bobreuschlein

A topnotch WordPress.com site

Archive for the category “Sociology of Empire”

Trump Russia Fire and Fury

Trump Russian Timeline

The timeline of events and important facts of the Trump Russia story are often mentioned only once while the media overemphasize other facts.  This account features those lesser known facts and assumes many of the media redundant facts.  The British spy dossier points out that Russia tries to cultivate Western businesspeople and had been doing so with Trump for at least five years by 2016.  That implies since 2011, two years prior to the Trump Miss Universe selection in Moscow 2013.  Then in April May 2015 the CIA noticed an unusually large amount of communication between Trump Tower and Russia before the June 2015 announcement of the Trump presidential run.  Rachel Maddow noted on her show that Trump signed a letter of intent to build a Trump Tower in Moscow the morning of the third Republican presidential debate in October 2015.  Rachel further noted that Trump was unusually quiet in that debate.

The new buzzword is that Trump is a transactional person with no permanent values, always the business deal maker.  Truth means nothing to him as he reaches 2000 lies in his first year in office.  So, when seasoned politicals would have called the FBI when Russians reached out to his campaign, his operatives all acted opportunistically instead.  So, when Papadopoulos reached out to the Russians shortly after the March DNC hackings, he quickly reported to Sam Clovis in April 2016, campaign co-chair, and then leaked the connection to the Australian British ambassador in May.  That escalated to the famous June 9th meeting with Donald Trump jr., Paul Manafort, and Jared Kushner and a Russian delegation of five led by a lawyer.  Two days before Donald Trump sr. promised a new dirt on Hillary in a major speech soon.  Experts suggest there is no way Don jr. would not have immediately told Don sr. because that’s the way they operate.  The quid pro quo of it all is the view of Russia by Trump as a vast market to reach, rather than a traditional enemy of the USA.  Then he lets Manafort, who successfully managed a pro-Russian presidential campaign in Ukraine, move to take arming the Ukrainians out of the Republican Platform.  Much later, when the senate votes 98-2 for Russian sanctions on July 27, 2017, Trump signs the bill but does nothing to implement it.

The right-wing spin machine has been trying to blame that British former spy dossier for the FBI counterintelligence investigation begun in July 2016.  That is incorrect; a foreign policy advisor from the Trump campaign leaked the story over drinks with the Australian ambassador to Britain in May 2016, four weeks after his April visit to Russia where he learned of the March 2016 Russian hacking.  That Australian ambassador then reported to the US about the Russian hack of Hillary campaign related emails from the DNC.  So, at that point it was known that the Russians had illegally hacked the emails for the express purpose of helping the Trump campaign.  So, when Trump suggested in July 2016 that the Wikileaks material might have come from a 400-pound man living in his parents’ basement in Ohio, that was a red herring lie.  Donald Trump junior was in constant contact with WikiLeaks and knew full well the Russian source of those emails.  Diane Feinstein has clobbered the anti-Mueller anti-FBI anti-Hillary attempt to obstruct or distract justice by the House and Senate Republicans, especially Devin Nunes and Jim Jordan in the House.  Her courage releasing the Fusion GPS transcript of testimony about the Dossier explodes the Republican false narrative about those events.

Jared Kushner oversaw the Trump ground campaign.  Shortly after he met with the Russian ambassador in September, in early October 2016 massive file transfers occurred between Trump Tower New York and the Russian money laundering Deutsche Bank.  This is probably the source of necessary voter microtargeting data needed for the fake news bots used by Russia to help carry swing key states like Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.  Kushner was renegotiating a loan with that same bank at that same time, but the volume of data for that would be much less.  Both Donald Trump and Jared Kushner bank there as the bank recently settled a $10 billion Russian money laundering fine.  Together with Republican voter suppression laws and vote total suppression in Democratic areas this was enough to swing the election by 70,000 votes in those three states, despite Hillary’s three million popular vote majority nationwide.  For example, an estimated 200,000 voters in Wisconsin were disenfranchised by the new voter ID law there, and 85,000 people from mainly Democratic areas in Michigan mysteriously did not vote for president.

“Fire and Fury” Fallout by Michael Wolff

The new book shows the universal opinion of Trump staff that Trump is not qualified for the job and not very intelligent.  However, other recent Republican presidents since Nixon are estimated to have only average intelligence.  Still the low opinion of staff is not there for Ford Reagan and the Bushes like it appears to be for Trump.  Bannon’s humiliation may end up working for Trump as political figures need to be either feared or loved to succeed, and this episode shows Trump should be feared.

Summary

Trump wants to do business with Russia and admires other authoritarian figures like Putin in Russia and Erdogan in Turkey.  He is a figure of resistance against the browning of America.  He does not understand the essentials of democracy like checks and balances, a free press, and an independent judiciary.  He resists the cold war bureaucracy of the modern military industrial complex while championing the cause of the military.  He supports military strength while resisting foreign policy orthodoxy.  These impulses have driven him into the arms of Putin the master spy manipulator and the current cooperation with Russia to get elected and to make deals around the world.  This puts him squarely in the sights of the obstruction of justice problem and possible impeachment.

Presidents and Emperors

Parallels exist between the American and Roman Empires.  Nero fiddled while Rome burned.  George Bush jr. fiddled at a fundraiser while New Orleans drowned from Katrina.   Emperor Caligula lasted four years and was considered the crazy emperor.  His name comes from his reputation for small boots.  Trump is the crazy president noted for his small hands.

Nobel Prize Update

The same usual pattern of viewing all my expertclick.com press releases in a row tipped me off that the Norwegian Nobel Committee was interested in my nomination.  That same pattern recurred 12 days, 10 days, and 1 day before the last announcement October 6th, 2017.  So, I came very close last time.  Then November 3rd and 10th both Fridays, tipped me off that they may have had buyer’s remorse not picking me last time, with 5 German and 3 French views on those two days, where my assigned committee member is located as Secretary General of the Council of Europe.  Evidently Thorbjorn Jagland works in Strasbourg France and may also connect to the internet across the river in Germany on occasion.  February 1st is the deadline for nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize.  Associate Professors of Social Sciences and related areas as well as government officials and members of national assemblies are among the many eligible to nominate.  The Norwegian Nobel Committee has launched an on-line nomination form.  Please read more here: https://www.nobelpeaceprize.org/Nomination.  I thank those who have nominated me the last two years and anyone who does again this time.          

For additional information about election stealing in the USA:

https://www.academia.edu/30092060/ELECTION_Stealing_2004_&_2000_24_pages_2004.doc

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2018, January 1), “Trump Russia Fire and Fury” Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Trump-Russia-Fire-and-Fury,2018152922.aspx

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted 2016, and one of 76 Given Odds, tied for 31st for the Nobel Peace Prize 2017
Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, Info: www.realeconomy.com

Advertisements

Peace & Security Economists

The following report was published in the November 2003 Newsletter of “Economists for Peace and Security”.  It is typical of the differences between my science of economics and the traditional nature of far left economists who still stubbornly cling to the notion that economics is a social science.  It’s all just a matter of degree and perspective.  Water can be gas, a liquid, or a solid.  Economics is like the gas state at the individual level and like the liquid state at the business level.  When economists say there will never be a science of economics they really mean there will never be a solid state for economics.  But when solid state like qualities are found in macroeconomics as in my 20th and 21st century modeling, economists of all stripes are inclined to stick to their training rather than accept a new truth.  Even a hard science like physics can resemble the social sciences at the quantum physics level. But without the uncertainty of the Schrodinger wave equation we can not explain the solid state circuit board of all our modern electronics.  Uncertainty becomes certainty as activity reaches modern levels of trillions of dollars and billions of people.  All we have to lose is our illusions and build new models from scratch and common sense as an engineer and accountant would.  This was written before my 2009 doctorate.

War and Empire: The Political Economy of US Militarism by Robert Reuschlein

Meeting from August 23-26 2003, members of the Union of Radical Political Economists, URPE, considered war and empire. The David Gordon Lecture was given by Michael Perelman of Cal State Chico on War, Empire, and Economic Decline. He said empire emerges with weakening of the economy. (I would take this a step further to say that “empire” with high levels of military spending causes a chronically weakened economy.) He went on to say the US was outsourcing production to concentrate on distribution, and that deindustrialization was acceptable to the public. (I find this an inevitable result of wasting key resources on the military, thus hollowing out the technological base of the economy to leave only the service and distribution sectors at world class competitive levels as “empire decay” sets in.)

He alluded to strategic overreach, saying “ever new acquisitions bring ever new frontiers of risk.” He said the military would not save the economy, that postwar busts follow wartime booms, and he mused that WWII might have marked a height for demand helped by war. (But I say the 1946 economy was the same size as that of 1941, setting America back five years, and that the manufacturing productivity growth rate for the forties was 40 percent below average, suggesting four lost years, most likely the war years. Of course others suffered even more: Russia was set back 8 years, Germany 13 years, and Japan 17 years by the war.) He said the military squanders talented resources making civilian industry less competitive.

Other speakers were Bob Pollin, Alan Campbell, David Laibman, and Paddy Quick. Pollin, who will soon host the URPE office at the University of Massachusetts in Amherst, anchored a Sunday morning panel on The Effects of War and Empire at Home. The speakers were good; it’s just that they all seemed to agree that military spending stimulates the economy, a point for which I find precious little evidence. (Even in World War II, when war bonding failed to keep up with war spending in the third and fourth years, the economy slowed and then halted. So I believe that deficit and adrenaline war booms happen in spite of a military drag on the economy, not because of military spending.)

Pollin’s lecture discussed the Clinton years as a 36 percent cut in the military and a 10 percent to 20 percent drop in social programs producing the surplus: that’s the peace dividend. He argued that the stock market boom helped boost private consumption from 62 to 68 percent of the economy, creating the growth wave as local government grew and federal government shrank from 22 to 18 percent. He thinks the best way to stimulate the economy would be for the federal government to bail out the states. Nothing in his lecture suggested the negative effects of military spending as outlined by Michael Perelman. Pollin believes in military Keynesianism, ignoring the possibility that large cuts in military spending after the end of the Cold War propelled the nineties boom. He sees military spending as a political negative but an economic positive.

Alan Campbell was the coordinator of workshops and plenaries. The group is certainly egalitarian, and tries to give everyone a workshop. He also presented a slide show demonstrating a rich understanding of the Cuban economy.

David Laibman used his thorough grasp of the ins and outs of macroeconomic analysis for an imaginative workshop showing aggregate supply and demand models with their sundry price level variables and feedback loops.

My workshop on the “Social Decay of Empire” focused on the ways societies with high military spending become stagnant and frustrated internally.

Robert Reuschlein, a member of ECAAR, is an MBA engineer and CPA and a war-gaming mathematician who has published and spoken widely on issues of war and economics. See http://www.realeconomy.com.

Economists for Peace and Security http://www.epsusa.org

 

For additional information please see this Published Article (with details added):

https://www.academia.edu/23034796/TECHNICAL_Peace_Economics_8p._2014-2016

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2018, January 1), “Economists Peace & Security”  Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Economists-Peace-&-Security,2018152413.aspx

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted 2016, and one of 76 Given Odds, tied for 31st for the Nobel Peace Prize 2017
Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, Info: www.realeconomy.com

Scientific Methods Variety

What is the scientific method? 

According to Google these are the seven steps of the scientific method:

  • Make an observation.
  • Conduct research.
  • Form hypothesis.
  • Test hypothesis.
  • Record data.
  • Draw conclusion.
  • Replicate.

How is it used in the social sciences compared to the hard sciences?

The hard sciences like physics and chemistry follow the scientific method more closely, more traditionally, more quantitatively.  The social sciences are usually looking for more nuance and focus on proceeding from a scholastic literature review of previous work in the field of choice.  So they are starting with the “form hypotheses” or questions stage after a literature review, the third step in this process as described by Google on 11-29-17.  Only then do they proceed with the more basic research approach with the first two steps of observation and conducting research.  This is more of a qualitative approach than the more quantitatively oriented basic research approach of the hard sciences which follows in the same order of the Google approach.  The basis for most social science work is the APA standard of the American Psychological Association.  The social sciences have a bias and assumption that they reflect the complexity and diversity of the human species and human civilization, hence psychology sets the standard.  As one sociology professor once told me, a correlation of 0.30 is significant, and perfect fits are inherently suspect.  This is very different from the basic research approach of the hard sciences, where the last step, replication, is expected to be exact.  Close is considered good enough for the social sciences where ambiguity of results is expected to resemble the diversity of the human experience.

How is it used in economics? 

Nobel prize winner in 1973 economics sciences, laureate Wassily Leontief, has said that 97% of the economics literature consists of articles about other people’s articles, and 2.5% is for model building and 0.5% is basic research.  So when Robert Reuschlein pursues modeling and basic research as his primary focus he is already outside of the mainstream.  Economics History Society co-founder R. H. Tawney, rejecting the Marshallian economics of his day, asserted that “There is no such thing as a science of economics, nor ever will be.”  This remains the common belief of the average economist today.  See “The Nobel Factor” subtitled “The Prize in Economics, Social Democracy and the Market Turn” by Avner Offer and Gabriel Soderberg (2016), and reviewed by Jim Tomlinson (2016).  These views are furthered by the department head’s views when I was admitted to the University of Oregon Economics Doctoral Program.  His view was the starting with the data was cheating, that the reasonable hypothesis must come first.  This makes sense if you are constructing econometric models of fifty some “three or four variable” equations, because the degrees of freedom with make the results meaningless.  This doesn’t make sense for a three factor elegant scientific sixty year model such as created by Robert Reuschlein. Following the elegant basic truths of the hard science methodology is completely different from the traditional social science methodology, where 97% of the economic literature is perfectly happy to do.

Does peer review help or hinder scientific revolutions? 

Peer Review can easily lead to the situation where new ideas can be considered inappropriate, as has often happened to a colleague of mine that has repeatedly offered new path breaking articles in emerging new fields.  I find this in my own work on Peace I can leave the crowd so stunned they do not know where to begin with questions.  This is very frustrating so I have turned to blogging in an effort to simplify the material enough to make partial progress.  The wordy diversity junkies of the social sciences simply do not have the patience to follow the systematic building of a long string of engineering steps that lead to a physics like solid conclusion.  Some have called me “dry” as I carefully seek to clarify simple important points.  Others call me arrogant for the courage of my convictions based on provable math.  If you do not have the understandings of business, you can easily accuse me of self promotion, but without promotion branding and marketing, new ideas go nowhere.  If you think avoiding war or social movements are the only acceptable paths to peace, you fail to see how reducing military spending and better understanding the causes and time periods for war can lead to much happier lives and prosperity for whole populations.  If you do not see the connection between military spending and murder rates or poor health outcomes, you are giving military spending too much credit, underestimating the domestic destruction of militarism.

Does it help or hinder interdisciplinary studies?

Peer review  and differing interpretations of the scientific method can be great impediments to new thinking that can only be truly appreciated in an interdisciplinary way.  Interdisciplinary thinking helps clarify basic concepts by looking at them from several angles.  This is the same kind of triangulation that is used in astronomy to estimate how far away objects are.  Differing religions can put barriers between people, but all religions have their version of the Golden Rule.  Hence multiple religions can better triangulate basic principles of good.  Some religions say pray always, while others encourage chanting singing and meditation to the same effect.  History, politics, economics, sociology, and psychology should be unified in their thinking, not at war  with each other in their separate silos and linguistics.  Empire theory helps unify these different disciplines at a basic level.  Having a common backbone can help the various social sciences relate to each other.

For More Information:

https://www.academia.edu/5558307/ACCURATE_ECONOMICS_MODEL_US_18ppt_3p._2014

Published Article:

https://www.academia.edu/23034796/TECHNICAL_Peace_Economics_8p._2014-2016

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2017, December 10), “Scientific Methods Variety”  Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Scientific-Methods-Variety,2017131789.aspx

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted 2016, and one of 76 Given Odds, tied for 31st for the Nobel Peace Prize 2017
Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, Info: www.realeconomy.com

Findings and Special Claims

Since the Norwegian Nobel Committee seems to be taking me very seriously lately, it’s time for a catalog of my findings and special claims.

  1. Manufacturing Productivity growth rate reduces in proportion to military economy. Ruth Sivard provided the bar chart of nineteen years summary of G7 countries plus Sweden and Denmark in 1981.  Nils Petter Gledisch correlated the data at R=-0.81.  Reuschlein combined Europe and North America improving the continental correlation to R=-0.997.  Claim:  this proves the non-productive nature of military spending.  Reuschlein 1986.
  2. Capital Investment reduces by the amount of military spending. Ruth Sivard in 1983 published this bar chart of the G7 countries plus Sweden over a twenty one year period.  Reuschlein claims that for five of these countries R=-0.993.  The outliers of Italy and Canada are secondary countries in the two main continents, 3.5% GDP lower than the main top four NATO countries, and Japan is 4.5% GDP higher due to a strong cultural bias towards savings. Reuschlein 1986.
  3. American economic productivity model from 1920 to 1983 shows a correlation of R=0.999. All parameters were independently arrived at from annual historical data analysis.  Claim:  this model proves the existence of the 1926 Nicolai Kondratieff 54 year cycle and the Clement Juglar 1860 nine year investment cycle.  This model also has trade loss Great Depression factor and oil shock seventies Oil Crisis factor.  These special factors also repeat confirm their accuracy on a three year basis. Reuschlein 1986.
  4. Defense Strategy model 1985 and 1986. Here is where my war-gaming background comes in handy.  Claim:  this is the key concept why it is imperative for nations to reduce military spending or suffer long term national security disaster in a next major war decades from now.
  5. Decade by decade GDP of these same countries from 1900 to 1980 shows countries rising on low military and falling on high military generally. Best examples, USA, Japan, Russia, Germany.  Claim:  rise and fall of nations depends on level of military spending.  This supports 1972 Toynbee claim that 23 of 25 empires fell because of their high military spending.  Reuschlein 1986.
  6. Murder and Crime rates of five of same countries are proportional to the military economy. The five are from high to low America, Germany, Sweden, Italy, Japan, R=0.996.  This works best for murder rates, and crime index of murder, crime, criminals.  Sweden does not fit for crime index because of definitional issues such as misdemeanors added to felonies.  These five are all 160 year old societies.  The 400 year old societies of England, France, Massachusetts, and Virginia also correlate, R=0.93, but at a 60% lower rate.  The additional 240 years divided by 400 years is 60%.  This indicates a reduced crime rate for being a stable society, but still affected by the military economy size.  Claim:  social decay of declining empires is a direct result of the military spending levels, both because of the economic stagnation and the level of militarism.  Reuschlein 1989.
  7. Regional Growth proportional to military spending changes R=0.97. Analysis of Bi-Coastal Economy report of 1986 shows this when adding military spending changes and grouping states together around regional hub cities or other logical economic clusters of 17 state cluster mini-regions. Cluster idea partial credit goes to Los Angeles Book Award “Cities and the Wealth of Nations” and Reuschlein’s accounting background.  Reuschlein 1987.
  8. Kondratieff wave not only in economics, but also in droughts, temperature, and in wars. Reuschlein 1991.  Claim:  my list of 56 major events, natural, economics, and wars, shows 20 exact year fits and an average departure of 1.5 years from the 54 year cycle.  Drought data prepared by NOAA in 1988, presented on C-SPAN, started the three year project.
  9. Reuschlein finds 54 year cycle in a variety of volcanic, drought, flood, temperature, precipitation, hurricanes, blizzards, earthquakes, and El Nino data. “Trends 90” a key statistical help with other sources.  Working with 14 temperature and 2 precipitation data sets I gradually discovered the pattern.  The difference in hemispheres North and South confirmed the pattern.  My forecasting prowess once earned top honors in a business course on production 1976.
  10. Found nine year cycle in precipitation records 1991. With nine year and 54 year cycles in both temperature and economics, what is the connection?  Failed trying to find it in agriculture.  Then the business production class bails me out as I remember Frederick Taylor’s work finding an ideal temperature to build railroads of 64 degrees Fahrenheit.  A 1986 Climate Change video aired on Maryland PBS by Australian Journalist James Walker leads to Ideal Temperature Zone concept.  Claim:  humans respond to excessive heat with lethargy, creating the link between economic cycles and weather cycles.
  11. Goldstein 1987 finds fifty year cycle in major wars in Europe last five hundred years. Reuschlein extends this to three hundred years of Roman Empire, 200 years of America, for a total of 1000 years with 6 of 17 major war years projected onto the future year 2025.  Pattern is usually #1 versus #2 power after 27 year high growth period when wealth is maximized and new economic differences are maximized.  Then about three years into the new low growth period, at the end of a major cold year two or three year trend, leaders seek a distraction into war and the major war breaks out.  Claim:  both economics and temperature lead to major wars.
  12. Finding: unemployment rate variance across the states fluctuates greatly with the military spending.  For the 1984-1992 period, US military spending % GDP drops 23% overall while the Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell’s home state Maine increases 100%. 12 state clusters representing the Eastern 78% of the country correlate directly with the military changes, R=0.97.  The largest rise in unemployment occurs in Massachusetts as Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill retires in 1986.  Opposite pattern of #7 but same correlation, as the sixteen states that benefited most under Reagan military buildup have fourteen of the highest unemployment rate increases.  The two exceptions?  South Carolina and Georgia with the chair and ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee representing those two states.  Reuschlein 1992.
  13. Richard Schneider asks me to teach my course on “University of the Air” Radio for Peace International 1997. Finding:  recognizing the manufacturing nature of military spending taken as a whole.  1991 University of Colorado professor invites me to write up the manufacturing productivity connection explanation.  Finding:  must look at arms manufacturers as suppliers to the military “factory”.  Then military “factory” is light manufacturing with heavy equipment manufactured by arms industry.  Then absence of a positive product that helps meet human needs like food, clothing, shelter, transportation, fuel, and other hard goods explains how military spending inputs can nourish local communities while giving back only a political service to the larger community or nation.  Necessity is not the issue, national defense is not the issue; lack of a consumer product is the economic flaw in military spending.  Input Output analysis is the key to this understanding.
  14. Spirit Level 2010 by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Puckett shows that income inequality leads to disastrous social and health outcomes. Finding:  Military Spending has much stronger correlations on the six strongest components of their index.  Claim:  Decline of empire is more responsible for poor social conditions than income inequality.
  15. Doctoral Dissertation on Peace Economics in Peace Studies 2009 finds that of eight key concepts in Peace Economics as I define it, Peace Studies programs are very weak on two. Those are the regional state by state economics of military spending and the long cycle of history of booms and busts and wars.  The 54 year cycle is hardly mentioned.  Claim:  not understanding the local impact of military spending and politics beyond the usual generalities avoids findings like all presidents elected during the 11 elections of the Cold War came from an above average military spending state.  Claim:  not understanding the long cycle leads to poor prediction of wars, which leads to military over preparation for constant wars and war threats.
  16. Finding: Klyashtorin’s spectrum analysis of Greenland ice core data shows a very strong 55 year cycle in temperature data over 1400 years.  A friend on a global warming list-serve shared that research from decades ago in circa 2005.  Finding after Hurricane Sandy in 2012:  Running a 55 year moving average over the 1850 to 2010 annual global temperature data smooths the graph into three straight lines, with the last two correlating at .998 and .997 respectively.  Claim:  this proves the existence of the Kondratieff wave   and the natural origins of that cycle show that the economic cycle is not human made but comes from a cycle between land and ocean caused by differential evaporation rates over land and ocean.  Like the four seasons over 12 months this super season occurs over 54 years and occurs despite background changes to the underlying trends caused by the Greenhouse Effect.

Summary

  1. Claim: Recognition of this body of work will lead to better severe weather and major hurricane repeat events predictions as historical records are analyzed and regionalized better.

Claim:  Fortunes will be made in the stock market as the regional impact of major military budget changes is seen to change the fortunes of regionally concentrated stocks and as military states and manufacturing states are seen to move in opposite directions.  Claim:  downward pressure will be strong on all military budgets everywhere as nations begin to understand the self-defeating role high military spending has on a nation’s real defense strength, its economy, over the course of a few decades:  a better balance will be struck between short term defense and long term defense.  Claim:  economic benefits as well as social benefits will accrue to those who find a lower balance of military spending as the way to go.  The million US homicide deaths that occurred in the thirty years after John Lennon’s death could have been cut in half if the military budget had been cut in half, saving 500,000 lives.  Claim:  science will be enhanced greatly as economics and climate change each improve in accuracy by an order of magnitude, with many benefits to the billions of people on this planet.  Claim:  all of these benefits and more will only occur if someone like the Norwegian Nobel Committee helps me get over the publicity and recognition hurdles, so that thousands of scientist can help take this work to the next level.

Seven Page Summary of Main Ideas:

https://www.academia.edu/33884446/Main_Ideas_Summary_July_2017_7pages

 

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2017, November 16), “Why Is the USA an Empire?”  Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Findings-and-Special-Claims,2017131181.aspx

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted 2016, and one of 76 Given Odds, tied for 31st for the Nobel Peace Prize 2017
Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, Info: www.realeconomy.com

Why Is the USA an Empire?

Many make the mistake of defining an empire by its legal structure or the formal way it projects its power overseas.  That is too narrow a definition.  Who is considered a citizen and what lands are possessed by the empire often are the basis of traditional empire definition.  A better modern definition of empire would look at the flows into and out of a country to better define the scope of empire.  Those who recognize America as an empire often begin with the 700 or 800 foreign military bases the United States has worldwide.  Those who would call America an empire would often refer to this as Imperial Overstretch and consider this a main cause of the decline of empires generally speaking.  I myself find the large standing military and overseas political entanglements a better definition of an empire society.  Because the military budget itself defines and measures so much of the rate of economic decline and the rise of various forms of social decay and political control, that is the single best measure of empire as I see it.  Control of large areas of land outside of the original nation state is just not the way Americans like to do business or see themselves; they like to think they are a democracy, not an empire.  But post World War II America not only adopted a large standing army, it also projected its democratic image in a variety of world institutions like the United Nations, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.  However, the mixture of America’s elites (often Ivy League) among the areas of dominance in business, politics, law, media, and the intelligence agencies has created a ruling class.  This ruling class has over time become ingrown and stifles social mobility among the various income groups.  There are still success stories among the land grant college graduates and the military, but America is now more of a class based society than Europe; just the opposite of the situation around World War II, the hegemonic war that lead to US world dominance and empire.

How Did We Get This Way?

The start of the modern American empire was in 1944, when the Democratic Party Convention failed to keep the liberal Wallace as Vice President.  He earned 63% of the vote, but the rules required a two thirds vote.  Early the next morning, moderate Truman was voted in.  Truman was determined to oppose the Soviets and use the atomic bomb, taking the Churchill side of the debate and setting up the rise of the Cold War confrontation.  Then in 1947 the national security act was passed creating the CIA and the Nazi spy network in Russia was absorbed into the CIA.  All this was opposed by the Secretary of War and the Joint Chiefs of Staff who wanted a traditional small army between wars rather than the large standing army of the Cold War.  So Truman raised the military to 5% of the economy rather than the traditional 1% between wars that went back to the 19th Century.  After Korea, Eisenhower then doubled that rate to 10% of the economy keeping the Eisenhower economy under a 2.5% annual growth rate.  Oddly, in both 1953 and 1961 Eisenhower warned us about the military industrial complex even as he was their agent.  Under Kennedy through Carter, except for the Vietnam War, the military was brought back down to the Truman pre-Korea levels of 5% of the economy.  Then Reagan reversed course raising the military to 6.5% of the economy, supported by a tax cut deficit twice the rise in military spending to keep the economy from collapsing.  Kennedy brought military spending down to 7.7% of the economy by 1965 that together with the Kennedy targeted tax cut investment tax credit created the sixties boom.  The four years after 1965 had a 5.6% growth rate, the next four years 4.0% and the next four years 3.6% as the Vietnam War dragged down the economy under Johnson and Nixon through 1973.  The next sixteen years of four presidential terms averaged about 2.5% growth in each term as the post-Vietnam oil crisis recession, the Carter 1978 tax, and Reagan military buildup weighed down the economy into mediocracy.  The Bush senior term suffered from the 1990 tax increase and the post-Cold War and post-Gulf War recessions that elected Clinton in 1992.  Then the drop from 6.5% military to 3.0% from 1965 to 1999 returned the economy to sixties like high growth rates under Clinton. Bush junior then ruined the surplus and the economy with a Reagan like military buildup to 5.0% of the economy with a too small tax cut.  A suddenly surging military buildup, in fiscal 2008, doubled the increase of the military compared to years before and since, and leads to the financial collapse of 2008-2009.  Deregulation of derivatives in 1999 lead to a ten-fold increase in derivatives that set the table for the financial collapse, but a quarter by quarter economy analysis shows the four quarters of the fiscal year 2008 were the worst economic quarter results in that period of several years either side of 2008.  So the Iraq War surge, that actually began in July 2008, lead directly to the economic collapse, combined with the bank deregulation and lack of SEC oversight to make matters worse.  The economic recovery under Obama was slow as he tripled troops in Afghanistan, keeping Bush levels of military spending, but picked up in his second term as the military budget finally went down. This link gives you a better detailed historical account of the American presidencies and supporting data: https://www.academia.edu/4044532/HISTORY_Presidents_Military_Economy_1910-2009_3p._2013

What Are Some Effects of Empire Levels of Military Spending?

As Toynbee (1972) noticed, 23 of 25 civilizations studied collapsed due to high levels of military spending.  Control of the military budget is two way street, corrupting the political system while giving power to those who dole out the money.  The social decay of empire is a result of the economic lost energy represented by the dead end purpose of military spending.  Not meeting people’s needs as they multiply under a stagnant empire political economy structure leads to poor health, lack of social mobility, and high anxiety and crime.  Just as Rome’s Nero fiddled while Rome burned, Bush fiddled while New Orleans was drowned by hurricane Katrina.  Just as Rome once had a crazy emperor for four years named Caligula for his small boots. America now has a crazy president noted for his small hands. Empires tend to emphasize power and control in their social structure, while healthier societies emphasize achievement.  Here are a wide variety of comparative aspects of an empire society including power/achievement, control/opportunity, win/lose, feudalism/ingenuity, boredom/excitement, high crime/low crime, football/baseball, bomb/home, forgiving/unforgiving:

https://www.academia.edu/11421799/MILITARISM_CONTROL_Empire_Social_Decay_WWW_97_6p

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2017, November 5), “Why Is the USA an Empire?”  Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Why-Is-the-USA-an-Empire?,2017130884.aspx

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute, Nominated Vetted 2016, and one of 76 Given Odds, tied for 31st for the Nobel Peace Prize 2017
Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, Info: www.realeconomy.com

Changing the World Views

How Mastering Macroeconomics and Climate Change Created Kudos and Backlash

My academic work creating a perfect science-like model of economic growth proves that military spending is the biggest impediment to a powerful nation’s economic growth.  That in turn leads to my new defense strategy requiring a nation to minimize military spending or fall into decline that will inevitably be eclipsed by another power.  Many falsely assume this decline to be inevitable, when in fact it is the result of prolonged over-militarization.  The Norwegian Nobel Committee’s failure to recognize this new reality of science only delays, it does not stop, the inevitable recognition that excessive militarization is self-poisoning of a society.  It does not stop the fact that huge stock market gains are possible following the moves of the military industrial complex better and recognizing the Great Lakes states region moves in the opposite direction of the military budget.  That is because military spending drains key science and capital resources away from civilian manufacturing industries that can be restored by reducing the military budget.  Even the military will benefit from initial lowering, because that results in a better future for them and the society around them as the new high growth glide path “tide lifts even the military boat” ever higher faster.

History of Campaigning to Change the World

My campaign to change the world began with a brochure with a bar chart by Ruth Sivard in 1983.  I took it to the walls of legislative workspace of the 1983 Oregon legislative session with blown up copies of that bar chart.  Finding that in my files after the 1985 Oregon legislative session, I realized the world was ignoring her great work, so I began to test it.  My tests lead to the first presentation of material in December 1985 to the Lane County Commissioners, including Jerry Rust who offered to submit my material to the Pulitzer Prize committee back then and in 2016 submitted my first nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize.  Then Frank Arundel offered me his MacIntosh to complete the first edition of “Peace Economics” in 1986 which I extensively footnoted unlike these blogs.  That remains my clearest and most convincing work of the Economic Model that results from the nonproductive nature of military spending.  PRIO, the “Journal of Peace Research” in Oslo Norway where the Nobel Prize is awarded, asked me to submit an article, but I did not know how to, so I ignored them.  I taught three academic years my Peace Economics course from 1987 to 1989 at the University of Oregon.  My enrollment for a Doctorate in Economics at U.O. ended in my withdrawal due to the fact my professors agreed with me that military spending was non-productive, yet it was not in the model we were expected to study for the first year.  Frustrated at the University, I turned to being a monthly columnist 1989-1997 with Peter Bergel’s Oregon PeaceWorker which had a circulation of 10,000.  Soon all the Democratic Congresspersons knew of my work and Peter DeFazio asked me to write a piece for him to read on the floor of the House, but I was intimidated once more, fearing I might be too critical for a political body like that.  Then Richard Schneider of Radio for Peace International asked me to offer a University of the Air shortwave radio course in 1997 until 2004 when RFPI folded.

The New Campaign

Having met a professor at an anti-war rally in 2003, she later helped me find a new Doctoral Program without the obstinacy of Economics.  From 2006 to 2009 I completed the Doctorate in Educational Leadership from Madison, Wisconsin’s Edgewood College, next to the Edgewood High School I once graduated from and earned the first of many subsequent listings in Marquis Who’s Who I am listed in, later including America and World.  My day job for many years had been as a CPA working for my father, but now I could finally get on with my real life’s work establishing the new scientific economic theory no one in the field of economics even thought was possible.  Economists and Accountants don’t have the scientific training of an engineer, my first degree, so I knew the only way was to advance my ideas to academics and the public until the anticipated foot dragging of economists was overcome.  To that end, I turned to blogging press releases on expertclick.com, recommended by an author I had read.  I now have 119,000 views on Expertclick.com over a four year period, 5443 views on Academia.edu, 5014 views on WordPress.com, and about 10,000 views on Realeconomy.com which has links to all the other detailed websites and is the best place to start.

Favorites of the Press

ExpertClick.com shows me constant updates I check daily for the most current 50 press releases sent out to their list of 7000.  Of those who have left the 50 list, but remain on access to site visitors, I update those results once a year.  The full lists ranked by both views and chronologically are at the link at the bottom of this page.  The most popular old releases in the last year are, in rank order of views this last year, in parentheses (all time total), and date:

Predictions 200 (1067) 8-26-14, Global Citizen 190 (1289)     6-28-14, Walker Work Dignity 154 (722) 2-28-15, Politician in Eugene 151 (789) 5-14-14, Scientific Revolution 142 (687) 12-21-14, Nepal Chile 127 (595) 4-28-15, Grandpa Horicon Marsh 121 (695) 3-1-14, Elections Plus 114 (553) 11-13-14, Military Terror Policing 101 (1222) 8-17-14, Modern Feudalism 99 (863) 2-21-15, Religion and Empire 99 (795) 1-3-15, Heat Hurts 99 (652) 9-8-14, Baltimore Riot 97 (613) 5-2-15.

Favorites of the Academics

Academia.edu lists my 72 papers, including seven peer reviewed articles, several six per page power point conference presentations, many chapters of my unpublished book based on the Radio for Peace International course, the most important Defense Strategy and Economic Model chapters of “Peace Economics”, and many special papers on key topics old and new.  These are ranked by downloads as a marker of serious interest in the link at the end of this article. Unfortunately, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has focused only on the superficial ExpertClick.com press releases and not enough on this academic papers section.  The most important work of all is the 1986 Economic Model and the 1986 Defense Strategy chapters from “Peace Economics” worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize.  The Climate War Cycle power point from 7-20-13 World Future Society presentation and the Weather Cycle paper document the 54 year cycle work that is worthy of the Nobel Physics Prize.  Both of these together are worthy of the Nobel Economics Prize.  Alas for me, the world is full of very slow learners. The ranked lists of state, country, and topics are all shown in the link at the bottom of this page.  This is my best source for people and places interested in my work, and show an evolution from mainly US interest, to mainly British Empire interest among the foreign interest, to strong global acceptance of my work beyond the British Empire countries including more US and worldwide gamers from the Gary Gygax and Dungeons and Dragons crowd.

Favorites of the Mostly Political Friends and Public

BobReuschlein.wordpress.com is where I put all my press releases, and it allows typos to be corrected so it is the best version of my press releases and includes some excellent work just before I started with ExpertClick.com in October 2013 including the first interest by the Pentagon and the CIA in my work. This general list to the public and my mostly political friends has very different priorities than the other two.  Much of this comes from referrals.  Here are the 16 most interesting articles according to the common folk out there, in rank order of views:

1133 Scientific Revolution Facts (Thomas Kuhn), 114 “Where to Invade Next” (Michael Moore), 104 Wargaming with Gary Gygax, 92 Game Master Gygax History, 70 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee, 58 Politician in Eugene Oregon, 53 History US Military Economy, 51 The New Weimar Republic, 47 Are Chili and Nepal Related?, 47 Modern Stages of Empire, 43 Scott Walker of Wisconsin, 42 To Hillary Clinton Critics, 40 Paris Terror, Who Gains?, 40 CIA Presidents:  Obama Clinton, 38 Baltimore Riot the New Watts, 38 Odds on Nobel Peace Prize.

For complete ranked lists of viewings by topic, state, country, by websites:

https://www.academia.edu/34794541/CHANGING_WORLD_VIEWS_2013-2017_13p

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2017, October 8). “Changing the World Views”.  Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Changing-the-World-Views-Robert-Reuschlein,2017130137.aspx

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted 2016, and one of 76 Given Odds, tied for 31st Nobel Peace Prize 2017
Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, Info: www.realeconomy.com

Teaching Peace Economics

People wonder why I criticize exactly the people I need on my side.  It’s because I’m not writing for them, my academic colleagues, I’m writing for history.  In the course of time, even though many of them rightly consider themselves great for their disciplines or great among their colleagues, most of them will be long forgotten one hundred years from now.  I’m different.  My work is so unique many fail to understand it.  I will be remembered one hundred years from now, probably better posthumously than now.  I have found scientific bedrock in two fields, economics and climate.  Because I’m an outsider to those fields, a talented mathematician, wargamer, and politician in that order, I consider my best chance for a Nobel Prize is in the political field of Peace.  I consider that I have a very good chance of becoming the first to win three Nobel Prizes, in Peace, Economics, and Physics.  People want to pigeon-hole me into one area or another without seeing the essential interconnectedness of it all.  My achievement would not have been possible without my thorough intuitive understanding of mathematics in a real world context.  A mathematician and wargamer with depth in politics is what it took to find the answers in fields long thought to be imprecise in the aggregate.  My frustrations and situation sound a lot like those of Galileo trying to awaken the world to the Copernican Revolution in astronomy to me.  Try telling today’s economists that military spending and temperature trends are the two biggest impediments to economic growth.  They’d be rolling in the aisles with laughter.

Living with Thomas Kuhn’s Insights

When Thomas Kuhn wrote “Structure of a Scientific Revolution” he gave me the guideposts to understanding the resistance of those in the world around me when I came out with my first strong findings in my short book “Peace Economics” in 1986.  Days ago I attended a memorial service of another somewhat reclusively shy academic, Warren Hagstrom, a Sociology Professor at UW Madison, either the first or second ranked such school program in the world (Berkeley is the rival).  On the cover of his memorial service brochure is this John Maynard Keynes quote “The difficulty lies not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping from old ones.”  Indeed.  Lately I’ve come to realize the mistake of starting with World War II in my 2010 forty minute video and 24 page accompanying pamphlet on Peace Economics.  Challenging Military Keynesianism by starting with that war is to challenge the most deeply held belief in America, the notion that the war brought us out of the Great Depression.  I have lost several potential allies over that issue (initials GF, FG, and MP).  I should have started slowly and built to such a conclusion ever so gradually.  It’s like when I discovered most people reading the 48 page paperback version of Peace Economics stopped one third of the way through.  Or like the discovery that conservatives instantly want to turn a Peace Economics discussion into a discussion of the merits of war versus peace, instantly stereotyping me as some naïve hippy fool peacenic.  My solution to that problem was to call my website and nineties book Real Economy.  That is when I realized the manufacturing economy was being sacrificed on the military altar.  That further lead to the political insight that the Great Lakes region industrial states were the ones most imperiled by militarism, collapsing with military buildups like the eighties and after 9-11-01 (the aughts?), and prospering with military builddowns like the sixties, seventies, and nineties.

Stunning New Insights of my Life (Math, Political Economy, Peace)

Born the day after my mother’s mother’s funeral, I was traumatized for many years over the mixed messages of grief and love I received from mom in that first year.  It took a couple decades of therapy to figure that out.  My mother was told by a doctor when I was four that I might be retarded.  My grandfather then wrote a poem about me “My Bobby boy, why to you have that somber eye?”  Not until I got an arithmetic test back in the third grade with 100 on it did I begin to realize I was a person of worth.  That was my first ever positive feedback from school.  Math saved my life as it slowly pulled up all my grades over the years, peaking in the high school college wargaming years of math genius turned top wargamer turned top engineer.  Math was the first great insight of my life.  Gary Gygax was my first role model.  Second great insight was to intern in the 1981 Oregon Legislative session.  Nothing but the best of testimony on any given subject, I learned the basics of economic development in the desperate times of the state of Oregon having the highest unemployment rate in the nation and living in the poorest precinct neighborhood in Eugene Oregon ranked last of 378 cities by Rand McNally in 1982.  I learned first hand how the realities of politics were far different than the perception.  Third great insight was the national peace movement list-serves from 2001 to 2005 as a leading member of the Madison Area Peace Coalition, a great lesson in learning about how the military industrial complex really operates and functions, again quite different than the common perceptions.  A fourth great insight lies in the unexpectedly hostile reaction in 2014 by some leading academics of peace and justice, hostile to me personally and to my work.  Although many are keenly interested in my writings and many have very positive reactions to it all, I live the Thomas Kuhn reality of difficulty overcoming pre-existing notions with new insights and awareness.  I live all the time with the John Maynard Keynes corrected quote “The difficulty lays not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping from old ones.”

Resistance to New Ideas

Just as I have been encouraged by Gary Gygax (gaming), Sister Ralph (calculus), Lyman G. Hill, XIII (54 year cycle), Herald Bock and Jerry Rust (politics), Gene Emge (teaching), Peter Bergel (writing), I have been discouraged by others.  Just as my ideas were nourished and flourished in the University of Oregon Eugene political environment up through 1993, I have been generally under-rated and under-appreciated by the Madison Wisconsin University of Wisconsin establishment since then.  There are plenty of exceptions to this broad generalization both ways.  Ageism may play a role, as well as general status difference of an up and coming politician in the eighties in the growing West Coast, versus just another older activist in the stagnant Mid West.

You would think that peace academics would mostly praise and follow up on my extensive work against the military industrial complex, and many do.  Cyber bullying is when a group collectively attacks one person.  Some think three postings a month is too much and use the following words against me:  arrogant, combative, your websites do not meet the threshold I make my students use to write research papers, bragging, claiming to have invented, understanding economics is found in law and ethics not in mathematics, clueless, self-aggrandizement, arrogant self promotion, have you considered running for President, do you ever study nonviolence?, abuse of this list, cherry picking, spamming.

Others say much kinder things:  terrific piece, I’m just saying we ought to all be talking about population and scarce resources a bit more than we do, thank you for your thoughtful and sobering thoughts on selling peace, thanks for getting me back into the loop, so keep up the good work and know that there are people out there who are grateful for your work, you have allies who would agree with you completely, I too think you offer useful insights and support on important issues like the economy and militarism, I appreciate being on your list and enjoy your questions and how you think things through.

I have been amazed at the insularity of many forums at the University of Wisconsin at Madison.  Your status at the University is much more important than your ideas for most of them.  This stands in sharp contrast to places like Oxford or Cambridge where independent scholars are most welcome and appreciated at their numerous forums.

Summary

No new idea is birthed without great difficulty and resistance, and paradigm shifts are often falsely seen as more of the same by some.  Even the new movie “The Distinguished Citizen” has come out showing the difficulties a Nobel Prize winner in Literature experiences in his own home town.  You can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs.  The idea that “if you build a better mousetrap the world will beat a path to your door” doesn’t work without marketing.  Some will complain about self promotion while tolerating it from others on the same list-serve, but actually my several postings about the Nobel Prize quest are very popular on my websites and some complain there is not enough information about myself.  You can never satisfy everyone.

Yes, it pays to read and re-read Thomas Kuhn on Structure of Scientific Revolutions and 10 quotes from that work are included as the seventh and last page of this summary of my main ideas:  https://www.academia.edu/33884446/Main_Ideas_Summary_July_2017_7pages

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2017, September 4). “Teaching Peace Economics” Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute. Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Teaching-Peace-Economics,2017119399.aspx

Professor Robert Reuschlein, Dr. Peace, Real Economy Institute, Nominated Vetted 2016, and one of 76 Given Odds (tied for 31st) for the Nobel Peace Prize 2017
Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, Info: www.realeconomy.com

Senate Power Republicans

Friday three Republican Senators stepped up to stop the massive tax cuts for the rich that would provide loss of health care to 16 million or more middle class Americans.  These heroes were uniquely powerful members of the key Armed Services and Defense Appropriations Committees.  Lesser Senators were intimidated by the power structure.  When half the discretionary budget goes to one agency, the Pentagon, members of those two Senate Committees are uniquely powerful in the whole Congress, including their counterparts in the same two House Committees.  Here is the rest of the story of how those four key committees and people from the high military spending states have come to dominate national politics like no one else.  Senate legend John McCain was chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee from the 13th ranked military state, Arizona.  Lisa Murkowski of third military ranked Alaska and Sue Collins of ninth military ranked Maine, are sixth and fifth ranked Republicans on the Senate Defense Appropriations Committee.  Armed Services can favor weapons systems, but ultimately Appropriations funds them.  Arguably, the 122 members of the House and Senate Armed Services and Defense Appropriations Committees are the most powerful in Congress, other than the overall Leadership like Speaker Ryan and Majority Leader McConnell.  Among the overall leadership, McConnell of seventh ranked Kentucky is second ranked Republican on Defense Appropriations and Senate Assistant Minority Leader Dick Durbin of lowly 43rd ranked military state Illinois is Ranking Member of the Senate Defense Appropriations Committee.

Power from the Military Down

Seventy two years after the epic hegemonic Second World War, all three branches of the American government are dominated by the military budget.  All presidents elected during the Cold War came from “above average military spending per capita” states.  Based on the 1984 data it looks like two term presidents come from states about twice the military average and one term presidents came from states about the military average.  Today that power level has subsided only slightly, but still about 75% of the cabinet (78% for Clinton), Supreme Court, and congressional leadership positions come from the half of the country that is high military spending by state.  And the military level tends to rise higher among parties in power and drop a little lower among parties out of power.  The general rule seems to be, the closer to the top, the more direct the military money connection.  The key is not your states total military spending, it is your states per capita military spending that indicates the mutual dependency between the politician and the military.  Democrats who tend to oppose military spending and wars, tend to do so only somewhat, often leaving claims about military spending out of their websites and campaign materials.  Even Obama who opposed the Iraq War had to triple troop levels in Afghanistan to compensate.  Bernie Sanders opposed wars easily but made no mention of cutting the military budget to fund his 14 budget proposals on the campaign website.  Jesse Jackson took 14 issues to the 1988 Democratic Convention, each had some accommodation except the 10% military freeze cut.  Democrats tend to cut weapons funding but not military payroll.  This kind of bowing to the military god goes on and on, leaving many in the peace movement angry at Democrats despite their 90% voting record in congress on small cuts in the military budget.

Women and the Military

When you look at the four key committee 122 military power positions in congress, 29 are filled by women, about 24% of the total, very close to their overall percentage in the congress.  But a closer look reveals the glass ceiling operates similar to the overall discrimination against those from low military states.  For example, when the Senate Republicans crafted health care bills in secret recently, no women participated.  When you break down the percentage of women on the big four committees from high military states versus low military states, 21% are from high military and 29% from low military states.  Military state Republicans are 13% women, while nonmilitary state Republicans are 17% women.  Military state Democrats are 31% women, low military state Democrats are 44% women.  Joni Ernst of Iowa overcame these obstacles to be a powerful woman Republican in the Senate, but it took her being a lifetime member of the Army Reserve or Guard rising to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel while five of the six states she served in were high military.  That’s how you overcome coming from the 46th ranked military state of Iowa to sit on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Military Economic Changes

The biggest change in military state rank from 2010 with the Democrats in power to 2015 with the Republicans in power was Mississippi rising 23 places from 29th to 6th place.  You can thank the Senate Appropriation Committee Chairman and Defense Appropriations Committee Chairman Republican Thad Cochran for that spectacular move.  The big move for a Democrat is Rhode Island Senator Jack Reed, who is ranking member of Armed Services and also sits on Defense Appropriations, so Rhode Island went up 16 places from 26th to 12th.  Maine had bipartisan teamwork going for it as it rose 14 places from 23rd to 9th.  Republican Senator Sue Collins is on Defense Appropriations while Independent (who caucuses with the Democrats) Senator Angus King is on Armed Services.  In the other direction, Wisconsin is a spectacular falling 23 places from 21st to 44th, where Senator Tammy Baldwin seeks to reverse that collapse of the popular Iraq war IUD proof truck sales from Wisconsin manufacturer “Oshkosh Truck”.  She has moved over from Budget to Defense Appropriations.  Typical Democrat, she is shy about the move with no mention on her website, as Madison Truax field will soon be adding F-35s.  She mentions Agriculture Appropriations on her website, her other subcommittee on Appropriations.  She wants more Wisconsin contracts without angering her liberal base as a member of the Progressive Caucus, a tough juggling act.  Health care has always been her top priority and a committee assignment, but coming from the Dairy State, Agriculture Appropriations is also very important for the upcoming 2018 re-election bid.

Summary

While the 22 high military states have equal population to the low military states, they have 70% of the military budget compared to 30% for the low military states.  The representation on the four key military committees in congress is also split about the same, 66% from high military and 34% from the low military states.  It has the appearance of all of them being proportionately representative of the military money.  When the White House threatens to punish Alaska for Murkowski’s vote on health care, the threat rings hollow because she not only sits on Defense Appropriations, but the other Senator from Alaska, Sullivan, sits on Armed Services, just like the situation in Maine with Sue Collins.  Alaska will continue it’s long standing position among the top three with Virginia and Hawaii long after the current President is gone.  Another powerful Senate tandem is Feinstein of California and Murray of Washington who represent drone production and research respectively, and both sit on the Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.  California military rank has risen 9 places from 26th to 17th from 2010 to 2015.  California has a total of ten members on the key four committees, while Washington has three.

For further reading, here is the detailed link to my very popular peer reviewed entry on the “Political Economy of War” in the SAGE Encyclopedia of War:

https://www.academia.edu/28849523/SAGE_POLITICAL_ECONOMY_OF_WAR_2016_6p

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted 2016, and one of 76 Given Odds (tied for 31st)                                         for the Nobel Peace Prize 2017
contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, info: www.realeconomy.com

Middle Year Empire Update

Making a big impression wherever I go has become standard fare for me now.  Resistance or passive resistance from some social science types has also become standard for me.  The social science view of the scientific method is quite different than the hard science view.  Fortunately the overall tide of acceptance has steadily gained strength, especially this year.  Thomas Kuhn, in his Structure of Scientific Revolutions would expect as much.

Liberal Arts Prejudice Against Professional Schools

The ivory tower concept can apply to all academic schools to some extent.  But it is especially true for the academics in the social sciences, who deeply resent the higher pay earned in professional schools like business, engineering, law and medicine.  When they have control of campus wide awards systems, they may systematically exclude academics from the professional schools from those awards.  As an undergraduate, I experienced this exclusion from the Phi Beta Kappa honors fraternity and as an engineer had to settle for the Phi Kappa Phi all university “equivalent” with a “separate but equal” feel to it, not unlike racial discrimination may have felt a century ago.  While blacks have made great strides, women still face glass ceilings in many academic settings.  A woman who got more votes than Obama in the 2008 primaries and more votes than Trump in the 2016 general election is still not president, because of the caucus system in the first case and the electoral college in the second case.  Recent attempts to eliminate memory of the first black presidency and his legacy show how far we still have to go in racial matters.

Peace and Justice

So after years of making presentations at the Peace and Justice Studies Association I am suddenly excluded in 2016 after supporting an “unpopular” woman presidential candidate on the list-serve and being attacked on the discussion list once for using the word “stupid” defending myself against a slur by “one of their own” against me, and another time by someone posting “refutations” to a small part of my statement in mild support of the Democrat running against their favored Socialist candidate.  A black woman who stood up for Hillary was later hounded out of the group.  This unethical retaliation through peer review is only possible because of the distinctive nature of my work, which makes blind evaluation not possible.  That some clique calls my work unpopular and tries to limit my expression is clearly refuted by the website reaction to my 36 releases a year.  Enthusiasm for my work is growing internationally and lately among Gary Gygax fantasy gamers, recently pushing me into the top 1% on academia.edu.

My point was that the Socialist refused to call for cutting defense to fund any of his dozen proposals, each specifically paid for with specific taxes on separate links of the official website and never with defense cuts.  The Socialist candidate was anti-war on his official website but never called for defense cuts specifically.  This is a common ruse among mainstream national candidates who do not want to lose any swing states with high military spending.   Sanders himself has said on television that he did not come up with the “Feel the Bern” slogan, although he wishes he had.  In that second case, large font quotes were taken from the Sanders independent website FeeltheBern mostly against war and some against military spending, twisting my words and falsely calling me inaccurate, refusing to admit this is tantamount to calling me a liar.  Gee, thanks.  Shouting against me and then saying you did not call me a liar.  Such courage.  Later this same board member openly put down my Nobel Peace Prize nomination rather than celebrating it like a decent human being would.

Methodology

Then a second person of the threesome putting down my Nobel nomination on the list-serve accuses me of not being methodological when I describe the process of creating my pinpoint accurate sixty year model of US manufacturing productivity.  That second person disagrees with my use of continental measuring of economic activity.  This assumes the social science process of creating questions first before surveying for their answer.  That is not the physical science method of observing first before you build your hypothesis.  Precision is not expected in the social sciences because it is generally only found in the physical sciences.  That difference changes everything, including what is considered the scientific method.  Professional schools rely on more traditional scientific methods but that does not make them non-methodological. This is another example of social science bias against professional schools.  It may be that crowds and human nature are viewed as unstable in the social sciences, but in the physical sciences more leads to more stability, just as in economics, moving from the individual to the family to business to the city to the state to the nation to the continent tends to reduce inaccuracies and add clarification of results, thanks to the law of large numbers.

Science and Society

In another instance, an academic organization dedicated to science and technology studies was busily talking about the differences between cultural and socialism versions of feminism when the topic turned to Russia suddenly and I pointed out some Russian history and the group suddenly disbanded and branded me as a Trump supporter which I am not.  At the next regular meeting of the group my hand was raised and for the first time not acknowledged before the group discussion ended after a presentation.  Once again Letters and Science discriminate against an interdisciplinary individual with practical professional real world experience.  Pure high minded academics don’t want to get too close to the dirty business of politics; they just want to talk about it.

Conference in Toronto

In a history of economics conference in Toronto one month ago, I raised a question in the general session that challenged the speaker’s thoughts on religion and was thereafter banned from further questions.  Most conferences and presentations welcome my questions, but some control freak moderators occasionally try to stifle me.  My own presentation was greeted with a lack of questions from a large group of 27 people.  This was the second time I’d tried to present the whole of my accurate economics theory with a similar result.  When I feature one aspect of my theory at a time, I get great receptiveness, but when I bite off more than they can chew, I get stony looks and cool receptiveness.  It was ironic in that one of the keynote speakers went on and on about how economics is not a science, a widespread belief among economic historians, that was well received.  But when I present my tightly accurate results of the science I’ve created about economics, it is a bridge to far for them, that’s not possible they are thinking.  When I break the ideas down to digestible chunks, they usually greet the material warmly.  Once again, Thomas Kuhn would not be surprised by any of this.  Toronto has a wonderful Quaker meeting house group, a Whole Foods that acts like a cafeteria at lunchtime, and a vibrant high tech industry with the Toronto newspaper leading the way.  Baked Lays potato chips are far more delicious in Toronto than the flat shaped and flavorless variety sold in the United States.

Fields of Knowledge Addenda

Main Ideas July 2017, the link to further reading on academia.edu for this press release, consists of seven pages:

The first three pages are 8 PowerPoint frames each on three main topics:

First is “Social Decay of Empire” and Stages of Empire,

Second is “Weather Wealth and Wars” or Global Warming Cycle

Third is “Dungeons and Dragons” Origins of Gary Gygax’s Work

Fourth is “Summary” Military DisEconomics thirteen key correlations

Fifth is “Reductio Ad Absurdum” about the New Macroeconomic Model

Sixth is the “Nine Areas of Mastery” needed to build the Reuschlein Model

Seventh is “10 Scientific Revolution Facts” by Thomas Kuhn

An eleventh point by Kuhn is that an outsider or newcomer like Reuschlein is usually the person who comes up with the new paradigm.  Here is the detailed link:

https://www.academia.edu/33884446/Main_Ideas_Summary_July_2017_7pages

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted and Given Odds for Nobel Peace Prize 2016-17
contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, info: www.realeconomy.com

Wargamer to Peace Economist

Looking back over my life, asking how I got to this point of nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize, I have to consider my Avalon Hill wargame experience crucial.

Math and Games

I started with things like Erector sets, Lincoln logs, American bricks, and just blocks.  But there were four siblings and we played board games together a lot, like Careers, Monopoly, Risk, and many others.  I fell in love with two things early on, Games and Math.  Getting encyclopedias when I was seven, and later the Time Life book on Mathematics really got me going.  I loved the way that math book showed all 36 possible combinations of two dice, one in red and one in green.  Dice became the passion that united my two great interests, games and math.  I went on to play games on Democracy, Summit, and standards like Checkers, Chess, and Go.  You name it; I’d try it and be good at it.  But they were all too simple until my older brother and I discovered the Avalon Hill game Chancellorsville in 1961.  We also tried Tactic II, Gettysburg, and D-Day, and I never let him win.  So I needed a new challenge and along came the Avalon Hill General magazine in December 1964.  That was my freshman year moving from five frustrating years in the public schools to a Catholic High School.  That was the last semester in high school I had anything less than an A in math or science.  This was decades before the grade inflation of today, and I was top of my math classes the rest of the time in high school.  I found opponents wanted in the General from other high schools and UW Madison and for the next ten years spent about three times a week, fifteen hours a week, in wargames.  I was a master at the math and probabilities and also the rules, and these two, rules and math, were my edge.  I loved the maps and terrain and playing counters and movement just as well.  Soon I was inventing new rules, new games, and reinventing math before being taught it in the Trapezoidal Rule, the Pythagorean Theorem, and the Binomial Expansion Theorem.  Endless imagination and experimentation became the norms of my life.

Technician in Society

I became a great Nerd.  But humans are social animals, too, and I was a lonely boy who needed a social life.  Opponents Wanted ads and a genius wargamer 90 miles to my Southeast came to the rescue.  No one wrote more articles for wargaming magazines than Gary Gygax, inventing and imagining all the things you can do with wargames.  This local role model noticed me and invited me into his new wargaming club, the International Federation of Wargaming.  I started writing articles too, and inventing games, and starting a wargaming convention in Madison the year after his convention in Lake Geneva.  I attended the first seven GenCons from 1968 to 1974 inclusive, winning Waterloo and tying Afrika Corp the first two Avalon Hill wargames tournaments in 1973 and 1974..  Then I gave up wargaming and Gary agreed to sell my stuff on consignment the last time I saw him in 1974.  Gary welcomed me into his world and I made many trips to Lake Geneva and he came to my first wargames convention in Madison in June 1969.  I had learned the social skills of being a wargaming organizer in Madison, Wisconsin.  I learned many skills, math, games, rules, strategy, geography, military history, and organizing in those ten years of wargaming averaging 15 hours a week, three years of full time equivalent work.  That creative foundation laid the way forward for my fifteen year career in politics from 1978 to 1993 where I learned the issues, campaigning, lobbying, and creating legislation and debates, submitting the 1984 National Delegate Selection Plan for the Democratic Party of Oregon, and meeting at a high level Rainbow Coalition meeting with Jesse Jackson in Chicago in February 1987.  Everywhere I was getting great things done.  Politics is where I discovered Sivard’s work on military spending in 1983.  I discovered the Kondratiev Wave in 1981 from a close friend (Lyman G. Hill, XIII).  We were both in the YMCA Singles Association; where I was president in 1978 and group facilitator from 1978 to 1981.

Summary

These formative experiences combined the endless variety of games and the endless variety of politics into the necessary knowledges that made the Peace Economics breakthroughs possible.  In both macroeconomics and global warming theory these complex yet precise and elegant models will define how people see the coming century.  In both cases stubborn academic bureaucracies have resisted the compelling math of my discoveries.  But I have Thomas Kuhn on my side, knowing that new generations will adopt these basic discoveries and the resistant old order will eventually die off.  The new paradigms will revolutionize the stock market and predictions of the future as the naysayers and doubters are pushed to the side.  Sometime around the year 2025 the world will cool off for two or three years leading into a major war followed by global warming at a faster than ever pace and we will be prepared to mitigate these circumstances or we will blunder ahead ignorant of my discoveries.  The choice is up to each of us individually.  Collectively, if we learn, I will get my rewards.  Today my term “Peace Economics” is routinely marginalized by peace groups as just a large sum of money, seldom if ever considered a major driving force of lost opportunity in the economy, by groups like the Berlin Peace Congress last year and Code Pink this year.  Please stop using my terminology for misleading and understated purposes.  Nations and peoples rise or fall with their choice of military spending levels.

Here is the suit pocket sized booklet for the twenty-fifth anniversary of Peace Economics:

https://www.academia.edu/4108656/BOOKLET_Peace_Economics_11_charts_24p._2011

Here are a few key pages about the climate cycle ending in 2025, warned about above:

https://www.academia.edu/6002772/WEATHER_CYCLE_5_p._WWW_course_9p._2014

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute,

Nominated for Nobel Peace Prize 2016-2017

contact  bobreuschlein@gmail.com for more info www.realeconomy.com

Post Navigation