Women Rule the World

Women rule by proxy. Men certainly have limited power. If we break power down into economic, political, and reproductive then we can see that women in aggregate have far more power than men. There are more female voters. Women control more wealth than men. And most importantly, women’s sexual power far exceeds men’s.

The fact that women have not voted in a female president since being able to vote en masse for a hundred years is telling of their thoughts of ruling overtly. This is corroborated with women’s general dislike of working for a female boss. Though it does appear that women have decided they want to rule overtly now as I think most people are predicting a Clinton presidency as well as a female fed chief, giving the two most powerful positions over to females. I expect HIlary will be hated by women more than men, even by the women who voted for her.

Women’s power is a tripod propped up by capitalism, democracy, and sex. Sweep a single leg and the tripod falls. They’re more responsible for the way the world is than men are. They’re willing to take credit for improvements in society, even though they didn’t cause them, but not for the failings. There’s also the fact that women influence the subsequent generations through child rearing far greater than anyone else.

I’m conflicted on how I feel about a female president. On one hand I believe her term will be doomed from the beginning because of the economy, so it’s she’ll be seen as a failure. The other hand is that she’s guaranteed to make life worse for men.

Women will do what they're told by an authority figure. The milgram experiment is interesting to look at from a gender perspective. 100% of the female participants were willing to kill a person because an authority figure told them to do it. Sherly Sandberg is telling women to lead overtly. She's as much of an authority figure as they'll need. They're likely to follow what she says even if it makes them miserable. Expect that women will never surrender power.

Likely in the transformation from covert rule to overt rule some power will be displaced. Women will not lose any sexual power. That is certain. What power women will lose is the power of the victim class. They will attempt to retain this as long as possible but only so many bogus statistics will be held to when reality conflicts with them at every step. 

Women are innately sexists so it's likely that if women achieve overt power they will follow their solipsistic beliefs to a maximum conclusion and disenfranchise men to the point of violent revolt. Women are less rational than men  and being taught that men are the enemy. By making rational discourse impossible you make war inevitable. 

Women Choose and Men Lose

Women are already disposed towards materialism and pettiness. When they display it by mate selecting for money they just expose themselves for what they are. I appreciate it as it saves me time from realizing that these women are soulless. In the past that might have taken a few dates to figure out. Soulless women will wind up with soulless men in loveless marriages only connected by their lust for money.

So a woman who reads what I wrote might be offended. It sounsd harsh. Certainly, it does. I look down on this type of woman though. There is nothing for me to be intimidated by. I have the wealth I need to survive. See, that’s the difference. I wouldn’t expect a woman to date homeless men or men who can’t support themselves but every woman reading this knows that’s not what women want. They want to exploit their potential husbands to fill the void in them where their soul should be. They shove plastic crap made in China into their psyches, garbage food grown in Mexico, and spend, spend, spend endlessly with the crack addict belief that this time I’ll be happy, fulfilled, content.

Men will let them do it too because men are pathetic and needy. Their only accomplishments in life have become getting pussy and most can’t even do that so these pathetic men will do anything to receive the least bit of attention and validation from a woman. They’ll marry fat, bitch women. They’ll sell other men out without thought.

And nothing will change. Women have all of the power in sexual relationships and men are needy slaves. This woman will probably get what she wants. Most women will. Men aren’t on strike. That is nonsense. Look at Minter. The first woman to offer him companionship and he jumps at the chance to get enslaved with her.

Men need to understand one thing. Women do not like you. They never have liked you. They are built and designed to exploit you and cast you aside the moment your usefulness is gone. Women say they don’t need men. They’re right. They don’t. They’ve made that clear and I believe them. Right now, men need women. If they didn’t need women they wouldn’t be so eager to endure abuse, so willing to be exploited. Women are going to get whatever they want and men are going to accept it and suffer for it.

Should Women Vote

Should women vote? I don’t like the question mainly because I’m uncertain about democracy. It seems impossible to contain the electorate. Originally, women could vote if they were considered heads of house but that generally fell on a man. The intent was that only those who contributed to the republic would have a say in how it was run. It worked at the time but lawmakers need jobs and they constantly reform lest they be put out of business. Eventually, groups lobbied for expansion of the electorate to include everyone natural born. There was never really any need to discriminate against women with the vote.

But voting was a terrible idea anyway. First, because it politicizes people who should not be concerned with politics. Prior to democracy no one cared about issues. The issues of the day were the things that mattered. Did I have a job. Was there food available to eat. The banality of gay marriage would have no place in the majority. If the answer to the former questions was a no then the people voted with pitchforks and guillotines and replaced their leaders by force. It offered real consequences to the leaders because if they screwed up their heads rolled. Now the elite wield the vote like a cudgel to legitimize their rule. They can deflect the blame if the president miscalculates something because he was the chosen elect of the people. It’s the people’s fault for voting for a moron. Third, democracy politicizes the family when the family should be united. Their survival should be paramount and linked symbiotically to each other. By the division created along political issues it furthers the dividing line between woman and man who are naturally going to hold differing political opinions and creates animosity where union is needed.

Besides which, opposing female suffrage directly is too radical a notion for too little gain. It demonizes the manosphere et al further and offers fuel to our opponents to ignore everything else they might be willing to listen to otherwise. Only a small percent of feminists are truly man hating. The others are just following their lead. They’re going along to get along and many would be willing to listen to a new way of life if one was presented. The problem is that there isn’t another paradigm offered. There is the feminist woman and nothing else.

The future of war

The City-State and The Internet

There may be an inverse correlation with moral agency and technological advance. The past didn't have democracy which politicizes EVERYONE who still assumes their vote matters. Politics makes people miserable. At least it does for me and I've considered giving up any political theory in favor of spiritual development.

If you take the vote away from everyone then no one will care about issues or politics. They'll focus on themselves and their own lives which is why I believe people outside of a democracy would be happier. The games of power are sickening. It's like the ring of power from the Lord of the Rings. The more you wield it the more you want to wield it and the sicker you become. Not even the noble hobbits were immune to the corruption of the ring of power.

The past didn't have social media nor all of the connective communication devices that we do today. The positive is that there is a growing movement of disdain for the current political and social climate. While the voices on the left, right, and center are divergent on the aims of a successful society they are united in their general enmity of the current status quo and are eager for change. Real change and not the BS Obama change.

The vision I have for the future is humility. One of diversity of thought and coexistence of various ideologies. I begin with humility. I am not God and I do not know what's best for everyone. I know only what I want, if that. I can decide for myself. I control my own life and have no need for power over others. But to bring that about diversity of thought there must be an end to universalism. The idea of big government must be put to rest.

The city-state is a social construct where autonomous states may govern themselves as they wish. This is similar to the United States prior to the tyrant Abraham Lincoln imposing his universalist thought onto everyone. But these city-states would not be limited to 50 or any other arbitrary number. It would allow for states to grow and govern as they see fit. A christian state could be born, a theocratic christian state run under the principles of the Bible, so long as it agreed to exist peacefully next to other autonomous states. This breeds independence to people and true diversity. Diversity of lifestyle where the Christian would not fear a secularized media and school system. It would have no need to brainwash children or force them to conform to its ideas of equality and secular thought.

The left could have their paradise. They could have their free and just world without gender or race or religion. But they never want that because theirs is a spirit of a parasite latched onto the greater beast.

We only need to look to the internet to see the future. The groups that form along various websites are similar to the pairings of the city-states that would form. The homosexuals could have their own state. Let them. The catholics and the muslims could form theirs as well. And any other who would choose to do such a thing. The internet communities that we see could very well be the models of future societies.

We are fortunate to live in these times as we may see this come about. The government has spent beyond its means. The trillions in unfunded liabilities can never be paid which means a downsizing, which means they'll lose power. Hopefully, the angst of the populace will not allow them to regrow back to their former state after it collapses. I don't think it will because I don't think it will need to.

