- Iraq Gets US Green Light To Pay $2.76 Billion Gas Bill To Iran
Iraq Gets US Green Light To Pay $2.76 Billion Gas Bill To Iran
The Iran-Iraq Joint Chamber of Commerce Chairman, Yahya Al-e Eshaq, announced on June 10 that Iraq has released $2.76 billion worth of Iranian funds in gas export money owed by Baghdad. Iraq received a sanctions waiver from the US to make the payment.
According to an unnamed foreign ministry official that spoke with Reuters, Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein got the clearance to make the payment from US State Secretary Antony Blinken on the sidelines of the Riyadh Conference on Thursday.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken with Iraq FM Fuad Hussein, Wiki Commons Eshaq told Iranian media on Saturday that the released funds will meet the Central Bank of Iran (CBI) demands and ensure the purchase of goods needed in the country. He added that the funds could significantly help stabilize the foreign exchange market.
“Part of Iran’s blocked funds in Iraq has been earmarked for hajj pilgrims, and portions have been used for basic goods,” the Iranian trade official told local media.
In April, Eshaq said that Tehran and Baghdad had “found several solutions to receive our debt from the Central Bank of Iraq, so Iraq’s outstanding payments to Iran will be cleared gradually within the next three to five months.”
The US green light to release the money comes following reports that Iranian and US negotiators recently held “proximity talks“ in the Omani capital Muscat, with Omani officials going between them and passing messages.
According to the sources, the talks aimed to deescalate tensions as a basis for future talks on a new nuclear agreement between the parties.
In 2015 Iran and several world powers, including the US, signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which placed significant restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief.
Washington withdrew from the deal in 2018 and launched a “maximum pressure” sanctions campaign against the Islamic Republic.
After months of talks between Iran and the remaining signatories of the JCPOA, last September — under heavy Israeli pressure — the US put an end to any hope of reviving the deal.
Since then, Iran has restored ties with Saudi Arabia under a Chinese-brokered deal and is reportedly working alongside Gulf countries to form a “naval alliance” to protect the northern Indian Ocean.
Earlier this week, Iranian media reported that $24 billion of Iran’s frozen assets would soon be released from Iraq and South Korea.
Due to the sanctions on Iran, Iraq is only allowed to receive Iranian energy imports and pay for them via waivers that extend up to 120 days, a policy implemented by former US president Donald Trump and kept in place by Biden. The sanctions have also hampered Iraq’s payments for imports, putting it in heavy arrears.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/12/2023 – 02:00 - Escobar: The Hegemon Will Go Full Hybrid War Against BRICS+
Escobar: The Hegemon Will Go Full Hybrid War Against BRICS+
U.S. Think Tank Land hacks are not exactly familiar with Montaigne: “On the highest throne in the world, we still sit only on our own bottom.”
Hubris leads these specimens to presume their flaccid bottoms are placed high above anyone else’s. The result is that a trademark mix of arrogance and ignorance always ends up unmasking the predictability of their forecasts.
U.S. Think Tank Land – inebriated by their self-created aura of power – always telegraphs in advance what they’re up to. That was the case with Project 9/11 (“We need a new Pearl Harbor”). That was the case with the RAND report on over-extending and unbalancing Russia. And now that’s the case with the incoming American War on BRICS as outlined by the chairman of the New York-based Eurasia Group.
It’s always painful to suffer through the intellectually shallow Think Thank Land wet dreams masquerading as “analyses” but in this particular case key Global South players need to be firmly aware of what awaits them.
Predictably, the whole “analysis” revolves around the imminent, devastating humiliation to the Hegemon and its vassals: what happens next in country 404, also known – for now – as Ukraine.
Brazil, India, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia are dismissed as “four major fence-sitters” when it comes to the U.S./NATO proxy war against Russia. It’s the same old “you’re with us or against us” trope.
But then we are presented with the six major Global South culprits: Brazil, India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa and Turkey.
In yet another crude, parochial remix of a catch phrase referring to the American elections, these are qualified as the key swing states the Hegemon will need to seduce, cajole, intimidate and threaten to assure its dominance of the “rules-based international order”.
Saudi Arabia and South Africa are added to a previous report focused on the “four major fence sitters”.
The swing state manifesto notes that all of them are G-20 members and “active in both geopolitics and geoeconomics” (Oh really? Now that’s some breaking news). What it does not say is that three of them are BRICS members (Brazil, India, South Africa) and the other three are serious candidates to join BRICS+: deliberations will be turbo-charged in the upcoming BRICS summit in South Africa in August.
So it’s clear what the swing state manifesto is all about: a call to arms for the American war against the BRICS.
So BRICS packs no punch
The swing state manifesto harbors wet dreams of near-shoring and friend-shoring moving away from China. Nonsense: enhanced intra-BRICS+ trade will be the order of the day from now on, especially with the expanded practice of trade in national currencies (see Brazil-China or within ASEAN), the first step towards widespread de-dollarization.
The swing states are characterized as “not a new incarnation” of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), or “other groupings dominated by the Global South, such as the G-77 and BRICS.”
Talk about exponential nonsense. This is all about BRICS+ – which now has the tools (including the NDB, the BRICS bank) to do what NAM could never accomplish during the Cold War: establish the framework of a new system bypassing Bretton Woods and the interlocking coercion mechanisms of the Hegemon.
As for stating that BRICS has not “packed much punch” that only reveals U.S. Think Tank Land’s cosmic ignorance of what BRICS + is all about.
The position of India is only considered in terms of being a Quad member – defined as a “U.S.-led effort to balance China”. Correction: contain China.
As for the “choice” of swing states of choosing between the U.S. and China on semiconductors, AI, quantum technology, 5G and biotechnology, that’s not about “choice”, but to what level they are able to sustain Hegemon pressure to demonize Chinese technology.
Pressure on Brazil, for instance, is much heavier than on Saudi Arabia or Indonesia.
In the end though, it all comes back to the Straussian neocon obsession: Ukraine. The swing states, in varying degrees, are guilty of opposing and/or undermining the sanctions dementia. Turkey, for instance, is accused of channeling “dual-use” items to Russia. Not a word on the U.S. financial system viciously forcing Turkish banks to stop accepting Russian MIR payment cards.
On the wishful thinking front, this pearl stands out among many: “The Kremlin seems to believe it can make a living by turning its trade south and east.”
Well, Russia is already making excellent living all across Eurasia and a vast expanse of the Global South.
The economy has re-started (drivers are domestic tourism, machine building and the metals industry); inflation is at only 2.5% (lower than anywhere in the EU); unemployment is at only 3.5%; and head of the Central Bank Elvira Nabiullina said that by 2024 growth will be back to pre-SMO levels.
U.S. Think Tankland is congenitally incapable of understanding that even if BRICS+ nations may still have some serious trade credit issues to iron out, Moscow has already shown how even an implied hard backing of a currency can turn out to be an instant game changer. Russia is at the same time backing not only the ruble but also the yuan.
Meanwhile, the Global South de-dollarization caravan moves on relentlessly – as much as the proxy war hyenas may keep howling in the dark. When the full – staggering – scale of NATO’s humiliation in Ukraine unfolds, arguably by mid-summer, the de-dollarization high-speed train will be fully booked, non-stop.
“Offer you can’t refuse” rides again
If all of the above was not already silly enough, the swing state manifesto doubles down on the nuclear front, accusing them of “future (nuclear) proliferation risks”: especially – who else – Iran.
By the way, Russia is defined as a “middle power, but one in decline”. And “hyper-revisionist” to boot. Oh dear: with “experts” like this, the Americans don’t even need enemies.
And yes, by now you may be excused to roar with laughter: China is accused of attempting to direct and co-opt BRICS. The “suggestion” – or “offer you can’t refuse”, Mafia-style – to the swing states is that you cannot join a “Chinese-directed, Russian-assisted body actively opposing the United States.”
The message is unmistakable: “The threat of a Sino-Russian co-optation of an expanded BRICS—and through it, of the global south—is real, and it needs to be addressed.”
And here are the recipes to address it. Invite most swing states to the G-7 (that was a miserable failure). “More high-level visits by key U.S. diplomats” (welcome to cookie distributor Vicky Nuland). And last but not least, Mafia tactics, as in a “nimbler trade strategy that begins to crack the nut of access to the U.S. market.”
The swing state manifesto could not but let the Top Cat out of the bag, predicting, rather praying that “U.S.-China tensions rise dramatically and turn into a Cold War-style confrontation.” That’s already happening – unleashed by the Hegemon.
So what would be the follow-up? The much sought after and spun-to-death “decoupling”, forcing the swing states to “align more closely with one side or the other”. It’s “you’re with us or against us” all over again.
So there you go. Raw, in the flesh – with inbuilt veiled threats. The Hybrid War 2.0 against the Global South has not even started. Swing states, you have all been warned.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 23:30 - US Musician, Ex-Paratrooper Arrested In Moscow On Drug Charges
US Musician, Ex-Paratrooper Arrested In Moscow On Drug Charges
Another American has been arrested in Russia and could be detained for “several years” – CNN is reporting.
Statements from the Russian judiciary have identified that “Travis Michael Leek” (the spelling of his name in English statements produced by Russian media have been disputed – and it’s since been corrected in some Western reports to Leake) was detained Saturday on drug-related charges.
Moscow’s courts of general jurisdiction issued a statement on Telegram saying he was arrested after “the Khamovniki District Court of Moscow took a preventive measure against an American citizen.”
He’s said to be a US veteran, specifically a former paratrooper:
“The former paratrooper and musician is accused of engaging in the narcotics business through attracting young people,” the Moscow court statement said.
The district court statement alleged that he “organized the sale of drugs to young people.” He’ll be in custody “until Aug. 6, 2023,” pending possible trial. Specifically he’s accused of selling mephedrone, which has effects commonly described as close to cocaine and MDMA.
Leake has reportedly lived in Russia for many years and is known as a musician and music producer. His family has said he goes by Travis.
The State Department in a statement indicated it is “aware” of Leake’s detention, saying “We are aware of reports of the recent arrest of a US citizen in Moscow.” It added: “When a US citizen is detained overseas, the department pursues consular access as soon as possible and works to provide all appropriate consular assistance.”
Local media reported Leake’s initial statement upon his arrest as follows: “I don’t understand why I’m here. I don’t admit guilt, I don’t believe I could have done what I’m accused of because I don’t know what I’m accused of,” he said.
Washington is likely to see this as part of Russia’s ongoing crackdown on Americans in its territory amid the backdrop of the Ukraine war and ratcheting punitive economic sanctions from the West.
Despite the December prisoner swap involving WNBA star Brittney Griner and Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout, other Americans which Washington declared ‘unlawfully detained’ are still in Russian detention.
This includes Wall Street Journal correspondent Evan Gershkovich, former US Marine Paul Whelan, and school teacher Marc Fogel – the latter who was arrested in August 2021 for possessing medical marijuana. Being caught with drugs also tends to get Americans put under immediate suspicion of “smuggling” or intent to distribute by Russian authorities, which appears to be happening in the case of Travis Leake’s detention.
Leake is actually well-known in the Moscow music scene, and appeared on Anthony Bourdain’s “Parts Unknown” in 2014:
CNN filmed with Leake in 2014 for an episode of Parts Unknown in Moscow and St Petersburg. Host Anthony Bourdain had personally handpicked Leake to participate in the show.
In the episode, Leake talked about his frustrations with censorship and relayed an incident involving his band and MTV. “This was a documentary series about musicians standing up and risking their lives in some cases, to stand up against government abuse of power, government corruption,” he said. “And yet, a foreign government was able to editorially control what Americans viewers see on their TV screens. That to me is a scandal of epic proportion.”
Darya Tarasova, who had produced the episode, said the “band wasn’t that famous but Travis and his friends had been very vocal about the freedom of speech and state oppression in Russia. “Bourdain really liked that interview,” she said.
Friends of Leake’s have expressed surprise that he chose to stay in Russia even after Putin ordered the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. The US has with increased alarm warned Americans to leave Russia.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 23:00 - Eric Peters: "Our Nation's Competitors And Adversaries Are Taking Full Advantage Of Gary Gensler's Hubris"
Eric Peters: “Our Nation’s Competitors And Adversaries Are Taking Full Advantage Of Gary Gensler’s Hubris”
By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management
“Look, we don’t need more digital currency,” said the Chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission, attempting to somehow justify his agency’s aggressive actions against the crypto industry as a whole.
“We already have digital currency: it’s called the US dollar. It’s called the euro, or it’s called the yen; they’re all digital right now. We already have digital investments,” continued the regulator, expressing a rather strong opinion for an unelected civil servant leading an agency whose mission is “protecting investors, maintaining fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitating capital formation.”
But of course, the SEC is just one of many US financial regulators, which in aggregate have helped foster the conditions necessary to host the world’s deepest capital markets. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is another regulator. The Federal Reserve too. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. The Financial Industry Regulatory Association. And then myriad US state banking, insurance, and securities regulators.
With such a tangled web of overlapping bureaucracies, there are naturally countless individual ambitions, political agendas, inter-agency tensions, territorial disputes, land grabs, you name it.
And the whole thing rests upon the great American foundation of democracy, rule of law, property rights, due process, and at least in theory, free market capitalism. Traditionally, such agencies have been agnostic to technologies, recognizing that while the nature of markets and humans are eternal, the tools we invent to connect them advance through time.
The technologically driven financial market efficiencies made in the past century have been utterly extraordinary, helping fuel American dominance. And yet, here we are, with one of the nation’s most powerful regulators apparently believing it knows better than other regulators and the wisdom of free markets, taking aim at a specific technology and a nascent industry.
While our nation’s competitors and adversaries take full advantage of the opportunity created by such hubris.
* * *
Anecdote
“The internet now carries the flag of being subversive, possibly rebellious, chaotic, nihilistic,” said David Bowie in a 1999 BBC interview [here].
“I embrace the idea that there is a new demystification process going on between artist and audience,” continued the visionary, peering over the horizon, glimpsing a world of peer-to-peer connection, synergy, exchange.
“Up until the mid-1970s, we were still living in the guise of a single and absolute created society, where there were known truths and known lies. And there was no duplicity or pluralism about the things we believed in.” The BBC interviewer remained skeptical throughout, often smug.
“That started to break down rapidly in the 1970s. And the idea of a duality in the way that we live – there are always two, three, four, five sides to every question. The singularity disappeared,” explained Ziggy Stardust, iconoclast, genius.
“And I think that has produced a medium such as the internet, which absolutely establishes and shows us that we are living in total fragmentation.”
The interviewer clung to his small mindedness, a harmless man. Helpful in fact, because such people remind us of the profound dangers we face when allowing such characters to ascend to positions of power, governing our activities, telling us what we can and cannot build, explore, limiting human potential.
“I don’t think we’ve even seen the tip of the iceberg. I think the potential of what the internet is going to do to society, both good and bad, is unimaginable. I think we’re on the cusp of something invigorating and terrifying,” said Bowie. “It is an alien life form. Is there life on Mars? Yes, it’s just landed here,” explained the Space Oddity.
“The context and state of content is going to be so different to anything we can really envisage at the moment. Where the interplay between user and provider will be so sympatico that it will crash our ideas of what mediums are all about.” Great artists help us imagine our many possible futures, and we then collectively conjure one from the nothingness.
“It is happening in every form. The idea that the piece of work is not finished until the audience come to it and add their own interpretation, and what the piece of art is about is the grey space in the middle,” explained Bowie. “That grey space in the middle is what the 21st century is going to be about.”
Blow Outs
Binance withdrew its bid to acquire FTX on Nov 9th last year. Sequoia wrote down its $210mm investment to $0 that day. The SEC and DOJ opened investigations. The NYT ran this headline: “Is this Crypto’s Lehman Moment?” Markets plunged. There was no TARP. No lender of last resort. No Fed bailout. In fact, nearly every central bank on the planet was proceeding with a historic rate-hiking cycle. Bitcoin fell to around $15,800 on that scary day in Nov. Ethereum hit $1,100. Basically, the lows. They’re now up 63% and 59% respectively.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 22:30 - Covid-19 Created In Wuhan Lab Through Classified Bioweapons Program: US Investigators
Covid-19 Created In Wuhan Lab Through Classified Bioweapons Program: US Investigators
Researchers in Wuhan, China working with the Chinese military were genetically manipulating the world’s deadliest coronaviruses to create a new mutant virus right around the time that the Covid-19 pandemic began, according to the Sunday Times, which has reviewed hundreds of documents, “Including previously confidential reports, internal memos, scientific papers and email correspondence that has been obtained through sources or by freedom of information campaigners in the three years since the pandemic started.”
EcoHealth Alliance president Peter Daszak (L) collaborated with Dr. Shi Zhengli (R) The Times also interviewed the US State Department investigators, including experts specializing in China, emerging pandemic threats and biowarfare – who conducted what the outlet describes as “the first significant US inquiry into the origins of the Covid-19 outbreak.”
[O]ur new investigation paints the clearest picture yet of what happened in the Wuhan laboratory.
The facility, which had started hunting the origins of the Sars virus in 2003, attracted US government funding through a New York-based charity whose president was a British-born and educated zoologist. America’s leading coronavirus scientist shared cutting-edge virus manipulation techniques.
The institute was engaged in increasingly risky experiments on coronaviruses it gathered from bat caves in southern China. Initially, it made its findings public and argued the associated risks were justified because the work might help science develop vaccines.
This changed in 2016 after researchers discovered a new type of coronavirus in a mineshaft in Mojiang in Yunnan province where people had died from symptoms similar to Sars. –Sunday Times
The Mojiang mineshaft strain which killed several people are now recognized as ‘the only members of Covid-19’s immediate family known to have been in existence pre-pandemic,’ and were transported to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. After that, “The trail of papers starts to go dark,” said one US investigator. “That’s exactly when the classified programme kicked off. My view is that the reason Mojiang was covered up was due to military secrecy related to [the army’s] pursuit of dual use capabilities in virological biological weapons and vaccines.”
According to US investigators, the WIV embarked on a classified program to make the mineshaft viruses more transmissible to humans, which they believe led to the creation of Covid-19, which then leaked into the city of Wuhan following a lab accident.
“It has become increasingly clear that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was involved in the creation, promulgation and cover-up of the Covid-19 pandemic,” said one of the investigators, who found evidence that researchers working on said experiments were hospitalized in November 2019 with Covid-like symptoms, just one month before the West became aware of the pandemic. One of the victims’ relatives died as well.
“We were rock-solid confident that this was likely Covid-19 because they were working on advanced coronavirus research in the laboratory. They’re trained biologists in their thirties and forties. Thirty-five-year-old scientists don’t get very sick with influenza,” said an investigator.
Meanwhile, a separate analysis reveals that the epicenter of the original Covid-19 outbreak was close to the WIV, not Wuhan’s “wet” wildlife market as previously thought.
“I interviewed scientists in Asia who have close relationships with the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” said one of the investigators, who said they had evidence that the WIV was also working on a Covid-19 vaccine before the pandemic. “They told me it is their belief that there was vaccine research going on in the fall of 2019, pertinent to Covid-19 vaccination.”
Rutgers University microbiologist, Richard Ebright, called the experiments “by far the most reckless and dangerous research on coronaviruses — or indeed on any viruses — known to have been undertaken at any time in any location.”
Humanized mouse tests
Professor Ralph Baric of the University of North Carolina is a pioneer in cutting-edge experiments which use a technique to fuse together different pathogens by combining their genes. To test the effects of these chimeric coronaviruses, Baric created “humanized” mice, which were injected with genes that allowed them to develop lungs and vascular systems similar to those of a human.
“Ominously, tools exist for simultaneously modifying the genomes for increased virulence [and] transmissibility,” Baric wrote in a 2006 paper. “These bioweapons could be targeted to humans, domesticated animals or crops, causing a devastating impact on human civilisation.”
Meanwhile, by 2012, campaigners and scientists were beginning to push back against gain-of-function research due to its inherent dangers.
“About 30 labs now are working with live Sars virus worldwide. The probability of escape from at least one laboratory is high,” wrote Lynn Klotz, a senior fellow at the Centre for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. “Would one in ten escapes lead to a major outbreak or pandemic? One in a hundred? One in a thousand? No one knows. But for any of these probabilities, the likelihood-weighted number of victims and deaths would be intolerably high.”
In 2013, WIV researcher Shi Zhengli called Ralph Baric to ask for his help in growing sufficient quantities of a Sars-like virus found in a cave, SHC014, in order to conduct testing. Baric agreed, and the WIV provided him with the genetic sequence for the strain so that he could recreate genes from its spike proteins. Baric’s team inserted SHC014s’s “spike gene” into a copy of the original Sars virus they created in North Carolina and tested out the new chimeric virus on humanized mice.
Meanwhile in May 2014, EcoHealth Alliance was awarded $3.7 million from the US National Institutes of Health – of which over $500,000 went to fund lab equipment purchases at the WIV, and $130,000 went directly towards Shi and her assistant.
Then, the Obama administration banned gain-of-function research, but a ‘loophole’ allowed the practice to proceed if deemed ‘urgent and safe.’ Baric argued just this to the NIH, which granted approval.
The results of Baric’s experiment with the genetic sequence given to him by Shi were published in co-authored research in November 2015. The combined Sars copy and SHC014 virus was a potential mass killer. It caused severe lung damage in humanised mice and was resistant to vaccines developed for Sars. The paper acknowledged this might have been an experiment that was too dangerous.
It caused a big stir. “If the virus escaped, nobody could predict the trajectory,” warned Simon Wain-Hobson, a virologist at the Pasteur Institute in Paris. -Sunday Times
And in May, 2016, Daszak told a New York conference that She was moving “closer and closer” to obtaining a virus “that could really become pathogenic in people.”
By 2017, She wrote in a paper that her team had sought to create eight mutant coronaviruses based on strains found in the Shitou cave – two of which were found to infect human cells. The research had been carried out in BSL-2 laboratories, while US guidelines for such research require BSL-3 precautions, which include self-closing doors, filtered air and scientists equipped with full PPE while under medical supervision, the Times writes.
We talk a lot about inequality.
Well try these numbers:
20 million people dead.
1 billion sickened
8 billion lives put into a deep freeze.All because 1 lab wanted to do audaciously dangerous virus experiments.
And 1 US official insisted on funding it. https://t.co/i5EXAKiDOx
— Ashley Rindsberg (@AshleyRindsberg) June 11, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Enter smoking gun
As Shi was creating her eight mutant viruses, the WIV took ‘another perilous leap forward’ with their work on the Shitou cave viruses – in what Ebright describes as the most dangerous coronavirus experiment ever undertaken – which was funded in part by EcoHealth’s grant money.
The scientists selected three lab-grown mutant viruses, created by mixing Sars-like viruses with WIV1, which had all been shown to infect human cells. These mutants were then injected into the noses of albino mice with human lungs.
The aim was to see whether the viruses had the potential to spark a pandemic if they were fused together, as they might do naturally in a bat colony. The original WIV1 virus was injected into another group of mice as a comparison.
The mice were monitored in their cages over two weeks. The results were shocking. The mutant virus that fused WIV1 with SHC014 killed 75 per cent of the rodents and was three times as lethal as the original WIV1. In the early days of the infection, the mice’s human-like lungs were found to contain a viral load up to 10,000 times greater than the original WIV1 virus.
The scientists had created a highly infectious super-coronavirus with a terrifying kill-rate that in all probability would never have emerged in nature. The new genetically modified virus was not Covid-19 but it might have been even more deadly if it had leaked. -Sunday Times
In his April 2018 annual progress report the WIV, EcoHealth’s Peter Daszak omitted the mice deaths. He also failed to mention them in his grant renewal application filed with the NIH later that year. In fact, he said they had only experienced “mild Sars-like clinical signs.“
“What really went on inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid erupted?”
“Fresh evidence drawn from confidential files reveals Chinese scientists spliced together deadly pathogens shortly before the pandemic, the Sunday Times Insight team report”https://t.co/6P2CzACMLP https://t.co/dfB12nqNTL pic.twitter.com/jdkpZHcjJe
— Richard H. Ebright (@R_H_Ebright) June 11, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
So Daszak lied, as the experiment had actually killed six of the eight infected humanized mice.
Daszak eventually came clean, but says that his statement about “mild” illnesses was based on preliminary results (despite the fact that the mice had died months before he issued his statement).
US State Department weighs in
As the global lockdowns were coming to an end, the US State Department’s investigators were given access to secret intelligence on China’s coronavirus experiments in the months and years before Covid-19 emerged. Over a dozen investigators, given unparalleled access to “metadata, phone information and internet information” from US intelligence intercepts, published a report in early 2021 which made two assertions; that the WIV was experimenting on a strain, RaTG13, found in the Moijang mine, and that covert military research – including experiments performed on animal test subjects, was being conducted right before the pandemic.
“They were working with the nine different Covid variants,” said one of the investigators, adding that they think one virus at the WIV was an even closer match to Covid-19 than RaTG13.
“We are confident they were working on a closer unpublished variant — possibly collected in Mojiang.”
