California Dreaming & Separatist Movement


On the November election in California, enough signatures were gathered just over 400,000 to put a question on the ballot – should California be split into three states? The discontent in California is certainly regional. The proposal for three states would break California up into North, South, and just California.

Tim Draper has been the primary bankroller behind the division idea. He managed to collect at least 402,000 signatures to divide California into three parts. Northern California will be composed of the region from Oregon down to San Francisco. Southern California would include Fresno, Bakersfield, and San Diego. Then there will be California between these two regions which will be with its capital at Los Angeles. Effectively, three capital cities would emerge, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego. Anyone who has been to California knows that indeed there are three distinct cultures.

Silicon Valley is a region in the southern San Francisco Bay Area referring to the Santa Clara Valley, which serves as the global center for high technology, venture capital, innovation, and social media. This will be part of Northern California leaving behind the craziness of the Los Angeles politics that has far too often swamped the philosophies of Northern California.

This is once again part of the separatist movement that is rising everywhere around the world. It is all part of the same cycle of Civil Unrest.

Netflix Signs Barack and Michelle Obama


 

I mentioned before that Netflix had originally wanted to air The Forecaster movie, and then all of a sudden they refused because of politics. Well, now Barack Obama and his wife Michelle just signed a contract with Netflix. Netflix has signed a contract with the Obamas for the production of films, documentaries, and a series. Obviously, it seems that Netflix is also becoming politically “connected” like CNN. Netflix is planning TV productions with the Obamas who have created the Obamas film company, known as “Higher Ground Productions,” that is expected to begin in 2019. It looks like we will be in store for political propaganda delivered by Netflix just in time for the 2020 elections

Raging Bullsh**t


Published on Jun 15, 2018

Robert DeNiro had just one thing to say at the Tony’s…. And it wasn’t very nice. How much more Hollywood hypocrisy can we handle?! Want even more Right Angle each week? Become a member at BillWhittle.com! https://www.billwhittle.com/subscribe Right Angle is brought to you by the paying members of BillWhittle.com and by donations from viewers like you! Show your support by making a donation at: https://www.billwhittle.com/donate

Economic Migration v Welfare Migration


COMMENT:

Sir,

After reading your blog post about the 300% increase in the cost of healthcare for refugees, I wondered the cost in this country for illegal aliens. Healthcare. Education. Food stamps. Etc. I googled anywhere from 3.4 to 11 billion dollars from health care alone.

I laughed out loud after reading the above. You wrote about the turn on the last group of people off the boat.

Keep up the good work and see you in Nov

DK

ANSWER: The cost of socialism is not merely over the top, it has altered the migration patterns within human society tremendously. The waves of migration from Europe to America were each inspired by the economic conditions at home. Therefore, we find the Irish, Germans, Italians, and English all coming during varied waves or periods overall when looking at the majority (naturally there were people from each group who moved for personal reasons). Nonetheless, the one thing that they all had in common was that they paid for their passage and they did not expect social benefits for free.

Today, the migration patterns are purely economic, but they are inspired by socialism whereby they need only show up and receive automatic income and benefits. When the European migration took place, predominantly during the 19th century and then waves after World War I and World War II, the people received no handouts from the taxpayer. There were no social programs to receive free living expenses. Churches provided food when people gave to charity BEFORE there were taxes. Europeans migrated to the United States to start new lives and to earn a living — not because they would be subsidized.

There are waves of migration that are caused by political unrest and no doubt some of that was at the reason for people fleeing Syria. Less know is the wave of refugees fleeing to Colombia and Venezuela who are also seeking security and economic stability since the army continues to support the Venezuelan socialist government that is collapsing. There were Americans in the south who fled to Brazil during the Civil War. They were called Confederados (Portuguese pronunciation: [kõfedeˈɾadus]) and were some 10,000 to 20,000 Confederate American refugees. They settled primarily in the state of São Paulo.

Providing welfare checks to show up on your soil alters the reasons for migration that have existed for thousands of years.

Jordan Peterson – Poverty causes crime? Wrong! – The Gini coefficient


Published on Mar 6, 2017

original source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJI0h… Psychology Professor Jordan Peterson explains the clear documented science why it’s relative poverty and not poverty itself that causes crime. He goes on further explaining the role of the male dominance hierarchy in context of relative poverty and crime. Dr. Peterson’s new book is available for pre-order: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos: http://amzn.to/2yvJf9L If you want to support Dr. Peterson, here is his Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/jordanbpeterson Check out Jordan Peterson’s Self Authoring Program, a powerful tool to sort yourself out: http://bit.ly/selfAuth (Official affiliate link for Bite-sized Philosophy

How the Socialists Keep the Poor – Poor


Everyone knows I donated my time to try to reform Social Security and privatize it back in the 90s. I was even shuttling between the Chairman of the House Ways & Means Committee, Bill Archer, and the House Majority Leader Dick Army. I argued for the privatization of Social Security to allow it to become a wealth fund allowing it to invest in equities.

The Dow Jones Industrials recently broke through the 4,000 level. The greatest obstacle was the Democrats. I had laid out the structure that we allocate money according to the track record of the manager. I was doing this because I had no interest in managing the money of this nature. The Democrats wanted to replace the fund managers at will when they retook the majority. I explained that this decision should not be political. I did not care if the fund manager voted Democrat or Republican. That just never sunk in.

The Democrats painted this private investment as “risky” and they would vote against it. So Social Security invests 100% in government bonds. Let’s see. The Fed lowered the interest rates to “stimulate” the economy. The net effect is that Social Security is simply a slush fund with no possible economic growth. The loss has come at the “opportunity risk” of leaving the money in bonds.

Had Social Security simply become a wealth fund as so many nations around the world have adopted, it would NOT be in danger of a financial crisis today. This is the result of the Democrats who always want to strangely keep the poor poor and punish the rich. They talk about income inequality and portray this as “unfair.” Yet, the very way the “rich” make their money is through investment, which the Democrats have rejected for more than 40 years.

As the stock market rises further and interest rates remain low, the disparity of income will expand rapidly because they are comparing profits on investment as income rather than wages. We should expect the Socialists to get a lot more vocal over the years ahead going into 2020. They will call for the heads of the “rich” rather than address the fact that they are the very people who prevent the poor from getting ahead.

Matthew Charles: Justice VS The Law


Published on Jun 8, 2018

Matthew Charles was released on parole in 2016… and now he’s being sent back to jail. What’s wrong with our criminal justice system? Want even more Right Angle each week? Become a member at BillWhittle.com! https://www.billwhittle.com/subscribe Right Angle is brought to you by the paying members of BillWhittle.com and by donations from viewers like you! Show your support by making a donation at: https://www.billwhittle.com/donate

 

Perfect Timing – Part II: The Trump Doctrine…


When we ended part I... A U.S. foreign policy that provides the opportunity for fully-realized national authenticity is a paradigm shift amid a world that has grown accustomed to corrupt globalists, bankers and financial elites who have established a business model by dictating terms to national leaders they control and influence.

When you take the influence of corporate/financial brokers out of foreign policy, all of a sudden those global influence peddlers are worthless. Absent of their ability to provide any benefit, nations no longer purchase these brokered services.

As soon as influence brokers are dispatched, national politicians become accountable to the voices of their citizens. When representing the voices of citizens becomes the primary political driver of national policy, the authentic image of the nation is allowed to surface.

In western, or what we would call ‘more democratized systems of government‘, the consequence of removing multinational corporate and financial influence peddlers presents two options for the governing authority occupying political office:

♦One option is to refuse to allow the authentic voice of a nationalist citizenry to rise.  Essentially to commit to a retention of the status quo; an elitist view; a globalist perspective.  This requires shifting to a more openly authoritarian system of government within both the economic and social spheres. Those who control the reigns of power refuse to acquiesce to a changed landscape.

♦The second option is to allow the authentic and organic rise of nationalism.  To accept the voices of the middle-class majority; to structure the economic and social landscape in a manner that allows the underlying identity to surface naturally.

Fortunately we are living in a time of great history, and we have two representative examples playing-out in real time.  •One example is the U.K. and voices of the British people who have voted to Brexit the European Union.  •The second example is Mexico, and the upcoming July 1st election of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (aka AM LO), a national socialist.

In the U.K. we see the government turning more authoritarian and distancing itself from the voices of the majority who chose to rebuke the collective association of the EU.  In recent decisions the government has taken a more harsh approach toward suppressing opposition, and as a consequence oppressing free speech and civil liberties.

This doesn’t come as a surprise to those who have followed the arc of history when the collective global elite are rejected.  Globalism can only thrive amid a class structure where the elites, though few in number, have more controlling power over the direction of government.  It is not accidental that the EU has appointed officials and unelected bureaucrats as the primary decision-making authority.

By its very nature collectivism requires a central planning authority who can act independent of the underlying national voice.  As the Trump Doctrine clashes with the European global elite, the withdrawal of the U.S. financial underwriting creates a natural problem.  Subsidies are needed to retain multiculturalism.  If a national citizenry has to pay for the indulgent decisions of the influence class, a crisis becomes only a matter of time.

Wealth distribution requires a host.  Since the end of World War II the U.S. has been a bottomless treasury for EU subsidy.  The payments have been direct and indirect.  The indirect have been via U.S. military bases providing security, and also by U.S. trade policy permitting one-way tariff systems.   Both forms of indirect payment are now being reversed as part of the modern Trump Doctrine.

Similarly, in Mexico the Trump Doctrine also extends toward changed trade policies; this time via NAFTA.  The restructuring of NAFTA disfavors multinational corporations who have exploited structural loopholes that were designed into the agreement.

With President Trump confronting the NAFTA fatal flaw, and absent of the ability of corporations to influence the direction of the administration, the trade deal ultimately presents the same outcome for Mexico as it does the EU – LESS DOLLARS.

However, in Mexico, the larger systems of government are not as strongly structured to withstand the withdrawal of billions of U.S. dollars.  The government of Mexico is not in the same position as the EU and cannot double-down on more oppressive controls.  Therefore the authentic voice of the Mexican people is likely to rise.

Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AM LO), is a nationalist but he is not a free-market capitalist.  AM LO is more akin to a Hugo Chavez soft-Marxist approach with a view the central governing authority is the best structure to control the outputs of the production base and distribute equity.

The fabric of socialism runs naturally through the DNA strain of Mexico, and indeed much of South America.  This is one of the reasons why the current Mexican government is so corrupt.  Multinational corporations always find it easier to exploit socialist minded government officials.

When bribery and graft are the natural way of business engagement, the multinationals will exploit every opportunity to maximize profit. Withdraw the benefit (loophole exploitation) to the financial systems, and the bribery and graft dries up quickly.  A bottom-up nationalist, albeit a soft-Marxist like AM LO, is the ultimate beneficiary.

The authentic sense of the Mexican people, rises in the persona of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador – who actually does personify the underlying nature of the classic Mexican class-struggle.

Thus we see two similar yet distinct outcomes of the Trump Doctrine. Within a highly structured U.K. parliamentary government the leadership becomes more authoritarian and rebukes the electorate; and in Mexico a less structured government becomes more socialist and embraces the underlying nature of the electorate.

It is not accidental the historic nature of the U.K. is a Monarchy, and the historic nature of Mexico is socialist.  Revolution not withstanding, both countries are now returning to their roots.

We are indeed living in historic times.

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) – Leftist candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador extended his double-digit opinion poll lead to claim half of voter support ahead of Mexico’s July 1 presidential election, a voter survey showed on Monday.

Lopez Obrador, who has consistently ranked in the lead in major polls, has 50 percent of voter support, 26 percentage points ahead of his nearest rival, according to the poll published in newspaper El Financiero.

The former Mexico City mayor’s support rose from 46 percent in a May survey by the same pollster. (read more)

Are Politics Doomed?


COMMENT:

Dear Mr. Armstrong,

You are writing: “Donald Trump is the symptom, not the cause”

He is a unique personality. I am a structural engineer and work with micro Trumps. Maybe such people choose the profession as building contractors. The similarities are stunning.

To get Donald Trump, you must have one.

We here in Germany don´t have such a personality. It is really interesting, what follows after Angela Merkel.

Sincerely

MF

ANSWER: You are very correct. Those in the construction field do have a different culture than most others. Dealing with contractors and just trying to get them to show up when they promised is an impossible challenge. It might be easier to balance the national debt.

I wonder myself what we are going to face. I used to sit down and have intelligent conversations with heads of state. Today, I am not sure that is even possible. The quality of politics has declined like a bear market. CNN has totally forgotten that the President of the United States is an “institution” and not a person. They have reduced politics to a mud wrestling contest. I do not know anyone who would be qualified to be President who would dare to enter the ring after what CNN has done to Trump. The rumors is that his wife does not want to appear with him because she is torn apart for whatever she wears, says, or fails to do.

 

What comes after Angela Merkel will most likely be more authoritarian. America, we are burdened by the Puritan culture. The incident at the Superbowl when Justin Timberlake appears to deliberately expose the breast of Janet Jackson sparked hearings on Capitol Hill. We have had people like the Vice President and former Attorney General Ashcroft cover up bronze statues of Justice because her breasts are bear. Just about every fountain in Rome has some image of bare breasts. If the Trivia Fountain were in Washington, they would cover it up with a tarp and hold hearings for months.

I had a friend who is a policeman and he applied for an elite squad. They wanted a list of every girlfriend he had back into high school. Who can remember every name that far back?

The future of politics looks to be very grim. The press in America has destroyed the office of the President. What comes after Trump can ONLY now be a hand-picked bureaucrat who the press will support. Nobody else need apply.

Trump was elected because the faith in government is collapsing. It will NEVER go back to what it was — respectful. What comes after Trump looks to be an attempt by the press and political class to take the country back from the people. This will most likely result in a wave of a rising civil unrest and ultimately the breakup of the United States. We will see similar trends in Canada and Europe

Clinton Says He Would Not Be Elected Today


 

Bill Clinton came out with a shot against Trump saying he would not be elected today BECAUSE he does not like insulting people as Trump does. It seems to me that the press is all over Trump for having sex with a porn star years ago, which was obviously consensual. The press seems to have no problem with Clinton having an affair with staff while he was married no less. Sure, women marry their boss or they meet someone at work. That is fairly common. But having an affair with an intern rather than a real romantic relationship is something altogether different. Not sure why he walks on water. That would be an issue in today’s environment that would prevent election