복잡계 혁명이 몰려온다

5월 20일

역천(逆天)의 시대 대미(大尾)는 내각제 개헌

나는 여기에 대한민국 정통 우익 보수의 살 길이 있다고 봅니다. 즉 우리가 기존 정치 정당을 개혁할 아무런 수단을 갖고 있지 않은 마당에 유일한 무기는 불복종 가투(街鬪)입니다. 태극기 시위로 실력을 이미 입증한 바 있는데, 조금만 더 기다리면 5·18 정신이 헌법 전문에 들어가는 내각제 개헌안이 나올 것입니다. 그때 이 역도(逆徒)들을 뒤집을 기회는 의외로 쉽게 올 수 있다는 것을 명심하고 투쟁의 의욕을 불태웁시다. (이희도, 조갑제닷컴 발췌)

----> 원래 이번 쿠데타는 더불어민주당과 나머지 야당 및 비박계가 내각제 개헌이나 이원집정부제를 하기로 하고 일으킨 것이다.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[성명] 梨大, 구학서 겸임교수의 양심과 학문의 자유를 보호해야

국가교육국민감시단

17일 이화여대 경영대학 특강에서 구학서 겸임교수(신세계그룹 고문)는 플라톤의 말을 인용, ‘2400년 전에 우매한 군중에 의해서 이끌어지는 민주주의는 민주주의가 아니라고 했는데, 지금도 되풀이되고 있다. 촛불로 바뀐 정권은 우매한 민중이 이끄는 민주주의’라고 말한 사실이 논란이 되고 있다(발언출처: 인터넷 <한겨레> 5월17일字)....

대학 교수가 강단에서 한 강의 내용을 하루도 지나기 전에 사과하고, 대학 당국이 해당 강의 위촉 해지 운운한 일련의 과정을 보면, 이화여대는 진리의 요람이기는커녕 강남에 있는 사설학원만도 못한 것이 아닌가 하는 생각이 든다.

---> 똘레랑스를 외치던 좌파들이 사상과 언론의 자유까지 말살하려 들고 있다.

-------------------------------------------------

머지 않아 웬만한 전라도 사람은 모두 유공자가 될 것 같다.

--------------------------------------------------------------

왜 좌파들은 베네수엘라에 대해 침묵하는가?

버니 샌더스와 프란치스코 교황이 베네수엘라에 대해 말하지 않는 이유는, 베네수엘라 정권이 추구한 정책들이 바로 샌더스나 교황 그리고 시장경제의 반대자들이 선호하던 것들이기 때문이다.

그것은 가격 통제와 정부에 의한 사유재산의 탈취, 거대한 복지정책, 중앙정부에 의한 계획, 그리고 평등과 가난의 구제 및 소위 신자유주의자들과 투쟁이라는 입에 발린 구호 등으로 대표된다.

베네수엘라가 혼돈으로 빨려들어 갈수록, 좌파들의 침묵은 귀가 아플 만큼 커지고 있다.

처음에는 비교적 신자유주의적인 정권이 정부 지출을 감축하고 개혁을 해서 어느 정도 경제 성장을 이뤄 놓으면, 좌파 선동가들이 나타나 부를 재분배하고, 탐욕스런 자본가들을 벌주고, 시장을 규제해서 좀 더 인간적으로 만들면, 모두가 더 잘살게 되는 유토피아가 온다고 선동을 한다. 그래서 좌파 사회민주주의자들이 정권을 잡은 다음에 경제를 망가뜨려 놓으면, 다음에 다시 우파 신자유주의 정부가 나타나 그것을 복구한다. 이것이 남미에서 악순환처럼 벌어지는 현상이다.

Why the Left Refuses to Talk About Venezuela

•Ryan McMaken

During the 2016 presidential election, Bernie Sanders refused to answer questions about Venezuela during an interview with Univision. He claimed to not want to talk about it because he's "focused on my campaign." Many suggested a more plausible reason: Venezuela's present economy is an example of what happens when a state implements Bernie Sanders-style social democracy.

Similarly, Pope Francis — who has taken the time to denounce pro-market ideologies for allegedly driving millions into poverty — seems uninterested in talking about the untrammeled impoverishment of Venezuela in recent years. Samuel Gregg writes in yesterday's Catholic World Report:

Pope Francis isn’t known as someone who holds back in the face of what he regards as gross injustices. On issues like refugees, immigration, poverty and the environment, Francis speaks forcibly and uses vivid language in doing so.

Yet despite the daily violence being inflicted on protestors in Venezuela, a steadily increasing death-toll, an explosion of crime, rampant corruption, galloping inflation, the naked politicization of the judiciary, and the disappearance of basic food and medical supplies, the first Latin American pope’s comments about the crisis tearing apart an overwhelming Catholic Latin American country have been curiously restrained.

This virtual silence comes in spite of the fact that the Catholic bishops who actually live in Venezuela have denounced the regime as yet another illustration of the "utter failure" of "socialism in every country in which this regime has been installed."

Thus, for many Venezuelans, the question is: "Where is Pope Francis?"

As with Sanders, it may very well be that Francis has nothing to say about Venezuela precisely because the Venezuelan regime has pursued exactly the sorts of policies favored by Bernie Sanders, Pope Francis, and the usual opponents of market economics.

It's an economic program marked by price controls, government expropriation of private property, an enormous welfare state, central planning, and endless rhetoric about equality, poverty relief, and fighting the so-called "neoliberals."

And, as Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro has helpfully explained, "There are two models, the neoliberal model which destroys everything, and the Chavista model which is centered around people.”

The Chavista model is simply a mixture of social democracy and environmentalism which is easily recognizable as the Venezuelan version of the hard-left ideology espoused by a great many global political elites both in the United States and Europe. Neoliberalism, on the other hand — as I've noted before — is a vague term that most of the time really just means a system of relatively free markets and moderate laissez-faire.

Indeed, no other regimes in the world, save Cuba and North Korea, have been as explicit in fighting the alleged menace that is neoliberalism.

For this reason, as Venezuela descends into chaos, we are hearing a deafening silence from most of the left, as even some principled leftists have noticed.

In an article at Counterpunch, for example, Pedro Lange-Churion points out:

Venezuela was news while it was good news and while Chávez could be used as a banner for the left and his antics provided comic relief. But as soon as the country began to spiral towards ruination and Chavismo began to resemble another Latin American authoritarian regime, better to turn a blind eye.

Nevertheless, as a dedicated leftist, Lange-Chrion unfortunately still mistakenly thinks that the Venezuelan problem is political and not economic. For him, it's merely an unfortunate coincidence that the implementation of the Chavismo economic agenda just happened to coincide with the destruction of the nation's political and economic institutions.

But here's the thing: it's not a coincidence.

In fact, it's a textbook case of a country electing a leftwing populist who undoes years of pro-market reforms, and ends up destroying the economy.

This has been going on for decades in Latin America where, as explained by Rudiger Dornbusch and Sebastián Edwards, the cycle repeats itself again and again.

It's happened in Argentina and in Brazil most recently, and it goes something like this: first, a relatively neoliberal regime comes to power, moderately reduces government spending, somewhat restrains government power, and ushers in a period of growth. But, even with growth, middle-income countries like those of Latin America remain poor compared to the rich countries of the world, and large inequalities remain. Then, populist social democrats convince the voters that if only the regime would redistribute more wealth, punish greedy capitalists, and regulate markets to make them more "humane," then everyone would get richer even faster. And even better, the evil capitalists would be punished for exploiting the poor. Eventually, the economy collapses under the weight of the new social democratic regime, and a neoliberal regime is again elected to clean up the mess.

Venezuela is in the midst of this cycle right now. After decades of relatively restrained government intervention, Venezuela became one of the wealthiest nations in Latin America. During the most recent twenty years, though, the Chavistas were able to take that wealth and redistristribute it, regulate it, and expropriate it for the sake of "equality" and undermining capitalist evil. But, you can only redistribute, tax, regulate, and expropriate so much before the productive classes give up and the wealth runs out.

To the leftwing mind, the explosion of poverty that results can't possibly be the result of bad economic policy. After all, the Chavismo regime got everything it wanted. It redistributed wealth at will. It "guaranteed" a living wage, health care, and plentiful food to everyone. "Equality" was imposed by fiat over the cries of the "neoliberal" opposition.

The only possible answer, the left assumes, must be sabotage by capitalists or — as the Pope reminds us — too much "individualism."

The problem the global left has in this case, though, is that this narrative simply isn't plausible. Does Colombia have fewer capitalists and individualists than Venezeuala? It almost certainly has more. So why do Venezuelans wait hours in line to cross the Colombian border to buy basic food items not available in the social-democratic paradise of Venezuela? Has Chile renounced neoliberal-style trade and markets? Obviously not. So why has Chile's economy grown by 150 percent over the past 25 years while Venezuela's economy has gotten smaller?

The response consists largely of silence.

This isn't to say that what the left calls call "neoliberal" is without its faults. Some aspects of neoliberalism — such as free trade and relatively free markets — are the reason that global poverty and child mortality are falling, while literacy and sanitation are rising.

Other aspects of neoliberalism are odious, particularly in the areas of central banking and crony capitalism. But the free-market answer to this was already long-ago voiced by Ludwig von Mises, who, in his own fight against the neoliberals, advocated for consistent laissez-faire, sound money, and far greater freedom in international trade.

For an illustration of the left's answer to neo-liberalism, however, we need look no further than Venezuela where people are literally starving and will wait hours in line to buy a roll of toilet paper.

And if this is what the the left's victory against neoliberalism looks like, it's not surprising the left seems to have little to say.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

According to Mises,

…there is need to emphasize the truism that a government can spend or invest only what it takes away from its citizens and that its additional spending and investment curtails the citizens’ spending and investment to the full extent of its quantity.

정부는 시민들에게서 빼앗은 것만큼을 소비하거나 투자할 수 있고, 정부가 추가로 소비하고 투자하는만큼, 시민들의 소비와 투자를 그만큼 위축시킨다. ---- 미제스

케인즈의 인플레 정책은 본인의 책 <대한민국, 이렇게 망한다>에서도 충분히 다룬 바 있다. 정부가 경제를 활성화하기 위해 많은 돈을 푸는 만큼, 시장은 그만큼 위축되고 얼어붙는다. 엉터리 케인즈 정책이 경제를 망치고 서민들을 더욱 가난하게 만들고 있다.

-----------------------------------

특사로 중국 가서 시진핑 앞에서 허리를 굽힌 이해찬. 사대 굴종 외교를 하는 이해찬도 한심하고, 이를 그냥 지나치는 언론들도 한심하다. 중국에서는 특별히 사과를 하거나 고마움을 표시하는 경우가 아니면, 상사 앞에서도 좀체로 허리를 굽히지 않는다.

----------------------------------------------------------

병원에서 병을 고치지 못하니까 사람들이 한약에 눈을 돌린다. 그걸 노리고 일부 업자들이 약재의 효과를 과장하거나 엉터리 용어를 써서 사람들을 속인다.

티비에 보면 연삼이라고 하는 식물이 있는데, 이는 전호(前胡)라는 약재이다. 삼이라는 말이 들어 있지만, 삼과는 아무 관련이 없고, 주로 감기나 해수에 넣어 쓰는 약재이다.

또 봉황삼이라는 약재도 있는데, 이는 백선피(白鮮皮)라는 약재이다. 백선피는 몸의 습열(濕熱)을 제거할 때 쓰는 약재로, 삼과는 아무 관련도 없고, 치료 약이기 때문에 보약으로 알고 먹으면 큰 일 난다. 그리고 이 밖에도 약재 채취상들이 약재의 효과를 과장하는 경우는 더 많다. 가장 안전한 방법은 제기동의 약재상에 가서 구입하는 것이다.

환자들이 이런 약재상들의 말에 현혹되어 큰돈을 잃지 않도록 조심해야 한다.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

타샤니_하루하루

https://youtu.be/ZloRX7ePgAk

----------------------------------------------------------

최근의 과학 연구에 따르면, 언론인들이 과음을 해서 일반인보다 멍청하다고 한다