Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts

Saturday, March 23, 2024

Cliffnotes of the Zeitgeist, 63d Edition. Strange Bedfellows.

 


Misery acquaints a man with strange bedfellows.

William Shakespeare, The Tempest

The environmental populists?

Politics, as they say, makes for strange bedfellows.  But how strange, nonetheless still surprises.

Wyoming Secretary of State Chuck Gray, who rose to that position by pitching to the populist far right, which dominates the politics of the GOP right now, and which appears to be on the verge of bringing the party down nationally, has tacked in the wind in a very surprising direction.  He appeared this past week at a meeting in Natrona County to oppose a proposed gravel pit project at the foot of Casper Mountain.  He actually pitched for the upset residents in the area to mobilize and take their fight to Cheyenne, stating:

We have a very delicate ecosystem, the fragility up there, the fragility of the flows … the proximity to domestic water uses. All of those things should have led to a distinct treatment by the Office of State Lands, and that did not happen.

I am, frankly, stunned.  

I frankly never really expected Mr. Gray to darken visage of the Pole Stripper monument on the east side of Casper's gateway, which you pass by on the road in from Cheyenne again, as he's not from here and doesn't really have a very strong connection to the state, although in fairness that connection would have been to Casper, where he was employed by his father's radio station and where he apparently spent the summers growing up (in an unhappy state of mind, according to one interview of somebody who knew him then).  Gray pretty obviously always had a political career in mind and campaigned from the hard populist right from day one, attempting at first to displace a conservative house member unsuccessfully.

We have a post coming up which deals with the nature of populism, and how it in fact isn't conservatism.  Gray was part of the populist rise in the GOP, even though his background would more naturally have put him in the conservative camp, not the populist one.  But opportunity was found with populists, who now control the GOP state organization.  The hallmark of populism, as we'll explore elsewhere, is a belief in the "wisdom of the people", which is its major failing, and why it tends to be heavily anti-scientific and very strongly vested in occupations that people are used to, but which are undergoing massive stress.  In Wyoming that's expressed itself with a diehard attitude that nothing is going on with the climate and that fossil fuels will be, must have, and are going to dominate the state's economy forever.   The months leading up to the recent legislative session, and the legislative session itself, demonstrated this with Governor Gordon taking criticism for supporting anything to address carbon concerns.  Put fairly bluntly, because a large percentage of Wyoming's rank and file workers depend on the oil and gas industry, and things related to it, any questioning on anything tends to be taken as an attack on "the people".

Natrona County has had a gravel supply problem for quite a while and what the potential miner seeks to do here is basically, through the way our economy works, address it.  There would be every reason to suspect that all of the state's politicians who ran to the far right would support this, and strongly.  But they aren't.

The fact that Gray is not, and is citing environmental concerns, comes as a huge surprise.  But as noted, given his background, he's probably considerably more conservative than populist, but has acted as politicians do, and taken aid and comfort where it was offered.  Tara Nethercott ran as a conservative and lost for the same office.

But here's the thing.

That gravel is exactly the sort of thing that populists, if they're true to what they maintain they stand for, ought to support.  It's good for industry, and the only reason to oppose the mining is that 1) it's in a bad place in terms of the neighbors and 2) legitimate environmental concerns, if there are any.  But that's exactly the point.  You really can't demand that the old ways carry on, until they're in your backyard.  

Truth be known, given their nature, a lot of big environmental concerns are in everyone's backyard right now.

The old GOP would have recognized that nationally, and wouldn't be spending all sorts of time back in DC complaining about electric vehicles.  And if people are comfortable with things being destructive elsewhere, they ought to be comfortable with them being destructive right here.  If we aren't, we ought to be pretty careful about it everywhere.

There actually is some precedent for this, FWIW.  A hallmark of Appalachian populism was the lamenting of what had happened to their region due to coal mining.  John Prine's "Paradise" in some ways could be an environmental populist anthem.

Hard to feel sorry.

Far right goofball Candace Owens was fired from the Daily Wire. She stated that she "cannot be silenced", but frankly the gadfly has gone from sort of being a token black populist to a has been already.

That no doubt sounds extremely harsh, but frankly it's true. Owens went from being sort of a snarky populist commenter to writing some real wack job stuff, at which time her popularity dropped off.  Part of her popularity was because she was black, and we don't think of populists being African American, although some are.  Once again, black conservatives and black populists are not the same thing.  Her status as a rare black populist, and a highly attractive woman at that, didn't hurt in her getting attention. 

I don't know what her fan base is, but this is all a sort of tragedy.  Always abrasive and controversial, her early commentary was not completely without merit.  She's really dropped off in the recent year or years and probably won't really revive.  She's sort of like Tucker Carlson that way, being a person of obvious high intelligence who really went down a rabbit hole.  Carlson looked like a complete fool with his recent trip to Russia. We hope that Owens has a legitimate conservative revival, or at least isn't touring North Korea to get a one up on Carlson.

The Dead Elephants.

There was an Irish street gang in New York at one time that bore the name The Dead Rabbits.  The House GOP is rapidly becoming The Dead Elephants.

Something is really going on.

Filled with disgust, some Republicans in the House are abandoning the House well before their terms are up. In doing that, they're setting themselves free from something. That something might just be failure, but at this rate, it suggests something else.  They almost seem set on sabotaging their party, except their party isn't a party.

In 1944 when it became obvious to those who cared to see, and many simply did not, that Germany was going down in defeat, not only did conservative German army officers but a few, albeit very few, members of the SS began to plot against him.  It's notable that the cover the July 20 bombing was given was that it was an attempted assassination by the SS.  At least one member of the SS was actually part of the plot, and the head of the Berlin police was far from a liberal democrat.  Right at the end of the war Himmler was conspiring against Hitler and notably didn't take a place among the suicides at the bunker.

The point is that when people who have been part of a movement begin bailing out, they sense defeat and don't want to be associated with it.

An added point is that with Donald Trump the effective Speaker of the House, and Marjorie Taylor Green acting as the Howler Monkey Sergeant at Arms, Trump's destructiveness has reached a new level.  Republicans lost the Oval Office in 2020 and the Senate in 2022.  Their House representation declined to perilous levels in the same time period. They were supposed to do well throughout it.  Now, not only is Trump causing the GOP to lose at the ballot box, he's causing Republicans to abandon their posts. 

In only one more Republicans leaves, the House will be deadlocked and Mike Johnson out the door.  If two leave, the Democrats are in control.  There will be replacements, but there's no guarantee that they'll be Republicans.

The Conservatives v. The Populists

While, once again, we'll have more on this later, we'll note here that the primary race in the state this year is really shaping up to be a fight between two parties, the Conservatives and the Populists, all of whom register as Republicans.  

