California this week declared its independence from the federal government’s feeble efforts to fight Covid-19 — and perhaps from a bit more. The consequences for the fight against the pandemic are almost certainly positive. The implications for the brewing civil war between Trumpism and America’s budding 21st-century majority, embodied by California’s multiracial liberal electorate, are less clear.The analysis is entirely partisan as usual, but California going its own way is a perfectly acceptable solution.
Speaking on MSNBC, Governor Gavin Newsom said that he would use the bulk purchasing power of California “as a nation-state” to acquire the hospital supplies that the federal government has failed to provide. If all goes according to plan, Newsom said, California might even “export some of those supplies to states in need.”
“Nation-state.” “Export.”
UPDATE: The sound is different here.
Apparently they've never heard of the California Air Resource Board. They'll be back soo though, once the pension system implodes.
ReplyDeleteThe Bloomberg piece doesn't really match up with what the Governor said. His reference to "nation-state" is not what Bloomberg presents it as. Also, the Governor is clear that this is not a knock on the Feds. This piece is more even-handed (or perhaps "rational" is the word):
ReplyDeletehttps://www.desertsun.com/story/news/2020/04/08/coronavirus-california-newsom-announces-1-b-purchase-plan-supplies/2972537001/
In the interview itself, the Governor makes it clear they are going to be importing the masks from Asia. I don't know who has this equipment to spare anywhere in the world except perhaps Taiwan (because they've done a good job with COVID-19) and China. Where will this come from; how much will California pay; why are they able to obtain this when the rest of the world is hurting for equipment? It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Here's the actual interview:
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/newsom-california-has-deal-for-200-million-masks-per-month-81763397587
Its perfectly acceptable until you look at a map, then it becomes unacceptable at any cost. A price the winner will extract from the loser in a war for the Continent.
ReplyDeleteFor we need nothing from California but our flank on the Pacific. The people were always unnecessary and are at present troublesome.
The wars of American reunification will make the prior struggles trifles in comparison.
The winner will never settle for less than Atlantic to Pacific, no competent government would. Ever.
Oh they can go, but that is not the path to peace.
Its about land and resources and the matchless geography guarding them, and the matchless resources of these lands.
That is our strength; not faded parchment.
Whoever wins will be important, indeed likely the master of earth. As we are.
That’s our magic, our dirt.
At any price we keep it.!
I have no desire to be master of the earth. I hear bad things about the true holder of that title. I just want to be free, to flourish while I may, and to deliver liberty intact to my children and grandchildren.
ReplyDeleteBut if Elise is right, and she usually is, the remarks were misunderstood by the Bloomberg analyst.
I too have no desire to master anything but our lands, truly we never needed the rest.
ReplyDeleteBut our lands we master - or others from Europe or Asia WILL you see.
They’re not as shy and modest as we are.
So we don’t really have a choice, even if after the century of war and genocide we call “Progress” to master them - or face long wars and genocide ourselves.
You see; Sovereignty means exactly that - these Sovereign little Americas could and for survivals sake would form foreign alliances.
Then we are in at best a far worse position than we are now - Sir bluntly the geography of North America demands sea to sea.
You may not be interested, but others are very interested not in you - but your lands and mine.
Cheers
Looks like California is trying to secede like S Carolina.
ReplyDeleteThe only way to have a chance of being sure no one else is our master is for us to be the master of everything. We always will have enemies seeking to conquer and enslave us--some to exterminate us. We cannot ever let them be our equals.
ReplyDeleteEric Hines
But if Elise is right, and she usually is, the remarks were misunderstood by the Bloomberg analyst.
ReplyDeleteIf I am right, I do not think "misunderstood" is the correct word. I am not naive but I find myself truly at a loss to understand the many people in the media who are deliberately fostering division and quarreling with apparently no understanding that our best hope for getting out of this with as little damage and suffering as possible is to hope that everyone involved does the best job he or she can, and to encourage everyone involved to work together. (Which I know is not a new sentiment/understanding here.)
Eric,
ReplyDeleteWe cannot let them be our equals on this continent, that is certain.
Honestly if we were off their borders they'd lose interest in us, it's logistically impossible to invade over the seas or the polar caps.
Which is why: 1] we must get off their borders and 2] they must never be on ours, especially in North America so 3] we must remain in Union.
Elise: Don't be lost: it's simple malice.
They mean harm, we know because they do harm.
