From there he became something of a prophet. He doesn’t claim any extraordinary powers to predict the future, but says his cold-eyed reading of available facts gives him insight into events he says are inevitable. A documentary about him, “Collapse,” was released in 2009.

Mr. Ruppert has been in the doom and gloom business for a long time now and given what’s happened in the past decade, any such merchant is going to look pretty smart. Just about any unhappy event, from terrorist attack to economic bust to environmental disaster has occurred. (All we seem to be missing is a lightning fast pandemic that kills a few million people – or at least turns them into zombies.)

So Mr. Ruppert brought his traveling lecture to town last spring. I missed the performance, but caught the newspaper article about it. (I’d link to it, but the Burlington Free Press is extraordinarily stingy with their online archives.) During his visit, Mr. Ruppert made five very specific predictions, which he said would be fulfilled by the end of 2010.

In my own act of prescience, I knew I’d be writing a post today, so I wrote Mr. Ruppert’s predictions down on today’s page of my desk calendar. Before I get to them, let me say it can’t be easy being Michael Ruppert. Like any entrepreneur who’s found a bit of success, your customer base will forget about you if you don’t bring new products to the marketplace and they’ll expect each successive product to be more “gee whiz” than the last. Steve Jobs is an example of someone who surfs that particular wave well.

First Prediction: By 31 December, the Dow Jones Industrial Average will be between 4,000-5,000. Mr. Ruppert was wrong. The DJIA opened today at 11,575, so he’s off by a minimum of 6,575 points, barring some wild trading in the next 30 hours.

Second Prediction: Many banks will fail. This is a bit squishy, since I don’t know who defines “many.” But let’s leave the definition to the Washington Post, which Tuesday reported that 2010 saw the highest number of bank failures since 1992. That’s good enough for me. Mr. Ruppert was right. (At this point you might be noticing Mr. Ruppert made five predictions, making a tie unlikely.)

Third Prediction: Oil will cost over $200 per barrel. Well, the price of oil has been rising quickly of late, but at $91 a barrel this morning, Mr. Ruppert is wrong. (The average price of a gallon on gas, BTW, is $3.05, up 44.5 cents from this week last year.)

Fourth Prediction: Gold will cost over $2,000 per ounce. Again, Mr. Ruppert has the trend right, but the prediction is wrong. Gold this morning is selling for $1,410 an ounce. Silver’s at $30.73 an ounce. These are close to record highs. Copper is going for $4.36 a pound, which is huge, so if you’re going to be away from home over the New Year’s holiday, ask the neighbors to keep an eye on your plumbing.

Fifth Prediction: The US and Iran will be at war. Well really, how would we know? I don’t think we’ve had a Constitutionally-declared war since WWII. Korea was a “police action” that is still formally unresolved, Vietnam was not a declared war nor were either of our two Iraqi escapades nor our-near decade in Afghanistan. Seymour Hersh has claimed for some time that US special forces are active in Iran and with all the nuclear stuff going on, who knows?

Bottom line: Times are tough, but they could be tougher. If you look for misery, you’re likely to find it. In the year ahead, I (susceptible to gloom merchant disease) will do my best to appreciate the good things while I can.

Happy New Year.

© Mark Floegel, 2010

There are many people today, some of them the governor of Alaska for the next two weeks, who spit the word “Congress” out of their mouths as if it was a piece of burnt toast. They should remember that the first words of the Declaration of Independence are “In Congress, July 4, 1776.”

That’s right, a bunch of guys sitting around in a room, talking, but talking on behalf of people ranged up and down the east coast. As the document says, governments derive their just powers from consent of the governed. (And to be honest, in those days “the governed” was defined as white men who owned property.)

All this comes to mind as we see the governed around the world withholding their consent in recent days. In the Xinjiang region of China, native Uighurs are battling in the streets with Han Chinese, imported by the government as settlers from the east. Uighurs are ethnically Turkic and Muslim. The government in Beijing doesn’t trust them and so sends Han Chinese to Xinjiang, in hopes of making the region more loyal.

This is nothing like the American Revolution. This is more like the various wars Native Americans fought against European settlers for the first 400 years after the white folks arrived. To the south of Xinjiang, the Tibetan people are subjected to the same influx of Han Chinese – who in both situations, tend to be favored by the government over the natives.

Still, these are the governed, withholding their consent. On one face, it looks nothing like our revolution, but at its heart, it’s the same.

In Iran, the people gave their consent in June’s election and it was ignored, so they took to the streets. The government there is doing its best to repress the spontaneous demonstrations on behalf of liberty with violence and threats of even greater violence, but I don’t think it will work.

Just this morning I received an email about protest marches in Iranian provinces. The Iranian government wants the world to think it’s only a couple thousand people in Tehran who are dissatisfied, that the people in the provinces are quiescent and pro-Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, but that’s not true.

I’ve been reading histories of the 1979 Iranian revolution. One of the shah’s great tactical errors was letting his secret police kill protesters. (Of course, we should never forget that killing is a moral error.) If you want to stay in power in Iran, don’t kill protesters. In Islam, a deceased person is remembered on the 40th day after his or her death. In 1979, the police killed protesters. Forty days later, huge crowds turned out to remember the killings and at those events, police killed more citizens. The process repeated itself and commemorations grew exponentially, until the shah left his country behind.

The mullahs’ police and Basij militia began killing protesters on 15 June, which means we can expect a new round of protests beginning 25 July. The ayatollahs, all veterans of 1979, know this and that’s why they’re trying so hard to cram the lid on now. It won’t work.

In the summer of 1776, we the people sent those guys to sit around a room in Philadelphia and talk. They weren’t perfect, the principles they represented weren’t perfect, what they created wasn’t perfect. Two hundred and thirty-three years and five days later, it’s still not perfect. It is an improvement over what came before.

So it is in western China and Iran. The people know they are not well governed and so they withhold their consent, sometimes violently. My hope for them is the same as for us: fuller enjoyment of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

© Mark Floegel, 2009

Most of us fall between 1) and 2). I was closer to 2) for eight years and acted accordingly. Finally, those actions – combined with actions by millions of my fellow citizens – have brought me closer to 1). Millions of others who were 1)s for eight years are now 2)s. Some of those people have guns and have turned to tragic acts of terrorism in recent weeks.

In Iran, the country has been heading one way for the last 30 years, although the momentum picked up significantly in the last four years. People finally drifted much close to 2) than 1) and acted accordingly, they came out and – apparently – voted for a change in direction. Change did not take place and the result of that failure to change is leaking out of Iran, despite the regime’s best efforts to slap a lid on communication technology.

I’ve been reading and viewing what I can and a few things are becoming clear:

1 – Politics is politics. It doesn’t matter if a political leader wears a cowboy hat or a black turban. Iran might be ultimately ruled by ayatollahs, but it calls itself the Islamic Republic of Iran and it does hold elections. Last time out, the moderates boycotted the elections, thinking their candidates could not get a fair shake. They wound up with Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, who seems to be a Persian version of George W. Bush.

No, really. By writing that, I mean no disrespect to Mr. Bush. The similarities I see are that both Mr. Bush and Mr. Ahmedinejad presented themselves to voters as regular guys, outsiders to politics as usual, not part of the ruling elite. (Mr. Ahmedinejad did not need to massage his life history as Mr. Bush did to accomplish this.) Both men in office pursued an aggressive, unilateral foreign policy, curtailed domestic civil rights and played the politics of fear and jingoism.

2 – Perception is reality. If politics is politics, then perception is reality, the same in Tehran as in Washington. The perception, both in and out of Iran, is that Mr. Ahmedinejad stole the election from Mir Hossein Mousavi. Unlike Bush-Gore 2000, this one doesn’t look like it came down to a mere 500 votes in a province inhabited by senior citizens.

More to the point, Iran is a theocracy. Ayatollahs are in charge, regardless of who is president or prime minister. Still more to the point, Iran is an Islamic theocracy and the brand of Islam practiced in Iran doesn’t allow much wiggle room on issues like lying, cheating and stealing elections.

