Best Damn Lil’ Explanation of Great Depression Yet

0

Category : Liberal Antidote

A journalistic blast from our 1969 past reappeared on the Web yesterday in a couple of places, most notably on the Ludwig von Mises site.

Entitled simply enough "The Great Depression," the article from happier days is an masterful dissection of how governmental folly–stretching from Grover Cleveland (the inflationist) to Herbert Hoover and FDR (the depressionists)–created and sustained the unnecessary economic coma known as, well, the title of the article.

The author was Hans F. Sennholz, the nation’s first doctoral candidate under Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises. Not unlike his mentor, Sennholz shows off his monetarist passions in his article, altogether not a bad trait to have in these days of Keynsian Kool-Aid.

His conclusion is fascinating:

Social and economic decline is facilitated by moral decay. Surely, the Great Depression would be inconceivable without the growth of covetousness and envy of great personal wealth and income, the mounting desire for public assistance and favors. It would be inconceivable without an ominous decline of individual independence and self-reliance, and above all, the burning desire to be free from man’s bondage and to be responsible to God alone.  

Can it happen again? Inexorable economic law ascertains that it must happen again whenever we repeat the dreadful errors that generated the Great Depression.

Four decades later and we’ve answered his question–resoundingly.

Why the Iranian Revolution Failed (Besides Obama)

0

Category : Liberal Antidote

By George Friedman
Courtesy of
Strategic Forecasting

Successful revolutions have three phases. First, a strategically located single or limited segment of society begins vocally to express resentment, asserting itself in the streets of a major city, usually the capital. This segment is joined by other segments in the city and by segments elsewhere as the demonstration spreads to other cities and becomes more assertive, disruptive and potentially violent. As resistance to the regime spreads, the regime deploys its military and security forces. These forces, drawn from resisting social segments and isolated from the rest of society, turn on the regime, and stop following the regime’s orders. This is what happened to the Shah of Iran in 1979; it is also what happened in Russia in 1917 or in Romania in 1989.

Revolutions fail when no one joins the initial segment, meaning the initial demonstrators are the ones who find themselves socially isolated. When the demonstrations do not spread to other cities, the demonstrations either peter out or the regime brings in the security and military forces — who remain loyal to the regime and frequently personally hostile to the demonstrators — and use force to suppress the rising to the extent necessary. This is what happened in Tiananmen Square in China: The students who rose up were not joined by others. Military forces who were not only loyal to the regime but hostile to the students were brought in, and the students were crushed.

I Couldn’t Have Said It Better

0

Category : Liberal Antidote

I was going to write about "Silence in D.C." about Obama and his utter unwillingness to stand on the side of the reformers in Iran battling a theocratic dictatorship, but then I came down with food poisoning.

So today, I came across this absolutely perfect cartoon called "He’s Barack Obama." Pictures being worth a thousand words each, this is absolutely priceless and shows you the farce our government has become:

China and Russia Lead De-Dollarization Charge

0

Category : Liberal Antidote

The Yekaterinburg Turning Point

By Prof. Michael Hudson

URL of this article: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13969

The city of Yakaterinburg, Russia’s largest east of the Urals, may become known not only as the death place of the tsars but of American hegemony too – and not only where US U-2 pilot Gary Powers was shot down in 1960, but where the US-centered international financial order was brought to ground.

Challenging America will be the prime focus of extended meetings in Yekaterinburg, Russia (formerly Sverdlovsk) today and tomorrow (June 15-16) for Chinese President Hu Jintao, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and other top officials of the six-nation Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). The alliance is comprised of Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrghyzstan and Uzbekistan, with observer status for Iran, India, Pakistan and Mongolia. It will be joined on Tuesday by Brazil for trade discussions among the BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India and China).    

The attendees have assured American diplomats that dismantling the US financial and military empire is not their aim. They simply want to discuss mutual aid – but in a way that has no role for the United States, NATO or the US dollar as a vehicle for trade. US diplomats may well ask what this really means, if not a move to make US hegemony obsolete. That is what a multipolar world means, after all. For starters, in 2005 the SCO asked Washington to set a timeline to withdraw from its military bases in Central Asia. Two years later the SCO countries formally aligned themselves with the former CIS republics belonging to the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), established in 2002 as a counterweight to NATO.

