Ian Welsh

The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Tim Walz Is Excellent Domestically & Pro-Genocide

If I were an American, I’d be pretty happy about the guy, unless I have a problem with mass murder of foreigners.

On the good side:

  • signed a bill giving free breakfast lunch to all students;
  • 20 weeks of paid family & medical leave, for America, excellent;
  • right to repair bill;
  • free college tuition for students whose families make less than 80K;
  • banned non-competes;
  • and so on.

So, domestically, excellent. But he’s pro-Israel:

At AIPAC:

Israel is our truest and closest ally in the region, with a commitment to values of personal freedoms and liberties, surrounded by a pretty tough neighborhood.

“The values of personal freedoms of liberties” about an apartheid state is pretty rich.

To the Jewish Community Relationship Council, June 2, 2024 (aka, while the genocide was ongoing):

I see people debating something I don’t feel is debatable here. The ability of Jewish people to self-determine is foundational to everything […] and the failure to recognize the State of Israel taking away that self-determination. So it is anti-semitic, and that is a statement of fact.

If what you’re going to do with your “self determination” is commit a genocide, then you shouldn’t have self-determination. Note also the conflation of Israel with being Jewish, which if I were Jewish, I’d object to on the strongest terms, not wanting to be associated with mass murder.

Of course he’s the VP pick, Harris is healthy and he’s unlikely to matter a great deal. That said, he’s about as good as Harris was likely to pick. I’d say that the Harris/Walz ticket is better for more Americans than Trump/Vance, as long as you can get past the whole genocide thing.

Consider that damning with faint praise.


My writing happens because readers donate or subscribe. If you value that writing, and you can afford to, please support it.

Why Are the British Race Riots Happening?

We’ll start with the proximate:

As mobs attempt to burn down hotels housing asylum seekers, don’t forget Nigel Farage led a campaign to publicise these hotels. He recorded himself turning up at a series of them in 2020 and asked his followers to identify more hotels, saying some residents “might be ISIS”.

Then let’s move backwards:

First there’s been a lot of anti-Muslim propaganda thru the years, including entire TV and movie eras where the most common villains.

Second is a sustained right wing campaign complaining about demographic replacement and stating that immigrants are more likely be criminals than natives.

Third is the fact that Britain has been bringing in massive numbers of immigrants when there isn’t enough housing, driving up prices and leading to homelessness.

Fourth is that the the UK has been in decline for over forty years. A lot of people are hurting. There aren’t enough good jobs, yet somehow the government is allowing in record numbers of immigrants.

When I was young I said to my father that I didn’t see a lot of racism. He, a child of the Great Depression, replied, “wait till times are bad.”

The “other”, the immigrant, is always an easy target. The actual villains are the UK’s ruling class and if violence is the method then the correct response would be to Bastille them, but people are rarely capable of understanding that their most profound enemies are those who rule them. Putin is not a significant danger to Americans or Brits: their own politicians and corporate leaders are responsible for their poverty, increasing death rates, sickness and homelessness.

If you want a good country again, figure out a way to replace your leadership class wholesale. Nothing else will work, certainly not burning hotels with powerless immigrants in them. That’s pathetic and stupid, on top of being immoral.

Be better and be smarter.


My writing happens because readers donate or subscribe. If you value that writing, and you can afford to, please support it.

Big Picture Financial Collapse

Though newer readers will be forgiven for disbelieving it, during my early online career I was primarily considered a finance and economics blogger, though I’d write about almost anything. Among other things, I predicted the financial collapse, including the DOW bottom and the month it would happen in. A correspondent once went thru the Wayback machine and found that there were less than forty people who made the prediction in advance.

I lost interest somewhere around 2010 and moved my primary focus to other topics: at the time mostly ideology and how it interacted with the political economy. There was no reason in continuing: my goal had always been change, and the Fed, Congress and Obama had all confirmed that the only change was to be the end of any real spar of capitalism.

So I’m not going to write about the proximate cause of the current financial collapse, but instead look at the bigger picture that lead here.

First we have the offshoring of real industry, primarily to China. There is a real economy, and financial skyscrapers, no matter how high, are based on them. The bottom line is that the West no longer has the industry to hold up the skyscraper.

Second is that the 80-now long bull market was entirely a creation of government policy: mostly thru the Federal Reserve, but with serious assists from Congress and the President. There was a time when stock buyback were illegal, for example. There was a time when the Fed didn’t run a “the markets must always go up” policy: in fact, during the 50s and 60s the stock market traded sideways, even though real economic growth was, by every measure, higher than in the post 80 period.

Third is the response to the 2008 financial collapse. Not the collapse itself, but the response, which was to bail out the people and institutions which had caused the crash, to immunize thru fines and agreements those who had engaged in massive and widespread fraud, to force the burden onto homeowners by allowing banks to steal houses; and in general terms to ensure that the same people who had caused the crisis were in charge afterwards, but more powerful and controlling larger institutions.

Then they patted themselves on the back and said they’d saved the world. Capitalism isn’t a system I like, but one of its virtues is that if you fuck up you go out of business: if you’ve made a lot of bad decisions you aren’t allowed to keep making bad decisions. Bernanke, the Fed, Congress and the Presidency put an end to that dynamic and essentially ended even the shadow of real capitalism in America, and indeed, in the West.

This meant that resources were terribly misallocated, and that further economic decline was inevitable, since there was no possibility of a new economic elite rising based on actually producing good products and solving real problems. It also mean that further financial crises were inevitable, and that in the end those crises would not be able to be papered over, because, Virginia, there may be no Santa Clause but there is a real economy where things have to actually be made and built and grown and dug up and refined.

The fourth factor is the decline of US dollar hegemony. It isn’t obvious in the numbers yet, but it’s real and those who are making long term bets against it will regret doing so. I won’t go on about this, since I’ve written a dozen articles or so on the topic in the last two years.

We’re at the end of somewhere between two and five centuries of European/Western world superiority and dominance. It’s going to suck for Europe, the Anglosphere and most of our allies. There’s just no way around that, and the decision points are past. A recovery is theoretically possible, and I could even write an article giving the outlines of what’s necessary, but there’s no political possibility of doing it and our current elites are too incompetent to make it work anyway. A revolution which throws out our entire leadership class is a pre-condition and by the time we got that done, the day would have passed anyway.

All of which is, I suppose, just a long way of saying “economic decline sucks and isn’t going to stop,”


My writing happens because readers donate or subscribe. If you value that writing, and you can afford to, please support it.

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – August 4 2024

by Tony Wikrent

 

Gaza / Palestine / Israel

US Urged to Condemn Israel’s ‘Summary Execution’ of Two Journalists

Edward Carver, August 02, 2024 [CommonDreams]

A Palestinian journalist on Thursday pressed a U.S. State Department spokesperson to characterize the killings of two Al Jazeera journalists by Israeli forces as summary execution.

The heated press briefing followed an airstrike on Wednesday that killedAl Jazeera reporter Ismail al-Ghoul and cameraman Rami al-Rifee, and sparked global outrage. Israel’s military acknowledged targeting al-Ghoul, saying he was “eliminated” because he was a Hamas “terrorist,” an allegation the Qatar-based network said was “baseless.”

The death toll of Palestinian journalists and media workers now stands at least 108, including several intentionally targeted by Israel forces, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).

 

[X-Twitter, via Naked Capitalism 07-31-2024]

It’s telling Israel (allegedly) can conduct pinpoint operations thousands of kilometers away to a capture target with precision, yet just two kilometers from home, they use 5-ton bombs on families to eliminate minor threats.

Oligarchy

Private Equity Giants Invest More Than $200M in Federal Races to Protect Their Lucrative Tax Loophole 

[Exposed by CMD, via Naked Capitalism 08-02-2024]

 

The carnage of mainstream neoliberal economics

Uber, Lyft and Others Win California Ruling to Treat Drivers as Contractors 

[Wall Street Journal, via Naked Capitalism 07-28-2024]

 

Big Law Confronts Tail Risk Threat to Private Equity Bankruptcy 

[Bloomberg, via Naked Capitalism 07-29-2024]

Big Law partners are looking at a ruling that sent shock waves through the bankruptcy world as a lesson rather than a serious threat to their model of representing both private equity sponsors and their distressed portfolio companies.

The fallout comes in the wake of a decision this month in the Eastern District of Virginia. The court declared Vinson & Elkins could not represent wood-pellet maker Enviva Inc. in its bankruptcy case due to the law firm’s longstanding relationship with Riverstone Investment Group LLC, a private equity firm that held 43% of Enviva’s publicly traded shares.

Open Thread

Use to discuss topics unrelated to recent posts. No vax/anti-vax this week.

China Continues To Crush In Science & Intel Falters In Chips

Well, this is practically nail in the coffin news:

Meanwhile Intel is laying off 15,000 workers, slightly over 15% of its workforce and announced yield issues with its new “Meteor Lake” semiconductors. Its last two generations of chips have hardware problems which cause and crashes and have no software fix. (Buy AMD for your next computer.)

The CHIPS act was supposed to cause a rebirth of US chip manufacturing, but so far this seems unlikely. The US no longer has the necessary skills. Meanwhile, China is roaring on chips, taking over the legacy end of the market and pushing hard on the rest of it.

The end result of semiconductor sanctions is going to be that China will become the dominant player in semiconductors, a field which American allies dominate.

This wasn’t necessary. Chinese companies preferred foreign semiconductors before the sanctions: they sneered at domestic made ones and felt the quality was inferior, which it was. But what was done to Huawei told every Chinese company and China’s leadership that they couldn’t rely on foreign suppliers under Washington’s thumb.

A little history, because sanctions and CHIPS were aimed just at China.

Back in 1986 the US dollar was very high due to Volckers high interest rates. The great powers of the time got together and agreed to intervene to depreciate the dollar. The great loser was Japan, and the great winner in Semiconductors were Intel and Micron: Japan had previously been clearly in the lead. The Plaza accord later contributed to Japan’s crash, and the real end of its post war golden age. Doing so may have helped America, but it weakened the American alliance system’s overall power significantly.

CHIPS and sanctions can be seen as an attempt to return the lead from Taiwan and South Korea to America, but this is failing and it will also lead to American allies losing the lead.

As Kissinger once said, It may be dangerous to be America’s enemy, but to be America’s friend is fatal. This is especially true as American hegemony ends. America is cannibalizing or trying to cannibalize its allies: much of German industry crushed by anti-Russia sanctions, for example, has moved to America.

But America no longer has the real engineers (not software engineers) and factory know-how to scoop up cutting edge semiconductor production.

We’ll see if China, which is now more powerful than the US in every way that matters except deployed military, is better to its allies.

Smart nations will cut deals with the Chinese and re-align towards it if they can get anything close to a good deal. The West is going down and the decline will not be halted any time soon.


My writing happens because readers donate or subscribe. If you value that writing, and you can afford to, please support it.

The Most Evil Religious Belief

Religion is a subset of ideology, and ideology is a set of beliefs about how how the world is and how the world should be. Capitalism is an ideology. Communism is an ideology. Scientism is an ideology. Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Sikhism and so on are religious ideologies.

The boundary between the two is weak. Communism and Scientism make metaphysical statements. Communism and Scientism generally state that there is no soul, there is no afterlife and there are no supernatural beings.

Capitalism believes that people, out of self interest (greed and selfishness), act in ways that create welfare for the majority. This is a radical belief, held by almost no one and no other belief system in history. It also believes in unlimited growth. The combination of these beliefs is going to wind up killing a few billion people.

But the worst religious belief is almost certainly “there is an afterlife, and only thru this religion can you achieve it. If you don’t worship this religion you will be tormented for eternity after death.”

This belief creates monsters. If there is only one way to avoid eternal torment, then ANYTHING is justified. This is one reason why Christianity and Islam have a history of atrocities. Charlemagne, a hero to most in the West, spent much of his life force-converting “pagans.” In one case he forced ten thousand Saxons to accept baptism, then immediately killed them all. Had they lived, after all, they could have gone to their priestly class and un-converted.

The mass burnings in the New World, primarily by Spain, were justified by the belief that burning pagans would let them get into Heaven. Sure, burning alive is one of the most horrible deaths possible, but what’s that compared to an eternity of torment? Burning someone alive to avoid Hell and get them into Heaven isn’t just not evil, it’s a truly good and moral act: to not burn them would be evil. If there’s something you can do to ensure you or someone else avoids eternal torment, it’s always justified.

This is the most extreme of “only my way is the good way” beliefs common in ideology. We’ll discuss this in more general terms later. It isn’t always wrong to say “some actions and beliefs and ideologies are good and others are evil”, it is always wrong to say “only this set of beliefs is right and all other sets of beliefs are wrong.”

The distinction is fine, but important. It’s also one that many moderns reject.


My writing happens because readers donate or subscribe. If you value that writing, and you can afford to, please support it.

Will Kamala Harris Be A Worse President Because She Doesn’t Have Children?

Here’s the case, put relatively well:

Moral superiority aside, a somewhat general rule of thumb is that if you have children AND they live in the same country, then you have a HIGHER vested interest in the wellbeing of your country.

I’ll take “wellbeing of your country” to mean wellbeing of the residents of your country, though it doesn’t have to mean that.

Now, this argument is one that’s true sometimes. But only sometimes. It also assumes that parents care about the wellbeing of their children, which isn’t always true, but we’ll assume it is for now.

Let’s run thru why it doesn’t work for powerful people, which includes most politicians, certainly anyone with a decent chance of winding up President of the United States.

It is possible to take actions which increase the wellbeing of your children, which also harm the wellbeing of your country. American politicians and oligarchs, for example, sold America’s manufacturing base to China. They become filthy rich as a result and their children will be very well taken care of even if America is in serious decline. It did, however, harm the majority of Americans. (There are thousands of other examples, feel free to add some in comments.)

Your children may live in a worse-off America, but they are better off than if you did not do that harm. (Or, at least, that is your belief.)

If you prioritize the wellbeing of a small group over a larger group it usually possible to hurt the larger group to benefit the smaller group.

In fact, there is a strong argument that people without children are far more likely to prioritize the wellbeing of the residents of their country than those with children: they don’t have to make a choice: “should I make my kids better off OR the everyone else better off?”

Even at the simplest level, of “should I spend more time with my kids OR spend more time doing my job” there is this conflict. Great men and women are often bad parents, because if working an extra hour means helping a thousand of someone else’s children, they do that even if it hurts their own kids.

There is no free lunch. You always have to prioritize.

Harris will be a terrible President, I’m confident of that. But it has nothing to do with whether or not she has kids and, in fact, if she intended to do the right things for ordinary Americans, the fact that she didn’t have children would be a significant plus.

Most cultures have a family worship disease: the idea that you should always put your family first.

NO.

If you are willing to put your family first when doing so means that large numbers of people will suffer, you’re a monster. In fact, one of the necessities of having power over large numbers of people has to be that you don’t put your family first IF doing so will result in harm to others.

If you reach a point where it’s your family or a large number of others, and you can’t choose the “others” then you should step down and give the job to someone who can take care of the others.

Only those without power can, ethically, prioritize their own family without being monsters.

That this has to be explained to people is another sign of our inability to reason clearly about moral and ethical issues.


My writing happens because readers donate or subscribe. If you value that writing, and you can afford to, please support it.

Page 105 of 530

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén