|
The End Of Civilization
By Dave Eriqat
03/17/06 "Countercurrents"
-- -- I had a mild epiphany the other
day: it’s not President Bush who’s living in a fantasy world, it’s
most of his critics who are. I’m no apologist for Bush – I neither
like nor dislike him. He’s no more significant to me than a fly
buzzing around outside my window. So permit me to explain my
reasoning.
People look at Bush’s invasion of Iraq and see a miserable failure.
But a failure to do what? Democratize Iraq? Eliminate Iraq’s WMD
arsenal? Reduce global terrorism? If those were, in fact, the
reasons for invading Iraq, then the invasion would have to be
classified as a failure. But what if the real reason was to secure
Iraq’s oil supplies, perhaps not for immediate use, and perhaps not
even for use by the United States? Then the invasion of Iraq would
have to be judged a success, a “mission accomplished,” so to speak.
Or take Bush’s seemingly irresponsible handling of the domestic
economy. How can any sane person fail to understand that cutting
revenue while increasing spending will produce deficits, and that
those deficits cannot increase in perpetuity? Sooner or later that
accumulated debt has got to have consequences. Bush appears to be
acting as if there were no tomorrow. But what if there really were
no tomorrow, financially speaking? In that case, the reckless
economic policies of today would not only be irrelevant, but might
actually be shrewd. I mean, if one knows that he is not going to
have to pay back his debts tomorrow, then why not borrow money like
crazy today? In fact, if civilization is coming to an end, then why
not use all that borrowed money to stock up on guns and vital
resources, such as oil?
Now, I’m just one person. And I’ve been closely studying economic,
environmental, and energy issues for only a few years. And I’m no
expert. Yet I’ve come to the conclusion – and I don’t want to be a
“Chicken Little” here – that civilization as we have known it for
the last century is doomed. Our wasteful manner of living – heck,
the sheer size of our human population – is unsustainable.
Everywhere you look you can see signs of strain on the Earth, from
spreading pollution of the air, water, and land, to disappearance of
life in the seas, to depletion of natural resources. Something’s got
to give. Things simply cannot continue as they have.
If I can see this, I would guess the United States Government, what
with its thousands of full time experts, probably can too. Now, if
you are the government (and I don’t mean Tom “I am the federal
government” DeLay), and your experts tell you that civilization as
we know it is doomed, what do you do? Well, for starters, you do not
tell your population of sheeple. That would precipitate panic and
result in premature doom, which would consume the government along
with everything else. Above all, government seeks to survive, so you
would maintain the facade of normalcy for the benefit of your
population while you use what time you have left to prepare, as
quietly as possible, for the inescapable future.
What will matter in this future? Commodities, principally energy,
food, and water. Everything else is secondary. Money is far down the
list in importance.
So how would you, the government, prepare for a future world in
which commodities are king? By securing today as many of those
commodities as possible. Hence, the U.S. government’s binge of
military base building throughout the commodity-rich regions of the
world. What would you not worry about? Money. The only concern you
might have for money is to prevent its premature demise. Hence, the
smoke and mirrors used to paint a pretty but false portrait of the
economy. Some will argue that the government needs more than just
energy, food, and water to survive. True, but by controlling the
bulk of the world’s key commodities, everything else can be
procured, including human labor and loyalty.
In preparing for the future demise of civilization you would also
seek to increase the government’s power as much and as rapidly as
possible. Why? To maintain control over those increasingly precious
resources, and equally important, to control people – especially
your own people – by force, if necessary. Viewed in this light, the
government’s aggressive pursuit of power during the last five years
makes perfect sense. Ironically, President Bush got it right when he
reportedly referred to the now totally eviscerated United States
Constitution as a “god damned piece of paper.” That’s really all it
is anymore.
So what fantasy world are Bush’s critics living in? The fantasy
world in which civilization can continue as it has in the past. That
we can continue to improve the standard of living of everyone in the
world if we just return to a more sharing and egalitarian way of
life, like that which we enjoyed between World War II and the mid
1970s. This is a fantasy. The Earth has finite limits. We are
finally starting to grasp that fact with respect to oil. But oil
depletion is merely the first in a series of coming crises ensuing
from the finite confines of our planet. The fundamental problem –
and I’m not a Malthusian – is that there are simply too many people
for the Earth to sustain. This is why fish are disappearing from the
oceans, why the supply of oil is unable to keep up with demand, why
the globe is being deforested, why animal and plant species are
going extinct, why water wars are in the offing. Perhaps if people
were wiser and more willing to share, and implicitly, less greedy,
we could sustain the more than six billion people on Earth, but,
alas, such idealism does not describe human beings.
