Generational Dynamics World View - Printable Version +- Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory (http://generational-theory.com/forum) +-- Forum: Fourth Turning Forums (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-1.html) +--- Forum: Theories Of History (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-7.html) +--- Thread: Generational Dynamics World View (/thread-51.html) Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
|
30-Oct-17 World View -- India begins shipping wheat to Afghanistan through Iran's Cha - John J. Xenakis - 10-29-2017 *** 30-Oct-17 World View -- India begins shipping wheat to Afghanistan through Iran's Chabahar port This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** India begins shipping wheat to Afghanistan through Iran's Chabahar port **** Map displaying the trade routes related to the Chabahar and Gwadar ports. Purple lines show China's trade routes through Gwadar, while red lines show India's planned trade routes through Chabahar. (Defence.pk) A long-awaited "historic" first occurred on Sunday, when India shipped its first consignment of wheat to Afghanistan through Iran's Chabahar port. The shipment travels by sea from Mumbai, India, to Chabahar, and then overland through Iran to Afghanistan. The agreement for India to invest $500 million to increase the size of the Chabahar port was signed in Tehran in May of last year, in a signing ceremony attended by the leaders of Iran, Afghanistan and India. Sunday's shipment was more symbolic than otherwise, since the port will take at least another year to be fully functional. The shortest overland route from India to Afghanistan is, of course, through Pakistan, but in December 2015 Pakistan decreed that Indian trucks would no longer be permitted to travel overland to Afghanistan. Pakistan required India to follow a complex route shipping goods by sea to Karachi, where they would be loaded onto Pakistani trucks for overland delivery to Afghanistan. The Chabahar is also being developed in competition to Pakistan's Gwadar port, which is receiving heavy investment from China as part of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). The purple lines in the map above show China's traditional trade routes across the sea, using China's "String of Pearls" port facilities (purple stars), while the red lines show the trade routes being planned using Iran's Chabahar port. India and Pakistan, of course, have very poor relations. India is very concerned about China's heavy investment in Pakistan in the CPEC program. In return, Pakistan is very concerned about the fact that India is also investing heavily in Afghanistan's infrastructure, building on the relationship between Afghanistan and India at Pakistan's expense. As regular readers are aware, Generational Dynamics predicts that in the approaching Clash of Civilizations world war, the "axis" of China, Pakistan and the Sunni Muslim countries will be pitted against the "allies," the US, India, Russia and Iran. Pakistan Today and Pajhwok (Afghanistan) and The Hindu and Livemint (India, 10-Dec-2015) **** **** In retaliation, Afghanistan bans entry of Pakistan trucks **** Much of the competition between the Chabahar and Gwadar ports is related to strategic military planning in anticipation of the coming war between India and Pakistan, but a lot of it also has the more prosaic objective of providing jobs for truck drivers. Pakistan's December 2015 decree forbidding Indian trucks from traveling overland through Pakistan to Afghanistan had the effect of causing Indian truck drivers to lose jobs and Pakistani truck drivers to gain jobs, since shipments from India had to come through Pakistan's Karachi port, and there loaded onto Pakistani trucks for overland delivery into Afghanistan. In addition, in recent years, Afghanistan trucks have not been allowed to enter Pakistan, although at one time they were permitted to carry goods overland to either the port of Karachi or to the border with India. On Sunday, Afghanistan's president Ashraf Ghani issued a decree forbidding Pakistani trucks from entering Afghanistan. According to Afghanistan's transport ministry: <QUOTE>"The Afghanistan and Pakistan Trade Agreement (APTA) has expired. Before this Pakistan did now allow Afghan trucks to enter its territory. So we do the same and after this, Pakistani trucks will be unloaded at borders and Afghan trucks will carry the goods to Hairatan and Shir Khan ports."<END QUOTE> Afghanistan trucking company execs were delighted. One said, "By this move lots of people will get job opportunities and the transit companies will also get work." Another said, "Pakistani trucks go to every part of our country, but our trucks are not allowed to enter Pakistan. We want the government to do the same to Pakistan." Apparently anticipating this decree, Pakistan has recently tried to head it off by offering to negotiate with India on the terms of a new transport deal. However, India turned down the offer, according to an Indian government official who said, "It wasn’t a real offer, as far as India sees it." Tolo News (Afghanistan) and The Hindu **** **** Afghanistan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement (APTTA) - conduit of smuggling **** The Afghanistan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement (APTTA) was originally signed in 1950, and has undergone numerous changes over the years. The original purpose was to permit land-locked Afghanistan to import goods through Pakistan's Karachi port, without the Pakistan authorities charging customs duties on the goods, since they simply passed through Pakistan. The agreement also allowed Afghanistan trucks to travel overland to India, though that is no longer permitted. India has asked to be included as part of the APTTA agreement, and to allow its trucks to deliver goods to Afghanistan through Pakistan. Pakistan has refused for several reasons, two of which have already been given: for strategic military reasons, and to prevent Indian truck drivers from taking jobs from Pakistani truck drivers. However, there's a third reason, having to do with smuggling and corruption. There's evidence that something like 50% of the goods currently being imported under APTTA -- such as cotton goods from China, or vegetable fats and oils from Indonesia and Malaysia -- never reach Afghanistan. Instead, corrupt Customs Officials permit them to be unloaded within Pakistan for sale there, evading customs duties. These foreign goods flood into Pakistan in competition with locally produced goods, and the losses in customs duties from smuggling was estimated to be $35 billion from 2001-2009. One figure estimates that APTTA accounts for 75% of an estimated $5 billion worth of smuggled goods entering Pakistan. Some other figures estimate that around 40% of transit goods do not cross the Pak-Afghan border, or they re-enter into Pakistan from Afghanistan. China envisions its trade to increase by more $1 trillion over a decade. Even a small percentage of that volume of trade smuggling into Pakistan would be crippling to its economy. Business Recorder (Pakistan) and Business Recorder Related Articles
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, India, Iran, Pakistan, China, Chabahar, Gwadar, Afghanistan, Ashraf Ghani, Karachi, Caspian Corridor, New Silk Road, China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, CPEC, Afghanistan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement, APTTA 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 31-Oct-17 World View -- A 'powderkeg' as Australia closes refugee camp and refugees r - John J. Xenakis - 10-30-2017 *** 31-Oct-17 World View -- A 'powderkeg' as Australia closes refugee camp and refugees refuse to leave This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** A 'powderkeg' as Australia closes refugee camp and refugees refuse to leave **** Protesters in Australia's PNG Manus Island refugee center (AAP) About 600 male refugees inside a refugee center on Manus Island in Papua New Guinea (PNG) are barricading themselves inside, refusing the leave as Australia and PNG attempt to shut down the center on Tuesday. The men are refusing to relocate to other to other more residential facilities in PNG, saying that they fear violence by the locals. Starting in 2013, Australia's prime minister Kevin Rudd announced that any asylum seeker who arrives by boat without a visa will have "no chance" of being resettled there as a refugee. Australia intercepted refugees who tried to reach the country by boat and sent them to offshore refugee centers. Under an agreement with the respective countries, men have been sent to Manus Island in PNG, while men, women and children have been sent to refugee centers on Nauru. From the point of view of meeting its objective, the policy has been successful. While there had previously been tens of thousands of "boat people" per year arriving in Australia, that number has been reduced to almost none, because refugees know that they will be transferred to one of the offshore detention centers. However, the policy has been extremely controversial, and has been opposed by humanitarian organizations, who claim that the refugee centers in PNG and Nauru are filthy and unsafe, with numerous stories of beatings, torture and sexual abuse. Australia's refugee policy was thrown into chaos in May of last year, when the PNG Supreme Court ruled that PNG's Manus Island refugee center was inhumane, and had