Everyone knows the answer is yes. But most of us know that Obama was trying to weaken american interests and ‘level the playing field’ but putting america behind.
it’s not complicated.
https://www.quora.com/Would-the-U-S-Military-have-been-more-successful-in-Iraq-and-Afghanistan-if-they-werent-held-back-by-the-Obama-Administrations-Rules-of-Engagement
Everyone knows the answer is yes. But most of us know that Obama was trying to weaken american interests and ‘level the playing field’ but putting america behind.
it’s not complicated.
https://www.quora.com/Would-the-U-S-Military-have-been-more-successful-in-Iraq-and-Afghanistan-if-they-werent-held-back-by-the-Obama-Administrations-Rules-of-Engagement
You are, as is common, due to ‘suggestion’ (deception) by false dichotomy, falling prey to the wrong question. the question is do you want rule of law resulting in markets, or rule by discretion (command), resulting in the absence of markets.
The answer is, that the contemporary fantasy is that we should maximize our abiity to extract taxation in order to maximize redistsribution. This is good for dysgenic families and individuals. The opposite proosal is to minimize taxation and redistribution, and fund eugenic (meritocratic) families and individuals.
The free riders (the majority) that do not compete in the market but join large organizations whether private, semi-private, or public, and those who ‘talk for a living’ meaning teachers, academics, media, and politicians, can use democracy to extract from eugenic families and productive individuals in order to fund dysgenic families and unproductive, parasitic, and predatory individuals.
https://www.quora.com/Is-socialism-always-authoritarian-Could-capitalism-be-authoritarian-If-so-what-is-an-example-of-authoritarian-capitalism
There never was any collusion. It was just typical nonsense from the left when their dream collapsed.
https://www.quora.com/Why-did-the-Russian-collusion-story-wither-out-How-soon-until-Hillary-is-declared-president
It is a virtual certainty that we will see some sort of massive correction even greater than the 2008 crisis, sometime between now and 2025. And at that time the states will need to bypass the financial system in order to put liquidity into consumer (citizen’s) hands, so that the economy can adapt to the shock. And governments are not yet ready to do this, although Americans can do it fastest. (And some of us are trying to make sure it happens this time around.)
Now, the reason this will be difficult, is that we have spent the entire postwar era financializing the economy, and done more so since the advent of petro-dollars, and more so to defeat world communism, and more so since the 2001 crash, and more so since the 2008 crash. (We could have paid off the vast majority of home mortgages in 2008 with the money we have spent SINCE 2008 trying to correct the economy. (Only Galbraith, me, and one other made this argument. Unfortunately, he was the only person of influence, and he died.) Imagine what that would have done to the economy.
Unfortunately, that ‘shock’ of de-financialization (ending rent seeking on consumer), will vastly diminish (a) the size of the financial sector (b) the rents that ‘institutional investors and pension funds’ can extract from consumers. So it will be a vast correction we have not seen in the world before.
Just WHY this is so is … well, non trivial. But it’s largely a factor of demographics, abilities of those demographics, and AVAILABLE consumption.
And, yes I can explain it in scary detail, but at present, it’s bedtime…..
https://www.quora.com/Will-the-economy-bubble-burst-again-in-2018-like-the-one-that-happened-in-2008
It is a virtual certainty that we will see some sort of massive correction even greater than the 2008 crisis, sometime between now and 2025. And at that time the states will need to bypass the financial system in order to put liquidity into consumer (citizen’s) hands, so that the economy can adapt to the shock. And governments are not yet ready to do this, although Americans can do it fastest. (And some of us are trying to make sure it happens this time around.)
Now, the reason this will be difficult, is that we have spent the entire postwar era financializing the economy, and done more so since the advent of petro-dollars, and more so to defeat world communism, and more so since the 2001 crash, and more so since the 2008 crash. (We could have paid off the vast majority of home mortgages in 2008 with the money we have spent SINCE 2008 trying to correct the economy. (Only Galbraith, me, and one other made this argument. Unfortunately, he was the only person of influence, and he died.) Imagine what that would have done to the economy.
Unfortunately, that ‘shock’ of de-financialization (ending rent seeking on consumer), will vastly diminish (a) the size of the financial sector (b) the rents that ‘institutional investors and pension funds’ can extract from consumers. So it will be a vast correction we have not seen in the world before.
Just WHY this is so is … well, non trivial. But it’s largely a factor of demographics, abilities of those demographics, and AVAILABLE consumption.
And, yes I can explain it in scary detail, but at present, it’s bedtime…..
https://www.quora.com/Will-the-economy-bubble-burst-again-in-2018-like-the-one-that-happened-in-2008
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Since-the-ideological-core-of-America-is-a-individualistic-democracy-what-makes-you-think-that-a-fascist-movement-would-be-more-popular-with-the-American-populaceTHAT’S A FUZZY LANGUAGE QUESTION…. LET’S FIX IT.
—-”Since the ideological core of America is a individualistic democracy, what makes you think that a fascist movement would be more popular with the American populace? (https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Since-the-ideological-core-of-America-is-a-individualistic-democracy-what-makes-you-think-that-a-fascist-movement-would-be-more-popular-with-the-American-populace)”—-
America was founded as a ‘third way’ free of both church and state, and instead for the entrepreneurial (meritocratic) individual. The original colonists recruited heavily ‘people of good character’ to create that ‘third way’ The constitution constructed rule by “The natural law of reciprocity”, and individual sovereignty (although they used the world liberty).
