White privilege, race war and reforms

I saw on the internet this expression: "white privilege".

So I searched on the internet, on wikipedia it is about that the Europeans privileges had in the colonies and in US

It seems that the source for this term now is this article from 1987 by Peggy Macintosh.

Few remarks: if you were born in Sweden from Swedish parents, you will have the same privileges as in the article and you can call them "Swedish privileges".

They are privileges coming from majority.

Every country thinks that they are the top of civilization especially those who had colonies. Portuguese are proud of their explorers, Spanish of their conquest, Brits,French, Russian, Chinese, Arabs, Indians all think that their culture is the best, and not all are whites.

True being inside a culture is blinding you to the outside.

What disturbs me is not the findings that are mostly true but the solution:

Abolish the privilege.

Very communist. Why some people to live well when we can all live bad.

If you treat the white people how the black are treated this doesn't mean that you improve the life of blacks.

You must improved the life of black to have the same 'privileges'.

This idea of 'white privilege' can heat up a race war, because white people can see it as threat to their rights, and black people might think we are living bad because  white are living better.

And black and whites will fight one each other, and those in power will remain in power and suck the money from both races.

The movie 'Blue collar' from 1978 describes very well what will happen.

Maybe the use of excessive force in American police is due to overwork,fear and conditioning to react violently.

There are several causes:

First they are a lot of guns in US.

Second they are a lot of drugs.

Third all he psychiatric patients are on the streets since '80.

Forth we have tradition from Wild West, elected sheriffs, and shoot first ask later.

Fifth the are some immunity for officers. I don't have sources, but in the '80 was a court decision in which some officers had immunity, so bye bye equality in front of the law.

Sixth, the jury is biased always. Think of OJ Simpson.

Seventh there is no minimum wage, so people must take 2 jobs to work.

Eight they are pockets of poverty from which one cannot get out.

Solutions:

You can't take the gun away, second amendment.

But you can treat drug addicts in clinics, put person with psychiatric diseases in hospitals.

You can guarantee a minimum wage.

Some jobs will disappear because they will be more expensive, but instead 2 people having two jobs each,everyone will have one job.

Free college education, or if don't like free because as an American you learn that nothing is free, education that is paid after you gain enough money, like in Australia.Free college will rise many smart kids from poverty.

Stop H1B visa's corporations use them to bring programmers from overseas, for 'training', but in fact for low paying jobs.

Abolish all immunity privileges.

Federal oversee of the local police. Train the police to hod suspects in a safe manner, and to deescalate.

It seems to me that the Minneapolis police was not well trained. Chauvin was a sadistic bastard but the other 2 police officers that sat on Floyd's body, were not trained.In order to pin down a human body is enough to put your weight on the pelvis not on the thorax.

But I expect that everything will be about the race and none of these ideas will be implemented.

It will be a war between India and China

Covid 19 pandemic has created chaos in many countries, also in China.

But China has the advantage of producing 30% of the world goods by quantity and every type of product. So chines doctors are having professional protected gear while western doctors had to improvise.

Putin used the chaos from Ukraine to annex Crimea.

Japanese in 1937 use the chaos from China to invade it.

Why China shouldn't do the same ?

Xi presidency was shaken by the pandemic, a national war will strength the unity of the country and dissenters will be silenced.

Milosevic has done this in Yugoslavia, the Argentinian junta did it 1986 and occupied Falklands.

The economic success was the silk glove that covered the iron fist of the communist party. But the glove is worn down, and the steel is more visible than ever. The communist ideology that made everybody equals was thrown to the dust bin of history when Deng Xiaoping said in '80: "Get rich"

Without ideology and without money to bribe people, CCP was left only with nationalism. And nationalism needs an enemy.

What enemy will China pick to fight ?

It seems that they are in good relations with Russia, we can exclude them.

They can go to the east and take Taiwan, and risk a naval warfare with US,Japan and other allies.

In naval warfare the technology is winning the battle.

In 1860 opium war few British Iron clad ship sunk all chines fleet.

In a war on sea China's strength in numbers is useless.

On east China has the economic heart,the majority of the population and of the economy, it is enough a missile to hit a power-plant and you can shut down a 10 million people city.

On the west it has India.

Between the Indian border and Beijing it is the scarcely populated Tibetan plateau.

New-Delhi is closer to the border.

It will be a land base war so China can deploy all its infantry and air-force.

There are people in Kashmir who want independence from India, and can offer information and guerilla support to Chinese.

Pakistan an ally of China, wants the region also.

There were 3 wars between China in India in region.

Conquering Kashmir region, China strengthens the ties with Pakistan, it can make an oleo-duct with Iran, and can have access to Indian Ocean.

The advantage for India is that is a mountainous region and can be easily defended.

