The main failures of the United States constitution as pointed out by Patrick Henry.

Still busier than a kid in a candy store. I hope you all appreciate this article.

Why Did Patrick Henry Oppose the Constitution?

By Thomas Kidd

How could the man who cried “give me liberty or give me death,” this patriot who penned Virginia’s resolves against the Stamp Act in 1765, not support the Constitution?…

Today’s offering in our Timeless Essay series affords readers the opportunity to join Thomas Kidd as he explores why Patrick Henry opposed the Constitution. —W. Winston Elliott III, Publisher

At the conclusion of Virginia’s 1788 ratification convention, a meeting tasked with voting on the new Constitution, Patrick Henry strode to the assembly floor, convinced that the future of American liberty hung in the balance. In his mind’s eye, the great orator warned, he could see angels watching, “reviewing the political decisions and revolutions which in the progress of time will happen in America, and the consequent happiness or misery of mankind—I am led to believe that much of the account on one side or the other, will depend on what we now decide.”

To Americans familiar only with Henry’s blazing “Liberty or Death” oration of 1775, it may come as a shock to learn that Henry opposed the adoption of the Constitution. Henry always had a flair for the dramatic, but on this occasion, Mother Nature offered him an improbable assist: As he thundered against the dangers of the new centralized government, a howling storm rose outside the Richmond hall. Frightened delegates scurried to take cover.

A memorable scene, to be sure, but how could the man who cried “give me liberty or give me death,” this patriot who penned Virginia’s resolves against the Stamp Act in 1765, not support the Constitution? The answer was pretty simple: Henry thought that the American Revolution was, at root, a rebellion against the coercive power of the British government. In particular, it was a rebellion against unjust British taxes. Henry, therefore, thought it was madness for Americans to place that same kind of consolidated political authority over themselves again.

The All-Powerful States

America already had a constitution in 1788, the Articles of Confederation, basically a continuation of the Continental Congress, the ad hoc body formed in 1774 to plan resistance against British taxes. The Articles of Confederation government was composed of a single-house legislature. The states retained most of their power under the Articles, and it was very difficult for the national government to do much of anything without overwhelming support from the states.

Historians often assume that the government under the Articles was an unmitigated disaster. But, really, the Articles government was not too bad. It managed (with major difficulty, of course) to beat the formidable British military in the Revolutionary War. It secured the Treaty of Paris in 1783, which remains one of the greatest diplomatic achievements in American history. And it passed the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, the key precedent for the future expansion of the United States into the Great Lakes region and the trans-Mississippi west.

Certainly, there were many problems under the Articles of Confederation, mostly regarding the national government’s inability to craft coherent trade and economic policy. Part of this inefficiency was intentional, as the national authorities did not have the power to tax. When the Confederation Congress needed money, it had to issue requests for funding to the states. Often the states could not (or would not) pony up.

We should remember that the Founders designed the Articles government simply to perform those tasks that only a national government could do. They did not wish to create a large, powerful national government. The states still commanded the primary allegiance of most leading Patriots. When someone in the Founding period spoke of his “country,” he was probably talking about his home state, not the United States.

Amendments, or More?

It was James Madison and Alexander Hamilton who began moving the nation away from the Patriots’ original suspicion of big government. They pushed for a 1787 meeting that was ostensibly tasked with proposing new amendments to the Articles of Confederation. Henry and George Washington were the two most popular leaders in Virginia, and Henry was elected to attend the Philadelphia convention. But he had already begun to suspect that the organizers had more in mind than just suggesting amendments. He famously explained his refusal to attend by saying “I smelt a rat.”

Henry had served five terms as Virginia governor during the 1770s and ’80s, and he had already become alarmed at the willingness of Northern congressmen to act directly against Virginia’s economic interests. In particular, John Jay, the secretary of foreign affairs, had in 1786 attempted to sign away America’s rights to navigate the Mississippi River in exchange for preferential trade status. This would have been a disaster for the Southern economy. Only the requirement for a two-thirds majority on navigation acts prevented the measure from being adopted, but James Madison knew that the damage was done. “Mr. Henry’s disgust [at the Jay treaty] exceeded all measure,” Madison wrote, and turned Henry totally against the notion of enhancing national government’s power.

When Henry saw the result of the Philadelphia convention’s work, he was appalled. To him, the new Constitution proved that Americans had already forgotten the dangers of consolidated national authority. Although he had refused to attend the Philadelphia meeting, Henry eagerly went to the Richmond ratifying convention, setting the stage for a clash between Henry and his political nemesis, Madison. Henry commandeered the ratification proceedings, warning in exquisite (and, Madison thought, exasperating) detail all the ways in which the Constitution jeopardized American liberty.

Limitations on Power

Like most Antifederalists, Henry wanted a bill of rights added to the Constitution (the document did not originally include one), but that was not his core concern. Instead, Henry wished to see real, structural limitations on the new government’s power, such as taking away its authority to tax. Federalists (supporters of the Constitution) said that in order to have a powerful, effective government, the Constitution required these new powers. To Henry, this was hogwash. The Constitution’s defenders, he warned, believe “we must be a great and mighty empire,” he said. But “when the American spirit was in its youth, the language of America was different: Liberty, sir, was then the primary object.”

Henry concluded his assault on the new Constitution with his remarkable thunderstorm speech, but he could not derail ratification. Virginia voted 89-79 to approve the Constitution, and when his longtime ally, Washington, became the first president, Henry slowly began to reconcile himself to the new government. But he never got over the feeling that when the nation ratified the Constitution, it betrayed the principles of the Revolution.

Patrick Henry thought that a national government invested with the unlimited power to tax and spend would inexorably transform into a monstrosity, one that the Founders—even Madison—never intended.

Most Americans believe that the Constitution, at least as originally designed, fostered a wise system of checks and balances that divided power between the states and national government.

But when you consider the titanic government we have today, and the struggles to contain our mind-boggling rates of federal debt and spending, Henry’s warnings about what the government under the Constitution could eventually become seem more and more reasonable.

Rufus Chen

Chen knew he had to do something. A woman, rambling on in a foreign language, was climbing over the railing. It was a 230-foot (70 meters) drop into the water below. Death was certain.

The new bridge over the Yangtze River in Nanjing, China had quickly surpassed The Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco and Aokagohara Park in Japan as the most popular location for suicides.

Chen slammed on the brakes and jumped out of his car. In a state of desperation, instincts took over. Gently, he spoke with her, sharing his compassion and understanding. Chen let her know that he, too, was a struggling migrant worker. She was not alone. People cared.

After several minutes of sharing each other’s pains and struggles, the woman climbed back over the railing and gave Chen a hug. Never again would she attempt another suicide.

Chen decided to come back to the bridge the next day. His infant child was left with his young wife, but Chen thought that he might be able to help someone else on the ledge who needed someone – even a stranger.

Fortunately, no one came. Chen drove home.

Despite the bitter cold, Chen came back on Saturday and the next day, too, spending almost his entire weekend on the bridge.

He found a man, traumatized over the loss of his life’s savings. They, too, hugged. Chen gave him all the money he had in his wallet. Chen had prevented another suicide.

x
x

Finding a higher purpose, Chen went to the bookstore and ordered every book written by the psychiatrist Sigmund Freud to better understand the human psyche. He read and reread every page, taking notes and memorizing passages.

x
x

From the day of that first encounter, every Saturday and Sunday Chen would go to the 2 1/2 mile (four kilometers) Nanjing Bridge and do whatever he could to let others know someone cares, always willing to share his time and his money.

x
x
 

In the 53 years since the bridge was built, more than 3,000 people have jumped. None are believed to have survived. But another 412 people are still alive because of Chen Si, the one who devoted every weekend for eighteen years to saving the lives of strangers.

x
x

Abandoned Kitties

Look at the eyes…

x
x
 

1 Tess, left outside for 8 years and treated like garbage. Photo taken while she was a stray.

x
x
 

2 Tess a few months after I took her in (her owners moved away and left her behind).

x
x
 

3 Phoebe – found in the weeds behind my house, 4 months old, starving and flea-bitten.

x
x
 

4 Phoebe six months after I took her in.

Look at the eyes.

Abandoned cats are sad, beaten down, and afraid.

Adopt a stray cat or dog from the street or the shelter. Save a life and change your life for the better.

Some Chinese scholars discuss the Taiwan issue…

LI Chen, Associate Professor and International Security and Strategy Program Director at the School of International Studies at Renmin University of China

At present, the chain of command of the two militaries is still unimpeded, and the risks are still under control as long as the leaders on both sides adhere to bottom-line thinking on the issue of war and peace.

SHI Xiaoqin, PLA Sr. Colonel (Retired), Research fellow at School of Public Affairs, Zhejiang University

In the long run, these military exercises might be a watershed event.

CAO Qun, Associate research fellow at the Department for American Studies, China Institute of International Studies

Military-to-military relations will not spiral out of control just because these mechanisms are removed.

And last but not least

Victor Gao, Vice Director, Center for China and Globalization, Chair Professor of Soochow University

As for the Sino-U.S relationship, Washington hopes to compartmentalize bilateral ties with China with their cooperation, competition and confrontation approach. That’s wishful thinking on the part of Washington.

LI Chen, Associate Professor and International Security and Strategy Program Director at the School of International Studies at Renmin University.

The positioning of the military relationship between China and the U.S has actually elevated in recent years. In the past, Beijing and Washington emphasized their economic and trade relations were the ballast stone of bilateral ties. Over the last two or three years, there has been a new formulation that the military-to-military relations as other aspects of China-U.S. relations have deteriorated.

The significance of “military relations are the ballast stone” is that with many setbacks in bilateral relations and rising hostility, any major problems that arise in military relations would have an overall impact on bilateral relations. It should be recognized that there is a certain consensus between China and the United States on this. However, the disagreement is that the U.S. side believes as long as it maintains operational-level management & control and strategic-level communication, there is no need for them to respond to China’s various concerns on security and military issues. Then they can do whatever they think is at low risk, which harms China’s security interests.

On the other hand, the U.S. side now is hard to move forward with mil-to-mil relations due to its domestic politics, even from a professional point of view that the U.S. and China have room for further progress on some issues.

So, the two sides have conflicting ideas, and the Chinese side on various occasions has been hoping that the U.S. can change its ideas and practices, but so far the effect is not particularly positive.

The Taiwan question is a matter of China’s core interests. As Deng Xiaoping once told then U.S. President Ronald Reagan decades ago that if there is a major change over the Taiwan question due to the U.S. side, China will safeguard its core interests, even if there could be some setback in China-U.S. relations, and such a cost we need to bear. So, these three countermeasures (cancelling the three mil-to-mil dialogues) show our determination as Pelosi’s Taiwan trip is indeed very serious in nature.

Although Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan ostensibly did not involve the U.S. federal government, the Taiwan question is, after all, involved in every aspect of China-U.S. relations, including security relations. Were the Taiwan question not well managed and the situation escalates, it will only have a greater impact on the security relationship between the two countries and militaries. These countermeasures are a necessary warning sent to the U.S.

In terms of these three measures, talks between China-U.S. theatre commanders are not a regular or normalized mechanism so far; the China-U.S. Defense Policy Coordination Talks are relatively frequent at the working level. But if some major incidents occur, the two sides still need senior-level officials or even leaders to communicate and make decisions.

The third is the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement, which does have a long history in China-U.S. military relationship, with the two sides meeting almost annually to discuss maritime security issues, but mainly at the operational level.

Therefore, these three mechanisms do not represent the entirety of the security relationship between the two militaries, which means that even if these three are cancelled for a short period, there are still channels open.

The hotline between the U.S. and Chinese defence departments remains. The military attachés of embassies in two capitals can communicate with each other’s relevant departments. At the operational level, agreements like the Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES) adopted by the Western Pacific Naval Symposium and the two MOUs are still working.

One last point, the military and defence departments act differently from other government agencies. At present, the chain of command of the two militaries is still unimpeded, and the risks are still under control as long as the leaders on both sides adhere to bottom-line thinking on the issue of war and peace.

Indeed, these necessary countermeasures may have a negative impact in terms of dealing with the potential escalation of frictions. However, there is still some operational leeway for restoration of these mechanisms, or in other forms, if the situation improves. Also, if one reads the announcement of these countermeasures literally, it still leaves room for interpretation of whether what is being cancelled are the entire mechanisms or just some specific meetings or arrangements in the near future.

SHI Xiaoqin, PLA Sr. Colonel (Retired), Research fellow at School of Public Affairs, Zhejiang University

The PLA has long been pursuing a national defence policy that is defensive in nature, and the military exercises were a stress test in response to the current situation. U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan was a major move in Washington’s attempt to hollow out the one-China principle in recent years, which might likely trigger a Domino effect. In response, the PLA launched these real combat exercises to offset the momentum of U.S. provocation and restore a balanced posture over the Taiwan question.

The PLA no longer took a restrained approach as in the past. Its aircraft and warships crossed the median line of the strait, flew missiles over the island and established exercise zones circling it. These moves marked a deviation from the PLA’s tradition of confining itself to the mainland side in previous drills. It demonstrates PLA’s transformation from an offshore military to a long-distance operation force and a major change in its decision-making.

Meanwhile, the PLA is fully aware of the possibility of crisis escalation. The PLA publicly stated that the exercises were conventional missile drills. The United States said it would postpone the Minuteman III ICBM test. These interactions demonstrated basic strategic trust between the two great powers. The PLA exercises also took into account the busy international air and sea lanes around the island in response to international concerns.

The strategic goal of the PLA remains deterrence. The duration and scale of the exercise were solid evidence of Beijing’s great wrath but also a restrained attitude showing its will and capability.

The objectives of these deterrence-oriented exercises are also clear, which are against the separatists in Taiwan and the foreign forces that support “Taiwan independence.” The PLA demonstrated: that they are capable of “encircling but not fighting”; they could conduct surgical strikes and divide the island into several pieces; and they also could launch “Golden Bell strikes” with land, naval, air, space and electronic & cyber forces.

These theatre-level exercises were carried out by the PLA’s Eastern Theater Command, and it serves as a test of the new combat operational command system since the military reform of 2015. The exercises examine the joint and integrated operations between arms and services in the theatre, the chain of command between military services and the theatre as well as the capability of rapid response.

In the long run, these military exercises might be a watershed event. The U.S. government recently clarified its one-China policy has not changed, and it does not support Taiwan’s independence. However, the political fallout from Pelosi’s Taiwan trip would continue, with the state of policy on the Taiwan question that has been established over the past 50 years through a series of maneuvers might be disrupted. It is not the military exercises but the provocation by Pelosi that led to the negative effects on international politics. The PLA military exercises are only responsive, defensive, and deterrent.

First, in the context of the “Indo-Pacific Strategy”, the U.S. intends to take “integrated deterrence” as the guidelines, bringing in allies and partners working across the nuclear and conventional deterrence. These PLA exercises might accelerate U.S. efforts to integrate Taiwan into its “integrated deterrence” network.

Second, the U.S. might make adjustments to its regional military posture. U.S. military’s forward presence in the Asia Pacific could be replaced by a far-peripheries presence in the region. This time the U.S. aircraft carriers operated farther away from Taiwan island than they were during the 1996 Taiwan crisis. The PLA advancing and the U.S. forces somewhat retreating will be a clear trend in development. To balance its weakening position at sea, the U.S. military may increase its land-based military deployments in Asia or make other tactical adjustments.

Third, Japan, which is within the firing range of the PLA, probably will use this drill as an excuse to increase its military expenditure, expand its military strength, strengthen its alliance with the U.S., firmly collude with “Taiwan independence” separatist forces, or even abandon its Peace Constitution.

Fourth, the Taiwan authorities will reassess their position, especially the U.S. determination and capability to defend Taiwan.

It is worth noting that on August 5, China announced 8 countermeasures in response to Nancy Pelosi’s Visit to Taiwan, three of which are related to the military: cancelling the China-U.S. Theater Commanders Talk; cancelling China-U.S. Defense Policy Coordination Talks (DPCT); cancelling China-U.S. Military Maritime Consultative Agreement (MMCA) meetings.

At a time when communication and dialogue are urgently needed, the removal of these communication channels will inevitably raise concerns about the prospect of miscalculation and difficulty in timely communication when unexpected events occur. These communication channels have been built through long and arduous efforts. They guarantee the minimum strategic trust between two militaries and reassure other concerned parties. Fortunately, the list of countermeasures only cancelled the practice of talks and meetings without eliminating these mechanisms, which preserves the basis for resuming communication and exchanges in the future.

Comments outside China about the PLA exercises further irritated Beijing. These justifiable and restrained countermeasures are interpreted as escalating, coercive, dangerous, provocative, irresponsible, etc. In the age of social media, one-sided interpretations circulate quickly and widely, unsettling the court of public opinion worldwide. This gap in interpretation is not conducive to the stability of the Taiwan Strait and the international situation. It calls for timely dialogue and exchanges among the strategic, journalistic, and commentary communities to accurately understand each other’s intentions.

CAO Qun, Associate research fellow at the Department for American Studies, China Institute of International Studies

The differences in understanding between the two militaries are a long-standing problem. In April, the Defense Ministers of China and the United States had a video call, during which the two sides reached a consensus on managing differences and strengthening communication. But there have always been differences between the two militaries: the U.S. military has put more emphasis on technical aspects, such as how to deal with encounters at sea and in the air more professionally; China, in turn, has stressed that the United States should reduce such military actions that are provocative or endanger China’s national security interests.

There have been some positive interactions between the Chinese and U.S. militaries, such as the signing of CUES (Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea) at the Western Pacific Naval Symposium in 2014, followed by the signing of two MOUs (Memorandum of Understanding), all of which demonstrate that the two militaries have the basis of mutual trust and the ability to handle encounters professionally. But even so, differences in the perception of military exchanges have not been resolved.

Among the countermeasures, China cancelled China-U.S. Theater Commanders Talk, China-U.S. Defense Policy Coordination Talks (DPCT), and China-U.S. Military Maritime Consultative Agreement (MMCA) meetings. The MMCA signed in 1998 is the first agreement on military confidence-building measures between the two countries. It has worked well for a long time but gradually entered a bottleneck period.

However, despite the cancellation of the three mechanisms, there are still other communication channels between China and the U.S., such as the Defense Telephone Link (DTL) and the Joint Strategic Dialogue Mechanism (JSDM). The JSDM was signed in 2017, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley called his Chinese counterpart Gen. Li Zuocheng twice in 20 and 21 to assure him that the two countries would not suddenly go to war. This shows that China has taken the concerns of the U.S. into account this time.

In addition, there is always room for policy flexibility. As long as the U.S. returns to the path of meeting China halfway, the resumption of these mechanisms is possible. The MMCA was suspended for a year in 2020 under the Trump administration but was reinstated in 2021.

The guardrails between China and the United States still exist, and the chances of a military clash between China and the United States arising from Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan are slim. And military-to-military relations will not spiral out of control because these mechanisms are removed. The U.S. will continue to criticize China diplomatically, and the U.S.-Japan ties will be further strengthened. China needs to maintain a strategic focus and refute all statements made by foreign countries that are not in line with the facts. The struggle between China and the United States is still at the level of diplomacy, public opinion and international law but not military.

At the same time, the United States might instigate some European countries to follow suit to send delegations to Taipei. Such moves will impact China-EU relations and economic and trade development, which is what we should be worried about.

Scrappy kitten named Marley

My husband has severe anxiety and panic attacks. He decided to get him an emotional support animal. My husband loves cats, so we decided to get a kitten. I called the local rescue and was put in touch with the kitten foster mom. When I talked to her, I told her that we were looking for a kitten that was calm and would tend to be a lap kitty. She said she had the perfect one.

It was a kitten named Sadie.

We went to see the kittens. The foster mom had two large rooms with about 20 kittens. She brought a black and white kitten to my husband. This was Sadie.

My husband petted her but soon she jumped down and was off playing with the others.

Then this lanky blond kitten crawled into my husband’s lap.

He purred like crazy. My husband fell in love with this kitten. The foster mom said she wasn’t sure that this kitten would be a good match for us. He was always play fighting and getting in trouble.

She had named him Scrappy because of his feisty personality.

My husband had made up his mind, so we took Scrappy home. We had thought of different names that we liked. The kitten became Marley before we even got home.

x
Marley

Our Marley has been an angel. He has helped my husband so much. Marley always knows when my husband needs him. He will cuddle up close to my husband and purr. Since Marley came to live with us about 8 months ago, my husband has not had a bad panic attack and his anxiety is better. We love our “Scrappy” kitten named Marley.

Rufus

x
A hungry old lady with only 2 yuan on her body came to the restaurant, just wanting a glass of water. The waiter patiently served her and presented her with a box lunch.

Red Braised Pig Trotter

Pig trotter or we may see it as pig feet is considered as one of the most delicious parts on pig. Additionally, the rich collagen contained in pig trotter makes it as a popular beauty food in China. If you are patient enough, you can even try to make collagen mask from pig trotter.

x
x

There are many recipes about trotter for example pig trotter soup with soy beans. This red braised pig trotter is also excellent. Pig shoulder can be used to replace pig trotter in this recipe. As for the treatment of pig trotter, be patient with the pig hair if there is any because it may influence the appetite a lot, or you can ask the batcher to help with that.

Besides, I want to introduce red braising a little bit more. In Chinese cooking methods, braising is a common and popular method. Red braising or sometimes known as red cooking, from its name, we know that the basic cooking method is braising but the color of the food should be red. The key step of red braising dishes is to make the red oil color via oil and sugar, however sometimes people use soy sauce as coloring when they do not want brother to do that. Generally crystal sugar is used for making the red color. We call this process as stir frying the sugar color. I have introduced the detailed steps and tips in this red braised pork belly also known as Hong Shao Rou. If you do not want to stir fry the sugar color, just add sugar along with soy sauce in clay pot. This method only sacrifice the color slightly but do not influence the taste. 

For red braised meat recipes, it is import to guarantee the cooking time. I recommend cooking for at least 2 hours. Since it is a long time, you may use slow cooker or electric cooker to save time. I use high pressure to cook the pig trotter until almost soft, which cost 30 minutes and then red braise in a clay pot this time. It is ok to use a common pot or a wok or even a sauce pan. This version can be the most easy version.

x
x

Another tip is that do not add salt at the very beginning because this may destroy the taste of the meat and make it chewy.

Ingredients

  • 2 pig trotters , remove the hair and cut into bite size chunks (resort to batcher)

For cooking process

  • ½ tablespoon ginger slices
  • water as needed
  • 1 green onion
  • 5 Sichuan peppercorn
  • 2 tablespoons cooking wine

Sugar coloring

  • 1 tablespoon crystal sugar
  • 1 tablespoon cooking oil

For red braising

  • 2 Dried chili pepper
  • 5 ginger slices
  • 2 green onion
  • ½ teaspoon Sichuan peppercorn
  • 2 bay leaves
  • ½ tablespoon star anise
  • 1 teaspoon salt
  • 1 tablespoon light soy sauce
  • 1 teaspoon dark soy sauce

Instructions

  • Cut trotter into small sections. Rinse the pig trotter in clean and boiling water. Remove all the hair carefully. Put aside and drain.
  • Bring water to a boil in a large pot and cook the pig trotter for 2-3 minutes. Transfer out and wash under running water. This process can help to remove the odd taste as much as possible. And then in a high pressure cooker or electric cooker or a pot, cover pig trotter with enough water, add ginger slices, green onion, sichuan peppercorn and cooking wine. Cook until you can insert a chopstick into the meat. If you want a softer taste like me, cook it longer. Transfer the pig trotter out and the liquid can be kept as soup stock.
  • Heat up 1 tablespoon oil in wok, put the sugar in wok to stir fry until all the sugar melts and you can see large bubbles. Keep stirring during the process. Pour around 1 cup of hot water. Mix well! You need to be stay away from the wok and do not hesitate when pouring the water. If you do not want to stir fry the sugar color, just add sugar in clay pot and skip oil. The later method only influence the color but not the taste.
  • Prepare a clay pot or another deep sauce pan or wok, fry ginger slices and other spices for 1-2 minutes until aroma. Add pig trotter in, pour some cooking liquid in the previous until the pig trotter is almost covered. Pour the sugar color in the previous step and soy sauce. Heat over high fire with the lid uncovered until there are large bubbles in the pot and the sauce is almost dried up.
  • Sprinkle some green onion and then serve warm!

What do you need?

x
x

My little cat was sitting on the coffee table, facing me, looking intently at my face, as he meowed again and again.

He was clearly conveying to me that he needed my help.

Keeping my gaze on him, so he knew that he was the focus of my attention, I asked, “What do you need?”, while standing up from the sofa.

He immediately jumped off of the coffee table to hurry towards the kitchen, several times glancing back as he went, to make certain that I was following him.

When we got there he ran to his water bowl, which, I was horrified to discover, was dry!

My poor little guy was on steroids for an illness which caused him to feel thirsty almost all of the time, and although I tried to ensure that his bowl was always filled with water, I’d obviously dropped the ball!

As I quickly moved to fill it from the water pitcher, I apologized profusely, saying his name repeatedly as I did so.

My hope was that he could tell, from the sound of my voice that I was very, very sorry, and from hearing his name numerous times, that my sorrow involved him.

Sitting on the kitchen floor with him, I felt my remorse deepen by the second as he drank and drank, paused for a moment to catch his breath, and then drank some more.

When he was done, I carried him back into the living room, scratching his ears as I went.

By the time I sat back down on the couch, with him still in my arms, he was purring.

I promised him that I would never, ever let that happen again—and I never did.

My darling cat passed away from cancer several months later—last July.

I miss him terribly.

I think I am the perfect person to answer this. I have been working in the semiconductor industry for years, currently living in the Netherlands, lived and worked in China for 3 years, I know a lot of engineers from ASML (expecially after they hired hundreds of Turkish engineers). Let me tell you something: High-end semiconductor manufacturing is black magic. Both the processes and tools used for it are very complex. ASML’s EUV lithography machine is probably the most complex tool humankind ever developed since it stopped jumping between trees. It took billions of Euros and decades of experience to perfect it. Other experienced lithography machine suppliers failed at it. China has no experience in high-end semiconductor manufacturing tools with the exception of one-off/few-off prototypes.

x
x
 

ASML’s EUV lithography machine. Needs 41 semi-trucks to get transported, costs $150 million, has 100.000 major parts, has mirrors that need months of grinding to reach needed smoothness, needs multiple people with PhD’s as machine operators. Quite high-tech. Isn’t it?

Unfortunately, ASML is a very convenient target for the USA. The company uses a lot of critical parts from the USA but those parts don’t represent anything significant in the US economy in terms of their monetary value. Chinese electronics industry still depends on foreign chips so it can not threaten fabs with banning the sale of chips in China that were manufactured using ASML tools. Also, China isn’t a big customer of ASML too. In short, China can not answer with reciprocal sanctions.

Is China hopeless? No.

1- All of those tools are engineered and made by humans, and the laws of physics are the same both in the Netherlands and China. If the Netherlands could, then there is no reason for anybody else to fail with the correct approach.

2- China is filthy rich compared to the Netherlands. Chinese economy is 17x of the Netherlands’, 9x of SK’s, 27x of Taiwan’s, 3+x of Japan’s. With state support, Chinese fabs and tool makers can hire the top people from the rest of the world with salaries ASML, LamResearch, AM, Synopsys, TSMC, Samsung, … simply can not compete with. A significant portion of these companies’ employees are expats anyway, most of them are just after money. In fact China is already doing this successfully with good results. For example, it already has a working EUV lithography machine prototype, already caught up with the rest in chip testing, packaging, wafer production, also its first immersion lithography machine (good enough for most things) is getting prepared for commercial use.

3- China is a scientific powerhouse on its own. It is the country with most patent applications, most research output, graduates more STEM students than any other country, 2nd largest R&D spender, has 11 universities in top 100. This leads us to my first point. If the Netherlands could, so can China if given enough time.

4- Catching up is much easier than innovating. Knowing something is possible and having a general knowledge of how it works make things much easier.

5- Time is on the Chinese side. Technology of semiconductors is close to maturity/stalling (choose the word depending on your view). If the development slows (which it does) it gives China the opportunity to catch-up. If a tech revolution happens, then the playing field evens out anyway.

6- You don’t need EUV for the most things. You don’t even need high-end processes for the most things. There is more to semiconductors than the latest smartphone processors, GPUs, and CPUs. Look at iPhone 12 teardown videos. You will see a lot of chips. Only one of them needs EUV. An average modern car has 250+ computers inside. That means thousands of chips. All of them are manufactured using old processes. This is even more true for military and space applications. Those use very old chips that are known to be reliable and secure.

Conclusion: Blocking ASML from selling EUV machines to China can hurt Chinese businesses for some time but in the grand scheme it is insignificant. The USA needs to run faster rather than keep trying to block China if it wants to preserve its dominance in tech.

An update on the Chinese EUV light source:

New Options for Synchrotron Light Sources

It seems the basic research is complete and the method completely different than of ASML’s.

Rufus

x
A sanitation worker picked up a female college student’s wallet and waited for two hours in the rain. After the female college student arrived, she was moved to tears by the sanitation worker’s behavior.

Project Guoguang

‘Project National Glory’ was an attempt by the Republic of China (ROC), based in Taiwan, to reconquer mainland China from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) by large scale invasion.

It was the most elaborate of the ROCs plans or studies to invade the mainland after 1949.

Guoguang was initiated in 1961 in response to events involving the PRC, particularly the Great Leap Forward, the Sino-Soviet split, and the development of nuclear weapons.

Guoguang was never executed; it required more troops and material than the ROC could muster, and it lacked support from the United States.

The use of a large scale invasion as the initial stage of reunification was effectively abandoned after 1966, although the Guoguang planning organization was not abolished until 1972.

The ROC did not abandon the policy of using force for reunification until 1990.

An orange tabby named “Spock”

x
An orange tabby named “Spock”

Before my wife and I married, we lived together and went through a period when some of our “discussions” got quite heated. My cat at the time, a 16y.o. orange tabby named “Spock” did NOT like us arguing. (I sure do miss that old man of a cat!)

His strategy for dealing with it?

Do most anything he could think of to do to distract us from each other. One tactic of his was his favorite — because it usually worked and had us in stitches watching him. He would chase his tail.

It wasn’t so much that he would chase the tail as it was where he would chase his tail. It was typically in a chair in the living room or, even better, in the bathtub. In the bathtub, chasing his tail would make such a ruckus that it was impossible to ignore.

 

“Old Man Big Eyes” left the realm of the living nearly 6 years ago. We miss him terribly. The photo is from when he was about 15 years old.

Rufus action

”Wednesday afternoon I was driving west on I-40 when my blood sugar dropped to a dangerous level. Luckily a Burger King restaurant was at the upcoming exit. As I stumbled through placing my order I mentioned to the voice on the speaker that I was diabetic and in need of food. Low blood sugar makes it difficult to think or act. I pulled up to the first window in order to pay for my food. I was shocked to see Burger King employee Tina Hardy running toward the front of my car. She squeezed between the front of my car and the building just to bring me a small serving of ice cream. Tina later explained that her husband was also diabetic and she could tell that I needed help. After paying I pulled up to Tina’s window where she gave me my food. She instructed me to park across the driveway so that she could keep an eye on me until I felt better. After eating I waited for a break in business so that I could return to Tina’s window. I then took this picture and spoke with Tina’s supervisor, telling him what she did for me. If you appreciate what this special woman did please share this story. Hopefully Tina Hardy will receive the recognition that she truly deserves from the public and from the big bosses at Burger King.”

x
x

The Aconitine Insurance Murder

1986 in Okinawa, Japan.

x
x
 

A 33 year old woman visiting a beautiful small island in Okinawa suddenly complained of acute chest pain. She was immediately taken to the hospital, but died, despite the strenuous efforts of the emergency doctors.

The doctors diagnosed her death as caused by a “myocardial infarction”, an unfortunate, sudden death. Note that there are more than 40,000 deaths caused by myocardial infarction in Japan alone. It is not uncommon, but one young doctor named Ohno felt something was suspicious about this death, and so he took 30cc of blood sample from the woman, just in case.

x
x
 

(Image taken from Wikipedia)

Things started to get a bit fishy when a middle-aged man called Kamiya, who claimed to be the woman’s husband, appeared at the insurance office. Surprisingly, the man applied to receive 2 million dollars for his wife’s death. His monthly insurance premium on her policy was $2000 a month, an amount that is improbably high for a regular businessman to be able to pay for a long period of time.

The police started to think something was wrong and began the investigation. Lots of suspicious information popped up. Kamiya and the woman were married one month after they first met. And Kamiya previously had two wives who also died in similarly suspicious manners. As a result of the two previous deaths, Kamiya had already received a substantial amount of insurance money.

Ohno also started his investigation. He tried to discover what kind of poison could lead to ventricular fibrillation, of which there are numerous kinds.

Caffeine, amphetamines, … and aconitine. Aconitine is found in natural flowers, is 10 times more lethal than potassium cyanide, and was once used by Cleopatra to kill her brother. It opens the sodium channel inside the body, which leads to the excitement of the muscles and organs, resulting in death.

x
x
 

Aconitum, the flower that contains aconitine (Image from Wikipedia)

Aconitine was the most suspicious poison. It was a gamble for Ohno. He only had 30cc of a blood sample. Experiment equipment was not advanced yet, and they weren’t able to measure the blood many times over. Fortunately for Ohno, he was able to find aconitine in her blood.

Despite aconitine being found in his apartment, Kamiya was still confident that he was innocent. The police and Ohno could still not solve one big mystery:

Time.

Aconitine is a poison that could kill you in minutes. The last time the woman had taken medicine was more than two hours before the attack. Aconitine would have killed her in several minutes. The police tried to prove that using a thicker capsule would delay the dissolution, but they discovered that thickening the capsule only delays the poisoning for a few minutes.

Time is on Kamiya’s side. How would you solve this mystery?

… The answer was yet another of the most dangerous poisons in nature: Tetrodotoxin, a deadly neurotoxin found in blowfish (or fugu in Japanese).

x
x
 

Fugu (blowfish), known as a delicacy in Japan (Image from Wikipedia)

He exploited the conflicting mechanisms of the two poisons. Basically, aconitine is a poison that makes the Na+ channels of your muscles and neurons open, while tetrodotoxin inhibits the Na+ channel, preventing muscles from receiving messages from the neurons. The two poisons basically cancel out each others’ effect. However, the trick is that the two have different durations of their effects, resulting in the slower disappearing aconitine killing the victim after a much longer period of time than usual.

Ohno was finally able to discover the mechanism, and tetrodotoxin was found in the remaining blood sample. Kamiya was arrested and was sentenced to life imprisonment. Kamiya had been testing for hours to determine the perfect amount of poison that could result in the exact timing, using rats as test subjects.

What I think is frightening is that had he not committed three murders — and had he stopped after the second one — none of this would have been revealed.

Also what is saddening is that all of the passion and effort he devoted to find this modus operandi could have been used in a much more benevolent way.

Trade war with China could cost Germany six times as much as Brexit

 
8 August 2022, 6:16 pm
.
BERLIN (Reuters) – Germany would face costs almost six times as high as Brexit if it and the European Union were to shut China out of their economies, the Ifo institute said on Monday, citing the results of a study.
.
The biggest losers of a trade war with China would be the automotive industry with a 8.47% loss of value-added, manufacturers of transport equipment with a 5.14% loss and mechanical engineering with a 4.34% loss, the Ifo said.
.
The authors of the study,
.

From HERE

Burnt Toast

x
x

“I immediately noticed, the burnt toast …. And, I was waiting to see if he was going to complain about it, but my father started to eat them, smiling and asked me how I spent my day at school.

My mom apologized to my dad for the burnt toast. I will never forget his response to her: “Honey, I love burnt toast!”

Later when I went to bed and my dad came over to kiss me goodnight, I asked him if he really liked the burnt toast?

He hugged me and said, “Your mother has had a difficult day and she is really tired. She went out of her way to prepare this meal for us, why blame her and hurt her.

Burnt toast never hurt anyone; but words can be very painful! “

We have to know how to appreciate what others do for us, even if it’s not perfect, because it’s the intention to do well that counts, and no one is perfect.”

-john thiessen

Starbucks and McDonald’s Russia exit sees Moscow entrepreneurs cash in with Stars Coffee and It’s Tasty — Period

Good riddence : now 100% Russian own, 100% profit retain in Russia.

Key points:

  • Moscow entrepreneurs are cashing in on the departure of Western outlets from the city by filling their unoccupied stores with imitation businesses
  • Starbucks is the latest to get a makeover, rebranding as Stars Coffee and sporting a similar-looking logo
  • Former McDonald’s are also reopening as Vkusno — i Tochka, roughly translated as It’s Tasty — Period
Article HERE

Klaus

x
Klaus

His name was Klaus and he came almost every day to the bar I was working at to save money for university.

 

Klaus was in his late sixties and a widower. His wife had died yeaaars ago and he told me that he left everything the way it was in their bedroom and that he wasn’t able to sleep in their bed. He only slept in the living room. He was very lonely and he had no kids. Klaus and I became good friends even though I was 45 years younger than he. I drove him to his doctor appointments and always listened to him when he needed to talk about his wife. He loved her very very much. One day he told me he had cancer and he refused any treatments. It took a couple of months until he needed to be hospitalized but he was still doing ‘okay’ for someone who was terminally ill. My family and I went on vacation and my boss from the bar called me to tell me that Klaus was transferred to the hospice. We drove back home and I visited him two times, and I even brought him his favorite beer and we talked about his wife. He told me that he would soon get to see her again.

He died that night in his sleep. Not many people came to his funeral and his urn was buried anonymously. It’s been 3 years. I miss him. He is one of the reasons I believe in true love.

The Plundering Nations Last Stand

In Nineteenth Century France a now mostly forgotten lawyer and political-economist lived until he died far too young at the age of 49 from throat cancer in 1850, Frédéric Bastiat, who is canonized today by Libertarians. During his life he made some very powerful observations that have proven true overtime:

When plunder becomes a way of life, men create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it. “Economic Sophisms,” 1848
Sometimes the law defends plunder and participates in it. Sometimes the law places the whole apparatus of judges, police, prisons and gendarmes at the service of the plunderers, and treats the victim–when he defends himself–as a criminal. “The Law,” 1850
When misguided public opinion honors what is despicable and despises what is honorable, punishes virtue and rewards vice, encourages what is harmful and discourages what is useful, applauds falsehood and smothers truth under indifference or insult, a nation turns its back on progress and can be restored only by the terrible lessons of catastrophe. «The Law», 1850
When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law. “The Law,” 1850

When he died, Bastiat was working on a manuscript, History of Plunder, that remains unpublished along with other works, but his published works gave us the above gems and many more. At the time he seemed to be just coming into his own as a political-economist having just witnessed the series of revolutions in 1848 and the theft of France’s Republic by Napoleon III. All of the above quotes can be applied to our world today. Bastiat was neck-deep in the Era of Plunder otherwise known as the Colonial Era or Era of Imperialism, and France was a major actor as was most of the Western European Realms. I don’t call them nations because most were still mired in Feudalism and ruled by Royalty as most tried to suppress the radicalism spawned by the revolution in British America. Eventually republics were born but they still practiced plunder. Many today still try to plunder while themselves are subjected to it in often unrecognized ways. And one of the most significant actions happening today is the fact that the historical plunderers are now being plundered as that Era comes to a close and the new Era based on cooperation takes form and displaces those unwilling to be on the right side of history and will suffer from the effects listed in the third citation above.

Now, our tale. Recently at the Fans of Lavrov’s Telegram, there was posted an excellent political cartoon that depicts the situation better than any I’ve seen–A snarling Uncle Sam firing a machine gun fed with an ammo belt using Ukrainians as bullets. I’d copy/paste it here but Telegram doesn’t seem to allow that operation. Here’s the caption for the cartoon:

“The results of the work of the Ukrainian propaganda machine are impressive: for example, 98% of Ukrainians are confident of victory in the special operation. Such survey data, commissioned by the Center for Analytical Studies (CISR) of the International Republican Institute (IRI), was published by the Rating group. The regime of Zelensky and his ‘servants’ continues day after day to hang noodles on the ears of the citizens of Independence, who in his political adventure are cannon fodder and the main means of warfare on the principle of ‘war to the last Ukrainian’.”

Too few people seem to understand that with the 2014 coup, Ukraine as an independent nation ceased to exist and was transformed into a de facto colony of the Outlaw US Empire which has guided its “development” (managed its plunder) ever since in a manner very similar to South Vietnam. The main difference is the lack of significant Imperial combat forces in-country. When looked at closely, there are very clear similarities between South Vietnamese forces and the UAF–their Naziness being one of them. While the nature of the two wars is slightly different, the capabilities of the two proxies isn’t–both are inept for much the same reason: They are led by politicized Pentagon and State Department flunkies only interested in Plunder. The result again has the Outlaw US Empire fighting against nationalist forces aiming to liberate their people who have powerful allies supporting their cause. The situation’s also very similar to what the British did in South Asia by using different proxies to fight each other instead of the Raj while it looked on and continued its plundering unabated.

The policy choice by the Outlaw US Empire to use Ukrainians as an anti-Russia force and to support them until they’re totally spent while the Empire continued its plundering opened up a unique opportunity for Russian strategy–Russia would oblige the Outlaw US Empire’s policy by ensuring NATO would bleed itself dry of its arms and munitions in supporting Ukraine while Russia went about demilitarizing all Ukraine had to start with plus all that’s being sent. And then there were the sanctions, which Russia knew might hurt some but would become a very sharp weapon against the sanctioners that would generate chaos and possibly split the EU/NATO enemy organizations once and for all that would create a blank slate for a new Eurasian security arrangement fashioned mostly by China and itself. The result shows Russia gaining strength while NATO weakens daily to the point where NATO nations will be too poor to finance rearming themselves in the face of vast societal upheaval caused by their policy choices. Talk about Hybrid War!

Then there’s the even bigger global picture as the once dominant Plundering Nations now plunder themselves via Neoliberal Parasitism. It’s really quite a sight when one takes a moment to review it all. This editorial excerpt dealing with Biden’s refusal to cancel the tariffs of Trump’s China Trade War despite the fact that it harms the Empire’s public far more than China is an excellent example:

“Besides, the US is the only superpower in the world. It has always been the bully, but when has it been bullied by others? In the realistic level of China-US relations, the US has always been the one that provokes China, so where does this ‘being soft on China’ rhetoric come from? This is a psychological disease in politics that needs to be treated. The endless competition of ‘who is tougher on China’ will make Washington lose itself and the courage for self-renewal. Moreover, the overall posture the US has shown in front of the world is becoming less and less honorable and more and more erratic.”

Is there a touch of sarcasm there? The Global South observes the behavior of the Plundering Nations and snicker to themselves that they’re finally getting the karma they so richly deserve. The global paradigm is rapidly changing as the Age of Plunder dies and the nations that benefited from it choke as they plunder themselves by following the diktat of what’s rapidly becoming a failed state so deeply addicted to Pleonexia it will very likely die from an overdose while plundering itself. “Self-renewal” can’t be done while you’re busily plundering your people, which is the political disease at the core of all the Plundering Nations. In one sense they are exceptional nations because they are blind to the fate they are providing for themselves as a result of their addiction.

The great sorrow of this state of affairs is that it was well known centuries ago as Dr. Michael Hudson illustrates:

The greatest challenge facing societies has always been how to conduct trade and credit without letting merchants and creditors make money by exploiting their customers and debtors. All antiquity recognized that the drive to acquire money is addictive and indeed tends to be exploitative and hence socially injurious. The moral values of most societies opposed selfishness, above all in the form of avarice and wealth addiction, which the Greeks called philarguria – love of money, silver-mania. Individuals and families indulging in conspicuous consumption tended to be ostracized, because it was recognized that wealth often was obtained at the expense of others, especially the weak.
The Greek concept of hubris involved egotistic behavior causing injury to others. Avarice and greed were to be punished by the justice goddess Nemesis, who had many Near Eastern antecedents, such as Nanshe of Lagash in Sumer, protecting the weak against the powerful, the debtor against the creditor.
That protection is what rulers were expected to provide in serving the gods. That is why rulers were imbued with enough power to protect the population from being reduced to debt dependency and clientage.

Well before the Greeks, empires built on plunder already existed and slowly moved from West Asia to Europe. Within them arose a power relationship that continues to plague humanity–the plundering of debtors by creditors, or what’s known as The Class War so few recognize because none of its origins and history are taught as such, while what is taught is euphemized to protect powerful institutions like the Catholic Church. Other words like exploitation are used as well as expropriation to mask the plundering. Recall the first Bastiat citation above, while learning there were means employed to renew society from the plunder through what’re known as Debt Jubilees, which was actually codified into Mosaic Law and is what Jesus died trying to reinstate. (For more on this topic, go here.) As we should all know, the system was organized to legalize plunder, but as a rule we don’t because we’re not taught about it so it can continue and be thought of as a natural part of life. It must be noted that Saint Augustine failed to mention what was at the base of the moral debacle that prompted him to write City of God which was the elite’s worship of the God of Mammon which Rome’s elite fashioned Rome’s legal system to support and ensured no one could challenge them via their policy of assassinating all opposition. And since Roman Law forms the basis for much Western Law, the great bias in favor of creditors versus debtors continues, which is clearly something Bastiat wanted to purge

And so the plundering empires of the Greco-Roman Era rose and fell as they were plundered themselves. But plundering didn’t vanish; instead, it got religion. Into the power vacuum that developed with the fall of Rome arose the Institution of the Roman Catholic Church which despite its Mosaic Law and its Son of God being the champion of those being plundered broke its own laws and morals to become the Western World’s biggest plunderer until the 1500s. It made possible the Age of Plunder that erupted with the “discovery” of sea routes to Asia and the Western Hemisphere’s continents with its series of Papal Bulls that began in 1479 with the Treaty of Alcáçovas, was followed by its much more infamous Treaty of Tordesillas in 1494 and capped by the Treaty of Zaragoza in 1529. The arrogance of these Papal Bulls is stupendous–only Christians (and only select Christians at that) were deemed to be humans, all other humans were animals and to be treated as such–and that led to a global genocide which isn’t over yet. Even legal aspects of those Bulls remain on the books so the plunder they generated can continue. It didn’t take long for all the plundering realms to adopt the Bulls, whether nominally Protestant or Catholic. Only the Eastern Orthodox refused to use them mainly because they were deemed to be unworthy Christians and thus animals.

And so began the most recent Age of Plunder which is finally drawing to a close after 500+ years of rampage and rape, although there remain forces trying their utmost to extend it further. Many efforts were raised over the years to combat and overturn the basis of Plunder all of whom failed until now, which builds on the efforts of Bastiat and other Classical Economist reformers during the 19th Century. Their primary aim was to end all Feudal privileges, many of which were granted by Royalty to exploit their subjects, and come under the heading of Unearned Income, or the Free Lunch many have heard about. The best contemporary work on this subject is Dr. Hudson’s Killing the Host: How Financial Parasites and Debt Bondage Destroy the Global Economy, although he’s been interviewed many times and written many essays on the topic, one terse version of the book being «The rentier resurgence and takeover: Finance Capitalism vs. Industrial Capitalism». Hopes for victory were high during Disraeli’s government during the latter 1870s as many practical reforms were at long last passed into law, but not enough was done and a Reaction was sparked that still continues. The program was to cancel the initiatives of the Classical Economists and eliminate political-economy as a course of study at schools and universities, first in England then in the USA. The substitute was the promotion of a non-scientific form of economics having little relation to reality that’s now known as Neoliberalism that was well entrenched after WW1 ended with the Parasites capture of the US Federal Reserve and City of London financial centers as well as those on Continental Europe. US plunder was rampant via what was called Dollar Diplomacy, which provided the motivation for General Smedley Butler to write his seminal War is a Racket. But perhaps the greatest attempt at plunder was the Versailles Treaty‘s reparations, or raperations, to be borne by Germany. Not yet under the illusion of the «new» economics and present at Versailles was John Maynard Keynes, who became so irate and disconsonant at what he was witnessing that he left for Marseilles to write his prophetic The Economic Consequences of the Peace, which predicted WW2. Both World Wars as well as our Hybrid Third World War were waged in the further pursuit of Plunder.

Fortunately for humanity, a countervailing force has arisen that’s stronger than the Plundering Nations, which is commonly known as the Multipolar World. The irony is its strength is due to the Plundering Nations quest for ever more plunder, for under the Neoliberal doctrine, they parasitized their industry and sent it to developing nations to feast on the wage arbitrage, which is known as the financialization of capitalism, that transformed their nations into what were touted as Service Economies. The shortsightedness of this plundering policy was made very clear with Trump’s Trade War against China. Biden’s crew has not just continued that as noted above, it has also instituted a Sanctions War of Plunder against what were once its EU/NATO allies whose main aim is to nullify Germany as Europe’s economic engine. The aim of this strategy is to make EU/NATO completely dependent geoeconomically on the Outlaw US Empire, which translates into more plundering. EU/NATO «leaders» are essentially owned by the Empire and thus do whatever it dictates, but fortunately not all. Then there’s the public that’s bearing the brunt of the plundering and slowly rising in protest despite the massive propaganda campaign based on Russophobia, longstanding and recently cultivated. So, between Russia’s boomeranging the sanctions back at their originators and the policy of fighting Russia first to the last Ukrainian, then the last Balt, and presumably the last European, the EU is experiencing both destabilization and dysfunction that will reach a climax come January when Winter really takes hold and much of Europe has no gas to heat homes or run businesses.

It’s difficult to judge the desperation of the Outlaw US Empire’s plunderers and their UK allies. Their Free Lunch is in deep jeopardy as their domestic situations are also being subjected to destabilization and dysfunction. Meanwhile, all the organs of the Multipolar World grow stronger daily. The dedollarization of international trade gathers greater momentum. The theft of too many nation’s assets by the plunderers throws up a big warning sign to all others that they aren’t at all trustworthy. This testimony is but one instance:

For a long time, the US has been the country that attracts the most foreign investment. But over the years, under the poisonous atmosphere of pan-politicization and generalization of concept of security, the country has created many terrible precedents, making more and more originally rich investment soil into a minefield. For example, it has forced foreign high-tech companies to hand over their technology and even carried out “technical confiscation” of capital, leading many people to say that Washington is close to “open robbery.” Can a company develop at ease if it is constantly worried about its investment and if it might be confiscated one day or waste all its investment? According to US media reports, CATL has long been planning to build US battery plants and visited some places in the US, but eventually may choose alternative plan to build plant in Mexico. It should be said that the doubts of CATL are also those of many other companies.

That’s how plundering nations commit suicide. Currently, the planet’s two most dynamic economies are under attack by the plunderers as they seek to avoid what those nations and their vast array of allies want to construct–A world with plundering replaced by sharing, Zero-sum replaced by Win-Win, perpetual war for plunder replaced by perpetual peace so humanity can mature and gain the wisdom it will need in the coming centuries. The plunderers have turned their «back on progress and can be restored only by the terrible lessons of catastrophe» because of their Pleonexia affliction. As was done via Enclosure, the plunderers are now attacking their own polities and will likely be attacked by them soon. The Good Works being practiced by the Multipolar World and their solidarity in facing down those driven by Pleonexia for centuries have already won over 85% of humanity. Histories once hidden are being revealed in a manner that longstanding truths are now exposed along with the villains. The Global South is eager to learn those truths as are many within the plundering nations despite the efforts made to impose an information blackout. A very long Era/Age is closing that humanity won’t miss. There does remain one big problem, however, and that’s the possibility that the plunderers will unleash their bioweapons as opposed to nukes since there’ll be nothing left to plunder if the latter are employed.

Joshua (Rocky)

x
Joshua

When I visited the shelter to adopt a cat back in February 2016, one of the cats that caught my attention—mostly because he was awake and looking out of his cage at me, with his pleading yellow eyes—was a boy named “Joshua.”

He’d been there since the prior November, and no one had requested a meet and greet with him in 3 months’ time. No one!

He had several strikes against him: he was a 3-year-old adult black cat who’d been labeled as having FIV (an immunodeficiency virus akin to HIV in humans). He wasn’t sick, but he couldn’t be around other cats—and the shelter warned me that if he got the sniffles, it would need to be addressed right away so it didn’t escalate to something more serious like pneumonia.

Well, after I brought Joshua home—and renamed him “Rocky”—I took him to the vet for a checkup. The vet asked me if I wanted to re-test him for FIV, since it might’ve been a false positive. I agreed, and that first test came back negative. The vet then offered to do a western blot test, whose results would be more definitive—but more expensive (over $300). I told her, “Take my money!”

The final results came back negative. Poor baby had been mislabeled! I wonder how many people passed by his cage because they were deterred by an FIV+ cat.

Here’s the other thing: He’s now 9 years old, but he’s still my little boy, my sweet little baby. He has the tiniest little “mew” and hasn’t gotten his big boy voice yet. I’m not sure he ever will. So I have a kitten for life.

As for the black cat thing, Rocky has been nothing but good luck for me.

Dollar Vs. Yuan: China Dumps US Treasuries for 7th Straight Month

China is not the only nation doing that. All US so-called allies such as Japan are doing the same thing.
Article HERE

He turned himself in…

x
x

“A Swatara police officer was called to the Capital Diner this morning. An elderly man couldn’t pay for his breakfast; he tried but his card was declined. He panicked and actually called the police on himself because he didn’t know what to do. The restaurant gave him his space to figure it out and that was the best solution he could come up with. Officer Anthony Glass went to the counter, pulled out his credit card, and paid for the man’s breakfast. The man asked for his phone number so he could pay him back but the officer kindly declined. This young man deserves to be recognized.”

Chen Xianyi: A letter to the officers and soldiers defending Taiwan, Penghu, Jinmen

From HERE

google translate :
 
Brothers and soldiers of the Taiwan-Penghu, Golden-Horse Guards:

With that American witch staying with you all night, the situation in the Taiwan Strait took a turn for the worse.

The witch Pelosi originally went to support the Taiwan independence die-hards led by Tsai Ing-wen, but she never thought that such a hasty visit would make the originally uneasy Taiwan Strait even more turbulent. surge.

It can be seen that more than 170 countries in the world have denounced and condemned the visit of the American witch for interfering in China's internal affairs in unison, and once again jointly stressed that there is only one China in the world, and Taiwan is inseparable from the People's Republic of China. part.

At the same time, we have announced the full start of our large-scale island-encircling military exercise against Taiwan, and I am afraid it will become the norm in the future.

The entire Taiwan Strait is becoming the most suitable training ground for the major relevant theaters of the People's Liberation Army.

This provides a large platform for actual combat-oriented military exercises for rotation training and military drills in relevant theaters of our army.

This is undoubtedly of great significance to improving the modern combat capability of the People's Liberation Army.

Not only Tsai Ing-wen can't think of this, but even her American master probably didn't think of it.

In the face of this huge change, the US imperialists are still unwilling, they are stepping up their efforts to build an anti-China alliance in the Asia-Pacific region, they are visiting the South Pacific island countries, and they are promising to cross the Taiwan Strait again.

But what is the use of all this?

Some island countries in the South Pacific have already suffered from the United States' use of them as nuclear test sites, and they vowed never to endure humiliation and become such puppets.

As for crossing the strait, it will only trigger stronger countermeasures from our army, and we have adequate countermeasures for this.

At the same time, your Tsai Ing-wen is not giving up.

In recent days, there have been sporadic artillery drills on your coastline.

The sparse artillery sounds let the whole world know that in the siege of the modern army of the People's Liberation Army, Tsai Ing-wen's

It was to whistle on the road at night to strengthen herself, which just exposed her inner weakness and cowardice.

As long as the Central Committee of our Party gives an order, all of you and the scraps of iron and steel that the United States gave you will all be wiped out in an instant.

Brothers and soldiers of the guardsmen of Taiwan, Penghu, Jinma, we are all Chinese, we are all descendants of Yan and Huang, and the blood of the same clan and clan flows in our veins.

We really do not want to meet you in battle.

Because of the comparison of strength, you are no longer an opponent.

Who wants to start a war in the Taiwan Strait?

There is only one kind of person in this world, and that is the American imperialists and all the reactionaries, because only when there is a war between the two sides of the strait can they draw chestnuts from the fire and reap the benefits.

As long as there is imperialism, there will be wars.

This is the law of history and the logic of survival for the United States and all its imperialist countries.

There is another kind of person, that is your superior, the Taiwan independence diehard represented by Tsai Ing-wen who is willing to be the eagle dog of US imperialism.

We believe that although these people are very few, they are extremely destructive.

They cooperate with US imperialism and are pushing the Taiwan Strait into the abyss of war step by step.

As brothers of the same clan and clan, the officers and soldiers of the Taiwan-Penghu-Golden-Horse Guards, we would like to tell you something from the bottom of your heart.

The road before you actually has no choice.

One is to surrender or the other is to perish.

Going to the embrace of the motherland openly and uprightly is called abandoning the darkness and turning to the light.

I believe that most of you are hesitating about this.

Facing the outstretched arms of the motherland, facing justice and light, it will be a great and glorious thing for you to abandon the dark and turn to the light. 's choice.

If you follow Tsai Ing-wen stubbornly, you will only end up dead.

When it comes to death, the Chinese historian and writer Sima Qian once famously said: "A person's death is more valuable than Mount Tai or lighter than a feather."

Chairman Mao Zedong made the most incisive interpretation of this sentence.

He said: To die for the interests of the people is heavier than Mount Tai; to die for those who exploit and oppress the people is lighter than a feather.

If you die for traitors like Tsai Ing-wen, imperialism and fascism on the battlefield in the future, such a death will not only be lighter than a feather, but will also be reviled by future generations. ashamed.

U.S. imperialism has also given a very apt name to the people who died in this way, saying that the people who died in this way are the " consumables " necessary in their war to dominate the world .

At present, not only people at the presidential level like Zelensky are " consumables " in the eyes of the Americans , but even the heads of some European countries that follow them, plus Japan, Australia and other reactionary forces, Americans are regarded as " consumables " in their hearts, because Americans only have greatness in their hearts, and everything else is the necessary " consumables " for their war machines .

Brothers in the Taiwan Army, are you willing to be such consumables for Tsai Ing-wen and US imperialism?

If you are used as " consumables " to die for US imperialism and Tsai Ing-wen and others, it will be a huge shame for you and your family for generations to come.

Brothers in the Taiwan Army, I believe that you will not be willing to do such a sinful thing to humiliate future generations.

Taiwan, Penghu, Golden and Horse defenders, when faced with major decisions in life, you have a reference and an example to follow.

In the decisive battle between us and you before the founding of New China, batch after batch of officers and soldiers of your Kuomintang army revolted heroically, or raised the white flag firmly on the battlefield, or turned their backs.

In the Liaoshen, Pingjin, and Huaihai battlefields, when the Kuomintang army formed a group and formed a division or even an army revolted to our army, and put down their firearms and flowed to our army's position like a tide, what a firm and heroic feat it was.

It is a turning point in life towards light and justice, and it should be worthy of praise.

Many of them later became heroes on the battlefield, or contributed their lifelong wisdom and talents to the construction of New China, and some of them also took important government positions in certain positions.

For example, Fu Zuoyi, who contributed greatly to the peaceful liberation of Peiping, Cheng Qian, who held the Hunan Uprising at a critical moment, Dong Qiwu, who launched the Suiyuan Uprising despite Chiang Kai-shek's every effort to obstruct the Suiyuan Uprising, and Tao Zhiyue, who led 100,000 troops to order an uprising in Xinjiang at a critical moment, are known as Lu Han, who launched the Yunnan Uprising at a critical moment for the last " King of Yunnan " , etc., are all heroes with outstanding achievements, and many of them have become leaders in building a new China.

There are also thousands of ordinary officers and soldiers who abandoned the dark and turned to the light, and they have all made indelible contributions to the unity and unity of the Chinese nation

Brothers in the Taiwan Army, as the sons and daughters of China, shouldn't their life choices enlighten you?

What we can tell you is that although in your eyes, we still have many difficulties and problems that need to be solved urgently, but under the wise leadership of the Communist Party of China, we have entered a new era with great pride.

An important sign of this new era is that our country has achieved comprehensive poverty alleviation in 2020 , which has shaken the world.

We were the second largest economy in the world many years ago; before 2030 , we will confidently surpass the United States and become the world's largest economy; by the middle of this century, we will strut to achieve the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.

This is a great event that the sons and daughters of the Chinese have dreamed of for thousands of years.

As Chinese, we hope that tens of millions of Taiwan compatriots and 1.4 billion people will share the greatness and glory of being a Chinese, and enjoy being a Chinese.

The supreme glory of the children of Huaxia.

As a soldier, shouldn't you make a difference in such a great era?

The great historical opportunity provides each Chinese son and daughter with their own choices.

A good man should show his skills in this great historical change and not be an absentee or even a destroyer.

Cao Zhi, a poet of the Three Kingdoms period in China, has a famous "seven-step poem", the poem is " boiled beans and burned beans, beans are weeping in the kettle, they are born from the same root, why is it too urgent to fry each other? "

Brothers in the Taiwan Army, I believe you are great Most of them insist that both sides of the Taiwan Strait are Chinese, and they all know that our brothers and compatriots should not face each other.

Right now, the US imperialists and the Taiwan independence forces are insisting on dividing us and provoking a war.

We have to fight for the reunification of the motherland.

The liberation of Taiwan, from 1949 to the present, we have been waiting for more than 70 years, we do not want to wait any longer.

For the sake of national unity and national unity, our central government has issued a series of policies to benefit Taiwan for more than ten consecutive years, but it has not changed the minds of the Taiwan independence diehards.

Instead, they have cultivated a group of traitors who eat mainland food and scold mainland mothers.

Now, marked by the military blockade of the island of Taiwan, the reunification has entered an accelerated period.

If the expectation of reunification in the past was not clear, now with the help of the American witch and the United States, it is now basically clear.

The short term is one and a half years, and the long term is three years or five years.

The return of Taiwan will soon become a reality. , the situation has not allowed us to drag on.

We will not and cannot leave this burden related to territorial integrity and national justice to future generations.

Taiwan-Pengjin-horse defenders, our arrow of unification has been fired. Now that the military blockade has been launched, it will mean a battle of real guns and real swords.

Let me tell you, my modern People's Liberation Army is ready to fight, waiting for the order of the Party Central Committee, and we will fight according to the order.

The day when the People's Republic of China will realize the unification of its territory is coming.

We will embrace this great historical moment.

Every true son and daughter of Yan and Huang should make the right choice in the interests of the whole nation in the face of the great right and wrong which is related to national honor and disgrace and national unity.

A retired veteran of the Chinese People's Liberation Army

August 14 , 2022

Australian beef industry on edge as New Zealand escapes Beijing ban

New Zealand has escaped a sweeping Beijing ban on livestock, dairy and other agricultural products worth more than $6 billion a year, but the outlook for Australian beef exporters remains ominous.

Article HERE

Rufus

x
A disabled man with lower limbs is lying on a self-made scooter, he is crossing a zebra crossing. Although his movements were very slow, all the vehicles at the intersection were waiting quietly in place.

After IBM’s first 2nm chip, TSMC announced the results of 1nm chip, Huawei chose the right direction

After IBM's first 2nm chip, TSMC announced the results of 1nm chip, Huawei chose the right direction

Egg Drop Soup

Restaurant style Chinese egg drop soup — 蛋花汤.This is a very basic Chinese style egg drop soup using only common ingredients. This easy and quick egg drop soup can be amazingly beautiful

x
x

Pure egg drop soup is not popular in Mainland China. Usually we add tomato wedges, dried laver  or oyster mushroom to provide an extra basic flavor since we usually use water as the soup base. I have decided to try this one because I have my homemade leftover chicken stock after enjoying the shredded chicken noodle. It comes out so satisfying! I love smaller and finer drop flowers as they are so beautiful and more interestingly they are hard to detect in mouth.

The size of the egg drop flower actually depends on your fire and the stirring speed. If you want finer flowers, turn up the fire before drizzling the egg liquid and stir the soup at a constant speed.

Ingredients

  • 4 cups chicken stock
  • 2 large eggs
  • 2 tbsp. cornstarch
  • 3 tbsp. water
  • ¼ tsp. ground white pepper
  • 1 tsp. salt
  • 1 tbsp. light soy sauce (optional)
  • ½ tbsp. minced ginger
  • 3 scallion, white part and green part separately chopped
  • ½ tbsp. sesame oil (optional)

Instructions

Mix 2 tablespoons of cornstarch with 3 tablespoons of water in a small bowl. This is our water starch.

Add chicken stock to a pot. Add ginger, scallion whites and light soy sauce. Bring the broth to a boilings. Remove the ginger and scallion whites. Add salt and white pepper.

Stir the starch water again and pour it into the broth. Simmer to boil again.

Turn up the fire and then slightly pour the whisked egg in. Stir the soup with chopsticks. Turn off the fire, add some fresh chopped scallion and serve immediately.

Optionally drizzle some sesame oil.

x
x

Be the Rufus

My short video. If you’ve already watched it, then please watch it again. This is what DOMAIN is all about.

Take note at the “heart of snowflakes” at the end of the movie.

Mass protest in South Korea calling for the termination of US Korea alliance.

Not reported in the Western media. We cannot understand the real world until the crusaders collapsed.

韩国首尔爆发大规模反美集会!有集会者高喊“解散韩美同盟”

And so another deceased kitty cat returns to its owner

x
x

I was walking my elderly Border Collie near a playground one day. Kids were coming over to pet her. One mentioned there was a kitten hanging out. I was going to check on it…. Instead the kitten headed for me! She climbed my leg & turned herself into a parrot. I called my (now) husband crying. We had lost my beloved calico 2 weeks before. I was not ready for another cat.

No one claimed this kitten. After 2 days I knew she was mine.

It’s hard to believe Mox is the same starved kitten we brought home. She’s a mess. Still a kitten at heart. Loves to snuggle under the covers with me.

She has done a lot of “toasting” since then. She’s considered a Tortie/ siamese color point mix.

Before the USA was able to stop the reunification…

Video footage of 1955 October 10, nationalist party leader ( jiang jieshi )蒋介石 address army in Taiwan calling for the preparation to take back the mainland, and 3 months later, Footage of Zhou enlai 周恩来 calling for the preparation to reunify Taiwan in a peaceful way

 

China urges U.S. not to miscalculate resolve to defend sovereignty, territorial integrity

BEIJING, Aug. 19 (Xinhua) — Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin on Friday urged the U.S. side not to miscalculate China’s firm resolve to safeguard its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Wang made the remarks at a daily news briefing, in response to what the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Daniel Kritenbrink had said about China’s response to U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan.

“Regarding Pelosi’s provocative visit to China’s Taiwan region, the context, cause and course of events are crystal clear,” Wang said.

It is the United States that has gone back on its commitment to the one-China principle and undermined China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, not the other way round. It is the U.S. leaders who went to Taiwan to support “Taiwan independence” separatist activities, not the Chinese ones who went to the United States to support Alaska’s “independence,” Wang added.

Wang said that China’s firm response to the U.S. provocation is reasonable, lawful and justified, which has been widely understood and supported by the international community. For the U.S. side, the only solution for the problem is to return to the three China-U.S. joint communiques and the one-China principle, instead of shirking responsibility and deflecting blame, still less acting recklessly to create a bigger crisis.

“We are firmly determined to safeguard our national sovereignty and territorial integrity. We urge the U.S. side not to miscalculate on this,” Wang added.

China

The real way the United States Constitution works and it’s not pretty. We are watching the collapse in real time.

 

i don't know that the usa has any type of long range strategy... and i don't think they care who dies, or what mess they make of other places on the planet either... it seems the usa is intent on serving the god of mammon only.. this certainly works for wall st and the military industrial complex... i really don't think concern for the welfare of other nations, or the planet for that matter, are any considerations washington gives at this point... and to have the same brand of neo cons in bidens gov't as the previous bunch, is not a positive sign either.. it is hard to appreciate the constant hate towards russia these people have.. i find it impossible to understand in fact..

Posted by: james | Apr 9 2021 17:00 utc | 1

It’s a nice day out. And maybe too nice to complain about the mess the United States is today. But that’s life, don’t you know. Human constructions, nations and people, come and go. But the weather, society, the birds and the bees continue oblivious to whatever the United States does.

Too nice a day to worry about the collapse of whatever the heck it is. But it’s happening whether we want to watch or not. Meanwhile it’s not only the “rank and file” citizenry; the “Joe Sixpack” in the “flyover states” discussing this, but also the “elites” in the posh enclaves inside the elite residential areas of the North east. And they so banter about…

Here we have a couple of elites chatting about what’s going on.

While (initially) laws might say that everyone is equal, what actually happens is that certain types of people (psychopaths) tend to gobble up all the “power” over time. Thus resulting in a society of “elites” who rule over the nation.

These elites are talking.

I found it interesting, not only for the way that they are approaching the current situation; all, but also for what they know, and what they are oblivious to. As people used to say in the hills “He might be smart, but he has shit for brains”…

These people talk about life inside of the Washington DC “beltway”, and the various “alphabet” agencies while they live in their nice plush estates, inside their gated communities. You cannot blame them. They are not oblivious to what is going on in America, and in the rest of the world on the international scene, instead, they view it from a set of “eyeglasses” that is alien to the rest of us. thus their discourse, and bantering about has value and is valuable to us.

It’s worth taking the time to absorb…

Here's a pretty good read about what America is, and who the "leaders" are. It came from Culture News, and I edited to fit this venue. the author wrote long expansive paragraph-long run-on sentences that was difficult to read. But aside from that, and my own artistic flourishes in this particular article, the content remains intact. It's a good read. All credit to the author.

Please note that I interjected quotes and comments from the “Joe Six-pack” audience at the start of each section, just to keep everyone grounded. They are in dialog boxes.

The Codevilla Tapes

The historian of American statecraft and spycraft and conservative political philosopher Angelo Codevilla talks about the ruling elite, Jonathan Pollard, and the rise of the techno-surveillance state—and the consequent demise of the American Empire.

By David Samuels

No one runs America.

That’s the terror and the beauty of American life in a nutshell.

It is the answer to the secret of how 300 million people from many different places can live together between two oceans, sharing a future-oriented outlook that methodically obliterates any ties to the past.

All prior lived experience is transformed into science fiction…

…or else into self-serving evidence of …

…the present-day moral, intellectual, and technological superiority of the brave imagineers…

…those who are fortunate enough to live here, in the “Now”, while all who came before them are cursed.

It’s out of control

Yes it is.

Thanks for pointing out the planning of US aggression. One hopes this is all brinksmanship on all sides. 

If the plan is to take Crimea, then the USA has completely lost its mind and is hellbent on extinction rather than face collapse of 'the greatest country in the history of the world.'

It's understandable that those wanting to see the USA get its ears boxed are frustrated by Putin/Russia's strategy of repeatedly 'turning the other cheek.'

Rather than weakness, we can see now how Russia has consolidated its alliances, developed advanced weaponry, and consistently worked within International Law and not the Rules Based International Order of Might Makes Right.

The United States and its equally bankrupt allies/vassals face a three-front battlefield - Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. Obviously the supply chain is a problem.

So, dear friends, the question is: How batshit crazy are the folks pulling the strings?

Posted by: gottlieb | Apr 9 2021 17:21 utc | 7

No one can or does control such fantasy-driven machinery…

… which seems incapable of operating in any other way than it does, i.e., in a space with no beginning and no end…

… but trending always toward utopia perfection.

Learning to accept imperfection and failure may be an emotionally healthy way for adults to negotiate the terrors and absurdities of human existence, but it is not the highway to the perfectibility of man or woman-kind.

Because the large-scale explanations that Americans offer each other about how their country works, or doesn’t work, arise from working backwards from the expectation of some future storybook perfection…

…Americans tend to be either childishly conspiratorial or cartoonishly stupid…

…because those are the types of explanation that tend to win out…

…once you stipulate an ever-more-perfect-and-glorious future…

…as the inevitable outcome of whatever snake oil it is that you are pitching to the suckers.

The Snake Oil Addiction

To my mind, the most chilling sentence uttered in this whole affair was by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. He said "that any attempts to start a new military conflict in Ukraine’s war-torn east could end up destroying Ukraine".

Lavrov never speaks like this and the Russians do not bluff.

Zelensky signed a decree recently stating Ukraine's intent to take back the Donbass AND Crimea! This means if Ukraine attacks, Russia WILL intervene and destroy Ukraine as we know it. I think it means Russian tanks will roll on Kiev to stop this war forever.

Moves like recalling the US Ambassador are very ominous and usually prelude all out war between nations. Combined with Lavrov's warning, Russia is giving all possible signals it is ready for war with Ukraine AND the US.

Posted by: Mar man | Apr 9 2021 18:03 utc | 13

In today’s America, these explanations come in the form of shallow and sweeping identitarian polemics (“white people” or “globalists” run “everything”)…

… indecipherable academese backed by graphed coefficients (people are motivated by “rational self-interest,” as calculated by academics)…

… or as appeals to a glorified and abstracted historical past (“the Founding Fathers,” “the melting pot”)…

…whose promises of future perfection may have seemed real enough to past generations, but must now grow ever more distant with every new iteration of Moore’s law.

Who is in control?

Martyanov is correct in the sense that the USA can only claim to be "universal" (empire) as long as it keeps the European Peninsula in its hold.

psychohistorian @ 4 states that the USA would still be the world empire even if it loses Europe because it has the financial system. But this financial system, including the dollar standard, would mean jack shit without Eurasia. The Americans would lose, by definition of the term, the petrodollar if it were to lose Eurasia, plus most of the world trade. The USD would have nothing to back it up as the world standard fiat currency; at most it would still be a strong, well-respected fiat currency (a la Swiss Franc, Pound Sterling, Euro, Yen and now the Renminbi) which would probably still be the currency used in Latin America and the Pacific region - but the power to enforce economic sanctions the USA has today would be instantly over.

Without its great foothold in the European Peninsula, the USA would certainly lose any serious claim to be a world empire. Maybe if it somehow would be able to keep the Middle East (through Israel and Saudi Arabia) - but that would probably be a Justinian version of the American Empire, not the Good Ol' American Empire of the times of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

If it were to lose the European Peninsula, the USA would just have Japan, South Korea, Australia and other Western Pacific islands as its last serious footholds in Eurasia. It would be what I called here sometimes a "Byzantine" USA - essentially a Western Empire, with some footholds in the Western Pacific, memories of a glorious long gone past. It would not mean the end of the American Empire by any stretch of the imagination (the true end of the American Empire can only be achieved by internal conflicts/contradictions, not external), but it would certainly mean the beginning of another era (a much less glorious one) of its history, for sure.

Posted by: vk | Apr 9 2021 18:19 utc | 15

Which is not to say that America isn’t governed by an elite class, just like China, or Japan, or France is—only that the ability of that class to actually rule anything is even more constrained by the native culture.

The idea that an advanced technologically driven capitalist or socialist society of several hundred million people can be run by something other than an elite is silly or scary…

…the most obvious present-day alternative being a society run by ever-advancing forms of AI, which will no doubt have only the best interests of their flesh-and-blood creators at heart.

Yet it is possible to accept all of this, and to posit that the reason that the American ruling class seems so indisputably impotent and unmoored in the present…

…is that there is no such thing as America anymore.

In place of the America that is described in history books…

…, where Henry Clay forged his compromises, and Walt Whitman wrote poetry, and Herman Melville contemplated the whale, and Ida Tarbell did her muckraking, and Thomas Alva Edison invented movies and the light bulb, and so forth…

… has arisen something new and vast and yet distinctly un-American.

That for lack of a better term is often called the American Empire.

Which in turn calls to mind the division of Roman history (and the Roman character) into two parts: the Republican, and the Imperial.

The American Empire

I guess the Russians made clear they mean business:

"What happened and how this could be, that mighty Ukraine and her US handlers suddenly want to prioritize "political and diplomatic way". Well, here is some snippet of suddenly a much more peaceful mindset with a bit of explanation of this sudden (not really) change:

The United States on Thursday said it was discussing Russia’s military build-up near the Ukrainian border with Nato allies as fresh reports showed Russia deploying ballistic missiles to the area. Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, said that Washington was “increasingly concerned” about what has been described as Russia’s largest military manoeuvres in the area since the break-out of hostilities in eastern Ukraine in 2014. “Five Ukrainian soldiers have been killed this week alone. These are all deeply concerning signs,” Ms Psaki told reporters on Thursday."

