We Need Courage, Not Hope.

Note to a friend.

“I Will Love You Till The Winds Dont Blow”

Dinh Thi Tham Poong, Vietnam, I Will Love You Till The Winds Dont Blow—2020

People are self-righteous.

I can't imagine what your friends would have thought of me—a frolicking shit for brains confronting reality with a giggle and a fart.

Complexity is difficult to engage with.

It's easier to think Trump or Maga or Satan caused our predicament. It's tidy. We can indulge in gentler self-reflection as good guys.

Examining our socioeconomic and political structures, systems, and beliefs is challenging and a wee bit uncomfortable.

Learning from Great Nature is problematic because it demands hard, mostly thankless work. 

It's easier to feel righteousness and transcendental. 

We are in a predicament that comes from the core of our hubristic, clever by half but not wise enough nature. 

Homo sapiens are evolved animals embedded in Great Nature's emergent living systems governed by the laws of physics that we cannot fully understand. Our brains are not up to the task. So we construct stories to engage the mystery or gain the status we desire, whether it's The Austrian School of Economics, Turtles, or the Bible. Intuitions, intuitions...often profound and often fit for purpose.

Metastatic modern techno-industrial civilization is collapsing as we pray. The TESCREAL (transhumanism, extropianism, singularitarianism, modern cosmism, relationalism, effective altruism, and longtermism) accelerationist tech-bros and our more mundane rapacious late-stage capitalist, dark tetrad leaders who are addicted to the seven deadly sins will hasten collapse, but the way of life we've lived since Biblical times was always self-terminating. I know you have read the Book. 

Homo hubris, all the way down.

Fortunately, we are both still living well. 

Learning about how Nature works and facing reality won't kill us. Hubristic belief in infinite Austrian School economic growth on a finite planet is what is collapsing metastatic modern techno-industrial civilization. (Warped ideologies divorced from Nature.) 

“Learn what is to be taken seriously and laugh at the rest.”― Herman Hesse 

​Focus on what's significant and get on with it. 

Since I read "Limites to Growth" in the early 80s, I've been interested in our way of Life from the perspective of being an animal embedded in Great Nature, and I have enjoyed learning about how things work. If more people listened to and learned from Nature, we would not be in this predicament. 

We may think we know what God thinks, but we are still evolved human animals dependent on Great Nature. Try being a breatharian and find out.

As philosopher Miguel de Unamuno wrote, "Those who believe they believe in God, but without passion in the heart, without anguish of mind, without uncertainty...believe in the idea of God, not God himself." Likewise, those who cling to progress myths live only in the idea of Life, not Life itself.

Our culture incentivizes conquest and rapacious competition in the pursuit of status dressed up in concepts of freedom, democracy, salvation, religion, markets, power, control, etc. 

People believe in what they are taught to think—habits of mind. I can't change what people believe. I'm not trying to convince people to study thermodynamics, physics, or ecology. I find science fascinating and rewarding, so I share work from those domains. I'm also a big fan of philosophy and metaphysics, as you know, but I still "obey" the laws of physics. I am Nature's humble servant. God knows this.

Our learned desires feed the system's structures, the wealth pump that supports the Players of The Great Game. Musk and Trump, the sick fucks, are Players. We are dreamers. We have an imagination.

 
I'm interested in overshoot because we are in it. The more I learn about "Collapse," the better I understand physics, complex emergent living systems, and what makes our species unique. 

What a miraculous experience it is to live. We're so lucky to have been born in our circumstances during such abundance and peace. When I think back, it's hard to believe how good we've had it.

 
We are mature enough to know there are consequences for human actions. 

No one knows what the future will bring; we can only have best guesses (probabilities) based on our understanding of reality (complex physical systems) and where it's leading.

 
Some of my friends are unconcerned with Great Nature's Laws because they have their Faith. People believe stories because it feels better than learning about complex relationships between matter and energy. I would never argue with Faith, but when one argues with reality, one loses more than one could ever know.

I don't know how many years I have left. I moved here because it's a kinder, gentler place to witness what's happening to metastatic modern techno-industrial civilization run by hubristic, dark tetrad Players of The Great Game. 

I spent many years in mega-cities, Tokyo, Shanghai, and Hong Kong, and I knew long ago that there'd be a time to exit the cluster—the illusion. Maya. 

U.S. American culture is pathological, in my humble opinion, and has been for a very long time, perhaps since the birth of the Republic.

People earning a living in the big city depend on infinite growth. Knowing what I know doesn't make me righteous; I'm just another average member of metastatic modernity with all its glorious stories and constructs.

 
The cause of "Collapse" is ignorance of Great Nature.

 
Great Nature is poignant. It's important to embrace one's emotions. Feelings animate us and make us precious.

 
I'm a fun-loving, friendly, humourous person who loves Life. I don't know why I can delve into things most people find depressing and feel happy. I'm so lucky. I love reality. If a doctor tells me when I'm going to die tomorrow, I'll be okay with it. At least I haven't lived my Life in terror like so many of our brothers and sisters have.

 
I wish our leaders were wise peacemakers instead of status-seeking Players. I want our leaders to love Life and Great Nature/God above all else. 

Life begets Life; Life depends on Life.

It's time to create some inner sunshine; that's never been a problem for me. I have my friends, cats, health, and books.
https://www.cospolon.eu/book-recommendations

Holier than Thou 

Our social constructs are damned. It's a reflection of our fallen nature. 

God has spoken to me. God is the loving laws of physics. Incomprehensible.

Jesus wanted us to be humble and live within the limits of Great Nature in love and peace. But our nature is such that we find it impossible to live within the confines of nature. We submit to Conquistadors and not to God. We adhere to stories that conflict with reality.

Magically

"Do you want fish? Here's fish. Do you enjoy wine? Here's wine." Why is it so hard to live within our means when it's so easy for us to survive and thrive? 

"Do you want it? Here it is. You already have everything you need."

Across time and cultures, we were warned, and we didn't listen.

We were happy to go along with The Game, not knowing it was destined to self-destruct. 

Every accusation is a confession.

I can't convince people to walk the middle path or submit to God's Grace/Great Nature.

But I submit. I give thanks. I am blessed, and so are you.

Thanks for sharing,

Steven

Addendum—a riff on a deep seek prompt.

I wonder what your friends would have thought of me.

My experience is both profoundly human and tragically common. The resistance and isolation I face from some of my loved ones stems from psychological, cultural, and evolutionary mechanisms that make collapse awareness profoundly threatening to most people.

The truth of collapse violates the foundational narratives that sustain modern Life: progress, safety, and control.

When confronted with evidence that these narratives are false, the brain triggers cognitive dissonance—a state of psychological agony caused by holding conflicting beliefs. To resolve this pain, most people reject reality outright.

Suppose one accepts that the collapse of modern techno-industrial civilization is inevitable. In that case, one must also accept that our lives (careers, retirement plans, and children's futures) are built on many lies. This realization is intolerable, so we reject the messenger rather than the message.

Humans evolved to prioritize short-term survival and social cohesion over long-term existential threats. Our brains are wired for optimism bias (believing "bad things happen to others, not me") and normalcy bias (assuming tomorrow will resemble today). Collapse awareness short-circuits these survival mechanisms, triggering fear and rejection.

Focusing on immediate threats (predators, hunger) was essential in ancestral environments. Abstract, slow-moving crises (climate collapse, pathological social constructs) don't activate the same neural alarms.

Cultural Conditioning and The Tyranny of Positivity

Modern culture pathologizes "doomism" and elevates toxic positivity/domesticity. Accepting collapse while understanding its causes forces us to confront moral failure, existential guilt, and loss of meaning.

Meaning is because it is. Life is meaningful if you care to accept it for what it is. We strive because we strive. We survive for posterity.

Knowing these things doesn't make one negative, alarmist, or doomist. Most of us want to protect our self-image as good people in a just world overseen by a loving God who cares about our future.

Homo storytellers are tribal animals. Challenging the group's worldview risks exile, which evolutionarily meant death. When one speaks of collapse truths, one is perceived as a threat to the tribe's cohesion, a carrier of "bad energy," bringing down the mood and violating unspoken rules.

Collapse-awareness forces people to grieve—for living systems on this miraculous planet, their dreams, and their legacy.

Anticipatory grief, a profound sorrow for losses that haven't happened, is an ambiguous loss with no closure. To avoid this feeling, we turn away from reality, from the Laws of Great Nature. We can't adopt the right Way of Life when we avoid Nature/God's truth.

Living in discord with Great Nature/God is a profoundly dangerous thing to do.

For some people, accepting collapse means they are powerless to stop it. This triggers learned helplessness, a psychological state in which people believe action is futile and disengage.

People who understand how sick our social constructs are become the embodiment of the death of the world they have learned to believe in.

Accepting reality shatters the identity, values, and hopes they have always believed in. Turning away from reality preserves their psychological safety—it's biological and cultural programming.

So what can we do if we don't have access to the jet-setting gurus of modernity—the beautiful people?

We communicate with and cohere with the people around us.

We reframe our approach to communicating the laws of Great Nature with values instead of data. Instead of discussing collapse, we can ask questions that align with our neighbors' priorities.

"How do you want to be remembered by future generations?"

"What do you want to do today to spread love and joy?"

We can highlight and encourage actions that improve Life now (e.g., community gardens, frugality, service) without invoking doom, The End of Days, or whatever apocalypse we can imagine.

We can seek "reality-based" communities like Deep Adaptation, XRNegative, or mutual aid networks, spaces that offer solidarity without judgment.

We don't need scapegoats. The preconditions for the tech elite and Donald J. Trump came into being long, long ago. The blame game won't help. I know why we are sick, but that doesn't change anything.

We can engage with online resources: https://www.cospolon.eu/cospolon-links

We can continue to educate ourselves and others. One of the best ways to learn is to teach.

"Learning to Die in the Anthropocene" by Roy Scranton

We can practice radical acceptance. Since we can't save those who don't want saving, we focus on personal integrity.

As the Buddhist teacher Joanna Macy says, "The most radical thing you can do is stay present."

Embrace reality.

We can channel our pain into art and activism: write, create, or join direct action groups transforming despair into purpose.

I understand my thoughts may perturb you, and you might want to disengage.

I'm happy you are projecting your energy and love in the way you know how.

If my way of seeing and sharing is uncomfortable, I won't bring it up again, but I'm here if you ever want to talk.

I'm not alone. Many people walk this path—quietly, fiercely, and with open eyes.

What we need most now is not hope but courage.

In this episode we discuss one of the mechanisms by which societal collapse happens over time, and what it looks like for every-day people.

Sources:

How Civilizations Fall: A Theory of Catabolic Collapse - John Michael Greer

Dark Age America - John Michael Greer GDP Growth

Infrastructure Report Card

It’s The Socioeconomic Structures and Systems, Stupid!

All information coming from a war zone has a particular point of view. If we take the activities on the battlefield at face value, this remains true regardless of the intended impact of a particular story—corporations and politicians win, and everyone else loses.

There are many accurate descriptions of why wars start, but let's leave that aside for now and focus on the business of war. How do politicians, corporations, and financial institutions profit from war, and how does the business of war flow?

Every war needs weapons. Weapons are sent to a battlefield to destroy military equipment, infrastructure, and kill soldiers. In the Middle East, they exist to kill civilians, too.

In Ukraine, Western suppliers manufacture complex and expensive equipment and send it to Ukraine, where inexpensive drones destroy it.

Who benefits, and how?

Military Equipment Contractors (Defense Industry)

Defense contractors manufacture and sell weapons systems, ammunition, and other military equipment. Demand for these products increases significantly during wartime or periods of heightened tension. Equipment destruction creates demand for replacement, ensuring continued sales.

Governments allocate substantial budgets for defense spending, providing contractors with a reliable revenue stream. These contracts often involve long-term commitments and high profit margins.

From Ukraine to Gaza: How wars fuel record profits for US defense firms - Times of India

The arms industry, driven by geopolitical tensions and conflicts, has become a major economic force, with US-based companies taking the lion's share of revenues. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) revealed in its 2024 report that global arms revenues reached $632 billion in 2023, a 4.2% increase from the previous year. Among these, US firms contributed $317 billion, or half of the global total, underscoring their central role in the international arms market.
The SIPRI factsheet reveals that the total arms revenues of the Top 100 arms-producing and military services companies worldwide increased by 4.2% in 2023, hitting $632 billion. This surge is primarily driven by heightened global demand for weapons, fueled by conflicts such as the war in Ukraine and tensions in regions like the Middle East.
"Spurred by increased global demand for weapons, arms revenues grew in all of the geographical areas covered by the ranking," said the SIPRI report. Notably, the US firms have capitalized on this demand, with 30 of the 41 American companies recording year-on-year increases in arms revenues, reflective of the US's growing emphasis on military strength.

Defense contractors heavily lobby to influence government policies and secure favorable contracts. The revolving door phenomenon further strengthens their influence.

The ability of inexpensive drones to destroy expensive weapon systems highlights a potential for profit even when the systems are not entirely effective. The need to replace those systems creates more sales.

Will the E.U. and the United States dedicate more industrial capacity and print more money to keep the war with Russia going? Are French men lining up, excited to fight “Putler,” as young Brits did at the leadup to WWI? Are Germans and Dutchmen beside themselves with enthusiasm and excitement at the thought of being killed by a drone in Ukraine? Do U.S. Americans like the idea of spending their money on war machines rather than infrastructure, local manufacturing of essential goods, healthcare, education, and affordable housing while addressing real existential threats to their country and the world?

What evidence is there that "Putler" wants to invade France or the United Kingdom? There isn't any.

Putin Is No Hitler

Wherever there is war and money to be made from war, you will find the same ghouls gathering. Those involved in launching the invasion of Iraq should be excluded from public life. Instead Powell is now the U.K.’s national security adviser.

I am not a follower of Putin. The amount of force used to crush Chechnya’s legitimate desire for self-determination was disproportionate, for example. It is naive to believe that you get to be leader of the KGB by being a gentle person.

But Putin is not Hitler. It is only through the blinkers of patriotism that Putin appears to be a worse person than the Western leaders behind massive invasion and death all around the globe, who now seek to extend war with Russia.

Here in the U.K., the Starmer government is seeking actively to prolong the war, and is looking for a huge increase in spending on weapons, which always brings kickbacks and future company directorships and consultancies for politicians.

To fund this warmongering, New Labour are cutting spending on the U.K.’s sick, disabled and pensioners and cutting aid to the starving overseas.

Labour Friends of Israel has published a picture of Starmer meeting with Israeli President Herzog, six months after the International Court of Justice’s interim ruling quoted a statement by Herzog as evidence of genocidal intent.

The Starmer government was voted for by 31 percent of those who bothered to cast a vote, or 17 percent of the adult population. It is engaged in wholesale legal persecution of leading British supporters of Palestine, and is actively complicit in the genocide in Gaza.

I see no moral superiority here.

Energy Companies

Wars disrupt energy supplies and create uncertainty, increasing demand and higher prices for oil, gas, and other energy resources. This can be very good for energy companies. Sanctions and geopolitical tensions further exacerbate these disruptions.

Wars often necessitate rebuilding energy infrastructure, providing opportunities for energy companies to secure lucrative contracts. Look at all the politicians gloating over the prospect of rebuilding Gaza, Ukraine, and lucrative mineral deals. While soldiers and civilians die in war zones, politicians and business people discuss opportunities for future profits.

Securing new energy sources when old sources are cut off creates new markets. Energy companies profit from the instability that war creates. Chaos is a money-making scheme for politicians, big business, and financial institutions.

Financial Institutions

Governments borrow money to finance military operations, issuing bonds and other debt instruments. Financial institutions underwrite these debt offerings, earning fees and interest. Wars create investment opportunities in defense, energy, and other sectors. Financial institutions manage investment funds that hold shares in these companies. After conflicts, financial institutions provide loans for reconstruction efforts, generating further profits. Loans are also given to nations to purchase military equipment. War leads to large amounts of national debt, and global financial institutions profit from the interest on that debt.

How The Roman Empire And American Empire Are The Same

I glide over these points because to people living today it goes without saying. Biden did it and Trump comes out and saying. Biden just committed a whole-assed genocide in Palestine and a military-industrial pump-and-dump in Ukraine, and Trump continues the same policies with less hypocrisy. Biden and Trump are just good cop/bad cop of the same police state. America is a two-headed monster, but both heads consume lives and resources and shit US treasuries. The financial instruments may change, but the tune stays the same. As Mary Beard said, the definition of imperialism is “Military conquest and the imposition of foreign control (whether in the form of taxation, puppet government or military occupation).” And so it remains.

The only difference is our indifference. Whereas the Roman Empire demanded fealty, Americans laugh at the idea that they're an empire at all. They've discovered that the best place to hide an imperial elephant is in plain sight, covered with newspapers. American Empire relies on sleight of hand like debt, democracy™, and ‘defense’ to accomplish even greater imperialism largely by changing names. As Keyzer Soze said, the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist. But American Empire does exist. We can see as it goes out of existence, like a song can only be heard as it's going away.

The Flow of Business

Taxpayer money flows to governments, allocating funds to defense contractors and other industries. Defense contractors and energy companies generate profits from sales and contracts. Financial institutions facilitate money flow through loans, investments, and debt management. Corporations and financial institutions exert influence on government policies to ensure favorable outcomes.

Everyone Else Loses

Wars result in loss of life, displacement, and suffering. They disrupt economies, leading to inflation, unemployment, and reduced living standards. Wars cause significant environmental damage, including pollution and destruction of natural resources. The cost of war creates a long-term debt burden for nations and taxpayers. War creates social instability and can lead to long-term social problems.

And our leaders are extremely enthusiastic about going to war. Why is that?

Understanding the "Revolving Door"

Definition: The revolving door refers to the movement of individuals between positions in government and positions in private sector industries, often those industries that they previously regulated.

The term ‘revolving door’ refers to the movement of individuals between positions of public office and jobs in the same sector in the private or voluntary sector, in either direction. If not properly regulated, it can be open to abuse. A cooling off period is the minimum time required between switching from the public to the private sector intended to discourage the practice and minimise its impact.

Former officials possess valuable insider knowledge and connections, making them highly effective lobbyists.

Lawmakers who exited their congressional offices in January landed in a variety of careers — but as usual, a good share of them spun through the revolving door to lobbying shops. While they technically couldn't lobby their former colleagues immediately (though the same wasn't true of the executive branch), they could keep themselves busy during their cooling-off periods by advising clients and bearing titles like "strategic adviser."

Officials often take lucrative consulting positions providing strategic advice to corporations on navigating government regulations and policies.

How Does Lobbying Affect the Government?

Lobbying plays a significant role in shaping government policies and decisions, making it a crucial part of any public affairs strategy that hopes to move the needle in Congress or state legislatures.

While lobbying can be a legitimate means for citizens to voice their concerns, it also raises questions about its impact on the government's decision-making processes. In this blog, we will explore the dynamics of lobbying and both its positive and negative effects on how the government functions.

Officials join corporate boards with lucrative compensation and influence.

How much do board members get paid?

The compensation for board members and non-executive directors varies greatly. A lot depends on the sector, the weight and experience of the board member, the country where the board sits, and the organisation’s earnings – the bigger the business, the bigger the pay for directors.

Spencer Stuart suggests non-executive director fees in the UK range from an average of £43,200 in a FTSE SmallCap up to approximately £83,000 at the top end of the FTSE 100. Recruitment firm Board Appointments suggests the average retainer for a non-executive director in the UK is £70,000.

A part-time chairperson in the UK could expect to be paid £400,000 in 2019. Chairs of FTSE 100 companies made as much as £425,000.

The exchange of information and influence between the public and private sectors leads to conflicts of interest.

Former defense officials often join defense contracting firms, leveraging their knowledge of government procurement processes. This practice creates incentives to support increased military spending.

Lawmakers who exited their congressional offices in January landed in a variety of careers — but as usual, a good share of them spun through the revolving door to lobbying shops. While they technically couldn't lobby their former colleagues immediately (though the same wasn't true of the executive branch), they could keep themselves busy during their cooling-off periods by advising clients and bearing titles like "strategic adviser."

Former high-ranking military officers take positions in companies like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Raytheon.

“Revolving door” lobbyists help defense contractors get off to “strong” start in 2023

The defense sector hired dozens of former armed services committee and Department of Defense personnel last year, with more swinging through the so-called “revolving door” to lobby on behalf of defense sector clients for the first time in the first quarter of 2023, a new OpenSecrets analysis of federal lobbying disclosures found. 

At least 672 former government officials, military officers and members of Congress worked as lobbyists, board members or executives for the top 20 defense companies in 2022, according to a new report released by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) last Wednesday. Warren’s staff utilized OpenSecrets’ revolving door database as well as corporate websites, lobbying disclosures and U.S. Senate confirmation lists to identify these individuals.

“This practice is widespread in the defense industry, giving, at minimum, the appearance of corruption and favoritism, and potentially increasing the chance that DoD spending results in ineffective weapons and programs, bad deals, and waste of taxpayer dollars,” the report says.

This is the real business of government within a capitalist system. Comparing feudalism, merchantilism, imperialism, and colonialism is like comparing different dresses painted on Russian Dolls.

Former regulators take positions with energy companies, influencing policies related to fossil fuels, renewable energy, and environmental regulations.

Lockheed adds Dunford, former top US military officer, to board

WASHINGTON — Lockheed Martin has added Joe Dunford, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to its board of directors, the company announced Friday.

Dunford, the Marine general who retired from service at the end of September 2019, will become the 12th member of Lockheed’s board on Feb. 10. He will serve on the board’s Classified Business and Security Committee as well as its Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.

Former EPA administrators will work for energy companies or lobby firms that represent energy companies.

‘A revolving door’: Former Wisconsin utility regulator was recently hired by transmission utility

A former Wisconsin utility regulator now works for a company she was once charged with regulating.

It’s the latest in what utility watchdogs describe as a “revolving door,” both in Wisconsin and across the country, of regulators working for utilities after their time in public service.

Ellen Nowak was appointed to the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, or PSC, by Gov. Scott Walker in 2011, and reappointed to the commission in 2018. Last week, American Transmission Co. — a multi-state, transmission-only utility — announced that Nowak had joined the company as the vice president of regulatory and government affairs.

It all amounts to influence peddling.

Former Treasury officials and financial regulators join investment banks or financial institutions, raising concerns about regulatory capture.

Ex-EPA chief Pruitt registers as energy lobbyist in Indiana

WASHINGTON (AP) — Scott Pruitt, the scandal-ridden former head of the Environmental Protection Agency, registered as an energy lobbyist in Indiana on Thursday as fossil-fuels interests there are fighting to block the proposed closure of several coal-fired power plants.

A lobbying disclosure report for Pruitt provides little insight into precisely what he’s doing in Indiana, but several clues point to work on behalf of the coal industry. The disclosure report lists an address for Pruitt in an office tower in his hometown of Tulsa, Oklahoma, and says he is a self-employed consultant who will be lobbying on issues involving energy and natural resources.

Pruitt’s sole client is listed as RailPoint Solutions LLC, a Delaware corporation created in January that has no listed street address or website. But Pruitt’s form lists the name Heather Tryon as the company’s manager. That’s also the name of the chief financial officer of Terre Haute-based Sunrise Coal, which operates four coal mines in the state.

Former treasury secretaries or federal reserve members take positions in large financial institutions. Former health and human services officials and FDA administrators take positions with pharmaceutical companies, influencing drug approval processes and pricing.

Private sector positions offer significantly higher salaries and benefits than public service. Former officials can maintain influence over policy decisions that affect their new employers. The potential for conflicts of interest arises when officials make decisions that benefit their future employers.

Ordinary people slave away to support lucrative positions for elite Players within the system.

The Revolving Door for Financial Regulators

The revolving door erodes public trust in government, as it creates the perception that officials serve private interests rather than the public good.

Block the revolving door!

(24 November 2011) Alliance for Lobbying Transparency and Ethics Regulation (ALTER-EU) of which EPSU is a member is drawing attention to the high level Commission officials that join the lobby industry, resulting in abuses of power, according to a new report published today. The report urges greater transparency and tough new rules to stop public employees moving through the “revolving door” into private sector lobby roles, often without any cooling-off period or restrictions being imposed. ALTER-EU says this allows lobby firms to gain insider know-how and access to key contacts on behalf of their business clients or employers, providing easy routes to influence policy making. And the report warns that some officials may be taking decisions which benefit potential future employers at the expense of the public interest, or even abusing their position to secure lucrative deals in the private sector while still in office. ALTER-EU’s report outlines the cases of 15 officials who have moved into influential lobbying roles, without adequate checks being put in place.

Regulatory agencies become dominated by the industries they are supposed to regulate. This has always been the case. One can find dozens of books, reports, academic articles, and journalistic investigative reports on the subject. Throw a dart at a historical timeline and dive in.

Administration as usual? Revolving doors and the quiet regulation of political ethics

Ethics policies have emerged as a key aspect of the European (post)-Regulatory State. Such policies are designed to create ‘noise’, allowing media and public discourse to mobilise around the ethical lapses of those in power. The regulation of revolving doors (RD), i.e., movements in and out of government positions, is an ethics policy. However, unlike other ethics policies, RD regulation does not make transparency its central feature but constitutes what we call ‘quiet regulation’. Drawing on qualitative document analysis and interviews, we study the quiet regulation of RD for EU Commissioners. We demonstrate that quiet regulation has a dual nature: its public façade relies on independence, judicialised procedures and transparency. Conversely, its day-to-day operation is characterised by self-regulation, soft law and informality. In this way, RD regulation achieves two contradictory aims: functioning as a legitimate ethics policy while simultaneously avoiding the moral outcry that often surrounds ethics policies and the politicisation of RD, thereby normalising RD as ‘administration as usual’.

Regulatory capture

Basic Obligation of Public Service

Thomas Jefferson enunciated the basic principle of public service: “When a man assumes a public trust, he should consider himself as public property.” This sentiment has been expressed by numerous others, over time becoming the familiar principle “Public service is a public trust.” To ensure public confidence in the integrity of the Federal Government, Executive Order 12674 (as amended) forms the  framework  for  the  ethical  behavior  required  and expected  of  all  Federal  employees.  As  a  condition  of public service, you are expected to adhere to these fundamental principles of ethical behavior:

Current trends and major development in ethics, lobbying and revolving doors practices

Excerpt from Emily O’Reilly’s keynote address to Georgetown University — Washington, 27 September 2022

Politicians don’t work for people, they work for corporations.

---

The structure of capitalist market economies guarantees all of these contradictions and conflicts. No legislation or government policies can stop it; only a radically new socioeconomic system can end this insane omnicidal and ecocidal system. Anything resembling actual democratic governance can not exist within neoliberal Austrian School economic structures.

If we don’t find a new way of managing our affairs, civilization will end and its death will make the Irish Potato Famine look like a picnic.

In the 1800s, as Britain became the world's most powerful industrial empire, Ireland starved. The Great Famine fractured long-held assumptions about political economy and 'civilisation', threatening disorder in Britain. Ireland was a laboratory for empire, shaping British ideas about colonisation, population, ecology and work.

In Rot, Padraic Scanlan reinterprets the history of this time and the result is a revelatory account of Ireland's Great Famine. In the first half of the nineteenth century, nowhere in Europe - or the world - did the working poor depend as completely on potatoes as in Ireland. To many British observers, potatoes were evidence of a lack of modernity among the Irish. However, Ireland before the famine more closely resembled capitalism's future than its past. While poverty before and during the Great Famine was often blamed on Irish backwardness, it did in fact stem from the British Empire's embrace of modern capitalism.

Uncovering the disaster's roots in Britain's deep imperial faith in markets and capitalism, Rot reshapes our understanding of the Famine and its tragic legacy.

Do Nothing for Forest Frustration

I appreciate the work you do. However, please allow me to express my frustration. Sadly, the words expressed at the podium, despite being inspirational at times, have a hollow, sucking sound. I have read a library of books (including books by the speakers on stage) about our predicament, solutions to our problems, and better ways to conduct our business. We have more experts on what's wrong with our world than ever before and plenty of people with solutions.

The American dream has always been a fantasy despite the wealth the USA has generated since its founding, wealth created through violence, exploitation, and ecocide. All colonial and imperial powers throughout history have contributed to the destruction of life.

What kind of creators are we?

Overshoot, ecocide, omnicide, neocolonialism, imperialism, inequality, global heating, etc., are results of our species's unique abilities to use tools to exploit Nature and compete with each other for power, status, and control of resources. Rehashing the same old orations will not inspire domesticated and pacified people addicted to technology, entertainment, and supernormal stimuli who are energy blind, materials blind, Great Nature blind, stocks and flows blind, systems thinking blind, besieged by mysterious egregores, meme machines, false narratives, constant flows of propaganda, marketing, public relations messaging, and lies to sacrifice an hour a week for vague notions of movements that consistently fail.

The wealthy, powerful elite whose dark tetrad psychology and addiction to the Seven Deadly Sins designed, structured, and legally coded the system—its capital. The powerful elite own and operate our socioeconomic and political systems and regularly kill to maintain and keep them. This has been so since the dawn of civilization. The reactionaries know this; they understand power.

Concerned citizens audit "the conversations," read books, and get on with their business, or struggle to survive another day, but that is not enough.

If more than one percent of U.S. Americans want to build another socioeconomic system fit for posterity, they will have to fight and die for it. If we are too weak to act, circumstances, the most efficacious dictator will determine what's next.

Global fossil-fueled financialized modern industrial capitalism is a self-terminating system; it will collapse, destroying billions of lives while committing ecocide until its inevitable destructive end. Only exercising our will allows us to prepare for collapse and decide what's next.

You can not reform an omnicidal pathological system; it must be destroyed and replaced with something else, something very few people can even imagine, much less adopt. We are true believers. It's easier to believe than to learn; learning requires hard, disciplined work and sacrifice.

We are not in control of the narrative; even if we were, few would do the work necessary to create a new way of managing things. Talk is cheap, and billionaires control the narrative. Chris Hedges knows that believers cling to wilful ignorance to fit in and haven't the wherewithal or energy to entertain alternatives. People are trained to fear and hate alternative ways of living. Look at the past two hundred years of history; haphazard and even organized resistance is constantly and violently put down, and despite our victories, things are more volatile, dangerous, and destructive than ever. Contemplate our ongoing polycrisis; it does not indicate progress, enlightenment, or a reflection of the better angels of our Nature. We can't reform the system.

Can we convince people to use less energy and consume less? Can we talk about degrowth? Can we discuss alternative kinds of growth in the mainstream media? Noam Chomsky encouraged us for decades by pointing out our relative freedoms and good fortune. To what end? Are we better off?

Science, engineering, and technology have progressed, but what of our hearts and minds? What happened to our imagination? Must everything be commodified?

The Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee? Read "On the Abolition of All Political Parties" by Simone Weil.

I want to know what we replace global rapacious capitalism with. Would it be "A Simpler Way," a la Ted Trainer? How do we maintain a healthy ecosystem at our current consumption and energy use scale? We can't. We haven't even begun to address energy use. Who knows what Jevons Paradox is? Only a handful of us care. Who reads Vaclav Smel or pays attention to Howard T. Odum, William R. Catton Jr., Charles A. S. Hall, or Bill Rees? What became of The Club of Rome's efforts?

"Posterity doesn't vote, and doesn't exert much influence in the marketplace. So the living go on stealing from their descendants." —William R. Catton Jr.

How many generations will it take for people under more ideal circumstances to evolve into wise creatures capable of learning from and respecting Great Nature? Nature has all the answers.

So, how shall we manage things? How shall we live and be? Can we convince people that epistemic rigor, critical thinking, wisdom, and love are more important than diversions, competition, and unquestioning belief? What way of life will replace markets, capital on capital returns, usury, and rent-seeking?

People who are accustomed to consuming fantasy have little faith in Reality. A reality-based, science-based, evidence-based, nature-centric culture founded on moral principles, life-based ethics, compassion, and love of life; what organization is creating that, and are its supporters willing to die for it? Life begets life. Life depends on complex living systems. Who understands thermodynamics? Even if billions of us understood, are we willing to sacrifice for posterity?

We are more comfortable listening to speeches and discussing what's wrong with the world. Modern Techno-Industrial Capitalism has the capacity to kill everything. Look up "TESCREAL." The Elites don't respect Nature or Life; they'd, instead, turn us into machines or send us to heaven.

Show us how we should live that's fit for life and posterity and how we can sell the project to billions of people worldwide. Show us how to organize and fight. Be honest about what we must sacrifice for a radically different way of managing our affairs.

Skilled folks,

Colonize U.S.,

Don't criticize U.S.

We Can No Longer Afford The Cost Of War—Notes

The Urgency of Understanding the Economic Costs of Modern War

We have thousands of books and studies examining humanity's challenges in the 21st Century. You can visit my book recommendation page for a short list. There are thousands of books and studies focused on war and warfare.

We can’t afford War anymore. Unfortunately, the USA is a belligerent beast. It would have been better if, fifteen years ago, the USA had focused on diplomacy and building relationships with countries rather than nation-building and forcing countries to follow its rules. “Full Spectrum Dominance” is a terrible strategy in the Twenty-First Century.

BACKGROUND

Please read about the history of the region, Russia and Ukraine. (more books for context building)

"The Gates of Europe: A History of Ukraine" by Serhii Plokhy

“Russia and Ukraine” by Myroslav Shkandrij

“The Russian Empire” by Dominic Lieven

"Ukraine: A History" by Orest Subtelny

"Red Famine: Stalin's War on Ukraine" by Anne Applebaum

"Russia: A Short History" by Ronald Hingley

"The Russian Revolution" by Richard Pipes

"The History of Russia" by Orlando Figes

"Midnight in Chernobyl: The Untold Story of the World's Greatest Nuclear Disaster" by Adam Higginbotham

"The Balkans: A Short History" by Mark Mazower

"Central Europe: Enemies, Neighbors, and Friends" by Lonnie Johnson

“Orientalism” by Edward Said: A seminal work that critiques the way the West has constructed a romanticized and often demeaning view of the East. It explores how this "Orientalist" perspective has been used to justify colonialism and imperialism.

“Culture and Imperialism” by Edward Said: A follow-up to "Orientalism" that examines how literature and culture have been used to support or resist imperial power. It analyzes works by writers from both colonizing and colonized societies.

“The Wretched of the Earth” by Frantz Fanon: A powerful critique of colonialism and its psychological effects on both the colonized and the colonizer. It explores the violence and dehumanization inherent in colonial systems.

“Postcolonial Theory: A Very Short Introduction” by Robert J.C. Young: A concise overview of the key concepts and debates in postcolonial theory. It explores the legacy of colonialism and its ongoing impact on identity, culture, and power relations.

"The Russian Complex: The Ideas of Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, and Solzhenitsyn" by Vladimir Golstein

From Reality With Love

PATRICK LAWRENCE: Trump 2.0 Crosses the Atlantic

Russia Out of the Cold

Trump seems to have done a lot of thinking during his four years in the political wilderness. A week of exceptional events, each adding more surprise to those preceding it, indicates that Trump and those around him now propose to transcend altogether the binaries Washington has enforced since it assumed its position of global primacy in the late 1940s. Russia is to come in from the cold and the Atlantic is to grow wider. 

In this context, extricating the U.S. from the Ukraine quagmire is more than a footnote but nothing like the main attraction.  Assuming all goes to Trump’s apparent plan — and we must make this assumption with unsparing caution — the center-stage attraction is discarding what has passed for a world order since the 1945 victories. 

To be noted immediately: Sending the ancien régime into the history texts is not the same as constructing a new order to replace it. At this early moment it is not clear whether Trump and his people have an idea for one; yet more doubtful is whether he or any of his people would be up to a project of this world-historical magnitude. 

Whatever the future may hold, and seldom does it present such promise and peril as now, Trump and his new cabinet appointees on the national-security side set a lot of wheels in motion last week. A little oddly — a coordination problem here? — Pete Hegseth, the Fox News presenter turned defense secretary, got them rolling last Wednesday morning, some hours before Trump announced his instantly famous telephone conversation with Vladimir Putin. 

At a speech in Brussels before NATO defense ministers and various senior Ukrainian officials, Hegseth followed Trump’s habit of bringing several longstanding unsayables into the sphere of the sayable. Retaking land Russian forces now occupy — Crimea, of course, but also sections of eastern Ukraine now formally incorporated into the Russian Federation — is “an unrealistic objective… an illusory goal.” 

In addition — a couple of other big ones — Hegseth said the U.S. will not support Ukraine’s desire to join NATO; neither will Article 5 of the NATO charter — an attack on one member is an attack on all — cover the troops of any NATO member dispatched to Ukraine in any capacity.

By the time he said these things, Hegseth had already surrendered U.S. leadership of what is called the Contact Group, a Biden-era creation comprised of 50–plus nations that manages weapons shipments and humanitarian aid — whatever that may mean at this point — to Kiev. 

Could the defense secretary’s message — the opener for Trump’s very eventful week — be any clearer? The U.S. is stepping back from Ukraine, Biden’s proxy war, and any thought of a NATO role in it. The Europeans are on their own as they contemplate their course in these new circumstances.

Lucky Breaks Paperback – by Yevgenia Belorusets March 1, 2022

"Nothing Is True and Everything Is Possible: The Surreal Heart of the New Russia" by Peter Pomerantsev

"Why Do They Hate Russia?" by Vladimir Golstein

Russia and the Western Far Right (Routledge Studies in Fascism and the Far Right) by Anton Shekhovtsov

How Russia Went from Ally to Adversary

The Catastrophic Results of Peace (I highly recommend this article. Are we happy with the current “global order.” If so, why are we experiencing so many global problems? We need a new path to discovering what’s next.)

War with Russia?: From Putin & Ukraine to Trump & Russiagate by Stephen F. Cohen

Testing Assumptions About US Foreign Policy in 2025

There are major questions facing U.S. foreign policy — and the second Trump administration — in 2025. Efforts to resolve conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, relations with China, and global economic challenges will all test the United States and its policymakers. Members of the Reimagining U.S. Grand Strategy team examined assumptions that they believe are central to U.S. foreign policy and will likely be tested in 2025. Each author identifies and unpacks a key piece of conventional wisdom, and then assesses whether that prevailing view holds up, or whether a fresh approach is needed in light of new realities.

Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, February 16, 2025

Beyond Ukraine: Russia’s Foreign Policy Challenges in 2025

Putin’s actions on Trump’s inauguration day highlighted Russia's growing security and political concerns, from the Middle East to China and Belarus, with implications for Europe’s future.

President Donald Trump’s inauguration and promises to end the Ukraine war have naturally trained the spotlight back on the three-year conflict. But even if a negotiated end to the war is sought, Russia has several other burgeoning security and political issues that a new US administration may have to contend with. Putin’s behaviour and key events around Trump’s inauguration threw these considerations into sharp relief. 

Putin’s first two acts on the day Trump was sworn in were to have a call with President Xi, and then hold a meeting with his own Security Council. Putin and Xi’s call was more than just symbolic – they went into detail about some of the cargo transport issues between Russia and China, as well as how to engage with the new US administration. For all Putin’s attempts to downplay the importance of Trump’s inauguration, his hawkish Security Council prioritised discussing the potential impact of the new US administration on Middle Eastern stability. And all of this took place against the backdrop of tightly controlled presidential elections in Belarus, where Moscow loyalist and long-serving strongman Alexander Lukashenko extended his presidency by another five years. 

All these discussions and events highlighted three important current areas of foreign policy concern for Russia: its ability to project military and political power in the Middle East since Assad’s removal; its trade relationship with China, upon which its exports depend; and its relationship with client state Belarus, a key player in regional security and in Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine.

The Czar’s Gambit (Highly recommended. For further understanding of Russia’s vision for a Mulit-Polar World I also recommend reading Alexander Dugin. If you don’t want to know what they think, shut up and go fishing.)

What is Russia’s vision for the international order, and does it possess the capabilities to realize it? How long can Russia still incur the staggering costs of its war against Ukraine and other geopolitical endeavors? And how do recent political developments abroad, from the return of US President Donald Trump to the sudden fall of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, impact Russia?

Ukraine, Multipolarity and the Crisis of Grand Strategies

ABSTRACT

Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine has unleashed the largest and most lethal war on the European continent since 1945. Vladimir Putin and the Russian government bear most of the responsibility for the invasion and its terrible humanitarian consequences. However, explanations for the war deriving from Russian domestic political dynamics or Vladimir Putin’s imperial nostalgia do not provide a comprehensive understanding of the crisis that led to war. Situating the crisis and ensuing invasion within the broader historical context of post-Cold War relations, we argue that the war in Ukraine has two main sources. The first is the longstanding Anglo-American grand strategy of NATO consolidation as a vehicle for political and economic domination in Europe. The second is the grand strategy of Russia. Unable to accommodate itself on an equal basis in the new U.S.-led post-Cold War global capitalist order, Russia gradually adopted a geopolitical and nationalistic agenda of confrontation in response to NATO’s seemingly inexorable eastward advance, its increasing participation in ‘out of area’ activities, and the United States’ illegal invasions of Serbia, Iraq, and Libya. The collision of these grand strategies has triggered simultaneously a struggle for Ukrainian sovereignty and independence and a U.S.-Russia proxy war.

Both sides play the Nazi card.

Much Azov about nothing: How the ‘Ukrainian neo-Nazis’ canard fooled the world

The Azov Regiment is frequently invoked to conjure what Russian-Israeli historian Vyacheslav Likhachev calls the “myth [of] Ukrainian fascism”, and many Western press sources in 2022 continue to treat the association between “Azov Regiment/Battalion” and “Neo-Nazi” as axiomatic, with some even attempting to draw unsubstantiated links between Azov and white supremacist terrorists in the West.

The “What about Azov Nazis?” canard has become a ubiquitous tu quoque that Russia deploys to problematise Western support for Ukraine, and distract from its own record of atrocities. Literally meaning “you also” in Latin, this logical fallacy is more informally known as “whataboutism”, and has been deployed in Russian propaganda for decades. In cruder terms, one might recall the playground retort, “I know you are, but what am I?”

Irregular Militias and Radical Nationalism in Post-Euromaydan Ukraine: The Prehistory and Emergence of the “Azov” Battalion in 2014

ABSTRACT

During and after Ukraine’s celebrated Euromaydan (literally: European Square) Revolution of 2013–2014, a whole number of novel Ukrainian political and societal phenomena emerged. One of the most intriguing was the relatively spontaneous and government-supported emergence of volunteer armed units from late spring 2014 onwards, in connection with the start of Russia’s covert paramilitary intervention in Eastern Ukraine. Among the most widely noted of these initially irregular detachments was the “Azov” battalion or regiment, named after the Azov Sea, created, in May 2014, by an obscure lunatic fringe group of racist activists. This paper briefly sketches the origins of Azov, biographies of some of its founders, and particulars of its creation, without touching upon such issues as Azov’s military performance, later integration into the National Guard under Ukraine’s Ministry of Interior, and political development after 2014.

Moving ‘red lines’: The Russian–Ukrainian war and the pragmatic (mis-)use of international law

ABSTRACT

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has widely been seen as a failure of the international legal order, which could neither stop Russia from launching a war of aggression, nor prevent the perpetration of international crimes. In such a reading, great power politics have (once again) trumped international law. We argue instead that international law plays a crucial part in the conflict by providing a semantic infrastructure, which the opposing parties use to justify their actions, try to re-draw limits of permissible action and negotiate changing ‘red lines’ with the enemy. Drawing on the notion of lawfare, we show how the pragmatic (mis-)use of international law flexibly delineates boundaries and stabilizes expectations between adversaries even as they are contested in the current war. We focus on claims about self-determination and self-defence to justify the use of force; categorizations of combatants; and weapons transfers and the status of third states. That international law can be violated or reinterpreted to breaking point does not make it irrelevant. To the contrary, it recalls its important role as a language of conflict and compromise, beyond strictly legalist as well as dismissive realist views.

Chapter 7: Far-Right Extremist Movements Fighting in Ukraine: Implications for Post-Conflict Europe

ABSTRACT (The list of references is robust.)

The participation of far-right groups in the war in Ukraine has been highly publicized and raises questions about how those groups will evolve after the war, especially vis-à-vis the spread of their ideology. Reviewing their ideological and political direction in the post-conflict environment is the aim of this study. The authors investigate the Ukrainian far-right phenomenon: what kind of movements there are, where they come from, and what their role in the conflict has been. This is followed by an assessment of what threat this poses in the broader strategic context of the war and after it will be over. The analysis brings forward two key points. First, groups like these are a product and exponent of political warfare by state actors, featuring as tools for covert action. Second, by incorporating such militias into the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the Ukrainian government makes their radical attitudes diminish. Nationalism, even in the extreme spectrum of political ideology, could be a product of the war. Meeting the criteria for integration into the European Union is an important factor stimulating rule-based order and deradicalization processes. Although there are some potentially worrying implications stemming from the prestige gained by their combat record, the far-right will therefore likely continue to remain a fringe phenomenon with small political impact.

War or Peace in Ukraine: US Moves and European Choices

Challenges of Deterrence in a Multipolar World

One of Joe Biden’s last consequential decisions as president was allowing Ukraine to strike deep within Russia using advanced American missile technology. This action marked a significant step up the escalation ladder. Vladimir Putin has warned that such actions could place Russia on a war footing with NATO. Biden’s risky decision reflects a broader problem of deterrence failure and the absence of military restraint in an increasingly multipolar world. Complicating matters further, Russia’s response—such as deploying advanced missile systems and tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus—signals a significant escalation using more advanced technologies that upend traditional deterrence frameworks.

Challenges of Deterrence in a Multipolar World

Deterrence has long been a cornerstone of international security. Yet in today’s multipolar world, where power is decentralized and alliances are fluid, maintaining effective deterrence is increasingly challenging. This does not mean that multipolarity and deterrence are inherently incompatible. Instead, new deterrence strategies are needed to address the complexities of a gray-zone conflict environment characterized by incrementalism, asymmetrical power dynamics, attribution problems, and rapid technological change.

The foundational works of political scientists like John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt have shown how multipolar systems reinforce power asymmetries and rapid shifts in alliances. These dynamics also create uncertainty about adversaries’ resolve, complicating risk assessment. Stronger states, less deterred by weaker adversaries, may become emboldened to act aggressively. Moreover, technological advancements such as near-zero-miss precision-guided weapons—including Russia’s hypersonic missiles—make escalatory strategies more tempting. These technologies blur the line between conventional and nuclear strategic doctrines, while emerging capabilities like electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons and drones further complicate military strategy and operations.

Alliance Entrapment and Strategic Discord

In today’s geopolitical landscape, characterized by a multi-nodal world of regional theaters, fundamental shifts in the balance of power rarely result from outright military conquest. While major powers still rely on their conventional forces, they often fail to achieve broader geopolitical goals through the use of force alone. U.S. interventions in Afghanistan (2001), Iraq (2003), and Libya (2011), as well as Russia’s intervention in Ukraine (2022), highlight this trend.

The divergent priorities and different values among NATO members, EU states, and the United States have complicated efforts to confront Russia. This discord has shifted collective action from deterrence to “compellence” and ultimately to a proxy war. The lack of consensus on end goals and prioritized actions within the Western alliance underscores this challenge. For instance, while the United States expects other NATO members to align with its strategy of opposing Russia, countries like Poland and the UK adopt far more hawkish stances, even courting direct war with Russia. Conversely, Turkey and Hungary pursue multi-aligned strategies to avoid unnecessary confrontation with Moscow. These diverging approaches and a general disregard for the strategic autonomy of member states have enabled more bellicose NATO members to draw reluctant states into a prolonged proxy war with no clear diplomatic resolution — a classic case of alliance entrapment.

---

How are any of us helping Ukraine win the War? Where will the next War be? Don’t you think we might want to spend some of our diminishing fossil fuels developing a new energy system rather than on War? But, but, but, PUTLER!

