Skip to content

A Foreign Policy Toward our “Friends”

September 22, 2017

In 1980, the victorious Reagan campaign had information that the People’s Republic of China had made cash donations to the campaign of Democrat candidate Jimmy Carter.  They won the election and didn’t pursue the allegations.

That was unfortunate since Russian intervention in the American presidential election of 2016 is a major concern. Had we begun an examination in 1980 and exposed the culprits, we might not be asking who did what in 2016.

The PRC, however, has not refrained from using free access to American society in ways not permitted in Communist China.

A study by the National Association of Scholars finds that Confucius Institutes have been planted at more than one hundred American colleges and universities that distort the history and current conditions of life in mainland China.

Chinese “Birth Tourism” persists, even though the U.S. government is attempting to slow the birth of “Americans for a Day” that is permitted by the PRC.

The 19th National Congress of the PRC will be held on October 18 and is designed to fortify the grip of General Secretary, Xi Jinping, over the People’s Liberation Army and China’s Communist Party.

Economic growth from liberalization of commercial activity generated a democracy movement that was stifled by the massacre of demonstrators in Tiananmen Square in 1989.. After Richard Nixon played the “China Card” and the U.S. granted diplomatic recognition to the PRC on January 1, 1979, American attitudes toward the totalitarian character of the regime were softened.

Putin’s Russia and Xi Jinping’s PRC are not our “friends” and we need forceful and calculated foreign policies to address that reality.

Path to Success for Leftists

September 21, 2017

Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Powers, is reported to have engaged in “unmasking” of 260 people during the last days of the Obama Administration. A Harvard educated attorney and 2003 Pulitzer Prize winning author of a study on genocide. Power’s highly politicized career and swift advancement began as a foreign reporter for U.S. News and World Report and the first executive director of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at Harvard University.

Gregory Carr, founder of the Carr Center, is a successful high tech entrepreneur who has dedicated his philanthropy to “global justice.”

Powers is an ideologically motivated Leftist with a “Johnny one-note” interest in “global justice” and the pursuit of power.

Her ability to discern common interests with the wealthy and powerful led her Gregary Carr and the staff of a junior Senator from Illinois, Barack Obama. Powers parlayed that position into work on the Obama Presidential campaign and appointment as U.N. Ambassador.

Her “unmasking” activity can only be explained as political “snooping,” most likely encouraged by members of the Obama White House.

Apart from invasion of privacy–apparently justified when the object of scrutiny is not a Democrat or Leftist–Powers’ career indicates what the “fast track” to success within the Left University system requires.

1) a major prize for publishing in an area of Left University interest;

2) a patron who is, essentially, uneducated, but extremely wealthy;

3) a Harvard law degree and

4) affiliation with the Kennedy School at Harvard University which attracts endowments for ideological area studies from wealthy benefactors like Gregory Carr.

It’s nice work, if you’re a Leftist.

 

A UN Speech Worth Watching

September 19, 2017

President Donald Trump’s speech to the United Nations today, September 19, 2107, answers some questions about the President’s policies, and whether the influence of Liberal Internationalists in his Administration will move him toward positions “acceptable” to major media, the Left university and an appalling number of corporate executives who are ignorant of their nation’s deepest values.

President Trump cited the regime of North Korea, Iran and Venezuela for being the outlaws they are and expressed disdain for socialist ideas and communism for bringing misery to every nation tempted to impose them on their peoples.

The delegates from the People’s Republic of China appeared shocked. The delegates from Venezuela and Cuba looked resigned and the delegates from Iran appeared to understand that they were due for conflicts with the United States that they may have thought were resolved. President Trump said “It is time for the entire world to join us in demanding that Iran’s government end its pursuit of death and destruction.”

The President’s United Nations address was worth watching because it tells us three things: 1) the President has basic principles; 2) he still has staff who can articulate them and 3) he will not be dissuaded from affirming policies responsible for his election.

Well done, Mr. President!

Trump at the United Nations

September 17, 2017

President Donald Trump will address the United Nations on Tuesday, September 19,  in New York city. He is expected to address the threat to the United States and its Allies from North Korea.  Sitting but twenty feet from the podium where the President will speak, the UN delegation from North Korea will express disdain for America, President Trump and civilization in the West of North Korea’s totalitarian regime.

