Sputnik Moment Or Visigoth Moment?

I don't watch much TV news. My father watches CNBC all day. He pointed out a new fnord phrase, "Sputnik Moment". The USA is much closer to having a "Visigoth Moment" than a "Sputnik Moment".

It's interesting to watch the birth of a new fnord phrase. The President (or other State leader) says the new fnord phrase. The mainstream media then incessantly repeats the new fnord phrase. This reinforces how brilliant the President is, because he was the first to say the new fnord phrase. It's amazingly well-scripted.

Two new fnord phrases are "Sputnik Moment" and "Win the Future!". A new fnord phrase must be somewhat original, because slaves become resistant to the old lie. Obama can't promise "Hope and Change!" anymore! A new fnord phrase must be vague and optimistic.

"Read my lips, no new taxes!" was a lousy fnord phrase, because it made a specific promise.

Corporate executives use "focus groups" to test a new brand of cereal. Similarly, politicians use "focus groups" to test new fnord phrases! I was shocked when I heard that politicians use focus groups to test their slogans! The "manufacturing consent" process is very scientific!

From my point of view, it's all a lie. It doesn't affect me. However, State speechwriters agonize over every word and inflection. They are trying to achieve the right mass brainwashing effect.

"Sputnik Moment" refers to the Russian satellite launch in 1957. This made the USA look stupid. There was a push to invest in science and catch up to the Russians.

There's a lot of important differences, comparing now to 1957. The USA is moving all its factories and manufacturing technology to China. There is much higher inflation. "Peer review" is about playing politics more than scientific merit. There is much higher corruption. There are more taxes and regulations. After WWII, Europe was in ruins; this was a huge economic advantage for the USA.

In the current USA, stealing is way more profitable than working. No political slogan will correct that problem.

A lot of the post-WWII growth was fake growth. Large corporations grew. Small businesses were ruined. During the Great Depression and New Deal, most people went from farmers and small business owners to wage slaves. There was massive consolidation of economic power. This gave the illusion of economic growth.

After WWII, the battle was between corporate executives and small business owners. Via State power and State subsidies, the small businesses were bankrupted or ruined. For example, the estate tax forces a small business owner to sell, rather than pass the business to his children. This sale is typically to a larger corporation like Berkshire Hathaway. This puchase is financed by a bank, i.e. with newly-printed money. Via their money-printing power and high taxes, the banksters gained control of nearly every business.

Corporate executives gave semi-decent treatment to workers, so they could bankrupt smaller competitors. With smaller competitors gone, now the corporate executives can turn on their workers. Moving factories offshore takes away worker bargaining power. I suspect that offshore factories are less efficient when you consider transportation costs. State subsidies make offshoring profitable. State restriction of the market makes it hard/impossible for displaced workers to start new businesses. If you're fired from a factory, you can't easily start a new business that competes with your former employer.

One key corporate philosophy is "The worker is an interchangeable cog. The real value is in the equipment and the State-backed monopoly." When you move your factory to another country, you're giving them all your key knowledge.

Nobody in the USA knows how to make anything anymore. For example, do you know anyone who knows how to make an incandescent light bulb? That might be a lucrative agorist business opportunity, after State thugs ban then.

After WWII, the Bretton-Woods agreement places some limits on inflation. Now, there's no limit to paper inflation. Banks profits are now a *HUGE* percentage of the economy. A growing percentage of S&P profits are bank profits. That's pure theft, and not legitimate profit. Those excessive profits come at the expense of the productive sector of the economy. Also, that profit number refers to bank *SHAREHOLDER* profit. Banks spend as much on salary/bonus as they give in profits to shareholders. You should *DOUBLE* that number, if you include bankster salaries and bonuses as money stolen.

This rate of bankster theft is not sustainable. It's much higher now than it was after WWII. Banksters have this huge State-backed cash cow. They will always profitably lobby to block reform.

After WWII, there was massive growth in universities. A college degree became a requirement for a decent job. Enrollment skyrocketed. There was massive faculty growth. Anyone with a PhD was guaranteed a decent job.

In the present, tenured faculty numbers are flat or shrinking, although schools still graduate a large number of PhDs per year. A PhD no longer is a guarantee of a decent job. If you're *LUCKY*, a PhD gets 5-7 years of postdocs and then a tenure-track job. Most are not as lucky.

The "peer review" process is a ****sucking contest, rather than genuine science. For the top economics journals, most of the referees are current or former Federal Reserve employees. "Global warming" propagandists brag about corrupting the peer review process to silence dissenting views.

After WWII, "scientist" or "engineer" was a respected career. Now, everyone wants to be a bankster, a trader, a hedge fund manager, a lawyer, or an MBA. Everyone wants to be the middleman/parasite. Nobody wants to be the guy who actually does the work.

For example, in the original "Flash Gordon", Dr. Zarkov was presented as a competent guy. In the most recent remake, he was presented as a sniveling coward.

After WWII, the role model was Einstein. Now, the role model is Snooki. (If the mainstream media incessantly talks about someone, that's "manufacturing a celebrity".)

The current USA resembles the fall of the Roman Empire, more than post-WWII USA. Inflation is approaching hyperinflation. There is flagrant rampant corruption. It isn't sustainable.

A clever speech isn't going to fix things. "Sputnik moment" and "Win the future!" are pretty pathetic fnord phrases. It's a predictable cycle. You invent a new fnord phrase when people get disgusted with the old one, and then hype it incessantly.

There no longer is any "rule of law" in the USA. Many insiders know that it's going to be over soon, and they're stealing as much as they can in the meantime.

The USA is much closer to having a "Visigoth Moment" than a "Sputnik Moment". There's no way the President can reverse things, even if he wanted to. If the President got too serious about slashing corruption, he'd be Kennedy-ed. Fortunately, the President is crippled by his false beliefs and parasitic/psychopathic advisors. He'l make superficial changes. It's too late to do anything meaningful. It's too late to prevent the collapse.