Generational Dynamics World View

[Warren Dew]

By the time they're rebels, though, it's too late to indoctrinate them. I can see how starting a war with Japan could serve to preempt a southern Chinese rebellion if it was done before the rebellion actually happened, but after the rebellion happens, it's too late.

[John J. Xenakis]

** 27-Nov-2019 World View: China rebellion

(11-27-2019, 02:55 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > By the time they're rebels, though, it's too late to indoctrinate
> them. I can see how starting a war with Japan could serve to
> preempt a southern Chinese rebellion if it was done before the
> rebellion actually happened, but after the rebellion happens, it's
> too late.

That's not what happened during WW II. China's civil war began in
1934, but Mao and Chiang suspended the civil war after Japan invaded
in 1937, and resumed it in 1945. This is the "United Front" concept,
which survives to this day.

[Warren Dew]

Is that what western sources really say? No, there was no suspension of the civil war in 1937-1945. In fact, Chiang diverted a significant fraction of the aid received from the US to fighting the Communists instead of fighting the Japanese; if he hadn't the nationalist government might have collapsed from the rear.

Now, Chiang and the KMT might have done even worse in the civil war without the aid, but attacking Japan isn't likely to get China US aid this time around.

[John J. Xenakis]

** 27-Nov-2019 World View: Nationalists vs Communists

(11-27-2019, 09:33 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > Is that what western sources really say? No, there was no
> suspension of the civil war in 1937-1945. In fact, Chiang
> diverted a significant fraction of the aid received from the US to
> fighting the Communists instead of fighting the Japanese; if he
> hadn't the nationalist government might have collapsed from the
> rear.

> Now, Chiang and the KMT might have done even worse in the civil
> war without the aid, but attacking Japan isn't likely to get China
> US aid this time around.

What you said does not contradict my point.

It's not as simple as that. You had multiple wars going on at once.
People were forced to choose how to spend their resources. The main
objective was to fight the Japanese, not each other. That doesn't
mean that the Nationalists and Communists forgot about each other, but
it means that they both set priorities. I read this in several
sources. Here's one.

https://valeriaribeiroufabc.files.wordpr...s-2006.pdf

CHINA
A NEW HISTORY
Second Enlarged Edition
John King Fairbank
and
Merle Goldman
THE BELKNAP PRESS OF
HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS
Cambridge, Massachusetts
London, England

...


The Second United Front

In 192.8 the CCP had reached a low point when its Sixth Congress had
to be held in Moscow. While the Comintern directed its destiny for a
time thereafter, by 1935 the Russian-trained element was beginning to
be superseded by Mao's followers, less because of any conspiracy than
because Mao had discovered the key to power in the Chinese
countryside. This lay in his feeling for the mentality, needs, and
interests of the common people. The "mass line" which he advocated was
genuinely concerned to have the revolution guided and supported by the
common people. Imported doctrines must be secondary. The people must
be carefully listened to, the better to recruit, mobilize, and control
them.

A comparable bankruptcy of the Comintern directives had occurred in
the white areas under GMD control. Repeated attempts to organize labor
unions as an urban proletariat and use strikes to get control of
cities never got off the ground. The chief organizer who emerged was
another man who knew how to pursue what was possible. Liu Shaoqi
headed the Communist effort in the North China cities, where he
encouraged the left-wing literary movement, the use of the arts, and
the recruitment of students. By dropping Comintern doctrines about
proletarian revolution, Liu achieved a parallel indigenization of the
CCP methods.

By the time Liu joined Mao at Yan'an in 1937, the second united front
had already taken shape. A united front of all Chinese against Japan
became the Moscow line in the summer of 1935 in order to combat the
rise of fascism in Europe and Japanese aggression in the East. Mao,
however, came out for a united front in China against the Japanese but
excluding Jiang Jieshi. The key point was that the national revolution
to save China from Japan now took precedence over the social
revolution on the land, but Mao would not give up the latter to
concentrate on the former. Instead, he urged a two-front effort to
combat both the Japanese and Jiang Jieshi by developing Soviet bases
in a war of resistance. To prove its sincerity, the CCP from Yan'an
launched an eastern expedition into Shanxi province in order to get at
the Japanese farther east. Just at this time in the spring of 1936 a
Comintern directive ordered Mao to join a united front with
Jiang. Zhou Enlai went to Shanghai to negotiate the terms.

The Second Coming of the Chinese Communist Party 3I1

When the GMD and the CCP finally agreed on a united front alliance in
April 1937, Mao began to win out against the remaining twenty-eight
Bolsheviks in the CCP. Far from combining with the GMD, Mao planned to
carry on the social revolution in Soviet areas as a basis for fighting
Japan on the nation's behalf. If this strategy worked, the separate
armed forces of the CCP would develop their own bases and popular
support while also riding the wave of national resistance to the
invader. The basis for Mao's national communism was already at hand.

The force of Chinese nationalism had been mobilized in the early 19zos
with the help of Soviet advisers in two competing party dictator- ,
ships. However, the senior of these, the GMD, had already become the
hope and path of advancement for the urban Sino-liberal professionals
who had a Western returned-student or Christian-college
background. Thus Nationalist China faced two ways, toward the
reformist West in the cities and toward conservatism on the land. Both
philosophies might be present in the same family.

Without the devastating Japanese invasion, the Nanjing government
might gradually have led the way in China's modernization. As it
turned out, however, resisting Japan gave Mao and the CCP their chance
to es-

tablish a new autocratic power in the countryside, excluding the
elements of a nascent urban civil society that were still developing
under the

Nationalists. In conditions of wartime, the CCP was building a new
type of Chinese state geared for class warfare. In the twentieth
century, Chinese revolutionaries were thus preparing to assault and
reorder a class structure that went back at least 3,000 years.

16
China's War of Resistance
1937-1945
Nationalist Difficulties

Militarist Japan's attempt to conquer China began by seizing Manchuria
in 1931 and became a full-fledged invasion from 1937 to 1945 (see Map
23). Japanese historians saw Japan following in the footsteps of the
Manchu conquerors of 1644, while Tokyo's modernizers saw Japan
shepherding the Chinese people into the modern world. But times had
changed. Japan's aggression only strengthened China's new nationalism.

During the eight years of war, a major part of the Chinese people were
in Japanese-occupied territory, mainly the coastal cities and railway
towns. Another major segment were in the GMD-controlled area, called
Free China. The smallest division of China was the CCP area, with its
capital at Yan'an. Historians are genetic-minded, looking for origins,
And China's future came out of Yan'an. Accordingly, the defeat of the
Japanese and then of the Nationalists has been less researched than
the rise of the CCP. Success is creative and interesting, failure sad
and dull. Who wants it? Moreover, Yan'an being smaller, in size and
documentation, is easier to encompass than the vastly variegated
experience of Occupied China and Free China. These two areas, though
larger than the area under Yan'an, have been less studied.

While the GMD and the CCP were both party dictatorships in form, they
were very different political creatures in fact. The GMD had two
incarnations, first in the associates of Sun Yatsen in the 1911
revolution, second in the followers of Jiang Jieshi in the Nanjing
government after 1927. The GMD's forced removal in 1938 from Nanjing
to Wuhan and then beyond the Yangzi gorges to Chongqing cut it off
from its roots. Its revenues from the Maritime Customs and the opium
trade to Shanghai China's War of Resistance 313

were knocked out. Its hard-won echelon of modern-trained
administrators became refugees. From being the central government of
China, the Nationalist regime was now a fugitive in a mountain-ringed
redoubt, obliged to work with reactionary provincial militarists and
landlords. In West China the Chongqing government tried to keep the
local warlords in line and avoid upsetting the social order in the
villages.

[Warren Dew]

We could argue about whether building a political infrastructure that would ensure the success of the revolution as a prerequisite to fighting the Japanese was really "prioritizing the fight against the Japanese over the civil war", but as your source points out, what's clear is that the Japanese invasion helped the rebels and hurt the preexisting government:

Quote:... resisting Japan gave Mao and the CCP their chance
to establish a new autocratic power in the countryside, excluding the
elements of a nascent urban civil society that were still developing
under the Nationalists. In conditions of wartime, the CCP was building a new
type of Chinese state geared for class warfare. In the twentieth
century, Chinese revolutionaries were thus preparing to assault and
reorder a class structure that went back at least 3,000 years.

Back in the 1930s, the Chinese Communist Party was fine with that, since they were the rebels.  In the 2020s, the prodemocracy movement, or whatever the southern Chinese cognate might be, would be the rebels who would be helped by an external war, and the Party, as the incumbent government, are the ones who would be hurt.  Being on the opposite side than before, it would not be in the Party's interests today to start an external war once a rebellion had started.

[John J. Xenakis]

** 28-Nov-2019 World View: Diversionary tactic

(11-28-2019, 03:00 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > Back in the 1930s, the Chinese Communist Party was fine with that,
> since they were the rebels. In the 2020s, the prodemocracy
> movement, or whatever the southern Chinese cognate might be, would
> be the rebels who would be helped by an external war, and the
> Party, as the incumbent government, are the ones who would be
> hurt. Being on the opposite side than before, it would not be in
> the Party's interests today to start an external war once a
> rebellion had started.

The CCP thugs are obviously well aware of the role reversal. There's
no way to predict the exact scenario, but there's no doubt that the
CCP thugs will figure out a way to adapt the lessons of WW II to the
current situation, and use some kind of diversionary tactic to slow
any rebellion.

Since the CCP has spent the last 30 years with its Patriotic Education
Campaign generating vitriolic nationalistic anti-Japan fervor, then I
would say not only that Japan will be part of that diversionary
tactic, but that the CCP thugs have been planning for it for 30 years.

[John J. Xenakis]

** 28-Nov-2019 World View: Hong Kong on Thanksgiving



Thanksgiving day pro-democracy demonstrations in Hong Kong on
Thursday, Demonstrators are thanking the United States and President
Donald Trump for signing the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act
of 2019.

[John J. Xenakis]

*** 29-Nov-19 World View -- Spiraling bloodbath in Iraq, as anti-Iran and anti-government riots spread

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Bloodbath in Nasiriyah, Iraq, as riots spread to multiple cities
  
• Protesters demand end of intervention by Iran
  
• Protesters demand restructuring Iraq's 'confessional' government
  

****
**** Bloodbath in Nasiriyah, Iraq, as riots spread to multiple cities
****


Map of Iraq showing locations of anti-government, anti-Iran protests (AFP)

Increasingly violent anti-Iran and anti-government demonstrations and
riots are spreading across numerous cities in southern Iraq. These
are generational Awakening era riots following the Iran/Iraq war of
1980-89. The riots are mostly confined to cities in southern Iraq,
which is the stronghold of the Shia Muslims, and the rioters are
themselves almost entirely Shia Muslims.

So far, there is activity by Sunni Muslims in Iraq. This is ironic,
of course, since Iraq is a Shia Muslim country being attacked by Shia
Muslim civilians in Iraq.

There was a bloodbath on Thursday, as 40 protesters were killed and
hundreds wounded in the cities of Baghdad and Nasiriyah.

The unrest in Iraq began on October 1, when thousands took to the
streets in Baghdad and southern cities. At least 350 people have been
killed by security forces, which routinely uses live ammunition,
bullets, tear gas, and stun grenades to disperse crowds.

On Wednesday evening, there was a dramatic escalation when hundreds of
anti-government protesters attacked the Iranian consulate in the holy
Shia city of Najaf, setting the building on fire, and replacing the
Iranian flag with the Iraqi flag.

