For the record

President Biden’s decision not to seek reelection was particularly validating for me. This development is consistent with one of the subplots in my forthcoming novel, How the Assassination of Donald Rumsfeld led to the fall of the Milky Way. It is a work of science fiction involving wormholes and time travel that mostly functions as a parable to show why the Muslim world has been so weak for so long. The main protagonist from Part I convinces himself to enlist in the US Space Force in the year 2025, in part, because the White House is occupied by Gavin Newsome, who replaces Biden after he unexpectedly drops out of the race shortly before the election. The character is an Iraqi refugee who grew up in the suburbs of Maryland and has no desire to serve under a Commander and Chief who supports apartheid Israel and its violence against the Palestinians. I wrote this scene in 2022 in reference to one of Israel’s many other violent attacks on Gaza.  

This prediction is one of several I have made since I began my novels and blog, www.mirrorsfortheprince.com.

For example, over the years I have made repeated calls for the Palestinians to adopt non-violent means of resistance to Israel’s apartheid regime. On Nov. 11, 2020, I even suggested “it is time for the Palestinians to surrender.” My calls for non-violence were based on a clear-eyed diagnosis of the dynamics driving this conflict wherein the Palestinians are hopelessly outgunned by people willing to slaughter innocent women and children.

Given recent events in Gaza, my admonition that “armed struggle plays directly into the hands of the considerably more powerful IDF” has proven depressingly prescient. Although the numerous reports of Israeli soldiers shooting unarmed people waving white flags have certainly given me pause, I still believe following my advice to wave white flags of surrender en masse would have prevented much of the bloodshed witnessed since Oct. 7th

I also wrote “Israelis just elected a government that will murder thousands of Palestinian civilians” ten months before its massacre in Gaza on Dec. 5th 2022 and that “when the inevitable happens, most Americans will talk about how “complicated” this conflict is while our government continues to supply Israel with the weapons and funding needed to continue the slaughter.” I further argued, “Israel’s new government is crazy and will very likely end up being genocidal” in that same piece. Here, it was obvious the moment Israel’s extremist government was elected that it would do everything in its power to goad the Palestinians into responding and then use their response as an excuse to unleash horrific violence.

Similarly, I argued the August before Hamas’ attack that efforts to bring Saudi Arabia into the Abraham Accords would never lead to real peace because marginalizing the Palestinians would only make the region’s “problems worse by exacerbating its underlying issues.” Foreign Affairs Magazine published a piece that mostly agreed with my analysis. It just took them eleven months and the war in Gaza to see what was obvious to me much earlier (https://www.foreignaffairs.com/israel/dangerous-push-israeli-saudi-normalization).

My analysis regarding areas outside Palestine has proven equally accurate. On Nov. 17, 2020, I argued the Afghan Republic’s dependence on American military support was a critical vulnerability that would lead to “the development of an entirely new government in Afghanistan that, at best, will have to share power with the Taliban in the near future” eight months before the Taliban marched into Kabul.

On Oct. 20, 2022, when America’s leaders and foreign policy establishment were up in arms about Saudi Arabia’s decision to drive oil prices higher, I mocked the idea that their anger portended a long term shift as some other analysts were suggesting. Instead, I argued this episode was just another bump in their often bumpy relationship that would soon be “glossed over.” The rumors these nations are currently negotiating a long-term security agreement that may involve the transfer of nuclear technology shows my analysis was spot on again.

Even the anti-Muslim riots that  recently shook the UK validate the concerns raised in this piece about the dangers Muslims in America face. The only difference: America’s right-wing nuts are armed with AR-15s, not knives.

Admittedly, forecasting geopolitical developments is more art than science since predicting the exact fallout when political, social, military, and economic trends collide is obviously impossible. It is possible, however, to analyze data, compare it to additional data from the historical record, and use this information to make logical inferences and extrapolations.

Even in a fictional setting written several years ago, it seemed clear Biden’s age would force him to step aside. The difficulty was not in predicting he would be unable to run again but in deciding on his successor. I chose Gavin Newsome because I believed America was too racist and sexist to support a candidate like Kamala Harris. That same scene also forecast Ron DeSantis as the Republican nominee because the idea anyone could support Trump for President again after Jan. 6th seemed beyond the pale.