If the general public thinks the ayatollahs are sanctioning a fraudulent election, then the regime loses ALL legitimacy. We Americans expect our politicians to lie and cheat – to a certain extent – and still trust them to act on our behalf. The ayatollahs claim to speak for God and when people like that are perceived to be lying and cheating, then even those inclined to support Mr. Ahmedinejad will begin to lose faith.

3 – The past isn’t dead. It isn’t even past. Seventy percent of the people in Iran are under 30, which means they have no personal memory of the shah. All they know about him is what they’ve been told. Whether their parents are religious or secular, chances are they have nothing good to say about the shah. One thing the parents have said about the shah is: “He was an illegitimate ruler. He fixed the elections and ignored the voice of the people.” I’m sure the people marching in the streets in Iranian cities today are starting to think, “If this government is fixing elections, then they’re no better than the shah.”

I think the ayatollahs know this. They know that if they are seen as cheats and liars, the political situation is Iran will change swiftly, and not in their favor. The soldiers and the officers of the Iranian army will see that, too. This is why the Guardian Council is recounting some ballots.

Although the success of Mr. Mousavi’s supporters depends on keeping pressure on the streets, it’s ultimately about an idea. Right now the general idea in Iran is: 2) I think my government is not acting in my best interest. People are acting accordingly.

Change may not come to Iran this week or this year, but unless the ayatollahs can get people closer to 1) than 2), then change will come to Iran and soon.

© Mark Floegel, 2009

Nearly a year ago, in a Democratic debate, Sen. Barack Obama said that if he is elected president and has a chance to capture or kill Osama bin Laden, he may order military action inside Pakistan without first notifying the Pakistani government. Other Democratic candidates jumped all over him. So did Republican candidates. Sen. John McCain said Mr. Obama “wants to bomb our ally” and pledged never to take action in Pakistan without notifying its government.

What does Mr. McCain say now? Will he criticize Mr. Bush, the man he hopes to succeed; now that Mr. Bush has adopted Mr. Obama’s position? Does Mr. Bush want to “bomb our ally”? Is there one standard for Democratic positions and another for Republican positions? Is Mr. Bush hopelessly naïve when it comes to foreign affairs?

I think he is. To tell the truth, I’m not sure I agree with Mr. Obama (or Mr. Bush) on this one. My point today is not about policy, but politics.

Mr. Obama has long advocated drawing down American troops in Iraq on an 18-month timeline. (I agree with him there.) Everyone jeered him for that, too. Then the Iraqi prime minister came out with the same timeline. Then the Bush administration said, “Well, maybe it’s time to start drawing down those combat troops.”

It seems that within a matter of months, everything Mr. Obama suggests in the area of foreign policy goes from being a matter of scorn to carved-in-stone Republican administration policy. Mr. McCain says Mr. Obama doesn’t have the experience to be president, but when it come to the current president following a candidate’s advice, Mr. Obama is batting .600 and Mr. McCain is batting .300. (I use a baseball metaphor so that, on the off chance Mr. Bush is reading this; he’ll know what I’m talking about.)

Here’s where we stand: today is the seventh anniversary of the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. We are less than two months away from electing a new president. Our nation is at war in two countries on the far side of the world. Our military forces are stretched to the breaking point and thousands of our veterans are returning with physical and psychic wounds that will take decades to heal, if ever. One candidate, Mr. McCain has sung ditties about bombing a third nation, Iran. He has called for policies that would bring us close to war with Russia over the nation of Georgia.

Our economy is a wreck. Banks are failing and home foreclosures are at a rate that has not been seen since the Depression and Dust Bowl. Inflation is up, but the money supply is shrinking. The deficit will likely be a half trillion dollars by inauguration day. Both the stock and currency markets are fluctuating wildly on a daily basis.

Hurricanes ravage our southern coast while entire communities in Alaska are sinking because the permafrost they were built on is melting for the first time in tens of thousands of years. Delegates at the Republican National Convention last week danced in the aisles chanting, “Drill, baby! Drill!”