And of course, others believe that Covid-19 was largely a US production…
Scientists exposed the US created the COVID virus in a US Lab in the recent COVID Summit. pic.twitter.com/CtsE9mDpKJ
— Alexander #LM8 (@HaalandGoalKing) June 11, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Either way, there you have it. Apologies from the MSM, fact checkers, social media companies, and the Biden administration can be submitted to tyler@zerohedge.com.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 22:00 - No Collapse Is The Real Dystopia
No Collapse Is The Real Dystopia
Authored by Robert Stark via Substack,
So far the 2020s seem more chaotic than previous decades. Based upon current events, economic and sociological data, and looking at historical cycles like the 4th turning theory and Peter Turchin’s research, it looks like there will be a major historical crisis this decade. In contrast, the 2010s felt very stagnant, despite the recession at the beginning of the decade, and political movements such as Occupy Wall Street, nationalism and populism in Europe, the Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders movements, and the beginning of the Great Awokening. Looking specifically at years, 2016 was a turning point with the election of Trump, 2017 was somewhat chaotic with political strife between antifa and the alt-right, then both 2018 and 2019 felt very stagnant. Obviously 2020 was a chaotic year with the pandemic, as well as the BLM riots and acceleration in woke politics and cancel culture, with certain moments feeling apocalyptic. However, with the exception of Jan6th, 2021 was another stagnant year, with covid easing and the peak of the stimulus bubble and market euphoria. Also in 2021, the right was totally demoralized and cancel culture had become the new normal. There was some return to chaos in 2022, with the onset of inflation and the Ukraine war. While this year has seen a banking crisis, dept default scare, migrant crisis, more political turmoil such as the inditement of Trump, and increased political instability overseas, overall things feel stagnant again, or perhaps a calm before the storm.
The perma bulls just won’t give up
Source: Maverick of Wall Street
It initially seemed that the Silicon Valley Bank crash would put an end to copes about economic recovery. Despite recent fear of a debt default, major vulnerabilities in the financial system, higher interest rates, unprecedented levels of debt, sticky inflation, and the worst yield curve inversion in over 30 years, there is still a lot of bullish propaganda. For instance talk of a mild recession, soft landing, a new bull market, and that we may have even dodged a recession altogether. The bulls’ basis for optimism is a combination of the debt ceiling deal, official unemployment stats still being low, a slight dip in inflation, and hope for a pause in Fed rate hikes. Not to mention the new cope of an AI boom saving the economy and ushering in a new bull market, which is just creating another bubble in stocks, on top of the existing super bubble. This propaganda is in line with Janet Yellen’s infamous statement that we will never have another financial crisis again in our lifetime, the arrogance that the system is perfected to withstand collapse. The cringiest bull take so far, is that the economy is doing great because of the exorbitant prices for Taylor Swift concert tickets, as obviously there are many affluent girls who use Daddy’s credit card to buy tickets. If anything this just further shows the scope of the debt bubble, and high levels of income inequality. The current vibes remind me a lot of January’s bullishness before the banking crash, though we will probably see some repeat of cycles of coming close to the imminent crash, followed by more copes of a recovery, before the inevitable big crash.
While bears have been vindicated, looking at the overall trajectory of the economy, there have been times over the past few years, when bears appeared wrong or overshot their predictions about the severity of an impending crisis. For starters, expecting that covid would cause a depression, which did not anticipate stimulus propping up the economy, at least for the time being. There was also concern, including from the mainstream media, that the Ukraine war was going to cause a global famine, the worst in modern history, by last fall. However, there was a successful deal, negotiated by Turkey between Russia and Ukraine, to allow the safe shipments of Ukrainian grain through the Black Sea. The question is whether a prolonged conflict, delaying Ukraine’s planting season, will mean a global famine within the next few years. There were also expectations that Europe would have a catastrophic energy crisis last winter, which also did not pan out. Even Russia limiting oil production did not spike oil prices as high as anticipated. Europe lucked out by having a mild winter, and enough petrol and natural gas saved up in their reserves, and extra help from America, as Biden depleted America’s strategic petrol reserves. Overall it was a combination of certain supply chain issues getting resolved from the pandemic and war, but also a decline in global demand, and just kicking the can down the road.
In order to have a healthier economy, it is necessary for super bubbles to pop, and a similar case can be made for social and political ills. Since the pandemic mostly exacerbated the worst trends of the 2010s, such as social atomization, the mental health crisis, the sex recession, income inequality, the establishment consolidating power, cancel culture, cultural decay, and overall cringe, the question is whether a severe economic collapse would clear out societal bullshit or just make these problems worse. An economic soft landing or stagnation scenario would likely exacerbate the worst existing trends, so I totally get the doomers and accelerationists who cheer on the collapse. However, dissidents, who are often in despair, or feel that the current system is stacked against them, have this fantasy cope, that when the big collapse occurs, either they or their ingroup will do better or be liberated from systems of oppression, which is incredibly naïve. Dissidents have no institutional power and this doomer mentality is very passive, primarily fulfilling a psychological need. If one’s life and inner psyche is in chaos, one tends to want to see the cold indifferent society around them collapse as well.
Doomers rely upon this fantasy that one external shock to the system, or Black Swan event, will cause the entire system to come crashing down like a house of cards, but the system has shown itself to be much more resilient than that. California shows that a one party liberal hegemonic system can last much longer than one would think, though it has been sustained by Silicon Valley revenue, and the exodus of the middle class acting as a safety valve for discontent. The financial propagandists who talk of a soft landing are partially correct, in that it is a soft landing or no recession for those at the top. In fact, America is working great for the people who run it, but not for those with no power and influence. The incoming severe recession may just mean more urban blight, homeless encampments, increased deaths of despair, and widening income inequality, but not necessarily a collapse of institutional power.
Anonymous 4chan post from 2013
The prophet of despair, Michel Houellebecq, has been totally vindicated in his prediction from the beginning of the pandemic that post pandemic life would be “the same but worse.” Collapses are often gradual and not overnight, and not necessarily a Mad Max scenario, but rather collapse just means a lower quality of life for most people. This is even true for third world nations that have collapsed, like Sri Lanka, or with the current high levels of inflation in Turkey and Argentina. “The nightmare is not the “collapse.” The nightmare is that they pull off the End of History, and things just gradually get worse – more crime, more poverty, more degeneracy, fewer services, and a population incapable of anything other than demanding larger doses of the poison,” tweets VDARE’s James Kirkpatrick. Basically a gradual decline in people’s quality of life or a frog in the boiling pan scenario, where people just get used to degradation, and may never actually reach that breaking point but rather merely adjust their expectations and standards. Dissidents rely upon this fantasy of the masses awakening and rebellion, but with lower wages and higher unemployment, there is just greater leverage to those in power and less to the people. The political elite must factor in that some type of economic crash means that people will be desperate enough to work for little or nothing and give up their freedoms and autonomy. The question is whether Americans, especially middle class Whites, can psychologically handle the decline and transition to a post-American order?
Federal Reserve Chart of change in Foreign Exchange Reserve
A probable scenario is where the US economy has a quasi-soft landing but at the expense of the rest of the world, by abusing the reserve currency to export inflation abroad. For instance, nations being forced to play catch up with the Fed’s rate hikes in order to save their currencies. This will accelerate the migrant crisis and increase resentment against America, with the potential for retaliation against the dollar. America would go into a depression, if it lost its reserve currency status, but the dollar still dominates foreign exchange reserves, with no clear competitor. On a similar note, an AI boom could turn the economy around after the recession, perhaps even a period of rapid economic expansion, but would also exacerbate income inequality and gradually erode the value of labor.
While there will likely not be a debt default anytime soon, the main danger now is the Treasury being forced to sell treasury bills and bonds, which would drain liquidity in the financial markets, thus exacerbating the banking crisis, push commercial real estate over the edge, and cause a pension solvency crisis. Not to mention, exacerbating the financial trap that the Fed is in, where if the Fed pivots or bails out the banks, inflation resurges, but if rates are kept high, there will be a liquidity and debt default crisis. Whether this will be the financial event that causes the big crash is hard to say. Overall, the main vulnerability in the economy is the sheer levels of debt, both public and private, in which the response will likely be inflating the dollar to pay off massive debts.
The crash has taken much longer than anticipated, like watching paint dry, and I am done trying to guess when this mega crash will occur. Generally I take the view that the economic bubble is just being propped up further, and that the inevitable is being delaying, which will lead to a much worse economic crisis. However, what if this is all part of a successful managed decline, or manufactured stability, which is really depressing and demoralizing. America is in decline but it is a stretch to say collapse, but rather a long term multidecade process, a slow motion decay, analogous to Rome’s decline as a late stage empire, which took a very long period of time to fall. America has both advantages over other nations and major vulnerabilities.
* * *
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 21:30 - 12 Philly Cops Fired For Social Media Posts Can Sue The City, Appeals Court Rules
12 Philly Cops Fired For Social Media Posts Can Sue The City, Appeals Court Rules
Police in Philadelphia can keep fighting back over being fired or suspended due to allegedly “racist and violent” social media posts, an appeals court ruled late last week.
A Federal appeals court ruled this week that the officers can file a lawsuit against the city claiming their First Amendment rights were violated due to their terminations, according to WHYY.
In total, a dozen offers were fired for their social media posts, the report says. Their social media accounts “were included in a database, published in 2019, that catalogued thousands of bigoted or violent posts by active-duty and former police officers in several states”, WHYY reported.
About 200 officers were disciplined and 15 were taken off the job, the report says. 12 of those 15 ultimately went on to file a civil rights lawsuit against the city, but it was dismissed last year, with the presiding judge ruling that “the officers’ posts had undermined public trust in the department and violated the city’s social media policy”.
U.S. District Judge Petrese Tucker wrote in his ruling last year that the officers “played racist bingo, mocking as many ethnic or religious groups as possible”.
But on Thursday, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said it was too early to throw out the case, citing “a lack of clarity over the provenance of some of the posts”. The appeals court did, however, write that: “Posts like the officers’ have the capacity to confirm the community’s worst fears about bias in policing.”
The 3rd Circuit said it doesn’t “condone the officers’ use of social media to mock, disparage, and threaten the very communities they were sworn to protect.”
The appeals court said the plaintiffs “undoubtedly face a steep uphill climb in ultimately proving their case”, but sent the case back to the lower courts nonetheless.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 21:00 - Can Trump Clean The Augean Stables On The Potomac?
Can Trump Clean The Augean Stables On The Potomac?
Authored by Roger Kimball via American Greatness,
Joe Biden’s Department of Justice is as corrupt as Hunter Biden’s laptop. Few people of either party trust it, nor should they…
There is a reason that, since before the time of the emperor Tiberius, treason trials have been a favorite tool of totalitarians. Such proceedings allow them to get rid of nearly anyone they dislike. Successfully brand someone a “traitor,” an “enemy of the state,” and, bang, into the oubliette they go.
I think the treason trial is the appropriate heuristic for what is happening, and what has been happening to Donald Trump ever since 2015 when he descended the escalator.
The charge that Trump was “Putin’s poodle,” a “Russian asset,” etc., during the Russia collusion hoax was a sort of treason trial. And remember how elaborate it all was, a veritable glass onion, thanks in large part to Hillary Clinton, whose campaign concocted, paid for, and disseminated the infamous fantasy “dossier” fabricated by former MI6 spook Christopher Steele. And it was Hillary, remember, who first broadcast the charge that servers in Trump Tower were secretly communicating with Russia’s Alfa Bank. The Justice Department, the FBI, the intelligence services—all were in on that game.
Trump’s two impeachments were episodes in the long-running treason trial, as was Liz Cheney’s January 6 show trial, as are the still unfolding series of indictments that have dogged his footsteps with increasing ferocity as the 2024 election looms and Trump’s poll numbers stubbornly refuse to recede.
A lot of legal hermeneutical ingenuity has been lavished on the current criminal indictment, a 37-count blockbuster revolving around charges that Trump mishandled classified documents he had stuffed away at his Mar-a-Lago mansion in Palm Beach. I think those analyses are mostly beside the point, so much wasted foolscap. The indictment, which histrionically relies heavily on the 1917 Espionage Act, is, when looked at with a sufficiently jaundiced eye, an amusing performance. Macbeth would have said it was a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
You, dear reader, know differently. You know it is the latest writ of attainder pronounced against Trump by the regime.
For what, when you come down to it, is Trump’s crime? Please don’t tell me it has something to do with his possession of classified documents or “obstruction” of an official proceeding. Former presidents have very wide latitude with respect to managing documents, as was set forth explicitly by the Presidential Records Act in the late 1970s.
It’s a different matter with the 1,800 boxes of documents that Joe Biden glommed onto in his days in the Senate and as vice president. I believe they are still moldering under his Corvette in the garage of his Delaware residence, having wound up there after a trip through D.C.’s Chinatown and the Penn Biden Center, a facility paid for, as was Biden’s $900,000 stipend at the University of Pennsylvania, by China.
This is the moment we return to Hillary Clinton and her “home-brew” email server through which she ran all manner of classified correspondence. According to disgraced former FBI Director James “Higher Loyalty” Comey, “no reasonable prosecutor” would go after Hillary, even though she deleted thousands of emails and destroyed mobile phones and hard drives after being subpoenaed.
If you are hearing the winds murmur “two-tier system of justice” you are not imagining things. Donald Trump, as president, could declassify anything he wished. Neither Joe Biden nor Hillary Clinton had that authority. Yet Trump has to show up in Court on Tuesday to face criminal charges, while Hillary and (so far) Joe Biden skate.
I say “so far” with respect to Biden because things are heating up for the Senescent One. Margot Cleveland, writing at The Federalist, noted the curious timing of the Trump indictment: “The news of the indictment quickly suffocated coverage of a confidential human source’s claim that the Ukrainian founder of Burisma had paid a $5 million bribe to Joe Biden.” Hmm.
Nothing to see here, gents, move along please.
But Cleveland is right. “The entire case [against Trump] was a set-up from the start.” Yet one wonders, set up by whom? And what was the supposed predicate? I ask again, what was Trump’s crime?
I think it was a dual manifestation of one crime. His original sin, his unforgivable or eternal sin, was being elected president in 2016. The regime endeavored to expiate that sin by hampering Trump, then by impeaching him. But here he is, persisting in his folly, seeking to commit the same tort again. Conclusion: he must be destroyed. Hence the treason trial masquerading as a legitimate judicial proceeding.
Reflecting on the latest chapter in the tale we might call “The Persecution of Donald Trump,” the Wall Street Journal noted that this is “a fraught moment for American democracy. For the first time in U.S. history, the prosecutorial power of the federal government has been used against a former President who is also running against the sitting President.”
Donald Trump is currently, and by a large margin, the front runner of the opposition party in the 2024 presidential campaign. The party in power is attempting to silence him, to take him out of the running, by mobilizing the police power of the state against him. This is the sort of thing one expects from banana-republic regimes in Africa and Central America. It could never happen, one would have said only a few years ago, in America.
But here we are. The indictment against Trump was formally brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith. But the Journal is right. Smith is just an errand boy. “Americans will inevitably see this as a Garland-Biden indictment,” they noted, “and they are right to think so.”
Indeed. Elon Musk, no fan of Trump’s, put his finger on an essential element in this saga: “There does seem,” he wrote on June 8, responding to the indictment, “to be far higher interest in pursuing Trump compared to other people in politics.”
How’s that for understatement? Almost as good, I’d say, as his deployment of the future tense in his follow-up sentence:
“Very important that the justice system rebut what appears to be differential enforcement or they will lose public trust.”
That ship has sailed, I regret to say.
Joe Biden’s Department of Justice is as corrupt as Hunter Biden’s laptop. Few people of either party trust it, nor should they. What we need now is a bold new Hercules who can cleanse the Augean stables on the Potomac. It seems unlikely, I know, and perhaps supremely ironical, but the name of that cleansing hero may just be Donald J. Trump.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 20:30 - Baby Boomers Are Moving To Vegas And Tampa, Millennials Prefer Austin: America's Great Migration In Real-Time
Baby Boomers Are Moving To Vegas And Tampa, Millennials Prefer Austin: America’s Great Migration In Real-Time
Until now, Bank of America would periodically publish a snapshot of consumer spending and retail sales that was based on real-time debt and credit card data, that provided a far more accurate economic picture months ahead the Census Bureau’s distorted, seasonally adjusted (frequently for political reasons) data. Now, it has expanded into geo-tracking, and in a time when we are seeing unprecedented migration patterns across the continental US, the bank has started using internal data on checking, savings, credit and/or other investment accounts to construct near real-time estimates of domestic migration flows, giving the bank and its clients an almost one year of extra insight over and ahead of Census Bureau data.
Cutting straight to the punchline, BofA finds pandemic migration trends are not reversing and America continues to see faster population inflow into sunbelt cities like Austin and Tampa. But, in a curious twist, BofA also finds that house prices are weakening even in cities with growing populations. Why? In addition to high mortgage rates that are dampening demand in the near term, demographic composition also matters. For example, the data shows that population inflows into Austin skew younger, which might be putting more upward pressure on rents instead of on home prices.
Looking through the current housing downturn, local housing markets with more Millennial and Baby Boomer residents could see strength as the former enter prime home-buying age and the latter downsize their houses or move after retirement. Bank of America data suggests Baby Boomers are relocating to Las Vegas and Tampa while Millennials prefer Austin. Both groups are leaving the larger cities of San Francisco and New York.
Let’s dig into the data.
A key theme that shaped the housing market during the pandemic was domestic migration (i.e., people moving within the US). While data from the Census Bureau is broken down by metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs), it is only updated annually and can be outdated for real time analysis.
Utilizing aggregated and anonymized Bank of America customer data, the bank has constructed near real-time estimates of domestic migration flows and found that pandemic migration trends are not reversing. Data as of 1Q 2023 suggests that cities that saw a large influx of people during the pandemic have still been growing faster than other cities in recent quarters. As Exhibit 1 shows, among the major MSAs, Austin saw the largest net inflow of population both during 2020-2021 and over the past four quarters.
Also high on the list are Tampa and Orlando, both with a net increase of customers of +0.8% between 1Q 2022 and 1Q 2023. Interestingly, while Phoenix and Las Vegas saw strong increases in population during the first two years of the pandemic, the pace of growth has slowed noticeably in recent quarters, up just 0.3% and 0.2% year-over-year (YoY), respectively, in 1Q 2023.
On the flip side, cities such as San Jose, San Francisco and New York saw the biggest outflow of people during the early years of the pandemic and the rate of decline in 2023 continues to be the highest among major MSAs.
Note that the analysis is based on the group of Bank of America customers who had an open consumer checking, savings, credit and/or other investment accounts for every quarter between 4Q 2018 and 1Q 2023. Migration pattern is then extracted based on customer home addresses. This methodology yields a fixed sample size and allows for granularity by demographic breakdowns.
Macro conditions outweigh population growth in the near term
Large population inflows usually increase both home and rental prices. However, home prices are slowing rapidly, according to data from Freddie Mac, even in cities with growing populations, including Austin. In Bank of America’s view, many variables are at play in the near term.
In 2020 and 2021, when both housing inventory and mortgage rates were low, cities with the most inward migration such as Austin and Tampa also witnessed the biggest increase in home prices (Exhibit 2). But, as Fed rate hikes pushed up borrowing costs for these homes, demand dampened despite continued population growth in these popular cities, which has led to a correction in home price appreciation.
In contrast to home prices, rental prices remain strong in cities with positive inflow of residents. In addition to the fact that population increases lead to higher demand for rental units, low affordability in the home purchasing market has likely also pushed some prospective buyers into the rental market, leading to even more upward pressure on rent levels.
Exhibit 3 shows that MSAs with large population increases continue to see very strong rent increases. In April 2023, median rent payments for Bank of America customers in Austin, Orlando and Tampa were up 11%, 14% and 14% YoY, respectively. This compares to the national average of 8% and just 3% for San Francisco.
Among major cities, Austin stands out given its steep drop in home prices over the past year – a similar pace to that of San Francisco whose population has been decreasing. One reason for this is that the pace of migration into Austin has slowed noticeably over the past year compared with 2020 and 2021 (Exhibit 4). Excess supply was another factor, with a much higher number of building permits, which tracks the number of units approved for construction, than in other cities with an influx of residents (Exhibit 5).
Demographic composition also plays a role. Bank of America data shows that the population inflow into Austin skews to the younger side while Baby Boomers have been leaving Austin over the last year. Given the lack of affordability in many housing markets, many younger prospective buyers are staying on the sidelines, which could in part explain the weakness in home prices but relative strength in rent levels in Austin.
Demographic composition matters over the long term
While the housing market is heavily influenced by monetary policy and macroeconomic conditions in the near term, demographics play a critical role in the long term. The most direct impact is that home prices in cities with net population inflow will see upward pressure from increased demand for housing in the long run. Another important factor to consider, in our view, is the composition of the population. This is because not all generations have the same demand for housing, but two generations are especially important right now: Baby Boomers and Millennials.
The rise of Boomers as the main homebuyer
The latest Home Buyers and Sellers Generational Trends report from the National Association of Realtors found that for the first time since 2014, Baby Boomers overtook Millennials as the generation with the biggest share of homebuyers. From July 2021 to July 2022, 39% of surveyed homebuyers were Baby Boomers, followed by 28% of Millennials and 24% of Gen X (Exhibit 6).
The rise of Baby Boomers as the primary homebuyers can be attributed to three main reasons. First, as this generation retires, they move closer to family and friends. Second, demand for smaller homes increases as their children move out. Last but not least, Baby Boomers hold the greatest wealth across generations at $73 trillion in 4Q 2022, eight times that of Millennials (Exhibit 7). In the current environment of high home prices and interest rates, Baby Boomers are better equipped financially for home purchasing. In fact, only 49% of older Boomers (68-76 y/o) financed their home purchase in 2022, compared with 93% of those aged 33-42 y/o, according to the same National Association of Realtors report.
Given the importance of Baby Boomers in the housing market, where are they moving to?
The generational breakdown of Bank of America internal data suggests Baby Boomers’ migration patterns over the past few years have been different from other generations. Specifically, while Austin continues to attract inward migration overall, the number of Baby Boomers in the city has declined over the past year. The exodus of the group with the most cash could have added to the downward pressure on Austin’s home prices over the last year.
Las Vegas, Phoenix, Tampa, and Orlando are among the most popular destinations for Baby Boomers, according to Bank of America internal data (Exhibit 8). Note that the pace of migration slowed for Vegas and Phoenix over the past year, but was relatively unchanged for Tampa and Orlando. This could partly explain the still resilient home price appreciation in Tampa and Orlando relative to other cities.
Alternatively, Baby Boomers, similar to other generations, are leaving some of the largest cities in the US, including the Bay area, New York and Seattle (Exhibit 9).
Millennials will likely drive home buying in the longer term
For Millennials, the most popular destination for domestic migration is Austin, with the number of Millennial customers up 16% in 1Q 2023, relative to three years ago, which led other cities by a wide margin. Cleveland, Tampa, and Dallas each saw a 6% increase in Millennial population over the past three years.
In the near term, many of this cohort are staying on the home buying sidelines. A recent Bank of America Global Research survey found that increasing concerns about affordability are the top reason many Millennials are staying out of the housing market. But hopeful buyers who may be waiting for the market to cool are still forging ahead in their own way. In a separate Bank of America 2023 Homebuyer Insights Report, over half of respondents who are not planning to purchase a home in the near term are still actively scrolling through real estate marketplace apps.
This means that demand for home purchasing will likely return when we move past the current housing cycle, especially in the case of younger Millennials, who are entering prime home buying age. In 1Q 2023, the home ownership rate for those younger than 35 years old was 39%, 23 percentage points lower than that for 35–44-year-olds.
Therefore, in the longer term, it is likely that cities with a large inflow of Millennial residents will see a meaningful boost to the local housing market. For now, however, Millennials are leaving the same cities as Boomers. San Francisco, New York and San Jose are high on the list. But the pace for San Francisco and New York has slowed in the past year compared with the early years of the pandemic.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 20:00 - How JFK Would Pursue Peace In Ukraine
How JFK Would Pursue Peace In Ukraine
Authored by Jeffrey Sachs via CommonDreams.org,
Sixty years after Kennedy’s commencement address at American University, crucial lessons must still be learned about how to end dangerous conflicts in a nuclear world…
President John F. Kennedy was one of the world’s great peacemakers. He led a peaceful solution to the Cuban Missile Crisis and then successfully negotiated the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty with the Soviet Union at the very height of the Cold War. At the time of his assassination, he was taking steps to end US involvement in Vietnam.
In his dazzling and unsurpassed Peace Speech, delivered exactly sixty years ago on June 10, 1963, Kennedy laid out his formula for peace with the Soviet Union. Kennedy’s Peace Speech highlights how Joe Biden’s approach to Russia and the Ukraine War needs a dramatic reorientation. Until now, Biden has not followed the precepts that Kennedy recommended to find peace. By heeding Kennedy’s advice, Biden too could become a peacemaker.
A mathematician would call JFK’s speech a “constructive proof” of how to make peace, since the speech itself contributed directly to the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty signed by the US and Soviet Union in July 1963. Upon receipt of the speech, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev told Kennedy’s envoy to Russia, Averell Harriman, that the speech was the greatest by an American president since Franklin D. Roosevelt, and that he wanted to pursue peace with Kennedy.
In the speech, Kennedy describes peace “as the necessary rational end [goal] of rational men.” Yet he acknowledges that peacemaking is not easy: “I realize that the pursuit of peace is not as dramatic as the pursuit of war—and frequently the words of the pursuer fall on deaf ears. But we have no more urgent task.”
The deepest key to peace, in Kennedy’s view, is the fact that both sides want peace. It is easy to fall into the trap, warns Kennedy, of blaming a conflict only on the other side. It is easy to fall into the trap of insisting that only the adversary should change their attitudes and behavior. Kennedy is very clear: “We must reexamine our own attitude—as individuals and as a Nation—for our attitude is as essential as theirs.”
Kennedy attacked the prevailing pessimism at the height of the Cold War that peace with the Soviet Union was impossible, “that war is inevitable—that mankind is doomed—that we are gripped by forces we cannot control. We need not accept that view. Our problems are man-made—therefore, they can be solved by man.”
Crucially, said Kennedy, we must not “see only a distorted and desperate view of the other side.” We must not “see conflict as inevitable, accommodation as impossible, and communication as nothing more than an exchange of threats.” Indeed, said Kennedy, we should “hail the Russian people for their many achievements—in science and space, in economic and industrial growth, in culture and in acts of courage.”
Kennedy warned against putting a nuclear adversary into a corner that could lead the adversary to desperate actions. “Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war. To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy—or of a collective death wish for the world.”
Kennedy knew that since peace was in the mutual interest of the US and the Soviet Union, a peace treaty could be reached. To those who said that the Soviet Union would not abide by a peace treaty, Kennedy responded that “both the United States and its allies, and the Soviet Union and its allies, have a mutually deep interest in a just and genuine peace and in halting the arms race. Agreements to this end are in the interests of the Soviet Union as well as ours—and even the most hostile nations can be relied upon to accept and keep those treaty obligations, and only those treaty obligations, which are in their own interest.”
Kennedy emphasized the importance of direct communication between the two adversaries. Peace, he said, “will require increased understanding between the Soviets and ourselves. And increased understanding will require increased contact and communication. One step in this direction is the proposed arrangement for a direct line between Moscow and Washington, to avoid on each side the dangerous delays, misunderstandings, and misreadings of the other’s actions which might occur at a time of crisis.”
In the context of the Ukraine War, Biden has behaved almost the opposite of JFK. He has personally and repeatedly denigrated Russian President Vladimir Putin. His administration has defined the US war aim as the weakening of Russia. Biden has avoided all communications with Putin. They have apparently not spoken once since February 2022, and Biden rebuffed a bilateral meeting with Putin at last year’s G20 Summit in Bali, Indonesia.
Biden has refused to even acknowledge, much less to address, Russia’s deep security concerns. Putin repeatedly expressed Russia’s ardent opposition to NATO enlargement to Ukraine, a country with a 2,000-kilometer border with Russia. The US would never tolerate a Mexican-Russian or Mexican-Chinese military alliance in view of the 2000-mile Mexico-US border. It is time for Biden to negotiate with Russia on NATO enlargement, as part of broader negotiations to end the Ukraine war.
When Kennedy came into office in January 1961, he stated clearly his position on negotiations: “Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate. Let both sides explore what problems unite us instead of belaboring those problems which divide us.”
In his Peace Speech, JFK reminded us that what unites the US and Russia is that “we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children’s future. And we are all mortal.”
Note: Jeffrey D. Sachs is author of “To Move the World: JFK’s Quest for Peace, Random House: 2013.“
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 19:30 - Pennsylvania Gov. Issues Disaster Declaration After I-95 Bridge Collapse, May Take 'Months' To Rebuild
Pennsylvania Gov. Issues Disaster Declaration After I-95 Bridge Collapse, May Take ‘Months’ To Rebuild
Update (1919ET):
Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro will declare a “disaster declaration” on Monday to tap federal funds to rebuild a bridge on Interstate 95 in Northeast Philadelphia that was destroyed by a tanker fire, according to NBC 10.
During a press conference on Sunday evening, Shapiro said the bridge rebuild could take “some number of months.” PennDOT officials and engineers have yet to give specifics on a timeline for reconstruction.
“To expedite this process and to cut through the red tape, tomorrow morning I plan to issue a disaster declaration, allowing the Commonwealth to immediately draw down federal funds and move quickly to repair and reconstruct this roadway.
“I’ve spoken directly to Secretary Pete Buttigeig of the United States Department of Transportation, along with Senator Casey, Congressman Boyle and other federal officials,” the governor said.
With regards to the complete rebuild of I-95 roadway, we expect that to take a number of months.
We will know more about that exact timeline once the engineers and PennDOT have completed their review. pic.twitter.com/WBVb5AOXTU
— Governor Josh Shapiro (@GovernorShapiro) June 11, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Shapiro said officials are creating alternative routes for motorists during the rebuild.
Early this AM a vehicle fire under I-95 in Philly caused part of the highway to collapse.
While this is still an active scene, I completed an aerial view of the site and was briefed by first responders, law enforcement and transportation experts on the ground with @PhillyMayor. pic.twitter.com/g4rHy5NTMM
— Governor Josh Shapiro (@GovernorShapiro) June 11, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
I-95 is a major artery for transporting people and goods, and the bridge’s closure is already sparking traffic chaos.
* * *
Interstate 95 in Philadelphia closed on Sunday after a tanker truck burst into flames underneath an overpass, causing a portion of the bridge to collapse.
All lanes on 1-95 are shut down in both directions nearing Cottman Avenue exit due to large fire. Smoke is visible. Avoid 1-95 approaching Northeast Philadelphia and expect delays. https://t.co/DydujHbkqr
— Philadelphia OEM (@PhilaOEM) June 11, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
NBC’s Randy Gyllenhaal reported the ‘accident’ broke out around 0630 ET on the off-ramp to Cottman Avenue, right underneath I-95, in the Tacony neighborhood in Northeast Philadelphia.
Major fire on 95 North approaching Cottman @FOX29philly @CBSPhiladelphia @NBCPhiladelphia looks like the grass is on fire pic.twitter.com/PKbUYkrWLn
— Sgt. Mark Fusetti (Retired) (@MarkFusetti) June 11, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
All north and southbound lanes are closed for 3 to 4 miles between Bridge Street and Academy Road. Traffic chaos has erupted across that section of the city, as per traffic data via TomTom.
Gyllenhaal said officials are on the scene and investigating the accident and the state of the bridge. He said the southbound side is “compromised” while there could be structural issues with the northbound section.
All lanes of I95 closed in both directions between Woodhaven and Aramingo exits due to fire/road collapse. Other streets closed for the response. Avoid area. Plan and seek alternative travel routes. pic.twitter.com/myNyH0nCiq
— Philadelphia OEM (@PhilaOEM) June 11, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Officials told Gyllenhaal, “The roadway is gone.”
The runoff from the tanker is also causing underground explosions, explained Captain Derrick Bowmer of the Philadelphia Fire Department. There have been multiple reports of exploding manholes around the area.
“We will be here for awhile,” Bowmer said. “We have fire coming out of those manholes.”
He said the ‘highways isn’t expected to re-open anytime soon,’ and this could spark significant traffic delays on Monday morning, considering the I-95 highway is a major interstate through the Mid-Alantic corridor.
Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro tweeted he has been briefed on the tanker explosion and bridge collapse.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 19:19 - Bud Light Appears In Promotional Material For "All Ages Drag Show Party" In Flagstaff
Bud Light Appears In Promotional Material For “All Ages Drag Show Party” In Flagstaff
“If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em” – could that be Bud Light’s latest genius marketing move?
The beer brand, still under intense fire and a suffering a sales collapse that came as a result of its embrace of ‘trans’ influencer Dylan Mulvaney, is (or was) reportedly co-sponsoring an “all ages drag show party”, according to a report from Fox News.
In what appears to be a full embrace of its new target audience, Bud Light may have co-sponsored an “all-ages Pride event” in Flagstaff, Arizona, Fox News writes. The event is called “Pride in the Pines” and includes drag queens.
Bud Light was previously listed as co-sponsor for the event on posters, which is also being described as a “family festival event” and a family-friendly, “safe space”. Old Navy, Toyota and Coca-Cola USA are also sponsoring the event, Fox News reported.
Flagstaff Pride’s Twitter account wrote this week that Bud Light was not a sponsor, despite appearing on a poster for the event: “We put out an incorrect promotional poster which included Bud Light as a sponsor.”
Meanwhile, Anheuser-Busch commented that “Bud Light is not a sponsor of this event. The event organizers have issued a corrected version of the poster.” But while Anheuser-Busch appears to be contesting that it is involved in the event, Flagstaff Pride’s website still prominently displayed “Bud Light” as a sponsor as of Sunday morning.
As Fox notes, its unclear if Bud Light was previously a sponsor and then decided to pull out of the event or if Flagstaff Pride was in error.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 19:00 - George Soros Skips Former 'Heir Apparent' — Hands Reins Of Empire To 'More Political' Son Alex
George Soros Skips Former ‘Heir Apparent’ — Hands Reins Of Empire To ‘More Political’ Son Alex
George Soros is handing control of his $25 billion empire to his son Alex – who in recent years has been seen flying around the world to conduct business on behalf of his family’s Open Society Foundation.
George Soros, left, and Alex Soros Photo: Alexander Soros via WSJ In doing so, the 92-year-old Soros is passing over the family’s one-time ‘heir apparent,’ Jonathan Soros, 52 – the third child from George’s first marriage, and a Harvard-trained lawyer who stabilized the Soros investment firm after a tumultuous period saw several investment chiefs come and go.
“I expected Jonathan to be the one,” said former Open Society Foundation president Aryeh Neier, who ran the organization from 1993 to 2012.
From left, Jonathan Soros, David Miliband, president and CEO of the International Rescue Committee, and George Soros at a 2013 benefit event in New York. Photo: Neilson Barnard/Getty Images for International Rescue Committee Jonathan Soros thought he was the one as well, telling the Wall Street Journal; “I always knew he could change his mind,” adding “As a trader, it’s the thing he’s most famous for.”
Their differences upended the succession plan. George was impulsive. Jonathan was analytical and contemplative. Jonathan was respectful of George but pushed back when he disagreed with his father’s decisions, according to people who worked with them. When they butted heads about two senior hiring choices, George felt his authority challenged. Jonathan felt undermined.
Looking to keep peace in the family, Jonathan left the Soros’s investment business in 2011, he said. His father soured about picking him to lead the foundation. “We didn’t get on on certain points,” George said. “That became evident to both of us, particularly to him, and he wanted to be out on his own.” -WSJ
“We ended our business relationship on pretty good terms,” said Jonathan of his father. “I was disappointed but not regretful.”
Enter Alex – the oldest of two sons from George’s 2nd wife, Susan Weber, who was elected chairman of the Open Society Foundation in December and is now responsible for directing political activity as president of Soros’ super PAC.
Alex Soros wearing bright red shoes Alex – once an unlikely choice to lead the family – cared little about finance and instead loved football and philosophy. He’s described by the Journal as a once-introverted fat kid who was embarrassed by his family’s wealth who blossomed into a red-shoe wearing party animal.
He cared little about finance and couldn’t persuade his father to watch football. Instead, they spent hours discussing ideas and global politics. His thesis topic, “Jewish Dionysus: Heine, Nietzsche and the Politics of Literature,” thrilled his father. For Alex, “it’s football, philosophy and politics, in that order,” said Svante Myrick, one of his friends. -WSJ
But now, it’s all business.
“I’m more political” said Alex, who recently met with officials from the Biden administration, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and heads of state such as Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to discuss affairs related to the Open Society Foundation – which donates roughly $1.5 billion per year to various causes and groups around the world.
Foundation money also goes to universities and other educational organizations. The Soros super PAC, Democracy PAC, has backed the election campaigns of district attorneys and law-enforcement officials seeking to reduce incarceration rates and racial bias in the justice system, among the efforts that have riled the right.
…
The selection of Alex, a hip-hop fan and New York Jets devotee, was once a long shot. Early on, Alex barely spoke up in meetings and was best known for his highflying social life. “Gorgeous models, NBA pals and hide-and-seek at his mansion: Welcome to the lavish life of investor George Soros’ playboy son,” said one Daily Mail.com online headline in 2016. -WSJ
Alex is also the sole Soros on the investment committee overseeing Soros Fund Management – which will migrate most of its $25 billion to the Open Society Foundation in the years ahead. Approximately $125 million has been set aside for the super PAC.
Between 2004 and 2006, Alex worked part time at the foundation. According to people who worked there, he didn’t make much of an impression – much less as a likely successor.
“Alex used to come to board meetings, but he hardly spoke,” said Neier.
Orange Man Bad
According to Alex, he’s concerned about the prospect of Donald Trump retaking the White House in 2024 – and has suggested a ‘significant financial role’ for the Soros organization in the effort to defeat him.
“As much as I would love to get money out of politics, as long as the other side is doing it, we will have to do it, too,” he said, as if his Super PAC didn’t employ Marc Elias, the Democrat superlawyer who worked tirelessly to change election laws leading up to the 2020 election.
According to Elon Musk – who recently compared George Soros to supervillain Magneto, the selection of Alex was “just a formality,” as “Alex has been de facto in charge for several years.”
Just a formality. Alex has been de facto in charge for several years.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 11, 2023
The Journal cites Alex as suggesting that speed had become too constrained on college campuses and elsewhere, saying: “I have some differences with my generation in regard to free speech and other things—I grew up watching Bill Maher before bed, after all.”
If @AlexanderSoros is serious about freedom of speech, then we have common ground.
But destroying public safety by electing DAs who won’t prosecute violent criminals needs to stop.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 11, 2023
Not everyone has sharks with lasers on their heads, Alex…
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jshttps://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 18:00 - The Capitalists Who Fear Capitalism
The Capitalists Who Fear Capitalism
Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via DailyReckoning.com,
Among the many grim memories of lockdowns were boarded-up local shops.
Meanwhile, long lines outside the big-box stores like Walmart, Kroger, Whole Foods and Home Depot. For very strange reasons, small business was universally declared to be nonessential whereas the big chains were deemed essential.
This amounted to a massive industrial subsidy to large companies, which emerged from the pandemic period richer and more bloated than ever. Meanwhile, millions of small businesses were utterly wrecked.
Nearly every day, my inbox fills with tragic stories of family businesses that were just getting going when the lockdowns came and destroyed everything. Not enough of these stories were ever told.
Major media were not interested.
The government loans (PPP), later mostly forgiven, could not possibly make up the difference for the losses from old-fashioned revenue. In addition, their supply chains were wrecked because they were either starved for business or gobbled up by the large companies.
There are no firm numbers but it is possible 25–40% of small businesses closed permanently. Dreams were shattered and millions of jobs were disrupted or destroyed.
As a result, retail trade (declared nonessential except for chosen businesses) has yet to recover in employment, despite the frantic hiring. Neither has hospitality. However, the information sector (declared essential across the board) is larger than ever.
A Brutal Attack on Free Markets
It was a brutal attack on commercial freedom but what a way to gain an industrial advantage!
The American economy is supposed to rest on competition as an ideal. This was the opposite.
Lockdowns were the bolstering of industrial cartels, particularly in the information sector. Even today, all these companies benefit from this period in which they were able to deploy their unfair advantages against their smaller competitors. The entire disaster was an attack on property rights, free enterprise and the competitive economy.
Incredibly, the regulators offered a public-health rationale. They were issuing every manner of edict concerning ventilation, social distancing, plexiglass, silly stickers everywhere and capacity restrictions. Later these companies added vaccine mandates.
These all benefited the large corporations and exterminated the small businesses that could not afford to comply or could not risk alienating labor with shot demands.
Consider the capacity restrictions alone. If you are a restaurant that serves 350–500 people, a capacity limit of 50% isn’t going to hit the bottom line too hard. It’s rare even in normal times for these places to fill up.
But across the street, you have a family-owned coffee shop with seating for 10. It is almost always packed. Cutting that by half is devastating. It cannot survive.
It was the same with the distancing requirements. Only the largest businesses could implement and enforce them.
Big Business Is Often the Biggest Enemy
I can recall standing outside waiting in lines to be chosen to be the next person entitled to go into the store. As I approached the door some masked-up employee would sanitize a shopping cart and push it my way so as to maintain six feet of distance.
Smaller and local shops could not afford to hire extra employees for such ridiculous jobs and needed to serve everyone who showed up. Only the well-heeled places could afford such antics.
And that is precisely why the large corporations did not complain too much about lockdowns.
They watched their bottom lines swell even as their competitors were crushed. It was the perfect embodiment of Milton Friedman’s dictum that big business is often the biggest enemy of genuine capitalism. They far prefer industrial cartels of the sort created during the lockdowns.
If we look back at 20th-century commercial history, we observe that in totalitarian societies, such cartels thrive. This was true in the Soviet Union, which featured state-owned companies that held a full monopoly not only in its stores but also for the products they would sell: one brand of everything you need.
The principle of essential and nonessential thrived under Soviet communism like never before.
The Real Meaning of Fascism
But it was the same in fascist-style economic structures too. The German economy under Nazi rule privileged the largest industrial players who became agents of state power: This was true for Volkswagen, Krupp, Farben and a host of munitions manufacturers.
It was the opposite of a competitive economy. It was socialism with German characteristics. Italy, Spain and France did the same.
Prevailing intellectual opinion in the 1930s celebrated the cartelization of industry as more “scientific” and less wasteful than competitive free markets. Fashionable books at the time cheered on the way such cartels made possible scientific planning for the whole of society.
Reading through Benito Mussolini’s manifesto on fascism today prompts the question: Once you replace nation with globe, what precisely would the WEF disagree with here?
Fascism asserts not the rights of commerce but its fundamental duty to serve the state. What can be more consistent with this view than the claim that some businesses are essential to state priorities and others are not?
This is what was created during lockdowns in the U.S. and around the world. I’ve tended to think that this was all an outgrowth of disease panic and bad thinking. Well-intentioned policy that went very badly.
But what if it wasn’t? What if the whole point of the industrial segregation and cartel creation was to run a real-time test of the full vision of a corporatist state? It’s not a crazy speculation.
Amazon Loved Lockdowns
The case of Amazon is particularly intriguing. It benefited massively from lockdowns. Meanwhile, its founder and CEO, Jeff Bezos, had already bought The Washington Post, which very aggressively and daily pushed the lockdown narrative throughout the entire period.
There is nothing wrong with gratitude for Amazon’s performance throughout but the involvement of its founder and CEO in actively pushing for lockdowns, anxious to prolong them as long as possible, raises alarm bells.
Or have a look at the March 2020 viral article called “The Hammer and the Dance,” pushed hard by all the major social-media outlets. The man who signed it is Tomas Pueyo, an educational entrepreneur pushing digital learning. He and the industry he represents made a windfall from lockdowns.
The companies that massively benefited from lockdowns have been forced to pull back in hiring due to higher interest rates, but they are still much larger than they were pre-lockdown. They will cling to their power and market domination through all means fair and foul.
How to dislodge them and restore competition?
We Need Another Ludwig Erhard
The historical precedent is postwar Germany. When Ludwig Erhard took over as finance minister following the destruction of the Nazi government, he worked to dismantle industrial cartels but faced massive resistance.
The richest and most powerful corporate actors pushed back against his introduction of competition. You can read his story in the great 1958 book Prosperity Through Competition.
His priority focus was on decentralization, deregulation, cuts and eliminations of taxes that are barriers to business formation, bolstering property rights, ending subsidies, stabilizing the current and otherwise encouraging as much freedom in the economic sphere.
“Freedom for the consumer and freedom to work must be explicitly recognized as inviolable basic rights by every citizen,” Erhard wrote.
“To offend against them should be regarded as an outrage against society. Democracy and a free economy are as logically linked as are dictatorship and State controls.”
His efforts produced the “German economic miracle,” during which time the German economy grew an annual average of 8.5% between 1948 and 1960, and caused the nation to be the most prosperous in Europe. And this happened at the same time that the U.K. was adopting ever more socialist and corporativist forms of governance.
The point is that industrial cartelization is not an unusual pattern. Big business has traditionally loathed competition and free enterprise. It would be naive to believe that they had no role in the destruction of American liberty and rights in those fateful days of lockdowns.
Freedom Is the Historical Exception
The norm in commercial life from the Middle Ages through the modern era has not been competition and freedom but cartelization and despotism, with some exceptions beginning in the late 18th century through the Great War, also known as the great age of liberalism or the Belle Epoque.
What followed in the 20th century in many countries — coupled with economic crisis and war — was an egregious public-private partnership and the regulatory state that benefited the largest corporate players at the expense of startups and local companies.
The introduction of digital commerce in the late 20th century threatened a new age of commercial freedom that came to a screeching halt with the lockdowns of 2020.
In this sense, lockdowns were not “progressive” at all but profoundly conservative in the old-fashioned sense of the term. It was an establishment fighting to preserve and entrench its power.
Perhaps that was the whole point all along.
All those crazy mandates, protocols and recommendations served some purpose and they sure weren’t disease mitigation. They benefited those institutions that could afford to implement them while punishing their lower-capitalized competition.
The response should be obvious: reparations for small business and the restoration of real commercial competition along the lines of postwar Germany.
We need our own Ludwig Erhard. And we need our own miracle.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 17:30 - Watch: Woman Becomes A "Trans Man" Then Realizes Being A Man Is Too Hard
Watch: Woman Becomes A “Trans Man” Then Realizes Being A Man Is Too Hard
The modern social narrative is that men have always held all the cards, held all the control and kept the good life locked up tight behind an almost supernatural barrier of male privilege and patriarchy. Not only do men hoard power like sleeping dragons hoarding treasure, but they are also supposedly maliciously “toxic”; driven insane by a dangerous and mysterious radioactive energy called “masculinity.” They are unstable creatures with a hair trigger, ready to rape and pillage without warning. Men need to be subdued, observed and conditioned from childhood to be more like women.
These beliefs have become so ingrained into progressive culture that they are now doctrine. The patriarchy is a fact, even though they have no proof of its existence. Male privilege is a fact, even though women have all the same rights as men under the law in the western world. And all men are violent and vicious towards women if given the chance, though, if that were true then feminism would not stand a chance of survival in America or Europe. It would not be allowed to exist.
But what if the leftist perception is actually the opposite of reality? What if women enjoy far more privileges than they could ever know?
Libs Of TikTok gives us some insight into the conundrum with a recent post of a woman who “transitioned” into manhood, only to discover that being a man is so hard she now understands why men are much more likely to commit suicide…
This is really sad. Trans man realizes how hard it is to be a man when you’re really a woman.
Males and females are different and no matter what you do to your body, you can’t be the opposite sex. pic.twitter.com/Ib2in2vJrb
— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) June 10, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
The video is revealing on multiple levels. The woman above tries to express the difficulties of becoming a trans-man while still clinging to the precious victim status of womanhood. She’s incapable of reconciling the two dynamics, and even suggests at one point that such pain could be solved by people providing even more attention and kindness to women.
It is very reminiscent of other female attempts to prove that men “live on easy mode,” such as writer Norah Vincent’s famous experiment in 2006 of living as a man for 18 months. The project was supposed to last for two years, but Vincent found being a man so difficult and intolerable that she ended it early (the stress of pretending to be someone else was also a factor). The writer discovered how cold women can be towards men and found she started to develop negative opinions of women as a whole. Sadly, Vincent would go on to commit assisted suicide in 2022.
First and foremost, it’s not enough to wear the costume of a man – Men are fundamentally and biologically different from women in every way, including how they process the world and deal with adversity. Women enjoy the comfort of collective support and group affirmation, that is how they cope with hardship. Men are far more likely to deal with the struggle alone; in fact, men often prefer to be alone in order to mentally regenerate. Here is comedy legend Patrice O’Neil to explain the simple psychological differences between men and women:
No matter how much a woman wants to become a man due to the illusory privileges she thinks they have, she will never be a man in the head. It’s not possible.
A second factor to consider is that men tend to be more isolated and more dangerous for a reason – Men are expendable, by design. From the beginning of recorded history men have been the cannon fodder for keeping civilization intact. When the saber-toothed tigers attacked the tribe or the village was threatened by marauding armies it was the destiny of each able-bodied man to risk almost certain death to keep the women and children safe. To provide and protect is an integral part of almost every man’s circuitry.
However, in first world societies government and bureaucracy has taken over the role of provider and protector, with numerous monetary and security safety nets for women. With men’s primary biological role now treated as peripheral and unimportant, men are left to search for new meaning with very little in the way of social support. In the feminized west, masculine men are seen as potential powderkegs; walking time bombs without a purpose that could wreak havoc at any moment.
But the truth is, as soon as disaster erupts and those first world safety nets disappear women come running back to men for safety, expecting them to fulfill their job as cannon fodder once again. As the venerable Bill Burr notes “There are no feminists in a house fire.”
At bottom, masculine men end up in leadership roles more often because they are built for the job. They are inherent risk takers and are more capable of self sacrifice for the good of the tribe. Feminists believe that women can take on these responsibilities while also enjoying the privileges of collective emotional support and the coddling that modern society provides, but the two things are mutually exclusive. They can’t have both, and some “trans men” are slowly starting to discover this, to their horror.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 17:00 - Bullwhip Effect Cracking US Imports' Peak Season (Again)
Bullwhip Effect Cracking US Imports’ Peak Season (Again)
By Henry Byers of FreightWaves
Last week, we forecast a further decline in U.S. containerized import volumes in the second half of 2023, and a “new” bottom for volumes during this downcycle.
The lingering effects of the “bullwhip effect” on inventories, along with the considerable downside risks that exist to consumer spending, the upcoming months are likely to witness an unprecedented level of caution among importers during this year’s peak season. This caution, combined with a weakening global macroeconomic backdrop, only heightens the risks of declining import volumes.
The Inbound Ocean TEUs Volume Index – USA with four-year seasonality. Chart: FreightWaves SONAR As we forecast, ocean container bookings in the first half of 2023 (white line) have continued trending right alongside 2019 levels (orange line). This is expected to continue through early Q3, at which point we will likely begin to see a detaching from 2019 levels to find a “new” bottom, ultimately resulting in a significant drop of 10% to 20% below levels experienced during the 2nd-half of 2019. Below is a chart of what that decline of 10% (orange) to 20% (red) in monthly loaded import TEUs would look like across the Top 10 U.S. ports.
The most recent May report from Logistics Managers’ Index (LMI) data highlights an important nuance in the persistently high inventories. While the supply chain activity reached an all-time low for the third consecutive month in May, inventory levels also contracted for the first time since the early days of the pandemic. However, even though inventory levels decreased by 1.5 points to 49.5 (marking the first time since February 2020 that inventories have entered contraction territory), it’s important to note that downstream retail inventories continue to grow at a rate of 54.4, while upstream manufacturer and wholesaler inventories are contracting at a rate of 46.7, which pulled down the overall figure for May.
Logistics Manager Index – LMI composite measure vs. LMI inventory levels in white and green, respectively With retail inventories still in a period of expansion, retailers that are major U.S. importers can be expected to adopt a cautious approach as they navigate the excess inventories that have accumulated in the supply chain bullwhip. These retailers have been scaling back since recognizing the inventory issue in Q1 2022, but the reality is that high inventory levels persist and could extend the destocking cycle throughout (at least) the remainder of 2023. This will require importers to be increasingly strategic in their reordering efforts in the second half to prevent further inventory buildup and manage costs effectively while addressing any additional shifts in consumer demand.
As a prime example, Target, one of the major retail players (and the second-largest U.S. importer of containerized goods) entered 2023 with a sense of caution due to its inventory glut and potential shifts in consumer spending patterns. The company’s fiscal year 2022 report highlighted the challenges posed by rapid changes in consumer preferences and supply chain volatility, necessitating careful inventory planning to minimize markdowns. In the most recent quarter, Target has now seen both a decline in foot traffic (down 9% y/y) and sales figures (down 5% y/y) as reported by CitiBank analysts, which has likely only increased Target’s concerns about reordering/restocking. In the report from CitiBank, which downgraded Target’s stock price, the Citi analysts also noted other growing concerns for the retailer, such as the competitive pressure posed by Walmart, which is expected to continue gaining market share (largely due to its strong Grocery segment), potentially impacting Target’s discretionary sales, which account for 55% of its overall sales. With Target serving as a prime example of the issues that major retailers are potentially facing heading into the second half of 2023, it is becoming increasingly evident why the company would be incredibly cautious with bringing in new container volumes.
Source: Macrotrends.net – Target Inventory Levels Reported on Quarterly Reports – top bar chart reporesents $USD value with bottom chart representing y/y % change Looking a little further upstream, wholesalers are also facing larger inventory problems than may be perceived from solely looking at the most recent LMI report. Since November 2022, the inventory-to-sales ratio has been higher than during the worst months of the Great Recession. If sales do not rebound (increasingly unlikely that they will), inventories must undergo substantial reductions in the second half. The imbalance between excessive inventories and only a slight softening of sales is causing significant strain throughout the global supply chain, especially when it comes to major origin countries and production centers for U.S. containerized goods.
This strain is becoming increasingly apparent further upstream into major origin countries for U.S. containerized imports like China, where economic troubles continue to worsen. Jeffrey Snider of Eurodollar.University has been covering this in-depth in recent weeks, and in a recent video post, he pointed out that for the fourth consecutive month, consumer prices have dropped alongside the largest year-on-year decline in Producer Price Index (PPI) and factory gate prices since 2016. In the chart below, we can see that in May alone, China’s producer prices experienced a significant 0.9% decrease, further confirming that China’s reopening has been significantly overstated. These year-on-year declines are especially concerning given the fact that these comparisons are being made during last year when large manufacturing centers in China (i.e. Shanghai) were still largely on lockdown due to COVID restrictions.
Source: Jeffrey Snider – Eurodollar.University Snider also pointed out that China’s economic woes are reverberating throughout Asia, driven by the global recession that has dragged down industries. This widespread contraction is evident in the sharp decline in imports from South Korea and Japan, with both countries experiencing a 26% year-to-date decrease in imports. There has also been a substantial decline in China’s exports. Specifically, the value of goods exported to the U.S. plummeted by 18% year on year in May. This is all supportive of the reality that the reverse bullwhip effect has dealt a large blow to China, resulting ultimately in lower prices while intensifying the global trade recession, which has spread deeper into Europe.
The Outbound Ocean TEUs Volume Index – China to the USA. Chart: FreightWaves SONAR. To learn more about FreightWaves SONAR, click here. Europe’s PPI has sharply declined, primarily due to falling energy prices, but included a considerable decline in core prices as well. The HCOB Flash Manufacturing PMI for the Eurozone in May 2023 recorded a significant decline to 44.6 from April’s 45.8, far below the forecasted 46.2. This reading indicates the sharpest contraction in the factory sector in three years, with output, new orders, and backlogs of orders all declining at an accelerated pace. Input prices experienced the most substantial drop since February 2016, as manufacturers curtailed their input purchases, leading to a steep decline in inventories. Business confidence, especially within the manufacturing sector, weakened further, and Germany (already in an official recession) witnessed a particularly pronounced decline in manufacturing activity. Factory orders there have plummeted, especially from non-European markets, further indicating weakening global demand.
The Outbound Ocean TEUs Volume Index – Germany to All Ports (Globally). Chart: FreightWaves SONAR. It is also important to note another major input in the manufacturing process: cardboard box demand. FreightWaves was among the first to cover the concerning signs surrounding cardboard box demand in the article, “Cardboard box demand plunging at rates unseen since the Great Recession.” Demand has remained soft ever since, and in a recent article from Charles Schwab’s chief global investment strategist, Jeffrey Kleintop, he proclaimed that the United States is currently experiencing a “cardboard box recession.” This refers to a situation in which manufacturing and trade experience a global recession while services industries continue to grow. Demand for manufacturing and trade-related goods has declined, as indicated by the decrease in demand for corrugated linerboard.
Circling all the way back to consumers, there are still a number of downside risks facing consumer spending in the 2nd-half, but one of the largest risks is student loan repayments. FreightWaves CEO Craig Fuller covered this risk at length in his recent article “An unusually terrible freight market may get a lot worse.” The article points out factors that could worsen the freight market, including the potential end of various stimulus programs that have boosted personal income and freight demand, but specifically, it highlights the potential fallout caused by the impending resumption of student loan payments.
The end of the student loan deferment program, which allowed consumers to save an average of over $15,000 since March 2020, will have a significant impact on consumer spending. With 64% of the $1.7 trillion student loan debt remaining in forbearance, the resumption of payments will create a cash flow shock for many households, particularly among the 25 million Americans ages 18-44 who have deferred their payments. This demographic plays a crucial role in driving consumer spending, and the sudden increase of approximately $393 per month in loan payments will likely lead to reduced discretionary income and a potential decrease in spending capacity.
The lingering effects of the “bullwhip effect” on inventories at major U.S. importers, along with the considerable downside risks that exist to consumer spending, the upcoming months are likely to witness an unprecedented level of caution among importers. The prevailing global economic conditions further contribute to the downward risks facing import volumes. While it may not be a sharp drop, it is becoming increasingly probable that U.S. import demand will experience a fresh decline and establish a new low point in the second half of 2023.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 16:30 - Some Dems Uneasy About Cornel West's Third Party Presidential Run
Some Dems Uneasy About Cornel West’s Third Party Presidential Run
Leftist firebrand Cornel West launched a third-party presidential campaign last week, and some Democrats are uneasy over his potential to sow Democrat discontent with Joe Biden and potentially play the spoiler in 2024, Politico reports.
West is running as the first-ever presidential candidate of the People’s Party, a progressive group formed in 2017 by a former campaign staffer for Bernie Sanders. In a video announcing his candidacy, West said he was running under the People’s Party banner because “neither political party wants to tell the truth about Wall Street, about Ukraine, about the Pentagon, about Big Tech.”
I am running for truth and justice as a presidential candidate for the People’s Party to reintroduce America to the best of itself – fighting to end poverty, mass incarceration, ending wars and ecological collapse, guaranteeing housing, health care, education and living wages for… pic.twitter.com/u3NYGUbG1S
— Cornel West (@CornelWest) June 5, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
The Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party has an affinity for West, who was one of Sanders’ media surrogates during his presidential campaigns, and was named to the 2016 Democratic Party platform committee by Sanders.
The sharp-tongued West may have his most profound impact among young voters, who are more prone to embrace far-left politics. Among 18- to 34-year-olds, 56% disapprove of President Biden‘s performance. A former professor at Yale, Princeton and Harvard, West now teaches at Union Theological Seminary in New York City.
Biden-backing Congressman Brendan Boyle sounded an indignant alarm about West’s announcement, telling Politico, “Any Democrat who runs an independent or third-party presidential campaign is dramatically helping Republican odds of victory. It’s that simple. And unfortunately, I have seen this play before.”
Boyle’s expression of political deja vu seemingly refers to 2016. Many Democrats accuse Green Party candidate Jill Stein of peeling away Democrat votes to an extent that cost Hillary Clinton the electoral votes of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin — and thus the general election.
Cornel West speaks at a 2020 Bernie Sanders rally in New Hampshire (Joseph Prezioso/AFP via Getty Images and Axios) West’s potential to pull votes away from Biden will be driven in large part by the ability of the People’s Party to qualify to appear on ballots — a complex, labor-intensive undertaking that typically involves collecting petition signatures.
That will have to be repeated in every state the People’s Party targets, with the potential for the Democratic Party to intervene with legal challenges. Plaintiffs in a third-party ballot access lawsuit in Texas said trying to meet the signature requirement in the Lone Star State alone would cost more than $600,000, with no guarantee of success.
Because of those formidable hurdles, some progressives are already discussing a way to amplify West’s ballot presence — by also winning him the nomination of the Green Party, which appeared on 28 state ballots in 2020, and conducted write-in campaigns in 17 more.
Pulling votes isn’t the only way West can undermine Biden. A steady stream of his trademark, sharp-edged criticism is certain to dampen Democrats’ already lackluster enthusiasm for Biden, with the potential to put a dent in general election turnout.
West endorsed the Green Party’s Stein over Hillary Clinton in 2016. He voted for Biden in 2020, but damned him with faint praise, saying he voted for a “mediocre, milquetoast neoliberal centrist because he’s better than fascism, and a fascist catastrophe is worse than a neoliberal disaster.”
West’s campaign policy stances are a typical progressive mixed bag of horrible and excellent. On the negative side, he wants to “forgive all student debt…guarantee quality education, housing, a living wage [and] health care to all…support unions…end drilling on public lands and invest in clean energy.”
On the plus side, West says he wants to “stop CBDCs [central bank digital currencies]…end the wars…stop all foreign military aid, close the bases, disband NATO…restore free speech [and] press freedoms…switch to hand-counted paper ballots.”
Philosopher @CornelWest calls the Ukraine war a “clash of two empires” between the United States and Russia, stressing the need for a ceasefire. “We’re on the road to nuclear war,” he warns.
Cornel West just announced he is running for president in 2024 with @PeoplesParty_US. pic.twitter.com/SKu9aUMO99
— Democracy Now! (@democracynow) June 7, 2023
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 16:00 - The Censorship Hegemon Must Be Stopped
The Censorship Hegemon Must Be Stopped
Authored by Aaron Kheriaty via The Brownstone Institute,
One year ago, I joined the states of Missouri and Louisiana and several other co-plaintiffs to file a suit in federal court challenging what journalist Michael Shellenberger has called the censorship-industrial complex.
While much of the press cooperated with the state’s censorship efforts and has ignored our court battle, we expect that it will ultimately go to the Supreme Court, setting up Missouri v. Biden to be the most important free speech case of our generation—and arguably, of the past 50 years.
Prior government censorship cases typically involved a state actor unconstitutionally meddling with one publisher, one author, one or two books, a single article. But as we intend to prove in court, the federal government has censored hundreds of thousands of Americans, violating the law on tens of millions of occasions in the last several years. This unprecedented breach was made possible by the wholly novel reach and breadth of the new digital social media landscape.
My co-plaintiffs, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya and Dr. Martin Kulldorff, and I were censored for content related to COVID and public health policy that the government disfavored. Documents we have reviewed on discovery demonstrate that government censorship was far more wide-ranging than previously known, from election integrity and the Hunter Biden laptop story to gender ideology, abortion, monetary policy, the US banking system, the war in Ukraine, the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, and more. There is hardly a topic of recent public discussion and debate that the US government has not targeted for censorship.
Jacob Seigel, Matt Taibbi, and other investigative reporters have begun to document the anatomy of the censorship leviathan, a tightly interconnected network of federal agencies and private entities receiving public funding—where much of the censorship grunt work is outsourced. The “industrial” in censorship-industrial complex should be understood literally: censorship is now a highly developed industry, complete with career-training institutions in higher education (like Stanford’s Internet Observatory or the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public), full-time job opportunities in industry and government (from the Virality Project and the Election Integrity Partnership to any number of federal agencies engaged in censorship), and insider jargon and euphemisms (like disinformation, misinformation, and “malinformation” which must be debunked and “prebunked”) to render the distasteful work of censorship more palatable to industry insiders.
Our lawyers were in court last week arguing for a preliminary injunction to halt the activities of the censorship machine while our case is tried. I will spare you a full account of the government’s endless procedural wrangling, obfuscation, attempts to hide, delays, and diversionary tactics in this case—futile efforts to dodge even the most legally straightforward aspects of discovery, such as our request to depose former Biden Press Secretary Jen Psaki. So far, the government has been caught hiding discovery materials, which the judge chastised them about before ruling against their motion to dismiss, reminding the government that the limited discovery so far would widen once the case went to trial.
The government’s lawyers were not able to block the deposition of Anthony Fauci, however, who had to answer some pointed questions about his COVID policies for the first time under the threat of the penalty of perjury. Dr. Fauci seemed to suffer from a strange syndrome of “sudden-onset amnesia” during his deposition, as I have described elsewhere.
Government censorship was far more wide-ranging than previously known
But aside from these procedural scuffles, the more important aspects of this case are the government censorship activities we have already exposed. For example, our documents demonstrate how a relatively unknown agency within the Department of Homeland Security became the central clearinghouse of government-run information control—an Orwellian Ministry of Truth. My fellow citizens, meet the Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency—better known as CISA—a government acronym with the same word in it twice in case you wondered about its mission.
This agency was created in the waning days of the Obama administration, supposedly to protect our digital infrastructure against cyberattacks from computer viruses and nefarious foreign actors. But less than one year into their existence, CISA decided that their remit also should include protecting our “cognitive infrastructure” from various threats.
“Cognitive infrastructure” is the actual phrase used by current CISA head Jen Easterly, who formerly worked at Tailored Access Operations, a top secret cyber warfare unit at the National Security Agency. It refers to the thoughts inside your head, which is precisely what the government’s counter-disinformation apparatus, headed by people like Easterly, are attempting to control. Naturally, these thoughts need to be protected from bad ideas, such as any ideas that the people at CISA or their government partners do not like.
More on Disinformation in America
In early 2017, citing the threat from foreign disinformation, the Department of Homeland Security unilaterally declared federal control over the country’s election infrastructure, which had previously been administered at the local level. Not long after that, CISA, which is a subagency of the DHS, established its own authority over the cognitive infrastructure by becoming the central hub coordinating the government’s information control activities. This pattern was repeated in several other government agencies around the same time (there are currently a dozen federal agencies named among the defendants in our suit).
So, what exactly has the government been doing to protect our cognitive infrastructure? Perhaps the best way to wrap your head around the actual operations of the new American censorship leviathan is to consider the vivid analogy offered by our brilliant attorney, John Sauer, in the introduction of our brief for the injunction. This is worth quoting at length:
Suppose that the Trump White House, backed by Republicans controlling both Houses of Congress, publicly demanded that all libraries in the United States burn books criticizing the President, and the President made statements implying that the libraries would face ruinous legal consequences if they did not comply, while senior White House officials privately badgered the libraries for detailed lists and reports of such books that they had burned and the libraries, after months of such pressure, complied with those demands and burned the books.
Suppose that, after four years of pressure from senior Congressional staffers in secret meetings threatening the libraries with adverse legislation if they did not cooperate, the FBI started sending all libraries in the United States detailed lists of the books the FBI wanted to burn, requesting that the libraries report back to the FBI by identifying the books that they burned, and the libraries complied by burning about half of those books.
Suppose that a federal national security agency teamed up with private research institutions, backed by enormous resources and federal funding, to establish a mass-surveillance and mass-censorship program that uses sophisticated techniques to review hundreds of millions of American citizens’ electronic communications in real time, and works closely with tech platforms to covertly censor millions of them.
The first two hypotheticals are directly analogous to the facts of this case. The third, meanwhile, is not a hypothetical at all; it is a description of the Election Integrity Partnership and Virality Project.
The censorship activities of the nation’s largest law enforcement agency, which it terms “information warfare,” have turned the FBI, in the words of whistleblower Steve Friend, into an “intelligence agency with law enforcement powers.” But there is no “information warfare” exception to the constitutional right of free speech. Which other federal agencies are involved in censorship? Besides the ones you might suspect—the DOJ, NIH, CDC, Surgeon General, and the State Department—our case has also uncovered censorship activities by the Department of the Treasury (don’t criticize the feds’ monetary policies), and yes, my friends, even the Census Bureau (don’t ask).
In prior precedent-setting cases on censorship, the Supreme Court clarified that the right of free speech guaranteed by the Constitution exists not just for the person speaking but for the listener as well: We all have the right to hear both sides of debated issues to make informed judgments. Thus all Americans have been harmed by the government’s censorship leviathan, not just those who happen to post opinions or share information on social media.
The judge presiding over the case, Terry Dougherty, asked on Friday in court if anyone had read George Orwell’s 1984 and whether they remembered the Ministry of Truth. “It’s relevant here,” he added. It is indeed time to slay the government’s censorship leviathan. I hope that our efforts in Missouri v. Biden prove to be a crucial first step in this project to restore our constitutional rights.
* * *
This piece originally ran at Tablet and is reprinted by the author’s Substack
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 15:30 - Give War A Chance – A 'War That Even Pacifists Can Get Behind'
Give War A Chance – A ‘War That Even Pacifists Can Get Behind’
Authored by Alastair Crooke via The Ron Paul Institute,
More than a year into Russia’s Special Operation, the initial burst of European excitement at western push-back on Russia has dissipated. The mood instead has turned to “existential dread, a nagging suspicion that [western] civilization may destroy itself,” Professor Helen Thompson writes.
For an instant, a euphoria had coalesced around the putative projection of the EU as a world power; as a key actor, about to compete on a world scale. Initially, events seemed to play to Europe’s conviction of its market powers: Europe was going to bring down a major power – Russia – by financial coup d’état alone. The EU felt ‘six feet tall.’
It seemed at the time a galvanizing moment: “The war re-forged a long-dormant Manichaean framing of existential conflict between Russia and the West, assuming ontological, apocalyptic dimensions. In the spiritual fires of the war, the myth of the ‘West’ was rebaptized,” Arta Moeini suggests.
Via AP After the initial disappointment at the lack of a ‘quick kill’, the hope persisted – that if only the sanctions were given more time, and made more all-embracing, then Russia surely would ultimately collapse. That hope has turned to dust. And the reality of what Europe has done to itself has begun to dawn – hence Professor Thomson’s dire warning:
Those who assume that the political world can be reconstructed by the efforts of human Will, have never before had to bet so heavily on technology over [fossil] energy – as the driver of our material advancement.
For the Euro-Atlanticists however, what Ukraine seemed to offer – finally – was validation for their yearning to centralize power in the EU, sufficiently, to merit a place at the ‘top table’ with the US, as partners in playing the Great Game.
Ukraine, for better or worse, underlined Europe’s profound military dependence on Washington – and on NATO.
More particularly, the Ukraine conflict seemed to open the prospect for consolidating the strange metamorphosis of NATO from military alliance to an enlightened, Progressive, peace alliance! As Timothy Garton Ash effused in the Guardian in 2002, “NATO has become a European peace movement” where one could watch “John Lennon meet George Bush.”
The Ukraine war is portrayed, in this vein, as the “war that even former pacifists can get behind. All its proponents seemed to be singing is “Give War a Chance.”
Lily Lynch, a Belgrade-based writer, argues that…
…especially in the past 12 months, telegenic female leaders such as the Finnish Prime Minister, Sanna Marin, German Foreign Minister, Annalena Baerbock, and Estonian Prime Minister, Kaja Kallas, have increasingly served as the spokespersons of enlightened militarism in Europe… ”
No political party in Europe better exemplifies the shift from militant pacifism to ardent pro-war Atlanticism than the German Greens. Most of the original Greens had been radicals during the student protests of 1968 … But as the founding members entered middle age, fissures began to appear in the party – that would one day tear it apart.
Kosovo then changed everything: The 78-day NATO bombing of what remained of Yugoslavia in 1999, ostensibly to halt war crimes committed by Serbian security forces in Kosovo, would forever transform the German Greens. NATO for the Greens became an active military compact concerned with spreading and defending values such as human rights, democracy, peace, and freedom – well beyond the borders of its member states.
A few years later, in 2002, an EU functionary (Robert Cooper) could envisage Europe as a new ‘liberal imperialism.’ The ‘new’ was that Europe eschewed hard military power, in favour of weaponising both a controlled ‘narrative’ and controlled participation in its market. He advocated for ‘a new age of empire’, in which Western powers no longer would have to follow international law in their dealings with ‘old fashioned’ states; they could use military force independently of the United Nations; and could impose protectorates to replace regimes which ‘misgovern.’
The German Greens’ Foreign Minister, Annalena Baerbock, has continued with this metamorphosis, scolding countries with traditions of military neutrality, and imploring them to join NATO. She has invoked Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s line: “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.” And the European Left has been utterly captivated. Major parties have abandoned military neutrality and opposition to war – and now champion NATO. It is a stunning reversal.
All this may have been music to the ears of the Euro-élites anxious for the EU to rise to Great Power status, but this soft-power European Leviathan was wholly underpinned by the unstated (but essential) assumption that NATO ‘had Europe’s back.’ This naturally implied that the EU had to tie itself ever closer to NATO – and therefore to the US which controls NATO.
But the flip-side to this Atlanticist aspiration – as President Emmanuel Macron noted – is its inexorable logic that Europeans simply end by becoming American vassals. Macron was trying rather, to rally Europe towards the coming ‘age of empires’, hoping to position Europe as a ‘third pole’ in a concert of empires.
The Atlanticists were duly enraged by Macron’s remarks (which nonetheless drew support of other EU states). It could even seem (to furious Atlanticists) that Macron actually was channelling General de Gaulle who had called NATO a “false pretense” designed to “disguise America’s chokehold over Europe.”
There are however, two related schisms that flowed out from this ‘re-imagined’ NATO: Firstly, it exposed the reality of internal European rivalries and divergent interests, precisely because the NATO lead in the Ukraine conflict sets the interests of the Central East European hawks wanting ‘more America, and more war on Russia’ up and against that of the original EU western axis which wants wanting strategic autonomy (i.e. less ‘America’, and a quick end to the conflict).
Secondly, it would be predominantly the western economies that would have to bankroll the costs and divert their manufacturing capacity towards military logistic chains. The economic price, non-military de-industrialization and high inflation, potentially, could be enough to break Europe – economically.
The prospect of a pan-European cohesive identity might be both ontologically appealing – and be seen to be an ‘appropriate accessory’ to an aspiring ‘world actor’ – yet such identity becomes caricature when mosaic Europe is transformed into an abstract de-territorialized identity that reduces people to their most abstract.
Paradoxically, the Ukraine war – far from consolidating the EU ‘identity’, as first imagined – has fractured it under the stresses of the concerted effort to weaken and collapse Russia.
Secondly, as Arta Moeini, the director of the Institute for Peace and Diplomacy, has observed:
The American push for NATO expansion since 1991 has enlarged the alliance by adding a host of faultline states from Central and Eastern Europe. The strategy, which began with the Clinton administration but was fully championed by the George W. Bush administration, was to create a decidedly pro-American pillar on the continent, centred on Warsaw – which would force an eastward shift in the alliance’s center of gravity away from the traditional Franco-German axis.
By using NATO enlargement to weaken the old power centers in Europe that might have occasionally stood up to [Washington] such as in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, Washington ensured a more compliant Europe in the short-term. The upshot, however, was the formation of a 31-member behemoth with deep asymmetries of power and low compatibility of interests” – that is much weaker and more vulnerable – than it believes itself to be.
Here is the key: “the EU is much weaker than it believes it to be.” The outset of the conflict was defined by a cast of mind entranced by the notion of Europe as a ‘mover and shaker’ in world affairs, and mesmerized by Europe’s post-war prosperity.
EU leaders convinced themselves that this prosperity had bequeathed it the clout and the economic depth to contemplate war – and to weather its reversals – with panglossian sanguinity. It has produced rather, the converse: It has put its project in jeopardy.
In John Raply and Peter Heather’s The Imperial Life Cycle, the authors explain the cycle:
Empires grow rich and powerful and attain supremacy through the economic exploitation of their colonial periphery. But in the process, they inadvertently spur the economic development of that same periphery, until it can roll back and ultimately displace its overlord.
Europe’s prosperity in this post-war era, thus was not so much one of its own making, but drew benefit from the tail-end of accumulations hewn from an earlier cycle – now reversed.
“The fastest-growing economies in the world are now all in the old periphery; the worst-performing economies are disproportionately in the West. These are the economic trends that have created our present landscape of superpower conflict — most saliently between America and China.”
America may think of itself as exempt from the European colonial mold, yet fundamentally, its model is…
…an updated cultural-political glue that we might call “neoliberalism, NATO and denim,” which follows in the timeless imperial mold: The great wave of decolonization that followed WW2 was meant to end that. But the Bretton Woods system, which created a trading regime that favored industrial over primary producers and enshrined the dollar as the global reserve currency – ensured that the net flow of financial resources continued to move from developing countries to developed ones. Even when the economies of the newly-independent states grew, those of the G7 economies and their partners grew more.
A once-mighty empire is now challenged and feels embattled. Taken aback by the refusal of so many developing countries to join with isolating Russia, the West is now waking up to the reality of the emerging, polycentric and fluid global order. These trends are set to continue. The danger is that economically weakened and in crisis, western countries attempt to re-appropriate western triumphalism, yet lack the economic strength and depth, so to do:
In the Roman Empire, peripheral states developed the political and military capacity to end Roman domination by force… The Roman Empire might have survived – had it not weakened itself with wars of choice – on its ascendant Persian rival.
The final ‘transgressive’ thought goes to Tom Luongo: “Allowing the West to keep thinking they can win – is the ultimate form of grinding out a superior opponent.”
Interesting!
Tyler Durden
Sun, 06/11/2023 – 14:30
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...