Certain technologies such as 3D printing will redistribute the population away from cities. We can see the growth of universalist thought along with the growth of the city. People forced to live in close proximity to each other must conform to a certain rigidity of thought in order for it to function. But as the industrial world collapses because of a decentralization of industry in the form of 3D printing then it's likely the same will trigger an exodus from the city.

It is need which defines us. People need food and they need jobs. When the jobs are all in the cities then the people will all be in the cities. When the jobs are decentralized then the people will not be there. Most people do not like most people and most people will be happie choosing where and what form of society they live under. But for any of this to work a vitriolic hatred of universalism must be burned into everyone's mind.

If Hillary Clinton Becomes President

Back when Obama got elected the first time I thought it might bring about some change in race. I thought the racial ideologues would back off with their white racist witch hunts. How can a country be racist if it elected a black man? I was wrong. The anti-racism spiel seemed to intensify if anything.

The same will happen with a female president. If you think a female president will make the feminists back off you're mistaken. It will embolden them and they'll roll out even more blatant female supremacist laws and misandrous organizations. The stories that will come out of the media will make The End of Men article look pro-male.

Just wait until a lesbian, man-hating, feminist sits in the oval office. Women will lose their minds with hate.

The Rifle and The Drone

Democracy worked best around the time after the American Revolution. Democracy being a distribution of power among the people, there was one invention which lead to this being possible and tenable during the era, the rifle. Ubiquitous access to firearms was more liable for the American and French revolutions than was the Enlightenment era's philosophy of egalitarianism. The rifle made power distributable among the people more than the vote. Voting became an extension of that most carnal of power and since all power is derivative of violence then general equality of rich man and poor man armed with a flintlock rifle by necessity made them equals. God made man but Samuel Colt made them equal.

With the advance of military technology there is a push away from the common man. The 2nd amendment can be destroyed in two ways. One by revoking its status legally. Two by making the possession of firearms pose little threat to the state. The state has attempted both but has been more successful for the later.

Now we enter the age of the drone a nearly autonomous killing machine. At most a user inputs some data on a screen safely tucked away in a bunker somewhere and the drone kills a group of people or drops a bomb on a weapon's factory. It's like a video game.

There is really no division between state and citizen. The two are imagination. There is man with resources, the rich man and man without resources poor man. By voluntarily surrendering one's freedom a man may gain temporary access to certain resources. For example, a man in the military may gain access to a million dollar attack chopper but only while he wears a certain uniform. Regardless, the dichotomy remains rich man poor man and the gap between the two is ever widening.

Prior to the rifle there was the lancer, the swordsmen, and the archer. The problem with all three of these is similar. The amount of training it took to create an able bodied swordsmen was too long. The elite with the resources to allow someone to train a swordsmen were not apt to distribute this power to the peasants. The aristocracy held sway because no one could compete. Never doubt where power lay. It is brought from the willingness to murder another or it is phantasmal, illusionary, so much brainwashing on television. And so it took ten years to train a swordsmen and outfit him in armor. Then the rifle came and it took an afternoon to show a boy how to fire a rifle. He was now competitive with a 200 pound man in battle. The rifle destroyed the aristocracy as much as the guillotine did because it is technology which brings about changes.

The push to drones move power away from the people because the people do not have access to drones. That may or may not change but the rich man grows greater in strength because he can afford these million dollar death machines and the working class grows poorer. When drones become totally autonomous and hundreds of drones can perform patrol duties, surveillance, and serve arrest warrants without human insight the shift toward elite power will be nearly absolute. A few men will control the drones and the drone oversight and maintenance crew and anyone not them will be peasants. Humans are violent chimpanzees and no amount of modern liberalism and kindhearted diatribes have changed that.

The only way for power to be distributed evenly is not with voting but making sure everyone can kill each other. In particular, if the state fears the people, or the rich man fears the poor man, there can be peace. Otherwise, if the rich man has no need to restrain his inner psychopath, he won't.

