The Future Of Labor For Washington Agriculture How Do We: Fill & Download for Free

Please indulge me in covering a little bit of history before I get to the answer.God said let there be light. Then people started showing up, love happened, illness, death, eventually the world’s oldest profession arrived, followed by the world’s oldest economic system called slavery.Fast forward thousands of years to a time where advancements in naval technology created the following: Those who previously only enslaved people of their own race, could now sail to other places to enslave people of different races. It also allowed transoceanic travel to a new land we now call America.When the first African slaves were brought to America in 1619, slavery as a concept, was less controversial than calling on a young maiden without her parents being around. As time moved on the institution of slavery, which was taken for granted as a normal part of the human experience, started to be challenged on moral grounds because it conflicted with the novel concept of personal liberty and freedom.However, when it came time to form a more perfect union the conflict between the institution of slavery and personal liberty and freedom was nothing to fight over but something to find a compromise in.Time marched on and four distinct cultures from the old world arrive to the new world. These four cultures were the Quakers, Puritans, Cavaliers and Redneck Celtics. The Quakers and Puritans primarily settled in the North and the Cavaliers and Redneck-Celtics (not used as an insult but an identifier) settled in the South. See: Albion’s Seed Four British Folkways in America by David Hackett FischerThese people formed societies based on cultural values and attributes that existed prior to arriving in America. The Northern society, with hard labor and education, viewed as a virtue and a Southern society that disdained physical labor and anyone who did it.Of particular note is the culture of the Celtic- Rednecks. According to David Hackett Fischer Albion’s Seed and referenced in Thomas Sowell’s book Black Rednecks and White Liberals “They were a people described as having an aversion to work, proneness to violence, neglect of education, sexual promiscuity, improvidence, drunkenness, lack of entrepreneurship,… and a style of religious oratory marked by strident rhetoric, unbridled emotions, and flamboyant imagery.” Paraphrasing from The Economics and Politics of Race by Thomas Sowell “By 1680, half of the slaves in America were born in America. By the time slavery was abolished, 99% were born in America.” The Celtic-Redneck culture is what black slaves were exposed to and subsequently adopted.It must be stated that although Redneck-Celtic cultural values and attributes served them well in a tribal and agrarian society certain aspects of this culture have been proven to be a hindrance to success in an industrialized society. Similarly, the Bushido code served the Japanese well during Japan’s feudal era but was deemed inefficient in an industrial society.The very influential aristocratic attitudes of the Cavilers, blended with the Celtic-Redneck culture, along with the total dependence of the black slaves, made up the agricultural society ultimately represented by the Confederate government.As the North became more industrialized with factories and the South grow more dependent on slave labor as its economic engine, the idea of bringing factories to the South and putting slaves in the factories started to be heard. The northerners were like “Oh hell no. We can’t compete with slave wages! i.e. no wages”The institution of slavery for the first time in history really started to be challenged. Now on moral and economic grounds. This tried and true economic engine deployed in the South was a threat to the future progress of industrialization in America and the growth of a free market society.What does this have to do with Trump? It’s coming.The Southerners needed a galvanizing tool to fight the threat to their economic engine and way of life. So, someone came up with the idea of white supremacy and they coupled that with a political tool called racism. As Ayn Rand put it “Racism is the lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism.” The Virtue of SelfishnessIt should be obvious from the aforementioned that these things were not needed while whites were enslaving other whites, blacks were enslaving other blacks, or when Asians were enslaving other Asians.The slave oligarchy of the South which at the height of slavery in 1850 amounted to 346,048 people (less than 11% of all Americans at the time) was able to use the idea of white supremacy and racism to influence poor whites into fighting a war on their behalf. See: The Impending Crisis of the South by Hinton Rowan Helper published in 1851.That is except for the Yeomen class of whites in what is now called West Virginia. They seceded from Virginia because they didn’t want to fight a war on behalf of a slave oligarchy. See: Poor Whites of the Antebellum South by Charles C. BoltonA civil war broke out between the Northerners representing a free market society based on individualism and the Southerners representing a racist society based on collectivism.Fortunately, the representatives of a free market society prevailed and the institution of slavery for the first time in the history of mankind was deemed illegal. (America wasn’t the first to declare it illegal. I know. Just roll with me on this… and I’ll get to Trump.)The people who relied on the slave economy of the South were now forced into a situation where they had to compete as laborers in a free market society. A society where a person’s skills, values, and social values were their primary attributes as opposed to the former racist society where a person’s race was their primary attribute. Moreover, the very people who loathed labor had to now compete