The Church of Kharma Futures

The Rev's views on politics, events,faith, and the world. All content copyright Church of Kharma Future 2007-2015 All rights Reserved

Archive for June, 2009

End of Empire

Posted by revkharma on June 30, 2009

For nearly fifty years there were two competing empires in the world, with dramatically different worldviews. The Soviet Empire was bent on forcible domination, imposing a Marxist-socialist state on every nation. The American Empire was determined to export it’s worldview of state sponsored capitalism and nominally democratic government systems installed to replace  whatever previous system was in place.

The competition eventually ground down the Soviet system, which collapsed in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s. Many of the international supporters of that system migrated to various other political activities, notably environmentalism. During the last decade there has been somewhat of a resurgence of state sponsored socialism in the western hemisphere, particularly in Latin America.  Originally backed by Castro’s Cuba, then funded by the petrodollars of Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela, the movement has sought to blunt the strength of the American influence in the region.

Months ago,while George W. Bush was still president, I sat and mused one night about how the opponents of America could move steadily to bring about the collapse of the American Empire.  I was reading through some old writings and came across this piece, which I never posted.  It seems to be pretty appropriate to our current situation.

For what it’s worth, here’s my musings from last October, 2008


Ok, so let’s look at some things.

Let’s suppose one wishes to work now to undermine what remains of the USA (empire) after the collapse of the Soviet empire.

What are the weak points, where are the choke points.

Well, as we move from the late 1980’s forward, one clear thing emerges. People are led by ‘popular opinion’. The new god of America is the mythical “Democracy”. Recall how when the Chinese students protested against their autocratic rulers, they gained credibility with the west by erecting a small version of the Statue of Liberty. Only as you may remember, it was called the “goddess of Democracy”. This was the elevation of the concept which began with Wilson, of the USA as the bringer of Democracy to the world. Gradually we saw the replacement of references to the USA as “the Republic” with the fetishization of Democracy as the goal of everything. Now, those bent on replacing the constitutional system of the republic with a dictatorship need to gain the acceptance of the people. Mass communication, led by the emergence of the 24r hour cable news outlets drives mass hysteria. Social engineers can see that constant polls, reported as news over and over will tend to push public opinion rather than reflect it.  Recall the term used during the last several political campaigns of “Push Polling”. By routinely suggesting ideas, the mass media can drive perception.

Now, watch the last few years of reporting. After a terrorist attack on the USA, our military moves with lightning speed, and accomplished unprecedented deeds in theater after theater. Afghanistan was quieted, despite cries that we would fall victim, just as “the British in the 1800’s and the Soviets in the 1980’s”. Once that failed to play out, the media simply went quiet on the story. Then in Iraq, as the military campaign rolled up victory and success again and again, the individual behavior of some soldiers was distorted, and then portrayed as a ‘standard policy of evil’ enacted by a ‘rogue administration’. While the Bush administration worked around this, the press stole and published military documents, and praised such acts, previously (and quite accurately) described as treason.

When this too failed to deter, then the shibboleth of “world opinion’ was trotted out to bash the Americans. Nation after nation was presented as opposed to America. As the nations saw the results of ignoring the peril; riots in France, murder in Holland, bombs in Spain, ’honor killings’ all over the world, elections turned out the presumed left leaning governments, replacing them with center-right, pro American leadership.

However, ‘public opinion’ in the US was growing increasingly opposed to the policies of a successful government, as the media continued to tell gullible consumers of ‘news’ that what they saw was not reality.

The economy was continuing an unprecedented growth string, interrupted only by the infamous ‘dot com’ bubble and a brief hiccup following the 9-11 attacks.

However, surveys showed that as the party out of power and it’s craven allies in the media shouted once again that facts were not so, and reality was malleable, that opinion was moved against truth. A generation raised on situational ethics, believing that there is no fixed viewpoint of right and wrong could not argue against such illogic.

Despite strong economy, jobless rates at or below 5%, low inflation, and continued increase in annual GDP figures, elections were moved by screams of ‘the worst economy in a generation’.

Now that everyone believes that the economy is in the tank, it will follow. After all, much of the interconnected global economy is lubricated by confidence. Removing that confidence is the equivalent of sand in the gears. The result is the small road bump created by the sub prime mortgage fiasco becoming a sink-hole that sucks the American economy into a pit. Those who wished to replace a free market system with a centralized, socialist command economy simply needed to control the media outlets and those drivers of public opinion.

Fast forward as the US government, in the face of economic panic, and global pressure to stop what is increasingly beginning to be called a US contagion to the global economy, must accede to and embrace international controls on economics.

As the economy stumbles from blow upon blow, a single, small added pressure can then bring about vastly greater leveraged results.

Imagine the result, of the following scenario:

After the election of a leftist president, accompanied by a sympathetic congress, the US government begins to concentrate economic control in Washington. The economy continues to stagger along, with blame heaped on the evil capitalists, and robber barons of industry.

Somewhere in the world, perhaps in England or France, is a spectacular terrorist attack, perhaps the destruction of Trafalgar square in London, or the collapse of the Arc de Triomphe in Paris.

Taking this as a cue, the media in the US decry the culture of individuality and guns in America. Emergency powers are granted and gun confiscation begins. As the economy continues to collapse, Americans now more resentful than ever of the ‘over class’ of industry and government, stage insurrections and acts of resistance. In a rapid and accelerating pace, this action spreads across the nation.

The US government, now nearly bankrupt simply has neither the resources, nor the loyalty if it’s citizens to stop the disintegration of the country into warring factions.

We will see the dissolution of the USA into many, perhaps dozens of fractured republics, fiefdoms and warring enclaves. As the central engine of free market economics and free government disappears, socialist regimes expand power, and are subsequently subsumed by surging Muslim majorities in nation after nation.

The USA will not need to be conquered by Islam. The virus of socialism will rot the nation from its inside out, making the destruction of The Great Satan a moot point, made irrelevant by history and events.


For now, this is purely conjecture. For now. But tell me just how much of it you think is not probable. Tell me the flaw, please, show me that none of this is remotely possible. Because it’s a nightmare scenario that is likely to become a waking nightmare for all of us.


Posted in administrative power, bank takeover, Big Government, chaos, China, Civil liberties,, Democrats, diversions, economics, Global government, Government expansion, Government Power, Islam, Obama Administration | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

What is Obama thinking?

Posted by revkharma on June 29, 2009

Let’s look at some recent events here. There may be some instruction in the the nature and form of our President’s thinking.

Obama has reached out to those opposed to the political system embraced historically by the USA. Achmedinajad in Iran, Chavez in Venezuela, Lula in Brazil, etc. ( leftist thugs in the USA like the ‘New Black Panthers’ who had charges dropped just before they would have been convicted of illegal voter intimidation)

Now, look at recent events.

Israel’s new Prime Minister stands firm against Haman and Hezbolla. He refuses to kowtow to the conventional wisdom of ‘following the ‘peace process’. This is a process which has allowed terrorist organizations to gain more and more credibility while the legitimate security interests of a freely elected, liberty loving nation are tossed into the gutter.  Obama’s policies pressure Mr. Netanyahu to cede more land, surrender more freedom even in the face of an implacable foe who refuses even to grant Israel’s right to exist.

The election in Iran appears to have been massively fraudulent. While there was polling data in advance to indicate that the incumbent would win a close election, the results have been nearly universally condemned as entirely made up.

The people of Iran, seeing that their wishes are ignored protest. It takes days for the US president to respond. Even after it is clear that repression and violence are being deployed on a massive scale, Barack Obama cannot seem to rouse himself beyond token statements that ‘everyone should remain calm’. He refuses to make any statement of support for ‘democracy’ in Iran.

Next, the President of Honduras attempts to run a ‘referendum’ which will enable him to violate the constitution of his country and assume a second term. The Congress voted that this was illegal. The Supreme Court ruled that this was unconstitutional.

Yet he pursued the referendum anyway. Eventually the Supreme court ordered the Army to step in, and remove him from office and allow the leader of Congress to assume the presidency. Obama has stated that he is ‘deeply concerned’ by the news.

Why the difference? Why would Obama respond rapidly to one, and respond to the other only after pressure from political opponents as well as some allies?

The Thuocracy in North Korea tramples on any and all agreements to which it is a party. This has been the pattern for decades and multiple administrations have followed the dead ent of negotiations with them. Now Kim and his army detonate weapons, fire missiles and threaten to annihilate the US. In face of this, Obama says ‘there will be consequences.’

What I see here is a pattern. If the ‘incumbent’, who exercises authority, has such power threatened, then Obama will condemn it. Achmedinijad holds power. The opposition is attempting to remove him, to prevent him from continuing his agenda. Obama is opposed.

Zelaya in Honduras violates his constitution, and attempts to extend his term. The constitutional, legal authorities thwart him, and Obama supports him. He must be defended . Why does  it Obama chose some leaders to object to and gives others a pass? It seems that as long as someone maintains power, he is credited with the right to keep it, no matter the legal, moral or constitutional violations he committed to maintain that position of power.

Is he setting an international precedent? Is he attempting to set the stage for future actions in his own administration?

We shall see.

Posted in administrative power, global warming, Government expansion, Government Power, Israel, Obama Administration | Tagged: , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Idiots on Parade

Posted by revkharma on June 7, 2009

Relaxing this morning, I was sitting on the patio, reading the morning paper. Included in it is the weekly junk mail called Parade. Over the years this ‘journalistic endeavor’ has moved more and more to a parody than a magazine. The editors preach their liberal gospel even in the fawning celebrity gossip pages contained in the front.

This morning was an even wilder and more silly bit than I have seen in quite a while. It’s easy to dismiss it as junk and move on, but I think this takes more thought and deserves more attention than the usual tripe they print. Buried amidst stories trumpeting Hollywood stars ( Did you know Kyra can actually DANCE??? and Suri is well dressed!) comes something called ( now don’t laugh) ” The Intelligence Report”. The gem on display today is headlined:

Despite Recent Violence, Gun Laws Are Softening

The bit features a photo of a fierce faced woman apparently at a gun range. Of course to make it interesting she’s dolled up in some sort of cleavage baring  shimmery top. ( Imagine the discomfort should a wayward spent casing find its way there!) The story goes on to decry the fact that so many states are actually allowing law abiding Americans to exercise their second amendment rights! Worse still, they say, is that the congress has ( oh the HORROR) allowed Americans to carry their own weapons in federal parks, pursuant to local state laws.

The editors use an old diversionary tactic in the hit piece. In one line they say:

While it wouldn’t necessarily lead to more mass shootings, they say,

In the next paragraph they quote another expert, who clearly links any guns to mass shootings:

“We have the equivalent of a Virginia Tech massacre every day in this country. It’s just not all in one place,” says Daniel Webster of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research.

We could dance all day over the silliness of this drivel, but the more serious point is clear. Any time there is any advance in protecting freedom, individual freedom in particular, the media will do whatever it can, wherever it can to attack it.  The anti gun advocate quoted above works for a university. Like many Johns Hopkins will benefit from significant federal funding for it’s research.  Mr. Webster’s particular research is funded by the fiercely anti gun Joyce Foundation.   There is a deeply rooted web of such groups which work diligently to portray individual rights in general, and Second Amendment rights in particular as dangerous to the greater good.

The headline of the piece is a clear indicator of the disconnect between reason and advocacy.  Perhaps  someone with a calmer head, and slightly better powers of reason would see the link. The reason that governments are heeding the call by citizens to remove restrictions on a fundamental right  is simply that individuals wish to protect themselves rather than wait for the bankrupt government to do so. Concerned citizens will do what it takes, especially when the government which confiscates so much of wealth returns less and less to those who actually earned it.

Oh, one more thing, there’s a link at the end of the article. Parade is asking for comments. Anyone wanna send them some thought provoking critique of the pile of goo they printed this week?

Keep the Faith!

The Rev

Posted in Civil liberties, Constitution, gun rights, media coverage, Politics, Right to Carry, RKBA, Second Amendment | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »