The Truth of the Matter

Part I

The U.S. Government’s new administration is taking a path of hard resistance in its policies, both foreign and domestic. I cannot recall, In the history of our government, any administration basing its decisions upon reality rather than an idealized concept of how the constituents wish things to be. Meanwhile opposition politicians continue to tell people they can make that idealized concept into a real world wherein every person receives what they need.

This U.S. administration, on the other hand, is saying, “This is the real world and in the real world what counts is facing the truth and here’s the irrefutable truth: the human condition has, at its core, an unchanging biological imperative, and that is to control. Every man and woman seeks to control the environment and the people around them. We learn it in the crib: cry this way to get changed, cry this way to get food, laugh this way to be hugged, do this to be praised, etc. We learn to act, then speak; then speak and act. We manipulate. It is human nature and when humans form themselves into groups they contend one with another to control that group. When those groups become nation states, human nature is magnified in the speaking and acting of those who have been either chosen or forced themselves upon the rest of the group, as its leaders.

We learn early on that strength can be exerted in both a physical and mental manner. That is we can physically overpower someone as in “might is right” or we can convince someone that our way is the best, whether it is the truth or not. Both are forms of manipulation or plainly put, methods of controlling the environment. Often the latter will take the form of promises to make things better for the individual and/or smaller groups identified by ethnicity, sexual preference or even mental instabilities like gender dysphoria.

Now that last sentence will put a lot of people off, but you see, that is the truth versus an idealization. The truth is, gender dysphoria is a recognized mental illness and should be treated like one. The idealization is that the concept is harmless; people should get to be whomever they choose. Yet, it is not harmless if the action is to force upon the group a way of acting and speaking that is antithetical to millennia of biological science and cultural acceptance. Reference the earlier paragraph about seizing control of the group by convincing them your idea, while perhaps not an observable fact is, the new truth. Once you believe that particular new truth they will have others for you. Then they have control of language and culture. If we were to treat other psychoses as we treat gender dysphoria we would have a real mess in trying to maintain order in our society. Oh wait! We do and we do.

The truth is most often ignored in favor or a more palatable less painful idea. For example:

Before this administration Canada had many tariffs on goods produced in the U.S. being shipped into Canadian provinces for sale. These were not ten, fifteen or even twenty-five percent tariffs but one-hundred, one-hundred -fifty and sometimes even more than two-hundred percent. This made U.S. goods far more expensive than similar Canadian produced goods. This is called protectionism wherein the importing country charges large tariffs to ensure the sale of goods produced in that country. Meanwhile the U.S. had no such tariffs on Canadian produced goods imported and sold inside the U.S. This situation resulted in a significant trade imbalance between the two countries and was not good for the overall U.S. economy. Similar situations exist with Mexico and China, the U.S. next two largest trading partners as well as with the European Union, Brazil, Argentina, Chile and other South American countries. In all the United States has a trade deficit with more than ninety countries including, ready for this, Cambodia. That means we buy more from them than we sell in their countries and in most of these cases it is because the U.S. products have tariffs imposed on them and sell for much more than locally produced products.

This administration says trade should be equitable and has imposed tariffs on many of the countries with which we have trade deficits. In some cases the tariffs are the same that country charges on U.S. products but in many cases the U.S. tariffs are much lower than the second country is charging.

Reaction to these tariffs has been typical of opposition groups including the media. They tell you, It is upsetting our allies and trading partners. It is raising prices. I would suggest that if someone charges you a 100% tariff for a product that you allow them to import into the U.S. free of tariff or with a much lower tariff, then you could hardly call that entity a partner. As for raising prices it is doing so only on imported goods. You can get a good deal if you buy a U.S. product. Plus not all goods have had tariffs placed on them and certainly not across the board.

If you think that the U.S. being taken advantage of to the tune of $1.23 Trillon a year (according to the Wall Street Journal) then you might be living in that idealized in your head paradise to which I referred earlier. Fair trade should be fair trade. Either no tariffs, in which case the goods compete on quality, or expect to have your exported goods taxed at the same rate you charge for U.S. imports. There has been lots of talk about equality in the last four years; this is about equality in the world and not being discriminated against. That is something with which even the oppositionists should be able to identity.

The Truth of international relations is always more difficult to accept than the idea of a paradise of international brotherly/sisterly love. It’s just human nature.

End of Part I

Next Up: Truth: Canada, Greenland, NATO and Ukraine