My last politics post

I’ve posted lot of politics recently, because I saw a historic shift in World politics by the Brexit-Trump upheaval. I endorsed Trump at last August because I supported most of his positions and saw him as a history-altering figure. The anti-immigration stance that answered the most urgent problem of the West: being overrun by people who cannot and do not want to contribute. The anti-global-trade stance that stops oligarchs abusing welfare states and state captures of weak countries to produce there and killing law-abiding businesses at home. But above all the America First international policy, which places his country’s interest as goal of diplomacy instead of forcibly spreading ideology that led to civil wars and failed states in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Yemen, Ukraine and God knows where else.

His presidency wasn’t perfect of course and there were disappointments, but I understood that he had to make compromises to navigate Washington. But after his UN speech I cannot support him anymore. He put the World on course that – except for an unprecedented international unity against the USA – cannot end any other way than nuclear war, leading to the death of more people than killed by Hitler and Stalin combined. The main reason of this post is to make sure that when it happens I won’t be called a “Trump supporter”. I’d like to stress that I didn’t regret my older posts, my position didn’t change, Trump betrayed his agenda and his supporters (no wall, no border tax, dreamers still around, Hillary not locked up…).

The start of the speech was great. “As President of the USA, I will always put America First. Just like you as leaders of your countries will always and should always put your countries first.” – if he ended his speech there with a smile, I’d say it was the best speech since “tear down this wall”. But it was just lip service to his followers, what came was the direct opposite.

The problem wasn’t the North Korea part. That could be dismissed as “deterrence” or “tough talk to a rouge state”. North Korea indeed violates multiple UN resolutions. In a better World – one that would already be here if Trump just kept his promises – North Korea should give up its weapons of mass destruction.

The main problem were the Venezuela and Cuba part: these countries are not a threat at all to the USA. Trump didn’t even claim they were. Yet he announced sanctions and “prepared to take further action” if they “persist on a path to impose authoritarian rule”. How internal oppression is an international issue? This is exactly what Trump ran against: messing with internal politics of harmless countries. The elephant in the room of course is not the idea itself, but its disastrous results. Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Somalia and Yemen didn’t become free and prosperous democracies. They didn’t even become enlightened dictatorships like Chile under Pinochet where political people were persecuted but simple guys could live in peace and enjoy GDP growth. They became horrible failed states with civil war, headchopping and literal slavery. Don’t get me wrong, I never supported communism and agree that Cuba and Venezuela are jokes. But eating rabbits is much better than being sold as a sex-slave. I have zero doubt that if the USA would intervene, these countries would become much worse.

Then he continued with Iran and Syria, countries that are acting only locally, following their own interests. While I do not support many things they do, they aren’t a threat to the USA. More importantly, they aren’t a bit worse than the rest of the region. Saudi-Arabia is a much bigger threat to both the region and the USA, constantly financing terrorists. Yet it didn’t stop Trump to visit them and dance with swords and press that dumb orb. In case of Syria things are getting better recently and Trump clearly signaled to push this back for worse. He stood by the disastrous bombing of Syria and claimed that it’s OK to attack a country just because it kills some children in an attack (which was probably done by the CIA at the first place).

Ergo, Trump wowed to uphold the Cheney-Clinton line of unprovoked aggression based on “bringing democracy”. After these, even without a single mention to North Korea, it is clear that the North Korean regime is a target. While I’m not at all fan of their weirdo-communism, the Kim dynasty ruled the country for 60 years without a single war or terrorist action. Their ideology is one of self-reliance and isolationism. That country is probably the most harmless on the planet, they could be totally ignored. Yet they are on the “axis of evil” since Bush put them there for no particular reason. Their nuclear program is for nothing but self-defense, to deter the USA from turning them into another Libya.

The tragic thing in this is that the USA doesn’t see this and believe that North Korea is arming because of some genocidal plan. The reason behind it is that they don’t see themselves evil aggressors. And indeed, whenever the people have a chance to vote, they always vote against aggression. Also, “why would we do it”? The objective answer is “I don’t care, all I care is that you do”. I mean it’s an observable fact that the USA attacks countries for no reason, and for a rational actor, that’s enough (I also don’t ask why the masked man with a gun tries to enter my home, I just shoot him). However a social person who lives and dies by intent wants to understand.

The answer is (again, it’s irrelevant, the fact that Libya, Iraq, … happened are enough to assume that it’ll happen again) that “the USA” didn’t attack these countries. Globalists who control the USA attacked these countries, using US and other Western manpower and taxpayer money to capture it. Why? Because globalists believe that it’s the right thing to do. Globalists aren’t hellspawn devils. They are moral people who believe that the World will be a happy place when the “leaders, the press and the experts” will guide the “deplorables”. They are infested with the old British colonial ethos, seeing themselves the enlightened ones whose burden is to lift up the “noble savages”.

I have no doubt that the USA will attack North Korea to stop it from becoming able to defend itself, becoming a model to others. I also have no doubt that the attack will fail to take out enough nukes to prevent a nuclear response leading to the death of about 100M people. The US military has shown nothing but incompetence in the last two decades against properly scattered and hidden targets. If they couldn’t take out idiots on pickup trucks, they won’t be able to do this either. Also, it’s impossible to carry out such large attack without spies noticing the preparations.

I don’t regret supporting “candidate Trump”. His reception shown how enthusiast the common people are for a change. His election also pushed back the globalist plans by a year. Hillary could have started planning the attack on election eve and start it on inauguration day. Not only every month living is life, but this time gave North Korea lot of progress on nukes. Without it only the life of North Koreans was turned into hell and the business would go on. This way enough Americans and allies will die that the outrage will wash away the globalists.

I still hope in some game changer, like South Korea and Japan breaking free from the US and evict US troops from their land, seriously decreasing the ability of the US to attack while removing themselves from the target list of North Korea. Or that Russia and China sign a military pact and put all-out embargo on the US for Libya and Syria (not like Trump didn’t mention Ukraine and South China sea too, declaring them as enemies). But the logical conclusion is that SK/JP will not do a 180 and that Russia and China don’t care about the destruction of the useless NK and they even benefit from the destruction of local competitors SK/JP while can more easily unite the nations against the USA after a 100M-genocidal aggression.

So what will I do now? I go back to simply not talking about politics and by extension not even reading it. How can someone cheerfully chat about video games while the biggest tragedy of the history is coming? By knowing that the reason is exactly what Arthasdklol could teach us: that most people are morons and slackers and their groups suck because of them and not because of some evil regime that must be removed. Replacing the guild leader of a bunch of Arthasdlkols won’t bring progress any more than replacing a dictator front of a third world trash heap. The globalists are privileged elitists who believe that all people are capable and motivated and any failure is due to oppression and injustice. They believe that it’s their noble mission to liberate these oppressed people, may they be immigrants, local minorities or countries living under dictators. If everyone had spent a year trying to raid with randoms in WoW, there wouldn’t be a single globalist, affirmative-action supporter or feminist.

100M deaths in a few days is a tragedy, but still less than 2% of all mankind. There will be people around and they will need the lesson of Arthasdklol more than ever.


Author: Gevlon

My blog:

16 thoughts on “My last politics post”

  1. That’s a nice rundown of your position and it indeed seems like a decent time to take a break from politics (as nothing much seems to be truly changing).
    Just don’t make promises (of not talking about politics anymore) that you won’t really be able to keep 😀


  2. As for the position itself, i agree with your assessment of Trump and i also agree with the notion of globalists riding the USA (among others).

    What i don’t agree is the notion that globalists are such nice fluffy rabbits that just want to liberate everyone. Every time i have a real talk with a globalist, i find a self-assured, almost religious, extremely authoritarian person, who well and truly thinks (s)he figured out how the world works and expects everyone else to automatically submit and agree. And if you don’t submit or agree, then the person gets insulted and then the whole thing is somehow supposed to be my fault or my problem.

    What we are looking here is the end result of individualism, taken to its logical extreme, where individuals start feeling free to inflict themselves upon other people, as they jump through hoops to find ways to avoid considering other people individuals and construe them as something lesser (but part of a larger whole, which they want to tear down and replace with globalist chaotic soup).

    This is what makes you somewhat similar to those globalists, Gevlon.


  3. @Maxim: individualists mind their own business. Why would I bother trying to micro-manage Venezuela? These are naive elitists who believe they know it all and everyone who disagrees is evil or stupid.

    I will keep the promise because I won’t read politics, so I won’t have anything to write about. It’s just depressing to see all those stupidity and takes my time away from fighting it. I mean every person I teach to think logically in a game and also realize that most people don’t is someone who will not daydream about bringing democracy to Syria.


  4. While some globalists will have the British colonial ethos (we must educate the savages), most conflicts happen due to money, nothing else. Even if we ignore the oil (we shouldn’t) the US and its allies manufacture the majority of weapons used inthose conflicts, and even have a thriving para-military/mercenary multi-billion industry. It’s only natural that a death-dealer would incite conflict. Venezuela is a target because of their oil reserves, that is why the US needs to bring “peace” to them. They need to make sure that it becomes a puppet state that feeds the hands of its masters.

    North Korea is the exception, they will not be allowed to arm themselves because they become untouchable and the US will lose face, giving way for other countries to boot up their own nuclear programs. Even though there are terrorists is the Pakistani side of the Pakistan-Afganistan borders, you don’t see the US threatening Pakistan, do you?
    If there was an imminent threat of Kim going mental and randomly launching nukes, China and Russia would be among those affected. Kim is in self-preservation mode, and Japan and Korea know this, even the population realizes that NK’s threats are pure theatrics and they are fine with leaving the bear in hibernation. The problem is that the village idiot just now stepped up and started poking it with a stick.


  5. @tithian: oil and other resources can be traded. Dictators gladly give out concessions for money to their pocket and international support, their people be damned. Syria doesn’t have a single drop of oil.

    The death industry is more accurate but it’s a consequence. The same guys could work in other fields, they just happen to deal with death because it pays.

    You are unjust with Trump. He was the least bellicose in Washington. After all he still just did words and limited strikes. Compare it to W. Bush and Obama/Clinton! Sure, even that is too much and will lead to a disaster. But his “moral” fault is not getting impeached/assassinated by the deep state for his supporters. I’m not being sarcastic here. A leader SHOULD be ready to die for his people and he is not. But if a nation needs a hero, it’s already damned.


  6. Syria does indeed have oil and gas fields, it’s how ISIS and the other various factions are funded (by openly or secretely trading with countries, mostly Turkey – see the bombings of convoys coming in and out of the country). But the Syrian civil war is not a consequence of that, simply a byproduct of three factions trying to get a hold of power and the economic priviledges that come along with it, in the aftermath of the Arab spring. People jumping in at that point is an effort to get leverage out of the eventual winner of the conflict.

    Oil and other commodities can be traded, but you know what’s better than cheap prices? Getting it even cheaper, or free. Especially when you also make a profit by providing weapons, as well as reconstruction of infrastructures after the was has ended. The US is triple-dipping for mega profits, Iraq and Afghanistan being major gold mines for Blackwater or the various Construnction firms in the past, that made deals under the table and had the monopoly of the ‘pie’ after the end of hostilities. It’s been happening as far as I remember, from the 1st Desert Storm or even the Yugoslavian civil war in the early 90s, but it definitely became more of an ‘Industry’ after Bush junior came into power. Obama wasn’t an angel either, he almost certainly became rich from his ‘Drone war’ deals.

    To be fair, I wasn’t calling Trump per se an idiot, but rather the administration (regardless of who would lead it). Hillary’s handling of the case would be just as bad, or probably even worse.


  7. The Japanese kidnappings are nasty, but hardly a big issue. Compare it with Guantanamo (people there are just taken from their home countries without any due process)

    The Air Flight bombing stinks as badly as one can. There was no valuable target on the plane, the captured spy’s claims are ridiculous (assuming the spies are not caught and the explosion remains a mystery, how could it destabilize the government or sabotate the election?!). Personal contact between the chosen successor of the president and simple spy who goes enemy territory where she can be caught or defect is outright laughable. My guess: either CIA or renegade SK faction who wanted to sabotage talks between Koreas.

    The Rangoon bombing targeted “The Butcher of Gwangju”, a brutal military dictator who emerged to presidency in a coup. He had more enemies at home than in North. The only link to North Korea is the confession of one perp done under death threat. My guess: Southern coup attempt, blamed on North to not show disunity and weakness.

    There are no mention that the YS-11 hijacker was a Northern agent. My guess: a communist lunatic who wanted to “escape to the land of communism”. Most people were returned, the rest probably stayed “volunteerly” after brainwashing (which is a common practice in dictatorships and I admit that it’s not really free will, but most passengers could say no and were released)

    The Blue House raid was a military operation that had only accidental civilian casualties. It’s not terrorism, but a violation of the armistice which was pretty common on both sides back then.

    The abduction of South Koreans was “collecting more citizens” and not terrorism. No one was intended to die, the goal was to make their country stronger and South weaker. It’s a kind of “reuniting” the country. Of course I do not support grabbing random people away from their families and make them your citizens, but it wasn’t made to terrorize anyone. It’s more alike the Berlin Wall, which was also made to force people who didn’t want to live in East to live there.

    Most importantly all these actions – even if they were done by NK and not just blamed on them – (besides the few dozen Japanese) were all aimed at their war enemy SK and not against “the world”. I stand by my statement that on the ranking of “chance of being killed by guerillas/spies/terrorists as an innocent citizen by country”, North Korea is at the very bottom. Hell, I could list more wrongful deaths from my own country’s communist past.


  8. I wouldn’t worry about it too much. The President can’t just attack whatever he wants, launching nukes is an act of war that requires the Supreme Court to vote on it unless the US gets attacked first. The reason there hasn’t been any insurgency attacks is because the NK missile system is protected by mountains, giving them 30-45 minutes to do whatever it wants before it can get taken down. Nothing will happen unless they actually hit someone.

    Cuba and Venezuela do affect the US, and in a major way for two reasons: they are the sole importers of things like sugar (serious, I know) and if their governments were to completely collapse, there will be a massive wave of refugees trying to get in as asylum seekers or cartel drug mules. It will be impossible to get the wall if that happens first. The wall IS still coming; nobody really thought all 800k dreamers would all get deported, but at least more than half will. Trump has been creating more programs to exclude and deport more of them. Like the article says, illegals from Mexico are immediately deportable, but illegals from anywhere else (Cuba and Venezuela) have to stay. In this specific case, he HAS to intervene.


  9. At what point do you take the threats of a hereditary dictatorship despot that oppresses its own people in horrific ways seriously? Should you wait until after they develop country destroying weapons?


  10. @Anonymous: the scenario I’m worried about is this. The less than successful military leadership approaches Trump with a genius plan of “limited strike” that will “cut Kim down to size”. Kim either considers the attack a full scale one, or simply concludes that the series of “limited attacks” won’t stop until nothing left, so he retaliates with an all out nuclear strike.

    @anon: can you point to a SINGLE threat by Kim where he claimed that he attacks first?


  11. Have you watched the debates before the election? Even if you are a conservative you should have seen that Trump policies were wishful thinking from the very beginning. Even a very capable and intelligent candidate would not be able to implement them. If you watched the debate you should have realized that Trump was not an intelligent and capable candidate. Much of his statements were incoherent and did not address the questions that were asked. Have you ever interviewed a candidate for a job? Could you image if the candidate spoke the way Trump did and then going “Yes this guy is good, hire him right now”?


  12. @Anon: his bad debate performance proves … being bad at talking in public. I know many brilliant people who have trouble talking to a single woman, not a whole nation. This “dumb” guy made 10 billion dollars without government contracts. I’m with meritocracy.

    His “wishful thinking” policies are “obvious baseline” in most countries:
    * have a secure border
    * deport illegal aliens
    * have a border tax
    * don’t start wars

    I indeed came to realize that such basic functions are very hard to reach in the USA, just like “I’m a cook, I have money, I open a restaurant,” is very hard to reach in North Korea, but his failure is not him being illogical, but the country being so dysfunctional.


  13. @nightgerbil: funny but true, a socialist and a capitalist has more in common than either with the crony-capitalist warmonger, because both values the working class (though for different reasons) and both hate the oligarchs (again for a different reason)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s