Politics is more like war than most realize…
The virtues of markets over politics…
Robert Kiyosaki’s new warning reveals the shocking truth about the economy they don’t want you to know. Don’t be left behind. Click here to get his urgent action plan now!
Dear Reader,
I have yet to comment upon last week’s assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
I was not certain how to come at it.
Such events generally generate prodigious amounts of heat — yet little light.
I will simply observe that the youthful Mr. Kirk was a political figure.
And politics is a form of warfare.
In this particular instance, warfare between the “Left” and the “Right.”
Politics carries with it the hatreds, vilifications, propagandas, the good vs. evil dichotomies of war itself.
‘Donald Trump is a Nazi!’... ‘Charlie Kirk is a fascist!’... ‘Kamala Harris is a communist!’
Are these not war cries?
Politics Needs Devils
Such denunciations raise the blood. They bubble the hormones and summon the adrenaline… as do war cries.
Thus politics thrives on the identification of devils.
And its use for devils vastly exceeds its use for angels.
That is because angels do not get the blood up. Angels do not bubble the hormones.
Devils do get the blood up. Devils do bubble the hormones.
And any political movement hates its devils more than it loves its angels.
Mr. Carl von Clausewitz maintained, famously, that war is the extension of politics by other means.
Yet is it not true that politics is the extension of war by other means?
SPONSORED: BANYAN HILL
While everyone's chasing the same AI plays...
Reagan's former advisor has identified 3 companies positioned to explode when this news breaks.
George Gilder's track record is legendary. He gave Steve Jobs the iPhone idea in 1990. He foresaw Qualcomm’s rise BEFORE it soared 2,600% in one year.
Both sounded ludicrous at the time, but there’s a reason he’s been called “America’s #1 Futurist.”
Now he believes a rare "super convergence" event will create more millionaires in the next few years than we've seen in decades.
A bombshell announcement scheduled just days from now could trigger it all.
Politics Is Founded on Coercion
As I have argued before:
Politics disunites, divides, disrupts, discombobulates — as war itself disunites, divides, disrupts and discombobulates.
Assume an election.
50.1% of voters yank a lever for X. 49.9% pull one for Y.
Thus X claims the laurel. He proceeds instantly against the desires, wishes and interests of the vanquished 49.9%.
Each day they live they must cringe, wither and chafe beneath X’s atrocities… helpless as worms on fishermen’s hooks.
Yes, there is always the next election. Yet how many years off?
And what if X or some other X wins that election?
Politics Engages the Primitive Brain
Modern neuroscience reveals that politics activates the primitive “fight-or-flight” brain centers of the limbic system.
Politics sends the reasoning centers of the neocortex into suspension.
That is, politics reduces a man’s political opponent to a creature hostile to his survival.
He is not a political opponent but a blood-questing lion, a murderous tiger, a venomous snake.
Or, later in man’s evolutionary development, a member of a warring tribe.
The tribal instinct yet remains. It is embedded deep within the neurology.
Thus politics — even now — reduces inevitably to a mortal contest between “us” and “them.”
Mr. Kirk’s assassin considered the conservative a member of a hostile tribe.
He yielded to the primitive impulses that settle disputes not through reason… but violent action.
Peaceful Markets vs. Warlike Politics
I have previously compared the peace of markets to the violence — actual or implied — of politics.
I maintained that free markets lack entirely the violent combats central to politics.
They are scenes of peace, tolerance… and justice. They impose no coercive will upon the electorally vanquished.
They do not engage the primitive brain centers. And the “fight-or-flight” dynamic is unknown to them.
I once suggested that readers consider, for example, a theoretical market contest.
Competing parties must choose between Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola.
The competing factions select their product.
Does one faction injure, usurp or ruffle the interests of the rival faction… as it does in politics?
It does not. Each faction has simply expressed a preference that leaves the other unmolested.
Multiply this one example countless times and in countless directions.
McDonald’s vs. Burger King, Honda vs. Ford, Nike vs. Adidas, Walmart vs. Target… it is all one.
What emerges is a picture of majestic peace and serenity.
If Only
Prior to the murderous act, chain Mr. Kirk’s assassin to Mr. Kirk himself. Compel each to choose between any product on the free and open market.
The assassin may razz Mr. Kirk’s ghastly and barbarian tastes. Mr. Kirk may in turn razz his assassin’s effete and supercilious tastes.
Yet neither would have attempted to dragoon or bludgeon the other.
Each would have conceded the other’s freedom to vote his own way, as he might, according to his liver and lights.
Thus peace would have prevailed between them.
Now enter politics. Now enter the paranoid primitive brain.
The assassin regarded Mr. Kirk’s politics a threat to his tribe — a threat that must be scotched.
Thus he reached for the rifle.
We must recognize of course that a mere handful of zanies resort to political violence.
For the vast majority, the reasoning centers keep the savage fight-or-flight system in a benign state of quiescence.
Thus they are suitable for civilization and civilization’s blessings.
The Young and Liberal Are More Likely to Condone Political Violence
Why precisely did the assassin select the violent option?
I do not know. Yet it appears that one political cohort blesses political violence more than its opposite.
What is more, the youthful cohort blesses political violence more than the aging cohort.
Reports polling agency YouGov:
Liberal Americans are more likely than conservatives to defend feeling joy about the deaths of political opponents. 16% of liberals say this is usually or always acceptable, including 24% of those who say their ideology is very liberal... That compares to 4% of conservatives and 7% of moderates…
Younger Americans are also about twice as likely as older Americans to defend feeling joy at political opponents' deaths…
Younger and more liberal Americans are more likely than older or more conservative Americans to say political violence can sometimes be justified…
I do not know how to conclude this piece. I shall therefore conclude it here.
I add simply:
"Requiescat in pace," Charlie Kirk.
Regards,
Brian Maher
for Freedom Financial News
P.S. Wall Street and its financial media have convinced the masses to invest massively in stocks. Why? Because it benefits Wall Street.
But Old Money invests in assets like real estate.
“Rich Dad” Robert Kiyosaki figured that out years ago. He used that knowledge to make himself a fortune.
But Robert says that today's market is different. It’s more dangerous.
He says the old rules don't apply when the government stops propping up prices and demographic reality kicks in.
That's why Robert has created a new Smart Investor's Guide — to show you the income streams that can generate serious revenue EVEN during crashes.
It involves powerful strategies that few investors even know about. You should take advantage of them while you can.