Good Intentions and National Socialism

0

Category : Liberal Antidote

I recently compared the Obamaniac agenda with that of Adoph Hitler. Now, I don’t foresee gas chambers. That was purely a Hitler thing, not a National Socialist-managed economy thing. No need for those extreme measures anyway when you can smother your opposition in PC correctness, hate crime innuendo, and orchestrated slander by the mainstream (read: socialistic) media. However, if you disagree with the Counterfeit-in-Chief and you seem to have any muscle, you will be dealt with swiftly and decisively.

Now, many will say that Obama is sincere and trying with "good intentions" to come to the aid of the country, which coincidentally was ruined by Republicans rather than by generalized greed (what did the Obamas "make" last year, $2.5 million on paper and untold millions in campaign sleaze?). However, the only sincere element in any politician’s desire for power is that he or she sincerely wants that power, the public be damned.

Daniel Webster put it quite succinctly and right-on-ly when he said:

"Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."

"Just so," as my Irish brethren would say.

Now, how about the National Socialism charge? Economist Ludwig van Mises answers that succinctly:

"There are two patterns for the realization of socialism.  The first pattern (we may call it the Lenin or the Russian pattern) is purely bureaucratic….

"The second pattern (we may call it the Hindenburg or German pattern) nominally and seemingly preserves private ownership of the means of production and keeps the appearance of ordinary markets, prices, wages, and interest rates.  There are, however, no longer entrepreneurs, but only shop managers….[I]n all their activities they are bound to obey unconditionally the orders issued by the government’s supreme office of production management….

"This is socialism under the outward guise of the terminology of capitalism."

Ever notice how many "czars" Obama has appointed (where are they listed in the Constitution?)? Last count was 22, following exactly in the German/Hindenburg/Hitler model. "[T]he appearance of ordinary markets" is what we now see in the case of Chrysler and GM and many of our financial institutions, but they are ruled by "czars" who report only to Obama.

Not hard to connect the dots.

Unmitigated Stench of Hubris from the White House

0

Category : Liberal Antidote

Obama snubs Netanyahu with his shoe sole insultSo, the Great Man decrees it, and it shall be done, even if we all have to fall into Hiterlerian/Stalinesque worshipful lockstep–and that includes you too, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Witness the pictured arrogance of Barack Obama snubbing his foot at Netanyahu as he speaks on the phone with him, ordering an immediate surrender to Hamas and the Palestinians.

Simultaneously, news came out of Israel that Netanyahu was told by a visiting "American official": "We’re going to change the world. Please don’t interfere."

That could well have been George Mitchell, and it certainly wouldn’t be surprising. Doesn’t matter who it was, just that it shows the unbelievable hubris of Barack Obama and his team of ruffians.

Sure, they’ll change the world, and make George Orwell’s predictions come true.

Must Read: Brink Lindsey Debunks Paul Krugman

0

Category : Liberal Antidote

I’m inundated by Paul Krugman dogma (socialistic, probably totalitarian) everyday through alerts from Google about various economic topics. Krugman, whose diatribe appears in the New York Times, is pro-union, pro-taxation, pro-big government, pro-nationalization–everything that doesn’t work, but he’s pretty much gotten a free ride since free-marketers have been, along with Rush Limbaugh, assigned to the category of far-right hallucinators (ever see a newspaper use the term "far left"?–it’s not part of the liberal media’s lexicon) by Obama and his media kiss-asses.

Along comes someone describing himself as a liberal who takes on Krugman and his ersatz "Nostalgianomics," and he does so wthout a conservative’s litany of free-market benefits. Brink Lindsey of the Cato Institute rebuts Krugmania by focusing on what really happened from the Great Depression until now–showing that the liberals are as much or more to blame than conservatives for creating what Krugman derides as income inequality but is really just economic and political freedom.

This is must reading: "Nostalgianomics, liberal economists pine for days no liberal should want to revisit."