Can we sort ideologies between those justifying the strong (“right wing” / imposing karma / marketplace for competition), and those justifying the weak (“left wing” / demand sharing / not leaving anyone behind).
Why is it that the ideologies that justify the weak always attempt to deny and destroy heritage?
From economic Marxism to cultural Marxism to Pan-Africanism. What is it about appealing to the weak that requires the left to destroy everyone’s heritage?
friend of mine:
—“Execution of Americo-Liberians (descendants of freed American Slaves) who imposed tyrany and slavery on the autochonous groups in Liberia.
Pan-africanists have never learned from this brutal lesson. You may read the histories of modern west Africa and nevrr learn why the seria leonians and Liberians fought brutal civil wars.”—
WSJ: “welfare is abused by Muslims across Europe — some 80% of Muslim immigrants to Europe are on the dole, and more than half are “economically inactive.” Muslims claim disability more than any other group. In the EU capital of Belgium, as well as neighboring Netherlands, Muslims are roughly 5% of the population yet consume 40% to 60% of the welfare budget. Belgium spends more on unemployment benefits than any other country outside Denmark. European society isn’t oppressing Muslim immigrants. Far from it. It’s coddling them.”
I suppose it’s not hard to grasp these properties:
2) categorical consistency
3) internal consistency (logical and non contradictory)
4) external consistency (external correspondence)
5) existential consistency (existential possibility)
6) moral consistency (moral objectivity)
And i suppose these tests are not terribly hard to grasp:
4) Full Accounting
But I suppose logic, mathematics, and grammar are not all that difficult either.
But then again, the ancients didn’t solve this problem.
It took 2500 years.
or more than a decade people opposed to the government of Venezuela have argued that its economy would implode. Like communists in the 1930s rooting for the final crisis of capitalism, they saw economic collapse just around the corner. How frustrating it has been for them to witness only two recessions: one directly caused by the opposition’s oil strike (December 2002-May 2003) and one brought on by the world recession (2009 and the first half of 2010). However, the government got control of the national oil company in 2003, and the whole decade’s economic performance turned out quite well, with average annual growth of real income per person of 2.7% and poverty reduced by over half, and large gains for the majority in employment, access to health care, pensions and education.
Now Venezuela is facing economic problems that are warming the cockles of the haters’ hearts. We see the bad news every day: consumer prices up 49% over the last year; a black market where the dollar fetches seven times the official rate; shortages of consumer goods from milk to toilet paper; the economy slowing; central bank reserves falling. Will those who cried wolf for so long finally see their dreams come true?
Not likely. In the opposition’s analysis Venezuela is caught in an inflation-devaluation spiral, where rising prices domestically undermine confidence in the economy and currency, causing capital flight and driving up the black market price of the dollar. This adds to inflation, as does – in their theory – money creation by the government. And its price controls, nationalisations and other interventions have caused more structural problems. Hyperinflation, rising foreign debt and a balance-of-payments crisis will mark the end of this economic experiment.
But how can a government with more than $90bn in oil revenue end up with a balance-of-payments crisis? Well, the answer is: it can’t, and won’t.
ANGLO=GERMAN < 1840. ANGLO != GERMAN > 1880
1) Jefferson was the first CONSTITUTIONALIST (USING: LAW/FORCE) An Aristocrat. (Protestant)
2) Burke was the first CONSERVATIVE (USING: MORALITY/GOSSIP) The Upper Middle Class (Tilting Catholic)
3) Disraeli was the first NEOCON (USING: COMMERCE/REMUNERATION) The Middle Class (Tilting Jew)
This in itself is a profound statement about the devolution of western civilization.
China’s millionaires, having looted their country, are anxious to get their money out of reach of the Politburo, to guard against confiscation should the political tides turn. Only one problem: the government will only let Chinese nationals move $50K/year out of the country.
The majority of China’s new super-rich are prepped to leave the country, but getting their cash out is a serious problem. Much of the volatility in Bitcoin can be ascribed to Chinese elites using the cryptocurrency to smuggle cash out of the PRC. With the Chinese Yuan tanking, the race is on to convert Chinese wealth to other currencies and get out while the getting is good.
But there’s a better way: for a small sum, you can just set up an offshore shell company, direct it to sue a Chinese company you own, throw the lawsuit, and then, oh well, I guess there’s nothing for it but to send a bunch of cash to your shell company, exempted from export controls, in the form of court-ordered damages.