Similarly, I never imagined Putin would be dumb enough to hold on in Ukraine for this long. It was obvious within the first few months of this war that he had marched his forces into an unwinnable quagmire that could easily lead to the disintegration of the Russian Federation. I still stand by that conclusion, but I underestimated Putin’s willingness to double down on a losing bet and Russia’s ability to withstand western sanction and rebuild its forces. Nevertheless, Putin’s stubbornness over Ukraine will likely have a similar impact as the failed Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, though it may take another decade or so before we see the results.

Speaking of forecasts, I will add one more for the record. Donald Trump will fire and replace JD Vance before the election, probably shortly after the Democratic Convention in Chicago. Vance was an awful choice to begin with since he did not expand Trump’s appeal in any way and he has acquitted himself poorly on the campaign trail. Realizing he needs a spark and refusing to accept any blame himself, Trump will go back to his reality TV show roots by making the unprecedented decision to fire his running mate so he can replace him with either Tim Scott or Niki Haley.

My repeated ability to accurately forecast world events suggests the underlying analysis driving these observations is sound, which should worry people in America and the Muslim world. As I have stated many times, America is headed for disaster. A reasonable analysis of the macro-trends suggests economic upheaval and large-scale violence are very real possibilities within the next few decades. America today reminds me of Prof. Kennedy’s admonition that “a large military establishment may, like a great monument, look imposing to the impressionable observer; but if it is not resting upon a firm foundation (in this case, a productive national economy), it runs the risk of a future collapse.”

America is headed for the same abyss that trapped the Muslim world centuries ago since it is now controlled by military industrialists and elites who can only thrive when it is at war. As the Ottomans once learned, this is the path to self-destruction.

Unfortunately, my warnings have gone unheeded so far. I do not expect these words will convince anyone either. But as a lawyer, I understand the importance of keeping a record. As such, this piece is intended to memorialize yet one more of my accurate predictions since Part I will probably not be ready for publication before the election in November. At the least, I hope these thoughts will be of interest to those studying us many years from now. But that will probably depend on the accuracy of my other longer-term predictions.

Tagged : / / / / / / / / / / / /

America’s conservatives make no sense

In the spirit of Kendrick Lamar versus Drake, the following discussion is offered as a diss track about conservatives. It may not be as lyrical or poetic, but it does provide some insight into the silly ideas that fuel their perspectives.  

As we all learn through the process of aging, change is an intrinsic part of life. Conservative political philosophies seek to deny this truth under the guise of upholding tradition, placing them in opposition to the laws of nature itself. As such, they are inherently irrational, which renders them incapable of forming coherent ideologies.

The American strain of conservatism is a particularly illogical variant that illustrates the point well since the policies favored by America’s conservatives are exceptionally incoherent. They claim to favor small government as a defense against absolutism and authoritarianism, but consistently empower the agencies of the state most likely to devolve into despotism, namely, the ones with the weapons. Throughout history, it has been men trained by their governments in the arts of organized warfare and violence who have seized power or abused those they were charged with protecting.

Julius Caesar did not march on Rome with a mob of disgruntled teachers or tax collectors. He marched at the head of an army trained and equipped by the government he was trying to overthrow. Similarly, it is the militaries of Chile, Argentina, Indonesia, Thailand, Turkey, and Pakistan, among many others, that have seized political power in their countries, not their ministries of finance or education. The idea that supporting a strong military is a conservative value contradicts the fundamental logic that is supposed to drive the ideology. Nevertheless, conservatives consistently demand massive military budgets.

They argue doing so is necessary to protect America in a dangerous world but ignore some basic facts when assessing the threat level and the number of resources required to contain it. America is arguably the most geographically blessed political entity that has ever existed. Two of its borders are protected by large oceans, while its north is protected by the Canadian Shield. Its natural defenses and vast lands make it a fortress that has no need for a large standing military. A strong navy combined with a small army consisting of a few mechanized divisions along the southern border and a few light infantry divisions trained in mountain and guerrilla warfare in Alaska, backed by a couple hundred advanced fighter aircraft, a stockpile of 100 or so thermonuclear devices, and a robust air defense network to protect against long-range missiles and space-based weapons would be sufficient to keep America safe.

Despite these minimal defense requirements, America has spent trillions building and maintaining the world’s most powerful military. It fields a lethal arsenal of advanced fighters, drones, tanks, and warships, many of which are positioned in Western Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia. Between its fleet of aircraft carriers, forward bases, and airlift capabilities, America can project military power onto nearly every square inch of the planet. It can track and kill anyone, anywhere, using small teams of special forces to hunt down individual targets or it can airlift an entire army halfway around the world within a matter of weeks. It even has enough nuclear bombs to render the planet uninhabitable. America’s military is not designed to protect it but to dominate and control the rest of the world.

Conservatives correctly understand that governments, due to their ability to accumulate power and marshal resources, are the greatest potential threat to a nation’s freedom. But instead of reigning in the parts that pose the most danger, they channel their skepticism towards limiting the state’s ability to provide vital public services like funding education and healthcare or protecting the environment. Unfortunately, their inconsistent ideas extend well beyond the realms of national security and domestic spending.

They also passionately support banning abortions during the earliest stages of pregnancy and denying women access to birth control. These issues touch on some of the most complicated and personal decisions a woman can make. To insert the government into these deliberations by giving it the power to usurp a women’s right to choose represents one of the greatest intrusions of governmental authority imaginable. With respect to childbirth, it takes the decision away from the person in the best position to weigh the unique circumstances that surround each pregnancy, i.e., the mother, and gives it to the government.

Their willingness to ban abortions combined with their refusal to fund public healthcare initiatives show conservatives have a fundamental misunderstanding of the role and purpose of government. Ensuring all citizens have access to the medical care they need is a basic governmental function. No one should die from cancer because they cannot afford chemotherapy. To that end, the government must provide the infrastructure and facilities required to give every citizen access to necessary medical treatment. But giving it control over their personal healthcare choices is an unconscionable expansion of the government’s power well outside its scope of authority. Conservatives would give the state the power to compel life against the wishes of the women who must carry the burden both during and after pregnancy while denying them the resources needed to safely deliver and care for their babies.

They believe the overriding need to save the lives of unborn children outweighs the concerns of the mother. This argument touches on questions that have no easy answer. Some believe life begins at conception, others when the baby is born. The reasonable compromise seems to be that a life cannot be a life until it can survive on its own. Despite this gray area, conservatives have decided life begins at conception and weaponized the courts and their control of various state legislatures to impose their views on their neighbors.

These examples, though very different, show the same thing. Despite the lofty rhetoric about individual rights and limited government, American conservatism is not the product of a carefully considered ideology. It is rooted in a fear of change and the desire for power. America’s conservatives would use their military to control the world and their judges to control women. Their illogical ideas and willingness to use the mechanisms of the state to impose their values on others shows exactly why the exercise of political authority must always be strictly limited, particularly when it comes to matters of life and death like waging war or abortion.

Though many refuse to admit it, America is slowly collapsing under the weight of its contradictions. As its rapidly growing debt of $35 trillion shows, it has overextended itself financially and geopolitically. The inability of its leaders to admit basic facts about their nation’s dire finances and unsustainable military posture have set it on a path to self-destruction. The irrational ideas championed by its conservatives exemplify these trends, but they are hardly alone.

Many liberals also support maintaining a military designed to dominate the world and ignore or whitewash the massacres committed in pursuit of their hegemonic ambitions. They believe the government can and should solve all our problems and that magically printing money will have no consequences. Neither end of America’s political spectrum makes any sense, but its conservatives are especially irrational.

Aside from their blatantly hypocritical views on military spending and abortion, they also believe the US Constitution, a document written centuries ago that once legalized treating human beings as chattel, is inviolable and that rights not explicitly granted by it do not exist. In their quest for power, they have created a cult around a treasonous buffoon who has already tried to overthrow the government once. When America finally implodes, they will shoulder much of the responsibility, though they will likely blame “wokeness” and label any attempts to discuss their toxic role in its fall as “critical race theory” to stifle meaningful debate.

The author is a US Navy veteran and attorney who usually limits his political musings to the Muslim world on his blog, www.mirrorsfortheprince.com. These thoughts were first inspired by his study of its long decline, which is the direct result of the conservative ideologies that have dominated it for centuries. Muslim conservatives vanquished their liberal foes roughly a thousand years ago and the results speak for themselves. In one of the many parallels between the Islamic world and America, the latter’s conservatives are determined to drag their nation down a similar path. Their insane ideas are but one more datapoint that shows America is in the “senile” stage of its development first described by Ibn Khaldun centuries ago, which means the Pax Americana is not long for this world.

Tagged : / / / / / / / / /