This week, Mr. McCain accused Mr. Obama of calling Sarah Palin “a pig.” Please read the preceding three paragraphs again and then realize that Mr. McCain’s top priority this week has been to accuse Mr. Obama of calling Ms. Palin “a pig.” (For the record, Mr. Obama’s pig statement referred to Mr. McCain’s platform, not his running mate.)

When I was in sixth grade, I ran for class office. I lost. I didn’t accuse anyone of name-calling. Maybe I should have.

© Mark Floegel, 2008

September 11, 2001 was the late summer day when everything changed, just a little. Since then we’ve started wars against two Muslim nations and now we’re contemplating a third. Weird thing is, most of us really don’t feel it. Some extra hassle at the airport, some extra buzz at the top of the evening news, occasionally a local kid gets killed overseas. There’s wiretapping and e-mail surveillance, but we don’t really notice those, do we?

Wednesday’s New York Times carried a story about George Bush’s new sanctions against Iran. Do you feel like you’re living in a nation that’s about to open a third front in a world war? I don’t. Much has been made of the fact that in the five years since the U.S. first started bombing Afghanistan; no real sacrifice has been asked of the majority of Americans. Sure, we’ve asked much – too much – from our military and reserve personnel, but even counting military families, it’s a sacrifice borne by two or three million people from a nation of 300 million.

For the rest of us, the request has been that we keep spending money, to keep the economy afloat. Mr. Bush has set the example here. The Congressional Budget Office this week estimated that the Afghanistan and Iraq wars will cost taxpayers $2.4 trillion in the next decade. (So you can see how that looks, it’s $2,400,000,000,000.00)

Now we’re going to attack Iran. Mr. Bush and his handlers know opposition to his first two wars is high, so he’s not rolling the Iran invasion out with all the bells and whistles of the Iraq invasion. Don’t expect to see him strutting around an aircraft carrier in a flight suit this time. He’s learned that much.

Last month, the Senate passed the Kyl-Lieberman Iran Amendment by a vote of 76-22. The amendment labels Iran’s Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist organization. That’s enough of a blank check for George Bush and Dick Cheney to go to war, because in the ten months since they’ve taken control of Congress, Democrats have shown they will not stand up to Mr. Bush when he exceeds his authority.

Iran is not Iraq. The two nations fought an eight-year war in the 1980s. In that war, Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons and other high-tech gear supplied by the U.S. Iran’s weapon was the human wave. Not the one seen at college football games, but thousands of soldiers rushing at the enemies lines, some of whom didn’t even have guns. They were promised paradise and while high–tech gear versus human wave sounds like a slam dunk, the war was a draw.

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have left the U.S. military a “broken force” in the eyes of military professionals and Mr. Bush now wants our troops to face the human wave. Not to worry, the neocons argue. We’ll bomb them a bit and the Iranian people will rise up and overthrow their government. It was the U.S.-backed overthrow of an Iranian government in the 1950s that started so much of this Middle East mess in the first place. Americans may have forgotten that, the Iranians have not.

News cameras brought the horror of the Vietnam war in to Americans’ living rooms and helped turn public opinion against that war. The lesson the Bush administration took from that is to question the patriotism of any news organization whose reports differ from the party line. The American people, sensing that they’re not getting the real story are bored rather than horrified and instead of protesting, they take Mr. Bush’s advice and shop. (The business pages report that since the housing bubble’s burst and people can no longer borrow against the inflated price of their homes, they’re borrowing from their 401k accounts. Good luck paying off $2.4 trillion in war debt while you pay for mom and dad’s retirement, kids.)

America’s summer ended six years ago. On September 12, 2001, we should have been asked to take on the sacrifices that a sane response to terrorist attacks would have required. Instead, we were told to sit back and spend, because the Bush/Cheney cynicism cuts so deep they knew that sacrifice on our part would have demanded accountability on their part. George Bush’s weird little gift to America has been to lull us to sleep when we should have been working. Get ready for the rude awakening.

© Mark Floegel 2007