The Response to Civil Service Resistance? North Koreanization of USG

Report on the Work of the Central Committee to the Eighteenth Congress of the C.P.S.U.(B.), Delivered by Joseph Stalin

“A country which is surrounded by a capitalist world, is subject to the menace of foreign military attack, cannot therefore abstract itself from the international situation, and must have at its disposal a well-trained army, well-organized punitive organs, and a strong intelligence service consequently, must have its own state.”

Yes North Koreanization of USG would be an improvement.

Assuming he bothered to humor a transgender rights activist for a few minutes instead of having ‘it’ dragged away to a reeducation center, Chairman Mao would interrupt and ask “… what the fuck do these perverts have to do with COMMUNISM!?“.

These transvestite perverts have nothing to do with Communism, Chairman.

These perverts have to do with Comte, the founder of Sociology, Bureaucracy and what turned into Technocratic Progressivism.

Comte did not create the pussyhat.

What Comte did create is our real problem: Government of the Bureaucrats.  Note that I include as members of the Bureaucratic/Technocratic class all of the institutions that are not directly part of the FedGov machinery, but which are always demanding FedGov (or Brussels for my European readers) be given more power to socially engineer the rest of us into oblivion –

It cannot be emphasized enough that history before 1932 is without precedent for an aristocracy of bureaucrats; Comte’s priesthood is a complete historical aberration.

The classes making up the Technocratic elite were more able than the proletariat, yet still only dull, gray, members of the bourgeois and upper classes. However numerous were the advantages Technocracy held over Communism thanks to drawing leadership from the bourgeois, these were overwhelmingly the mediocre or even failed portions of the bourgeoisie. They consist of sociologists, academics, scientists, pseudo-scientists, government bureaucrats, media hacks, ‘artists’, ‘experts’, celebrities, non-profit workers, quacks of every type, writers, philosophers, economists, environmentalists, feminists, public and private sector unions, and international organizations.

Little though they would agree about anything else, both Engels and conservatives of any type would agree that these elements of society were unfit to serve as a ruling class. Traditional conservative ruling classes were drawn from the aristocracy, military, priesthood, and merchant classes (the class that met Alexander Hamilton’s ideal of a ‘natural aristocracy’), and, to varying degrees of flexibility, with room made for admission into the elite of the occasional parvenu of great ability.

The leadership of Soviet Russia, as well, did not consist of Technocrats. Soviet rulers overwhelmingly came from the founding revolutionaries, the military high command, economic management, and intelligence agencies. As in Conservative systems, the Civil Service in Communist nations served a purely advisory role to the Communist elite.

In times past there have always been bureaucrats of some kind.  But not until Comte was there any concept of Bureaucracy as a form of government.

A dictatorship of Bureaucrats (which is what the governments of Western Civilization have become) is necessarily a dictatorship of unsupervised and unaccountable Bureaucrats.  Bureaucrats left unsupervised and unaccountable and who have had the mainstream crackpots of the Sociology departments indoctrinate them with the absurd notion started by Comte that Bureaucrats are royalty inevitably leads them to socially engineer every conceivable aspect of life, aspects that not even the Soviet Union thought for a moment should be regulated.

Almost two centuries after Comte, the professional Civil Service has now devolved to a point where it presumes a right to regulate gender; granting them legal jurisdiction over gender is as certain to be successful as their management of the Oroville dam.

Continue reading “The Response to Civil Service Resistance? North Koreanization of USG”

General Flynn & the Temptation of the Lazy Left to Miscalculate

The resignation of General Flynn gives us the opportunity to further expand our point, previously made here, about how Trump can turn the hysterics of the Left over the most insignificant items against them by manipulating their 140 character attention span away from the more complex – but higher rewarding – long strategic game.

What apparently happened was that Flynn engaged Russian authorities about the possibility of lowering American sanctions without Flynn having authorization to delve into that topic.  When asked about the conversation by Vice President Pence he then lied about its contents; for that he was summarily fired by Trump.

Flynn’s downfall is his own fault.  He should have referred the questions of the Russians to other cabinet officials instead of acting on his own initiative.

Flynn’s incompetence acknowledged, there is the separate matter of whether it is in the interests of the Left to play this latest media sensation for a news cycle or two in the short term, or latch onto it as a long term scandal.

The answer to this hinges on one question – is Flynn’s mishandling of the Russians isolated to himself or part of a broader administration plot?  If it was isolated, the Technocratic Progressives would be wasting much energy for little gain if they play it long term.

The odds favor the responsibility being isolated to Flynn.  The first reason to suspect this is that Pence was reportedly surprised that the conversation was held.   It follows that if Flynn were acting entirely within permissions given to him by the administration that Pence would not be surprised by actions approved by the White House.  For his part Flynn would not have had to deceive anyone about it because they would have already known about it.

In fact, if Flynn had permission to discuss sanctions the administration would not have fired him in the first place.  They would have responded to the very first questions about his call by simply saying Flynn discussed sanction relief and that he had proper authorization to do so.  There would be no reason for the administration to lie about this because improved relations with Moscow has been part of Trump’s platform for his entire presidential campaign.

Further, the administration, having been in power for only 4 weeks, most likely would not have had adequate time to organize a sinister plot with Russia even if it wanted to.

Flynn seems foolish enough to have gotten into a more serious scandal if he remained in his position.  By washing out early he has done a long term disservice to the Left.

Continue reading “General Flynn & the Temptation of the Lazy Left to Miscalculate”

The Supreme Court, Using Protesters to the Advantage of Trump & Fun with the IRS

The coinciding of the legal battle over Trump’s executive orders with his nomination to fill Scalia’s seat on the Supreme Court provides this lesson to the administration, a lesson his advisors would do well to emphasize to him: whenever an opening appears on the High Court, Trump should always nominate a Conservative to occupy it.

With Ginsburg age 83 and in poor health, Anthony Kennedy 80, and Stephen Breyer 78 the odds are very good that Trump will have to make nominate at least one more Supreme Court Justice.  However many further opportunities emerge, Trump should select a Conservative judge every time because the more Conservative the Court is the more likely his agenda is to survive lawsuits against his program.  The pressure on him to select a moderate will be especially acute if the moderate Kennedy or one of the Liberal justices vacate their seats.  This pressure should be ignored by Trump; instead he should move decisively to make the Court Conservative leaning for a generation.

This leads us to discuss the issue of Liberal protesters.

Unlike the makeup of the Supreme Court – which is decisive because it is policy – protests are transient because they are hysteria.

In the Hamiltonian view this hysteria of the Progressive Left is a force that Trump’s persuasive powers can and should manipulate to his advantage.

Because the protesters are prepared to mobilize at a moment’s notice over the most trivial of issues Trump should invent trivial issues every week to send them running around in circles, exhausting themselves, dividing their resources and public attention.  With the media spotlight and the rest of the Left chasing decoys everywhere Trump will be free to pass his policy agenda (such as replacing Kennedy or a Liberal Justice with a Conservative) without the public having enough bandwidth to process that his main objectives are marching ahead.

The hope of the Left that there is somewhere a hidden media sensation that can defeat the Trump administration is a sign of how feeble and lazy they have become because of their degeneracy.  A proper political strategy is built around a slow game.  A winning case against the policies of a ruling party must be made gradually, carefully highlighting to the public its weakest points, and strategically coordinating political resources.

Continue reading “The Supreme Court, Using Protesters to the Advantage of Trump & Fun with the IRS”

How Comte Overthrew Marx – Part II: The Fall of Proletarian Socialism & the Rise of Dictatorial Bureaucracy in the Century of Scientific Dictatorship

1804france40francsgoldobv400

Metternich, Volume I xiii

December, 1844. — The men who create History have not time to write it — I at least had none.

I have called the period between the years 1810 and 1815 the most important, because it includes the epoch in which Napoleon’s attempt to establish a new order of things was overthrown; through which overthrow Europe fell under the natural consequences of the French Revolution — consequences which are only now beginning to develop themselves.

Metternich, Volume III page 335

September 9, 1819. — I never come to Prague without thinking I hear midnight strike. Six years ago, at that hour, I dipped my pen to declare war with the man of the century — the Man of St. Helena — to kindle the beacon which was the signal for 100,000 men of the allied troops to cross the frontier.

Metternich, Volume IV page 14

August 29, 1823. — There was but one single man in France who understood how to master the Revolution, and that man was Bonaparte. The King’s Government inherited from him, not the Revolution, but the counter-Revolution, and they have not known how to make use of this inheritance.

Metternich, Volume I page 275

His heroes were Alexander, Caesar, and, above all, Charlemagne. He was singularly occupied with his claim to be the successor of Charlemagne by right and title.

Metternich, Volume V page 24

August 27, 1830. — ‘ It appears to me,’ said I to the General, ‘ that you have not grasped the nature and real meaning of my words : I will proceed to make them more clear.