Drones don't exist in vacuums however. There is another device that helps with power distribution. The internet allows for the free exchange of information. It's turned everyone's apartment into a television station allowing everyone to freely broadcast their thoughts to millions of others. Unfortunately, most people ignore all of this. Look for well thought out blogs and videos with insightful, educational commentary and you'll usually stumble over a writer that's struggling to get by or make a living from his craft for the specific reason that well thought out posts don't draw much attention. Commentary on relationships and celebrity gossip bring tenfold the attention as of a philosophical treatise on consciousness. But the internet has organized people. It is this era's rifle which has given some power to the people and stripped it away from the elite which is why internet freedom is just as important if not more so than the 2nd amendment. The days of the rifle defending freedom are gone. Liberty hangs on the wire, on youtube, on the blogs, and the web pages.

On the feminization of the military

One day they'll push too far and some young man with ambition will realize he has no hopes of obtaining the rank he deserves through merit. He'll split off and take a lot of other angry young men with him. There's only so much transgender and gay praise a southern boy can take before he's had it and realizes that the military and the nation he believed in no longer existed. Then things get interesting. Real interesting.

When most people hear of secession and civil war they have an image of dumb rednecks with shotguns lead by Alex Jones. Then they say how impossible it is for citizens to fight the military which may or may not be true but the more likely scenario is of a schism within the military of highly trained, heavily armed soldiers performing a coup or going rogue against the military. So when the leftists imagine a revolt they always envision the military on THEIR side when any real civil war will have a military, political leaders, and infrastructure on both sides.

Considering that the majority of the military are all white, male, christian, conservatives who are being oppressed with leftist tolerance, the splinter faction scenario is possible. Another possibility is that the white christians simply stop joining the military and as diversity becomes the norm within the military we go the way of Rome and fill up the rank with foreigners and aliens. Similarly as Rome, once the decline accelerates the foreign born military will not hold loyalty to anyone and will turn to looting and piracy once the .gov checks stop rolling in.

But leftists don't live in reality. They long for ideals and not realism. For a society to function properly it must focus its intent on the mainstream of the culture not the outlier. The transgender is such a tiny minority that paying them any mind within the collective is wasted since their issues don't matter. 

Hierarchy Works: World of Warcraft Edition

I started playing World of Warcraft in 2008 during college. Then the new expansion Wrath of the Lich King was just released and the game was still on its amazing rise into cultural fame. There were new players joining all the time, guilds started, friendships formed, and a world to explore, but over time it changed from the game I started out playing. 

I've always been into fantasy (though I've never played D&D because I wanted to have sex) and would treat it like my dorky side hobby that I didn't tell too many people about. And while I played other games besides WoW, when I first set foot into Azeroth, I was amazed at what I found. The environment, the details, and all of the character intrigued me from the start. 

From the beginning I heard things about the higher levels. There was something called a raid and guilds and they would compete for whoever was the best guild. I used to see characters in amazing looking gear with mounts and fancy sounding guild names like Equilibrium and Brotherhood. People would chat about the server first dragon kill or some player claiming a rare mount. I knew from the start what I wanted. I wanted to raid, to be the guy with the amazing gear and cool mounts. I had a goal, a dream, and motivation to pursue it. 

The fact that my gear sucked and that I died often made it better not worse. I knew there was something to strive for. I could improve if I worked at it enough. The separation between the top players and the average player was strong and everyone knew it. It was the hierarchy of it, not equality, which gave purpose to playing the game. 

Then the complainers started winning. They complained and moaned endlessly on the forums. And complainers complained about the complainers which I saw as redundant and useless. And the collective bitching of the player base reached a high water mark and the developers started to listen. Not only did they listen but they started to make the game more fair more equal.

A popular term started to be tossed around. Welfare epic. At one time wearing a piece of purple gear meant you put in an inordinate amount of time to get that gear. Any purple epic was amazing to have and really separated the players out. Not only that, but a lot of players never had the gear to even do a raid. They didn't have the time or they weren't skilled enough to make it. Instead of giving up or just enjoying the game for what they could do they went to daddy Blizzard and demanded fairness. They demanded everything be made equal to their level of failure. Instead of dedicating themselves to improving their situation, which they could do with a quick google search and some practice, they wanted to make the distinction between the great players and the average player much less noticeable.

They won and got what they wanted and epic gear was handed out just for showing up. Every aspect of the game was carefully laid out for everyone to understand. Bosses were made so easy it took little coordination to kill one and get those epics. And the thing about epics is that when everyone has one they feel much less epic than before. The prestige was gone. The feeling of the game being mysterious was gone. Having something to strive for, work toward, and obtain was gone.

And the subscriptions fell with each passing year as the game was toned down to the worst, laziest player's level. No scaling. No hierarchy. Just endless equality and boredom. And the complainers didn't miss a beat. They didn't become pleased with what they were given. Instead they demanded more and more. While I can't blame all of the loss in popularity on the lack of prestige within the game, I do believe it deserves a fair chunk of it.

I learn wherever I go and from whatever I see. I'm always trying to find the lesson in things and that discerning eye for wisdom doesn't stop at something that lacks intellectual content. The lesson that I took from WoW is that equality produces nothing but mediocrity. And as the pitch of cries society-wide for more equality reach a crescendo that's all I expect to see it produce. The mediocre.

Continue Reading: A Video Game Rant

Can Robots Feel?

What are emotions? Forget any idea that emotions are mystical in nature. They are not magic. They are biochemical responses to stimuli. Emotions derive from our need to foster and care for children. The human infant is born helpless, unable to care or defend itself. It is totally dependent on its parents to provide for the child. By necessity we developed powerful emotions to bond us to children and to each other to better facilitate our survival and the survival of our species. The fact is that if humans were born self-sufficient we would not have powerful emotions if any at all because nature does not create superfluous things. Reality asks only one question. Does it work? Or more succinctly, nature declares only one dictate. All things must serve reason.

So when we ask whether or not robots will feel we should be asking another question. What reason would a machine, a system programmed to operate under a rational pretense, have for emotion? The answer is that it would have little need.

But not zero need. So long as machine and humans interact a machine would have a need for emotions. Or to put it bluntly, to mimic the same behavioral responses as sufficient emotions would generate in order to better engage with humans.

Continue Reading: What Penis Envy Looks Like

Vending Machine McDonalds.

The future is a vending machine. The craze has already swept over Japan and as time goes on more and more things turn into vending machines. Look at what happened to Blockbuster. It's gone. It's been replaced by Red Box, an entire store that hired several dozen employees is now a vending machine. Corporations are basically stagnate. If it wasn't for them, McDonalds could easily be turned into a vending machine. But then the economy would collapse.

I think its foolish to deny technological unemployment. I won't even debate it. What job can't be automated? The only reason we don't see all the public sectors jobs turned into vending machines is because there is no will to do that yet. There would be massive amounts of jobless, unemployed people running around. The fight for the jobs that would exist would increase. You'd need a PhD to be considered for any job at all.

A Review of "Enjoy the Decline" by Aaron Clarey

Socialism fails. It's a repeating story throughout history. The rise and fall of empires can be traced back to the ever incessant push in the increase in state power. And yet we never learn. Whether by hubris or ignorance we fall to the same machinations that generations past fell to and Aaron Clarey's book "Enjoy the Decline" documents the rise of socialism in America and the fall of a nation.

The title is perfect. It's one of the best titles for a book on the economy and America that I've read. It's catchy and fitting to the subject. Clarey's book can really be seen as a book in two volumes. The first volume is the economic. The second volume is the personal. Both have their merits.

The book lays the tracks for the future of the US economy. Not good. But never dwells there and never strays into hopelessness any more than it needs to. This is the decline. The math is there. There are a few charts to read and some numbers to understand but there's no prerequisite in economics needed to understand everything. Clarey did a great job of making all the material easy to understand for the majority of people.  

The book makes a clear case what is happening in America. Vast amounts of government spending, entitlements, the increasing debt, social security, and medicare are destroying the economy. The american dream is finished. It was destroyed by keynesians, socialists, and corporations.  But the book is not a lamentation over the death of the world's greatest nation. The tone of it is one of hope. It's no macabre prophet to point to the storm clouds and shout rain. There is no anger in this book. No resentment over what's happening. Clarey writes like a man not enraged by the decline of his country but one who is saddened by it.

The second half goes into detail about personal issues. This is the "Enjoy" part of it. The author makes a breakdown of what's likely to happen during the decline and how people can best to prepare for it. He details some of the aspects of the destruction of the family. He covers why most degrees are worthless and then helps the reader chart a course to help them navigate today's America.

The second part is practical. It's there as a guide to help the reader understand that many of their beliefs are false. The things they grew up believing they should work for:  career, family, community, are not possible or much more difficult to obtain than before. Instead, Clarey gives a guide on how to live and be happy without those things. He covers how to live with less, how to reap some of the benefits the government offers while they're still available, and how avoid a lot of the dangerous contracts laced throughout society. Hint: get out of debt and avoid most marriages.

The decline is likely to get ugly. Part of the book talks about the need to prepare yourself and anyone around you to be self-sufficient for a disaster scenario and it goes into detail on how to do that and what you'll need to survive. This is the most practical part of the book as it ventures into survivalism and disaster recovery. It covers all the basics, goes into detail on what you'll need and plans you should make.

The book is part economics, part career councilor (the one you should have had in high school), and part survival manual to aid and inform its readers to the many pitfalls they may face in their lives. It's unfortunate but America as a whole has denied reality for decades and continues to do so. However, as "Enjoy the Decline" points out, while denying reality might offers some temporary comfort the consequences of reality can only be ignored for so long.

Enjoy The Decline available on amazon.

Continue Reading: Get Social Security Disability

The Future is small

It is a decentralization of information that's happening today. The mainstream media becomes less relevant year after year. It is a decentralization of education as massively online open courses (MOOCs) replace higher education. As khan academy makes a classroom redundant, parents must question the validity of sending their children off to public school. As homeschooling and unschooling grow in popularity, the eager tax slaves of the state diminish in number.  Bitcoin is the decentralization of currency.   Out and away from the central bankers.

The next stage is 3D printing. The state recognizes the threat of 3D but is limited in its scope. Just as it couldn't predict the destruction of its state run indoctrination farms known as schools, it can't predict the effects of 3D printing. It goes beyond printing guns. In fact, if it were only useable to print guns than it would have far less scope. Instead it is the destruction of the industrialized world.

Taoist thought goes like this: all that rises must fall, all that expands must contract. Cycles. Up and down like the tides of the sea.

Why do I believe we'll be leaving cities? I know demographics do not favor this idea. Most cities in the US grow every year. They're not shrinking. One of the reasons the city will shrink in the future is because most people living in a city aren't happy. Cities mimic prisons and the people often exhibit behavior similar to animals in captivity.

How We Can Win

The MRA is in its infancy, it's weak, scattered, lacks funds, and faces an entrenched juggernaut known as feminism. Knowing that, we must choose our fights carefully. No matter how pressing many issues are, most should be ignored until later. I know the temptation to fight for injustice everywhere it's found. I know you hold sympathy for men and boys suffering in this system but we must not divide our attention. We believe we're right but history is full of defeated armies who believed in the righteousness of their cause. Any battle against feminism is unwinnable at this point. Except one.

Feminists are quite literally obsessed with rape to the point of madness. In fact, anything that has to do with sex and reproduction is their turf. And like any other gang they'll be willing to die to defend what they consider theirs. We will lose every fight. Except one.