And suddenly the Ukrainians become angels of peace: ""Liberation" of Donbass by power means will lead to mass loss of life among civilians and military personnel--this is unacceptable for Kiev, stated the Commander of the Ukrainian Armed Forces Ruslan Khomchak. "Being dedicated to universal human values and norms of humanitarian law (I am under the table trying to get up....), our state places the life of its citizens on the first place (I tried to get up, fell again...)",

https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2021/04/another-day-another-tune.html
One could just as well say "tail between their legs" running...

Posted by: Peter | Apr 9 2021 18:30 utc | 18

While containing the ghosts of the American past, the American Empire is clearly a very different kind of entity than the American Republic was…

…starting with the fact that the vast majority of its inhabitants aren’t Americans.

Ancient American ideas about individual rights and liberties, the pursuit of happiness, and so forth, may still be inspiring to mainland American citizens or not…

… but they are foreign to the peoples that Americans conquered.

To those people, America is an empire, or the shadow of an empire, under which seemingly endless wars are fought…

… a symbol of their own continuing powerlessness and cultural failure.

Meanwhile, at home, the American ruling elites prattle on endlessly about their deeply held ideals…

….of whatever that must be applied to Hondurans today…

…and Kurds tomorrow…

…in fits of frantic-seeming generosity in between courses of farm-to-table fare.

Once the class bond has been firmly established, everyone can relax and exchange notes about their kids…

… who are off being credentialed at the same “meritocratic” but now hugely more expensive private schools that their parents attended…

… whose social purpose is no longer to teach basic math or a common history….

…but to indoctrinate teenagers in the cultish mumbo-jumbo that serves as a kind of in-group glue that binds ruling class initiates (she/he/they/ze) together…

…and usefully distinguishes them from townies during summer vacations by the seashore.

America is run by a class of people

A quick consideration on the MIC question.

It is patent that the USA, at this stage of its development, depends almost entirely on its defense industry - which is backed up and insulated from the law of capitalism by the State - on keeping its technological prowess.

We already know that, as the world's financial superpower, the USA is destined to deindustrialize (because that's the price of keeping the USD as the standard fiat currency without incurring the danger of hyperinflation). As it deindustrializes, another part of the world must industrialize - in this case, Asia (China in particular). That's the conditio sine qua non for the financial hegemony to exist without quickly self-destructing, i.e. another part of the world has to industrialize, you can't have a financial superpower without an industrial superpower, as the commodities are what back up money (as Marx once said, the use value is the Träger des Tauschwerts, the surface over which the house of cards can be erected).

By exclusion, the USA can only keep its status as the financial superpower as long as it keeps absolute control over the Seven Seas (most of trade still happens through the sea), which means a strong defense industry must be kept at the behest of the financial sector (Wall Street). The Defense industry is, therefore, the exception to the rule - alongside the electronics-communications system (which gives material form to the financial system, to the USD and the stock market) - over which the USA cannot escape. If it can keep recycling USDs through multi-billionaire defense contracts with other countries, the better, as it gives another life extension to the USD. This is what happen in the famous Petrodollar scheme, where Saudi Arabia denominates its oil in USDs by buying American T-bonds, but also American military weapons and systems, which keeps Saudi Arabia sovereign and intact to keep its oil reserves denominated in USDs, in a virtuous cycle.

That's why arms sales are so important to the USA: it keeps, at the same time, its domination of the Seven Seas and therefore of world trade thus keeping its financial system the dominant one, and decelerate its inevitable deindustrialization process.

Posted by: vk | Apr 9 2021 18:43 utc | 19

The understanding of America as an empire is as foreign to most Americans as is the idea that the specific country that they live in is run by a class of people who may number themselves among the elect but weren’t in fact elected by anyone.

Under whatever professional job titles…

… the people who populate the institutions that exercise direct power over nearly all aspects of American life from birth to death are bureaucrats…

…university bureaucrats,

…corporate bureaucrats,

…local, state and federal bureaucrats,

…law enforcement bureaucrats,

…health bureaucrats,

…knowledge bureaucrats,

… spy agency bureaucrats.

At each layer of specific institutional authority, bureaucrats coordinate their understandings and practices…

…with bureaucrats in parallel institutions through lawyers.

They do so in language that is designed to be impenetrable, or nearly so, by outsiders.

Their authority is pervasive, undemocratic, and increasingly not susceptible in practice to legal checks and balances.

All those people together comprise a class.

For themselves, and only for themselves.

I’ve never commented before. I’m in South Africa, with family members in Palestine and family members who’ve lived through WWII. 

I truly hope that Russia has a strategy to make the US Mainland (I also have many American friends I dearly love) carry some of the consequences of anglozionist adventures abroad.

The world is imploding/exploding under the weight of Western hegemony.

None of the people I love (including my dearest family and friends or myself) will probably survive consequences a conflagration of this type could unleash. But what option is there to responding to ongoing geopolitical abuse by the US-ZIO-EU? How sad! Five billion years of evolution and this is what it comes to?

Posted by: Xerxes | Apr 9 2021 20:49 utc | 29

Another thing that residents of the broad North American expanse between Canada and Mexico have noticed is…

…that the programs and remedies that this class has promoted, both at home and abroad…

… have greatly enriched and empowered a small number of people, namely themselves.

While the broader American population continues to decline in wealth, health, and education.

Meanwhile, the American Empire that the ruling elite administers is collapsing.

The popularity of such observations on both the left and the right is what accounts for the rise of Donald Trump, on one hand, and of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren on the other hand…

… among an electorate that has not been historically distinguished by its embrace of radicalism.

Add those voter bases together, and perhaps 75% of Americans would seem to agree that their country, however you think of it, is in big trouble.

And that the fault lies with the country’s self-infatuated and apparently not-so-brilliant elite.

Why Empires Fall

Xerxes, Russia (or any other country) is unlikely to “make the US Mainland carry some of the consequences of anglozionist adventures abroad”. This could only happen in a “post-war/Nurenburg” type scenario, once the US has already been defeated. What they will do, and have been doing, is to separate from the US monetary system, work together with other resistance countries, and let the US isolate itself and fade as a result of this.

Fortunately the US empire has been weakening, and other countries developing and strengthening and working together under an ostensibly fairer paradigm. The worm has been turning against the empire. This is something to be happy and hopeful about.

Posted by: Featherless | Apr 9 2021 21:18 utc | 33

Every student of history has their own theory about how and why empires fall.

My theory is this:

The wealth of any empire flows disproportionately to the capital, where it nourishes the growth, wealth, and power of the ruling elite.

As the elite grows richer and more powerful, the gulf between the rulers and the ruled widens…

… until the beliefs and manners of the elite bear little connection to those of their countrymen…

… whom they increasingly think of as their clients or subjects.

That distance creates resentment and friction.

In response to which the elite takes measures to protect itself.

The more wealth and power the elite controls, the more insulation it must purchase.

Disastrous mistakes are hailed as victories or are made to appear to have no consequences at all.

This is done in order to protect the aura of collective infallibility that protects ruling class power and privilege.

What happens next…

the US sociopaths want to do in Europe much the same as what they did in Iraq - but using different means/proxies:

Create a situation of much chaos in a chosen country, as a relatively modern state dissolves, and use that as a pretext both to inject themselves even more into that region's affairs, and also to spread the 'contagion' of 'chaos' to other surrounding states..... where the US sociopaths who run the Empire will try (again) for regime changes in the surrounding nations (from Serbia to Georgia to the other Black Sea states) and beyond.

that the puppet Zelensky has been off to Qatar and next Turkey is a sure sign that these mindless people in the US national security state are going to try once again using the psychopathic jihadists as one of their means to inject instability, terror and chaos into the region.

on top of all that, as many commentators have already pointed out, as soon as Russia intervenes in a big way (if it does go that route), the Nord-Stream project is over with, Germany is without its gas and gas hub plans - plus there's now no gas/oil going to Europe via the Ukraine.

So two birds with one stone: northern/central Europe is then even more dependent on the US for energy, as well as 'protection' from the big bad bear.

Posted by: michaelj72 | Apr 9 2021 21:54 utc | 44

What happens next is pretty much inevitable in every time and place…

…Spain, France, Great Britain, Moghul India, you name it…

… Freed from the laws of gravity, the elite turns from the hard work of correct strategizing and wise policymaking…

…to the much less time-consuming and much more pleasant work of perpetuating its own privileges forever.

In the course of which endeavor the ruling elite is revealed to be a bunch of idiots and perverts who spend their time prancing around half naked while setting the territories they rule on fire.

The few remaining decent and competent people flee this revolting spectacle, while the elite compounds its mistakes in an orgy of failure.

The empire then collapses.

Sanity Check

Interesting to see the sudden back-peddling by the Kiev mouthpieces. I see a few different things going on here. First, and the biggest, is that I have come to believe that Russia (and China) has finally had enough, what with the constant pinpricks of the Trump years and now the absolute vitriol and diplomacy-killing antics of O'Biden, and have decided that everything else has been tried, the only way the US will listen is if it gets its nose bloodied, and bloodied good. Too many years of no consequences. So with this in mind, I believe Russia (and perhaps China) are actually looking for a good opportunity to inflict pain.

Posted by: J Swift | Apr 9 2021 22:51 utc | 50

In the hopes of confirming or disproving my theory, I recently traveled out to a vineyard in Plymouth, Northern California. There I found Angelo Codevilla.

He, who along with Michael Walzer of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey, is one of the few American political philosophers who combines a deep sense of the Western moral and philosophical traditions with a hard-nosed sense of how the American political system actually works.

While I am naturally more inclined toward Walzer-ism, I thought it would be fair minded to give Codevilla a hearing, despite the fact that he identifies as a conservative Catholic rather than as a liberal Northeastern Jew.

As a sometime student of intelligence work, I will also admit to being an attentive reader of Codevilla’s book Informing Statecraft.

Which together with Norman Mailer’s novel Harlot’s Ghost offers a fair guide to the karmic evolution of the U.S. intelligence community.

Codevilla’s former boss in the U.S. Senate, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, had this to say about his protégé’s book:

Woodrow Wilson once spoke of the demands that would be made on Presidents in the age to come; demands of a kind that could only be met by “wise and prudent athletes, a small class.” Such is Angelo Codevilla; one of the small class of intelligence analysts who has actually been there. Read him; although I plead: Do not invariably agree!

What follows is an edited record of our conversation, which began when I arrived at the Codevilla vineyard in the evening and then continued the next morning, after the Codevillas invited me to spend the night at their house and then served me a delicious breakfast.

***

The Ruling Elite

David Samuels: In 2010, you wrote an article, which then became a book, in which you predicted the rise of someone like Donald Trump as well as the political chaos and stripping away of institutional authority that we’ve lived through since. Did you think your prediction would come true so quickly?

Angelo Codevilla: I didn’t predict anything. I described a situation which had already come into existence. Namely, that the United States has developed a ruling class that sees itself as distinct from the raw masses of the rest of America. That the distinction that they saw, and which had come to exist, between these classes, comprised tastes and habits as well as ideas. Above all, that it had to do with the relative attachment, or lack thereof, of each of these classes to government.

David Samuels: One of the things that struck me about your original piece was your portrait of the American elite as a single class that seamlessly spans both the Democratic and Republican parties.

Angelo Codevilla: Of course, yes. Not in exactly the same way, though; what I said was that the Democrats were the senior partners in the ruling class. The Republicans are the junior partners.

The reason being that the American ruling class was built by or under the Democratic Party. First, under Woodrow Wilson and then later under Franklin Roosevelt. It was a ruling class that prized above all its intellectual superiority over the ruled. And that saw itself as the natural carriers of scientific knowledge, as the class that was naturally best able to run society and was therefore entitled to run society.

The Republican members of the ruling class aspire to that sort of intellectual status or reputation. And they have shared a taste of this ruling class. But they are not part of the same party, and as such, are constantly trying to get closer to the senior partners. As the junior members of the ruling class, they are not nearly as tied to government as the Democrats are. And therefore, their elite prerogatives are not safe.

David Samuels:  As a young person moving through American elite institutions, I was always struck by the marginal status of those other people you mention, Republicans. Clearly, they were not as bright as me and my friends were, which is why they were marginal, even if they had an easier path to some kind of dubious status as pseudo-intellectuals in their second- or third-rate party organs. That hardly mattered, though. The New York Times was the important newspaper, and it was a liberal newspaper. The New Yorker was an important magazine, and so it was a liberal magazine. Right-wing types might look instead to the Conservative Review of Books, published out of Mobile, Alabama, or the Jesuit review of something or another. But nobody was quaking in their boots about how such places might review your work. All the cultural capital was on the Democratic side of the ledger.

Angelo Codevilla: What a marvelous recitation of ruling class prejudice.

Of course, you would not have judged them to be nearly as intelligent as you folks were. And you probably didn’t imagine that others would think you less intelligent.

David Samuels: Let them rant and rave about their conspiracy theories and whatnot. They didn’t matter.

Angelo Codevilla: Well, they didn’t matter. Because of the power that you wielded, because of the institutions that you controlled.

Now let me give you an alternative. In France, with which you tell me you are acquainted, you have meritocracy in government and institutions. Meritocracy ensured by competitive exams. I, and a bunch of nonliberal democrats as myself, would be absolutely delighted if institutions like The New York Times, The Atlantic, were to open their pages to people who bested others in competitive exams. But of course, they’re not thinking at all of doing that. As a matter of fact, the institutions of liberal America have been moving away from competitive exams as fast as they know how.

In living memory, and I’m an example of that, it was for a time possible for nonliberal Democrats to get into the American foreign service, and if they did as I did, and scored number one in their class, they would have their choice of assignments. But now, you have all sorts of new criteria for admission into the foreign service, which have supposedly ensured greater diversity. In fact, what they had done was to eliminate the possibility that the joint might be invaded by lesser beings of superior intelligence.

David Samuels: There is a curious mélange of dispensations under which people are escorted into the grand ballroom of the good and the great, right? Category one were with high test scores. Then there were the children of people who had gone to these institutions in previous generations, whose parents have money and might be named Cabot or Lowell. Then there were the admissions categories that cover you in the opposite direction—4.8% African Americans plus at least one white person who grew up without shoes in the mountains of West Virginia. These covering cases were useful because they could be trumpeted as proof of how far and wide the net was cast. All of which went to show that the most meritorious people were all gathered together in this place, and were therefore fit to rule everyone else.

Angelo Codevilla: Merit as defined by what?

David Samuels: I have no idea.

Angelo Codevilla Merit as defined by the capacity to be attractive to those at the top of the heap. In other words what you have is rightly called not meritocracy, but co-option.

Now it is one of the fundamental truths of our co-option that it results in a negative selection of elites. That each group selects people who are just a smacking below themselves, so that generation after generation, the quality of those at the top deteriorates.

David Samuels: Are you suggesting that the all-white Christian male elites, who largely inherited their status from their parents, were more deserving of their elevated status than their more diverse counterparts, like the people who ran American foreign policy under President Barack Obama?

Angelo Codevilla: I don’t know that the statesmen of the 1920s and ’30s were any more meritorious than the folks under Barack Obama, because they themselves were not selected by any meritocratic criteria, as you suggest. However, I do know, having taught college for many years, that the amount of work that was done by college students 50 years ago or more was considerably greater than the amount of work that is done by college graduates today.

David Samuels: As a graduate of two elite American universities, I am entirely willing to grant that point.

Angelo Codevilla: Them that don’t work so much don’t learn so much, usually.

David Samuels:  There is something funny to me about your description of these people as the “elite” or a “ruling class,” though. I picture grand country homes like in the Masterpiece Theatre production of Brideshead Revisited. But if you look at your American elite, you find earnest bureaucratic types living in collegiate apartments with Ikea furniture.

Angelo Codevilla No. Not Ikea furniture.

David Samuels:  You’re talking about a class of people who are academics or lawyer-bureaucrats living on federal government and NGO salaries.

Angelo Codevilla They have far more money than people who don’t have similar government attachments. The fact is that proximity to government power has meant, and does mean, more money and greater possibility.

David Samuels: I think about the tech oligarchs who park their multibillion-dollar fortunes offshore.

Angelo Codevilla: I would dispute that.

David Samuels: Really?  How many tens of billions of dollars has Apple parked offshore? How much money do Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer and Mark Zuckerberg pay in taxes?

Angelo Codevilla: Apple and Bill Gates have secured their money, not so much by relocating, but by having become the biggest lobbyists in the country. That is the source of their financial security.

The point of the ruling class is precisely the confusion of public and private power. This is, in fact, this is becoming in fact a corporate state. Which by the way was pioneered by one of my former countrymen by the name of Benito.

David Samuels: So, when you’re talking about the ruling class, you’re positing a continuum between the Silicon Valley oligarchs with their hundred-billion-dollar fortunes and these public employee and NGO types.

Angelo Codevilla: I am indeed. That is the meaning of the word party. The Democratic Party is in fact composed of the very people that you are talking about.

Parties are by nature coalitions, each part of which benefits from the other. But they share certain things in common. One of them is contempt for Americans who are outside of their ranks.

David Samuels: You call those contemptible people the “country party.”

Angelo Codevilla: Precisely. Here, I’m borrowing an 18th-century British term.

David Samuels: I thought it was a good term because it brings to mind country music.

Angelo CodevillaThat too. Have you ever been to Branson, Missouri? Do you even know what it is?

David Samuels: I gather it’s neither Aspen nor Hollywood.

Angelo Codevilla: Branson, Missouri, is an entertainment center, larger in every way than Hollywood. It is located in Branson, Missouri, in the Ozarks. It is one of the homes of country music stars and starlets. It’s a huge complex of every kind of family entertainment, from bass fishing to theater, music, museums, anything you can imagine. Now the fact that you have never heard of it typifies the limitations of the ruling class.

David Samuels: My oligarchical snobbery.

Angelo CodevillaNo, no, no. You haven’t even risen to that.

David Samuels: I’m a piker. I bet $5 on the trifecta at the dog track.

Angelo Codevilla: It typifies the limitations of the ruling class mind, not even to understand that over which you are lording it.

David Samuels: So, what role do the poor and disadvantaged people of America play in your scheme? As I’m sure you understand, the reason we members of the elite class accumulate so much money and power is to be good allies for those who are less fortunate than we are. At least that’s what they teach my children in these schools that cost $35,000 a year.

Angelo Codevilla: You certainly do teach them that. It is a youthful pretense. It is a pretense to which the Roman patricians did not stoop.

David Samuels: But eventually they did, right? Constantine got them. The nobles all made public displays of their Christian charity.

Angelo Codevilla: No, no, go back. The Roman patricians call these unfortunates clients. Their relationship with their clients is precisely your relationship with the unfortunate and the poor. They are your pawns, the people whose votes you take.

David Samuels: So, when I express my sincere concern about transgender rights, you would presumably accuse me of manufacturing a new category of clients—and at the same time, a new class of bigots for me to self-righteously oppose.

Angelo CodevillaYou are not manufacturing a class, or rather you are exploiting that class’ weakness to turn that class into clients.

Most of all, what you are giving them—which really in a sense they crave more than anything else—is a sense of grievance against the rest of America. Grievance is the handle by which you push these pawns into your cultural wars.

David Samuels: What an ungenerous way to describe my noble instinct to help the less fortunate. Do the less fortunate truly have nothing to be aggrieved about, here in America?

Angelo Codevilla: Whatever they have to be aggrieved about, that grievance serves your instrumental purpose. Their grievance is your happiness. If they didn’t have a grievance, you’d try to manufacture it. Their having a grievance is an occasion for you to, to sharpen it, to scratch it, and to make it more relevant to them than it otherwise would be.

David Samuels: So, what exactly does the authority of the beneficent class I am supposedly part of, and which you seem to abhor, rest upon? There is the inherent rightness of my views, of course, which is proven by science—

Angelo Codevilla: Well, no. It is founded upon your will to power.

David Samuels: But look at all the wonderful benefits we elitists have to offer, like Davos in the wintertime. Why shiver out in the cold, Angelo?

Angelo Codevilla: Let me crib my response to you. Verily, verily I say unto thee, they have their reward. Do people in your class know where that comes from?

David Samuels: I’m a Jew, so I get a mulligan on quotations from the New Testament.

Angelo CodevillaI read the first part of the Bible as well as the second, so you ought to read the second as well as the first.

David Samuels: So people have insisted to the Jews throughout our history.

Now tell me: How does your eccentric description of the American elites square with what we know to be the American democratic system? Congress makes the laws. The president of the United States is in charge of the executive functions of government. And then there’s the Supreme Court, which makes sure everything’s constitutionally kosher.

What you are describing is a kind of semiconspiratorial extraconstitutional elite superstructure whose actions do not accord with American civics textbooks or what I read in the newspaper.

Angelo Codevilla: Thank you! Right over the plate.

You are describing, and the textbooks describe, what used to be the American system of government, which has not existed since the late 1930s. The last attempt to revive that system, to make it rise up out of the overlay of administrative agencies that the New Deal built, was the Supreme Court of Schechter Poultry vs. the United States, 1935, the essence of which decision was to say that a legislative power cannot be delegated. Were that maxim to be enforced, the FAA, the FCC, and on and on, all of these agencies would cease to exist because they are, quite literally, unconstitutional. Now the Supreme Court has held them to be constitutional under the fiction that they are in fact merely filling in the interstices of laws. However, your average law passed by Congress these days consists almost exclusively of grants to these agencies to do whatever it is they wish.

Which is why, when Nancy Pelosi said of Obamacare that we would only know what it contained after it was passed, she was entirely correct. She was describing the way the American government works, which is in fact, to use your words, a vast conspiracy between the best lawyers on the outside and the best lawyers on the inside of government. They call each other, both on the inside and the outside, stakeholders. And the rest of us are what, scumbags?

David Samuels: Deplorables.

Angelo Codevilla: Deplorables, yes. But we’re not stakeholders, we who are neither regulators nor regulated entities, but rather ordinary people. We are not parties to this covenant.

There’s a lecture given by James Wilson, the signer of the Declaration of Independence and the head of the first American law school, about the difference between American law and law everywhere else in the Western world. Elsewhere, law came from power. In America, positive law will be valid only if it was in accordance with the laws of nature and nature’s god.

David Samuels: But that’s not the basis of the revolt of the deplorables, or the country party, as you call it.

Angelo Codevilla: The basis of the revolt is simple. We realize that you hate us and therefore we hate you back. And we will take anybody, not that we found this man who fits our description, because Donald Trump didn’t fit anybody’s description of what they wanted. But we will take anybody who’ll take a swing at you.

Which is why I originally wrote at the back of that essay, that this revolution would be for the better or the worse. Because of the urgency that the country class felt. For getting out of all of this.

David Samuels: You seem to have had a marvelous life, though.

Angelo Codevilla: Fraught with all manner of difficulties. I had several job offers just as I was finishing my comps, and then I got drafted. By the time I came out of the service, there were no jobs to be had. And so first I worked at a jerkwater college in Pennsylvania. Too awful for words, I got out of there, but I couldn’t find anything else. So I did the only thing that I could do, which is to pass exams. I got into the foreign service. And then from there to the Hill and then to Stanford to the Hoover Institution and then to Boston. While I was on the Hill, I also taught ancient and modern political thought in Georgetown.

I probably would have done better for myself and my family if I stayed in the foreign service. Or, in the depths of my depression I got admitted to Berkeley Law school. But hey, you’re right. I have absolutely nothing to complain about.

David Samuels: You got to write. You got to think. You got to see the kinds of things that were going to feed your writing.

Angelo Codevilla: I got to teach a lot of students, several of them are teaching right now. And they’re doing good work. Books, we’ll see. I don’t think I’m going to write another book because the last one I wrote, hell of a good book, didn’t sell very much. But who knows. If I get some time off of the vineyard here, and I don’t get too many irrigation systems going wrong or things like that, I’ll write some more.

***

The Rise of the Surveillance State

David Samuels: You have some real knowledge of how the American intelligence community thinks and operates, from your days as a staffer working for Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

Angelo Codevilla:  Senate staffer in control of the intelligence budget. My senator was the chairman of the Budget Subcommittee of the Intelligence Committee. Which means that the budgets came through him and therefore through me. And back then we had markups and we could punish those who were not forthright with us, and we did.

David Samuels: How do you understand the seemingly unchecked growth of this globe-spanning American surveillance apparatus, and how do you understand the danger of that apparatus being turned to domestic political purposes?

Angelo Codevilla:  There’s always danger inherent in secrecy. And you know secrecy of course is central to intelligence operations. Secrecy most often is used not for the good of the operation, but to safeguard the reputations of those who are running the operations.

The agencies, like all bureaucracies, have always tried to aggrandize themselves, build their reputations, in order to make and spend more money. Get more high-ranking positions. Get more post-retirement positions for their people in the industries that support them. They’ve done exactly what bureaucrats in other agencies have done, neither more nor less.

But the business they’re in, which involves surveillance, is uniquely dangerous, because surveillance is inherently a political weapon. Inherently so. And there is never any lack of appetite for increasing the power of surveillance, and for increasing the reach of surveillance.

Fortunately, especially in my time on the Hill, we had pretty good resistance against bureaucratic attempts to increase the reach of government surveillance over the rest of the country.

Then along came 9/11, and congressmen, senators, who didn’t know any better, were rather easily persuaded, and for that matter Presidents—George W. Bush being exhibit number one—were very easily persuaded, that giving the agencies something close to carte blanche for electronic surveillance would help to keep the country safe. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was amended in 2008 to accommodate the practices which had evolved extralegally under George Bush, which essentially allowed the agencies to wiretap at will, so long as they claimed that this was for foreign intelligence purposes. In this regard, they claimed that what they were doing was within the spirit, if not the letter, of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which stated that any warrantless collection of electronic intelligence, bugging and other means of collection in finding intelligence, could capture the communications of U.S. persons, only incidentally in the course of capturing the communications of foreign targets.

The 2008 amendments legalized this practice, and added the capacity of the agencies to compel communications companies to help upstream collection of emails etcetera, which would then be recorded. The act, rather the amendment, contains an even longer list of apparent restrictions on how these intercepts of Americans may be used. But these restrictions are basically for show because, essentially, once the foreign intelligence surveillance court authorized a particular operation the practical means of judicial review of what has happened, of how it is being carried out, are so complicated as to be unworkable. And besides, what the hell do judges know about the substance of these things?

Therefore, to get to the point of your question, this increased power and lax attitude conserving it posed a temptation to use these tools for the convenience of the administration in power, which was made much more likely by the increasing identification of the senior ranks of the intelligence community with your ruling class. To the point that these people, being ordinary sentient human beings, believe what the people at the top of their class are saying about the opposition.

David Samuels: We are good, and they are bad.

Angelo Codevilla:  We are good and these opponents of ours, which mean to take over our positions, are bad people, they are dangerous to the country, and therefore why not look for every possible means of keeping them out of office?

David Samuels: You were directly involved in the drafting of the original FISA law in 1978.

Angelo Codevilla:  That’s correct.

David Samuels: In the aftermath of the Church Committee revelations, yes?

Angelo Codevilla:  Right. Now you use that term “the Church Committee” in the context that it was something that was antagonistic to the intelligence business. It was not. The Church Committee was a joint operation between, let’s call it “the left” inside the intelligence community, specifically the CIA, and their friends on the Hill. The result of it was that the left component of that bureaucracy has control of the CIA now.

The drafting of FISA was a cooperative enterprise between the Democratic majority, at that point, of Congress, the staffers being all Church Committee staffers, every one of them. And the ACLU. What I’m calling the establishment left. They were the drafters.

But the impetus of the drafting came from the FBI, primarily, and secondarily from the CIA, the NSA. The reason for their pressure was that the left had sued individual members of the FBI for having wiretapped them during the Vietnam War, in their communications with North Vietnam, communist Czechoslovakia, the KGB, and so on. Now they didn’t like that, and they wanted to make sure that nothing like that ever happened again.

So the point of FISA from the standpoint of the left was to keep that from happening again. The point of FISA from the standpoint of the FBI etcetera was never to be in a position to be sued again.

David Samuels: Right. A judge signed it. So now it’s legal.

Angelo Codevilla:  Right. What the FBI etcetera demanded was preauthorization. We will not do any wiretapping unless it is preauthorized. Unless we are ipso facto clean.

Now the objections to FISA were primarily of a constitutional kind, mainly that wiretapping for national security was an inherent part of presidential power. The president is commander-in-chief of the armed forces. And that was a true objection.

I however made a different objection, although I agreed with the constitutional objection. I said that pre-authorization, pre-clearance of wiretapping, would be an unendurable temptation for people in the agencies to do whatever the hell they wanted. They would be exempt from the prudence that the fear of being sued would impose.

My objection caught the eye of the American Bar Association at the time, which organized a debate on that subject at the University of Chicago Law School, with me on one side, and a local law professor by the name of Antonin Scalia on the other.

Scalia took the position that the danger, which I described, which he found real, was minor compared to the need to get the agencies doing their job vigorously. We see how the future turned out.

I must note that Scalia is a southern Italian. And I am a northerner.

David Samuels: When you saw the Snowden revelations about Stellar Wind and these other collection programs which then were retroactively legalized—what was your response?

Angelo Codevilla:  “What else is new?”

David Samuels: Along with the impetus of 9/11, do you feel that the technology itself fundamentally—

Angelo Codevilla:  Sure. Technology itself increased the possibilities. And it would have taken real self-restraint for people to say, “No. We could do this, but we won’t.”

David Samuels: We fear the future threat to the constitutional order.

Angelo Codevilla:  We ought not to have such powers.

David Samuels: Please remove me from temptation, said no one, ever.

Angelo Codevilla:  Well as a matter of fact, Christians do “lead us not into temptation” all the time.

David Samuels: You do say “lead us not into temptation,” but I am not aware of the Christian prayer that says “please take away the chocolate cake while I’m in the middle of eating it.”

Angelo Codevilla:  Well, St. Augustine said exactly that, you know, “Lord make me pure, but not yet.”

***

Are Assange and Snowden heroes or villains?

David Samuels: I was an early and avid supporter of Julian Assange, who is now the devil for both the Democratic and Republican elite factions and appears to have vanished into a dark hole. But I have always defended him, because I felt that at the heart of his project, and no one else’s project, was a fundamental insight into how information was controlled and moves in the modern surveillance state, and how to confront it using the actual tools that are now in play.

When people said, that’s not journalism, I have always looked at them and said, “Yeah, it is. Or at least, it’s more like journalism than most of what passes now for journalism. It is a method for making public the fundaments of how the country is actually being governed.” I don’t know how you’re supposed to have a democratic society without that kind of transparency into the bureaucracies that spy on us and lie about it—and have turned a supine press into these pathetic hand puppets.

If you look at the universe of government bureaucrats and contractors and all the rest, there are now well more than a million Americans with some form of top secret or higher security clearance. Now I can accept that something is properly a secret if only five people know it, or if 40 people know it, or even 400 people. But there is no such thing as a secret that is shared by 1 million people. That is an anti-democratic exercise of power by a bureaucracy.

Angelo Codevilla: I agree with everything you said, up until the time you got to numbers. Because military operations involve a lot of people. Some intelligence operations are essentially military operations which put people’s lives at risk. The line must be drawn where the military is involved.

However, every word you said concerning Julian Assange, I agree with. Every last word.

David Samuels: Did you understand Edward Snowden to be a knowing Russian agent? As someone who was used and manipulated by the Russians?

Angelo Codevilla:  I do not know. What is fairly clear is that Snowden entered government service with the idea of doing something like what he did, which certainly removes him from the category of whistleblower. He is certainly no innocent.

But regardless of his motivation, I am glad that he existed. And I’m glad that he did what he did.

The United States does not suffer, and has never suffered, from a lack of knowledge about the rest of the world on the basis of which to make foreign and defense policy. OK? And that is a fundamental fact. And because of that, all the fancy arguments that you must sacrifice this and that for the sake of intelligence, I think are false.

David Samuels: One of the minor scandals that startled me in the late Obama/early Trump interregnum was the unmasking scandal, which struck me as much more significant than people seemed willing to credit at the time. I mean, the fact that someone leaked an intercept to David Ignatius may be a crime, but it was hardly news to me. I mean, people leak stuff all the time. That’s how Washington works.

What struck me as much more significant was the defense that “oh, actually most of these unmasking requests came from Samantha Power, in her job as U.N. ambassador.” And then it turned out it wasn’t her sitting at her desk all day long unmasking hundreds of names of U.S. citizens. It was someone she deputized in her office. She didn’t even know about these requests, or most of them, or so she claimed.

It was news to me that ordinary low-level bureaucrats and political appointees now sit at their desks all day reading raw intercepts targeting American civilians, collected under the pretext of gathering foreign intelligence. A 26-year-old assistant can sit there all day long reading your email, based on the three-hop rule. I don’t think that’s what—

Angelo Codevilla:  What the authors of the FISA had in mind.

David Samuels: Authors of FISA, authors of the U.S. Constitution, you can pick your authors. Yet that has became normative reality, right?

Angelo Codevilla:  Look. Most people who have a title in Washington don’t do their work. There’s always the chief assistant to the assistant chief, they’re the ones who do the work. And so yeah, they get deputized.

David Samuels:  So now we have this surveillance apparatus that Snowden, James Risen, and others have detailed, which provides daytime reading material for bored 26-year-old assistants, which means that material can easily be repurposed for—

Angelo Codevilla:  Any purpose under the sun.

David Samuels: That is a very powerful weapon for this bureaucracy to have.

Angelo Codevilla:  That’s the point.

***

When Jeff Bezos Has Dinner With the CIA

David Samuels:   The guys working in the White House whether under Obama or Trump aren’t writing the code for their surveillance systems. Neither are the nice people at the CIA. They’re all writing checks to Silicon Valley.

I saw the other day that Jeff Bezos, who’s one of the most dedicated champions of democracy and the free press in America, the guy who says that democracy dies in darkness, I saw that his company, Amazon, provides all the data storage for the CIA. Now as a reporter and as a citizen, that makes me confident—

Angelo Codevilla:   Ha, ha.

David Samuels:   —that Jeff Bezos’ newspaper, The Washington Post, is reporting without fear or favor every day on Jeff Bezos and all these CIA and DoD contracts with Amazon, because they have such a strong incentive to make sure that everything’s on the up and up. And by the way, Amazon is definitely not listening in on your private conversations through the listening devices—in the form of digital assistants like Alexa, Echo speakers, and doorbells with spy cameras in them—that it is installing by the millions in American homes.

Angelo Codevilla:   May I give you a quick answer to your larger question?

David Samuels:   Yes.

Angelo Codevilla:   It depends on who goes to dinner with whom. That’s how Washington works.

David Samuels:   That can’t be your answer, so let’s take it from the top. There is a company called Amazon, which now has monopolistic position A, in the field of books and all printed material distributed in America, and B, in a whole host of other industries ranging from diapers to blow-up pool toys. It looks like a classic monopoly trust. You have Google, which has a near-monopoly over the search function, the leading portal to most information on the internet, and holds a monopoly on search advertising. You have Facebook, which controls 78% of entries onto the internet now through their platform. So, you have these three monopolistic companies, right, one of which also owns the only major newspaper in Washington, D.C., and which control the movement of information throughout the entire society.

Now, another arm of Silicon Valley controls storage and access to the information that the government agencies gather on the society. And all of the money earned from both these pursuits flows back to these people, who are richer than any class of people in America since the robber barons. They got so rich by sucking out the life’s blood from five dozen different industries that employ people and destroying the 20th-century press, which played a key role in maintaining our democracy.

Now I look at that, and I say the power is out there. You look at it and you say no, my lad. It’s about who has dinner with who in Washington.

Angelo Codevilla:   Oh no, no, no. You misunderstand me. The ruling class transcends Washington. Part of it is in Silicon Valley, it’s in every major university town in America. It’s in Sacramento. And then you ask, what is it that ties it together?

David Samuels:   Right, the poor associate professor of gender studies with his or her little espresso machine.

Angelo Codevilla:   The poor associate professor of gender studies, number one is not so poor. Number two, she gets her living from the same partisan connection that Jeff Bezos does. She is part of the same party as Jeff Bezos, who has God knows how many billions.

David Samuels:   A large fortune.

Angelo Codevilla:   But his power as you have pointed out substantially consists of his connection with government. Although I must say one thing contrary to an absolutist view of the ruling class. That the four major trusts that you mentioned are in large part—have in large part grown naturally, organically. They’re securing themselves by government power. But the government did not force anybody to shop with Amazon.

David Samuels:   Ah! As a matter of fact, Google and Facebook secured their monopolies and their ability to commit massive and ongoing copyright violations thanks to a little-known provision of the Communications Decency Act, which was passed by Congress in 1996 in response to a series of moral panics that engulfed America at around that time. Those included the McMartin nursery school witchcraft case

Angelo Codevilla:   Oh ho ho ho ho. I remember that.

David Samuels:   There was a generalized hysteria about pedophiles running nursery schools and satanic rituals involving small children. And this became part of a hysteria so significant that Congress had to pass a law. And the law specifically targeted this phenomenon which was almost entirely imaginary, even if in a few specific instances it might have also been real, as is always the case. Except for the Jews baking matzo with the blood of Christian children, of course. We didn’t actually do that.

Angelo Codevilla:   You didn’t?

David Samuels:   No. Matzo tastes bad enough as it is.

So the Communications Decency Act was set up to prevent pedophiles from sharing pictures of child sexual abuse over the newfangled internet. In response to which, two farsighted members of congress, Ron Wyden and Christopher Cox, who fancied themselves experts on the digital frontier, wrote into the Communications Decency Act a section stating that internet providers shall not be considered to be publishers and that if you provide internet service or platforms or hosting you are not subject to any of the liabilities that traditionally attach to publishing information.

Now, all of a sudden, thanks to the wisdom of the U.S. Congress, two classes of publishers were created. One class, traditional publishers, had to spend a lot of money on fact checkers, editors, lawyers, and other people because they could be held legally responsible for the information that they published in their newspapers. Another class of publishers, internet publishers, like Google at the time and Facebook as it emerged, were free from all of these potential torts. So Facebook or Google could put up any damn thing they wanted—

Angelo Codevilla:   Yeah, except the fact that Google and Facebook supposedly exercise no control.