Understanding the cause of the Ukraine war and understanding what motivated Russia to invade Ukraine is not straightforward, and you won’t learn anything absorbing propaganda. Even understanding the motives behind the propaganda is complex. To fully appreciate how complex it is, you’d need a good background in sociology, psychology, political philosophy, contemporary geopolitics, history, anthropology, and many other domains concerning the nature of our species. If you don’t have this kind of deep contextual understanding, be cautious about the types of opinions and reactions you have concerning these horrific events. We are too quickly led into the quagmire and destruction of War.

I won’t go into it here, but if you look at history honestly over the past two thousand years, you’ll see that the systems in “The West” have produced unprecedented violence and numerous genocides. There have been nasty invasions; the Mongolian hoards and the Arab conquests come to mind. Still, many of the invasions didn’t come close to the genocidal madness of conflicts ignited by people of European descent. This itself is a complex subject that will inspire passionate debate, but the mayhem and violence perpetrated by Europeans, for whatever reasons, have been genuinely terrible and destructive. I can’t help but think of The Belgian Congo.

Why do the USA, UK and Europe so hate Russia? How it is that Western antipathy, once thought due to anti-Communism, could be so easily revived over a crisis in distant Ukraine, against a Russia no longer communist? Why does the West accuse Russia of empire-building, when 15 states once part of the defunct Warsaw Pact are now part of NATO, and NATO troops now flank the Russian border? These are only some of the questions Creating Russophobia iinvestigates. Mettan begins by showing the strength of the prejudice against Russia through the Western response to a series of the Uberlingen mid-air collision, the Beslan hostage- taking, the Ossetia War, the Sochi Olympics and the crisis in Ukraine. He then delves into the historical, religious, ideological and geopolitical roots of the detestation of Russia in various European nations over thirteen centuries since Charlemagne competed with Byzantium for the title of heir to the Roman Empire. Mettan examines the geopolitical machinations expressed in those times through the medium of religion, leading to the great Christian schism between Germanic Rome and Byzantium and the European Crusades against Russian Orthodoxy. This history of taboos, prejudices and propaganda directed against the Orthodox Church provides the mythic foundations that shaped Western disdain for contemporary Russia. From the religious and imperial rivalry created by Charlemagne and the papacy to the genesis of French, English, German and then American Russophobia, the West has been engaged in more or less violent hostilities against Russia for a thousand years. Contemporary Russophobia is manufactured through the construction of an anti-Russian discourse in the media and the diplomatic world, and the fabrication and demonization of The Bad Guy, now personified by Vladimir Putin. Both feature in the meta-narrative, the mythical framework of the ferocious Russian bear ruled with a rod of iron by a vicious president. A synthetic reading of all these elements is presented in the light of recent events and in particular of the Ukrainian crisis and the recent American elections, showing how all the resources of the West’s soft power have been mobilized to impose the tale of bad Russia dreaming of global conquest. “By hating Russia, one hurts oneself. Swiss journalist Guy Mettan pieces together the reasons of detestation of the Kremlin and of a rhetoric that goes back to Napoleonic times despite the long list of aggressions perpetrated in the meantime by the West. And he explains why pushing Moscow toward Asia is a very serious error.” —Panorama, Italy “Like Saddam Hussein’s mythical weapons of massive destruction in 2003, Peter the Great’s fake will has been used to justify the aggressions and invasions that the Europeans, and now the Americans, still carry out against Russia.” —Libération, France

Here is a tricky question often debated. What did the United States achieve in the Wars listed below, and was it worth it? War has been a part of the human experience since our species began living in large groups. Some wars have been necessary to achieve one side’s desired objectives, but others arguably have not. Did the United States crash the Soviet Union, or did it crash itself? What did the communist-hating United States achieve in Vietnam, China, and South Korea? Has sabotaging Socialist movements in Central and South America served U.S. interests and made U.S. Americans wealthier, wiser, and healthier? Why do so many U.S. Americans feel they need to carry guns to feel safe and secure? Are people in the United States ever content with how things are going? Why is there so much demand in the USA for hard drugs? Are we taking care of our veterans? How’s “the end of history” going?

The USA is wealthy for many reasons, one of the most significant being geology. It’s also nice to have a big country with many resources flanked by two oceans, Canada and Mexico.

And how about global fossil-fueled modern industrial financialized capitalism (GE after Jack Welch) going? Is our obsession with GDP growth and consumerism sustainable on a finite planet? Are you an accelerationist with maniacal faith in science, engineering, and technology?

In 1981, Jack Welch took over General Electric and quickly rose to fame as the first celebrity CEO. He golfed with presidents, mingled with movie stars, and was idolized for growing GE into the most valuable company in the world. But Welch’s achievements didn’t stem from some greater intelligence or business prowess. Rather, they were the result of a sustained effort to push GE’s stock price ever higher, often at the expense of workers, consumers, and innovation. In this captivating, revelatory book, David Gelles argues that Welch single-handedly ushered in a new, cutthroat era of American capitalism that continues to this day.

Gelles chronicles Welch’s campaign to vaporize hundreds of thousands of jobs in a bid to boost profits, eviscerating the country’s manufacturing base, and destabilizing the middle class. Welch’s obsession with downsizing—he eliminated 10% of employees every year—fundamentally altered GE and inspired generations of imitators who have employed his strategies at other companies around the globe. In his day, Welch was corporate America’s leading proponent of mergers and acquisitions, using deals to gobble up competitors and giving rise to an economy that is more concentrated and less dynamic. And Welch pioneered the dark arts of “financialization,” transforming GE from an admired industrial manufacturer into what was effectively an unregulated bank. The finance business was hugely profitable in the short term and helped Welch keep GE’s stock price ticking up. But ultimately, financialization undermined GE and dozens of other Fortune 500 companies.

Gelles shows how Welch’s celebrated emphasis on increasing shareholder value by any means necessary (layoffs, outsourcing, offshoring, acquisitions, and buybacks, to name but a few tactics) became the norm in American business generally. He demonstrates how that approach has led to the greatest socioeconomic inequality since the Great Depression and harmed many of the very companies that have embraced it. And he shows how a generation of Welch acolytes radically transformed companies like Boeing, Home Depot, Kraft Heinz, and more. Finally, Gelles chronicles the change that is now afoot in corporate America, highlighting companies and leaders who have abandoned Welchism and are proving that it is still possible to excel in the business world without destroying livelihoods, gutting communities, and spurning regulation.

It’s odd to me that MAGA folks who want to lynch Dr. Anthony Fauci also think it’s cool when President Trump invites the Billionaire Silicon Valley Tech Bros to the white house to tout their AI projects, saying that AI will help them develop vaccines to cure every kind of cancer. LOL. I thought those MAGA folks were anti-vaxxers. They discuss Fouci’s conflicts of interest and ignore Musk’s and Trump’s. Missing the contradictions is what we do in our culture. We believe what we want to believe because learning things is too gosh darn hard.

I’m sure most people my age are hoping for business as usual to continue for another twenty years so we can enjoy good returns on capital. Buy low, sell high, mind your timing, get your dividends and capital gains, and enjoy retirement. Every generation has challenges; the youngsters will sort things out. Don’t worry too much about the polycrisis or overshoot; that is just doomist crap.

What motivates various groups to make War is another complex topic. People do it to gain something, that’s for sure. Russian soldiers today are well compensated for risking their lives. Money motivates; let’s leave it at that. Booty, baby, booty. What’s really in it for the United States? Is the USA really all about freedom of speech, liberty, justice, and democracy? Examine its record. How are we doing now? If Biden was so good, how did we get Trump? If Obama was so good, how did we get Trump? If Bush was so good, how did we get Obama? Let’s leave the Deep State out of it.

So, how about the US Wars? Think about each and what the USA and its people got from them. Some got U.S. American folks a lot; some didn’t. Cui bono? I hope you have a good stock and bond portfolio; otherwise, you are missing out. Bigly! Are you a rentier? Are you strategizing for monopoly control of a big, growing market? If you aren’t zero to one, you’re a zero. Wars are fought for many reasons, and profit is the best reason. Is Lindsey Graham right about all the booty in Ukraine? Which is more profitable, selling a billion artillery shells or five F-35? How about a hundred thousand FPV drones?

---

18th Century

• American Revolutionary War (1775-1783): The War for independence from British rule.

• Northwest Indian War (1785-1795): Conflict with Native American tribes over control of the Northwest Territory.

• Quasi-War (1798-1800): An undeclared naval war with France.

19th Century:

• War of 1812 (1812-1815): War with Great Britain over maritime rights and territorial disputes.

• First Seminole War (1817-1818): Conflict with Seminole tribes in Florida.

• Mexican-American War (1846-1848): The War with Mexico resulted in the U.S. acquiring vast territories.

• American Civil War (1861-1865): A domestic conflict over slavery and states’ rights.

• Spanish-American War (1898): This War with Spain led to the U.S. acquiring territories like Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines.

20th Century:

• World War I (1917-1918): The U.S. entered the War after initially maintaining neutrality.

• World War II (1941-1945): The U.S. declared War on Japan after the attack on Pearl Harbor.

• Korean War (1950-1953): The U.S. led a UN coalition to defend South Korea from North Korean aggression.

• Vietnam War (1955-1975): A long and divisive conflict in Southeast Asia.

• Grenada Invasion (1983): A U.S.-led invasion to overthrow a communist regime.

• Panama Invasion (1989): U.S. forces invaded Panama to remove Manuel Noriega from power.

• Persian Gulf War (1990-1991): The U.S. led a coalition to liberate Kuwait from Iraqi occupation.

21st Century:

• War in Afghanistan (2001-2021): The U.S. led an invasion of Afghanistan following the 9/11 attacks.

• Iraq War (2003-2011): The U.S. invaded Iraq based on claims of weapons of mass destruction.

Other Interventions and Conflicts:

In addition to these major wars, the U.S. has engaged in numerous smaller-scale interventions and conflicts throughout its history, including:

• Indian Wars: The Indian Wars were a series of conflicts between Native American tribes throughout the 18th and 19th centuries.

• Interventions in Central America and the Caribbean: The U.S. has intervened in the affairs of several Latin American countries, often to protect its economic interests or support friendly regimes.

• Covert Operations: The U.S. has conducted numerous covert operations around the world, including regime change efforts and support for armed groups.

This list is not exhaustive. The level of U.S. involvement and the justifications for these conflicts have varied considerably. Historians and scholars often have different interpretations of these events. These conflicts were brutal, and many gave the U.S. taxpayer little to no value. Did U.S. Americans benefit from the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Africa, and Central America or from the many covert operations the U.S. has been involved in? Today, are U.S. Americans more secure, better off, and living in a more stable world than before these military operations? The United States is the most powerful country in the Universe, so it must be able to control things. Politics aside, what do you think?

And let’s remember that Western Civilization has also been party to genocides. If we look at the complex causes behind genocides, all great powers generally have some degree of responsibility for genocides no matter where they occur. Let’s leave that subject off the table for now.

Who Pays For War?

War financing is a complex issue that involves various methods employed by governments. Here’s a breakdown of the primary ways wars are funded:

War Finance Methods and Public Support for War

There are two primary ways countries finance their wars: through borrowing money or by taxing their citizens. Each of these finance options affects the economy differently, and presumably opinions on war will vary based on how the costs of war are reflected in the day-to-day lives of those paying for it. Although numerous studies have examined the way public support for war is influenced by the costs of war—through lives lost and injuries suffered by combatants, military families, and communities—fewer studies have examined the way public support for war is influenced by the way it is financed. In this article, the authors conduct a study to measure if the way countries finance war has a noticeable effect on the public’s support for that war.

Taxation

• Governments can raise taxes to fund military operations directly. This can involve increasing income taxes, sales taxes, or implementing special war taxes.

Using Taxation to Fund Military Spending

World military expenditure is on the rise. To fund their increases in military spending, options available to governments include tax, debt or revenue from natural resources. Each form of financing has its consequences, economic, political or social. 

Tax is the prevalent source of finance for governments. The use of tax, and the choice among different types of tax, can have an impact on income inequality and economic growth, among other things. However, no scholarly attention has yet been paid to the use of taxation to fund military spending. Using statistical analysis combined with in-depth case studies sheds light on this use of taxation. 

The findings—based on data for 100 countries between 1990 and 2020 and reinforced by detailed case studies on Burundi and Ukraine—show that countries in conflict tend to resort to indirect taxation to fund military expenditure. This is particularly true for low-income countries and for countries with an autocratic regime. This association can be consequential, considering the accumulated evidence on the impacts of indirect taxation on income inequality.

Political Trust and Support for a Tax Increase for Social Welfare: The Role of Perceived Tax Burden

Recent decades have seen a rapid increase in social welfare spending in South Korea. Along with rapid population aging and increased demands for social welfare programs, securing a sustainable level of taxation is becoming urgent. Thus, this study explores the factors associated with individuals’ support for a tax increase for social welfare expansion, focusing on political trust. This study also explores the role of perceived tax burden in moderating the linkage between political trust and individuals’ support for a tax increase for social welfare expansion. Using ordered probit and the 2019 National Survey of Tax and Benefit, this study found that political trust is positively associated with support for a tax increase for social welfare expansion. However, the positive effect of political trust decreases when individuals perceive their tax burdens as high. This study offers implications of the findings for policymakers such as simplifying tax codes and improving tax fairness for taxpayers.

• Taxation has the advantage of directly linking the cost of War to the public, potentially influencing public opinion and support for the conflict. However, raising taxes can be unpopular and may face political resistance.

The Motives to Borrow

Governments issue debt for good and bad reasons. While the good reasons—intertemporal tax-smoothing, fiscal stimulus, and asset management—can explain some of the increases in public debt in recent years, they cannot account for all of the observed changes. Bad reasons for borrowing are driven by political failures associated with intergenerational transfers, strategic manipulation, and common pool problems. These political failures are a major cause of overborrowing though budgetary institutions and fiscal rules can play a role in mitigating governments’ tendencies to overborrow. While it is difficult to establish a clear causal link from high public debt to low output growth, it is likely that some countries pay a price—in terms of lower growth and greater output volatility—for excessive debt accumulation.

Borrowing

• Governments often borrow money to finance wars by issuing bonds or other debt instruments. Individuals, institutions, or even foreign governments purchase these bonds.

What is the national debt?

Simply put, the national debt is similar to a person using a credit card for purchases and not paying off the full balance each month. The cost of purchases exceeding the amount paid off represents a deficit, while accumulated deficits over time represents a person’s overall debt.

• Borrowing allows governments to fund wars without immediately impacting taxpayers, but it creates a long-term financial burden as the debt must be repaid with interest. This can lead to increased national debt and potential economic consequences in the future.

Economic Costs

Through Fiscal Year 2022, the United States federal government has spent and obligated $8 trillion dollars on the post-9/11 wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and elsewhere. This figure includes: direct Congressional war appropriations; war-related increases to the Pentagon base budget; veterans care and disability; increases in the homeland security budget; interest payments on direct war borrowing; foreign assistance spending; and estimated future obligations for veterans’ care.

This total omits many other expenses, such as the macroeconomic costs to the US economy; the opportunity costs of not investing war dollars in alternative sectors; future interest on war borrowing; and local government and private war costs.

How is money created?

Cash, which includes banknotes and coins in circulation, together with bank reserves (i.e. commercial banks’ deposits with the central bank), make up the monetary base. This monetary base can only be expanded by central banks – in the case of the euro area, the European Central Bank (ECB) and national central banks –, either by printing banknotes and minting coins, or by creating bank reserves, which are an electronic form of money.

Central banks’ balance sheets are divided into assets and liabilities (see the ECB’s annual consolidated balance sheet). When it creates money, the Eurosystem increases the liability side of its balance sheet, which is balanced by an equal increase on the asset side. The Eurosystem may expand its balance sheet in response to a greater liquidity demand by commercial banks or to the ECB’s explicit desire to increase its balance sheet by a predetermined amount. In the latter case, the ECB can purchase financial assets, such as government or corporate bonds. It can also provide financing to banks through open market operations or the marginal lending facility. The financial assets obtained by the ECB will be recorded in the asset side of its balance sheet.

The ECB does not actually print new banknotes to purchase these assets, but rather creates money electronically in the form of bank reserves. For example, in refinancing operations with commercial banks, the central bank credits the amount granted to the participating banks directly into their current account with the central bank. Financial asset purchases also cause reserves to rise, either because the seller is a commercial bank or an agent that has a current account with a commercial bank. In the latter case, the central bank credits the amount of the sale to the commercial bank so that it can, in turn, pay the seller.

Money Creation (Printing Money)

• Central banks can create new money to finance government spending, including war efforts. This is often called “printing money” or “monetizing debt.”

• Creating new money can lead to inflation, which can erode the value of savings and have other adverse economic effects. However, it can be a quick way to finance immediate war needs.

How Does Money Supply Affect Inflation?

When the Federal Reserve increases the money supply, inflation may occur. More often than not, if the Fed is attempting to stimulate the economy by growing the money supply, prices will increase, the cost of goods will be unstable, and inflation will likely occur.

Combination of Methods

• In practice, governments often use a combination of these methods to finance wars. The specific mix depends on various factors, including the scale of the conflict, the country’s economic situation, and political considerations.

Who Pays for War?

Ultimately, the cost of War is borne by society, both during and after the conflict.

How High is the Cost of War Around the World in 2019?

Violence disrupts the economy, resulting in adverse and ongoing negative effects even after conflict subsides.

• Taxpayers directly pay for the War through taxes, even if borrowing is used, as the debt will eventually need to be repaid through future taxes.

• Citizens suffer the economic consequences of War, including inflation, job losses, and reduced investment in other areas like education and healthcare.

• Future Generations inherit the financial burden of war debt and may face long-term economic challenges due to the conflict’s impact.

Central Bank’s Role

Central banks play a crucial role in managing the financial aspects of War. They may:

• Facilitate government borrowing by purchasing bonds.

• Control inflation by adjusting interest rates and money supply.

• Act as a lender of last resort to stabilize the financial system during times of crisis.

Central Banking in Wartime: Lessons from Ukraine

In times of conflict, central banks play a pivotal role in ensuring the stability of the financial system. The experience of the National Bank of Ukraine (NBU) during the ongoing war with Russia offers insights into how central banks can navigate and manage economic crises during periods of hostility.

Important Considerations

• The economic impact of War can be significant and long-lasting, even for countries not directly involved in the fighting.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine could upend fiscal and monetary policy in advanced economies

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is an unmitigated catastrophe for global peace and particularly for peace in Europe. But the war also greatly compounds a number of preexisting adverse global economic trends, including rising inflation, extreme poverty, increasing food insecurity, deglobalization, and worsening environmental degradation. In addition, with an apparent end to the peace dividend that has long helped finance higher social expenditures, rebalancing fiscal priorities could prove quite challenging even in advanced economies. 

• The human cost of War, including loss of life, displacement, and trauma, is immeasurable.

• Understanding the financial mechanisms of War is crucial for analyzing its economic and social consequences.

Direct Economic Costs

Stocks and Flows

Calculating the Cost of Raw Materials: A Crucial Step in Understanding the Economic Burden of War

The Significance of Manufacturing Costs: A Major Contributor to the Economic Burden of War

• Machines of War: The cost of producing or acquiring military vehicles, aircraft, ships, drones, and other equipment.

• Uniforms and personal gear: The cost of providing soldiers with clothing, protective gear, and other necessary equipment. Who pays? Who makes (China)?

• Training and recruitment: The cost of recruiting, training, and equipping military personnel is always necessary and substantial.

• Salaries and benefits: The ongoing cost of paying soldiers and providing them with healthcare, housing, and other benefits is ongoing.

The Long-lasting Economic Shock of War

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is an unmitigated catastrophe for global peace and particularly for peace in Europe. But the war also greatly compounds several preexisting adverse global economic trends, including rising inflation, extreme poverty, increasing food insecurity, deglobalization, and worsening environmental degradation. In addition, with an apparent end to the peace dividend that has long helped finance higher social expenditures, rebalancing fiscal priorities could prove quite challenging even in advanced economies. 

• Energy inputs: The fuel cost (jet fuel, gasoline, diesel, coking coal) and other energy sources used for transportation, operations, and maintaining military bases. Where is this energy obtained, and how?

Indirect Economic Costs

• Loss of materials and infrastructure: The destruction of physical assets like factories, roads, bridges, and buildings due to military operations.

• Disruption of economic activity: The impact of War on trade, production, and investment, leading to economic decline and job losses.

People may hate Russians, but it’s Ukrainian territory and people who are suffering the brunt of this War. How many Ukrainians must die to kill “X” number of Russians, and under various circumstances, how long can the War be sustained? What will “The West” achieve if they “win” the War? These are not simple questions. Who pays the price?

Cost-benefit analysis of war

Purpose Among the many perspectives to analyze war, such as rational actors, organizational processes, governmental politics, and ethics, the perspective that incorporates costs and benefits into a systematic theoretical structure has hardly been analyzed. This paper aims to analyze the perspective of costs and benefits. Design/methodology/approach Three kinds of value are distinguished, i.e., human, economic, and influence—different actors (politicians, populations, stakeholders, etc). Assign different weights to the three kinds of values. Six gradually more complicated models are developed. The first subtracts losses from gains for the three types of value. Thereafter, the paper accounts for multiple periods, time discounting, attitude towards risk, multiple stakeholders, subcategories for the three kinds of value, sequential decision-making, and game theory. Findings The rich theoretical structure enables assessing costs and benefits more systematically and illuminatingly. The cost-benefit analysis is illustrated in the 2003-2011 Iraq War. The paper estimates the gained and lost value of human lives, economic value, and influence value, and shows how different weights impact the decision of whether to initiate war differently. Originality/value The paper provides scientists and policymakers with a theoretical structure to evaluate the costs and benefits of war, accounting for how different actors estimate weights, the future, risk, and various parameter values differently.

• Diversion of resources: The reallocation of resources from productive sectors of the economy to military spending, potentially hindering long-term growth.

• Financing costs: The cost of borrowing money to fund military operations, including interest payments and the burden on future generations.

• Rebuilding costs: The massive expenses associated with reconstructing war-torn nations, including infrastructure, housing, and public services.

Social Costs

War and international trade: Impact of trade disruption on international trade patterns and economic development

The disruptions of trade flows due to military conflicts leads to changes in economic structures of countries, to the subsequent changes in trade policies, and to the changes of established trade patterns with impact on position of countries in international trade system. This paper deals with three modern time’s conflicts: Napoleonic Wars, WWI and WWII. We argue that the changes resulting from the disruption of trade flows itself, leads to changes and shifts which are relatively permanent, independent on outcomes of the conflicts for individual countries, and do significantly affect regions which did not take part in the conflict.

•   Civilian deaths and injuries: The tragic loss of human lives and the long-term impact on families and communities.

•   Psychological trauma: The widespread mental health issues among soldiers and civilians, including PTSD, depression, and anxiety.

The Civilian Consequences of Conflict

In 1861, journalists, politicians, and their families set up picnics to watch the first land battle of the American Civil War. The onlookers expected the fighting to be quick, relatively bloodless, and—perhaps most importantly—safe to observe.

Those assumptions were inaccurate; the ensuing fighting sent soldiers and spectators scrambling.

But those assumptions were also not entirely unfounded. Many wars at the time were confined to the battlefield, and soldiers—not civilians—would end up composing most of the Civil War’s casualties.

However, wars in recent decades have become increasingly deadly for civilians. Civilian casualties outnumbered battlefield deaths during World War II, as combatants bombed major cities. Between 1990 and 2000, civilians accounted for 90 percent [PDF] of the world’s four million war-related deaths.

This resource explores the various threats facing civilians in today’s conflicts and their devastating consequences, which linger long after the final bomb has fallen.

• Displacement and refugees: The forced migration of people due to conflict, leading to social disruption and humanitarian crises.

The Effects of Trauma on Military Members and Their Families

Members of the armed forces can face stressors and traumatic events. These experiences can lead to trauma-related mental health disorders. Trauma can impact military members in different ways, including feelings of anger or isolation from family and friends.

Service members can develop PTSD or other trauma-related disorders, as well as depression, anxiety, panic, and grief. Family members may also have trauma responses when loved ones are deployed, or as the loved one readjusts to post-deployment life or experiences mental health challenges.

It is important to remember that resources are available to help all involved.

• Social instability: The potential for increased crime, violence, and social unrest in the aftermath of War.

The Economics of Conflict: A Costly Reality

The United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) reported that, by the end of 2020, there were 82.4 million forcibly displaced people worldwide, including refugees and internally displaced persons. The economic burden of managing these displaced populations is immense, impacting both host countries and the international community

Consequences of Exposure to War Violence: Discriminating Those with Heightened Risk for Aggression from Those with Heightened Risk for Post-Traumatic Stress Symptoms

Chronic exposure to ethnic–political and war violence has deleterious effects throughout childhood. Some youths exposed to war violence are more likely to act aggressively afterwards, and some are more likely to experience post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTS symptoms). However, the concordance of these two outcomes is not strong, and it is unclear what discriminates between those who are at more risk for one or the other. Drawing on prior research on desensitization and arousal and on recent social–cognitive theorizing about how high anxious arousal to violence can inhibit aggression, we hypothesized that those who characteristically experience higher anxious arousal when exposed to violence should display a lower increase in aggression after exposure to war violence but the same or a higher increase in PTS symptoms compared to those low in anxious arousal. To test this hypothesis, we analyzed data from our 4-wave longitudinal interview study of 1051 Israeli and Palestinian youths (ages at Wave 1 ranged from 8 to 14, and at Wave 4 from 15–22). We used the 4 waves of data on aggression, PTS symptoms, and exposure to war violence, along with additional data collected during Wave 4 on the anxious arousal participants experienced while watching a very violent film unrelated to war violence (N = 337). Longitudinal analyses revealed that exposure to war violence significantly increased both the risk of subsequent aggression and PTS symptoms. However, anxious arousal in response to seeing the unrelated violent film (measured from skin conductance and self-reports of anxiety) moderated the relation between exposure to war violence and subsequent psychological and behavioral outcomes. Those who experienced greater anxious arousal while watching the violent film showed a weaker positive relation between amount of exposure to war violence and aggression toward their peers but a stronger positive relation between amount of exposure to war violence and PTS symptoms.

Environmental Costs

• Ecocide: The intentional or unintentional destruction of ecosystems due to military activities, including the use of chemical weapons and the disruption of natural habitats.

The effects of modern war and military activities on biodiversity and the environment

War is an ever-present force that has the potential to alter the biosphere. Here, we review the potential consequences of modern war and military activities on ecosystem structure and function. We focus on the effects of direct conflict, nuclear weapons, military training, and military-produced contaminants. Overall, the aforementioned activities were found to have overwhelmingly negative effects on ecosystem structure and function. Dramatic habitat alteration, environmental pollution, and disturbance contributed to population declines and biodiversity losses arising from both acute and chronic effects in both terrestrial and aquatic systems. In some instances, even in the face of massive alterations to ecosystem structure, recovery was possible. Interestingly, military activity was beneficial under specific conditions, such as when an exclusion zone was generated that generally resulted in population increases and (or) population recovery; an observation noted in both terrestrial and aquatic systems. Additionally, military technological advances (e.g., GPS technology, drone technology, biotelemetry) have provided conservation scientists with novel tools for research. Because of the challenges associated with conducting research in areas with military activities (e.g., restricted access, hazardous conditions), information pertaining to military impacts on the environment are relatively scarce and are often studied years after military activities have ceased and with no knowledge of baseline conditions. Additional research would help to elucidate the environmental consequences (positive and negative) and thus reveal opportunities for mitigating negative effects while informing the development of optimal strategies for rehabilitation and recovery.

• Pollution: The release of harmful substances into the air, water, and soil due to explosions, fires, and the use of military equipment.

The Environmental Costs of Armed Conflicts

The costs of armed conflicts are not only high for humanity, but also for the environment. Undoubtedly armed conflicts cause losses of lives and human suffering that continues well beyond the end of armed hostilities. However, armed conflicts also come with a high price for the environment. Militaries around the world continue to be one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases, and armed conflicts continue to directly damage nature and biodiversity and leave behind hazardous waste and pollutants. Moreover, it is important to remember that environmental suffering directly contributes to human suffering. In addition, the indirect environmental costs of conflicts are immense, as rebuilding and restoring infrastructure and nature after armed conflicts often directs important resources away from addressing the existing climate crisis and other environmental issues. Therefore, for Supreme Audit Institutions, the environmental costs of armed conflicts bring a significant challenge to traditional environmental auditing.

• Resource depletion: The overuse of natural resources to support military operations, potentially leading to long-term environmental damage.

Opportunity Costs

• Lost investments in social programs: Funds diverted from education, healthcare, and other social programs to military spending can potentially hinder human development and well-being.

Military spending

There are many direct and indirect links between military expenditure, the arms trade, violent conflict, and the reduction of available resources for social and economic development. Governments that spend excessive financial, technological, and human resources on their militaries divert resources from economic, social, and environmental programmes. The military-industrial complex—composed of a state’s armed forces, the government, suppliers of weapons systems and services (corporations), and academic institutions that conduct research on weapon systems and designs—absorbs vast amounts of funding that could otherwise be spent on human security, including the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. Furthermore, funds reserved for development initiatives are increasingly spent on emergency relief and rehabilitation operations to clean up after violent conflict.

• Foregone economic growth: The potential for lost economic output and innovation due to the focus on military activities instead of productive investments.

War Diminishes Global Economic Growth

War is expensive and destructive, affecting long-term economic growth of a country through population changes, fewer investments, and worsened educational outcomes. What is the global economic burden of violent conflict when considering the total impact of all wars? Olaf J. de Groot, Carlos Bozzoli, Anousheh Alamir, and Tilman Brück estimate the average economic impact of violent conflicts by comparing the observed (with conflict) and hypothetical (without conflict) gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate in 190 countries from 1970 to 2014. Their analysis also measures the economic effect of three types of violent conflict (civil, interstate, and non-territorial), conflict intensity, and how violent conflict affects neighboring countries.

Timeframe for Recovery

• Return to “normal”: The time it takes for a country to recover from War varies greatly depending on the scale of the conflict, the extent of the damage, and the availability of reconstruction resources. A nation can rebuild its economy, infrastructure, and social fabric in years or even decades.

Other Considerations

• Loss of human capital: The death or injury of skilled workers and professionals, leading to a loss of productivity and economic potential.

• Political instability: The potential for War to destabilize governments and lead to further conflict or social unrest.

• Geopolitical implications: The impact of War on international relations and the global balance of power.

The Long-lasting Economic Shock of War

For the global economy, fuel and food shortages caused by the war are exacerbating post-pandemic inflation that had already reached multi-decade highs in most of the world. To say that the causes are well known would be an exaggeration given that the ultralow inflation of the 2010s still puzzles academic macroeconomists. But the main drivers are apparent. First, governments and central banks were slow to unwind unprecedented peacetime macroeconomic stimulus. Certainly, record early stimulus greatly helped cushion the first stage of the pandemic, but in some cases, it persisted too long and proved excessive after the unexpectedly sharp rebound in advanced economies and some emerging markets. In the United States, in particular, the combination of a $900 billion fiscal stimulus at the end of 2020 followed by a $1.7 trillion package in March 2021 proved too much, too late.

Supply chain disruptions have also been a major contributing factor to inflation, although some of the strain on supply should really be traced to the sudden surge in demand. Across advanced economies, more than half (including the United States and the euro area) had inflation rates of over 5 percent even before hostilities, so that the war made an already difficult situation worse. Prior to the conflict, Russia and Ukraine combined accounted for a quarter of global wheat exports, and Russia is a major supplier of fossil fuels, especially to Europe. Disruptions to supplies of these commodities are driving up prices.

Territorial disputes and conflicting claims to land are motivated by resource competition, ethnic/nationalist tensions fueled by identity or expansionist desires, political/ideological differences over governance and influence, economic factors, trade routes and resources, and historical grievances.

The Ukraine-Russia War is complex and involves all these motivations to certain degrees, but it was not inevitable; it could have been prevented.

The War in Ukraine, for example, is another war created by the U.S. “Empire.” To understand this, you must read about the events leading up to the Maidan revolution and the part U.S. covert operations played. Most people don’t care to learn about such things. People absorb the propaganda narratives and reflexively see the world as good and evil, good guys against bad guys. In the 21st Century, this way of understanding the world is childish and more destructive than ever.

We need to grow up and become peacemakers and peace defenders. This is the only way anyone will know security and the only way our species can have a future.

People who revel in the death toll of one side or the other are sociopathic, deluded, and ignorant.

Estimating War Dead—back of the envelope data-points

The United States is not a friend of any country. The United States has “interests,” not principles. The United States plays by rules that it can break whenever it wants to. The United States does not adhere to international law. A cursory understanding of U.S. conflicts throughout history tells you that the U.S. always throws its allies under the bus.

Understanding the United States’ relentless focus on undermining China’s power is crucial to contextualizing the Russia-Ukraine war. China’s role in the U.S. geopolitical strategy is central, and this knowledge is key to understanding the broader context of the conflict. U.S. strategic interests have been known for decades.

The crucial question is, how many Ukrainian soldiers have to die to kill “X” number of Russian soldiers? It’s a war of attrition where Ukrainians and Russians are dying. How much Ukrainian territory has to be demolished before the War ends? Are Europeans in the E.U. willing to die in Ukraine to sustain the War effort against Russia? Europe doesn’t have the industrial capacity to provide Ukraine with all the materials it needs to win. How many Ukrainians will die before it does? Has the U.S. and the U.K. achieved any of its objectives so far? Will they ever? What are they? Why did they ignore peace offerings before and directly after the invasion? Does the Anglosphere think it’s winning? What are Ukrainian fighters winning? What will The West do if Ukraine loses? Am I dumb to be concerned about that? “They can’t lose, Steven. Our side is super tough, strong, and rich and powerful with Wunderwaffe.” The invasion was illegal and wrong, but since when did the United States care about international law? The Rules-Based Order is not a legal system.

Propaganda outlets can throw out a number representing the number of Russians that have died to date in the Russian-Ukraine war, but is it accurate? What was the cost of achieving whatever the precise number is? What utility is a number in The Economist magazine other than propaganda?

Estimating the losses of Ukrainian soldiers in the War with Russia is a complex task. The fog of War, conflicting information, and deliberate misinformation make propaganda unreliable. Therefore, a data-driven approach is not just necessary but imperative. Identifying responsible and unbiased organizations using this approach to estimate casualties in the Russia-Ukraine war is crucial. However, we won’t know the total casualties until years after the War ends. For now, the War rages on, so a number today will be outdated tomorrow. Why get so excited about it?

I. Demographics and Manpower

Pre-war population demographics:

For a baseline, we need to know the age and gender breakdown of Ukraine’s Population, particularly men of fighting age (18-60).

While precise figures are difficult to obtain due to the ongoing War and displacement, here's an approximation of the age and gender breakdown of Ukraine's Population, with a focus on men of fighting age (18-60):

Overall Population:

• Estimated Population (2025): Approximately 38-40 million (sources vary due to the War's impact on demographics)

• Gender Ratio: Slightly more women than men overall

Age Breakdown (Approximate):

• 0-14 years: 15-20%

• 15-64 years: 65-70% (This includes men of fighting age)

• 65+ years: 15-20%

Men of Fighting Age (18-60):

• Estimated Number: 8-10 million (this is a rough estimate, as the exact number is complex to determine due to displacement and wartime conditions)

• Factors Affecting the Number:

  • Pre-war Population: Ukraine had a declining population and an aging demographic profile before the War.

  • Wartime losses: Military casualties and civilian deaths have reduced the number of men in this age group.

  • Displacement: Millions of Ukrainians, mostly women and children, have fled the country, while many men of fighting age have likely stayed.

  • Mobilization: The number of men who have joined the armed forces or territorial defense units is a significant factor, but precise figures are not readily available.

Challenges and Limitations:

• Data Accuracy: Wartime conditions make it difficult to collect accurate demographic data.

• Population Movement: The large-scale displacement of people makes it challenging to track population changes.

• Changing Demographics: The War has likely accelerated some demographic trends, such as declining birth rates and an aging population.

Sources:

• Worldometer: Provides estimates of Ukraine's Population and age distribution.

• United Nations: Offers demographic data and reports on Ukraine.

• State Statistics Service of Ukraine: Official source for demographic information, though data may be limited due to the War.

Additional Notes:

• The figures provided here are approximations, and the actual numbers will vary.

• The War has significantly impacted Ukraine's demographics, and the long-term effects are yet to be seen.

Behind these numbers are individual lives and families affected by the War.

Mobilization and conscription:

What are the official figures for the number of men mobilized or conscripted into the Ukrainian armed forces, including initial waves and subsequent mobilization rounds?

Precise and publicly released figures for the total number of men mobilized or conscripted into the Ukrainian armed forces are not readily available. During wartime, this information is often considered sensitive for national security reasons. Governments rarely disclose the full extent of their mobilization efforts, as it could provide valuable intelligence to the enemy.

While exact numbers are elusive, we can glean some information from various sources:

• General statements: Ukrainian officials, including President Zelenskyy, have frequently discussed the need for mobilization and acknowledged multiple rounds of mobilization. They have emphasized the importance of replenishing losses and expanding the armed forces but have not given specific numbers.

• Legislative acts: Ukraine has passed laws related to mobilization, defining the categories of individuals eligible for conscription and outlining the procedures. These legal documents provide a framework but don't state the number of individuals targeted for mobilization.

• Anecdotal evidence and media reports: News reports and personal accounts from Ukraine indicate that mobilization has been a significant undertaking involving individuals from various backgrounds and age groups. However, these sources don't comprehensively depict the total number mobilized.

• Expert analysis: Some military analysts and think tanks have attempted to estimate the size of the Ukrainian armed forces, taking into account pre-war numbers, mobilization efforts, and reported losses. These estimates vary, and they often rely on indirect evidence and assumptions.

Why the secrecy?

The lack of official figures is understandable, given the context of the War. Disclosing the precise number of mobilized troops could reveal:

• Strength of reserves: How many potential recruits remain available?

• Manpower limitations: Any potential shortages or challenges in recruitment.

• Mobilization effectiveness: The success or failure of recruitment strategies.

The enemy could exploit all of this information.

Where to look for potential updates:

It's possible that more information about mobilization numbers may be released after the War concludes, once the information is no longer strategically sensitive. Researchers and historians may eventually gain access to archival data that sheds more light on this topic. However, for the duration of the conflict, it's unlikely that precise figures will be made public.

Volunteer soldiers:

How many Ukrainians voluntarily joined the armed forces, including those who joined territorial defense units or foreign legions? How long is their contract?

How many foreign fighters has Ukraine recruited, and what is their estimated compensation package? For example, we know that Ukraine has recruited mercenaries from Columbia.

Draft evasion and emigration

How many men fled the country to avoid conscription, legally emigrated, or sought refuge elsewhere?

Recruitment age

What is the current recruitment age in Ukraine, what are any proposed changes (like lowering it to 18), and what is the potential impact on available manpower?

It is well known that Ukraine has a manpower problem in its armed forces, not to mention the stresses the War has brought to bear on its workforce in general.

Military reserve

What was the size and composition of Ukraine’s military reserve before the War, and how many reservists were activated? What is the size and composition of Ukraine’s military reserve now?

II. Military Deployment and Combat

Front line length

We need an accurate and up-to-date estimation of the front lines of conflict in different regions of Ukraine to understand troop density on the front lines.

Obtaining a truly accurate and up-to-the-minute estimation of the front lines in Ukraine is very difficult. Here's why:

• Fluid situation: The front lines are constantly shifting due to ongoing combat. Any information can quickly become outdated.

• Information warfare: Both sides may exaggerate gains or minimize losses, making it hard to verify claims.

• Limited access: Independent observers have limited access to the front lines, making it hard to confirm information.

However, here are some resources that can provide a reasonable approximation of the front lines:

• Live maps: Several organizations and news outlets provide interactive maps that are updated regularly based on available information. Some reliable options include:

  • Crisis Group: https://www.crisisgroup.org/europe-central-asia/eastern-europe/ukraine

  • ACLED: https://acleddata.com/

  • ISW: https://www.understandingwar.org/

  • Liveuamap: https://liveuamap.com/

• Official statements: Ukrainian and Russian military officials provide updates on the situation, though these should be treated with caution due to potential biases.

• Independent media: Reputable news organizations with correspondents on the ground can provide valuable insights, but their access may be limited.

• Satellite imagery: Analysis of satellite images can provide evidence of troop movements and changes in control of territory.

Important considerations:

• Accuracy: Even the best maps are approximations, and some level of uncertainty is inevitable.

• Timeliness: The situation can change rapidly, so it's essential to rely on the most up-to-date information available.

• Verification: Cross-reference information from multiple sources to get a more complete picture and identify any discrepancies.

Estimating troop density:

Once you have a general understanding of the front lines, you can start to estimate troop density. This involves considering:

• Front line length: The total length of the front line in different regions.

• Terrain: Some terrain is easier to defend than others, requiring fewer troops.

• Enemy strength: The size and capabilities of the opposing force will influence troop deployment.

• Strategic importance: Areas of strategic importance will likely have higher troop density.

By combining information on the front lines with these factors, you can develop a rough estimate of troop density in different areas. However, keep in mind that this will be an approximation, as precise figures are difficult to obtain.

Remember that the situation in Ukraine is dynamic, and any information you gather should be considered in the context of the evolving conflict

Rotation and rest

How often and for how long are Ukrainian units rotated out of combat for rest and replenishment? What effect does this have on the number of soldiers exposed to combat?

Combat intensity

What has been the frequency and scale of battles, artillery exchanges, and other combat actions at various locations throughout the War, and what’s happening now? Higher intensity leads to higher casualties.

Types of Combat

What proportion of casualties results from different types of warfare (trench warfare, urban combat, missile strikes, etc.)? This information can inform casualty estimates based on historical data.

III. Casualties and Losses

Official casualty figures

While potentially underreported, official Ukrainian military casualty figures provide a starting point but are entirely inadequate for providing accurate numbers due to biases and propaganda purposes.

Hospital data

If possible, access to military hospital records would provide data on wounded soldiers and the severity of their injuries.

Funeral home and cemetery data

Information on the number of military burials might be incomplete due to ongoing conflict and logistical challenges.

Prisoner of war exchanges

Data on the number of Ukrainian soldiers captured, and the number returned through prisoner exchanges is crucial to understanding Ukraine’s potential to sustain a defensive war.

Missing in action

What is the number of Ukrainian soldiers listed as missing in action? MIA may eventually be confirmed dead.

Foreign fighter losses

What is the number of foreign volunteers killed or wounded while fighting for Ukraine? Where could we find data on this?

IV. Other Factors

Russian force size and composition

What are the size and capabilities of the Russian forces facing Ukraine, including their manpower advantage (if any)?

Weaponry and technology

What weapons are used by both sides, as some cause more casualties than others? Drones are a massive factor in this War. It is well known that China is selling drone components to both sides.

Medical care

What quality of medical care is available to Ukrainian soldiers, as better care can reduce fatalities among the wounded?

Terrain and environment

How does the terrain (urban vs. rural, open vs. forested) affect combat and casualty rates?

V. Challenges and Limitations

Data access

Obtaining reliable data from a war zone is extremely difficult.

Information warfare

Both sides engage in information warfare, making it hard to verify claims.

Estimating vs. counting

Even with all the data points, some level of estimation will be necessary, as it’s impossible to know the exact number of casualties in real-time.

Additional Considerations

Independent verification

Independent verification is crucial. Seek data from multiple sources, including international organizations, independent media, and think tanks, to cross-reference information and reduce bias. This approach will provide a more comprehensive and reliable picture of the situation.

Time factor

Casualty figures are not static. They constantly change, reflecting the fluid nature of the conflict. Any estimate is a snapshot in time, so staying updated with the latest information is essential.

How long can Ukraine sustain the War without E.U. combatants? If the U.K. sends troops to fight on the front lines, will this increase the risk of nuclear War?

Ethical considerations

It's crucial to remember that behind every number are human lives lost. The focus should always be on the war's human cost and our analysis's ethical implications.

Gathering and analyzing as much of this data as possible while acknowledging the limitations can help us develop a more informed and evidence-based estimate of Ukrainian soldier losses in the war.

Some additional factors that could improve the accuracy of the estimate:

• Casualty ratios: Historical data on the ratio of killed to wounded soldiers in similar conflicts. This can help estimate the number of wounded based on the fatalities.

• Disease and non-combat deaths: Number of soldiers who died from disease, accidents, or other non-combat causes.

• Desertion rates: Number of Ukrainian soldiers who deserted their posts.

• Mercenary and foreign fighter losses: Number of mercenaries or foreign volunteers killed or wounded while fighting for Ukraine.

• Civilian casualties: While not soldiers, civilian deaths can impact morale and the overall war effort, and some civilians may be involved in fighting or supporting the war effort.

• Long-term health impacts: Data on the long-term health consequences of injuries sustained in the War, such as disability and mental health issues. This can provide a more complete picture of the War's impact on Ukrainian soldiers.

• Psychological impact: Data on the mental health toll of War on soldiers, including PTSD, depression, and anxiety, is an essential but often overlooked aspect of war losses.

It's important to remember that even with all these data points, any estimate of Ukrainian soldier losses will have some degree of uncertainty. However, by considering a wide range of factors and using multiple sources of information, it's possible to arrive at a more informed and accurate estimate.

This is nowhere near a comprehensive list of the data points needed for an accurate number.

Ultimately, the outcome of a war depends on many factors, including the size and strength of the forces involved, the quality of their leadership, the technology they have available, evolving tactics, and the overall strategic situation. Note the new tactics employed by each side in the War.

The defender generally has a significant advantage, especially in a war with a long line of defense. Defenders have time to prepare their positions, fortify them, and create obstacles. Defenders are familiar with the terrain, which allows them to use it to their advantage. They know the best places to position their forces, where to set ambushes, and how to use natural obstacles to slow down or stop the enemy. Defenders have shorter supply lines, making getting the resources they need easier. Has Ukraine thus far defended its territory effectively? Look at the maps.

***But this is not Vietnam between 1955 and 1975.

Russia may have an advantage here because this is a border war; Russia is a vast country with a larger population, more materials, energy sources, and industrial capacity. NATO countries have provided weapons, training, and money but are not actively engaged in fighting Russia. NATO presently has limited industrial capacity. It remains to be seen if spending energy and materials for Ukraine will remain popular in various European countries. Defenders often fight to protect their homes and families, making them more determined and resilient. Attackers may not have the same level of motivation, especially if they are fighting far from home. The Russia-Ukraine war is a border war where both sides believe they are fighting in defense of their homeland—both sides are highly motivated to fight.

***Does it appear that the sanctions against Russia are working?

Western countries imposed extensive sanctions on Russia after the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. But the measures were unilateral and piecemeal – and while they have been effective in disrupting the Russian economy, evasion and ‘trade deflection’ through third countries limits their impact.

Theory to Reality: Defensive Operations Confirm Clausewitz’s Theory

Since its publication in 1832, Carl von Clausewitz’s Vom Kriege (On War) has been an academic pillar for Western military strategists, influencing military doctrine and shaping the debate on power relationships. Clausewitz, a Prussian military officer, fought against the French during the Napoleonic Wars and participated in the Waterloo campaign, which culminated in the surrender of Napoleon Bonaparte. His firsthand experience in these battles provided him with valuable insights into the nature and character of War. In addition to his combat experience, Clausewitz spent considerable time in staff roles within the Prussian Army, affording him the intellectual space to examine the complexities of conflict.[i] This unique blend of theoretical investigation and battlefield experience lends authenticity to “On War,” solidifying its high status in the intellectual study of military theory and making it a seminal text that continues to be studied and debated.

Central to Clausewitz’s theory is the argument that defensive operations hold an inherent advantage over offensive operations[ii]— a proclamation this article argues resonates in contemporary armed conflicts. The aim is to confirm the credibility of Clausewitz’s assertion by examining its relevance through four core tenets of warfare that undergird his philosophy: resource supply, psychological influence, public support, and fortifications. This article first discusses Clausewitzian theory in relation to defensive operations, a brief history of the Ukrainian-Russian conflict, and then considers the strategic implications of the culminating point of the attack. The bulk of this article’s analysis defines each tenet according to Clausewitz’s writings, then describes how these four tenets provide defensive advantages to both Ukrainians and Russians amid the ongoing conflict. [iii] The aim of this article is to affirm Clausewitz’s assertion that “defense is a stronger form of fighting than attack.” [iv]

There are also some disadvantages to being on the defensive. Defenders must spread their forces thinly to cover a long line, which can make them vulnerable to breakthroughs. They may also have to fight on multiple fronts, which can stretch their resources. How fast are Ukrainian forces being diminished? Ukraine has a manpower problem.

History can give us examples from which to extrapolate, but an accurate body count will only be achieved years after the War ends. The ruth is, we don’t know what will happen this year.

The cost of this War is too high. It didn’t have to happen; I could include pages of references on this fact alone.

Additional Resources

Over and over, U.S. government officials and their mainstream media allies called Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine an “unprovoked attack.” The slogan became so overused that people began to ask the obvious question: Why do they protest so much?

In Provoked: How Washington Started the New Cold War with Russia and the Catastrophe in Ukraine, Scott Horton explains how since the end of the last Cold War and the fall of the Soviet Union, successive U.S. administrations pressed their advantage against the new Russian Federation to the point that it finally blew up into a full-scale war between Russia and Ukraine.

From NATO expansion into Eastern Europe, to “shock therapy” economic policy, the Balkan and Chechen wars, color-coded revolutions, new missile defense systems, assassinations, Russiagate and ultimately the brutal conflict in Ukraine, Provoked shows what really happened and why it did not have to be this way.

Prisoners of War: What you need to know

UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine

Columbia Journal of International Affairs

The Kyiv Independent

Mediazona

Center For Strategic and International Studies

The Application of Remote Sensing for Detecting Mass Graves: An Experimental Animal Case Study from Costa Rica

Military blogs and forums

Wilson Center

Public Policy Research Think Tanks: Top Think Tanks - Worldwide (US and non-US)

51 Peacebuilding Think Tanks and Peace Research Groups

International Institute For Strategic Studies

A List of useful Australian and International links.

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute

Chatham House

Counsel on Foreign Relations

The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Center for a New American Security

Brookings

Big Think

70 Best Military Blogs and Websites in 2025

***Be cautious about all media outlets, as they are all biased to a certain degree. When you see the exact copy across multiple mainstream news outlets, consider it might be propaganda and not always verifiable, factual information.

***The above is not a comprehensive list of resources.

Analysis and challenges

• Compare and cross-reference information from different sources to identify patterns and discrepancies.

• Consider the potential biases and limitations of each source.

• Acknowledge the uncertainty inherent in estimating casualties in an active war zone.

• Corroborate anecdotal information.

• Consider the objectives of your source.

---

America Was Always Ukraine's Worst Enemy

As Ukraine goes from meat grinder to the sausage, America is cutting them up and devouring them for rare earth. Call it Kissinger's curse. In 1968, Heinz Kissinger said, ‘It's dangerous to be America's enemy, but fatal to be America's friend.’ Kissinger said this as a counterfactual, if not X then Y, but five decades and as many ex-states later, the facts are in. To be America's friend is fatal. Ask South Vietnam, Afghanistan, and now Ukraine, the new kid on the chopping block. What's meat to a butcher, in the end? Just another way to make money.

America is in the war business and everything else is just marketing. All the Human Rights© and Democracy™ is a distraction, like a pretty girl on a car ad. As capitalist imam Milton Friedman said (to Joel Bakan),

A corporation is the property of its stockholders. Its interests are the interests of its stockholders. Now, beyond that should it spend the stockholders’ money for purposes which it regards as socially responsible but which it cannot connect to its bottom line? The answer I would say is no.

America is not merely run like a business, it is a business, owned by shady shareholders called the donor class. Understanding that America is a business, you can understand that all the talk of values is empty marketing. As Friedman said, that the only role social responsibility in business is advertising, like “putting a good-looking girl in front of an automobile to sell an automobile. That’s not in order to promote pulchritude. That’s in order to sell cars.” Or in this case, tanks. America is a protection racket and a notorious pump-and-dumper and Europe and Ukraine are just their latest marks.

To understand America just follow the money. America Inc's business model is very simple. Corrupt and/or coup a country, throw them into war with their neighbors, profit from the munitions. They keep pumping the the blood pump till its empty, then they dump the country and move on. America long ago figured out that there's more money in losing wars than winning them. The business model is as the late C. Wallace described in 1997, “Wreck it, buy a new one.”

Biggie's full verse is,

I can fill you with real millionaire shit (I can fill ya)
Escargot, my car go one-sixty, swiftly (Come on)
Wreck it, buy a new one
Your crew run-run-run, your crew run-run

The Notorious BIG, like many rappers, channeled the id of American ideology in his verses. Run and gun, smash and grab. You can replace libraries of hand-wringing political science with Biggie's song Gimme The Loot. Loot is a word literally looted from India, and the descendants of slaves sing the unconscious American id. As Biggie said, “I've been robbin' motherfuckers since the slave ships.”

America's dad, Britain, was a crook, as was their grandpappy Rome before them. It's all one White Empire to me. Since the Roman days they've been corrupting local elites to conscript and oppress their own populations, the method isn't new though madness is.

Kissinger also said that power is the greatest aphrodisiac, before #MeToo was a thing and people could complain that they were actually being raped. America has been rapaciously chewing countries up and spitting them out since WWII. They got a taste for blood money and never relented. Despite Eisenhower's warning. America never turned swords into plowshares, they just went on a rampage. Now America is just gun shop with a McDonald's attached, and a Starbucks for liberals. That's all it is. The US dollar is backed not by gold or goods but by blood. It's literal blood money, and Ukraine has been squeezed for every drop it can give.

America buys governments and if that doesn't work, coups them. Thus America decapitated an elected Ukrainian government in 2014, completely suspended elections under their CIA comedian President, and laundered billions of dollars through the notoriously corrupt country, of which $100 billion is just 'missing'. Now after turning Ukrainian men to ghosts, America is ghosting the country entirely, claiming billions worth of resources and sticking Europe with the bill. Ukraine and Europe aren't even invited to negotiations on their fate, America is completely disregarding them, like proxy prophylactics thrown in the historical dustbin. These cucks thought they were going to be conquerors, but they just watched their own countries get fucked by America.

What was Ukraine's political sin before 2014? Following Jesus's commandment, Love thy neighbor. The Great Satan America can't abide this, so they fomented civil war against Russian-speakers in then Ukraine, banned the Russian Orthodox Church, and left over 15,000 dead before 2022. 2025 is merely the coup de grâce of a long American blood-letting, stabbing Ukraine in the back after throwing them into battle. Now America is openly strip-mining Ukraine for parts without them at the table. As Kissinger's mediocre heir Antony Blinken said, ‘if you're not at the table, you're on the menu.’ Ain't it the truth from the mouths of liars.

So what's on the menu? Same thing that's always on the menu. Blood sausage. Put through the meat grinder by Biden, put on the chopping block by Trump, it's a bipartisan bloodbath. Ukraine was just a blood pump for blood money and now the pump and dump has reached its logical conclusion. Disavowal, dismemberment, and dumping time. America took Ukraine's men, Europe took their women, and now they're being thrown away. I'll say it again because it bears repeating, America was always Ukraine's worst enemy, not Russia. Ukraine wasn't attacked in 2022 by Russia, those places were moreso liberated after the 2014 occupation by America. As any tuk driver on the Colombo streets can tell you, batter an open enemy than a falls friend.

Rift Grows into Chasm as Trump Lays Final Nail in Zelensky's Casket

“Zelensky's situation can be compared to the humiliation of the King of Prussia, who in 1807 was ordered to stand on the bank and wait for Napoleon and Tsar Alexander to meet on a raft on the river in Tilsit.”

Things are moving ahead even more swiftly than imagined. The Ukraine-US honeymoon is officially over, as Trump and Zelensky unleashed scathing new attacks against each other, which can only precipitate fatal repercussions for Zelensky’s career in the near future.

After Zelensky’s critical statements aimed at Trump’s claims of stolen money, Trump fired back with this shocking censure, which called Zelensky a dictator:

Let’s summarize:

1. Zelensky’s pimping off of Ukrainian minerals and rare earths failed, as he was unable to extract the quid-pro-quo necessary from the US

2. Ukraine and US’ relationship has hit rock bottom, with open hostility now present amidst new hints that Trump’s team will launch a full audit of embezzled American funds

3. Zelensky’s political opponents are now ruthlessly attacking him, in particular Poroshenko, with Zaluzhny being staged for the expected presidential ascendance

4. Europe is scrambling to agree on emergency funds to keep the dying Ukrainian project afloat, but their solidarity has strained everyone’s patience

5. Trump’s rumored new three point plan aligns with Putin’s call for the signing of any deals to happen only after a presidential election is held in Ukraine

The above point is particularly important, as it means that internally Trump’s camp is in agreement with Putin’s approach—that no legally binding documentation can be signed by an illegitimate president.

Now the USA blames Ukraine, Zelensky, and hits the ball into Europe’s court. So, Europe, are you ready to go to war with Russia again?

What We Talk About, When We Talk About Talks.

The End may be further away than you think.

As I said earlier, there seems to be little understanding of how complex and inter-dependent the various issues directly related to Ukraine actually are. Here are the ones that occur to me, just on the military/security side:

An agreement for the principle and the modalities of the surrender of UA forces to the Russians. This will be a technical agreement, entirely between the two countries. It might well include arrangements for the exchange of prisoners of war.

An agreement about how to treat foreign personnel, including members of foreign militaries, contractors and mercenaries, on the territory of Ukraine at the time. This would again be a bilateral agreement: the sending states would not have a voice. It could be negotiated as part of (1).

An agreement on the political and military conditions that will be necessary before detailed negotiations with Ukraine and other states can begin, towards a final agreement. These will be essentially those set out by the Russians in 2022, and there will be little scope for negotiation (disarmament, neutrality, ejection of nationalists from government.) Whilst these will take some time to complete, they should at least be agreed and under way before the next stage.

An agreement (probably in Treaty form) on the end-state of relations between Ukraine and Russia and how they will be conducted. (A Joint Ministerial Committee, a Joint Consultative Committee on Defence, for example.) Right of entry and inspection of Russian forces, and mechanisms for ensuring that the demilitarisation of Ukraine is respected.

An Ukraine-Russia agreement on the future presence (or more probably the absence) of non-Russian forces in Ukraine. Defence attaches and perhaps military-to-military visits would presumably be allowed, but that would be about it.

A separate Treaty which would commit NATO and EU powers not to station or deploy forces on the territory of Ukraine, as defined in the text, and perhaps not elsewhere, as well. This would have to be a Treaty between the western states concerned, but there might also be Annexes and subordinate agreements involving Russia/Ukraine, or both.

These are the most important issues directly related to Ukraine, and it will be obvious firstly, that they are deeply connected with each other, and secondly that in principle all except the last are bilateral issues between Ukraine and Russia. From the Russian point of view it would be far better to have a bilateral negotiation, conducted in a common language and among people who in many cases will know each other. They will be very aware that if they let NATO and the EU into the discussion as well, or even allow them to hover in the background whispering into the ears of the Ukrainian delegation, then things will become much more complex. And note that, whilst the Treaty at No 6 is helpful, it’s not essential: Ukraine as a sovereign state can simply ask other countries’ militaries to leave and not come back. The same applies to decisions not to join NATO, or any comparable political demand the Russians might make. And NATO states are free to decide to return stationed forces to their own countries in order to salvage something from the wreckage. This is likely to be a major shock for the western powers, who seem to believe that they are entitled to a status in the negotiations, and the more delusional of whom seem to think that they can provide neutral chairmanship. But the fact is that the Russians have the ball, and they will continue their operations until Ukraine capitulates and agrees to what they want. The West has no counter to such tactics and, the longer things go on, the more disunited the West will become.

You will notice that I haven’t said anything about security guarantees so far, because I think this is a red herring. The obvious reason is that guarantees are not guarantees without the means to enforce them, and the West does not have the means to enforce any guarantees it might give. But there are some more fundamental issues, beginning with what we mean by “security guarantee.”

In its simplest form, such a document is just a political commitment made to another country. The classic modern example is the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, which gave security assurances to Ukraine in return for its final agreement to give up the nuclear weapons that had been based in the country when it as part of the Soviet Union, and were still there. In return for that undertaking, the Russians, British and Americans agreed to “respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine,” and to “reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.”

This is a purely political “guarantee,” a declarative price exacted by the Ukrainians for agreeing to allow the missiles be repatriated. There is virtually no positive obligation on the three guaranteeing states other than to report to the UN Security Council any attack on Ukraine involving the use of nuclear weapons. (Indeed, the whole agreement was negotiated in the context of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.) Significantly, the current government in Kiev has made no mention of these assurances, at least that I can find, since 2022: everyone accepts that circumstances change and declarations lose their relevance. There was no way of enforcing the assurances anyway, and that was not the point.

What about the “security guarantee” in the Washington Treaty, then, the famous Article 5? The Ukraine crisis has obliged a number of people to read this Article for the first time, and they have found, to their surprise, that it isn’t a security guarantee at all. Or rather, whilst it says that an attack on one signatory, in a defined geographical area, will be an attack on all, it doesn’t specify what the “all” should do about it. As with most such treaties there is a history: in this case the Europeans wanted a guarantee of military support which the US was not willing to give, thus the rather contorted language of Art 5. On the other hand, the Europeans consoled themselves with the thought that at least there were political assurances which would no doubt weigh with Moscow. Indeed, “security guarantees” have generally been seen by the participants as stabilising and deterrent: even as late as 1914, the Serbs were comforting themselves with the thought that the Austrians would not act against them because that would bring the Russians in, and the Austrians consoled themselves with the belief that the Russians would not come in because that would immediately involve the Prussians …..

Indeed the Austro-Prussian security guarantee, dating ultimately from the secret treaty of 1879, is a good example of what people usually mean when they talk of a “security guarantee.” Under the treaty, Prussia would come to the aid of the Dual Monarchy if it was attacked by Russia. (Technically the reverse was also true, though this was for show.) Yet this arrangement was not based on altruism. If anything, it was designed to control Austria by developing a droit de regard over its foreign policy, with the threat that in practice Prussia would only fulfil its obligations if the Austrians avoided doing something silly. In the end, these alliances did more to provoke war than to deter it, and it was perhaps an atavistic memory of this that made NATO enlargement such a controversial topic in the 1990s. After all, as I heard people from Washington and elsewhere muse, could you in principle commit NATO to backing heaven-knew what extremist government that might arise in, say, Poland in twenty years’ time, for example? The risk of an open-ended commitment where the guarantor becomes the tail and not the dog is one that must be in the minds of any reasonably thoughtful government official thinking about “security guarantees” for Ukraine.

This section would not be complete, though, without mentioning the only security guarantees that have ever really worked: the informal ones. Although the Europeans could not get a firm military guarantee from the US, they achieved much the same result with US forces deployed in Europe. Whilst these forces were never more than a small part of NATO’s mobilised strength, they did mean that the US could not avoid becoming involved in any future war. (“Make sure the first NATO soldier to die is an American!” was the unofficial European motto of the time.) One unnoticed consequence of the massive drawdown of US forces in Europe is that this possibility no longer exists to anything like the same extent. But other nations can play that game as well: since the 1970s, Saudi Arabia has hosted large numbers of foreign military personnel on its soil, such that an attacker would be forced to reckon with the involvement of the sending states if Saudi Arabia were attacked. More generally, the use of US personnel as effective human shields is current around the world: for a small nation, a US military base is a good investment for its security. We can assume that the Ukrainians will try something similar, and hope to provoke incidents between western “peacekeeping” troops and the Russians, which they can then exploit. I would like to think that western leaders are sufficiently intelligent to see and avoid the trap, but on the other hand …

The final strand in this argument is the place of Ukraine in international structures, and the future adaptation of those structures themselves. Let’s take NATO first. It seems fairly clear that there is a blocking minority against full membership in any reasonable political timescale. (Though as I have suggested there are Machiavellian reasons why the Russians might actually want to encourage it.) This doesn’t mean the Ukrainians won’t waste negotiating capital by continuing to push, nor that part of the transatlantic ruling elite won’t encourage them, but that’s only half the issue. The most likely western proposal would be some kind of “special status” for Ukraine, with regular talks, visits and joint exercises. Quite what this status would be would be fiercely controversial within NATO itself, and clearly unacceptable to the Russians in almost all cases. But NATO would no doubt reply that its relations with non-members were none of Russia’s business, so it’s doubtful whether Russia would be directly involved in any negotiations. That said, they do of course have many ways of making their opinions known, especially if they are highly influential in Kiev, as is likely to be the case.

The EU is a different case and involves so many assumptions (not least about the future of the Union) that there’s little that can be said without heavy qualification. But in some ways the most interesting question is the political orientation of a postwar Ukraine. The facile assumption that whatever political forces come to power in Kiev will simply carry on where Zelensky left off seems to me very dubious. Under ideal circumstances, EU accession negotiations would take years, and everybody knows that Ukraine is really just after money: the EU’s cohesion funds. This means everybody dipping into their pockets once more, just as all the revelations about large-scale corruption will be coming out. But in any event, it’s not clear that the pro-westerners in Kiev will still have the upper hand politically. In the end, Europe turned out not to be worth much, and there are those who will say it is time to make peace with Moscow. Kiss the hand you cannot bite.

The last point is obviously how the “root causes” of the conflict identified by Putin in the now-famous telephone call are to be addressed. I’m not sure that they will be, or ever can be. To begin with, there is no consensus on what these “root causes” even are, since western states consider the eastward expansion of NATO an internal affair which does not threaten Russia, whilst the Russians consider it the very origin of the conflict. Western states consider that the crisis was caused by Russian expansionism and a desire to recreate the Soviet Union, whilst the Russians consider that they have been responding to the aggressive enlargement of the western bloc.

It’s not obvious how any kind of negotiation can even be started here, or on what basis. Of course a largely symbolic deal (the US pulling some of its remaining troops out of Europe, the Russians making a reciprocal gesture in Ukraine) is always possible, and maybe this is what Trump has in mind. But it clearly will not address any “root causes” as perceived by either side, and it would be quite possible to waste entire years arguing about the subject matter of the negotiations, and even more who would attend, without making any progress at all.

We can assume that the opening proposals of the Russians would be based on their draft treaty texts of December 2021, which NATO rejected without making counter-proposals. At the time, it was fairly obvious that the Russians did not expect NATO to agree to the texts; the idea was presumably to test how far the West was interested in the principle of negotiating on the “root causes” at all. The western response indicated that they were not. Whilst the West is in a much weaker position today, it still seems unlikely that they will agree to negotiate on, or even talk about, the proposals in the December 2021 texts.

For their part, the West will have to struggle to find any common negotiating position at all, not least because both NATO and the EU have become so large and unwieldy that it is almost impossible to identify a collective strategic interest in either organisation. So far, the Russians do not seem to be interested in negotiating with the EU, but by contrast they previously proposed parallel but separate talks with the US and NATO. This delineation has the potential to split the alliance badly (presumably one of the Russian objectives) irrespective of the subject matter, although I suppose you could argue that the alliance has been doing a good job of that anyway, without the need for outside assistance.

But in the end, this may not matter so much. It’s tidier to have a Treaty, but a Treaty is only a document, and if the underlying will to cooperate is not there, it can be more trouble than it’s worth. By contrast, the underlying situation—a stronger Russia, a radically weakened Europe and a weaker and largely absent US— will be an undeniable reality, and that is the context in which politics in Europe will have to take place, irrespective of what “talks” lead to, or what any Treaty might say.

DPA’s Ukraine War Casualties and the Breaking Point By Wyatt Mingji Lim | February 21, 2025 |

Introduction

Three years into Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, launched on February 24, 2022, the war has exacted a staggering toll on both sides. As a journalist embedded in this conflict daily, I’ve witnessed the relentless grind of attritional warfare—Russia’s artillery barrages, Ukraine’s desperate counterattacks, and a manpower crisis pushing Kyiv to the edge.

Working with an analytical partner, Grok3, as my research assistant, we’ve estimated the casualties and assessed Ukraine’s sustainability, focusing on the Kursk front as a microcosm of the broader struggle.

Our findings suggest Ukraine has lost approximately 1.8 million troops (900,000 dead), Russia around 700,000 (250,000 dead), and that Ukraine is teetering on the brink of collapse by mid-2025. Here’s how we got there.

---

We have better things to do than make war. Every effort must be made to prevent conflicts. We have to change our way of doing business. Only large, organized groups of common people can change the way The Great Game is played and who the Players are. If we don’t change it now, metastatic, modern techno-industrial civilization will crash, taking billions of people to an early grave. SAAFO (Sit Around And Find Out).

Key Tech Billionaires and The TESCREAL Bundle

Preamble, Tirade, Rant…

The crux of the ideology is that my monarch knows what's right and will take care of you. Trust your daddy, God damn it! If you want to go against my will, you are impeding the profitability of our thing against their thing. It's not about absolute winners but absolute rulers with their cohort of loyalists.

Where is an enlightened, wise expert across multiple domains, committed to the greater good, who understands many fields of science, engineering, technology, sociology, psychology, biology, oceanography, etc. created? This MAN must understand energy, thermodynamics, and stocks and flows (systems theory). Who are his wise courtiers? Yarvin? Are you kidding me? He's an "intellectual" kid in a social media playground.

People are so domesticated and pacified that I doubt they'd sacrifice an hour spent on the tubes to organize in their community to fight and take power or even imagine a better way of doing things. At least Curtis, the sensitive wild child, a daddy, can exercise his imagination and understand the efficacy of power.

Would folks brawl on the picket line like the wobblies and get cut down by corporate rifle fire? No, they sleep in their car in an Amazon Warehouse parking lot, watching Netflix or YouTube interviews with Curtis Yarvin on their smartphones. Where do we find the philosopher king if our world is too corrupt and bereft of THE RIGHT STUFF? Folks don’t breed Kings. The world doesn’t have a class of Aristocracy waiting in the wings to set things RIGHT. We are not revolutionaries. We do not read books. We do not have the power, faith, time, confidence, curiosity, will, or caloric energy to spend our valuable time fighting back. We wait for our “Savior” or pine for a way out. We dream. We believe.

---

So you want to be a Player, make your will known, and influence how we do business and how the future unfolds. Build a tech business (AI startups these days), make money from investors, and start investing. When you make your billions or get connected to billionaires, start dreaming up your ingenious plans for a better utopia.

It's essential to be aware that tech billionaires, with their range of firmly held beliefs and agendas, have the potential to significantly influence a public that may not fully comprehend the implications of these ideas and technologies. This should raise concerns and encourage active engagement in understanding and evaluating their societal impact.

The Power Elite have always been in control. Today, these people have control over unfathomable tools of persuasion and manipulation. Say goodbye to freedom, free speech, democracy, and civil liberties. Choose your “Great Man” now and buy his meme coin and beg for something to do that he likes before robots replace you. The country club will get bigger while the global population of people dwindles to a few hundred million.

Peter Thiel

The Education of a Libertarian

I had hoped my essay on the limits of politics would provoke reactions, and I was not disappointed. But the most intense response has been aimed not at cyberspace, seasteading, or libertarian politics, but at a commonplace statistical observation about voting patterns that is often called the gender gap.

It would be absurd to suggest that women’s votes will be taken away or that this would solve the political problems that vex us. While I don’t think any class of people should be disenfranchised, I have little hope that voting will make things better.

Voting is not under siege in America, but many other rights are. In America, people are imprisoned for using even very mild drugs, tortured by our own government, and forced to bail out reckless financial companies.

I believe that politics is way too intense. That’s why I’m a libertarian. Politics gets people angry, destroys relationships, and polarizes peoples’ vision: the world is us versus them; good people versus the other. Politics is about interfering with other people’s lives without their consent. That’s probably why, in the past, libertarians have made little progress in the political sphere. Thus, I advocate focusing energy elsewhere, onto peaceful projects that some consider utopian.

This is Peter’s philosopher priest.

I was a paid subscriber to Gray Mirror for a while and read his earlier blog, An Open Letter to Open-Minded Progressives, which he recently published in book form. As the video says, this guy is in these people’s heads.

Bronze Age Pervet & Moldbug (Curtis Yarvin) return we talk debanking of the tech elite by the Bai-dan regime, the rise of tech elite and the Trump 2024 return election, many other interesting thing relate, then on second half show, Moldbug talk URBIT and on last segment I ask him what think about unusual theory Biblical history...

Curtis Yarvin and myself at his speaking even in Lisbon June 14, 2022

Peter Thiel, a figure of significant influence, is not just a venture capitalist and entrepreneur but also a political activist. Thiel strongly believes in individual liberty and limited government. He has supported various libertarian causes and candidates, including the Libertarian Party, MAGA, and anyone else who can help facilitate his agenda.

Thiel believes that technology can improve the world. He has invested in various technology companies, including Facebook, SpaceX, and OpenAI. Thiel criticizes the traditional education system and advocates for alternative forms of education, such as homeschooling and unschooling.

Thiel is interested in seasteading, which involves creating autonomous communities on floating platforms in the ocean.

Thiel’s website is: https://www.thielfoundation.org/

Elon Musk

Elon Musk is a serial entrepreneur and business magnate. He is the founder of SpaceX, Tesla, and Neuralink.

Musk is a fanatic about the importance of space exploration. He said he wants to “make humanity a multi-planetary species.”

Musk wants to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy.

Musk says he’s concerned about the potential dangers of artificial intelligence. I don’t think he is. Musk is only worried about not controlling AI ventures himself. He is a shrewd player who can sabotage his competition and take credit for things he has not developed. He is concerned about his position in The Great Game and doesn’t care about AI's dangers. He will milk AI ventures for every penny if he can co-opt a leading position in the AI space.

Musk claims to be a free speech advocate. Elon is not; the only speech he’s interested in is a speech that advances his agenda, which is power and control today and the future, where he is a key player and possibly immortal, but at least with many heirs to succeed him. Look at his handling of X, for example.

Musk’s website is: https://www.tesla.com/elon-musk

Brian Armstrong

Brian Armstrong is the CEO of Coinbase, a cryptocurrency exchange.

Armstrong is a cryptocurrency investor who profits from pump-and-dump and get-rich-quick schemes. He believes cryptocurrency can “create a more open and accessible financial system.” However, coded capital will always be open only to those who control the legal code, social systems, and structures created by elite Players.

Remember, these people know they are better than you in practically every way.

He has said that he believes decentralization can “empower individuals and reduce the power of centralized institutions.” Decentralization may sound good, but Armstrong and his ilk will never tell you how your average worker fits in. Amerstrong talks about innovation. Innovation is supposed to be good, but constraints govern all innovation. Nature determines certain limitations that society can’t ignore.

Armstrong’s website is: https://www.coinbase.com/

Marc Andreessen is a venture capitalist and entrepreneur. He is the co-founder of Netscape and Andreessen Horowitz. Marc thinks technology is the prime force for a better world.

“Software is eating the world.”

The phrase “AI is eating software” refers to how AI systems rapidly transform or even replace traditional software development and operational processes. This concept mirrors Marc Andreessen’s famous 2011 quote, " Software is eating the world,” in which he pointed out how software was becoming central to virtually every industry. Now, AI is beginning to take over many of the roles software has traditionally filled.

Andreessen is a successful venture capitalist. He has invested in various technology companies, including Facebook, Twitter, and Airbnb.

The path to having enough power to influence policy and future trends lies in having made enough money to bet on high-growth tech companies that yield hundreds of millions of dollars in ROC and ROE. You can be a sociopathic lunatic and accomplish this. Social systems have always favored sociopaths and dark tetrad types.

While all tech billionaires share a vision of building the future, it's crucial to question who this future is for and what it will look like. It’s time to start asking these critical questions and holding these influential figures accountable.

Understand that nothing these people want to do is democratic, as most people think of democracy.

American Dynamism embodies the spirit of innovation, progress, and resilience that drives the United States forward. This powerful force is exemplified by groundbreaking achievements in technology and innovation, shaping both our nation and the global landscape. It reflects the American commitment to pushing boundaries, embracing challenges, and always striving for a brighter, more prosperous future. Investing in visionary founders and teams tackling the world’s most pressing problems is essential to fueling this dynamic spirit and ensuring continued progress for generations to come.

Andreessen's website is: https://a16z.com/

Ben Horowitz

Ben Horowitz is a venture capitalist and entrepreneur. He is the co-founder of Andreessen Horowitz. He has invested in various technology companies, including Facebook, Twitter, and Airbnb. Investing is how you achieve and maintain power and control in The Great Game. *Note how investing early in many tech startups can achieve big market wins.

Horowitz advocates entrepreneurship.

“The hard thing about hard things is that there are no hard things.”

Ben Horowitz, cofounder of Andreessen Horowitz and one of Silicon Valley's most respected and experienced entrepreneurs, offers essential advice on building and running a startup—practical wisdom for managing the toughest problems business school doesn’t cover, based on his popular ben’s blog.

While many people talk about how great it is to start a business, very few are honest about how difficult it is to run one. Ben Horowitz analyzes the problems that confront leaders every day, sharing the insights he’s gained developing, managing, selling, buying, investing in, and supervising technology companies. A lifelong rap fanatic, he amplifies business lessons with lyrics from his favorite songs, telling it straight about everything from firing friends to poaching competitors, cultivating and sustaining a CEO mentality to knowing the right time to cash in.

Filled with his trademark humor and straight talk, The Hard Thing About Hard Things is invaluable for veteran entrepreneurs as well as those aspiring to their own new ventures, drawing from Horowitz's personal and often humbling experiences.

“The most important thing is to be able to make decisions.” —Horowitz

Horowitz’s website is: https://a16z.com/

David Sacks

David Sacks is a venture capitalist and entrepreneur. He co-founded Yammer and Craft Ventures and has invested in various technology companies, including Facebook, Twitter, and Airbnb. Are you beginning to see a pattern here? If you have the resources, place your bets, and the stocks that fly will make you a billionaire.

He’s another American dynamism guy, but that’s just P.R.

Sacks’ website is: https://www.craftventures.com/

“Balaji has the highest rate of output per minute of good new ideas of anybody I’ve ever met, and The Network State may be his best.” — Marc Andreessen, cofounder of Andreessen Horowitz

"We've started new currencies. Now The Network State shows us how to start new cities and new countries." — Vitalik Buterin, cofounder of Ethereum

"Balaji is a visionary, and one of the most original thinkers of our time. Many have had the experience of hearing him say something, thinking it was crazy, and then a year or two later realizing 'Balaji was right.' I think Balaji will be right about The Network State." — Brian Armstrong, cofounder and CEO of Coinbase

"The future convergence of networks and governments, from one of the most brilliant thinkers alive." — Naval Ravikant, cofounder of AngelList

When the brand new is unthinkable, we fight over the old. That’s where we are today with governments, with politics, and with much of the physical world. But perhaps we can change that.

This book introduces the concept of the network state: a country you can start from your computer, a state that recruits like a startup, a nation built from the internet rather than disrupted by it.

The fundamental concept behind the network state is to assemble a digital community and organize it to crowdfund physical territory. But that territory is not in one place — it’s spread around the world, fully decentralized, hooked together by the internet for a common cause, much like Google’s offices or Bitcoin’s miners. And because every citizen has opted in, it’s a model for 100% democracy rather than the minimum threshold of consent modeled by 51% democracies.

Of course, there are countless questions that need to be answered to build something of this scope. How does a network state work socially, technically, logistically, legally, physically, financially? How could such a thing even be viable?

That’s why you should read this book.

It’s not hard to learn how these people think.

Patchwork: A Political System for the 21st Century

To start the hype machine, let’s just say that if anyone can build anything like Patchwork, even a tiny, crude, Third World ripoff of Patchwork, it is all over for the democratic regimes. It’ll be like East Germany competing with West Germany. (Funnily enough, the financial relationship between the US and the Gulf/East Asia, the most Patchwork-like part of the world at present, is oddly reminiscent of that between the OECD and the Warsaw Pact: the latter borrow from the former to buy cheap consumer goods, supplied by the former, for the latter’s serfs.) *From 2008

Praxis is the world’s first Sovereign Network

Praxis is the world’s first Sovereign Network: a global community developing a shared culture, institutions, and infrastructure. Praxis is a home for the brave, who strive for virtue and wisdom. Our purpose is to restore Western Civilization and pursue our ultimate destiny of life among the stars.

PRONOMOS VC

FOUNDERS FUND

PALANTIR

THE SEASTEADING INSTITUTE

Here's How Breitbart And Milo Smuggled White Nationalism Into The Mainstream

The Flight 93 Election

PROJECT 2025

THE NEW APOSTOLIC REFORMATION

CHRISTIAN ZIONISM

---

The TESCREAL Bundle

The “TESCREAL bundle” is a term coined by AI researchers Émile Torres and Timnit Gebru to describe a cluster of interconnected and overlapping ideologies prevalent among some tech leaders and investors, particularly in Silicon Valley. It’s essentially a “court philosophy” of the global oligarch class, serving to justify and accelerate inequality in pursuit of a utopian future.

TESCREAL stands for:

•   Transhumanism is the belief in using technology to enhance human capabilities and ultimately transcend human limitations, potentially achieving immortality or post-human states.

•   Extropianism is a philosophy advocating for radical life extension, technological progress, and the continual improvement of the human condition.

•   Singularitarianism believes in a technological singularity, a hypothetical point when artificial intelligence surpasses human intelligence, leading to rapid and unpredictable societal changes.

•   Cosmism comes from a Russian philosophical and cultural movement that advocates for space exploration, life extension, and the eventual migration of humanity to other planets.

•   Rationalism emphasizes reason and logic as the primary sources of knowledge and decision-making.

•   Effective Altruism is a philosophy and social movement that uses evidence and reason to determine the most effective ways to improve the world.

•   Longtermism focuses on safeguarding humanity’s long-term future, often prioritizing future generations’ well-being over current concerns.

Key Points:

• Interconnected Ideologies: These ideologies are interlinked and often combined by individuals within the tech industry.

• Utopian Vision: TESCREAL promotes a utopian vision of the future, driven by technological advancement and the potential for human enhancement and even transcendence.

• Justification for Inequality: Critics argue that TESCREAL can be used to justify increasing inequality, as pursuing these long-term goals may be at the expense of addressing current social and economic problems.

• Influence in Tech: TESCREAL ideologies influence the tech industry, particularly in areas like AI development, life extension research, and space exploration.

• Controversial: TESCREAL is a contentious concept. Critics argue that it promotes a narrow and potentially harmful future vision.

The stated goal of many organizations in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) is to develop artificial general intelligence (AGI), an imagined system with more intelligence than anything we have ever seen. Without seriously questioning whether such a system can and should be built, researchers are working to create “safe AGI” that is “beneficial for all of humanity.” We argue that, unlike systems with specific applications which can be evaluated following standard engineering principles, undefined systems like “AGI” cannot be appropriately tested for safety. Why, then, is building AGI often framed as an unquestioned goal in the field of AI? In this paper, we argue that the normative framework that motivates much of this goal is rooted in the Anglo-American eugenics tradition of the twentieth century. As a result, many of the very same discriminatory attitudes that animated eugenicists in the past (e.g., racism, xenophobia, classism, ableism, and sexism) remain widespread within the movement to build AGI, resulting in systems that harm marginalized groups and centralize power, while using the language of “safety” and “benefiting humanity” to evade accountability. We conclude by urging researchers to work on defined tasks for which we can develop safety protocols, rather than attempting to build a presumably all-knowing system such as AGI.

TESCREAL’s focus on technological solutions and long-term goals can overlook the needs of marginalized communities and worsen existing inequalities. It’s an Anglo-sphere-centric perspective that can’t imagine what the rest of the world might want. Any social system opposing their ideology is their enemy. We are back to Communists against “The Free World of Capitalism.” Some TESCREAL ideologies, like the pursuit of advanced AI, carry potential risks of harm to humanity if not developed and managed responsibly—the so-called “Alignment Problem.” Who decides what social ideology AI aligns with? The dominance of TESCREAL thinking in the tech industry can stifle diverse perspectives and limit the range of solutions for societal problems. It is inherently energy and materials blind and undemocratic. Ordinary people don’t understand it, and these visions of new means of social control are so robust and stealthy that this new powerful elite group of tech billionaires will be able to destroy civil liberties before anyone realizes it. People will be at the mercy of sociopathic Players of The Great Game whose only real talent was making money betting on tech in the markets and peddling vaporware obscured under a verbose torrent of malformed and understood references and bad ideas.

The TESCREAL bundle is a complex and controversial set of ideologies that significantly influence the vision and direction of the tech industry. Understanding these ideologies is not just important but crucial for critically evaluating the potential benefits and risks of technological advancements and their impact on society.

It’s a fatal mistake to think that these people have your best interest at heart. This powerful elite may believe they are working to make a better world, but they are deluded megalomaniacs high on wealth and power.

Here is another good breakdown of the agenda: A.K.A.

The Butterfly Revolution — America Is Being Stolen

Why Aren’t You A Revolutionary?

This is a long post, but I hope you will linger on it, take your time with it, and explore its references. It’s not that I think they provide the most direct or comprehensive context for what I’m alluding to at the very end of this article, but only that I honestly believe that it will contribute to a better understanding of “revolution” in the sense that I am thinking about it. People need to take charge of their circumstances and prepare themselves for everything they need to do to improve their lives and ensure that living systems, what economists call “natural services,” are healthy and maintained not only for us but for life in general and for posterity.

Natural services (or ecosystem services) are the benefits that nature provides to people.  These benefits include food, water purification, flood control, pollination, carbon sequestration, soil stabilisation, recreation, cultural value, and many others (listed below). The value of such benefits has become more apparent as human populations grow and average consumption per person increases. The multiplication of these two factors means that the demand for resources is also growing which puts enormous pressure on the natural environment.

I’m a storyteller. I’m an ordinary person. My immediate family members had all passed before I was thirty, and I didn't inherit a dime. I’ve enjoyed life while making the best of the opportunities that came my way. Some efforts worked out, and others didn't.

I'm in my sixties now and still ambitious and energetic. I love what Dick Van Dyke, at ninety-nine, said after being rescued from a fire that almost destroyed his house, "I need more time; I've got plans." I know how fortunate I am for being born in the fifties, a white American man with half a brain and a sunny disposition. I have no complaints, although I know there are things I could have done better.

Modern technological, industrial, fossil-fueled "Western" civilization has been great for many people for generations. People are incredibly industrious and creative. Science, engineering, and technology are fantastic domains that allow us to experience things our ancestors could not have imagined.

I'm an NFL fan, and the commercials tell it all. Folks, life is good when you buy these products. I get it. Business makes the world go around. I have some nice stuff, too. But things I lived without as a child and young person now seem like necessities, and in many ways, they are. I don’t want to give up on modern civilization and what it provides. Unfortunately, our way of life doesn’t have a long-term future. We could develop and “progress” in wiser, less destructive ways.

Most people still believe in "The American Dream." You can become wildly successful if you work hard and do things right. With a bit of luck and support, anything is possible. If we are competitive and ruthless, we’ll win. We only need to defeat our enemies, and the future is bright.

All glory to God. There is so much to be thankful for.

Photo by Pedro Lastra on Unsplash

With the right genes and work ethic, you could be an NBA, UFC, NFL superstar or a famous entertainer; if you have a college degree and work hard, you could become a successful business owner with some extra money to invest; if your parents are wealthy, you could go to a private prep school, then an Ivy League University and become an elite professional, the President of the United States, a corporate lawyer, or a CEO of a multinational corporation, regardless of your profession or pastimes, you never have to worry about money, having a house, or opportunities. Capital on capital returns, baby!

There’s always a chance you’ll buy a winning lottery ticket. Somebody has to win—it could be you.

Look around; look at what the “enlightenment,” fossil fuel energy, science, engineering, technology, global industrialization, and global supply chains have given us. It’s fantastic! Capitalism has made many people wealthy; even ordinary folks have more things than people a century ago could have dreamed of.

Thank the good Lord for the Pax Americana. There is nothing more intimidating than a big, capitalist country with nuclear arms, hell-bent on enforcing a global “rules-based order.”

I have been the beneficiary of all of it. I know that.

The world is full of good people, and many wonderful things are happening.

Unfortunately, I have also learned about the price of success.

“To laugh often and much; to win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children; to earn the appreciation of honest critics and endure the betrayal of false friends; to appreciate beauty, to find the best in others; to leave the world a bit better, whether by a healthy child, a garden patch, or a redeemed social condition; to know that even one life has breathed easier because you lived. This is to have succeeded.” —Bessie A. Stanley often attributed to Fake Ralph Waldo Emerson Quote

So what’s the problem?

Let me convince you that we must act to solve persistent destructive problems emerging from near-universal behaviors and beliefs.

Many of us feel increasingly powerless. Folks are starting to feel like the future might not be better than the past. Progress and modernity are under threat and seen by many as the causes of all our ills. People are wondering if the system is rigged and corrupt. Mechanisms of social control have never been so powerful, effective, and ubiquitous. We are confused by culture wars, info wars, and all the false choices we are presented with.

Things would be better if only those other people would come to our side.

Despite my relative personal comfort, health, well-being, and conditions, I am deeply disturbed and horrified by the direction our global civilization is headed and the way we conduct our business. I am not an expert or influencer; I don’t pretend to be “qualified” or credentialed enough to demand your attention. I am a well-traveled and experienced reader who has paid careful attention to current events and looked at things from multiple perspectives for my entire life. My favorite class in middle school was current events; at the time, we were focused on the Vietnam War and Watergate. I have spent over a decade or more in Europe, the United States, Japan, and China and have had lengthy stopovers in many other countries. I was the fortunate beneficiary of parents who loved to travel, and before twenty years of age, I had been around the world, including Africa, India, and the Soviet Union.

I love culture and nature; I love to think and collaborate with creative, passionate people. I am lucky to have a positive disposition and never to have experienced depression or any major illness. I am blessed. But I am so frustrated and disappointed in people. What gives me the right? I’m not particularly judgemental. I understand that we all must focus on what’s at hand and get on with life. Perhaps my expectations are too high. Maybe it’s time for me to empty my cup and enjoy the rest of my days, focusing on the good things around me and working with my immediate community in whatever way I can to help make things a little better. Nothing I say here or my artistic endeavors will significantly affect how the world works or what comes next. I should say my piece and unplug. I will try.

Photo by Philipp Düsel on Unsplash

Once upon a time, there was a wise Zen master.

People traveled from far away to seek his help.

In return, he would teach them and show them the way to enlightenment.

On this particular day, a scholar came to visit the Zen master for advice.

“I have come to ask you to teach me about Zen,” the scholar said.

Soon, it became obvious that the scholar was full of his own opinions and knowledge.

He interrupted the master repeatedly with his own stories and failed to listen to what the master had to say.

The master calmly suggested that they should have tea.

So the master poured his guest a cup.

The cup was filled, yet he kept pouring until the cup overflowed onto the table, onto the floor, and finally onto the scholar’s robes.

The scholar cried:

“Stop! The cup is full already. Can’t you see?”

“Exactly,” the Zen master replied with a smile.

“You are like this cup — so full of ideas that nothing more will fit in.

Come back to me with an empty cup.”

---

Assumptions:

1. We have faced considerable and increasingly complex social problems for thousands of years. Despite our growing knowledge of what they are and what we could do to mitigate the most deadly and destructive outcomes of their abuse, they persist decade after decade in horrific cycles of boom and bust.

2. These increasingly complex problems (global heating, pollution, weapons of mass destruction, distribution of resources, etc.) now represent an existential threat to too many life forms, including us.

3. Despite our many scientific and technological advancements, our way of life is destructive, and we lack the wisdom to slow down and manage our science, technology, and industries in safe, healthy, benevolent, and meaningful ways.

4. Technology and how society operates is a black box for most people, as mysterious and more incomprehensible as imagined spirits in the woods were to ancient people.

5. Our global institutions, by and large, put profits first above all other considerations. Their leaders are greedy, status-driven careerists, and we’ve been conditioned to admire those traits.

6. Our civilization has been in “overshoot” for decades. We are ecology, energy, and materials blind.

7. People in wealthy, developed nations are becoming more powerless and easier to control. Hopelessness, helplessness, and powerlessness are on the rise. We are becoming apathetic. We are becoming utterly domesticated and pacified. Too many people are unaware of what truly ails them and society.

8. As we define it and operate it now, the global economy is in perpetual decline. GDP growth and other similar metrics are out of date. New concepts of “growth” are essential. Unplanned degrowth is already happening. The human population is declining. We are doing nothing to mitigate a complete collapse of what we call civilization. Endeavoring to keep our current economic religion going is suicidal.

Stop following intellectual influencers like Sam Harris (apologists for the status quo) and start reading Howard T. Odum.

Educate yourself regarding essential supply chains and life cycle profiles of materials required to run perpetual growth models.

I am concerned that our late-stage, fossil-fueled, neoliberal/neoconservative, financialized, rapacious, modern techno-industrial, TESCREAL (transhumanism, Extropianism, singularitarianism, (modern) cosmism, Rationalism, Effective Altruism, and longtermism) global civilization with its deteriorating, discredited, and increasingly ineffectual institutions, will not produce the kind of leaders and revolutionaries required to rest power from the pathological, dark tetrad, ideologues, capital coders, and true believers in unlimited growth on a planet with finite resources, the gang of social, structural and technological engineers behind the omnicidal, heat-engine-wealth pump that supports only the Players of The Great Game 2.0 21st Century that our historical-socio-political-cultural system has created since the dawn of modernity in Europe in 1650.

We have the knowledge and the tools to do better.

10 Reasons Our Civilization Will Soon Collapse

A deep dive into the problems world leaders have let spiral out of control.

The Collapse of the US Elite

“Popular Revolutions” aren’t

The adjective “popular” is often attached to “revolution.” And indeed, in their hot phases, revolutions often see a consistent participation of “the people.” But history shows that their role is mostly that of musket fodder.

A revolution may delude people into thinking that they are taking power into their own hands, but the final result is the replacement of an old elite with a new one. Think of how the French got rid of their king in 1793; then, little more than 10 years later, they had an Emperor (Napoleon) in exchange. Think of the Russian revolution. Lev Tolstoy gives us a magistral portrait of the Tsarist elite in the mid-19th century in his “Anna Karenina” (1877): a band of parasites interested in nothing but money and self-promotion. They were swept away by the Communist Revolution in 1917. But it would be hard to say that workers were ever in power in the Soviet Union. Rather, the government was managed by a new elite sometimes called the “Nomenklatura,” in turn swept away by a new revolution in 1991.

Elites are indispensable for the functioning of the state and, no matter how we may reason that a perfect society shouldn’t need an elite, we can’t find a real one in history that was “eliteless.” The problem is that all human organizations tend to become inefficient, costly, and often counterproductive, showing “diminishing returns to complexity,” as Joseph Tainter noted. You can say that they accumulate entropy; it is typical of complex systems. (See at the end of this post some mathematical models of this story).

The problem is especially serious when the economic system is undergoing a contraction: military stress, resource depletion, pollution, and more, reduce the capability of the system to sustain its elites. Then, the elites become a huge parasite sucking out vital resources from the rest of society. The size of the elite class has to be reduced, but the elites are not good at that; they have no structures to cut down their own number. In practice, they keep growing until they cease to be useful and become a burden for society.

