i guess the geniuses of the ruling class still think nuclear war threats (or nuclear war itself) help any person on the planet:


there's a phrase for this - sabre rattling.  Kim Jong Un, the baby king (reminds me of Cleopatra's deposed baby brother, Ptolemy) of 'North Korea', for some reason, is trying to make waves about the possibility of a nuclear war between the 'United States' and 'North Korea'. [or, evidently, is falsely attributed by the American media as trying to do so Apr 5, 2:48 UTC]

who is this beneficial to?

in reality, it's truly beneficial to nobody.    people perceive they've benefited from it, but curse themselves at the same time, by sowing self-doubt and guilt into their own lives, rendering it impossible for them to maintain normal human relationships (at least, without disavowing their past ways).

so, moving on, who thinks this is beneficial to them?

the ruling classes of the 'United States' and 'North Korea' both benefit if the citizens of both 'countries' are afraid of each other.  'North Korea' in particular has a propaganda narrative that relies almost exclusively on its official opposition to the 'United States' (and its near-religious worship of the Kim family):

meanwhile, the 'United States'' ruling class enjoys the ability to portray 'North Korea' as part of its semi-official "Axis of Evil", consisting of 'North Korea', 'Iran' (A.K.A. 'The Country Formally Known as Persia'), and other countries with official stances against the 'United States'.

both ruling classes benefit from this sort of national division for several reasons.  first, it promotes the division of civilization on the planet, which prevents people from ideologically focusing on our shared goals.  being distracted from those goals helps politicians and corporate officials to promote agendas which run against the grain of actual human needs and desires.  one of the more dramatic of these agendas is the agenda of war itself - despite their claims to want peace and stability, the ruling class thrives on social disorder and war.  these are strongly established facts, but perhaps they deserve some more emphasis, for there are people that don't yet understand them. 

it is simple enough to explain this for 'North Korea'.  those who control the military, official propaganda, and who 'benefit' (in their minds) from rulership in 'North Korea' - they are the exact same people.  Kim Il-Sung, then Kim Jong-Il, then Kim Jong-Un, and their direct subordinates.  the nearly complete merger of the state and the economy in 'North Korea' has guaranteed that the managers of the state operate with as much glorification and privilege as the population will sustain.

who benefits in the 'United States'?  the same principles apply, although the relations are much less obvious, because  the 'government' is forced to operate under the myth of public accountability.  it is trivial to point out the massive 'campaign contributions' and under-the-table deals given to members of Congress by military contractors, something which obviously tilts the game in their favor.  it is just as trivial to make the same observations about our last few 'Presidents' - Obama makes war-mongering decisions, in exchange for favorable coverage from military contractor General Electric on their news channels, NBC and MSNBC.  Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan were among his top campaign contributors in 2008 (although they ceased it in 2012, for Obama's P.R. reasons), and they heavily invest in the war industry, whether through government bonds or private stock holdings.  Bush's "Vice President" was the former CEO of military contractor Halliburton, and Bush apparently had a direct relationship with Erik Prince, CEO (?) of draconian military contractor Blackwater/Xe/Academi (three name changes in a decade!  escaping bad press?).  Bush's family received massive payments from the Carlyle Group, a private equity firm with massive investments in military contracting - payments of at least $100,000 in size, enough to buy a small-to-average house.  all of these candidates received huge "campaign contributions", at one time or another, from members of banking firms who invested in the debt instruments necessitated by the massive spending increase initiated by the Bush administration.  these are all massive and irreconcilable conflicts of interest, and we see that these 'officials' acted directly in favor of those who sought to corrupt them.    and to top all of this off - these same firms, and their associates, are the principle economic presences in both the 'United States', and 'North Korea''s primary state sponsor - China.  

that is the reality of modern threats of nuclear warfare.  it is a hideous part of a profit-making venture that involves fooling the population into investing in unnecessary military warfare, and into trusting their government to pointlessly pit them, and their resources, into a deadly, destructive, worthless battle.    not even the politicians, who are stupid enough to put their own lives in jeopardy over these pointless battles their bosses have  ordered them to initiate, and degrade their own honor and conscience in full view of millions of people - not even these politicians ultimately benefit the most (although they believe they do).

 it is the people who invest in war - the people who invest in government debt, in military contractors, in financial instruments that profit from resource acquisition, such as resource futures, and in the companies that profit from the stream of war spoils - that ultimately benefit the most from war, although they curse themselves to lives of distrust and guilt.     and it is those people who almost certainly  ordered Kim Jong Un and his subordinates to begin threatening nuclear obliteration against the 'United States'.  they want more money, and they think the population needs to be made afraid once again.  only when we unanimously disobey them, and those who would obey them, and reject their 'jobs' and their 'money', will their system ultimately collapse.  the #1 element of the social sickness that pervades the world is what psychologists call the "diffusion of responsibility" - the failure of individuals to take responsibility for the behavior of the swarm they're members of.

photo op for Kim Jong Un to look like a sophisticated and important military leader

photo op for Obama to look like a sophisticated and important military leader