This is the second time this month that an Iranian consulate was
attacked. Three weeks ago, security forces killed four demonstrators
who stormed the Iranian consulate in the city of Karbala.

One could say that Iran is getting what it deserves, since Iran has
frequently allowed attacks on foreign embassies in Tehran as an
instrument of government policy.

****
**** Protesters demand end of intervention by Iran
****

Since the riots began on October 1, demonstrators have been accusing
the government of corruption, and have been protesting Iran's massive
intervention in Iraq.

Iran's government has been demanding action from the Iraq government
to stop the attack on Iran's consulates.

There have been some efforts by Iranian officials to meet with
protesters to try to quell the demonstrations. However, this will
never go well, because the protesters are young kids who are well
aware that their grandfathers and grandmothers were attacked, raped,
tortured, and killed by Iranians during the Iran/Iraq war.

Iran's foreign ministry spokesman Abbas Mousavi criticized Iraq's
government's failure to prevent violence:

<QUOTE>"The Iraqi government is responsible to secure safety
of diplomatic missions and diplomats in Iraq... Tehran strongly
condemns the attack and demands the Iraqi government's firm
response to the aggressors."<END QUOTE>

A statement from the Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) suggests
that Iran will take action of its own by using the Popular
Mobilization Forces (PMF) to control the protesters. The PMF were
formed in the past few years and were the principal paramilitary force
used to expel ISIS from northern Iraq. However, the PMF are still
around, and Iran is threatening to use them to attack the Shia
protesters in southern Iraq.

This action by the PMF would certain raise concerns that the Iran/Iraq
war was starting all over again. That can't happen because both Iran
and Iraq are in a generational Awakening era, but there could be a
brief military clash.

****
**** Protesters demand restructuring Iraq's 'confessional' government
****

As I described earlier this month, Iraq has a "confessional" form of
government. ( "3-Nov-19 World View -- Anti-Iran, anti-government protests spread across Iraq"
)

The confesssional form of government was set up in both Lebanon and
Iraq. Different governmental institutions are assigned, based on the
sectarian affiliation or confession. In Iraq, the nation's resources
and institutions are divided up among Shias, Sunnis and Kurds, to
ensure free and equal citizenship.

In terms of preventing new rounds of sectarian violence, the
confessional form of government seems to have worked. But
unfortunately it makes corruption too easy, since officials in each
"confession" have too much control over the funds, with no checks and
balances.

The young Iraqis are now calling for an end to the confessional form
of government, saying that it has permitted too much corruption. They
particularly blame Iran's influence for the greatest amount of
corruption.

Needless to say, the corrupt government officials in Iraq who have
been using control of money and institutions to keep their cronies in
power have no intention of letting this happen. But if the street
protests continue and grow, they may have no choice.

The same thing is happening in Lebanon, where there are massive street
protests, and calls for an end to its confessional form of government.

Both Iraq and Lebanon are client states of Iran, and these protests
represent serious threats to Iran's foreign policy.

Sources:

• Iraqi forces kill dozens of protesters as uprising intensifies after Iranian consulate torched (Reuters, 28-Nov-2019)
  
• 'Bloodbath': Dozens of protesters killed as army deploys south (Al-Jazeera, 28-Nov-2019)
  
• Iraqi protests: Iranian consulate torched in Najaf as death toll mounts (Middle East Eye, 28-Nov-2019)
  
• Iraq forms ‘crisis cells’ as Iran’s Najaf consulate burned and more than two dozen protesters killed (Washington Post, 28-Nov-2019)
  
• Moqtada al-Sadr / As protests rattle Iraq, influential Shiite cleric calls to overhaul political system (Washington Post, 29-Oct-2019)
  
• Nasiriyah / Iraqi crackdown kills 25 protesters after Iran mission torched (AFP, 28-Nov-2019)
  
• WATCH: Iraq death toll after Nasiriyah massacre continues to rise (Al-Araby, London, 28-Nov-2019)
  
• 40 Iraqi protesters slain in 24 hours as violence spirals (TRT World, Turkey, 28-Nov-2019)
  
• 40 Iraqi protesters slain in 24 hours as violence spirals (AP, 28-Nov-2019)
  
• Confessional gov / In the heart of Baghdad, a new vision for Iraq is emerging (New Statesman, London, 27-Nov-2019)

Related Articles:

• Anti-Iran, anti-government protests spread across Iraq (03-Nov-2019)
  
  
• Massive anti-government street protests paralyze Lebanon (21-Oct-2019)
  
  
• Riots in Iraq's Basra evoke fault lines of 1980s Iran-Iraq war (09-Sep-2018)
  
  
• Iraqi Sunnis are turning against al-Qaeda in Iraq (01-Apr-2007)
  
• Massive Beirut explosion killing Rafiq Hariri puts Lebanon into state of shock (16-Feb-2005)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Iraq, Iran, Iran/Iraq war,
Nasiriyah, Najaf, Baghdad, Confessional government,
Abbas Mousavi, Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps, IRGC,
Popular Mobilization Forces, PMF, Lebanon

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

[John J. Xenakis]

*** 2-Dec-19 World View -- Massive measles epidemic joins Ebola as health crises in DR Congo

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Measles spreads like wildfire across DR Congo, and spikes globally
  
• WHO closing Ebola health clinics in DR Congo, after attacks by tribal militias
  
• Civilians attack UN peacekeeping missions in DR Congo for failure to protect them
  

****
**** Measles spreads like wildfire across DR Congo, and spikes globally
****


Graphic showing huge global spike in measles cases in 2019. AFR=Africa, AMR=Americas, EMR=Eastern Mediterranean, EUR=Europe, SEAR=Southeast Asia, WPR=Western Pacific (WHO)

Measles is spreading like wildfire in the Democratic Republic of Congo
(CRC). It's believed that 250,000 people have been infected this year
alone, more than three times the number in all of 2018, and has spread
to all 26 provinces of the country.

