Culture and the middle position

Beijing Pledges Fight “To the End” Against U.S. Economic Confrontation – Let It Be So… sundance – “An announcement from China on Saturday, pledging a full economic war against the United States, will likely not come as a surprise for most CTH readers. However, it does serve as emphasis for our 2017 statement: “prepare your affairs accordingly“…

“Peace or war. Win or lose. Yin and Yang. Culturally there is no middle position in dealings with China; they are not constitutionally capable of understanding or valuing the western philosophy of mutual benefit where concession of terms gains a larger outcome.

President Trump doesn’t apply force, he simply creates outcomes where the best alternative for the adversary is to change their approach according to their own best interests. President Trump positions the location of the interests themselves, he does not need the direct application of force.

What Globalism Did Was To Transfer The US Economy To China, PCR. Tyler Durden – “In effect, the US economy is being moved out of the First World into the Third World.” Durden falls into the consensus trap and into casting ad hominem judgment by moving from a view of the entire forest down to a microscopic image of a very small, selected, event. Perhaps Durden needs to climb down off his mountain and open his thoughts to looking at other paths than those he knows now.

“One has to wonder that there is not a single economist anywhere in the Trump administration, the Federal Reserve, or anywhere else in Washington capable of comprehending the situation and conveying an understanding to President Trump.

Real statistical analysis, as contrasted with the official propaganda, shows that the happy picture of a booming economy is an illusion created by statistical deception.

How does a country recover when it has given its economy away to a foreign country that it now demonizes as an enemy? What better example is there of a ruling class that is totally incompetent than one that gives its economy bound and gagged to an enemy so that its corporate friends can pocket short-term riches?

We can’t blame this on Trump. He inherited the problem, and he has no advisers who can help him understand the problem and find a solution. No such advisers exist among neoliberal economists. I can only think of four economists who could help Trump, and one of them is a Russian.

Political Forecast: Stormy Weather Ahead. Clarice Feldman – “With no saleable candidates or agenda I expect the Democrats to grow ever more pugilistic and the press to grow ever more blind to their incitements to violence. And voters to become even more disgusted by both.”

End of the Peer Show. Mark Steyn – “But what if there’s a more effective way to silence your critics? Say, by proving scientifically that they should be expelled from polite society.” This is about the Mann v. Ball court case and a recent academic effort to use power politics rather than intellectual integrity.

Nature, founded in 1869, is generally regarded (with Science) as one of the two most prestigious peer-reviewed journals in the world. Like many great nineteenth-century institutions its distinguished past lends an undeserved imprimatur to its meretricious and ever more politicized present.

Nature’s paper cloaks itself in scientific language (“quantifying disparities”) to pass off politicized pseudo-science as the real thing. Note the loaded terms, starting with the division of what’s actually a wide spectrum of opinion into two teams, 386 “expert scientists” versus 386 “contrarians”.

Furthermore, DeSmog’s “extensive documentation” of us “disinformation” peddlers is anonymous:

Come to that, why are over a third of the articles “analyzed” from just three publications

Gotcha. So you’re just another guy in the shut-up business, a phenomenon of our times rising far more rapidly than sea levels in the Maldives. “Consensus enforcement” (in Dr Curry’s very useful formulation) stalks our public discourse

Politicized science is something we used to leave to the Soviets and other totalitarians.

Even with Steyn’s satire and humor the contrast is evident. This is specifics and topic focused rather than broad, anonymous, ad hominem, and judgmental.

Comments are closed.