Chronic Disease Comes With a Huge Price Tag — Most of It for Drugs

Chronic Disease Comes With a Huge Price Tag — Most of It for Drugs

---------------------------------------------

The U.S. channels 90% of its $4.5 trillion annual healthcare costs toward chronic diseases, yet most of it funds profitable drugs and procedures that do not address the root cause of illness.

Dr. Joseph Mercola - September 4, 2026

Story at a glance:

• The U.S. channels 90% of its $4.5 trillion annual healthcare costs toward chronic diseases, yet most of it funds profitable drugs and procedures that do not address the root cause of illness.
• Prescription drugs trap patients in an endless cycle of dependence. Once patients start medications for chronic conditions, they rarely stop, even when their health continues to decline.
• Chronic disease patients face severe financial strain; 32% have medical debt in collections, and their bankruptcy rate is four times higher than that of healthy individuals.
• Beyond the physical toll, chronic disease impacts your mental health, strains your relationships and makes you feel isolated. Caregivers also experience stress, exhaustion and lost income.
• Medicine needs to shift from disease management to true healing. Instead of masking symptoms, the focus needs to be on restoring cellular function and supporting metabolic health to break free from the cycle of chronic illness.

Chronic disease is the defining health crisis of our time. Despite medical advancements, rates of diabetes, heart disease, cancer and neurodegenerative conditions continue to rise. The U.S. spends more on healthcare than any other country, yet people are getting sicker, not healthier.

This failure stems from conventional medicine’s narrow focus on pharmaceuticals and procedures that only prolong dependence rather than recognizing the role of mitochondrial function and cellular health in preventing and treating chronic disease. It’s time to challenge this system, expose its shortcomings and demand a shift toward solutions that actually restore health at its foundation.

The financial toll of lifelong disease management

The financial burden of managing chronic diseases is overwhelming, even for those with health insurance. This has made medical debt one of the most pressing economic crises in the U.S. today.

The problem is not just that these conditions are expensive — it’s that they are rarely resolved. Patients are placed on lifelong prescriptions and procedures that generate billions in revenue for pharmaceutical and insurance companies while failing to restore health.

• A major study reveals chronic conditions heighten financial vulnerability — A study published in JAMA Internal Medicine evaluated more than 2.85 million adults and found that over 38% had at least one chronic condition. While many assume that health insurance protects against major medical expenses, their findings show that those with chronic conditions are much more likely to struggle with unpaid medical bills, delinquent debt and even bankruptcy.
• As the number of chronic conditions increases, so does the likelihood of financial strain — Among individuals with no chronic illnesses, only 7.6% had medical debt in collections. However, that number skyrocketed to 32% for those with seven to 13 chronic conditions.
  • This pattern was also seen in nonmedical debt in collections, which affected only 7.2% of those without chronic illness but increased to 24% among those with the most medical issues.
• Delinquent debt and poor credit scores are more common with chronic illness — Delinquent debt, meaning missed payments on any type of debt, was found among 14% of healthy individuals, compared to nearly 43% among those with multiple chronic conditions.
  • The financial toll of chronic illness also extends to credit scores and bankruptcy rates. Individuals with no chronic illnesses only had a 17% chance of having a low credit score, while it was 47% for those managing seven to 13 chronic conditions.
• Bankruptcy rates rise dramatically with more chronic conditions — Bankruptcy rates also climbed, with 1.7% of those with multiple chronic conditions filing for bankruptcy, a fourfold increase compared to the 0.4% of healthy individuals who had to take that step. Beyond the likelihood of accumulating debt, the actual amount of medical debt in collections also increased with each additional chronic condition.
• Unpaid medical debt rises sharply with more chronic illnesses — Among those with no chronic conditions, the average amount of unpaid medical bills in collections was $784. For those with multiple chronic illnesses, that number rose to $1,252. This suggests that even with insurance, the out-of-pocket costs of ongoing treatments, medications and specialist visits quickly add up, leaving patients financially overwhelmed.

The soaring economic burden of chronic disease

Chronic disease is the leading cause of healthcare spending in the U.S. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 90% of the nation’s $4.5 trillion annual healthcare costs go toward treating chronic illnesses, averaging $13,493 per person.

These expenses include doctor visits, hospital stays, surgeries and long-term prescription drug use.

• Lost productivity from chronic disease also results in billions of dollars in economic losses each year — In 2022, the indirect costs of diabetes in the U.S. economy were estimated to be $106.3 billion. Meanwhile, cardiovascular disease alone is projected to cost the U.S. $1.1 trillion annually by 2035.
• Chronic illness creates generational financial strain — When declining health forces workers to leave their jobs, the financial strain also affects their entire family. Spouses and children often become full-time caregivers and sacrifice their own careers and financial security in the process.
  • As medical expenses pile up and income dwindles, families are left trapped in a cycle of economic instability that stretches across generations and makes financial recovery a challenge.
• Even government programs are crumbling under the overwhelming cost of chronic disease — The 2024 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services financial report reveals that Medicare alone accounts for 22% of all U.S. healthcare spending, while Medicaid contributes another 17%. In total, these programs handle over a billion fee-for-service claims each year and represent approximately 13% of total federal outlays.
• Most Medicare and Medicaid funds are likely spent on chronic illness care — Given that chronic disease is responsible for 90% of U.S. healthcare expenditures, it is likely that a substantial portion of these Medicare and Medicaid funds are dedicated to managing chronic conditions.
  • More than a decade ago, Medicare was already spending vastly different amounts depending on how many chronic conditions a person had.
• Medicare costs escalate dramatically with the number of chronic conditions — In 2010, the average Medicare beneficiary with no or just one chronic illness cost the system $2,025 per year. But for those with two or three conditions, that number jumped to $5,698.
  • Patients with four or five chronic diseases cost an average of $12,174, while those with six or more racked up a staggering $32,658 annually. With chronic illness rates climbing higher every year, it’s safe to assume these figures have only grown worse.
• The system profits from lifelong treatment rather than curing disease — The staggering cost of chronic disease is a reflection of a medical system designed to manage symptoms instead of helping you heal, with billions funneled into medications, surgeries, and treatments that ensure a steady flow of profits for pharmaceutical companies and the medical industry.
  • Even the best-selling drugs in the world aren’t designed to treat disease but to keep you dependent.
• Best-selling medications make billions while diseases persist or worsen — Lipitor, a cholesterol-lowering drug, has made over $150 billion in sales, yet heart disease remains the leading cause of death. Similarly, insulin costs continue to climb, even though Type 2 diabetes is largely preventable with diet and lifestyle changes.
  • As long as the system profits from keeping people on medication, prevention and real solutions will be ignored. If you want to break free, you have to start looking beyond conventional medicine.

Patient burnout — when medications become a life sentence

The endless cycle of seeking relief without healing is the defining reality for millions trapped in the modern medical system. A patient battling chronic pain, for instance, may begin with a mild prescription for relief, only to find themselves escalating to stronger medications as their condition worsens.

• Opioid prescriptions increase over time but don’t improve patient outcomes — A study published in Pain Medicine found that among chronic non-cancer pain patients, opioid prescription rates jumped from 59.6% at baseline to 74.3% over two years, with a disturbing 71% of users remaining on the drugs long-term.
  • Strong opioid use more than doubled, rising from 13% to 31%. Despite this surge in prescriptions, patients continued to report severe pain and high levels of daily life interference.
• Long-term opioid users experience more pain and rarely discontinue use — Additionally, the study found that opioid users were more likely to experience continuous pain and disability compared to those who were not prescribed opioids. Most notably, only 1% of patients successfully discontinued opioid use over the two-year period, showing how once patients start opioid therapy, they rarely stop, even when their pain does not improve.
• Opioids worsen pain over time by lowering the body’s pain threshold — Research has also demonstrated that long-term opioid use leads to opioid-induced hyperalgesia, a condition where your nervous system becomes more sensitive to pain rather than less.
  • Instead of providing lasting relief, opioids rewire your pain pathways, lowering your pain threshold and making discomfort feel even more intense. The very drugs meant to ease your suffering actually exacerbate it over time and trap you in a cycle of increasing pain and drug dependency.
• For those navigating mental health disorders, the pattern is eerily similar — Brooke Siem, writing for The Washington Post, recounts how she spent nearly half her life on antidepressants, never once challenged by a doctor to reconsider the necessity of these medications. Like so many others, she accepted the notion that her only choices were to “cope with depression or cope with antidepressants.”
  • Years later, she found herself staring out of her Manhattan high-rise window, contemplating suicide despite the drugs that were supposed to keep her stable. It was only when she withdrew from the medications — which involved an excruciating, months-long process riddled with withdrawal symptoms — that she realized the depth of her dependency.
• Brooke’s story is unfortunately not a one-off case — It’s estimated that nearly 15.5 million Americans have been on antidepressants for over five years, often without reevaluation.
  • Moreover, a 2024 systematic review and meta-analysis published in The Lancet Psychiatry found that approximately 15% of individuals who discontinued antidepressants experienced withdrawal symptoms directly caused by discontinuation. In about 3% of patients, these symptoms were severe.
• Polypharmacy reduces quality of life by worsening mental and physical health — A 2021 study in Patient Related Outcome Measures also found that patients with a high Drug Burden Index — which measures exposure to medications with sedative (e.g., benzodiazepines, opioids) and anticholinergic (e.g., some antihistamines, antidepressants, bladder medications) effects — reported significantly worse psychological well-being, functional limitations and an overall diminished quality of life.

In other words, the more medications a person takes, the more likely they are to experience cognitive impairment, fatigue, and emotional distress. Even when these drugs are prescribed with good intentions, their long-term effects often make daily life more difficult, not better.

The hidden costs of chronic illness — mental, emotional and social strain

If you’re living with a chronic illness, you already know that the struggle goes far beyond physical symptoms — the mental and emotional toll can be just as overwhelming.

According to a study published in Middle East Current Psychiatry, 68.7% of chronic disease patients experience stress, 51.1% suffer from anxiety and 58.8% struggle with depression.