The one thing that has enabled the human population to grow to the
immense dimensions we see today is oil, the resource facing the
greatest challenge from depletion. As the oil supply diminishes, in
the absence of herculean efforts to use oil more efficiently and
fairly, large numbers of human beings will die off. Before then,
soaring prices for oil will probably destroy the economies of the
countries most dependent on the stuff, if not the entire intricately
linked world economy. This is what I mean by the end of
civilization. Of course life will go on. But it won’t be anything
like what we’ve been accustomed to. Life will be more like that of
the Middle Ages, in which a few wealthy lords controlled all the
resources and possessed all the power, and the rest of the people –
the lucky ones, anyway – were veritable slaves under these lords. In
many ways that state of affairs exists today, but it’s unseen by all
but the most observant individuals. The future I’m talking about,
though, is considerably more spartan than what the worker bees enjoy
today.
I believe that what we’re witnessing today is the inception of a
titanic and protracted competition for survival: between countries,
between civilizations, between governments and their people.
Moreover, I believe the Bush administration is the first to
recognize this competitive future, which explains its fundamentally
different – seemingly feckless – behavior compared to past
administrations. Bush’s favored courtiers, which include
corporations, are profiting today and will become the new nobility
in the coming New Middle Ages.
Truth and Distractions
The governments of the world, and the U.S. Government in particular,
don’t want their people to know the truth. Governments usually end
up seeing themselves as entities distinct from their people, and
usually end up competing against them. That is true of almost every
government on Earth today, and is especially true of the U.S.
Government. Keeping the truth from people helps a government achieve
its goals, for if the people knew the truth they might demand that
the government start actually serving them.
One way to keep the truth from people, aside from today’s favored
approach of simply suppressing it, is to feed them a steady diet of
compelling distractions.
Elections are one such distraction. Elections arouse peoples’
passions and keep them entertained for weeks or months. Elections
even give people the illusion of participation, when, in fact,
elections mean absolutely nothing in a country like the United
States, which is run by money. Of course, elections are run by, and
legitimized by governments.
Sex is another good distraction, both sex scandals and sex-related
social issues. Look at how much mileage the media got out of the
Catholic Church sex abuse scandals. By comparison, sexual abuses by
the government’s own schoolteachers outnumber those by the church,
but we hear nary a word about them because they reflect negatively
on the government, and the media cooperates in keeping this quiet.
Sex between consenting adults, which ought to be nobody’s business
except the participants’, also consumes our attention. Look at how
much attention people pay to homosexuality. Why is that anybody
else’s business? It’s not, obviously, but it’s a great distraction
from important things, such as the government’s reverse-Robin Hood
economic policies. The same with abortion. Abortion is a personal
matter for the people involved. It’s none of society’s business. But
government stokes the flames of debate about abortion and it
consumes peoples’ attention. Sexually transmitted diseases –
diseases in general – are also good distractions and have the added
benefit of instilling fear in the population.
Crime is a perennial distraction. Even when the crime rate is
falling, the government seems to hype the crime statistics, making
it seem as if you’re putting your life at risk by merely setting
foot outside your front door. Of course, “crime” breeds prisons, and
prisons empower the government. Given the benefits of crime to the
government, it comes as no surprise that the government creates
crime by criminalizing harmless behavior such as using drugs or
hiring a prostitute.
Religion is also a distraction. Domestically, the fashionable debate
today revolves around the separation of church and state. There
really ought not be any debate. The United States Constitution is
unequivocal: the United States Government shall not recognize any
particular religion. End of story. It does not say how states may
address religion, but it does say that all powers not prohibited to
the states belong to the states. In my opinion, then, if a state
wants to recognize a religion, it may do so.
The “clash of civilizations” is perhaps the newest distraction, and
a completely contrived one at that. The Muslim-Christian antipathy
that exists today is both a religious and a cultural distraction.
Decades ago, when we were affluent, we were taught to celebrate
cultural diversity on our planet. Today that same diversity is
touted as the explanation for the “clash of civilizations.” Granted,
different cultures are, well, different. But that doesn’t mean that
conflict must ensue, and for decades there was no conflict. Clearly,
the flames of cultural conflict are being stoked. By whom? The
governments of the world and the media. For example, just look at
how European media companies and European governments colluded
recently to provoke Muslims with those silly cartoons. Cultural
conflict not only distracts the masses, but it provides governments
with a credible justification to increase their power, for instance,
to regulate headgear worn in schools and restrict immigration. Of
course, “terrorism” is ancillary to this clash of civilizations and
serves to intensify anxiety in the population. How many acts of
terrorism are actually perpetrated by governments? It’s impossible
to say, but it’s definitely more than zero, a lot more. So why does
a government perpetrate an act of terrorism? To create a
distraction, to increase its power, or both.
One thing all of these distractions have in common is collusion –
intentional or incidental – between the government and the media.
The government seems to be involved in all of these distractions to
varying degrees, ranging from merely exaggerating the importance of
some distractions to actively orchestrating others. And none of
these distractions could successfully distract the public without
the zealous participation of, and amplification by, the media. One
might argue that the media is naturally drawn to report sensational
news, as a moth is drawn to light, and most of these distractions
qualify as sensational. But I don’t think it’s purely coincidental
that the media relishes these stories when there is so much overlap
between the agendas of the government and the corporations that
comprise the “media.”
Both entities seek to dominate, exploit, and control the “little
people.” And the little people, being xenophobic, uneducated, and
fearful, are easily manipulated in a formulaic manner to help
undermine their own welfare. Simply look at their support for Bush,
a leader who has systematically attacked their standard of living,
not to mention their liberties. All Bush had to do was push a few
buttons labeled “religion,” “sex,” and “culture” to get them to
react like Pavlovian dogs. And all this button pushing was, of
course, happily assisted by the media.
Resource Competition
We humans like to think of ourselves as so much more sophisticated
than “lower” animals. In affluent times and places we can afford to
worry about silly things like what movies will win Oscar awards,
whether our body looks good at the gym, or where we will take our
next family vacation.
But our existence still depends on this fundamental equation:
survival = food + water + shelter.
In leaner times, like those we’re heading into, the above equation
becomes sharply apparent.
Food production today is highly dependent on oil. Oil powers our
farm implements, oil and natural gas are ingredients in commercial
pesticides and fertilizers, and oil transports food to market. Today
food travels as far as 10,000 miles from where it’s produced to
where it’s consumed, which would be impossible without oil. Oil
vastly increases agricultural productivity. So it’s because of our
largess of oil that the human population has been able to grow as
large as it has. One might say that humans eat oil. We can, of
course, produce food without oil – barring such evil manifestations
as crops that are genetically engineered to require the use of
petroleum-based pesticides – but without oil food production will be
much lower.
Water is a resource we take for granted. We act as though there is
no limit to the supplies of water, and that there are no
repercussions to our profligate consumption of it. We’re building
cities in places without adequate water supplies – Phoenix and Las
Vegas come to mind – and we’re using up vast reservoirs of non-replenishable
“fossil” water, such as the Ogallala Aquifer in the American
Midwest. Just as we’re failing to plan for economic “rainy days,”
we’re failing to regulate our water usage to prepare for a literal
lack of rainy days. We seem to think that the replenishable water
supply patterns will remain unchanged, an especially optimistic
expectation if the Earth’s climate is truly in the midst of major
change. But the water situation is even worse in some other places
than in America. Water delivery is partly dependent on energy, just
as food production is. It takes energy to pump water from the
ground, to transport it to where it’s consumed, and even to treat
it. Of course, food production is vitally dependent on water.
I hardly need mention the importance of oil except to say that for
the first time in history, the demand curve is passing the supply
curve. Moreover, the supply curve will soon be heading downward and
we’ll find ourselves perpetually chasing this ever dwindling supply
downhill. When demand merely exceeds supply the price of oil will
increase. But when demand exceeds supply and the supply starts to
diminish, then prices will really go up, enough to destroy economies
or render impractical the transportation of food and water to some
places. But the gap between supply and demand means more than just
higher prices. It also means shortages. Those who can afford to buy
oil will usually have their needs satisfied, albeit at higher cost.
But those who cannot pay the price will do without. Occasionally,
even those who can afford to buy oil will be forced to do without
because from time to time there simply won’t be any oil to buy on
the global market, at any price. Imagine going to your local gas
station and seeing a sign out front reading “Sorry, no gas.” Imagine
going to your local grocery store and seeing empty shelves because
the trucks that deliver goods to the store had no diesel fuel.
Imagine having to bundle up in two layers of sweaters inside your
house because you have to make half your normal allotment of home
heating oil last the entire winter. These hypothetical scenarios
will become reality and will occur with increasing frequency as time
goes on.
What’s going to happen when people have to vigorously compete for
food, water, and energy in order to survive? I think it’s going to
get vicious. My opinion of humanity holds that in the face of such
adversity, it will be every man for himself. Countries will compete
against countries. States will compete against states. Cities will
compete against cities. Governments will even compete against their
citizens. Civilization, in the sense of the word “civility,” will be
no more. Perhaps genetically engineered terminator seeds, depleted
uranium, and exotic diseases are secretly intended to reduce the
human population to alleviate resource competition.
Clearly, the U.S. invasion of Iraq is one of the opening salvos in
the coming resource wars. And the U.S.’s belligerence toward Iran is
undoubtedly due to Iran’s possession of vast oil and natural gas
resources. Bear in mind that a country need not seek control of
vital resources with the intention of consuming them. The country
that controls resources can use those resources either as a lever to
compel other countries to behave a certain way, or to buy other
resources or finished goods, such as weapons and integrated circuit
chips.
The End of Money
The 1970s was the apotheosis of the “American Dream.” Wedged between
the preceding decade of civil unrest and the subsequent decade of
recessions, rapidly rising homelessness, and mass layoffs, the 1970s
was a comparatively idyllic decade. It certainly had its problems –
stagflation, for instance – but even while living during that time I
felt it was a special decade. Life was good; people were happy,
friendly, and mellow; TV shows and movies were cheerful; civil
liberties were at their peak; government power was at its lowest
ebb; the country was affluent and at its peak of industrial prowess.
It’s not a coincidence that the tallest buildings in America were
built during the 1970s. Those buildings were icons of American
industry and power. Although the Vietnam War raged during the first
half of the 1970s, it was in the process of winding down and came to
an end by the middle of that decade. The cessation of the Vietnam
War was as much a reflection of the peoples’ desire to “live and let
live” as it was a military defeat. Military conscription also ended
in that decade, and even the cold war cooled off because of détente.
Unfortunately, what we didn’t realize at the time was that we would
never again have it so good. The 1970s represented a “tipping
point,” to use the popular vernacular, for the American Dream. That
was when globalization really started to take off and when the
serious decline of American industry began, the steel and auto
industries being among the first casualties. Interestingly, the
1970s was also the decade of peak oil production in the United
States, after which point we became increasingly reliant on imported
oil, which greased our downward slide. What I didn’t realize until
writing this was how crucial a role President Nixon played in
creating this tipping point. Nixon opened the door to trade with
China, a major player in today’s globalized economy. Nixon
disassociated the U.S. dollar from gold, facilitating the
destruction of wealth through unrelenting devaluation of the dollar.
Nixon launched the war on drugs, a precursor to today’s war on
terror (or is it the war of terror, I can’t tell?). Both the drug
war and war on/of terror consume wealth in order to serve the
imperial ambitions of the U.S. Government, but contribute nothing to
the country’s production of wealth.
The 1980s was a decade in which previously accumulated wealth was
systematically extracted, mainly through the mechanism of “Merger
Mania.” The 1980s was a decade of marked industrial and economic
decline, which was masked to a large extent by releasing into the
economy some of the wealth squeezed out of these mergers, as well as
by the massive accumulation of debt. The transformations of the
1980s also introduced a new component: the injection of foreign
wealth into the country. Many of the assets sold in the 1980s were
purchased by foreigners, especially the Japanese, a trend which
accelerated toward the latter half of the decade, highlighting
America’s economic decline. The 1980s also marked the inception of
the mythical “service economy” theory to justify the profitable
exporting of American jobs. The economy is like a pyramid. Forming
the foundation of this pyramid is the one true source of wealth:
natural resources – the free wealth given to us by the Earth and the
Sun. Mining for minerals and energy, agriculture, fishing, and
forestry are the source of all other wealth. Above this foundation
are industries that utilize its products. These second level
industries consist primarily of manufacturers that take raw
materials and produce something of greater value. Above the
manufacturers are companies that serve them, including law firms,
advertising agencies, shipping companies, airlines, hotels,
restaurants, and even entertainment. As wealth moves up this pyramid
a little wealth, constituting salaries and savings, is retained by
each level in the pyramid. The myth of the service economy, the
darling theory of the 1980s, is that a country could retain the top
of the pyramid and outsource the base of it. During the last three
decades we have transfered much of the base of this economic pyramid
to countries such as China and India and indeed, initially, the
money kept flowing to the top of the pyramid which remained in the
United States. But after a while, a new top of the pyramid began to
form in those countries where we had shipped the base of the
pyramid. Witness today not only the exodus of high tech jobs to
China and India, but that in those countries pure service companies,
such as advertising agencies, are also starting to flourish.
The 1990s was a period of greatly accelerating globalization and
economic decline for the United States, aided and abetted by such
treaties as NAFTA, GATT, and the WTO. Again, this massive decline
was masked by the illusion of wealth that persisted during the huge
stock market bubble of the latter half of the 1990s. Like merger
mania before it, the stock market bubble attracted a lot of foreign
wealth. A bit more previously accumulated wealth was extracted from
rising human productivity here in the United States during the
1990s.
Finally, the 2000s so far represent an era massively dependent on
inflows of foreign wealth. With our previously accumulated wealth
now exhausted and little means left for fundamental wealth
production, about the only thing keeping the U.S. economy afloat
these days is consumer spending and deficit spending by the
government, both of which are financed by growing mountains of debt,
which is owed to foreigners. The United States has largely been
reduced to a nation of people that sell each other hamburgers, with
foreigners paying the checks. Asset sales to foreigners continue as
well, the failed Chinese bid for Unocal and the not-so-failed Dubai
bid to run some of our seaports being prominent recent examples.
During the last thirty years in America two persistent trends are
clear: the steady depletion of existing wealth and decline in the
means to produce new wealth; and the steady rise of an imperial U.S.
Government.
Today, the economic imbalances in the United States economy are so
vast that I cannot see how they can be corrected gracefully. Even
more astonishing to me is that people keep buying financial
instruments like U.S. Treasury bills. Do these investors really
believe they’re ever going to get their money back? The national
debt is so large that paying it down is nearly impossible,
especially since there is no political will to either increase taxes
or reduce spending. Obviously, the U.S. Government knows it cannot
pay down the national debt, which is why it covertly relies on
dollar devaluation to reduce the value of the national debt.
It’s only a matter of time before the majority of investors in
dollar-denominated financial instruments open their eyes and stop
buying those assets. When that happens the dollar is doomed. The
government’s only recourse when it cannot borrow money will be to
print dollars, which will only accelerate the dollar’s demise,
possibly even inducing hyperinflation along the way.
If oil prices skyrocket because of the global supply and demand
relationship and harm the U.S. economy, that could accelerate the
dollar’s demise as well. I personally don’t see how the dollar can
avoid substantial devaluation, either slowly or rapidly. I hope the
decline is gradual.
All of the world’s government-issued currencies are in similar
straits. None are firmly backed by finite, physical resources, such
as gold. Consequently, all currencies have the potential to suffer
from devaluation, even more so since the economies of the world’s
countries are so intricately linked together. If one currency
abruptly collapses, especially an important one like the dollar,
they could all come crashing down.
Additionally, faith in the world’s currencies depends in part on
globalization. The willingness of an investor in Japan to buy
American dollars depends in part on the investor’s expectation of a
continuing economic relationship between Japan and America. But in
an era where global trade is increasingly challenged by oil
shortages, faith in other countries’ currencies will diminish too.
Countries will increasingly prefer to conduct international trade
using universal mediums like gold instead of currency.
If currencies such as the dollar become worthless, even local trade
may be conducted using gold or other precious metals. Such trade
may, in fact, have to be conducted in black markets, since
financially distressed governments will probably seek to confiscate
all gold and precious metals from their citizens.
The bottom line is that government-issued currency will be a thing
of the past. So how will the government continue to exist?
Acquisition of Resources
Without money or credit, government can only continue to exist
through force. The United States government is particularly well
endowed in this regard and has demonstrated its willingness to use
force to acquire resources, and not as a last resort either.
Iraq’s oil is the first such resource to be acquired by military
force. Iran’s oil and natural gas may well be the next. In the long
run, the energy-rich regions of central Asia will also attract the
hungry gaze of the U.S. Empire. Of course, other powerful, populous,
and hungry countries, such as China and India, will also have
designs on these energy-rich regions, which will probably result in
significant wars. Oil from the Middle East will probably become so
valuable that countries will have to provide a military escort for
every tanker carrying oil across the ocean.
Domestically, energy will be controlled by the government. It will
satisfy its needs first, corporations will have their needs
satisfied second, and the populace will be forced to ration whatever
is left.
Food is also critical to the government, comprised, as it is, of
people. So it’s logical to assume that the government will at some
point take control of food production. As with energy, the
government will satisfy its own food requirements first, and the
populace will be left to ration whatever is left.
If water becomes a scarce or unreliable resource, then we can assume
that the government will take control of that as well.
In a future where money has no value, the only way a government can
retain people is by providing them with food, water, and shelter. In
fact, in a future world where resource competition is the order of
the day, people will probably covet a government job – as a
bureaucrat, a laborer, or a soldier – simply because it will mean
three square meals a day and a roof over their head.
Of course, government needs more than just food, water, and shelter.
Government needs weapons, vehicles, computers, communications gear,
and myriad other manufactured items. Some of these things are
manufactured wholly in other countries, or depend in part on
components from other countries. Without money the government cannot
buy these things. But it can trade precious resources, such as oil,
water, and food, for them. Some critical factories, such as domestic
weapons plants, may be taken over wholesale by the government for
security reasons.
Slave Labor
Government cannot operate on resources and material alone. It also
needs labor. Some of that labor can be “purchased” in exchange for
resources. But in order for the government to operate “profitably”
it will have to employ slave labor, that is, labor it doesn’t have
to pay so richly for.
We already have such a precedent. Many of the two million people
already incarcerated in this country are veritable slave laborers.
They “earn” anywhere from twenty-five cents to one dollar per hour,
often working for major American corporations. But in some cases
these poor prisoners are then charged room and board for being in
prison, thus wiping out their minuscule income. In effect, since
they are being forced to work without making any net income, they
are slaves. It does not challenge the imagination to envision future
slave laborers working in factories manufacturing everything from
machine guns to computers, or working on farms to produce food,
returning each night to sleep in their prison cells.
The United States military is currently exploring ways to utilize
civilian prisoners to satisfy the military’s labor needs. It’s only
a matter of time before they come up with a justification for doing
so.
Once the framework for utilizing slave laborers – all nice and
legal, of course – is established, it’s quite easy to increase the
pool of potential laborers, if necessary. The government merely has
to criminalize more behaviors. Caught driving your car on the
“wrong” day? Three months in prison loading ammunition cartridges.
Caught possessing gold coins? Six months in prison assembling
computers. Caught saying “subversive” things over the telephone to
your aunt? Five years on a prison farm – for the both of you –
tending crops. Of course, prison sentences will likely be
accompanied by asset forfeiture, that is, if you have anything the
government wants. There is already a precedent today for asset
forfeiture too, even for minor offenses such as hiring a prostitute
or having a marijuana cigarette in your car. Heck, simply walking
through an airport today with “too much” cash on your person might
result in it being confiscated.
Conclusion
Although this essay has mainly been a description of the United
States and its future, much of it is applicable to the world as a
whole. Some other countries may well face worse times ahead because
they lack the natural resources and/or military might that the
United States possesses.
The goal of this essay is not to propose solutions to the many
problems facing us, although there are solutions, but to explain the
seemingly irrational behavior we see around the world. Viewing the
world today in light of the foregoing essay, Bush’s actions are
understandable, even though I don’t endorse them: the competitive
pursuit of resources, the rolling back of civil liberties, the
carefree handling of the economy.
Copyright 2006 by Dave Eriqat
Click below to read or post comment's on this article
(In accordance with Title 17
U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to
those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes.
Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the
originator of this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) |
