Guest Post: The New Civil Wars Within The West

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by

The New Civil Wars Within the West

Internecine civil wars are underway almost everywhere within the West, and most virulently in the United States of America. They are not yet kinetic wars, but wars of grinding prepositioning, the kind which lead to foregone conclusions without a shot being fired. They are wars of survival, nonetheless, because the basic architecture for national strength is being altered incrementally or dramatically. And, in many cases, consciously. 

Almost all of the strategic restructuring of states is occurring in large part as a result of an accumulation of wealth; an accumulation and value of which is seen as permanent. This has resulted in the hubris — expressed by those who did not earn it — of triumph in the Cold War. This is a Western phenomenon because the widespread growth of wealth, the creation of freedoms classically associated with democracy, resulted — as it must inevitably result — in complacencies which in turn led to a “vote too far”: the extension of the democratic franchise to those who do not help in the creation of wealth. 

Once the voting franchise of the West reached the point where those who sought benefits outweighed those who created benefits, the tipping point was reached. The situation of de facto “class warfare” thus emerges automatically under such circumstances, and the envy of those who take against those who provide erupts into “rights” and “entitlement”.  By deifying “democracy” above justice, the enfranchised non-producers could always outvote the producers.  We are at this point.  The result can only be collapse, or restructuring around a Cæsar or a Bonaparte until, eventually, a productive hierarchy reappears, usually after considerable pain. 

The United States of America 

Virtually every conscious step of the Administration of Pres. Barack Obama and the overwhelming Democratic Party majority in Congress has been to increase the size and role of government in the economy and society, and to decrease, limit, and control the position of private enterprise and capital formation.  Given that this progressively contracts and ultimately eliminates production, and reduces the inherent asset base of the country — its raw materials and productive intellect — to a null value, the tradable value of the US currency will inevitably decline. We cannot be swayed by the enormous wealth of the North American continent.  Almost all areas have an inherent wealth of some kind, but assets left idle in the ground or infertile in the brain define countries which fail, or are not victorious in their quest for unbridled sovereignty. 

Thus, a decline in currency value is exacerbated, or accelerated, by the increasing supply of money, inextricably depreciating its value, particularly at a time of decreasing productivity in vital perishable and non-perishable output. 

The US Obama Administration has focused entirely on an agenda of expanding government — the seizure of the envied (and often ephemeral) “wealth” of the producers — without addressing the process of facilitating the production of essential commodities and goods.  Even the USSR and the People’s Republic of China, during their communist periods, focused — albeit badly — on the production of goods and services, when they realized that the “wealth” to be “redistributed” existed only as the result of production and innovation.  The US, meanwhile, heavily as a result of policies of the former Clinton Administration, has “outsourced” production, and the State — that is, the Government — cannot easily, in the US, become the producer. 

Pres. Obama has addressed the US’ economic crisis by expanding government, and government-related, employment in non-productive sectors, while at the same time blaming and punishing the private sector for all of the US’ ills.  Empowered by the extended franchise, this was the politics of envy now becoming enabled. 

Moreover, the populist, short-term response to the major oil-spill in the Gulf of Mexico was clearly geared toward (a) transforming a crisis into an opportunity to pursue a green energy agenda by highlighting the evils of the fossil fuels on which the US remains dependent; (b) ensuring that the President was not blamed for the poor crisis response; and (c) ensuring that the Democratic Party did not suffer from the crisis in the November 2010 mid-term Congressional elections. 

The result of all the Obama initiatives has been to expand government and reduce or absolutely control and tax the private sector, even though, without the private sector, the US has no viable export or self-sustaining capability. The net effect has been to mirror — and overtake — the situation in which, for example, Germany found itself a decade ago: without the ability to retain capital investment or attract new capital investment.

And in order to restrain capital flight from the US, the Obama Administration seeks to further control worldwide earnings of US corporations and citizens. For other reasons, the US, believing that it still dominates the technology arena, has imposed greater and greater restrictions on international exports of technology through its ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations) and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. 

All of this conspires to limit investment in US manufacturing and restrict foreign interest in US exports because the regulations are being enforced merely for political punitive reasons. The US is making itself increasingly unappealing to foreign investors and has, as this writer has noted, made the appeal of the US dollar as the global reserve currency evaporate, saved, for the moment, only by the lack of a ready alternative. That situation will change within a very few years. 

Thus, the US has, in the space of a couple of years: (i) so dramatically inflated money supply that the value of the dollar is only shored up by the lack of international alternative currencies to act as reserve trading currencies; (ii) so dramatically inflated public debt, without stimulating economic growth, that US economic performance will continue to decline on a national and a per capita basis while competitive economies, such as the PRC and Russia, will grow, reducing strategic differentials; (iii) severely punished the private sector, thereby reducing the opportunities and incentives for strategic capital formation, and in particular punishing the industrial production and energy sectors, almost ensuring major dislocation to the delivery of US basic needs in the near-term; and (iv) so blatantly reduced its strategic capabilities through all of these actions and in its diplomatic and military posture as to guarantee a reduction in US strategic credibility. Concurrent with all of this is an increasingly punitive taxation framework. 

The near-term impact will include rising domestic energy prices, possibly even before the November 2010 mid-term Congressional elections, which could result in the Democratic Party losing its substantial majority in both Houses.  Even on this matter, Democratic Party ideologues have attempted to suggest that this is exactly what the country needs: expensive energy in order to facilitate change to “green” solutions. This defies the historical reality that pre-eminent powers must always have vast energy surpluses and use. 

So much damage has been done to the US strategic posture in just two years (although building on a base of inefficiencies which have been growing since the end of the Cold War), in many respects equal to the 1917 Russian Revolution (but without the bloodshed), that it is difficult to forecast whether — because of a changing global environment — the US can, within a decade or two, recover its strategic authority and leadership.

Domestically, the massively statist and interventionist approaches of the Obama Administration have polarized the country, and the response will be reactive rather than innovative, inducing a period of isolation and nationalism, but with grave difficulty in rebuilding confidence from the international investment community. 


Artificial, wealth-induced complacency following the end of the Cold War led to fury when economic collapse inevitably occurred in 2010, leading to draconian restraint in public spending in many societies, but particularly Greece and Spain. It is said that tourists are warned not to feed bears in Yellowstone National Park (in the US) because the bears do not understand when the tourists have run out of food. State-fed populations in Europe, the US, and Australia (see below) equally do not understand when the free ride is over, and work must recommence. 

Germany, France, and the United Kingdom have begun the arduous path back to recovery, but the euro may, as a currency, have been irrevocably damaged, and the European Union itself may have spent the term of its virility. Clearly, the wealth-induced complacency, which had the compounding effect of allowing a decline in a sense of national survival and national identity among the European Union (EU) component states, has led now to a revived — but as yet unrealized — sense of nationalism.

This is beginning to lead to the recognition of the cohesive national efficiency required for survival and competitiveness. It can be said that the EU destroyed nationalism, without replacing it with any mechanism to create a new sense of social cohesion, thus removing Europe’s capability for economic competitiveness, self-defense, or ability to define a new culture (and identity) to replace the national identities. 

Had the British Labour Party Government of outgoing Prime Minister Gordon Brown persisted in office with his slavishly doctrinaire governance — and demonstrably unworkable socialism, led by a privileged élite of Labour mandarins wallowing at the trough — it is possible that an economic recovery in the UK would have been problematic. It may still be problematic. And in this, Brown was a prototype Obama, with his rank sense of entitlement.

Even now, the British political psyche is fractured along geographic lines, and, wealth-induced, considers itself effectively “post-industrial”, and therefore beyond the need for a manufacturing (or even agricultural base). Thus, even though the UK is now far more dependent on a maritime trade base than at any time in its history, it is incapable of defending or projecting that maritime base; neither does it have the wherewithal to trade. 


The Australian Government has — like the Obama Administration in the US and the Brown Administration in the UK — demonstrated its absolute lack of experience in management, economics, or real-life work skills. A decision by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to impose a new “super tax” of some 40 percent on resource companies — miners, who produce most of Australia’s export wealth — suddenly highlighted the reality that the mining companies did not need to put their investment into Australian projects.

This “tax and spend” approach so damaged Prime Minister Rudd’s popularity in the run-up to a November 2010 election, that his deputy Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, an extreme left-wing feminist, mounted a rapid campaign within the ruling Labor Party to overthrow him.  But apart from some temporary back-peddling on the Resources Super Profits Tax until the next election is out of the way, don’t expect incoming Prime Minister Gillard — the first Australian female head-of-government and the most left-wing ever — to back off her punitive stance against the private sector.

The Australian Government’s punitive tax approach, initiated by Rudd but likely to continue for as long as Labor governs, also highlighted the fact that foreign investors did not need to invest in Australia, and that capital could move — as it always does — away from draconian tax regimes.  As Chilean Mines Minister Laurence Goldborne said in June 2010, “Just because you have resources doesn’t guarantee investment.” This is something which the governments of most African states know. 

In Australia, the realization of the over-reaching greed — and envy-inspired approach of the proposed new tax laws — in turn led much of the ruling Australian Labor Party (ALP) and the profoundly leftist Australian media to begin their drift away from Rudd, leaving him with the prospect that he could either be abandoned as party leader before the late-2010 general elections, or be faced with the prospect of becoming Australia’s first one-term Prime Minister.

Gillard’s unbridled ambition also saw to that. The question remains as to whether she will be able to win the November 2010 general election. A more important question remains, however, as to whether the markets will still be there when the ruin of trust in Australian export and investment reliability is addressed by a future government. The People’s Republic of China (PRC), Australia’s major export client state, and Russia are now developing vast iron ore reserves on their mutual border, possibly — in the near future — obviating the need for much of what Australia exports. 

In the meantime, both Kevin Rudd and the opposition Liberal Party have essentially embraced the move by Australia to see itself as a pseudo-post-industrial society, gradually eroding the independent and innovative manufacturing sector which had been a hallmark of Australian economic growth.  A pseudo-post-industrial society is one which believes that it can live solely on the intrinsic value of its currency, without the necessity to sustain a balanced agricultural and industrial base to preserve sovereign independence. A true post-industrial society — something thus far a utopian dream — can produce all of its food and goods with a minute fraction of its population, which would largely be left to address intellectual pursuits. 

Australia, thus, faces a major challenge to its comfort, wealth, and security when value perceptions, investment, and clients evaporate. We see, then, in the very deliberate acts of envy and entitlement politics, the seeds of national collapse in Australia, the US, and Western Europe. 


Some of the Western powers have slumped before, and recovered. The United States has yet to demonstrate this resilience.  Other Western societies have slumped, and have yet been protected by a strong regional system so that their societies could prosper under foreign protection.  The Netherlands, Spain, and Portugal, for example, retained stable and individual prosperous societies and yet never recovered their strategic leadership, relying, instead, on the power of their region for economic and security protection.  States which remain dependent on others for their protection never fully regain their wealth and freedom. 

States such as New Zealand depend on their greater neighbors for protection.  But wither New Zealand if Australia fails?  Wither the Netherlands today if the European Union fails?  And wither the United States if its fortunes erode? Re-birth is, as Britain has found through history, as did Rome, more arduous than that first, pure flush of strategic victory. 

The West is at its watershed, not because of a threat from a less-productive society. The collapse of the West is not because Islam is at the gates. Islam is at the gates because of the collapse of the West.


Analysis. By Gregory R. Copley for This article first appeared in the Global Intelligence Report. For Energy, Finance and Geopolitical News visit

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
VK's picture

And why do countries, societies and civilizations fail?

Marginal cost > Marginal Benefit. Not economically feasible to keep the empire humming as the cost begins to outweigh the benefits. We've hit brick walls credit wise, resource wise and population wise. Limits bitchez, learned by every single empire and civilization before the present one. An economic smackdown of Keynesiansim and Monetarism is at hand.

PS - Islam isn't the problem. Stupidity is, otherwise religion would've been banned centuries ago.

pan-the-ist's picture

Do I interpret correctly your post script as implying that religion is necessary to keep stupid people in line?

Broken_Trades's picture

I read as far as and realized this article wasn't worth my time.


Canucklehead's picture

I agree with you on 

I read the article above.  Very simplistic linear thinking.  No paradym shifts or "outside the box" simulations.  Basically the premise of the article is "if people put up with short term pain they will put up with long term pain".

Now you know real time paradym shifts will happen and the outcome will be completely different than that professed above.

The above analysis must have come from a phd (econ). It is so simple because macro is too hard...

Broken_Trades's picture

Economics, high finance, central banking, MBS, CDOs, CDS, are all things I don't do every day.  I come here to read about that - It's confusing, its complicated.  The information posted on thsi site has opened my eyes and led me to discover so much more about the financial markets on my own.


The oil business is what I do,  I understand how it works.  Thats why I need to post that anything from is complete garbage.  It makes no sense.  It's not based on reality.  Most of the articles posted here from are obviously written by someone without even the most basic understanding of oil and gas.  It's sensational BS that doesn't pass even a cursory look.  No need to fact check, it's utter nonsense. 



dark pools of soros's picture

then let us into the deep secrets that you possess??  or do you just get your info from what is released to the MSM since you are just a grunt?

trav7777's picture

To really mount a credible rebuttal, you need to learn how to spell "paradigm" properly

trav7777's picture

To really mount a credible rebuttal, you need to learn how to spell "paradigm" properly

Muir's picture

And you need to be able not to hit the save button twice, you moronic smiley.

The above poster was correct this "article" is pure rubbish.

p.s. And, take that finger and stick it up your bung hole.

Dr. Sandi's picture

Jesus Christ, I got this shit all over my monitor.

Bad ZH, bad. Go to your room.


Problem Is's picture

"And why do countries, societies and civilizations fail?"

Answer: Fraud and Systemic Corruption
When the fraud and corruption of the parasitical oligarchy become to great a burden, rent seeking taxation, on the citizenry and real economy, collapse is inevitable.

BTW: Obummer is not some creeping socialist. He is a pro corporate owned governance fascist.

Obummer institutes corporate and TBTF (Obummer's owners) bankster welfare and bailouts, instead of free market failure for the incompetent elite (Obummer's owners) Rubin, Rubinites, Jamie, Lloyd, et al (Obummer's owners)...

TBT or not TBT's picture

He is a statist, but then so are most politicians.  Government grows in scope, intrusiveness, and destructiveness, at different rates over time, but it always grows, faster under some, a bit slower under others.   Our Constitution was designed in recognition of that tendency to ever increasing reach by government:  It set the several branches against each other, and reserved many rights to the people or the state and local governments.   However, ever since the Commerce Clause was reinterpreted to allow the Congress to regulate absolutely anything it wants to in the name of regulating commerce, our central government has gone out of control.   Thus pointed questions to Kagan whether the Commerce Clause limits what Congress can regulate, including down to individual behavior (such as being forced to buy some good or service, the very centerpiece of Obamacare, a piece of overreach unimaginable to our founders).   Much hinges on how the Supremes rule on the latter.  It is the end or the continuation of the american experiment in liberty at stake.

Problem Is's picture

Tyler: I am getting sent to some bizzaro blank edit page when I hit save... I can not even tell anything posted...

Can you delete the last three?

DosZap's picture

Problem IS,

Was having same issue....

Here's the only way AROUND it, w/out losing your POST....

Leave the error page alone.

Click on ZEROHEDGE.Com, anew, and you will find ONE POST..NOT 3/4-5-

DosZap's picture

Not Tyler,

 but you can, hit edit, erase, and put an asterik in, and  hit SAVE.

DosZap's picture


LARGESS is why we're FKD.

Instant Karma's picture

Article II Section 4 - Disqualification

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

DosZap's picture

Instant K,

Look up the definition of MISDEMEANORS...............cover a LARGE GAMBIT.

Instant Karma's picture

Good, maybe we can get rid of this insane Administration before it's too late.

ZackAttack's picture


Once the scales fell away, I've begun tuning out anyone who parses the world through the broken, cloudy prism of their politics or religion.


Reductio ad Absurdum's picture

Wtf?? Did dcb just argue that Obama forcing everyone to buy health insurance proves that the democrats aren't trying to expand government??? This is the kind of logic that causes robot brains to explode on Star Trek. It's self contradictory. Let me explain things very very slowly so that dcb can understand: When the government forces you to do something -- anything -- then the government is expanding its role in your life.

sgt_doom's picture

Apparently, neurons are in short supply in the bizarro universe you dwell in, Reductio Absurdist!

Word up, lowbrow, the US goverment has long been majority privatized, dood!

Word up, lowbrow, the most sensitive intel operations in the US government are now between 67% to 95% privatized (N.R.O., 95% privatized, last time I checked several years back)!

Word up, dood, that so-called "health insurance reform" was about the further consolidation of power and control within the health insurance industry.

Word up, dood, that so-called "financial reform" just passed by the US congressional whorehouse is about the further consolidation of power and control of the banksters.


DosZap's picture


word up.............

List a few, pls sir?.....................Outside the USPS,and the Fed.

On the last two, Uh, Yes & No..................

A LOT more to it than that.

sgt_doom's picture

Forgive my annoyance, but in the year 2010, anyone who asks me to list a few, must surely be unable to read.  Kerist, dood, this has been going on for thirty years now!

The US military, many, too many functions have been privatized.  Perhaps you've heard about this country and US invasion known as Iraq!  Half or more of the "soldiers" over there: private contractors!

Perhaps you've hard of this country and US invasion known as Afghanistan: half or more of the "soldiers" over there are private contractors.

Over 60% of NSA, CIA, DIA and CIFA are private contractors.  I previously mentioned that 95% of National Reconnaissance Office, what should be the most secretive of US intel ops, is privatized.

A considerably large fraction of the US government has been privatized, beginning with Reagan, and continuing on with Bush #1, Clinton and Bush #2.

Who does the background checks for the TSA? Blackwater USA, nor called Xe Services.

Who does the background checks for the Office of Personnel Management, and a number of other government agencies? Formerly Kroll, now owned by Veritas Capital and renamed Pearson.

And on, and on.  I am stupified by the asking of such a question at this site.



sgt_doom's picture

What the frigg do you mean, Yes & No?

The health insurance legislation came from the Heritage Foundation, was written by the Wellpoint VP, and the insurance exchange originated at Enron?

On the so-called financial reform, the only thing unique is the replication of existing laws regarding predatory lending, which the Bush Administration, acting through the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, interdicted individual states when they wanted to use their existing predatory lending and consumer protection laws to go after the banksters.

Oh yes, along with the help of Standard and Poor's threatening to reduce the states' bond ratings.

And a consumer protection agency from within the Fed....puuuuhhlease don't make me puke.

Tenma13's picture

enough already with the dood, sort of funny the first time, moronic by the last. Good points, leave it at that.

sgt_doom's picture

FYI on dood.

I use it as a term of disrespect.  Otherwise, I would spell it dude.

Such semantics have their purposes.

dcb's picture

I am unable to find my initial post, but I would argue along the lines of the sargent below.

nationalizing healthcare is an expansion of government. forcing people to buy private insurance is forcing people into private corporations. Not government expansion. (in my view).

There really is no reason to be insulting. As usual such tactics have to be used by those who aren't very logical in their thought progression.

If you still don't understand what I am attempting to say, I hope at least others do.

By the way I fully understand what you are saying. the point then concerns what is intended by the author in this debate.

I'm getting a bit frustrated by the whole Obama commie socialist thing. His polices are much closer to the last Bush than the man I thought I voted for.

dcb's picture

The US Obama Administration has focused entirely on an agenda of expanding government — the seizure of the envied (and often ephemeral) “wealth” of the producers —

the statement above is just silly. you don't say this and force people into for profit insurance. you don't have record banker bonuses while main street suffers. Obama (showing big time via Bernanke, geithner, summers) if a corporate guy. these folks would have never been appointed or reappointed if he wasn't.

When the wealth comes from corporate crony goverment capiatialism it isn't wealth. taking money from bankers that failed (but now were bailed) isn't stealing from producers.  covernment /tax payer money has been systematically diverted to the wealthy.  there is overwhelming data to support this.

it is the crony capitialist/governemt axis that ensures those connected always make profits and never fail that has goten us into trouble. By the way. putting back regulations that worked for this country for 70 years (seperation commercail and investment banking) isn't some socialist plot. It was good enough for many republican presidents. Remember Clinton (the democrat) really rolled back banking regulations. I do not consider that deciding the removal of regulations were a mistake, and putting them back to be an expansion of government.  We aren't even getting the financial reform we deserve,a dnwe know it will happen again. the white house itself has fought agains the toughest regulations. the were/are against the audit the fed (which is supported by about 80% of the people.

People are just saying stuff that isn't supported by the data.

jeff montanye's picture

sounds pretty good to me.  however it is not contradictory to say obama, as bush before him, seeks to expand the power of both corporations and the government at the expense of the individual.  the obama/bush policies on incarceration/rendition (and now assassination) clearly are expansions of government power.  

Mr. Anonymous's picture

Government is a stooge, a lackey, for the real power.  Government, in and of itself, is inert.  Who controls it gives it the direction to become what it will.  This is more diversion from the simple, overarching truth that we are an oligarchic fascist state controlled by the monied interests.

The heart of this false meme can be observed in the ongoing agit/prop campaign that it was, essentially, the government forcing banks to lend money to undeserving people for the 'socialist' agenda of a home for everyone, rather than the facts on the ground wherein a system of crony capitalism allowed lobbyist to use soft and hard money to get compliant legislators to write the laws and overturn the regulations that led to the most outsized profits in history and the seeds for our own economic collapse.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

faustian bargain's picture

compliant legislators

...doesn't sound like an inert government to me.

LeBalance's picture

lol...that's all show, CFR writes everything, tells the CON-critters when to eat a BLT and how much mayo goes on it, too.

Mr. Anonymous's picture

I mean, the initial state of government is 'inert', waiting to be acted upon.  But as soon as whatever prevailing force takes the reins, whether it be monied interests or the People themselves or any other dominant power block, it becomes an agent of change in that direction. Government is the golem to be commanded to wreak its havoc.

TBT or not TBT's picture

The question is, who is John Galt?

Hard work and heavy investment occurs more intensely when the natural incentives for them are not destroyed.

The current Pelosi-Reid-Obama bunch destroys these incentives with their vindictive, punitive measures toward work and investment, and by the rewards they hand out in effect for not working, not saving, not investing.   This is what is happening, now.   We're in the beginning stages of a general retreat by the productive and prudent, in the face of unproductive pillagers voting themselves goodies on the backs of the productive and prudent.   Incentives and individuals will make or break this country.

gmrpeabody's picture


The people junking you are living off our taxes!

sgt_doom's picture

Negative, pea-brain, the people junking the two you are are ACTUALLY paying the taxes, and know just who ain't paying their taxes, sonny!

RockyRacoon's picture

Whew (wipes brow).  So now we know the real problem -- it's the Democrats

I'll rest easy now. 

No need to look further; I'll just vote for Republicans and that'll fix everything.

TBT or not TBT's picture

Lesser of two evils.  That's your choice at the ballot box under our political system.

DosZap's picture


+1000, Dead fkin on............anyone with half a brain can see that.

The current Pelosi-Reid-Obama bunch destroys these incentives with their vindictive, punitive measures toward work and investment, and by the rewards they hand out in effect for not working, not saving, not investing.   This is what is happening, now.( Except for the recently unemployed, you have descibed the majority of the Welfare state).


   We're in the beginning stages of a general retreat by the productive and prudent, in the face of unproductive pillagers voting themselves goodies on the backs of the productive and prudent. 

Yes sir,we are....................that's why the Unemployment numbers continue to climb, corporations,middle/small sized business, is not going to HIRE a soul, unless they know what the cost is, and how the new SOCIALIST policies are going to affect the bottom line.............any PRUDENT businessman/woman, Corprpration, is doing JUST that.


  Incentives and individuals will make or break this country.( Yeah, it's called Capitalism).

Seal's picture

bedda red than ded