• Psychological strain is especially severe with multiple chronic conditions — These conditions are particularly prevalent among individuals with cardiovascular disease, metabolic disorders, cancer, respiratory illnesses, degenerative diseases, chronic kidney disease and chronic liver disorders.
  • The Patient Related Outcome Measures study further confirms that those with three or more chronic conditions are significantly more likely to experience poorer psychological well-being.
• The burden of chronic disease affects patients’ families, too — Research shows that 95% of chronically ill patients rely on a caregiver, usually a family member, to help with daily tasks, medications and medical appointments.
  • The demands of caregiving can quickly become overwhelming, leading to exhaustion and emotional strain. Many caregivers struggle with constant fatigue, lack of support, and the heavy responsibility of managing someone else’s health while trying to keep up with their own lives.
• Moreover, chronic illness leaves you feeling isolated — Fatigue, pain or mobility issues make it difficult to engage in social activities and lead individuals to withdraw from gatherings and hobbies they once enjoyed.
  • Some friendships fade as plans get canceled and invitations stop coming. The loneliness that follows makes depression worse, creating a cycle that fuels both emotional and physical decline.
• Chronic illness strains marriages, relationships and even children — If you’re in a marriage or long-term partnership, the shift from equal partners to patient and caregiver can be difficult to navigate.
  • Research shows that chronic illness increases the risk of divorce and relationship breakdowns, often due to financial stress, emotional exhaustion and a loss of intimacy. If you have children, they may struggle emotionally or academically, as the focus of the household shifts toward managing your condition.

Ultimately, chronic disease affects every aspect of living. As long as the medical system continues to focus only on symptom management, millions will remain stuck in a cycle that chips away at their quality of life.

Conventional medicine’s blind spot

Modern medicine prides itself on advancements in pharmaceuticals and surgical interventions, yet it has continuously overlooked the most fundamental factor in health — cellular function.

Few researchers understood this better than the late Dr. Ray Peat, a biologist and pioneer in bioenergetic medicine and human metabolism, whose work challenged nearly every mainstream dietary and metabolic dogma.

• Cellular energy is the foundation of health — Peat’s research on bioenergetic medicine, which became the foundation of my book “Your Guide to Cellular Health,” emphasizes the central role of cellular energy in disease prevention and health restoration. He rejected the low-carb approach, arguing instead that carbohydrates are essential for fueling mitochondrial function and metabolic health.
• Low-carb diets may harm mitochondrial health by restricting glucose — I was once among those who promoted a low-carb diet, but Peat’s work opened my eyes to the reality that mitochondria thrive on glucose, and that denying your body this essential fuel worsens the very conditions low-carb diets claim to treat.
  Instead of promoting caloric restriction and macronutrient avoidance, Peat’s work demonstrates that adequate carbohydrate intake fuels energy production, lowers stress hormones and supports thyroid function.
• Peat warned against seed oils and their harmful metabolic effects — Peat was also one of the most vocal critics of polyunsaturated fats found in seed oils, long before mainstream medicine acknowledged their risks.
  • His research demonstrated how excess linoleic acid, a primary component of seed oils, disrupts mitochondrial function and promotes inflammation. While the medical community continues to promote vegetable oils as “heart-healthy,” the bioenergetic model reveals their devastating impact on metabolism.
• Important research like Peat’s has been ignored for not aligning with profit — This is just one instance where groundbreaking research has been systematically ignored in favor of profit-driven dietary guidelines.
  • Peat’s insights have profound implications for conditions ranging from hypothyroidism to neurodegenerative diseases, yet they remain largely unrecognized by modern medicine. It’s no surprise that conventional medicine dismissed Peat’s work as either too obscure or unworthy of serious clinical consideration, subjecting it to censorship and ridicule.
• The medical industry resists change that could reduce reliance on drugs — This deliberate suppression limited its reach, much like the work of the pioneering researchers he built upon.
  • There is no financial motivation to promote dietary and lifestyle interventions that restore mitochondrial function, reduce pharmaceutical reliance and reverse chronic disease. After all, the medical industry is structured around profitable treatments rather than disease prevention.

As a result, promising research on cellular health and metabolic therapies remains on the fringes of healthcare, while patients are left to navigate the system on their own.

Until the medical establishment shifts its focus to supporting mitochondrial function, addressing nutritional deficiencies and eliminating toxic exposures, the chronic disease epidemic will continue to spiral out of control. The real solutions to health are not hidden — they are simply ignored.

A wake-up call — The healthcare system is in desperate need of change

Modern medicine is failing the very people it was meant to help. Chronic disease has reached epidemic levels, yet the healthcare system’s only response is more drugs, more procedures, and more expensive interventions — none of which address the root causes of disease.

Your body isn’t lacking pharmaceuticals; it’s deprived of the essential conditions needed for optimal cellular function. Poor nutrition, metabolic dysfunction, environmental toxins and chronic stress are the real drivers of modern disease. Yet, these factors are overlooked in favor of high-cost, high-profit interventions that do nothing to reverse illness at the cellular level.

This cycle does not have to continue. Real health is possible, but it requires a shift from managing illness to restoring function at the cellular level. Instead of masking symptoms, medicine needs to prioritize the conditions that allow the body to heal itself.

The good news is that solutions already exist. Research in bioenergetics and metabolic therapies is paving the way for a future where chronic disease is no longer the norm.

The human body is incredibly resilient when given the right tools, and healing is within reach for those willing to step outside the conventional model. By shifting the focus toward cellular health, the future of medicine can finally move beyond disease management and toward real, lasting vitality.

FAQs about the root cause of chronic disease

Q: Why does the U.S. spend so much on healthcare but see worsening chronic disease outcomes?

A: Despite allocating 90% of its $4.5 trillion annual healthcare budget to chronic illnesses, the U.S. continues to see rising rates of conditions like heart disease, diabetes, and cancer.

The reason? Most spending goes toward profitable pharmaceutical treatments and surgeries that do not address the underlying cellular dysfunction. Instead of supporting healing, these interventions promote lifelong dependence and fail to reverse disease progression.

Q: How does chronic illness impact patients financially and emotionally?

A: Chronic illness causes severe financial distress, even for those with insurance. Patients with multiple conditions are four times more likely to file for bankruptcy, with average unpaid medical debt rising from $784 (no illness) to $1,252 (multiple conditions).

Beyond finances, patients and their families face intense emotional strain, stress, isolation, and relationship breakdowns. Caregivers, often family members, endure burnout and lost income as they juggle daily care duties.

Q: Why are prescription medications like opioids and antidepressants problematic for chronic conditions?

A: Prescription drugs often become a life sentence rather than a path to healing. Studies show that patients rarely discontinue opioids, even when their pain doesn’t improve, due to increased sensitivity to pain (opioid-induced hyperalgesia).

Similarly, long-term antidepressant use is widespread, with 15.5 million Americans on them for over 5 years, often without reevaluation. Withdrawal symptoms are common and sometimes severe, and polypharmacy worsens overall mental and physical well-being.

Q: What are the “hidden costs” of chronic illness beyond physical symptoms?

A: Chronic illness takes a deep toll on mental, emotional, and social health. Nearly 70% of patients suffer from stress, anxiety or depression, particularly those with multiple conditions. Social withdrawal, loneliness and strained marriages and parent-child relationships are common.

The emotional burden also extends to caregivers, who experience fatigue and diminished quality of life. The system’s focus on symptom management, rather than true healing, only worsens these outcomes.

Q: What approach can help me break the cycle of chronic illness and dependence?

A: Healing begins by addressing the root causes at the cellular level. Prioritizing mitochondrial health, adequate glucose intake, reduced exposure to seed oils and nutrient-rich diets supports the body’s ability to restore itself.

This approach moves beyond managing symptoms, aiming instead to rebuild energy production, balance stress hormones and reduce pharmaceutical reliance — leading to lasting health instead of chronic dependency.

Originally published by Mercola.

Dr. Joseph Mercola is the founder of Mercola.com.

---------------------------------

Source

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/chronic-disease-huge-price-tag-most-for-drugs-cola/

When War Comes Home: A Constitutional Warning

When War Comes Home: A Constitutional Warning

Andrew P. Napolitano | Sep 10, 2026

A failed war does not end when the drones stop flying. It creates a new danger: A government that refuses to admit defeat and a president who, having failed abroad, seeks muscular victories elsewhere.

The war against Iran is a case study in the limits of military power, the dangers of presidential overreach and the enduring wisdom of the Constitution’s separation of powers. It was unauthorized, unconstitutional, illegal, strategically incoherent and — by the standards by which wars must be judged — a geopolitical failure.

The American people were told that force would achieve clear objectives. Iran would be compelled to surrender. Somehow, American security would be enhanced. The region would become more stable.

Instead, the United States expended enormous resources, consumed scarce munitions, deepened regional instability and failed to produce the political outcome President Donald Trump promised. Senior military officials just last week warned him that extending large-scale operations risked exhausting critical military capabilities and weakening America’s ability to respond elsewhere.

The United States can destroy buildings, eliminate targets, deploy aircraft, ships, missiles, drones and troops anywhere on the planet. But war is not a video game in which the destruction of enemy assets automatically produces political surrender. War is a contest of wills, societies, culture and endurance.

And here is the constitutional question that should have been asked before the first bomb was dropped: Who gave the president the authority to begin this war? The Constitution did not.

Article I, Section 8 gives Congress — not the president — the power to declare war. The framers deliberately rejected the British model in which kings could drag nations into conflicts based upon personal judgment, ambition or political convenience. James Madison warned that the executive branch was “the branch of power most interested in war,” and therefore the Constitution placed the decision to enter war outside the president’s constitutional reach.

The president is commander in chief. He commands forces after lawful congressional decisions have been made. He does not possess the power to transform his title into a personal authority to begin wars.

That principle has been repeatedly recognized by the Supreme Court. In cases such as Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, the Court rejected the idea that President Harry Truman had unlimited power simply because he claimed national security. Justice Robert Jackson’s famous concurrence warned that executive power is most dangerous when it operates in a “zone of twilight” where presidents attempt to expand authority beyond constitutional boundaries and without congressional concurrence.

The Iran war belongs precisely in that twilight — where executive ambition collides with constitutional restraint.

The administration may argue that modern threats require flexibility. That argument has been made by presidents of both parties for decades. But flexibility is not the same as unlimited authority. The Constitution was written for difficult moments, not easy ones. It was designed to restrain presidents even when they believe they have compelling reasons to act.

The military failure abroad has created a political dilemma at home. A president who promised victory must now confront the reality that victory was never achieved.

The danger is what happens next.

History teaches that political leaders who suffer public humiliation abroad often seek demonstrations of strength elsewhere. Foreign-policy failure can produce domestic overreach. Leaders who cannot achieve the desired result overseas may attempt to prove their power through actions at home.

That is where the war comes home.

The president, frustrated by military limitations, may turn toward radical immigration enforcement, Supreme Court-prohibited tariffs, statutorily prohibited domestic deployments of military forces, stealing foreign-owned oil, and assertions of executive authority that collide with free speech and free association.

But the Constitution does not permit a president to substitute disappointment for law.

The Fifth Amendment guarantees that no person — not just Americans — shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. The Sixth Amendment guarantees all persons — not just Americans — from whom the government seeks life, liberty or property the right to a public trial before an impartial jury, and other constitutional protections. These protections apply not because accused persons are necessarily innocent but because government power is too dangerous to operate without restraints.

Evidence is not conviction. Accusation is not guilt. Presidential assertion is not judicial judgment.

The executive branch cannot simply identify alleged criminals in speedboats or elsewhere, declare them enemies and impose punishment without trial. That is a system the American Revolution rejected.

The same principle applies to the use of military force inside the United States. The founders were deeply suspicious of standing armies being used for law enforcement. That suspicion produced constitutional protections and later statutes prohibiting the military’s role in civilian law enforcement.

The military exists to defend the nation from foreign threats. It is not a presidential police force.

Likewise, Congress — not the president — defines crimes and establishes punishments. A president cannot create new categories of enemies and decide their fate by executive command. The Constitution does not authorize a monarchy with aircraft carriers.

Every generation faces a temptation to exchange freedom for security. Every generation is told that normal rules cannot apply because a crisis is too serious, an enemy too dangerous and a moment too urgent.

The founders knew that argument well and they rejected it.

The Constitution was written precisely because government officials would sometimes believe that their objectives justified employing extraordinary power. The separation of powers, congressional war authority, judicial review and due process protections are not obstacles to effective government. They are safeguards against government becoming the threat it was created to prevent.

The ultimate question is not whether a president is strong enough to exercise power. The question is whether the president is restrained enough to obey the laws he has sworn to uphold.

That is the fear of a republic when the war comes home. To paraphrase the author Herman Melville, beware the president weeping when he bares an iron hand.

To learn more about Judge Andrew Napolitano, visit https://JudgeNap.com.
COPYRIGHT 2026 ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO 
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

-------------------------------------

Source

https://ronpaulinstitute.org/when-war-comes-home-a-constitutional-warning/

Americans Should Never Have Given the U.S. Government a Pass After 9/11

Americans Should Never Have Given the U.S. Government a Pass After 9/11

Jacob G. Hornberger - The Future of Freedom Foundation

September 11, 2026

One of the most disastrous consequences of the 9/11 aftermath was the pass that the American people gave to their own government. Their anger was focused entirely on the terrorists rather than on both the terrorists and the government that provoked the attacks.

There were two reasons for this phenomenon.

The biggest reason is that Americans bought into the rationale that U.S. officials immediately announced as to motive — that is, the reason the terrorists struck on 9/11 with their devastating attack. U.S. officials said that the terrorists had been motivated to strike out of a supposed hatred for America’s “freedom and values.” Some officials also maintained that the terrorists had attacked as part of a supposed centuries-old Islamic campaign to establish a worldwide caliphate.

Those were lies — intentional, knowing, deliberate lies. The real reason that the terrorists had struck was retaliation. They were retaliating out of anger over the massive death and destruction that U.S. officials had unleashed in the Middle East, especially in Iraq with bombings and sanctions, after the U.S. national-security establishment’s Cold War racket suddenly and unexpectedly came to an end in 1989.

The second reason for Americans’ failure to focus on the responsibility that the U.S. government had for the 9/11 retaliatory strikes is that Americans viewed their federal government as their daddy, one that would never lie to them or put them in danger. Their daddy would do anything and everything to keep them safe. Thus, Americans bought into the “freedom and values” lie and summarily rejected any suggestion that their daddy’s policies were responsible for provoking the 9/11 retaliation. In fact, whenever a libertarian would point to the U.S. government’s role in provoking the 9/11 attacks, American statists would immediately respond with, “Oh, so you’re now defending the terrorists and the Muslims. You’re a traitor.”

How different things would have been if Americans had acknowledged the role that U.S. foreign interventionism had played in provoking the 9/11 attacks. In that case, there would have been tremendous anger directed not just at the terrorists but also at the government whose foreign interventionism had motivated the terrorists to retaliate.

In that case, Americans could have focused on two things: (1) restoring our nation’s founding foreign policy of non-interventionism, a foreign policy that had lasted more than 100 years; and (2) restoring America’s founding governmental system of a limited-government republic, with just a small, basic military force, and dismantling the totalitarian-like national-security state governmental structure that came into existence after World War II to wage the old Cold War racket.

Instead, by focusing exclusively on the terrorists and giving the U.S. government a pass on its role in provoking the 9/11 attacks, Americans rallied to their political daddy, as it embarked on more deadly and destructive interventionist campaigns, including the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. In other words, U.S. officials, with the full support of the American people, continued and expanded the very same interventionist foreign policy that had given rise to the 9/11 attacks.

Not surprisingly, the decision to invade Afghanistan and Iraq as part of the new “war on terrorism” now placed America under a constant, never-ending threat of terrorist retaliation. That’s what made the “war on terrorism” an even better racket than the old Cold War racket, which involved the supposed threat posed by the Reds. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were terrorist-producing machines. The more death and destruction inflicted on people over there, the greater the chance of terrorist retaliation here at home. That’s what made the “war on terrorism” a perpetual racket, which, needless to say, was a boon to those who were making big money off this racket.

Equally important, from the standpoint of U.S. officials, was the fact that U.S. officials were able to use the 9/11 attacks as a way to consolidate power over the American people — much more power than they had achieved during their old Cold War racket. Conjuring up images of fascist regimes, U.S. officials called into existence the Department of Homeland Security. There was also the patriotically named USA PATRIOT Act, which subjected Americans to the threat of warrantless searches. There were mass secret surveillance and the illegal telecom scandals. There was the TSA takeover of the airports. Ominously, there was also the clarification that the national-security establishment’s omnipotent Cold War powers of assassination, torture, and indefinite detention applied not just to foreigners but also to Americans.

In other words, the 9/11 attacks served to accelerate the destruction of the liberty and the privacy of the American people at the hands of their government. The tragedy is that this accelerated destruction of liberty and privacy was ardently supported by the American people themselves, who were more scared to death of the terrorists and the Muslims than they had been of the Reds during the old Cold War racket. Thus, Americans were even more willing to relinquish their freedoms in the hope of being kept safe from the terrorists and the Muslims than they had been during the Cold War racket.

The question is: What now? Knowing now the role that the U.S. government played in provoking the 9/11 attacks and knowing full well the adverse consequences of foreign interventionism, will Americans continue to support the federal government’s foreign policy of interventionism and its totalitarian-like governmental structure of a national-security state?

Or will Americans decide to restore America’s founding foreign policy of non-interventionism and its founding governmental structure of a limited-government republic?

As we have seen, the first choice involves perpetual death and destruction, and the continued loss of liberty for Americans. The second choice involves a life of normality, liberty, peace, prosperity, and harmony.

It sure doesn’t seem to me like a difficult choice to make.

Reprinted with permission from The Future of Freedom Foundation.

----------------------------------

Source

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2026/09/jacob-hornberger/americans-should-never-have-given-the-u-s-government-a-pass-after-9-11/

Mundane Astrology Looks at the Coup of Iran in 1953

Mundane Astrology Looks at the Coup of Iran in 1953

----------------------------------------------

I would like to examine the 1953 Coup Of Iran through the lens of two books, The Devil's Chessboard by David Talbot and Legacy of Ashes by Tim Weiner. let's start with the The Devil's Chessboard.

In The Devil's Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America's Secret Government, David Talbot treats the 1953 Iranian coup (Operation Ajax) not merely as a Cold War foreign policy decision, but as a seminal moment where the CIA became an unchecked, corporate-aligned power state operating above democratic oversight.

Talbot frames the overthrow of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh through several core arguments:

1. The Protection of Wall Street and Corporate Capital

Talbot places heavy emphasis on Allen Dulles’s pre-CIA career as a partner at the white-shoe Wall Street law firm Sullivan & Cromwell.

• The Thesis: Dulles and his brother, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, viewed the world through the lens of international corporate wealth.

• The Iranian Application: When Mossadegh nationalized the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (now BP), Talbot argues that the Dulles brothers saw it not just as a regional political dispute, but as an intolerable threat to Western capitalist interests and property rights. The coup set a precedent: the national security apparatus could be deployed to protect private corporate cartels under the guise of national security.

2. Allen Dulles as the Imperial Grandmaster

Unlike traditional histories that view coups as institutional government decisions, Talbot centers on personality, informal networks, and rogue agency.

• Dulles is portrayed as a shadowy grandmaster moving pieces on a board, viewing nations like Iran as mere pawns in an imperial game.

• Talbot emphasizes how Dulles circumvented traditional diplomatic channels and manipulated President Dwight D. Eisenhower—who was initially cautious about covert action—into authorizing the removal of a democratically elected leader.

3. The Blueprint for Future Overthrows

Talbot positions Operation Ajax as the crucial proof-of-concept for the CIA.

• By using bribed mobs, psychological warfare, paid press disinformation, and military co-optation (personally orchestrated on the ground by Kermit Roosevelt Jr.), the CIA realized it could rewrite foreign governments cheaply and quietly.

• Talbot argues this success intoxicated Dulles and the agency, directly leading to the 1954 Guatemalan coup (Arbenz) and subsequent interventions throughout the Third World, embedding a culture of interventionism that eventually turned inward.

4. Moral Bankruptcy and Long-Term Consequences

For Talbot, Operation Ajax represents the explicit corruption of American democratic values. By replacing a secular democrat (Mossadegh) with an autocratic monarch (Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi), Dulles sacrificed long-term global stability and democratic integrity for short-term geopolitical and financial control.

-------------------------------------------

Now let's examine the 1953 Iranian coup through Tim Weiner's Legacy of Ashes.

In Legacy of Ashes: A History of the CIA, Tim Weiner approaches the 1953 Iranian coup (Operation Ajax) through a starkly different lens than David Talbot. While Talbot views the coup as a masterclass in clandestine power executed by an all-powerful, corporate-aligned deep state, Weiner presents it as a flukey, chaotic operation whose accidental success created a dangerous and enduring delusion within American intelligence.

Weiner frames the overthrow of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh around several core themes:

1. The Delusion of Operational Brilliance

Weiner’s central thesis throughout Legacy of Ashes is that the CIA has historically suffered from incompetence, poor analysis, and self-deception.

• Near-Total Failure: Weiner details how Operation Ajax actually collapsed in its initial phase. When the Shah fled to Rome and the first attempt to arrest Mossadegh failed, CIA Director Allen Dulles and the State Department considered the operation dead and ordered its chief operative, Kermit Roosevelt Jr., to abort and leave Tehran immediately.

• Accidental Triumph: Roosevelt ignored Washington’s orders to retreat. Capitalizing on widespread public anxiety, paid mob agitators, military opportunists, and street-level chaos, the coup succeeded almost in spite of CIA planning.

• The "Magic Bullet" Fallacy: Because the operation ended in success, the CIA convinced itself—and President Eisenhower—that it had perfected a cheap, clean method for regime change. Weiner argues that this overconfidence directly set up the CIA's future intelligence disasters (such as the Bay of Pigs).

2. Cold War Hysteria Over Rational Analysis

Where Talbot sees the coup primarily as Wall Street corporate protectionism, Weiner emphasizes institutional paranoia and strategic blindness.

• Truman had resisted covert action in Iran, believing it would backfire. Eisenhower, however, came to power surrounded by advisers terrified of Soviet expansion.

• Weiner argues that the CIA completely misread Mossadegh. Intelligence officers viewed the nationalistic Prime Minister through a rigid Cold War binary, assuming that an anti-British leader must inevitably fall into the arms of the Soviet Union, despite Mossadegh's staunch anti-communist stance.

• The CIA's political analysis was shallow: it treated complex regional dynamics as simple theater in the Soviet-American struggle.

3. Institutional Arrogance and the Myth of Kermit Roosevelt

Weiner dismantles the romanticized internal mythology that grew around Kermit "Kim" Roosevelt Jr.

• Roosevelt returned to Washington as a legendary hero, privately briefing Eisenhower and top officials about how a handful of agents and a briefcase of cash saved Iran from communism.

• Weiner points out that Roosevelt’s sensationalized accounting of the coup inflated the CIA's ego and convinced American presidents that covert covert-action operations could replace actual diplomacy and long-term foreign policy strategy.

4. The Legacy of Unintended Consequences ("Ashes")

The title Legacy of Ashes comes from Dwight Eisenhower’s late-in-life reflection that he left behind "a legacy of ashes" in intelligence. Weiner shows how the 1953 coup perfectly exemplifies this:

• The short-term tactical victory—restoring Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi to absolute power—planted the seeds for deep Iranian resentment toward the United States.

• The destruction of Iran's fragile secular democracy directly paved the way for the 1979 Iranian Revolution, the rise of the Islamic Republic, and decades of hostile geopolitical blowback for American foreign policy.

Synthesis: Talbot vs. Weiner

Analytical Axis	David Talbot (The Devil's Chessboard)	Tim Weiner (Legacy of Ashes)
Primary Driver	Corporate interests, Wall Street power, Sullivan & Cromwell networks.	Cold War panic, systemic miscalculation, intelligence incompetence.
View of the Coup	A calculated, sinister masterstroke by an unchecked secret government.	A botched operation saved by chaos and luck that created a false myth of success.
Allen Dulles's Role	The imperial grandmaster manipulating the board and President Eisenhower.	An overconfident director blinded by covert action who misread regional realities.
Long-Term Impact	Proof-of-concept for corporate-state interventionism and anti-democratic subversion.	A classic example of intelligence "blowback" that destroyed American credibility long-term.

----------------------------------------------

Shifting gears here, how might mundane astrology explain this coup using the synodal cycles of the plants, Jupiter out to Pluto, through the lens of the harmonic 4 transiting aspects (conjunction, outgoing square, opposition and incoming square.

In Mundane Astrology—particularly through the lens of cyclical planetary dynamics championed by astrologers like André Barbault and Charles Harvey—major geopolitical events like the August 1953 Iranian coup d'état are evaluated through the interaction of the outer planet synodic cycles (Jupiter through Pluto).

The 4th Harmonic phase model views a synodic cycle like a breathing pattern of history:

1. Conjunction (0 degrees): The seed moment; absolute concentration of potential, initiation of a new geopolitical or economic paradigm.

2. Outgoing / Waxing Square (90 degrees): Crisis in action; initial structural test, confrontation with established resistance, aggressive expansion of the seed impulse.

3. Opposition (180 degrees): Peak exposure, maximum polarization, ultimate manifestation, or radical ideological turning point.

4. Incoming / Waning Square (270 degrees): Crisis in consciousness; systemic decay of the old cycle, institutional restructuring, reckoning, and liquidation before the next conjunction.

Applying this framework to August 1953 highlights several key synodic cycles intersecting in the 4th harmonic structure.

1. The Heavyweight Backbone: Saturn–Neptune (The 1952–1953 Conjunction)

The single most decisive planetary cycle defining the 1953 coup was the Saturn–Neptune conjunction at 21 degrees - 23 degrees Libra.

• Archetypal Meaning: Saturn represents institutional power, state authority, boundary enforcement, and hard realism. Neptune represents ideology, covert operations, deception, propaganda, oil/petroleum, and socialism/communism. Combined, the cycle rules covert statecraft, ideological warfare, oil disputes, and the secret subversion of institutions.

• The 0 degree Phase in 1952–1953: In August 1953, Saturn and Neptune were tightly conjunct in late Libra. This was the seed phase of an entirely new 36-year cycle. Operation Ajax was literally a textbook manifestation of Saturn-Neptune: using secret intelligence (Neptune) to restructure state power (Saturn) over a dispute rooted in nationalized oil (Neptune).

• The Geopolitical Seed: The 1953 coup set the template for US Cold War covert interventions for the rest of that Saturn-Neptune cycle (which ran until the next conjunction in 1989).

2. The Power Shift: Jupiter–Pluto (The Waning Square / 270 degree Phase)

While Saturn-Neptune provided the covert thematic background, Jupiter and Pluto provided the dynamic tension of raw power and capital.

• Archetypal Meaning: Jupiter rules expansion, international finance, legal sovereignty, and ideological reach. Pluto rules deep coercive power, cartels, covert intelligence, underground wealth (petroleum), and total transformation/overthrow.

• The Incoming Square (270 degree) in Summer 1953: In August 1953, Jupiter in Gemini was forming an exact incoming square to Pluto in Leo (23 degrees Gemini to 22 degrees Leo).

• The 4th Harmonic Dynamic: An incoming square demands the liquidation or forcible reorganization of structures that no longer fit the dominant power paradigm. Mossadegh’s assertion of national sovereignty over Iranian oil (Jupiter in Gemini: legal rhetoric, trade contracts) came into direct, irreconcilable friction with the entrenched global plutocracy and covert covert-action network (Pluto in Leo: autocratic power, intelligence agencies, corporate oil syndicates). The 270 degree phase broke Mossadegh's resistance to force a realignment back under Western hegemony.

3. Economic Revolution: Uranus–Pluto (The Approaching Conjunction)

Throughout the early 1950s, Uranus (rebellion, technological disruption, sudden shifts) and Pluto (underground power, total upheaval) were approaching their monumental mid-1960s conjunction.

• The Cycle Phase: In August 1953, Uranus was in Cancer and Pluto was in Leo, in a closing balsamic relationship heading toward their 0 degree seed in 1965–1966.

• The Dynamic: In mundane terms, the pre-conjunction phase forces a death-struggle between older imperial/colonial mechanisms and emerging nationalistic self-determination movements. Iran’s oil nationalization was one of the opening salvos of Third World decolonization—a movement that would fully erupt when the Uranus-Pluto cycle finally hit its exact conjunction a decade later.

4. The Trigger: Jupiter's Transits to the Saturn–Neptune Conjunction

In 4th harmonic analysis, outer planet conjunctions define the macro-historic epoch, but faster outer planets (like Jupiter) act as the ignition mechanism when they form quarter-phase hard aspects to those heavy conjunctions.

• In August 1953, as Jupiter in Gemini squared Pluto in Leo, it simultaneously formed a trine/trine-sextile release pattern to the exact Saturn-Neptune conjunction in Libra.

• Jupiter amplified the covert potential of Saturn-Neptune, providing the financial grease (bribes, paid mobs, covert CIA funding) necessary to translate secret planning into tangible street-level regime change in Tehran.

Summary of the 1953 Mundane Grid

Planetary Pair	Harmonic Phase in Aug 1953	Aspect Angle	Mundane Expression in the Coup
Saturn – Neptune	Conjunction (0 degrees)	0 degrees Libra	Birth of the modern covert state apparatus; espionage used to seize control of oil and institutional power.
Jupiter – Pluto	Incoming Square (270 degrees)	90 degrees Gemini–Leo	Crisis of power; international finance and intelligence agencies breaking a sovereign government over resource control.
Uranus – Pluto	Balsamic (Closing to 0 degrees)	Cancer / Leo	Destruction of nationalistic self-determination to preserve the global order prior to the 1960s revolutionary boom.

Through this astrological lens, August 1953 was not an isolated event; it was the birth hour of a 36-year Saturn-Neptune cycle of covert imperial intervention, triggered by a Jupiter-Pluto crisis in global wealth and power enforcement.

------------------------------------------

Source

Google Gemini