as equals with blacks who knew nothing but labor.This created what I call the Lebron James effect. Imagine being the owners and management of the Cleveland Cavaliers on Monday and then having to compete against Lebron James and any other four human beings yet along four other NBA players on Tuesday in a professional game of basketball. What do you think they said? Say it with me …“Oh hell no.” (taking liberties here but you get the point)Although the Confederate government that represented the Racist society of the South was defeated, the Racist society and those that favored it didn’t disappear. In fact, many of the leaders of the Confederate government were restored to previous or similar positions in government in the South after reconstruction.The restored ex-confederate members of the Democratic Party blocked the first civil rights bills (that passed 100 years later) and also came up with a way to suppress competition in the labor force while simultaneously restoring the social hierarchy of race in society with… you guessed it… Jim Crow laws.Time marched on with blacks fighting for individual rights and dealing with Jim Crow and real institutionalized racism like the Davis Bacon Act/Federal Minimum wage act. This came about in-part because some clever northern capitalists started bringing skilled black labor (carpenters) from the South to the North and underbidding the white skilled laborers in the North. This cause another “oh hell no” moment and we get the Federal minimum wage law.Politicians played on the prejudices of the white community and assumed that if they had to pay a carpenter say $1 an hour regardless of race most would prefer to give it to a white carpenter. The effect of this was fewer opportunities for blacks in the market, less competition for whites, and it eliminated the need for whites to refine their skills relative to the competition in a free market. (That can be called systematic racism — not failing inner-city schools.)We arrive at a post-1960’s civil rights era where blacks and whites were now free to compete in the labor market as equals and we all lived happily ever after. Nope. There was another Lebron James moment. However, this time some politicians along with post-civil-rights-soon-to-be-out-of-work-social-activist began to tell people who looked like Lebron James that they can’t win in America (labor market) in the present or future because of what racist people have done in the past.Ambiguous, gooey, undefinable terms such as white privilege, the legacy of slavery, and systematic racism were constantly being heard in media outlets and on school campuses. These terms are used to spearhead legislation for social equality; something MLK, Fredrick Douglass, Booker T. Washington and others have all said is impossible to legislate. See: Booker T. Washington’s Up from Slavery and Life and Times of Frederick Douglass by Frederick Douglass.This constant attempt to legislate social equality has three major effects. Number one is to polarize and separates voting blocks into black and white. Number two is to distract people from the absolute necessity of obtaining the “marketable” skills, values and social behaviors needed for an “individual” to succeed in a free market society. Number three keeps those who have yet to come to the realization of number two faithfully dependent on government and politicians as protectors in the fight against perceived racism and reverse racism stimulated from number one.Which leads us to the question: How did we end up with Trump?Trump is the natural progression of this story. Trump has managed to position himself as a pseudo-savior to many affected by number one above. This does not mean that those who are pro-Trump are racist or pro-racism!However, MAGA rings MMWVA (make my whiteness valuable again) to blacks and whites caught up in the collectivism of a racist society.I’m in no way suggesting that whiteness never had a value. In fact, the case concerning Plessy v. Fergurson was a case in which Plessy asserted that his whiteness was infringed upon. See: Plessy v. Fergurson Supreme Court of the United States, 1896 163 U.S. 537, 16 S. Ct. 1138, 41 L.Ed. 256. Fortunately, we are a more enlightened community now.Racism is a political tool for collectivism. As Ayn Rand put it “Racism is the lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism.” The Virtue of SelfishnessRacism distracts from the fact that America is great not because of collectivism but because of individualism.Racism has created a false security in just being white that has led to some white people ignoring the need for “marketable” skills. They are being left behind in a free market society with nothing to blame but reverse racism, illegal aliens, and the lack of a border wall for drug overdoses and unemployment.Racism has created a false insecurity in just being black that has led some blacks to ignore the need for “marketable” skills. They are being left behind in a free market society with nothing to blame but racism, under or nonperforming schools, drug overdoses, and unemployment.Today, many members of both voting blocks are currently underemployed, unemployed or unemployable. The future will be even worst. Artificial Intelligence and automation will eliminate their necessity as participants in the free market’s labor pool. Cries about illegal aliens or the legacy of slavery will fall on the deaf ears of politicians impotent to fight the ever forward marching technology of the free market society.If you are going to support any politician make sure you support the politician who will represent you as an individual citizen in this free market society. Demand that they clear a path for you and your dependents to obtain the skills, values and social behaviors needed to adequately participate in America’s free market.This is not an endorsement or rebuke of any particular politician.

My opinion: It is not just economics that enters the picture. The US is afraid that China will surpass her in technology, soft politics, and maybe even the military. The US has a paranoia that China will become the world hegemon.That fear is unfounded, but America has told the world and her citizens that China is a danger. Even before China turned to Russia and communism, that fear has existed. The US does not recognize changes to China since those days or it uses this fear to continue to view China as an enemy. One suspects it is racial. Ever since the Chinese appeared in the Americas, white citizens, especially in the western parts of America have treated Chinese in a similar vein to black people with the same violence and bias. The same racism has been applied to almost all Asians.“Throughout their history, Asian Americans have confronted a long legacy of exclusion and inequity in relation to school policies and practices, particularly during periods of changing demographics, economic recession, or war. In spite of historic, linguistic differences, distinct Asian nationalities have been grouped together and treated similarly in schools and in the larger society. The grouping of Asian Americans together, then, makes sense in light of historic links from the past to the present.Beginning in the 1850s when young single men were recruited as contract laborers from Southern China, Asian immigrants have played a vital role in the development of this country. Working as miners, railroad builders, farmers, factory workers, and fishermen, the Chinese represented 20% of California's labor force by 1870, even though they constituted only .002% of the entire United States population. With the depression of 1876, amidst cries of "They're taking away our jobs!," anti-Chinese legislation and violence raged throughout the West Coast.In 1882, Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act—the only United States Iaw to prevent immigration and naturalization on the basis of race—which restricted Chinese immigration for the next sixty years. The "Chinese Must Go" movement was so strong that Chinese immigration to the United States declined from 39,500 in 1882 to only 10 in 1887.By 1885, following Chinese Exclusion Act, large numbers of young Japanese laborers, together with smaller numbers of Koreans and Indians, began arriving on the West Coast where they replaced the Chinese as cheap labor in building railroads, farming, and fishing. Growing anti-Japanese legislation and violence soon followed. In 1907, Japanese immigration was restricted by a "Gentleman's Agreement" between the United States and Japan.Small numbers of Korean immigrants came to Hawaii and then the mainland United States following the 1904-1905 Russo-Japanese War and Japan's occupation of Korea. Serving as strike-breakers, railroad builders, and agricultural workers, Korean immigrants faced not only racist exclusion in the United States but Japanese colonization at home. Some Korean patriots also settled in the United States as political exiles and organized for Korean independence.South Asian Indian immigrants also entered the United States as laborers, following Chinese exclusion. Recruited initially by Canadian-Pacific railroad companies, a few thousand Sikh immigrants from the Punjabi region immigrated to Canada which, like India, was part of the British empire. Later, many migrated into the Pacific Northwest and California, and became farm laborers. Ironically decried as a "Hindu invasion" by exclusionists and white labor, the "tide of the Turbans" was outlawed in 1917 when Congress declared that India was part of the Pacific-Barred Zone of excluded Asian countries.By 1924, with the exception of Filipino "nationals," all Asian immigrants, including Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, and Indians were fully excluded by law, denied citizenship and naturalization, and prevented from marrying Caucasians or owning land.”Asian Americans Then and NowChina’s rise seems to elicit the same responses echoed by history.“Expanding on a theme first aired by President Donald Trump at the United Nations last week, Pence accused China of waging an "unprecedented effort to influence American public opinion" ahead of critical congressional elections on November 6."To put it bluntly, President Trump's leadership is working; China wants a different American president," Pence said in a speech at the Hudson Institute, a conservative Washington think tank."There can be no doubt -- China is meddling in America's democracy."Pence paints China as enemy in US election“China was given heavy emphasis in the report. It was singled out for dominating the global supply of rare earth minerals critical in U.S. military applications. The report also noted China’s global profile in the supply of certain kinds of electronics as well as chemicals used in U.S. munitions.“A key finding of this report is that China represents a significant and growing risk to the supply of materials and technologies deemed strategic and critical to U.S. national security,” the report said.”Pentagon sees China as 'growing risk' to U.S. defense industry“In order to ensure a clear and transparent process — free of foreign influence over our critical infrastructure — takes place, Congress must ensure that these foreign-owned American carriers finally, explicitly break with Huawei. This will send a message worldwide that China must act as a rational actor in this space and that, given its recent history, Huawei’s technology is not welcome in any secure 5G network. It’s time for Washington to lead so these companies see it’s in their economic interests to do what we need them to do: ensure America’s future communications network remains secure.”The Huawei threat is real. Congress should act accordingly.