For now, the United States relies on support for sanctions against North Korea instituted by the UN Security Council. Long term, President Trump knows that the United Nations is a problem, not a solution to resolving security issues facing the United States.

The United Nations’ headquarters is based on property provided by the Rockefeller family, principally former New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller who was imbued with the spirit of internationalism as a young diplomat in the administration of President Franklin D. Roosevelt in which capacity Rockefeller was given authority to improve relations between the U.S. government and the nations of Latin America.

Nelson Rockefeller felt that the United States was too insular and that hosting the United Nations in New York would drag the United States into the international arena. Indeed, the current crisis we face with North Korea can be traced to a decision by President Harry Truman to use the United Nations to respond to a North Korean invasion of South Korea. America’s military leaders wanted to use our stockpile of atomic bombs against North Korea and Communists engaged in a civil  war in China. Truman chose to work through the United Nations.

Our President seems to appreciate that a political mistake was made back in 1950 by relying on the UN, and may want to say some very un-diplomatic things in his address on Tuesday. He is counseled against that by his foreign policy team consisting of Ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, U.S. Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, chief economic advisor Gary Cohn and U.S. Treasury Secretary, Steven Mnuchin.

A weaker team of foreign policy advisors attending this week’s session of the United Nations could not have been assembled by a foreign adversary of the United States, but that characterizes the Trump Administration’s failures to appoint seasoned, conservative, experts to more than one thousand vacant policy positions in the U.S. government. Even when the President overcomes his belief that the United States government has too many officials, he reaches into corporate America for appointments, not the deep bench of conservative experts.

Nevertheless, President Trump seems to understand how the enemies of the United States control the high ground on ideological issues of climate control, trade and Islamic radicalism.

Representatives to the United Nations from member nations believe that the United States should continue to pay 25% of the UN budget, accept onerous payments to third world countries that are polluting the environment with carbon emissions, and tolerate an agreement with Iran that will give this radical Islamic regime nuclear missiles to threaten its neighbors and the United States.

Aligned against the President’s best instincts are the best and the brightest in our universities, the journalists of CNN, MSNBC and other major media venues including the New York Times and the Washington Post, and an increasing number of poorly educated corporate executives who actually believe that the United States is a racist nation.

What will the President say on Tuesday, September 19?  Will he accept the counsel of his advisors to “cool it”?  Or will President Trump himself express the views that attracted American voters to elect him?

Much depends on his answers to these questions.

 

 

Trump’s Christian and European America

September 14, 2017

President Donald Trump seems to be holding fast to his promise to build a wall along the border of the United States with Mexico.  Discussions with Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi last night at the White House indicate that he is willing to hold hostage legislation giving citizenship–or civil status–to “Dreamers” in exchange for funding to build “the Wall.”

The whole notion of “a Wall” along our southern border is ridiculous. There are portions of Texas, New Mexico and Arizona where illegals can make the dangerous trek across arid plains simply by walking, but what is needed is greater surveillance, not a physical wall.

So, if not the promise to build a Wall, what is it that attracted a winning response from American voters to Donald Trump’s candidacy?

To find the answer, we must go back in time to London, England in the late 1960s. Indian Sikh’s were visible on British transit as bus drivers and Council Housing that had served they white British working class was roiled by the admission of non-white immigrants from the Dominions.

A Conservative member of Parliament, Enoch Powell, took a stand against immigration that attracted the support of British workers who had never supported Conservative politicians, but felt threatened by the influx of immigrants. When the Conservative Party won the 1970 general election, Powell’s supporters claimed that Powell’s stance on immigration guaranteed the Conservative victory.

Donald Trump is our Enoch Powell.

Trump, like Powell , however, is a terribly flawed politician.  Powell was a student of the German philosopher, Friedrich Nietzsche, and preferred Europeans, the stronger, educated, race that gave England security and supremacy for centuries. Trump, unlike Enoch Powell, is quite ignorant of most things he must be familiar with if he is to serve as an American President–history, diplomacy, economics, national security and foreign policy.

But, like Powell, Donald Trump understands that voters resent illegal immigrants because of their dipping into welfare programs, demands for low college tuition reserved for in-state American students and, yes, their color.

Trump tapped support from older, white, non-college educated Americans who had voted for Democrats since World War II and their children, also white, blue-collar workers whose jobs were impacted by free trade agreements, and whose schools from kindergarten to grade 12 were warehouses that stored them until they could no longer be kept legally from leaving school.

