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
|
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Cynic Hero '86 - 02-26-2018 (02-26-2018, 09:57 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:(02-26-2018, 02:28 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: Boomers are against implementing political economic and military reform. If the boomer view of not striking is correct we therefore we should continue sanctions which would avoid war with North Korea. Therefore if North Korea knows that there is no chance of the US striking first then there is no danger of a North Korean Attack if the boomer views are correct. But that is not the Correct view; in reality North Korea is building an arsenal to attack the US with nukes or at the very least sell nukes to terrorists and other rogue states. Therefore not striking NK is not a prudent or responsible decision it is an absolutely irresponsible decision. Regard events If boomers refused to strike or lauched a limited conventional cruise missile strike and NK responded with nukes, even if the nukes only targeted bases in the region. Then it would be the "not striking first" crowd that would be discredited. America did not continue listening to Lindbergh's advice after Pearl Harbor and Germany's declaration of war. The Boomer establishment has no intention whatsoever of striking North Korea first or on the flip side listening to the NORK demands either. The establishment's policy is to preserve the status quo as long as possible. Thus even attempting strategy of any kind or in any direction is regarded as a cardinal sin by establishment boomers. The globalists leaning of Trump's advisers are desperately trying to restrain Trump because Trump has correctly accessed that striking first is the least bad option. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 02-27-2018 (02-26-2018, 09:57 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > I'm pretty sure John was just saying that he thought the Boomer Do I agree with the strike first strategy? That's an interesting question. I like to think of myself as a weather forecaster. I tell you that a sunny day is coming or that rain is coming, but I don't advocate either sun or rain. I realize that I sometimes cross the line and advocate something, but the weather forecaster model is the ideal. And, indeed, sun helps some people and rain helps other people, so I don't know what I'd advocate if I could. So now let's consider the strike or no strike question, and the consequences of either decision. First off, we're headed for a world war either way. So in that sense it really doesn't matter whether we strike or not. There's one major thing about Syria that is rarely if ever mentioned, but it bears very heavily on the North Korea strike or no strike decision. When Bashar al-Assad used Sarin gas on civilians on April 4, 2017, thus once again crossing Obama's red line, Trump retaliated with a cruise missile attack on April 6 on Shayrat Airbase in Syria, thus fulfilling Obama's implied threat. However, al-Assad continues to use chemical weapons -- chlorine, ammonia, phosphorous, Sarin gas -- almost every day with complete impunity, fully supported by the war criminals in Russia and Iran. So in the end the cruise missile attack on April 6 accomplished absolutely nothing, except symbolically. So now let's assume that the US makes some "bloody nose" attack on North Korea, and let's assume that it's done so cleverly that it doesn't lead to an immediate war with China or to massive retaliation on Seoul. Will it accomplish anything? I doubt it. Maybe it will cause a delay of a few months, but NK's nuclear weapon and ballistic missile development program will be up and running again pretty quickly -- and that's true even if Kim Jong-un has been killed. On top of that, the missile strike completely inflames the entire region, with the Chinese population becoming far more nationalistic, xenophobic and belligerent, calling for revenge. A military confrontation in the South China Sea becomes a lot more likely. When historians look back at the ensuing world war, they will say that the US started the war by attacking North Korea. Now look at the alternative -- no strike. NK builds its arsenal of nuclear tipped missiles. They're pointed at the US, but they're mobile, so they could also point to Japan, South Korea, China or Russia. Tensions rise throughout the whole region. Sooner or later someone attacks someone. Maybe NK even uses one of its nuclear weapons on someone. That triggers a world war. Depending on how it happens, when historians look back at the ensuing world war, they will say that the US started the war by appeasing North Korea. So if I were going to advocate a strategy, strike vs no strike, I really don't know what I would select. They're both equally awful. However, what I would advocate is a different question from what I think is going to happen. Putting on my weather forecaster hat, what I think is going to happen is that there will be some sort of bloody nose attack, because Donald Trump doesn't want to be regarded by historians as another Neville Chamberlain or another Barack Obama. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Cynic Hero '86 - 02-27-2018 A Strike must go "all In" not striking North Korea or doing a half-measure limited strike is sheer folly. The Boomer refuses to comprehend the causes of the various issues both regarding the Korea issue or the world in general because doing so would force the boomer to admit that their preferences are the problem that the entire "peace dividend" since the late 1980s just led to the US being regarded as a wuss. The Boomer is emotionally attached to globalism and the peace dividend because those are the policies THEY advocated. Yet the same boomers refuse to let Xers and Millies into the government because they think the Xer or Millies MIGHT commit genocide in the future. Thats what makes boomer governance tyranny because boomers insist on trying to control the natural flows of events and social evolution and that is contrary to nature. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - David Horn - 02-27-2018 (02-27-2018, 10:35 AM)Cynic Hero Wrote: A Strike must go "all In" not striking North Korea or doing a half-measure limited strike is sheer folly. The Boomer refuses to comprehend the causes of the various issues both regarding the Korea issue or the world in general because doing so would force the boomer to admit that their preferences are the problem that the entire "peace dividend" since the late 1980s just led to the US being regarded as a wuss. The Boomer is emotionally attached to globalism and the peace dividend because those are the policies THEY advocated. Yet the same boomers refuse to let Xers and Millies into the government because they think the Xer or Millies MIGHT commit genocide in the future. Thats what makes boomer governance tyranny because boomers insist on trying to control the natural flows of events and social evolution and that is contrary to nature. You really need to get your meds adjusted. Really! RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 02-27-2018 (02-27-2018, 10:35 AM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: > A Strike must go "all In" not striking North Korea or doing a When I described the first strike option above, I wrote, "let's assume that it's done so cleverly that it doesn't lead to an immediate war with China or to massive retaliation on Seoul." What you want is both immediate war with China and also massive retaliation on Seoul. That's why I'm always writing about the destructiveness and self-destructiveness of Generation-X. You would welcome a world war that kills four billion people, just as people in your generation welcomed the financial crisis they created by knowingly selling fraudulent subprime mortgage backed security. Your bizarre, vitriolic hatred of Boomers has made you completely nihilistic, willing to destroy the whole world if it means getting your revenge against Boomers. The world is in very bad shape today, but you would bring it to total destruction, which excites you. This makes you a very dangerous person, and puts people around you in physical danger. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 02-27-2018 (02-27-2018, 10:35 AM)Cynic Hero Wrote: A Strike must go "all In" not striking North Korea or doing a half-measure limited strike is sheer folly. The Boomer refuses to comprehend the causes of the various issues both regarding the Korea issue or the world in general because doing so would force the boomer to admit that their preferences are the problem that the entire "peace dividend" since the late 1980s just led to the US being regarded as a wuss. The Boomer is emotionally attached to globalism and the peace dividend because those are the policies THEY advocated. Yet the same boomers refuse to let Xers and Millies into the government because they think the Xer or Millies MIGHT commit genocide in the future. Thats what makes boomer governance tyranny because boomers insist on trying to control the natural flows of events and social evolution and that is contrary to nature. Every generation hangs on to power as long as possible. You'll have your turn; you just have to be patient. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 02-27-2018 (02-27-2018, 09:44 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:(02-26-2018, 09:57 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > I'm pretty sure John was just saying that he thought the Boomer That seems inconsistent with your constant value judgements about people and nations being evil. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Cynic Hero '86 - 02-27-2018 (02-27-2018, 01:31 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:(02-27-2018, 10:35 AM)Cynic Hero Wrote: > A Strike must go "all In" not striking North Korea or doing a There are only two possible options with North Korea, Strike first in a total war strike or sign a treaty ending the Korean war. Those have always been the two options. The Boomers preference of Maintaining the status quo while kicking the can down the road as long as possible is fundamentally untenable. As you mentioned the financial crisis let me remind you that Regarding the financial Crisis it was boomer executives who didn't want to remain bound by the established financial regulations and who hated being restricted to legitimate commerce, began ignoring the law altogether and initiated transactions designed to hoover up as much money as possible using such tactics such as predatory lending and establishing fraudulent trust funds. It was boomers who wanted to break the law, therefore it was boomers who caused the Financial Crisis. The boomer elites by refusing to make any decision and by refusing to allow anyone else to make those decisions regarding important matters; are the ones who have embraced nihilism and destructiveness. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 02-27-2018 (02-27-2018, 01:55 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: > There are only two possible options with North Korea, Strike first So do you own any guns? Do you live near a school? 28-Feb-18 World View -- Russia's 'humanitarian pause' in Syria turns into farce on fi - John J. Xenakis - 02-27-2018 *** 28-Feb-18 World View -- Russia's 'humanitarian pause' in Syria turns into farce on first day This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** Russia's 'humanitarian pause' in Syria turns into farce on first day **** Smoke rising from Eastern Ghouta after air strikes by Syrian and Russian warplanes during the ceasefire on Monday (AFP) We keep seeing the same horrible script played out over and over. What we've seen in the last few days is similar to what we've seen probably a dozen or so times in the UN Security Council in the last few years:
With regard to the last point, I've heard several interviews with civilians in Ghouta about whether they were going to take advantage of the opportunity to leave Ghouta. They all said pretty much the same thing, that they don't feel safe trying to do so. This is not surprising, since they're all pretty much aware of what happened in late 2016 in Aleppo, and two of them actually mentioned that. Allowing civilians to leave is part of the Syrian-Russian strategy. Civilians were allowed to leave Aleppo, and travel to Idlib, where they were killed en masse by Syrian and Russian airstrikes. In fact, I've described this strategy several times before. It's called the "Grozny model," named after the capital city of Chechnya and the battle of Grozny. The Russians created a "safe zone" to allow civilians to escape the Grozny siege, and then killed them as they were escaping. So in the end, this "ceasefire" in east Ghouta is not a ceasefire at all, and was never intended by the Russians to be a ceasefire. Instead, it provides political cover for an intensification of the war crimes against civilians. There are 400,000 people living in Ghouta, mostly women and children. There are at most 1,000 fighters who might be called "jihadists and terrorists." Russia and Syria are going to use the 1,000 fighters as a reason to kill as many of the 400,000 civilians as they can. An analogy in America would be if an American city contained some people from the Black Panthers or Black Lives Matter, then it would be OK, using the Syrian-Russian strategy, for the army and air force to exterminate hundreds of thousands of people in the black neighborhoods in that city, or maybe to permit some of them to escape, and then slaughter them as they leave. In my lifetime, I've heard the words "Never again!" applied to the Nazi Holocaust. And I've heard the words "Never again!" applied to the Srebrenica genocide. And I've heard the words "Never again!" applied to the Rwanda genocide. But now it's happening again, just like it's happened before, but instead of stopping the genocide, the United States has become a tool to support the genocide, by having diplomats run around the Security Council and pass farcical ceasefire resolutions that provide cover for the genocide. It's truly astonishing. Sky News and NBC News and Reuters **** **** Report: North Korea is selling chemical weapons supplies to Syria **** According to an unreleased United Nations report, Syria's president Bashar al-Assad is receiving supplies from North Korea for supplies to be used to manufacture chemical weapons. These supplies include acid-resistant tiles, valves and thermometers. We can assume that North Korea is selling this technology to Syria to make money and get around UN sanctions. We can also assume that either Iran or Russia is providing the money to Bashar al-Assad. Who knows? Maybe it's some of the money that Iran has gained from the removal of sanctions after signing the nuclear deal. At any rate, we can be pretty certain that if the North Korea is able to complete its development of nuclear weapons and long-range ballistic missiles, then it will sell that technology to any rogue state willing to pay for it. CNN and Axios Related Articles:
**** **** Areas of control in Syria and Iraq **** Map of Syria and Iraq showing areas of control (Deutsche Welle) I wanted to reference this map because it's one of the best that I've seen, and easiest to understand what's going on. There are several things that one can see from the map:
As I've described before, there at least 14 armies and militias operating in Syria now: Syria, Russia, Iran, Hezbollah, Turkey, Free Syrian Army (FSA), Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), People’s Protection Units (YPG), Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Israel, United States, al-Qaeda linked Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), and the so-called Islamic State (IS or ISIS or ISIL or Daesh). This is a country in complete chaos, with a war criminal and sociopathic genocidal leader, Bashar al-Assad, and with a proxy war that's nowhere near ending. As I've written many times, Generational Dynamics predicts that the Mideast is headed for a major regional war, pitting Sunnis versus Shias, Jews versus Arabs, and various ethnic groups against each other. 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. Deutsche Welle Related Articles
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Syria, Ghouta, Russia, Bashar al-Assad, António Guterres, Nikki Haley, Aleppo. Grozny Model, Chechnya, North Korea, Turkey, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, HTS, Jabhat al-Nusra, al-Nusra Front, Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, JFS, Front for the Conquest of Syria, Islamic State / of Iraq and Syria/Sham/the Levant, IS, ISIS, ISIL, Daesh, Eastern Ghouta, Hama, Idlib, barrel bombs, chlorine, Sarin gas, Kurds, People’s Protection Units, YPG, Afrin, Manbij, Rojava, Kurdistan Workers' Party, PKK 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 - John J. Xenakis - 02-28-2018 (02-27-2018, 01:38 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > That seems inconsistent with your constant value judgments about A weather forecaster could say, "That cyclone will have winds of 150 mph. That's terrible because a lot of people will be killed." Saying that a lot of people will be killed is part of the forecast. Saying that it's terrible is a personal value judgment, but it's still not advocacy. Indeed, it can't be advocacy, because there's no way for a weather forecaster to advocate for or against a cyclone. When I say that using Sarin gas will kill a lot of people, and is a war crime, and is evil, then saying that it's evil is my personal value judgment, but in the end I'm still the weather forecaster just telling what's going to happen and how it will be viewed. It's not advocacy, and indeed it can't be advocacy, because there's no way for me to advocate whether Bashar al-Assad for or against using Sarin gas. Me calling him "evil" has no effect. So there are three parts to this. One is the weather forecast. One is my occasional personal value judgment - "good," "evil," "terrible," etc. And one is advocacy, which is extremely rare. I'm a nobody who cannot control anything but myself, and whose opinions are widely hated and rejected by almost everyone who even pays attention. When I express a personal opinion ("good," "evil," etc.) then I'm hated even more. And if I advocated something, I would be subjected to a great deal more contempt, scorn and ridicule. If I were a somebody who could control things, then the hatred, contempt and ridicule might be put into action, and I would be put into personal danger, like Steve Scalise and Rand Paul. So, in summary, me advocating something would be useless or dangerous, so I don't do it. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 02-28-2018 Except that: but instead of stopping the genocide, the United States has become a tool to support the genocide, by having diplomats run around the Security Council and pass farcical ceasefire resolutions that provide cover for the genocide pretty clearly advocates that the US do something different instead. It's like the weather forecaster saying, "the Coast Guard has said they will not perform rescues during the hurricane, instead allowing people to die". RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 02-28-2018 (02-28-2018, 08:26 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > Except that: What policy did I "pretty clearly" advocate? "Do something different" is not a policy. Your two examples are completely incomparable. In the Coast Guard case, it's easy -- you advocate more rescues. But what do you claim that I'm advocating in the case of Syria? I'm simply stating the result of current policy, but I'm not advocating anything different. In fact, I don't have any idea what I would advocate if I could. In fact again, the subtext of what I've written is that there is no policy that would work better. There is no policy that can stop Bashar al-Assad from committing genocide and war crimes, using Sarin gas, using chlorine gas, bombing schools and hospitals, etc. He's determined to exterminate as many of the men, women and children of Ghouta that he can, with the help of war criminals Putin and Khamenei. So what policy do you claim that I'm advocating in Syria? "Do something different" is not a policy. The North Korea situation is the same, but with a twist. There we have two alternatives -- strike or no strike. I have no idea which would have a better outcome, so I wouldn't advocate either. The Coast Guard example is easy because rescuing people has no cost. But any policy or non-policy in either Syria or North Korea has a high cost. So the two examples are incomparable. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 02-28-2018 It occurs to me that I do sometimes advocate things on an individual basis. Sometimes people ask me about investments or where they should live, and I try to give them helpful advice, if I know any. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Classic-Xer - 02-28-2018 (02-28-2018, 09:26 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:The Coast Guard could loose a boat or a plane or a helicopter and members of the Coast Guard. Rescuing people can have costs too.(02-28-2018, 08:26 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > Except that: 1-Mar-18 World View -- Moving sharply left, South Africa calls for potentially disast - John J. Xenakis - 03-01-2018 *** 1-Mar-18 World View -- Moving sharply left, South Africa calls for potentially disastrous land reform This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** Moving sharply left, South Africa calls for potentially disastrous land reform **** South Africa's president Cyril Ramaphosa after addressing parliament on Tuesday (Daily Maverick) In a major shift in public opinion in support of the radical far left Economic Freedom Fighters and its leader Julius Malema, South Africa's parliament has passed overwhelmingly a motion for a constitutional amendment that would allow the government to expropriate land from white-owned farms with no compensation whatsoever. A year ago, a similar motion was rejected, with 261 against and 33 in favor. But on Tuesday, the vote was carried with 241 votes in favor, and 83 against. Expropriation of private land without compensation is forbidden by Section 25 of South Africa's constitution, but the overwhelming acceptance of the motion far exceeds the 2/3 majority required to amend the constitution. This change within one year represents a radical shift in public opinion. The successful campaign to pass the motion was led by left-wing radical Julius Malema, who was expelled from the ruling African National Congress (ANC) party in 2012, with the expectation that he would die a quick political death. Instead, he's successfully led a racially divisive campaign that's become so popular that the ANC was forced to endorse the land reform proposal, giving it an overwhelming victory. Leading the debate in the parliament, Malena said that "it was time for justice" on the land issue: <QUOTE>"We must ensure that we restore the dignity of our people without compensating the criminals who stole our land."<END QUOTE> According to South Africa's new president, Cyril Ramaphosa, who recently replaced the corrupt Jacob Zuma, taking farmland away from white farmers is necessary because of "land hunger" among blacks: <QUOTE>"Land dispossession is a defining feature of colonialism and apartheid in SA. Land hunger among black South Africans is genuine and pressing. The time has arrived that we act decisively to resolve this matter. We must repair the damage inflicted upon our people. The time has arrived that we act decisively to resolve this matter. We must repair the damage inflicted upon our people. By providing more land to more producers for cultivation and by providing the necessary support, we are laying the foundation for what I would call an agricultural revolution. We are determined to work with traditional leaders to significantly expand agriculture not only to ensure food security, but also to create jobs on a significant scale and increase the value of our exports."<END QUOTE> This is a typically meaningless political speech, full of hot air. The promise of an "agricultural revolution" is laughable. Ramaphosa also promised that the land expropriation would only be used when the amount of food produced would be increased. This is also laughable. What will happen is what always happens in Socialist societies. Thousands of hard-working white farmers and their families will be thrown into the streets, and their farms will be turned over to party cronies who know nothing about farming. This happened in Zimbabwe, and similar things happen in all Socialist countries. This will be a disaster for South Africa's economy, and for all of Africa. I've written many times what happened in Zimbabwe. It's hard to believe, but Zimbabwe used to be the breadbasket of southern Africa, growing much more food than the country needed and exporting the rest. Then in 1999 Robert Mugabe instituted a "land reform" plan just like the one that South Africa is about to implement. Within ten years, Zimbabwe was an economic disaster, with mass starvation, a worthless currency, and massive million percent inflation. We've seen the same thing happen in