“For decades, the principal objective of US strategy in Asia had been to bolster key Pacific allies Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the Philippines, while containing Chinese power in adjacent waters, including the East and South China Seas. However, in recent times, China has sought to spread its influence into Southeast Asia and the Indian Ocean region, in part by extolling its staggeringly ambitious “One Belt, One Road” trade and infrastructure initiative for the Eurasian continent and Africa. That vast project is clearly meant both as a unique vehicle for cooperation and a way to tie much of Eurasia into a future China-centered economic and energy system. Threatened by visions of such a future, American strategists have moved ever more decisively to constrain Chinese outreach in those very areas. That, then, is the context for the sudden concerted drive by US military strategists to link the Indian and Pacific Oceans and so encircle China with pro-American, anti-Chinese alliance systems. The name change on May 30 is a formal acknowledgement of an encirclement strategy that couldn’t, in the long run, be more dangerous.GIRDING FOR WAR WITH CHINATo grasp the ramifications of such moves, some background on the former PACOM might be useful. Originally known as the Far East Command, PACOM was established in 1947 and has been headquartered at US bases near Honolulu, Hawaii, ever since. As now constituted, its “area of responsibility” encompasses a mind-boggling expanse: all of East, South, and Southeast Asia, as well as Australia, New Zealand, and the waters of the Indian and Pacific Oceans—in other words, an area covering about 50% of the Earth’s surface and incorporating more than half of the global population. Though the Pentagon divides the whole planet like a giant pie into a set of “unified commands,” none of them is larger than the newly expansive, newly named Indo-Pacific Command, with its 375,000 military and civilian personnel.”The United States Is Pushing Toward War With ChinaA view of America by the Chinese in America. Instead of excerpting a portion, I suggest you read the entire article so I don’t bias any of the information.How Chinese Americans See Themselves and Their Place in American SocietyBottom line: Appearances may be deceiving, but our leadership seems to echo the past and that war seems to be the eventuality to solve the problem. Today, that may be a none solution. It may become a global reset, the end of another empire.

This answer takes a bit of a tangent in explaining US-Chinese relations but it’s important to visit that in order to answer this question properly.Not anymore, possibly. A major part of China’s economic success in the early days was taking advantage of the early stages of Globalization to become the world’s manufacturing center. Labor intensive industries with low to medium tech barriers offloaded a lot of their manufacturing and supply chains to cheaper SEZs in China. Basically the Chinese said “Replicate your supply chains in China and we’ll do the same job, but cheaper”.And a lot of countries and companies did just that. The 90s Globalization fever was characterized by “optimization” or “efficiency” fever where each company wanted to get the edge in terms of operational costs and supply chains to increase their bottom line so they could re-invest profits in other business ventures (cheaper products, more R&D spending, acquisitions, shareholder earnings) and so on.This replication of foreign supply chains was tied in to enormous growths in exports as well as either supply chain related products were exported back or the growth of a domestic industrial base permitted for the Chinese to move up the export tech ladder. They could also leverage their huge domestic consumer market to coax companies to set up shop in China in order to sell there.So why can’t India replicate this model anymore?Corona virus.Had the Pandemic not occurred, India would have been in prime position alongside a few other countries like Pakistan, Vietnam, Bangladesh etc to follow the same replication of foreign supply chain models process that seemed standard following the 90s liberalization and free trade period.India has a lower median income and permits lower costs for foreign businesses. As China moves up in median income, the costs of doing business there are growing. And as it lifts it’s population out of poverty, the idea of making cellphones in hot factories doesn’t appeal as much anymore.Similarly, in India, the enormous domestic consumer market offers the government significant leverage in negotiating with foreign companies and countries regarding how they could access such consumers (aka by having them build factories in India etc), same way China did.The problem is, the Trump era has shown that there was already a growing backlash in the West to the massive offshoring of labor to cheaper countries abroad. And a growing call to restore economic nationalism in countries like the US and UK by returning jobs from abroad even if it means higher priced goods and economic inefficiencies.But the movement seemed to have struggled to form a unified platform as it splintered around racial, ideological lines. And the comforts of a cheap, consumerist lifestyle have seeped in too deeply into the socio-economic life of the developed nations, their economies too changed to go back to the economies of the 70s and 80s.Then the Corona virus pandemic happened and flipped the entire discussion table over.Overnight, supply chains across the world began to fail systematically. Their over centralization in China meant that when the Pandemic first happened, a massive shock to global supply chains occurred due to the Wuhan lock down and the Chinese going dark in Jan-Feb.But then the virus followed supply chains to other nations like South Korea, India, Israel, Pakistan, Iran, the Middle East, Europe and North America and suddenly the idea of a Global supply chain tuned to efficiency met it’s match.No nation could close it’s border because the doors had been removed a decade ago. The supply chains of the world were too interconnected for a country to lock down and prevent a covid 19 spread unless they had acted extremely early like the Vietnamese had or their society and culture were supportive of measures to combat COVID-19.And then there’s the kicker: While the Department of Defence in the US had always maintained key industries within the US that were of strategic importance, Pharmaceutical companies were not considered as strategic resources or assets up until the Pandemic outbreak.The US was faced with the situation that it’s largest economic competitor, possible military rival in the Pacific and strategic rival, China, controlled it’s access to key Pharmaceutical drugs.God forbid, the Chinese do to the United States, what the United States did to Iraq and Iran when it sanctioned even life saving medical drugs to those countries and led to half a million children in Iraq dying and cancer patients dying right now in Iran.You see, the Chinese have something called a Made in 2025 plan which is designed to upgrade their industry from making cheap, low tech goods for exports to instead develop high tech industries in key strategic sectors that would allow them to elevate their economic power to the next level. Lots of industrialized or industrializing nations have them. The plan seeks to ensure that Chinese Industry produces more high tech products indigenously while at the same time ensuring control or near dominance in certain strategic sectors.Of which Pharmaceuticals is one. Simple medical products like Vitamin C are not produced in the US anymore (discounting the Florida Oranges) and are manufactured almost entirely in China. Vitamin C is one of the key things people stock up on during a pandemic where your immune system is the first line of defense. Same goes for other products like Tylenol and Penicillin.So the US is suddenly waking up to the fact that a lot of key medical industries and pharma companies have either their supply chains located in China or that China has gained a near monopoly on pharmaceutical products that the US might need to combat the Pandemic.To the Chinese govt’s credit, they haven’t turned off the tap line of these medical products to the US in the middle of a pandemic (which is what the US hardliners fear). But the Trump Administration is already considering expanding the Department of Defense’s Defense Production Act to Pharmaceutical companies and other medical companies that are relevant to the Pandemic response in the US.The Defense Production Act essentially maintains a pool of money that the US can dole out to industrial partners for them to manufacture essential components for it’s military hardware. Because the US Govt is the only market for them and thus it has to maintain the supplier’s business while also ensuring they don’t go around exporting those products to stay in business.Essentially, the US doesn’t worry about China making T-shirts. They worry about China making M1 Abrams components or having a monopoly on 5G. And they worry ALOT right now about China either being in the essential supply chain of medical products the US relies on to combat COVID-19 or having a near monopoly on said products. Which is why the US is willing to take two approaches:Use the Defense Production Act to treat pharma and medical companies the same way Defense companies like Lockheed Martin or Boeing are treated and essentially ensure the US has a more robust supply chain for all the medical products needed during the COVID-19 crises.Make access to Medicare beneficiaries conditional upon the medical care products being completely manufactured in the US or in US friendly nations. The Medicare market is nearly literally millions of American citizens who are entitled to health care and offers a huge market for pharma companies. So the US govt would tell medical companies that they can only access this market if their products are made in the US or in US trusted nations.Now here’s the kicker for India:During the mid stage period of the first COVID-19 wave, there were some reports of certain Japanese manufacturers moving their supply chains to India. And this lead to a news cycle developing among India’s domestic media that India would benefit immensely from COVID-19 as a lot of industrialized nations would move their supply chains to India from China leading to the same economic boom in India that China experienced in the 90s and 2000s.This is…not entirely true. For the following reasons:To have robust supply chains, you can’t afford to centralize them anymore the way they got centralized in China during the 90s and 2000s. When the pandemic started, the first shock wave was due to the over centralization of supply chains in China meaning that the Chinese lock down had a far greater impact than if supply chains had been dispersed across different countries. If not completely internalized that is.With demand across the world suppressed due to the pandemic, it’s difficult to see how companies could afford such short term credit crunches that involve moving supply chains to another country entirely.While the US-India relationship has improved significantly in recent decades, Trump is at the end of the day an America First politician. What he wants from India is to extract concessions in terms of buying more American products and so on. His trade war policies are pretty clear.The last point is key: In the US, hard liners wonder if we can even trust friendly nations with our supply chains. Look at South Korea and the UK. These are extremely close US allies and even they were impacted by the pandemic (controlled in SK, still at large in the UK). So the specter of having supply chains in friendly countries still wont protect those supply chains if the pandemic reaches said friendly countries. The only way to completely defend the supply chains of key strategic industries, that you consider at par with your Boeings and Lockheed Martins is to internalize those supply chains entirely.The Pandemic has also revealed the “Every man for himself” mentality of nation states, particularly for the US which basically went rogue and seized the medical supplies of other nations. The US truly is the country that fears others will treat it the way it treats them.So the idea of replicating supply chains in India to the extent that they’ve been replicated in China is…not as accepted in Washington at the moment. Or any major industrialized nation. The political climate of 2020 is very different from the 90s and 2000s. Borders have become harder, nationalism louder. We’re seeking self sufficiency more than efficiency as Great Power rivalry heats up again.In 2010, China and Japan had a territorial dispute when two boats crashed. Japan took certain steps to censure China and the Chinese retaliated by cutting off all rare earth elements to Japan. This led to the idling of several Japanese industrial plants since they didn’t have any raw material to manufacture.The US National security community refers to this example when examining how Globalization has impacted the US’s supply chains from a national security perspective. What if the Chinese did cut the US off from vitamin C, Penicillin and Tylenol right now? In the middle of the Corona virus Pandemic?This has led to a growing willingness among the US and other nations, that had once replicated their supply chains in China to enjoy greater efficiencies and profits, to begin considering either developing more resilient but costly supply chains internally, diversifying supply chains more rather than concentrate them in one country or shortening supply chains so that fewer countries are involved in them.The US has already developed the 2017 National security strategy which has openly declared that the US is again in an age of Great Power Rivalry. And China is the new power on the block.And that is why India can’t replicate the Chinese model. The same core ingredients are still there: The cheap labor force, the huge domestic market, the low cost of doing business and the government’s support. But the problem is that the global political and economic climate has changed. And there are certain fears about inter-dependencies between nations arising now that we didn’t have a decade ago.The Corona Virus just accelerated the process and laid it bare.The Indian government would have to find it’s own home grown way to grow the economy. Parts of the Chinese strategy can be replicated. Japan and the US could move some parts of their supply chains to India. But they will also move other parts to South Korea or Vietnam or Bangladesh. They probably will never allow for such an over centralization and extreme dependency on one country ever again.But how to navigate exports in a world struggling with a long term depression, a youth bulge entering the job market in a pandemic, companies accepting lower profits and revenues in return for more robust supply chains, increasing nationalism making supply chains shorter, tariffs being re-imposed and so on. These are questions the Indian government will have to develop it’s own model to answer.I don’t have a crystal ball into the future. But the way things are going now, the World could become increasingly divided into blocs with each bloc struggling to maintain and develop certain key strategic sectors within their bloc (AI, Medical equipment, Aerospace, Agriculture during Climate change, Biotech etc). Or develop coalitions that maintain such sectors internal to their bloc. And other, smaller or poorer countries become satellites around such independent blocs and offer them market access and resources in exchange for the strategic products that only the blocs can manufacture and maintain.These are our strength, who strike against history.These whose corrupt cells owe their new styles of weaknessto our diseases;these carrying light for safety on their foreheadsdescended deeper for richer faults of ore,drilling their death.These touching radium and the luminous poison,carried their death on the lips and with their warningglow in their graves.These weaves and their eyes water and rust away,these stand at wheels until their brains corrode,these farm and starve,all these men cry their doom across the world,meeting avoidable death, fight against madness,find every war.Are known as strikers, soldiers, pioneers,fight on all new frontiers, are set in solidlines of defense.Defense is sight; widen the lens and seestanding over the land myths of identity,new signals, processes:Alloys begin : certain dominant metals.Deliberate combines add new qualities,sums of new uses.Over the country, from islands of Maine fading,Cape Sable fading south into the orangedetail of sunset,new processes, new signals, new possession.A name for all the conquests, prediction of victorydeep in these powers.Carry abroad the urgent need, the scene,to photograph and to extend the voice,to speak this meaning.Voices to speak to us directly. As we move.As we enrich, growing in larger motion,this word, this power.Down coasts of taken countries, mastery,discovery at one hand, and at the otherfrontiers and forests,fanatic cruel legend at our back andspeeding ahead the red and open west,and this our region,desire, field, beginning. Name and road,communication to these many men,as epilogue, seeds of unending love.Source: from The Book of the Dead: The Book of the Dead… | Poetry Foundation