Originally Posted by pbrower2a

the republicans have an ambiguous message on the economy -- that the only people whose economic success does any good for america is for the economic elites, and that economic hardships for the rest do not matter because there will be pie in the sky when you die for those who accept a mindless, joyless, regimented, insecure, inequitable, impoverished, environmentally-ravaged world on behalf of their betters. For people who no longer have hope for well-paid jobs as miners and assembly-line workers, such could be a valid trade and the republican promise is the best available. For those who want better or who can't believe that exploitative brutes have any wisdom about the judgment of god upon politics, the republican promise is absurd. Such makes all the difference in the world.



If i really believed what the right promises --- suffer for my greed and go to heaven -- i would chain-smoke, pig out on junk food, guzzle lots of beer, and vegetate on the couch while watching television, probably alternating between televangelist programs, fox propaganda channel (helping create the personality cults of republican politicians and demonizing liberals), and maybe sports. I would also be dead by now of cancer, heart disease, cirrhosis, or alcohol poisoning. I would probably also be at best in purgatory for a wasted life.



A free america with opportunity for anyone with a good work ethic and even modest talent is worth defending against foreign enemies and against americans who would turn america into a nightmare. So,

god bless america -- smash fascism!

could anything be more patriotic? If so many could face the nightmares of the fascism of three thug empires of germany, italy, and japan as soldiers in the last 4t, then why can't we do so against those who would transform america into a fascist nightmare if they could do so? An american fascism will be no less ugly because it uses sousa marches than because it uses old prussian marches.



A good america is a just america. We will need to make some sacrifices -- use energy more judiciously, buy things for durability and multiple use instead of buying junk that ends up in the landfill, allowing opportunities for people who are superficially dissimilar to ourselves, dedicate more resources to education, strengthen the social safety net, reform corruption away, and improve the public infrastructure -- and of course val;ue rational thought. If we fail at that we will face even greater sacrifices and for far fewer earthly rewards.

god bless america -- smash totalitarianism!

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

Yes, the trip to the convention is still long, but the time to start the journey is now. Who else is in the running? I 'm ecstatic that Jim Webb decided to enter, because he is truly a different candidate than the typical Democrat of recent history. I doubt he can win, and I'm not sure he would be a good President if he did. So who else is in?

Honestly, I have no idea. I'm just saying that Hillary shouldn't count her chickens yet, and after the upsetting experience of 2008 she probably won't. Who saw Obama coming that year? I had my eye on him after the 2004 convention speech, but I didn't expect him to do that well that quickly.

The GOP is morphing, and the Dems are going sclerotic. I'm mad at the latter, and not overly encouraged by the former. I'm not typical, and neither are you. Joe and Jane Voter are less engaged, and more open to superficial positives. Joe and Jane out number folks like us by orders of magnitude, so they are the target audience that needs to be reached and romanced.

The situation we're seeing today is that there isn't one Joe and Jane Voter, but at least two. One is the reality-accepting denizen of mainstream America, significantly to the right of you or me, but someone you and I can relate to and understand. The other is the reality-denying denizen of Neo-Confederate America (mostly inhabiting the South, but existing in small numbers in other regions). The Republicans are increasingly the party of the latter group. The latter group is a minority, a dwindling one, and so wildly out of step with the other group that a GOP candidate who can win the nomination (requiring Neo-Confederate support) must lose the national election (requiring the support of mainstream America).

And so again: a Republican candidate who has a chance to win the election, and who shows that the party has come to its senses, is one that you could conceivably vote for. I don't mean a liberal. I mean someone who isn't insane. I mean a Dwight Eisenhower, or even a Richard Nixon before we discovered what a crook he was. The GOP used to have lots of politicians like this: not ideal from a progressive perspective, but not terrifying. Today, while there are still a few of them working in local and state government (mostly in blue states), the national scene is dominated by the Wacko Birds (as Chris Ladd at GOP Lifer calls them). Neither Eisenhower nor Nixon would have been your preferred candidate, most likely, but you wouldn't have found the prospect of them in the White House terrifying. (If you say you would have found Nixon terrifying, that's hindsight. His actual governance as president included expansion of civil rights, the EPA, detente with the Soviet Union, recognition of China, and belatedly getting us out of Vietnam. If not for the unacceptable abuse of power, he would have been a great president.)

By the way, Chris has a new blog post out today and it's worth looking at: http://goplifer.com/2015/01/13/why-j...probably-lose/

Why is winning a good thing, in and of itself?