These Trump voters were themselves children of immigrants–white European “ethnics”– who still go to Catholic Mass or Protestant services on Sunday, and send their children to Catholic or parochial schools.  Beginning in the 1960s, they  found themselves abandoned by the Democrat Party, Protestant Pastors, Catholic priest and nuns, who championed civil rights of African Americans and gave them legal preferences and welfare benefits.

What neither Enoch Powell nor Donald Trump affirmed, however, was the Christian character of America and “the West” and that the response to the “Moors” in Spain and a rising Islam that generated the Crusades was now something we need to consider in our own time.

Notice that Trump’s policy restricting immigration, challenged by jurists in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, was directed at Muslim countries. Trump’s base may not want to expel “the Dreamers,” but they damn well want to restrict Muslim immigration.

All the talk about a Wall, DACA and illegal immigration actually hides the real reason that Donald Trump was elected President.  He was the one person who affirmed the right of America to stay Christian, European in origin and, fundamentally, conservative.

Defeating the “Kingdom”

September 13, 2017

Though the Kingdom of the Progressive Left has had more than a century to capture the main institutions that shape American society, that history is also its greatest weakness.

Anything routed in social conditions of a century ago is open to weakening by new conditions.

Major media, the universities are the two main institutions by which the Left controls not only the dialogue, but also places its minions in positions where that influence can be expanded.

How can that dominance be challenged, upset and replaced?

The seed of an answer lies in attempts by conservative entrepreneurs.

On December 6, 1993, Paul Weyrich, founder of the Free Congress Foundation, launched National Empowerment Television.

Organized as a cable television service with content provided by leading conservative institutions, National Empower Television sought to confront the Left media on its own terms. National Empowerment Television was important because it showed that there were influential leaders and financial backers who saw a problem and wanted to do something about it. That effort also gave opportunity to young conservatives to gain experience in television production, marketing and on-air roles.

In 1977, another conservative entrepreneur, M. Stanton Evans, began the National Journalism Center that for forty years has provided an alternative education opportunity for young conservatives seeking careers in journalism. University Communication Departments are host to radical Leftists who indoctrinate future journalists and infect Schools of Journalism with Progressive ideology. The National Journalism Center is a way to get an education for a career in journalism without Leftist indoctrination.

And in 2000, seeking to use new Internet technology to enter the higher education market, I founded Yorktown University as a way to bypass the Left university. This month, a history of that effort has been published by St. Augustine’s Press.

These 20th century efforts to defeat the Left in cable television, print journalism and university education point the way to defeating the Left Kingdom in the 21st century.

How can that be done?

It seems that Steve Bannon and the Mercer Family are working to found a cable television network. A new cable network will be formed, if not by Bannon then by others, to counter the Left at MSNBC, CNN and a failing Fox News.

A bevy of “citizens” media venues are replacing major print media institutions such as the New York Times, Washington Post, Time magazine. Their names are too many to list here but they include Drudge, Washington Examiner, Newsmax, Free Beacon, Daily Caller and Breitbart.

The habit of reading the Left media is now being challenged forcefully.

The foundations of higher education, where the Left University dominates, are very old and showing extreme signs of wear. The system of “accreditation” blocks the use of new technologies that can offer equivalent education products at substantially lower cost. Only a few regulatory reforms will open floodgates to new entrepreneurial education ventures and force closure of at least a thousand colleges. Today college level courses can be offered for less than $20 each.

The Kingdom of the Left can be destroyed.

 

 

Remember 9/11

September 10, 2017

From July 14 to September 11, 1683, Vienna endured the siege of a vast Turkish army under the Turkish Serasker (Supreme Commander), Grand Vizier Kara Mustafa.

After fending off 18 major Turkish assaults, only a third of the originally 11,500-strong garrison in Vienna remained fit for combat and their munitions were nearly exhausted.

The Holy Roman Emperor, Leopold I, called for help. Responding were Imperial troops and additional forces from Saxony, Bavaria, Baden, Franconia and Swabia.

The opposing military forces were those of the Ottoman Empire and Ottoman fiefdoms commanded by Grand Vizier Mustafa Pasha.

The King of Poland, John Sobieski, led the relief forces and defeated Mustafa Pasha.

The attack on the World Trade Towers occurred 328 years later on September 11, 2017.