traumatic, and will lead to revolt. If you are new to a position of power, or an outsider trying to build a power base, make a show of respecting the old way of doing things. If change is necessary, make it feel like a gentle improvement on the past.
TRANSGRESSION OF THE LAW
Sometime in the early 1520s, King Henry VIII of England decided to divorce his wife, Catherine of Aragon, because she had failed to bear him a son, and because he had fallen in love with the young and comely Anne Boleyn. The pope, Clement VII, opposed the divorce, and threatened the king with excommunication. The king’s most powerful minister, Cardinal Wolsey, also saw no need for divorce—and his halfhearted support of the king cost him his position and soon his life.
One man in Henry’s cabinet, Thomas Cromwell, not only supported him in his desire for a divorce but had an idea for realizing it: a complete break with the past. He convinced the king that by severing ties with Rome and making himself the head of a newly formed English church, he could divorce Catherine and marry Anne. By 1531 Henry saw this as the only solution. To reward Cromwell for his simple but brilliant idea, he elevated this son of a blacksmith to the post of royal councillor.
By 1534 Cromwell had been named the king’s secretary, and as the power behind the throne he had become the most powerful man in England. But for him the break with Rome went beyond the satisfaction of the king’s carnal desires: He envisioned a new Protestant order in England, with the power of the Catholic Church smashed and its vast wealth in the hands of the king and the government. In that same year he initiated a complete survey of the churches and monasteries of England. And as it turned out, the treasures and moneys that the churches had accumulated over the centuries were far more than he had imagined; his spies and agents came back with astonishing figures.
To justify his schemes, Cromwell circulated stories about the corruption in the English monasteries, their abuse of power, their exploitation of the people they supposedly served. Having won Parliament’s support for breaking up the monasteries, he began to seize their holdings and to put them out of existence one by one. At the same time, he began to impose Protestantism, introducing reforms in religious ritual and punishing those who stuck to Catholicism, and who now were called heretics. Virtually overnight, England was converted to a new official religion.
A terror fell on the country. Some people had suffered under the Catholic Church, which before the reforms had been immensely powerful, but most Britons had strong ties to Catholicism and to its comforting rituals. They watched in horror as churches were demolished, images of the Madonna and saints were broken in pieces, stained- glass windows were smashed, and the churches’ treasures were confiscated. With monasteries that had succored the poor suddenly gone, the poor now flooded the streets. The growing ranks of the beggar class were further swelled by former monks. On top of all this, Cromwell levied high taxes to pay for his ecclesiastical reforms.
Celebrating the turn of the year is an ancient custom. The Romans celebrated the Saturnalia, the festival of Saturn, god of the harvest, between December 17 and 23. It was the most cheerful festival of the year. All work and commerce stopped, and the streets were filled with crowds and a carnival atmosphere. Slaves were temporarily freed, and the houses were decorated with laurel branches. People visited one another, bringing gifts of wax candles and little clay figurines.
Long before the birth of Christ, the Jews celebrated an eight-day Festival of Lights [at the same season], and it is believed that the Germanic peoples held a great festival not only at midsummer but also at the winter solstice, when they celebrated the rebirth of the sun and honored the great fertility gods Wotan and Freyja, Donar (Thor) and Freyr. Even after the Emperor Constantine (A.D. 306-337) declared Christianity to be Rome’s official imperial religion, the evocation of light and fertility as an important component of pre-Christian midwinter celebrations could nor be entirely suppressed. In the year 274 the Roman Emperor Aurelian (A.D. 214-
275) had established an official cult of the sun-god Mithras, declaring his birthday, December 25, a national holiday. The cult of Mithras, the Aryan god of light, had spread from Persia through Asia Minor to Greece, Rome, and as far as the Germanic lands and Britain. Numerous ruins of his shrines still testify to the high regard in which this god was held, especially by the Roman legions, as a bringer of fertility, peace, and victory. So it was a clever move when, in the year A.D. 354, the Christian church under Pope Liberius (352-366) co-opted the birthday of Mithras and declared December 25 to be the birthday of Jesus Christ.
NEUE ZÜRCHER ZEITUNG, ANNE-SUSANNE RISCHKE, DECEMBER 25, 1983
In 1535 powerful revolts in the North of England threatened to topple Henry from his throne. By the following year he had suppressed the rebellions, but he had also begun to see the costs of Cromwell’s reforms. The king himself had never wanted to go this far— he had only wanted a divorce. It was now Cromwell’s turn to watch uneasily as the king began slowly to undo his reforms, reinstating Catholic sacraments and other rituals that Cromwell had outlawed.
Sensing his fall from grace, in 1540 Cromwell decided to regain Henry’s favor with one throw of the dice: He would find the king a new wife. Henry’s third wife, Jane Seymour, had died a few years before, and he had been pining for a new young queen. It was Cromwell who found him one: Anne of Cleves, a German princess and, most important to Cromwell, a Protestant. On Cromwell’s commission, the painter Holbein produced a flattering portrait of Anne; when Henry saw it, he fell in love, and agreed to marry her. Cromwell seemed back in favor.
Unfortunately, however, Holbein’s painting was highly idealized, and when the king finally met the princess she did not please him in the least. His anger against Cromwell
—first for the ill-conceived reforms, now for saddling him with an unattractive and Protestant wife—could no longer be contained. In June of that year, Cromwell was arrested, charged as a Protestant extremist and a heretic, and sent to the Tower. Six weeks later, before a large and enthusiastic crowd, the public executioner cut off his head.
Interpretation
Thomas Cromwell had a simple idea: He would break up the power and wealth of the Church and lay the foundation for Protestantism in England. And he would do this in a mercilessly short time. He knew his speedy reforms would cause pain and resentment, but he thought these feelings would fade in a few years. More important, by identifying himself with change, he would become the leader of the new order, making the king dependent on him. But there was a problem in his strategy: Like a billiard ball hit too hard against the cushion, his reforms had reactions and caroms he did not envision and could not control.