David Samuels:   That’s clearly a lie, especially now. They are obviously not the telephone company.

Angelo Codevilla:   Very interesting. At which point, one can challenge that exemption.

David Samuels:   Except it’s now too late. They ate the 20th-century American press.

Angelo Codevilla:   Let me give you the tiniest, tiniest glimmer from the margins, the very, very remote margins, of all of this, so you can understand my perspective. Q: There is a dream that unites progressives and bureaucrats and wealthy technologists. And where does that dream come from?

A: It’s a dream peculiar to this class. Other classes have been united by different dreams.

Q: Is it a substitute for religion?
A: Yes.

When I started working for the Senate, some folks at the agency figured out that I wasn’t a run-of-the-mill staffer. So I was visited by one of the old boys who took me up to the director’s office—the director wasn’t there at the time. He took me up via the director’s elevator, he had a key. And showed me all around and was very, very clubby with me. Then they took me to his house, which is overlooking the Potomac, with these large wolfhounds sitting about. And essentially, he said the equivalent of “all this could be yours.”

David Samuels:   My son, if you play the game.

Angelo Codevilla:   If you play the game. I said to myself, “Hmmmm, what did the Lord say to all this?”

But it really is a matter of who has dinner with whom. I have worked in Washington long enough to know that people would sell their souls for invitations to be at certain tables. To be allowed to speak with this person or that. In the end, it’s all social.

And how do you become social? You express the same thoughts, you have the same tastes. You vacation in the same places. You love the same loves, you hate the same hates.

David Samuels:   This is a very Italianate explanation.

Angelo Codevilla:   No, it’s not. You have the wrong idea about Italy. I’m from Northern Italy. I believe this is a hardheaded explanation of a soft but powerful reality.

David Samuels:   These are all people who are connected to the power of government.

Angelo Codevilla:   Either physically, i.e. economically, or emotionally—power. The dream of sharing power. The gender studies professor not only gets her money eventually from government, but she dreams of being part of a world-transforming enterprise.

David Samuels:   Here, I agree with you. There is a dream that unites progressives and bureaucrats and wealthy technologists. And where does that dream come from?

Angelo Codevilla:   It’s a dream peculiar to this class. Other classes have been united by different dreams.

David Samuels:   Is it a substitute for religion?

Angelo Codevilla:   Yes.

David Samuels:   Is that its primary emotional charge?

Angelo Codevilla:   Well, I don’t know about primary. Look, the primary element is, as we Christians were taught, pride. That is the sin of sins. There is nothing that moves human beings quite so much as the desire to be on top of other human beings.

David Samuels:   It’s interesting. I’m a Jew. But there are things that are lacking in our tradition, just as there are things that are very well developed in our tradition. You know, decent food can be lacking in our traditions.

Angelo Codevilla:   However, not in Italy.

David Samuels:   Oh, my God. The Jewish food in Italy is fantastic.

Angelo Codevilla:   The Jewish food in Italy is fabulous.

David Samuels:   I see that more as a reflection on Italy than the Jews.

***

Henry Kissinger Meets the Demon Emperor

David Samuels:   Judaism as it has existed for the last 2,000 years is an exilic tradition. The religion took the place of both the rituals in the Temple and the state itself. It was all ritualized. So for a 2,000-year-old tradition that’s remarkably elaborated and rich and subtle in so many areas, you have remarkably little discussion of political power—including the sins related to power, the proper ways to exercise power, all that was outside the experience of these people because they were politically powerless. Religion took the place of statecraft.

Israel hasn’t necessarily helped. Why do Jews want political power? To keep themselves from being exterminated. Why does a Jewish state want a strong army? Because if you don’t have one, people are going to wipe you out. In the Middle East, that’s a pretty ironclad rule. These are not very subtle or complicated ideas.

Angelo Codevilla:   But there are plenty of Jews in Europe who are very well acquainted with the theory and practice of exercising power.

David Samuels:   Of course, but—

Angelo Codevilla:   But these Jews were not real Jews. I mean, they were not religious Jews. They happened to be Jewish but they were primarily socialists or whatever.

David Samuels:   Or Henry Kissinger.

Angelo Codevilla:   What a fraud.

David Samuels:   He is an egomaniac and he is highly manipulative and he is a flatterer and a courtier. But Henry Kissinger sure ain’t dumb.

Angelo Codevilla:   Oh no. He’s very smart. Very smart.

David Samuels:   And one has the sense, that if he had really spent the time working on a biography of Metternich, that it would have been fantastic, too.

Angelo Codevilla:   Yes! Look, the man never had time to be a scholar. He was taken up immediately into the world of conferences and power. And he navigated it masterfully.

David Samuels:   Plus, he had the emotional capacity to get down on his knees and pray to Jesus with Richard Nixon after five whiskeys. And you look at Trump and you’re like, that’s what’s needed here too. Right?

Angelo Codevilla:   What would Kissinger do with Trump? Who knows. This man Trump is something else.

David Samuels:   I have a name for Trump: The demon emperor. Because I feel like he’s like a figure that you’d find in some Chinese chronicle, right? There was a time of terrible chaos, social disintegration, and then a Mongol invasion. They breeched the Great Wall and did this and that. And in those moments, the Demon Emperor would arise and take power. He had the head of a pig and the body of man, and he was known for his vile excesses and the terrible rampages that he’d go on, and his desecrations of ancient scrolls. Everyone bemoaned him.

But there was a certain virtue, at times, in certain moments, to having the demon emperor around. Yes, he raped 150 virgins in surrounding villages and all their families were very upset and there’s no reason he should have done that, and he defiles the very ground he stands on, and indeed, no one of noble birth would consent to marry his daughter. At the same time, he defeated the Mongols.

So, the real question isn’t whether Trump is vile, but rather what has he actually done, aside from being vile?

Angelo Codevilla:   Putting a parenthesis in the conversation, talking about Chinese epics. Are you familiar with the Romance of the Three Kingdoms?

David Samuels:   No.

Angelo Codevilla:   You should be. This is a book that describes the tradition between—or rather I should say the end of the Han Dynasty around 200 A.D. The book was written over maybe 200 years. And it is partly prose, partly poetry. And it’s considered one of the great classics of Chinese literature. The Chinese government a couple years ago did a—condensed it into 95, 45-minute TV episodes. Beautifully acted, with gorgeous costume. With English translations that read something between Shakespeare and Thucydides.

Captivating.

I started watching it, I couldn’t stop. I mean my poor wife was left alone. And it conveyed as deep an insight into Chinese character as I’ve ever seen. To get Westerners to empathize with Chinese characters takes some doing. And you can download it, it’s free. The Chinese government has made sure you can download it for free.

***

The Progressive High Church Mass

David Samuels:    Where does the ethos of a class come from?

Angelo Codevilla:    Here I speak with the prejudices of an academician. Because the ethos of the academy changed, evolved. And what drove the change was the growing contempt of professors for our civilization. And you Jews ought not to feel that you are any less the enemy of these people than we Christians.

I should say the defining feature of the ruling class is a certain attitude. And that attitude developed in the academy, and that attitude became uniform throughout the country because of the uniform academy. The uniformity of the academy transformed itself into the uniformity of the ruling class.

David Samuels:    Because that was the institution that credentialed the otherwise uncultured American masses?

Angelo Codevilla:    It credentialed the mind and the habits. The habits of the heart. It credentialed the habits of the heart. The habits of conversation. The habits of work. The habits of logic. The habits period.

Can you imagine a bright kid coming in contact with that kind of intellectual fraud? The smartest ones will say, “hey, I don’t want to be part of this.” He’ll do something else. He won’t be taken in. Which means that this class will continue to degrade itself.

David Samuels:    Just as it would be wrong to understate the importance of who has dinner with whom in Washington, it would be wrong to understate the extent to which the class you dislike is moved by an idea: The rational scientific functioning of the bureaucratic state. That’s their God. I may find this attachment emotionally bizarre, but that doesn’t make it any less real.

Angelo Codevilla:    You’re saying the same thing in two different ways. Why is it that they have dinner together? It is that they believe that they share something terribly important. And that is precisely what they believe to be their stewardship of all things good.

Once upon a time, thus moved, they believed that they were holier than thou. Now they simply believe that they’re trendier than thou. In other words, they share the most valuable thing, which is not devotion to God but devotion to their own corporate mission. Their own corporate status. Status and mission. Status being the priests of the salvific religion of science and progress.

David Samuels:    Yeah, that’s right. There is a monkish sense of devotion.

Angelo Codevilla:    You’re going far too far with using the word “monkish.”

David Samuels:    They exist! These people exist.

Angelo Codevilla:    Oh no, no, no. They exist but they’re very few.

I taught in Boston for many years. And believe it or not, I put my kids in the highest-ranking schools in Boston, and I had to go to a parent meetings and school celebrations. And these were, in fact, secular masses. With, including, believe it or not, the breaking of bread.

Bread! Simple bread, passing it around. There’s a kind of faux simplicity. You have fake Puritans too.

David Samuels:    Now the idea of the worship of the corporate bureaucratic state, right? You have a religion that is capable of attracting, if not the adherence of the majority of the country, then maybe 40% of them.

Angelo Codevilla:    No, no, no, no, no. Not 40%. This is an elite attraction. Which attracts people who naturally, very naturally, want to rise above others.

Again, as a kind of professor, I came across hundreds of young people who very naturally ask the question, how can I rise in life?

David Samuels:    That is my job. I am young, I am supposed to rise.

Angelo Codevilla:    I am supposed to rise in my life, how can I do that? And I in good conscience explain to them that the paths are there and the ladders are being provided. And they will take you to these places. You will, however, have to adapt yourself to the mindset of these folks.

Now, if you insist on being independent minded, don’t bother. But if you do insist on being independent minded, also realize that these ladders will not be available to you.

A lot of kids will come and tell me how much they enjoy my classes and how much they like the ancients, the way I taught the ancients. And I said to them: “Look. There is no future for you in following the likes of me. I cannot give you the kinds of internships and prospects for employment and writing that others can.”

David Samuels:    But they also were successful it seems to me, in inculcating parts of their faith in what you would describe as their client base. Right?

Angelo Codevilla:    No, no, no, no, no. Clients, certainly not.

David Samuels:    They win elections in some places.

Angelo Codevilla:    Sure, they win elections. Not through faith but through pure clientelism. And don’t forget, especially nowadays, more and more nowadays, by fostering hate, by fostering resentment against others. If you are on our side, you’re on the side of the good. But more important than that, on the other side are people who hate you.

This is especially true with regard to blacks. They want to put you back in chains! What utter nonsense.

David Samuels:    Jews are subjected to the same kinds of disciplinary activity. Don’t you understand that the right wingers are all secret neo-Nazis who are planning to pack you off to the gas chambers? I’m an FDR-type liberal, but I find those attempts to trigger some fearful reflex to be incredibly demeaning and offensive.

Angelo Codevilla:    People believe mistakenly that Jews are especially smart. American Jews have proven to be dumb, politically. What is political stupidity? Political stupidity means not knowing which side your bread is buttered on.

Jews have taken to believing the leftist propaganda that the Christians are somehow their enemies. Where in fact, there is no group that is friendlier to Jews in America.

The more Christian you are, the more let us say pro-Jewish we tend to be. And why? Well for this very simple reason. That if you read the Bible, you don’t grow up rooting for the Philistines.

David Samuels:    American Jews come primarily from Poland and from Russia, where the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox churches often played a very nasty political role and also preached a pretty harsh supersessionist doctrine. They were not friendly to Jews. Now that’s very different from American Protestantism, and also American Catholicism.

Angelo Codevilla:    The Christian faith has always been an outgrowth of Judaism. That’s not contention, that is a fact.

David Samuels:    Any group that has a scar, you can press on the scar and profit.

Angelo Codevilla:    Well, yeah. But Jews are supposed to be smart.

David Samuels:    It’s embarrassing to be the object of this kind of primitive manipulation. And both sides do it. You know how they really talk about you, you know what they say behind your back. They’re gonna make your kids bow down to Jesus! Now vote for me.

Angelo Codevilla:    Working on the Hill, I would see these Jewish lobbyists breaking their heads against the left. Whereas if they’d gone to conservatives, they would have been greeted with open arms and gotten exactly what they wanted.

***

The Cruxification of Jonathan Pollard

David Samuels:    You were working on the Hill when Jonathan Pollard was thrown in jail for life to cover up the crimes of Aldrich Ames and others.

Angelo Codevilla:    Oh, that’s a really big subject.

David Samuels:    Would you say that the treatment of Pollard happened independently of the fact that he was a Jew?

Angelo Codevilla:   Oh heavens, no. No, no, no. Since you’re asking this question to me, you obviously have read that I did what I could to champion his release. Having nothing to do with the fact that he was a Jew, and everything with the obvious falsehood of the accusations on the basis of which he was sentenced.

David Samuels:    Right.

Angelo Codevilla:   He certainly committed espionage. And rightly merited prison for a couple of years. Instead he got a life sentence. Which ended up to be 30-something years. Why? Certainly not on the basis of the indictment. I mean, he was accused and pleaded guilty to precisely what he did.

What I know, which a lot of other people did not know, is that given his clearances, he could not possibly have done the things on the basis of which he was sentenced. It was simply impossible for him to do that. And every time I pointed that out to people in intelligence, they would make an argument which was untenable. Mainly that the revelation of facts in reports is tantamount or can easily lead to the revelation of sources and methods.

Nonsense! The compartmentation of American intelligence is premised precisely on the notion that this is not possible. Or extremely difficult. And although it is theoretically possible, one would have to show precisely how it did happen. And nobody even tried to do that.

Furthermore, Pollard was sentenced on the basis of a memorandum, which is yet secret. For our judicial system, to sentence anyone on the basis of any secret proceeding is about as un-American as anything yet.

David Samuels:    Have you read that memorandum?

Angelo Codevilla:   Hell no!

David Samuels:    Did anyone ever offer you a summary of its contents?

Angelo Codevilla:   Well, sure! But it had been only in the most general terms, to which I would say, oh? Show me how that’s possible.

You know, if somebody says, well and by the way, the snowballs in hell were not melting. I’d say, what? How is that happening?

David Samuels:    How do you understand his treatment?

Angelo Codevilla:   Oh horrible, horrible.

David Samuels:    No, I’m asking why.

Angelo Codevilla:   Why? Well, OK. The CIA has all kinds of social-political prejudices. The first thing I learned that I did not expect to learn when I went to my job on the Hill was just how controlled and defined by certain social norms the CIA is. That it is a kind of club that secures itself through co-option. And that co-option involves the furtherance of a whole bunch of prejudices.

So, the straightforward political prejudices are, in no particular order: liberalism, prejudice in favor of the Arabs. You probably are not aware of the corporate prejudices that existed in the favor of the Soviet Union. And they were very, very powerful at CIA, as opposed to DIA or NSA.

To give you an example of these political, pro-Arab prejudices and how they work, when specifically relevant to the Pollard case: When Israel bombed Iraq, the CIA came to us and they formed this committee, and railed at the Israelis for having spoiled this wonderful relationship we had with this wonderful man, Saddam Hussein. I remember at the time sitting next to Pat Moynihan who gave me the elbow and chuckle.

I would say that the majority, by far, of the intelligence committee, laughed at—this is Bobby Ray Inman. And they were cheering on Israel. Hey, bomb more!

But CIA was coming to notify us that in fact they were cutting off the flow of certain intelligence to Israel. And they were doing so in great anger. Now these items of intelligence which were being cut off were precisely the items of intelligence that Jonathan Pollard supplied to them.

David Samuels:    They were hurt!

Angelo Codevilla:   They were hurt! They were hurt and they took it out on Pollard. How far did this attitude which I just described blend over into anti-Semitism? I don’t know.

David Samuels:    Right.

Angelo Codevilla:   But if I were a Jew, it wouldn’t be too much of a stretch for me to think that it did. And even though I’m not, I sure would have my suspicions.

So that’s the essence of my attitude, attitude and subsequent involvement, such as it was, in the Pollard case. I mean I saw number one, that the reason for the CIA’s anger was wrong. And in fact, the United States had every reason to cheer what the Israelis did. And most Americans did, as a matter of fact. And later on, the subsequent administration thanked the Israelis for having done precisely what they did.

So the CIA was wrong in that regard. And they were doubly wrong in convincing that imbecile, Caspar Weinberger, to write that un-American memorandum. And that judge should be damned by his profession for having paid attention to it. You don’t sentence people on the basis of a secret memorandum. You just don’t do that in America.

David Samuels:    The basis for his sentencing is still classified. So who can say for sure if his sentence was unjust.

Angelo Codevilla:   Well, no. We can say. It doesn’t matter that it’s classified, because it alleges something that couldn’t possibly have happened. You can classify it, but that doesn’t make it any truer or any likelier to be true. In fact, it makes it less likely to be so.

***

Secrecy and the Rule of Law

David Samuels: Now this opens up the last subject that I wanted to talk about at some length. Which is, what happens when secret intelligence becomes the basis for actions within the domestic sphere. This seems to me like a gathering storm cloud over this country and the freedoms that most of us still believe are ours.

Angelo Codevilla:   Right, quite so. Two things happen. The first bad, the second worse.

The first is that policy or action made on the basis of information that is not generally available tends to be bad policy. Secret policy doesn’t get the kind of scrutiny that ordinary policy does. And the people who make it do not themselves feel the necessity to be as careful at all that they do as they otherwise would be. So you get sloppy policymaking. You get people riding hobby horses. Not thinking through what they’re doing. And you end up with unintended consequences.

The second is that policymaking on the basis of information not generally available allows one to cut out one’s opponent, allows one to make policy partisan. More partisan than it would otherwise be.

David Samuels:    Would you say that the Iraq War was an example of that?

Angelo Codevilla:   Yes, in the following way. And we’re talking of course about two Iraq wars and then the criticism applies to both in a different way.

The first Iraq War, that is the original invasion of Iraq, happened because the president was under entirely reasonable pressure to do something serious, something definitive, about terrorism. And he concluded in his heart of hearts that overthrowing the regime would have been most vocal in its advocacy of anti-Americanism, and anti-American terrorism, would eliminate one of the major sources of terrorism, and also send a healthy message to other regimes that were in their own ways fostering terrorism.

But, when the subject was moving about inside the highest levels of government, great resistance was encountered to this. And the Bush administration found itself searching for a rationale for that invasion that would minimize opposition from within the government and the ruling class in general. And they sent up a whole bunch of trial balloons in that regard, and the trial balloon that got the least resistance was the trope about the weapons of mass destruction. About which the evidence was always terribly sketchy. But they found that to be the most bureaucratically tenable explanation, and so they went ahead with it. That was a mistake made intramurally, which compromised the eventual support of the larger population.

So much for the first Iraq War. The second one, being the occupation, that was decided in an even less transparent manner. We know that there was intense lobbying on the part of CIA and State for the occupation. And lobbying by the Saudis for that same course. How all that interacted and how George W. Bush and Condoleezza Rice and friends soldiered all of that out and came to that particular decision, we still do not know. And they ain’t about to tell us.

And so, we ended up with an occupation which would ostensibly be for the purpose of democratization, but which number one, shied away from democracy because everyone involved realized that democracy meant that the Shia ruled. So as a fact, the day-to-day effort of the occupation, the one that cost so many American lives, had nothing to do with democratization. It had everything to do with preserving a role for the Sunnis.

The U.S. government never fought that war with the intention of crushing the Sunni opposition. They never fought that war with the intention of crushing the people who were shooting at Americans. And then ended up, in fact giving up on that war and paying those very people, in what was otherwise known as the Surge.

A whole bunch of idiots, Fox News conservatives count the Surge, the so-called Surge, as a great success. Great success in what?

Again here, this is as good an example as you will find of the wages of making policy in a nontransparent manner.

David Samuels:    There was one quote, I forget who it came from, but it came out of an interaction of one of the reasonably high-up war planners in the Defense Department and a journalist for, I think it was, The Atlantic. And the quote was that power creates its own reality. So it doesn’t matter what we say, because even if it’s not true now, by the time we’re finished we will make it true. And therefore there is no real difference between statements that are true or false, as long as we make them.

Do you have the sense that a similar attempt to manufacture reality was at play in what at this point are the still-unknown interactions between the CIA, the FBI, and the Obama White House with regard to the surveillance of Donald Trump’s associates, and the attempt to suggest some vast Putin-Trump conspiracy to game American elections, and whatnot?

Angelo Codevilla:   I don’t think that it went that far. Or I should say, I don’t think the people involved thought about it that deeply.

David Samuels:    I would agree.

Angelo Codevilla:   I think what you had was a small pooling of resources to tweak the news cycle with regard to the hacking of the Democratic National Committee, which then turned into something very major.

David Samuels:    After the election.

Angelo Codevilla:   After the election. It was, like Watergate, a minor attempt to gain marginal advantage. Which then, unintended by the people involved at the time, became something very big, which escaped everyone’s control.

I believe that there are a whole bunch of people in Washington right now who are quaking in their boots because the House Intelligence Committee has shaken loose some of the documents involved. Because in the long run there are no secrets in Washington. And one can then wonder about the quality of the people who imagined that the things they did could remain secret.

It really was a marvel. The idea was that if we all say it together long enough and we shout it loud so nothing else can be heard, then it will become the effective truth, Machiavelli’s verita effettuale. But I mean, there is a limit to this. I have some close personal friends who are more on the left, and I said to them: OK. Where’s the evidence? Who did what when to whom? Where are the quids and where are the quos? What’s going on here? And all they could say is, “Well, the investigation is going on.”

What is not clear is just how much of the reality will come into the public’s consciousness.

David Samuels:    Whose fault is this?

Angelo Codevilla:   The fault here is not of Democrats on the left. The fault here is of Donald Trump and his friends who have refused to enforce the most basic laws here. The most obvious one is Section 798, (18 U.S. Code), the simple comment statute. Now anybody in the intelligence business knows that this is the live wire of security law. It is a strict liability statute. It states that any revelation, regardless of circumstance or intent, any revelation period, of anything having to do with U.S. communications intelligence is punishable by the 10 and 10. Ten years in the slammer, and $10,000 fine. Per count.

Now the folks who went to The Washington Post and The New York Times in November and December of 2016 and peddled this story of the intelligence community’s conclusion that Trump and the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia, these people ipso facto violated §798.

Considering these matters are highly classified, and that the number of the people involved is necessarily very small, identifying them is child’s play. But no effort to do that has been made.

David Samuels:    But doesn’t that failure in turn point to what is, to some extent, the root of this entire drama, which is that Donald Trump seems unfamiliar with and temperamentally at odds with the executive function that he has now assumed?

Angelo Codevilla:   That’s certainly true. But you have to go beyond Donald Trump, to Republican power holders in general. These people far more than Donald Trump would be inclined to forbear for the sake of comity with the ruling class. And what kind of comity are we talking about? We’re talking about social comity. Because if you follow the law in this case, you end up putting former directors of CIA, FBI etcetera behind bars. They, and a whole bunch of their subordinates. Maybe a dozen people here would end up behind bars.

David Samuels:    We’ve come to accept that certain classes of people are in fact above the law.

Angelo Codevilla:   We have come to accept that.

The election of 2016 was precisely about whether anyone in America is above the law. The reason why so many people did not vote for Hillary Clinton is the feeling that she and her ilk were above the law, were acting as if they were above the law, which happened to be entirely true. Now the fact that the Trump administration is acting according to the same premise, i.e., that some people are above the law, is evidence that the revolution that the voters wanted in 2016 has only just begun.

***

Conclusion

It’s interesting to read the opinions of others. Especial if they come from the Washington “beltway”. It’s almost like they are a completely different “animal” than what the rest of us are. I suppose it goes along with my belief that the super elite have evolved into something other than what the rest of us are. They are another creature entirely. It’s not that they are clueless. For they indeed have intelligence. I just wonder if they have scruples and understanding. That’s all.

But that’s just me.

One thing is for certain, they think that they are better than you and I. They are driving the United States into a massive war that does not have an exit. It’s crazy, it’s dangerous, and while they might be intelligent, they sure are out of touch with man’s humanity.

And his humility.

That frightens me.

But they seem oblivious to it all. It’s like people coloring a coloring-book with crayons inside a large RV that is being driven by a drunk madman. These fools haven’t a clue as to what dangers are being toyed with. Sheech!

Do you want more?

I have more posts like this in my Oligarchy Index (which is part of my SHTF index) here…

The Oligarchy

.

Articles & Links

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.

To go to the MAIN Index;

Master Index

.

  • You can start reading the articles by going HERE.
  • You can visit the Index Page HERE to explore by article subject.
  • You can also ask the author some questions. You can go HERE .
  • You can find out more about the author HERE.
  • If you have concerns or complaints, you can go HERE.
  • If you want to make a donation, you can go HERE.

Please kindly help me out in this effort. There is a lot of effort that goes into this disclosure. I could use all the financial support that anyone could provide. Thank you very much.

 

Metallicman Donation
Other Amount:
Please kindly enter any notes that you would like to attach to the donation here:

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Forgotten Ninth Amendment to the Bill of Rights; Why it is More Important Than Ever.

The Ninth Amendment? What is that?

Well, do you know? Most people don’t, and if you were to poll Joe-and-suzy average on the street, you would find that just about no-one has ever heard of it. Yet, it is THE most important amendment to the United States Constitution. In fact, I would argue that the United States is what it is today due to ignoring this amendment.

Yes… yes… yes…

We all know that the Bill of Rights functionally no longer exists. It doesn’t, and it hasn’t existed for over a hundred years. I’m not going to insult the reader with the facts, it has long since been documented time and time again…

  • The sole purpose of the ATF is infringe on the Second Amendment.
  • The Utah Data Collection Center would not exist if the Fourth Amendment was being enforced.
  • Judicial “Plea Bargains” circumvented both the Sixth and Seventh Amendment Protections.
  • The DHS and TSA has severely degraded Fifth Amendment protections.
  • The Tenth Amendment was eviscerated when the Southern States lost the American Civil War.
  • The Preamble to the Bill of Rights is ignored.

The facts are there, plain as day. There is no need to parse individual details. Those doing so are either [1] Living in an Ivory Tower bubble, [2] Mentally retarded, or [3] Shrills for the Oligarchy. There is no other excuse.

The United States was set up to be free of regulation from government.
The United States was set up to be free of regulation from government. The founders believed that a people should be unhampered, and unfettered by links, and chains of an oppressive government. Not only did they hate regulations, but they felt that the United States government should have ZERO ability to regulate anything.

I argue here, that just about everything related to the “War on Drugs”, the “War on Poverty”, regulations for “Climate Change”, and just about every single liberal progressive social engineering effort (from cake baking, to LGBT bathrooms), would be stopped dead in it’s tracks, if the Ninth Amendment were being followed.

We now inhabit a world that demonizes Thomas Jefferson and elevates  Frederica Wilson. Is there any way out of this mess that doesn’t involve  a spaceship? 

- From the editors, at Taki's Magazine 

What is the Ninth Amendment?

The Ninth Amendment

The ninth amendment states that though only some rights are specifically listed in the Constitution, those rights not specifically listed are not denied to the people. 

It was designed to further protect the rights of the people by preventing the government from creating restrictions on unlisted rights.

-Wikipedia

I like that sentence…

“It was designed to … prevent the government from creating restrictions … on citizens.”

The exact text reads:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. 
 

Ah, it’s pretty clear, don’t ya think. Just because the Constitution list the freedom to speak as a Right, this amendment says that there are many, many other Rights that Americans have.

The Ninth Amendment was James Madison’s attempt to ensure that the Bill of Rights  was not seen as granting to the people of the United States only the  specific rights it addressed.  

In recent years, some have interpreted it  as affirming the existence of such “unenumerated” rights outside those expressly protected by the Bill of Rights. 

-Legal Information Institute

The FDA example.

For instance… consider this RIGHT that is not enumerated within the Constitution;

The RIGHT to eat and drink whatever you want.

Or, in other words, the RIGHT to take what ever medicine or substance and ingest it. If you want to drink alcohol, then the government should not get involved. If you want to smoke crazy-weed, it’s none of the government’s business. I you wanted to take a large dosage of vitamin “D”, go ahead.

That’s what freedom is all about.

A person living in freedom, as delineated by the Ninth Amendment would not have to contend with…

  • Regulations on “Obama-School-Lunch” composition.
  • All FDA restrictions, and drug schedules.
  • Regulations on the manufacture of home-made moonshine.
  • Regulations on “Magic Mushrooms”, “demon weed”, and “tobacco”.
  • Even, regulations on eating Tide Pod’s.

Freedom, real freedom, is the ability to enjoy or even harm yourself unencumbered by laws, regulation, or the busybody next door.

Thus, I argue, that the Ninth Amendment clearly says that the RIGHT to eat and drink what you want shall not be restricted, infringed or forbidden by the government.

Thus, the enormous federal bureaucracy (the FDA) that restricts access to food, drugs, and drinks DOES NOT CONSTITUTIONALLY HAVE THE POWER to ban, restrict or reduce access to anything. The only power that they have is advisory.

Or, are you going to use the twisted logic that banning access to local plants falls under the “commerce clause” in the Constitution?

Ah. I can hear the squeals from the busybodies in the audience! Look over there… Jeff Sessions is really going to clamp down on that “demon weed”, and look over there…! Nancy Pelosi is all hot and bothered…”what about the children?”!!!!

Jeff Sessions meme regarding smoking marikuana.
Jeff Sessions meme regarding smoking marijuana. In a free country, people have the liberty to practice freedom. That means that you can live your life on your own terms. Free of regulation, laws, or the busybody down the street.

Today, we need the Ninth Amendment more than ever before. With larger and larger number of Radical Muslims taking seats in Congress, it won’t be long until pork products will be banned in America, and Islamic food preparation methods will be mandated across the land.

People, the government is NOT our parents.

The United States government was intended to be a mechanism of government, a machine that we the people controlled. Why in Heaven’s name would we create a government that would hurt, harm or restrict our Rights? Hum?

Another Example, the EPA…

Today, most Americans have no idea what the concept of “property” means. They think it is a house. A house that you make mortgage payments to a bank, and yearly tax checks to the government. A house that when you die, your heirs must fight the government to determine how of of “your” property you get to keep in the family.

Nonsense!

Property is anything that you own that no-one can tax, regulate, inspect, investigate, or seize.

Under that definition, most Americans don’t have any property.

It’s true, and I don’t want to rub your face in the doggie-do-do, but that’s a fact. Everything that you “own” can today be seized, inspected, or taxed by the all powerful United States government. Including your very own body. Everything.

And, since you don’t own anything, the government can tell you what you can or cannot do with it. People, if you actually owned property, no one could tell you what to do with it, nor could they tax it either.

Like…

I argue that the Ninth Amendment protects your RIGHTS to own property.

The RIGHT to own property that cannot be taxed, inspected, regulated or seized by any government agent.

Which brings me to one of the favorite militarized branches of the progressive left; the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Or, are you going to use the twisted logic that telling you what you can do on your property falls under the “commerce clause” in the Constitution?

The commerce clause.

Rights retained by the people.

The Federalists contended that a bill of rights was unnecessary. They believed that everyone understood that God made man and gave him Rights. Therefore, we could have a kind and just government that did not need to enumerate any Rights given by God. They believed that the government would always protect the Rights of man.

Such fools. Such simpletons!

They argued that if you started to list the Rights given to man by God, that you would have to list every single Right. Or else the government would insist that only those Rights listed would count as Rights.

Well, they were correct. That is how the government works today.

Rights come from God.

Madison adverted to this argument in presenting his proposed amendments to the House of Representatives. He said…

“It has been objected also  against a bill of rights, that, by enumerating particular exceptions to  the grant of power, it would disparage those rights which were not  placed in that enumeration; and it might follow by implication, that  those rights which were not singled out, were intended to be assigned  into the hands of the General Government, and were consequently  insecure. 

This is one of the most plausible arguments I have ever heard  against the admission of a bill of rights into this system; but, I  conceive, that it may be guarded against. I have attempted it, as  gentlemen may see by turning to the last clause of the fourth  resolution.”

It is clear from its text and from Madison’s statement that the Amendment states are but a rule of construction. He made clear that a Bill of Rights might not by implication be taken to increase the powers of the national government. Whether it was in areas not enumerated, or in any other fashion. Further, the simplicity of the amendment, does not contain within itself any guarantee of a Right or a proscription of an infringement of a Right.

In 1965 the Amendment was construed to be positive affirmation of the existence of rights which are not enumerated but which are nonetheless protected by other provisions.

Justice Goldberg devoted several pages to the Ninth Amendment in one of her rulings…

“The language and history of the Ninth Amendment  reveal that the Framers of the Constitution believed that there are  additional fundamental rights, protected from governmental infringement,  which exist alongside those fundamental rights specifically mentioned  in the first eight constitutional amendments. . . . 

To hold that a right  so basic and fundamental and so deep-rooted in our society as the right  of privacy in marriage may be infringed because that right is not  guaranteed in so many words by the first eight amendments to the  Constitution is to ignore the Ninth Amendment  and to give it no effect whatsoever. 

Moreover, a judicial construction  that this fundamental right is not protected by the Constitution because  it is not mentioned in explicit terms by one of the first eight  amendments or elsewhere in the Constitution would violate the Ninth Amendment. . . . 

Nor do I mean to state that the Ninth Amendment  constitutes an independent source of right protected from infringement  by either the States or the Federal Government. 

Rather, the Ninth Amendment  shows a belief of the Constitution’s authors that fundamental rights  exist that are not expressly enumerated in the first eight amendments  and an intent that the list of rights included there not be deemed  exhaustive.”

- 381 U.S. at 488, 491, 492. Chief Justice Warren  and Justice Brennan  joined this opinion. Justices Harlan and White  concurred, id. at 499,  502, without alluding to the Ninth Amendment,   but instead basing their conclusions on substantive due process,   finding that the state statute “violates basic values implicit in the   concept of ordered liberty” (citing Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319,   325 (1937)). Id. at 500.  

Therefore, although neither Douglas’ nor Goldberg’s opinion sought to make the Ninth Amendment a substantive source of constitutional guarantees. Which is unfortunate. Instead, both read it as indicating a function of the courts to interpose a veto over legislative and executive efforts to abridge other fundamental rights.

Never the less, the text to the Ninth Amendment is quite clear…

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. 

Other Rights that fall under the Ninth Amendment…

Here’s some other Rights that the Ninth Amendment would normally be protecting were it enforced…

  • Right to Privacy.
  • The Right to exist.
  • The Right to own property without infringement.
  • The Right to eat and drink freely.
  • Right to Internet Freedom.
  • Right for the Freedom of Thought.
  • The Right of DNA privacy.
  • The Freedom to be forgotten.
  • The Freedom to be forgiven (Felons).
  • The Freedom to have opinions.
  • The Rights of those not yet born.
  • The Right to be left alone.

All of which were non-enumerated Rights that Americans enjoyed in 1776. Which, unfortunately today, Americans no longer have.

An average citizen here in 1800 would go years, decades even, without  seeing one single minion of the federal government, anywhere, not only  his entire day, but for his entire life. 

- From Aesop at Raconteur Report 

Conclusion

I argue that the Ninth Amendment is severely under-utilized.

I further argue that this amendment would render much of the regulatory agencies in the United States obsolete, as they all operate under the assumption that Americans only have enumerated Rights. Not any non-enumerated Rights no matter what the Ninth Amendment says.

The presence of any regulatory agency presupposes that there are ZERO non-enumerated Rights.

Supreme Court decisions that involve the Ninth Amendment have implied that only the enumerated Rights (in the Bill of Rights) are all that is needed for American citizens to have. Their mention of the Ninth Amendment is only in passing without any substantive effect on governance. Hopefully this will change in the future.

That being said. I’m not going to hold my breath. The swamp is big, enormous and very powerful. The ONLY way that the nation can recover from decades upon decades of abuse is to “nuke it from orbit” and start all over fresh.

nuke-from-orbit-meme
Sometimes, when things are so bad, you just don’t take any chances. You get far, far away from the danger, and then you eliminate it completely. This scene has long since became a meme that is used in many different situations. It is not intended to be taken literally, but rather suggestive of how to handle a particular issue.

Posts Regarding Life and Contentment

Here are some other similar posts on this venue. If you enjoyed this post, you might like these posts as well. These posts tend to discuss growing up in America. Often, I like to compare my life in America with the society within communist China. As there are some really stark differences between the two.

Why no High-Speed rail in the USA?
Link
Link
Link
Tomatos
Link
Mad scientist
Gorilla Cage in the basement
The two family types and how they work.
How to manage a family household.
Link
Soups, Sandwiches and ice cold beer.
Pleasures
Work in the 1960's
School in the 1970s
Cat Heaven
Corporate life
Corporate life - part 2
Build up your life
Grow and play - 1
Grow and play - 2
Asshole
Baby's got back
Link
A womanly vanity
SJW
Army and Navy Store
Playground Comparisons
Excuses that we use that keep us enslaved.

Posts about the Changes in America

America is going through a period of change. Change is good… that is, after it occurs. Often however, there are large periods of discomfort as the period of adjustment takes place. Here are some posts that discuss this issue.

Parable about America
What is planned for American Conservatives - Part 2
What is going to happen to conservatives - Part 3.
What is planned for conservatives - part 4
What is in store for Conservatives - part 5
What is in store for conservatives - part 6
Civil War
The Warning Signs
r/K selection theory
Line in the sand
A second passport
Link
Make America Great Again.
What would the founders think?
The Tale of the Killdozer.

More Posts about Life

I have broken apart some other posts. They can best be classified about ones actions as they contribute to happiness and life. They are a little different, in subtle ways.

Being older
Things I wish I knew.
Link
Travel
PT-141
Bronco Billy
How they get away with it
Paper Airplanes
Snopes
Taxiation without representation.
Link
Link
Link
Link
Link
Link
Link
Link
Link
Link
Link
1960's and 1970's link
Democracy Lessons
A polarized world.
The Rule of Eight
Types of American conservatives.

Articles & Links

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.

  • You can start reading the articles by going HERE.
  • You can visit the Index Page HERE to explore by article subject.
  • You can also ask the author some questions. You can go HERE to find out how to go about this.
  • You can find out more about the author HERE.
  • If you have concerns or complaints, you can go HERE.
  • If you want to make a donation, you can go HERE.