It will be a regional war or a world war ?

If US decides to attack China in SE Asia ? Or at least to blockade the ports ?

A blockade on ports will reduce the imports of oil,iron ore and copper.

If Xi won't back because he can lose everything and Trump will not back-up either things will warm up and escalate.

US wanted to remove Assad because the wanted Russia out of Syria, and the civil war still continues today.

US can attack China coast, with losses but China cannot attack US coast without ballistic missiles.

The US has spread its economy and cities on 2 coasts, China has everything concentrated on east coast.It is more vulnerable.

US has no problem with food supply, China has a reduced arable land.

When e everything will be directed to the army, a new famine will emerge in China.

Communist party controls China and the anti-war movement can be suppressed in the bud.

US cannot control its democracy, people are tired of wars. The are worn by Afghanistan and Irak. US army is based on volunteers, China on conscripts.

If US doesn't finish in 1 or 2 years the conflict then will sue for peace, and will lose SE Asia. It will be a second Vietnam.

A Chines proverb says: "If 2 tigers are fighting one is dead and the other badly wounded"

IF China,US and India will collapse what will happen with the world ?

The members of NATO, already pay US for their safety,Mr. Trump

Donald Trump often declared that NATO in an old alliance the members should pay US for security provided.
NATO membership doesn't mean that all countries will receive free weapons from US. They have to pay for their planes,tanks and rockets.
Below is a list with planes bought by NATO allies.The planes are the most expensive items and they are a good indicator of how much the US armament industry has sold in that countries.

• Albania
• Belgium 60 planes F16,10 transport plane Lockheed C-130 Hercules

• Bulgaria
• Canada 61 c-130 transport planes 

• Croatia
• Czech Republic
• Denmark 77 F16 planes

• Estonia
• France (has its own aircrafts)
• Germany (has its own aircrafts)
• Greece 170 F16 planes + 17 c-130 transport planes

• Hungary 3 Boeing C-17 Globemaster III

• Iceland
• Italy 34 F16 planes (leased): $777 million/10years+ 10 F35 planes

• Latvia
• Lithuania
• Luxembourg
• Netherlands 2 F35 planes and 35 to be delivered,61 F16 planes existing 216 bought,4 Lockheed C-130H-30 Hercules,3 Boeing C-17 Globemaster III

• Norway 74 F16 planes,10 F35 planes 

• Poland 48 F16 planes 

• Portugal 45 F16 planes

• Romania 5 C-130 transport planes ,6 F16 bought from Portugal

• Slovakia
• Slovenia
• Spain 13 C-130 transpor planes

• Turkey 250 F16 planes

• United Kindgdom 14 F35 planes

As we can see except France and Germany who have money and industry for producing their armament and they can provide security for the alliance, and excepting cash strapped countries, all other allies are customers of the US armament industry.
In addition to the planes the allies bought also spare parts, licenses, payed for trainings and bought equipment for land forces.

So if US will leave NATO, they will leave a lot of customers who will buy European made planes as Eurofighter ,Saab or Mirage.

Another interesting point is that the defense of UK,Netherlands,Italy and Norway is depending of F35 plane, so canceling this plane will determine these countries to find another supplier, and US will lose money and jobs.


In my opinion even a baby is better president as Trump: a baby doesn't know to speak and cannot affect the NATO security with stupid declarations, but most important a baby is cute.

Finnally Russia it is at the Mediterranean sea

In 1856 the Crimean war was fought to keep Russia out of Eastern Mediterranean sea.

In 1967 after the six day war Soviet Union was ready to send its army in Middle East to help its allies Syria and Egypt, but it was persuaded not to by the US threat of a nuclear war.

In 2015 US watches how Russia is sending troops in Syria to fight ISIS (maybe with its silent agreement).
It is a second victory after the Iran nuclear deal. The main supplier of nuclear technology for Iran was Russia. Allowing to Iran to have a nuclear program is opening a new market for Russia, who can diversify its revenues.So either you buy Iranian or Russian oil, the money goes to Putin.