to be shut down. After months of finger-pointing between PNG and Australia, the Manus Island refugee center is officially closed as of Tuesday, November 1. However, the refugees have barricaded themselves into the center and are refusing to leave. In order to force them to leave, food, water, electricity and sanitation will no longer be provided to the center after Tuesday. At some point, police try to forcibly remove them. This situation is being described as a "powder keg." All along, there has been sporadic violence between the refugees in the center and between the refugees and locals. According to some reports, handsome young male refugees from the center and attractive young girls from the neighborhoods have formed secret relationships, with violence breaking out when the girls' families discover what's going on. So now refugees are being asked to relocate to refugee centers in residential neighborhoods, and are refusing to leave because a number of PNG locals have threatened violence against anyone moving into their neighborhoods. Reuters and Sydney Morning Herald and Post Courier (PNG) and Radio New Zealand **** **** Australia and Papua New Guinea unable to agree on the future of the refugees **** When the PNG Supreme Court issued its ruling last year, Australia issued a statement saying that PNG was responsible for the health and welfare of the refugees after they leave the refugee center. On Saturday, PNG's government issued a statement saying Australia was completely responsible. Humanitarian groups are demanding that the refugees all be relocated to Australia, something that's opposed by Australian government officials, who fear that such a move would trigger a new flood of boat people arriving in Australia. As usual, money is a large part of the motivating factor here. In May, the Australian government confirmed that it had spent A$4.89 billion (US$3.83 billion) on its Nauru and PNG Manus operations since 2012. Thus, the refugee centers have been a valuable source of income to the two countries involved, and they don't wish to lose it. So few people in PNG's government are suggesting that the refugees simply be shipped back to Australia. Under Australia's agreement with PNG, Australia is financially responsible for food, services and healthcare. These financial obligations will continue, even if the refugee center is closed, however the contractors providing the services will be under contract to PNG rather than to Australia. Estimates are that Australia will pay $150-$250 million per year. In a statement Saturday by PNG's immigration minister: <QUOTE>"It is PNG’s position that as long as there is one individual from this arrangement that remains in PNG, Australia will continue to provide financial and other support to PNG to manage the persons transferred under the arrangement until the last person leaves or is independently resettled in PNG. PNG has offered refugees the option of resettlement but will not force refugees who do not wish to settle in the country ... they remain the responsibility of Australia."<END QUOTE> As of the date of closing of the camp, there is no agreement on what will happen to the refugees. Some may be granted refugee status and remain, others will be refused and will be deported back to their home countries. Some will be transferred to other refugee centers on PNG, and others will be transferred to Nauru. Some may be transferred to third countries. In November of last year, President Barack Obama and Australia's Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull signed an agreement to allow 1,250 refugees being held in the offshore detention centers to be resettled in the United States. President Donald Trump reluctantly agreed to honor the deal, but so far only 54 refugees have been transferred to the United States. From the point of view of Generational Dynamics, the rapid worldwide growth in the number of refugees and displaced persons is one of the main factors leading to the next major wars in the world. The Crisis Group estimated a year ago that there were 65 million such people, mostly from war regions in Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, and South Sudan. Sydney Morning Herald and Crisis Group and Asian Age and Guardian (London) Related Articles
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Australia, Papua New Guinea, PNG, Manus Island, Nauru island, Kevin Rudd, Malcolm Turnbull, Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, South Sudan 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 RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Cynic Hero '86 - 10-31-2017 Man, the Boomers are going to be regarded as the idiots par-excellence by the history books when they are gone. The very definition of "fool" might have a picture of a fat globalist boomer who deluded themselves into thinking that peace and free-trade were somehow natural states of man. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 10-31-2017 (10-29-2017, 12:20 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: > It does not, however, make China socialist. Socialism is an I completely disagree. There's no such thing as socialism or capitalism in the economic sense you claim. They're purely abstract concepts. Neither China nor the US is pure socialist or capitalist, because those concepts don't exist and can't exist. And there's nothing in the definition of abstract socialism that even mentions GDP. Injecting GDP is meaningless, and has nothing to do with socialism anyway. Going beyond the abstract to real life, controlling a business versus owning it is a distinction without a difference. The real life meanings of socialism and capitalism have to do with government control vs freedom. The whole point of Capitalism is that a person running a business can make decisions based on his objectives and his view of the marketplace. If his objective is simply profit, or if it's to use his business to help minorities or Christians or poor people in underdeveloped countries, or if it's to build a real estate empire, he can do that in a capitalist society, and either succeed or fail on his own abilities. But if the government controls what he does, and forces him to make business decisions based on government politics or ideology, then it's effectively a Socialist economy, irrespective of the details of who owns it. This gets back to what I wrote in my article: Quote:> I was in school in the 1950s-60s, I was repeatedly told that the So China and Nazi Germany share National Socialism, and to say that China is a capitalistic society, while America is a Socialist country just shows how moronic the political discourse has become. (10-29-2017, 12:20 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: > China is basically a capitalist dictatorship, not a socialist The term "capitalist dictatorship" is an oxymoron, because capitalism implies freedom to make business decisions. If you want a term to use that's not an abstract fantasy or oxymoron, then use Hitler's term National Socialism since that now has a well-known historical definition. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 10-31-2017 (10-29-2017, 02:24 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: > I interpret Donald Trump's "Make America Great Again" as a return The thing that I really love about Trump's tweets is that they drive people like you absolutely crazy, and make it clear that you still don't have a clue why you lost the election. Part of leadership is learning how to identify and disarm your enemies, and Trump does that very effectively with his tweets, because you guys can't talk about anything else. The phrase "Make America great again" is not about a return to the 1920s, and the end of the welfare state or ignoring the environment. I haven't heard anyone even suggest those things, which shows how completely moronic and laughable your statement is. The phrase "Make America great again" is actually about recovering from the disasters of the Obama administration. The most obvious example is Obamacare. Obamacare was a financial disaster. I knew that from day one, and I wrote about it in 2009. It was perfectly obvious to anyone who cared that Obamacare was going to end in financial disaster. Obama lied about it every time he opened his mouth -- keep your doctor, keep you insurance plan, and everything else he said about it. He lied every time he opened his mouth. In fact, everything that I predicted in 2009 would happen has happened. I was pretty much 100% right about Obamacare from the beginning. On the other hand, everything that Obama said about Obamacare has turned out to be a lie, which was obvious to me. So it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone the enormous contempt I have for Obama when I was 100% right and for 8 years I've had to watch him openly lie and put the entire American economy at risk to satisfy his own ego, for something that was provably a financial disaster from the beginning. And so Trump's "Make america great again" applied to Obamacare is to fix this financial disaster to try to limit the damage. That's real leadership. Then there's foreign policy. Obama's foreign policy never made any sense to me. He had no clue what's going on in the world on the day he took office, and still had no clue on the day he left. The worst was his whole "red line" farce about wmd's in Syria, which was an enormous disaster for America because it showed how weak we were under Obama. Trump's missile attack on Syria earlier this year did a lot to reverse Obama's disaster. Then there's John Kerry. I still just can't get over this. John Kerry said in 1971 that American soldiers were worse than Nazis, and he confirmed his 1971 remarks in 2006, around the same time that he said that all American soldiers were stupid. I just can't get over Obama's appointing this jackass as secretary of state, a thumb in the eye to every American soldier, and showing enormous disrespect to the military. This is another sign of Obama's contempt for America and America's values, and putting the country at risk. This is unforgivable. And then we had to watch as Kerry lurched from one foreign policy disaster to the next. To say that Kerry is a jackass gives him too much credit. Once again, Trump showed real leadership by appointing Rex Tillerson as secretary of state, who is working to undo the disasters of the Obama foreign policy. This is what he means by making America great again, not your idiotic interpretation of ending the welfare state. Then there's Obama's use of tsunamis of regulations to cripple the economy. Trump has shown real leadership by reversing many of those regulations. The irony here is that people call Trump a dictator when it's clearly the opposite -- by reversing the regulations he's making the country freer. It's Obama who was pushing the country to dictatorship by his tsunami of regulations, and it's Trump pushing the country away from dictatorship by ending the regulations. Finally, there was Obama's contempt for the law and the Constitution. You talk about dictatorships, but Obama's contempt for the constitution is the real danger to America's democracy. Obama was openly contemptuous about religious freedom, gun ownership, and free speech when it didn't agree with him. But Obama went way beyond that. Obama used the IRS to target Republican organizations, he started a criminal investigation targeting a Fox reporter, he misappropriated billions of dollars to give to his cronies to prop up Obamacare and other programs through sweetheart deals with contributors, he invited violent groups like BLM to the White House, he refused to bring criminal charges against banks that caused the financial crisis, but instead took billions of dollars in donations from the money that the banks gained from illegal activities in the financial crisis, and so forth. Conservatives have more fully documented Obama's almost unending criminal activities and threats to America and American values: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/02/18-major-scandals-obama-presidency/ http://thefederalist.com/2017/01/19/10-ways-obama-violated-constitution-presidency/ These are really serious threats to America's democracy, and Trump is showing real leadership with "Make America Great Again" by reversing Obama's disasters. Democrats are hoping to use Mueller as a weapon to kill Trump. If they succeed, then hopefully Price will continue to reverse the Obama disasters and work to make America great again. Anyway, have you read today's tweets? I'm sure you'll find something to scream about. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - rds - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 10:57 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:(10-29-2017, 02:24 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: > I interpret Donald Trump's "Make America Great Again" as a return I'm very disappointed by that rant, I always thought you had some sense. Quoting Brietbart really? Really? I read your site daily, and you have excellent observations in your daily columns. You argued against the resident Fascist at length, at the old forum, and now on this one. I even agree (and have always agreed) that a Generational War is coming. I've read and thoughts about a sneak attack by the Chinese would be a great opening move. But, now with this response dragging out all of the old boring tropes, and outright propaganda if the current political climate has gotten to you too. Shaking my head and sad. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 03:35 PM)rds Wrote: > I'm very disappointed by that rant, I always thought you had some I'm confused. Breitbart is a conservative web site (as I said in my posting), but are you really claiming that it's any worse than the NY Times or NBC News? The article that I referenced seems to be pretty well sourced, so it's probably even more reliable than the NY Times or NBC News. By the way, you are aware that I've been cross-posting on Breitbart since 2010, aren't you? And you are aware that I'm personally acquainted with Breitbart editor Steve Bannon, and I've worked with him on a couple of projects in the past, aren't you? You'd better stop reading my articles, and just stick to Huffington Post. Speaking for myself, I read and reference all media sites, all around the world as needed -- left-wing, right-wing, and everything in between. If what you're saying is that you read only left-wing web sites and shun right-wing web sites, then you're going to be ignorant of a great deal of what's going on in the world. You need to be a lot more open-minded, for your own good. That's obviously true anyway, if you think the things documented in those articles are just "old boring tropes." I can assure you that you don't have a clue what's going on. Shaking my head, and sad. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - rds - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 05:27 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:(10-31-2017, 03:35 PM)rds Wrote: > I'm very disappointed by that rant, I always thought you had some I didn't know you were cross-posting on Brietbart, not that I care. I also didn't know that you had personally worked with Bannon. I have to ask, did you introduce Bannon to the idea of the turnings? Bannon would seem to be doing more to give them a black eye than anyone else alive. As for credibility, yes I trust the NYT, Wapo and NBC a lot more than Brietbart. It's not that I love them all that much, but I don't have to wonder if there is even an iota of truth in any particular article. But more power to you if you trust them as a source. It'll be pretty funny to find out that Hillary and Bush really are both lizard people. I would like to regularly monitor a conservative news site, but they're pretty hard to find (for me at least) on the free web. I use to read the Economist and WSJ, but times have changed and my current finances preclude subscriptions at the moment. As for HuffPo, yes I use them for headlines, very much the same way I use to use Drudge. I forget what got me ticked at Drudge, but I threw in the towel on his babble. As for having a clue, I'm not convinced anyone has a clue about anything. There are multiple possible outcomes of this turning. Your prediction of the generational war coming is a likely scenario. If it happens, I'll congratulate you if I'm around, but I'm pretty sure I'll be a radio active cinder in the first volley. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - pbrower2a - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 10:57 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:(10-29-2017, 02:24 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: > I interpret Donald Trump's "Make America Great Again" as a return OK, Hillary Clinton did not run a good election. She went after votes that she did not get or that were less important than votes in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin (or Florida) that really would have made a difference. Donald Trump is the first demagogue to win the nomination of one of the two main political parties. Except for Dwight Eisenhower, all Presidents from Cleveland on have some record of service in elected or appointed office (this includes the Cabinet), so we all have some record of the politician's conduct as a political leader. With Trump we got a pig in the poke. Indeed we really got a pig. We got someone who has no idea of how the political process really works. At least with Eisenhower we had a clear image of his personality. Exhibiting a chilly rationalism, caution, respect for institutions and legal precedent, and a willingness to cut deals with usual opponents, he would be a fine President. That sounds much likie another recent President. Maybe not in the league of Washington, Lincoln, or FDR, but well fitting the time. If I compare Obama to anyone it is Eisenhower even if Obama shot his way through public office quickly, was a little younger, and had no military service. I can show you an overlay of Eisenhower and Obama elections whence I conclude that Eisenhower and Obama appealed to much the same political culture as shown by the states. Partisan affiliations can change in states, but their political cultures rarely change except for demographics. Quote:The phrase "Make America great again" is not about a return to the Donald Trump is a Marxist stereotype of a capitalist. For good reason, Marxists use that stereotype -- a rapacious hedonist devoid of conscience -- as their strawman argument against capitalism. That, to the surprise of nobody, is the worst sort of capitalist. Donald Trump is not an innovator. He's basically a rent-collector. He is not out to expand a market; he is out to get more out of the market in which he is by grabbing more income from tenants. Railroad magnates at least made transportation available to settlers in the thinly-settled West and replaced draft horses with more efficient transportation between cities. John D. Rockefeller II was as much an innovator in discovering fuels for household and commercial use as he was in distributing those fuels. Henry Ford may have been a piece of work, but at least he made automobiles available to the proletariat. Don't forget the charitable institutions that Andrew Carnegie (lots of libraries, many extant) and Howard Hughes (medical research) established through their bequests. I have no idea what Warren Buffett intends to establish with his gigantic fortune, but it will likely be something that we will want to keep in the privat4e sector. As a demagogue, Donald Trump created or adopted a vapid and ambiguous slogan that he could use to mean whatever he wanted it to mean while convincing other that it means something very different. He has sold out his voters to the rapacious hedonists like him as plutocrats and to the executive elite. Quote:The phrase "Make America great again" is actually about recovering No -- it is about refuting the idea that an erudite non-white fellow could be President, something that grated on white people especially in the Mountain and Deep South, and of the rise of non-white, non-Christian people into the middle class as America let its industrial base erode. It's about celebrating the "low-information voter" who has been the supporter of demagogues from Vladimir Lenin to Adolf Hitler to Hugo Chavez and sticking it to the egghead who prefers counterpoint to country music. The erosion of America's industrial base began long before Obama, and accelerated under Dubya as he pushed a bubble economy based on people buying houses that they couldn't really afford. As Friedrich Hayek suggests, it is the capital-devouring bubble that does the damage and the financial panic (as in 1929 or 2008) that shows when people realize that the bubble won't sustain itself. Donald Trump, who surprisingly got catcalls from Corporate America during his campaign, since kissed up to those elites at the expense of everyone else. That's one way to disappoint the masses, if not those who own and manage the assets. Quote:The most obvious example is Obamacare. Obamacare was a financial With any major reform comes unintended consequences. We cannot assume that the unintended consequences are all bad. Social Security, for example, cut heavily into the sale of whole-life insurance policies. IRA accounts have made possible a great inflation in the cost of nursing homes that the politicians have given blank checks with our signatures upon them. Expansion of opportunities for college education in the early 1960s made possible the counterculture of the late 1960s . That's not only true of political change; it is also true of technologies. Automobiles made possible such prolific bank robbers as John Dillinger and the Barrow-Parker gang, and television has become a wonderful tool for numbing the minds of multitudes. For the worst sorts of unintended consequences, simply stick to the preservation of rotten institutions and practices. Quote:In fact, everything that I predicted in 2009 would happen has But other countries have national healthcare. Of course their systems are responsible to elected officials who have budgets to meet. Germany has physicians paid far less than American physicians -- but German physicians got their education from the start of undergraduate school through medical school at practically no cost Quote:So it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone the enormous contempt I have OK, here's your disaster. From the spring of 2009, this has been a good time to be an investor. It isn't simply inflation driving up stock prices and dividends: Quote:And so Trump's "Make america great again" applied to Obamacare With President Trump trying to repudiate everything that Obama does, it is only a matter of time before we have another nasty economic downturn. I have no idea what sort of solution Donald Trump would have. Oh -- burn more coal? Open the spigots on effluents? Burning more coal will get us the global warming that the President says is a hoax. More pollution means quick profits but great human and environmental costs that cost us heavily in side effects (lead cuts into intellectual ability and creates behavioral problems and creates crime waves) and future remediation. Quote:Then there's foreign policy. Obama's foreign policy never made any As shown by the dictator of North Korea loosing missiles to incinerate numerous Japanese and South Korean cities while Obama was President, the continuing survival of Osama bin Laden, and the acceleration of the frequency of terrorist attacks upon America and its allies. Whoops! Obama doesn't incite anti-Americanism. Pardon the Star Trek reference, but he likes to serve his revenge cold. Quote:Then there's John Kerry. I still just can't get over this. John Even I concede that John Kerry wasn't up to the job. Quote:Once again, Trump showed real leadership by appointing Rex Tillerson An unconventional choice. Someone connected to the fossil fuel business and with no record of diplomatic, military, or elective service? We shall see. Tillerson often has his spats with the President. Quote:Then there's Obama's use of tsunamis of regulations to cripple the No, he's simply doing what the most rapacious plutocrats want him to do. Quote:Finally, there was Obama's contempt for the law and the Constitution. I saw none of that under Obama. Tell me all about his Great Gun Grab, as I must have missed it. If anything it is President Trump who is squelching science when it runs afoul of his economic agenda. Quote:Obama used the IRS to target Republican organizations, he started a Obama is no friend of legal misconduct. Black Lives Matter has an agenda, but that is for police to be less trigger-happy around black people than they are around whites. Protesters at one Black Lives Matter event ended up shielding cops from a shooter at one protest at Dallas. Pull a gun on a cop and you will end up dead. There are no protests about that. Quote:Conservatives have more fully documented Obama's almost unending There have been no Obama officials indicted for any law-breaking. There would be plenty of opportunities for indictments and convictions if there were any wrongdoing suitable for prosecution. If a judicial system with plenty of Obama appointees is making things tough for bad actors under Donald Trump... do the crime, do the time. In view of the indictment and house arrest of Paul Manafort, we can all see that President Trump has much more tolerance of shady associates than did Obama. Your problem with Obama is that you dislike him and his position on the political spectrum. I would have big trouble with a Trump-like Democrat as President if he were similarly corrupt and capricious. If I want drama, I'll grab a video or go to the theater, thank you. Quote:These are really serious threats to America's democracy, and Trump is He is setting up America for real disasters, as by baiting Kim Jong-Un. Kim Jong-un can of course act up in the worst way possible without being baited, but I see it this way: I'm not throwing stones over a fence where a couple of Rottweilers lurk. I want those Rottweilers to have no reason to vault, knock down, burrow under, climb over, or break through a fence to knock me down (which is basically a fall) and inflict some nasty lacerations from its teeth and claws. This is a severe fault of character. Quote:Democrats are hoping to use Mueller as a weapon to kill Trump. If Price? I thought you meant Mike Pence, an unabashed reactionary who wants a return to the 1920s. Quote:Anyway, have you read today's tweets? I'm sure you'll find something I have learned to avoid the President's impulsive tweets. Aren't you sick of all that "Crooked Hillary" nonsense? RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Cynic Hero '86 - 10-31-2017 Yawn, two moronic boomers sparring over the smoking ruins of a national order their generation had destroyed. Boomers have nothing to say about their spectacular failure regarding refugees once again seen with the terror attack in New York. Also since someone mentioned it, Regarding a China vs America war; a war of attrition favors the CHINESE side, It would be the US who would favor a Blitz strategy in such a war because such a war plays our strength while we still have a technological advantage in such a war, it is the Chinese who would seek to turn a war into a long war of attrition because that allows china to play on its own strengths which are it's industrial capacity and manpower reserves. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - pbrower2a - 10-31-2017 (Another post brought here, adapted some) When all is said and done, I think that the Obama and Eisenhower Presidencies are going to look like good analogues. Both Presidents are chilly rationalists. Both respected legal precedents more than they trust legislation and the transitory will of the people in states. Both are practically scandal-free administrations. Both started with a troublesome war that both found their way out of. Neither did much to 'grow' the strength of their Parties in either House of Congress. In the 2008 election, Barack Obama won only one state that Eisenhower lost in either 1952 or 1956 (North Carolina); in 2012 he did not win any state that Dwight Eisenhower ever lost. This is amazing in view of the partisan identities of the two Presidents. It may be premature, but I expect historians to hold Eisenhower and Obama similar in quality. Despite the great differences in curriculae vitae, Eisenhower and Obama seem to have something very much in common: both are members of Reactive generations. 