Some thoughts on my choice in the next elections

 When discussing elections in the past I was interested in a few questions:

1. Why do people listen to top sportsmen? They are usually less educated (prerequisite of rational thinking) than the average voter and highly biased because of mercantile interest is getting top income. 

2. Why do people listen to actors? These human beings are puppets (not puppies) by professions and nobody can distinguish between their own thoughts and emotions (if any) and their roles.  

3. Why do people listen to pop-signers? 

Now I have an additional question. Why people listen to bloggers? Nobody should trust my posts and consider than as a source of valuable information. 

As a physicist, I am rather a conservative person with most of the methods and approaches from my University time and results positioned in the broader and well-established environment of experiments and theories. I cannot say that some poor theory or experiment deserves to be praised for the sake of liberal values.  The same is with the discussion between conservatives and liberals. It is difficult to discuss values that are under permanent change. How can conservatives know that the current statements of liberals will not change the next day? As a matter of fact, sportsmen, actors, and pop-singers are rather liberals. I cannot trust people who almost surely change their minds tomorrow.  

33rd Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS Charlemagne (1st French)

French people always wanted to kill Russians. Nothing changes from Napoleon's time. They joined the Nazi and likely France does not deserve to be in the UN Security Council. The SS DIvision Charlemagne was larger than the Resistance. Here is a citation from Wiki:

The Waffen Grenadier Brigade of the SS Charlemagne (German: Waffen-Grenadier-Brigade der SS "Charlemagne") was a unit of the Waffen-SS formed in September 1944 from French collaborationists many of whom were already serving in various other German units. Named after the 9th-century Frankish king, it superseded the existing Legion of French Volunteers Against Bolshevism formed in 1941 within the German Army (Wehrmacht) and the SS-Volunteer Sturmbrigade France (SS-Friwilligen Sturmbrigade Frankriech) formed in July 1943, both of which were disbanded the same month. It also drafted in French recruits from other German military and paramilitary formations and Miliciens who had fled ahead of the Allied Liberation of France (June–November 1944).

After training, the Charlemagne Brigade was reclassified as a division as the 33rd Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS Charlemagne (1st French) (33. Waffen-Grenadier-Division der SS "Charlemagne" (französische Nr. 1)). It had 7,340 men at the time of its deployment to the Eastern Front in February 1945. It fought against Soviet forces in Pomerania where it was almost annihilated during the East Pomeranian Offensive within a month. Around 300 members of the unit participated in the Battle in Berlin in April–May 1945 and were among the last Axis forces to surrender.

rUsSiA

 Russia and USA are two by far the biggest nuclear weapon powers and their future is highly merged (as in the title of this post) to define the future of mankind. So, the stability of this duet is important for all of us. US presidential elections may create catastrophic turbulence and increase the probability of major nuclear war in case the US power will be not well defined. This might happen if the outcome of the elections is not accepted by the losing party. 

1. most dangerous is the case when Trump loses and does not recognize the loss. 

2. if Biden loses and does not accept the loss - the major control is safe for some time but the vacuum of power may increase dramatically

3. If Trump wins and Biden accepts or vice versa the overall stability may be retained for some time. But the battle may not end worldwide.

Principal idea of capitalism: the people only work because and so long as they are poor

This is an excerpt from "The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism"  by Max Weber

Another obvious possibility, to return to our example, since the appeal to the acquisitive instinct through higher wage-rates failed, would have been to try the opposite policy, to force the worker by reduction of his wage-rates to work harder to earn the same amount than he did before. Low wages and high profits seem even to-day to a superficial observer to stand in correlation; everything which is paid out in wages seems to involve a corresponding reduction of profits. That road capitalism has taken again and again since its beginning. For centuries it was an article of faith, that low wages were productive, i.e. that they increased the material results of labour so that, as Pieter de la Cour, on this point, as we shall see, quite in the spirit of the old Calvinism, said long ago, the people only work because and so long as they are poor

Winter Olympics must be prohibited

Winter Olympic Games is the most prominent example of global racial segregation and inequality. Formally, all countries have full right to participate but white population has extraordinary advantage of snow in winters. Men and women of colour look like and presented by TV as funny and incompetent amateurs in the worst traditions of the human zoos. Winter Olympic Games is the  shame of the civilized world. 

The libertarian era has come in the USA

Risk assessment is a key procedure for business. To provide safety, i.e. mitigation of major risks for a reasonable price, for all stakeholders of a given business one needs profit assessment and revealing/ understanding risks. Since the desired safety level depends on business profit and expenses related to risk mitigation one looks into the profit forecast and long term statistics of risks to decide on business perspectives. Both, the COVID-19 pandemic and socio-racial protests enhanced by robbery and looting, have dramatically changed both sides of the balance – for the majority of people and businesses the mid-term profit is much lower than that was estimated in 2019 and the risks for many businesses have been increasing since February 2020. For example, business-related to outdoor food and hospitality will likely be suppressed due to increased insurance payment and reduce profit forecast.

The major beneficiary in this situation is IT-companies, which benefit on both sides – their capitalization has been increasing since the deep local minima in February-March due to the lockdown and their risk assessment has been decreasing since these companies have moved to remote work. The latter means no risk for the IT-companies – everything is online. Easy money made their thoughts thin and they support protesters – longer and bloody protests will bring more and more money – this is a magic dollar printing machine.

Lucky IT-companies (and few others), but many other businesses will suffer more and more. Industrial companies will have problems with increasing risks of pandemic pressure and the personal safety of workers. Credits will be harder to get due to increasing risks and debts rising since February. Protests- looting-robbery -… will affect people who have to drive to work instead of sitting home with laptops on top of their laps and with caps of coffee. All in all, the next stage of economic growth will not be with industrial companies (good for IT who can prolong the protests and suppress industries, which likely support Trump). I have to say that the support of protesters creates a moral hazard situation. This is a declaration of war to suffering industries.

However, the real dark time comes to laypeople with lower incomes. Both, the COVID-19 pandemic-related lockdown and slower recovery due to protest disordering will make these people poorer and much poorer. The income loss alone puts their lives at risk and this is the existential risk for tens of millions. But this is a smaller risk to my mind. The actual risk is that law enforcement troops like police and sheriffs are in the process of replacement by private security service (e.g. Minneapolis City Council members). This is a fully libertarian idea that lower-quality human beings have to sell workforce to higher-quality human beings and no social/governmental services have to exist at all. This means state deconstruction. The USA will be the union of self-assistance.

Why American political institutions do not work?

S. Huntington defined institutions as  "stable, valued, recurring patterns of behavior".  Everybody in this universe believed that the American institutions are stable and the most valued patterns of behavior. Just a few months of COVID-19 broke the shell of polished lie. The American institutions is a fake news. This happened not because the depression of the longer home stay without pay had to be channeled into the rage of racial and social riot. This happens because the discussion of institutions was just words about the institution and there were no recurring patterns of valued behavior in many organizations and procedures. The labor income share fall in the 2000s reveals an important process - the US institutions tried to cover the globe (the  whole world is not enough) and a larger part  of the US society was eliminated from this institutionalization process as insignificant. The set of social organizations and procedures was reduced to suppression of potential protests by various means from rough vocal statements ("Basket of deplorables" ) to law enforcement ("Occupy Wall Street") instead of resolving crucial problems of the racial, social, and economic inequality.

The US institutions failed because there is no consensus in the society. The organizations and processes are still alive, however. And they fight now not for institutionalization of new and adequate "patterns of behavior" within the USA but for power and money. And this war will be costly to all organizations but most painful for the US society.