Moldbug and Wood Stoves

Cuckservatives have an amazing ability to tell themselves pretty white lies.  The conservative movement has long claimed to favor the rule of law, while simultaneously claiming to be against regulations.  Which is it?  A regulation is simply a rule—in other words a law for all practical purposes.   In the case of many regulations the congress simply empowers an agency to create all the regulatory details of a law.

A specific example may serve to illustrate the point.  A few years ago, my wife, a dedicated Glen Beck listener, informed me with horror that the EPA was creating new regulations which would outlaw all wood burning stoves.  Whether this is a bad thing or not is beside the point—I like clean air as much as the next guy.  She and Glen were more or less correct.  The EPA enacted new regulations in 2015.  These will be phased in over a five-year period and will dramatically reduce the amount of particulate (smoke) that a wood stove may legally emit.  These new rules probably will force a few companies to close their doors for good.

Consider the situation from the point of view of a small wood stove manufacturer.  Perhaps you do not like the new rules.  Whom should you approach with your concerns?  The EPA is not going to be very receptive.  You may choose to call or write your congressman, but congress no longer control the little details of law.  Your congressman is not going to be able to take regulatory power from the EPA once it is granted.  Perhaps you contact the media and try to raise awareness of your plight.  Well done sir!  You are petitioning the King.  As Mencious Moldbug pointed out, you could always petition the King even before all this freedumb and democracy stuff started.

When conservatives say they want to end regulations, but they want the rule of law they sound silly.  What conservatives should state is that they want rule of law that is accountable.  For law to be accountable some hierarchy must exist.   The present system in the USA is rule of think tanks, universities, bureaucracies, and media.  This system is not very hierarchical or accountable.  Conservatives are complaining about rule by Moldbug’s cathedral, but they do not recognize the nature of their complaint.

Conservative always lose because freedumb is their highest value.  A society governed by whomever is most successful at manipulating the masses is not likely to be a society governed by rational analysis of the problems.  I the case of wood stoves it might seem reasonable to ban them outright in Los Angeles, while permitting use in rural Montana.  This solution is not possible in a system where demotism means that a crisis must always be created, and then a blanket solution applied to fix it.

Trump’s Master Plan–Strategic Bankruptcy

Donald Trump may have a master plan for saving the country, or he may not.  Phase 1 of Trump’s plan will be to consolidate power.  His best course of action will be to emulate Ronald Reagan’s fiscal irresponsibility.  While some remember Reagan as a great conservative, federal deficits soared to unprecedented levels under his administration.  Reagan had two primary goals and he achieved them both.  His first goal was to lower all marginal tax rates and simplify the tax code.  His other goal was to rebuild the US military.  Reagan seldom had full congressional support for these measures, and the media fought him every step of the way.  To overcome congressional opposition Reagan simply bought cooperation with deficit spending.  Congressmen may make noise about balanced budgets, but they all love to spend money on their constituents.  Reagan’s deficits were strategic.  He ensured cooperation with the parts of his program that mattered to him, and he felt that economic growth would make all the spending irrelevant overall.  Things did not work out quite so rosy, but the Soviet Union did come apart.

Donald Trump is no Regan, but he may elect to use a similar strategy.  Trump does not care so much about abortion, tax policy, or military spending as many so-called conservatives.  Trump’s main issues seem to be border security, and favorable trade deals.  Neither of these issues are popular with congress, and the media hates the idea of an America first policy.  This does not matter to Trump—he will buy cooperation.  Already there are rumors of a massive infrastructure spending bill in his first 100 days.   This bill will do very little to put Americans to work.  Public works projects just do not employ many people compared to the old days, and projects take forever to leave the planning stage.  All this spending will buy cooperation from key members of congress who are eager to reward their friends with a big pork dinner.  Trump will also use military spending and tax cuts to buy cooperation.  These measures will be fiscally irresponsible in the extreme, and will place stress on an already shaky financial system.  Trump will not care.

Trump will use all the cooperation that he buys to build a real border wall.  He will also act to create what amounts to a security state favorable to most Americans.  Deportations of illegals will begin and this step is critical to the overall plan.  Trump will also seek to delegitimatize the media, and weaken their power.  His judicial appointments will also help to secure his power for the next important phase.  He will seek to obtain a great relationship with the FBI and military.  He will build friendships with state and local law enforcement.  When he senses that the time is right, Trump will collapse the system.

The idea that Trump will use spending to build cooperation should not be controversial.  Whether Trump intends to cause or allow an economic collapse is highly speculative.  (Larping) Consider that Donald Trump is no stranger to bankruptcy.   He has used bankruptcy to successfully defend and rebuild his business empire.  Trump does not share the same sky is falling, woe is me, the world is ending, attitude about business failure that is common in the media.  Donald Trump is likely to use the economic collapse to save the county.  Bankruptcy is beautiful and deflation is divine.

People who are what Rush Limbaugh calls low information voters think of rich people as if they had huge vaults full of money, when the truly rich are considered to be rich because of the market value of their assets.  This market value fluctuates, and many of the wealthiest people in the world also hold a great deal of debt.  As long as their assets can generate enough revenue to keep paying on the debt these people and institutions remain rich.  As soon as the checks start to bounce, an entire empire can come to its knees quickly.

