Hollywood’s Love Of Fascism

The world “Fascism” has been perverted by political advocates into some kind of “Right Wing Military Dictatorship” and the horror of all things Progressive.

Nothing could be further from the truth…

During the ’30s, Mussolini was a Hollywood Celebrity. He even was invited to do a Cameo in some Hollywood Movie and all the Stars and Starlets wanted to be at the parties where he was celebrated. Unfortunately, do to the more recent Mussolini movie, any searches I’ve done to try to find the name of the movie with that cameo have come up empty. (Prior to the new movie it was fairly easy to find).


I did find this interesting little article about another long lost movie:


Newly found Hollywood Mussolini film screened in Italy

AFP Relax News•October 7, 2014

A long-lost 1923 Hollywood film featuring Benito Mussolini was screened in Italy on Tuesday after being re-discovered by a student in the United States.

Only 28 minutes of “The Eternal City” remain. The reels of the silent film were found by student Giuliana Muscio at New York’s Museum of Modern Art.

The film, produced by Samuel Goldwyn, stars Lionel Barrymore — great uncle of Hollywood actress Drew Barrymore — who plays the role of a Communist villain.

The film shows Mussolini reviewing troops and in his office. It was screened at a silent film festival in the northeastern town of Pordenone.

“The Eternal City” was filmed less than a year after the March on Rome paved the way for Mussolini’s Fascist party to come to power in Italy, which was then a kingdom.

The George Fitzmaurice directed film portrays Mussolini as a leader who saves his people from the scourge of communism.

“The fascist parades appear to have been staged for the big screen and at this time Mussolini was a popular hero,” Muscio said in a statement.

The film ends by showing Mussolini in his office at the Palazzo Venezia.

The dictator had been a fan of Hollywood and invited several stars to visit him, including Jackie Coogan, the child star of Charlie Chaplin’s “The Kid” as well as Douglas Fairbanks and Mary Pickford, Hollywood’s best-known star couple at the time.

So I'm going to capture that item here, just so it, too, can't evaporate.

Unmentioned in this write up is that the love affair of Mussolini with Hollywood was reciprocated. At least up until he fell in with Hitler and started banning Jews from positions of authority in the government and military. Note the part that says "at this time Mussolini was a popular hero". That wasn't just in Italy… Note, too, that he invited the Glitterati to visit, but it doesn't mention that they went; or that he came to Hollywood and was celebrated.


Ah, IMBD to the rescue!


Writer (3 credits)
1936 100 Days of Napoleon (collaboration – uncredited)
1935 Hundred Days (play)
1934 Villafranca (play)

Self (11 credits)
1943 Deutsche Wochenschau Nr. 681/40/1943 (Short)
Himself (uncredited)
1941 Cavalcade of Faith (Documentary)
1937 Mussolini Visits Hitler (Documentary short)
1929 Benito Mussolini (Documentary short)
1929 Chasing Through Europe
1927 Duce (Documentary)
1927 Il duce fra i soldati d’Italia (Documentary short)
1926 Viaggio di S. E. Mussolini in Tripolitania (Documentary)
1926 Mussolini (Documentary short)
1923 The Eternal City
Himself (uncredited)
1923 Benito Mussolini, il Duce invitto, celebra e consacra il primo anniversario della marcia su Roma (Documentary short)

Dropping out the documentaries, that would most likely make it “Chasing Through Europe”. So that’s where I’ll go dig…

Chasing Through Europe (1929)
Full Cast & Crew
Directed by
David Butler
Alfred L. Werker Writing Credits (in alphabetical order)
Andrew Bennison … (story)
John Stone … (story) Cast (in credits order) complete, awaiting verification
Sue Carol …
Linda Terry
Nick Stuart …
Dick Stallings
Gustav von Seyffertitz …
Phineas Merrill
Gavin Gordon …
Don Merrill
E. Alyn Warren …
Louise Herriot
Rest of cast listed alphabetically:
Papa Joffre …
Benito Mussolini …

Lou Pigalle …

Music by
Arthur Kay … (uncredited) Cinematography by
Lucien N. Andriot
L. William O’Connell … (as L.W. O’Connell)
Sidney Wagner Production Management
Harry Brand … unit manager Other crew
William Fox … presenter

I suppose finding a copy to view is all that’s left ;-)

Darn. This claims to be a live YouTube showing that hasn’t started yet, but the schedule date has it yesterday at 7 A.M.


It is important to recognize what Mussolini thought and said in terms of Economics. He coined the phrase 3rd Way to describe a National form of Socialism. He started his career translating Marxist doctrine and papers for his parents. He was originally part of the Communist movement. But the need to eliminate nations in favor of One Global Communism, he saw as not working. So he came up with a “3rd Way” between a global Communism and a free market capitalism. A kind of “Socialism Lite” or “Communism Lite”. I described that in a comment here:


Talking about these news articles:



That I think is worth saving in an easier to find place here:

That FreeBeacon article is great! They have Big Clue. Also like the direct admission in the NYT article that Clinton is a “3rd Way Progressive” i.e. “3rd Way Socialist” i.e. “Italian 3rd Way Fascist”… (they are all identical in root and meaning…)

Matteo Renzi, the Italian prime minister who styled his own career on the pro-market progressivism that Mr. Clinton called the “Third Way”


Bolded bits mine:

The best example of a fascist economy is the regime of Italian dictator Benito Mussolini. Holding that liberalism (by which he meant freedom and free markets) had “reached the end of its historical function,” Mussolini wrote: “To Fascism the world is not this material world, as it appears on the surface, where Man is an individual separated from all others and left to himself…. Fascism affirms the State as the true reality of the individual.”

This collectivism is captured in the word fascism, which comes from the Latin fasces, meaning a bundle of rods with an axe in it. In economics, fascism was seen as a third way between laissez-faire capitalism and communism. Fascist thought acknowledged the roles of private property and the profit motive as legitimate incentives for productivity—provided that they did not conflict with the interests of the state.

It is, quite literally and historically correct and accurate to describe The Clintons as Fascists. That is exactly what the “3rd Way” was all about. A kind of “Socialism Lite” or “Communism Lite” where ownership of businesses was kept private, but all decisions where in league with Central Authority in league with Labor Unions. Industries were often reduced to just a ‘few’ nominal ‘competitors’ in functional monopolies to “reduce destructive competition”. What do we see today under Obama and Friends? Massive reduction in the number of competitors in any given field with little to no enforcement of anti-trust policies, rampant expansion of “regulation”. (Look at Bud as a near monopoly in market share of beer…) Government control of industry, with nominal private ownership, and the enrichment of The Well Connected.

But say that to anyone NOT well educated on the Economics of the W.W.II era, who’s only ‘education’ has been via movies, and you will get tremendous push back. Facts be damned.

Oh Well…

? IF “The Truth shall set you free!” what does “Government Propaganda and empty news” do?

That is, IMHO, the great Deep Dark Secret of the Progressives. They really ARE, in every way of importance, Fascists in the true technical sense of the word. They loved Mussolini until Hitler added racist and antisemitic fervor to the mix. They still love the “3rd Way”, though now it is nationalism with a very small ‘n’ and subject to an overriding Globalism. Not quite Communism with one single world wide Socialist Government, but with ‘layered’ governance from multiple centers. So the UN to set the Global Rules, Supranational Governments and Treaties to quash excess nationalist sentiments and laws (like the EU, TPP, NAFTA, etc.), and a tiny remnant of National Government to handle annoying things like enforcing the police state and collecting taxes… and directly issuing regulations to the rump of Capitalist Enterprise that has to be kept around to provide cash…

ANY time you hear the phrase “3rd Way”, that’s what it means. Token Capitalism and modest nationalism in support of the Socialist Central Authority.

In the interest of preservation (since the Clinton Langoliers like to erase things…) I’m going to quote the Economics article in whole. Also note that they state a ‘newer version’ is up at another location, so just in case the ‘old one’ goes away… cut/past… I do recommend “hitting the link” as those are good folks and deserve the hit count. Bold bits mine. Note that “bundle of rods” is often stated as “bundle of sticks” from the notion that if a bunch of small sticks is cut with the axe, tying them into a bundle makes an unbreakable whole. A common union theme at that time in Italy. “Stronger together”.

The best example of a fascist economy is the regime of Italian dictator Benito Mussolini. Holding that liberalism (by which he meant freedom and free markets) had “reached the end of its historical function,” Mussolini wrote: “To Fascism the world is not this material world, as it appears on the surface, where Man is an individual separated from all others and left to himself…. Fascism affirms the State as the true reality of the individual.”

This collectivism is captured in the word fascism, which comes from the Latin fasces, meaning a bundle of rods with an axe in it. In economics, fascism was seen as a third way between laissez-faire capitalism and communism. Fascist thought acknowledged the roles of private property and the profit motive as legitimate incentives for productivity—provided that they did not conflict with the interests of the state.

Fascism in Italy grew out of two other movements: syndicalism and nationalism. The syndicalists believed that economic life should be governed by groups representing the workers in various industries and crafts. The nationalists, angered by Italy’s treatment after World War I, combined the idea of class struggle with that of national struggle. Italy was a proletarian nation, they said, and to win a greater share of the world’s wealth, all of Italy’s classes must unite. Mussolini was a syndicalist who turned nationalist during World War I.

From 1922 to 1925, Mussolini’s regime pursued a laissez-faire economic policy under the liberal finance minister Alberto De Stefani. De Stefani reduced taxes, regulations, and trade restrictions and allowed businesses to compete with one another. But his opposition to protectionism and business subsidies alienated some industrial leaders, and De Stefani was eventually forced to resign. After Mussolini consolidated his dictatorship in 1925, Italy entered a new phase. Mussolini, like many leaders at this time, believed that economies did not operate constructively without supervision by the government. Foreshadowing events in Nazi Germany, and to some extent in New Deal America, Mussolini began a program of massive deficit spending, public works, and eventually, militarism.

Mussolini’s fascism took another step at this time with the advent of the Corporative State, a supposedly pragmatic arrangement under which economic decisions were made by councils composed of workers and employers who represented trades and industries. By this device the presumed economic rivalry between employers and employees was to be resolved, preventing the class struggle from undermining the national struggle. In the Corporative State, for example, strikes would be illegal and labor disputes would be mediated by a state agency.

Theoretically, the fascist economy was to be guided by a complex network of employer, worker, and jointly run organizations representing crafts and industries at the local, provincial, and national levels. At the summit of this network was the National Council of Corporations. But although syndicalism and corporativism had a place in fascist ideology and were critical to building a consensus in support of the regime, the council did little to steer the economy. The real decisions were made by state agencies such as the Institute for Industrial Reconstruction (Istituto per la Ricosstruzione Industriale, or IRI), mediating among interest groups.

Beginning in 1929, in preparation for achieving the “glories” of war, the Italian government used protectionist measures to turn the economy toward autarchy, or economic self-sufficiency. The autarchic policies were intensified in the following years because of both the depression and the economic sanctions that other countries imposed on Italy after it invaded Ethiopia. Mussolini decreed that government bureaus must buy only Italian products, and he increased tariffs on all imports in 1931. The sanctions following the invasion of Ethiopia spurred Italy in 1935 to increase tariffs again, stiffen import quotas, and toughen its embargo on industrial goods.

Mussolini also eliminated the ability of business to make independent decisions: the government controlled all prices and wages, and firms in any industry could be forced into a cartel when the majority voted for it. The well-connected heads of big business had a hand in making policy
, but most smaller businessmen were effectively turned into state employees contending with corrupt bureaucracies. They acquiesced, hoping that the restrictions would be temporary. Land being fundamental to the nation, the fascist state regimented agriculture even more fully, dictating crops, breaking up farms, and threatening expropriation to enforce its commands.

Banking also came under extraordinary control. As Italy’s industrial and banking system sank under the weight of depression and regulation, and as unemployment rose, the government set up public works programs and took control over decisions about building and expanding factories.
The government created the Istituto Mobiliare in 1931 to control credit, and the IRI later acquired all shares held by banks in industrial, agricultural, and real estate enterprises.

The image of a strong leader taking direct charge of an economy during hard times fascinated observers abroad. Italy was one of the places that Franklin Roosevelt looked to for ideas in 1933. Roosevelt’s National Recovery Act (NRA) attempted to cartelize the American economy just as Mussolini had cartelized Italy’s. Under the NRA Roosevelt established industry-wide boards with the power to set and enforce prices, wages, and other terms of employment, production, and distribution for all companies in an industry. Through the Agricultural Adjustment Act the government exercised similar control over farmers. Interestingly, Mussolini viewed Roosevelt’s New Deal as “boldly… interventionist in the field of economics.” Hitler’s nazism also shared many features with Italian fascism, including the syndicalist front. Nazism, too, featured complete government control of industry, agriculture, finance, and investment.

As World War II approached, the signs of fascism’s failure in Italy were palpable: per capita private consumption had dropped to below 1929 levels, and Italian industrial production between 1929 and 1939 had increased by only 15 percent, lower than the rates for other Western European countries. Labor productivity was low and production costs were uncompetitive. The fault lay in the shift of economic decision-making from entrepreneurs to government bureaucrats, and in the allocation of resources by decree rather than by free markets. Mussolini designed his system to cater to the needs of the state, not of consumers. In the end, it served neither.

About the Author
Sheldon Richman is the editor of Ideas on Liberty and is a senior fellow with the Future of Freedom Foundation. He is a lecturer and author of articles on the New Deal era, American foreign policy, and international trade.

Any of that sound like familiar economic policies? Hmmmm?

I may add to this article over time if I can find the original movie cameo title, or if other expansion is needed on just what is “3rd Way” economics. Oh, and one FYI: This government / business partnership has been resurrected in a slightly technically different form as “Lange Type Socialism”. Some links on Lange follow:


The Mises-Hayek argument met its most formidable counterargument in two brilliant articles by Oskar Lange, a young economist who would become Poland’s first ambassador to the United States after World War II. Lange set out to show that the planners would, in fact, have precisely the same information as that which guided a market economy. The information would be revealed as inventories of goods rose and fell, signaling either that supply was greater than demand or demand was greater than supply. Thus, as planners watched inventory levels, they were also learning which of their administered (i.e., state-dictated) prices were too high and which too low. It only remained, therefore, to adjust prices so that supply and demand balanced, exactly as in the marketplace.

Lange’s answer was so simple and clear that many believed the Mises-Hayek argument had been demolished. In fact, we now know that their argument was all too prescient. Ironically, though, Mises and Hayek were right for a reason they did not foresee as clearly as Lange himself. “The real danger of socialism,” Lange wrote, in italics, “is that of a bureaucratization of economic life.” But he took away the force of the remark by adding, without italics, “Unfortunately, we do not see how the same or even greater danger can be averted under monopolistic capitalism” (Lange and Taylor 1938, pp. 109–110).


Oskar Lange is arguably the most famous of the market socialists. His fans often see him as a great spokesman for “socialism with a human face.” In the early 1990s, I attended a talk where Ken Arrow lauded Lange as a great friend of freedom.

While I always scoffed at this praise, I was still taken aback when I happened to read Lange’s famous “On the Economic Theory of Socialism” (Review of Economic Studies, 1937). His fans notwithstanding, Lange’s views strikingly confirm my view that the socialist movement was “born bad.” Though Lange was an exceptionally economically literate socialist, his clarity of thought led him directly to a totalitarian vision that he gladly embraced.

You need not take my word for it. Just read Lange’s case against socialist gradualism – and remember that this is the era of Stalin. [All italics original].


The Lange model (or Lange–Lerner theorem) is a neoclassical economic model for a hypothetical socialist economy based on public ownership of the means of production and a trial-and-error approach to determining output targets and achieving economic equilibrium and Pareto efficiency. In this model, the state owns non-labor factors of production, and markets allocate final goods and consumer goods. The Lange model states that if all production is performed by a public body such as the state, and there is a functioning price mechanism, this economy will be Pareto-efficient, like a hypothetical market economy under perfect competition. Unlike models of capitalism, the Lange model is based on direct allocation, by directing enterprise managers to set price equal to marginal cost in order to achieve Pareto efficiency. By contrast, in a capitalist economy managers are instructed to maximize profits for private owners, while competitive pressures are relied on to indirectly lower the price to equal marginal cost.

This model was first proposed by Oskar R. Lange in 1936 during the socialist calculation debate, and was expanded by economists like H. D. Dickinson, Abba P. Lerner and Fred M. Taylor. Although Lange and Lerner called it “market socialism”, the Lange model is a form of planned economy where a central planning board allocates investment and capital goods, while markets allocate labor and consumer goods. The planning board simulates a market in capital goods by a trial-and-error process first elaborated by Vilfredo Pareto and Léon Walras.[1]

Essentially Fascism with the Private Ownership turned into Public Ownership. Market Socialism has never worked. Later enhancements of the Lange model have only the largest industries publicly owned (like Oil in Venezuela or in a weaker form via “Government Companies” like oil in Brazil and Mexico. The results have inevitably been corruption, nepotism, and decay.) Minor businesses like restaurants and car washes are left in private hands.

This is now being tried in Cuba. Any move from a Communist model toward Capitalism improves things, so ‘for a while’ moves like Cuba and China bring great progress and that causes folks to praise the “3rd Way” and “Lange Type” economies. What is missed is that moves from a Capitalist “Mixed Economy” (USA and Europe about 1950 to 1970) results in decreased economic performance. (Witness the EU and USA today).

Subscribe to feed


About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in Economics - Trading - and Money, World Economics and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

39 Responses to Hollywood’s Love Of Fascism

  1. Larry Ledwick says:

    I found this ( http://www.neatorama.com/2015/06/04/Odd-Movie-Appearances-and-Cameos/ )
    Benito Mussolini (!!!!!!!) was actually an extra in The Eternal City, a silent from 1914.


    Government by propaganda

    As dictator of Italy, Mussolini’s foremost priority was the subjugation of the minds of the Italian people and using propaganda to do so whether at home or abroad, and here his training as a journalist was invaluable. Press, radio, education, films — all were carefully supervised to manufacture the illusion that fascism was the doctrine of the twentieth century, replacing liberalism and democracy. The principles of this doctrine were laid down in the article on fascism, written by Giovanni Gentile and signed by Mussolini that appeared in 1932 in the Enciclopedia Italiana. In 1929, a concordat with the Vatican was signed, the Lateran treaties, by which the Italian state was at last recognized by the Roman Catholic Church, and the independence of Vatican City was recognized by the Italian state. In 1927, Mussolini had himself baptized by a Roman Catholic priest in order to take away certain opposition from the side of Italy’s Catholics, who were then still very critical of the modern Italian State, which had taken away papal property and virtually blackmailed several popes inside the Vatican. However, Mussolini never became known to be a practicing Catholic. Nevertheless, since 1927, and more even after 1929, Mussolini, with his anti-Communist doctrines, convinced many Catholics to actively support him.

    Under the dictatorship, the effectiveness of the parliamentary system was virtually abolished, though its forms were publicly preserved. The law codes were rewritten. All teachers in schools and universities had to swear an oath to defend the Fascist regime. Newspaper editors were all personally chosen by Mussolini himself, and no one who did not possess a certificate of approval from the Fascist party could practice journalism. These certificates were issued in secret, so the public had no idea of this ever occurring, thus skillfully creating the illusion of a “free press.” The trade unions were also deprived of any independence and were integrated into what was called the “corporative” system. The aim (never completely achieved), inspired by medieval guilds, was to place all Italians in various professional organizations or “corporations,” all of them under clandestine governmental control. Furthermore, that all schools, newspapers, etc. had to not write, for example, “the 13th of June 1933” but instead had to write “the 13th of June of the 11th year of Mussolini’s power.”

    Mussolini played up to his financial backers at first by transferring a number of industries from public to private ownership. But by the 1930s, he had begun moving back to the opposite extreme of rigid governmental control of industry. A great deal of money was spent on highly visible public works and on international prestige projects, such as the SS Rex Blue Riband ocean liner and aeronautical achievements such as the world’s fastest seaplane the Macchi M.C.72 and the transatlantic flying boat cruise of Italo Balbo, who was greeted with much fanfare in the United States when he landed in Chicago. Those projects earned respect from some countries, but the economy suffered from Mussolini’s strenuous efforts to make Italy self-sufficient. A concentration on heavy industry proved problematic, perhaps because Italy lacked the basic resources.

  2. M Simon says:

    Italo Balbo and Chicago’s Forgotten Gift from Fascist Italy


    It wasn’t just Hollywood.

  3. Larry Ledwick says:

    I find it interesting that his control of journalists sounds very similar to recent attempts by the FCC and others to throttle free media, such as criminalizing those who speak out against global warming dogma. They already have effective control of the major media due to the personalities running those networks.

  4. M Simon says:

    Quite some time ago fascism in America split into a left and right wing. The “Left” handles the economic part of Social-ism. Mostly. The “Right” handles the social part of Social-ism. Mostly. The object is to bring every aspect of life under government control.

    The clue? One “side” hardly ever repeals the doings of the other “side”.

    Some people have taken to referring to this union of interests (more government control) as the UniParty.

    If the question is “what to do about xxx” and the answer is “more government” you are talking to a socialist.

  5. M Simon says:

    BTW “more government” also translates as “we need a law”.

    And with laws come enforcers. And expenses. And exemptions for the connected. etc.

  6. Pouncer says:

    The planning economy starts with a market economy in which a dozen guys are all, each for himself, allocating time and resources to play their own work. Then two guys pull out of the market economy and begin making decisions on behalf of each of the other ten. A pair of guys comes into one of the ten individual’s workplace and says, “We are the government now. We’re here to help. Do it OUR way — it’ll be better. Do it OUR way, or else.”

    It is more or less inevitable that the overall economy that used to enjoy the efforts of 12 guys will, in fact, not be better, but will be worse, suffering the lack of two workers and the imposition of a planner and an enforcer — Pinky and the Brain.

  7. gallopingcamel says:

    There are ways to measure this kind of thing. I have already mentioned “Economic Mobility” and the concept of “Inclusive vs. Exploitive” institutions (Acemoglu & Robinson). Don’t forget to read “The Sovereign Individual” by Davidson & Rees-Mogg.

    OK……you don’t have the patience for all that so here is the “CliffsNotes” version:

    Note that the USA was once rated as “FREE” but it has tumbled down the rankings and at #11 is now rated as “MOSTLY FREE”. Currently the USA is in a downward spiral that affects both personal freedom and economic prosperity.

    It is downright depressing to find out how few jurisdictions earned Heritage’s FREE ranking. Here they are……..all of them:
    Hong Kong
    New Zealand

    Note that you can be free even if your government is not elected (Hong Kong).

  8. gallopingcamel says:

    I forgot to mention that the “Downward Spiral” the USA is experiencing started in 2009. Could it be a coincidence?

    YEAR 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
    WORLD 60.2 59.5 59.4 59.7 59.5 59.6 60.3 60.4 60.7
    USA 81.0 80.7 78.0 77.8 76.3 76.0 75.5 76.2 75.4
    © 2016 by The Heritage Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

  9. gallopingcamel says:

    @M Simon:
    “And with laws come enforcers. And expenses. And exemptions for the connected. etc.”

    How true! K-12 is a major interest for me and I see this playing out as the federal government see so now the federal government wants to control major things like the curriculum (Common Core) and little things such as how the school restrooms will be managed.

    Please elect Donald Trump who will get federal enforcers out of our schools. Then some states will be smart enough to get rid of the enforcers at state level as well so that we can compete with New Zealand in matters of high school achievement.

  10. philjourdan says:

    YOur observation of the direction that the 3rd way is approached from is excellent! Those looking at Cuba and China do not see the degradation of market economies when moving to them (and never bring them up as an example).

    Great Reading! Guess I will have to check out NetFlix for some of Benito’s acting. ;-)

  11. Larry Ledwick says:

    YEAR 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
    WORLD 60.2 59.5 59.4 59.7 59.5 59.6 60.3 60.4 60.7
    USA 81.0 80.7 78.0 77.8 76.3 76.0 75.5 76.2 75.4

    What do these numbers represent?

  12. Gail Combs says:

    For those who might have lost the link or never read it. E.M.’s “Evil Socialism” vs “Evil Capitalism”
    A really great comment on economics and terms that clears out the fog deliberately created by the Progressives.

  13. cdquarles says:

    Lange should have read von Mises’ Bureaucracy (1919, I think). Maybe he read his Socialism (1920). Unless you make your government distributed, with an armed citizenry that are virtuous, you’ll never have socialism in any form work, where living things wear a material body and must make decisions under uncertainty. Markets are real time. Governments have inertia. [What makes Lange think that business managers would know what the marginal cost, tomorrow, is going to be? Yes, you can assume it will be like today’s, but then, that’s like another damped-driven deterministically chaotic system we must live in, survive and adapt to; also known as weather. Climate? Who cares. Climate tells me what I’ve gotten and only a summary statement of it at that. The weather is telling me what I’m getting, right now!]

  14. M Simon says:

    Gail Combs says:
    2 October 2016 at 9:52 pm

    This reads like “Evil Socialism” vs “Evil Capitalism” it was published within the last day or two.


  15. gallopingcamel says:

    @Larry Ledwick:
    Those numbers are a measure of economic freedom devised by the Heritage Foundation.

    Heritage awards 20 points for each of five categories such as property rights, access to loan capital etc. A totally FREE country would be awarded 100 points.

    The current leader is Hong Kong with a score of 88.6. Hong Kong was #1`back in 1997 when the Brits handed control to the ChiComs. It is a surprise (at least to me) that Hong Kong still leads the world in “Economic Freedom”.

  16. gallopingcamel says:

    Until 1997 Hong Kong was ruled by an unelected Administrative Council.

    Once the Chicoms took over they called the government a “Special Administrative Region” and simply replaced the British administrators with their own people. If Heritage is to be believed, very little changed and as a result Hong Kong is still doing well.

    There has been some agitation with the aim of electing the members of the administration. In my opinion Democracy would have a negative effect on the economic freedom in Hong Kong. They would become more like us and thereby risk economic decline.

  17. gallopingcamel says:

    @M Simon,
    Those comments about the prosperity of the “Working Class” stagnating over the last 30 years while the elites have prospered ten fold is the main reason for Sanders/Trump populism.

    Hillary is asking why she is not ahead by fifty points. I ask why is she not behind by fifty points considering she works for the elites (Fortune 500 CEOs, Academia, Hollywood, The Media, Trade Union Bosses, the grandees of both political parties, the banks etc)? These people have the money and the power but they only get to vote once like you and me. We outnumber them by a ratio of at least 20:1.

  18. M Simon says:

    gallopingcamel says:
    3 October 2016 at 3:34 am

    I think she is behind by 50 points. Trump is running ads in California.


  19. E.M.Smith says:

    @M. Simon:

    I’ve seen them! Gave me a WTF moment…. Then “Oh dear God let it be”….

  20. Gail Combs says:

    E.M. Economically, how does California today compared to a decade or two ago?

    Hispanics are now the largest ethnic group in California. About 15 million Hispanics lived in California on July 1, 2014, compared to roughly 14.9 million non-Hispanic whites, according to U.S. Census Bureau estimates released late last week.Jun 30, 2015

    ‘The Hispanics are not dumb.
    They KNOW what a totally corrupt government looks like.
    They KNOW what the Drug lords have done not only to Mexico but to the border states.
    Also They KNOW what NAFTA did to the small independent farmers in Mexico that used to feed their nation. (I think this is why Trump keeps hitting NAFTA so hard and ignores WTO/China. )

    In 2008, there were food riots around the world including Mexico as the Elite, lead by Goldman Sachs, jacked up world food prices. How Goldman Sachs Created the Food Crisis – By Frederick Kaufman

    NAFTA Is Starving Mexico

    Since the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) became the law of the land, millions of Mexicans have joined the ranks of the hungry. Malnutrition is highest among the country’s farm families, who used to produce enough food to feed the nation.

