The cause and outcome of most conflicts can be determined by economic factors.
“War is the continuation of politics by other means.” -Carl Von Clauswitz
Let’s start with Pearl Harbor. If you read John Keegans’ second world war, you find out that even if Japan had sunk every single carrier we could have had them rebuilt and replaced in 6 months and continued to outproduce carriers against Japan by a factor of 6:1. Essentially, you can determine from the economic factors alone, just the production capacity of both sides, that destruction was not the goal, that a psychological deterrent only was intended.
For the first time in my adult life it is time to put my college major to use. Majoring in Advertising Business management, my college career was spent looking at data and making inferences on the market and identifying the target market for a product, what they watch or read and how often for one purpose: to determine the budget for a media campaign, what to spend and how much it is worth.
One paragraph history lesson: The very first print publications for market consumption were advertisers. Right after Gutenburg printed the bible the next step was to start producing publications known as ‘advertisers’ which were exactly what you think: Sheets of paper with a list of companies and services. Naturally if people want to make you look at their list of advertisers over someone else’s, it only makes sense to put interesting articles in them too. So any publication can tell you that they exist so you can ‘just read it for the articles’ but you know what that excuse means. The articles just exist to make you pick up Advertiser A instead of Advertiser B, thereby allowing advertiser A to charge more money for ad sales. The only purpose for any media outlet, from the beginning, is ad sales.
So imagine how big a cash cow an election is. Conclusively for the last 200 years, the winner of every American election has been the candidate who spends the most on Advertising. This means that since the dawn of time, the ad sales manager could hard sell any election campaign on the simple line, “you know your opponent is spending more than you,” and the “keeping up with the Jones’ ” Principle used to sell encyclopedias and vaccuum cleaners door-to-door kicks in.
But then, in 2016, the ad sales man told a campaign manager, “Hillary is outspending you by over 600 million dollars.” The ad sales man licked his chops as he calculated the commission he would make off the extra half a billion dollars. That weekend in Vegas, ballet lessons for the kids, a new ferrari. The voice on the other end of the phone says, “Yes we are aware of that, but we have a plan.”
The ad sales man goes for the hard sell, “you can’t win unless you out spend.” The weekend in Vegas with his buddies is on the line, he has to make this deal close. “We’re good. We think we can win with spending half as much with Breitbart. *click*”.
That, in a nutshell, explains why every major media publication despises Trump. He started winning without giving them lots of money, (right around the time they started calling him racist misogynist and bad). The MSM has lost a massive revenue source, presidential elections, and have seen what little remains of the fragmented income go to fringe news sources. You know, the ones they now call ‘Fake News.’
I choose to believe the least sensational explanation whenever possible. Since communism, globalism and socialism make no economic sense, the only solution to this bizarre media coverage must be capitalist.
In short, the media must impeach Trump and destroy every news source that competes with them so that next election they can tell the candidates, “sure,you can spend less, but you will be impeached, and those companies you want to spend money with besides us are fake news.”
Like they say in Mafia films: nothing personal, it’s just business.