A third victory can be, that Russia has its army in a area rich in oil, and can control the supply. An extensive conflict in Middle East will increase the price, and Russia can replenish its gold coffers by selling oil at higher price.
Maybe after they finish off with ISIS in Syria they discover some ISIS fighters in Irak and go there to make some order. (The Iraq people will regret Americans, after they will meet the Russian harsh rule) .
And which is the neighbour of Iraq? Saudi Arabia ? The main competitor on the oil market, and the number one sponsor for terrorism in Russia?
Will USA help it's Arab ally against Russia? They will risk a nuclear war for co nationals of Bin Laden?
The Saudi Arabia in this case is alone, Russia doesn't care about other Islamic nations. It doesn't buy anything from them, it sells them only old weapons. Pakistan will not dare to launch nuclear missiles to defend Saudi Arabia, because it will be obliterated, by Russian or Indian nuclear rockets.
Who will help Saudi Arabia? Europe? No, after the recent wave of propaganda against the Islamic invasion no politician from Europe will dare to defend them in public.
(Very good work Kremlin propaganda office, but a little advice: tell your people to criticise from time to time Russia because it is too obvious).
Anyway Europe is disunited, they don't have a solution to the refugee problem which will become more and more critical, and it will be affected by the high oil prices.
If Russia will move toward Middle East , it will be capable to maintain the Eastern Ukraine?
Russia will be so involved in Middle East conflict that it will consume its resources and make a draw in Ukraine?
Or the turmoil in Middle East will affect Kiev backers and Ukraine wil remain in the orbit of Moscow?
A chinese scholar, after the unification of China by Huang Di said that the rulers who are good at winning wars, cannot make a country prosper during peace time, because the wars are won using cruelty and wile, while a country prospers when it is kindness and rule of law.
Putin's clique is not good at making Russia prosperous, but they are good at war.
Europe on the other hand has a good political bureaucracy which administers well the resources but it is bad to at taking fast decisions during time of crisis. EU must reform itself if wants to survive.

Fighting Russia from your armchair 2: More useful idiots

I read in satirical newspaper Catavencii a an article by Doru Bucsu, in which condemns the aggressive attitude of president Basescu toward Russia, and says that it is our fault that we don't have better diplomatic relations with Russia and deeper economic ties.
Seen what is happening with Russia ban on European agricultural products, I am glad that we don't have big exports in Russia. In fact we shouldn't have deeper economic ties with countries were the will of the rulers is stronger than the law and your products can be banned at wish.
Regarding diplomatic relationships, how can he have good relations with a neighbour that threatens us with nuclear bombing in case we want to protect our country and allies from ballistic missiles?
How shall we deal with a character as Dimitri Rogozin who threaten that he will come back in Romania at a board of Tupolev bombardier?
This opinion that the we, the weaker country we are guilty for the actual situation, (or how I read on a comment: "... the small countries are guilty for starting war")  is the syndrome of blame the victim, in which the victims are responsible for crimes. So the Egyptians are guilty that they rose against a corrupt regime and they troubled the Middle East, and Ukranians that they have done the same and troubled Europe.
A good article regarding the blame victim fallacy is here.

Regarding victims if you are cornered by a bully, the worst thing it to be submissive, because you encourage him to come close to attack you, and by retreating you lose you opportunities to attack. If the bully sees that you are ready for fight, he will stay out of range of your kick for example,
In a fight first it is mental fight then a physical fight. If you lose the mental fight, you will lose it for sure the physical one.
So if we want to win the next war with Russia we must prepare mentally for the battle.

Another article in category useful idiots working for Russia, made me think about different views of the conflict from US and from rest of the world.
America thinks that it is so powerful that it can do whatever it wants, but the down side is that the critics of US are blaming it for everything wrong on the world, and Russians take advantage of that.

First of all US cannot do whatever it wants, see Ukraine case, so it cannot be blamed for everything that is happening. It can be blamed that is not pursuing strategic long terms goals, but concedes at the interests of corporations (see Latin America), or simply withdrawing from a situation without solving it (see Afghan withdrawal, abandonment hmong tribes in Laos, abandonment of democracy movement in Egypt)
The US cannot be blamed that in the Iraq chaos Shia and Sunni wanted to settle some scores.
The current situation is caused by the fact that Iraq society as most of the arab societies is composed of tribes that compete for resources. Once the oil resources were freed from Sadam grip the fought has started.
The US didn't need bombs in market squares. Those who put bombs are responsible.
The Sadam Hussein state was falling, sooner or late and the violence would burst, but US wanted to control things in Middle East, to grab the Iraq oil and to control the oil bought by China (the same is doing Russia with the gas and Crimea).
So they precipitate the things but the tensions were there ready to sprung.
They over estimated the support of Iraqis for Americans, and they underestimated the influence of tribal organisations.
The Iraqis were disappointed because they expected to be freed by americans in first Gulf War, but Bush senior kept his promise to Gorbatschev the president of Soviet Union that he will not occupy Iraq.
(You can blame now US that they keep their promise.)
This disinterest in Iraqis fate and this lack for forward thinking led to the second war and the current situation in which US is shy to respect its written commitment to the Ukrainian integrity.

One thing we must learn from these events (Ukraine and Middle East):

Bears are more powerful than bees, they like honey, this means that the bees should have been gone.
But the small creatures can chase a bigger predator with their small sting if they are work as a swarm.

US went to Iraq and it was stung, now it is Russia's turn to be stung in Ukraine.