The Master Negotiator: What’s really going on at the Korean Peninsula

I completely support what Donald Trump is doing on the Korean Peninsula.  During an interview with Reuters Trump showed exactly why he is the most unusual American president in history by exhibiting excellent concepts of strategy as his reputation points to him being a master negotiator.  He certainly showed those skills this week in regard to North and South Korea.  First he politely dismissed North Korean tyrant Kim Jung-un stating that the kid inherited a regime and that he was only 27-years-old and that it was a difficult thing to be thrown in to.  And at the same time Trump stated that he intended to renegotiate the South Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement and that he wanted South Korea to pay for the billion dollar THAAD missile system that was put in place to protect them from North Korean aggressions.   All this came out as North Korea launched a missile that flew a few miles then fizzled out before it reached the Sea of Japan and Trump acknowledged that aggressive action with the communist country was appearing more likely.

No, we are not at war with South Korea, but as Trump said during the campaign, countries that use the United States for protection should pay for those services and he’s simply bringing South Korea to the table during a time of crises.  As a very smart engineer said to me this week when we were discussing these matters—“chaos is cash.” Trump is looking to do well for the United States and why shouldn’t he?  South Korea needs protection from its crazy northern neighbor who is a reckless kid who might cause some trouble, so they needed to renegotiate the deal between them—and pay a billion dollars for that THAAD system.  We have it–they don’t—so why not cover the costs?  All of that makes sense to me.  Trump is in the driver’s seat on all issues and nobody seems to understand how he got there—but that’s only because we’ve had political hacks in the past as presidents—not a guy who is actually good at this stuff.  Trump is doing an excessively good job.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again—North Korea isn’t going to be going to war with anybody.  That little communist country has been used by the many tyrants of the world as a cover story to hide their misdeeds behind the lunatics of the Korean Peninsula for a long time.  North Korea won’t be allowed to fire any more missiles into the waters off its borders beyond International waters.  They won’t be blowing up any American warships or sending any threats into South Korea—not while the United States is in the area.  While the world wants a fight like school kids egging on an after school brawl, North Korea is the skinny zit faced punk who picks on people and would get their ass kicked with one punch by the opponent who shows up and shuts everyone up in just a few seconds of engagement from someone who really knows how to fight.  Kim Jung-un and his deceased father were used by the world to harass others into making bad trade deals to begin with—and now their bluff has been called—in China, in Russia, in Iran and many other places.  Trump has them all stunned to silence with essentially one punch.

The news outlets who count on such fights for their ratings really don’t know what to do with all this information.  How can a president do two things at once?  Well, for the kids who are in the media who were trained at socialists training centers called “colleges” this is how things are done in the world—especially in business.  Those mysterious people on Wall Street do this kind of thing all the time and Trump is a master of that world—so what did they expect to see from his handling of the very volatile region of the orient?   American has demonstrated to both North and South Korea that they can stop acts of aggression.  Now the North has to come to the table and think about disarmament of their nuclear capabilities and the South has to pay for the protection—and the United States wins both ways.  That’s how it’s supposed to be.

In the old days with stupid presidents the United States would have been forced to protect everyone, eat the cost then end up spread out all over the world for endless decades of indecision because the problem was never dealt with—which is how we end up on the bad side of all these trade deals with economically inferior countries.  Their socialist natures figure that the United States was a rich nation that could afford to be the policemen of the world, so they should take care of that obligation because they had the means. Thus, American tax payers ended up taking care of all these messes when the creation of the mess was all part of a negotiation strategy to weaken the United States to begin with—just another wealth redistribution scheme by globalists like Obama, Clinton and the Bush boys to bring equality to the world.  Not anymore.

I’ll put myself on the record though, in spite of the rest of the world conducting their saber-rattling for that after school fight they hope happens for their ratings spikes on news broadcasts—there won’t be war with North Korea.  Trump gave the North Korean dictator a way out and showed a little compassion so that he didn’t have to knock his head off.  And the missile that was launched yesterday wasn’t going anywhere anyway.  North Korea is dealing with forces it can’t comprehend and Trump is standing over them smiling with a fist on top of the head of Kim Jung-un and another hand out to South Korea to pay up.   And China has suddenly had its covers ripped off in the middle of the night and now they are naked and afraid.  This is a new game for all of them and the United States is in a good position for a change—for the good of our capitalist country’s sovereignty.  I know that’s hard for a lot of people to see, but it’s quite clear if you know what you’re looking at. The American media in a lot of ways are like Kim Jung-un—they are all about the same age (27) and have a very limited view of the world.  It’s not always their fault that they just lack experience in the way things work.  They are about five minutes out of their parent’s womb and they think they know everything—and they are all learning painfully that they don’t.  But Trump is a seasoned veteran battle hardened by some of the smartest negotiators this world has to offer and now he’s in charge of things.  Yeah, North Korea isn’t going to war with anybody.  In the end, they’ll soon be eating out of our hand and there will be jaws that drop—and when they do, remember you read it here first.

Rich Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  Use my name to get added benefits.


Bomb the Towels Right off the ISIS Heads: The joy of getting a bag of chips out of a vending machine

It continues to be a topic of fascination how the world of politics deals with Donald Trump. They are just bewildered by him, one minute he’s for dismantling NATO.  The next he’s for it.  One minute he’s anti-China—the next he’s shaking hands—palm up with the communist leader and talking about trade.  Then there are the accusations of a “bromance” with Vladimir Putin—then the hammers of war being beaten in the direction of Russia. The people in politics and those who cover it are literally about to explode with frustration because they don’t understand what Donald Trump is doing.  But I do.

