Military Empire and Climate Cycle Views

Archive for the month “March, 2016”

Process of Peace Economics

Military Economics (1985-1989)

Peace Economics began when I got into politics and went to thousands of different meetings of all kinds of political and civic groups.  That led to a brochure showing Ruth Sivard’s bar chart comparing military spending to growth:  finding a strong underlying relationship in that data was next.  Skepticism and lack of news about that relationship drove me to test it in every way possible, from international to various tests over time on various economies.  That led to the modeling, using graphs and multiyear averaging’s to find the essence of the situation.  That led to including the deficit, the 54 year cycle, the 9 year cycle, and special downwards adjustments for the Great Depression and the seventies Oil Crisis.  That was enough to produce the book Peace Economics in April 1986.  In April 1987 I taught my first class in Peace Economics.  Regional modeling in 1987 showed the impact of military spending on the states in the Reagan military buildup.  That required clumping the states into mini regions of about three or four states that had similar dynamics.  My congressman Peter DeFazio provided the data through the Bi-Coastal Economy Report.  Here is a link to the booklet about Peace Economics in my video:

Empire Economics (1986-1989)

Empire dynamics began with a conversation with my uncle Spencer Markham.  Sure military spending was known to be a major cause of the internally caused decline of empires.  But could all the related social effects of that decline come from that one cause, or did they arise independently?  My intuition that military spending economics was the prime cause needed to be examined and tested, and that has taken decades to do well.  Evidence for alternative theories did not look to be empirically supported.  They usually emphasize that personal weaknesses lead to an empire’s decline. Which came first, the chicken or the egg, led me to see the military cause as primary.  My own tests started with murder rates versus the military, then including crime.  This was tested in three different decades with the same near perfect results, and I did little empirical testing until the Spirit Level (2010) book gave me extensive data to show the military primacy over their income inequality theory.  Many fairly general observations easily came up to explain many details of how our society became the way it has over time.  For the general idea try this link:

Global Warming 54 Year Cycle (1988-1991)

Although the economic outline of this cycle was enough to create the 99.9% accurate sixty year model of the US manufacturing productivity model, the real work of understanding the cycle began with data from the 1988 US drought.   NOAA graphed the period 1895-1988 for the temperature and precipitation, and careful analysis of these started the process of looking for the cause of the cycle.  Using 16 data sets of various components of the Earth’s temperature and precipitation, I eventually figured out the sequence of events after three years study.  Natural Global Warming was published in May 7, 1991, and the next month the eruption of Mt. Pinatuba, on June 16th confirmed my theory, according to one of my readers.  Here is the general weather cycle concept:

Starting with 43 events on my list in 1994, I now have 56 events confirming the climate, economic, and war cycle of 54 years.  This link gives you that list:

Maturation of the Theories  

I did have some acclaim early on from 1985 to 1990, but interest in Peace Economics dropped off precipitously after the end of the Cold War.  Everyone expected a big peace dividend and that the military industrial complex would just go away.  Even the 1991 Gulf War was considered a mere blip in time and no one could imagine the War on Terror that greeted the 21st Century.   Nils Petter Gledisch of the Peace Research Institute of Oslo asked me to submit an article and sent guidelines after I sent him a copy of Peace Economics in 1986.  But I knew nothing about academic articles and let the opportunity pass.  I had someone interested in publishing my book, but when I called back a while later, he was no longer working there and they would not tell me where he had gone.  I gave many workshops in many places and sold a book or manuscript to one out of three in each audience.  After teaching a college class in three straight academic years at the University of Oregon, I switched tactics to writing a monthly column for the Oregon PeaceWorker from 1989 to 1997.  My day job was as a Certified Public Accountant, so when I taped my classes for Radio for Peace International in April to June 1997 I had to abandon the monthly column.  In 1999 I put a new book out, Real Economy, and developed the matching website  I began my doctorate in 2006 completed in 2009 studying peace studies programs in the American Midwest for my dissertation.  Then I found and began weekly press releases since December 2013.  My academic conference presentations reached about 100 including a banquet in my honor in March 2013, a Presentation Excellence Award in May 2013, and an amazing crowd reaction to my global warming theory at the World Future Society in July 2013.  Last year I was featured speaker in Hiroshima on the seventieth anniversary month of August 2015, and invited on the INTESDA advisory board, peer reviewing other papers for that conference.  This year at least two people nominated me for the Nobel Peace Prize by the February 1, 2016 deadline. That choice is finalized in early October and announced on October 11, 2016.

Nobel Peace Prize Update

Until the publication of my press release on Saturday 3-19-16, called Nobel Peace Prize Watch, I have not had any visits from Norway to my blog.   That day and the next morning, Saturday and Sunday, now I have six.  Three are the only ones so far this morning by 8:30am which is 2:30pm Norway time.  Those three started in the generic “Home page/Archives”, then “Proof of Peace Economics” and “Nobel Peace Prize Watch.”

From Sweden, on both February 10 and 18th, the much more important website was visited to view the paper “POLITICAL Military Presidency,” which was promoted to my followers list. That is a good paper, but much more traditional and less path breaking that my economic model.  The viewer from Ekero, Sweden, is a 45 minute commute from the Nobel Prize Museum.

The award for viewing my Economic Model goes to Brisbane, Australia.  That was the only recent viewer of the 11 page section from my 1986 book “Peace Economics.”  I consider that paper, excerpts from my book, the most significant achievement of all.  That work is worthy of the Nobel Prizes in both Economics and Peace.  That is the achievement that will put me in the history of science books someday.  Yet the Norwegian Nobel Committee is not going there, nobody is going there, except Brisbane, Australia.  Only Brisbane went there twice on Saturday 3-19-16 despite my providing links to that paper to hundreds of viewers of my press release that day.  This is what I mean when I call society “numbers phobic.”  My best work is with numbers, but without my analysis of those numbers and my endless following of the threads of logic that spring from those numbers, I would reach no one.  That’s why this press release campaign started in October 2013 is so vital.  Invent a new idea and the world does not beat a path to your door, unless you tell them about it.  Some “stick in the mud” academics resent it, but recognition does not occur without promotion.

On March 21, 2016, before noon German time, someone from Germany looked at “To Hillary Clinton Critics.”  This is unusual, but it is just across the river from Strasbourg where one member of the Norwegian Nobel Committee works.  It is the only contact from Germany on my website this year.

Here is the 11 page heart of the real model that is the “Proof of Peace Economics”:

Professor Robert Reuschlein, Dr. Peace,

Real Economy Institute, Madison, Wisconsin

CONTACT: 608-230-6640,



Nobel Peace Prize Watch

Several unprecedented events on my websites these last two weeks suggest the vetting is continuing of my Nobel Peace Prize nomination.  From the website:  “There are 376 candidates for the Nobel Peace Prize for 2016 out of which 228 are individuals and 148 are organizations.  376 is by far the highest number of candidates ever.  The previous record, 278 candidates, was set in 2014.”  The short list typically contains from twenty to thirty candidates.  In the first meeting at the end of the week nominations close, then the surviving nominations would be divided up by the five member committee.  Someone with some economics background would probably be assigned to vet my nomination and report back to the committee as a whole.  That has apparently happened, according to the following events.

Nobel Peace Prize Watch 3-8-16 Tuesday morning

On Monday March 7, I was interviewed by Mitch Henck on radio for a half hour at 10am.  Mitch asked how the Nobel Peace Prize nomination was going.  I told him it’s private, but my website was showing signs of an intelligent evaluative choice of press releases to read lately, not the usual random selection of the typical casually interested reader.  I must have been clairvoyant, because that night between 1:20am and 2:40am Tuesday, which corresponds to 8:20am to 9:40am Tuesday morning Oslo Norway time, someone looked at 18 of my emails.   That corresponds to a rate of 14 per hour compared to the rate of 1.7 per hour for everyone else that day, and it was a normally quieter time of day in the US.  Two press releases had an unusual three looks each, they were:  “National Security State” and “Peace is Very Hard to Sell.”    The first one helps explain my comments about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in the release 10 days before, and the second shows how hard it is to favor peace in militaristic America, possibly justifying the case for picking a US activist academic like myself for the Nobel Peace Prize.  So apparently the vetting is ongoing.

Nobel Peace Prize Watch 3-10-16 Thursday morning

Another very unusual thing happened on my website.  Just before 7am French time, someone from France looked at my site and archives 22 times, very close to the single day record of 26 views.  After going to the site, that meant 21 looks at the archives.  That takes it back to July 2014, when I published “Proof of Peace Economics” one of three that month in my “top seven most viewed press releases of all time.”  Not only is the Nobel Peace Prize mentioned in that release, but all the main evidence for the singular result that military spending does not move the economy forward but only acts as a placeholder in the economy.  This link seems to be the perfect place to stop the search backward:

The Norwegian Nobel Committee consists of five Norwegians.  One is living in France.  One of the five members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee is a former prime minister of Norway and a Social Democrat according to one wiki and member of the Labour party according to his personal wiki.  He currently serves as Secretary General of the Council of Europe, based in Strasbourg, France, in the Alsace Lorraine area near Germany on the Rhine River.  He was majoring in economics in college but did not finish his studies according to his wiki.  His name  is Thorbjørn Jagland.  His listing on the Nobel site is as follows:  Born 1950.  Secretary General, Council of Europe 2009-2020. President of the Storting, 2005-2009. Prime Minister 1996-1997, Foreign Minister 2000-2001. Member of the Storting, 1993-2009.  Member of the Norwegian Nobel Committee since 2009, reappointed for the period 2015-2020.  He appears to be the ideal candidate to vet my nomination.  Jagland is very interesting, unexpectedly resigning as Prime Minister due to a 1% drop in election results, later being demoted from Chair of the Nobel Committee in unprecedented fashion, after the Obama award, but staying on as member.  He was reappointed Secretary General of the European Council for a second five year term, also unprecedented, thanks to his good work in Ukraine.  This sounds a lot like my own up and down political career in the Democratic Party of Oregon 1980-1993.  My Peace Economics (1986 book) and “Natural Global Warming” (1991 paper) were produced in this very productive period also.  See what I mean here:

Nobel Peace Prize Watch 3-13-16 Sunday morning

An unusual viewing of my most recent press releases on happens at between 9am and 10am Oslo Norway time:  2 viewing each of the last ten press releases for a total of 20 views.  Later in the day the two other press releases in 2016 showed 2 viewing each, so all twelve press releases for 2016 are being reviewed.

Nobel Peace Prize Watch 3-14-16 Monday morning

24 views after 7am and before 10am Norway France Europe time, at a time in the US when all other views were averaging about one per hour.  The ten most recent press releases were repeat viewed.

The announcement is usually made on the second Friday of October at 11am, October 14th this year.  Wouldn’t that make a nice 3am phone call.  Current exchange rate suggests the Nobel Peace Prize is worth $959,000 (8 million Swedish krona).

The “reduction of armies” clause in Nobel’s Will is my best basis for the Peace Prize.  The will states “prizes to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit to mankind.”  I question how important timeliness is, since awards often go to discoveries thirty years old.  Coincidentally, my book Peace Economics is thirty years old this year (1986-2016).

Here is the “searched for” press release “Proof of Peace Economics”:

Professor Robert Reuschlein, Dr. Peace,

Real Economy Institute, Madison, Wisconsin

CONTACT: 608-230-6640,


Technical Proof Peace Economy

The link at the bottom of the page has six pages of the best statistical compilations for proof of the Peace Economics Theories.  Together they will give the reader a good empirical basis for Reuschlein’s Empire and Cycle Theories.  Military Spending is deadweight on the American economy, filling communities with jobs but giving very little back to the private sector economy, starving the manufacturing sector and regions based on manufacturing of key resources.  What we seem to be going through is the long slow collapse of a high military spending empire.  In fact, I often treat high military spending as the defining hallmark of empire.  Here are synopses of these five basic documents that define Peace Economics:

Defining Correlations of Peace Economics and Cycle Theory

Eight of these correlations are 0.99 or better, within 1% of a perfect 1.00, highly robust for international comparisons.  Ten define the economics of military spending and empire.  Three define the long term land ocean oscillation in temperatures known as the 54 year cycle.  Empire economics theory was relatively easy taking about six months to develop; the global warming cycle took about three years to develop.  Then it took about thirty years to communicate these paradigm shifting ideas to the rest of the world, still a work in progress.  Although I’ve outlined many corollaries along the way, uncertainties remain, and I could use a staff of ten.

Accurate Long Term Economic Model in 28 Steps

The development of the economic model was straight forward for me, just pursuing all the obvious angles until the job emerged.  The amazing part was how the final result just popped out after carefully using good judgment to estimate the parameters in advance.  The model substantiates the Kondratiev Wave, the Juglar Cycle, the lack of economic benefit of military spending (except as part of a deficit and with some rare research results compared to the research spending), and the short term benefit of deficit spending.  Military spending reduces capital investment and the manufacturing sector.

Evaporation Changes the World

Evaporation is the dominant use of solar radiation hitting the surface of the Earth.  Since water is required, evaporation is most intense over the ocean.  Hence lack of water leads to the desert’s high heat level.  Bodies of water help feed the clouds above.  Estimates using Steven Schneider’s figures (1983) suggest that land heats up as much as three times faster than ocean.  This is the driving force in the 54 year cycle.  The cycle divides into 27 years of warming as the land warms up and 27 years of cooling as the ocean brings the land back into equilibrium.   Understanding this cycle is hard work, but connecting the three cycles of weather, economics, and wars is even harder but I’ve developed good logic for those connections.

Kondratiev Pioneers the 54 Year Cycle

These 56 examples of the 54 year cycle take two pages to list.  They come in five major categories starting with weather and economics as clearly the first two.  Next comes the war cycle, the social upheaval cycle, and lastly, the strangest of all, the weather war cycle.  45% of the  results are an exact fit, overall the events are 1.32 years off the 54 year cycle, 97.5% accurate overall.  Together with the 55 year moving average fitting the last two segments 99.8% and 99.7% for R and 99.6% and 99.4% for R squared, the new theory ties together several different 54 year cycles and explains the difference between the ocean and land editions of the 54 year cycle in each 108 year cycle.  There are more droughts in the land led cycle and floods and blizzards in the ocean led cycle.

Ten Pathways to the Nobel Prize

Three Nobel Prizes should be awarded for all of my work, in Peace, Economics, and Physics.  Peace Economics starts with the nonproductive nature of military spending and leads to a brilliant sixty year model of US manufacturing productivity.  Because it includes a 54 year cycle, it was necessary to explain where the cycle comes from, and that was discovered in a three year investigation that started with the three major droughts of the twentieth century in the United States.  Working with 16 century and one half long data sets, the final piece came in the difference in annual temperature over time between the Northern and Southern Hemispheres of the planet Earth.  This lead to the 108 year cycle:  60 years with the Southern Hemisphere hotter and 48 years with the Northern Hemisphere hotter.  Hence every other 54 year cycle is slightly different.  Because the major ingredient in the economic model is military spending, empire theory becomes the easiest pathway to the Peace Prize, even though the global warming cycle clearly deserves the Physics Prize and the long term economic model clearly deserves the Economics Prize.  Unfortunately the gatekeepers of the Physics and Economics Prizes are probably both too narrow minded to award me their prizes, so the Peace Prize is the most politically possible to obtain.  The “reduction of armies” clause in Nobel’s Will is the best basis for the Peace Prize.

These key technical facts are all summarized here on these six pages: 2014-2015

Hint: to read this paper for free, you must click on the tiny word “read”


Paper about scientific revolutions and paradigm shifts:


Professor Robert Reuschlein, Dr. Peace,

Real Economy Institute, Madison, Wisconsin

CONTACT: 608-230-6640,


Key Public Peace Economics

The link at the bottom of the page has six of the best press releases for a general audience about the Peace Economics Theory.  Together they will give the reader a good feel for Reuschlein’s Empire Theory.  Military Spending has so many profound impacts on society that together it explains many of the modern complaints about American society.  What we seem to be going through is the long slow collapse of a high military spending empire.  In fact, I often treat high military spending as the defining hallmark of empire.  Here are synopses of these five most popular press releases on and the most popular single article on 

Domestic Effects of Military Spending

This was the going away favorite press release citing ten domestic effects of military spending or empire.  It was having a normal release of high initial interest gradually fading over time when suddenly, two weeks in, interest started coming in at 250 a day for several weeks.  This suggested unusually strong referrals were going on.  The ten adverse effects were productivity, crime, inequality, decline, politics, regional, social mobility, health, prisoners, and press freedom.  Many of these correlations are in the high nineties, highly robust for international comparisons.

Political Effects of Military Spending

Control of the budget is the most important tool of power in Washington DC.  Nothing is more arbitrarily, unequally, and easily distributed than military spending.  No wonder every elected president and Speaker of the House came from high military spending states during the Cold War.  In the eighties, the top twenty states had unequal distribution of per capita federal spending that was 80% coming from military spending differences by state.  80% of congressional leadership, the Supreme Court, the Presidential cabinet, and the Presidents now come from the high military spending half of America.

Defense Strategy of Military Spending

One of the biggest lies is this notion that high military spending makes a nation strong.  Actually it only gradually weakens a nation while new competitors grow more quickly and become more powerful in real strength, economic strength.  Premature high military spending leads to considerable military and economic weakness in just a few decades time.  The half life of the manufacturing sector has been thirty years during America’s long continuous decline, since  the 1945 end of World War II.

Regional Effects of Military Spending

The rise of the Sunbelt and the demise of the Rustbelt have more to do with Cold War military spending than anything else, including trade.  Half of the Cold War budget represents a transfer of wealth from the 28 Northern states to the 22 Southern states.  Trade deals have rewarded the unproductive financial and military sectors of the bi coastal economy at the expense of the productive Great Lakes region of the country.  Hollowing out the middle of the country has combined with hollowing out the middle class to feed the insatiable appetite of empire.  But the process is bringing all of us down.

Importance of Peace Economics

Personal income, the manufacturing sector, the stock market, sociology, history, politics, science, labor, education, and the environment will all have to be rewritten extensively to recognize the extensive impacts of peace economics in all these areas of life and understanding.  Many sure bets in the stock market could have been made over the years using peace economics principles.

Criminal Effects of Militarized Society

The near perfect correlation between leading economies military spending and their crime rates demands an explanation.  Once understood, it explains what the criminologists can’t explain, the sudden drop in crime and murder rates in the nineties to about half their previous levels.  Seventy years of empire have lead to invasions in the Middle East and occupations of America’s central cities by militarized “shoot first and ask questions later” police forces.  This press released the week after the Ferguson police shooting of unarmed Michael Brown became a number one big hit on

These six great top press releases are all here on these six pages:    Hint: to read this paper for free, you must click on the tiny word “read”

Professor Robert Reuschlein, Dr. Peace,

Real Economy Institute, Madison, Wisconsin

CONTACT: 608-230-6640,


Post Navigation