    As the blood-spattered violence of the drug war takes over the headlines, many Mexican men, women, and children confront the slow and silent violence of starvation. The latest reports show that the number of people living in “food poverty” (the inability to purchase the basic food basket) rose from 18 million in 2008 to 20 million by late 2010.

    About one-fifth of Mexican children currently suffer from malnutrition…. Government statistics report that 25 percent of the population does not have access to basic food….

    Mexican malnutrition has its roots in the way NAFTA and other neoliberal programs forced the nation to move away from producing its own basic foods to a “food security” model. “Food security” posits that a country is secure as long as it has sufficient income to import its food. It separates farm employment from food security and ignores unequal access to food within a country…

    That is only looking at the statistics AFTER 2008 when the major damage was already done by NAFTA.

    23 June, 2008 Small Farmers And The Doha Round: Lessons From Mexico’s NAFTA Experience

    ….Even Felipe Calderon, Mexico’s President and an acolyte of neoliberal economics, has had to acknowledge that Mexico, at least in part as a result of agriculture’s integration into global markets, is faced with an unprecedented agrarian crisis. At a recent press conference in May when the German Chancellor Angela Merkel was visiting Mexico, he said that high levels of subsidies available to European and US farmers had a debilitating effect on the competitiveness of Mexican farmers, resulting in a large number of his compatriots migrating to the US “abandoning land, because it was simply impossible to compete with subsidies in other countries”….

    it was Mexico’s accession into GATT in 1986 that made possible a new strategy based on global economic integration.

    As a result in 1989, during Carlos Salinas’s presidency, a strategy of agricultural ‘modernization’, centered around global integration, private investment and markets, was put in place. Salinas amended the Mexican Constitution to make it easier to buy and sell communally owned land….

    NAFTA, which entered into force in 1994, essentially built on all of the above institutional changes and sought to lock-in agricultural trade among NAFTA partners in terms of comparative advantage. Vis-à-vis the USA (and Canada), Mexico was at a comparative dis-advantage in grains (corn, wheat, rice), oilseeds, cattle rearing and forestry. It has a comparative advantage in fruits, vegetables sugar cane and coffee[8]. It was also felt that as a result of relatively backward and low-productivity agriculture, the share of agriculture and allied sectors in its workforce – in 1991 it accounted for 27% – was much larger than was warranted given its level of development.

    Comparative advantage driven modernization of agriculture therefore, it was hoped, would also help shift labour towards higher productivity non-agrarian occupations….

    The vacuum created by retreat of the Mexican state from agriculture was filled by large US and Mexican agribusiness. In the post-NAFTA period the bulk of FDI in agricultural sector has been in the agri-business and agro-processing rather than agriculture[15]. As a result a few large trans-national agribusiness firms, mostly US and Mexican, dominate storage, flour milling, grain trading[16] and meat processing. Put differently they dominate the intermediation chain that takes crop or cattle and makes it a marketable commodity. Transnational agribusiness has used this dominant position and a process of vertical and horizontal integration to establish an overwhelming presence in the market for wheat, rice, corn, soya, poultry, meat, pork and eggs. Transnational agri-business tends to have much closer links with larger farmers and producers, who have better access to land, irrigation and credit, all of which are scarce commodities for small farmers[17], particularly after the withdrawal of the state…..

    Alongside this, as hoped for by designers of NAFTA, has been ‘modernisation’ – a sharp decline in the share of agriculture and allied sectors in the workforce. From nearly 27% in 1991 it declined to slightly less than 15% in 2006, losing more than 2 million jobs[18]. Again small and marginal farmers and agricultural labour bore the brunt, as evidenced by very sharp decline in the number of rural households. According to a study by Jose Romero and Alicia Puyana carried out for the federal government of Mexico, between 1992 and 2002, the number of agricultural households fell an astounding 75% – from 2.3 million to 575, 000[19].

    There has been a significant increase in migration out of rural areas as livelihoods are lost and farms have been abandoned. The hope was that this migration out of low-productivity agriculture would be absorbed into higher-productivity non-agrarian urban employment. But anemic employment growth in the post-NAFTA period, particularly in manufacturing[20], put paid to that. And what little employment there has been has largely been in the informal sector. As a result there has been a change in the pattern of rural out-migration. In the 1980s the likelihood of migrating to urban Mexico was higher than that of migrating to the USA. Today, as a result of anemic employment growth, the likelihood of migrating to the USA is significantly higher…..

    This driving the peasants off the land is a tried and true method of consolidating power and wealth.

    It was done in the UK.
    WIKI – “The Highland Clearances was the forced displacement during the 18th and 19th centuries of a significant number of people from traditional land tenancies in the Scottish Highlands, where they had practised small-scale agriculture.”

    It was purposefully done to Americans after WWII and continues to this day with the Food Safety Modernization Act. link

    The goal of course is to move ALL means of production into the hands of the elite, Food, Energy, Mining, Manufacturing and of course to also control Trade and Money. Do that and the entire world population becomes nothing but serfs. No middle class can hope to arise to challenge the Elites.

  21. Gail Combs says:

    I kept wondering why Trump hammered and hammered NAFTA and ignored WTO until I wrote the above comment and the light bulb finally went on.

    Again, this is stuff (food/small farmers/NAFTA/Mexico) I have been hammering for years and I never made the connection.

    Boy is the guy brilliant! As Scott Adams says he is a Master Persuader and about 20 steps ahead of the rest of us.

  22. Patrick healy says:

    Mussolini was executed hanging upside down. Just a thought.

  23. E.M.Smith says:


    FWIW, I now swap to Spanish on the second sentence when asking anyone stocking shelves where a product is located. (Sometimes start that way if they look Mexican enough). Most have poor or no English and good Spanish. So “Where is the house brand butter?” at Safeway grocery store 2 nights ago got that slightly fearful look from the guy moving a pallet jack of (something) in position to stock… I then said “¿De dónde es la mantequilla?” and he pointed me to the right row… (They had expensive butter in two easy to find places, most of the stuff was in a cold case away from the milk products… including the $2/lb-cheaper house brand…)

    As of now, I’m a minority in California (both race and gender) and increasingly moving toward a language minority (certainly so in service industries or late at night). I now expect to shift to Spanish in fast food restaurants (especially late) and retail outlets (if not talking to the checker or the manager) and occasionally at other times too.

    Some rural towns are nearly all Mexican / Hispanic. In IIRC Gonzales, I stopped in a hardware store. Cute girl behind the counter. Whole town (driving in) looked like mostly Mexican farm hands with pickup trucks and such. Many signs in stores in Spanish. She looks at blue eyes blondish red and starts to ask me what I want in accented English. I replied in “OK Spanish” what I was looking for… watching her startle was fun ;-) In Florida especially, it was great fun to swap to Spanish when folks “Pegged” me as a monolingual Northern Honky based on looks. A subtle way of putting their biases in their face ;-)

    So yeah, about 15 Million Mexicans moved to California over the last few decades… Welcome to NAFTA… Then there’s the flood of Indian H1B Visa tech guys. Drove wages down and essentially made I.T. uninteresting for anyone going to college ( I advised my son not to ‘go there’ and take ‘business’ instead).

    The good news is we have Great Restaurants in Mexican, Indian, Chinese (we’ve had a fair number of them on H1B visas or just showing up… too) and {various Middle Eastern} ethnicities. Want to know who’s moving into an area? Look up the kinds of restaurants and watch how they change over time. If you have, for example, one Indian restaurant, that’s likely just for folks seeking variety. When Restaurant Row converts 5 from American / European Standard to Indian with cheap lunchtime buffets, that’s because a large bolus of Indian workers have shown up. (We got a load of good Vietnamese restaurants just after the Viet Nam war ended… )

    So now it is easier to find a burrito or taco in Silicon Valley than to find meatloaf or a hot turkey sandwich. (I know of ONE place with those two items – Harry’s Hoffbrau. There may be others, but who knows where. BTW, over the last 30 years the chef behind the counter at Harry’s has changed from Germanic guys to Mexican guys who talk to each other in Spanish…) Taco’s and burritos? Almost as common as Starbucks…

    FWIW, I’ve started occasionally watching the Spanish Language TV stations to brush up my Spanish. For 40 years or so it wasn’t very useful, I’d just learned it and then let it slide. (Overlaid by French in College – I chose to suppress Spanish by ‘suggestion’ as it was interfering with my French speech production). As of about a decade back, it’s become ‘an important tool’ when shopping or dining out… among other times. (Gardener, one of my mechanics, some social events, local grocer – the Mexican Market has a real butcher and all those non-muscle cuts that have disappeared from the chains… how do you make steak-n-kidney pie without lamb kidneys? )

    I’m not complaining about it. I’m comfortable in both cultures and OK with Spanish. But this is not the California of 1970 and the rise of Silicon Valley.

    Oh, and when my kids were in high school, they had a choice of ONE foreign language to learn. Spanish… Gone were French, German, the Latin my spouse learned at the same school decades prior, and more… C’est la vie… n’est-ce pas?

  24. Gail Combs says:

    Not really complaining E.M. except for the Globalists who treat us like cattle or less than cattle.

    I am absolutely horrible at languages. I could READ French and German OK but could not speak it worth beans. I know some phrases in Spanish but am of the opinion that if you come to this country as anything BUT a tourist it is up to YOU to learn English.

    When I lived in Germany for a year I always used German and not English. The merchants and I got a lot of good belly laughs out of my horrible pronunciation but they were really good about helping me learn better German. Another year and I think I would have been fairly fluent in the language.

    I always remember the advice that an Old Army sergeant gave me: Memorize lists of nouns and useful verbs. Don’t worry too much about grammar because you can make yourself understood with those lists immediately within a few days and pick up the grammar later if you wish.

    Also memorize the useful phrases:
    Please, Thank you, good bye, hello, how much does that cost, where is the…..

    If all else fails Ye Ole’ phrase book and pointing. But DON’T expect the natives to speak your language. It is a sure way to build up resentment in the local community and you are going to be living there for several months to several years.

    Only the French and Basque were short tempered about my mangling French and resorting to writing for communicating. The Belgiums thought it was hilarious when I tried to speak French and grabbed a German word instead.

  25. Larry Ledwick says:

    It is interesting that over the last couple decades there has been what appears an intentional effort to cripple critical commodity security. During WWII we had strategic reserves of essential raw materials. Since the time of Moses mankind has maintained strategic reserves of food at the local level. Part of that strategic reserve concept is to ensure the retention of key manufacturing and production capabilities in high value defense and survival commodities.

    You don’t make yourself dependent on a water supply that someone else controls
    You don’t make yourself dependent on food grown in some other country which can be cut off in a crisis, if you want a safe and secure country.

    As the world has moved toward a just in time production and delivery model and globalization all that consideration of what would happen if critical resources were subject to cut off has fallen by the way side. In 1996 we abolished our strategic grain storage system.

    http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=4770135&page=1 (I hate these stories which have no date)

    More importantly it appears to have been intentional.
    Obama was quite happy to keep the US dependent on foreign oil and was dragged kicking and screaming toward energy independence by the fracking industry. So he responded by trying to kill coal, and continue to throttle oil and natural gas production any way he could.

  26. Jeff says:

    Looks like mental health (and control) is the next “crisis”…

    and “The End of Meat”

    These are the Globalists. At their closed meetings in Davos they decide the future, or so they think.
    It’s scary to read what they want and do (and all the position papers, etc. on their site). This is what we’re fighting.

  27. Gail Combs says:

    Larry on the strategic food reserve. Two points. ‘Hoarding’ of food, depending on the state can be illegal AND It was the Grain Cartel that decided that the USA should have no grain reserves.

    As usual from my old notes. – This is before/during the 2008 Food Crisis

    “Recently there have been increased calls for the development of a U.S. or international grain reserve to provide priority access to food supplies for Humanitarian needs. The National Grain and Feed Association (NGFA) and the North American Export Grain Association (NAEGA) strongly advise against this concept..Stock reserves have a documented depressing effect on prices… and resulted in less aggressive market bidding for the grains.” July 22, 2008 letter to President Bush

    “Ten corporations now control nearly every aspect of the world’s food chain. Four control 90 per cent of the world’s exports of corn, wheat, tobacco, tea, pineapple, jute and forest products.” — guardian.co.uk

    “In summary, we have record low grain inventories globally as we move into a new crop year. We have demand growing strongly. Which means that going forward even small crop failures are going to drive grain prices to record levels. As an investor, we continue to find these long term trends..very attractive.” Food shortfalls predicted: 2008 Financial Sense

    The bottom line is that transnational corporations want to make the largest profit possible without regard for the consequences. Recent actions indicate they are moving behind the scenes to:
    Vertically integrate the food chain
    Get rid of competition via mergers, buyouts and regulations,
    Make it impossible for new competition to arise via cost prohibited regulations
    Transport goods across national borders without inspections thanks to free trade agreements
    Transfer product liability (lawsuits) to others using unfair contracts
    Have a captive market who has no option but to buy from them
    Create a monopsony so sellers have only one buyer

    Do the transnationals views competition from independent farmers selling locally a threat? Yes!
    “With consumers increasingly demanding food that is safe, nutritious, and locally grown, the industry is sure to grow, say Penn State researchers, who believe that maximum growth will depend on collaboration among different parts of the industry from the grower through the processor and marketer to the consumer, and also involve institutions of higher learning to provide science-based innovations and an educated workforce. The university is responding to this need by developing a coalition to address strengths and weaknesses in the food industry.
    The project is being funded by a USDA grant.”

  28. Gail Combs says:

    This is an interesting comment I saved from a grain farmer.

    I am glad that this topic (lack of grain reserves) is being talked about. I am a [grain] farmer (and cattle rancher), and I have seen the handwriting on the wall for quite some time, now.
    The U.S. has depleted its’ strategic [grain] reserves; and one reason for that was that the U.S. gov’t was trying to keep the price of wheat low, and thereby “dumped” reserve wheat onto the market in hopes of doing so. This is contradictory in principle, though (hardy-har-har), because programs like the CRP (conservation reserve) program were put into place to, in essence, reduce the amount of tillable acres; and thereby increase the price of crops (because there weren’t as many acres being grown). Of course, this did not work–once again, the U.S. Gov’t got it ALL wrong.

    One thing the CRP program did do, though, was to shut down small towns that received their monies from local agri-business. The small businesses that rec’d their money from local farmers now found themselves in the same position that a lot of the farmers were: out of a job. In a lot of places, the CRP program is grinding to a halt, but the small, friendly little towns won’t be back…
    The CRP program basically put the US Gov’t in direct competition with [some] farmers. Say for instance that the local cash rent on a farm (at the time) was $20 per acre (per annum). Well, the CRP program came along, and if you got your land in the program, Big Brother would pay 1/2 the cost of planting the once-productive field back to grass; but then Big Bro would also pay the farmer about $37 per acre to leave it out of production. The US Govt paid far more than fair market price (at least around here) to “lease” the farmland, and thereby put Big Brother in direct competition with farmers trying to lease farm land. (typical contract was at least 10 years)

    Again, the “plan” was to reduce the amount of farm acres; [which would in theory] reduce the amount of grain (or crop) on the world market, which would make the price go up, because of supply and demand. (Didn’t work that way, though)

    In my opinion, it was a big, costly flop! Production was not reduced by near as much as they thought (per the ingenuity of the American farmer). Thousands upon millions of acres of perfectly good farm land was ‘put’ back to grass (and in a lot, if not most, of the cases, they gov’t soil consevationist recommended the wrong variety of grass to be sown).

    The original theory behind CRP was to take acres that should have never been put into production in the first place, and take them back to their “original state”. Government like, nothing of the sort happened… (i guess you can tell i am not a big fan of the CRP program; and no, I have never had one single acre in the program).

    The lack of grain reserves is something to be gravely concerned about. Ironic how China has been buying the living daylights out of grain, especially over the last few years..They’ve been buying grain…and guns…and cement, and scrap iron, and such…
    anybody see a trend here? History does have a habbit of repeating itself..

    I could go on and on about the grain/food [stock] supply, or lack there of it, but you guys certainly get the point…again, I am glad this topic was brought up again, as it is in the forefront of my mind on a regular basis.

  29. Gail Combs says:

    Now onto my notes on HOARDING.

    The government is NOT going to have grain/food reserves for the US population AND on top of that they are going to make it so YOU can’t have your own food supply either. (Got to keep the international ag cartel happy selling food at top dollar during a famine doncha know.)

    Federal law: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50a/usc_sec_50a_00002072—-000-.html


    Can Our Government Really Tell Us How Much Food and Supplies We Can Keep?

    The short answer is YES, in a roundabout way. Due to numerous discussions questioning the existence of federal anti-hoarding legislation, I wanted to see if such Executive Orders had been written. First and foremost, we do not want to suggest people store items beyond “legal limits” if such limits did exist. Second, we want to separate fact from rumor buzzing around the Internet which has only added to the confusion. This search has yielded no federal legislation aimed directly at prohibiting food storage. But this does not mean “hoarding” is legal, and here’s why…..

    ….some presidents take Executive Orders too far confusing EO with executive lawmaking….

    These EOs are not aimed at anti-hoarding but rather at seizure or confiscation of items and facilities “….These Executive Orders don’t define what specifically constitutes a national emergency and maybe this is as it should be. The specifics on hoarding are left up to the individual states.
    executive order 10998
    From Disaster Center


    By virtue of the authority vested in me as President of the United States, including authority vested in me by Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1958 (72 Stat. 1799), it is hereby ordered as follows:

    SECTION 1. Scope. The Secretary of Agriculture (hereinafter referred to as the Secretary) shall prepare national emergency plans and develop preparedness programs covering: Food resources, farm equipment, fertilizer, and food resource facilities, as defined below; rural fire control; defense against biological warfare, chemical warfare, and radiological fallout pertaining to agricultural activities; and rural defense information and education. These plans and programs shall be designed to develop a state of readiness in these areas with respect to all conditions of national emergency, including attack upon the United States.

    SEC. 2. Definitions. As used in this order:

    (a) “Food resources” means all commodities and products, simple, mixed or compound, or complements to such commodities or products, that are capable of being eaten or drunk, by either human beings or animals’ irrespective of other uses….

    (c) Priorities and allocations. Develop priorities, allocations and distribution control systems and related plans to insure that available food resources are properly apportioned among and distributed to civilian, military and foreign claimants in an emergency and develop priorities, allocations and distribution control systems and related plans for the domestic distribution of farm equipment and fertilizer……

    SEC. 5. Claimancy. The Secretary shall prepare plans to claim materials, manpower, equipment, supplies and services which would be needed to carry out assigned responsibilities and other essential functions of the Department from the appropriate agency and work with such agencies in developing programs to insure availability of such resources Ill an emergency.

    SEC. 6. Stockpiles. The Secretary shall assist the Office of Emergency Planning in formulating and carrying out plans for stockpiling strategic and critical materials. In the administration of Commodity Credit Corporation inventories of food resources shall take all possible measures to assure the availability of such inventories when and where needed in an emergency. The secretary shall also develop plans and procedures for the proper utilization of agriculture items stockpiled for survival purposes….

    …..To locate information for your state, look for laws about:
    Blood Typing
    Disaster Preparedness
    Martial Law
    National Guard
    Public Safety or Public Welfare
    State Militia
    State Police Force….

    Hawaii As A Specific Example of Anti-Hoarding

    For Hawaii, this information will be found in Title 10 under “Public Safety”. It is located after legislation on militias, state guard troops, etc. Then you find the jewel… In Hawaii you are considered a “hoarder” if you have more than one week’s provisions on hand BUT you have to dig to uncover this information. Here is a specific example:


    (1) Prevention of *hoarding, waste, etc. To the extent necessary to prevent hoarding, waste, or destruction of materials, supplies, commodities, accommodations, facilities, and services, to effectuate equitable distribution thereof, or to establish priorities therein as the public welfare may require, to investigate, and any other law to the contrary notwithstanding, to regulate or prohibit, by means of licensing, rationing, or otherwise, the storage, transportation, use, possession, maintenance, furnishing, sale, or distribution thereof, and any business or any transaction related thereto.”

    Committee Notes? Huh?

    In the actual Title document for Hawaii, you will not find the specifics for what length of time constitutes “hoarding” nor an amount. Instead, you must look at the committee notes which describes it as the opinion that one week’s supplies per person is considered adequate food provisions. It is not spelled out what those provisions shall consist of or how much is considered “adequate” until you get to the committee notes.

    You will probably have to “dig” for the committee notes as well. Lynn Shaffer, our legislative interpreter, explains committee notes this way. “When the legislature agrees that a law or statute is needed to effect certain governmental goals to prohibit or encourage civilians to respond in a particular way, that statute has attached to it (you will see it printed in the law books) what is called “committee notes.” The courts, when making a determination of how the statute is to be interpreted and applied to the case before it, looks to “legislative intent” or what was recorded in the committee’s notes when the bill was meandering its way through the legislative process.”

    What happens if a hoard is found:

    “128-28 Forfeitures. The forfeiture of any property unlawfully possessed, pursuant to paragraph (2) of section 128-8, may be adjudged upon conviction of the offender found to be unlawfully in possession of the same, where no person other than the offender is entitled to notice and hearing with respect to the forfeiture, or the forfeiture may be enforced by an appropriate civil proceeding brought in the name of the State….

    From the looks of it you would have to be a lawyer to actually dig out each state’s anti-hoarding laws and given the way they are buried it would be difficult to say whether or not the inability of finding such a law means the law is actually absent. The trying to prove a negative problem.

  30. E.M.Smith says:

    Mormons are required by their church to keep one year of food supply on hand (due to a famine early in their formation….) so I suggest you get a Book Of Mormon and put it on the shelf. Then IF anyone tries to claim “hording” because you have a months worth of food, just tell them it is your religious duty as you have decided you are a Mormon. Oh, and at least in my home town, they were required to have ‘guns to defend it’ from those less prepared…

    Did I even mention I like Mormons and they have their head on straight? Well, most of the time… ;-)

  31. Gail Combs says:

    There is a reason they are going after meat. It is absolutely necessary for proper development of the brain in the fetus and babies. If you want a duller more docile serf class, restrict meat and calories. (I put up several links earlier but not sure on which article)

    Here are a few mostly different:

    Clinical effects of inadequate protein intake
    As outlined above, protein is the fundamental component necessary for cellular and organ function…. Similarly unless amino acids are present in the diet in the right balance protein utilization will be affected. In the World as a whole protein-energy malnutrition (PEM) is fairly common in children and adults, and is associated with the deaths of 6 million children a year. In industrialized nations. PEM is seen primarily in hospitals, is associated with disease, and is often found in the elderly…..

    Clearly protein deficiency has an adverse effect on all organs. In infants and children it has been shown to have harmful effects on the brain and may have longer term effects on brain function. Furthermore, protein deficiency has been shown to have and adverse effects on the immune system, resulting in a higher risk of infection. Pg 608, 609(citations removed)
    Dietary Reference Intakes for Energy, Carbohydrate, Fiber, Fat, Fatty Acids, Cholesterol, Protein, and Amino Acids (Macronutrients)

    Role of red meat in the diet for children and adolescents

    Scientists at the Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, have discovered that going veggie could be bad for your brain – with those on a meat-free diet six times more likely to suffer brain shrinkage….

    Going from hunting/gathering to farming (a more grain based diet) decreased the size of our brains and also, according to my very old Anthro course caused malnutrition at least in paleo-indians relying on corn.

    Nutrition and the developing brain: nutrient priorities and measurement

  32. Gail Combs says:

    When the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) came up with the recommendation that America Should Adopt a ‘Plant-Based’ Diet back in March of 2015 I looked into it.

    A bunch of pointers to comments of mine at that time.

    The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) came up with the recommendation that America Should Adopt a ‘Plant-Based’ Diet. and
    Here comes the food Gestapo and UNsustainable Corn. and another government scandal — E. coli O157:H7

  33. Jeff says:

    @Gail: Thanks. That ties in with the CAGW/CO² Methane madness, etc. A ruse on behalf of the globalists. I was thinking about your comments and agricultural remarks when I saw the WEF articles.

    Here in Germany, (no)thanks to the Greens, Vegetarianism in all its lethal forms is flourishing. Oddly enough, in the MSM (aka Lügenpresse) here, there have been articles about vegetarianism being very bad for infants and children. In spite of that, the Greens are pushing for “Meat-free Mondays” and the like. The farmers, of course, are not impressed. With the rise of the AfD, I think (and hope and pray) that the Green madness will get slapped down.

    I think of the Beefeaters of England. Even back then, it was apparent that meat was necessary for health and strength. Ironic that now the UK is in the forefront of the anti-meat movement.

    Most troubling of all is the depletion and/or outright elimination of all reserves by the USA. This forces total dependency on other nations, and heaven forbid that they ever go to war with us (same thing with manufacturing and China, etc.). Of course that’s what the globalists want. The old “butterfly” malapropism.

    The EU isn’t any better, with its crazy system of price supports, subsidies, and “fair trading” guidelines. Grocery chains, restaurants, wholesalers, junk-food producers, and other food manufacturers are all required to purchase a fixed (usually 20) percentage of their supplies from “impacted countries”, e.g. Somalia, Tunesia, Turkey(!), etc., while being discouraged or outright forbidden to buy goods from “contested” areas of the Middle East (read: West Bank, Judea, Samaria).

    Politics and Politicians are killing us all. And the beancounters are helping them… (Being a longsuffering victim of SOX and its draconian reporting requirements, etc.).

    I think the “survivalists” have it right. I just wish the folks over here felt the same way…

  34. gallopingcamel says:

    @Larry Ledwick,

    One of the things that Heritage measures is “REGULATORY EFFICIENCY”. Comparisons for Hong Kong, the USA and China show some important differences. We need to become more like Hong Kong and less like China.

    Business Freedom 98.4, Labor Freedom 89.0, Monetary Freedom 81.8
    “The overall entrepreneurial environment remains one of the world’s most transparent and efficient. The business start-up process is straightforward, with no minimum capital required. The labor market is vibrant, and the labor force participation rate has gradually increased since 2010. The peg between the Hong Kong dollar and its U.S. counterpart has served the territory well since 1983, ensuring monetary stability and facilitating international commerce”

    Business Freedom 87.7, Labor Freedom 91.4, Monetary Freedom 77.0
    The regulatory burden continues to increase. Over 180 new major federal regulations have been imposed on business operations since early 2009 with estimated annual costs of nearly $80 billion. Labor regulations are not rigid, but other government policies, such as excessive occupational licensing, restrict growth in employment opportunities. Damaging monetary policies, tangled webs of corporate welfare, and various subsidies have bred economic distortions.

    Business Freedom 54.2, Labor Freedom 62.0, Monetary Freedom 70.6
    The overall regulatory framework remains complex and arbitrary. Completing licensing requirements costs over three times the level of average annual income. The labor regime remains repressive. In May 2015, the government announced a program of tax breaks and subsidies aimed at creating jobs and promoting entrepreneurship. The government has also set up a 40 billion yuan fund to help emerging market sectors of the economy.

  35. beththeserf says:

    ‘Fascism another brand of Right Wing military Dictatorship.’
    Don’t you believe it , its a top down platonist – leftist – distopianist
    variation of national socialism,’ Reference, “Varieties of Fascism”
    Eugen Weber. Great little book with primary documentation, readings
    of Mussolini, Mosley, the Na*i Party and Program of the Communist
    International and more.

  36. Gail Combs says:

    ‘Fascism’ was re-branded The Third Way after people saw how horrible it was. ‘The Third Way’ Is being pushed by none other that Bill Clinton, Tony Blair and the former head of the Fabian founded London School of Economics.

    see E.M. Smith’s “Evil Socialism” vs “Evil Capitalism” and link

  37. E.M.Smith says:


    Oddly, that “rebranding” was only possible once folks from the W.W.II generation had died out. It was Mussolini himself who coined the term “Third Way” for fascism, and that memory had to end before the modern socialists could resurect it “cleanly” for corporatist socialism.

Comments are closed.