Their policy is simple: Malice Oblesse.
I recall reading, in a history of the Gurkha's, how livid the English Officers were at the Press, when the Partition occurred- how they would wantonly, deliberately exacerbate violence with lurid descriptions of atrocities from all sides. Pouring gasoline on the fire.
ReplyDeleteReporters, like politicians, should be decimated from time to time, to keep the excesses down to a dull roar.
Some year's ago, I heard a newscast. Apparently some local, predominately black church had burnt down. The report was filled with repeated speculation that some right wing nazi supremacist group had torched it. Calling in every stereotype in the book and every church burning from 50 years ago,without one shred of evidence.
I was so pissed off I called up the writer on the phone and read him the riot act. "Well, it COULD have been them bad boys....". Not good enough, you jerk- you are slandering, speculating, and promoting this idea of guilt, with no evidence what so ever. I don't think he ever really conceded, a few days later the fire was traced to an overloaded electrical box.
Most reporters are scum. Utter, ignorant scum with an ideological axe to grind.
I have no idea if Bloomburp is being accurate or not with the Governor's sentiments, but if California wants its independence, well, the first thing springing to mind would be tariffs on the ex-state power grid and pipeline infrastructure that supply the vast majority of California's energy requirements. After all, these have been the elements of supporting infrastructure that have enabled the ridiculous NIMBY farce that California's ruling class have been indulging in for years, as they tax the living crap out of their constituents. At last, we have a clear and robust model for their Sin Tax.
ReplyDeleteHonestly if we were off their borders they'd lose interest in us, it's logistically impossible to invade over the seas or the polar caps.
ReplyDeleteWhich is why: 1] we must get off their borders and 2] they must never be on ours, especially in North America so 3] we must remain in Union.
All wrong. If we weren't on their borders, they'd be on ours trying to crash in. We always will have enemies seeking to conquer and enslave us--some to exterminate us.
Impossible to invade over the seas or polar caps? Couple things: I guess we didn't invade North Africa or Europe in WWII. Jumping from Sicily or the English coast was only the final staging. I guess we didn't invade various nations of the Pacific, or Japan going the other way. History is rife with overseas invasions. Very few of them are single jump affairs. You're also operating from the false premise that an invasion would be the first step in a modern conflict.
Eric Hines
Eric,
ReplyDeleteMay we agree to begin with our own nation secure, and our Western Flank on the Pacific?
That is the question of this post and the Bloomberg story on Newsom, which I am sure Bloomberg twisted, that is another matter.
Our lands first, the rest later.
Federalism. Looks like the Gov might understand the concept.
ReplyDeleteBdoran,
ReplyDeleteOnly partly. I'm not willing to write off Hawaii. Or Guam. Or certain valued friends and potential allies. Our Western Flank doesn't only rest on the Pacific, but well out across it.
Besides, our lands cannot be secure without the rest and sooner rather than later.
As a man once said, The best defense is a good offense.
Eric Hines
E.Hines-
ReplyDelete" You're also operating from the false premise that an invasion would be the first step in a modern conflict."
You got that right. The first step in a modern war would be frighteningly similar to what is going on right now with the virus.
Ambiguity is desirable- hard to respond if you don't even know if it is an attack or not.
Second would be a cyber attack, while all the techies are home sick. Still ambiguous- hacker? Foreign power? WTF is going on?
After the control systems start going down and the lights go out, is when the satellites get hit, and we are blinded. Then the boomers.
Given Trum's recent tweets, Newsom doesn't seem to be as hostile as people think.
ReplyDeleteOr at least Trum has a deal with Newsom.
Second would be a cyber attack, while all the techies are home sick. Still ambiguous- hacker?
ReplyDeletePeople opting in for "smart" cars that can be hacked and remotely controlled to crash (Clinton Clowns in Action style), or Smart Meters next to their houses that emit radiation and are veritable JDAM ready targeting solutions as well as potentially hackable to overload and cause fires (like California) that doesn't burn trees but totals cars and rubber. If people don't know what the latter is about, look up various Californian "fires" that burned everything down to slag, including rubber and glass, but not the ever green trees. Pictures of trees with their cores burnt out and the outside still normal, is also interesting, from a weapons stand point.
Deniability is indeed the "super weapon" of our day.
If a nuke goes off, people will find a nation to declare war on. If half your state goes up in Flames or Australia even... who you gonna declare war on? Nobody.