It's not necessarily, and that's where the Republicans in their current form still have influence and power: they can paralyze the government. I'm not saying that the Democratic lock on the presidency is necessarily a good thing. I wish the Republicans were sane, and could mount a credible challenge. I wish we had a real political dialog between progressives and conservatives, instead of between a party that includes both and a bunch of nut jobs. I wish the nut jobs were gone. I wish the American Civil Conflict were over. If it were, the GOP would be different than it is, the Democrats wouldn't have the election sewn up already, and that would be better for everyone.

You mentioned the one thing that changed: regional affinity. The one thing that hasn't changed is focus: the GOP is still the party of business.

The GOP has never been entirely the "party of business" as you mean that phrase. In the past, when the Republicans were still true to their roots and traditions, the conservative center of the party was often challenged by people like Abraham Lincoln, Thaddeus Stevens, and Theodore Roosevelt. Today, it's challenged with increasing success by nut jobs like Michelle Bachmann and Ted Cruz and Rand Paul. In the past, the GOP actually governed, with an eye on reality, knowing that the interests of the rich had to be compromised with the national interest and the well-being of the non-rich. Republican governance gave us some real progressive achievements in those days. Today, they've lost all contact with reality and can't govern at all. What they can do is prevent governance, which is not the same thing.

Given that, tell me how an HRC Presidency is progressive.

I never said it was. What I am saying is that this situation will not change until the ACC is finished and done, when we have no effective political voice for the neo-Confederates at all, when the reality-denying yahoos have been completely discredited. We can live with a progressive-conservative dialog. Conservatives aren't the enemy. They want this country to succeed. They have an awareness of reality. They are skeptical of wild-eyed craziness from either the left or the right. Given that dialog, we will have progressive victory over time, but not too easily, and that's exactly what's needed. Neither progressives nor conservatives want the government paralyzed. Only the Neo-Confederates want that. Get rid of them, and things will happen. But until we do, nothing that happens at the national level will make much difference. We will continue to have impotent government at the top, and progressive change will happen only at the state and local level, as it is today.

Well, it looks like George Pataki and John Bolton are deciding to throw their hats into the ring long with HuckaJesus.

And even swarmy Bill Kristol is casting about for something somebody anything!

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/...ll_823298.html

Kristol Clear 2016 Straw Poll

Obviously some overlap wit the current clown car -


Credit: DonkeyHotey

but there's some new faces there as well.

They're gonna need a clown bus

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

... then he killed Glass-Steagle, signed NAFTA and basically climbed the rest of the way in bed with the oligarchs. It worked ... for a while.

Yes. We were speaking about how the Democrats campaign and what issues they speak to. What they actually do is another thing, unfortunately.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

People don't need alternatives. They need jobs. If the economy can't or won't provide good jobs for good people, then the State needs to step in and provide them directly.

Yes, that's one of the "alternatives" the Democrats need to offer.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Yes, that's one of the "alternatives" the Democrats need to offer.

Jobs aren't an alternative, they're necessary. We can't continue to pretend that underemployed people get a rats ass about politics, unless it comes with direct payoff.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

Jobs aren't an alternative, they're necessary. We can't continue to pretend that underemployed people get a rats ass about politics, unless it comes with direct payoff.

You were speaking, I think, about government jobs building infrastructure. Yes, that's one of the alternatives to the Republican program (which is what I was writing about here).

The Republican program is to protect the income and perogatives of big corporations and wealthy businessmen. It is called trickle-down economics. The "alternatives" means other programs and policies besides that trickle down program.

I hope everyone here remembers my proposal, and the reasons for it. Right now, CEOs and other wealthy businessmen get 100s or 1000s of times more dollars more than the people who work for them and make their companies prosperous. Automation has given them even more money. That money needs to be shared back to the working people and society. That means first of all higher taxes on them, and higher minimum wages.

But more needs to be done than this. First of all, if companies are earning all this extra money, and machines are supposed to save time and effort, than it ought to save time for all the employees. Working hours need to be reduced at the same or higher pay. The 8-hour day can be reduced by law to 6 hours, and overtime can be prohibited. This gives the workers the free time they deserve, which they can use to enjoy life or for creative or social service pursuits. The higher pay would go back into the economy.

But minimum wage is not enough to guarantee that CEOs raise salaries and wages. So, once taxes are raised on them and their companies, tax breaks can be given in appropriate ways and amounts to be determined, to those who hire more people and pay them more.

As I read it, Brian Rush's proposal of paying people for non-profit work might involve providing more government grants to those doing creative or non-profit work.

The Archie Bunker type who votes Republican based on such values as traditional religion, militarist patriotism, patriarchy, guns, racism and nativism, and free markets and anti-welfare individualism, which TNT points out are values not respected by many liberals and Democratic Party politicians, may be a product of work in which people were forced to be more stupid than they really are. Remember that Archie Bunker worked on "a loading dock." This job no longer exists. Many blue-collar jobs were repetitive factory jobs that require no thought or imagination from the worker. Others are rural workers such as ranchers, which is a very parochial environment, and ranching is something else we need less of now too, if we are going to move away from meat eating. These kinds of workers are often frustrated because the economy does not provide good jobs for them anymore. But these workers are used to jobs that engender and require stupidity, rather than bring out the creative innovative abilities and brains that most of us have.

The new economy requires workers to use their brains and intuition more than in the past. That doesn't mean that these new workers necessarily need to study civics, literature and art; they can be apprentices. But, it would help create a more civic and cultured society if workers were also required to be college graduates; even graduates of the free junior colleges that Obama proposes. We need workers for the new economy, and we also need informed and cultured citizens. And these other humanities-type subjects also enhance the kind of skills needed in the new economy. And, a new kind of education that emphasizes creative and social skills over memorization and teaching to tests, is essential.

Eric, I was actually talking about a guaranteed base income for everyone, just for existing, or anyway to all U.S. citizens and legal residents.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

Eric, I was actually talking about a guaranteed base income for everyone, just for existing, or anyway to all U.S. citizens and legal residents.

We only have to overcome the Protestant work ethic issue for that to work. Unfortunately, we're getting more Calvinist, not less. There's no doubt that pay-to-not-work will be mandatory at some point in time ... and that point is not far away. So what do we do to change that? The PTB want us feeling guilty for working less than 60 hours a week.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

We only have to overcome the Protestant work ethic issue for that to work. Unfortunately, we're getting more Calvinist, not less. There's no doubt that pay-to-not-work will be mandatory at some point in time ... and that point is not far away. So what do we do to change that? The PTB want us feeling guilty for working less than 60 hours a week.

Yes they do, and that will need to change if we want everyone to share in the benefits of automation instead of only the few at the top. It can happen, if people understand the benefits of a 6-hour or less workday, but a guaranteed income will take longer. I imagine eventually it could be sold as a minimal floor to replace welfare and food stamps, where fraud is alleged. Maybe if everyone gets it, it would have more support, just as most people now get social security, so people support it.

I lean more toward MMT's Job Guarantee (JG) rather than a Basic Income Guarantee (BIG) , but most MMTers don't see it as an either/or but that there can be some synergies that in particular make the BIG much more viable.

Here's an interesting recent article on when BIG was tried and failed - not really suggesting failure is inevitable but how it can possible be avoided -

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/...nd-system.html

The Failure of a Past Basic Income Guarantee, the Speenhamland System
Posted on January 15, 2015 by Yves Smith

Look toward the bottom on how could align with JG.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Yes they do, and that will need to change if we want everyone to share in the benefits of automation instead of only the few at the top. It can happen, if people understand the benefits of a 6-hour or less workday, but a guaranteed income will take longer. I imagine eventually it could be sold as a minimal floor to replace welfare and food stamps, where fraud is alleged. Maybe if everyone gets it, it would have more support, just as most people now get social security, so people support it.

The current meme is: work hard, work long, work smart. Failing any of those criteria is shameful; just ask the average cubicle surfer. Since that is an unsustainable model, The PTB are hoping that the worker-bees will continue guilt each other into submission, making their lives easier in the process. What they seem to miss is how the economy works when the final goal of low-pay for part-time work is the standard model, and no one has the wherewithal to buy all those things we produce.

I don't think we solve that this 4T.

Originally Posted by playwrite

I lean more toward MMT's Job Guarantee (JG) rather than a Basic Income Guarantee (BIG) , but most MMTers don't see it as an either/or but that there can be some synergies that in particular make the BIG much more viable.

Here's an interesting recent article on when BIG was tried and failed - not really suggesting failure is inevitable but how it can possible be avoided -

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/...nd-system.html

Look toward the bottom on how could align with JG.