This meant that all functions of society were organized into markets. You could perform service, with service you could earn property, with property you could earn voice.
Meanwhile the court adjudicated differences entirely by property rights. This was ‘the third way’ that they were inventing. A third way not done before. Or at least, the third way that had continued from Anglo Saxon times, and was under attack during the colonial period.
So it is that America was founded under rule of law. Not rule of legislation. rule of LAW. With legislation being little more than contract negotiated between the states, just as contracts were negotiated within the state, and within the polity, and between individuals.
This is why those of us educated pre-marxism-postmoderism’s takeover of the school, academy, media and state during and the vietnam war, treat the constitution as ‘sacred’. Because for all intents and purposes – it is. It is ‘inviolate’. Unfortunately, beginning with the 14th amendment, then increasingly during the 20th century, the left was able to destroy rule of law, and re-implement rule-by-legislation, and then eventual restore the church, with a secular religion of postmodernism.
**FASCISM/NATIONALISM VS COMMUNISM/UNIVERSALISM**
Fascism, meaning **economic and cultural nationalism**, was developed to counter the spread of **global communism. **
There is very little difference between **FrankfurtSchool Marxism**, and it’s successor, **Postmodern School Political correctness** – and world communism. Just as there is very little difference between j**udaism, christianity, and islam** and **world communism**.
So if you are from a good family, clan, tribe, and nation, you might choose nationalism over globalism. And if you are from a not-so-good family, clan, tribe, and nation you might choose globalism.
People tend to follow the elites that promise them a competitive advantage. This is why people in homogenous societies vote by class blocks, and in heterogeneous societies they vote in racial and tribal and religious blocks: to obtain advantage via the force of government, rather than through market competition in the service of others.
So Fascism is just a practical means by which KIN GROUPS (Nationalists) protect themselves from MAJORITY TYRANNY (Corporatists) by resisting universalism.
Who do you want to get ahead? Well that depends upon what elites you can put into place to get your agenda ahead.
Some of us are wired (like females) for the short term and experiential, and some of us are wired (like males) for the long term and capital accumulation.
The strange thing is, nationalists are happy to separate and let others do as they will, but universalists are not?
Why is that?
The only answer CAN BE that one fears facing the reality of one’s inferiority in competition with kin groups.Updated Dec 31, 2017, 7:38 PM
Source date (UTC): 2017-12-31 19:38:00 UTC
THAT’S A FUZZY LANGUGE QUESTION…. LET’S FIX IT.
America was founded as a ‘third way’ free of both church and state, and instead for the entrepreneurial (meritocratic) individual. The original colonists recruited heavily ‘people of good character’ to create that ‘third way’ The constitution constructed rule by “The natural law of reciprocity”, and individual sovereignty (although they used the world liberty). This mean that all functions of society were organized into markets. You could perform service, with service you could earn property, with property you could earn voice. Meanwhile the court adjudicated differences entirely by property rights. This was ‘the third way’ that they were inventing. A third way not done before. Or at least, the third way that had continued from Anglo Saxon times, and was under attack during the colonial period.
So it is that America was founded under rule of law. Not rule of legislation. rule of LAW. With legislation being little more than contract negotiated between the states, just as contracts were negotiated within the state, and within the polity, and between individuals.
This is why those of us educated pre-marxism-postmoderism’s takeover of the school, academy, media and state during and the vietnam war, treat the constitution as ‘sacred’. Because for all intents and purposes – it is. It is ‘inviolate’. Unfortunately, beginning with the 14th amendment, then increasingly during the 20th century, the left was able to destroy rule of law, and re-implement rule-by-legislation, and then eventual restore the church, with a secular religion of postmodernism.
FASCISM/NATIONALISM VS COMMUNISM/UNIVERSALISM
Fascism, meaning economic and cultural nationalism, was developed to counter the spread of global communism.
There is very little difference between FrankfurtSchool Marxism, and it’s successor, Postmodern School Political correctness – and world communism. Just as there is very little difference between judaism, christianity, and islam and world communism.
So if you are from a good family, clan, tribe, and nation, you might choose nationalism over globalism. And if you are from a not-so-good family, clan, tribe, and nation you might choose globalism.
People tend to follow the elites that promise them a competitive advantage. This is why people in homogenous societies vote by class blocks, and in heterogeneous societies they vote in racial and tribal and religious blocks: to obtain advantage via the force of government, rather than through market competition in the service of others.
So Fascism is just a practical means by which KIN GROUPS (Nationalists) protect themselves from MAJORITY TYRANNY (Corporatists) by resisting universalism.
Who do you want to get ahead? Well that depends upon what elites you can put into place to get your agenda ahead.
Some of us are wired (like females) for the short term and experiential, and some of us are wired (like males) for the long term and capital accumulation.
The strange thing is, nationalists are happy to separate and let others do as they will, but universalists are not?
Why is that?
The only answer CAN BE that one fears facing the reality of one’s inferiority in competition with kin groups.
https://www.quora.com/Since-the-ideological-core-of-America-is-a-individualistic-democracy-what-makes-you-think-that-a-fascist-movement-would-be-more-popular-with-the-American-populace