Some Conservatives have registered to try to displace Populists, and some Populists are doing the same in regard to Conservatives.  Of note, the importation of out of state Populists is becoming really obvious, that having been a barely noticed aspect of it until very recently.

Populists are going to be howling that their Republican contenders are "RINO"s in short order, when in fact it's really the other way around, and the Populists are a sort of Neo Dixiecrat.  Republicans are late in rising to their challenge, but they are doing it.  

The primary may be quite interesting.

Last prior edition:

Cliffnotes of the Zeitgeist, 62nd Edition. The trowel and musket edition.

119th Congress, Part 2.

 

February 4, 2024

The House of Representatives will move forward with a  $17.6 billion bill this week that provides military aid to Israel and replenishes U.S. weapons, but leaves out more help for Ukraine.

It will not pass the Senate. 

The Senate apparently left the House out of its efforts to negotiate on these topics, which shows the level of dissention between the two bodies.

Ukraine has become an increasingly hot topic in the House, which is strongly influenced by Trump, who is a Putin fan.

February 5, 2024

Mexican Border Crisis






February 6, 2024

Yesterday Mitch McConnell urged Republicans to vote for the Senate bill then in a closed door meeting urged them to vote against it.

President Biden threatened to veto the House's stand-alone aid package to Israel.

Cont:

Matt Gaetz and Elise Stephanik have co-sponsored a resolution that Donald Trump did not engage in insurrection or rebellion against the United States on January 6, something that clear is an attempt to address the 14th Amendment in that insurrection may be excused under it.

Having said that, a resolution that it didn't occur will not excuse it, and this will not get through the Senate.

Cont: 

The House failed to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas. All the Democrats voted against this, and the following Republicans retained their integrity on this matter; Rep. Tom McClintock (CA-05), Rep. Ken Buck (CO-04),  and Rep. Mike Gallagher (WI-08). Rep. Blake Moore (UT-01) also voted no, but on procedural grounds to that this may be brought back up again, even though it should not.

Look for all four, including Moore, to suffer the same fate as Liz Cheney.

February 14, 2024

Yesterday the House managed to get the Big Top in order and the GOP was able to impeach Mayorkas.

This now goes to the Senate, which will have to deal with it, but he'll retain his job.

Wyoming's Congressman Harriet Hageman will be a Senate Trial Manager for the impeachment.

Impeachments, which were rare up until Bill Clinton was wrongfully impeached, were once rare.  Now they're becoming extremely common, a sign of the collapse of American government.

The Senate voted aid for Ukraine. Wyoming's Senator John Barrasso voted against it, then came out with a statement noting his strong support for Ukraine.  Clearly he's worried about the strong MAGA base in Wyoming.

February 26, 2025

Russo Ukrainian War

Two separate discharge petitions to bring funding for Ukraine are being introduced into the House on different bills, one being the bill that has already passed the Senate.  There seems to be optimism that one of them, that being the unique House bill in particular, will pass in this end run around politically castrated Trump eunuch, Mike Johnson.

February 28, 2024

One of life’s most underappreciated talents is to know when it’s time to move on to life’s next chapter, so I stand before you today ... to say that this will be my last term as Republican leader of the Senate.

Mitch McConnell, earlier today.

Personally, I suspect the almost certain election of Trump this Fall, and the descent of the GOP into a nativist, isolationist, Evangelist, Populist Party had a lot to do with this.

This is, frankly, not a good development at all.

March 1, 2024

The House passed a stopgap funding bill yesterday.

March 10, 2024

President Biden has signed the bill.

March 14, 2024

The House of Representatives took passed a bill which might ban TikTok due to its Chinese ownership and fears that it exploits information for the benefit of the PRC.

Oh my, what will over endowed teens and twenty-something girls now do?

I have to admit that I find it almost impossible to care about this, which in turn contributes to my cynicism.  I don't know if the Chinese are mining vast amounts of data from TikTok  and frnakly I'm in favor of banning the vast amount of the Internet that's hypersexualized porn of some sort in any event. But that's not why it's being banned.  I can't help suspecting that its being banned as this is a feel good moment for a body that's done almost nothing.

Address the border?  Nope.

Address Russian aggression in Ukraine?  Nyet.

Let's ban TikTok instead.

Well, if I was there, I'd probably vote to ban it too.  It's trash.  I just find it amusing that this, and seemingly this alone, is the one thing they seem to be able to do.

March 21, 2024

Republican Congressmen have introduced a bill, the details of which I have not yet learned, to raise Social Security retirement age to 69.

Yikes.

This follows a series of comments by Republican figures recently, at first taken to have been made in a gadfly like fashion, that taking retirement is not a proper thing to be doing in the first place.

The Social Security System does need to be immediately addressed, and pushing the age limit up would help keep it funded, but there are other ways to do that and at some point it becomes manifestly unfair as well as a retardant on the economy.  We already are enduring a gerontocracy in the US, and this would make it worse. 

March 22, 2024

Wisconsin Rep. Mike Gallagher is leaving the House of Representatives next month, dropping the GOP majority in the House down to one vote.  Meanwhile, Marjorie Taylor Greene has filed a motion to remove Johnson, but it's a motion that doesn't have to be taken up.

The chances of the Republicans losing the House before November are now about 50/50, and with each example of Republican dysfunction, the corpse of the dead GOP starts to smell more and more.  While nobody is yet predicting it (I'm about to), the Democrats will take the House and the Senate in the Fall.

March 23, 2024

The Senate passed the budget bill so the government will avoid shutting down, again.  This just before they went home on recess, again.

Last prior edition:

119th Congress, Part 1.

The Work Truck Blog: Hating on EVs.

The Work Truck Blog: Hating on EVs.

Hating on EVs.

Oh my, they're here:


An earlier thread here:

The Work Truck Blog: Wyoming Delegation: Everyone Wants Internal Combus...

Wyoming Delegation: Everyone Wants Internal Combustion Engines, Enough With EV Nonsense


Wyoming Delegation: Everyone Wants Internal Combustion Engines, Enough With EV Nonsense


There is a real holding back the tide aspect to this.  Electric vehicles are coming, and soon.

Indeed, they aren't really new.


Something is really up with the GOP hating on EV's. It's really bizarre.  And it's not just Wyoming.  Consider that Senator Deb Fischer of Nebraska, who was on a tear the other day, posting tweet after tweet about electric vehicles.
California insists it's “speculative” to assume EVs will remain heavier than gas cars.
 
Public policy should reflect reality, not the baseless future dream of featherweight electric cars.

What’s speculative, obviously, is assuming with no evidence that their weight will change.

Heavy? Great. We used to complain that fuel efficient vehicles were too light.