More than 5,000 people have been killed. Of those, 4,500 are
children.

Measles can be controlled with vaccines, but DRC has a weak health
infrastructure, regional wars, escalating violence, and widespread
suspicion of health workers. There have been more than 300 attacks on
health care facilities in the country this year, with six deaths.

There's a shortage of vaccines, so not all parents who want their
children vaccinated can obtain them. Many people live in hard to
reach rural areas. Furthermore children require two vaccine jabs to
be protected against measles, making the vaccination problem even more
difficult.

Although DRC has the biggest measles outbreak in the world today, they
are far from alone. There are large measles outbreaks in other
countries, particularly in Africa, eastern Mediterranean, and eastern
Europe.

Even Western countries in Europe and North America are seeing surges
in measles cases. This is blamed on parents in political
"anti-vaxxer" movements who refuse to allow their children to be
vaccinated. This puts the children and the entire community at risk
of measles.

****
**** WHO closing Ebola health clinics in DR Congo, after attacks by tribal militias
****

In the past couple of months, the Ebola outbreak in North Kivu
province in eastern DRC had appeared to be well-contained, as the
number of new cases has been falling substantially. Health workers
have achieved this by means of aggressive contract tracing of new
cases, followed by providing vaccines to people considered vulnerable.

At the beginning of this year, it appeared that Ebola would continue
to spread exponentially faster, but since then, the World Health
Organization has effectively used new vaccines that have become
available to slow the spread considerably.

However, North Kivu is still a tribal war zone, where a Uganda-based
group of rebels known as "Allied Democratic Forces" (ADF) have been
fighting in eastern DRC against the Congolese army and other rebel
groups, to take advantage of the rich mineral resources of the region.

ADF militias and Maï-Maï militias have been attacking Ebola health
centers, forcing the World Health Organization (WHO) to close some of
them down. This has raised fears that Ebola will once again begin to
spread.

****
**** Civilians attack UN peacekeeping missions in DR Congo for failure to protect them
****

As a separate issue, civilian protesters stormed the facilities of the
UN peacekeeping mission in Congo (MONUSCO). MONUSCO is the largest UN
peacekeeping force in the world, with some 15,000 personnel, but has
failed to bring peace. The attackers were protesting the fact that
MONUSCO had failed to protect them from violence, after ADF terrorists
had killed eight civilians last weekend.

Monusco was formed in 1999, and has been so unsuccessful at keeping
peace that there are actually calls for it to be disbanded.

A lot of people like peacekeeping forces, even when they do nothing to
keep the peace. The UN likes them, because they allow the UN to
collect money from Western countries to pay for them. They use that
money to increase the sizes of their budgets and staffs. Most of the
money is supposed to pay for the soldiers who are sent by member
countries to form the peacekeeping operation. However, the
governments of the member countries confiscate the salary money, so
little of it reaches the peacekeeping soldiers. So a lot of people
are making money from peacekeeping operations, even when they do not
keep the peace, which is why it's almost impossible to end a
peacekeeping operation.

Sources:

• ‘More deaths than Ebola’: Measles outbreak hits DRC (France24, 28-Nov-2019)
  
• Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC): Measles outbreaks - Emergency Plan of Action (EPoA) DREF n° MDRCD028 / PCD053 (ReliefWeb, 25-Nov-2019)
  
• Children bear the brunt as the world's biggest measles epidemic sweeps Congo (Guardian, 22-Nov-2019)
  
• Measles – Global situation (WHO-int, 27-Nov-2019)
  
• DR Congo / MONUSCO appeals for calm after fresh Beni attacks (AfricaTimes, 25-Nov-2019)
  
• Monusco / Angry demonstrators storm UN camp in DRC after deadly attack (AlJaz, 25-Nov-2019)

Related Articles:

• Measles outbreaks in New York, Israel blamed on 'anti-vax' movement (03-Dec-2018)
  
  
• Measles outbreak being blamed on the 'anti-vaccine movement' (25-Jan-2015)
  
  
• Bill Gates calls for worldwide vaccination program (18-May-2011)
  
  
• Ebola outbreak in DR Congo now spreading exponentially faster (19-Jan-2019)
  
  
• World Health Organization fears 'perfect storm' could spread Ebola rapidly in DR Congo (26-Sep-2018)
  
  
• United Nations stunned as peacekeepers are massacred in DR Congo (09-Dec-2017)
  
  
• DR Congo's Joseph Kabila brings the art of power and corruption to new heights (24-Jul-2017)
  
  
• Massive government atrocities in DR Congo's Kasai threaten regional stability (21-Jun-2017)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Democratic Republic of Congo, DRC,
measles, World Health Organization, WHO, anti-vaxx movement,
United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the DR Congo,
Monusco, Alliance of Democratic Forces, ADF, Uganda, Maï-Maï,
Ebola, North Kivu

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

[John J. Xenakis]

** 03-Dec-2019 World View: Civil war and impeachment hearings

[From the Civil War thread]

Trevor Wrote:> Generally, when we think of civil war, we think red states
> fighting against blue states. However, the fault line that's grown
> isn't quite that simple. It's much more of an Urban-rural divide,
> with the suburbs the most divided.

> If we had a civil war, it'd look a lot more like the fighting in
> Syria, Yemen, Yugoslavia, etc. than the Union-Confederacy
> conflict. It's unlikely we'd have two sides fighting each other;
> we'd see several different factions, including possible succession
> efforts by states like California. Having half a dozen different
> groups, sometimes cooperating, sometimes fighting. . . it'd be far
> less straightforward than our historical Civil War.

FishbellykanakaDude Wrote:> Nah,.. we'd all have muskets and those de rigueur three-pointed
> Hector Heathcote hats.

> But, yeah, it would be a "War of a Thousand Thousand
> Factions",.. where the average militia size would be about
> 30ish.

I've been saying for years that a new American Civil War is
impossible, and I still believe that to be true, but I've definitely
been shaken up by the impeachment hearings.

I actually listened to the five days of public testimony live. I
don't know how many people are going to read this posting, but I doubt
that any one of them besides myself did that.

It was very depressing, because after each day's testimony, I would
listen to the news on the BBC or Al-Jazeera or MS-NBC later, and the
news reports bore absolutely no relationship to what actually
happened. They were total lies -- and I know this because I saw and
heard it with my own eyes.

Every single witness was forced to admit under Republican
cross-examination that they had no evidence whatsoever to support Adam
Schiff's charges. It was all made up. It was all garbage. But every
single news report lied about it, saying something like "Today,
Ambassador X gave explosive testimony that Trump withheld aid from
Ukraine until Ukraine started investigating Joe and Hunter Biden." In
fact, all the news reports used the same words, indicating that they
were all reading the same press releases from Adam Schiff and the
Democrats.

Nothing even remotely close to that ever occurred. The Republican
cross-examination forced every single witness to admit that there was
no evidence for a "quid pro quo" of any kind. It's a total
fabrication and fantasy.

You should be aware that everything you've heard about the impeachment
hearings is completely wrong, because everything you've heard is Adam
Schiff talking points, provided by the Democrats. That's all the
mainstream media quotes. If you want to hear the other side, a good
source is Hannity at 9pm ET on Fox.

The star witness, Gordon Sondland, originally said that there was no
qpq in the bunker hearings. Then he changed his testimony in public
to say that there was a qpq. Then under cross-examination in the
public hearing, he was forced to admit there there was no evidence of
a qpq.

Why did he change his testimonay? Because his family was being
threatened with violence and his businesses were the targets of riots
and demonstrations. These threats and riots were being organized by
Democrats to force Sondland to change his testimony. And it worked,
because he was forced to change his testimony, to keep his family from
being killed or his businesses from being destroyed. Even so, under
Republican cross-examination, he was forced to go back to his original
position.

These threats of violence on Sondland's family and businesses are
being led by Adam Schiff, who has lied and manufactured evidence
dozens of times in the last three years. He is the worst piece of
lying garbage on the scene today -- which is saying something, because
there's a lot of garbage today on the scene in Washington. And it
says a lot that the Democrats are being led by this worthless peace
of garbage. It says a lot about them.

What does this have to do with "civil war"? This has been going on
long before Trump. This is a tribal war targeting the 63 million
Trump supporters, who were known as "The Tea Party" before Trump ran
for office. For years, they've been threatened with violence and
ridiculed by the Democrats.

After three years of the ridiculous Mueller report garbage, the
Democrats have become furious, and now they're looking for blood, and
they won't hesitate to incite and use violence if they don't get their
way. I've seen this happen in too many countries I've written about.

On the other hand, the Tea Partiers / Trump supporters are becoming
increasingly furious about this ridiculous show that's been going on
for three years.

I still don't believe that the country is headed for a civil war, even
if there are some clashes and some people killed. But we are seeing
the early stages of either a civil war or a tribal genocide. I don't
think it will get that far, if only because we'll be at war with China
first, but we're definitely headed in that direction.

[David Horn]

(12-03-2019, 10:02 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: ** 03-Dec-2019 World View: Civil war and impeachment hearings

I actually listened to the five days of public testimony live.  I don't know how many people are going to read this posting, but I doubt that any one of them besides myself did that.

It was very depressing, because after each day's testimony, I would listen to the news on the BBC or Al-Jazeera or MS-NBC later, and the news reports bore absolutely no relationship to what actually happened.  They were total lies -- and I know this because I saw and heard it with my own eyes.

Every single witness was forced to admit under Republican cross-examination that they had no evidence whatsoever to support Adam Schiff's charges.  It was all made up.  It was all garbage.  But every single news report lied about it, saying something like "Today, Ambassador X gave explosive testimony that Trump withheld aid from Ukraine until Ukraine started investigating Joe and Hunter Biden."  In fact, all the news reports used the same words, indicating that they were all reading the same press releases from Adam Schiff and the Democrats...

Really?  One witness attended the infamous phone call: LTC Windman.  He testified to what was said from direct personal knowledge, and it tallied directly with what the other witnesses said.  This is enough by itself to convict in a court of law.  If other witnesses weren't refusing to testify out of fear of Trump, I suspect the corroboration would be even greater.

[John J. Xenakis]

** 04-Dec-2019 Windman

(12-04-2019, 12:16 PM)David Horn Wrote: > Really? One witness attended the infamous phone call: LTC
> Windman. He testified to what was said from direct personal
> knowledge, and it tallied directly with what the other witnesses
> said. This is enough by itself to convict in a court of law. If
> other witnesses weren't refusing to testify out of fear of Trump,
> I suspect the corroboration would be even greater.

So you believe that a court of law would convict someone of a crime
because of Windman's feelings, or on what you "suspect." All the
so-called evidence is feelings and assumptions, but under Republican
cross-examination, they all had to admit that there was no actual
evidence to support their dreams, fantasies, wishful thinking,
feelings and assumptions.

Every single witness was forced to admit under Republican
cross-examination that they had no evidence whatsoever to support Adam
Schiff's charges. It was all made up. It was all garbage.

Windman's testimony was especially comical because Schiff freaked out
and cut him off to prevent him from revealing the name of Schiff's
pal, the so-called whistleblower. What a farce.

You'd make a good CNN commentator. You should apply.

[John J. Xenakis]

Are you watching the hearings on tv right now? Jonathan Turley just
specifically tore apart any so-called evidence that Windman might have
given, or any of his feelings, assumptions, or fantasies.

[David Horn]

(12-04-2019, 01:15 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: Are you watching the hearings on tv right now?  Jonathan Turley just specifically tore apart any so-called evidence that Windman might have given, or any of his feelings, assumptions, or fantasies.

Turley's argument goes to criminal standards -- uniquely his interpretation, and decidedly different from his opinions when it was Clinton in the box*.  His idea that the bribery statute, and the court cases around it, have a bearing on the impeachment clause in the Constitution is simply bizarre.  The Constitution can oily be modified as it allows within the document -- the Congress deciding on the nature and extent of the inferior courts and the number on the SCOTUS being the prime examples.  I see no similar language regarding impeachment.  More to the point, the activity is not the same as a criminal trial, because it deals in the political sphere.  Being POTUS, or any of the other impeachment-eligible government officials, is a privilege that can be removed.  Note that no one goes to prison or forfeits any wealth, unless a follow-on criminal persecution and conviction is secured.

I actually like Turley, though I rarely agree with his interpretations.  In this case, he's being highly partisan, though the others were as well.  I think it's good that the public got a quick tutoring on constitutional law, but I doubt it took with most of them.

* During the Clinton impeachment proceedings, Turley argued that he had no right to limit access to an evidence of his guilt, and, among other things, his personal Secret Service detail should be forced to testify.

[pbrower2a]

(12-04-2019, 01:05 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: ** 04-Dec-2019 Windman

(12-04-2019, 12:16 PM)David Horn Wrote: >   Really?  One witness attended the infamous phone call: LTC
>   Windman.  He testified to what was said from direct personal
>   knowledge, and it tallied directly with what the other witnesses
>   said.  This is enough by itself to convict in a court of law.  If
>   other witnesses weren't refusing to testify out of fear of Trump,
>   I suspect the corroboration would be even greater.  

So you believe that a court of law would convict someone of a crime
because of Windman's feelings, or on what you "suspect."  All the
so-called evidence is feelings and assumptions, but under Republican
cross-examination, they all had to admit that there was no actual
evidence to support their dreams, fantasies, wishful thinking,
feelings and assumptions.

Every single witness was forced to admit under Republican
cross-examination that they had no evidence whatsoever to support Adam
Schiff's charges.  It was all made up.  It was all garbage.

Windman's testimony was especially comical because Schiff freaked out
and cut him off to prevent him from revealing the name of Schiff's
pal, the so-called whistleblower.  What a farce.

You'd make a good CNN commentator.  You should apply.

In a court of law a jury is expected to weigh testimony for credibility, corroboration, and impartiality. Lt. Colonel Vindman heard something shocking to him, and he could report only what his unbiased senses could recognize. Others corroborated it. 

No, it was not a joke. Donald Trump is no joker; even if he is a fool he is deadly serious in all that he says. 

Adam Schiff handled the investigation well. Republicans alleged that the process was a witch-hunt several times, but never established backing for such. No, it is not about nullifying an election; it is far too late for that.  Besides, however shady some facets of the election were, we have no proof that Donald Trump did not win fair and square... sort of. We are much closer to the 2020 election than to the 2016 election, and we Americans can solve much of our discontent (if we are dissatisfied) in the next election even with an Electoral College in which winning the 'right' votes means more than does winning a plurality. 

It is about the next and subsequent elections!

I see a cult of personality with a political leader holding political rallies before adulating fans, a party that treats the Other Side as completely irrelevant, that has turned Big Government into a means of enriching the well-connected loyalists... it has happened elsewhere, and anyone who expect any better results in America because this is America is a fool.

We have checks and balances, rule of law, and separation of powers to prevent the concentration of power in someone unsuited to trust with it. It is not enough that one dislikes the agenda; people who dislike the agenda of Donald Trump probably disliked the agendas of either Bush and Ronald Reagan, too.  

Democracy does not mean that those who win get their way. Maybe a majority of Germans thought Hitler wonderful for creating economic stability rare then in the West, believed that he could renegotiate the Treaty of Versailles without starting a war, and thought that marginalizing the Jews was a good idea. Of course, there was no rule of laws, there were no meaningful elections, and anyone who  ran afoul of the Nazi Party or even his employer could end up beaten or get shipped to a concentration camp in which he learned to appreciate work as a desirable thing in itself even if it implied toil to exhaustion on starvation rations. If one survived, one knew what to say, and one came out of it a more diligent and less demanding machine of meat. Annexing Austria, incorporating the Sudetenland, dismembering Czechoslovakia and Poland, and restoring Alsace-Lorraine to the Reich all should have been popular. Media were strictly one-sided, with anything countering Nazi propaganda no longer available or illegal.

If people are foolish enough to vote for a bad businessman who has shown horrible character by his bigoted and sexist remarks, who holds objective reality in contempt when such runs afoul of his will, then they deserve someone like Donald Trump and the consequences. People who dislike such who have the means can emigrate, and there are nearly 200 sovereign entities to which to go. Those who lack the means can make their adjustments. If one lives in China and knows what is good for one, one avoids getting involved with the Falun Gang. If one enjoys ouzo or slivovitz but works for Aramco in Saudi Arabia, one knows that one wisely looks for local sources -- as in Greece or Bulgaria, which are not part of Saudi Arabia.  That's before I even discuss the madness that is Syria or North Korea. 

Donald Trump more resembles Fidel Castro than he does George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, or even Ronald Reagan.

[David Horn]

(12-04-2019, 01:05 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: ** 04-Dec-2019 Windman

(12-04-2019, 12:16 PM)David Horn Wrote: Really?  One witness attended the infamous phone call: LTC Windman.  He testified to what was said from direct personal knowledge, and it tallied directly with what the other witnesses said.  This is enough by itself to convict in a court of law.  If other witnesses weren't refusing to testify out of fear of Trump, I suspect the corroboration would be even greater.  

So you believe that a court of law would convict someone of a crime because of Windman's feelings, or on what you "suspect."  All the so-called evidence is feelings and assumptions, but under Republican cross-examination, they all had to admit that there was no actual evidence to support their dreams, fantasies, wishful thinking, feelings and assumptions.

As I noted: Windman was there in person. He testified to what he heard in real time. How in God's name can you refer to direct evidence as 'feelings'? Windman cited what he heard -- full stop. Whether that is a criminal offense is open to a court case, and for the last time: this is not a court of law!

John J. Xenakis Wrote:Every single witness was forced to admit under Republican cross-examination that they had no evidence whatsoever to support Adam Schiff's charges.  It was all made up.  It was all garbage.

You truly live in a fantasy world, where evidence doesn't matter at all. If you really wan t evidence, here is a juicy piece: Trump has either directly or indirectly refused to comply with at least 137 subpoenas. There is no arguing that point. Ignoring subpoenas from Congress is a crime, in and of itself. It was the third article in Nixon's impeachment, and he only ignored a handful.

John J. Xenakis Wrote:Windman's testimony was especially comical because Schiff freaked out and cut him off to prevent him from revealing the name of Schiff's pal, the so-called whistleblower.  What a farce.

FYI, the whistleblower's identity is protected by law. Intentionally exposing him or her is a felony, though you seem to believe Trump's cabal should do it anyway.

John J. Xenakis Wrote:You'd make a good CNN commentator.  You should apply.

Hardly. Actually, I was supposed to be a lawyer, but I'm totally wrong for that job too.

[Warren Dew]

(12-06-2019, 09:36 AM)David Horn Wrote: FYI, the whistleblower's identity is protected by law.

No, it's not.  Retaliation is prohibited by law, exactly so that his identity doesn't need to be protected.

The rest of your post equally displays ignorance of actual facts.

[John J. Xenakis]

** 05-Dec-2019 World View: Mexican civil war

Guest Wrote:> Mexico is on the brink of total collapse. It's been a failed state
> (by almost any definition) for decades, but under the current
> president, Mexico is heading towards anarchy and the complete
> and total breakdown of law and order.

> The 25-30 million Mexicans who now reside in the US represent 25%
> of Mexico's citizenry. Think about that. And the vast majority of
> these migrants are on welfare and rely heavily on Medicaid, food
> stamps, and have overwhelmed the public school systems and
> hospitals. They also make up a huge portion of the violent
> criminals in the US. The financial and human costs have already
> overwhelmed the country.

> Here is where it gets really interesting. When Mexico totally
> implodes and the Mexicans are left without even the most basic of
> services (water and electricity, for example), what do you think
> they are going to do? You got, it. They will head into the
> US. Instead of a million Mexicans crossing into annually, we will
> be looking at millions of Mexicans flooding across the border ever
> month. Then what?

> Even Mexican law enforcement officials and think tanks inside of
> Mexico are openly expressing dismay at the events unfolding around
> them. It's no longer a question of if Mexico will total collapse,
> it's a question of when. Can America afford to take in 100 million
> more Mexicans and other Latinos from across Latin America
> (which is made up of failed states). These failed states are
> controlled drug dealers.

> America won't survive this kind of influx. I don't believe we can
> survive the illegals we are carrying now. This is it. Time to make
> some decisions.

> Or flee the country.

Mexico's last generational crisis war was the Mexican Revolution civil
war of the 1910s decade, so Mexico is long overdue for a new civil war.

So you say: "When Mexico totally implodes ... what do you think they
are going to do? You got, it. They will head into the US."

When Mexico totally implodes, it will be in the context of a new civil
war. It's true that there will be refugees into the US, particularly
from northern Mexico, but everyone else would have to cross through
a country in total war to reach the US.

Depending on the scenario, there may also be Chinese troops in Mexico,
preparing for their own invasion of the US, and Chinese missiles
hitting American cities. Mexico's government and the drug cartels may
be forced to choose between the US and China - and I expect them to
choose the US.

So the situation is going to be a lot more complicated than millions
of refugees.

Guest Wrote:> Or flee the country.

Don't count on it. However, if you decide to try, here's some advice
provided by another member of the Generational Dynamics forum:

Higgenbotham Wrote:> Based on the information you provided, since you are young
> (presumably wouldn't have a lot of money to invest) and you think
> a nuclear war is probable, I would suggest you first "invest in
> yourself" and your survival. One idea for consideration in that
> regard is to set yourself up to be able to get to a safe haven
> outside the US. A couple countries that come to mind are Chile and
> Namibia. One way to do that would be to try to meet a woman in a
> country you determine to be a safe haven who has a reputable and
> well connected family. Know how you are going to get to her
> family's home within 24 hours and have the money set aside to do
> that, your bags packed and an idea of what news would make you
> ready to act.

So there you go.

[John J. Xenakis]

** 05-Dec-2019 World View: Beijing's Hong Kong policy

utahbob Wrote:> I told my subordinates when making plans to see the world through
> your opponent’s eyes. Here is one version:
> https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/...ong-crisis
> Don’t project your biases or world view on to your
> opponents.

According to the article:

Quote: "But according to two Chinese scholars who have
connections to regime insiders and who requested anonymity to
discuss the thinking of policymakers in Beijing, China’s response
has been rooted not in anxiety but in confidence. Beijing is
convinced that Hong Kong’s elites and a substantial part of the
public do not support the demonstrators and that what truly ails
the territory are economic problems rather than political ones—in
particular, a combination of stagnant incomes and rising
rents. Beijing also believes that, despite the appearance of
disorder, its grip on Hong Kong society remains firm. The Chinese
Communist Party has long cultivated the territory’s business
elites (the so-called tycoons) by offering them favorable economic
access to the mainland. The party also maintains a long-standing
loyal cadre of underground members in the territory. And China has
forged ties with the Hong Kong labor movement and some sections of
its criminal underground. Finally, Beijing believes that many
ordinary citizens are fearful of change and tired of the
disruption caused by the demonstrations."

This article is pretty close to fantasy.

The article was written on 9/30, well before the 11/24 elections,
which blew many of Beijing's hopes and dreams out of the water.

HK has plenty of economic problems, but there are ALSO major political
problems. The elections were a historic "stunning upset" of the view
that "a substantial part of the public do not support the
demonstrators." It's true that much of the public do not support the
violence, but polls and the election have shown that they support the
political goals of the demonstrators. Furthermore, they're appalled
by the violence on the part of police and triad thugs.

To say that Beijing's policies are not rooted in anxiety is NEVER
true. The CCP is extremely paranoid and anxious all the time,
particularly since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

As I keep pointing out, the CCP thugs have a record of doing one
incredibly stupid thing after another. I don't know what the CCP
thugs will do about the situation in Hong Kong, but I can say with
certainty that whatever they do, it will make the situation worse.

The fact that they haven't yet sent in the army to bash the protesters
actually proves this point. Even the CCP thugs realize that doing so
would make things massively worse, and so they're choosing to do
nothing, in the hope that the problem will go away by itself.

There are many reasons why the problem won't go away, such as the
split between Cantonese and Mandarin speakers. But the biggest reason
of all is that young Hong Kongers know that if they marry and bring
children into the world, then these children will be subjected to a
full-scale brutal CCP dictatorship in 2047, with all the oppression
and atrocities that go with the CCP.

John Xenakis is author of: "World View: War Between China and Japan:
Why America Must Be Prepared" (Generational Theory Book Series, Book
2) Paperback: 331 pages, over 200 source references, $13.99
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1732738637/

[John J. Xenakis]

** 05-Dec-2019 World View: Second American Civil War

Tom Mazanec Wrote:> I posted John's article on the Impeachment hearings and the idea
> of a second ACW on another forum. Here is a response I got:

Quote:> Tom, if you want to hear the opinion of someone who has studied
> the American Civil War for decades, then here it is.

> I believe that we, as a nation, are finding ourselves at a
> dangerous precipice. We are presently living in a time that is
> perilously similar to the sectionalism era that preceded the
> American Civil War, particularly the time between 1859 and
> 1860. While the lines were pretty clear then, they are not as
> clear now. That said, the feelings of resentment and animosity are
> there. We have pAntifa attacking anyone who dares to disagree with
> them, violently and showing an increasing willingness to use
> violence. The level of violence being used is escalating as well.

> The post from that forum is correct in that those targeted by
> pAntifa and 'The Resistance' are becoming increasingly angry at
> the violence and the seeming disregard by LEO's when said violence
> is reported. They are getting angry that the cops seem to ignore
> assaults on them by pAntifa while those who defend themselves tend
> to get arrested and branded as Racists or Nazi's by the media.

> The political Right, not the politicians but the rank and file
> voters, are getting fed up with the "Schiff Show" because of the
> blatantly partisan way they are attacking a duly and
> constitutionally elected president. They are angry because those
> people voted to represent their interests do not seem compelled to
> exercise their authority under the constitution to put an end to
> what we rightly see as a partisan coup.

> As the anger and resentment continues to build on both sides, it
> is not at all hard to imagine that sooner or later, someone is
> going to touch a match to this proverbial powder keg and wide
> spread violence erupt like Krakatoa.

> So, yes, I believe that it is possible and I believe that if it
> happens, it will make the Civil War from 1861-1865 look like a
> leisurely stroll through the park.

> And to be honest, I think that is PRECISELY what the Democrats
> want.

> Then again, that's just the opinion of a grumpy old
> dragon.

I'm reminded of the December 2015 attack by two Muslim jihadist
terrorists in San Bernadino, California, Syed Rizwan Farook (male) and
Tashfeen Malik (female). They shot dead 14 people and wounded dozens
of others. The guns they used were purchased legally, but Democrats
were actually blaming Republicans and Tea Partiers for the terrorist
attack. Obama had already blamed Republicans because they're "bitter"
and they "cling to guns and religion," and now the Democrats were
blaming the Tea Partiers becuase they opposed gun control.

I read some messages by a group of Midwest Conservatives at the time,
and it's hard to overstate how furious they were that they were being
blamed for a jihadist terror attack in California. They lived nowhere
near California, they were mostly contemptuous of California, and they
were legal, responsible gun owners, and yet, the Democrats were
actually blaming them for a jihadist terror attack in California.
Some of them would have shot dead a Democrat if one had been in sight.

Democrats have been inciting and encouraging violence against Tea
Partiers for years, and the incitement is getting more pronounced,
more organic, more genocidal, and more hysterical. They should
realize that if they really want to trigger some sort of civil war,
then it's the Tea Partiers who have the guns.

I agree that these are very dangerous times, particular after the
Russia hoax, the Ukraine hoax, and the impeachment hoax. The
Democrats have experienced one extremely humiliating setback after
another. As I wrote yesterday, every impeachment witness was forced
by Republican cross-examination to completely back down and admit that
there was no evidence whatsoever to support the charges against Trump,
and I've never seen a single media report mention this fact. So the
impeachment hoax is 99.9% certain to be another humiliating defeat for
the Democrats, and they might become even more violent at that time,
or after a Trump reelection.

On the other hand, if somehow the Democrats succeed in eliminating
Trump with the impeachment hoax, then it could be the 63 million Tea
Partiers / Trump supporters who decide to become violent.

When I was a kid, my father, who was a Greek immigrant, told me that
in the 1930s there was so much Communist violence in the country that
he actually thought that the United States would not survive.
Unfortunately, I never asked him why, but I can see it building up
today.

As I said yesterday, I still don't believe that the country is headed
for a civil war, even though the Democrats are apparently pushing in
either that director or tribal genocide against the Tea Partiers. But
if it happens, I suspect that a lot more Democrats than Tea Partiers
will be killed.