It's Sunday and I find my thoughts turning to prophecy. This is largely due to my recent pop in over at Kevin Baker's site. I give him a look every week or so to see if he's still spouting Bircher nonsense. Most of the time, this is usually the case. But a post from last Friday caused me to sadly shake my head.
Kevin put up a quote from another site which essentially was no different than a Chuck Manson looking dude holding up a sign on a street corner which says, "The End of the World is Coming." Kevin himself than commented, "Our major cities may very well burn." The ensuing comments detail possible alignments in inter-city warfare. I've seen a few of these types of posts here and there but this one was starker than I have ever seen. Honestly, if this is what he and his readers truly think, I find little difference between them and your typical apocalypse cult. I guess I shouldn't be surprised as the right has been trending that way since the evil socialist gun grabber, Blackie McBlackerson, took office.
These sorts of things never end well. Take a look at Glenn Beck. He was riding high at Fox-spewing dire warning after boiling pit of sewage prophecy-and when it kept not happening, he lost viewers and Fox gave him the boot. He still has his radio show and will likely find some sort of TV outlet but people have stopped paying attention to him. Being a member of the right wing blogsphere, as Kevin is, means that he will always have that niche just like Beck does.
But I have to wonder...what is the half life for predicting the end of America? Doomsday scenarios have become more prevalent as human beings have less ordinary things to worry about but, folks, Red Dawn never fucking happened! The logic of the United States' geostrategic position made that scenario impossible. Yet, we still things like Home Front, a video game written by John Milius ( a fave of Kevin's), that depicts yet another one of these faux scenarios. There is no doubt in my mind that there are many people who think that this has a good chance of happening. This leads us to recall point #1 from Boaz's 14 points.
1. Panic Mongering. This goes one step beyond simple fear mongering. With panic mongering, there is never a break from the fear. The idea is to terrify and terrorize the audience during every waking moment. From Muslims to swine flu to recession to homosexuals to immigrants to the rapture itself, the belief over at Fox seems to be that if your fight-or-flight reflexes aren't activated, you aren't alive. This of course raises the question: why terrorize your own audience? Because it is the fastest way to bypasses the rational brain. In other words, when people are afraid, they don't think rationally. And when they can't think rationally, they'll believe anything.
I don't know. I mean, I get that they have no real solutions to offer that work in reality and likely are avoiding real problems in their own lives which leads to the creation of these paranoid fantasies but with this sort of talk, I have to question their sanity.
32 comments:
What do you have to say about what's happening in England? Or about the flash mobs here?
Of course, when your only defence is the impersonation of an ostrich, everything else tends to look a bit more extreme.
He's an ostrich because he doesn't believe in paranoid fantasies? I think you hit the nail on the head, here, Mark. Like all of the charlatans throughout history, people stop listening to the Harold Campings of the world. Kevin Baker is no different.
The problem is real. The solution will be painful.
...if left unchecked, will see our children and grandchildren living in a poorer, weaker nation.
If the U.S. does not put its house in order, the reckoning will be sure and the devastation severe.
We were willing to put our differences aside to forge a plan because our nation will certainly be lost without one.
www.fiscalcommission.gov
==============
I thought we had already crossed this ground, Mark.
Do you no longer agree with the position of the commission?
Is the President allowing his people to engage in 'paranoid fantasies', mjh?
I agree with the findings of the commission for the most part but I don't see how that correlates to apocalypse fantasies that have been around forever and end in never coming true.
'The cities will burn' isn't the same as 'zombies will attack and kill us all'.
'Looting and mayhem in the cities' is not the same as 'Lord Zargon will return from Planet X and save only the faithful.'
I guess it depends on your definition of apocalypse.
If "our nation will certainly be lost" is the opinion of the fiscal commission, what do you see resulting from the 'loss of our nation'?
I doubt it will be a non-event.
'Lord Zargon will return from Planet X and save only the faithful.
Fucking hilarious! Love it.
Our nation will surely be lost means to me the loss of the unipolar world and a shift into multipolar world. That's probably going to happen anyway but Bowles Simpson is saying that we need to make the necessary and difficult decisions in order to lessen the blow. Our ability to compete in the world is eroding and a very large factor contributing to this is wealth inequality.
You are going to have to dumb that down for me.
Unipolar, as in US - Centric?
Multipolar, as in globalist?
I think the stern wording of the commission goes a little beyond 'we will need to be more global'.
"the reckoning will be sure and the devastation severe"
does not sound much like, 'we will need to celebrate global diversity'.
