Generational Dynamics World View News

[Guest]

I don't see Japan getting involved unless the US did and that's by no means assured. Though Japan would not be declaring war but supporting an ally which allowed under the new reading of the Japanese constitution.

Japan would go to war to help Taiwan because the Japanese know that they would be next. You don't understand how the Japanese think. Even Japanese leftists would support a war with the mainlanders in the event of an attack on Taiwan.

There is no treaty to support such an action and the general Japanese populace is pretty pacifistic. It would be in Japan's long term interest to intervene, but countries often make decisions contrary to those interests for various reasons. I wouldn't consider it to be assured.

The Japanese public is alarmed at recent developments. They know what the Chinese have in store for them. The Japanese know. This is not the Japan of 1975.

[John]

** 10-Jun-2020 World View: Japan and Taiwan

Japan would go to war to help Taiwan because the Japanese know that they would be next. You don't understand how the Japanese think. Even Japanese leftists would support a war with the mainlanders in the event of an attack on Taiwan.

There is no treaty to support such an action and the general Japanese populace is pretty pacifistic. It would be in Japan's long term interest to intervene, but countries often make decisions contrary to those interests for various reasons. I wouldn't consider it to be assured.

The Japanese public is alarmed at recent developments. They know what the Chinese have in store for them. The Japanese know. This is not the Japan of 1975.

I recently posted an article on this subject:


** 24-May-20 World View -- Minister suggests Japan will defend Taiwan against military invasion by China
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e200524

[John]

** 10-Jun-2020 World View: Defund police

> This is something that I posted recently in the Financial Topics
> thread:

> "A black man’s death was blamed on democrat cops in a democrat
> city with a democrat police chief and a democrat mayor in a
> democrat state with a democrat governor. Then democrats got
> together and burned democrat cities. The democrat mayors and
> police chiefs allowed black businesses and neighborhoods to
> burn. Black people died in the riots."

> It's all Trump's fault.

> It is not all Trump's fault. It is the murder cop's fault,
> primarily.

> But the aftermath asks the question, do you agree with the people
> that police racism and violence should be curbed, or use violence
> to quell the voice of the people. Trump seems to be leaning
> towards the latter. Not wise, I suspect.

The problem is that a lot of people are blaming the murder on all cops
and, by extension, on all whites. These statements are sowing
enormous racial division and inciting violence. This has led to the
loony "defund police" policy, which is being widely adopted by the
Democratic Party leaders, apparently with the reasoning that if you're
being attacked, then being able to call a cop is "white privilege."

I've seen clips of Democrat leaders calling the violence and looting
"wonderful," because it will lead to reforms. These people are
completely deluded, and are encouraging further violence --
ironically, mostly to black neighborhoods and businesses.

But as the old saying goes, you have to crack a few eggs
to make an omelet.

[Bob Butler]

** 10-Jun-2020 World View: Defund police

> This is something that I posted recently in the Financial Topics
> thread:

> "A black man’s death was blamed on democrat cops in a democrat
> city with a democrat police chief and a democrat mayor in a
> democrat state with a democrat governor. Then democrats got
> together and burned democrat cities. The democrat mayors and
> police chiefs allowed black businesses and neighborhoods to
> burn. Black people died in the riots."

> It's all Trump's fault.

> It is not all Trump's fault. It is the murder cop's fault,
> primarily.

> But the aftermath asks the question, do you agree with the people
> that police racism and violence should be curbed, or use violence
> to quell the voice of the people. Trump seems to be leaning
> towards the latter. Not wise, I suspect.

The problem is that a lot of people are blaming the murder on all cops
and, by extension, on all whites. These statements are sowing
enormous racial division and inciting violence. This has led to the
loony "defund police" policy, which is being widely adopted by the
Democratic Party leaders, apparently with the reasoning that if you're
being attacked, then being able to call a cop is "white privilege."

I've seen clips of Democrat leaders calling the violence and looting
"wonderful," because it will lead to reforms. These people are
completely deluded, and are encouraging further violence --
ironically, mostly to black neighborhoods and businesses.

But as the old saying goes, you have to crack a few eggs
to make an omelet.

And yet, the city has to have the option of getting rid of the entire force if the force is resistant enough to block any reform. I'm not saying reduce funding to all police organizations. Most every union has a last hired first let go policy. Just cutting funds would result the release of the more idealistic cops leaving the corrupt ones still in charge. It would have the opposite effect from reform. But if an organization is completely murderous and resists change against murderous intent, in a few cases a start over is required. At this time, Milwaukee and perhaps Buffalo might be nominated. Let other organizations read the handwriting on the wall, and decide if they want to be next.

[Navigator]

Bob,

I think you actually got to the root cause of the problem: Police UNIONS. If people really want the police (or, on a different note, the school systems) to change, then they have to de-UNIONIZE. This is the only way to be able to root out the bad apples.

And there are plenty of bad apples.

I was on a jury once where we were being asked to convict someone solely on the word of a SINGLE policeman. This is in a state where secret recording is legal ( so he should have recorded the alleged confession). Fortunately, I was able to convince the rest of the jury that I didn't want to live somewhere where a single cop could have me convicted, based solely on his "word". I should also point out that no other policeman involved in the situation would lie to corroborate the "single witness".

