How to Stop Gun Violance in American Schools: The answer is in the roots of our basic philosophy

It was never a mystery as to why all these school shootings are occurring. It’s two things really, one is that they are government places which are gun free zones, and the second is that they are essentially liberal places filled with liberal people who think liberal things. The shooter in this case was Dimitrios Pagourtzis who killed 10 and wounded at least 10 more at Santa Fe High School who admittingly shot up people he didn’t like, based on his own statements. The kid wore a trench coat with leftist Soviet era propaganda on it and apparently, he wore it often, even when it was 90 degrees outside. It’s not a mystery that these kids are snapping as reality outside of these government schools are clashing with the leftist learning they get in those places. Dimitrios intended to kill himself after he used a shotgun and a revolver he stole from his dad and attacked people he didn’t like in an art class at that small high school around 7 AM Friday morning of May 18th, 2018.

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/school-shooter-anti-trump-icon/

Yet it was perplexing as many news reporters covered the story and continued to ask—why are these school shootings happening and what can we do about it. Well, first you must arm the teachers and make those schools gun zones to discourage the kind of carnage that kids like this Dimitrios Pagourtzis was—troubled youth that have had their minds filled with leftist ideology that is not conducive to the world outside of their schools. If those kids don’t have strong peer groups, girlfriends, or goals in life that might otherwise keep their thoughts in check, then they will be prone to violence and will have to be destroyed once they initiate an attack. I would guess that there are hundreds of thousands of kids out there in America just like this Dimitrios kid and they aren’t going to go away soon. Even if we put together again all the broken homes, started teaching kids the correct things in those government schools, and managed to convince the entertainment industry to stop publishing such angry music, movies, television shows, and video games—it would take 50 years to begin to solve the problem. Gun violence and murderous kids are going to be a part of American schools for the foreseeable future. Why you might ask—well, it’s because those schools made those kids the way they are. Its their own fault, a fault of liberal sentiment aligned with improper philosophy that is collapsing against the merits of reality. It’s pretty simple.

Of course the political left is going to blame guns, because they can’t blame themselves. They can’t admit it is their failed policies and beliefs that are causing all these kids to become mass murderers. This actually is a global problem and is rooted in philosophy itself, the epistemological beliefs of society itself. Most places in the world are to the political left of even the liberals in America. While its true that we don’t hear much about mass murder violence in schools in France, or in China, the kind of trouble that Dimitrios Pagoutizis exhibited manifests in other ways, either in sexual depravity, body piercings and tattoos, and generally a somber existence that is quite typical of most Europeans and members of the Asian corridor. But because in the United States there is a Constitution that is rooted in a very independent philosophy of self-governance, the emphasis has always been on the individual with expectations that each would do their part to conduct themselves properly in context with the greater society. The right to own and use guns for self-defense were always intended to protect that individual sanctity from the kind of group think that is so persistent elsewhere in the world and has been failing for many centuries.

Yet the political left in the America which would be considered the far right in almost every other country in the world has brought these clashing ideas into North America and made them the basic platform of the tax payer funded schools that kids are learning in. Yet those ideas are not conducive to the capitalist society that those same kids find themselves in once their school days have concluded, leaving many to face a very fearful future filled with anxieties that their parents are becoming increasingly ill prepared to help them with. That is largely also the fault of the government schools which actively has sought to replace parents in the home with a parental authority figure within the school. That is an experiment that has not worked. It hasn’t worked in Europe, it certainly hasn’t worked in Mexico and all through South America and Canada—it doesn’t work in Australia, and New Zealand—it doesn’t work anywhere. It appears to work in communist countries like China because they hide all their domestic statistics from the world—the misery factor is obscured with state-controlled polling data that is not representative of the individualized lives of their citizens—because communist countries in Asia do not care about individuals. They are concerned with the affairs of the state as a whole—so analysis from those places cannot be trusted. Obviously, the American model should be studied by all people of the world since it is within North America that the most successful economies anywhere are found, and the quality of living for each person are extremely high. Even our poorest of the poor in America would be considered to live a great life if compared to the average villager in Africa or India. So in the context of who should learn from whom, it’s quite clear that America does enough things correctly to merit a philosophy shift that is conducive for success in other countries. Yet American schools do not respect or teach those values, so it’s really not practical to expect other countries to do what’s right for their people and make the necessary changes. Instead the political left has declared a civil war against the American right and they purposely have used our own youth against us as weapons. It is the American leftists who built the mind of Dimitrios Pagourtzis. You don’t see kids with strong mothers and fathers in the home that take their kids fishing every Saturday running around in black trench coats covered in Soviet propaganda trying to kill other kids. You certainly don’t see kids growing up in homes of NRA members entering adulthood with lots of crazy anxieties that prove to be self-destructive—where other people get hurt as a result. There is a reason that families that put God and guns at the front of their epistemological beliefs do better than families who turn to mother government for their basic necessities. Those two groups can’t be put together and expect everything to just work out.

The answer is easy in how we can stop this violence in our government schools—stop letting those places be run by liberals who teach liberal ideas to kids who don’t know any better and make them gun zones. Put guns on the teachers so they can do more than pull fire alarms and can engage a threat at the point of attack and end the misery quickly, before 10 people are slaughtered for no reason. This is not a problem that can be solved by politics or any legislation. Politics is born of philosophy, so if a philosophy is wrong, obviously the politics will fail as well. Gun ownership is not a political problem, it is part of a philosophy of self-reliance—and education comes out of that branch of thought. So to solve the problem you have to fix the philosophy that feeds the politics, and in this case left leaning philosophies are proven failures everywhere in the world they are utilized. That means that if we really want to fix these government schools, we must use American ideas to solve them, not the same old European failures and until that happens, there are many more Dimitrios Pagourtizis types waiting to snap and make a name for themselves at the expense of others before they kill themselves.  And those are facts we all must deal with.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

‘Solo’ Gets a Standing Ovation at Cannes: Mythology and culture are on expanding in a very positive way

I can’t emphasize enough what Star Wars means to our current society—and specifically how important this next film, Solo: A Star Wars Story is to the continuation of the great mythology that is now set to take on a life well beyond anything planet earth has ever seen. As I say often the most important topic to me out of all the things that I discuss is the realm of mythology and how it captures the minds of mankind and propels it forward at each juncture of history. I am specifically thinking right now about the great legends of King Arthur, or the early works of the Iliad where Odysseus propelled modern society to its current form to the point where our civilization has outgrown those great stories. Our modern society is very complex, and we know so much about so many things that were not known at the time that the great classics were written, and we are and have been in desperate need for stories that can take us all into the future—because that’s how human beings work. They need conceptual devices in story form to put into context their observed reality—and even though Star Wars is intended for kids, it works on so many levels to get the imaginations of the human race moving that I think it’s currently the most important thing in the world happening right now, and I understand very well what is happening from North Korea to the taxation of Amazon in Seattle—to the teacher union strikes, to the corruption of our own FBI becoming weaponized against us all. Even in that context I think this new Star Wars movie is a tremendous opportunity for mythmaking to expand dramatically into the lives of all thinking beings on planet earth for the better, and it would all come down to the presentation of the film at the Cannes Film Festival in France. It’s not just because I love the character of Han Solo, but it’s why the movie was made in the first place that I think it’s so important and I was very happy to see a standing ovation for the film after its screening. This is going to be a big one.

I read the critics opinions of the film and most of them were positive, many very positive with about 23% less than enthusiastic. What those lukewarm reviews had in common was that they missed the epic scale of life and death situations that have been present in Star Wars up to this point—the save the whole galaxy or else type of storylines. If Star Wars is going to work in future, they need to become much more individualized, personal stories which we all know culminate into the three trilogies of nine films we have mostly been familiar with. And once Lucasfilm accomplished that, mythology by way of the vehicle of Star Wars will be unleased in a very dramatic way and I don’t think those people trained into their institutional professions, and are making good livings in those comfortable places, are open to these big changes. Their comments about nobody asking for a movie about Han Solo and that the movie is just capitalizing off the Star Wars name and is an entirely different kind of film altogether are missing the point. This movie was always intended to expand the Star Wars mythology in ways that I would argue it always needed to go—since the Empire Strikes Back way back in 1980 and I think everyone watching this movie is going to be in for a surprise.

I know enough about this movie to be happy with the decisions that Kathy Kennedy has made over the last two years. A lot of people do not understand how hard it is to make a movie, and to negotiate contracts with expensive actors and to hold those contacts over many films. I continue to be amazed how the Marvel team does it with all their big-name actors now and how they can put them all in a film like Infinity War. That would be an astonishing payroll to put all those stars into one movie, but Marvel has figured it out and that Disney polish is now coming to Star Wars with these Han Solo movies serving as a test bed of creative entanglement. I will be the first to say I was not happy with the Lucasfilm abandonment of the original books which they now call legends, and I was not at all happy with The Force Awakens when they killed Han Solo in that movie. Long time readers here know very well how angry I was at the way they dealt with Han Solo’s character in that film and I did several radio shows discussing the issue in detail. However, and I know I wasn’t the only one, I think Lucasfilm to a reasonable extent has listened to the fans—and they have made some adjustments with this Solo movie which is why it needed to stay on schedule even after the previous directors were fired and Ron Howard was brought on to fix things. It’s also why I believe that the last movie of the modern trilogy, Episode 9 now directed by J.J. Abrams was pushed out into 2019—because Lucasflim needed to see how audiences reacted to new story elements in this new Solo movie.

I don’t think Kathy Kennedy or Bob Iger are all that happy with the direction of Solo: A Star Wars Story, I think they’d love to have a much more progressive film with less male characters acting so strongly. That’s a very educated guess on my part, but business is business. If you are running a movie company that makes Star Wars movies and you intend for them to transcend modern politics, then they need to be timeless stories, and this new Han Solo movie needed to be more of a classic western than a modern progressive version of Guardians of the Galaxy. I watched Kathy Kennedy at the Cannes press events and I think she is breathing a bit better now—she really needs to pull in at least a billion dollars off this Han Solo movie to justify everything they’ve done with Star Wars since Disney bought it in 2012. She made serious mistakes putting top-heavy female characters into Star Wars and making really stupid comments like she did to the New York Times where she said she didn’t care about male Stars Wars fans—which traditionally have been the primary support of the franchise for over four decades now. There was always room for women in Star Wars, but they couldn’t just take everything over and get away with it. The backlash against Kathy Kennedy in general has been harsh. And Bob Iger is an anti-gun liberal, so it’s probably tough for him to see all these posters of Han Solo pointing a gun out into the horizon, but that’s the character and that’s what people want to see in movies, and putting politics aside, Lucasfilm and Disney have given fans what they want—which is a very good thing.

I will likely give a very long and detailed review on the 24th of May which will articulate many, many things that I think are superb about this new kid’s movie which I think will capture the hearts of so many people in a very positive way. It’s not just the movie that I’m happy about, but what will come out of it creatively. Mythology has always been the center of any advanced culture and when a story works—it advances everything from arts and sciences, to politics and philosophy. And after watching that standing ovation at the Cannes Film Festival, I am quite sure that we are all about to see something very special.

Rich Hoffman
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

The American Embassy in Jerusalem: Uncovering our true human roots as Palestinian radicals throw their bodies in front of an effort to keep it hidden

It usually comes down to either Marxism or capitalism in modern societies where ideological differences stand in the way of a peaceful exchange of social values. That is one of the reasons I find movie box office sales indicators so fascinating, because it informs us of the shared values of the average ticket buyer, where they enjoy a particular kind of movie enough to see in story form a set of idea at a movie theater with perfect strangers. In relation, regarding the unrest in the Middle East, nothing could be more fascinating than the problems between Israel and every other country in the region. Israel has been part of that region since well before the Islamic religion came to the Middle East, and even long before the Romans and Greeks had their empires which helped shape all the lands around the Mediterranean Sea. But after the Sykes Picot Agreement of 1916 it was Marxist revolutionaries who channeled their anger at the western nations that were the victors of World War I and then those United Nations powers which formed up the borders of the Middle East further after World War II that took over the governments of Iran, Syria, Iraq, and everywhere else to exact revenge on the creation of Israel. The border between Palestine and Israel today is not much different from America and Mexico—on one side is a capitalist nation—on the other is a Marxist one choking on failed socialism. It really is that simple—economic opportunity versus economic limitations based completely on political ideology hiding behind masks of religion to sell it to their people.

That is why it was so significant that President Trump moved the United States Embassy to Jerusalem today—to proclaim to the world that America had made a choice in the matter where it has been fashionable to play the middle ground. I am a huge supporter of this move by Trump and would add further that there could have never been peace in the Middle East until this occurred. Now we can say that a move toward peace has been made by the United States and further advancements toward peaceful enterprise in the region, and an expansion of capitalism into the Middle East for the benefit of everyone is now about to take place. That is a wonderful thing.

Of course, there is more to the story, as there always is. One of the aspects of a peaceful Middle East that I am most excited for is the restoration of proper archaeological research into the cradle of civilization that is behind the wars in Iran, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, even down into Egypt, and Libya. The greatest tragedy of this past century has been that wars over religious beliefs and political ideology have made those regions unstable and prevented proper archaeological research I would argue is necessary to understanding our own history as a civilization. For those who want validation of the great Biblical stories which have driven the most popular religions the world has ever seen, proper archaeology of the great sites of the Middle East is absolutely necessary. But there are other religions which came before Christianity that are also there for all to see and the relics from those collections have been sold all over the world into private ownership and that evidence has been alarming to those who pay attention to those types of attributes, and its time that the rest of the world is let on to that evidence.

I say it often, wars are created by those who truly want to be in power and that is certainly the case in the Middle East. There are very wealthy people who have an eye on history who know what is to be uncovered in the Middle East—evidence that mankind is much older than the Biblical accounts can chronicle, and those parties do not want mankind to know that information—because so long as most of the world’s populations fall under one of the known present religions, then those same people can easily control those people under current political assumptions. By introducing two opposites to the Middle East, Marxist revolutionaries and the capitalists behind the Jewish faith the Middle East has had much of the evidence of its vast past destroyed by war, and very little archaeology has been able to transpire due to the perpetual conflicts.

As 52 Palestinians died in protest during the opening ceremonies of the new American Embassy in Jerusalem it served as a grim reminder of as to why that region has always been unstable, and why the other side is so desperate to keep it that way. The American Embassy is a stabilizing factor and the Palestinians know that if they don’t sacrifice themselves to some degree that their end is coming anyway, and nobody up until President Trump has been willing to make that move. But Trump has an advantage in understanding the real nature of the Palestinian conflict from the side of the wealthy collectors that most people never hear about—because they get all their news from the constructed media accounts which say that the entire conflict is one of religious differences—which couldn’t be further from the truth. On the political side of things, the Middle East conflicts are between capitalism and Marxism. But even deeper than that, it is of the origin stories of civilization as a whole, and to prevent those stories from getting out, war has been used as a cover to prevent proper scientific research into the world of the Middle East which has always had the secrets just a few feet under the sand.

Honestly anywhere in the world where there is great conflict you will find a similar situation—the current governments wish to keep their citizens in the dark to the realities of the world which came before them. That is certainly the case in North America where it is now well-known that the Indians were just another come-lately group of humans who migrated into a region that had a rather sophisticated empire that rose and fell long before Columbus ever sailed to the Americas. Mexico had an advanced culture that was destroyed by Spain. To cover up that past the Spanish built Mexico City on top of the ruins to hide it for all time. All over the Central and South American regions are countries drowning in Marxism making it nearly impossible to have western universities set up shop to conduct long archaeological surveillance to uncover the true nature of ancient civilizations. What policy and rules can’t limit, the economic conditions of the region frustrate real efforts at science. There are still tremendous opportunities for archaeological research to be conducted in the great continent of Africa, but almost every country there is a Marxist regime and westerners tend to end up dead in their tents deep in the back country of the “Dark Continent.” Then of course there is Russia and China, some of the largest land masses in the world yet they are as covered as anything ever could be anywhere, because under totalitarianism politics, science is run by the state—and the states don’t want people to know what came before them. They need to create the illusion among their people who all there ever was that illuminated power and influence were their regimes—not some culture that rose and fell centuries ago, or even tens of thousands of years ago. How many Göbekli Tepes are hiding out in the deserts of the Middle East? My guess would be hundreds, if not thousands—and what would they tell us about the world before Christianity? A lot. But modern politics doesn’t want that information known to the people they wish to rule.

I am all for peace, and in order to get it, the Marxism that is driving the anxiety of the Middle East has to be conquered and driven out of the region. For that to happen, the American Embassy in Jerusalem is a good place to start. There is a need to conduct archaeology in that great city immediately that cannot occur because of the unrest that the Muslims bring to the conflict which prevents it, and the politics behind that anxiety is happy to prevent that research as long as they can. But mankind cannot allow such a thing to continue, so moving the American Embassy has more meaning than in just supporting the Jewish people of the region—it truly is the first step in peace, and in the greater understanding of our own histories as revealed through proper science. The mysteries behind so many wars are waiting for us to uncover them, and its about time. After the Embassy opened, I can say that my enthusiasm for learning these facts over the upcoming century just became much more feasible, and was a tremendous effort on behalf of science, which demands thoughtful research to be conducted free of war and turmoil.

Yes, Israeli snipers killed scores of Palestinians and wounded 1,300 as 35,000 protesters rallied against the US Embassy opening in Jerusalem overseen by Trump’s Middle East envoy of Jared Kushner and daughter Ivanka. It was the Palestinians who decided they wanted to dispute the territory of Jerusalem and follow the philosophy of Marxism into such a desperate strategic position. As I have said many times, he who has the gold, rules. And it determines who will win in this conflict, and why there will be peace in the Middle East. Because finally America picked a side, and that’s all it will take.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

John McCain is a Bitter, Dying Man: Getting captured, and tortured can’t erase the fact that he was and still is an idiot

So what did White House communications aide Kelly Sadler say that wasn’t true? John McCain is dying, How else to explain McCain’s attitude toward Donald Trump as the former presidential candidate dies of a brain abnormality. There’s obviously something wrong with the guy, because even after turning around the economy, bringing peace to North Korea and solving a long list of problems that have plagued White Houses for many years, McCain’s hatred for Trump goes even deeper than sanity would dictate. It was just a week ago that John McCain let it be known that he didn’t want President Trump to attend his funeral. What is the Trump administration supposed to apologize for, Kelly Sadler was telling the truth, and trying in the nicest way possible to explain away the actions of an obviously bitter man in McCain?

Yet of course there is always more going on isn’t there? The calls for the Trump administration to apologize isn’t out of respect, but control. The intentions of the Trump-hating politicians like John McCain was never to solve regional problems, they always intended to use them for more military deployment, larger military budgets and more reasons to conduct legislative monstrosities on Capital Hill. The North Korean problems were always solvable—the kid Kim Jong Un just wanted NBA basketball tickets. He’s been in love with the West for years, he just didn’t know how to get there—after all he had a role to play which he inherited from his own family. Everyone knew that the kid was willing to turn—but nobody acted on it until Trump was elected and now that the little secret is out of the bag, people like John McCain are spiteful that Trump is actually solving problems instead of using those same problems to further the power of the legislative branch by using chaos to gain public opinions. The Never Trumper types out there are angry at Trump for taking away their excuses—they aren’t outraged by porn stars, or Trump’s weekend golf games, they hate him because he does the job he was elected to do and people like McCain never wanted to solve the problems to begin with. People like McCain use problems to stay in power but believe that if they ever solve anything that the public will turn on them and expect results in the future—which incompetent people always fear—results.

This method of control which is being attempted to keep Americans always in a state of guilt to hide the solutions to problems goes back a long time. Even to the point in world history where holes were being dug in the earth to mine gold or coal, lunatics trying to maintain the old order of politics would try to scare away prospectors by proclaiming that nobody should do such things because they might dig their way into the devil’s bedroom and awaken the wrath of Hell for disturbing God’s fallen protégé. Of course, we all know that now to be nonsense, but such arguments have been made in the past to keep mankind clinging to the old so that those who held power could keep it based on the fears of the population. Even men on their dying beds hold such power to be their primary sustenance and they cling to those fears like a hungry person clutches a marinated chicken wing fresh off the grill.

What makes a person a hero is not that they were a prisoner of war, or that they suffered at the hands of an enemy. When Trump made his original comment during the 2016 campaign when he said he liked people who weren’t captured, he was simply stating that in the private sector results matter. Yet in politics there are all these emotional rules we are supposed to follow no matter how bad politicians have been. John McCain the way that the political order of things has established for us, is supposed to be a hero just because he was a POW during the Vietnam War. With that criteria the three guys who were just released from North Korea will be heroes for the rest of their lives, no matter what they do in the world. McCain lost the 2008 election because he had the wrong strategy and he cost Republicans a lot of trouble during the years of Obama. Most recently he voted against the repeal of Obamacare and he has even participated in the leaked dossier which found its way into the FBI hands against Trump. McCain went after the jugular of the Trump presidency many more times than once and we are supposed to overlook them all just because John McCain was captured at one point in his life?

Politicians like John McCain use military service to highlight a larger, more corrosive element of human existence which actually imprisons us all to the aristocracy of ancient times, when modern life has made it quite clear that those old politicians are worthless to our advancements. By highlighting military service as the highest honor an individual can obtain they define self-sacrifice to the “greater good” as being the focus of human existence, which is as wrong as wrong can be. But that’s how they have sold the kind of trouble that politicians have gotten America into over the years, for which ultimately Donald Trump was elected to fix. I have known that this game was a farce for a long time, and I dreamed of having someone like Trump in the White House to fix the philosophical problems presented by statist societies. Because he was a Republican I voted for John McCain in 2008 but he was so embarrassing—always apologizing for things, always insisting that we play nice with all our opponents—and he wonders why he lost. An apology is an admission that something is wrong or that someone committed an improper act. Would John McCain apologize to the United States for holding a personal grudge against President Trump by voting down the Obamacare reform, or in trying to keep the Russian conspiracy alive with fake documents just because he is spiteful that an American businessman was elected president while a POW from the Vietnam War didn’t get elected just because people didn’t feel guilty enough about his service in the military so long ago?

In the logic of the political order we are supposed to ignore everything John McCain says because he is dying, even to the point that we aren’t supposed to talk about it. We are supposed to ignore everything he says because he was a war hero, even though John McCain’s intentions have been quite malicious and personal. What he has done hasn’t been for the good of the country, it has been to satisfy his own yearnings for power by using guilt of service and hardship to cruise his way through frozen opinion that put his actions beyond social judgment—and that is just ridiculous. It is exactly that which caused people to vote for Trump in the first place, and if McCain really loved America, he’d see that. But John McCain doesn’t love America or its role in the world as a beacon of freedom. He loves to use guilt to drive opinion because he’s been doing it most of his life now—using his personal failures such as being captured as a POW to elevate himself beyond opinion so that the political order that he does love could continue to rule mankind through guilt instead of logic—and that is a crime all of itself.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Observational Realities: What the premier of ‘Solo’ in Los Angeles tells us about the future

I am the type of person who could write a novel about the reason that a person might change the way they hold a fork. Observational changes in nonverbal communication are an obsession with me and are a constant companion. I would have to say that nothing happens that I don’t notice. I am always on the lookout for why someone might have changes to their eye movement, or the tip of a head as it’s positioned on the shoulders, does it drop more than usual, or is it cantered off to the left or right more than typical. Is there an unusual emphasis on words when somebody is speaking and if there is, what does it mean—those types of things. So I enjoy big pop culture events because of all the mass information available to the way I think. I love going to baseball games where there are lots of people, because it tells me so much about the temperature of our culture, and I love big entertainment movie premiers—especially for projects that I am excited about like this new Star Wars movie, Solo: A Star Wars Story because there are always important things that can be learned about the nature of our society. And the thing that I thought was most compelling at the Solo premier in Hollywood this past Thursday wasn’t the usual fanfare that comes from most Disney productions that they know going in will turn in big box office numbers—it was that Bob Iger wasn’t there. I would encourage you dear reader to watch the whole red-carpet coverage. It was quite impressive.

Going even further was the lack of VIP formality at the event, even after the premier. The after party mixed cosplayers and celebrity actors together in ways that were very unusual for Hollywood which is kind of a theme with this new Solo movie. Freedom from social pretension is the underlying message of this new Star Wars movie and the absence of authority figures in our lives is the goal of Han Solo, and Disney wisely embraced that during this premier. This Star Wars movie is quite different from any other in the past, and it reaches back to recapture that feeling so many people had in 1977 when the first film came out where a much younger George Lucas put out a very unusual movie he had made with his wife in what were some very happy days for the fledgling filmmaker. Not happy on the business side, or the marital side, but from the ideological position where observations made were translated into unique characters placed into the Star Wars movies, like Han Solo—maybe one of the most independent characters ever put into film. That revulsion for authority figures was actually quietly part of the Disney movie premier. There were no special speeches by anybody from Disney or Lucasfilm before the three theaters started playing Solo: A Star Wars Story—all that happened were that the lights dimmed, the movie started, people had a good time, and afterwards everyone mingled together no matter what their social standing was. If you were at the premier, you were someone and therefore welcome to interact with anybody, anywhere within the scope of the premier. It was all very unusual. The richest person in the world was at the premier, but nobody made much mention of it. At the after party mixing with fans dressed in their favorite Star Wars outfits was a bald guy introducing himself as, “HI, I’m Jeff.” No pretension what-so-ever.

What these movies about Han Solo do for the Disney franchise of what is coming in 2020 and thereafter is that they use the main character to open up the entire galaxy to new stories. Solo is the thread that is connecting the massive mythology that is being planned by Lucasfilm and that is important in many ways. Lately I have been talking a lot about the scientific changes that are coming to us in real society, like the Uber Elevate sky cars, the missions to Mars by NASA and Elon Musk’s Space X, and just yesterday The Boring Company finished digging a tunnel under Los Angeles meant to carry traffic under the busy city with car pods and Hyperloops. Currently there is a video from Boston Dynamics that is freaking people out displaying a robot running across a park and jumping over a log in much the way a human does, so we are seeing a competitive species of a living thing that humans have invented moving into our world and it is causing some anxiety. There are a lot of things changing and what I see in pop culture are ways to intellectually deal with them that are emerging in our art, like in these Star Wars movies. For many people they need science fiction and fantasy to open their minds to the explosion of new ideas that are coming to the human race in a very rapid fashion and companies like Disney are trying to embrace their role in the whole thing in a proactive way.

Humans need conceptual tools to help them navigate ideas—in much the way that Star Wars needs Han Solo to open up the context of future stories, the elements of the films—the space travel between planets, the way that space travel is conducted, the type of people who will do it, and even the tools that humans use while doing all these things—like robots, religion, and even the type of “can do” spirit that everything takes are part of movies like Solo: A Star Wars Story. The movie exists to make money for Disney and all the merchandise retailers, but of course there is a deeper meaning that people like Bob Iger may not be consciously aware of, but the greater purpose is certainly part of the overall strategy. I watched very carefully the interview with the two Kasdens who wrote this new Solo movie and just like Larry was when he wrote the great film Raiders of the Lost Ark and The Empire Strikes Back, he knew what he was doing with his son on this latest film. It is just the kind of movie that people are looking for at this particular time in our lives where technology once again, as it was in 1977—is taking over and we are wondering what our place is in all of it. The original Star Wars movies told us it was OK to embrace the future and what we ended up with was the fabulous 1980s. I think the Donald Trump presidency had a lot to do with why the original Solo movie directors were fired, because Disney had planned a certain kind of Guardians of the Galaxy Star Wars film featuring Han Solo, but that wasn’t going to work in a post Donald Trump world and Kathy Kennedy wisely made the change to more of a traditional western as opposed to a color popping change that might have been a much more progressive film. I noticed that Disney has been very careful not to put Woody Harrelson on the red-carpet interviews, because he is a major pot supporter. He’s done a few interviews, but not much—he’s not even featured in the Denny’s cards from the promotional tour—and that says something.

Everything means something and there is a lot going on with Solo: A Star Wars Story. Disney is giving fans what they want in a Star Wars movie even if they don’t personally like the direction the franchise is going, because they have their eye on the bigger prize—the furtherment of human civilization as a whole, and the part they play in it as artists. While the company of Disney may not want to do a modern cowboy movie with hot rod spaceships, the fans want it, and that’s what drives merchandise sales and brings people into the parks where the real magic happens for Disney. That’s also where new technology gets its cutting-edge tests for public consumption, and directly leads to the world we are all stepping into. We are all going to space and our daily lives are changing with all this new technology. As humans we are looking for ways to process all this information into the context of stories, which is what we have always done when processing new observational realities. And it’s all very exciting!

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Iran is Finished: Those with money always determine the rules–and the outcome

How wonderful it is that Donald Trump as President of the United States pulled America out of that treacherous scam of a deal with Iran. With all the talk about how dangerous it was I have not heard a single media outlet tell the truth about Iran and why the Democrats under Obama were so willing to give so much to them without anything coming back in return. The answer which is key to the entire situation is that it was Marxist revolutionaries that moved in and took over the Iranian government in the late 1970s and they still rule to this day. Hidden behind the radical Islamic practices of showing anger toward the Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916 is the not so subtle push to spread Marxism to the entire planet, and to use force wherever necessary to do so. Most everything done in the Middle East including the support of Saddam Hussein of Iraq was to deal with the mess created by Sykes-Picot and the spread of Marxism that was generated in anger over that World War I negotiation. In the stalemate of a century of policy failures in that region it was always Marxism and a strong desire to spread socialism and communism to despot countries around the world, like Cuba, El Salvador, all of Africa, North Korea, Vietnam, Russia—virtually everywhere—which drove the politics of the Middle East. And the deal Obama’s administration made was meant to provide money to the struggling economy of Iran to keep them active in that original aim of spreading Marxism to every corner of the world through terrorism. Isn’t it something that nobody is talking about any of that?

The truth of the matter is that Iran isn’t much different from what happened to Venezuela in South America. Sitting on major oil reserves the world was willing to put up with the socialism and Marxism that was destroying the governments of those two countries—because of their oil. Socialism had already infected Europe, so they had no real reference point to judge the evils of the behavior in Iran—since they weren’t far from being in the same boat. Obama’s deal negotiated by John Kerry was designed to tie Europe, the United States and Iran together in an effort to keep the economy of the failing Iran together so they could perform their role in the great scheme of Marxist expansion.

Any college professor in America could tell you what I just did dear reader, which is why they support Iran mysteriously even though currently the country is the number one sponsor of terrorism. That is because most liberals support that Marxist spread of influence, and they are rooting for Iran to do their damage for the acquisition of socialist triumphs globally. But for everything to work the United States had to be involved because it is only from that capitalist country that there is any real value for Iran to loot and continue to exist. What Trump did was cut off that support. The deal Iran has with everyone else suddenly became worthless—Europe doesn’t have anything of any value to add. With the United States out of the deal, Iran has no cover and no way to prop themselves up on the world stage to hide their acts of terrorism, or to fund it.

Put another way that might be easier for people to understand, many years ago I had a group of family members who wanted me out of their way. They didn’t want me in the family and they wanted control of my wife. When I wasn’t intimidated by their outright aggressiveness toward me they regrouped and decided to play nice to my face in order to bring about financial ruin behind my back. The trouble was, my wife and I had great love for their children so if we wanted to see those children have a good life, we had to deal with these people in a civil fashion. These family members calculated they could put us in a dangerous position to bring about financial ruin to my family achieving their objectives of destroying me to get me out of it, because if I had no money, the thinking was, my wife would divorce me and they’d all live happily ever after—from their point of view. They didn’t care about my own children, or even my wife, they just wanted me out-of-the-way any way possible. So when frontal aggression failed to scare me off, they decided to make a “deal” and they used their children as the bargaining chips knowing we wouldn’t do anything to risk their wellbeing.

Once the father of these kids realized that I would do anything to make sure his kids were well off he became lazier and much less motivated to work. He spent most of his time lying around the house feeling sorry for himself and complaining that he wasn’t wealthy. Eventually the whole family ended up moving into my house because they had no place to go. I had to put up with it because the fear was that great harm would come to the children if we kicked them out. They had in many ways made themselves addicted to my every effort.

For many months on and off over several years the entire family loafed around and mooched off my efforts. My wife was a housewife, as she stayed home with our children. I was already carrying my whole family the way men have always been expected to. But now there was an entire family of five living in my house composing of nine people and essentially only one adult working. My situation was a perilous one, it was a situation that directly affected my wife.  I thought having a knock down drag out fight might be needed which is how I prefer to do things, but then that would have damaged the children and the larger aspects of the family, so what was I to do? Things are almost never literal enough for a good fight, strategy is often the most important combatant, and winning without physical confrontation. Well, I worked three jobs, two of them full-time and one part-time on the weekends and I made enough money to cover everything. In doing so I accomplished two things, I gained leverage of the situation over the lazy parents who found themselves addicted to my efforts, and because of that, it gave me power over the situation to protect the children, for the sake of everyone involved. But for the husband of that ridiculous couple, I showed him that he wasn’t man enough to keep pace with me and he gradually withered away in guilt. It took a few years, but the experience destroyed him as a person, as he deserved it. I did all that work and I still made time to play with all the kids and help them anyway I could, and it had a major impact on them. They grew up moderately intact. Not the way they would have if my wife and I had raised them, but better than they would have been without us in their lives. The couple ended up divorced once the kids were grown, and in exactly the condition we predicted they would at the time. Looking back, I am proud of how we handled a very delicate situation. The key was that by having all the money in the situation it gave us the moral authority to do what needed to be done in the long run. Instead of giving them what they wanted, which was to crush me out of existence, I simply showed that I was so much of a man who I could hold up the entire world and then some—and still smile and have fun with life.  Gaining the high ground is important in every major conflict if you can get it.  Money in all civilized society decides who has the high ground and holding the high ground in an effortless fashion, meaning you do not give your enemy the impression that you are exhausted is the most demoralizing thing you can do to win over such opponents.  And when they have ill intentions for your life–who the hell cares how much you hurt them.

Essentially this is what Trump has done with the Iran deal, only he has cut it off at the time when everyone was most addicted to America’s money. Like my situation, he had to wait for the kids to grow up, when they could no longer be harmed by any action on our part. For the United States that time came when North Korea decided it would rather have season tickets to NBA games from the West rather than carry on the failed policies of Kim Jung-Un’s communist father and grandfather. Once Iran was isolated, the time to choke off their income was there, and because they had grown dependent on the efforts of the United States, they are now unable to survive without the money from the most successful capitalist country on earth. Iran has no money to carry on their nuclear program, just as North Korea didn’t. And the Iranian people are tired of a Marxist regime limiting their opportunities for the future, so they are ripe for their own revolution back into a capitalist country. But they won’t act until the current Marxist regime is broke of money—so Trump made a move that Iran can’t survive. They will be crushed without anybody having to fire a single shot. Europe will be fine, and perfectly safe, because everything always depended on the United States, because it was they who had all the money. And when you have the money, you get to rule the circumstances.

Much like my personal story, the Iranian deal centers on financial power. Rather than sitting around feeling sorry for ourselves, we always had the power to solve the problem by using our money to control the situation. Trump held his cards long enough to squeeze out North Korea so now is the time to make the move against an only slightly stronger Iran. But Iran unlike North Korea already has internal rebellious elements hungry to seize power back into the people’s control. Marxism has failed in Iran, and everywhere else it has been tried. Their plan was to loot off the United States until there was nothing left, just like the family I described who wanted to get rid of me tried to work me into my own death—literally. But once that failed and all the financial leverage was on my side of things, they found themselves crushed by the guilt and their own lack of resources and the rest is now history. Iran has suppressed their own people and they will no longer be able to bring death to the West by looting America until there was nothing left. Now all the wealth is in our court and they need it to survive—so they’ll have no choice but to submit. Mark it down on your calendars. Iran is as good as gone.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

The Revealing Statement Made by James Comey: Beating the law at their own game

One of the greatest fears that people have is of the law. They think that because our legal system is written in such a way that it defies the type of education that we get in school, and that only specialized lawyers can interpret it for us, that the law is something they cannot defend against. We can protect our homes and families with guns, but when it comes to the law we are at the mercy of specialists and the court system which we all innately know can be leveled against us to serve the interests of our enemies. We know and understand that if our enemies want to come after us that we might have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees just to keep what we had before the legal incursion—so when the law comes after you, it means to destroy you and can be quite vicious. The law is never about individuals, it’s essentially about the institution of normality which has been established through collective case-law, to impose the order of the masses against individualized effort. That made James Comey’s comments recently particularly powerful when he spoke about his wishes that Hillary Clinton were president and what impact that might have had on his future. To me this one comment encapsulates the entire case against Donald Trump from the Mueller investigation, the Rod Rosenstein rebellion and the general behavior of the FBI over the last three years toward presidential politics:

“I think I would still be the FBI director…Secretary Clinton is someone deeply enmeshed in the rule of law, respect for institutions, a lawyer,” Comey said in response to a question about what he thought would have happened to him if Clinton had won the election.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/comey-id-still-have-a-job-if-hillary-clinton-won/ar-AAwAQcN?ffid=gz

Then consider what Rosenstein said about the mounting pressure to submit documents to House Republicans, that the Justice Department was not going to be extorted—obviously he forgets who he works for. Yet in the context of what James Comey has said, now with everyone under great pressure, pressure that the FBI, CIA, and all the career bureaucrats within the Department of Justice have never had to contend with in their entire lives—they are starting to say what they really think and we are learning a great deal about the values of our legal institutions which were always at the cores of our fears. Confirmations of our worst nightmares has surfaced, in a constructive way.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/justice-dept-won’t-be-extorted-rosenstein-warns-republicans/ar-AAwBVNM?OCID=ansmsnnews11

You should never have to fear the law unless you are up to bad things, but that’s not what we are talking about in this case. The people who are having their lives destroyed because they are somehow affiliated with Donald Trump’s acquisition of the Executive Branch wouldn’t find themselves in the trouble they are in now if they had not fallen on the wrong side of politics and that is the danger. We don’t elect people like Rob Rosenstein to office, we elect presidents who do fill those positions, so everyone in the Justice Department works for the President and should be more respectful. Comey should have been more respectful before he decided to leak information to his friend to inspire the special investigation that Robert Mueller is now conducting on his witch hunt, which is all it is at this point. The institutions of government as formed by ideological moderates in both the Republican and Democratic parties are using this investigation to keep an aggressive president from changing their good life as politicians being enriched by a corrupt process. They have been using for years the institution of law and order to preserve their racket, and its very disgusting. In the past when there have been challenges to the institutional system, those people were destroyed by James Comey and Rod Rosenstein—and people lost their net worth’s and even went to jail fighting the law which was protecting a corrupt band of Washington politicians.

People like James Comey have sold the purity of their institutional roles to themselves by not looking at the corruption which created the laws, but on the laws themselves as law enforcement officers. In a similar way that a cop collecting traffic citations to raise money for the local municipality will tell their victims, “I’m only enforcing the law” they rid themselves of the responsibility for the imposition by not paying attention to how that money is spent. They surrender their judgment to the greater aspect of the institutions they serve. Maybe city council members swipe money out of the coffers to pay for strippers in Las Vegas, or perhaps to fund a new government project that helps them get elected at the next election cycle, the money and how its used is of no mind to the law enforcement officer—they are only there to enforce the law. In the same way, Comey has surrendered his thoughts to the merits of law enforcement choosing not to deal with the corruption of the laws in the first place, and why they were created. In Comey’s world and that obviously of Rob Rosenstein, lying to the public isn’t hard because they are protecting the merits of the institutions that they serve, and in their world that is task they are bound to by duty. They don’t see anything wrong with doing such a thing because they are protecting the institution for which they are a part. When Comey said of Clinton that she had respect for institutions, what he meant is that like him, Hillary Clinton put individual value behind the need of institutions to function. He is blind to someone like her who functions beyond the scope of institutions because she has always been one of the law makers which formed the institutions in the first place. That’s why his statement is so interesting and revealing.

Many people in life associate their value by the role they serve in the greater world of their occupations. A lawyer will introduce themselves at a dinner party as such—an engineer will as well. A FBI Director likely will think of themselves completely by the role they play in society—not necessarily as a dad, a husband, or perhaps a collector of coins, Legos or baseball cards. What they do for a living is what they are to the world at large—they base their value on their status within the institutions they serve. However, thinking in such a way can make such people weapons against the innocent because those who control those institutions might be malicious and up to no good and if law and order can’t be counted on to protect the innocent, then who can? The answer is nobody. Comey, Rosenstein, Mueller and many others are functioning from this assumption that they were the top of the food chain of institutional value, and that their jobs were bigger than the Executive Branch. This occurred because previous presidents yielded to the awesome power we’ve given to our institutions of law and order, because of that basic fear we all have of the law, that we think we aren’t smart enough to translate laws for ourselves and need lawyers to protect us from that scary foreign language.

The case against Trump by the federal government is exposing this massive weakness in institutional judgment. The law is clearly on the wrong side of history and now they are finding themselves caught in the quandary of their own failed philosophies. It’s not enough to say to the world that they “serve” the institutions of law and order when we can see clearly that those institutions have been used against us for years, and now that we have a president in the Executive Branch we are seeing things we always suspected clearly for the first time, and we—the electorate—don’t like it.

We should not have to fear our own system of law and order. The institutions of the FBI and other government agencies should never seek to impose themselves on the public with fancy terminology that can only be interpreted by an overpaid specialist or the judges they play golf with on the weekends. If the law doesn’t serve the people of our Republic, then it’s no good. And Donald Trump was elected by us to represent our needs, and if the institution is picking a war with him, they are essentially picking a fight with all of us. And I can say this as a guy who has fought the law many, many, many times—sometimes even representing myself as legal counsel—I’m not going to take it. That’s for sure. While its true, I do have a lot of guns to protect myself from thugs, better than that I have a mind that isn’t afraid of any lawyer or judge. And neither should you dear reader. If you want our Republic to work properly, you need to stop fearing our own legal system, and to take command of it. Voting for a good person in the Executive Branch isn’t enough, obviously.

It’s time to change the title to this song–because they “ain’t” going to win this time.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.