False Pretenses to soothe the Rank-and-File

It is understandable that when a paradigm has worked for a time, you would be reluctant to change it even when it starts to weaken on delivering what it has promised. That's because you hope, or even believe, that the weakness is only temporary, and that things will soon go back to normal.

But when things fail to go to normal, or they get worse as demonstrated by your lagging behind events that keep racing past you, hanging on to the old paradigm becomes anachronistic. This, in fact, is the condition that the Jews brought to America. Two articles written on the subject of Iran, show how Jewish anachronism is playing itself out on the domestic level, and how it is playing at the foreign policy level.

One article came under the title: “Terrorism is making Europe think again about appeasing Iran,” written by Benny Avni and published on January 22, 2019 in the New York Post. The other article came under the title: “Marking four decades of Iranian decline,” Written by Ilan Berman, and published on January 24, 2019 in The Washington Times.

To better understand what’s wrong with those articles, we need to understand two things. First, there is the American doctrine that says: “Politics stops at the water's edge.” Second, there is the paradigm that worked for the nations that caught the Industrial Revolution at the start, and grew their economies organically in conjunction with the development of their industries ... and yet does not apply as well for the developing economies.

Before the Jews became influential in America, the paradigm adhered to by the political parties, was to the effect that they could attack each other all they want, as long as they did it at home. Once they left America and found themselves in a public forum in a foreign country, they did not snipe at each other across the ocean. But then the Jews loomed large in the country, and they blurred the line between their political activities in America and the country's diplomatic activities overseas. In time, the two activities were fused together, resulting in the old paradigm of distinguishing between home and abroad, being discarded.

As to economics, the old paradigm was that an industrial economy could only grow organically. That is, new and better production machines happened only because they developed in concert with the science, technology and engineering that were required to invent and build those machines. That's what made the economies grow. In fact, this is still true for the economies that stand at the leading edge of industry.

But that's not the case for the developing economies that must buy production machines from the advanced economies. To make their system work, the finance ministries of developing countries find themselves compelled to run two economies simultaneously. There is the local economy that's run with the local currency; and there is the foreign trade that is conducted with foreign currencies. The problem with authors that discuss economics without understanding this reality, is that they end up talking nonsense.

So then, when reading the Benny Avni and Ilan Berman articles, we should keep in mind that the Jews have fused the local politics and foreign diplomacy of America, when the two should be kept separate. We should also keep in mind that when talking about a developing economy, we must allow for the possibility that the local economy can do well even if the foreign trade is going through a difficult time.

Going over Benny Avni's article, you'll detect the fusing of America's local and foreign issues in the fact that America's foreign policy is conducted, not in a manner that serves the interests of America, but in a manner that serves the interests of Israel. This happens because the Jewish politics in America is entirely devoted to making America work for Israel. This is why America loses all the time, and Israel wins some of the time.

Going over Ilan Berman's article, you'll find it mind boggling that a writer would say Iran has experienced decline for the past four decades when in reality, it has advanced from being a backward Third World nation to become a nuclear power and space faring nation in that span of time.

So, you analyze how the writer is presenting his case, and find that he is giving credit to a fictitious Iranian decline to America's ill-advised sanctions whose aim is to wreak havoc on Iran's foreign trade. But the reality is that Iran has a dynamic local economy that's braving the Judeo-American effort to ruin it. In fact, Iran is winning this confrontation and getting stronger not weaker.