I agree that there is some merit in the current social outrage. I have had some pretty negative interactions with police officers. And I'm a older white guy with disabled veteran license plates. I can't fully imagine what a young black male has to go through. (this of course in NO WAY justifies looting and all the other criminal activity that this has enabled, and is in fact completely counter-productive).

I saw a great article the other day on some poor black guy who is a wildlife photographer in San Francisco having to deal with the police being called on him regularly by the local residents near the parks where he works.

The whole thing about the left is HYPOCRISY. They won't fix the police because they can't admit that unionizing them was an unbelievably bad mistake. They won't fix the schools for the same reason.

They rant against racism, but they are the ones calling the police when a black person is in "their" neighborhood.

[Tom Mazanec]

Know Your Enemy: China
https://www.americanthinker.com/article ... china.html

The Chinese version of Hakko Ichiu is called Tianxia under which China gets to rule the rest of the world. It has nothing to do with communism. In fact the trigger for the coming war -- China’s bases in the South China Sea -- were claimed by the Nationalist Chinese in 1947. The decades of poverty and backwardness under Mao caused a delay of a few decades for just that aim. But when it comes, China’s war, like Japan’s before it, will be a race war. And race wars are the nastiest of them all.

Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/article ... z6P0IEJpoK
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

[John]

** 10-Jun-2020 World View: Defunding police forces

> And yet, the city has to have the option of getting rid of the
> entire force if the force is resistant enough to block any reform.
> I'm not saying reduce funding to all police organizations. Most
> every union has a last hired first let go policy. Just cutting
> funds would result the release of the more idealistic cops leaving
> the corrupt ones still in charge. It would have the opposite
> effect from reform. But if an organization is completely
> murderous and resists change against murderous intent, in a few
> cases a start over is required. At this time, Milwaukee and
> perhaps Buffalo might be nominated. Let other organizations read
> the handwriting on the wall, and decide if they want to be
> next.

As far as I know, every city already has the option of getting rid of
their entire police force, so no such reform is needed. If I
understand the news correctly, the Minneapolis city council has voted
to do exactly that.

It should be fun to watch.

> I think you actually got to the root cause of the problem: Police
> UNIONS. If people really want the police (or, on a different note,
> the school systems) to change, then they have to de-UNIONIZE.
> This is the only way to be able to root out the bad apples. ...

> The whole thing about the left is HYPOCRISY. They won't fix the
> police because they can't admit that unionizing them was an
> unbelievably bad mistake. They won't fix the schools for the same
> reason.

This is exactly right. I listened to Shumer today rant about the
Republicans blocking "real" reform. That's a laugh. The unions,
which are almost always run by Democrats, will block every attempt at
"real" reform. There will be no reform because the Democratic
Party-run unions won't allow it.

I keep returning over and over and over to the same question: What
explains Chauvin's behavior? He had his knee on that person's head
for over eight minutes. How is that possible? What kind of
psychopathic mental state would cause him to do that? If he simply
wanted to kill the victim (and why would he want to?), he could have
done that quickly. Instead, he felt some kind of need to torture the
victim for eight minutes, and watch him die, as if in some kind of
horror movie (or an episode of the tv series Criminal Minds). So what
explains Chauvin's behavior?

And I keep returning to the same answer: Chauvin's behavior was common
practice in the Ku Klux Klan. Chauvin was imitating typical behavior
in the KKK, with the same kinds of motives and the same kind of
mentality. I still believe that there is some connection between
Chauvin and the KKK, since I believe that it's the only reasonable
explanation for his psychopathic behavior.

The larger point is that this kind of behavior is not going to be
stopped by defunding police or by passing a law in Congress. This is
behavior that is very deep in the American South, going back to the
KKK as it was formed at the end of the Civil War. There are still a
lot of Southerners pissed off because the slaves were freed.

*** 31-May-2020 World View: Racial Riots and the Ku Klux Klan
*** http://gdxforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=52443#p52443

[Navigator]

John,

There are a number of reports that the cop that killed Floyd knew him well. They both worked security at some club and had fights. Fights over Chauvin's manhandling of club customers. So there is an actual motive. He actually hated Floyd personally and wanted to hurt him.

[Navigator]

There is a way for cities to replace their police departments. It involves using the county and the Sherrif's office. You replace the police with an increase in the number of Sherrif's deputies. This is even better if the deputies are not unionized (most are not).

They all have the same training, meaning that they have been through law enforcement academies and all that.

A lot (if not most) crime lab stuff is done by the State police. If not, this could be rapidly expanded by giving them the facilities currently used by local police.

Just saying there is a way to get it done.

But doing away with law enforcement is NOT the answer. If there is no penalty or threat of a penalty for crime, you have actual anarchy. Of course, maybe that is what some people want.

[Xeraphim1]

The whole thing about the left is HYPOCRISY. They won't fix the police because they can't admit that unionizing them was an unbelievably bad mistake. They won't fix the schools for the same reason.

The reason is that if they ban police unions there is no reason to keep any other public union including teachers. The Democratic party is held hostage but public sector unions and would lose a huge chuck of their funding and volunteers if the unions go away. Look at what happened in Wisconsin when teachers didn't have to pay union dues to the teacher's unions there.

Follow the money.