Job guarantees will have to be creative. The more efficient we get, the less productive work is required from us. Since we're pretty diverse in capabilities and demeanor, we may have to resort to Keynes make-work project of burying money so other people can dig it up. That may the upper limit for some people, and they will feel a sense of accomplishment from the effort. In fact, hand me a shovel.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

The current meme is: work hard, work long, work smart. Failing any of those criteria is shameful; just ask the average cubicle surfer. Since that is an unsustainable model, The PTB are hoping that the worker-bees will continue guilt each other into submission, making their lives easier in the process. What they seem to miss is how the economy works when the final goal of low-pay for part-time work is the standard model, and no one has the wherewithal to buy all those things we produce.

I don't think we solve that this 4T.

I doubt that we solve problems in any one turning; but we can make progress. I am predicting we will make quite a bit of it in the 2020s (the 4T will last until 2028 or 2029 of course). I have predicted this for decades now. So, stay tuned, and don't get too discouraged by the blocks and lack of progress in the 2010s. I can take this advice myself I expect some things will be solved, and others postponed to future turnings. As always. The PTB seem to hope for a model of low-pay for overwork and long hours. The alternative "final goal" is high pay for less work and shorter hours. The sooner we press for that, and achieve it, the sooner more people will share in the prosperity generated by automation and a more equal economy.

On the other hand, the pressures of climate change/resource depletion, and the momentum of social and economic decline and inequality/low mobility over the past 40 years, not to mention the lasting and residual appeal of Reaganism (the self-responsibility, anti-social government meme), will take their tolls too. So, we need not hope for utopia or paradise. That will take a while.

Originally Posted by XYMOX_4AD_84

god bless america -- smash totalitarianism!

OK -- that is broader. Marxism-Leninism is dead; I just can't think of any totalitarianism that could appeal in America except fascism, and then to the vicious, sadistic, and greedy. Religious fundamentalism? The Catholics would be at war, at least culturally, with Protestant fundamentalists.

Our economic elites would surely attack its greatest fear, a humanistic socialism that offers ease instead of false consciousness. Just imagine an America in which people seek culture instead of entertainment, in which people must be paid inordinately well to do necessary but cr@ppy jobs, and in which contrived 'status symbols' are pitiable jokes. Just imagine a world in which people can buy good stuff once at a fair price instead of schlock designed to meet the terms of a payment plan or a rent-to-own contract.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

Unfortunately, we're getting more Calvinist, not less.

No, we're getting less Calvinist. Remember where you live Remember that it's not typical of the country.

Actually, the louder the religious right gets, the more I see that as a sign that they're losing the battle, which quite visibly they are. How many states accept same-sex marriage now?

The PTB want us feeling guilty for working less than 60 hours a week.

If by "the PTB" you mean corporations, of course they do. Who gives a rat's ass what they want?

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

I expect some things will be solved, and others postponed to future turnings. As always.

Exactly. Some of the unfinished business of the Crisis will be addressed in the next Awakening, when Millennials are in charge of the government and business. All we need to do during the 4T is lay the foundation. I have a lot of confidence we'll be able to do that, but it won't happen until fairly late in the game.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

Job guarantees will have to be creative. The more efficient we get, the less productive work is required from us. Since we're pretty diverse in capabilities and demeanor, we may have to resort to Keynes make-work project of burying money so other people can dig it up. That may the upper limit for some people, and they will feel a sense of accomplishment from the effort. In fact, hand me a shovel.

I've just recently got involved in a project dealing with trying to do something with aging pipe infrastructure for public drinking water systems. Those pipes are right down there by the aging sewage pipes.

Holy shit, it is scary what's under the ground, and nowhere enough money to do anything close to what is going to be needed. That's just a sliver of an infrastructure crisis we face, and that's not even thinking about what sea level rise and increasing droughts are going to require just to keep our most vibrant cities working.

We're not fixing this and creating millions of jobs because of something called the deficit/debt? Most people don't even know why federal deficits/debt is suppose to be bad. The ones that do no longer mention it (psss, inflation) because it is now something we pray for.

We truly have become insane.

If the poll showing 43% as independents is accurate, maybe it is time for a third party to emerge.

Originally Posted by radind

If the poll showing 43% as independents is accurate, maybe it is time for a third party to emerge.

Many of the "independent" voters are in some stage of transition from one Party to another. Such voters may think themselves Democrats but find their old Democratic identity out of touch with the current Democratic Party. They may have voted for Carter in 1976, but they can't now imagine voting for any current Democrats. Their loyalty is to a Democratic Party that no longer exists. Exchange "Ford" for "Carter" and "Republican" for "Democrat" or Democratic" and you get the other side.

This happens during regional shifts of the vote. Contrast 2000 to 1976, the two closest Presidential elections in the last fifty years.



1976 -- red Carter, blue Ford

As you can see, Carter won four states that no Democratic nominee has ever won since 1976 -- Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas). He also lost a raft of states (including California, Oregon, Washington, New Mexico, Iowa, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine) that Democrats cannot lose without losing the Presidency.



2000 -- red Gore, blue Bush

(Gore might have been wiser to seek a win of New Hampshire or Ohio than Florida, but that is water under the dam -- and the worst American President since at least Harding).

As you can see, Jimmy Carter and Al Gore (who would seem ideologically similar) win the popular vote, barely, with greatly different sets of states. Of course Gore loses the election that matters -- the electoral votes -- but the contrast is just amazing.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

No, we're getting less Calvinist. Remember where you live Remember that it's not typical of the country.

Actually, the louder the religious right gets, the more I see that as a sign that they're losing the battle, which quite visibly they are. How many states accept same-sex marriage now?

They are losing the 'war of persuasion'. They have found all possible allies, and many of the people that they thought would be allies (let us say devout Catholics on contraception and abortion) distrust the Religious Right on issues other than sexuality -- like economics, foreign policy, and educational content.

If by "the PTB" you mean corporations, of course they do. Who gives a rat's ass what they want?

They have the money with which to buy politicians and support the most cunning liars (public relations) around. They can fire at will, so they can order people to appear without pay at political rallies for the politicians of the choice of their employers and make contributions to politicians and political causes , perhaps with the injunction that 'failure to participate in the political interests of this company may have harmful consequences in the choices of this company in job placement and continued employment'. Such is free speech.

I wish that I could believe otherwise. High-functioning sociopaths thrive in corporate bureaucracies as brutal enforcers. Maybe the "PTB"s are too big for our good.

The only way to create a more equitable system is to implement the meritocratic state, civil-military education system, form and cultivate the combined civil and military meritocratic class. I have written on numerous prior occasions about how children will be raised into a society of friends and comrades, also about how citizens will be trained in work skills and survival skills from an early age, also mentioned the specific subjects children would learn in the future. But I have neglected to mention how the organizational structure of a Restorationist America would be composed of. Apart from the traditional armed forces, the army, navy, air force, marine corps and national guard, there would also be a new military police gendarmerie force. There would also be created two new paramilitary forces, the Honorguard and the Stormguard. The Honorguard would be more a home defense force as well as an ideological bolstering force, there however would be very few honor guard units serving a the front lines, however honor guard personnel would be quite prevalent at the various military training and survival training camps. They will also serve as bolstering muscle for various law enforcement organizations. Ironically the honor guard would be modeled heavily on Iran's Basij. A More important force would be the Stormguard, the Stormguard would serve as the elite troops of the Restorationist party. While the military, gendarmerie and Honorguard will police and instill disciple and camaraderie in society at large; the Stormguard will police the party and military itself. Many front line divisions would be created from Stormguard units and given elite training and equipment. Also the "deislamization units" mentioned in earlier posts will not be detached from the regular army or have army or marine corps personnel: They would be subordinate to the Stormguard and have Stormguard personnel. Thus the Stormguard are envisioned to participate heavily in the general pacification of the middle east. Also many of the military governors and a sizable chunk of the administrative personnel of the military regions that would be established in conquered and pacified regions of the middle east will come from the Stormguard. Eventually a large proportion of the Nuclear arsenal and a sizable chunk of the nuclear missile forces would come under the control of the Stormguard.

As Mentioned earlier the Restorationist program and ultimately the vassalization of Latin America and the general pacification of the middle east would have the ultimate goal of creating a civilizational reconciliation between the Anglophone world, the west ,and the ancient lands of the near east, as well as participation from Latin America and Black Africa, finally possibly even help from India as well. The pacification of the middle east would be followed by the creation of settlement zones and settlement cities populated by American, Anglophone, Latin American, Indian, African and Israeli settlers, although construction of the proposed cities would be carried out by Arab Muslim Labor. The Ultimate goal is that the final pacification of Islam would facilitate the molding of aforementioned civilizations into a giant universal culture and Superstate. Several posters have mentioned that such a state would be an ultimately doomed universal state as per the civilizational theories of Toynbee and Spengler. I disagree, what is hoped for is that this superstate would be ideologically and socially jump state western culture on a new basis, while the classic universal state generally only lasts about 3 to 5 centuries at best, Spengler also mentioned a proto-universal state that occurs much earlier in the civilizations life-cycle, in the west this was the Holy roman empire, and the Islamic world before it became barbarized, this was the original Caliphate. The earlier phase universal state often lasts much longer and provides the basis for its descendant civilization and cultures. This is what Restorationism seeks to create.

Do you realize how self-serving you are? Sure, your needs should be addressed but there are lots of other generations other than millennial.

Hispanics stayed home because Dems didn't fight for them, or , so they thought. Now, there is a GOP Congress and boy are they gonna be the cat's meow now!

Point is: politics is hard. Serving is tough. Voting for the best candidate/party isn't always easy. So, you're gonna just stay home and pout?

Originally Posted by Cynic Hero '86

The only way to create a more equitable system is to implement the meritocratic state, civil-military education system, form and cultivate the combined civil and military meritocratic class.

Oh, like this? I'm sure herr Wilhelm would be proud of you.

I have written on numerous prior occasions about how children will be raised into a society of friends and comrades, also about how citizens will be trained in work skills and survival skills from an early age, also mentioned the specific subjects children would learn in the future.

IOW, trained to be drones to use the drones we have in our arsenal already.

But I have neglected to mention how the organizational structure of a Restorationist America would be composed of. Apart from the traditional armed forces, the army, navy, air force, marine corps and national guard, there would also be a new military police gendarmerie force. There would also be created two new paramilitary forces, the Honorguard and the Stormguard.

[I][B]Stoßtruppen ? und this ?

The Honorguard would be more a home defense force as well as an ideological bolstering force, there however would be very few honor guard units serving a the front lines, however honor guard personnel would be quite prevalent at the various military training and survival training camps. They will also serve as bolstering muscle for various law enforcement organizations. Ironically the honor guard would be modeled heavily on Iran's Basij. A More important force would be the Stormguard, the Stormguard would serve as the elite troops of the Restorationist party. While the military, gendarmerie and Honorguard will police and instill disciple and camaraderie in society at large; the Stormguard will police the party and military itself. Many front line divisions would be created from Stormguard units and given elite training and equipment. Also the "deislamization units" mentioned in earlier posts will not be detached from the regular army or have army or marine corps personnel: They would be subordinate to the Stormguard and have Stormguard personnel. Thus the Stormguard are envisioned to participate heavily in the general pacification of the middle east. Also many of the military governors and a sizable chunk of the administrative personnel of the military regions that would be established in conquered and pacified regions of the middle east will come from the Stormguard. Eventually a large proportion of the Nuclear arsenal and a sizable chunk of the nuclear missile forces would come under the control of the Stormguard.

mitt namn är Ragnarök. Jag kommer att starta den stora branden



From Russia with love, man.

As Mentioned earlier the Restorationist program and ultimately the vassalization of Latin America and the general pacification of the middle east would have the ultimate goal of creating a civilizational reconciliation between the Anglophone world, the west ,and the ancient lands of the near east, as well as participation from Latin America and Black Africa, finally possibly even help from India as well. The pacification of the middle east would be followed by the creation of settlement zones and settlement cities populated by American, Anglophone, Latin American, Indian, African and Israeli settlers, although construction of the proposed cities would be carried out by Arab Muslim Labor.

Oh, I see. Arbeit macht frei, huh?

The Ultimate goal is that the final pacification of Islam would facilitate the molding of aforementioned civilizations into a giant universal culture and Superstate. Several posters have mentioned that such a state would be an ultimately doomed universal state as per the civilizational theories of Toynbee and Spengler. I disagree, what is hoped for is that this superstate would be ideologically and socially jump state western culture on a new basis, while the classic universal state generally only lasts about 3 to 5 centuries at best, Spengler also mentioned a proto-universal state that occurs much earlier in the civilizations life-cycle, in the west this was the Holy roman empire, and the Islamic world before it became barbarized, this was the original Caliphate. The earlier phase universal state often lasts much longer and provides the basis for its descendant civilization and cultures. This is what Restorationism seeks to create.

Everything would be equal already. Rats and roaches shall inherit the earth. Here's some doom metal to go with this post.



Geez, this thing pegs the crazy meter big time.

* dodo award for cynic Hero.