Consider the case of an Iowa corn farmer who owns 1000 acres of prime farmland free and clear.  If the land is worth $8000 per acre, this farmer holds 8 million worth of land, and perhaps has another $100,000 or so in the bank.  If the price of corn and the price of land collapse so that his farms are only worth $500,000 instead of 8 million he really does not care.  This farmer, who may lead a very middle class lifestyle, has simply moved sideways down the asset deflation bubble as it pops.

A corporate farm may also own 1000 acres, but the land will almost certainly be paid for with borrowed money.  In a major economic downturn, the corporate farm is instantly bankrupt and those 1000 acres will be offered for sale by the court at a fire sale price.   The popping of the asset inflation bubble will be painful for many people in addition to all the large corporations, but the end result will be affordable family formation and a healthy society.

Asset inflation has been one of the most destructive forces damaging American families, and it has been tolerated since the 1970’s.  The price of a house in a non-inflated economy will remain fairly stable, but housing prices in the USA have been steadily rising.  While homeowners typically see this as a good thing and have been known to consider their houses as speculative investments, rising asset prices kill the middle class.  Health care, education, transportation, and food have all been inflated to absurd levels.  When section 8 housing vouchers pay for a $1000 per month apartment, a middle-class family needs to spend $1500 per month to stay in a nice area.  White people choose not to have kids.  Society gradually degrades.

While Trump is a wealthy man, he has middle class sensibilities.  Lion of the Blogosphere has observed that Trump has 1950’s values.  Since Trump understands the real estate market as well as anyone, he will not be intimidated into another TARP.  The big banks will fall.  Asset prices will fall, but those assets will become productive once more since the cost of operating farms, factories, and stores will be so much more reasonable.  America will be much stronger and better post collapse.  The key to making all this happen is for Trump to have very strong political control of law enforcement, the judiciary, and the military.  Even if the dollar collapses a new currency, perhaps based on gold, could be created.  Instead of bailing out the big banks, Trump may choose to bail out the holders of CDs, checking accounts, small businesses, and farms.  These people, who may see the prices of their houses fall by 50% or more will suddenly feel rich.  These people will rebuild the country.

Rethinking Foreign Aid

As we progress from libertarian or old right points of view many of us wind up advocating for policies that we would never have considered before.    One example is higher minimum wage laws.  Randall Parker has called for higher minimum wages because they would reduce the incentive to hire cheap foreign labor.  Another previously unthinkable position is a massive foreign aid budget.

It is often remarked that the great struggle of our time is nationalism vs. globalism.  A more nuanced view is that we have evolved globalism 3.0 over the last sixty years.  Globalism 1.0 was the Marshall Plan and American hegemony.  Globalism 2.0 was the post Nixon era after the gold standard was removed and Chinese trade was opened.  As the American consumer was finally tapped out Globalism 3.0 evolved; huge numbers of third world consumers were imported into the US and other western countries.

Steve Sailer once remarked that the whole immigration debacle is really about toilet paper in a sense.  Imagine that you are on the board of directors of a company like Georgia Pacific that makes consumer goods.  Every quarter you read reports in which you target 10% revenue growth over last year.  How does a company which manufactures commodities create growth?  Americans will only poop so much and the market for toilet paper is fairly stable.  Under Globalism 2.0 the great dream was to sell American consumer goods overseas in massive quantities.   During the 1980’s corporate leaders dreamed of all the people of India and China becoming American style consumers or debt serfs, but the growth in the international markets proved unsatisfactory.  Once a system has been built upon ever expanding mountains of debt it must continue to expand or die.  Debt fueled growth is the goal of globalist policy instead of concerns about the living standards of people.    The people in the designated shitting streets of India don’t buy enough toilet paper, so we must bring them to the west where they will adopt the consumer lifestyle.

People on the old right often carry on quite a bit about tax policy and moan about costs to the taxpayers.   Under globalism 3.0 taxes don’t matter very much and the inner city dindus of Detroit are a resource.   Money can be created in nearly infinite quantities through deficit spending and is distributed through social programs.   The dindi are the ideal members of society under globalism 3.0 as they spend every dime that they obtain; meanwhile wage inflation is held in check by importing low wage workers.  Asset inflation of stocks and real estate benefits the wealthy while everyone else is slowly impoverished.

An alternative policy would be to buy off the globalists in order to save countries in the west.  Since taxes no longer matter and we can make money out of thin air, consider sending the helicopter money overseas.   Massive spending on underclass ghettos overseas would stimulate consumer demand there instead of here, and give the globalists the revenue growth they so desperately need.    To  LARP a bit we could even pay underclass people in western counties to leave and then continue to give them money after they leave as an incentive to stay away.    Americans have traditionally been opposed to foreign aid spending, but they don’t seem to object to massive welfare spending for foreigners who have stepped foot on American soil.  What’s the difference?   Is it not better to give a trillion dollars to Mexcans in Mexico as an incentive to keep them in Mexico?   The (((globalists)))  certainly don’t care as long as they get their money.

A better policy than massive foreign aid would be a sound money policy and balanced budget.  This would kill globalism, and collapse asset prices.  Make America affordable again!   Even Trump does not have enough guts and charisma to balance the budget, so massive foreign aid, like a twenty dollar minimum wage, becomes an attractive idea in this screwed up inverted world.