It’s a long story but today marked something of a personal milestone in achievement. I bought a bag of potato chips out of the new vending machines of a beautiful new manufacturing facility that I along with many other people breathed to life.  Whenever I do something like that I like to do little things like enjoy a bag of potato chips from there because it tastes very sweet due to all the effort it takes to get such a monumental task accomplished.  The road to get to where you actually put vending machines into such a place is a long one, and many pitfalls and challenges have to be navigated, so once you get the vending machines installed, you always achieve something tremendous.  But to get there you are constantly negotiating with other people, you are always employing some kind of strategy, you are always fighting something—because you have to remember that the world of government looks down on achievement—so you are always fighting various aspects of government corruption to do anything productive.  It could be zoning, unfriendly socialist trustees such as in the township where I bought the aforementioned potato chips.  There are three trustees there.  George Lang is a good one.  Mark Welch is another one.  But then they have a socialist who is always trying to build some sidewalk with tax payer funds, or yacking about his military record in the same breath as declaring himself a minority candidate.  He doesn’t understand business at all, so lucky for West Chester, there are two votes against that guy so business can happen.  But not every place is so lucky.  Many places around the world, especially in California, Seattle and other progressive areas, the good guys get outvoted by the bad guys (the anti-business people) most of the time.  So it is always a good feeling to get to a point where you can buy a bag of chips out of a vending machine because it’s nearly a miracle these days to get to that point.

But the administration part is only the beginning, there are deals that are constantly being made with other human beings to move a project along, and for someone like Donald Trump who has operated most of his life as a high-end developer, the chance to buy a bag of chips out of a vending machine is a very tall road to climb—indeed. The kind of person that does these types of things has to be unique because often it’s the thrill of accomplishment that drives such people—not necessarily the payday.  And for a person to master those skills means they can operate at many human levels of communication and are masters of negotiation, manipulation, and strategy.  Donald Trump is certainly all those things and I think he will be viewed by history as the unquestionably best president we’ve ever had in America because what he will produce during his time in office will be something that is rare.

You have to understand dear reader that for most of human history mankind didn’t have much of an economy that was driven off free market ideas. Always there was some king or emperor in the way skimming off the top of any national endeavor—and this effectively put the shackles on human production because people just don’t do much unless they are free.  They may work in the fields all day to pick rice, but they don’t think of better ways to pick that rice unless they can have the opportunity to get rich off it.  So without the free market system—innovation just doesn’t happen.  People don’t invent better ways to do things so some ruler can take their idea and live well off it.  If there isn’t some concept of reward, human beings keep their thoughts to themselves which is why socialist societies just don’t make it very long.

Now for complex economies where many people are pushing and shoving other people for a chance to win big, things get very complicated. In order to navigate any project where many such people are a part of your success you have to learn how to read everything about them to get some leverage that is mutually advantageous.  I say that because if you screw people over you may win once, but they won’t deal with you in the future.  So you must learn to read every non-verbal sign of body language, every variability of sentence structure, every hidden motive to learn how to move people to where you need them to be—where they also come out smelling wonderful.  And that is hard.  Very hard.

This is what we might call a “dynamic personality.” They tend to see things well ahead of other people, and are also personally courageous—perhaps to the point where they are thrill junkies who thrive off great risks.  Without them invention and economic expansion doesn’t happen.  Most people in the world are very static.  They learn the routines of their days starting with their very first experiences as human beings and once they level off in adulthood they are quite comfortable taking orders and falling in behind the leaders of society because it allows them to live within a framework of routine that is comfortable.  They don’t like risky behavior because it might make them late for dinner—that kind of thing.

Politics is built around static people—very predictable and having their roots back to aristocratic days when clear social levels could mandate what kind of home you lived in, what types of sexual encounters you might experience, and what the fate of your children might be. But when you introduce dynamic people suddenly the lives of the static people are always in jeopardy—because they don’t like change and dynamic people are all about change.  For many centuries, political people have prevented dynamic people from holding offices.  They allowed them to somewhat thrive in business so long as they could tax and control them through some legal means—but they didn’t allow them into politics. That makes Donald Trump the first of his kind to break through that invisible barrier for the long-span of the human race—and this dynamic has made the static order very uncomfortable.

That is why Trump’s negotiation skills are so frustrating to the static order of today’s politics—because the sheer dynamism of Trump threatens the future of the entire political system. As a businessman, Trump may want China to put an end to North Korea’s threats while closing the gap between the trading deficit.  So he does what he needs to in order to achieve that objective.  He may need to threaten war, or he may offer a bottle of wine—whatever is needed at that moment.  To the static political culture used to predictability—in fact their entire existence depends on it—this is a nightmare.  But for Americans in need of an American renaissance—its precisely what is required.  Just today Trump dropped a massive bomb on an ISIS hideout in Afghanistan.  Guess he wasn’t joking about ending ISIS—and the capital earned off that bombing will help with Russian deals, Chinese negotiations over territory and trade, and stop the butchering of innocent people in Syria.  In the end, everyone will get what they want because that’s what deal makers do.  And that really is the only way you can get to a bag of chips in a vending machine—you have to navigate very complicated engagements to arrive at such an opportunity. With that in mind, for the first time in the history of the world such a person is running things on the political levels, and the dynamism of that reality is shattering the static world of politics—likely forever.  And that is such a wonderful thing.

Rich Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

The End of Hollywood: Why the movie industry is dying

When I say that Hollywood is done my point of reference is from a business perspective and as a person who spent twenty years writing and pitching screenplays, attending film festivals, and sometimes working as a stunt coach.  Films were something I was very interested in—and still am, but the business of Hollywood motion pictures was something I used to spend a lot of time thinking about so I know it quite well.  Well enough to say that the time has finally come—Hollywood’s studio system movies are coming to an end and its right on time to what I said would happen over five years ago.  Hollywood’s current filmmakers do not represent most of America and like the national media companies, are much more interested in being a liberal propaganda machine.  Now that the costs of making a movie have intersected the declining box office receipts—such as in the case of Ghost in the Shell—the latest embarrassment with Scarlett Johansson—it’s just a matter of time now before the entire industry folds.

I suspect that Disney will always do something with film, as will Warner Bros. and a few other companies, but they will have to drastically change their habits.  After I watched the Blue Rey interviews for Rogue One—which I couldn’t wait to watch, it became very obvious—the filmmakers who are in the story group now replacing George Lucas have no idea why Star Wars movies work.  They only know to follow the basic formula that he created and that means they can get some semblance of a Star Wars movie—which is better than nothing, but not the whole experience.  I thought Rogue One was a fabulous movie, but it was missing the pop of a George Lucas production.  The San Francisco hippies who now work at Lucasfilm cited during the Rogue One interviews the fact that George Lucas had originally written that the “Force” was called “The Force of Others,” meaning mass collectivism and that kind of 60s communist philosophy.  Under tremendous pressure from Twentieth Century Fox Lucas had to whittle down his script and movie down to the bare necessities so he ended up following more of a Walt Disney approach to the themes of the movie which led to a great story rooted in Joseph Campbell myth interpretation.

But the “hero’s journey” is not a collective one.  Red State Americans do not think in collective terms and they cannot be made to.  We aren’t all better “together” and teams are not the supreme law of the land.  When North Carolina recently won the NCAA championship game over Gonzaga it wasn’t a “team effort” but actually the five to six guys who spent most of the time shooting the ball and the few individuals who shot clutch shots at just the right moment.  All the bench warmers sitting on the sidelines didn’t contribute equally—yet as members of the collective team they all celebrated as a single unit.  The cinematic story in telling such a movie would have been in the individuals—not the collective whole otherwise the mythic theme gets lost in the circumstances.  Luckily for the Rogue One people they killed everyone at the end so that washed out the ineffectiveness of the lack of individual performances.  By that I mean the mass collective sacrifice that all the members of Rogue One committed to save the Rebellion.  If the Star Wars story group continue to make those Lucasfilm projects with the progressive values of their San Francisco culture—they’ll see their Star Wars product losing its mythic effectiveness. It’s still a good product, but it’s certainly less effective as a storytelling device than it was under George Lucas’ care.  Just as the current collective decision makers at the Disney Company don’t understand what made Walt Disney work—they copy the formula and sometimes they get lucky.

Recently while I was in England for an extended period of time I noticed that there were a lot of westerns on television.  England was playing a lot of our old 50s era westerns because their society was fascinated by the individualism on display in American cinema.  They had committed themselves already to socialism for most of the 20th century and were looking for ways out of that mess—and American westerns were doing the trick.  They weren’t making much that was originally good as far as cinema in England, so they played old American westerns—and that seems to be a theme around the world.  And the best westerns are not about mass sacrifice for the greater good, but in individuals standing up against the masses in the name of suppressing collective evil—such as a band of cattle rustlers taking over a town and one gunman standing alone to face them down—or some bounty hunter like Clint Eastwood getting individually wealthy by killing all the bad guys and riding off into the sunset.  The best movies find some way to tell an individualized story about love, wealth, or power.  But movies lose their luster when they become instruments of statism.

Let me put it like this, when Wolfram Von Eschenbach wrote his King Arthur stories in the 12th century his subject was the individual casting off the limits of the collective.  The same kind of thing occurred with the Twin War Gods story of Navaho legend.  The society is in trouble and the individual must go out into the world to save everyone with their acts of heroics—alone.  When Hollywood adds all this “team” crap—and this “force of others” idiocy, the product on the screen gets watered down.  American audiences are by their nature individualists.  They don’t accept collectivist messaging in movies. They might endure them if there are cool action sequences or the leading lady takes her top off—but they won’t go out of their way to see the movie.  Now that China has bought up Legendary Pictures they are learning the hard way.  Their movie with Matt Damon about the Great Wall of China bombed in America big time.  And even the latest King Kong movie fell short—which I wanted to like badly.

I knew Kong: Skull Island was in trouble after the scene where the natives on the island were a bunch of utopian hippies who didn’t have any personal property or individualized desires.  They were autonomous robots who had learned to love serving King Kong as sacrificial elements.  As a result the movie only made 150 million in the domestic market but it did very well in communist China taking the film up and over the 500 million mark worldwide.  That paid the bills for the movie, but just barely considering that King Kong has almost 100 years of film history to build from.  It should have made a billion dollars—and could have if the filmmakers made a movie about individuals instead of collective salvation.  Audiences don’t attend movies as a collective.  They might share that experience with others—collectively, but they watch movies as individuals.

I watched with pain studio executives trying to explain why Scarlett Johansson couldn’t make Ghost in the Shell work.  With a production budget of 110 million it only had a domestic take of 26 million dollars.  The studio thought that Johansson did well in the Avenger movies so obviously she’d bring 100 million dollars to Ghost in the Shell?  No.  People don’t go to movies to see stars—you’d think that Hollywood would have learned this by now—they go to see stories about individuals.  At least that’s how it is in America—which then drives the world market.  And if Ghost in the Shell would have been cast by a Japanese woman—it would have done even worse—just for the record.  The content of the film is what hurt it—not that Scarlett Johansson was “white.”

Here’s the bad news, kids growing up today are interested in other things.  Their video games and phone apps are much cooler and individual based storytelling then modern movies and they just aren’t going to be there as adults giving Hollywood money.  The labor unions have driven up the cost of making movies to the point where small budgeted risky projects can’t be made.  For instance, you never see today movies like Days of Thunder or Top Gun being made where a Tom Cruise character who is over-the-top individually confident but loses his nerve after some tragedy, and the whole point of the character is in overcoming his individual fears and returning to the glory of being an arrogant son-of-a-bitch.  But that’s what American audiences want and Hollywood isn’t giving it to them so the movie industry is on life support held up by my generation who still goes to movies out of nostalgia.  The generation after mine will do something else because these movies don’t speak to them as individuals.  And those are the cold hard facts.

Rush Limbaugh Says We’re In A Civil War: He’s right, and what we need to do about it

I listen to Rush Limbaugh when I can, but not as often as I’d like. If I miss the show I try to catch the podcasts in my shop where I practice target shooting and doing gun repairs—which is soothing.  A long time ago when I worked at the “Mill” (Cincinnati Milacron in Oakley) Rush Limbaugh was on every day in every building on the shop floor.  You couldn’t go to the restroom without hearing Rush from 12 to 3 PM during the Clinton Years—so I have a point of reference to go on here.  But during yesterday’s broadcast Rush said something that I didn’t think he’d ever say.  I had said it about five years ago, but Rush finally said it and he was right.  Rush in my mind is mainstream.  Even though the radical loons from the left think Rush represents the “hard right” Limbaugh is in fact a moderate in my mind so for him to say that America was in another “civil war” was quite a statement.  Listen to the broadcast above specifically the second hour.  I consider that admission to be a turning point in this long war—because before you can fix something, you have to identify it.  Admitting that America is split into a civil war condition is the first step in solving the current national problem.  However, the next is in determining who wins—because obviously both sides are too far apart to ever come to agreements.   The philosophic positions are just too great and the political left isn’t interested—as they have demonstrated during the opening days of the Trump administration—at living peacefully together.

Rush asked a very hard question—how do you know who wins a civil war? Well, it comes down to one side recognizing the authority of the other and presently the political left is unwilling to do that—as Republicans have been so gracious in the past.  So there is no shame in pushing Democrats out of the political process because we gave them the table under the Obama presidency and they showed us what they were made of.  They abused their power and that caused Trump to be elected—to correct all those mistakes.  But Republicans can at least say they played by the rules.  Democrats have no such intention—and Limbaugh did a good job of pointing out the case as it stands.

That means that we have to not only beat Democrats in elections, but we have to beat them at their fundamental philosophy. To win this war we cannot have a “live and let live” attitude toward them in movies, music, and culture—we must challenge them at every phase of life and we must have a focus on “winning.”  Not just compromising, but beating those idiots into a pulp to the point where they must capitulate—or be utterly destroyed.  There is no reasoning with those people on the political left so we must beat them into submission intellectually until they either adopt our positions, or they are put to an end.  It’s as simple as that.

I’m not saying that we must impose physical violence on the political left, but when they start the fight, we must finish it. Otherwise, intellect is the weapon of today.  They cannot fight smart people, so it must be the smartest of the conservative base who must be the knights on this battlefield because it’s not cannons and arrows that will win—its superior strategic positioning and philosophic concept.  “The pen is truly mightier than the sword” as I’ve demonstrated repeatedly.  But that is only one weapon of war.  The use of the Second Amendment is one of the most powerful aspects of our position—because not even Hollywood can use the guilt game against conservatives—because without the gun, Hollywood would go bankrupt, which ironically is already happening.  Guns aren’t just for shooting, they are symbols of self-reliance and the political left hates that concept.  So just having a gun does a lot to undo the political left.  Using a gun as part of your recreational life does a lot more.  So one of the best ways to destroy the political left is to destroy their soft, snowflake sensibilities with “in your face” audacity.  They have certainly used that tactic on the abortion issue and many other leftist topics. Now is the time to turn that tide against them with conservative vantage points for a change—and the gun is the most effective weapon in that battle—not for shooting and killing—but for the self-reliance that they represent.

The political left does not represent America. They represent the stagnate old remains of Europe.  Recently while I was in Europe I saw clearly why progressives in America love Europe’s centralized control so much.  You could see it everywhere—Europeans are heavily encumbered by ridiculous rules intent to govern every part of their lives.  For instance, if you go to Burger King in London and you get a large drink with your meal—it’s like the size of a kids drink in America—because in England—and the rest of Europe there are many rules on serving sizes and ingredients designed to take the strain off their socialist health care systems.   Everything is small and served in reduced amounts—as opposed to America.  No wonder Michael Bloomberg thought he could limited the size of soft drinks in New York with similar rules that they have in the United Kingdom.  From his point of view Europe was already doing it and it really is all progressives want to do—is control other people’s lives.

From my little shop at my house I could make endless amounts of ammunition and maintain many firearms without the outside world having anything to do with any of it. I don’t need a store or a gun manufacturer to make guns.  A simple machine shop can make everything needed—and that is nice to know.  As I work out there I think about the political left and their stupidity in thinking that they can destroy the firearms market by taxing ammunition and putting tight restrictions on firearms manufacturers hoping to put them out of business—because that’s their intention.  That mentality doesn’t come from Americans it comes from European sympathizers who happen to have moved to America and been trained to think in a progressive fashion.  The best way to challenge them is to put it in their face and make them realize that there is nothing they can do to stop firearms in America—because the need for them arises from a philosophy that is specific to our culture.  It is not part of European culture, or even eastern culture—it is specific to America.

Just keep in mind that to win this war that you must do something. Letting the other side off the hook with silence won’t win the day. You must engage them with a shameless position toward your American philosophy and let them perish under its light like the devil might melt under Holy Water.  Whatever you do, don’t hide anymore.  Don’t give them the illusion that they are the only ones brave enough to be on the battlefield.  Join them there and outshine them.  Force them to retreat to their little liberal campus groups and pull out their hair in frustration.  Because Republicans—“conservatives” must now focus on winning this war.  It’s not enough to have Trump in the White House.  Now is the time to run liberals off the field of battle and force them into hiding for a change—and to bend to our will if we hope to save humanity.  That’s what’s at stake and what must be done.

Rich Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  Use my name to get added benefits.



Alan Bean and Hip Hop: Why its likely migrations from Mars were a part of our past

The below article about a comment the astronaut Alan Bean gave, covered in The Huffington Post, bothered me intensely. Bean represents the current academic view point largely shaped by the National Geographic Society and the Smithsonian about the nature of life as we know it—and he’s dead wrong.  As I have said about the Cameo Night Club shooting in Cincinnati—and other things regarding politics in general, no society can sustain itself exhibiting the values we are today from different sectors of our global culture.  It just doesn’t work—the people who attend places like the Cameo Night Club are not productive people who can lead a civilization toward prosperity.  Rather they are something that seems to always arise in human beings that is programmed into us at the core of our very cells—a self-destructive predilection toward always starting over.  In the great novel Finnegan’s Wake we refer to this as the Vico Cycle.  Without question the hip hop culture and counter culture of socialism infused into America during the 1960s on up through today is an attack on the intellectual expansion that came from America during westward expansion and the Industrial Revolution.  The apogee of those human experienced peeked in the 1980s then began to recede back toward primal concerns—in spite of the invention of the Internet which became common in the 1990s.  The hip hop activity I illustrated in reaction to the Cameo Night Club shooting was something that has happened to the human race likely for many thousands of years—a cycle of theology, aristocracy, democracy, and then anarchy only to start over again and again.  My intention is to stop that cycle.  Human culture seems hell bent to repeat it with an eye on infinity—never breaking free.

That is why it’s important to read this Huffington Post article as I did for context. Please read the following very carefully:

When Bean retired from NASA in 1981, he became an excellent artist who paints the experiences of fellow astronaut-moonwalkers.

Astronaut Alan Bean holds a container of lunar soil collected during Apollo 12 extravehicular activity.

Bean’s spacefaring experiences have given him plenty of time to think about the question of whether earthlings are alone in the universe, and specifically, whether aliens have discovered us.

“I do not believe that anyone from outer space has ever visited the Earth,” Bean told the Australian news site “One of the reasons I don’t believe they have been here is that civilizations that are more advanced are more altruistic and friendly ― like Earth, which is better than it used to be ― so they would have landed and said, ‘We come in peace and we know from our studies you have cancer that kills people, we solved that problem 50 years ago, here’s the gadget we put on a person’s chest that will cure it, we will show you how to make it.’

“Just like someday, say, 1,000 years from now, when we can go to another star and see a planet, that’s what we would do, because we will know how to cure cancer, cure birth defects, so we would teach them.”

I do believe that Alan Bean has taken up the very unhealthy habit of smoking Crack. Because no sane, rational mind could believe such things from a supposed educated position.  Bean believes, as many modern academics do, that human progress is linier so that once something like the wheel, or fire is discovered, mankind perpetually advances forward.  However, there is great evidence counter to that belief that is spewing out under every rock of modern archaeology, primarily that human kind rises from the ashes then advances to a certain point, then falls back to their beginnings over and over again.  And this process may very well have happened well before there was an Ice Age many times over.  For instance, consider that during the last Ice Age over 10,000 years ago ocean levels were 300 feet lower than they are today.  Forget about the mythical global warming theories perpetuated by modern politics to help with the Vico Cycle in taking mankind backwards intellectually—we’re talking about real science that has been proven.  That would mean that the entire English Channel would have been dry land—as well as many other places around the world.  Additionally, the land around Florida would be much larger meaning that much of the archaeology of that period would have been near the coast lines of that age.  That would put them underwater today.  Most of the archaeology that we study today from that time would have been deeply inland away from the vast water supplies and fish that being near the coast would have provided.  There are likely entire cities buried under that 300 feet of water now.  And this kind of thing could have happened many times over in the past.  After 10,000 years, a lot of the things that humans use and produce simply erode away into nothing.  Only something like stone can last the ages, but even then, the rate of erosion is very fast when compared to geologic time.

Due to the advanced arithmetic of the builders of Stonehenge and the various mound sites around the world, we are talking about people who learned these things from somewhere. They certainly didn’t learn them while hunting fish or catching game across the vast plains of grass during the last Ice Age.  There is some missing information that is likely buried under the oceans.  Just as New York City is built along an ocean front, mankind typically builds its largest metropolises on coastal regions, and during the last Ice Age, those coasts would have been very different from today.  The missing links to our modern understanding are likely located in those places.  Meanwhile, there are way too many reports about archaeology on the moon and Mars not to assume that there was life there at some point in time and likely they found their way to earth for either short periods of time, or for sustained stays.  Again, we won’t know until we visit these places for sure, but the evidence looks to be pretty convincing that we will find remnants of ancient civilizations on the moon and Mars when we set up settlements.  But like life on earth, they have went through their own Vico Cycles which we obviously have inherited in some yet to be discovered way.

If we look honestly into the past with an understanding of the Vico Cycle, we can see clearly what Alan Bean and many other intellectuals are missing. Just because a civilization is technical and masters certain aspects of interplanetary travel that doesn’t mean they can sustain themselves as a culture.  That doesn’t mean that people from an advanced culture once they are torn away from it won’t revert back to a primal state when forced to adapt to changing circumstances.  Take any of us in the present day of 2017.  Drop us off on a tropical island and we’d be forced to live as did our ancestors of Cro-Magnon from 10,000 BC.  We might have knowledge of our flat screen televisions, cars, flight and smart phones, but all those things would be useless to that reality of living on an island with no electricity or network signals to communicate with the outside world, and we’d revert back to primacy—quickly.

You can see that same primacy in modern cultures such as in Muslim groups, and in Hip Hop Clubs, even in motorcycle gangs—humans once they take their eye off greatness and forward achievement revert to an almost animal state and this always drives us backwards to the beginning of the Vico Cycle.

This seems much more logical than Alan Bean’s suggestion that an advanced society would be more altruistic and technically viable—and willing to help another culture along. Rather, the actual answer is that the Vico Cycle would send aliens to earth for help as a last refuge from whatever failure they endured elsewhere in the galaxy to start again.  If they were coming to earth they were likely fleeing for their lives—not brining cures for cancer.  Then they would mix and assimilate with whatever age of mankind they ran into—they’d mate and create new genetic pools assuming they were compatible through mitochondrial information and the Vico Cycle would start all over again. The assumption that mankind will always move forward is wrong.  A proper political philosophy must be in place before that can happen—it doesn’t occur in a natural state because if left alone—humans revert back to their origin state of animal behavior.  Just look at the conditions of any Hip Hop club and you will see the evidence.  That is not a society that will solve the problems of cancer or put people on Mars to live in a sustainable fashion. So just because Alan Bean walked on the moon that doesn’t make him an expert on all things historical.  It just makes him a guy who walked on the moon—just like we all will soon.  But before we can we must stop the trend to constantly reinvent ourselves through the Vico Cycle.  In that sense, I would say that America came the closest to breaking that Vico Cycle curse during westward expansion and the Hollywood westerns that followed.  That philosophic position of morality, exploration, and individual achievement was the closest that humans have ever come to breaking free of that perilous prison called the Vico Cycle.  When we stop that—mankind will advance and likely discover that out of the millions and millions of life forms floating around in the universe there is a very real possibility that we might be the first to break the code.  And that should not be an audacious thought for any of us.  But something expected.  In that regard, we should never listen to people like Alan Bean.  He just doesn’t get it.

Rich Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  Use my name to get added benefits.


When Snowflakes Melt: The coming crises of tomorrow

I did manage to catch some of the Rush Limbaugh Show during lunch on 3-28-2017 and he was making some excellent points about the nature of our modern “snowflakes” as we are calling them now. It was a topic I have been talking about for more than twenty years—in fact longer.  Even when I was in my school years I was concerned about how different the people were in the 80s than they were from the westerns I watched as a kid where everyone was polite to everyone else, intelligence was celebrated and chivalry—especially toward women was considered a virtue.  I was concerned as a high school student that we had fallen too far from our core American values.  Kids liked to drink and do drugs too much—casual sex was destructively too common for the needed process of romance which then built families.  I dated a lot of girls back then but the relationships fell apart within two weeks as they craved more what they were used to from their parents and it was obvious that I was far too serious of a person for casual fun—or a boy toy.  Even back then I was much more interested in very deep topics as opposed to what musical bands were popular—or what my favorite beer was.  As an anthropology student in high school I was one of those kids who read USA Today every morning in my home room class before preparing for that class which was one of the few that I really enjoyed—I looked at my classmates and I was really concerned about the future of America because they just weren’t cutting the mustard.  I disliked them so much because of what they were that I have not communicated with any of them for over twenty years now.  I bump into someone here and there, but I don’t communicate with anybody—essentially because I am let down by what they have become.

 (Check out the 25 minute mark for the best examples)

But let me tell you something—compared to today, my generation which graduated in 1986 was a beacon of morality compared to the kids of today and as Rush said during his broadcast, one of our greatest shortages coming over the next few decades is in the intelligence of our youth. They have been deliberately destroyed by our public education system and we are facing a true crisis as a country.  The biggest fear we have is not of artificial intelligence taking over as it often does in science fiction movies—it’s in the inability of our society to meet the challenges of tomorrow—because as the snowflakes that they’ve become, they melt upon the slightest heat—and simply cannot endure the stresses of our times.

Probably the hardest personal thing for me was in raising two daughters in a time when I knew that the direction our society was moving was wrong. Again, it probably helped me greatly to have as one of my main hobbies a love for studying history and culture—because I could see it clearly and was able to teach my kids in ways that society wasn’t—and they turned out to be fantastic young people and continue to be.  But they were girls and that typically means they’ll want to date boys and as I looked around the boys in their age group sucked.  That wasn’t just because I was protective of my girls—of course I was as all dads should be, but because the boys they had out there as options to date did not share their value system which my kids gained from living under my roof.  So that was a problem and was probably the worst years of my life because you have to let them live, but you know they are encountering a tangled mess and they had to go through the pain of sorting it out as individuals which was really hard to watch.  I still have a really tough time with it.  When I deal with people in that generation I just assume I’m talking to a child that needs excessive patience—much more patience than I’m comfortable with providing.  I can do it, but I usually just steam under my hat because they just don’t have the basic foundations to understand much of anything I say to them.  One dumb boy who dated my youngest daughter actually argued with me about the value of Chick-fil-A over their position against gays.  First problem was that you don’t argue with me, especially in my house or treat me like some kind of equal to his sluggish ass.  Second was the kid was so incredibly lazy and unfocused.  I had to let my daughter go through the dating patterns and realize on her own the direction of things, so I tried to let her live her life.  But the kid was just so stupid—it made me miserable to look at him.  He grew up without a father and his mother coddled him to the point where he never thought he was wrong about anything so he truly didn’t know how to interact with an alpha male like me.  I took that into consideration for my daughter’s sake, but it was painful.  My concerns went far beyond the fact that no boy would be good enough for my girls—it was literally the fact that no boy was good enough for my girls because they had been taught incorrectly from infants on how to be good people as adults.  And the crippling of these young people was intentional by our education institutions.

My generation was wave one of the dumbed down society, my kids were wave two. The Department of Education was legalized as an institution while I was in grade school and from there public education went downhill fast.  I’ve watched a lot of the kids my children played with grow up and some of them are alright—but they all have suffered with dealing against a world that deliberately put low expectations on them only to drown a little bit each day by their inner desires for personal excellence—because the world was determined not to give it to them.  That has left a level of exasperation on their faces that is clear to me—a silent reservation of understanding that mediocrity is the ruler of our times for which the human race has never really accepted at our cores.  But these days instead of doing something about it in our lives we yearn for empowerment in our television, sports and movies.  But increasingly even in those formats the concept of nobility and valor are evaporating.  In movies and television shows dads are portrayed as dumbasses, women are overbearing tyrants hell-bent on forging their own professions away from the family unit, and children are always the smartest people in the room.   That was a long way from Gunsmoke and Bonanza which is what I grew up on where older people were there to help young people reason through complicated problems with good advice when needed most.  No, these days the primary concern of the day is change from a good country into a bad one by turning off the minds of our youth with drugs, sex, and liberal educations so that they will grow up to be drones to progressive thinking—which we are starting to see in abundance presently.  Even if we changed course right now and the Trump administration gets things fixed over the next eight years it will take at least twenty more years to see a turnaround in personal human philosophy within the family unit that would be productive on a macro scale.  We are truly in a crisis because that means two generations of people will not be functioning correctly in our American government and our businesses—because they are not intellectually equipped for the job.  Old people like me will have to work longer and harder to keep the train on the tracks and the very young will have to enter the workplace sooner so that they can save this current breed of snowflakes from their undeveloped minds.

I’ve talked about it for such a long time but yet in the back of my mind I hoped to be a little wrong—but I wasn’t. This generation of “snowflakes” have been brought up in day cares and their core value system was shaped in those terrible places of collectivism and stunted development.  There is no way to trick F**k the system.  You can’t take away a biological mother and replace it with a paid babysitter who is watching eight other children and expect those kids to grow up correctly because that’s just not how human beings are wired.  The liberal experiment of this Brave New World has been an utter failure and the ramifications of it are upon us—and it’s hard to look at.   I don’t blame the kids so much as I do the system they grew up in, but never-the-less, we have a major problem and there is no easy way out of it.  There will be no real retirement for my generation and things won’t be easy for the current generation that grows up under Trump as president because they’ll have to be rushed into the marketplace just to keep the ship floating—and we’ll be stuck with over 100 million louses who can’t think for themselves and melt under the slightest pressure as they are ruined for life and our compassion for them will force us to carry them along kicking and screaming at every inconvenience.  And that is the greatest crises of our coming tomorrow.

Rich Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  Use my name to get added benefits.


A Case Against Islam: London terror, why spouses cheat on each other, and topless women in France

It was kind of weird to have been standing in the exact same spots as the terrorist attack victims had been when an Islamic lunatic hell-bent on Crusader revenge from the Middle Ages, ran his car into them in London, England near the Parliament building just a few feet from where Prime Minister Theresa Mays was speaking. After all, there were so many places in the world, and so many streets where something like that could have happened, yet it occurred on the exact walking path that my wife and I had just taken and the images where still fresh in our minds from our trip.  I found myself wishing that this had happened when I was there so I could have done something about it.  So close, yet so far away.  I did warn of this very thing as I was reporting what I saw in London, and Paris from that same trip and with all the Muslim people at all levels of activity within those two very liberal cities—the writing was on the wall.  You just can’t mix the religion of a Medieval origin with a forward-thinking civilization scratching at the ceiling of space and expect them to assimilate well together.  And that’s what’s happening.  There is a war between the east and the west and one side is going to win, and one side will lose as earth becomes one thing or another and those are the raw facts.  For many thousands of years, we’ve run from each other after one battle to another and now the world is just too small, and until we move into space, the fight between the two fundamentally different philosophies will battle it out in our city streets for supremacy.  We will never get along.

I of course am a white representative of western culture and my background is from the roots of that civilization—so obviously, I think its superior to all forms of eastern thinking. With that said, Christianity is an “eastern” concept.  It is not an idea born of western civilization as so wonderfully articulated by the 1150 AD art of Wolfram von Eschenbach and a few other writers who expressed the romance of the troubadours for about 100 years before the Catholic Church built their cathedrals all over England and ruled everything through the Church for the next thousand years.  We wouldn’t see another period like Eschenbach’s nobility, chivalry and romance in story form until the American western rose up for another 100-year period from about 1850 AD to 1950 AD for exactly the same reasons, to express the desires of the truly free, and western heart specific to the culture of Cro-Magnon man that evolved after the Ice Age in north western Europe—specifically.  The ideas forged in that region of the world were unique and very different from the rest of the world which has largely been shaped for all of human history by oriental thought.  So let that be a qualifier of my thinking and I have studied both in their various aspects and I see their values respectively—but clearly.

Also keep in mind that I respect people who need religion to hold together their otherwise unstable lives. It is too much to ask most people to live a good life without the fear of everlasting damnation motivating their private actions—so religions—especially for unstable people, is vastly important to maintaining a civil society which was the argument of the Church of England that was all too happy to abandon the romance of Arthurian legends in favor of the sacrament of Christ provided by the clergy.  In the modern era, progressives did the same only their church was that of government as the bureaucrat replaced the Church clergy for the same distribution of sacrament.

However, I am not going to abandon what I think are superior values—as expressed by the individualism of western culture for the “sacrament” of eastern religions—for which Islam and Christianity are but a few. And what is going on in London, Paris, and all over Europe is a clash of western ideas which are more underground these days, and superimposing them with a collision of the obvious surface eastern way of thinking collectively.   For instance, in France it is quite common to see a woman on the beach topless.  What she is doing in that situation is stating that she is an independent woman functioning from her passionate self-recognition.  But the religious background of the modern progressive will say that her nude state is a reflection of the collective essence for which we all are and her sexuality does not belong to one man, or lover—but to the world—that is the sacrificial aspect of it that came to the region from its long history with eastern infused religions—which essentially came from the Roman Empire trying to hold everything together in the last few hundred years of its existence.  The surface argument that many have about the topless women at French beaches is first of the morality of the nudity—which is fear of the Church—(Christianity and Islam).  But then there is that ancient troubadour history of western culture that inspires the woman to stand against those institutions proudly declaring to the world that she is a product of her own inclinations.  That’s why today we have all these kids looking like tattooed pin cushions declaring their individuality from the traditions of our past even through they are copying each other for the look—because they don’t know how to break down all these influences in their lives—because they are all stacked in dysfunctional ways.  That makes Islam’s simplicity appealing—which is a means of recruiting and why this problem is currently exploding.

In the confusion of our modern times western civilization has felt it had to apologize for the crimes of the Church during times of imperialist rule, through the Romans, then through the English and French Empires where Catholic missionaries did to the world what Islamic radicals are doing now—converting the world to their version of an eastern religion inherited from Zoroastrianism—and the cultures of the Indus Valley well before the times of the Greek. Christianity and Islam in fact are children of Zoroastrian religion, so they are not new to the human race but only the most recent embodiment of religion for the times of those large empires—which are outdated and useless to mankind in 2020 AD.  It was nice that Muslims preserved the work of Aristotle from the destruction of the Library in Alexandria by Roman radicals—but as far as original contributions, there is nothing innovative about Islamic culture that makes it more special to anybody else.  The same angel Gabriel as he did in the Bible was behind the shaping of Islam, so there isn’t anything really to fight over between Muslims and Christians that demand death.  Their rivalry is no different from that of a sport franchise between two teams within a 100 miles of each other.  They have a lot more in common than not.  If the religion produces zealots’ intent on murder, then the whole enterprise should be abandoned as a state religion.  No country should put their name on such a thing because it’s an outdated concept that has brought more harm to the human race than not.

My personal values which I share with many people in western civilization is that the original concepts of Wolfram von Eschenbach, of personal bliss and defying the authority of institutional barriers is a human concept that deserves its time in the sun. The eastern religions promise more of the same kind of trouble that has soaked mankind in blood from its inception.  Even though they preach peace often in Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity and all the variants in between—the result is often war because each attaches itself to state sponsorship and politics—which then become something not so sanctimonious.  In the case of London, the terrorist who attacked so many people in the heart of that nice historic city wanted to use fear to convert people to his religion—and to impose the black flag of ISIS over the state symbols of the Christianized Europe that unleashed the Crusades on the Middle East centuries ago.  It’s time to stop, and to insist on that stoppage loudly.  No member of Islam has a right to murder other people in the name of God.  And for the liberals who have been running England and France, you cannot mix the religions of the east with the innate passions of the individualized west—because even in the most ardent liberal—the topless woman on a French beach—there is a little bit of the Arthurian romances in them—and they’ll never assimilate with the religions of the east.  Ever.  It’s not in their DNA.

There will be no conquest of western civilization as ISIS fantasizes about—especially through fear because they don’t understand what makes us tick as a species of “westerners.” The moment we were free of the Church of England in America we developed into the frontiersman and cowboys of cinema that is the innate condition of our people—our heritage.  And regarding that particular mentality, it is better to destroy 1 million collectivists than to break the heart of one individual who is trying to live authentically according to their bliss.  A marriage between two people in love by their choice is better than an arranged marriage to bring two tribes together under the premise of oriental philosophy—which has been the common practice of the Church for many years both in Islam and Christianity.  When it comes to values, individuals take the world forward.  Collectivists take it back—every time—it’s the classic Vico cycle—theocracy, aristocracy, democracy, anarchy—then back again to the beginning as Orientals have been doing for thousands of years.

When we talk about the “west” we are not talking about London as it is today. Radical terrorists aren’t attacking the concept of the west as they think they are when they kill innocent people outside of Parliament.  Because that old idea of the “west” is much deeper in our culture than any surface reaction to collectivist religions. And the centerpiece of that value system is that the individual is more valuable than a collective ideology.  More minds do not make something better—it makes it worse because it forces an inauthentic experience.  So when we look at trying to assimilate Islam with the “west” it will never work.  It can’t work.  A choice between the two has to be made and that choice was made on the battlefields—and Islam lost over and over again.  And it always will because collectivists do not beat individuals  They can only win in mass force—they cannot win in ideology and that is why Islam no longer works and should be tossed aside in favor of something else.  If that religion can’t be more constructive for the meager minds that adhere to it for their own personal faults—then the religion needs to be dropped from state sponsorship and pushed from the human experience—so we can deal with the real problems of the human race—and not this contrived religion from the Middle Ages.

Islam is at war with the west and they aren’t looking to make peace. They are on a mission to convert as many people to Islam through any means and they won’t stop until they are all killed or accomplish their task.  Catholic missionaries did this before, and it caused a lot of trouble around the world.  Now Islam is doing it and they will accomplish the same results.  Because people don’t want to be killed, they’ll tell the Islamic terrorists whatever they want to hear, but what’s in their hearts will be something else.  And just like people cheat on their spouses and do anything and everything out of rebellion from whatever religion they come from—life in the west has at its core a need for rebellion.  And that isn’t a new thing, it comes from our Cro-Magnon experience to always push whatever limits we are presented with—and that is what advances society.  Not that cheating on a spouse is a good thing, it’s not, but when the marriage becomes to the human mind an instrument of the state—the romance leaves the marriage, and rebellion in some way is the mode of western thinking.  The oriental religion of Islam won’t work for the west and it’s too late to go back.  So we either go to all-out war with Islam to preserve the west—or we go extinct.  There is no middle way as liberals like to think.  The two cultures just don’t assimilate because their evolutional trajectories are going in radically different directions.

Rich Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  Use my name to get added benefits.