I am not attempting to argue against your belief in wealth inequality as a factor in the decline. I am simply acknowledging (and agreeing with) what you just said: our ability to compete in the world is eroding.
If we are both correct, then what comes next? If the eroding US economy does not rapidly rebound to a point where the current size of government is sustainable, then what happens?
Government cuts, perhaps?
Cut what?
Based on our last conversation, I think you agree those cuts will need to be very painful. So painful, in fact, that I can't imagine a politician getting elected by promising to make those cuts.
One thing I am certain of, if/when food stamps don't show up in the mail a large percentage of those hungry people will go find some food rather than watch their kids starve to death.
And the cities will burn.
Forget Doomsday, Apocalypse, Armageddon, or 'X' day (for you sub-genii out there). It will simply be the economic reality of 45 million hungry Americans.
During the Cold War, we were a bipolar world with Russia and the US being the only powers. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, we remained the sole power...so a unipolar world. This is evolving, of course, with China and India becoming more powerful as well as the EU. Within the next decade, it will likely be a multipolar world. In the past when this has happened, we have had world wars but it might be different now due to the massive globalization of the economy and the eclectic approach to global politics that most Global North countries are using. With free markets emerging in previously unheard of regions, the power of capitalism may prevent such conflicts.
Because of our wealth inequality and marginalized work force, the effects of this shift to a multipolar world will be devastating if we don't do something about it and I think that is what the commission is saying. This is where the government can help. The private sector is going to have to step up as well if they want to continue to operate with such freedom. They won't have that freedom in China or with the EU, correct? The federal government has to lead the way just as they have in the past when we have succeeded.
Actually, the commission specifically states the problem, and it has nothing to do with unipolar or multipolar or whatever.
"Our challenge is clear and inescapable: America cannot be great if we go broke."
-http://www.fiscalcommission.gov/sites/fiscalcommission.gov/files/documents/TheMomentofTruth12_1_2010.pdf
"Because of our wealth inequality and marginalized work force, the effects of this shift to a multipolar world will be devastating [...]"
Although not applicable to the current topic, I'd like to see this idea fleshed out in a future post.
At the moment, I don't see the connection. But, hey, I'm here to learn.
M: In other words, when people are afraid, they don't think rationally. And when they can't think rationally, they'll believe anything.
And right here is the basis of virtually every fearful, hate-filled, paranoid rant from Markto and Nikto about the terrible threat the country faces from the corporate-cock-sucking libertarian fascist religious Nazi fundamentalists and the corporations who back them that have taken over the Republican Party and yadda yadda yadda....
When America speaks of being "great," that's basically intimating how we compete in the global economy and where we rank as a player in it. That's where our current unipolar ranking comes into play.
And I do think this is applicable because if our work force is better off in a myriad of ways, we retain our power in the world. If it isn't, we don't and that's where the loss of greatness will be evident. Rest assured, I do play on talking about this theme more often.
Ummm. No.
"Our businesses will not be able to grow and create jobs, and our workers will not be able to compete successfully for the jobs of the future without a plan to get this crushing debt burden off our backs."
http://www.fiscalcommission.gov/sites/fiscalcommission.gov/files/documents/TheMomentofTruth12_1_2010.pdf
I'm not seeing anything about the global economy here. Nor anything about unipolarity.
"Every modest sacrifice we refuse to make today only forces far greater sacrifices of hope and opportunity upon the next generation."
"The era of debt denial is over, and there can be no turning back."
I honestly don't understand why unipolarital relations has even come into this conversation.
When they talk about the jobs of the future, that's jobs in the global economy. They're right about the debt but it's also much more than that. Did you give the Manzi article a full read? Here is the link again.
http://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/keeping-americas-edge
Businesses today have to compete in the global marketplace if they want to grow. This is becoming more and more evident every day. The global economy is now the framework...the foundation...for how we interact with each other as countries. China's GDP will equal Japan's in 2017...ours possibly in 2042. India is expected to surpass France in GDP in 2020 and Japan in 2030. This is due to their highly educated working population which leads to social cohesion. This is where the shift in polarity comes in to play.
You're really flailing here, Mark.
Commish says future jobs but they really mean global economy jobs?
Ummm... ok. I accept the fact that the US doesn't exist in a vacuum. The committee members probably do, as well.
"They are right about the debt..."
Are they?
They term it as a
"crushing debt burden"
Because if they are, they say we are done as a country.
You agree with them still?
Include "highly educated working population which leads to social cohesion" in a future post as well. Does the US have a 'highly educated working population'? If not, then your premise seems to lean toward less (or perhaps declining at least?) social cohesion at the moment.
Less social cohesion = the cities will burn
And presto, we are back on topic.
The topic is the only shift in polarity so far. Whatever that means.
“If you can refute a single sentence I uttered, madame, I shall hear it gratefully.”
...
“The woman turned away, a shudder running through the flesh of her cheeks and through the angry tremor of her voice: Well, it's certainly a funny way to talk at party!”
Damn shame this went off of the front page all of the sudden.
Looking forward to those concepts in a future post, Mark.
Larry, hold on a second...let me put your comment into my google translator which now offers the convenient feature of translating Right Wing Blogspeak into English.
You're really flailing here, Mark
(fed into translator)
I don't like what Mark is saying. His facts are stupid. And I won't admit that I don't understand some of what he says because he can't win.
You agree with them still?
Yes, but it's not an insurmountable task. Two thirds spending cuts, one third revenue. In other words, their recommendations.
I will be putting something together on all of this but you have to read the Manzi article as a primer because he really sets the foundation for many of these ideas.
In terms of polarity, it's probably easy to think in terms of who is the dominant power in the world right now. It's still us and us alone. But our debt does leave us in a weaker position and opens us up to potential problems and a near certain shift in the balance of power in the world. It's going to be difficult to tackle this problem with the completely immovable object that is the GOP today. Eventually, they are going to have to give in and recognize that an economy that sucks money upward makes us weak in the global economy.
Mark:
I still don't understand why you think that the Democrat policies are going to save us.
What is being done? By either side of the false dichotomy you pepetuate? Better question: What can be done?
Which of the commission's suggestions have been given the green light?
Which suggestions have even been brought up on the floors of congress?
How much time do you think the world economy has left? Obviously, you think there is plenty.
I disagree.
Not long ago, you didn't think the debt would ever need to be paid back. I'm glad you seem to recognize belatedly that it is a problem.
Two-thirds spending cuts. Cut what? Haven't we been over this ground as well?
Perhaps you should review your Manzi as well.
"If you think about it, any real solution to the federal deficit problem is currently politically impossible, yet we know mathematically that, barring a productivity miracle, the situation cannot persist indefinitely."
manzi
4-18-2011
"Eventually, they are going to have to give in and recognize that an economy that sucks money upward makes us weak in the global economy"
After careful thought, I had to ask:
Which historically sucessful economies are you referring to, that sucked money down?
I don't necessarily think that all Democratic policies will save us. I think they have some good ideas....well, in comparison, they actually have ideas and are willing to game them out and implement them. Part of the purpose of this blog is to discuss these ideas and take a look at the ones that are the best. Some of your questions require a much longer response than what I would say in a simple response in a thread. If you choose to stick around, you will see some answers.
Regarding the debt, I never said that it wasn't a problem. I always said it was a concern. How we manage our debt is important but we will always have debt. That's the nature of how credit-public or private-work. There is good debt and bad debt, right?
I also think you are being fatalist in your views and I can see why you would be that way. Things really do suck right now. But if the US is such a bad investment, why is it that when the stock market tanks people run to T bills? They are considered a rock solid investment even with our problems today. Or do you not agree? Why?
Regarding successful economies, I would submit that ours was very successful for over three decades when we had a much more progressive tax rate and more even distribution of income. Countries like Canada, Switzerland, and Australia are considered successes today by groups like the Heritage Foundation and they have lower inequality than we do at present.
US T-Bills really are a rock solid investment. For the near future, at least. Tax income is easily enough to pay the interest on our debt. The shrill cries of 'Default!' from the debt ceiling debate were worthless hype.
But you answer yourself with your question. The stock market tanks, flight to safety follows. I suspect it has always been that way.
When the USSR's stock market tanked, I wonder if Russians moved into the safety of government bonds...
I wonder if the buyers (in 2001) of 30 year Grecian bonds are happy with the investment...
"I never said that it wasn't a problem."
Of course you did. But that was then, and this is now. And now you realize that it is important. I can live with that.
Because it is important. So important, that something should be done.
It is unfortunate the country is incapable of doing anything.
I understand your post WWII 'successful economy' argument. I'm not so sure that 'progressive tax rates' and 'even distribution of income' were the cause.
It may have had something to do with an unscathed manufacturing base at a time of worldwide destruction, the 'discovery' of a doubled workforce when women came to the factories, and the creation of a US Dollar based international trading system guaranteeing the purchase of our reserve currency.
Insofar as labeling me a fatalist, I suppose it seems that way. I would consider myself a well-informed realist. Please, prove me wrong. My numbers may be off. My math may be faulty. Perhaps the fiscal commission is completely off-base.
Offtopic.
From the FOMC minutes:
Reports from business contacts suggested that depressed business confidence as well as uncertainty regarding the economic outlook, regulatory policy, and fiscal policy continued to restrain hiring and also capital investment.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/fomcminutes20110809.pdf
For your 'there is no uncertainty' file.
Of course you did.
Again, my fault for not communicating well. Let's look at this a different way.
Currently Japan is running at 245 percent debt to GDP. Clearly, this is a concern but even at twice our level of debt to GDP, their society is not in ruins. Why do you suppose that is?
Obviously, any country has to manage their debt well but it's not going to go away. This country has had debt since 1837, Currently we are at 102 and estimates show we will go up slightly to 105 and remain there until 2016. This is significantly lower than our post WWII debt. We've had greater debt in our history than we have had now and did quite well.
We will do so again if the Republicans would be more reasonable and cease operating from a "I'm never wrong and I'm not budging" position. They need to capitulate on taxes and defense as the Democrats have been willing to do on entitlements. If that happens, things get better.
But we would still have debt. We always will and it won't matter. So, basically what I'm saying is...it's a problem and it's not a problem." Right about now, you probably feel like Harry Truman and his desire for a one armed economist. But it's a gray world...
Well, there is no such thing as off topic on this blog so please feel free to post whatever you want:)
I think it's not entirely accurate to interpret my thoughts on uncertainty as you have stated above. There's probably a breakdown in understanding or communication somewhere. I'll just take the blame and say it's my fault for not being more effective in relating where I'm at.
My initial thoughts on uncertainty stemmed from the all too typical "winning the argument" tactic used by the right. Buffet confirmed this as well in his recent piece. People invest to make money and they don't wait around due to some imagined threat of...something. He just invested 5 billion dollars in BOA so he doesn't seem to be uncertain about anything.
In addition, I think there is clearly a difference between confidence and profits. This is where I get frustrated. Many firms are seeing record profits and are doing very well but they aren't hiring. Why should they when the can make a profit without doing so? So, I'm of the opinion that these reports mentioned here are ass covering in nature. They are saying this stuff because they don't want to be the bad guy. They are working the PR just like any entity would because they see the polls and know that the American people are pretty pissed off at the private sector, specifically Wall Street.
Business is always going to blame the government for their problems and then run to the government when they have serious ones begging for help. These contacts are likely manipulating perception to keep things status quo.
Japan has been explained recently. I'm sure you remember.
We will always have debt?
Why?
Aren't we a sovereign country? Can't we print enough of our currency to pay as we go?
Pardon the rhetorical question. Of course we could have.
As far as 'not communicating well', I'd say you communicated just fine. You just happened to be incorrect back then. Debt matters, as we both agree now.
Are we done with the 'cities will burn' topic? Did you end up thinking that it just might be possible?
You just happened to be incorrect back then. Debt matters, as we both agree now.
I think we simply disagree on the nuances of it.
Regarding burning cities, I suppose we have had burning cities before and survived just fine. I just don't think it will happen to the extent that people like Kevin Baker say it will. I think he and many of his posters fantasize about a world similar to "Falling Skies" or "Red Dawn" and I just don't see that happening.
The nuances? You said that the debt was meaningless. You and Cheney, I guess.
I say that debt is entirely unnecessary for a sovereign country with its own currency. The only reason for debt is to pull consumption forward. It makes today's statistics look nice, but is unsustainable.
You say something else.
I don't know Baker, or read his website, so I guess I'll stand on my original assertion.
The cities will burn.
You say they won't.
Or do you?
Will they burn as they did in the late 60s or early 90s? We are always a short step away from that so yes.
Will they burn as in "Red Dawn?" No.
8/21
Kevin himself than commented, "Our major cities may very well burn." ...
Honestly, if this is what he and his readers truly think, I find little difference between them and your typical apocalypse cult.
9/1
We are always a short step away from that so yes.
-----------
I guess all I can say is that I find little difference between you and your typical apocalypse cult.
Except you have thought it out logically, and come to a conclusion. It doesn't have to be a Niburu collision ordained by Mayan prophets. Just economics.
Thanks for the conversation.
Post a Comment