Venezuela, as Hugo Chávez and Nicolás Maduro destroyed the economy to the extent that food and medicines and even toilet paper are unavailable. Bashar al-Assad is destroying Syria by different means -- with barrel bombs, Sarin gas, and attacks with other chemical weapons, including chlorine, ammonia and phosphorous. We now know that North Korea has been supplying components to Syria to manufacture poison gas, and it uses the money to develop nuclear weapons and long-range ballistic missiles capable of carrying the nuclear weapons to the United States, or elsewhere in the world. And all this is going on with the support and encourage of China, Russia and Iran. This is the club of countries where the leaders are destroying their countries through economic destruction or weapons destruction. It's not surprising that South Africa is now joining that club. Daily Maverick (South Africa) and Business Live (South Africa) and Citizen (South Africa) and News 24 (South Africa) **** **** Julius Malema and the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) movement **** Julius Malema was expelled the ruling ANC in 2012 because he offended large sections of society, and has been accused of racism, sexism and corruption. He was twice convicted of hate speech in 2010 and 2011, for inciting violence against whites. However, he has thousands of supporters, mainly poor black South Africans who resent the history of apartheid. In 2013 he formed the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), which describes itself as follows on its web site: <QUOTE>"1. The ECONOMIC FREEDOM FIGHTERS is a radical and militant economic emancipation movement that brings together revolutionary, fearless, radical, and militant activists, workers’ movements, nongovernmental organizations, community-based organizations and lobby groups under the umbrella of pursuing the struggle for economic emancipation. 2. The EFF is a radical, leftist, anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist movement with an internationalist outlook anchored by popular grassroots formations and struggles. ... 5. The EFF is a South African movement with a progressive internationalist outlook, which seeks to engage with global progressive movements. We believe that the best contribution we can make in the international struggle against global imperialism is to rid our country of imperialist domination. For the South African struggle, the EFF pillars for economic emancipation are the following: a. Expropriation of South Africa’s land without compensation for equal redistribution in use. b. Nationalization of mines, banks, and other strategic sectors of the economy, without compensation."<END QUOTE> We've seen this script before. Socialism has a 100% failure rate, and South Africa is headed in the same direction, starting with the nationalization of farms, and continuing with the nationalization of mines, banks, and other businesses -- all without compensation. There are a couple of things that are becoming clear. First, you'd have to be crazy to invest in South Africa, because any business could be subject to nationalization without compensation at any time. Second, you'd have to be crazy to give foreign aid to South Africa, since any money would just be wasted on corruption. A country that goes down the path of nationalizing farms without compensation, with nationalization of other businesses to follow, is a country that cannot be helped. Economic Freedom Fighters online and BBC (30-Sep-2014) and South Africa History Related Stories
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, South Africa, African National Congress, ANC, Cyril Ramaphosa, Jacob Zuma, Julius Malema, Economic Freedom Fighters, EFF, Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe, Syria, Bashar al-Assad, China, Russia, North Korea 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 - 03-01-2018 Mass starvation, coming to South Africa soon. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 03-01-2018 (02-28-2018, 09:26 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:(02-28-2018, 08:26 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > Except that: Advocating against a policy is still advocacy, even if you don't advocate for a specific alternative. In context, though, you appear to be advocating military intervention, since that's what happened in the other cases you mention. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - pbrower2a - 03-01-2018 It turns out that the thug regime in Syria has been getting much of its lethal arsenal from.... North Korea! RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 03-01-2018 (03-01-2018, 12:26 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: > Advocating against a policy is still advocacy, even if you don't Wow! You've come up with quite a mind-boggling chain of logic here:
Here's the correct chain of logic in most cases:
That's not advocating a policy, and certainly not advocating military intervention. By the way, take a look at the last three paragraphs of today's article, where I advocate stuff. |