To read the GOP propaganda in some quarters, Electric Vehicles travel in rogue bands, cross the Rhine, sack and loot villages, and take your daughters.

It's really absurd. 

All this comes about due to a Biden Administration proposed fuel efficiency mandate designed to spur on the development of EVs.  This is similar to what was done in the 70s and 80s concerning mileage standards, which some people also howled about.  And it's similar to what was done regarding water efficiency and electric efficiency in appliances since the 1970s.  In each instance, there were complainers who howled it was Federal overreach and the standard could't be met.  In each instance, however, industry had little trouble meeting it.

The truth of the matter is that EVs are now here, and there's a real holding back the tide aspect of this.  They're going to dominate in the near future, and each and every one of the supposed reasons that won't happen will be proven wrong, as will the common assertions it won't matter.

Thursday, March 21, 2024

Dear Candidate,

Average Wyoming candidate on campaign trail.

Thank you for running for office.  If I assume that your goals are honorable, which I shall until proven otherwise, you deserve our thanks for running.

Until, that is, you don't.

As the election hurtles towards November, there are a few things I'd like for you to keep in mind.

The first is, I'm not stupid, and a lot of voters aren't either.  Quit acting like we are.

For that reason, if you are an incumbent, don't send me a letter that brings up a topic and then immediately hurl into "Biden's radical green agenda" and other such things.  In quite a few instances, I believe you don't believe a word of what you are saying.  Coming from here, I know that you have to be conservative, or pretend that you are, but if you weren't a populist when first elected, I know that you aren't now.  You are lying to me, as you know that a lot of imports and gullible are led to their positions.

Some of us think about them.

If you've been holding office, I want to know what you've done for the good of the country, and the good of the state, and why you believe what you cite was good.  That doesn't mean immediately launching off on a screed that holds the opposing party is evil incarnate, which will mean, from my prospective, that you can't think of anything to tell me of what you accomplished.

I'm not going to vote, I'd note, for a liar.  If you are telling me that Trump is great and the election was stolen, I know that you are lying and don't believe that, if you are an incumbent.   If you aren't, and run around saying that, I'll regard you as ill-informed at best.  

Just tell the truth.

If you send me an email that states:

From where I sit, it looks like Democrats are doing their best to screw up your life. The rising prices of groceries, gas, new cars, homes, and tuition, along with the increasing crime in our communities.

It's not your fault, but the Democrats are not going to stop.

I'm not going to be happy.  From where you sit, you don't believe for a second that the "Democrats are doing their best to screw up" my life.  You are lying to me, and you believe that I don't think.  No serious person thinks that the Democrats are purposely trying to increase inflation or crime. That's patently absurd.

If your positions comport 100% with your party's I'll know that you are lying or, almost worse, completely unthinking.

If you campaign like you aren't from here, and run on issues that don't matter, or that most Wyomingites are on the other side of, I'll assume that your default setting is set somewhere else.  I don't want you talking about Kerri Lake or trials in Georgia.

For that matter, I know that some of you "radical green agenda" folks actually believe in climate change, but are afraid to say it.  I know that some of you who are now for transgenderism or deeply disturbed dudes being admitted to sororities, actually find that icky, but your politics is governing your thought, not the other way around.  I know that some of you know that electric vehicles are going to replace gasoline ones, no matter what you say.   I know that none of you really think sixteen weeks is when a person suddenly becomes a human being.

If you campaign on something contrary to science, no matter how unpopular it is, don't bother me.

If your only arguments are economic, in the end, don't bother me either.  "Vote for me so that we all get richer" isn't what I want to hear.

If you cite your (Christian) religion, I'd like evidence that you grasp it.  If you are divorced and remarried, claim that we aren't our brother's keeper, or that God is keen with abusing refugees, I don't believe you for a second.  If you've switched churches to accommodate a divorce and remarriage, or for politics, I'll feel that you don't really believe in what you espouse much.  If you are an Apostolic Christian who can compromise on abortion, I'll feel that you can compromise on anything.  If you are an Evangelical Protestant who believes the Constitution of the United States is divinely ordained and subject to your special interpretation, I'm not voting for you ever.

I know that some of you who spout about family values have not lived them or have compromised deeply on them.  I'd rather you admit that, then pretend that you are in the outer camp at the Sermon on the Mount.  If you cite your deep convictions, but they don't reflect what a personal life should reflect by somebody holding them, I'd like to know the reason, no matter how personal.  There may be a very good reason, or maybe it was just personal convenience.  It matters.

If you find that uncomfortable, I'd frankly rather have you act like Kyrsten Sinema or Tammy Duckworth and just say that your personal beliefs are personal, and not particularly any of your business.  At least that's not acting like John Brown on the campaign trail, but not in the house.

If you come to me and proclaim your support for Israel but not for Ukraine, you better be able to explain it, and not in Evangelical Protestant terms.

If you were of conscription age during the Vietnam War, and were male, and didn't serve, I want to know why.  I'll accept an honest answer, including that you evaded service.  But I don't want a lot of flag waiving followed by "I wanted to go, but I had bad dandruff" or whatever.

I'd like to know what your real connection with the state is.  If you don't really have one, and washed up here for economic reasons, just admit it.  

I want to know what you failed at and what you were wrong about, including politically.  If the answer is nothing, I don't believe you and can't trust you.

I want to you to run an entire campaign and not mention Joe Biden or Donald Trump a single time. They have their own race.  Saying "I hate Joe Biden" or "I love Donald Trump" is the political equivalent to saying in the same campaign "I hate Rocky Road ice cream, but I love Vanilla".  It's irrelevant.

I want you to say, during your campaign, at least one thing that your party opposes, but you know to be true.  "We need to raise taxes" would be a good start.

I want you to show a personal command of something really boring but important during the campaign.  Launch into a discussion of the Social Security Act, give a detailed explanation of the role of the Federal Court of Claims, discussing bovine infectious diseases. Something. And, once again, I want you do to that without launching into some BS attack on the opposing party, as in "Scrapie is a fatal brain disease of sheep and goats and is related to other similar diseases in other mammals. It remains a threat to the sheep industry, AND JOE BIDEN'S RADICAL GREEN AGENDA IS GOING TO STEAL YOUR LUNCH, SHAVE YOUR CATS, AND CONVERT YOUR DAUGHTER'S INTO LESBIAN MUSLIM TAYLOR SWIFT FANS"

Finally, on economic issues which you will be voting on, I want you to be bold enough to say that you'll pledge your personal assets for not getting our spending problems fixed.  If you really believe lowering taxes is going to cause all boats to rise, so be it, but put your cash in the boat.  The rest of us already do, whether we like it or not.

Wednesday, March 20, 2024

Trump's political epitaph?

Almost 30 years ago, I cited in The Atlantic some advice I’d heard dispensed by an old hand to a political novice in a congressional race. “There are only two issues when running against an incumbent,” the stager said. “[The incumbent’s] record, and I’m not a kook.” Beyond that, he went on, “if a subject can’t elect you to Congress, don’t talk about it.”

The same advice applies even more to presidential campaigns.

Trump defies such advice. His two issues are his record and Yes, I am a kook. The subjects that won’t get him elected to anything are the subjects that he is most determined to talk about.

In Raymond Chandler’s novel The Long Goodbye, the private eye Philip Marlowe breaks off a friendship with a searing farewell: “You talk too damn much and too damn much of it is about you.” When historians write their epitaphs for Trump’s 2024 campaign, that could well be their verdict.

David Frum, The Atlantic.

Saturday, March 16, 2024

The Agrarian's Lament: A sort of Agrarian Manifesto. What's wrong with the world (and how to fix it). Part 6. Politics

The Agrarian's Lament: A sort of Agrarian Manifesto. What's wrong with th...

A sort of Agrarian Manifesto. What's wrong with the world (and how to fix it). Part 6. Politics

James Monroe.  

And, yes, we're still not on to the Agrarian finale in this series.  That's because we have one more important topic to consider first.

Politics.

If you read distributists' social media, and you probably don't, you'll see that some people have the namby pamby idea that if we all just act locally everything will fall in line.  While people should act locally, that's a bunch of crap.

What these people don't realize is that politically, we're a corporate capitalist society, and we are where we are right now, in large part due to that.  Corporations are a creature of the state, not of nature, and exists as a legal fiction because the state says they do.  This is deemed, in our imaginations, to be necessarily because, . . . well it is.

Or rather, it's deemed to be necessary as we believe we need every more consolidation and economies of scale.  

We really don't, and in the end, it serves just itself.  We do need some large entities, particularly in manufacturing, which would actually bring us back to the original allowance for corporate structure, which was quite limited.  Early in US history, most corporations were banned from being created.

Legally, they would not need to be banned now, but simply not allowed to form except for actual needs.  And when very large, the Theodore Roosevelt proposal that they be treated like public utilities, or alternatively some percentage of their stock or membership would vest in their employees, would result in remedying much of the ills that they've created.

Likewise, eliminating the absurd idea that they can use their money for influence in politics could and should be addressed.

Which would require changes in the law.

And that takes us back to politics.

Nearly every living American, and Canadian for that matter, would agree that a major portion of the problems their nations face today are ones manufactured by politics.  The current economic order, as noted, is politically vested.

The United States has slid into a political decline of epic proportions, and its noteworthy that this came about after Ronald Reagan attacked and destroyed the post 1932 economic order which provided for an amplified type of American System in which there was, in fact, a great deal of involvement in the economy and the affairs of corporations, as well as a hefty income tax on the wealth following the country's entry into World War Two.  It's never been the case, of course, that there was a trouble free political era although interestingly, there was a political era which is recalled as The Era of Good Feelings due to its lack of political strife.  

That era lasted a mere decade, from 1815 to 1825, but it's instructive.

The Era of Good Feelings came about after the War of 1812, which was a war that not only caused internal strife, but which risked the dissolution of the nation.  Following the war the Federalist Party collapsed thereby ending the bitter disputes that had characterized its fights with the more dominant Democratic-Republican Party.. . . . huh. . . 

Anyhow, President James Monroe downplayed partisan affiliation in his nominations, with the ultimate goal of affecting national unity and eliminating political parties altogether.

Borrowing a line from the Those Were the Days theme song of All In the Family, "Mister we could use a man like James Monroe again".

Political parties have had a long and honorable history in politics. They've also had a long and destructive one.  Much of their role depends upon the era.  In our era, for a variety of reasons, they are now at the hyper destructive level.

They are, we would note, uniquely subject to the influence of money, and the fringe, which itself is savvy to the influence of money.  And money, now matter where it originates from, tends to concentrate uphill if allowed to, and it ultimately tends to disregard the local.

"All politics is local" is the phrase that's famously attached to U.S. politics, but as early as 1968, according to Andrew Gelman, that's declined, and I agree with his observation.  Nowhere is that more evident than Wyoming.

In Wyoming both the Republican and the Democratic Party used to be focused on matters that were very local, which is why both parties embraced in varying degrees, The Land Ethic, and both parties, in varying degrees, embraced agriculture.  It explains why in the politics of the 70s and 80s the major economic driver of the state, the oil and gas industry, actually had much less influence than it does now.

Things were definitely changing by the 1980s, with money, the love of which is the root of all evil, being a primary driver.  Beyond that, however, technology played a role.  The consolidation of industry meant that employers once headquartered in Casper, for instance, moved first to Denver, then to Houston, or were even located in Norway. As the love of money is the root of all evil, and the fear of being poor a major personal motivator, concern for much that was local was increasingly lost.

The increasing broad scope of the economy, moreover, meant that there were economic relocations of people who had very little connection with the land and their state.  Today's local Freedom Caucus in the legislature, heavily represented by those whose formative years were out of state, is a primary example in the state.  Malevolent politics out of the south and the Rust Belt entered the state and are battled out in our legislature even though they have little to do with local culture, lands or ethics.

Moreover, since 1968 the Democratic Party has gone increasingly leftward, driven at first by the impacts of the 1960s and then by its left leaning elements.  It in turn became anti-democratic, relying on the Supreme Court to force upon the nation unwanted social change, until it suddenly couldn't rely on the Court anymore, at which time it rediscovered democracy.  At the same time Southern and Rust Belt Populists, brought into the Republican Party by Ronald Reagan, eventually took it over and are now fanatically devoted to anti-democratic mogul, Donald Trump, whose real values, other than the love of money and a certain sort of female appearance, is unknown, none of which maters to his fanatic base as they apply the Führerprinzip to his imagined wishes and he responds.

We know, accordingly, have a Congress that's completely incapable of doing anything other than banning TikTok.

Distributism by design, and Agrarianism by social reference, both apply Catholic Social Teaching, one intentionally and one essentially as it was already doing that before Catholic Social Teaching was defined.  As we've discussed elsewhere, Catholic Social Teaching applies the doctrines of Human Dignity, Solidarity and Subsidiarity.  Solidarity, as Pope John Paul II describe it In Sollicitudo rei socialis, is not “a feeling of vague compassion or shallow distress at the misfortunes of others. It is a firm and persevering determination to commit oneself to the common good”.  Subsidiarity provides that that matters ought to be handled by the smallest, lowest or least centralized competent authority.

We are a long ways from all of that, right now.

Politically, we're in a national political era that is violently opposed to solidarity and subsidiarity.  Supposed national issues and imagined remote conspiracies, dreamt up by political parties, swamp real local issues.  Global issues, in contract, which require a competent national authority, or even international authority, to deal with, cannot get attention as the masses are distracted by buffoons acting like Howler Monkeys.

Destroying the parties would serve all of this.  And that's a lot easier to do than might be supposed.

And more difficult.

Money makes it quite difficult, in fact.  But it can be done.

The easiest way to attack this problem is to remove political parties as quasi official state agencies, which right now the GOP and Democratic Party are.  Both parties have secured, in many states, state funded elections which masquerade as "primary elections" but which are actually party elections.  There's utterly no reason whatsoever that the State of Wyoming, for example, should fund an internal Republican election, or a Democratic one.

Primary elections are quite useful, but not in the fashion that most state's have them.  A useful example is Alaska's, whose system was recently proposed for Wyoming, but which was not accepted (no surprise).  Interestingly, given as the state's two actual political parties right now are the Trumpites and the Republican remnants, this a particularly good, and perhaps uniquely opportune, time to go to this system.  And that system disregard party affiliations.

Basically, in that type of election, the top two vote getters in the primary go on to the general election irrespective of party.  There doesn't need to be any voter party affiliation. The public just weeds the number of candidates down.

That is in fact how the system works here already, and in many places for local elections. But it should be adopted for all elections.  If it was, the system would be much different.

For example, in the last House Race, Harriet Hageman defeated Lynette Grey Bull, taking 132,206 votes to Gray Bull's 47,250.  Given the nature of the race, FWIW, Gray Bull did much better than people like to imagine, taking 25% of the vote in an overwhelmingly Republican state.  Incumbent Lynn Cheney was knocked out of the race in the primary, being punished for telling the truth about Дональд "The Insurrectionist" Trump.  But an interesting thing happens if you look at the GOP primary.

In that race, Harriet Hageman took 113,079 votes, for 66% of the vote, and Cheney took 49,339, for 29%.  Some hard right candidates took the minor balance. Grey Bull won in the primary with just 4,500 votes, however.

I'd also note here that Distributism in and of itself would have an impact on elections, as it would have a levelling effect on the money aspect of politics.  Consider this article by former Speaker of the House Tom Lubnau:

Tom Lubnau: Analyzing The Anonymous Mailers Attacking Chuck Gray


A person could ask, I suppose, of how this is an example, but it is.

Back to the Gray v. Nethercott race, Ms. Nethercott is a lawyer in a regional law firm. That's not distributist as I'd have it, as I'd provide that firms really ought to be local, as I discussed in yesterday's riveting installment.   But it is a regional law firm and depending upon its business model, she's likely responsible for what she brings in individually.  Indeed, the claim made during the race that she wanted the job of Secretary of State for a raise income was likely absurd.

But the thing here is that Nethercott, as explained by Lubnau, raised a total of $369,933, of which $304,503 were from individual donations.  That's a lot to spend for that office, but it was mostly donated by her supporters.

In contrast, Jan Charles Gray, Chuck Gray's father donated a total of $700,000 to Chuck Gray’s campaign, Chuck Gray donated $10,000 to his own campaign and others donated $25,994.

$700,000 is a shocking amount for that office, but beyond that, what it shows is that Nethercott's supporters vastly out contributed Gray's, except for Gray's father.  In a distributist society, it certainly wouldn't be impossible to amass $700,000 in surplus cash for such an endeavor, but it would frankly be much more difficult.

To conclude, no political system is going to convert people into saints.  But it's hard to whip people into a frenzy who are your friends and neighbors than it does people who are remote.  And its harder to serve the interest of money if the money is more widely distributed. Put another way, it's harder to tell 50 small business owners that that Bobo down in Colorado knows what she's talking about, than 50 people who depend on somebody else for a livelihood a myth.

Last prior:

Monday, March 4, 2024

The Agrarian's Lament: A sort of Agrarian Manifesto. What's wrong with the world (and how to fix it). Part 1. How the barbarians took over the city.

The Agrarian's Lament: A sort of Agrarian Manifesto. What's wrong with t...:   

A sort of Agrarian Manifesto. What's wrong with the world (and how to fix it). Part 1. How the barbarians took over the city.

 As a bishop, it is my duty to warn the West! The barbarians are already inside the city.

Robert Cardinal Sarah

Alaric entering Athens, 395.

On August 6, 1979, Newsweek came out with a surprising cover depicting Theodore Roosevelt leading the 1st U.S. Volunteer Cavalry up Kettle Hill.  The caption was "Where Have All The Heroes Gone".  I can remember laying on the couch in the living room looking at the issue.  I would have been about fifteen.

That was right about the time the nation was getting ready to see Carter square off against Reagan, and if the author of that article thought the choices were uninspiring, I have to wonder what he'd think now.

Anyhow, in reading about the contest between Reagan and Carter I was compelled to ask my father, "What's the difference between the Republicans and the Democrats?", trying to figure out what it was, and what I was, in that context.  I'm actually surprised, in looking back, that I was asking this question at that age, as in my mind, this was earlier.  And in fact I may very well be remembering this inaccurate, as to when I asked this question and what brought it about.

I do recall his answer.  He informed me that "the Republicans are more conservative than the Democrats".

It was an interesting answer.  He didn't say that the Republicans were conservative or that the Democrats were not.  He said the Republicans were more conservative than the Democrats, implying that they were sort of in the middle.

I decided at the ripe old age of 12, or so, that I was more conservative, and therefore I was a Republican.

When I registered to vote six years later, I in fact registered as a Republican, which is what I thought I likely was.  It didn't last a real long time, however, as by age 20, I was registering as a Democrat.

Conservation was the reason why.  Even by my late teens I as clearly a conservationist, and I teetered on the edge of, and crossed into, environmentalism.  While I didn't see myself being on the political left, those around me did. I recall one friend of mine in junior college, who had known me since high school, remarking in a conversation about the Vietnam War protests that if I'd been college age at that time, I'd be in the protesters, a comment that really surprised me as I was in the National Guard at the time, and I was a defense hawk, part of the reason I'd originally registered as a Republican.  The now late mother of a friend of mine loaned me The Monkey Wrench Gang on the basis that I'd like it, and while I was surprised by that when I read the cover about a group of fictional who were basically environmental terrorists, I in fact did like the 1975 Edward Abby novel.  It probably didn't hurt that I had a crush on the daughter of that lender, the sister of one of my friends, and that entire family were obviously environmentally centered, eccentric, Democrats.

It wasn't a facade, however.  I wasn't a DINO, if there is such a thing.  Going through my undergraduate years and through law school, and into at least my first decade of practicing law, I remained a Democrat.  It was rural issues that did it.  The Democrats were for preserving the wilderness, at a time that the Reagan Republicans never saw a tree they didn't want to cut down.  The Democrats were for keeping Wyoming's wildlife a public resource when a Republican legislature wanted to give it to landowners in a bill, I'd note, that our current Congressman's father promoted.  The Republicans always saw wild lands as something to be exploited, the Democrats normally saw them as something to be preserved.

Ultimately I left the Democratic Party for the Republicans as I couldn't stomach being in a party that embraced death so closely.  I wasn't alone.  Really significant Wyoming Democrats, like Ray Hunkins, who had campaigned as Democrats, left the party and became Republican politicians.  The overall impact was a good one, however, for the state's GOP.  It took a party that was already highly independent and frankly middle of the road on most things, and made it more so.  It was a Wyoming Party.

Those days are dead and gone.

It's hard to describe where we are politically in this country today, and that's in no small part because it's hard to explain where we are culturally.  The absolute insanity of social movements in the Western World, unleashed since the annus horbillus of 1968, but with roots dating back at least to the 1790s, has created as sort of cultural hellscape which now, very late in the day, average people are reacting to, but reacting in way that expresses their ignorance of their own culture and existential nature.  It's been a long time in the making.

Some thirty years ago I was at a not very well done bachelor's party, no not one of that type, that I hosted for a friend getting married. At the party was a young man who had just been admitted to a university in New York.  He was pretty impressed with getting into it, and had already taken up calling New York City, "the city", even though he knew just about as little about NYC as I did.

At the party he raised the question of whether the United States was existentially a liberal, or conservative, nation.  In thinking about it there in my late 20s, when I was somewhat more liberal than I am now, I thought the country basically existentially liberal.

I'm not certain that I think that now.  But then, back then, in the late 1980s, being liberal didn't mean I had to pretend that biological truths weren't just that, truths.

Educated people, including educated conservatives like me, as that's basically what I am, are to a large extent baffled by the phenomenon of Donald Trump.  How, we wonder, could anyone vote for a person like him, particularly after he attempted a coup to overthrow the 2020 election?

The Judicial Coup of 2015 has everything to do with that, as we warned that it would, in 2015.

Why Americans, irrespective of position, ought to cringe over Obergefell


Yes, we warned what was in store:
And we warned about it more than once.

We educated people, including we social conservatives, had acclimated ourselves to accepting that an unelected body of jurist could decree social liberality on the society, and everyone had to accept it.  To a large extent, frankly, we grew comfortable with being conservatives of varying stripes, but not getting much of what we wanted.

Obergefell was clearly a bridge too far, and it was right from the beginning.  And what liberals promised, that "this would never mean", very rapidly turned out to be a whopping lie.

The Supreme Court tries a bit to mop up a dog's breakfast. Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission.


An argument on what you can and cannot think about stuff that people don't understand with implications you just don't expect but maybe ought to.. Fallout from Obergefell


The contempt that's come for evolutionary biology and basic nature out of the American left, and indeed, the European left, since 2015 has been epic.  But it didn't start in 2015.  It started well before, with major events marking the path.  May 9, 1960, the entire year of 1968, 1969, 1973.  What marked it all, during the very period in which the left embraced everything in nature outside of ourselves, was the rejection of our natures.  We didn't see ourselves as men in nature any longer, but like gods, outside of it.

What the left apparently they didn't grasp is that no matter what the educated conservative "establishment elite" was willing to accept, the rank and file, instinctively conservative middle, wasn't, and isn't, once things went too far.

For we brought nothing into the world, just as we shall not be able to take anything out of it.

If we have food and clothing, we shall be content with that.

Those who want to be rich are falling into temptation and into a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires, which plunge them into ruin and destruction.

For the love of money is the root of all evils, and some people in their desire for it have strayed from the faith and have pierced themselves with many pains.

1 Timothy, Chapter 6.

At the same time, however, a combination of two of the oldest malevolent forces in the world had already united to make any reaction abhorrent.  Ignorance had combined with greed.

People like to spout a lot of babble about the settlement of North America, and the United States, that is just that.  People imagine that hardworking benighted immigrants came in and built a new land out of the sweat of their brows.  Yes, there's an element of truth in that, but the larger truth is that they were massively assisted by their governments, which removed the native population by force at public expense, and then sold or gave the land to the settlers for no value or grossly undervalue.  It's impossible to look at what occured and not regard it as deeply immoral, and claims to the opposite as deeply hypocritical. When Wyoming politicians today proudly declare that they're fourth generation Wyoming rancher who built their enterprises from nothing but their own hard work, they're deluding themselves.  Their ancestors were, as a rule, dirt poor people who benefitted from what was effectively a government hand out, in part, and in part from a program that made that possible by what today would be regarded as ethnic genocide.

There's really no two ways about it.

Nonetheless, in being honest about it, we can also be honest about the fact that the beneficiaries of those programs did not have in mind killing people.  

They also largely didn't have in mind getting rich.

The goal was to have a family, and provide for it.

We recently spent a lot of time on our companion blog looking at the laws and social conditions prior to the fateful legislature of 1977.  Those laws were geared towards that end.  And, prior to the 1970s, the laws in the country largely were.  Laws  on "domestic" topics were geared towards the preservation of the family and the protection of children.

And before Ronald Reagan, the tax structure and the structure of the Federal Government was aimed at regulating excessive accumulation of wealth and reigning in big business. It was widely held, and correctly, that people needed protection against large business and that vast accumulation of wealth could result in the wealthy paying their own way.  The wealthy were not worshiped, and big business was not seen as the little man's friend.  

A figure like Donald Trump was not regarded as admirable.

Reagan came in and changed that, selling the public the lie that as the wealthy got wealthier everyone else did as well.  It made some sense, until you thought it out.  And to a certain degree its true, as the wealthier a society becomes, the wealthier everyone in it is.  But it only goes so far, and it didn't go nearly as far as its backers claimed.  Moreover, the advance of technology, accelerated by World War Two and the Cold War, marched on irrespective of tinkering with the tax rates, and that is likely what made the reason difference.

Something that didn't withstand the tinkering was the assault on education.  The Great Depression, followed by World War Two, followed by the Cold War, had emphasized the need for science and engineering like nothing else.  World War Two, in turn, flooded universities with servicemen after the war, making college educations common.  But with Reagan came a reduction in support for science and engineering.  University remained important, but degrees suffered value erosion.  Degrees like law, which could be societally beneficial, or destructive, evolved towards the latter, as a Reagan era emphasis on greed set in.

Just as societal structures started to break down due to the battering rams of the left, therefore, they were replaced by a lack of education and an emphasis that everything was about money.  It was not a combined intentional attack.  The left would not have made everything about money, and the right would not have broken down societal structures, but the combined assault of both had that effect.  This left an American, and Western, culture with no existential values and nothing to measure individual self-worth other than economic success.  Like the concurrent assault of Germanic, Slavic, and Eastern tribes in the Middle Ages, the damage on the American metaphorical Rome was too much to bear.

Rome, of course, had the Church. And as Rome fell, the Church stepped in, preserving what was worthwhile of the existing culture, and educating the Barbarians.  The United States is not, however, Imperial Rome.  When Rome fell, which was over time, the Roman culture could look towards the Church and realize that it held existential truths Roman civilization did not.  As the American culture falls today, it has instead the adulterated American Civil Religion, a light and reduced content variant of original strict Protestant sects that reflected the product of the Reformation.  And people retain their native instincts, although not in a restrained or educated fashion.

This has left the reeling street level populist reacting against things they know are wrong, but mixing them with ignorance and confusion.  That it's absurd that some claim there are more than two genders is self-evident, and wrong, and that steps like Chloe's law must be taken to combat it is apparent.  What is not is that this depraved state of affairs stems from one that divorced sex from marriage, or the concept that marriage is natural, and not a set of highly advanced sexual dates which allow for discarded partners.  Hence, you have some railing against sexual mutilation, who practice chemical sterilization, or who are serial polygamists themselves.

And the substitution of money as the supreme value over family remains in the same class, with some seriously believing, as some have asserted since the 1980s, that God basically endorses their occupations as surely he must.  It can't be the case, they think, that their occupations could do harm. Therefore, you have those who, like James Watt, can't grasp the thought that natural resources must be conserved, and that this is conservative, let alone that there are things that are being economically exploited which may very well destroy the ability for us to exist.  In their heart of hearts there are those on the populist right who believe that the use of fossil fuels is Divinely sanctioned, just as there are those on the left who believe that altering our psychological and physical natures is some sort of existential, if not Devine, right.

This sort of thing has put us in the untenable position we now find ourselves it.

It ought to be possible, in other words, for a thoughtful conservative to oppose infanticide, genocide, and ecocide.  That is, it ought to be perfectly possible to oppose abortion, gender mutilation, Russian aggression in Ukraine while supporting conservation and indeed be concerned about the environment. That would, in fact, be thoughtful conservatism.

There's no need, and indeed no sense whatsoever, in feeling that because you are worried about gender disorder, that you need to support Putin in Ukraine, or hail a serial polygamist as somebody who presents as a modern Cyrus the Great.

But where to go from here, especially for a thoughtful conservative.

It's clear at this point that neither the modern Republican Party or Democratic Party are going to do anything to solve this. They are both too far corrupted in an existential sense. The Democratic Party is virtually at war with Human Nature and the Devine, while the GOP is at war with intelligence, Science and thought.  Between the two parties, the Democrats have revived a belief in democracy they lost in 1973, however, whereas the Republicans view everyone who doesn't agree with their Caudillo as a class enemy.

The populists know that something is deeply amiss with the assault on human nature. The progressives know that there's something deeply wrong with the assault on science and nature.  Progressives sense that a worship of money is wrong, whereas the Republicans are outright worshiping it.  Populists sense that a worship of yourself as a demigod is perverse, but only embrace that up to the point that it's not personally inconvenient.

National Conservatives and their fellow travelers claim they're the answer.  C. C. Peckhold, a university professor who seems to be in this camp, gives about as good of a justification of this as can be given in an episode of Catholic Answers live that's well worth listing to, but also  a little disturbing in some ways as well.  Like Patrick Dineen, he's big on "order".

What he seems to be missing, in so far as that interview goes, is that corporate capitalism has imposed its own order.  He regards "liberalism", as in the classic meaning of this word, to be the problem, and seeks a "post liberal order", and is one of the contributors to the Post Liberal Podcast whose blog we've linked in our companion site as its interesting.  What they miss, however, is that what they are seeking is effete, which to a large degree is what took down "post liberalism", by which them mean the pre liberal ancient regime, and that it was also corrupt, as concentration of order encourages corruptness.  Indeed, that's what we have now, to a degree, concentrated in capitalism.

Only in a Distributist Agrarianism, by whatever name, is the solution to this found.

Sunday, March 3, 2024

Wars and Rumors of War, 2024. Part 3. The Putin's Cheerleaders Edition.

February 13, 2024


You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.
Matthew, Chapter 24.
If your position is being cheered by Vladimir Putin, it’s time to reconsider your position.
Mitt Romney

Mitt Romney, whom I did not care much for as a Presidential candidate, has gone on to be an absolute hero in the Senate.  It's tragic that he's leaving this year.

Equally tragic is that the once pro defense Republican Party has not only retreated into isolationism, it's gone into America First isolationism, last seen advanced by the likes of the Bund and Lindbergh just prior to World War Two. 

February 15, 2024

Russo Ukrainian War

The Ukrainians sank the Caesar Kunikov amphibious ship near Alupka with naval drones.

North Korea v. South Korea

North Korea announced that it will take a more aggressive approach to disputed waters near its border with South Korea.

Myanmar

Myanmar announced it will begin to commence its citizens, male and female, to fill a 60,000 man shortage.

February 17, 2024

Russo Ukrainian War

Avdiivka has fallen to the Russians after months of fighting.


Severe ammunition shortages are becoming a factor in Ukraine, something that has set in since Republicans following Putin Fan Boy Donald Trump's views have held up aid.

Germany and France both signed bilateral security agreements with Ukraine on February 16.


Putin was bragging up the T-90

M'eh

And now the Russian Navy.

2011 Navalny designed poster about Putin's United Russia party, declaring it to be a "party of crooks and thieves".

Alexei Navalny became the latest Putin opponent in Russia, or outside of it, to die under mysterious circumstances. The 47-year-old politician reportedly collapsed in a penal colony, where he was serving a sentence for "extremism".  Trump mouthpiece Lord Haw Haw Carlson excused the death in an interview.

February 18, 2024

Russo Ukrainian War.

A series of rising reactions to the failure of the US to provide ongoing aid to Ukraine is resulting in ramping pressure on the weak Leader of the House, Mike Johnson.

Johnson came into office declaring himself on a mission from God (literally) but so far he's pretty much been a puppet of Trump's, the strings being his extraordinarily weak position, one that is now even weaker as Santos was predictably replaced with a Democrat.  Between the refusal to act on the border due to Trump and Ukraine, there's frankly a pretty good chance, in my view, that the Democrats might flip the House in the fall.

At any rate, we'd first note that Congress went on vacation without acting.  President Zelenskyy commented that dictators did not go on vacation.

President Biden urged Congress to act.

Vice President Harris pledged US support.