Consider how important image is. The MRA is seen as weak, impotent, and hopeless. This image is so strong that many in the fight for men's rights believe it themselves. How great of a boon to the MRA would a decisive, public victory against feminism be?

What, my dear brothers and sisters, do we have to lose? When you're in the sewers even the gutter is an upgrade. What I propose is for all MRAs, and anyone in support of men's issues, to adopt the fight for the male pill and put this at the forefront of everything we do. Here's why.

Young men will line up to get on the pill. Young, healthy males are the least likely demographic to seek medical help. The male pill targets that exact demographic. The drug companies know the numbers. They know the demographic. They can't ignore it. Their lobbyists will be, in effect, on our side.

Feminism was, initially, a huge success for the economy. The workforce nearly doubled, the housing market grew because of divorce, and women earning a paycheck also put most of that money back into the market. Looking at the numbers, it was insane not to support it. If men want men's issues supported they need to make it economical to do so.

The image of a victory will be the most important thing. If we appear to win, appear to be strong, it won't matter that we only rode the victory on the coattails of the drug companies. It will be a symbolic victory but just as important because the male pill is going to happen whether MRAs get involved or not. The MRA can co opt this for their benefit by making it appear as though we are stronger and have more power than we do. And this image of strength, no matter how ephemeral, will draw attention and support from those who can only follow strength. No one loves a loser and if we try to fight uphill battles, beleaguered as we are now, our image as losers will only solidify.

If I'm right and the male pill is inevitable because of economic forces, than anything feminist do will be ineffective. Not only will their opposition fail, the more they resist, the greater our victory will be. This is why we should draw a clear line between men's rights and feminism divided by the male pill. Not only do I believe we should try to fight for the male pill but should try to encourage feminists to fight against it. We should antagonize them, galvanize their resistance, and make it clear that the male pill is this decade's battle that feminism must win. Because they can't win and when they lose it will be our Battle of Concord, our shot heard round the world, that proves to the mighty juggernaut of feminism that women on pedestals can only fall.

The Future

I'll be the first to admit I'm wrong if, in 2016 none of this comes to pass. However, I do believe there is a crisis coming to America which will reshape the country. I believe it will be on par with WWII, The Civil War, and the American Revolution. This is just a guess. I'm no prophet. 

• The 2016 election will be the most pivotal election in history. My prediction is that a republican will win, similar in ideology to Ron Paul. Someone not controlled by corporate America, someone that isn't the lesser of two evils. A real leader with a different policy than others. Most people will be so desperate for change that they vote him in. 
• And this leader will divide the country in two even more than Obama. Libertarian policy is never popular when it's enacted. Turning back the state will cause immediate problems in the economy. It's a long term plan but it will be unpopular and the instant gratification of the population must be soothed. 
• The country will quickly divide into two camps. Those for the constitution and those for socialism. The military, police, will split. Academia and the media will mostly side with against the president. The 2016 candidate may face impeachment. 
• 2018-2020 civil war erupts within the United States divided by these two camps. The fighting is all out war. It may be state to state or some other arrangement. Civil war is the likely candidate for the coming crisis. The theatre is not really set for inter-country conflict, not even with China. China is too dependent on the US for trade. 
• The rest of the world will stay out of the fight. Canada may assist but each country will have their own recession and struggles to deal with. There may be infighting in Europe as well as neo-fascist and neo-islamists clash. But the world will recoil at the level of violence in America and will want to keep its distance. 
• 2023-2025 the war end.
• During the war people will be driven out of the cities. Small villages with high technology become normal. Local sporting events will be more important than the NFL. Technology like the internet and 3D printing and solar energy will allow for homes and villages to move away from cities. Small, local communities will be the most important thing to people. 
• A new baby boom occurs. These children will be ones to design the technology which propels humanity into the technological singularity. Food becomes abundant. Homelessness and starvation is dissolved. Human suffering is ended. 
• We explore space. We are a successful species.  

Continue Reading: The Future is A Vending Machine