‘ I have known you as one of the most zealous adherents of the man who was, beyond all question, the prototype of power. Of two alternatives I can only admit one ; either the character of Mgr. le Duc d’ Orleans comes up to that of Napoleon in strength, or else falls below it, for to exceed it seems to me beyond the bounds of nature. Now, intimately acquainted as you were with Napoleon, do you believe that, placed in the position of the present Government, he would have considered himself in possession of the requisite means for governing, or, what comes to the same thing, would have considered himself in a condition to assure his throne and the maintenance of internal tranquillity in France? Can that which Napoleon would not have recognised as sufficient be justly looked upon by the new Government as capable of affording it secure pledges of existence?’

To this question General Belliard made the only reply open to him. He was silent, and after a moment’s reflection said to me : ‘ Things are changed, Prince ; France is no longer the France of the past, and she, must be governed by new methods.’

Metternich, Volume I page 78

Beyond the confines of France, Governments had no other care than to withstand the political encroachments of the conqueror who had placed the Imperial crown on his head. The conflict between the different systems of government really existed only in France. Raised by the Revolution to the summit of power, Napoleon endeavoured to prop up by monarchical institutions the throne he had made for himself. The destructive parties, having to do with a man equally great as a statesman and as a general, who knew his country and the spirit of the nation better than any who ever guided the destinies of France, were above all anxious to save from the wreck of their works all they could secure from the encroachments of the Imperial power. These efforts were impotent ; but they were not the less worthy of observation.

Metternich, Volume IV page 436

February 11, 1828. — The crisis has arrived, and as I am an old practitioner in the maladies of the social body, I am not more alarmed than is necessary. What I cannot do is to know or predict how things will go: Certain it is that the crisis may turn against the folly of the age which has caused it; and the country that is most seriously ill is France, and France is also the country whose future is the least promising. A country where all the moral elements are extinct cannot help itself, and Providence alone knows what will become of this Babylon.

Metternich, Volume IV page 54

March 23, 1823 . — Now, to recognise a Government one must know first of all know what it is; and to enter into negotiations with it one must have recognised it. It is, therefore, necessary that we should know first of all what the Government will be.

The 20th century has been the century of scientific dictatorship. In that century three scientific ideologies contested each other for domination. On the extreme right scientific despotism was embodied by the Nazi Party of Adolf Hitler, Communism was embodied by Josef Stalin. But the third, which would emerge victorious after the Cold War and which is the only surviving ideology of the three, was Leftist, but not Communist. It goes by the name of Progressivism in America, Fabian Socialism in Britain, and Suprationalism in Continental Europe.

Between Nazism, Communism, and Progressivism, the bureaucratic dictatorship of the latter is the last remaining but least understood. The history and nature of Communism is very well documented however much this vast documentation is ignored or downplayed. Nazism could not be more infamous. But Progressivism is barely understood; we will remove the fog that surrounds it and expose it as a Liberal political entity very distinct from Communism.

To deal with Progressivism one must first of all know what it is.

Continue reading “How Comte Overthrew Marx – Part II: The Fall of Proletarian Socialism & the Rise of Dictatorial Bureaucracy in the Century of Scientific Dictatorship”

Repealing Obamacare

This one had better not slip beneath Trump’s radar. The Republican Senate, staying true to form, is wobbling with the repeal.

If Obamacare is to be scrapped the impetus for its end will have to come from significant White House pressure on the Republican Senate to get it done and done right.

And there should be no question that it is in Trump’s interest for it to be torn up. If it is not Trump will have to manage this unmanageable albatross. If he is forced to run a largely untouched and failed program he will find himself diverting political capital dealing with Obamacare that he would best spend on other initiatives.

The rule the White House should keep in mind is the higher the percentage of Obamacare is repealed the freer Trump will be to act elsewhere, the lower the percentage the less free Trump will have to maneuver.

The question of how much of Obamacare the Republicans will be able to get rid of brings us to the matter of whether the Republicans will repeal only Obamacare’s taxes.

Preferably the Republicans would also repeal the regulations that go along with the ACA. However, the Senate maneuver they plan to use that will prevent a filibuster by the Democrats technically only allows the Senate bill to address taxes.

Language repealing the regulations could be appended to the bill if the Senate Parliamentarian either agrees the regulations are directly related to the taxes or, if the Parliamentarian objects to their inclusion, the Parliamentarian is fired by the Republicans and replaced with a more compliant Parliamentarian.