60-ish Reactives (George Washington, John Adams, Grover Cleveland, Harry Truman, and Dwight Eisenhower) may be the best sorts of leaders that Reactive leaders can be: cautious, mellow, respectful of precedent, and more trusting in legality than in the contemporary passion. Even if Barack Obama is one of the youngest Presidents ever elected and won't reach or surpass 60 as President ) he seems to have acted like someone in his sixties. (The worst Reactive leaders are amoral, angry, cynical, bigoted leaders with an agenda of seeking revenge against real and imagined personal enemies -- like Adolf Hitler and Mao Zedong, puppets of tyrannical leaders such as Vidkun Quisling and Mátyás Rákosi, and such brutal functionaries of tyrants as Andrei Vishinsky and Lavrenti Beria). I could also add Timothy McVeigh, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and the two worthless sons of Saddam Hussein as illustrations of the sorts of people that one would least want as leaders. The definitive moderate Republican may have been Dwight Eisenhower, and I have heard plenty of Democrats praise the Eisenhower Presidency. He went along with Supreme Court rulings that outlawed segregationist practices, stayed clear of the McCarthy bandwagon, and let McCarthy implode. gray -- did not vote in 1952 or 1956 white -- Eisenhower twice, Obama twice deep blue -- Republican all four elections light blue -- Republican all but 2008 (I assume that greater Omaha went for Ike twice) light green -- Eisenhower once, Stevenson once, Obama never dark green -- Stevenson twice, Obama never pink -- Stevenson twice, Obama once No state voted Democratic all four times, so no state is in deep red. (This site uses the very old red for Democrats and blue for Republicans... I do not make waves about that in that website). To be sure, one would expect any winning President to win almost entirely states that FDR won in 1936 (all then voting except Vermont and Maine), that Nixon won in 1972 (all but Massachusetts), or Reagan won in 1980 (all but Minnesota). But the overlay between Obama and Eisenhower fits far better includes all four such states that FDR, Nixon, and Reagan won in nearly-complete wins of the entire USA. As another coincidence, Eisenhower was the first Republican to win Virginia since 1928 (24 years) and Obama was the first Democrat to win the Old Dominion since 1964 (44 years) -- and both won the state twice. Now, Carter vs. Obama: If anyone has any doubt that the Presidential Election of 1976 is ancient history for all practical purposes: Carter 1976, Obama 2008/2012 Carter 1976, Obama twice red Carter 1976, Obama once pink Carter 1976, Obama never yellow Ford 1976, Obama twice white Ford 1976, Obama once light blue Ford 1976, Obama never blue ....As you can see, Carter lost a raft of states (among them California, Oregon, Washington, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, Connecticut, Vermont, and Maine) that Democratic nominees for President have not lost after 1988, and some states (Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and New Mexico) that Democrats have not LOST in Presidential wins. On the other side, Carter was the last Democrat to win Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, or Texas. Democratic nominees for President are likely to get mostly states in white for the next couple of decades. ......................... Although partisan identities of the states may change, political cultures within the states are unlikely to change over time except through changes of demography. In general, Eisenhower lost the least-educated states, as did Obama. Both Obama and Eisenhower did well among people with at least a college degree. Obama did badly with white people with less than a college degree, as (it would seem) did Eisenhower. I am going to guess that Eisenhower did better among blacks than did any subsequent Republican President -- even Nixon in 1972 and Reagan in 1984. I would guess that the constituencies that Eisenhower got that Obama did not get were (1) plutocrats and executives (2) people in the ranching business (3) Mormons and the constituencies in which Eisenhower did not fare as well with as Obama were (1) blacks (2) Mexican-Americans 1-Nov-17 World View -- Chinese geologists warn of looming nuclear disaster from North - John J. Xenakis - 10-31-2017 *** 1-Nov-17 World View -- Chinese geologists warn of looming nuclear disaster from North Korean tests This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** China and South Korea reach an agreement on THAAD missile defense system **** Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha in National Assembly announces that South Korea would not pursue additional THAAD anti-missile deployments (The Hankyoreh) In a surprise announcement, China agreed to remove the harsh economic sanctions that it had imposed on South Korea in anger over South Korea's deployment of America's advanced Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) anti-missile system. In July of last year, South Korea's President Park Geun-hye announced her decision to deploy the THAAD system on South Korean soil. This was specifically a reaction to ballistic missile and nuclear threats from North Korea, but it infuriated China because THAAD's powerful radar could also give early warning to the United States of a pre-emptive missile attack by China on the United States. Early this year, news broke that the Lotte Group, a South Korean multinational conglomerate, had agreed to a land swap that would allow THAAD to be deployed on a piece of land previously owned by the company. The enraged Chinese imposed harsh economic sanctions, particularly targeting Lotte Department Stores in China and South Korea with a boycott. The economic sanctions have been devastating for South Korea's economy, banning South Korean goods for sale in China, banning South Korean pop stars and entertainers, and banning travel agencies from selling packaged tours to South Korea. Despite the sanctions, the first THAAD deployments began in March, with two launchers. South Korea's new president Moon Jae-in took office in May, after an election campaign promising to end THAAD deployment, and to develop closer ties with North Korea. But North Korea repudiated Moon's overture, conducting a new series of ballistic missile tests. As a result, Moon abruptly reversed policy and approved the deployment of four more THAAD launchers. So it was unexpected that South Korea and China issued a statement on Tuesday that "The two sides attach great importance to the Korea-China relationship," and that they would establish normal relations as quickly as possible. According to China's Foreign Ministry at a press conference on Tuesday: <QUOTE>"China's position on the THAAD issue has been clear and consistent, which remains unchanged. We have noted that the ROK stated publicly that the ROK [Republic of Korea - South Korea] will not join the US anti-missile system, develop the ROK-US-Japan security cooperation into a tripartite military alliance or make additional deployment of the THAAD system, and the current THAAD deployment in the ROK will not undermine China's strategic security interests. We hope that the ROK will match word to deed and follow through on these remarks to properly handle the relevant issue. Properly handing the THAAD issue and removing the obstacles to China-ROK relations are the shared aspiration of the two countries and conform to the common interests of the two sides, we hope the two sides can jointly work to bring the bilateral relations back to the track of normal development."<END QUOTE> I find this to be a very strange statement, because the wording implies low expectations that the détente between the two countries will succeed. The statement does not explicitly say that China is lifting its economic sanctions, and it only expresses hope that South Korea will not develop a closer military alliance with the United States -- in particular that no more THAAD launchers will be deployed. There was one more Q&A at the press conference that I found strange: <QUOTE>"Q: China said several times that the people-to-people and cultural exchange calls for public support. As the ROK and China reached agreement, what change does China expect to see in public opinion? A: As we all can see, for some time, the feelings and relations between the Chinese and ROK people have been affected by the THAAD issue. We hope that the two sides can properly handle the THAAD issue and bring the normal exchange and cooperation in various fields back to the track of normal development. We believe this is of positive significance to the change of public opinion in the two countries."<END QUOTE> The answer implies that bad feelings and relations between the peoples of China and South Korea were caused by the THAAD issue. From the point of view of Generational Dynamics, the most likely explanation is that bad feelings and relations between the Chinese and South Koreans have been growing for some time, and that the THAAD was just a trigger for open hostility. This view is supported by e-mail exchanges that I've had with readers in the past indicating that there is extreme hostility between Chinese and South Koreans. It seems unlikely that Tuesday's agreement to improve relations is going to do much to change these bad feelings and relations in the future. Business Insider and China's Foreign Ministry and The Hankyoreh (Seoul) and Global Times (Beijing) Related Articles
**** **** Chinese geologists warn of looming nuclear disaster from North Korean tests **** There have been reports that 200 North Korean workers were killed in a series of tunnel collapses on October 10 at the main North Korean nuclear testing site at Mount Mantap. These reports come from a single unverified North Korean report, and are doubted by some analysts. However, what is apparently certain is that senior Chinese nuclear scientists and geologists are saying that any further nuclear bomb tests could risk a huge nuclear disaster that would affect both North Korea and China. The problem is that Mount Mantap, where North Korea has conducted five underground nuclear tests, is now in danger of collapsing completely, releasing huge amounts of radiation and nuclear debris that would affect large parts of northeastern China. The warnings have been delivered directly to North Korean scientists by nuclear scientists at the Chinese Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Geology and Geophysics. They warned North Korea that further nuclear tests could blow the top off Mount Mantap and spark a potential catastrophic collapse at the nuclear testing site, resulting in radiation releases and other forms of contamination. The warnings were summarized by an unnamed researcher at Peking University: <QUOTE>"China cannot sit and wait until the site implodes. Our instruments can detect nuclear fallout when it arrives, but it will be too late by then. There will be public panic and anger at the government for not taking action. Maybe the North Koreans themselves have realized that the site cannot take another blow. If they still want to do it, they have to do it somewhere else."<END QUOTE> The Chinese geologists delivered the warnings to the North Koreans on September 20. Two days later, on September 22, North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong-ho at the United Nations said: <QUOTE>"It could be the most powerful detonation of an H-bomb in the Pacific. We have no idea about what actions could be taken as it will be ordered by leader Kim Jong-un."<END QUOTE> This would, of course, be equally disastrous, as the explosion could affect any aircraft or sea vessels in the area, and the radiation could be carried by the winds to any country bordering the Pacific. News Corp Australia and South China Morning Post and Chosun (Seoul) Related Articles
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, China, North Korea, South Korea, Kang Kyung-wha, Park Geun-hye, Lotte Group, Moon Jae-in, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, THAAD, Mount Mantap, Peking University, Ri Yong-ho, Chinese Academy of Sciences' Institute of Geology and Geophysics 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 RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 11-01-2017 Xi needed to be seen taking strong action against THAAD before the 5 year communist party meeting. Now he has consolidated power and can relax the sanctions. That is a signal to North Korea to stop their nuclear program, as is of course the warning about fallout. I doubt North Korea is paying attention, though. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 11-01-2017 (10-31-2017, 10:51 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:(10-29-2017, 12:20 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: > It does not, however, make China socialist. Socialism is an Since socialism and capitalism are purely economic concepts, you might as well quit using the words, then. Quote:Going beyond the abstract to real life, controlling a business versus To the contrary, the point of capitalism is economic efficiency through competition. In principal this rules out any motive except profit, since the success of capitalism depends on the fact that inefficient, unprofitable businesses must fail. The freedom of capitalism is that, within this profit motive, one is free to optimize one's business to the greatest degree possible free of governmental interference - which China largely allows - and also, freedom to spend the profits as one desires, including helping minorities or Christians or poor people in underdeveloped countries. But that's a matter of what one does with the money after it's personal money, not about running businesses. Quote:So China and Nazi Germany share National Socialism, and to say that Stripping out the economic terms, since you think economics is irrelevant, you're just saying China and Germany are both nationalist. That's true, but under Trump, the US is also nationalist - and that's a good thing, not a bad thing. You're just citing "Nazi Germany" for emotional effect, making a content free nondistinction. Quote:(10-29-2017, 12:20 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: > China is basically a capitalist dictatorship, not a socialist As amply explained, China is more capitalist than the US in the economic sense of the word "capitalist", which is the only sense of the word. But stripping out the economic terms, since you object to economics, we're left with my statement that China is a basically a dictatorship. hat it does share with Nazi Germany and not with the US. But it's stupid to say that makes it "identical" with Nazi Germany - even if you think the Soviet Union was also "identical" to Nazi Germany since it was also a dictatorship - since the economic system is fundamentally different. Spot on regarding your responses to pbrower2a and rds, though. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 11-01-2017 (10-31-2017, 06:33 PM)rds Wrote: > I didn't know you were cross-posting on Breitbart, not that I No, it was the other way around. He became familiar with the Fourth Turning and was personally acquainted with Neil Howe, and then came to Generational Dynamics when he was working on the movie Generation Zero. I've written many times this year that Steve Bannon is an expert on world and military history, and is also an expert on Generational Dynamics. Donald Trump's foreign policy has been generally consistent with Generational Dynamics, which undoubtedly comes from Steve Bannon. I believe that America's survival in the coming world war depends on understanding what's going on in the world, and Trump's understanding of Generational Dynamics analyses through Bannon is a major benefit to the United States and the world. ** 9-Feb-17 World View -- Mainstream media frets over Steve Bannon, the Fourth Turning, and Donald Trump ** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/xct.gd.e170209.htm#e170209 ** 21-Jan-17 World View -- President Trump's inauguration speech links today's America to the 1930s ** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/xct.gd.e170121.htm#e170121 ** 7-Jul-17 World View -- Donald Trump's speech in Warsaw Poland evokes the Clash of Civilizations ** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/xct.gd.e170707.htm#e170707 ** 30-Sep-17 World View -- Steve Bannon and Henry Kissinger form project to sound alarm on China ** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/xct.gd.e170930.htm#e170930 (10-31-2017, 06:33 PM)rds Wrote: > As for credibility, yes I trust the NYT, Wapo and NBC a lot more You should read the Breitbart National Security page. http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/ The Big Government and Big Journalism pages are mostly fatuous political stuff, but the National Security is really very good -- and of course that's where my articles are posted. The National Security page has some political stuff but relatively little, and instead covers world events pretty well. (10-31-2017, 06:33 PM)rds Wrote: > As for having a clue, I'm not convinced anyone has a clue about I have a clue. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Cynic Hero '86 - 11-01-2017 North Korea will not disarm. They would have to be eliminated by force. Boomers refuse to allow a preemptive strike because of their selfishness. Throughout their collective lives, Whenever there was a critical Juncture; the boomers have always chose the present over the future. It is this choosing of the present is why the younger generations hate them. 2-Nov-17 World View -- Israel and Saudi Arabia prepare for war with Hezbollah, as Syr - John J. Xenakis - 11-01-2017 *** 2-Nov-17 World View -- Israel and Saudi Arabia prepare for war with Hezbollah, as Syria war winds down This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** Israel and Hezbollah prepare for war with each other **** Hezbollah supporters chant slogans and gesture on al-Quds day in southern Lebanon on June 23 (Reuters) With the rise of hopes, delusional or not, that the war in Syria will settle down within a few months, all the players are now looking ahead to the wars to follow. Hezbollah, Iran's puppet Shia militia organization in Lebanon, was originally formed in 1985 to launch war with Israel, and still has no other objective other than war with Israel. War with Israel is its only reason for existing. Israel and Hezbollah last had a war in 2006. That war was a disaster for both sides, and also a disaster for Lebanon, much of whose infrastructure was destroyed. Since then, Hezbollah has made it known that it's preparing for a much more effective war with Israel, although this plan has been delayed by the war in Syria. Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah spoke on nationwide television in Lebanon October 1, to mark Ashura, the holiest day in the Shia Muslim calendar, and used the occasion to once again threaten to destroy Israel, and to warn that Israel would be devastated by war: <QUOTE>"I call on anyone who came to occupied Palestine to leave it and return to the lands you came from, so you will not be the fuel for any war waged by your foolish government. [Israel's prime minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and his government do not know how the war will end if they start one, and they do not have an accurate picture of what to expect should they embark on the folly of war."<END QUOTE> Israeli defense officials believe that Hezbollah has an of between 100,000 and 150,000 missiles and a fighting force of 50,000 soldiers, 10,000 of which are already positioned in southern Syria, ready for war with Israel. An extensive report released last month by the High Level Military Group, a think tank made up of retired generals and defense officials from the United States, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, Colombia, India, and Australia, agrees with the Israeli military assessment of Hezbollah, and also agrees with Nasrallah of the effect of war on Israelis: <QUOTE>"Policymakers expressed concerns about how prepared the Israeli public is for the level of devastation that would be wrought in a major military clash with Hezbollah. Younger Israelis are less familiar with the threat of direct attack than older generations, and Israel’s success in neutralizing less sophisticated rockets fired from Gaza may have led to inflated expectations of its capacity to intercept the volume of rockets likely to be fired by Hezbollah."<END QUOTE> In a war, Hezbollah would be launching about 1,000 missiles per day at Israeli targets, although without guidance systems the missiles could only be launched in the direction of the desired target. But in the last few months, reports have emerged that Iran is constructing manufacturing facilities in Lebanon for volume manufacturing of precision-guided missiles. These missiles could be launched from anywhere in Lebanon, and could be programmed to strike any target in Israel with accuracy. In the past, Iran tried to transport convoys of these missiles overland from Iran to Lebanon, but Israel has been very successful with airstrikes in Syria or Iraq to destroy the convoys before they could reach Lebanon. The manufacture of these precision-guided missiles within Lebanon is thought be "crossing a red line" for Israel. Israel would probably launch a preemptive strike on the production facilities in Lebanon, which would be a significant escalation on the relation between Lebanon and Israel since the end of the 2006 war. Hezbollah could then launch a retaliatory strike on Israel, risking tit-for-tat escalation that would lead to full-scale war. Some analysts are advising Israel to strike right away, before Hezbollah has a chance to fully arm. That option is certainly being debated, but whether it will be adopted remains to be seen. Times of Israel (26-Oct) and National Interest and Times of Israel (1-Oct) and High Level Military Group (PDF) and Israel Hayom (1-Sep) Related Articles
**** **** Saudi Arabian minister calls for 'toppling Hezbollah' **** Saudi Arabia's Minister of Gulf Affairs, Thamer Al-Sabhan, said on Monday that Hezbollah should be toppled: <QUOTE>"[Saudi Arabia] is determined to stand resolute against Hezbollah, the satanic militia working to recruit and train outlaws in the party’s strongholds in Lebanon. Hezbollah is declaring war on Saudi Arabia with the Iranian weapons. ... Those who believe that my tweets are a personal stance are delusional and they will see what will happen in the coming days I addressed my tweet to the government because the Party of Satan [Hezbollah] is represented in it and it is a terrorist party. The issue is not about toppling the government but rather that Hezbollah should be toppled. The coming developments will definitely be astonishing."<END QUOTE> Saudi Arabia has accused Hezbollah of supplying rockets and other weapons to the Houthis, Saudi Arabia's enemy in the war in Yemen. However, one pro-Hezbollah report mocked al-Sabhan by saying, "Al-Sabhan obsessively tweets about Hezbollah and continues to make promises about destroying the Lebanese group." Arab News and Naharnet (Lebanon) and Al Masdar News (Damascus) Related Articles
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Israel, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Hezbollah, Iran, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, High Level Military Group, Thamer Al-Sabhan, Yemen 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 3-Nov-17 World View -- Violence in Nigeria grows over clashes between herders and far - John J. Xenakis - 11-02-2017 *** 3-Nov-17 World View -- Violence in Nigeria grows over clashes between herders and farmers This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** Violence in Nigeria grows over clashes between herders and farmers **** Fulani herders in Nigeria (royaltimes.net) I've written many times that many ethnic wars are based on fundamental clashes between farmer tribes and herder tribes. in country after country, there a classic and recurring battle between herders and farmers, I've described in Central African Republic, Rwanda, Burundi, Kenya, Sudan, South Sudan, and even America in the 1800s. The farmers accuse the herders of letting the cattle eat their crops, while the herders accuse the farmers of planting on land that's meant for grazing. If the farmers put up fences, then the herders knock them down. In Nigeria, it's estimated that 2,500 people were killed and move than 62,000 people lost their homes in 2016 in just four provinces, Kaduna, Plateau, Nasarawa and Benue states. The federal government lost $13.7 billion in revenue as a result of these conflicts. According to former Head of State, General Abdulsalami Abubakar: "There is a breakdown of communal trust, conflict resolution mechanisms and these conflicts have become deadly," and "the current situation is threatening the fragile peace in the nation." A report last month from the International Crisis Group describes how the clashes have been getting more widespread and violent, and are becoming sectarian, as the herders are mostly Faluni Muslims from northern Nigeria, and the farmers are most Christians from southern Nigeria: <QUOTE>"Violent conflicts between nomadic herders from northern Nigeria and sedentary agrarian communities in the central and southern zones have escalated in recent years and are spreading southward, threatening the country’s security and stability. With an estimated death toll of approximately 2,500 people in 2016, these clashes are becoming as potentially dangerous as the Boko Haram insurgency in the north east. ... Familiar problems – relating to land and water use, obstruction of traditional migration routes, livestock theft and crop damage – tend to trigger these disputes. But their roots run deeper. Drought and desertification have degraded pastures, dried up many natural water sources across Nigeria’s far-northern Sahelian belt and forced large numbers of herders to migrate south in search of grassland and water for their herds. Insecurity in many northern states (a consequence of the Boko Haram insurgency in the north east and of less-well-reported rural banditry and cattle rustling in the north-west and north-central zones) also prompts increasing numbers of herdsmen to migrate south. The growth of human settlements, expansion of public infrastructure and acquisition of land by large-scale farmers and other private commercial interests, have deprived herders of grazing reserves designated by the post-independence government of the former Northern region (now split into nineteen states). ... The spread of conflict into southern states is aggravating already fragile relations among the country’s major regional, ethnic and religious groups. The south’s majority Christian communities resent the influx of predominantly Muslim herders, portrayed in some narratives as an “Islamisation force”. Herders are mostly Fulani, lending an ethnic dimension to strife. Insofar as the Fulani spread across many West and Central African countries, any major confrontation between them and other Nigerian groups could have regional repercussions, drawing in fighters from neighboring countries."<END QUOTE> The Fulani herders are now sometimes equated to terror groups like Boko Haram as a consequence of their attacks on farmers. The Fulani herders are also playing a big part in the generational crisis civil war in Central African Republic, as we've described in the past. Nigeria's president, Muhammadu Buhari, is a Fulani and owns large herds of cattle. He has been accused of complicity about the Fulani attacks on farmers. In order to protect farmers, Benue State, which is in Nigeria's middle belt separating the north from the south, passed an "Anti-Grazing Law. The law was passed in May, but only came into effect on Wednesday. The law prohibits open grazing of cattle, and requires herders to maintain their herds of cattle on ranches. The law is being accompanied by a training program to teach herders modern methods of ranching. However, the new law is somewhat laughable, as there's no way that it will stop Fulani herder attacks on farmers. On Thursday, an attack by suspected Fulani herdsmen on a village in Benue State resulted in one death and many others missing. Daily Trust (Abuja) and International Crisis Group and Vanguard (Nigeria) and The Nation (Nigeria) and Daily Post (Nigeria) Related Articles
**** **** Oklahoma! - The farmer and the cowboy should be friends **** Violent clashes between farmers and herders are not unique to Africa. They occur in any country that has a growing population and has both farmers and herders. In particular, there were many bloody battles between farmers and herders in 1800s and early 1900s America. In 1941, those battles were still fresh in the lives of many alive at that time, and they were a sub-plot of the great Rodgers and Hammerstein Broadway musical Oklahoma!. One of the most festive song and dance production numbers in the show was "The farmer and the cowboy should be friends." The number is instructive to today's audience's because it provides hints of just how bitter the fight was between farmers and cowboys. The play takes place around 1900, just as Oklahoma was becoming a state. The lyrics begin: <QUOTE>"Oh, the farmer and the cowboy should be friends, Oh, the farmer and the cowboy should be friends. One man likes to push a plough, The other likes to chase a cow, But that's no reason why they cain't be friends. Territory folks should stick together, Territory folks should all be pals. Cowboys dance with farmer's daughters, Farmers dance with the ranchers' gals."<END QUOTE> However, as the music and dancing continue, the farmers and cowboys start sniping at each other: <QUOTE>"Eller: The farmer should be sociable with the cowboy If he rides by and ask for food and water Don't treat him like a louse Make him welcome in your house Ike: But be sure that you locked up your wife and daughters"<END QUOTE> The ensuing mass brawl is fully choreographed, as farmers and cowboys take swings at each other in time to the music. If you'd like to enjoy five minutes of music and fun, then check out the Youtube video of the number from the 1955 film. YouTube KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Nigeria, Muhammadu Buhari, Fulani, herders, farmers, Kaduna, Plateau, Nasarawa, Benue, General Abdulsalami Abubakar, Central African Republic, Rwanda, Burundi, Kenya, Sudan, South Sudan, Rodgers and Hammerstein, Oklahoma! 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 RE: Generational Dynamics World View - pbrower2a - 11-03-2017 It is hardly surprising that cattlemen and shepherds don't get along. Cattle leave some vegetation behind to grow again. Sheep grazw so close to the ground that they leave behind ... bare ground. Sheep can turn short grassland into desert. 4-Nov-17 World View -- Socialist Venezuela may or may not have declared bankruptcy on - John J. Xenakis - 11-03-2017 *** 4-Nov-17 World View -- Socialist Venezuela may or may not have declared bankruptcy on Thursday This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** Socialist Venezuela may or may not have declared bankruptcy on Thursday **** During his televised speech on Thursday, Maduro grabs an empanada (a rich pastry) from his desk drawer when he thinks the cameras are off, while most of his people are starving (Caracas Chronicle) In a nationally televised speech on Thursday, Venezuela's Socialist president Nicolás Maduro Moros announced that Venezuela would be "refinancing and restructuring" and "reformatting" its debt: <QUOTE>"I decree a refinancing and restructuring of external debt and all Venezuelan payments. We’re going to a complete reformatting. To find an equilibrium, and to cover the necessities of the country, the investments of the country. ... We have to pay the amount of US$1.121 billion from the Pdvsa 2017 bonus and we have the money to fulfill this obligation," the head of state announced, adding that the government also has resources to continue providing necessities to Venezuelans. We have the money for this payment, and we also have the money for raw materials, medicines and food. ... I am naming a special presidential commission led by Vice President Tareck El Aissami to begin refinancing and restructuring all of Venezuela’s external debt and (begin) the fight against the financial persecution of our country."<END QUOTE> As various articles have pointed out, this announcement by Maduro didn't make sense, and was contradictory. Refinancing and restructuring are two different things. Refinancing implies an orderly market transaction, while restructuring implies a default and bankruptcy. Nobody knows what "reformatting" is. Some analysts are suggesting that Maduro is in so far over his head that he doesn't know what he's talking about. The "special presidential commission" will be led by Vice President Tareck El Aissami, who is under sanctions by the US Treasury Department for protecting drug lords and overseeing a network exporting thousands of kilograms of cocaine. El Aissami announced that his government will hold a bondholders meeting on November 13 to reaffirm Venezuela's commitment to paying off its debts. Maduro says that Venezuela would make a $1.1 billion payment that's due now. That payment was made, and if it hadn't been, then Venezuela would be in default, but it still makes no sense to make a payment just before refinancing or restructuring. Finally, Maduro says that even with this payment, the country has the money for raw materials, medicines and food. Actually it doesn't. Maduro has been starving the people and the hospitals for years, and that isn't going to change. Venezuela got into this situation by faithfully following Socialist principles. When oil prices were high, Maduro's predecessor Hugo Chávez used the overflowing treasury and even borrowed more money to buy votes with enormously expensive social programs. When oil prices crashed in 2014, Maduro paid off debts by incurring huge new debts. Telesur Tv and Reuters and Bloomberg and Washington Post and DealBreaker **** **** Socialist Venezuela may have reached the end of its economic road **** All told, there’s $143 billion in foreign debt owed by the government and state entities. Maduro would like to borrow more money, to incur even larger debts to make payments on current debts, but is unable to do so since August 28, when US president Donald Trump imposed sanctions that prevent further borrowing. The International Monetary Fund said last month it expects inflation in Venezuela to reach 2,350% in 2018, up from about 500% in 2017. This has made Venezuela's currency, the bolivar, almost completely worthless. Because Venezuela's bonds have been high risk for some time, they've been paying very high yields (interest rates) - almost 10 times as higher than those of neighboring Colombia. Investors have purchased these bonds hoping for big returns. Big institutional investors in the United States include T Rowe Price, Ashmore Investment Management, BlackRock Investment Management, and Goldman Sachs. Because of US sanctions, Maduro can't borrow any more money from Western companies "Today, if Venezuela wants to go out to the world to refinance one of these bonds we have to pay, it can’t. It’s prohibited by the global financial dictatorship of the North American empire." Maduro could borrow more from China and Russia, which are not covered by US sanctions. However, Venezuela already owes $37.2 billion to both countries, and both countries are said to be demanding economic reforms. Venezuela is sitting on the largest oil reserves in the world, but oil production under the Socialist government has fallen almost 3% this year. The disastrous Socialist economy is in disarray, and its refineries run at less than 50% of the available capacity, because the oil companies are being run by Maduro's Socialist cronies, not by people who actually know how to run an oil company. In the past, Venezuela has borrowed money from Russia and China via an oil-for-loan agreement, but oil production has been falling because of the incompetence of Maduro's Socialist cronies. In the 1980s, the Soviet Union took on the task of supplying money to Socialist Cuba. Now Russia has to decide whether to take on the task of supplying money to Socialist Venezuela, which has three times the population, at a time when Russia's own economy is in despair. So Maduro has three choices. First, he can convince Russia to bail him out again, and continue bailing him out forever into the future. Second, he can simply stop paying, and go into default. In this case, his creditors will go after the country's foreign assets, including Citgo and tankers that dock at foreign ports. And third, he can try to convince Western investors, along with the IMF, to bail him out. They would only agree to this if Maduro agreed to massive economic reforms, and probably Maduro himself would have to step down. Recent history tells us that Russia will bail him out at least one more time, but even Russia may be losing patience. With Tareck El Aissami's meeting with bondholders scheduled for November 13, we may have an answer soon. Reuters and Bloomberg and Economist Related articles:
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro Moros, Hugo Chávez, Petróleos de Venezuela S.A., PDVSA, Tareck El Aissami, Russia, China, International Monetary Fund, IMF, Colombia, T Rowe Price, Ashmore Investment Management, BlackRock Investment Management, Goldman Sachs, Citgo 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 |