National Review has an editorial aimed at Johnson urging he get off his duff and do something.

A bill in the House provides 47.7 billion for Ukraine, $10.4 billion for Israel, with has strong House report for some interesting reasons, $4.9 billion for the Indo Pacific, including Taiwan and $2.4 billion for supporting U.S. Central Command operations, including funding to offset efforts to deter Houthi
militant attacks in the Red Sea.

Matt Gaetz stated: ". . . I think that is a lot more significant to my constituents than which dude gets to run Crimea"

Presumably one of those things is getting conscripted when Poland and the Baltic States are invaded, which may well be coming, and fighting the first real toe to toe, peer to peer war, since World War Two.

About 400 Russians have been arrested for attending Navalny memorials.

Mexican Border Crisis

Democrats are also exploiting the GOP's Trump ordered failure to act on the border by exploiting the topic, which is now becoming an asset for them.

February 19, 2024

Hamas Israeli War

Israel set a deadline for the start of Ramadan in which it will invade Rafah if its hostages are not freed.

That would be March 10.

While seemingly missed, this may be a change in position towards a negotiated resolution of the conflict, as prior to this Israel has essentially taken the position that it will not be restrained, no matter what.

Papua New Guinea Tribal Warfare

53 people were killed in intertribal warfare on Papua.

February 20, 2024

Russo Ukrainian War
I don’t like this reality. Vladimir Putin is an evil war criminal.Vladimir Putin will not lose this war.
Mike Johnson last week.  Lindbergh said the same thing about Hitler.

Defecting Russian helicopter pilot Maxim Kuzminov was murdered in Spain.

Donald Trump posted that somehow the death of a Russian opposition leader who was put in a gulag by his Trump's buddy Putin, was sort of about him.


February 21, 2024

Hamas Israeli War

The US vetoed a cease fire resolution in the UN.

February 22, 2024

Trump in a Fox News interview stated, regarding nuclear war, the following:
I worry about their safety too. These people, everyone in this room is in great danger. We have a nuclear weapon that if you hit New York, South Carolina is gone

FWIW, and Trump is receiving criticism on this, the yield of a nuclear weapon is sufficient by a long measure to destroy South Carolina from a strike in New York.  Prevailing wind patters, also, would not carry the fallout there.

Anyhow, I'm noting this here as a recent item on NPR's Politics discussed Trump's fear of nuclear war, which apparently is very pronounced. 

I don't give Trump credit for deep thought s on very much.   The Internet has allowed a lot of those in the shallow end of the pool to have voice as if they know what they're talking about, and frankly I'd include Trump in those in the shallow end of the pool.  But apparently nuclear war is one thing he actually thinks about and has opinions on, and he's afraid of it.

That doesn't really surprise me too much.

Trump came of age in in the 1960s which was at a time that the fear of nuclear war was quite pronounced.  It remained that way in the 1970s, and by the early 1980s I recall being forced to read  A Republic Of Grass. which urged that we surrender to the Soviet Union, essentially, right then and there rather than face the prospect of nuclear war, which lefties were certain Ronald Reagan was going to get us into.  I recall some on the right saying "there are worse things than death" in response to such things, which is harsh, but true.

But if your values end at yourself, maybe there aren't.

Russo Ukrainian War

Prominent Russian milblogger Andrei Morozov committed suicide after refusing Russian military command orders to delete his reports on high Russian casualty rates around Avdiivka.

Iranian sources told Reuters that the country provided hundreds of short-range ballistic missiles to Russia in early January. 

That certainly helps Russia, but it also shows that industrially its a shadow of the former USSR.

Putin gave a car to the North Korean Communist Monarch.

February 23, 224

Houthi's

The Houthis on sent shippers and insurers a formal notice of a ban on vessels they deem linked to Israel, the U.S. and UK from sailing in waters bordering Yemen. They also declared they are going to use submarine weapons.

Russo Ukrainian War

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that Ukraine has a right to use its Western-supplied weapons to defend itself against Russia, up to and including targeting sites within Russia.

February 24, 2024

Armenia is suspending its membership in Russia's Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO).

February 25, 2024

Houthi's

The US and UK struck 18 Houthi targets yesterday.

Cont:

Russo Ukrainian War

In a speech marking the two-year point in the war, President Zylenskyy indicated 31,000 Ukrainian soldiers have lost their lives so far, which is actually about half of what I previously saw estimated some time ago.

Two separate measures are being introduced to provide aid to Ukraine that go around Mike Johnson, who has proven to be a Trump flunkie.

King Charles praised President Zylenskyy for his countrymen exhibiting something that Johnson is not, that being courage.

Nigeria

Fifteen Catholics were murdered at Sunday Mass.

February 26, 2024

Hamas v. Israel

The PM of Israel made it clear that it is Israel's intent to enter Rafah no matter what.  A ceasefire will merely delay that.

Russo Ukrainian War

Two separate discharge petitions to bring funding for Ukraine are being introduced into the House on different bills, one being the bill that has already passed the Senate.  There seems to be optimism that one of them, that being the unique House bill in particular, will pass in this end run around politically castrated Trump eunuch, Mike Johnson.

ISW reports that there were more Russians casualties taking Avdiivka, 47,000, than in the entire Soviet Afghan War.

February 29, 2024

Russo Ukrainian War

Russia has taken Stepove, seven miles northwest of Avdiivka. Ukrainian have pulled back from Stepove and the neighboring village of Sieverne.

Maybe the Russians will put up a monument to Mike Johnson there.

March 1, 2024

Russo Ukrainian War

A Ukrainian missile strike killed 19 troops, injured 12 and Colonel Roman Kozhukhov, a respected commander in the occupied Donetsk in Ukraine.  They were at a medal ceremony.

Donald Trump's Minister of Propaganda, Tucker "Lord Haw Haw" Carlson, stated that Donald Trump's object of affection, Vlad Putin, was stating something "dumb" when he justified the assault on Ukraine on the object of denazification.

China v. Taiwan

The PRC Coast Guard patrolled prohibited and restricted waters around Taiwan-controlled Kinmen.

Mexican Border Crisis

Both President Biden and would be president Trump were on the Mexican border yesterday.

March 2, 2024

Hamas v. Israel

The United States is going to air drop humanitarian relief into Gaza.

Russo Ukrainian War

Transnistria, breakaway sliver of Moldova, which itself is a Cyrillic using region of Romania that's a separate country as the Russians oppose Moldova uniting with Romania, asked Russia for "protection" from Moldova.

March 3, 2024

Houthis v. the West

A fertilizer ship hit days ago by the Houthis has sunk.

Russo Ukrainian War

For unknown reasons, North Korean munitions shipments to Russia appear to have stopped.

Related Threads:


Last Prior Edition: