Chaitanya Jyothi Museum Opening, 2000
RAMANAM
In the Name of The Father, and of The Son and of The Holy Spirit, Amen.
Countrymen,
ORBIS NON SUFFICIT
SOLUS DEUS SUFFICIT
In Ross Hunter’s Lost Horizon are many charming scenes, lovely David/Bacharach music and this gem, Question Me An Answer:
The song presents in appealing form an old wisdom, a certain doctrine: you will solve a problem when you ask the right question regarding it. The answer reveals itself when the right question is asked. A variant of this truth is this: the teacher appears when the student is ready.
For months or years now I have gone on public blogs and my own blog to urge eschewing outrage, surprise and despair in favor of quiet preservation of classical wisdom and persistent abrasion of assumptions against the grit of facts, or better put, phenomena.
I was hardly alone in 2007-2008 observing that the stupidity of the American voter would install insanity in the White House.
A few since those dreadful days, knowing what was coming, have tried to ask the right question so as either to solve the problem or teach others to. There has not been agreement on what, exactly, the problem is. This fact is monitory. Some say it is lack of morals, others abundance of arrogance, others downright stupidity, others straight up stupor, and others say it is too much money or time or drugs or something wafting about. And of course the problem is The Jews, or The Arabs, or The Chinese, or The Russkies, or The Whites, or The Blacks, or The Police and Military, or Wall Street, or K Street … or all ‘a dems bums.
I think the problem is more generations of children growing up without a mother’s love. When stupid or evil people hold mechanisms of government, commerce or education, I blame their mothers. The stupidity of the American voter is down to the cupidity of the American mother. But her cupidity is down to the timidity of the American father. So I am going to take the insanity in the White House as a leader-ship (male) rather than a nurture-ship (female) problem. Here’s looking at you, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. and Stanley Armour Dunham. That means I take the problem as one of political philosophy. Not politics and certainly not political science (so-called). Political philosophy.
By political philosophy I mean structures of reason and the mind which both illumine the depths of human nature and history and inspire their heights.
Today, commenting at Belmont Club and Power Line, I sensed an opportunity to ask the political-philosophical question that might, perhaps, yield the answer that solves the problem of America’s timid father-dom:
What inter-national structures best address
the phenomenology of inter-national activities,
seen just for itself, as is, for the purpose of
not only maintaining but, par excellence,
expanding USA national sovereignty by deepening
USA diplomatic, financial and military strength?
At Belmont Club I commented:
Dads Army [they call it in Great Britain]. I call it Civil Defense Battalions attached to local law enforcement agencies. Past time these should be formed.
Also, Russia should be an ally, along with India. USA should be on war footing with Congress Declaring War against Caliphism, with Russia and India allied with USA to that end. And the war should be fought to unconditional surrender of Saud and Iran and any jackwagon who so much as twitches Salafist or IRGC. Followed by military occupation of those countries for as long as it takes for them to shut up and behave themselves by USA, Russian and Indian standards, not theirs.
Then, USA, Russia and India invite China to a little game of Cowboys and Indians. And defund, de-place the UN.
Meanwhile, Civil Defense Battalions attached to local law enforcement agencies.
With respect, the assumptions, regarding geo-political structures, that animate this post are obsolete. All the intellectual givens, and their implementing military, diplomatic and financial structures, from containment days are obsolete. Trying to update — which is using — them IS the problem. Forget containment and its cartographies. Think victory.
Look at it strictly phenomenologically, without desire to preserve known inter-national structures. Just what is happening. Now, what structures best address that phenomenology for the purpose of not maintaining but rather expanding USA national sovereignty by deepening USA diplomatic, financial and military strength?
At Power Line I commented:
They have to lie because their intellectual fundament — containment doctrine — even if used aggressively, as Kennan intended — but they use it passively — does not work. A completely different fundament is indicated, but they will not use it even though the smarter among them see it: victory.
Ask the right question and you will get the right answer: what inter-national structures best address the phenomenology, seen just for itself, as is, for the purpose of not only maintaining but, par excellence, expanding USA national sovereignty by deepening USA diplomatic, financial and military strength?
What inter-national structures best address
the phenomenology of inter-national activities,
seen just for itself, as is, for the purpose of
not only maintaining but, par excellence,
expanding USA national sovereignty by deepening
USA diplomatic, financial and military strength?
This formulation of the question has assumptions and implications. I think it also produces the right answer.
Update 1: Independence Day at Power Line: President Calvin Coolidge and President Abraham Lincoln.
Update 2: Glenn Reynolds: Declaration Should Still Wake The Powerful Up At Night.
Update 3: The Saudi Connection: Wahhabism and Global Jihad, and related: Qatar.
Update 4: A leftie rag now wants American boots on the ground against ISIS. They must feel the beheading knife getting too close. They are right about that and will never admit that their general frame of reference made it so.
Update 5: Goodnight Vienna.
Update 6: Michael J. Totten really does not get Iran, but this of his is worthy of the exercise of criticizing and useful for historical content none-the-less.
Update 7: SR-72: Now, why would they be announcing the fact? Misdirection? Ego? Stupidity? Arrogance? Desire to incite/blunt Russo/ChiCom/Israeli espionage? I do not know. But it seems very strange. SR-71 was not announced, or pre-announced, was it?
Update 8: The Real Deal.
Update 9: Reconstituting The Militia.
Update 10: From early 2000s, several essays, by Glenn Harland Reynolds, on domestic terrorism.
Update 11: Charles Hill On The Iran Deal
Update 12: Sultan Knish: No More Mr. Nice Conservative
Update 13: The Flawed “Missing Man” Theory I commented:
The War on Poverty was waged by white supremacist liberals, who reproduced themselves markedly. The portion of the black demographic that always had been layabouts took the bait so they could do even more of what they always had done. Sanger, the white supremacist liberal par excellence, targeted that demographic. When did layabouts every think?
There is a black demographic that works, always has, and has fine American families. Perhaps they know what it would take to turn those deep-history layabouts into citizens.
Update 14: A side-point on this post: is it really true that Iran is the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism, aka global Islamic hegemony by every means available? This statement is repeated again and again, seemingly everywhere, by everyone. Is it true? I do not know, but I suspect it is not true, and have no way to validate my suspicion.
I suspect al Saud is the world’s largest state sponsor of global Islamic hegemony (Caliphism), at least if large is taken to indicate monies spent and time-in-grade.
For example, who pays for the Islamic Centers, Islamic propaganda/information circulars/curricula and Islamic Studies Departments at … how many primary and secondary schools, colleges and universities around the globe? Who pays for the Islamic “prison ministries” in virtually every country not officially Islamic? Who pays for the madrassas in Pakistan, Afghanistan and elsewhere? Who is trying to bankrupt some countries while funding others as well as supposedly non-state actors?
Who fills the world’s media with continuous cascades of sanctimonious double-talk to justify global Islamic hegemony?
If my suspicion regarding the world’s largest sponsor of “terrorism” is correct, then a one-eyed laser-focus on Iran as the primary enemy of the USA in the ME flouts Von Clausewitz’ first rule of war, does it not?
Finally — and of this I am certain: in the ME, it is deeply and widely held as fundamental truth that the State of Israel birthed ISIS — which in the ME is deeply and widely hated by the generality — to cripple Arab freedom, independence and self-determination.
Update 15: Richard Fernandez: That Old Time Religion
Update 16: Scott Johnson at Power Line quotes and comments thereon a law-learned correspondent in re incalculable damage done by Hillary Clinton to US national security. All of which is true, of course, but I saw another facet in the subject and commented as follows:
Scott, your correspondent assumes Hillary recognizes a country to secure. She does not. That’s the point of the entire world governance/globalist elite, isn’t it?: there is no national sovereignty, only personal viability in a global community. Get yours, they say to themselves.
Your correspondent’s point works in a law-based system of national sovereignty. But this now is a rules-based system of global governance by hyper-privileged elites — they attend the same cocktail parties everywhere on the globe — in their private global community. So they think. They can do as they wish because there is no authority superior to themselves, no nation deserving much less demanding security.
Their thinking — global governance (by themselves alone, because they mean so well), no national sovereignty — drives the Arab/Pan-African invasion of Europe, the Indo-Chinese/Pan-South American invasion of North America and such as the Obergefell-vs-Hodges decision. We make the rules, you obey them, and we don’t want or have national sovereignties obstructing our wishes for having lots of fun for ourselves while we talk about doing lots of good for you others.
If your correspondent wants to help, ask him or her to preach the reality of USA national sovereignty and all it implies in whatever is their orbit. These elegant globalists wield great power, as is known, but their foundation remains a cloud, a dream. Their power derives from their generation of deluding fictions. Ask your correspondent to make that point in his or her circle of contacts, to say again and again what is true, that national sovereignty is here to stay and will not be swept away.
Related: Glenn Reynolds quotes, approvingly, a jerk at Walter Russell Mead’s American Interest moaning that Hungary’s new emergency laws, to address invasion of that country by the Middle Eastern horde, trample on several basic liberal values. Reynolds concurred in this language: I’m afraid so. Against which I commented, Tut. To the jerk at American Interest I commented:
… laws that trample on several basic liberal values ….
No, you smug, fat, safely-padded, hand-wringing jackwagon, it’s not about liberal values, it’s about national and cultural sovereignty. Trying to make a sovereignty issue a values issue is classic fasco-commie subversion by misdirection. I knew American-Interest is sanctimonious fasco-commie, but this really self-exposes these muckers of weaponized empathy.
Update 17: Colin Woodward: Eleven American nations. Woodward’s purpose is to justify federal gun confiscation, but along the way his analysis of American regions — he calls them nations in order to divide the country to ease confiscation — is accurate and useful. Has a fine map supporting.
Update 18: Institute For The Study Of War: ISIS’s Global Strategy: 2015
Update 19: The Fraud and Iran nuclear fuel, 2010. Helping Iranian Mad Mullahs is an old American habit
Update 20: Charles Kenny: Saudi Arabia Is Underwriting Terrorism. Let’s Start Making It Pay
Update 21: Counter-Terrorism: The Origins Of Islamic Terrorism
Update 22: James Huffman: The Real Cause Of Campus Racism
Update 23: “Why would I tell you about this?” the imam said. “They’re not terrorists,” he said of the radicals. “They just hate the U.S. government.” Related.
Update 24: 1- Perhaps mistakenly, I was under the impression that neocons, such as Paul Wolfowitz, were/are Scoop Jackson Democrats.
2- War fighting to victory without occupation following is an historical howler. Never happens. When tried, as by The Fraud, the result is painful.
3- Occupation with the purpose of fostering representative democratic (republican) government dates from President McKinley and US victory over Spain in the Philippines. The concept/policy is linked, by McKinley himself, to “American manifest destiny,” an idea not foreign to many today and, in itself, not at all unworthy.
4- Occupation, which is unavoidable and essential following victorious war, should be for as long as it takes for the defeated belligerent to renounce belligerence, and no longer. The decease of beligerent spirit, not killing, is the purpose of war. Occupation is the second phase of war, following unconditional surrender by an enemy.
5- If Cruz does not know that now, he will learn it, one way or the other. Killing bodies and removing governments is not the purpose of war. Extirpating the spirit of belligerence is. For that, occupation is ineluctably indicated.
6- Representative democratic (republican) government is not a universal good. It works only in Christian civilization and in particular those blessed with a legal substrate of English Common Law. Ergo, establishing such government in a non-Christian civilization is an irrational goal, QED.
7- On the other hand, occupying a defeated enemy’s lands until such time as he renounces belligerence is a universal good with numerous exemplars of success.
Update 25: Found crucifix shows Christianity in Viking Europe earlier than thought.
Update 26: Robert Zubrin illustrates the obsolete Cold War frame of reference, not even a thought that a new structure (Three Brothers Doctrine) is indicated by current facts, families, constitution and land.
Update 27: How To Defeat Weaponized Empathy
Update 28: More Examples Of Weaponized Empathy
AUM NAMAH SHIVAYA