The man who initiates strong reforms often becomes the scapegoat for any kind of dissatisfaction. And eventually the reaction to his reforms may consume him, for change is upsetting to the human animal, even when it is for the good. Because the world is and always has been full of insecurity and threat, we latch on to familiar faces and create habits and rituals to make the world more comfortable. Change can be pleasant and even sometimes desirable in the abstract, but too much of it creates an anxiety that will stir and boil beneath the surface and then eventually erupt.
Never underestimate the hidden conservatism of those around you. It is powerful and entrenched. Never let the seductive charm of an idea cloud your reason: Just as you cannot make people see the world your way, you cannot wrench them into the future with painful changes. They will rebel. If reform is necessary, anticipate the reaction against it and find ways to disguise the change and sweeten the poison.
OBSERVANCE OF THE LAW
As a young Communist in the 1920s, Mao Tse-tung understood better than any of his colleagues the incredible odds against a Communist victory in China. With their small numbers, limited funds, lack of military experience, and small arsenal of weapons, the Party had no hope of success unless it won over China’s immense peasant population. But who in the world was more conservative, more rooted in tradition, than the Chinese peasantry? The oldest civilization on the planet had a history that would never loosen its power, no matter how violent the revolution. The ideas of Confucius remained as alive in the 1920s as they had been in the sixth century B.C., when the philosopher was alive.
Despite the oppressions of the current system, would the peasantry ever give up the deep-rooted values of the past for the great unknown of Communism?
The solution, as Mao saw it, involved a simple deception: Cloak the revolution in the clothing of the past, making it comforting and legitimate in people’s eyes. One of Mao’s favorite books was the very popular medieval Chinese novel The Water Margin, which recounts the exploits of a Chinese Robin Hood and his robber band as they struggle against a corrupt and evil monarch. In China in Mao’s time, family ties dominated over any other kind, for the Confucian hierarchy of father and oldest son remained firmly in place; but The Water Margin preached a superior value—the fraternal ties of the band of robbers, the nobility of the cause that unites people beyond blood. The novel had great emotional resonance for Chinese people, who love to root for the underdog. Time and again, then, Mao would present his revolutionary army as an extension of the robber band in The Water Margin, likening his struggle to the timeless conflict between the oppressed peasantry and an evil emperor. He made the past seem to envelop and legitimize the Communist cause; the peasantry could feel comfortable with and even support a group with such roots in the past.
Even once the Party came to power, Mao continued to associate it with the past. He presented himself to the masses not as a Chinese Lenin but as a modern Chuko Liang, the real-life third-century strategist who figures prominently in the popular historical novel The Romance of the Three Kingdoms. Liang was more than a great general—he was a poet, a philosopher, and a figure of stern moral rectitude. So Mao represented himself as a poet-warrior like Liang, a man who mixed strategy with philosophy and preached a new ethics. He made himself appear like a hero from the great Chinese tradition of warrior statesmen.
Soon, everything in Mao’s speeches and writings had a reference to an earlier period in Chinese history. He recalled, for example, the great Emperor Ch‘in, who had unified the country in the third century B.C. Ch’in had burned the works of Confucius, consolidated and completed the building of the Great Wall, and given his name to China. Like Ch‘in, Mao also had brought the country together, and had sought bold reforms against an oppressive past. Ch’in had traditionally been seen as a violent dictator whose reign was short; the brilliance of Mao’s strategy was to turn this around, simultaneously reinterpreting Ch’in, justifying his rule in the eyes of present-day Chinese, and using him to justify the violence of the new order that Mao himself was creating.
After the failed Cultural Revolution of the late 1960s, a power struggle emerged in the Communist Party in which Mao’s main foe was Lin Piao, once a close friend of his. To make clear to the masses the difference between his philosophy and Lin’s, Mao once again exploited the past: He cast his opponent as representing Confucius, a philosopher
Lin in fact would constantly quote. And Confucius signified the conservatism of the past. Mao associated himself, on the other hand, with the ancient philosophical movement known as Legalism, exemplified by the writings of Han-fei-tzu. The Legalists disdained Confucian ethics; they believed in the need for violence to create a new order. They worshiped power. To give himself weight in the struggle, Mao unleashed a nationwide propaganda campaign against Confucius, using the issues of Confucianism versus Legalism to whip the young into a kind of frenzied revolt against the older generation. This grand context enveloped a rather banal power struggle, and Mao once again won over the masses and triumphed over his enemies.
Interpretation
No people had a more profound attachment to the past than the Chinese. In the face of this enormous obstacle to reform, Mao’s strategy was simple: Instead of struggling against the past, he turned it to his advantage, associating his radical Communists with the romantic figures of Chinese history. Weaving the story of the War of the Three Kingdoms into the struggle between the United States, the Soviet Union, and China, he cast himself as Chuko Liang. As the emperors had, he welcomed the cultlike adoration of the masses, understanding that the Chinese could not function without some kind of father figure to admire. And after he made a terrible blunder with the Great Leap Forward, trying to force modernization on the country and failing miserably, he never repeated his mistake: From then on, radical change had to be cloaked in the comfortable clothes of the past.
The lesson is simple: The past is powerful. What has happened before seems greater; habit and history give any act weight. Use this to your advantage. When you destroy the familiar you create a void or vacuum; people fear the chaos that will flood in to fill it. You must avoid stirring up such fears at all cost. Borrow the weight and legitimacy from the past, however remote, to create a comforting and familiar presence. This will give your actions romantic associations, add to your presence, and cloak the nature of the changes you are attempting.
It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out, nor more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things.
Niccolò Machiavelli, 1469-1527
KEYS TO POWER
Human psychology contains many dualities, one of them being that even while people understand the need for change, knowing how important it is for institutions and individuals to be occasionally renewed, they are also irritated and upset by changes that affect them personally. They know that change is necessary, and that novelty provides relief from boredom, but deep inside they cling to the past. Change in the abstract, or superficial change, they desire, but a change that upsets core habits and routines is deeply disturbing to them.
No revolution has gone without a powerful later reaction against it, for in the long run the void it creates proves too unsettling to the human animal, who unconsciously associates such voids with death and chaos. The opportunity for change and renewal seduces people to the side of the revolution, but once their enthusiasm fades, which it will, they are left with a certain emptiness. Yearning for the past, they create an opening for it to creep back in.
For Machiavelli, the prophet who preaches and brings change can only survive by taking up arms: When the masses inevitably yearn for the past, he must be ready to use force. But the armed prophet cannot last long unless he quickly creates a new set of values and rituals to replace the old ones, and to soothe the anxieties of those who dread change. It is far easier, and less bloody, to play a kind of con game. Preach change as much as you like, and even enact your reforms, but give them the comforting appearance of older events and traditions.
Reigning from A.D. 8 to A.D. 23, the Chinese emperor Wang Mang emerged from a period of great historical turbulence in which the people yearned for order, an order represented for them by Confucius. Some two hundred years earlier, however, Emperor Ch’in had ordered the writings of Confucius burned. A few years later, word had spread that certain texts had miraculously survived, hidden under the scholar’s house. These texts may not have been genuine, but they gave Wang his opportunity: He first confiscated them, then had his scribes insert passages into them that seemed to support the changes he had been imposing on the country. When he released the texts, it seemed that Confucius sanctioned Wang’s reforms, and the people felt comforted and accepted them more easily.
Understand: The fact that the past is dead and buried gives you the freedom to reinterpret it. To support your cause, tinker with the facts. The past is a text in which you can safely insert your own lines.
A simple gesture like using an old title, or keeping the same number for a group, will tie you to the past and support you with the authority of history. As Machiavelli himself observed, the Romans used this device when they transformed their monarchy into a republic. They may have installed two consuls in place of the king, but since the king had been served by twelve lictors, they retained the same number to serve under the consuls. The king had personally performed an annual sacrifice, in a great spectacle that stirred the public; the republic retained this practice, only transferring it to a special “chief of the ceremony, whom they called the King of the sacrifice.” These and similar gestures satisfied the people and kept them from clamoring for the monarchy’s return.
Another strategy to disguise change is to make a loud and public display of support for the values of the past. Seem to be a zealot for tradition and few will notice how unconventional you really are. Renaissance Florence had a centuries-old republic, and was suspicious of anyone who flouted its traditions. Cosimo de’ Medici made a show of enthusiastic support for the republic, while in reality he worked to bring the city under the control of his wealthy family. In form, the Medicis retained the appearance of a republic; in substance, they rendered it powerless. They quietly enacted a radical change, while appearing to safeguard tradition.
Science claims a search for truth that would seem to protect it from conservatism and the irrationality of habit: It is a culture of innovation. Yet when Charles Darwin published his ideas of evolution, he faced fiercer opposition from his fellow scientists than from religious authorities. His theories challenged too many fixed ideas. Jonas Salk ran into the same wall with his radical innovations in immunology, as did Max Planck with his revolutionizing of physics. Planck later wrote of the scientific opposition he faced, “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”
The answer to this innate conservatism is to play the courtier’s game. Galileo did this at the beginning of his scientific career; he later became more confrontational, and paid for it. So pay lip service to tradition. Identify the elements in your revolution that can be made to seem to build on the past. Say the right things, make a show of conformity, and meanwhile let your theories do their radical work. Play with appearances and respect past protocol. This is true in every arena—science being no exception.
Finally, powerful people pay attention to the zeitgeist. If their reform is too far ahead of its time, few will understand it, and it will stir up anxiety and be hopelessly misinterpreted. The changes you make must seem less innovative than they are. England did eventually become a Protestant nation, as Cromwell wished, but it took over a century of gradual evolution.
Watch the zeitgeist. If you work in a tumultuous time, there is power to be gained by preaching a return to the past, to comfort, tradition, and ritual. During a period of stagnation, on the other hand, play the card of reform and revolution—but beware of what you stir up. Those who finish a revolution are rarely those who start it. You will not succeed at this dangerous game unless you are willing to forestall the inevitable reaction against it by playing with appearances and building on the past.
Authority: He who desires or attempts to reform the government of a state, and wishes to have it accepted, must at least retain the semblance of the old forms; so that it may seem to the people that there has been no change in the institutions, even though in fact they are entirely different from the old ones. For the great majority of mankind are satisfied with appearances, as though they were realities. (Niccolò Machiavelli, 1469- 1527)
Image: The Cat. Creature of habit, it loves the warmth of the familiar. Upset its routines, disrupt its space, and it will grow unmanageable and psychotic. Placate it by supporting its rituals. If change is necessary, deceive the cat by keeping the smell of the past alive; place objects familiar to it in strategic locations.
REVERSAL
The past is a corpse to be used as you see fit. If what happened in the recent past was painful and harsh, it is self-destructive to associate yourself with it. When Napoleon came to power, the French Revolution was fresh in everyone’s minds. If the court that he established had borne any resemblance to the lavish court of Louis XVI and Marie- Antoinette, his courtiers would have spent all their time worrying about their own necks. Instead, Napoleon established a court remarkable for its sobriety and lack of ostentation. It was the court of a man who valued work and military virtues. This new form seemed appropriate and reassuring.
In other words, pay attention to the times. But understand: If you make a bold change from the past, you must avoid at all costs the appearance of a void or vacuum, or you will create terror. Even an ugly recent history will seem preferable to an empty space. Fill that space immediately with new rituals and forms. Soothing and growing familiar, these will secure your position among the masses.
Finally, the arts, fashion, and technology would seem to be areas in which power would come from creating a radical rupture with the past and appearing cutting edge. Indeed, such a strategy can bring great power, but it has many dangers. It is inevitable that your innovations will be outdone by someone else. You have little control— someone younger and fresher moves in a sudden new direction, making your bold innovation of yesterday seem tiresome and tame today. You are forever playing catch- up; your power is tenuous and short-lived. You want a power built on something more solid. Using the past, tinkering with tradition, playing with convention to subvert it will give your creations something more than a momentary appeal. Periods of dizzying change disguise the fact that a yearning for the past will inevitably creep back in. In the end, using the past for your own purposes will bring you more power than trying to cut it out completely—a futile and self-destructive endeavor.
Do you want more?
I have more posts in my “48 Laws of Power” Index here…
You’ll not find any big banners or popups here talking about cookies and privacy notices. There are no ads on this site (aside from the hosting ads – a necessary evil). Functionally and fundamentally, I just don’t make money off of this blog. It is NOT monetized. Finally, I don’t track you because I just don’t care to.
Here, in this article I argue that the United States leadership is bat-shit-crazy. And their dealings with China confirms this. With each instance of interaction between the USA and China we see absolute ignorance, rudeness and irritating bluster that makes the entire world cringe. Why is this? Well, we will look at that right now.
Background
From MoA. The article discusses the second group of talks between the USA and China. This time taking place in China in July 2021. It was a second fiasco.
U.S. – China Talks Point To A Longer Conflict
The U.S. wants to slice and dice its approach to China. It will use all means to take advantage of China where it can, while restricting China in those fields were it can no longer compete with it.
The Chinese reject that approach.
The U.S., they say, should not see China as an enemy. It should stop lecturing China, accept it as an equal and cooperate with it in all fields.
The U.S. is unwilling to do that.
The USA is unwilling to accept China as an equal.
Its media-military-industrial complex is already primed for a cold war with China. Trillions of dollars are to be made from it.
China on the other side is ready to play hardball if it must.
Today U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman held talks with the Chinese Deputy Foreign Minister Xie Feng, She also meet with Foreign Minister Wang Yi. The later meeting, demanded to be the main event by the U.S., had already led to some squabble. Wang Yi is beyond Sherman’s rank and her main discussion, the Chinese insisted, should be with a person on her own level:
The State Department emphasized Sherman will have “senior-level” communications but a statement from China’s Foreign Affairs Ministry emphasized that Sherman “will hold talks” with Xie and after that Foreign Minister Wang will “meet her.”
Let me elaborate…
The Department of State announced that Ms. Sherman is going to meet with State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi and others in Tianjin. However, a spokesperson from China’s Foreign Ministry made clear on Friday that Ms. Sherman is to negotiate with Mr. Xie, while Mr. Wang will receive her afterward. ( “会见”）
For anyone who appreciates the richness of the Chinese language, “会见” can mean a meeting, but only in the context of gracing an inferior. This is the approach taken by the Foreign Ministry in the case of Wang’s meeting with Sherman.
When asked about Sherman’s visit on July 24, H.E. Wang remarked that China and the international community as a whole bear the responsibility to teach the US a lesson if the US has not learned to treat others as equals.
Accenting Sherman’s visit is China’s sanctioning of prominent US figures, including former Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross. The action serves as both a retaliation in the face of US warnings over Hong Kong and as a heads-up for the upcoming Tianjin talks.
From the Chinese perspective, Sherman’s Asia tour is assertive overall, as it seeks to solidify the encirclement of China.
But the Tianjin meeting will move ahead in [1] the context of China as an equal to the US; [2] that Chinese are not to be offended, and [3] the US cannot conduct foreign policy from a position of strength.
Professor Shirley Ze Yu's editors prepared a most insightful commentary ahead of Deputy Secretary of State Sherman's meeting with her counterparts ( or not) in Tianjin.
Please check out their commentary here https://lnkd.in/enBjf4i
On Saturday two ‘senior U.S. administration officials’ gave a preview of the talks:
As Secretary Blinken has said, the U.S. relationship with China will be collaborative where it can be, competitive where it should be, and adversarial where it must be.
And we expect all dimensions of the relationship will be on the table for discussion during Wendy’s meetings.
...
In Tianjin, [Sherman is] going to make clear while we welcome stiff and sustained competition with the PRC, everyone needs to play by the same rules and on the level – on a level playing field.
She’s going to underscore that we do not want that stiff and sustained competition to veer into conflict.
This is why the U.S. wants to ensure that there are guard rails and parameters in place to responsibly manage the relationship.
The second official added:
So let me also put this meeting into the context of the administration’s broader China policy effort.
Since President Biden took office, we’ve put a lot of focus on strengthening our own competitive hand vis-a-vis China through many actions that we’ve taken domestically, investing in ourselves at home.
We’ve also rallied our allies and partners, including to advance an affirmative vision of the rules-based international order.
And we’ve confronted China when they’ve acted against our interests and values while working to cooperate with China on areas like climate change and nonproliferation.
We know we’re stronger when we work with our allies. We know this makes us more effective when dealing with Beijing.
We aren’t seeking an anti-China coalition in our work with allies and partners, but rather trying to work together in a multilateral fashion to uphold the international rules-based order.
...
With all of those actions underway, we’re entering this engagement from a position of strength and of solidarity.
...
Even as we meet with our Chinese counterparts, we will also continue to hold China accountable.
These things are not mutually exclusive, and it should be clear that we are not afraid to impose costs for China’s behavior that undermines international norms.
Yup.
This describes how the rest of the world views the American position…
My opinion is…
As Peter Lee commented with his usual snark:
chinahand @chinahand - 16:43 UTC · Jul 24, 2021
"We're going to keep kicking your ass. Don't kick back, 'kay?" Our fate now that dime store Machiavellis, excuse me, generational talents, run the FP show.
The emphasized words were not welcome in China.
On Sunday Foreign Minister Wang Yi responded in an interview with an attack on U.S. exceptionalism:
“The United States always wants to exert pressure on other countries by virtue of its own strength, thinking that it is superior to others,”
Foreign Minister Wang Yi said on Saturday.
“However, I would like to tell the US side clearly that there has never been a country in this world that is superior to others, nor should there be, and China will not accept any country claiming to be superior to others.
“If the United States has not learned how to get along with other countries on an equal footing by now, then it is our responsibility, together with the international community, to give the US a good tutorial in this regard.”
Today, after the talk between Sherman and Xie, the Foreign Ministry published a series of strong response snippets by Deputy Foreign Minister Xie Feng:
I especially like the one about the ‘rules based international order’:
On 26 July, during his talks with U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, Vice Foreign Minister Xie Feng made the comment that the U.S. side's so-called “rules-based international order” is an effort by the United States and a few other Western countries to frame their own rules as international rules and impose them on other countries.
The United States has abandoned the universally-recognized international law and order and damaged the international system it has helped to build.
And it is trying to replace it with a so-called “rules-based international order”.
The purpose is to resort to the tactic of changing the rules to make life easy for itself and hard for others.
As well as to introduce “the law of the jungle" where might is right and the big bully the small.
China has for the first time given the US a list of red lines and remedial action it must take to repair relations.
Including [1] lifting sanctions and [2] dropping its extradition request for Huawei financial chief Meng Wanzhou.
Chinese foreign vice-minister Xie Feng told US deputy secretary of state Wendy Sherman on Monday morning that...
... US-China relations had reached a “stalemate”...
... and faced “serious consequences”.
According to a Chinese foreign ministry statement.
“The foundational reason is that some people in the US are treating China as an ‘imagined enemy’,” it quoted Xie as saying.
After the meeting, Xie said China gave two lists to the US.
[1] One with one remedial action for Washington to take towards China.
[2] And the other a series of Beijing’s key concerns.
...
Xie said the Chinese side also “expressed its strong dissatisfaction towards the wrong remarks and actions of the US” in relation to...
... investigations into [1] the origins of Covid-19, [2] Taiwan, [3] Xinjiang, [4] Hong Kong and [5] the South China Sea.
“We urge the United States not to underestimate...
...the strong determination,
...firm will and
...strong ability
of the 1.4 billion Chinese people to...
...safeguard national sovereignty,
...security and
...development interests,”
The state news agency Xinhua quoted him as saying.
In its summary of the talks the Associated Presspoints to the basic difference in the approaches:
High-level face-to-face talks between U.S. and Chinese diplomats on Monday highlighted sharp differences between the sides.
Although the tone appeared somewhat less contentious than at their last meeting.
...
Xie said China wants to [1] seek common ground while [2] shelving differences.
This highlights a divide in the basic approach to their relationship.
The Biden administration has said it will cooperate in areas [1] such as climate. But it will [2] confront China in others such as human rights. He described the relationship as collaborative, competitive and adversarial (at the same time).
As the U.S. is for now rejecting the Chinese offer for burying the hatchet…
… China will have to play hardball.
It will not be cooperative in the fields where the U.S. wants it to be cooperative (Iran, North Korea, etc.).
It will also be adversarial in fields where the U.S. has little ability to push back (rare earth exports, Boeing 737MAX re-certification).
The U.S. hopes that it can find and press ‘allies’ into confronting China. But Europe already rejected that. (Not happening.)
Under these circumstances I for one fail to see how the U.S. could win in a longer cold conflict.
How long then will it take until the U.S. recognizes that and steps down from its illusion of supremacy?
You do know…
America has been very public in saying that the Chinese leadership will be assassinated. That military forces are being trained to invade China and the outlying islands. That secret hidden forces are being trained to perform dangerous secretive work to sabotage China. And that every action that China does that is positive, that America will try to undo it.
And somehow, the American people are just fine with this.
Ok! China won’t fight back you know. No worries. No problem.
Right?
Crazy!
From what I see today…
…never.
The entire American leadership suffers from some kind of mental illness. They are so sick that they are beyond repair.
Today, on the Chinese television and in social media everyone is playing the clip with the government authorities have stated that America is no longer reliable, believable and worthy of interaction with.
That means…
…all negotiations from now on are zero-sum efforts. They are not possible and cannot exist.
I argue that this idea of natural superior to the Chinese derives from decades of constant reinforcement of what the Chinese are. Over time, this reinforcement gets crazier, and crazier, until today it is unrecognizable from reality.
Here is a movie that I believe represents the type of Hollywood movie fare that has shaped the political class in Washington DC today. You might read it and think “oh goodness! No one could possibly be that deluded as to believe such nonsense!”
To which I counter…
…you haven’t been to the USA lately have you?
BATTLE BENEATH THE EARTH
A Chinese general goes berserk and has a system of tunnels dug all the way from China to USA, under the Pacific Ocean. The man who has discovered this is locked up because they think he is insane. US Navy soldiers go underground to repel the invaders.
BATTLE BENEATH THE EARTH
The picture concerns upon Chinese communists (leader is Martin Benson as general goes berserk and who places atomic bombs) trying to destroy United States via some continued series of underground tunnels , made all the way from China under the Pacific Ocean , but some US Navy soldiers , scientists , military (Kerwin Mathews , Al Mulok , Ed Bishop) and a gorgeous geologist (Vivienne Ventura) discover the scheme and go underground to repel the invaders .
It's a pulp movie of science-fiction genre in which there are noisy action , suspense , intrigue , tension and results to be quite bemusing .
The history deals with nasty Chinese people and American patriots who fight strongly to vanquish them .
In spite of lack luster and budget is quite agreeable and fun .
The plot is almost ridiculous and senseless but it's developed in fast moving and numerous surprises and that's why it is amusing .
The movie has precedent in those films of the 30s with Fumanchu (by Sax Rohmer) and Boris Karloff as heinous starring and nearest the series of the 60s (produced by Harry Alan Towers with Christopher Lee as the Chinese baddie) in which the ¨yellow danger¨ was a fearful enemy .
The motion picture takes part of a genre which in the 80s attained splendor , thus : ¨Red Dawn¨ (by John Milius with Patrick Swayze) , ¨Invasion USA ¨ (by Joseph Zito with Chuck Norris) and ¨Amerika¨ (by Donald Wyre with Kris Kristofferson) where the communists -Russkies generally- execute invasion on America .
Rating : Average but entertaining .
Evil Communist Chinese woman using a powerful mind ray to seduce our young American hero.
The Characters:
Cmdr. Shaw – His experimental underwater laboratory imploded, so he is assigned as senior testing official, U.S. Navy Forces Out to Pasture, Ashore.
Tila Yung – I bet she gets tired of servicemen asking what a pretty girl like her is doing in a hole like this.
Dr. Arnold Kramer – Part anteater, part scientist, and all-American. He’s also mad as a hatter, though I doubt he’s ever worn a felt hat and presumably has enough sense to avoid drinking quicksilver.
SgtMaj. Mulberry – “Sir, if you call me ‘sergeant’ one more time, I am going to get Bataan on your a**.”
Cmdr. Cassidy – Computer technician who flies a desk. Because this is 1967, his computer is so big that it dwarfs his house.
Dr. Kengh Lee – You look just about as Chinese as Tony Randall.
Gen. Chan Lu – You look more like Tony Randall than a Chinese person.
So many opportunities to laugh at this film. Where does one begin? European actors in "yellowface" playing the bad guy renegade Chinese army. (Let's see here -- the bad guy in his lair always has an eccentric pet with him -- okay the guy has a parrot! Check that off the list!)
A film obviously made in Britain pretending to be a Hollywood film, which takes place in Las Vegas (unconvincing cardboard set inside a sound stage, plus some actual second unit stock footage), San Diego (England), Oregon (England again) and Hawaii (more stock footage, plus various underground tunnels (more paper mache sets in a sound stage).
Comically fake nuclear bombs. Laser guns mounted on bulldozers. Giant spinning tape reel computer banks...no wait, those were real at that time.
Bad directing, jump cuts, dropped frames, one establishing shot where the camera drops off the tripod. Awkward staging. Hokey dialog. The whole plot totally ridiculous. Well, it is like a live action comic book. So why should I take any bit of it seriously? Well, the characters seem to be dead serious about the whole enterprise. (That's good. True camp does not work if you give a "nod and a wink" to the audience...though that one scene with the slot machines in the mental hospital was perhaps a bit over the line...)
Yes, fans of The Batman or Green Hornet TV shows of this time period will be right at home here. Plenty of bright primary colors, swish pan transitions, and blaring cool-daddyo-jazz soundtrack. It's all here for the fan of 1960's camp and Cold War pop culture kitsch to treasure as an endemic artifact of its time, the likes of which we may never see again.
Thank goodness.
BATTLE BENEATH THE EARTH
The Plot:
As the film begins, Las Vegas’ finest (meaning the police, not strippers, showgirls, or escorts) are called to the site of a disturbance. They find Dr. Arnold Kramer, eminent scientist, with his ear to the sidewalk, yelling about something digging underneath their feet. Arnold is not half as crazy as he appears to be. There are not giant ants making a nest under Las Vegas, even though I would happily pay money to see a movie about giant ants. What is slowly crawling below the Earth of free America is much more insidous.
Hold on, I’ll tell you what it is in a minute.
What is that sound under the ground? Dastardly Communists destroying the bedrock of society?
Elsewhere, Commander Shaw is not enjoying his reassignment to shore duty following an accident of undetermined nature that destroyed his pet project, SeaLab VII, and killed twenty-seven men. Instead of actual research or having a ship to command, the Commander finds himself testing pipes. It’s not exactly rewarding work for one of the brightest minds in the U.S. Navy, but at least he is not a guest at one of the military’s correctional facilities, peeling potatoes next to mother stabbers and father rapers. Nor is he experiencing the hospitality of a state mental institution, like Mr. Kramer. He goes to visit Arnold, because the two have known each other for years. The visit causes Shaw to think that his old buddy is as crazy as the psychiatrists say.
Later on, a random news report about a tragedy at a deep mine in Oregon gets Shaw to thinking. He takes a trip to personally investigate the mine collapse and discovers something fantastic: a mysterious medallion and an unexplained tunnel with smooth sides. Taking some samples back to the Navy lab only creates more questions. To find out what is really going on, the Commander leads two squads of Marines down into the hole. They discover a room filled with Chinese and atomic bombs! The Marines attack and easily defeat the Chinese in a decidedly one-side battle. The outcome is not surprising, since most of the Chinese are technicians who are only armed with clipboards.
BATTLE BENEATH THE EARTH
What is surprising is that the Marines quickly set to work rendering the atomic weapons unusable. All of the bombs look like stainless steel milk tanks turned on their sides. Making them inert involves uncapping one end and reaching in to remove a small cylinder that is resting in a cradle. The cylinders appear to be 9 oz CO2 tanks. My trouble is knowing what they are, but not what they are supposed to be. They cannot simply be the fuse, because that would be easy to replace. Perhaps the cylinders are supposed to be the plutonium or tritium. If that is the case, then those Marines should not be handling the cylinders with their bare hands.
Deactivating an atomic bomb is not the sort of thing that you should rush. Unfortunately, the return of a Chinese tunnel-making machine means that the Marines are out of luck and out of time. Commander Shaw and his compatriots finish removing the tritium cylinders from the bombs, but then have to deal with the tunnel-making machine. While not a military vehicle, it is not the sort of thing that a Marine wants to run into in a dark tunnel. It does not have a huge drill on the front, because the tunnels are created with a super boring laser thingamajig. So, the Chinese tunneling machines look like armored zambonis. The Marines do what Marines always do when faced with armored vehicles: they throw grenades at it until it explodes.
Actually, that only happens in video games. When Marine infantry is forced to engage enemy armor, we like to use just about everything besides grenades. This makes everybody happy, except the crew of the armored vehicle. Especially thankful are the 0352 TOW gunners who finally get a chance to expend one of the missiles they have always wanted to shoot, but which are too expensive to use for training.
Battle beneath the Earth.
After conducting a tactical retreat from the Chinese tunnel, Commander Shaw returns to the laboratory so he and the other brass can plan their next move against the subterranean red menace. Gentlemen, this is not a matter for discussion. There is a Red Chinese tunnel under the United States! You should divert the Colorado River into it or else send in a lot of Marines to clear the artificial cave system room by room. Imagine how much fun a battalion of Marines would have in the Underdark. Well, except for encountering all sorts of weird creatures that could only be dreamed up by nerds with too much time. Having my skin turned into slime by an aboleth or my brain puréed by an illithid would suck (yea, mightily). On the other hand, a movie about a squad of Marines fighting beholders and cave fishers would be a lot of fun.
I know that the SyFy folks read the site, so consider the suggestion officially submitted. It will probably be made, get turned into a series, become extremely popular with a group of hardcore fans, and then get cancelled after the first season. That’s just the way the SyFy cookie crumbles. To be honest, that’s the way that every SyFy cookie crumbles.
Brave American hero easily takes over the unsuspecting evil Chinese soldiers.
Anyway.
While the Americans scramble to figure out what is going on under the purple mountains and fruited plains, the Chinese continue their tunneling activities. General Lu and Doctor Lee are only mildly concerned that the United States has finally discovered their tunnels. They are nearly ready to proceed with the final phase of their plan. The thermonuclear weapons are, of course, intended to be detonated below every major American city and military installation. I would guess that the Chinese intend to dig upwards and leave their little present inside someone’s basement, then set the timer and retreat to a safe distance until the “All’s Destroyed” signal. After the bombs are detonated, the Chinese are prepared to conduct a military invasion to overpower what is left of America’s military forces.
This tunnel stretches all the way from China to the United States. Where are they getting their fresh air? Heck, where are they getting the genuine imitation Chinese restaurant decor?
The Chinese might be master in technology, but are not a match for the American freedom and democracy!
There is one huge, glaring problem with this movie. No, it is not the general premise. Nor is it the Marines (even the Private) all looking like they reached retirement age ten years ago. It’s not even the idea that the Chinese use big vacuum tube capsules like the ones you see in a bank’s drive-through to get from one end of the tunnel to the other. The biggest problem with “Battle Beneath the Earth” is that the Chinese do not look Chinese; not even by my standards. I am talking about the two main characters, Lee and Lu. The job that makeup did on the two actors makes it appear that they are old men who have had way too much cosmetic surgery. They look more Botox than Chinese.
Battle beneath the earth.
General Lu’s second in command does look Chinese, but the general shoots him for incompetence. Meaning that we’re right back to square one. Hrumpf!
Back at the American lab, Dr. Kramer and the others are making good progress is replicating the Chinese tunneling technology. What they are having a problem doing is finding the existing tunnels. Even using the giant government computer, with its reels of magnetic tape and army of support technicians, proves fruitless. There is too much extra noise going on to pinpoint the relatively silent Chinese tunneling machines. What the scientists finally do is order the entire country to be quiet for ten minutes so the computers can listen for the Chinese moles.
Dangerous underground Communist Chinese cars!
Amazingly, it works. Mass transit grinds to a halt, construction workers stop jackhammering, farmers stop plowing, and rednecks stop fishing with dynamite. The last state to go quiet is Texas, which is probably on account of some idiot out in bumf**k digging out a stump. Stop digging for ten minutes, ya durn fool. The Chinese are coming! Nobody cares about that stupid stump. It’s almost time for supper anyhow.
The moments of silence work. The computer maps out the network of Chinese tunnels under the ocean and the United States. Commander Shaw and Doctor Kramer know where the Chinese are at, meaning that our national foundation has a fighting chance. Hooray for American ingenuity! Hooray for the big-a** computer! Hooray for all the female employees in white blouses and gray skirts!
Brave American soldiers hiding from the evil Chinese army.
Remember when science was all about big rolls of magnetic tape, pretty women in tastefully fitting skirts, and beeps? Man, I miss those beeps.
With the location of the Chinese tunnels mapped out, the Americans are finally ready to go on the offensive. Using a prototype tunneling machine built by Dr. Kramer using bits and pieces of the destroyed Chinese vehicle, the American forces intend to disrupt the tunnel at it’s most vulnerable point near Hawaii. I can hear the Marines now, “What? We have to go TAD to Hawaii? Oh, no!” Unfortunately, once the Americans descend into the tunnels things go terribly wrong. The small strike force is ambushed by Chinese troops and either killed or taken prisoner. In the end, it is up to the main characters to escape from their cell, hijack an underground atomic bomb train, and destroy the Chinese tunnel system.
Oh, and Commander Shaw hooks up with Dr. Yung, because she is hot.
BATTLE BENEATH THE EARTH
Things I Learned From This Movie:
Never, ever follow any advice that you get from the sidewalks in Vegas.
The Department of the Navy has jurisdiction over all military operations that take place below sea level.
Marines are trained to defuse nuclear bombs while they are at Boot Camp.
The space race was a Red Chinese herring.
Both paper and halogen headlights beat rock.
The only tool needed to arm or disarm a nuclear weapon is a 5.5mm allen wrench.
If a Chinese person and an elf conceived a child it would look exactly like Mr. Spock.
Atomic bombs make a ticking sound when they are about to explode.
Radioactive fallout causes the most beautiful sunsets.
BATTLE BENEATH THE EARTH
Stuff To Watch For:
19 mins – It’s a genuine Fu Manchu belt buckle with decoder ring! I got one of those in a box of Count Chocula cereal when I was a kid.
26 mins – “Oh, don’t shoot them.”
38 mins – Paint cans filled with soy sauce. How diabolical!
47 mins – You’d think that they would have unrolled a spool of comm wire as they went.
56 mins – Ah, back when the Air Force was so poor they couldn’t even afford paint for their aircraft.
61 mins – I would have died laughing if she replied that she had a doctorate in home economics.
68 mins – Their handheld fan technology is years ahead of our own!
82 mins – You just passed those same guys, with that same cart, a few minutes ago.
BATTLE BENEATH THE EARTH
Sheech!
Where the American Diplomats Learned about China…
All evidence that they picked up their knowledge from either B-grade budget movies made during the “cold war” or they found something stuck up their ass that they pulled out.
This is the university that taught American “diplomats” how to act with the Chinese.
Ok. Ok. I know it’s a bit of a stretch…
But if someone else can posit why the American diplomats are not acting like diplomats, and instead like power-crazed bullies being rude and bellicose, I will listen. Right now I am of the mind that it must be a combination of mass psychosis, insanity, massive quantities of mind altering drugs, greed, and nonsensical illusions of their real power and ability.
Or…
The American government WANTS the Chinese to get angry. They WANT to provoke a conflict. They WANT to have a war.
American illusions are shaped by fantastical notions that have no bearing on reality.
Why would they possible want that?
There are many reasons.
There’s no other options available. A war is the only remaining option in the American “playbook” to maintain a hope of survival. The future of America is bleak and an economic bubble is going to pop, and it might be any day now.
Maybe the USA has a “secret weapon” that they will engage once China falls and takes the “bait”.
Maybe America ACTUALLY IS stronger than it appears to us. Maybe all this weakness domestically and socially will magically end once a full-scale war is initiated.
Maybe America is convinced that China can be isolated and alone, and America can gather the rest of the world together and fight it as the leading superpower.
Maybe America is ruled by an aged senile passive figurehead, and the powers that control everything wants a war because their days of economic supremacy is over unless the Chinese banking system is extinguished.
I do not know.
What I do know, is that from the “front row seat” it seems like the United States government is just fucking useless, and that the only way for America to survive is to completely and totally scrap it’s form of governance and regress back to state control without a federal government.
China is not weak. Nor is it alone.
The rest of the world is not at all like it is portrayed in the American media.
The way that America was able to drag the entire nation into a war with Vietnam, and then again towards fighting country after country was because it maintained an artificial illusion of what the world is / was for the American population to consume.
This is the primary driver why CNN, FOX, BBC and all the rest doctor the pictures to make China look like a dirty shithole, and the “news” always describe China (and the rest of the world as really terrible places to be.).
But all in all, America is so absolutely mind-numbingly incompetent that it just doesn’t realize that it’s “too late”. China surpassed the United States in capability (full spectrum) decades ago.
Decades.
And now, America looks like some mangy old toothless dog snarling and snapping at a sleek, huge panther, that is deciding what to do with this piece of shit.
America is so hopeless.
Meanwhile…
Here’s a delicious Chinese fish.
Appreciate the good things in life.
Delicious fish.
OK, so what…?
Something is seriously WRONG.
I do not know what is wrong, but something is. The United States is treating China as if it is some minor small nation, and that American is going to “kick some ass” and “bust down some doors”. And I know China. China will blast the top 50 American cities into uninhabitable rubble as a result. Why can’t the United States leadership see this?
Are they that stupid. crazy, idiotic, or insane? What is their GOD DAMN MALFUNCTION?
Listen to me. It will not be like before. Everyone has learned.
CHINA and Russia will blast the United States into the bronze age.
I mean. They will REALLY do this.
Really.
But first they will collapse the American economy.
Then they will isolate it politically, globally and through trade.
Then they set fire to all the domestic problems, and then…
… then if the results are not satisfactory they will light the fuse to the gunpowder.
We cannot control the crazy.
No we cannot.
We can control our reality.
We can only run our prayers, our affirmations and our campaigns.
Death wishes by police is increasingly common in the United States today.
We can be kind to others and control our immediate reality; our neighborhood.
Never forget there is strength in numbers. Remember the rule of three.
And you will be just fine. And let the crazies try to engage in a world that is increasingly hostile to them and their crazy selfish ideas.
Never forget the rule of three.
It just boggles the mind!
The United States can’t make anything. Aside from some basic fabrication and some high-tech aircraft for military use, that’s about it. (And they source just about everything out of the country.) And yet they want to destroy the world’s factory.
What is their malfunction?
You cannot “bite the hand that feeds you”, nor should you pretend that you can make the parts in West-bumfuck USA at the same price and quality. It ain’t gonna happen.
Maybe…
Just maybe if you set up a plan, and work on the plan… perhaps in five years you can start getting some semblance of a kind of manufacturing capability. But the first products out of that factory will have incoherent quality, and all sorts of problems. I would suggest starting with rubber duckys, then work your way up to consumer appliances.
Really?
America is a nation for the wealthy and their fellow psychopaths.
America is “top heavy” in government “leadership” and severely lacking in manufacturing ability. And yet it really wants to destroy it’s source of products, and yet… and yet… it doesn’t realize that it can’t get that ability back easily. Somehow it believe s that it “grow on trees” and factories and workers are easy to come by.
What kind of deluded folk think like that?
I only met one person like that.
He was in a mental hospital in Rhode Island. He had other strange beliefs. Like he was the king of the world, and that God granted him unlimited power, and that he could not be destroyed or hurt because he was an agent for God. He was a crazy, childish, ignorant son of a bitch.
…
Sigh.
Seriously, I do not know what will happen in the future. I really don’t. But what I do know is that (increasingly) the United State looks like a crazy person that is going to run in front of the police and say “kill me… kill me!” and the police will not want to, but in the end, they will shrug their shoulders and simply shoot the mad man dead.
Sad.
But accurate.
What’s Next
I would brace for some non-violent retaliatory actions designed to suppress some of the bellicose nature that the American leadership seems to possess. If that fails, then expect a serious , SERIOUS “bitch slap” in your backyard. Sometimes the way to deal with a crazy, out of control child, is to paddle it’s butt so that it will never, ever, again “act up”.
China, and Russia both realize this. Do not expect half-baked measures. Brace for well thought-out next actions.
If the American “leadership” (and at this stage who can serious say that America has ANY kind of leadership) doesn’t listen to all the alarm bells, flashing lights, sirens and screaming hysterical people running for their lives…
…then a “kill shot” will be necessary.
One last thought
Never forget.
The rule of three.
The ONLY way that you are going to survive this crazy period of time, and handle an insane world seemly run by imbeciles is to help others, be the best that you can be, and do great works…
Do great works.
Do you want more?
You can find more articles related to this in my latest index; A New Beginning. And in it are elements of the old, some elements regarding the transition, and some elements that look towards the future.