Continue reading “Repealing Obamacare”

A Suggested Decoy for the Trump Administration – a DOJ Investigation into Obama’s Terrorist Connections

A powerful decoy it is, but too powerful to waste on just another media cycle.  I therefore recommend sending this terrifying device of chemically pure persuasion off into the political atmosphere only if circumstances demand a major distraction.

Given all the other diversions chewing up DC’s bandwidth – the latest being the administration’s nominee to the Supreme Court – my proposed decoy will most likely not be needed for some time.  But eventually events happen.  When they do, Trump and his team would do well to keep this ace up their sleeve.

The ace to play when the moment arrives is a threat to open a criminal investigation into the Obama administration over its potential connections to Islamic terrorism.

The advantages this maneuver brings to the card table are numerous.

First it is useful because the investigation can be broken down into many sub-investigations into distinct terrorist groups and terrorist nations Obama seemed to have an deep affinity for.  Collectively each investigation has the potential to distract for years.  One investigation could be made into Obama’s deals with Iran; if he secretly flew $400 million worth of Swiss franc notes to Iran there is no telling what other deals he made with them.  Another could look into why the Egyptian representatives of the Muslim Brotherhood were going in and out of the Obama White House before and during the Muslim Brotherhood’s coup attempt against the Mubarak regime.  Then are questions to be answered about why America was really arming ISIS in its war against Syria’s Assad, and many other matters.  None of the answers are likely to put the last administration in a positive light.

The second advantage is that Trump as President now has access to the Federal records about Obama’s cozy relationship with Islamic terrorism.  Given how well planet Hillary handled her email system it is unlikely Obama’s goons were smart enough to erase the vast paper trail Trump now has at his fingertips.  As President he can choose to declassify bits and pieces of information about Obama’s dealings anytime it suits his media manipulation strategy.  He can also send the media and Democrats in the wrong the direction by hinting at false leads about where the investigation is really going.  Obama did not pardon anyone in his administration for any crimes they may have committee; as a result Trump is both able to have his Justice Department bring Obama’s henchmen and henchwomen under oath and/or have them brought before a Congressional Committee.

The final advantage is that its use would tie the Left in a feedback loop of recriminations.   Because the ego of Obama would compel him to publicly dispute the investigation’s findings, the Democrats would circle the wagons around Obama not knowing what information bombshells Trump might be holding back on instead of fighting Trump on ground more favorable for the Left.

Muslim Immigration – The False Equivalence Between the Bible and Koran

The executive order issued by the Trump administration banning immigration from seven Muslim nations gives us the opportunity to debunk any moral and doctrinal equivalence between the arguments Jews and Christians have derived from the Bible to justify religious violence vs. Islamic obligations based on the Koran and Hadiths to wage holy war.

Because both the Bible and Islamic texts frequently discuss warfare against opposing religions, it has been suggested that Muslims are not inherently more difficult to assimilate into Western norms than Christian or Jewish immigrants.

As usual, this argument made by the Left is false.  When Biblical endorsements of violence are put in their right context and then compared to the doctrine of Jihad, Islam stands out as uniquely incompatible with Western civilization.

Because the New Testament borders on pacifist, the crux of this debate centers over how the Old Testament compares against the Koran.  The Old Testament records numerous stories where the Israelites came into fierce conflict with their neighbors and how God favored the House of Israel provided they were sufficiently devoted to God.

The essential difference between these justifications of Israelite violence and Muslim jihad is that Israelite defensive obligations are limited to only defending the land of Israel as promised by the Abrahamic Covenant.

Unlike Islam there is no Old Testament obligation to forcibly conquer all of mankind under Judaism.  Provided they are not at war with Israel or a threat in Israel’s immediate vicinity, Jews are nowhere commanded to subjugate or forcibly convert Scythians, Ethiopians, Greeks, Numidians, Chinese, Persians, Romans, Carthaginians, Gauls, Indians, or any other peoples contemporary with Ancient Israel.

Islam however is commanded to militarily conquer the globe.  Though they do not always follow this tenet of faith, they do strike at their non-Islamic neighbors whenever they feel they have the upper hand or are consumed with enough religious fanaticism that are willing to engage a superior opponent.  This command is not only distinguishes it from Judaism and Christianity but it also distinguishes Islam from any other known major religion.

It is the worldwide ambitions of Islam that make its followers inherently incompatible with Western civilization, and any non-Islamic Third World nation, and why its employment of violence against non-believers cannot be reconciled with civilization as Biblical faiths can.