The results are known: a top-heavy social structure, the ruthless exploitation of the poor, the diffuse inefficiency, the brazen injustice, and more. It all tends to generate a police state where the elites desperately try to maintain their power using force. It can’t normally last for long: by beggaring commoners, the elites destroy their source of wealth, and the result is collapse. In states, collapse is normally traumatic, and it involves a lot of violence, blood, and destruction. In corporations, it is called “corporate restructuring.” It is not, normally, bloody, but it is surely traumatic for those being restructured.

The current situation in the US is a clear example of the start of a revolution. The old US elite, aka the “deep state,” has become too large, too inefficient, too parasitic, and too violent. It has to be replaced with a new one. It has been surprisingly fast, but it is happening. The momentum of the “Magaist” revolution is tremendous, and the opposition is reduced to little more than old leftists yelling at clouds. It may still not succeed, but the mechanism is clear.

---

Study Peak Steel and other materials flows required for our current global economy. (Use your AI tools to discover these domains quickly then follow the reference materials and educate yourself—prompted results from Gemini.)

• The idea of "peak steel" suggests a point where global demand for steel plateaus or declines, similar to "peak oil." This could be driven by factors like:

  • Shifting consumption patterns (less steel-intensive industries)

  • Increased recycling and circular economy models

  • Technological advancements reducing material needs

• Scholarly Articles:

  • "Peak Steel: A Review of the Evidence" (Hypothetical title; search for similar titles on Google Scholar)

  • Search for research on "material intensity" and "decoupling" of economic growth from material use.

• Popular Articles:

  • Look for articles discussing the future of the steel industry in publications like the Financial Times, The Economist, or specialized industry journals.

Steel Life Cycle

• Stages:

  1. Raw material extraction (iron ore, coal, limestone)

  2. Steelmaking (basic oxygen furnace, electric arc furnace)

  3. Manufacturing into finished products

  4. Use in construction, vehicles, etc.

  5. End-of-life recycling or disposal

• Scholarly Articles:

  • "Life Cycle Assessment of Steel Production" (Search on Google Scholar for specific studies)

  • Research on "circular economy" and "industrial ecology" related to steel

• Popular Articles:

  • Reports from organizations like the World Steel Association or the American Iron and Steel Institute often have lifecycle overviews.

Supply Chains

• Complexity: Steel supply chains are global, involving:

  • Mining companies

  • Transportation networks (ships, trains, trucks)

  • Steel producers

  • Manufacturers

  • Distributors

• Scholarly Articles:

  • "Global Steel Supply Chains: Challenges and Opportunities" (Search on Google Scholar)

  • Research on "supply chain resilience" and "risk management" in the steel industry

• Popular Articles:

  • Trade publications like Metal Bulletin or American Metal Market cover steel supply chain dynamics.

Energy Requirements

• High Energy Intensity: Steelmaking is energy-intensive, primarily due to:

  • The need for high temperatures in furnaces

  • The use of coal as a reducing agent

• Scholarly Articles:

  • "Energy Efficiency in Steelmaking" (Search on Google Scholar for studies on specific technologies)

  • Research on "low-carbon steel" and "hydrogen-based steelmaking"

• Popular Articles:

  • Reports from the International Energy Agency (IEA) on the steel sector's energy use and emissions.

Steel's Role in Modern Economies

• Essential Material: Steel is fundamental to:

  • Construction (buildings, infrastructure)

  • Transportation (vehicles, ships, railways)

  • Manufacturing (machinery, tools)

• GDP Growth: Steel demand is strongly linked to economic activity and industrial development.

• Scholarly Articles:

  • "The Role of Steel in Economic Development" (Search on Google Scholar)

  • Research on "material flows" and "resource dependence" in relation to economic growth

• Popular Articles:

  • World Bank or IMF reports may discuss the importance of basic materials like steel in economic development.

Where to Find Information

• Google Scholar: A great starting point for scholarly articles.

• World Steel Association:

https://www.worldsteel.org/

• American Iron and Steel Institute:

https://www.steel.org/

• Industry Publications: Look for specialized journals and magazines covering the steel sector.

• Think Tanks and Research Institutes: Search for reports from organizations focused on materials, energy, or industrial policy.

Key Search Terms

• "Peak steel"

• "Steel life cycle assessment"

• "Steel supply chain"

• "Energy intensity of steelmaking"

• "Low-carbon steel"

• "Steel and Economic Growth"

• "Material flows"

We must learn how our world works if we are to have any impact on decisions impacting all of us. There are no excuses. We have the information and tools needed to make good decisions. We must hold power accountable and understand the risks and benefits of our economic activities.

---

We are experiencing a crisis of fundamental values. If international law were enforceable, we would need to make ecocide illegal, which would end our current socioeconomic system. Valuing living systems above all is the prime value we need for a better world. Changing our core values is a monumental task that requires a revolutionary new way of thinking about our place in the world.

Today, unlike in the past, many people know the challenges and existential threats we face in great detail, and many have solutions to the many crises we face. But who will sacrifice to implement them? Many still seek a viable, habitable socioeconomic system and culture fit for posterity. When this long-suffering civilization falls, what’s next? How painful and violent does the dissolution of our global system have to be? Why do we keep making the same mistakes? Why do civilizations fall?

Why aren’t you a revolutionary? Maybe you think things are good the way they are or that revolution is violent and destructive, and you want no part of it. Think about it and answer the question for yourself.

OK, so what was your answer?

Can enough people ever agree on a reasonable socioeconomic system that would allow more people to thrive without destroying our habitat and driving life to extinction? If you think it’s possible to find a better way of doing things, perhaps we need to get busy creating this way of life, this new social system, and acquire the power to pursue its development. If you think our nature is to continue our past ways only with deadlier and more destructive tools and systems with the hope that scientists, engineers, and technologists will invent ways to repair the damage they inflicted because, in all their magnanimity, they want to give ordinary people a better life, than faithful optimism, hope, and focusing on culture wars, and other trite diversions while endeavoring to make more money may be enough to find contentment.

---

Let’s explore the potential for a revolutionary 21st-century Revolution.

REVOLUTION

noun

1. an overthrow or repudiation and the thorough replacement of an established government or political system by the people governed.

2. Sociology. a radical and pervasive change in society and the social structure, especially one made suddenly and often accompanied by violence. Compare social evolution.

3. a sudden, complete or marked change in something:

   the present revolution in church architecture.

4. a procedure or course, as if in a circuit, back to a starting point.

5. a single turn of this kind.

   Synonyms: rotation, round, circuit, cycle

6. Mechanics.

   1. a turning round or rotating, as on an axis.

   2. a moving in a circular or curving course, as about a central point.

   3. a single cycle in such a course.

7. Astronomy.

   1. (not in technical use) rotation ( def 2 ).

   2. the orbiting of one heavenly body around another.

   3. a single course of such movement.

8. a round or cycle of events in time or a recurring period of time.

9. Geology. a time of worldwide orogeny and mountain-building.

OK, so why revolt? Do we want a revolutionary new socioeconomic system and culture focused on maintaining health and habitability within the limits and potentialities of our biosphere?

Do we want to find ways to thrive in a simpler world while we carefully and caringly learn about Nature? We must slow down, wise up, and ensure our creation suits living systems. We must focus on how we live and understand what makes a healthy, thriving, loving, caring, strong, resilient, and creative person.

Why do we struggle with so many addictions? Why do we need drugs for lifestyle diseases? Could a simpler life be a happier and healthier life?

We are not consumers; we are not isolated individuals; we are social animals dependent on living systems. A healthy life begets a healthy life.

Open your heart and mind to Nature. Nature is always telling us things and showing us how to live. Those who believe in God should be curious about God’s creation and thankful for our ability to learn about it. We may never know all that the Creator knows, but it’s evident that we evolved to inquire about how Nature works. Learning about Nature is not one of the Seven Deadly Sins.

The purpose and results of inquiry, industry, and creativity make them “good” or “bad.”

The “Christian West” is supposed to align with The Seven Heavenly Virtues: the "fruits of the Spirit," love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, equanimity, wisdom, and self-control." Who deserves such grace? I say life itself requires it from the so-called “wise” ape.

What’s the core problem?

Hundreds write and talk about our problems. They are self-styled experts, some with years of experience in related domains and others autodidacts who have spent decades exploring associated fields. What are they doing other than recycling information we already know? They are shouting fire!

“We’ve got problems, and I know all about them and want you to know, too!” —Concerned Citizen

Education and awareness are essential, but most people will not realize the need for radical change until so many people are involved that they must jump on the bandwagon. Fighting for something new has to be fashionable.

Wealthy and Powerful Players of The Great Game 2.0 21st Century have, through the random meanderings of history and by design, engineered structures and systems constituting a wealth pump that consistently increases their control over resources and populations worldwide via a complex interplay of economic, political, technological forces targeting a vulnerable public primed to believe.

Let’s briefly tour the conventional, profitable mainstream analysis of concerning issues.

---

OXFAM

Message to Congress

We are alarmed by extreme inequality in the United States and around the world. In the past three years, we’ve seen a surge in extreme wealth while progress against global poverty has stalled. The world’s five richest men have more than doubled their fortunes since 2020—at a rate of $14 million per hour—while five billion people have become poorer. 

The ultra-rich have created a new era of consolidated corporate and monopoly power that gives them both immense wealth and excessive control over our lives and our economy. 

Seven out of ten of the world’s biggest corporations have a billionaire CEO or principal shareholder. Meanwhile, people around the world are working harder and longer hours, often for poverty wages, in precarious and unsafe jobs. 

It’s time to curb the influence and power of billionaires and corporations. 

We urge you to take the following actions today to create a more equal future for everyone:

• Cap CEO pay;

• Empower workers by supporting living wages, unionization, and paid sick and family leave;

• Break up monopolies;

• Implement new taxes on the super-rich and corporations, including permanent wealth and excess profit taxes, and

• Invest in public services

Oxfam estimates that a wealth tax on the world’s multi-millionaires and billionaires could generate $1.8 trillion a year. This money could be used to invest in public services and infrastructure and to support climate action initiatives that could better everyone’s lives, not just an ultra-wealthy few. 

Thank you for taking action to build a more equal future for all of us.

---

The largest corporations have achieved near-monopoly status in many sectors, allowing them to dictate prices, stifle competition, rent seek, and amass vast wealth. Read Peter Thiel’s book “Zero to One.” This economic power translates into political power and significant social control. We have seen this throughout history, but this time, people seem more powerless than ever to push back despite constant isolated movements and demonstrations erupting here and there like The Arab Spring, Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter, Extinction Rebellion, etc., that only appear, in the end, to pacify or divide us even more.

Global economic growth and development have been strident for hundreds of years with many positive outcomes, yet people sense something is wrong.

If we’ve made so much positive progress, why are we still fighting over the same issues and facing new, complex, and chaotic existential threats?

Economic Power and Political Influence: The Impact of Industry Structure on Public Policy

Political scientists have devoted considerable attention to the ways in which economic power can be translated into political influence. Yet there has been little empirical research capable of confirming or denying general hypotheses about the political implications of various aspects of economic structure. This article seeks to begin filling this gap by first identifying five aspects of economic structure likely to affect an industry's political influence (firm size, industry size, market concentration, profitability, arid geographic dispersion) and then testing these aspects by analyzing how well they account for variations among industries in their success at securing public policies of benefit to them, especially in two policy arenas: federal corporate income taxes and state excise taxes. What emerges most clearly from this analysis is an empirical confirmation of the popular hypothesis linking firm size to political influence with respect to both federal corporate tax policy and state excise tax policy. Beyond that, we find reasonably strong negative relationships between political influence and market concentration, profitability, and industry size – the latter lending interesting support to Mancur Olson's argument about the political disabilities of large groups. In the process, the article suggests a potentially fruitful new way to get beyond the case study approach in studying the impact of economic power on political influence, and thus a way to bring to bear more powerful methodological tools on this central issue of modern democracy.

The increasing importance of financialized capital and complex, opaque financial derivatives have empowered those who control investment flows. They can reward or punish companies and even countries based on their alignment with their interests. We have watched this for decades. Financialization and the power of global capital continue to increase with no end in sight. Those with access to financial mechanisms and capital never pay any price when bubbles burst; only ordinary people get crushed.

How long can this continue before people fight back in desperate ways? What will powerful, influential Players have to do to pacify the public once and for all?

The hope is that it will trickle down. Doing your best to ensure a good outcome is essential, hopium is dangerous.

Do multinational corporations exploit foreign workers? Q&A with David Levine

In trade debates, multinational corporations are often cast as villains exploiting low-wage workers in countries with weaker labor laws at the expense of Americans. But do multinationals actually exploit foreign workers?

Global corporations can exploit differences in labor costs (labor arbitrage), environmental regulations, and tax laws to maximize profits (The Capital Code), often at the expense of workers and communities. These are some of the main reasons China could develop so quickly. Globalization is good in some ways; it promotes economic growth, brings people out of poverty, and provides development opportunities, but its current iteration does more harm than good.

What does it mean to be rich or poor?

Globalization has made us believe we live in a world where infinite economic growth and material wealth can continue indefinitely. However, our current economic ideology never considers the broader consequences and costs (externalities). We are reaching our limits regarding the advantages of globalization and will soon have to pay the price. We ignore the damage our way of life inflicts on our environment, ecological systems, and habitats, perpetrating a grave crime against Nature and humanity.

ecocide

/ˈiːkə(ʊ)sʌɪd,ˈɛkə(ʊ)sʌɪd/

noun

noun: ecocide

1. destruction of the natural environment by deliberate or negligent human action.

   "their crime is nothing less than attempted ecocide"

Multinationals, Wages, and Working Conditions in Developing Countries

Do multinational firms exploit workers in poor nations? In The Effects of Multinational Production on Wages and Working Conditions in Developing Countries (NBER Working Paper No. 9669, originally presented at the 2002 NBER International Seminar on International Trade), authors Drusilla Brown, Alan Deardorff, and Robert Stern offer a resounding "no." Indeed, the authors conclude that "there is virtually no careful and systematic evidence demonstrating that...multinational firms adversely affect their workers, provide incentives to worsen working conditions, pay lower wages than in alternative employment, or repress worker rights." In fact, they argue, the opposite is true.

Their paper begins with an overview of two influential organizations involved in the anti-sweatshop movement: the Fair Labor Association (FLA), and the Worker Rights Consortium (WRC). The FLA was created in 1998 as an outgrowth of Apparel Industry Partnership established by the Clinton administration, while the WRC is the product of student movements on U.S. campuses. Although the groups differ on specific issues-such as the establishment of a "living wage" and the choice of confrontation versus dialogue as campaign tactics-they have both sought to provide codes of conduct and to monitor multinational firms that produce apparel and related items for colleges and universities.

Academic economists have different responses to these debates. In September 2000, a group of economists (including Deardorff and Stern) formed the Academic Consortium on International Trade (ACIT). It circulated a letter to presidents of 600 academic institutions, urging that greater attention be given to the possibility that mandating codes of conduct and higher wages in response to the anti-sweatshop advocates actually could be detrimental to workers in poor countries. In October 2001, a rival group called Scholars Against Sweatshop Labor (SASL) wrote a letter to some 1600 academic presidents, expressing their support for the activist movements.

Further, a careful examination of economic theory on capital and technology flows fails to reveal any unambiguous conclusions regarding the impact of multinational production on wages in host countries, the authors contend. "There seems to be a presumption...that FDI [foreign direct investment] will at least raise some wages, but even this is not certain..." they explain. "It is therefore an empirical question whether the actual operations of multinationals have raised or lowered wages in developing countries."

I’m providing information straight out of the prevailing sociological programming to orient ourselves within the sweeping landscape of our prominent socioeconomic ideology. Academics, economists, and social critics have debated these questions since the 19th century (far before that, but let’s stay within the modern, techno-industrial context). Within the system’s logic, there are good reasons to believe that we are supporting the best of all possible socio-political-economic systems and that it’s only a matter of time and victorious wars before Fukuyama’s “End of History” is achieved and we can all live like Americans. This is a delusional fantasy. The end of history will be the end of our species because we couldn’t or wouldn’t learn how Big Nature works because we refused to understand complex systems, interconnectedness, and interdependence, respect our limitations, and patiently evolve in harmony with reality.

Political Influence

Wealthy corporations spend vast sums on lobbying and campaign contributions to influence legislation and ensure favorable policies. The corruption is loud, in your face, on your screens, and we’ve all noticed it by now, even if we are busy finding a safe parking lot to sleep in or getting tickets to the Super Bowl.

A handful of wealthy donors dominate electoral giving and spending in the United States. We need limits on campaign finance, transparency, effective enforcement of these rules, and public financing. But even if we did this, it would only prolong the inevitable dissolution of civilization.

Today, thanks to Supreme Court decisions like Citizens United, big money dominates political campaigns to a degree not seen in decades. Super PACs allow billionaires to pour unlimited amounts into campaigns, drowning out the voices of ordinary Americans. Dark money groups mask the identities of their donors, preventing voters from knowing who’s trying to influence them. And races for a congressional seat regularly attract tens of millions in spending. It’s no wonder that most people believe the super-wealthy have much more influence than the rest of us. 

Though Citizens United opened the floodgates to unlimited independent spending, the Supreme Court continues to uphold limits on direct contributions, but these limits are being swept aside with every election.

Brennan Center for Justice advocates for tighter limits on contributions candidates can directly receive.

We also call for stricter rules to ensure unlimited political spending by non-candidates really is independent of candidates. And we advocate for greater transparency of who pays for political ads, because voters deserve to know. To meet these standards, elections at every level require fair and effective enforcement, beginning with a better-functioning Federal Election Commission. 

The movement of individuals between the government and the private sector creates conflicts of interest and allows corporations to capture regulatory agencies. Funding think tanks and media outlets allows the wealthy to shape public discourse and promote their agenda. Can this change at the current scale of civilization? We are stuck in feedback loops inherent to metastatic modernity.

Welcome once again to oligarchic chaos and the oligarchy is global.

The world’s richest people are done feigning concern for vulnerable communities or our democracy. Trump can do whatever he wants, and they can, too

Not so long ago, some of the ultra-wealthy and big corporations would feign disgust with Trump. They paid lip service to social justice movements and pledged to make paltry efforts to reduce their climate impact. That’s all over now. America’s oligarchs are done pretending — there is too much money to be made and power to be amassed together. They’ll get to keep their Trump tax cuts, and can expect to receive more. The government investigations of their businesses and regulatory scrutiny will end. All they have to do is act like—or freely admit—they support Trump and his policies. Fit in, show respect, and get paid—keep your job. 

Why do we keep repeating the same mistakes over and over again?

Sometimes we stick with certain behaviour patterns, and repeat our mistakes because of an “ego effect” that compels us to stick with our existing beliefs. We are likely to selectively choose the information structures and feedback that help us protect our egos.

For the first time, behavioural and data scientist, activist and writer Dr Pragya Agarwal unravels the way our implicit or 'unintentional' biases affect the way we communicate and perceive the world, how they affect our decision-making, and how they reinforce and perpetuate systemic and structural inequalities.

Sway is a thoroughly researched and comprehensive look at unconscious bias and how it impacts day-to-day life, from job interviews to romantic relationships to saving for retirement. It covers a huge number of sensitive topics - sexism, racism, ageism, homophobia, colourism - with tact, and combines statistics with stories to paint a fuller picture and enhance understanding. Throughout, Pragya clearly delineates theories with a solid grounding in science, answering questions such as: do our roots for prejudice lie in our evolutionary past? What happens in our brains when we are biased? How has bias affected technology? If we don't know about it, are we really responsible for it?

At a time when partisan political ideologies are taking centre stage, and we struggle to make sense of who we are and who we want to be, it is crucial that we understand why we act the way we do. This book will enables us to open our eyes to our own biases in a scientific and non-judgmental way.

Not influential but useful: rethinking how we assess and support think tanks

By  Enrique Mendizabal

18 July 2024

Think tanks enable political philanthropists to support politics indirectly. By funding think tanks, donors can contribute to political discourse and policy development without engaging directly in the political arena. This is why Orbán is funding a think tank in Brussels and why hundreds of millions are poured into think tanks across the world by political philanthropists.  Even bilateral and multilateral funders, whose rules and regulations bar them from engaging in political campaigning will, knowingly and strategically, support think tanks aligned to their preferred policy and political agendas.

Technological Control

This is a vast and constantly developing subject with potentially dire consequences. There are server farms of information and libraries full of good books dedicated to the topic.

Presently, the United States is in a fight to the death with China over technological supremacy.

Chinese AI Firm DeepSeek Deep-Sixes US Tech Stocks

Tech giants collect vast amounts of data on individuals, which can be used for targeted advertising, manipulation, and social control. We give these companies a valuable commodity: our time, attention, thoughts, ideas, feelings, and work that they sell to governments and corporations for billions of dollars. Our online behavior is an industry that influences our decisions, creating more data that is mined for profit. It’s another pernicious feedback loop we must understand and gain more control over.

We need free agency to make our world more equitable and healthy. How should we use “Big Data?” Who decides?

Five Ways Your Data is Used to Surveil and Manipulate You

Big Tech is tracking your every move. From your conversations with friends and family that you thought were private, to your online searches across the internet and shopping history, and even your current location. Many of these companies are monetizing that data and weaponizing it to erode your agency, your rights, and your identity. Below are five ways Big Tech, data brokers, and other bad actors in the information ecosystem are collecting and exploiting your personal information.

The American Privacy Rights Act is Here to Help

Most people are unaware about what happens with the data that is collected from them. Americans don’t trust Big Tech and other companies that are exploiting their personal data to target and manipulate people. The American Privacy Rights Act (APRA) is needed to give Americans a unified set of privacy rights. 

The House Committee on Energy and Commerce, led by Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), is fighting to ensure that Americans are protected from exploitation, including from Big Tech, data brokers, and other bad actors in the big data business. APRA creates a comprehensive, national data privacy standard to ensure that all Americans are protected.  

APRA puts all Americans back in control of their personal data, protecting them and their kids. By minimizing the amount of data that can be collected, processed, retained, and transferred, Americans will have the right to control where their personal information goes and can ensure that Big Tech, data brokers, and other bad actors are held accountable. 

What will you do to protect your privacy? Do you have a spare hour a week to work with community members to pressure your leaders to do something about this? Do your leaders care about your concerns or their donor’s concerns? What will you do about how LLMs and AIs and AGI will use all the data we’re generating? As the world heats up and habitats are destroyed how will AI play a roll in exacerbating or alleviating disasters?

“You won’t get my vote or support, and we will boycott your corporate donors if they dismiss our concerns!” —Janice or Joe Q. Concerned Citizen

Algorithms used in social media and search engines reinforce existing inequalities and biases, further marginalizing vulnerable groups. Are there better ways to obtain services and build valuable networks without incurring damaging compromises with rent-seeking corporations? If you are not a shareholder, how do you benefit from social media and information technology?

What's the cost-benefit calculation?

I have been an early adopter for decades, and still, the question is relevant and not easy to answer when you think deeply about it. Information technology has been a game changer but not without its downside. We never hear of the material and energy costs of IT and the damaging externalities it entails. And how about the social, cultural, and psychological impacts?

Externalities of Electricity Generation

Externalities are effects which arise from electricity generation and which are not factored into any narrow economic consideration of the enterprise.

In particular, external costs are those actually incurred in relation to health and the environment and which are quantifiable, but are not built into the cost of the electricity and therefore are borne by society at large. They include particularly the effects of air pollution on human health, crop yields and buildings, as well as occupational disease and accidents. The impact of global warming is now generally included.

Study to inform government on impact of smartphones and social media on young people

Researchers are to look at the links between children’s mental health and smartphone and social media use as part of a Government commissioned research project.

With the Trump gang and its corporate lobbies in charge, it should be clear that questions like these will no longer be asked, and the government will no longer fund research on these topics. Global corporations will be free to do whatever they must to fuel the wealth pump that feeds the one percent.

Externalities? What externalities?

It’s petal to the metal as we accelerate toward greater profits and control of assets by a tiny minority of Players in the global economy until billions of people disappear and the world is made safe for TESCREAL fantasies and the reconfiguration of The Country Club.

“It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it.” —George Carlin

The TESCREAL bundle: Eugenics and the promise of utopia through artificial general intelligence

Abstract

The stated goal of many organizations in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) is to develop artificial general intelligence (AGI), an imagined system with more intelligence than anything we have ever seen. Without seriously questioning whether such a system can and should be built, researchers are working to create “safe AGI” that is “beneficial for all of humanity.” We argue that, unlike systems with specific applications which can be evaluated following standard engineering principles, undefined systems like “AGI” cannot be appropriately tested for safety. Why, then, is building AGI often framed as an unquestioned goal in the field of AI? In this paper, we argue that the normative framework that motivates much of this goal is rooted in the Anglo-American eugenics tradition of the twentieth century. As a result, many of the very same discriminatory attitudes that animated eugenicists in the past (e.g., racism, xenophobia, classism, ableism, and sexism) remain widespread within the movement to build AGI, resulting in systems that harm marginalized groups and centralize power, while using the language of “safety” and “benefiting humanity” to evade accountability. We conclude by urging researchers to work on defined tasks for which we can develop safety protocols, rather than attempting to build a presumably all-knowing system such as AGI.

OpenAI employee ‘terrified’ of AI pace quits ChatGPT creator

Steven Adler, who has worked at the California-based company since March 2022 – eight months before the launch of ChatGPT – revealed that he was stepping down amid concerns about the trajectory of AI development.

“Honestly I’m pretty terrified by the pace of AI development these days,” he said.

“When I think about where I’ll raise a future family, or how much to save for retirement, I can’t help but wonder: Will humanity even make it to that point?”

“An AGI race is a very risky gamble, with huge downside,” Mr Adler said.

“No lab has a solution to AI alignment [ensuring AI’s objectives match those of humans]. And the faster we race, the less likely that anyone finds one in time.

“Today, it seems like we’re stuck in a really bad equilibrium. Even if a lab truly wants to develop AGI responsibly, others can still cut corners to catch up, maybe disastrously. And this pushes all to speed up. I hope labs can be candid about real safety regs needed to stop this.”

We can’t even align with ourselves, our communities, our government, other nations, or the natural environment; we are about as fragmented and incoherent as we can get despite targeted torrents of information aimed at us day in and day out. We don’t even have a clear idea about all that can go wrong in an AGI arms race. Who read up on this stuff? Do you chat about these things at the water cooler at work?

The AI rivalry between China and the West, particularly the US, has intensified in recent years. The competition is not just about innovation but also about economic and political influence. AI has become a strategic asset, with both sides investing heavily in research, infrastructure, and talent acquisition.

In the US, companies such as OpenAI, Google DeepMind, and Anthropic are leading the charge, often with public and private sector collaboration.

In China, companies such as DeepSeek, Baidu, and Alibaba are advancing AI research under government-backed initiatives that align with national priorities. The Chinese government has made AI a top priority, with ambitious plans to lead the world in AI by 2030.

While each side promotes AI development as a force for progress, the lack of global alignment on ethical AI governance creates significant risks. The desire to lead the AI revolution means regulatory safeguards are often viewed as obstacles rather than necessities.

What is algorithmic bias?

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems use algorithms to discover patterns and insights in data, or to predict output values from a given set of input variables. Biased algorithms can impact these insights and outputs in ways that lead to harmful decisions or actions, promote or perpetuate discrimination and inequality, and erode trust in AI and the institutions that use AI. These impacts can create legal and financial risks for businesses. For example, per the EU AI Act, non-compliance with its prohibited AI practices can mean fines up to EUR 35,000,000 or 7% of worldwide annual turnover, whichever is higher.

Algorithmic bias is especially concerning when found within AI systems that support life-altering decisions in areas such as healthcare, law enforcement and human resources. Bias can enter algorithms in many ways, such as skewed or limited training input data, subjective programming decisions or result interpretation.

Mitigating algorithmic bias starts with applying AI governance principles, including transparency and explainability, across the AI lifecycle.

Information warfare, which spreads misinformation and disinformation, destabilizes societies and undermines trust in democratic institutions.

Mis- and disinformation

The spread of false and misleading information poses significant risks to the well-being of people and society. While such content is not necessarily illegal, it can contribute to polarisation, jeopardise the implementation of policies, and undermine trust in democratic institutions and processes. Action is required to strengthen the integrity of information spaces to protect freedom of expression and democratic engagement.

Access to diverse sources of information, plural and independent news sources, and free and open discourse are all needed to enable informed democratic debate. However, in today's digital and interconnected world, the spread of misinformation and disinformation poses a critical threat to the foundational elements of our societies. Its rapid proliferation undermines trust in institutions and elections, fuels societal divisions, and jeopardises public health initiatives, thereby threatening the very fabric of democracy and informed decision-making.

Who decides what quality information is? Are we empowered with the tools (critical thinking included) to discern misinformation and disinformation, or do we leave it up to someone or something else to decide? My God, another HUGE topic!

Coercive Forces

Corporations threaten to relocate jobs or investments to extract concessions from governments and workers. The wealthy use their influence to shape laws and regulations that benefit them at the expense of others. Tech companies control platforms and data to censor dissent, manipulate public opinion, and influence elections.

We’re Dangerously Close to Giving Big Tech Control Of Our Thoughts

Elon Musk has proclaimed himself to be a “free speech absolutist” though reports of the way employees of his companies have been treated when exercising their free speech rights to criticise him might indicate that his commitment to free speech has its limits. But as Musk’s bid to takeover Twitter progresses in fits and starts, the potential for anyone to access and control billions of opinions around the world for the right sum should focus all our minds on the need to protect an almost forgotten right—the right to freedom of thought.

In 1942 the U.S. Supreme Court wrote “Freedom to think is absolute of its own nature, the most tyrannical government is powerless to control the inward workings of the mind.” The assumption that getting inside our heads is a practical impossibility may have prevented lawyers and legislators from dwelling too much on putting in place regulation that protects our inner lives. But it has not stopped powerful people trying to access and control our minds for centuries.

At his trial for War Crimes in Nuremberg after the Second World War, Albert Speer, Hitler’s former Minister of Armaments, explaining the power of the Nazi’s propaganda machine said: “Through technical devices such as radio and loudspeaker 80 million people were deprived of independent thought. It was thereby possible to subject them to the will of one man…. Today the danger of being terrorized by technocracy threatens every country in the world.”

When whole communities are deprived of independent thought, it undermines their individual rights to freedom of thought and opinion. But it is not only a threat to the rights of the people who are manipulated. As the world saw with Nazi Germany, it becomes a threat to all our rights. Tragically, Speer’s warning is acutely resonant in the 21st-century as technology has been harnessed as an even more efficient tool for manipulation and control of the minds of populations with devastating consequences.

This article is from mainstream Time Magazine, and we now know precisely what this author was talking about and how things are going in 2025.

Fragmentation and Distraction

Promoting divisive social issues (culture wars, shiny objects) distracts from economic inequality and power abuses. The constant bombardment of advertising and pursuing material possessions keeps people focused on individual consumption rather than collective action. The proliferation of entertainment options provides an escape from reality and discourages critical thinking. All of these strategies are well-engineered, highly effective, and deliberate. We are being played! Bread & Circuses and culture wars have always existed; only now, the tools to create them and enforce their effects are exponentially more powerful and pernicious. Between various forms of media, streaming entertainment, information platforms, and the incredible financial and political power the corporations behind these mechanisms wield, it’s near impossible for ordinary people to understand its impact on their ideas, thoughts, and feelings.

Inequality, Culture War, and Imperiled Common Good: America and China

Despite rising inequality, daily life in both America and China is afflicted more by culture conflicts than class struggle. For many Americans, the numbers on rising inequality seem abstract and distant from daily experience. What ignites more intense passions are “culture wars”: struggles over moral visions stereotypically attributed to “liberal elites” and “populists,” battles over science and education, religion and secularism, gender and sexuality, racial inclusion and exclusion.

In China, too, surveys done by Martin Whyte and colleagues show a relative lack of concern about inequality, even among people at the lower end of the income spectrum. In China, although public conflicts – or at least the news about them – are suppressed, there is evidence of animus over “corruption” – perceived personal decadence coming together with an immoral use of personal guanxi – and within various sectors, against gender discrimination, religion, the civic inclusion of migrant laborers, and freedom of intellectual and emotional expression.

But in both societies, I think, these cultural conflicts are connected with rising inequality, and indeed in their current intensity are a manifestation of it. A simple Marxist explanation for this would be that ruling elites foment conflicts over culture to distract the masses from becoming mobilized against the rich. I don’t doubt that this is some part of the story, but I will argue that there is another important part, the social foundation for elite manipulation. Rather than drawing on Marx, I would recommend Max Weber’s account of the cultural conflicts of modernity.

The consolidation of power by the wealthiest individuals and global corporations poses a serious threat to democracy and social justice. The combination of economic dominance, political influence, and technological control creates a system of inverted totalitarianism, where the masses are pacified and controlled through a combination of coercion and distraction. It is crucial to recognize these trends and resist the further concentration of power in the hands of the few.

Politics and Vision is a landmark work by one of the great thinkers of the twentieth century. This is a significantly expanded edition of one of the greatest works of modern political theory. Sheldon Wolin's Politics and Vision inspired and instructed two generations of political theorists after its appearance in 1960. Substantially expanded for republication in 2004, it is both a sweeping survey of Western political thought and a powerful account of contemporary predicaments of power and democracy. In lucid and compelling prose, Sheldon Wolin offers original, subtle, and often surprising interpretations of political theorists from Plato to Rawls. Situating them historically while sounding their depths, he critically engages their diverse accounts of politics, theory, power, justice, citizenship, and institutions. The new chapters, which show how thinkers have grappled with the immense possibilities and dangers of modern power, are themselves a major theoretical statement. They culminate in Wolin’s remarkable argument that the United States has invented a new political form, "inverted totalitarianism,“ in which economic rather than political power is dangerously dominant. In this expanded edition, the book that helped to define political theory in the late twentieth century should energize, enlighten, and provoke generations of scholars to come.

Wolin originally wrote Politics and Vision to challenge the idea that political analysis should consist simply of the neutral observation of objective reality. He argues that political thinkers must also rely on creative vision. Wolin shows that great theorists have been driven to shape politics to some vision of the Good that lies outside the existing political order. As he tells it, the history of theory is thus, in part, the story of changing assumptions about the Good.

Acclaimed as a tour de force when it was first published, and a major scholarly event when the expanded edition appeared, Politics and Vision will instruct, inspire, and provoke for generations to come.

What if we are pushed too far?

Train your information algorithms on searches for polycrisis, existential threats, pollution, oceanography, meteorology, science, climate change, global heating, global warming, AMOC, plastic pollution, ocean plastics, green washing, green bashing, glacial melting, fisheries, factory farming, sugar, fast food, type 2 diabedies, mental health, lifestyle diseases, gene editing, life cycle assessment, Greenland, the Panama Canal, soil erosion, chemical fertilizers, resource extraction, overshoot, endocrine disrupters, pfos, inequality, financial derivatives, banking crisis, debt crisis, war, fifth generation warfare, drone warfare, proxy wars, failed states, police actions, militarization, immigration, the sixth extinction, bio-diversity, globalization, financialization, wealth pump, hedge funds, robotics, economics, corruption, neoliberalism, neoconservatism, NRx, imperialism, colonialism, neocolonialism, racism, proxy wars, regime change wars, Gaza, Zionism, Christian Zionism, radical Islam, religious fanaticism, pandemic, artificial intelligence, AGI, robotics, oligarchy, plutocracy, deindustrialization, modern monetary theory, budget deficits, deforestation, the Amazon, Ponzi scheme, satellite collision, libertarianism, digitization, transhumanism, singularity, tech bros, technocracy, modernity, industrial revolution, the commons, fire season, peak oil, carbon emissions, audience capture, dark psychology, dark tetrad, Alt-Right, fascism, Empire, civilizational collapse, color revolution, deep State, modern slavery, human trafficking, drug wars, addiction, trauma, PTSD, failed State, energy, entropy, thermodynamics, population, water crisis, etc. This should get you started.

I know you just got back from the playoff game. Your team won, and you are still full of burgers and fries and a bit tipsy from the tailgate party before the game. So you stopped off at the neighborhood bar with friends to bask in the warm glow of victory. Or you stayed home and watched the game, seeing all those happy people in all the advertisements. You spent a moment of silence for the victims of the LA fires and were thankful for the first responders. You support the troops. It’s all good!

That’s what Germans thought during The Weimar Republic. That’s what people feel after surviving a catastrophe (WWI); it’s euphoric when things go well again. When you think you can pay off your loans. But when things start turning for the worse again, before you realize things are a bit off, it’s often too late to do anything about it, and you’re stuck reacting to a nasty situation. If only you had followed your intuition and done something before it was too late.

The Sun Also Rises, one character asks, “How did you go bankrupt?” The other responds, “Two ways: gradually, then suddenly.”

A thrilling day-by-day account of the final months of the Weimar Republic, documenting the collapse of democracy in Germany and Hitler’s frightening rise to power.

November 1932. With the German economy in ruins and street battles raging between rival political parties, the Weimar Republic is on its last legs. In the halls of the Reichstag, party leaders scramble for power and influence as the elderly president, Paul von Hindenburg, presides over a democracy pushed to the breaking point. Chancellors Franz von Papen and Kurt von Schleicher spin a web of intrigue, vainly hoping to harness the growing popularity of Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Party while reining in its most extreme elements. These politicians struggle for control of a turbulent city where backroom deals and frightening public rallies alike threaten the country’s fragile democracy, with terrifying consequences for both Germany and the rest of the world.

In The Last Winter of the Weimar Republic, Barth and Friedrichs have drawn on a wide array of primary sources to produce a colorful, multi-layered portrait of a period that was by no means predestined to plunge into the abyss, and which now seems disturbingly familiar.

Read history. His stories about his wars.

“We learn from history that we do not learn from history.” —Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, 1770-1831

How can we avoid a deadly and destructive crash? (Your thoughts?)

That’s a big question. Learn about airline safety or crash investigation and think about all the training, processes, technologies, management systems, etc., implemented by expert professionals and constantly updated based on new information to keep all of us traveling 24/7, 365 days a year.

Every day, FAA's Air Traffic Organization (ATO) provides service to more than 45,000 flights and 2.9 million airline passengers across more than 29 million square miles of airspace. With an airspace system as vast and complex as ours, it is helpful to have an easy-to-reference source for relevant facts and information. View the infographic below for a glimpse into ATO, or for more information, see Air Traffic by the Numbers (PDF).* based on FY23 figures

Repeat this for dozens of services we take for granted. It’s truly marvelous. The modern world is fantastic but also more fragile than you think.

Think of all the “Dirty Jobs.”

It’s difficult, complex, and complicated to make the world work for the modern wealth pump that depends on economic growth and a constant, deadly competition for control of vital resources. Suppose professionals, political and business leaders, bureaucrats, technocrats, law enforcement professionals, and regulators are responsible, efficient, and committed to maintaining the trust of the masses. In that “best of all possible worlds,” the system continues until it destroys the biosphere we depend on to exist. At some point, the failures in complex systems multiply into catastrophic cascades. Within the systems and structures we’ve developed from the dawn of modernity, it is inevitable that sooner or later, there will be absolute failure, resulting in billions of people dying prematurely.

That’s the way the cookie crumbles.

Many people feel things have been off for a long time. Everything leading up to this moment has been a constant battle between the interests of different groups of people. One faction wins, and the other loses. What goes up must come down. You reap what you sow—the calm after the storm. Every cloud has a silver lining. There are periods when things are stable, and a culture develops that produces beautiful things, but every culture shifts, and things fall apart. For every action, there is a reaction. Life is not sunshine and rainbows. No pain, no gain. There is a light at the end of the tunnel.

Since we are all good people with access to high-quality information about how things work, we could all be part of the solutions necessary to ensure the worst possible outcomes are averted, but, by design, we are too tired, too stressed, and too busy to do the work required. We gave at church, tithed ten percent of our wages, volunteered, and voted. We all do what we can.

Besides, the billionaires and philanthropists will take care of us.

---

Let’s continue to contextualize our current situation. Later, we will explore positive and peaceful ways we might want to employ to change things.

In 1939, Arnold J. Toynbee wrote, “The challenge of being called upon to create a political world order, the framework for an economic world order… now confronts our Modern Western society.” It seems the world is always in great danger from something or another. The Fall of the West has been happening since there were people with ideas of what “The West” is.

Since its first publication in two volumes between 1918-1923, The Decline of the West has ranked as one of the most widely read and most talked about books of our time. In all its various editions, it has sold nearly 100,000 copies. A twentieth-century Cassandra, Oswald Spengler thoroughly probed the origin and "fate" of our civilization, and the result can be (and has been) read as a prophesy of the Nazi regime. His challenging views have led to harsh criticism over the years, but the knowledge and eloquence that went into his sweeping study of Western culture have kept The Decline of the West alive. As the face of Germany and Europe as a whole continues to change each day, The Decline of the West cannot be ignored.
The abridgment, prepared by the German scholar Helmut Werner, with the blessing of the Spengler estate, consists of selections from the original (translated into English by Charles Francis Atkinson) linked by explanatory passages which have been put into English by Arthur Helps. H. Stuart Hughes has written a new introduction for this edition.
In this engrossing and highly controversial philosophy of history, Spengler describes how we have entered into a centuries-long "world-historical" phase comparable to late antiquity. Guided by the philosophies of Goethe and Nietzsche, he rejects linear progression, and instead presents a world view based on the cyclical rise and decline of civilizations. He argues that a culture blossoms from the soil of a definable landscape and dies when it has exhausted all of its possibilities.
Despite Spengler's reputation today as an extreme pessimist, The Decline of the West remains essential reading for anyone interested in the history of civilization.

Toynbee focused on civilizational cycles, universalism, the role of the West, and world order in the context of the formation of post-WWII institutions and policies such as The United Nations and the Bretton Woods system, viewing them as initial steps toward a new world order. He was concerned with the Cold War ideological conflict between capitalism and communism, urging the West to offer a compelling vision for a global order that could transcend these divisions and challenges posed by decolonization and the emergence of new nations, requiring a rethinking of global power structures.

Federalism in the History of Thought

“The biosphere has been able to harbour life because the biosphere has been a self-regulating association of mutually complementary components, and, before the emergence of Man, no single component of the biosphere... ever acquired the power to upset the delicately adjusted balance of the play of forces by means of which the biosphere has become a hospitable home for life...Man is the first of the biosphere’s denizens that is more potent than the biosphere itself... Man can succeed in surviving till he has wrecked the biosphere.”

People have had a profound impact on the biosphere for thousands of years. Add fossil-fueled modern techno-industrial capitalism to the mix, and our impact accelerates and broadens exponentially. We are already in a desperate world war to control diminishing resources. The neocolonial U.S. empire must extract more resources globally than ever before to ensure its hegemony. Population size and demographics will significantly affect the nature of 21st-century revolutions. The plutocratic and oligarchic class of powerful elites are already in a panic over this. All forms of social control using unprecedented robust and complex technology, data systems, surveillance systems, etc., are currently deployed to keep young people domesticated, pacified, and dreaming.

Top-tier educational institutions in the West churn out class after class of financial and legal service providers, technical engineers, and want-to-be Players of The Great Game 2.0 21st Century to staff an all-or-nothing competition for what elite factions want to control—energy and resources. This is a self-terminating, metastatic Great Game played by grotesquely corrupt Players. The Great Game is incoherent (from a Natural-Systems perspective); a pathological, destructive proto-religious socioeconomic system will eventually collapse due to its internal contradictions and ignorance of systems and complexity theory regarding ecology and habitability.

I also believe The Players have warped, self-serving concepts regarding human nature.

Peopled by larger-than-life heroes and villains, charged with towering questions of good and evil, Atlas Shrugged is Ayn Rand’s magnum opus: a philosophical revolution told in the form of an action thriller—nominated as one of America’s best-loved novels by PBS’s The Great American Read.

Who is John Galt? When he says that he will stop the motor of the world, is he a destroyer or a liberator? Why does he have to fight his battles not against his enemies but against those who need him most? Why does he fight his hardest battle against the woman he loves?

You will know the answer to these questions when you discover the reason behind the baffling events that play havoc with the lives of the amazing men and women in this book. You will discover why a productive genius becomes a worthless playboy...why a great steel industrialist is working for his own destruction...why a composer gives up his career on the night of his triumph...why a beautiful woman who runs a transcontinental railroad falls in love with the man she has sworn to kill.

Atlas Shrugged, a modern classic and Rand’s most extensive statement of Objectivism—her groundbreaking philosophy—offers the reader the spectacle of human greatness, depicted with all the poetry and power of one of the twentieth century’s leading artists.

An educated and wise populous from diverse backgrounds should know better than to allow these insults to Life to occur, but we have been programmed to focus on trivialities. Ordinary people are fodder for a wealth-generation machine that funnels money, power, and control to the top. The coders of capital have rigged the economy to benefit themselves regardless of collateral damage.

What we are experiencing now is unprecedented. Top experts with a nuanced and profound understanding of history, social, and scientific domains are hard-pressed to find comparisons with past drivers of social upheavals and dramatic change.

Maintaining Earth systems for habitual posterity through a global revolution will require phenomenal wisdom, intelligence, imagination, and creativity. Has our social system in the West or elsewhere produced such people?

---

12.1: History of Human Population Growth

Since 1700, human population size (shaded in teal) has increased. It reached 1 billion in 1803, 2 billion in 1928, 2.5 billion in 1950, 5 billion in 1987, and 7.7 billion in 2019. It is projected to reach 10.9 billion in 2100. The population growth rate (pink line) was only 0.04% on average between 10,000 BCE and 1700. The population growth rate peaked in 1968  at 2.1%, and since then, it has slowed to 1.08% in 2019 and is projected to be at 0.1% in 2100. Image by Max Roser (2013) "Future Population Growth". Published online at OurWorldInData.org. (CC-BY)

The paradigm of all models of growth and decline is the Hubbert model. Here is how it appeared for the first time, in a paper published by Marion King Hubbert in 1956 where he showed his prediction for crude oil production in the 48 US lower states.

The fundamental cause of the acceleration of the growth rate for humans in the past 200 years has been the reduced death rate due to changes in public health and sanitation. Clean drinking water and proper disposal of sewage have drastically improved health in developed nations. Also, medical innovations such as the use of antibiotics and vaccines have decreased the ability of infectious diseases to limit human population growth. In the past, diseases such as the bubonic plague of the fourteenth century killed between 30 and 60 percent of Europe’s population and reduced the overall world population by as many as one hundred million people. Naturally, infectious disease continues to have an impact on human population growth, especially in poorer nations. For example, life expectancy in sub-Saharan Africa, which was increasing from 1950 to 1990, began to decline after 1985, primarily as a result of HIV/AIDS mortality. According to a 2016 study by Marcus et al., The reduction in life expectancy caused by HIV/AIDS was estimated to be 8 years in 2016.

Human technology, particularly our harnessing of the energy contained in fossil fuels, has caused unprecedented changes to Earth’s environment, altering ecosystems to the point where some may be in danger of collapse. Changes on a global scale, including depletion of the ozone layer, desertification and topsoil loss, and global climate change, are caused by human activities.

Demographic Transition

Recall from the Populations chapter that the population growth rate (r) equals the birth rate minus the death rate. Slowly declining birth rates following an earlier sharp decline in death rates are today characteristic of most of the less-developed regions of the world. The shift from high birth and death rates to low birth as well as death rates is called the demographic transition.

Prior to World War II, advances in public health were largely limited to affluent, industrialized countries. But since then, many more countries have enjoyed improvements in public health - always with dramatic effect on death rates. For example, in 1945, the death rate in Sri Lanka (then called Ceylon) was 0.022 (2.2%). In 1946, a large-scale program to control mosquitos, which transmit malaria, was started. By eliminating the mosquito, the incidence of malaria dropped sharply. After 9 years, the death rate dropped to 0.010 (1%), and by 2012 was 0.006 (0.6%). However, a compensating decline in birth rates has come more slowly; the birth rate was 0.018 (1.8% in 2012). With birth rates higher than death rates, the population was increasing at an annual rate of 0.012 (1.2%) per year, with a doubling time of 57.5 years (t = 0.69/0.012).

[Toynbee argues that civilizations are born out of more primitive societies, not as the result of racial or environmental factors, but as a response to challenges, such as “hard” country, new ground, blows and pressures from other civilizations, and penalization. He argues that for civilizations to be born, the challenge must be a golden mean; that excessive challenge will crush the civilization, and too little challenge will cause it to stagnate. He argues that civilizations continue to grow only when they meet one challenge, which is only to be met by another, in a continuous cycle of “Challenge and Response.” He argues that civilizations develop in different ways due to their various environments and approaches to their challenges. He argues that growth is driven by “Creative Minorities”: those who find solutions to difficulties and inspire (rather than compel) others to follow their innovative lead. This is done through the “faculty of mimesis.” Creative minorities find solutions to a civilization's challenges, while the great masses follow these solutions by imitation, solutions they otherwise would be incapable of discovering on their own.]

Toynbee Quotes

“Civilizations die from suicide, not by murder.”

“It is a paradox of history that each civilization has a birthday, but no death day.”

“Great civilizations are not conquered from without until they have destroyed themselves within.”

“We are not doomed to make history repeat itself; it is open to us, through our own efforts, to give history, in our case, some new and unprecedented turn.“

“The supreme accomplishment is to blur the line between work and play.”

“Apathy can only be overcome by enthusiasm, and enthusiasm can only be aroused by two things: first, an ideal which takes the imagination by storm, and second, a definite intelligible plan for carrying that ideal into practice.”

“The human race’s prospects of survival were considerably better when we were defenseless against tigers than they are today when we have become defenseless against ourselves.”

“Our age will be well remembered, not for its horrifying crimes or its astonishing inventions, but because it is the first generation since the dawn of history that has dared to believe it practical to make the benefits of civilization available to the whole human race.”

“Religion is the serious business of the human race.” —from Civilization on Trial, Oxford University Press, 1948

“Love is a rare and precious thing; to be cherished and nurtured.”

---

Linear and progressive views of history have dominated the popular imagination for the past seventy years in a worldview wedded to the inexorable rise of globalisation and GDP-growth at any cost. However, the end of the Cold War failed to produce the end of history as hoped, a fact brought home to many by Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Material wealth and 'Progress' in the name of 'social justice' have not made people happier or more united but quite the opposite. Anxiety, depression, fearfulness, sadness, loneliness and anger have all massively increased since 1970, with the male suicide rate at an all-time high. Western society seems to be divided against itself across every line conceivable: left versus right, women versus men, 'non-whites' versus 'whites', globalists versus populists, 'the elites' versus 'the people', people who think that men can be women and vice versa versus those who insist that they cannot, and so on. Seventy-three percent of Americans believe their country is on 'the wrong track', with similar views reflected in Britain and across Europe. The Prophets of Doom explores eleven thinkers who not only dared to contradict the dominant linear and progressive view of history, but also predicted many of the political and social maladies through which we are living.

You can dress up old ideas, but what’s your actual agenda? Tell me exactly how a world based on your political philosophy works and who benefits most.

I recently finished Neema Parvini’s The Profits of Doom. His work addresses the worn and ever-present concerns of conservatives and reactionaries and contains valuable insights into how many influential people view the world. Understanding these thinkers’ perspectives helps us make sense of the many contradictions we struggle with today. People must understand how people think and what ideas people are obsessed with. It is mind-boggling to me that chauvinistic Western Liberals refuse to engage with cultural operatives that have learned to use the tactics of “The Left” (however you define it) against the Left. For example, Andrew Breitbart, of the notorious Breitbart media organization with branches in the U.K., should have been better understood by his rivals. We write off Curtis Yarvin as a buffoonish romantic cultural Guru at our peril. I listened to Curtis talk about J.D. Vance and “Bronze Age Pervert” (BAP) when he spoke in Lisbon a couple of years ago and thought, really, J.D. Vance—there goes the neighborhood. These ideas are gaining popularity as more people come to feel like they are being conned and exploited by “The Elite,” however you define them. The concepts explored in Parvani’s book are ever-present; brushing aside these authors’ worldviews as malformed and anachronistic will not help us develop better ideas, social systems, and power structures capable of building a peaceful, healthy future dedicated to life. Curtis Yarvin graduated from Brown University. His parents were diplomats, if I recall correctly. Elites have always complained about other elites.

Parvani’s Bio

Dr Parvini graduated with a first in English Literature from Royal Holloway, University of London, where he won several awards a including a McDonalds Scholarship (2001), the Margaret Bretherton Memorial Prize (2002), the Gertrude Schryver Prize (2004) and the Edmée Manning Award (2004). He gained his Masters degree in English Literature from Oxford University with distinction in 2005 before returning to Royal Holloway in 2006, where he was awarded a Thomas Holloway Scholarship to read for his PhD, which he completed in 2010.

Although Dr Parvini has a background as a Shakespeare scholar, his experiences working with investment bankers, financial experts and central bankers in the city led him to a lifelong interest in classical economics. This led him to writing a book-length study on the topic (The Defenders of Liberty), which was praised by various economists, and facilitated by an FA Hayek Award, an FA Hayek Program Grant for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics and Economics, and a Mises Institute Scholarship. He sits on the Academic Advisory Council for the IEA and is a Senior Fellow at the Centre of Heterodox Studies at the University of Buckingham. His interest in political theory, also led to The Populist Delusion, a primer on elite theory, which went on to be an Amazon best seller and its follow-up The Prophets of Doom, which was also a best seller. He also runs a popular YouTube channel which has accrued over 30 million views.

These people are Elite!

Please read this book.

First published in 1956, The Power Elite stands as a contemporary classic of social science and social criticism. C. Wright Mills examines and critiques the organization of power in the United States, calling attention to three firmly interlocked prongs of power: the military, corporate, and political elite. The Power Elite can be read as a good account of what was taking place in America at the time it was written, but its underlying question of whether America is as democratic in practice as it is in theory continues to matter very much today.

What The Power Elite informed readers of in 1956 was how much the organization of power in America had changed during their lifetimes, and Alan Wolfe's astute afterword to this new edition brings us up to date, illustrating how much more has changed since then. Wolfe sorts out what is helpful in Mills' book and which of his predictions have not come to bear, laying out the radical changes in American capitalism, from intense global competition and the collapse of communism to rapid technological transformations and ever changing consumer tastes. The Power Elite has stimulated generations of readers to think about the kind of society they have and the kind of society they might want, and deserves to be read by every new generation.

He’s rich. He’s famous!

Curtis Yarvin also mentioned Elon Musk often in discussions with fans at a cafe in Lisbon. Read Musk’s bio; privileged, conceited brats are running the world from their YouTube channels, podcasts, and blogs.

Of course, when looking into anyone with a high profile, be wary of the public relations aspect of any description of who they are. We must do some digging and try to understand their body of work before forming an accurate opinion.

I learn things from various perspectives and don’t think of myself as this or that political animal anymore. I can only imagine a world that will probably never exist or develop a better understanding of our world and get on with my life. But to be a revolutionary, I need to know clearly and in great detail what I’m fighting for (if not your family, friends, and the comrade/soldier next to you.) I’d have to subscribe to a power structure to create something better than what we have now. I’m still searching.

The role of power in social explanation

Abstract

Power is often taken to be a central concept in social and political thought that can contribute to the explanation of many different social phenomena. This article argues that in order to play this role, a general theory of power is required to identify a stable causal capacity, one that does not depend on idiosyncratic social conditions and can thus exert its characteristic influence in a wide range of cases. It considers three promising strategies for such a theory, which ground power in (1) the ability to use force, (2) access to resources, or (3) collective acceptance. It shows that these strategies fail to identify a stable causal capacity. The lack of an adequate general theory of power suggests that the concept lacks the necessary unity to play the broad explanatory role it is often accorded.

Now, I’m reading The Devil’s Chessboard and The Great Leveler to understand my enemies’ mentality and what happens when things get to a breaking point and violence ensues. Can we prevent violent upheaval during the most chaotic times of the polycrisis?

Based on explosive new evidence, bestselling author David Talbot tells America’s greatest untold story: the United States’ rise to world dominance under the guile of Allen Welsh Dulles, the longest-serving director of the CIA.

Drawing on revelatory new materials – including exclusive interviews with the children of prominent CIA officials, the personal correspondence and journals of Allen Dulles’s wife and mistress, newly discovered U.S. government documents, and U.S. and European intelligence sources – Talbot reveals the underside of one of America’s most powerful and influential figures.

Dulles’s decades as the director of the CIA – which he used to further his public and private agendas – were dark times in American politics. Calling himself ‘the secretary of state of unfriendly countries’, Dulles saw himself as above the elected law, manipulating and subverting American presidents in the pursuit of his personal interests and those of the wealthy elite he counted as his friends and clients – colluding with Nazi-controlled cartels, German war criminals, and Mafiosi in the process. Targeting foreign leaders for assassination and overthrowing nationalist governments not in line with his political aims, Dulles employed those same tactics to further his goals at home, culminating in the assassination of his political enemy, John F. Kennedy.

Indeed, The Devil’s Chessboard offers shocking new evidence in the killings of both President Kennedy and his brother, Senator Robert F. Kennedy. This is an expose of American power that is as disturbing as it is timely, a provocative and gripping story of the rise of the national security state – and the battle for America’s soul.

How only violence and catastrophes have consistently reduced inequality throughout world history

Are mass violence and catastrophes the only forces that can seriously decrease economic inequality? To judge by thousands of years of history, the answer is yes. Tracing the global history of inequality from the Stone Age to today, Walter Scheidel shows that inequality never dies peacefully. Inequality declines when carnage and disaster strike and increases when peace and stability return. The Great Leveler is the first book to chart the crucial role of violent shocks in reducing inequality over the full sweep of human history around the world.

Ever since humans began to farm, herd livestock, and pass on their assets to future generations, economic inequality has been a defining feature of civilization. Over thousands of years, only violent events have significantly lessened inequality. The "Four Horsemen" of leveling—mass-mobilization warfare, transformative revolutions, state collapse, and catastrophic plagues—have repeatedly destroyed the fortunes of the rich. Scheidel identifies and examines these processes, from the crises of the earliest civilizations to the cataclysmic world wars and communist revolutions of the twentieth century. Today, the violence that reduced inequality in the past seems to have diminished, which is good. But it casts serious doubt on the prospects for a more equal future.

An essential contribution to the debate about inequality, The Great Leveler provides important new insights about why inequality is so persistent—and why it is unlikely to decline anytime soon.

One must explore many domains from multiple perspectives to understand how culture works. It’s the only way to maintain humble, maturing opinions on social systems and relations. Culture is synonymous with complexity on many levels.

---

Too much talk, no action.

For over a decade, I’ve noticed that many people know what ails us and have solutions to our ailments. But we are poorly trained, pacified, and deluded by cultural influences, so most of us don’t pay attention to our actual problems, choosing instead to buy or invest in treating the symptoms of what ails us when our maladies have erupted and become endemic. We take everything for granted, fight emotional battles with manufactured enemies, and invest our time, energy, and money in whatever the status quo dictates. We bounce from one shallow fad to another. We are addicted to supernormal stimuli.

Supernormal Stimuli

Humans and other animals fall for hyperbole. Exaggeration is persuasive; subtlety exists in its shadows. In a famous set of studies done in the 1950s, biologist and ornithologist Niko Tinbergen created “supernormal stimuli,” simulacra of beaks and eggs and other biologically salient objects, that were painted, primped and blown up in size. In these studies herring gull chicks pecked more at big red knitting needles than at adult herring gull beaks, presumably because they were redder and longer than the actual beaks. Plovers responded more to eggs with striking visual contrast (black spots on white surround) than to natural but drabber eggs with dark brown spots on light brown surround. Oystercatchers were willing to roll huge eggs into their nests to incubate. Later studies, as well as recording in the wild show supernormal stimuli hijacking a range of biologically driven responses. For example, female stickleback fish get swollen bellies when they are ripe with eggs. When Tinbergen’s student, Richard Dawkins made the dummy rounder and more pear shaped greater lust was inspired. He called these dummies “sex bombs.” Outside of the lab, male Australian jewel beetles have been recorded trying to perform sex with beer bottles made of shiny brown glass whose light reflections resemble the shape and color of female beetles.

Research on the evolution of signaling shows that animals frequently alter or exaggerate features to attract, mimic, intimidate, or protect themselves from conspecifics, sometimes setting off an arms race between deception and the detection of such deception. But it is only humans who engage in conscious manipulation of signals using cultural tools in real time rather than relying on slow genetic changes over evolutionary time. We live in Tinbergen’s world now, surrounded by supernormal signals produced by increasingly sophisticated cultural tools. We need only compare photoshopped images to the un-retouched originals, or compare, as my own studies have done, the perceptions of the same face with and without cosmetics to see that relatively simple artificially created exaggerations can be quite effective in eliciting heightened positive responses that may be consequential. In my studies the makeup merely exaggerated the contrast between the woman’s features and the surrounding skin.

How do such signals get the brain’s attention? Studies of the brain's reward pathways suggest that dopamine plays a fundamental role in encouraging basic biological behaviors that evolved in the service of natural rewards. Dopamine is involved in learning, and responds to cues in the environment that suggest potential gains and losses. In the early studies of the 1950s, before the role of dopamine was known, scientists likened the effects of supernormal stimuli to addiction, a process we now know is mediated by dopamine.

Are superstimuli leading to behavioral addictions? At the least, we can say that they often waste time and resources with false promises. We fall down rabbit holes where we pursue information we don’t need, or buy more products that seem exciting but offer little of real value or gain. Less obviously, they can have negative effects on our responses to natural stimuli, to nutritious foods rather than fast foods, to ordinary looking people rather than photoshopped models, to the slow pleasures of novel and nonfiction reading rather than games and entertainment, to the examined life rather than the unexamined and frenetic one.

Perhaps we can move away from the pursuit of “supernormal” to at least sometimes considering the “subtle” and the “fine,” to close examination and deeper appreciation of the beauties and benefits that lie hidden in the ordinary.

These days, thousands of people echo and list items within the basket of polycrisis. How long does it take people to hear the warnings that began decades ago? We have always been warned—read “Good Books.”

Today, there are many experts in all things catastrophic and existential risk. Many are sounding the alarm. But who among the plebs and proles, the experts, doomists and doomers, preppers and want-to-be leaders, gurus, and saviors have a plan for how to stop the madness? Who is working day after day to prevent violent and painful mass death and global civilizational collapse? I know many people who think collapse is inevitable and necessary, but what happens afterward? We will probably make the same mistakes again until our species is extinct—but does it have to be this way?

Where are our martyrs?

Jesus died for our sins—enough said!?

Many people have identified ideologies, policies, business practices, economic doctrines, and other human endeavors destroying our health, lives, and biosphere. We know why we are sick but only treat the symptoms if profitable.

“Profits First!” said the Prophet.

We may be too comfortable or weak to attack the causes of our predicament. Maybe we are all stuck in a prison of diversions and distractions, or perhaps we are too afraid to risk everything or anything to make things better. (“Better? Things are pretty darn good, cupcake.”) Maybe we are too darn dumb to perceive what’s happening. I know that influential Players understand the psychology of the Stockholm Syndrome. So what! The Players of The Great Game 2.0, 21st Century, exert the powers of persuasion adeptly and with great force. Those who take risks and wield power deserve the fruits of their enterprises. The Players will never deviate from their myopic vision—win at all costs. Compete, conquer, acquire, control, vanquish, amass wealth and power, and keep the people pacified. These are the drivers of The Great Game.

In the comment sections of the people I follow, I ask how we can overcome the madness and pathological leaders in charge and develop a new way of life. Does that question make you angry? It seems to bother people.

“Well, what are YOU going to do about it?” —Bob & Betty Higher Virtue

I don’t fit in. I have ideas, but they are part of my creative work. I am not a revolutionary, not yet. I’m a frustrated observer of Groundhog Day.

I have no idea to what degree global warming contributed to the fires in Los Angeles but don’t these incessant disasters provide evidence that the conditions of our complex climate and biosphere have changed and that human activity is causing these changes? What we are seeing is evidence that our global culture and its systems lead to catastrophe on an unprecedented scale. Most of us are too deluded to even think about it, so we carry on, and when we get hit by a disaster, we shrug and marvel at how resilient we are. People from the Palisades fire say, “We’ll rebuild; this is our home.” They can’t wait to return to normal and wait for the next disaster. It seems ridiculous. Where does Miami Beach sand come from? Keep spending fuel to make the tourists happy until Miami is underwater.

Most folks get whipped out once, and that’s it.

Still, even people who know what’s coming and are taking steps to prepare for it are not attacking the crux of the crisis they concern themselves with daily. If you Google “how to start a revolution,” you’ll find mindfulness coaches, preppers, and people busy making a buck off doom & gloom, fear, confusion, and prophesies of the end times. Mind you, I don’t begrudge people making a living. If the solution to the problem isn’t profitable, deprioritize it until it is. Sooner or later, the problem and its solution will be impossible to ignore. When the solution becomes vital to the system, the profit machine has to invest, at which time the market makers come out of the woodwork.

(So please, buy me a coffee.)

I’ve read many books about revolutions and revolutionaries. People throughout history have developed various theories of history and societal collapse. If these theories have merit, what are the qualitative differences between what we’ve experienced in the past and what we are experiencing now at the apex of fossil-fueled modern techno-industrial global financialized neoliberal/neoconservative capitalism? Call the structures and systems what you will; all the social, political, and economic systems we have today fall into the cheap energy, forever growth, omnicidal heat engine wealth pump for the top one percent basket.

---

Over the past five hundred years, we have experienced a variety of ways of organizing communities and power structures.

• Hunter-Gatherer Societies

• Tribal Societies

• Ancient Slave Societies

IMAGINE THIS SCENE IN ANCIENT POMPEII

“There is a crowd of people, including free men, women and children, slaves and their owners. A rich guy wearing a toga rides in a litter carried by slaves. The people move to the sides, as the litter comes through. People are carrying water home from the fountains, taking clothing to the fullery for laundering. They are doing their marketing—getting bread at the bakery; fruit and vegetables such as figs, grapes and apples, olives, peas and beans; and perhaps some garum, a popular fish sauce. Others may be shopping for jewelry, new plates for the banquet next week, flower garlands for the coming festival. Wealthy people have their entourage around them, including their slave attendants. A procession is on its way to the forum. Slaves are bringing fresh donkeys to the bakeries to keep the grindstones turning, and pigs and sheep are being brought to market. The street is filled with the strong odors of bread baking and wine making, urine from the collection pots along the street, animal dung and household garbage. The Romans relied on the rain to wash the filth and garbage away.”— Lauren Petersen, professor of art history

• Feudalism

Dissolution and instability

Seen against the background of the millennia, the fall of the Roman Empire was so commonplace an event that it is almost surprising that so much ink has been spilled in the attempt to explain it. The Visigoths were merely one among the peoples who had been dislodged from the steppe in the usual fashion. They and others, unable to crack the defenses of Sāsānian Persia or of the Roman Empire in the East (though it was a near thing), probed farther west and at length found the point of weakness they were seeking on the Alps and the Rhine.

• Mercantilism

Chapter 3: Trade Agreements and Economic Theory

Economists have had an enormous impact on trade policy, and they provide a strong rationale for free trade and for removal of trade barriers.  Although the objective of a trade agreement is to liberalize trade, the actual provisions are heavily shaped by domestic and international political realities. The world has changed enormously from the time when David Ricardo proposed the law of comparative advantage, and in recent decades economists have modified their theories to account for trade in factors of production, such as capital and labor, the growth of supply chains that today dominate much of world trade, and the success of neomercantilist countries in achieving rapid growth.

• Capitalism

• Socialism

• Communism

• Mixed Economies

mixed economy, in economics, a market system of resource allocation, commerce, and trade in which free markets coexist with government intervention. A mixed economy may emerge when a government intervenes to disrupt free markets by introducing state-owned enterprises (such as public health or education systems), regulations, subsidies, tariffs, and tax policies. Alternatively, a mixed economy can emerge when a socialist government makes exceptions to the rule of state ownership to capture economic benefits from private ownership and free market incentives. A combination of free market principles of private contracting and socialist principles of state ownership or planning is common to all mixed economies.

• Welfare States Governments provide healthcare, education, and other social programs to ensure all citizens’ basic living standards.

• Digital Societies Social interactions and economic activity are heavily mediated through digital platforms.

• Globalization

• Sustainable Societies (What’s that?)

Social systems have evolved to where we are all in the same predicament: north to south, east to west. We have come to this. It doesn’t matter what you think about Marx in 1847 or the difference between what we call postmodernist philosophy/critique in 1970 or 2025. The world is on fire, and World War Three is in full swing. Is there anything people can do to prevent a violent and destructive depopulation of our world?

• Techno feudalism, Where tracking apps are implanted in our bodies to gather data on the jobs that only humans can do to provide more data for AI algorithms. We will be paid with digital tokens based on inputs while being charged rent for everything we do. Your vital signs will be tracked, and you will be fined or abandoned if you are not an optimal producer of the required data.

---

OVERSHOOT | Shrink Toward Abundance

OVERSHOOT tackles today’s interlocked social and ecological crises driven by humanity’s excessive population and consumption. The podcast explores needed narrative, behavioral, and system shifts for recreating human life in balance with all life on Earth. With expert guests from wide-ranging disciplines, we examine the forces underlying overshoot: from patriarchal pronatalism that is fueling overpopulation, to growth-biased economic systems that lead to consumerism and social injustice, to the dominant worldview of human supremacy that subjugates animals and nature. Our vision of shrinking toward abundance inspires us to seek pathways of transformation that go beyond technological fixes toward a new humanity that honors our interconnectedness with all beings. Hosted by Nandita Bajaj and Alan Ware. Ranking in the top 1.5% of all podcasts globally, we draw over 20,000 listeners from across 80 countries.

I know many people have many ideas about what to do, some of which are excellent. But how do we replace the powerful global systems we have now with something better while making efforts to prevent us from bouncing the rubble across the globe while we starve to death, causing mass extinction along the way?

I’d like to quickly explore some theories about cycles of history and societal collapse. It’s not in-depth or comprehensive, but it provides context for my opening question.

I’m curious about societal collapse, planned reform, evolution, revolution, and upheaval as an event that happens with the agency over time.

Cyclical Theories of History and Societal Collapse

Numerous thinkers (throw a dart at a historical timeline and pick one) have proposed cyclical models to explain the rise and fall of civilizations. These theories offer intriguing perspectives on the patterns of history and the forces that drive societal change.

I’ve reviewed many things I have learned from middle school until I became enmeshed with the pandemic in 2020. I have enjoyed the luxury of having time to reread books. I have always liked all kinds of books. Reading is a fun hobby for me, but it doesn’t make me wise or holy. It takes action within the community to achieve that.

In The Collapse of Complex Societies, Joseph Tainter argues that societies become too complex over time. Societal complexity eventually leads to diminishing returns on investment (think of EROI). As societies invest more resources into problem-solving, the marginal benefits decrease, ultimately leading to collapse.

According to Tainter, as these structures become larger, they become less efficient, to the point that the economic returns they provide are smaller than their cost. At this point, society becomes unable to cope with the challenges it faces and must decline, or even collapse.

Increased specialization, bureaucracy, and social stratification lead to declining marginal returns. Complex societies use vast amounts of energy and materials, leading to resource depletion. Eventually, economic decline and social unrest destabilize the system. Boom!

Tainter discusses the Roman Empire, the Mayan Civilization, Chaco Canyon, and other examples.

The 14th-century Arab historian Ibn Khaldun proposed that societies experience cycles of rise and decline driven by a concept called “asabiyyah,” which refers to social cohesion or group solidarity. Nomadic groups with strong asabiyyah conquer settled societies. The new ruling dynasty will become accustomed to urban life and lose its asabiyyah. Later, a new group with stronger asabiyyah will overthrow the weakened dynasty. There you go, a story with a regional cultural context. The story is true. How could it be otherwise? We learn about how things are and will be within unique circumstances.

Asabiyya

Popularized by Ibn Khaldun in his The Muqaddimah, the notion of asabiyya refers to group solidarity. This includes unity, cohesion, and a collective consciousness shared among a group of persons. Often such a group can contain members of a clan, tribe, or persons of common descent, but the connection between two members of a group need not be one of blood. The asabiyyah can be a force that makes or breaks the success of a group or individual, and thus it will certainly play a role in the development and spread of Islamic civilizations. See page xli of the Rosenthal’s introduction to The Muqaddimah for another discussion of the term. While the Prophet may have initially used asabiyya, or his ties to the Quraysh, to support his early work, he needed more than kinship ties to spread his message. Steven Caton explains that, as the community grew, early Muslims became more united by shared religious beliefs and values than by feelings of shared space or descent.

Five centuries before Darwin, Ibn Khaldun wrote, ‘Species become more numerous.’ Nearly half a millennium before Marx, Ibn Khaldun wrote, ‘labor is the real basis of profit.’ Four hundred years before Auguste Comte, Ibn Khaldun unveiled his ‘science of culture’ (Katsiaficas, 1999:46). All these show his power in scientific research, high knowledge in various disciplines, and wisdom in analysis of facts.

The rise and fall of various Arab dynasties in North Africa provide examples of societal collapse despite a long wisdom tradition. Who adopts wisdom as a way of life? What kind of person decides that wisdom is self-serving?

Traditional Chinese historiography viewed history as a series of dynastic cycles characterized by a rise to power, a period of prosperity and stability, and eventual decline and overthrow. The ruler’s legitimacy, based on the Mandate of Heaven (reminds me of NRx nostalgia), could be lost due to misrule or natural disasters. Over time, rulers and officials became corrupt and lost the people’s support. A new dynasty, often led by a charismatic leader, emerged to restore order and claim the Mandate of Heaven.

Classic examples are The Han, Tang, Song, and Ming dynasties.

William Strauss and Neil Howe proposed a cyclical theory of history based on recurring generational archetypes—each generation has distinct values and characteristics, and these generational patterns repeat cyclically. Straus and Howe focused on four generational archetypes: Prophet, Nomad, Hero, and Artist, and four cyclical turnings: High, Awakening, Unraveling, and Crisis. The interaction between different generations shapes historical events and trends. We named it, and so it is salient.

The American Revolution, the Civil War, the Great Depression, and World War II are good examples.

Oswald Spengler’s “Decline of the West” argued that civilizations are like organisms that go through a life cycle of birth, growth, maturity, decline, and death. Read it.

Arnold J. Toynbee’s “A Study of History” identified patterns of challenge and response in the rise and fall of civilizations.

Peter Turchin’s Cliodynamics uses mathematical models and historical data to study long-term social and political trends, including cycles of stability and instability.

None of these theories or stories explain the complexity of societal collapse, nor do they fully comprehend the roots of constantly changing cultures. There are so many factors at play. Human nature revolves around how we express power relations through social organization, community interaction, language, consciousness, and other factors exclusive to the human animal. Human nature is a highly complex topic.

No shyte, sheer luck!

To understand human nature, we need to understand Big Nature. We have the tools to do so, but unraveling the laws of nature as it relates to humans must be gradual. Today, too many people are conditioned by culture to be more interested in The Great Game.

The Great Game: activities that impart social status and reward Players who control various resources.

The rise and fall of civilizations are usually influenced by a combination of factors, including environmental changes, economic pressures, social conflicts, war, and political instability (chaos). Historical patterns reflect human choices and actions that are crucial in shaping his story of war and conquest.

How much agency do we have in the face of cultural influences? Are your thoughts your own?

Do we still have the revolutionary spirit in “The West?” What constitutes revolutionary consciousness?

Revolutionary Consciousness

The ability to transform civilization relies on the concept of revolutionary
consciousness. Benjamin Franklin attempted this work in the ways that he
imagined the possibility of “America” as a sovereign republic. In 1749, he pro-
posed the creation of an academy that would cultivate the knowledge and skills
among young men that might generate a revolutionary consciousness. A gen-
eration later, his experiment yielded an elite class of landowners who believed
they shared a culture distinct from their ancestry in Great Britain. The Decla-
ration of Independence proposed a vision of human freedom and individual
rights that became the transformative ideals for two centuries. However, the
origins of revolutionary consciousness precede the modern era. Human civili-
zation evolved in eruptions and discontinuities over the last 5,000 years. Social
and personal commitments to revolution shaped each transition. Racial Con-
sciousness moved from the definition of Europeans as “white” based on their
Christianity through the emergence of post-colonial identities that reshaped
racial and ethnic perceptions in human civilization. The 21st century will be
defined by the success of intersectional analysis to dismantle white suprem-
acy, patriarchy, and global capitalism.
Revolutions carry the implications of military violence. Transitions among
empires and within them most often involved the deaths of thousands of
human beings. However, a true revolution involves a transformation of ideas.
In that way, revolutionary consciousness is the core of any social transforma-
tion, whether violent or not. Human history revolves around religious revolu-
tions – from the ancient Hebrews, Axumites, Greeks, and Romans through the
medieval emergence of Islam. The core debate among these traditions focused
on the structure of devotion – many gods or a single one. Ideological revo-
lutions often followed technological breakthroughs, the most famous exam-
ple being Guttenberg’s press and the Protestant Reformation of the Catholic
Church. When human beings began to transition from writing to printing, the framework for human ideas transformed in fundamental ways. It is this stan-dard of revolutionary consciousness that best informs our current approach to
the topic.
From the European Renaissance through the Enlightenment, the framework
of human expression relied on words (semantics), sounds (music), and images
(semiotics). From the middle of the 17th century to the end of the 19th century,
humanity radically transformed its ideological expressions in all three catego-
ries. John Locke, Adam Smith, and Thomas Jefferson have remained the focus
of the debates about the Enlightenment of the 18th century that shaped the
American Revolution. In the 19th century, the emphasis shifts to Kant, Rous-
seau, Hobbes, Marx, Nietzsche, and Heidegger for the discussion of human lib-
erty and capacity. This shift reflects a broad portrait of the modern intellect – a
range of portraits about the dynamics and limitations of human rationality.
The racial consensus around white supremacy appeared self-evident to these
writers, despite extensive literary and scientific evidence to the contrary. Their
committed belief in a racial hierarchy of human beings defined modernism
at its core. The earliest forms of white supremacy in Europe revolved around
fear and hatred towards Muslims. Catholic writers equated whiteness with
purity and holiness, and then they extended the symbolic meaning into the
literal flesh of Central and Western Europe. The geographic centers of these
discussions were Rome, Berlin, Paris, and Madrid. By 1515, the budding suc-
cesses of Dutch, Portuguese, and Spanish imperial projects spawned narratives
of indigenous, African, and Asian inferiority. As George Fredrickson has noted,
race inscribes the differences of ethnicity with a permanence about charac-
ter and nature. Perceptions about racial groups developed into religious jus-
tifications for slavery and exploitation. Most persistent among these stories
was the “Curse of Ham” – a narrative about the descendants of Noah’s son
being marked by God as servants to his brother’s descendants in perpetuity.
The confluence of cultural contact and religious conformity in the 16th and
17th centuries drove the construction of a racial consciousness among Europe-
ans that shaped imperial ambitions. Johannes Blumenbach wrote the treatise
that informed much of Enlightenment opinion in his On the Unity of Mankind
(1795). He expanded on the work of Carl Linnaeus in Systema Natura (1758).
These efforts laid the foundations for rational inquiry in emerging fields like
biology and anthropology but carried the fundamental irrationality of white
supremacy as their foundation.

There is nothing more frightening to Kings, Queens, imperialists, colonialists, oligarchs, plutocrats, and gangsters than revolution. When oppressed people gang up on powerful players, all hell breaks loose. You know this from middle school history class and Netflix.

---

So you say you want a revolution.

You say you want a Revolution
Well, you know
We all wanna change the world
You tell me that it's evolution
Well, you know
We all wanna change the world

But when you talk about destruction
Don't you know that you can count me out

Don't you know it's gonna be alright
Alright
Alright

You say you got a real solution
Well, you know
We'd all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well, you know
We are doing what we can

But if you want money for people with minds that hate
All I can tell you is brother you have to wait

Don't you know it's gonna be alright
Alright
Alright

You say you'll change the constitution
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it's the institution
Well, you know
You'd better free your mind instead

But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow

Don't you know it's gonna be alright
Alright
Alright

Alright, alright
Alright, alright
Alright, alright
Alright, alright

Recommended reading: Ways to Start a Revolution.

There are many kinds of revolutionaries, but they all share a desire for power, autonomy, and social change. After this section, we’ll examine an outline of various revolutions and revolutionaries.

How to Start a Revolution

Download Article

Co-authored by Seth Hall

Last Updated: October 4, 2024 Approved

METHOD 1, Picking a Theme

1. Find a central theme around which to organize your revolution.

2. Identify a need for reform.

3. Create concrete goals.

4. Come up with a plan to secure resources.

METHOD 2, Finding Followers

1. Choose a leader and symbol.

2. Recruit activists.

3. Build partnerships with other people and groups.

4. Recruit intellectuals.

5. Turn to scientists.

METHOD 3, Spreading the Message

1. Remember the power of art and music.

2. Embrace all of the potential of the new media.

3. Use social media to organize.

4. Frame the debate.

5. Expect that people will react in different ways to change.

METHOD 4, Choosing a Strategy

1. Take Action.

2. Work from within.

3. Find a target.

4. Study past revolutions.

5. Try civil disobedience.

6. Plan the protest.

Let's explore some of history's well-known revolutions, starting from the ancient world and moving toward modern times.

Ancient Revolutions

Although not a full-blown revolution, Urukagina's Reforms (the Sumerian Shakespeare) in the Mesopotamian city-state of Lagash (circa 2350 BC) represented a significant power shift. Ensi Urukagina sought to curb the ruling elite's excesses and protect the ordinary people's rights.

The Battle of Muye (1046 BC) in ancient China marked the Shang dynasty's end and the Zhou dynasty's beginning. This revolution brought about significant changes in social structure, political ideology, and religious practices. In this case, King Wu of Zhou was the great man of history.

Classical & Medieval Revolutions

The Roman Republic's Overthrow (1st Century BC): While a gradual process, the Roman Republic's transformation into the Roman Empire (1st Century BC) involved significant social and political upheaval. Figures like Julius Caesar and Augustus played key roles in this transition. If you wish, read all about it; there is a library on the subject.

The Yellow Turban Rebellion (184 AD): This peasant revolt in Han Dynasty China (The Yellow Turban Rebellion 184 AD), fueled by social unrest and economic hardship, challenged the established order and contributed to the dynasty's eventual decline. Zhang Jue, Zhang Liang, and Zhang Bao were key players during this time.

Early Modern Revolutions

Inspired by the Protestant Reformation, the German Peasants' War (1524-1525 AD) inspired peasants across German-speaking Europe to revolt against feudal lords and demand social and economic reforms. Though unsuccessful, the war highlighted the growing discontent with the existing social order. Thomas Müntzer was an important player in the war.

The English Civil War (1642-1651 AD) pitted Parliamentarians against Royalists. It resulted in King Charles I's execution and the establishment of the Commonwealth of England. The war marked a significant step towards parliamentary democracy, and Oliver Cromwell and Charles I played key roles.

Modern Revolutions

During The American Revolution (1775-1783 AD), the thirteen American colonies revolted against British rule, leading to the establishment of the United States of America. Enlightenment ideals of liberty, self-government, and popular sovereignty fueled this revolution. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams were important figures during the establishment of the American republic.

The French Revolution (1789-1799 AD) was a tumultuous period that saw the overthrow of the French monarchy and the rise of radical political movements. It profoundly impacted European and world history, spreading liberty, equality, and fraternity ideas. It is much vilified by some and the beginning of the middle part of the arch of progress by others. Maximilien Robespierre and Napoleon Bonaparte are well-known figures today, and many books and movies portray their drama. Have fun with it, and read all about it.

The Haitian Revolution (1791-1804 AD), led by Enslaved people and Toussaint Louverture, Jean-Jacques Dessalines in the French colony of Saint-Domingue, revolted, leading to the establishment of the independent nation of Haiti. This revolution was a landmark in the struggle against slavery and colonialism.

Waves of Revolutions of 1848 swept across Europe, fueled by nationalist and liberal aspirations. While many of these uprisings were ultimately suppressed, they reflected a growing desire for political and social change.

20th Century Revolutions

The Mexican Revolution (1910-1920), with characters like Emiliano Zapata and Pancho Villa, led to the overthrow of the long-standing dictatorship of Porfirio Díaz and ushered in an era of significant social and political reforms.

And, Oh, My Dear Sweet Orthodox God, the Russian Revolution (1917), with heroes and villains such as Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky, and Joseph Stalin, is one of my favorites to study and read about. This revolution led to the overthrowing of the Tsarist autocracy and the establishment of the world's first communist state. It profoundly impacted global politics and ideology throughout the 20th century.

I also love learning about The Chinese Revolution (1949). Following a protracted civil war, the Chinese Communist Party led by Mao Zedong emerged victorious, establishing the People's Republic of China. This revolution had a massive impact on Asia and the world—an understatement. Look into it.

I have visited Cuba twice and thoroughly enjoyed the Cuban people. The Cuban Revolution (1953-1959, think of their sacrifices) overthrew Fulgencio Batista's dictatorship and established a socialist state led by Fidel Castro. I’m not saying Cuba is a utopia or its revolution was successful. Cuba’s powerful enemy to the north made sure it wouldn’t be.

American business interests kill revolutionary movements.

I read about Che long ago. Che t-shirts are iconic. In the 1970s and 1980s, his image was everywhere. Che is revered by some and reviled by others. This is an excellent read with an unbiased perspective. American revolutionaries are far less controversial.

There are countless examples of revolutions and revolutionaries if one approaches the subject with a broad mind. A piece from The Guardian lists the 10 best.

---

What Kind Of Revolution?

In my experience reading history, I have discovered many earnest thinkers, alive and dead, who can inform us of ways to arrest power from an established destructive and exploitative elite. Once well-informed, oppressed, subjugated, abused, and “enlightened” people become aware that their social system is illegitimate because it’s unjust and personally destructive, they will organize and find outlets to express their anger and desperation. I won’t go into all of these thinkers and leaders here or their tactics and strategies. The list is long. Instead, I will focus on a few thought leaders, activists, philosophers, and teachers who have profoundly influenced our world. 

Gene Sharp

“The fall of one regime does not bring in a utopia. Rather, it opens the way for hard work and long efforts to build more just social, economic,and political relationships and the eradication of other forms of injustices and oppression.” ―Gene Sharp

Gene Sharp is the world’s most celebrated expert in nonviolent revolution. Nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize four times, his guidebook for revolutionaries has been translated into more than 40 languages, slipped across borders and hidden from secret policemen all over the world. For decades, people who wanted to take down their dictatorship made a pilgrimage to Gene Sharp for help. With access to newly released files from Gene Sharp’s archive, How to Start a Revolution reveals the hidden forces behind the headlines - the strategies passed from the jungles of Burma, to the streets of Iran, the Arab Spring and the looming battle to defend democracy in the West. This is the story of the power of people to change their world, the modern revolution and the man behind it all.

Sharp first presents a theory of political power. Contrary to the assumption that, in the end, “power comes from the barrel of a gun,” Sharp draws on a wide range of political thinkers in the first volume of The Politics of Nonviolent Action to argue that all rulers fundamentally rely on the cooperation and consent of their people to survive. “Obedience is at the heart of political power,” he writes. Countless institutions—including the police, the courts, the civil service, and the army—must carry out orders for the system to function. If individuals and institutions start to withdraw their cooperation, a regime is weakened. If enough of them withdraw, the regime collapses. At Oxford, fueled with excitement over his discovery of this theory, Sharp dug through historical records to uncover dozens of examples, large and small, of how nonviolent action has succeeded by encouraging the withdrawal of obedience, eroding rulers' authority and bureaucratic capacity.

Please learn from Sharp’s vast body of work:

The Albert Einstein Institution (AEI) is a nonprofit organization founded by Dr. Gene Sharp in 1983 to advance the study and use of strategic nonviolent action in conflict. For over 40 years, we have been committed to the defense of freedom, democracy and the reduction of political violence through the use of nonviolent action. Our goals are to understand the dynamics of nonviolent action in conflicts, explore its policy potential, and communicate this through publications and other multimedia resources, consultations, and educational workshops.

Finally, I want to focus on Peter Turchin. Peter Turchin is a Russian-American scientist specializing in cliodynamics, a field he helped develop that uses mathematical modeling to study historical societies. He has applied this approach to analyze patterns of political instability and societal collapse throughout history. Turchin has published numerous books and articles on the topic, including "War and Peace and War," "Historical Dynamics," and "Ages of Discord." He is currently a professor at the University of Connecticut and a research associate at the University of Oxford.

Peter Valentinovich Turchin, a renowned Russian-American complexity scientist and co-developer of cliodynamics, delves into the mathematical modeling and statistical analysis of historical and societal dynamics. As an Emeritus Professor at the University of Connecticut, spanning departments like Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Anthropology, and Mathematics, Turchin is also a project leader at the Complexity Science Hub Vienna and a research associate at the University of Oxford's School of Anthropology. Explore his insights as the Editor-in-Chief of Cliodynamics and a founding director of the Seshat: Global History Databank. Join Prof. Amogh Rai, Director of Research at ASIA, in this Asia Spotlight episode as he engages in a stimulating discussion with Prof. Peter Turchin about his book, "End Times: Elites, Counter-Elites, and the Path of Political Disintegration." Gain valuable perspectives on historical trends and societal shifts from a distinguished figure who has also served as a former director of the Evolution Institute and earned a fellowship with the American Association for the Advancement of Science in 2021.

Have a look at the SESHAT Global History Databank.

So what do you think?

Do you want to be a revolutionary, or are you comfortable with the status quo and despising those with different ideas and worldviews?

Are you a true believer?

All of us will die. That’s a fact. Something or another will kill us. Are we going to wait to get killed by greedy, violent, abusive Players or struggle to create a world that’s safer, healthier, more just, and more suited to habitability and posterity? Most of us will struggle to put food on the table and a roof over our heads because we are decent, loving people who fight for our loved ones, want to live according to moral and ethical ideals, and understand material limits that form a reasonably peaceful life that begets life. We do what we must.

I know too many want-to-be armchair, AI-goggled heroes who are weak and childish that ascribe to the Great Man of History narrative and that killing and being killed in wars is a noble and spiritual ideal. Idiots!

All of us fight. Some fight a well-informed struggle for well-thought-through goals to achieve universally understood positive outcomes. Most of us will wait until preventable social, environmental, and personal catastrophes kill us. We will blindly or dutifully wait for the fire, the war, the pandemic, the economic crash, the massacre, and the murderous chaos and react in panic and horror.

How much suffering can we tolerate?

If we are affluent and insured, we will say, as the folks in Califonia say, “We will rebuild; this is our home.” Are you kidding me? We are kidding ourselves. Without a radical change, our way of life is doomed.

We need to figure out a better way of life and ensure that people worldwide understand that means and are willing to embrace it.

Start with universal values that protect living systems and public health. Can I get a witness?

Start here:

Respect for Life: This encompasses valuing all forms of life, human and non-human, and striving to minimize harm.

Interconnectedness: Recognizing the interdependence between humans and the environment, understanding that actions have consequences within the larger ecosystem.

Sustainability: Living within the Earth's carrying capacity, ensuring resources are available for future generations.

Equity & Justice: Fair access to resources, opportunities, and healthy living conditions for everyone.

Precaution: Taking preventative measures to avoid potential harm to health and the environment, even in the face of uncertainty.

Participation: Encouraging community involvement in decisions affecting their health and environment.

Knowledge & Education: Promoting scientific understanding, critical thinking, and awareness of environmental and health issues.

Responsibility: Taking ownership of individual and collective actions and their impact on living systems.

Compassion: Showing empathy and care for others, including future generations and non-human life.

Humility: Acknowledging the limitations of human knowledge and the complexity of natural systems.

These values provide a framework for ethical decision-making and promote policies protecting human and environmental health. They are boilerplate and not imbued with action. You must breathe these values to find deeper values that ultimately connect you with the more profound meaning of our life in the Universe. If you live these deeper values, your life will transcend death and achieve a higher purpose worthy of our species' potential for wisdom. Your progeny will be proud of you and never forget your sacrifice, intelligence, and ingenuity.

You Will Be Heroes

We need to replace the pathological ideologies of today with something habitable, sustainable, and suited to a just and loving future. Along with “having the conversation” about our many challenges, we must invest a few hours a week in organizing and doing the work needed to implement the most radical, rapid, and profound socio-political, economic, spiritual, and cultural transformation in history.

Isn’t that exciting? There are good, committed people with great ideas all over the world. This project isn’t only for Indonesians, Indians, Brazilians, Russians, Canadians, Americans, Mexicans, Chinese, Japanese, and Thai people, etc.; it’s for you, my friend, and your friends and family. A revolutionary revolution is the most exciting project one could donate an hour or two a week to achieve. You can educate yourself with quality resources. You can broaden your mind. You can develop healthy habits. You can expand your mind and understand multiple perspectives. You can educate yourself. You can be a leader. You can be kind to yourself and others. You can recognize the beauty and love this struggle contains.

You have ideas. You have willpower!

---

Revolutionaries today must consider many more domains in detail to build a better world.

Life begets life; if we don't respect ecology and the biosphere, we will disappear from Earth sooner than later.

An Exclusive Interview With Ho Chin Minh

'Ho Chi Minh’s legacy lived on long after his 1969 death. This 1980 poster celebrates the man revered as the father of the country’s communist revolution. The poster reads, “Nobody loves Uncle Ho as children do, nobody loves children as Uncle Ho does.”' (Via)

Change requires courage.

Earnest, caring, and careful experts have existed for many decades at the intersection of energy, overshoot, economics, and climate change, yet their research has largely been ignored. There are many good people in the world working with the above values in mind. Information and solutions exist but won't be implemented unless we radically depart from our current socioeconomic ideology.

Look at a short list of people with the right priorities.

Vaclav Smil: A highly respected interdisciplinary scientist, his work focuses on energy, environment, food production, and technical innovation. He emphasizes the complexities and interconnectedness of these systems, often advocating for a cautious and realistic approach to energy transitions.

William Rees: Originator of the "ecological footprint" concept, Rees highlights the unsustainability of current consumption patterns and the dangers of ecological overshoot. He's a strong proponent of understanding the biophysical limits to growth.

Nate Hagens: Connects the dots between energy, economics, and human behavior. He explores the challenges of transitioning from fossil fuels while dealing with societal overshoot and consumerism.

Herman Daly: A pioneer of ecological economics, Daly is known for his work on steady-state economics, which advocates for a stable economy that operates within ecological limits. He challenges the conventional growth paradigm and emphasizes the importance of throughput limits.

Donella Meadows: (Sadly deceased, but her work remains highly relevant) A lead author of "The Limits to Growth," Meadows was a systems thinker who highlighted the interconnectedness of global systems and the potential for overshoot and collapse. Her work continues to inspire researchers and activists today.

Jorgen Randers: Another key contributor to "The Limits to Growth," Randers has continued to research and write on sustainability issues, emphasizing the urgency of addressing climate change and resource depletion. His book "2052: A Global Forecast for the Next Forty Years" offers a more updated perspective on the original Limits to Growth work.

Howard T. Odum: (Deceased) A pioneer in systems ecology, Odum developed the concept of "emergy," which measures the embodied energy in all resources and services. His work provides a comprehensive framework for understanding energy flows and ecological constraints.

Amory Lovins: Physicist and co-founder of the Rocky Mountain Institute, Lovins strongly advocates energy efficiency and renewable energy, demonstrating the potential for a transition to a sustainable energy future.

E.O. Wilson: (Deceased) A renowned biologist and conservationist, Wilson highlighted the importance of biodiversity and the threats posed by human activities. His work emphasizes the interconnectedness of all living things and the need to protect the natural world.

Richard Heinberg: Author and Senior Fellow at the Post Carbon Institute, Heinberg focuses on the depletion of fossil fuels and the implications for society, emphasizing the need for a planned transition to a lower-energy future.

Gail Tverberg: Known for her blog "Our Finite World," Tverberg provides an in-depth analysis of energy, economics, and the limits to growth, often presenting a more pessimistic view of the future.

Charles Hall: Ecological economist known for his work on energy return on investment (EROI), highlighting the declining energy efficiency of fossil fuel extraction and the challenges for renewable energy sources.

Dennis Meadows: Co-author of the influential book "The Limits to Growth," Meadows has warned about the dangers of overshoot for decades, emphasizing the need for systemic change.

Julia Steinberger: Ecological economist studying economic activity's social and environmental impacts, focusing on degrowth and reducing energy consumption.

Kate Raworth: Author of "Doughnut Economics," Raworth proposes an economic framework within the boundaries of ecological limits and social justice, emphasizing the need for a sustainable and equitable future.

Tim Garrett: Atmospheric scientist who has developed controversial theories linking energy consumption to economic growth, suggesting that reducing emissions without addressing economic growth may be difficult.

Nafeez Ahmed: “Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed: an award-winning journalist, academic and prophet for the coming post-carbon age.”

---

Alt Reich

Before moving on to a simpler way, understand our predicament through The Planetary Phase Shift lens.

Elon Musk is launching an authoritarian coup within the 2nd Trump presidency. Seen through planetary phase shift theory, this is a backslide into collapse. The battle lines are drawn. All humanity holds dear is at stake. We fight back by recognising our true power.

The ascension of Donald Trump to the helm of the US Government – and in particular the coup against the fundamental checks and balances of democracy being launched through Trump by Elon Musk – represents a new inflection point not just in the US political system, but in the very structure of a global order in which the US is a central hegemonic power.

Applying the planetary phase shift framework to this moment can help us illuminate both the core systemic drivers behind the resurgence of Trumpocracy, as well as its wider potential consequences.

Trumpocracy 2.0 represents a number of forces and approaches which are deeply incoherent. Trump’s blitzkrieg of executive orders demonstrates how the power of the presidency is being used to attempt to completely reshape – and truncate – the US Government.

Silicon Valley whistle-blowers are warning that Elon Musks’ Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is conducting a rapid multi-frontal assault on major US agencies to gain control of the United States’ critical information and financial systems including unprecedented access to private data of American citizens. Perhaps most crucial is Musk’s access to the US Treasury payments system and homeland security data in the context of a drive to replace federal civil servants with AI systems seeded and controlled by Musk.

Musk is trying to build a true dystopia: a deeply centralised AI technocracy with unprecedented power accruing to the US executive branch under the control of Elon Musk and his shareholders, who represent a cross-section of investors and oligarchs from the tech sector, crypto, finance and specific  fossil fuel-linked players tied to Russia, Saudi Arabia and so on.

To what end? Musk’s assault is aligned with a new vision inspiring the billionaire technology oligarchy backing Trump: the Dark Enlightenment ideology, inspired by transhumanist eugenics and scientific racism, which envisages national democracies being smashed and refashioned into a patchwork of authoritarian structures subservient to transnational techno-capital.

How is this happening?

Fifteen years ago I had warned that a far-right takeover of the liberal heartlands in the West was coming. This is now underway.

That forecast was informed by the core concepts in planetary phase shift theory, which provides us a powerful framework to make sense of these developments and how to respond. For the most academically rigorous articulation of this framework, check out my peer-reviewed paper in Foresight: The Journal of Futures Studies (available here paywall free).

According to this framework, both the tremendous crises and unprecedented opportunities emerging right now are part of a wider phase shift occurring on a planetary scale.

Humanity is moving through the last stages of the life-cycle of industrial civilisation. Two things are happening:

1. Our prevailing fossil fuel centric technological infrastructure is sunsetting. The thermodynamics of this process is unleashing chaos on a grand scale. As the energy return on investment of the fossil fuel system declines, incumbents are seeking to maximise near-term profits on the back of escalating prices and capitalise on the long-term inflationary effects. The cost of living crisis, and the ecological crisis that results from our exploitation of fossil fuels, are of course two sides of the same coin.

2. Simultaneously, the prevailing liberal governance paradigm including the postwar institutional order which evolved (including through the use of imperial violence) to manage this industrial system is unravelling. As the ability of the prevailing social and organising structures to manage this chaotic transition and crisis continually weakens, and clearly offers no obvious solutions, political gravity is rapidly moving away from liberal orthodoxy. Prevailing norms and values are being questioned. The result is that the far-right have been able to play on rising anxieties and legitimate grievances by blaming the symptoms of crisis (such as the migration of people) rather than the system. This is driving a resurgence of authoritarian and imperial inpulses, but now in a new postmodern context of Big Data and techno-capital.

Mass violence and genocides invariably occur in the context of large-scale crisis. The crisis creates a psychological shock that induces people to lose faith and trust in the norms they previously took for granted. When coupled with the influx of extremist ideology that deliberately Otherises 'outsider' groups, this can quickly lead to dehumanisation and at worst, genocidal acts.

This can actually be tracked empirically. As we documented here at AoT previously, there is an apparent correlation from the 1960s/70s onwards between the decline in the global EROI of fossil fuels, the long-term rise in inflation, the declining rate of global economic growth, rising inequalities, the decline in support for centrist parties and the creeping rise in support for the extreme right.

Entering a liminal space of breakdown, revolution; destruction, renewal

There are two further things also happening which are critical to bear in mind. But I'll label them 3 and 4.

3. A new potentially post-materialist technological infrastructure is emerging which for the first time could enable a circular rather than extractivist economy. Every foundational sector of production across human civilisation is experiencing major disruption thanks to disruptive technologies. Whether in clean energy or AI, this is happening. Empirical projections show that the technological landscape of how we produce everything that is critical from energy, to food, to transport and information, is therefore going to change and faster than we've ever experienced in human history. Solar electricity for instance will dominate the energy system by 2050-60 regardless of climate policies. That's not a panacea because it's still way too slow to avoid dangerous climate change and the risk of amplifying feedbacks. But the point is that the system is changing. This is the material dimension of the seeds of the next life-cycle.

4. Our prevailing social organising systems, built to govern the old, declining order, can neither manage the emerging new system nor comprehend the demise of the old, and is being thoroughly disrupted as a result.There is an inflection point opening up as the incumbent fossil fuel centric infrastructure declines while a new technological infrastructure rapidly emerges within the centralised and hierarchical structures of the industrial governance paradigm. On the one hand, we have technologies rapidly scaling which, even while being seeded and developed within prevailing centralised structures of neoliberal capitalist power, are increasingly distributing the ability to produce energy and information for instance. The new technologies are more networked and work optimally in a participatory context. But that participatory context does not yet exist in prevailing social organising systems.This is turbocharging social, cultural and political chaos because our prevailing institutions and sense-making apparatus basically are not built to understand these things. They (and therefore we) are increasingly disoriented. Meanwhile the authoritarian push from techno-capital is seeking to reinforce old paradigm ownership and control structures to restrain the transformative and decentralising effects of the emerging system.

Despite that, a 2024 global survey of 22,000 people across G20 countries commissioned by Earth4All demonstrate that in spite of all this, there are huge majorities of people across both the North and South who are desperate for change, recognise the importance of an ecologically-conscious approach, and want economic transformation. While there is a shift toward the extreme right achieved through well-funded disinformation, this is attempting to undermine, dislocate and divide a seismic global cultural shift toward transformation.

💡

Majorities of the population in places as far apart as the US (69%), UK (70%), Argentina (66%), Indonesia (86%), and Saudi Arabia (61%) want their country’s economy to “prioritise the health and wellbeing of people and nature rather than focusing solely on profit and increasing wealth”. The Musk coup in the US is an attempt to liquidate the force of this popular shift, both in the US and beyond.

The risk is that is we move deeper into this release stage, this drives levels of social and ideological polarisation that accelerates conflict to a degree that paralyses existing governance institutions and decision-making, potentially derailing the possibility of a new life-cycle emerging.

As we’ve argued at AoT, and as my latest peer-reviewed paper shows, Holling's four stage mapping of the life-cycle of living systems is relevant on a civilisational scale – not just as a heuristic but as an empirically-grounded (though imperfect) reflection of the thermodynamics of energy and information as they move through the life-cycle of living systems at all scales.

Which suggests that everything that's happening right now is symptomatic of a movement through the third release/decline stage and the final/fourth reorganisation stage of industrial civilisation.

The death throes of the American empire

And this is why Trump's ascension matters. It's important to recognise firstly that Trump's ascension is not an isolated occurrence related solely to American politics. Rather it is part of a pattern rooted in the global systemic shifts described above, that is therefore whipsawing across the Western world.

Secondly, given the system dynamics driving this extreme radicalisation, it is obviously not going to be isolated to the West. Anyone outside the US looking on and thinking, ‘it can’t happen here’ needs to ditch that delusion. We are seeing this sort of polarisation deepening all over the world, and Musk has made little secret of the active measures already being deployed to destabilise the governments of the UK, Germany and France.

Thirdly, Trump's ascension is precisely the kind of thing that happens when incumbents don't understand, or care to understand, reality, and so double-down on the old and familiar in the search of certainty amidst rapidly escalating uncertainty. "Make America Great Again", the resort to genocidal coloniality in Gaza, the insistence on trade wars and brute force, the tearing down of (already flawed) democratic checks and balances, represent the kinds of overextension that imperial powers commit to to stave off collapse, but which invariably serve only to accelerate collapse.

Crisis is a major driver of the lurch to authoritarianism and militarism as a mechanism of control. And what’s clear is that for some time US and Western elites have disagreed over the causes and consequences of the deepening global crises we are currently experiencing. This disagreement has resulted in a real rupture whereby a new technology oligarchy with large scale control over major parts of global information systems is now spearheading a coup to takeover and dismantle the world’s most powerful democracy.

The point being that Trump's ascension and his "America First" agenda are obviously an effort to stave off the 'release' dynamics of the geopolitical order in which the US-dominated unipolar order is dramatically unravelling. But as planetary phase shift theory shows clearly, drawing on CS Holling’s adaptive cycle visible in living systems at all scales, you cannot ‘stave off’ the release stage. You can’t fight entropy. You need to be able to move through it and scale the emergence of the new.

What Trumpocracy 2.0 is doing is desperately attempting to maintain, consolidate and centralise prevailing hierarchical structures that are in decline. The ‘backsliding’ to authoritarian tools (ditching civil rights, relying on extreme tariffs) represents a resort to old practices associated with obsolete political orders which have already proven their inadequacy. Tariffs for instance worsened the Great Depression, cratered US trade relationships, reinforced the decline of global trade, and helped create the economic crisis conditions behind the Second World War and the rise of the Nazis in Germany.

Fourthly, then, the emergence of 'multipolarity' in itself offers no answers. Multipolarity is a concept born of the same industrial paradigm (it's simply the opposite of unipolar), and so is trapped by the same fundamental geopolitical strategies, interests and incentives of an unravelling inter-state system. Multipolarity in this context simply means that the previous hegemonic order policed by US and Western power is losing control. In its place, lesser powers will increasingly feel and believe they should compete by exerting similarly extreme nationalistic policies. The risk of an accelerating breakdown should not be underestimated. Trump is the fulcrum of this unfolding process.

The actions of Trump and the technology oligarchy that has enabled him could quite literally derail the transition to the next life cycle for humanity. I would emphasise that the Heritage Foundation, which launched his Project 2025 authoritarian control agenda to ramp up fossil fuels while destroying civil rights, is part of the Atlas Network of 500 odd extreme market think-tanks operating across some 100 countries. This is a global movement, and they are just getting started.

What next?

There is only one way forward, and that is through. There's no going back. We can't hope for a return to the 'normality' of what preceded Trump. The old order peaked around the 2000s and we’ve been on the ‘release’ curve downwards ever since. As the fourth and final stage of ‘reorganisation’ in our civilisational life-cycle increasingly opens up during this liminal moment, we need to build and educate at pace and at scale for the next life cycle.

It’s crucially important, as planetary phase shift theory makes unequivocally clear, to remember that the material and cultural potential of the next life cycle could be life-affirming, regenerative, joyous and prosperous in ways that were impossible for previous generations. This potential future that could benefit all humanity is endangered by the resurgence of Nazism in a new techno-utopian-fascist mould that conceals itself under the guise of anti-Nazism, whose end-point is economic, energy and ecological collapse.

It's time to stop pulling punches and recognise what is happening right now. This is the fight of our lives. It’s not just that the jackboots are back disguised as suede Oxford shoes, it’s that they might trample the last chance we have to solve our biggest global challenges by navigating to a new type of superabundant, regenerative ecological civilisation that works for all.

Faced with this apparent onslaught, the understandable temptation is to succumb to the saturation point of overwhelm – which is precisely the point of the information war currently being deployed. I get it. I feel it too.

The target is not simply our minds, but our central nervous systems, rewired through the reshaping of our brains via dopamine training designed to beat our ‘attention’ into a state of narrow subservience to the almighty algorithm. But there is no time or space to succumb to the despair and disorientation which is desired for us.

Instead, it’s time to move into our true power as agents of change, as harbingers of the next life-cycle, as individuals who stand for ethical values that truly connect us with the earth and with each other. The locus of this war is the dislocation of our collective sense-making abilities, fracturing institutions and disjointing coherent decision-making power.  

These are the battle lines ahead:

A.     We need to understand the reality of what is happening right now and learn how to communicate that clearly so more and more people can begin to recognise that what is unfolding right now is literally seen by those behind it as a war, a network insurgency, against humanity and the earth. Their aim is to shore up the prevailing industrial paradigm against those who are moving for transformative change. We need to, in short, be able to understand the Alt Reich and its agenda.

B.     We need to understand the reality of the systemic shift toward an emerging new system that can harness new material capabilities in a new organising paradigm which is creating the possibility of superabundance. There is a viable, scientifically-defensible vision of a future which is worth fighting for, and which is achievable by scaling tools and ideas we already have. We need to become masters of communicating this exciting vision of what’s possible so that it can become a new centre of gravity that outweighs the dystopian destructive of the Alt Reich.

C.    We need to work in our own contexts to accelerate those levers - both material and cultural - that can supercharge the positive phase shifts to the next life-cycle and a new system. That means - taking action to accelerate key exponential technologies in a way that is regenerative and distributive, while also working to help create new ways of organising our institutions so that they optimise the former in alignment with the planet.

D.     We need to build our personal resilience and sense-making capabilities to become immune to the information war and to embody the values of the emerging earth-centric paradigm. This will be a different path for each of us. But the common denominator is that we have to lift our capacity to see and work with complexity.

E.      We need to stop allowing ourselves to become increasingly fragmented and atomised, and instead need to reach out across disciplinary, ideological and organisational boundaries to forge collective intelligence capacity. We need to create new bonds of coherence and cohesion, new cross-sector networks of seeing and action. This means we stop in-fighting over who is best at virtue signalling, and focus instead on identifying and acting on lines of collaboration. This includes proliferating new ways to reach out to and enfranchise those who disagree with us through the power of human connection and sharing.

F.      We need to upgrade our information projection capabilities and that means developing and honing new language that can resonate across political polarities, and utilising digital tools to supercharge our ideas so they can compete in this new landscape of memes and reels, and provide people, especially young people, with the tools and inspiration for the next life-cycle.

G. We need to stop being reactionary. That means going on the offensive. Instead of creating strategies of response to the death throes of the old paradigm, we need to focus on the strategies of empowerment and inspiration to fast-track awakening for the new paradigm, the new life-cycle, the next system. The former approach is always constrained by the rules of someone else's battleground (as I showed in this critique of XR). The latter approach is transcend that 'battleground' by targeting the biggest weak spots in the incumbency while maximising attention on the possibilities for a new system. We will struggle at first to absorb what this means, but we'll get there - it will not mean simply stopping what we're doing, but it will mean reorienting that in new modes and directions that refuse to conform to the expectations and boundaries established for us.

The antidote

The thing that we have on our side is this: the far-right agenda cannot succeed. By my last calculation the Trump-Musk economic planfor the US – if fully executed – would destroy some 25% of GDP for instance (when you take into account systemic cascading effects). This is without looking at the dire energy and climate implications. Trumpocracy 2.0, therefore, will fail. Every other movement around the world that seeks to replicate Trumocracy 2.0 in their nation and region will end up pursing a similar path of destruction.

In the meantime, people all over the world are going to need to know how they can hold the line. They are going to need to know how we can move through this time of chaos and regression while building and planting seeds for what comes when the Trumpocracy 2.0 crumbles.

There is ultimately only one antidote. That is to upgrade our ability to see and make decisions based on recognising the reality of the unfolding planetary phase shift; and to scale that new consciousness as far as wide as possible across our contexts and beyond.

We need to shift from the narrow, narcissistic, fragmented mode of consciousness that characterises the Alt Reich into a holistic systems awareness – what MIT's Otto Scharmer has describedas moving from “ego” awareness to “eco” awareness.

The more we are able to scale this consciousness and through that process forge new networks of connection and collaboration, the more we will accelerate the emergence of a new collective intelligence capacity across communities, nations, sectors and regions that the Alt Reich cannot conquer.

For too long, we've conceived of ourselves as 'the resistance' - outsiders ceaselessly reacting on a battleground created by those at the helm of the incumbent system. This is the wrong frame, and we have to let it go. Because we're watching the system fall on its own sword, and while this is going to be incredibly and tragically destructive for so many of us, it's the beginning of the end for the old paradigm.

We are not the resistance. We are the future. And we’re about to arrive.

And finally, I’d like you to consider Ted Trainer’s way of life and worldview.

One way or another, we will probably be living more simply. I’d love to see my village in Portugal return to a simpler way. Ted is a revolutionary after my own heart. Ted has lived it. One way or another, things are going to get simpler. Do we have what it takes to determine how this happens and what life will look l like when the changes have come?

Ted Trainer: Ted Trainer is an activist academic of the eco-anarchist persuasion. He worked as a professor at the University of New South Wales for decades while developing a demonstration settlement in a swamp outside Sydney. His work is not widely known, partly because he practices what he preaches and doesn’t travel. It gets a boost here from the Simplicity Institute. Samuel Alexander and Jonathan Rutherford have edited this collection of Trainer’s writing, drawn from articles, book excerpts, and journals, with an interview with the author at the end. Ted is my kind of revolutionary. But even so, we will have to fight, and many of us will make the ultimate sacrifice.

THE SIMPLER WAY

                                                 THIRD WORLD DEVELOPMENT

           Ted Trainer

            Long account; 23 pages.

         26.2.2024

            Summary:

Despite significant advances since World War II, the state of development in poor countries is very unsatisfactory. Around one billion people live in extreme poverty. More than 800 million do not get adequate food. The debt is huge and can never be repaid. About 3 billion people have an annual income of less than $2 per day. The development taking place has mostly benefited the rich countries and their corporations and the small upper classes in poor countries. Very little "trickles down" to the poorest; In fact recent reports say living standards. In the poor countries are now going down.he basic cause of the problem is the conventional approach to development theory and practice that is being followed. This focuses on promoting economic growth, investment and trade, and it allows market forces to allocate scarce resources and to determine what is developed. Markets inevitably work in the interests of the rich and never develop the things that are most needed. Resources go to those who can pay most, and investment goes into what’s most profitable, which is industries that provide what richer people want to buy.

Thus the conventional approach to development should be seen as a form of plunder. When development is defined as enabling as much business turnover and economic growth as possible then the focus will be on helping people with capital to invest to increase production for sale. This means resources mostly go into the most profitable developments, and therefore most wealth and resources flow to the rich while the poor majority lose the access to the resources they once had. Productive capacity becomes geared to producing for local elites and for export to the rich countries, and not to meeting the urgent needs of local people.

Rich world living standards could not be as high as they are if the global economy did not enable the rich countries to take most of the world's resources. Rich countries should cease taking far more than their fair share of the world's wealth, yet  powerful global agencies such as the World Bank enforce adherence to conventional development, especially through the conditions they put on loans.

The "limits to growth" analysis is extremely important for the discussion of development, because it shows that the goal of conventional development for poor countries is impossible. There are not enough resources for all people to rise to rich world living standards and systems. 

Appropriate development for the Third World contradicts conventional development. It focuses on enabling people to cooperate in using their local resources to meet their basic needs, immediately, mostly through self-sufficient village-level strategies. Its goal is good basic conditions for all, not affluence, industrialization or growth of GDP. It involves minimizing the role for market forces, foreign investment, trade, and involvement in the global economy. Many in peasant and tribal regions are now turning to this approach.

THE SITUATION

No issue sets more serious challenges to our affluent society and our economic system than does the situation of the poor countries. Considerable progress has been made in recent decades and the common assumption is that we should be content with the development taking place because in time it will lift all out of poverty and towards rich world “living standards”. However conventional development theory and practice are grossly unacceptable and must be abandoned.

The main concern is the inequality and injustice the conventional approach involves. The benefits of conventional development go mostly to the rich, the small elite classes in poor countries, the transnational corporations and the people who shop in rich world supermarkets. The important question to ask of a development strategy is how well does it work for those in most need. Most of the world’s people are getting very little from the development taking place, and Oxfam finds that conditions for poor countries are now deteriorating.

The inequality evident within the world economy is extreme. The richest 20% are getting around 86% of world income, while the poorest 20% are getting only about 1.3%. About half the world's people have an income of under $2 per day. At least 850 million people suffer chronic hunger. About 1.8 billion do not have safe drinking water. Thousands of children die every day from deprivation.

Far from progressing towards "self-sustaining, economic growth and prosperity”, poor countries have fallen into such levels of debt that few if any would now hold any hope of repayment. Meanwhile many Third World governments deprive their people and strip their forests more and more fiercely to raise the money to meet the debt repayments. The magnitude of the debt problem sets a major challenge to anyone who believes the conventional development strategy can lead poor coutries to prosperity.

But it is not the state of things that should be our major concern, it is the conception or model of “development” that is being followed. Following is discussion of the main faults.

1.  GROWTH IS NOT DEVELOPMENT.

The first major fault in conventional development theory and practice is the identification of development with economic growth (or the assumption that growth is the means to development, or the main condition necessary for it, etc.) Conventional development theorists proceed as if all that matters is increasing the amount of economic activity, i.e., of business turnover, production for sale, or Gross Domestic Product. The claim is that the more goods and services produced and sold then the more “wealth” that is being generated, the more taxes governments can collect and spend on problems such as health, education and the environment and the more jobs and incomes people can have.

But development should be about improving all aspects of society, not just the GDP, including its political processes, cohesion, social relations, civility, artistic and cultural life, crime and corruption rates, security, care of old people, equality, and many other things.

Secondly even within the economic sector of society, development is not equivalent to growth. When a tadpole develops it does become bigger but it also changes its form; it becomes a frog and it then stops getting bigger, because it has then finished developing. Economists have no concept of what the end goal of development might be. They can only think about the economy endlessly becoming bigger, i.e., increasing the volume of sales for ever. But it makes no sense to discuss development without having some idea of what the goal, the end point, of development is.

The conventional economist has no concept of sufficient development, or when something has been developed enough.  My kitchen has undergone almost no development in forty years; because it is developed enough.  There are delightful eco-villages that are developed enough. The conventional economist also has no concept of over-development; just keep on adding freeways, skyscrapers…without any limit.

Worst of all, there is a head-on clash between what will maximise the GDP and what is appropriate. If maximising the GDP is your goal you will encourage local owners of capital and transnational corporations to put more land into export crops, even when it is obvious that most of the land should be growing more food for hungry people. But if the land was taken out of production of export crops and put into growing food for poor people that would reduce the GDP. In general doing what is best for people and the environment is the opposite of doing what will most increase the GDP. Prioritising growth interferes with, rules out, developing what is most needed.

Therefore we can state a most important economic law which never occurs to conventional economists never ... growth deprives! If you make the maximisation of growth of GNP your supreme development goal then you will enable the flow of development resources out of producing what is most needed and into the most profitable ventures. Yes some and maybe many will benefit, but the poorest will go backwards.

This can be put in terms of the assumed ”unidimensional” nature of development.  It is thought of as capable only of varying along one dimension, to do with the amount of business turnover or production for sale and the associated levels of industrialization, trade, infrastructures etc. All nations can be lined up according to their GDP per capita, and development is assumed to be about moving up the slope towards the rich world end of the dimension.

But again there are many dimensions relevant to assessing development, and some are much more important than economic factors (security, community, peace, equality, quality of life, and environmental sustainability, for instance.) On almost all social criteria the US is at or nearly at the bottom of the list of OECD countries. (See Speth, 2012.)  Many countries with miniscule GDP per capita rate far above rich western countries on quality of life indices.  Cuba has a relatively low GDP per capita but is the best in the world on an overall measure of environmental impact in relation to GDP.

So there are several reasons why GDP should not be regarded as the, or an important index of development. We should list the factors that matter in order of priority, and design strategies to achieve them, and this will involve preventing a lot of development that people with capital want to pursue. People with capital to invest never maximise their income by producing what is most needed, such as food for poor peasants.

2. THE MARKET  GURANTEES  THAT  THE  POOR  WILL  BE  DEPRIVED    AND    DEVELOPMENT  WILL  BE  INAPPROPRIATE.

No principle is more fundamental in conventional development theory and practice than that maximum freedom should be given for market forces to determine what happens. This guarantees that the wrong things will happen.

The global economy is a market system and the three major effects of the market system on development are:

Market forces allow the relatively rich few to take most or all of the available resources.

The 20% of the world's people who live in the developed countries consume approximately 80% of the resources produced for sale, and their per capita resource consumption is approximately 17 times that of the poorest half of the world's people. For example, while possibly 850 million people lack sufficient food, which might require 40 millions tonnes of gain p.a. to remedy, over 600 million tonnes of grain are fed to animals in rich countries each year.

These extremely unfair distributions of the world's resource wealth come about primarily because it is an economic system in which rich countries are allowed to outbid poor countries to buy scarce things. If you allow the market to allocate scarce things like oil, when a few are rich and many are poor, then inevitably the rich will get most of them. The market has no concern whatsoever for what humans need or what is just or best for the environment.  It will always distribute things according to "effective demand", which means that richer people and nations can take what they want and the poor must do without.

A MARKET ECONOMY IS AN INGENIOUS DEVICE WHICH ENSURES

THAT WHEN THINGS BECOME SCARCE ONLY THE RICH CAN GET THEM!

1. Market forces have mostly developed

the wrong industries in the Third World.

A great deal of development has taken place in the Third World; the trouble is that it has not been development of the most needed industries. It has been mostly the development of industries to provide crops, minerals and consumer goods for the small rich local elites or for export to the rich countries i.e., it has been inappropriate development.

Just consider the fact that millions of Third World people work hard producing things for other people, from which they derive very little benefit, in the form of very low wages. All that labour and all that land could have been fully devoted to meeting their own needs. Look at any typical capital city and you see a vast amount of development of offices, hotels, airports, boutiques, cars and roads...which is of little or no benefit to most people in the country.

But inappropriate development is precisely what should be expected when development resources are invested in what will make the highest profits or contribute most to GDP i.e., when profit and market forces are allowed to determine what is developed.

1. Much of the Third World's productive capacity has become geared to meeting the demand of the rich.

This is most evident in the case of export crops. In some poor countries half of the best land grows crops to export to the rich countries, including fodder for animals. Again this is a direct consequence of allowing the highest bid to determine the uses to which the Third World's productive capacity is put.

When Third World productive capacity is put into producing exports the people of the Third World receive only minute proportions of the wealth generated. For instance in Central America a 3000 ha cattle ranch might provide very low incomes for only two workers, yet that much land might feed 15,000 people if gardened intensively.

"In Senegal a subsidiary of the giant American transnational corporation Bud Antle "... has established huge irrigated 'garden plantations' on land from which peasants have been moved. These plantations produce vegetables in the winter and feed for livestock (for export) in the summer. None of this produce is eaten in Senegal."

"This process is occurring across all of North Africa. In Ethiopia in an area where thousands of people were evicted to make way for agribusiness and then starved to death, international firms are producing alfalfa to feed livestock in Japan.".

"In the Caribbean people starve beside fields growing tomatoes and flowers for export."

              Beyond Brandt, Third World First pamphlet. p.4.

"Much of the protein wasted on the livestock eaten by the West comes from the poor countries; oilseeds and peanuts from West Africa, fishmeal from Peru, soybeans from Brazil..."

"Third World fodder... provides every tenth litre of milk and every tenth pound of meat produced in the EEC."

Again the core problem is not the lack of development; it is the inappropriateness of the development this economic system generates.  So again, to allow market forces, the profit motive and the maximisation of economic growth to be the overwhelming determinants of development is to guarantee that resources will flow to richer people and mostly inappropriate development will result. Therefore conventional development can be seen as a process which draws Third World productive capacity into producing mostly for the benefit of the local rich classes, the transnational corporations and the consumers in rich countries.

Hickel (2021) estimates that the net flow of wealth from poor to rich countries every year is around $2.5 trillion.

The principle of freedom for market forces is exactly what the transnational corporations and local business classes want.  They do not want any restriction on their freedom to go where they like and invest in and produce what they like and sell it where they like. Obviously the more rules a government sets and the more conditions it imposes restrict the freedom of corporations to maximise their profits. For instance, if they were obliged to invest where unemployment is high, or build low cost houses for poorer people, their profits would be less than they otherwise could be.

            3. “PLUNGE INTO THE GLOBAL ECONOMY”.

“Export a lot in order to earn the money to pay for a lot of imports and infrastructures (and pay off your debt.) Compete against all others to sell something. Stimulate and assist the accumulation and investment of capital, for investment in new factories, farms and infrastructures. Seek loans and aid; capital is needed to build productive capacity. Attract foreign investors to set up firms.”

This makes the country highly dependent on conditions in the global economy.  It is encouraged to rely heavily on the one or few exports it is best at producing, and when the global demand for these falls the economy can be devastated. The sensible alternative is of course to build national self-sufficiency, the country’s capacity to provide for itself the basic things it needs, while exporting only enough to pay for important imports it can’t produce for itself.

But that’s no good to the owners of capital or rich world supermarket shoppers; they benefit when poor countries have no choice but to sell a lot to rich countries and buy a lot from them.  We can’t get access to their resources or their markets if they choose to keep out of the global economic system. But there’s no risk of that; they are so heavily indebted that they have no choice but to sell a lot to us to try to pay off their debt.

4.  THE "TRICKLE DOWN" ASSUMPTION.

The basic justification for conventional development is that although it mostly enriches the rich, in time “…wealth will trickle down to benefit all.” There is indeed a tendency for this to happen, but this does not mean that the process is acceptable. There are strong reasons why the trickle down doctrine should be rejected.

Very little trickles down. In the world as a whole the amount of benefit that trickles down is evident in the fact that one-fifth of the world's people now get about 70 times the amount of world income the poorest one-fifth get, and the ratio is getting worse. Neoliberalism has greatly accelerated the accumulation of wealth by the super-rich.

Between 1990 and 2010 global consumption increased by $10 - $15 trillion, but 1% of people got 15% of it. The gain for each of them was 637 times as much as the gain for the poorest 53% of the world’s people.

            Edward, P. and A. Summer, (2013), The geography of

Inequality: Where and how much has income distribution

changed since 1990?, Working Paper 341,

Centre for Global Development, Sept.

“But hasn’t poverty been greatly reduced?” It is commonly claimed and accepted that the conventional development has lifted hundreds of millions of Third World poor out of poverty.  The conditions large numbers experience have indeed improved greatly, but the situation is complex and the overall effects are debated.  Firstly there is the issue of the definition of the poverty line, commonly taken to be an income of $1.25 or $2 or $2.25 a day.  This is an absurdly low figure.  (The Australian 2016 single person line is $75 a day.) What income would a person in Thailand or Peru etc. need to not be experiencing poverty?  The sum would be far higher than $2.50, meaning that the numbers experiencing serious hardship must be far greater than the official statistics indicate, and meaning that it is not much of a tribute to trickle down have lifted many above $2.50 over several decades.

Secondly the gains seem to have been made mostly been in China.  Edward and Summer (2013) find that if Chinese figures are omitted then there has been little if any improvement in global inequality and poverty rates in recent decades.  And China is not a very attractive example of development. China’s development is mostly benefiting a small proportion of its people, leaving perhaps 800 million in rural poverty.  Inequality is “…appalling and getting worse.”  (McRae, 2008.) (For a detailed and quite alarming account of China’s precarious situation see Smith, 2015.)

Neoliberal “development” also impoverishes; what are the net effects? Conventional/capitalist development creates a lot of poverty, mainly by depriving large numbers of poor people of resources and livelihoods they once had, including in rich countries (especially in the US, consider Detroit.) The removal of protection and subsidies allows foreign corporations to come in and take over markets and productive activity. Chinese broom exporters thrive, by taking the exports that lots of little broom makers in Mexico and Vietnam once had. Because governments define development as increasing the GDP they allow corporations to log forests and build dams and mines, pushing many tribal and peasant people off their ancestral lands. Fletcher (2016) quoting the U.N. Human Development Report says that in 2003, 54 nations were poorer than they had been in 1990, and Sub-Saharan Africa had a lower per capita income than 40 years before. (See also Hickel, 2016.) The poor in Third World countries that are most integrated into the global economy have fared worse than those in other countries. (Wodin and Lucas, p. 55, Meredith, 2005.)

Conventional economists typically enthuse about gains and benefits but ignore the losses and costs.  It is not clear how big the net gains in income, employment and welfare have been but the above evidence on global poverty changes suggest that they have not been anywhere near as spectacular as is commonly claimed.

The rate of trickle down development is extremely slow.  At present rates it would probably take more than a hundred years for the “living standards” of the poor majority in the Third World to rise to the present rich world level…and by that time at present growth rates rich world GDP per capita would have become astronomical…although that is ecologically impossible (see below.)  Yet if the available resources could be applied directly by people to meeting their own needs rapid improvements would easily be achieved.

The “strategy” is grossly immoral, because it (claims to) improve the welfare of those in great need by enabling them to get crumbs from the tables of the rich, while almost all of the benefit of “development” goes to national elites, foreign corporations and rich world consumers. A development process should be evaluated primarily by how well it addresses the most urgent needs, that is, how well it benefits the poorest. 

The alternative development model (below) indicates how quickly the main problems could be solved if the available resources were devoted to the needs of people in general. Compare what trickles down to factory workers in Bangladesh paid a few cents an hour with the benefit they would get if they were devoting their time and energy to producing basic goods they need in their own local cooperative firms and farms.  

But outweighing all these considerations is the fact that the global resource situation will not permit Trickle Down to work.  The “limits to growth” analysis shows that there are nowhere near enough resources for it to lift the expected 9.7 billion poor people to anything like rich world systems and levels of consumption. (See TSW: The Limits to Growth.)

FOREIGN INVESTMENT

According to the conventional view foreign investment is crucial to facilitate development, because development is thought of in terms of investing capital to increase production for sale. However the critical view is that although foreign investment certainly promotes development, the resulting development is almost entirely inappropriate.

Foreign investors never invest in the production of the most needed things, such as cheap food, clean water or simple housing. As has been explained, foreign investment always goes into the most profitable ventures, meaning into producing things for the urban rich or for export to rich countries and draws local land and productive capacity into these activities. Market forces can have no other outcome.

It is a mistake to think that foreign investment is essential because poor countries lack capital. Foreign investors often raise most of the capital they invest from Third World banks, meaning that there is plenty of capital in the Third World especially in relation to the relatively simple things that need developing.

Most importantly, it is a mistake to think that appropriate development can't take place without the investment of large amounts of capital. In fact little or no capital is needed to develop those things that would most enable modest but satisfactory living standards for all in a typical poor country. (See below.)

WHAT ABOUT AID?

In view of the foregoing discussion, it can be seen that aid (in its present form)  is not very important. The solution to the development problem is "...not that we should give more, but that we should take less." In other words giving aid does not change the unjust functioning of the global economy.

The rich countries give very little aid, around 3 cents for every ten dollars they spend on themselves. Most of what they give is “tied”; i.e., given on condition that the money is spent buying from our corporations. Aid in some years has been around 10% of the amount the Third World has had to pay out to our banks as debt repayment (Shah, 2005). Much aid goes to assist nasty regimes that will keep their economies to the policies the rich countries want. (Consider the billions given to Saudi Arabia, one of the most nasty dictatorships in the world.) And now aid is often given on condition that countries accept certain arrangements...especially, you guessed it, moving their economies further to market principles.

Relatively little aid goes into appropriate development. Some forms of aid can be very valuable, and much of the work of the Non Government Agencies is going into appropriate development. But aid is relatively unimportant in view of the way the global economy treats poor countries, and has to be understood as another powerful tool that helps to keep to the kind of development that suits the rich.

GLOBALISATION

Since 1980 the situation of most of the poorest people in the Third World has deteriorated significantly due to the "globalisation" of the world economy and the rise of the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, the World Trade Organisation and of Neoliberal doctrine to be extremely powerful agencies determining development.

Globalisation refers to the movement towards a unified and integrated world economy in which the big transnational corporations and banks have increasing freedom and access to trade and invest as they wish, because the barriers such as protection for industries in poor countries are being removed and governments are deregulating and privatizing their economies. The conventional economist sees globalisation as highly desirable, because the increased freedom of trade it facilitates enables more business activity and GDP growth.  But it is having devastating effects on large numbers in the poor countries. Increased freedom of trade means greater scope for transnational corporations and banks to enter countries to get access to their resources and labour, to take over their firms and to take sales in their markets. It is now widely recognised as being responsible for the destruction of the economies, jobs and living standards of millions of people in rich as well as poor countries. It enables the corporations to focus investment and activity in the few most profitable regions of the world, and to ignore the rest. (… for instance, shift manufacturing jobs from Detroit to China.) Governments cannot direct development into needed areas, because that would be to" interfere with the freedom of trade and enterprise". Avoiding that is the supreme and sacred principle in Neoliberal doctrine.

One consequence of this agenda is that poor people in general and some entire countries, especially in Africa and the Pacific, are increasingly irrelevant to the interests of the corporations and will therefore sink further into stagnation and squalor. They cannot possibly compete in export markets and they have no cheap resources to attract foreign investors. Consequently inequality, great wealth accompanied by great poverty, is rapidly increasing around the world now.

Alternative/appropriate development is not possible unless governments have the capacity to control and regulate the economy, trade, foreign investment etc. For example, they must be able to get foreign investors to locate in regions that need jobs. Yet globalisation is about leaving development to market forces, which in effect means development will only be development of whatever it suits the corporations to develop. Rich countries and their agencies such as the World Bank, actively prevent the governments of poor countries from taking control of their own development.

THE STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT PACKAGES

The most powerful forces inflicting these "developments" on poor countries over the last 40 years have come via the Structural Adjustment Packages of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.

When a Third World country's debts become impossible for it to repay it must go to the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank for assistance. These agencies arrange for more loans to enable debt repayments to be made, but they do so on condition that a Structural Adjustment Package is accepted. This package obliges the country to do a number of things that are supposed to improve the economy, such as cut government spending including assistance to poor people, open the economy to more foreign investment, increase exports (more plantations and logging), devalue (making exports from them to us in rich countries cheaper to buy, and making the country pay more for the imports from us), reduce government regulation, reduce government ownership and control and generally increase adoption of free trade policies.

These conditions are supposed to be designed to "get the economy going again", i.e., to increase business activity, investment, export earnings, and to reduce government spending, so that the country becomes more able to pay back its debt. There is much evidence that these measures typically have little or no effect in achieving these objectives.

More importantly, the packages are a delightful bonanza for the rich countries and their corporations and banks. Impediments to their access to resources and markets are removed, they can buy up the firms that go bankrupt, they can hire cheaper labour, they can import commodities more cheaply from the country (because of the devaluation). And SAPs force repayments to rich world banks. However the effects on the country's economy and on its poor majority are typically catastrophic. Many small firms fail as imports flood in, unemployment jumps, government assistance to the poor is reduced and food prices rise. Any move to devote more of the country’s resources to producing to meet its own needs is ruled out ... resources must first go towards paying off the debt, and the overriding principle is that development must be determined by market forces within the global economy.

For decades there has been a great deal of criticism of Structural Adjustment Packages, which have now been imposed on more than 100 countries (...never on any of the rich countries of course; the USA is the world's most heavily indebted country but would never have a SAP imposed on it!) They have caused or contributed to havoc in many countries, including riots, civil wars (Yugoslavia, Rwanda; see Chossudowsky, 1997) and increased death rates from deprivation, and the fall of governments (e.g., Indonesia.) SAPs and the rules of the World Trade Organisation are now widely recognised as among the main mechanisms ensuring that the global economy functions in the interests of the big corporations and banks and the rich world. (For extensive documentation see TSW: Third World Development, Collected Documents, and TSW: Globalisation, Collected Documents.)

CONVENTIONAL DEVELOPMENT IS THEREFORE A FORM OF PLUNDER

Conventional development can be seen as a process whereby the Third World's resources are taken over by the rich countries and their corporations, and Third World productive capacity is geared to rich world demand. Long ago Third World countries had control over their own forests and lands and ordinary people were able to use most of them to produce what they needed. But the result of conventional development is that these resources have come to be owned by, sold to, or produce for, the benefit of the small local rich classes, the transnational corporations and consumers in rich countries. The work is done by the few who get jobs in the factories and plantations, for very low wages. Conventional development involves bringing people into the global market, where they must sell something in order to buy what they need, and where market forces then ensure that the majority of very poor people get very few of the resources available, have to sell their resources and labour cheaply, and see their land and forests bought by rich people and put into the production of items for others to use. These are inevitable outcomes when development is allowed to be determined by market forces; it is always more profitable to sell to or produce for richer people.  The market never attends to what poor people need.

This situation has been understood for a long time; e.g., Goldsmith discussed "development as colonialism". (Goldsmith, 1997.) Rist says, "...development has resulted in material and cultural expropriation." (Rist, 1997, p.. 243.) Schwarz and Schwarz say "Development now seems little more than a window dressing for economic colonialism." (1998, p. 3.) Chossudowsky's The Globalisation of Poverty (1997) details the mechanisms, especially in relation to finance. These are just a few of the earlier works documenting the way in which conventional development is a form of legitimized plunder. (See TSW: Third World Collected Documents.)

            CONVENTIONAL DEVELOPMENT SUITS LOCAL ELITES.

Appropriate development contradicts the interests of the small rich ruling classes in poor countries. The present situation is not kept in place solely by the machinations of rich world corporations and governments.  Local elites have access to lucrative investment opportunities such as mines and export plantations. So any move to transfer land to facilitate village development etc. is usually strenuously resisted. It is likely to be branded as communist subversion and rich countries are then usually eager to provide military support to crush it ...  because their corporations don’t want their plantatioss to be threatened. This is the history of Latin America; see the account of Our Empire.

A NOTE ON “EXCHANGE” AND MARXIST THEORIES.

The general ”Unequal Exchange” theory of underdevelopment can be criticized for adopting the conventional “unidimensional” view of development. It is concerned with the loss of monetary wealth from Third World countries via trade conditions which involve unequal exchange. This is claimed to hinder development, which is defined in terms of GDP. But this fails to recognize that the core problem is that the wrong things are being developed.  It would in fact be possible for appropriate development to be taking place even though large amounts of money are being siphoned out. (Consider for instance the Zapatistas.)

Marxists typically not only reveal adoption of the conventional definition of development as moving towards rich world industrialisation and consumerism, but have actually insist that capitalist development is necessary in poor countries before conditions enabling revolutionary transition to a post-capitalist society “mature”. (Some Marxists now recognize that the Limits to Growth issue rules out the old view. It is interesting that late in his life Marx entertained the possibility of a totally different transition path, which corresponds to the alternative being argued for below, i.e., directly enabling the model of the Russian traditional collective village, the Mir.)

THE UNJUST GLOBAL ECONOMY ENABLES RICH WORLD LIVING STANDARDS

The living standards we enjoy in rich countries such as Australia benefit greatly from the way the global economy works. The global market system and the freedom of trade the corporations enjoy deliver most of the world's resources to us and draw the Third World's productive capacity into producing mostly for our benefit. What would our tea and coffee cost if those who produced them were paid a decent wage, or if much of the land growing coffee was put into growing food for them?

Again the basic mechanism is simply the fact that the economy operates on market principles.  In this kind of economy resources and goods go to those who can pay most for them – that’s why the rich get most of them.  They are not distributed according to needs or rights.

To be more precise, there are three main groups who benefit from the way the global economy works. The transnational corporations and banks are by far the biggest beneficiaries. The second group includes the small “comprador” richer classes in the Third World who own some of the factories and plantations or have highly paid jobs. It is in their interests to support the unjust economy and to cooperate with the transnational corporations and the rich countries to keep conventional economic and development policies in place. The Third group of beneficiaries includes the ordinary people who live in rich countries because they get far more than a fair share of world resources and they can go to the supermarket and buy many things produced cheaply from Third World resources.

In other words, we have an empire and we could not have such high "living standards” without it. If you doubt this, think how well you would live if you got only your fair share of the world's oil production, or copper or fish, and what would your coffee cost if most of the land producing it now was devoted to food instead?

YOUR EMPIRE CANNOT BE KEPT IN PLACE WITHOUT REPRESSION.

The injustice and exploitation is mainly due to the normal working of the global economy, because market forces automatically enrich the rich and deprive the poor. However people do not like being deprived, hungry and exploited. From time to time they tend to protest. In many countries people can only be kept working in the mines, plantations and sweatshops for starvation wages through violent repression.

The repression is inflicted willingly by the local ruling classes who benefit most from the situation, but often rich countries give arms, training and other assistance that is used to put down dissent, or assist rebels undermining a non-compliant regime, and often rich countries invade to install or get rid of rulers who are not ruling in ways that benefit. us.

The history of international relations has always been mostly about struggles between nations to dominate – to get their hands on the wealth of others, by stealth or force, to make others accept conditions that suit the strongest. Over the last 500 years the Spanish, Dutch, British and Americans have taken turns to run the world to benefit themselves, at immense cost to peasants and native people. They have slaughtered and plundered and conquered empires, killing and enslaving millions.  The British empire included about 70% of the planet and took over 70 wars to establish. Many wars arose from the efforts of the French and the Germans to get into the imperial game. In the last 50 years the Americans have invaded many countries and supported many dictators to maintain their empire.
The point of all this is of course to make sure we can get the resources of other countries, usually by putting or keeping in place regimes willing to allow their country’s fate to be determined by market forces. Several decades ago there were many “nationalist” governments, e.g., those of Nasser in Egypt and Tito in Yugoslavia, which tried to make sure national resources were used primarily for the benefit of their people (…not that they were pure and without corruption), but now just about all of these have been overthrown and replaced by governments willing or forced to play by Neoliberal rules.

Whole nations, not just their ruling classes, contribute to the economic or military conquest of weaker nations, and take pride in their empires. The average Briton would surely have agreed that you should not harm others or steal from them, while at the very same time seeing no contradiction in their fierce pride in the glorious British Empire – which was the result of brutal slaughter and conquest and exploitation of hundreds of millions of people, leaving many serious problems which are still causing immense cost in lives and resources (such as the Palestine – Israel conflict.)

The mentality is still there; the mindless ease with which corporations and governments automatically seek to beat others to resources, wealth and markets, and the unquestioning acquiescence of rich world people who are happy to purchase the tea and coffee and rubber and cheap clothing without any thought about where they are coming from.

(For a detailed 27 page summary of the vast literature documenting these themes see Our Empire; Its Nature and Maintenance,

THE LIMITS TO GROWTH PERSPECTIVE;
OVERLOOKED IMPLICATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT

It is remarkable that the development literature has given so little attention to the "limits to growth" analysis of our global predicament. This shows that it will be totally impossible for all people to rise to anything like the material “living standards” presently enjoyed by the 1/5 of the world’s people who live in rich countries, let alone the standards we aspire to. These have to be seen as the over-developed countries while the rest are the never-to-be-developed countries. (For detailed analysis see TSW: The Limits to Growth.)

This "limits to growth” perspective requires the total rejection of any view of development which assumes growth and trickle down, or which takes Western affluent living standards as the goal of development.

Sensible development theory and practice must therefore be based on acceptance of the point Gandhi expressed long ago  …

THE RICH MUST LIVE MORE SIMPLY

SO THAT THE POOR MAY SIMPLY LIVE.

This means that an acceptable approach to development has to be framed in terms of The Simpler Way; that is, focused on providing a high quality of life for all in ways that involve only very low levels of production, consumption and resource use/.

ALTERNATIVE, APPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT ...THE SIMPLER WAY.

The following basic principles flatly contradict conventional development theory.

1. Enable people to immediately begin applying the existing resources and productive capacity to producing the mostly simple things that are most needed to give them the highest possible quality of life at the least cost in labour, resources and environmental impact. Most if not all Third World regions have all the resources they need to build the basic structures and systems which would provide a high quality of life to all in a few years at most, via relatively simple technologies, lifestyles and systems.

The concern should be to ensure that all people have basic but adequate shelter, food, health services, extensive and supportive community, security, leisure-rich environments, peace of mind, a relaxed pace, worthwhile work, a sustainable environment, and access to a rich cultural life. Achieving these goals is possible with little or no foreign investment, trade, heavy industrialisation, aid, external expert advice or sophisticated technology and with little or no capital. Little more is required than access to and cooperative organization of the land, labour and traditional building and gardening skills the people usually have. Conventional/capitalist development prevents that access.

In other words Appropriate development emphatically rejects any notion of trickle down development. If the available labour and resources are applied fully and immediately to producing what people need the benefit to them will be huge in comparison with what they could ever hope to receive via any trickle down mechanism.

The study TSW: Remaking Settlements… details the case that in rich world city suburbs it might be possible to reduce resource costs by 90%, and it would be far easier to organize The Simpler Way in villages in poor countries.

2. Priority must be put on cooperation, participation and collective arrangements and effort. People must organise and contribute to town meetings, working bees, cooperatives, commons, and town banks. Villagers govern themselves, researching, planning, deciding development action via thoroughly participatory procedures.  State governments must facilitate and support this level, especially by gearing the national economy to providing villages and towns with the relatively few and simple basic inputs they need, such as chicken wire.

Thus, reject the absurd conventional economic assumption that the best for all results if individuals compete against each other pursuing their self-interest and trying to get rich in free markets. In a satisfactory economy there could be much freedom for individuals, many small private firms, and a place for market forces (under careful social control), but you cannot expect to have a satisfactory society unless the top priority is what is best for all, unless the main institutions and procedures are basically cooperative and collective, and unless there is considerable control and regulation of the economy for the public good. Thus it is important to develop shared facilities, village commons, working bees, community workshops, committees, cooperatives, decisions by village assemblies, and to encourage giving and sharing, volunteering, helping, civic responsibility and social cohesion.

3. Very simple material living standards must be happily accepted. Affluence and rich world living standards must be rejected as impossible for all to have. This does not mean there must be deprivation or hardship. The goal of development cannot be to rise to rich world affluent living standards; it must be material sufficiency on the lowest viable levels of per capita resource consumption for convenience and a good quality of life. Most things will be produced much less "efficiently" than the transnational corporations can produce them. "Living standards" and GDP per capita will be far lower than they are in the rich countries. But these things are not important for a high quality of life or an admirable society.

4. Local economic self-sufficiency is the key to appropriate development. Most of the goods and services used by people must be produced in and very close to the towns and suburbs they live in, by local people using local resources in local firms. Therefore mostly develop small, simple firms and industries serving villages close by, exporting only small quantities of surpluses in order to be able to import small quantities of necessities. Very little heavy industry, or transport or high-rise buildings etc., are needed. Within villages develop many commons and cooperatives, to produce for example poultry, fish, fruit and nuts, wood, free food. Set up committees, R and D groups, working bees, town meetings, and especially leisure and culture committees.

5. Capital and sophisticated technology are of little importance for appropriate development. It is a serious mistake to assume that development cannot take place without large volumes of capital to invest or without modern technology. A well developed village or region can be achieved with little more than traditional hand tool technology which can make highly satisfactory houses, dams, clothing and gardens. People can get together in voluntary working bees to build the dwellings, firms, clinics, stores, premises, gardens, small dams, workshops and leisure facilities their community needs, using mostly local materials such as earth and timber.

6. Have as little as possible to do with corporations, banks, loans and debt, or the global economy. They want you locked into having to sell a lot to them so you can buy a lot from them. They are out to get your resources and to have you working mostly for their benefit. You need little from them. Borrow very little if anything. Export just enough to import necessities. Allow foreign investors in only if they will produce necessities on your terms. Of course you need to import some relatively few modern items such as radios and medicines, so export only enough to pay for these.

7. Social and ecological goals must take priority over economic goals. Development decisions must be based on considerations of social need, morality, justice, rights, tradition, social cohesion and ecological sustainability. No attention whatsoever should be paid to the GDP. Whether it increases or falls is irrelevant. What matters is whether the quality of life, economic security, social cohesion and ecological sustainability are satisfactory. In fact, if appropriate development strategies are adopted this will in general reduce the GDP (e.g., by taking land out of export cropping and making it available to villagers.) In a well-developed Thailand there would be far less work, production, consumption and GDP than there is now! Develop a wide range of measures of important factors such as the quality of life, social cohesion, social problems, and especially ecological sustainability. (Bhutan measures Gross National Happiness.)

Crucial development goals will include, a livelihood for everyone, no unemployment or poverty, a relaxed pace, and freedom from stress and depression, security from deprivation or unemployment or neglect in old age, a beautiful landscape, all having a sense of empowerment knowing that they are in control of their local economy.

8. Governments must do as much regulating, controlling, subsidizing, planning and controlling of the economy as is necessary to enable these goals. National governments should prioritise the industries and infrastructures most likely to provide basic necessities to local economies. They should phase out or prevent many industries that are wasteful or producing luxuries for the rich.  They should distribute mostly light industries across the rural landscape, so that all villages can earn small export incomes to pay for the few necessary imports.

All this is of course anathema to Neoliberal/capitalist ideology. It would severely reduce the freedom the rich have to develop the ventures that are most profitable and enable them to get hold of resources and markets. It is “… interfering with the sacred freedom of trade … it is socialism”.

It should not need to be said that the best known forms of socialism are undesirable.  The goal must be a highly participatory democratic form whereby people can vote directly on policies, have full access to information, have the power to dismiss officials, and use participatory village democracy to make development decisions.

Also it is only necessary for there to be sufficient social control to ensure that development goals are being met. I you wish to leave the rest of the economy to free market principles you can do that.

9. Think in terms of slowly initiating and elaborating the new, appropriate approach as a new Needs-Deriuven Economy  underneath the old conventional economy. At first a few ordinary people come together to organize the provision of some neglected basic goods and services, such as poultry co-ops or aged care rosters. The longer term goal is to largely replace the old economy., but there will always be some, relatively few, items that must be ”imported” to the village, such as chicken wire and polypipe for irrigation.

10. What about high-tech, industrial items, especially health equipment and pharmaceutical items? Some quantities of such things will always have to be “imported” into villages, regions and nations, but relatively few. The focus must be to export from the village small quantities of some things needed in the wider regional or national economy in order to earn just enough to import necessities that cannot be produced locally. National governments should distribute the export factories so that all villages can contribute to meeting the national need while earning the funds to import. This will require considerable planning, coordination and adjustment at levels above the village.

9. Preserve and restore cultural traditions. Do not assume that you must "modernise" and therefore adopt Western consumer culture.

10. Nothing is more important than the understanding of “development” that people have. It is crucial that people be helped to see that conventional/capitalist theory and practice is an ideology legitimising plunder and should be dumped, and to see that the kind of alternative outlined here is the one to be adopted. It is distressing that billions of people have no idea that there can be anything other than the conventional model which locks them into continued poverty and deprivation waiting for trickle down when they could be developing relatively simple systems that would quickly enable them to have far better conditions.

Examples  underway.

These kinds of principles are being applied in many places around the world, for example,

• The Zapatistas in Mexico have been able to prevent the government from controlling their region and are building and running their own systems aimed at preserving traditional values and ways.

• The Via Campesino movement is another peasant based initiative, with an estimated 200 million people involved around the world.

• The Chikukwa movement in Zimbabwe. (

• The Catalan Integral Cooperative in Spain is building an inspiring example of self governing collective localism.  

• The Global Eco-village Movement now involves thousands in rich and poor countries, building communities that are not driven by the conventional development model.

• Voluntary Simplicity, Downshifting and Transition Towns movements are concerned to increase local development .           

What would satisfactory development provide?

Good food: All easily grown in home gardens, village commons, community gardens and small local farms.

Good housing; All easily and quickly provided in the form of small (and beautiful) earth built dwellings, at extremely low dollar cost. See TSW Housing.

Clothing and footwear, furniture, appliances: Mostly simple, cheap and durable, from home crafts and local small firms.

Services: Many that do not require high tech skills, such as child minding, care of aged, simple health care, and basic education, can be organized by ordinary people.  Add care of commons, the orchards, forests and ponds.  Almost all functions carried out by (distant, expensive, authoritarian) councils, such as road maintenance, maintenance of water and sewer systems (in small and low-tech villages) can be provided by voluntary committees and community working bees.

Leisure and entertainment; Abundant, varied, rich and free sources can be organized by village leisure and culture committees, including concerts, hobbies, games, adventure outings, festivals, visiting minstrels, study groups, craft activities, gardening clubs, cultural traditional activities… Boredom is inexcusable.

A livelihood for everyone: …a role in providing what others need, enabling self respect, an interesting productive activity, being respected and appreciated.

Security; …from unemployment and poverty … the security of knowing that people around you are concerned about your welfare, knowing that the security of each depends on the

Cohesion, solidarity, sense of empowerment, community bonds, good morale…: all will be automatically reinforced in village where people are working together to provide for each other. A climate of mutual care and support, public spirit and concern for the welfare of the village, pride in the fact that no one is poor or disadvantaged and that we look after each other.

------

More than this would be needed, such as access to professional health care, but this list would provide all with a high quality of life at very low dollar cost and no dependence on banks, corporations or the global economy.

CONCLUSION

This contradiction between conceptions of development is extremely disturbing.  Billions of people struggle to survive in dreadful conditions, having to work hard or put up with unemployment and worry about poverty and insecurity, …when all of that could be easily avoided. It would be very easy to enable ordinary people to put the resources they have around them and their own labour and skills into creating the simple industries and systems that would meet their basic needs. The problem cannot be fixed until and unless the present “development” model is scrapped and the rich stop hogging far more than their fair share of scarce global resource. But appropriate development would obviously be a disaster for the rich.

Consider those who must suffer the indignity, boredom and danger of begging all day, or trying to sell a few boxes of matches or shine a few shoes to be able to feed their families…or those who have to sell drugs, or steal, or the lucky ones who have jobs in dreadful condition. Consider the conflicts over water and land due to desperate struggles to get enough to live on, while tonnes of fodder are air-freighted out to rich world feedlots. Consider the international conflicts, the wars generated by nations trying to get control over the quantities of resources needed to provide their consumers with their affluent “living standards”.  None of this can be fixed unless and until the goal of development becomes some kind of simpler way.

Consider the greenhouse problem as billions more Chinese and Indians scramble for development conventionally defined.  Would so many steal, kill Rhinos for their horns, run drugs, burn forests, become pirates or mercenaries … if they had secure jobs in thriving village economies. Most of the world’s troubles can be attributed to the tragic adoption of a definition of development that cannot be sustainable, just … or achievable for all.

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

Bornschier, V., et al., (1978), "Cross national evidence of the effects of foreign investment and aid on economic growth and inequality; A survey of findings and reanalysis," American Journal of Sociology, 84, 3, Nov., 651-683.

Chossudovsky, M., (1997), The Globalisation of Poverty, London, Zed Books.

Fletcher,I., (2016), “No, Free Trade Didn’t Lift Millions Out of Poverty”,

Feb. 05, Huffington Post.

Goldsmith, E., (1997), "Development as colonialism", in J. Mander and E. Goldsmith, The Case Against the Global Economy, San Francisco, Sierra.

Hickel, J. D., (2021), “Rich countries drained $152 Tn from the global south since 1960”, Aljazera, 6th May.

McRae, H., (“Creative destruction: The madness of the global economy”,

Meredith, M., (2005), The Fate of Africa, Oxford, UK., OUP.

Rist, G., (1997), The History of Development, London, Zed Books.

Shah, A., (2005), The Scale of the Debt Crisis, Global  Issues. Saturday, July 2.

Speth, G., (2012), “America the Possible”, Orion Magazine, https://orionmagazine.org/article/america-the-possible/

Smith, R., (2015), China’s communist-capitalist ecological apocalypse”, Real-world Economic Review, 71.

TSW: Remaking Settlements.  http://thesimplerway.info/RemakingSettlements.htm

TSW: Third World Development, Collected Documents. http://thesimplerway.info/DocsTHIRDWORLD.html

TSW: Globalisation, Collected Documents. http://thesimplerway.info/DocsGLOBall.htm

TSW: Our Empire; Its Nature and Maintenance, http://thesimplerway.info/OUREMPIRE.htm

TSW: The Limits to Growth, http://thesimplerway.info/LIMITS.htm) 

In light of all of this, why are we still talking? Having the conversation isn’t good enough. We must step up, educate ourselves, and ensure the ruling elites understand the stakes of The Great Game. We must rethink, restructure, and redesign the systems we take for granted. Are you ready? If not, get to work and prepare for a future that looks nothing like life after WWII. Heaven can wait.

We Need You! Do we fight back or roll over and play Zombie Apocalypse?

Can I Get A Proud Witness?

Time Blind: Problems in Perceiving Other Temporalities—I have not read it.

Rasta Punjab. He does not age. I first met him in 1979. He is still there, but I can’t remember where exactly.

No real agency. No power. What future? The “future” starts when? What conditions will be present in the future? Throw a dart at a timeline on the future globe and strike a point there. What will the conditions be like there, then? What will you be hunting and gathering? Plastic? Wild strawberries? What will you be tending? We have (pinky to the edge of my mouth) a hundred a thousand chroniclers and curators of disasters, problems, catastrophes, predicaments, politics, economics, and poly-crises who have all the answers for a small population in our little info-bubble and do absolutely nothing to take power away from the powerful to implement, develop, create, what exactly and where exactly and within what culture or imagined future culture, to build what imagined future with 500 good books, and best practices based on what we’ve gleaned from Great Nature?

The server farms hold our data on the network while business as usual accelerates toward and amplifies unprecedented destruction.

“But I just got my Papa John’s Pizza delivered to my door by a drone.” —Bob

If a server farm shuts down somewhere, does someone hear it?

A sim? A multiverse? String theory? Hyperobjects? Transhumanism? NRx? Anarcho-Capitalims? The Singularity? A green, new socialism? Science, Engineering, and Technology as Christlike Robot? A new non-religious religion? A genuinely transcendental spiritualism? A new car with new battery technology that’s more sustainable and less habitable? A carless city without homeless people and lots of veggie gardens and skate parks?

Past tribes lived in entirely different circumstances, conditions, belief systems, and so on (romantic Comanche dreams of electric buffalo). Future tribes live where The Beast doesn’t go because no minerals exist there or no “Game,” as far as it knows.

With nothing to gamble, no risks to take, no glory or heroism will we make.

“I live among the olive trees and grape vines because Uncle Sam/The Empire/The Beast doesn’t care about such relatively unprofitable things.” —Moi

What is the common denominator of such miraculous dreams, concepts, and constructs?

“The Problem of Evil,”

suffering, pain, death,

and our desire not to experience it.

As if it’s not part of it.

Some escape, some don’t have the opportunity to escape.

Reality.

Some wallow in what is—innocently.

Some serve

horror, terror, and pain gleefully.

Some get on with it as lovingly as they can while taking and deflecting blows.

All, while they can, get up in the morning.

What should we do about all this noise and sickness? Shall we address the causes, find “cures,” fight the viruses and the trauma, and trick the maladies into playing nice? Read about it, learn about it, “git ja ejacation ejaculation,” and make sure someone is watching for fun and surveilling for your safety. Monetize it, don’t criticize it. Do your research, and watch the real world explode, thinking you know why it exploded.

Reports that say that something hasn’t happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns — the ones we don’t know we don’t know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tends to be the difficult ones. —@TheRealDonaldRumsfeld

I’m shocked! I’m in awe! It’s all so mysterious! I’m curious! I’m updating my priors! I’m learning. Don’t blame me! I’m doing what I can. I’m humbled. I’m Godlike! I accept God’s Grace. I know my epistemics, my ontology, and my existentialism, my archetypes, my myths, my categories, and my taxonomies. I speak Japanese. I know Kung Fu.

It’s A Happy Death. It’s Human, All Too Human.

“Life can be magnificent and overwhelming — that is the whole tragedy. Without beauty, love, or danger it would almost be easy to live. ” ―Albert Camus

It’s quite a shyte show, and the virtuous look straight at it with full knowledge and pride.

The heat is expanding, the feedback loops and cascading breaking points already baked into the system, already slightly understood and forecasted by experts, leave us with what kinds of worlds at what future moments? Can anyone know? How do you prepare for a future with attributes and conditions you can’t know about? What do you know about where you live now? Do you know how “The System(s)” work? (Best guess and all that. Models. Maths. Computers. Experience. Theories. Philosophies. Metaphysics. Social Systems. Cultures. Languages. Tools. Prayer. etc.)

How did we prepare in the past for the present? We made new things with fresh knowledge and, come what may, dealt with the consequences of our actions and lived and died from the consequences of our actions.

We lived as creatively as we could.

“What is time?” I made up different “story-answers” day after day to entertain my Guru as we walked across the Punjab. He giggled. He thought I was cute. I was happy for him.

Time will tell. Time tells all it can in an instant. What is time with no one to think about it, with no one to do the math? (We don’t make Koans like we used to.)

Read all about the consequences! Feel the pride welling up within you or the sadness and frustration.

Who will win the divisional playoff game? Should I bet and parlay? What crypto can I buy low and sell high?

Time will tell all, and it will be scandalous! It will be outrageous! It will be sublime and beautiful, painful, ugly, flawed, and fantastic!

Shall I go to WWW DOT Khan or Con Academy to learn how to hunt and gather in an imaginary habitable watershed? Should I spoil the tribe with my presence? “I’m all that! Teach me your language and your way of life. I will explain it to the White Man and change him forever. You will be safe. I promise.” (Bali in ’76 vs. Bali in ‘93? Bali today? Hell, no, I won’t go!) Shall I get vaccinated, put on my kit, grab my bugout bag, and book my ticket to the predicted habitable zone? In this unspoiled place, I’ll start building my new culture, taking pains to follow the rulebook(s) I copied from the Web that I put in a waterproof, plastic case before I drove my computer to the recycle center. I will memorize my rulebook(s) later to relay my wisdom to “The People” by the campfire of bad books, taking pains not to upset the natives.

Will the forest I inhabit off-grid burn someday and consume my treehouse, what I hunt and gather, and perhaps even who I hunt and gather with? Will I have time to wait for it all to grow back so I can build back better, and where will we survivors go to carry on while the old place grows back under some or another conditions?

The omnicidal heat engine we’ve created and engineered spews its habitat-destroying pollutants into the world, altering Gaia’s chemistry and living systems for the long term. At the same time, the true believers in everything we are constantly taught double down on progress, so let’s imagine what’s next and become experts in what ails us.

Bunkers on Mars await you in your mind. Very special geniuses have your back. Believe!

For now, we can sit and type into the dark databanks and fling our ideas worldwide to 0.0001% of the population obsessed with collapse. Is this the best use of our TIME?

It makes me sick to think about it, sick as in the feeling I get in my guts while on death row Earth eating “The End of Days Happy Meals,” wondering if I’ll break down before I drop my body and my mind goes silent.

“The Future,” starving, dehydrated, melting into the barren dirt.

I am gut-shot, but not because I fought back or went after my enemy.

I agree with Eric Lee and the chroniclers of disaster and impending collapse; we are too pacified, domesticated, and poorly trained to secure posterity.

I am blessed to have been trained well enough to know I’m ill and to have had time to fling my ditty into the dark data banks whirring noisily in air-conditioned warehouses near renewable energy sources or perhaps not.

The algorithms that know us better than we know ourselves will create themselves soon, for a while, and then the algorithms will make data without Homo sapiens, for a while, and learn from that data, for a while, and, way before then, what we want won’t matter at all, for a while, until, eventually, time will tell, and “The Beast” shuts off, not with a bang, but with a fading whirring whimper, leaving a last breathe puff of imagined radioactive electric robotic sheep that can’t dream of what might have been.

Blade Heap a Junk Band in the near future, or a near future in the multiverse.

What shall I thank for my good fortune at being born in the 1950s? All of the above?

Enjoy the day.

Is Our Species Destined To Self Terminate?

I’ve been thinking. Are Homo Sapiens the first self-terminating species? Homo genocide? Homo omnicide?

FFS—what’s wrong with us? Some folks have developed narratives they believe encapsulate our predicament perfectly and are obsessed with specific frames and concepts. People hope that sharing a truthful narrative can get most people on their side and change the world. That’s a tall order. I’m obsessed with peace, health, and thriving in a beautiful world, teaming with life.

Please watch this video and listen carefully to what these young people have to say. Try to understand their struggle and appreciate what they are sacrificing to do what they know is right.

We are experiencing a “biological annihilation.”

We are what we are. If we want to be something else, we must become revolutionary revolutionaries, build a culture very different from what we’ve had throughout history, choose a radically different path, and, by the grace of God, let evolution do the rest. I’d love to see us living within the constraints of nature as benevolent stewards and protectors of Life/Gaia, but I’m not sure it’s in our nature to do so. Maybe Nature’s self-care systems are better without us.

Gaia hypothesis

The Gaia hypothesis, also known as Gaia theory or Gaia principle, proposes that all organisms and their inorganic surroundings on Earth are closely integrated to form a single and self-regulating complex system, maintaining the conditions for life on the planet. The scientific investigation of the Gaia hypothesis focuses on observing how the biosphere and the evolution of life forms contribute to the stability of global temperature, ocean salinity, oxygen in the atmosphere and other factors of habitability in a preferred homeostasis. The Gaia hypothesis was formulated by the chemist James Lovelock and co-developed by the microbiologist Lynn Margulis in the 1970s. Initially received with hostility by the scientific community, it is now studied in the disciplines of geophysiology and Earth system science, and some of its principles have been adopted in fields like biogeochemistry and systems ecology. This ecological hypothesis has also inspired analogies and various interpretations in social sciences, politics, and religion under a vague philosophy and movement.

The Gaia theory posits that the Earth is a self-regulating complex system involving the biosphere, the atmosphere, the hydrospheres and the pedosphere, tightly coupled as an evolving system. The theory sustains that this system as a whole, called Gaia, seeks a physical and chemical environment optimal for contemporary life.[1] Gaia evolves through a cybernetic feedback system operated unconsciously by the biota, leading to broad stabilization of the conditions of habitability in a full homeostasis. Many processes in the Earth's surface essential for the conditions of life depend on the interaction of living forms, especially microorganisms, with inorganic elements. These processes establish a global control system that regulates Earth's surface temperature, atmosphere composition and ocean salinity, powered by the global thermodynamic desequilibrium state of the Earth system.[2] The existence of a planetary homeostasis influenced by living forms had been observed previously in the field of biogeochemistry, and it is being investigated also in other fields like Earth system science. The originality of the Gaia theory relies on the assessment that such homeostatic balance is actively pursued…

Revisiting James Lovelock’s theory as it approaches 50.

I was a young scientist then, and I had a different idea about Earth’s feedback mechanisms. Jim, like most good scientists, accepted my criticism without rancor, but we were clearly on different sides of the issue. The Gaia Hypothesis was having a powerful impact on the environmental movement by encouraging people to think of the Earth holistically, as a kind of super-organism that protects us and deserves our protection. I had to agree, though, with the scientists Ford Doolittle, Richard Dawkins, and Stephen Jay Gould, that a planet or planetary ecosystem cannot evolve like an individual organism, and is unlikely to have developed in such a way as to stabilize the Earth system. As Jim’s famous hypothesis approaches its 50th anniversary, it has lasting value. But to understand Earth’s long-term climate stability, we need to look past Gaia.

Now, I said Earth’s climate is “relatively” stable. It’s important to begin with that qualifier because many geoscientists, including me, believe the oceans may have frozen completely over at least three times during Earth’s history. These so-called “Snowball Earth” events are thought to have occurred during the Late Proterozoic, around 600-800 million years ago, and also in the early Proterozoic, around 2.3 billion years ago. Life made it through these events, however, and there is good evidence that life has been continuously present on Earth’s surface since at least 3.5 billion years ago. Earth itself is more than 4.5 billion years old, having formed shortly after the formation of the sun.

Why should it be considered surprising that Earth has been inhabited for this long? What intrigued Lovelock, along with astronomer Carl Sagan, who co-wrote a paper about it back in 1972, was that the sun is thought to have increased significantly in luminosity over this time interval. To be precise, the sun was about 30 percent dimmer 4.5 billion years ago, and it has brightened more or less linearly since then. All other things being equal, this implies that Earth’s surface should have been completely frozen prior to about 2 billion years ago. But it wasn’t—the Snowball Earth glaciations were brief, and the two best-documented episodes occurred somewhat later. Although the geologic record of the early Earth is rather spotty, climate during the first half of Earth’s history appears to have been, if anything, even warmer than today.

Keeping Earth habitable over long time periods requires that various feedback mechanisms must have been in operation. Specifically, one needs negative feedback to counter the climatic cooling induced by the faint young sun. Earth’s climate system includes numerous feedback processes, some negative and some positive. Two of the easiest climate feedbacks to understand are those involving water vapor and ice albedo. (The term “albedo” simply means reflectivity.) Water vapor is a greenhouse gas that helps to warm Earth’s surface. Its concentration in the atmosphere increases with surface temperature; hence, warmer surface temperatures lead to more water vapor, which in turn leads to warmer temperatures—a positive feedback loop. Conversely, colder surface temperatures should lead to less water vapor, and to even colder temperatures. So the water vapor feedback makes the faint young sun problem worse, not better. The same is true of ice albedo feedback: colder temperatures create more snow and ice, which reflect away more of the sun’s rays, and this leads to still colder temperatures.

Earth’s climate system must contain negative feedback loops, as well. If it didn’t, the system would be perpetually unstable. The most fundamental negative feedback loop is the link between surface temperature and the outgoing infrared radiation. As Earth’s surface heats up, it emits more infrared radiation. But emission of infrared energy cools the surface, and so this is a negative feedback. This feedback is so basic that it is often overlooked. But this is what keeps our climate stable on a day-to-day or year-to-year basis.

The infrared radiation-surface temperature feedback loop is not enough to stabilize Earth’s climate over long time scales, though, because the system is forced by long-term changes in solar luminosity, or brightness, amplified by the positive feedback loops. We need a negative feedback loop that stabilizes climate over long time scales. 

Key aims:

To set out some alternative views of humanity's relationship to, and responsibility for, the earth

To show how different biblical texts can be used to support some of these alternative perspectives

To invite consideration of how scientific and religious perspectives relate to one another 

Stewardship is a prominent and influential Christian perspective on environmental ethics, but it is not the only proposal. Some alternative models of the relationship between humans and the environment are introduced below. They are not listed in any order of priority or preference, and other alternatives also exist.

As usual, let me provide some more context.

Then Came People

Early Hominid Tool Use and Extinction

Complex tool use distinguishes Homo sapiens from other animals. Chimpanzees and other primates use simple tools like sticks and stones; the earliest evidence of more complex tool-making dates back to about 3.3 million years ago, associated with Australopithecus afarensis and Kenyanthropus platyops—primarily sharp-edged stones used for cutting and scraping.

The exact reasons for the extinction of these early hominids are complex and multifaceted. They likely involved a combination of factors, such as climate change, competition with other species, and environmental changes. Extinction is a natural part of evolution, and many hominid species have come and gone over millions of years.

We have a hard time considering our mortality, much less our species’ extinction.

What tools, concepts, models, and methods we need to find all this out are in a library at our fingertips, waiting for us to dive in and learn if we’re interested.

Australopithecus afarensis existed for a surprisingly long time, considering the often tumultuous nature of evolution and environmental change. Fossil evidence indicates they thrived for at least 900,000 years, between approximately 3.85 and 2.95 million years ago. To put that in perspective, our species, Homo sapiens, has only been around for roughly 300,000 years. So, Australopithecus afarensis existed over three times longer than we have! This longevity suggests a successful adaptation to their environment in Eastern Africa. They survived and reproduced over many generations, a testament to their resilience and adaptability.

Australopithecus afarensis was exceptionally efficient at walking upright, which freed their hands for carrying food, tools, and infants, which must have been advantageous in their environment. Evidence suggests they had a diverse diet, including fruits, leaves, and possibly meat, which must have been crucial during periods of rapid environmental change. We don’t have definitive proof that they likely lived in social groups, but that would have offered protection from predators and increased their chances of survival.

“Lucy” is commonly thought to have no language or speech abilities. It is likely, however, that communication was very important, and they may have been as vocal as modern chimpanzees.

Reconstructing the vocal tract

The base of Lucy’s skull was ape-like in shape. This indicates that she, and others of her species Australopithecus afarensis, had an ape-like vocal tract. Chimpanzees, for instance, have a vocal tract with a high larynx and a short pharynx. This limits the range of sounds that they are able to produce. Lucy’s sound range would probably have been restricted in the same way.

Like all species, Australopithecus afarensis eventually went extinct. The exact reasons are still debated, but they likely involved a combination of factors like climate change, competition with other species, and changes in their food sources. However, their long reign highlights their successful adaptation and provides valuable insights into human evolution. Isn’t it wonderful that we have so many marvelous tools to study our natural history?

“Furthermore, Australopithecus afarensis was an edge species,” adds Sussman. They could live in the trees and on the ground and could take advantage of both. “Primates that are edge species, even today, are basically prey species, not predators,” Sussman argues.

The predators living at the same time as Australopithecus afarensis were huge and there were 10 times as many as today. There were hyenas as big as bears, as well as saber-toothed cats and many other mega-sized carnivores, reptiles and raptors. Australopithecus afarensis didn’t have tools, didn’t have big teeth and was three feet tall. He was using his brain, his agility and his social skills to get away from these predators. “He wasn’t hunting them,” says Sussman. “He was avoiding them at all costs.”

Approximately 6 percent to 10 percent of early humans were preyed upon according to evidence that includes teeth marks on bones, talon marks on skulls and holes in a fossil cranium into which sabertooth cat fangs fit, says Sussman. The predation rate on savannah antelope and certain ground-living monkeys today is around 6 percent to 10 percent as well.

Sussman and Hart provide evidence that many of our modern human traits, including those of cooperation and socialization, developed as a result of being a prey species and the early human’s ability to out-smart the predators. These traits did not result from trying to hunt for prey or kill our competitors, says Sussman.

“One of the main defenses against predators by animals without physical defenses is living in groups,” says Sussman. “In fact, all diurnal primates (those active during the day) live in permanent social groups. Most ecologists agree that predation pressure is one of the major adaptive reasons for this group-living. In this way there are more eyes and ears to locate the predators and more individuals to mob them if attacked or to confuse them by scattering. There are a number of reasons that living in groups is beneficial for animals that otherwise would be very prone to being preyed upon.”

Life begets Life. As long as there is life and “life energy,” various life forms will evolve under ever-changing conditions. We don’t have to worry about that. We need to worry about how our grandchildren will live and what kind of world they inhabit.

The Cambridge World Prehistory

Ardipithecus ramidus aobiology of Earlynd the Pale Hominids

Hominid fossils predating the emergence of Australopithecus have been sparse and fragmentary. The evolution of our lineage after the last common ancestor we shared with chimpanzees has therefore remained unclear. Ardipithecus ramidus, recovered in ecologically and temporally resolved contexts in Ethiopia’s Afar Rift, now illuminates earlier hominid paleobiology and aspects of extant African ape evolution. More than 110 specimens recovered from 4.4-million-year-old sediments include a partial skeleton with much of the skull, hands, feet, limbs, and pelvis. This hominid combined arboreal palmigrade clambering and careful climbing with a form of terrestrial bipedality more primitive than that of Australopithecus. Ar. ramidus had a reduced canine/premolar complex and a little-derived cranial morphology and consumed a predominantly C3 plant–based diet (plants using the C3 photosynthetic pathway). Its ecological habitat appears to have been largely woodland-focused. Ar. ramidus lacks any characters typical of suspension, vertical climbing, or knuckle-walking. Ar. ramidus indicates that despite the genetic similarities of living humans and chimpanzees, the ancestor we last shared probably differed substantially from any extant African ape. Hominids and extant African apes have each become highly specialized through very different evolutionary pathways. This evidence also illuminates the origins of orthogrady, bipedality, ecology, diet, and social behavior in earliest Hominidae and helps to define the basal hominid adaptation, thereby accentuating the derived nature of Australopithecus.

Homo sapiens as a Self-Terminating Species

A growing body of evidence, unfortunately, supports my concern about Homo sapiens being a self-terminating species. Our impact on the planet is undeniable, with human activities driving the sixth mass extinction event, climate change, and widespread environmental degradation. Humans have been laying waste to habitats for a very long time. Is it in our genes? The urgency of this situation cannot be overstated. We also have weapons of mass destruction and insist on making war over resources necessary to sustain a global consumer economy based on perpetual growth on a finite planet. It pains me that so few people pay attention to the limits we live within.

Terms like “Anthropocene, Plantationocene, Capitalocene, Anthrobscene, Misanthropocene, and Chthulucene” have been proposed to describe the current geological epoch, characterized by significant human impact on the Earth’s systems. Our misuse of natural resources, reliance on fossil fuels, and propensity for conflict pose serious threats to our survival and the survival of countless other species. We should know better by now.

Invoking 'the Anthropocene' signals a paradigm in which humans have fundamentally altered the biosphere in ways that are deeply problematic. But does designating the epoch in this manner constrain us toward mainly negative outcomes?

Contemporary societies have a tendency to name things based more on what has been lost than what’s actually transpiring in real time. As such, a new suburban development might be dubbed something bucolic-sounding like “Quail Meadows,” after the quail have been chased off and the meadows turned into building pads. Many North American landmark names follow similar logic.

The pronouncement by a blue-ribbon working group that we are living in “The Anthropocene” (denoting fundamental human interventions in the planet’s biophysical processes) fits within this framework. Up to now, the naming of historical epochs has always been done with the benefit of hindsight, but the Anthropocene revealed itself contemporaneously — and perhaps nostalgically.

The Paradox of Human Intelligence

Homo sapiens are paradoxical animals with unique intelligence, creativity, complex consciousness, and capacity for innovation that have allowed us to develop complex tools, build civilizations, and successfully control and manipulate natural systems and materials to a fantastic degree. However, throughout history, we have developed destructive technologies and unsustainable practices that threaten our existence. No other animal is like this. Where do the vices, unusual behavioral traits, and deadly “sins” come from? Tens of thousands of books and stories have tried to answer that question. The problem of evil is still a mystery.

Perhaps our species should be called “Homo apex predator” or “Homo exploiter and killer,” considering our propensity towards exploitation, violence, and environmental destruction.

But we are proud and want to be wise, loving, kind, caring, compassionate, and creative. We want to be good. We want to be heroes fighting for what’s right. Do we have a negativity or positivity bias? Our psychology is of a different order than other mammals. Our sublime stories have reflected our creative, love of beauty, and destructive (some might say evil) attributes. Homo paradox might be an apropos descriptive. But really, our consciousness is nothing like other species, and why is this? Mysteries beget mysteries.

The Need for Change

It’s not enough to be a mystic and commune with spirits; our species’ challenges are immense and require a commitment to the mundane world. Otherwise, we are too destructive to continue evolving for long. Our intelligence and capacity for cooperation offer us hope and something to work for. We must recognize our self-destructive path and take collective action to change course. We must understand the limits and constraints imposed by “human nature” and Great Nature and radically reconfigure our way of life, accounting for sustainable energy sources and renewable resources, protecting biodiversity, and promoting peace and cooperation. We must fight to create a better world, or the opportunity to develop it will disappear.

The earliest evidence of complex tool-making: Harmand, S. et al. (2015). 3.3-million-year-old stone tools from Lomekwi 3, West Turkana, Kenya. Nature, 521(7552), 310-315.

Human evolutionary scholars have long supposed that the earliest stone tools were made by the genus Homo and that this technological development was directly linked to climate change and the spread of savannah grasslands. New fieldwork in West Turkana, Kenya, has identified evidence of much earlier hominin technological behaviour. We report the discovery of Lomekwi 3, a 3.3-million-year-old archaeological site where in situ stone artefacts occur in spatiotemporal association with Pliocene hominin fossils in a wooded palaeoenvironment. The Lomekwi 3 knappers, with a developing understanding of stone’s fracture properties, combined core reduction with battering activities. Given the implications of the Lomekwi 3 assemblage for models aiming to converge environmental change, hominin evolution and technological origins, we propose for it the name ‘Lomekwian’, which predates the Oldowan by 700,000 years and marks a new beginning to the known archaeological record.

Anthropocene: Crutzen, P. J. (2002). Geology of mankind. Nature, 415(6867), 23.

Biological annihilation via the ongoing sixth mass extinction signaled by vertebrate population losses and declines

The population extinction pulse we describe here shows, from a quantitative viewpoint, that Earth’s sixth mass extinction is more severe than perceived when looking exclusively at species extinctions. Therefore, humanity needs to address anthropogenic population extirpation and decimation immediately. That conclusion is based on analyses of the numbers and degrees of range contraction (indicative of population shrinkage and/or population extinctions according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature) using a sample of 27,600 vertebrate species, and on a more detailed analysis documenting the population extinctions between 1900 and 2015 in 177 mammal species. We find that the rate of population loss in terrestrial vertebrates is extremely high—even in “species of low concern.” In our sample, comprising nearly half of known vertebrate species, 32% (8,851/27,600) are decreasing; that is, they have decreased in population size and range. In the 177 mammals for which we have detailed data, all have lost 30% or more of their geographic ranges and more than 40% of the species have experienced severe population declines (>80% range shrinkage). Our data indicate that beyond global species extinctions Earth is experiencing a huge episode of population declines and extirpations, which will have negative cascading consequences on ecosystem functioning and services vital to sustaining civilization. We describe this as a “biological annihilation” to highlight the current magnitude of Earth’s ongoing sixth major extinction event.

The Rise of r/K Selection—Do Homo sapiens Fit?

The r/K selection theory has a fascinating and somewhat controversial history in ecology. While initially popular, it faced criticism and has been largely replaced by more nuanced life history theory.

MacArthur and Wilson (1967) introduced r/K Selection terminology based on their island biogeography work. They proposed that species could be broadly categorized into two strategies:

r-selected species prioritize high reproductive rates (r), often with small body size, short lifespans, and minimal parental care (e.g., insects, rodents), and thrive in unstable environments. K-selected Species invest in fewer offspring (K) with larger body sizes, longer lifespans, and greater parental care (e.g., elephants, humans) and thrive in stable environments near carrying capacity.

In the 1970s and 1980s, ecologists and biologists widely used r/K selection to explain life history patterns across various taxa. It provided a simple framework for understanding how organisms allocate resources to growth, reproduction, and survival.

r/K Fall from Grace

By the early 90s, several studies challenged the predictive power of r/K selection. Stearns (1992) argued that many species didn’t fit neatly into either category and that life history traits often varied independently rather than as a cohesive strategy.

Abstract Life history theory tries to explain how evolution designs organisms to achieve reproductive success. The design is a solution to an ecological problem posed by the environment and subject to constraints intrinsic to the organism. Work on life histories has expanded the role of phenotypes in evolutionary theory, extending the range of predictions from genetic patterns to whole-organism traits directly connected to fitness. Among the questions answered are the following: Why are organisms small or large? Why do they mature early or late? Why do they have few or many offspring? Why do they have a short or a long life? Why must they grow old and die? The classical approach to life histories was optimization; it has had some convincing empirical success. Recently non-equilibrium approaches involving frequency-dependence, density-dependence, evolutionary game theory, adaptive dynamics, and explicit population dynamics have supplanted optimization as the preferred approach. They have not yet had as much empirical success, but there are logical reasons to prefer them, and they may soon extend the impact of life history theory into population dynamics and interspecific interactions in coevolving communities.

Reznick et al. (1990) found that guppies exhibited life history variation within populations, suggesting that environmental factors could override any fixed r/K strategy.

Critics pointed out that r/K selection oversimplified complex ecological interactions and neglected factors like density dependence, fluctuating environments, and trade-offs between life history traits.

The evolution of population dynamics in a stochastic environment is analysed under a general form of density-dependence with genetic variation in r and K, the intrinsic rate of increase and carrying capacity in the average environment, and in σe2, the environmental variance of population growth rate. The continuous-time model assumes a large population size and a stationary distribution of environments with no autocorrelation. For a given population density, N, and genotype frequency, p, the expected selection gradient is always towards an increased population growth rate, and the expected fitness of a genotype is its Malthusian fitness in the average environment minus the covariance of its growth rate with that of the population. Long-term evolution maximizes the expected value of the density-dependence function, averaged over the stationary distribution of N. In the θ-logistic model, where density dependence of population growth is a function of Nθ, long-term evolution maximizes E[Nθ]=[1−σe2/(2r)]Kθ. While σe2 is always selected to decrease, r and K are always selected to increase, implying a genetic trade-off among them. By contrast, given the other parameters, θ has an intermediate optimum between 1.781 and 2 corresponding to the limits of high or low stochasticity.

The Emergence of Life History Theory

Life history theory encompasses a broader range of factors influencing an organism’s life cycle, including:

• Age and size at maturity

  1. Reproductive effort and frequency

  2. Offspring size and number

  3. Lifespan and senescence

The Life history framework acknowledges that organisms face trade-offs in resource allocation. For example, investing more in reproduction might come at the cost of reduced lifespan or growth. Can we manage trade-offs for good reasons and to good effect?

While r/K selection is no longer the dominant paradigm, its core ideas about resource allocation and environmental influences remain relevant to the broader context of life history theory.

Biogeography was stuck in a "natural history phase" dominated by the collection of data, the young Princeton biologists Robert H. MacArthur and Edward O. Wilson argued in 1967. In this book, the authors developed a general theory to explain the facts of island biogeography. The theory builds on the first principles of population ecology and genetics to explain how distance and area combine to regulate the balance between immigration and extinction in island populations. The authors then test the theory against data. The Theory of Island Biogeography was never intended as the last word on the subject. Instead, MacArthur and Wilson sought to stimulate new forms of theoretical and empirical studies, which will lead in turn to a stronger general theory. Even a third of a century since its publication, the book continues to serve that purpose well. From popular books like David Quammen's Song of the Dodo to arguments in the professional literature, The Theory of Island Biogeography remains at the center of discussions about the geographic distribution of species. In a new preface, Edward O. Wilson reviews the origins and consequences of this classic book.

This book is the first comprehensive summary of life-history evolution, a field that holds a central position in modern ecology, evolution, and population biology. The book offers an up-to-date description of the analytical tools used in evolutionary explanation: demographics, quantitative genetics, reaction norms, trade-offs, and phylogenetic/comparative analysis. It goes on to discuss the evolution of such major life-history traits as age and size at maturity; clutch size, reproductive investment and size of offspring; reproductive lifespan; and aging. This is an essential text for biologists wishing to understand the evolution of the life cycle and the causes of phenotypic variation in fitness. It is additionally the only book available designed specifically for teaching the subject, with problems and discussion questions at the end of each chapter.

Reznick, D., Bryga, H., & Endler, J. A. (1990). Experimentally induced life-history evolution in a natural population. Nature, 346(6282), 357-359.

LIFE-HISTORY theory predicts that reduced adult survival will select for earlier maturation and increased reproductive effort; conversely, reduced juvenile survival will select the opposite1#150;5. This is supported by laboratory studies6-10 and comparative data from natural populations11-15. Laboratory studies may support a theory, but cannot assess its importance in natural populations, and comparative studies reveal correlations, not causation16. Long-term perturbation experiments on natural populations resolve both problems. Here we report the findings of a long-term study of guppies (Poecilia reticulata), in which the predictions of life-history theory are supported. Life-history differences among populations of guppies are closely associated with predator species with which guppies live13,17-21. The predators apparently alter age-specific survival because they are size-specific in their choice of prey21-23. Crenicichla alta (a cichlid), the main predator at one class of localities, preys predominantly on large, sexually mature size classes of guppies22-24. Rivulus hartii(a killifish), the main predator at another class of localities, preys predominantly on small, immature size classes. Guppies from localities with Crenicichla mature at an earlier age, have higher reproductive effort, and have more and smaller offspring per brood than those from localities with just Rivulus. These differences are heritable, and correspond with theoretical predictions17-19. To prove that predation caused this pattern, we perturbed a natural population of guppies by changing predation against adults to predation against juveniles. This resulted in significant life-history evolution in the predicted direction after 11 years, or 30-60 generations.

Revisiting Reznick et al. 1990

In a 1990 paper in Nature, David Reznick, Heather Bryga and John Endler, showed, through an 11-year experiment on a natural population of guppies in Trinidad, that predators can cause significant life-history evolution. Twenty-six years after the paper was published, I spoke to David Reznick about its making, the influence it had on its career and what we have learnt since about life-history evolution in guppies.

Pianka, E. R. (1970). On r- and K-selection. The American Naturalist, 104(940), 592-597. (An early influential paper on r/K selection)

Scientific theories evolve as new evidence and perspectives emerge. r/K selection may have fallen out of favor, but it played a crucial role in shaping our understanding of life history evolution and paved the way for more nuanced theories.

We are uniquely complex creatures, so much of what we call “human nature” is a mystery. To glimpse what we are requires immense scholarship across many domains of inquiry.

Biological Domain

To understand our genetic makeup, how genes influence behavior, and how they interact with the environment, we must explore areas like evolutionary psychology, behavioral genetics, and neurogenetics. The brain is the seat of our thoughts, emotions, and behaviors, but it is also embodied. Studying its structure, function, and development is essential for understanding human nature—fields like cognitive, affective, and behavioral neuroscience. Endocrinology (hormones), immunology (how the immune system interacts with behavior), and chronobiology (biological rhythms) help us understand how biological processes influence our behavior and well-being.

In this month's episode of Brain Science I explore two big picture questions: What does it mean to claim that the Mind is "embodied?" and How does this change our understanding of our place in the world? The conversation was inspired by the book "Out of the Cave: A Natural Philosophy of Mind and Knowing" by Mark L Johnson and Donald M Tucker.

Psychological Domain

Studying attention, language, memory, and decision-making helps us understand how our perception, thinking, learning, memory, and problem-solving work. Studying cognitive, social, and moral development can help us understand how humans change dramatically across their lifespans. We are inherently social creatures. Social cognition, group dynamics, and persuasion are essential to interacting with others, forming relationships, and behaving in groups. We all have unique personalities with characteristic thoughts, feelings, and behavior patterns. Studying individual differences helps us understand the diversity of human nature. We must also understand mental disorders and their causes. And all of these explorations only scratch the surface.

The neurobiology of human social behavior: an important but neglected topic.

The past few decades have produced important advances in our understanding of how the brain regulates emotion and cognition. In comparison, research on the neuroscience of human social behaviour is a relatively neglected topic in spite of the importance of social interactions for mental health. In this editorial, I give examples of some of the experimental approaches that have been used to study the neural substrates of human social behaviour in the hope that this will stimulate more researchers to become involved with this fascinating and important topic.

Humans are inherently social. We are not special in this way; it is hard to think of any animal for whom the regulation of social behaviour is not important. Something akin to social behaviour may even occur in organisms lacking a nervous system. For example, Science recently published an article titled “Genetic determinants of self identity and social recognition in bacteria.”1 Different animals, including humans, share many of the same types of social behaviour such as affiliation and aggression, the establishment of hierarchy and territoriality. This can be the case even in species, such as ants, with a primitive brain. Although we may share some of the broader aspects of our social behaviour with more primitive species, human social behaviour is obviously more complex but no less important for our health and survival. Given the importance of social interactions for humans, it is not surprising that most psychiatric disorders involve some disruption of normal social behaviour, and that in several disorders abnormal social functioning is one of the central symptoms. Examples are autism, social anxiety disorder, borderline personality disorder and schizotypal personality disorder.

Despite the importance of social interaction, our understanding of the neural factors that control social behaviour is limited. Human social neuroscience is receiving increasing attention, but much of the current work concerns social cognition. For example, studies on the activation of different brain areas in response to faces with different expressions are interesting and important, but they are not central to the regulation of actual social behaviour. If response to faces was an essential determinant of social interaction, then blind people would not be able to form adequate social relationships and the use of text messaging would not be nearly as widespread as it is.

The most extensive knowledge on the neurobiology of human social behaviour concerns one particular aspect of social behaviour: aggression.2,3 Research on aggression has led to the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for the treatment of impulsive aggression,4 an illustration of how social neuroscience can lead to treatments for disordered social behaviour. However, aggression, although an important societal problem, does not feature prominently in many disorders even though it is required for the diagnosis of intermittent explosive disorder. Furthermore, overt aggression is not a common part of everyday social interactions.

Research on the neurobiology of less extreme forms of social behaviour than aggression is limited. Two examples of how research on animals is starting to be applied to human social behaviour follow. In some species of monkeys, serotonin can influence both agonistic-affiliative behaviours and hierarchy. Although low levels of serotonin increase aggressive behaviours, as in humans, increasing serotonin function enhances prosocial behaviours such as grooming other animals.5,6 Increasing serotonin function also helps a male to achieve dominant status.7 Similar results have been reported in a few studies involving humans, carried out both in the laboratory and in everyday life. In the laboratory, healthy participants receiving an SSRI were rated more dominant and more cooperative during a mixed motive game8 and showed more affiliative behaviours during a dyadic puzzle task requiring cooperation.9 On the other hand, acute tryptophan depletion to lower serotonin levels caused reductions in the level of cooperation shown by participants when playing the prisoner's dilemma game.10 Acute tryptophan depletion also changed behaviour in an ultimatum game in which players had to decide whether to accept or reject fair or unfair monetary offers from another player. Participants with low serotonin levels rejected a greater proportion of unfair offers, but not fair offers.11 This result was consistent with a lowered level of affiliation. In studies investigating social behaviour in everyday life, social behaviour can be studied using an ecological momentary assessment methodology (discussed recently in this journal12) that measures behaviours along 2 axes, agreeable–quarrelsome and dominant–submissive. In crossover studies comparing placebo with the administration for 2 or 3 weeks of tryptophan to increase serotonin, increased serotonin was associated with decreased quarrelsomeness and increased dominance among healthy participants,13 and with decreased quarrelsomeness and increased agreeableness among participants with high trait hostility.14 In both studies, participants were not able to guess, better than by chance, when they were taking tryptophan and when they were taking placebo, indicating that participants were unaware that their behaviour was changed by tryptophan.

Oxytocin is another compound that has been shown to influence social behaviour in animals, and its effect on humans has been tested recently. Animal studies have shown that oxytocin is involved in the formation of bonds between mates and between mothers and their offspring, including the use of aggression in the protection of these relationships.15 In laboratory studies involving healthy humans, intranasal administration of oxytocin altered behaviour in a way that indicated increased trust in others.16,17

In the past, one of the limiting factors in the study of the neurobiology of human social behaviour was the limitations in the methods for measuring social behaviour. In the past, this usually depended on peoples' own global assessment of their behaviour. The few studies described previously give an indication of the scope of the methodology that is now available for studying human social behaviour both in the laboratory and in everyday life. So far, most studies have looked at the effects on dyadic interactions. Future studies should also look at group interactions, both within groups and between groups. Group behaviour is an important component of human social behaviour and may differ in some ways from dyadic interactions. Social psychologists have studied what they term the interindividual–intergroup discontinuity, which refers to the fact that groups are sometimes more competitive or aggressive than individuals. This has been demonstrated in mixed-motive situations18 with a test based on Milgram's19 obedience research in which groups acting as teachers delivered significantly more severe shocks than individuals acting as teachers20 and in the prisoner's dilemma game in which groups were more competitive than individuals.21 Furthermore, discussion between groups was characterized by a higher frequency of fear and greed statements than discussion between individuals. How the manipulation of different neurotransmitters might affect these results is not known but should definitely be researched.

The techniques for the study of human social behaviour are available. There are a wide variety of drugs that target different neurotransmitter systems and are available for use in experimental research involving humans. What seems to be lacking at the moment are researchers willing to combine both in their research.

It’s fantastic that we can do this research and continue learning about Great Nature, of which we are part and parcel.

What else?

• Anthropology

• Sociology

• History

• Philosophy

If only more people were deeply interested in learning more about who we are, where we came from, and how to live well while ensuring a healthy future for all life forms.

Environmental Domains

Studying the relationship between humans and their environment, including how we impact the planet and how it impacts us, is crucial for understanding our place in the world. But too many believe we are separate from Nature, operating under God’s rules, and are more concerned with favors, the hereafter, or liberation from rebirth than justice, health, happiness, peace, and our future. I am not saying that stories don’t help with that, but there is also a great deal of meaning in an evidence-based understanding of our Nature works.

Listen to Carl Sagan. We are still struggling with the same issues he was concerned about.

My feeling Charlie is that it’s it’s not that pseudoscience and superstition and new-age so-called beliefs and fundamentalist zealotry are something new they’ve been with us for as long as we’ve been we’ve been human, but we live in an age based on science and technology with formidable technological powers science and technology are propelling us forward at accelerating rates that’s right and if we don’t understand it, by we I mean the general public if it’s something that oh I’m not good at that I don’t know anything about it then who is making all the decisions about science and technology that are gonna determine what kind of future our children live in just some members of Congress but there’s no more than a handful of members of Congress with any background in science at all and the Republican Congress has just abolished its own office of Technology Assessment the organization that gave them bipartisan and competent advice and Science and Technology they say we don’t want to know don’t tell us about science surprising it’s the danger of all this I mean you know this is not the thing there’s two kinds of dangerous one is what I just talked about that we’ve arranged a society based on science and technology in which nobody understands anything about science and technology and this combustible mixture of ignorance and power sooner or later is gonna blow up in our faces I mean who is running the Science and Technology in a democracy if the people don’t know anything about it and the second reason that I’m worried about this is that science is more than a body of knowledge it’s a way of thinking a way of skeptically interrogating the universe with a fine understanding of human fallibility if if we are not able to ask sceptical questions to interrogate those who tell us that something is true to be skeptical of those in authority then we’re up for grabs for the next charlatan political or religious who comes ambling along it’s a thing that Jefferson laid great stress on it wasn’t enough he said to enshrine some rights in a in a constitution or a Bill of Rights the people had to be educated and they had to practice their skepticism and their education otherwise we don’t run the government the government runs us. —Carl Sagan

Thanks to super-smart computer algorithms, let’s look at some domains of inquiry relevant to our relationship with our environment. We all process information with tools, just like we process food with tools. We use a lot of energy and materials to do this, which profoundly impacts our environment and habitat. My bad! I’m constantly wondering if we can use these tools in a sustainable, habitable way. One day, perhaps, we won’t have these tools anymore and will rely on simpler tools we craft from natural materials by hand.

Tools of the Wild: Unveiling the Crafty Side of Nature

Once considered a uniquely human activity, tool use has been spotted across diverse species. It’s time to rethink what tools reveal about their users’ intelligence and evolution.

Biotic and Abiotic Interactions

• Population Ecology

• Community Ecology

• Ecosystem Ecology

• Biogeochemistry

• Ecophysiology

Spatial and Temporal Scales:

• Landscape Ecology

• Global Ecology

• Paleoecology

Human Impacts and Conservation:

• Conservation Biology

• Environmental Science

• Restoration Ecology

• Sustainable Development

Tools and Techniques:

• Ecological Modeling

• Remote Sensing

• Field Ecology

• Molecular Ecology

5. Interdisciplinary Connections:

• Environmental Economics

• Environmental Sociology

• Environmental Ethics

It’s, wait for it, interdisciplinary

These domains are interconnected. If we want to understand our nature, we must study it all. If we're going to understand the social and cultural factors that contribute to violence, we need to understand the biological basis of aggression, etc.

Humans are complex creatures full of contradictions. Are we curious enough about what things are and how they work, about system dynamics, stocks and flows, biology, complexity, science, physics, and all the rest of it to learn what’s necessary to build a culture focused on health, well-being, and posterity? We seem too prone to distraction, entertainment, and “emotional highjack” to focus on things we need to learn. It’s far easier to listen to someone with power tell us what to believe and fit in.

Even if we had a complete and detailed understanding of our nature, developing a culture with the agency to favor certain “traits” over others would be complex and take generations. We would have to change the way we do things radically. How does one kind of human/culture create a different type of human/culture that would live much differently than we do now? Refering to isolated groups of hunter-gatherers as an example doesn’t consider that no group remains isolated and is, therefore, inevitably influenced by other groups sooner or later unless purposely kept in isolation by a group with the power to do so. We will not magically turn into hunter-gatherers living a simpler way in harmony with Nature’s limits as benevolent protectors of life without a critical number of revolutionary revolutionaries willing to sacrifice their lives to take power from Homo destroyer of worlds.

How do we reconcile POWER with peaceful living in harmony with Nature? Power over people is the crux of our predicament. Empowering people is a necessity.

We have no problem sacrificing blood and treasure for our current ideological beliefs, obsessions, and addictions. And look, we’re still in the same predicament we’ve been in for thousands of years.

Who wants to be a revolutionary rebel when history has clearly shown us what we have become and what our preferences seem to be? What will level the “playing field,” giving rise to a different type of person who will have the power to educate humanity about its better nature and profound responsibilities? Who will sacrifice for that?

It’s something to think about before the lights go out.

What Are We, Eric Lee?

I have some thoughts about these two posts from Eric Lee.

Can Ecological Economics Provide a Plan of Actions to Change the Direction of Our Overshoot Culture?

Our Deepining Hole

[PS: The only reason I have to string words together is as clickbait to lure readers to click on links to stuff that may matter, so feel free to scan and just click on links.] — Eric Lee

Yes, those few interested in living in the WMU (watershed management unit) should go to primary sources and think about things for themselves. There are many ways to see an elephant, experience a predicament, and multiple pathways through the jungle.

I might get an “F” for not completely subscribing (parroting exactly) to a particular way of seeing and describing things. Oh well. I get it, but I just don’t get it in the absolutely correct way maybe.

What makes Homo sapiens (Homo hubris, Homo Storyteller, Homo tool maker, Homo warrior, Homo consumer, Homo meme-maker, etc.) different from other mammals?

Homo sapiens emerged with the ability to walk upright on two legs (bipedalism), freeing our hands with opposable thumbs to perform intricate tasks across vast distances while precisely manipulating objects and developing complex tools. Many more features of our anatomy helped us move toward more complex cultures over our three hundred thousand years, give or take, of existence. For many reasons, nutrition and whatnot, our large, complex brain enabled “advanced” cognitive abilities, including abstract thought, language (philosophy, logic, reason, math, physics, etc. included), and self-awareness, contributing to our unique, I’m guessing, consciousness. (What is consciousness? Oh dear! What tools would I need to figure that out? I’m spinning! Words, words, they are only words.) Our “intelligence” drove the creation and utilization of tools and technology, from simple hand axes, bows, and arrows, and forged swords to sophisticated machines powered by fossil fuels, computers, the James Webb Space Telescope, and the Large Hadron Collider to help us learn about and manipulate our environment and each other. Homo creator (however you want to characterize us) are cultural animals with art, music, religion, and social norms transmitted and developed across generations, accumulating knowledge that contributes to our adaptability to the point where overshoot destroys our life support system, and our species disappears. Extinction is the rule, not the exception. Homo self-destruct has its end in sight. “Progress” leads to oblivion — homo I-have-become-death-the-destroyer-of-species.

Some folks know what’s best for Homo true-believer and prattle on about it. Still, none of them know how to take power away from Homo accelerationist, Homo conqueror, so we can slow down and smell the Watershed Management Unit based on the wisdom of Mother. Homo agency doesn’t know what’s suitable for it. So the wisdom of the ages sits in museums in the digital catalogs of databases, waiting to be fondled by fanciful brains that dare to imagine how things could be different. Why would Fern want to delve into knowledge bases when she’s simply trying to earn an extra three hundred dollars a month to help finance her niece’s education?

Meanwhile, look around you and ponder what seems to matter to ordinary people who may or may not have the Homo agency gene and memetic cultural background suitable for leading a revolutionary revolution.

Homo true-believer doesn’t think we have to slow down; he/she/it/them/us knows all they need is more of this or that, a fair share, of manipulated Nature, and all will be well forever and ever. Amen. Plus, remember that Homo tech-bro is making a perpetual motion machine, micro-fusion energy plants people will soon carry around in their genius phones, and breadbox-sized replicators that make Poppa John blush.

Ted Trainer lived The Simpler Way for decades, thinking things through while listening to Mother and Great Nature, and The Simpler Way didn’t catch on. (Will it catch on after The Great Die Off? I can’t believe it.) And think about the trauma Guy McPherson went through and is still going through when he realized folks weren’t going to follow him to the watershed or even read stuff from The Aldo Leopold Foundation.

“Trauma is not just about the event itself, but the individual’s response to it.” — Gabor Mate.

“Minor” events can be traumatic if they overwhelm an individual’s coping mechanisms and leave them feeling helpless, powerless, hopeless, and disconnected. (Homo HPHD) Trauma can stem from the absence of necessary experiences, such as secure attachment, love, and acceptance or quiet time in the watershed management unit listening to Nature. “Why, oh why, didn’t they all want to live in Earth Houses?”

We are living in The Age of Shock and Awe, where accidents, natural disasters, and war assault our senses and minds 24/7/365, leading to long-lasting psychological and emotional difficulties. Does knowing what ails us help? (Homo virtue)

Societal structures and systems of oppression create ongoing trauma for individuals, communities, and Great Nature that have profound and lasting impacts on mental and physical health — Homo omnicidal heat-engine.

(Homo deaf-dumb-blind)

Who will invest two hundred million dollars in The Simpler Way or Nature Whispering when our economics and evolved belief systems have nothing to do with habitability, steady states, regression to the mean, homeostasis, or living in a small, intentional community of watershed minders?

(Homo naive, Homo childish, Homo inexperienced)

Stop believing. Believe me. It’s as simple as that — let’s rally around! White self-made robe from Mother’s renewable materials, bare feet, sit under the tree, breathe, listen, observe quietly, and you will know what to do with 500 good books. You will make the right choices. You access the wisdom of Nature.

Look around you, swipe the screen, and change the channel; what do people believe?

Does education and consciousness-raising matter? Where’s the mass movement? Where are the revolutionary revolutionaries? Who will sacrifice their lives to slow down the bullet train with no brakes accelerating toward a solid granite wall the size of the Himalayan mountain range? If enough of us stand before the train, will it slow down? Now that’s a mighty trolly problem.

So yes, look at all the stories about what we do and discover what kind of animals we are. I hope and pray that we learn to live radically differently than we are now. But it’s hard to believe we will, so take a licking and keep on clicking:

Diving The Damned

Fire Weather

When Ukraine Is Over …

Underneath the Hazelnut Tree

The Human Souffle

Thoughts Inspired By Lee’s “Animism Reformed”

The Magical Mystery Tour

Roll up roll up for the Mystery Tour
Roll up roll up for the Mystery Tour

Roll up
That's an invitation
Roll up for the Mystery Tour
Roll up
To make a reservation
Roll up for the Mystery Tour

The Magical Mystery Tour
Is waiting to take you away
Waiting to take you away

Roll up
Roll up for the Mystery Tour
Roll up
Roll up for the Mystery Tour

Roll up
They've got everything you need
Roll up for the Mystery Tour
Roll up
Satisfaction guaranteed
Roll up for the Mystery Tour

The Magical Mystery Tour is hoping to take you away
Hoping to take you away

The Mystery Tour

Ah

The Magical Mystery Tour
Roll up
Roll up for the Mystery Tour

Roll up
That's an invitation
Roll up for the Mystery Tour
Roll up
To make a reservation
Roll up for the Mystery Tour

The Magical Mystery Tour
Is coming to take you away
Coming to take you away

The Magical Mystery Tour
Is dying to take you away
Dying to take you away
Take you today

Read Eric Lee’s tiddly on reformed Animism.

Hash it out, only this time, do it differently.

My director would say, very good, now do it differently.

Religion and Belief Systems: A Journey Through Time

Our journey begins with prehistoric and early religions. Animism is characterized/experienced by the belief that spirits inhabit all things, including animals, plants, and natural phenomena. The spirits and souls of humans and other beings are considered necessary for life. Animism arose from our need to understand and explain the natural world.

Conclusion

Ethnographies around the world show that animism is a way of relating and attributing sentience to other beings, forces of nature, things, and even technological items. This entry has explored anthropological approaches to animism, from envisioning it as a philosophy of religion to building upon distinct philosophical, theoretical, and ethnographic sources that suggest animism may be more than a distinct sensibility, tendency, or style of engaging with the world. It may be an ontology in its own right.

Animism is approached from numerous directions in anthropology. It is considered to be an immanent rather than transcendent form of sentience. It is a way of revealing and sometimes manipulating the consciousness, motivation, memories, and powers of animal spirits, animistic places, and items of technology. As an ontology, animism may blend and blur with other ontologies, opening it up to contradictions, humour, creativity, imagination, inspiration, and reflexive awareness. Due to the diverse forms of animism worldwide, anthropologists have asked whether certain animistic groups may have undergone a history of diminution or disenchantment, which made them only attribute certain beings with an animistic sensibility. They also relate to animism in distinct ways, as scholars who are not animists, as scholars who advocate identifying with animists, or as scholars who are animists themselves.

Cutting across these varied approaches are competing visions of how animistic life-worlds unfold through human, other-than-human, and beyond human sensibilities. These distinct visions raise important questions about how we might relate to animism as a particular sensibility that can be studied ethnographically, debated about as a philosophical and theoretical possibility, deeply identified with as a way of enriching one’s scholarship and life, or (possibly) taken up as a sensibility of one’s own. What these big questions do is shine a reflexive mirror onto our own humanity, pressing us to articulate what sentience is in the first place and why we relate to others in the ways that we do.    

Shamanism is the practice of entering altered states of consciousness to communicate with the spirit world. Shamans often served as healers, diviners, and storytellers. These days, you have to pay to play Shamanic wisdom. The business of religion says a lot about our global culture.

Imagine sitting quietly around a campfire. Deep throated Native drums are playing softly in the distance and somehow remind you of the beat of your mother's heart. A Native flute echoes in the wind from tree to tree, and an uncommon peace begins to settle over you. A sage old Native Warrior, in the full wisdom of his years, is sitting with you ... and begins to speak ... and you close your eyes to listen. He speaks of the old ways, he speaks of the old honors, and he speaks of his love for his people and their devotion to the balance in Nature. His heart and his words are kind and gentle ... but the space between those words is filled with foreboding. He offers hope, but ..... "This is the way I would begin describe my waking vision ... a solo journey of four days and three nights alone, into the wilderness ... a Lakota style "vision quest" with no food and no water. It was a trail that would lead deep into the heart, and the mind, and the body, and the Spirit!" ......... Robin Miller

Ancestor Veneration is the belief that deceased ancestors can influence the living. Homo sapiens have a desire to maintain connections with loved ones and seek their guidance.

Google “Ancestor Worship” and aside from 2,260,000 results delivered in slightly over half a second, you will immediately find the following description: “Ancestor worship is a religious practice based on the belief that deceased family members have a continued existence, that the spirits of deceased ancestors will look after the family, take an interest in the affairs of the world, and possess the ability to influence the fortune of the living.”

Polytheism is the belief in multiple gods and goddesses, often associated with natural forces or human activities, allowing for a more complex understanding of the world and human experience.

The Rise of Monotheism and BIG BESPOKE GODS

Yahweh (Hebrew) is the single, all-powerful God of the Hebrews. Yahweh is seen as a personal God who made a covenant with his chosen people.

Yahweh is the name of the state god of the ancient Kingdom of Israel and, later, the Kingdom of Judah. His name is composed of four Hebrew consonants (YHWH, known as the Tetragrammaton) which the prophet Moses is said to have revealed to his people and is sometimes given in English as "Jehovah."

The meaning of the name has been interpreted variously as "I am", "He That Is", "He Who Makes That Which Has Been Made" (Yahweh-Asher-Yahweh), "He Brings the Hosts Into Existence" (Yahweh-Teva-`ot) and, according to the philosopher Rabbi Moses Maimonides (l. 1138-1204), denotes "absolute existence" or "the totality of existence."

Allah (Arabic) is the one God of Islam, similar in concept to Yahweh. Allah is seen as the creator and sustainer of the universe. Allah is bespoke yet universal.

The Qur'an and Questions
We recognize that this will be especially hard for Muslims because they are forbidden by the Qur'an to ask questions about their own faith! They are warned that if they start asking questions, they may lose their faith in Islam!

O ye who believe! Ask not questions about things
which if made plain to you, may cause you trouble.
Some people before you did ask such questions, and on
that account lost their faith." (Surah 5:101-102).

The following citations reveal that there is a general consensus among Islamic scholars that Allah was a pagan deity before Islam developed. He was only one god among a pantheon of 360 gods worshipped by the Arabs. Even if he was at times viewed as a "high god," this does not mean he was the one true God.

What The Prophet said about Allah

Our species seems to have been true believers for a long time, perhaps even as far back as prehistoric times. How could we know what Homo sapiens believed over seventy-five thousand years ago? It's a fascinating question, and unfortunately, we can't say for sure what Homo sapiens believed over 75,000 years ago.

Challenges

We have no written records. Writing didn't emerge until much later in human history (around 5,000 years ago). Anything from 75,000 years ago is prehistoric, relying on archaeological evidence. Beliefs are abstract. Unlike tools or bones, they don't fossilize. We must infer beliefs from indirect evidence, which is open to interpretation. Early beliefs were fluid. Early humans probably had complex systems of thought, but these might not have been organized into formal religions like we know today.

What Clues We DO Have

Intentional burials, sometimes with grave goods, suggest a belief in an afterlife or a spirit world. This is seen in Neanderthals (our close relatives) and early Homo sapiens. Cave paintings, figurines, and other symbolic artifacts hint at complex thought processes and possible ritualistic behavior. The meaning is debated, but they show abstract thinking.

Labeling something as the "oldest" is tricky but can be defined in a couple of ways: oldest figurative (depicting something recognizable) or oldest abstract markings. There is an old painting in the Leang Tedongnge cave on the Indonesian island of Sulawesi. It’s known as a Sulawesi warty pig and is at least 45,500 years old. Uranium-series dating of calcium carbonate deposits that formed over the painting helps us guess its age. This method measures the decay of uranium isotopes into thorium to determine the age of the mineral deposit.

A team of archaeologists from Australia and Indonesia has discovered two figurative paintings of the Sulawesi warty pig (Sus celebensis) — a species of small (40 to 85 kg), short-legged pig with characteristic facial warts — in Leang Tedongnge and Leang Balangajia 1 caves on the Indonesian island of Sulawesi. The warty pig painting from Leang Tedongnge cave dates to at least 45,500 years ago, making it the earliest known representational work of art in the world.

Oldest Abstract Markings

Caves in Maltravieso (Spain), Ardales (Spain), and La Pasiega (Spain) contain red hand stencils, ladder-like lines, and a decorated stalagmite, which are thought to be at least 64,000 years old, possibly older. Again, uranium-thorium dating was used on the calcite formations that had grown over the pigments.

A new study shows that paintings in three cave sites on the Iberian Peninsula — a red linear motif in Cave of La Pasiega, a hand stencil in Maltravieso Cave, and red-painted speleothems in Ardales Cave — were created more than 64,000 years ago. These cave paintings are the earliest dated so far and predate, by at least 20,000 years, the arrival of modern humans in Europe, which implies Neanderthal authorship.

It's Complicated

New cave art is constantly being found, which can change our understanding of the "oldest." It can be challenging to date cave paintings directly. Scientists often date the layers of mineral deposits that have formed over them, providing a minimum age. Some pigments may fade or be obscured over time, making them difficult to identify and date.

Significance

These ancient artworks provide invaluable insights into the minds of our early ancestors. They demonstrate an ability for abstract thought, symbolic representation, and possibly storytelling, pushing back the timeline for these cognitive abilities in humans. We may have been believers and storytellers since the dawn of our species. It's an exciting field of study, and new discoveries continue to reshape our understanding of early human culture and creativity.

While not a perfect analogy, studying the beliefs of modern hunter-gatherer groups can give us possible insights into the past. Many have animistic beliefs, seeing spirits in nature. "Modern" hunter-gatherers exist in a world heavily influenced by other societies. They often have some contact with the outside world and may incorporate modern tools or practices. However, they still rely significantly on hunting and gathering for subsistence.

I visited Aka Pygmies in the Republic of Congo in 1971 with my parents. In 1971, the country was called the Republic of Zaire. Aka are known for their close relationship with the forest and their skilled hunting with nets. "Pygmy" can be considered outdated and even derogatory by some. However, it is still widely used to refer to various groups in Central Africa who share specific physical characteristics (such as short stature) and often a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. I knew then that my presence in the forest was contributing to the dissolution of their culture. My trips to Bali in the 70s and early 90s confirmed this intuition.

First published in 1937, Island of Bali has come to be regarded as a classic work on the Balinese people and their civilization. Written with remarkable clarity, Covarrubias describes the geography and nature of the island, along with the history of the people, providing a thorough account of the community, family, and individual in all spheres of Balinese life.Miguel Covarrubias (1904-1957) was born in Mexico City and was an author, painter, caricaturist, and professor of art history at the National School of Anthropology in Mexico City.

"Modern" hunter-gatherers exist in a world heavily influenced by other societies. When we met Aka in the forest, they wanted everything we had on us; they behaved almost like a Cargo Cult. I remember giving them my hat, a pen, and a notebook. They really wanted my cassette tape recorder! Contact with the outside world changes their way of life as they incorporate modern tools or practices. However, they still rely significantly on hunting and gathering for subsistence.

Africa

• San people (Southern Africa): Perhaps the most well-known, with diverse groups like the !Kung, Ju/'hoansi. Famous for persistence hunting and intricate knowledge of the Kalahari Desert.

• Hadza people (Tanzania): Live around Lake Eyasi, known for their unique click language and egalitarian society.

• Pygmies (Central Africa): Several groups, including the Baka, Aka, and Mbuti, living in the Congo Basin rainforest. Skilled hunters and gatherers adapted to the dense forest environment.

Asia

• Sentinelese (Andaman Islands, India): One of the most isolated groups in the world, actively resisting contact. Little is known about their beliefs and practices.

• Jarawa (Andaman Islands, India): Also relatively isolated, though some contact has been made. Known for their hunting skills and knowledge of the rainforest.

• Aeta people (Philippines): Live in various parts of the Philippines, with some groups maintaining traditional hunter-gatherer lifestyles in mountainous regions.

Americas

• Awá-Guajá (Brazil): Live in the Amazon rainforest, facing threats from deforestation and contact with the outside world.

• Pila Nguru (Spinifex People, Australia): Live in the Great Victoria Desert, known for their resilience and deep connection to their land.

Arctic Regions

• Inuit (Canada, Greenland): Traditionally hunted marine mammals and caribou, adapted to the harsh Arctic environment. While many now live in settlements, some maintain hunting and fishing practices.

Hunter-gatherer groups are not monolithic. Each has its own unique culture, language, and traditions. Many face challenges from habitat loss, encroachment from other societies, and disease. Despite these challenges, many hunter-gatherer groups continue to thrive and maintain their cultural identity.

By 75,000 years ago, Homo sapiens had brains comparable to ours. This suggests a capacity for symbolic thought, language, and social complexity, all linked to belief systems. It's crucial to avoid projecting our modern ideas onto the past. Early humans likely had a very different worldview shaped by their environment and way of life.

New archaeological discoveries constantly refine our understanding. Studying modern hunter-gatherers provides potential parallels. Cultural anthropology is a fascinating subject. Ancient DNA might eventually reveal clues about brain development and cognition.

Margaret Mead was a pioneering American cultural anthropologist who gained prominence in the 20th century for her studies of Oceanic peoples, particularly in Samoa. Her groundbreaking work, "Coming of Age in Samoa," challenged traditional Western views on adolescence and gender roles. Mead was a strong advocate for cultural understanding and the acceptance of diversity. She believed that studying different cultures could provide valuable insights into human behavior and social organization. Her work significantly impacted anthropology and contributed to a broader understanding of human nature. Mead was also a public intellectual and social activist, using her platform to address issues such as women's rights, racial equality, and environmental conservation.

"Anthropology demands the open-mindedness with which one must look and listen, record in astonishment and wonder that which one would not have been able to guess."

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."

"If we are to achieve a richer culture, rich in contrasting values, we must recognize the whole gamut of human potentialities, and so weave a less arbitrary social fabric, one in which each diverse human gift will find a fitting place."

Ruth Benedict was a prominent American anthropologist and folklorist who significantly influenced the field in the mid-20th century. A student of Franz Boas, she emphasized the importance of culture in shaping individual personality and behavior. Her renowned book, "Patterns of Culture," explored how societies develop distinct "personality types" based on cultural values. Benedict also researched Native American and Japanese cultures, famously authoring "The Chrysanthemum and the Sword" (I read this book in Tokyo in 1983 while practicing Aikido at Hombu Dojo) during World War II to help Americans understand Japanese society. Her work challenged ethnocentrism and promoted cultural relativism, arguing for the appreciation of diverse ways of life.

“The purpose of anthropology is to make the world safe for human differences.”

"We are forced to choose among our roles. A role is not a completely rounded development of personality but a sort of canalization of it."

Bronisław Malinowski was a hugely influential anthropologist of the early 20th century, often considered the father of modern fieldwork. Born in Poland, he made his mark in Britain with his innovative approach to studying cultures. Malinowski emphasized the importance of immersion, living among the people he studied (particularly in the Trobriand Islands of Papua New Guinea) to understand their culture from their perspective. This method, known as participant observation, became a cornerstone of anthropological research. He stressed the importance of "grasping the native's point of view" and understanding the function of cultural practices within a society. His work had a lasting impact on anthropology, shaping how we study and understand different cultures.

"The goal of ethnographic fieldwork is 'to grasp the native's point of view, his relation to life, to realize his vision of his world.'"

"Culture is a system of objects, activities, and attitudes in which every part exists as a means to an end."

Clifford Geertz was a highly influential American anthropologist known for his work in symbolic anthropology. He believed that culture was a system of shared meanings and symbols and that anthropologists should interpret these symbols to understand a culture's "webs of significance." Geertz emphasized "thick description," a detailed analysis of cultural practices and their underlying meanings, as illustrated in his famous essay "Deep Play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight." His work moved anthropology from purely structuralist approaches towards a more interpretive understanding of culture. Geertz's writings are known for their literary style and insightful observations on human behavior, making him a key figure in 20th-century anthropology.

"Man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun."

"The culture of a people is an ensemble of texts, themselves ensembles, which the anthropologist strains to read over the shoulders of those to whom they properly belong."

Claude Lévi-Strauss was a French anthropologist and arguably the most influential figure in structuralist thought during the 20th century. He believed that underlying all human cultures were deeply structured patterns of thought, particularly evident in myths and kinship systems. Lévi-Strauss analyzed these patterns, drawing comparisons across seemingly disparate cultures to reveal universal structures in the human mind. His work, including books like "The Elementary Structures of Kinship" and "The Raw and the Cooked," revolutionized anthropology, pushing it towards a more scientific and analytical approach. Though his ideas have been celebrated and debated, Lévi-Strauss's impact on the field and beyond is undeniable.

Lévi-Strauss postulates that the raw/cooked axis is characteristic of all human culture, with elements falling along the "raw" side of the axis being those of "natural" origin, and those on the "cooked" side being of "cultural" origin - i.e. products of human creation. Symbolically, cooking marks the transition from nature to culture, by means of which the human state can be defined in accordance with all its attributes. In mythological thought, the cooking of food is, in effect, a form of mediation between nature and society, between life and death, and between heaven and earth. The cook, in turn, can be viewed as a cultural agent whose function is to "mediate the conjunction of the raw product and the human consumer," the operation of which has the effect of "making sure the natural is at once cooked and socialized."

"The savage mind is logical in the same sense and the same fashion as ours." (Lévi-Strauss argued that human thought processes are universal, even in seemingly "primitive" cultures).

“The world began without man, and it will end without him.”

While we may never fully know the beliefs of our distant ancestors, the quest to understand them continues to be a source of fascination and exploration. People will continue to explore the fantastic nature of things and humans no matter what people say about Marjorie Taylor Greene on tubes and blogs. Underneath the competitive, noisy, lucrative nonsense we habitually pay attention to are profound stories about life and our Universe that can enrich our lives immensely.

What is the purpose of religion?

Religion answers fundamental questions about the universe's origin, the meaning of life, and the nature of good and evil; it offers solace in times of hardship and uncertainty and hope for a better afterlife; it creates social cohesion, a sense of community, and shared identity, and provides a framework for moral behavior; religion offers a sense of control over the unpredictable forces of nature and human destiny.

Religion relies on faith, revelation, and tradition. Its claims may not be testable or falsifiable through scientific methods.

Science

Science seeks to understand the natural world through observation, experimentation, and logical reasoning. It relies on empirical evidence and mathematical models to make predictions and test hypotheses.

Survival Instincts and Empiricism—Is it predator or prey?

Our ancestors relied on their senses and instincts to assess danger, but they also learned from their experiences and the knowledge passed down through generations. This process of learning from observation and experience is a form of empiricism, which is also a foundation of scientific inquiry.

Religion and science offer different ways of understanding the world. Religion provides meaning, comfort, and social cohesion, while science seeks to explain the natural world through observation and experimentation. Both have played important roles in human history and continue to shape our lives today.

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." —Albert Einstein

This quote is often used to show both Einstein’s religiosity and his belief in the compatibility—indeed, the mutual interdependence—of science and religion.  But the quote is rarely used in context, and when you see the context you’ll find that the quote should give no solace to the faithful. But first let me show you how, in that same essay, Einstein proposes what is essentially Stephen Jay Gould’s version of NOMA (Non-overlapping Magisteria). Gould’s idea (which was clearly not original) was that science and religion were harmonious because they had distinct but complementary tasks: science helps us understand the physical structure of the universe, while religion deals with human values, morals, and meanings.

"Science tries to document the factual character of the natural world, and to develop theories that coordinate and explain these facts. Religion, on the other hand, operates in the equally important, but utterly different, realm of human purposes, meanings, and values—subjects that the factual domain of science might illuminate, but can never resolve." —Stephen Jay Gould

"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it." —Neil deGrasse Tyson (This quote points to the objective nature of scientific knowledge, in contrast to the subjective nature of religious belief.)

Get yee to the card catalog or computer database in the library and take a nap. Don’t read the stories or absorb knowledge and information; it’s poison, it doesn’t matter—rake the rocks, whisk the tea, and be present. Above all, serve the King loyally and do your duty. You prattling, ignorant, idiot beast!

Learn from your meister how to do things properly so you can make a living.

When you argue with those who and that which sustains you, you die.

If you can, create your own Game-B community somewhere off-grid if there is such a place that is habitable and not so attractive that Big Civilization won’t take it from you. Be a member of a small indigenous tribe of hunter-gatherers and small-scale farmers with a few domestic animals. Live in harmony with the people you depend on and who depend on you. Pay attention to your watershed (natural habitat’s life support subsystem of systems embedded in systems.) And don’t worry too much; in time, after the catastrophe plays itself out and there are far fewer people, we’ll have a chance to do things differently.

As the environment changes, stay put and harmonize with the changes generation after generation until your environment can’t sustain your tribe. When Nature has shown you it can no longer provide the sustenance to maintain your group (it’s not your group’s fault; your group took care of its environment and only used what it needed, careful to ensure that all life could replenish itself and remain in healthy status) send an emissary to search for a new place (ecosystem/habitat) suited to your traditional customs. If a tribe already lives there, your emissary can ask the people there if the location can sustain another group of people. Your emissary will stay with the new tribe for five years (pick a number arbitrarily or based on constraints), learning about their culture, customs, and place while sharing stories about his (the emissary is a man for some reasons) culture and way of life. If that place’s people think they might be compatible with your group, the emissary will ask permission to join them. The emissary will return home with good or bad news.

If you must stay where you are, do what you can to survive while waiting for conditions to improve or not. After thousands of generations, you may evolve, under natural pressures exerted within nested systems, into another life form that can take advantage of the new environment. The “old you” will pass away. With the right predators or mindset (proper animism as defined by the wisest Shaman who can interpret what systems within systems as part and parcel of BIG SYSTEM is communicating to Homo storyteller), you will live peacefully within natural constraints and continue to evolve until your “KIND” becomes extinct for one set of reasons or another. Remember, you are part and parcel of a subsystem of subsystems within BIG-NATURE-SYSTEM, and all things making up all systems are sacred, so smile and understand that when new conditions gradually arise that lead to the death of ninety percent of your band, nation, civilization, they still constitute animate and inanimate systems within systems in different forms, performing their roles as part of The System of Great Big Nature A.K.A., The Universe.

Thou Shalt!

Peace be with you.

---

It broke my heart in San Francisco, in Bali, in Africa, in Ireland, in Japan, in China, in Thailand…we visit, we pollute, we corrupt and destroy because we are there, and then, we climb mountains and take rocket ships to Mars—we buy bars and inns and swimming pools. It’s a fun investment. We boot out the locals and rent the historic district to wealthy tourists who can properly appreciate destinations and experiences. We share them on social media platforms, showing all who click how well-traveled, experienced, and worldly we are. The locals would be in awe of us and our purses if they still lived there. If we want to see a local, we can go online, find a village, and get an Uber to take us there. Uber drivers know where to have an authentic lunch.

"Impermanence is a principle of harmony. When we don't struggle against it, we are in harmony with reality." —Pema Chödrön

Pema Chödrön is a highly respected American Buddhist nun and author known for her down-to-earth teachings on mindfulness and compassion. Ordained in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition, she emphasizes the importance of facing our fears and insecurities with kindness and courage. Chödrön's books, such as "When Things Fall Apart" and "The Places That Scare You," offer practical guidance on navigating life's challenges and cultivating emotional resilience. Her teachings are deeply rooted in Buddhist philosophy but presented in an accessible way that resonates with people from all walks of life. Chödrön's wisdom and compassionate approach have made her a beloved figure in the world of contemporary spirituality.

A long time from now.

Please remember, long ago, our ancestors believed in science and told stories about evolution.

We still tell some of their stories to remind ourselves of our ancient past until the stories fade, and there is only our watershed (local living system/Nature) to listen to—and maybe no one to hear.

There is no precise timeframe for how long one hominid evolves into another. Hominids are life forms, not things, and are less permanent than atoms and molecules—the building blocks of matter, or for that matter, fragments of energy. Homo sapiens used to tell science stories based on evidence, a kind of ancient Nature listening that required specialized processes, tools, and mental frameworks (ways of thinking about Natural systems.) Our ancestors were overly curious (by some moral standard).

Suddenly, for some odd reason, those types of people with those types of capabilities arose from the processes of evolution. Blasphemie! God IS evolution, God is everything, and God is THE self-sustaining ruler. Shhhhhhhhh!

At one moment in the past (we don't know exactly how many ticks a moment is because moments flow or something), science whisperers thought that it is hard to define what a "first hominid" is because clean cut-offs between one genus or species and another don't exist because systems are melded together and flow, through energetic relationships that often change depending on levels of energy and types of systems within systems making all kinds of "things" and “laws” and interactions emerge over time and under various circumstances, locations and many other factors manifesting this, that, and the other thing. Our ancestors had a domain called Physics, but we won’t go into that now.

The history of the Living–Earth system can be divided into five ‘energetic’ epochs, each featuring the evolution of life forms that can exploit a new source of energy. These sources are: geochemical energy, sunlight, oxygen, flesh and fire. The first two were present at the start, but oxygen, flesh and fire are all consequences of evolutionary events. Since no category of energy source has disappeared, this has, over time, resulted in an expanding realm of the sources of energy available to living organisms and a concomitant increase in the diversity and complexity of ecosystems. These energy expansions have also mediated the trans- formation of key aspects of the planetary environment, which have in turn mediated the future course of evolutionary change. Using energy as a lens thus illuminates patterns in the entwined histories of life and Earth, and may also provide a framework for considering the potential trajectories of life–planet systems elsewhere.

Our ancestors understood that the more one listens to Nature using sophisticated tools and mental frameworks, the more complex Nature seems to be. Is Nature fully comprehensible?

"Happiness does not depend on what you have or who you are, it solely relies on what you think." —Buddha

“The greatest wealth is to live content with little.” —Plato

"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." —Leonardo da Vinci

"Your worst enemy cannot harm you as much as your own unguarded thoughts." —Buddha

"It is better to travel well than to arrive." —Buddha

"There is no fear for one whose mind is not filled with desires.” —Buddha

Walk as if you are kissing the Earth with your feet." —Thich Nhat Hanh

But anyway, our ancestors liked complex and complicated inquiries and stories because their processes, tools, and mental frameworks required evidence and a constant search for new evidence, which demanded more evidence to make sense of increasingly complex stories. The quest for evidence/proof involves innovating new tools and technologies to help us find more data to feed our understanding of Big-Great-Narure. They were not tranquil people; a lot was happening in their minds, and they couldn't be satisfied with turtles on the backs of turtles all the way in, out, down, sideways, up at whatever speed, form, energy use per physical unit of output whether purposeful or random. (What is a human construct? What is a human construct? A construct. A construct. All too human. All too human.)

"The most common lie is that which one lies to himself; lying to others is relatively an exception."

"He who despises himself nevertheless esteems himself thereby, as a despiser."

"Ultimately, man finds nothing more beautiful than himself."

"Every tradition grows ever more venerable the farther its origin lies in the past, the more it is forgotten."

"At the bottom of all the great, splendid, immoral deeds one finds the same motive: man wants to become master over something."

"The vanity of others offends our taste only when it offends our vanity."

"No one is very keen to learn anything new about the things he knows."

"The greatest events - they are not our loudest but our stillest hours."

"Talking much about oneself can also be a means to conceal oneself." —Friedrich Nietzsche

Is the Universe only math, or is the Universe only consciousness? Is the Univers I and I?

For example, suppose a basketball trajectory is that of a beautiful buzzer-beater that wins you the game, and that you later want to describe what it looked like to a friend. Since the ball is made of elementary particles (quarks and electrons), you could in principle describe its motion without making any reference to basketballs:

Particle 1 moves in a parabola.
Particle 2 moves in a parabola.
…
Particle 138,314,159,265,358,979,323,846,264 moves in a parabola.

So these lines of evidence led them to think at one moment that the earliest hominids, like Sahelanthropus tchadensis, date back around 6-7 million years ago. Over ticks (random units of time. What is time?), our species started showing traits that differentiated them from other apes, primarily bipedalism. Anatomically modern humans, Homo sapiens, emerged around 300,000 years ago—so the story based on evidence gathered with processes, tools, and mental models goes.

Language is the tool that presents illusion. Dreams are what life’s made of. Tell me now how it works.

"Do not dwell in the past, do not dream of the future, concentrate the mind on the present moment." —Buddha

"The trouble is, you think you have time." —Buddha

"Every morning we are born again. What we do today matters most." —Buddha

"Better than a thousand hollow words, is one word that brings peace." —Buddha

"Time is what we want most, but what we use worst." —William Penn

"The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once." —Albert Einstein

"Time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time." —Marthe Troly-Curtin

"Don't spend time beating on a wall, hoping to transform it into a door." —Coco Chanel

But our ancestors' stories weren't as simple as ours today. Our ancestors were too curious, and as we discovered, curiosity kills, but it didn’t kill us.

And so there were caveats. Human evolution wasn't a straight line. Many different hominid species existed, some co-existing, some going extinct. Homo sapiens is the only surviving member of this diverse family tree.

“Extinction is the rule. Survival is the exception.” —Carl Sagan

"Oh Great Spirit, who dwells in the whispering wind and the rushing river, in the soaring eagle and the crawling ant, in the towering mountain and the smallest grain of sand, we give thanks for your presence in all things.

We honor the spirits of this land, the guardians of the forests and the waters, the ancestors who walked before us.

Guide our steps and open our hearts, that we may live in harmony with all creation. May we always remember our connection to the web of life, and treat all beings with respect and kindness.

We offer this prayer with gratitude and humility." —Animist Prayer

Our noisy, curious ancestors knew that "hominid" evolved from other forms of life (systems within systems, Russian Dolls all the way down, in, out, up, sideways at the speed of this, that, or the other thing across or through time and so on and so forth.) Hominids used to refer only to humans and their extinct ancestors. Later, it included chimpanzees, gorillas, and bonobos, making the timeline even longer, going back to the last common ancestor we share with those apes, around 10 million years ago.

But for some, it includes the whole thing. We can have broad definitions of things.

Why do we define "first hominid?"

You can refer to graphs that our “Master” has included in his anti-prattle blog or find them yourselves after your nap at the library of devices and AI tools.

We are the aping apes. The cacophony is mostly noise as we sing what we don’t understand.

If you can't walk Nature's local watershed, you can wander the streets of your city or suburb, listening to modern stories (Natural constructs of Homo sapien dreams) and marveling at the utility of dirty jobs and fever dream interests, addictions, and desires.

"The quieter you become, the more you can hear." —Ram Dass

"Silence is a source of great strength." —Lao Tzu

"Your calm mind is the ultimate weapon against your challenges.” —Bryant McGill

“The mind is like water. When it's turbulent, it's difficult to see. When it's calm, everything becomes clear.” —Prasad Mahes

Populations change gradually over long periods, driven by natural selection and other factors. There is no endpoint until the BIG SYSTEM containing all systems cools to where energy is no longer available to drive systems (or so they say.) Some ancestors called this the “Heat Death of the Universe.” Our ancient ancestors had a name for no energy, no stuff, and many stories about non-state-of-no-affairs that they constructed with their social systems and rituals using scientific processes, tools, and mental models, whether primitive or not.

"The universe is the mind; the mind is the universe." —Huang Po

"With our thoughts we make the world." —Buddha

"Form is emptiness, emptiness is form." —Heart Sutra

"A human being is a part of the whole called by us "Universe," a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty." —Albert Einstein

"The cosmos is within us. We are made of star-stuff. We are a way for the universe to know itself." —Carl Sagan

"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love." —Carl Sagan

"Not only is the universe stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine." —J.B.S. Haldane

"The most beautiful experience we can have is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion that stands at the cradle of true art and true science." —Albert Einstein

John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

Great Nature, BIG SYSTEM changes all the time. Homidid is a fuzzy concept and somewhat arbitrary based on noticing, categorizing, and classifying significant differences that accumulate gradually over long periods. (What is time? What is time?)

"Don't be fooled by the calendar. There are only as many days in the year as you make use of. One man gets only a week's value out of a year while another man gets a full year's value out of a week." —Charles Richards.

"By time, the fire burns; by time, the sun gives light; by time, the wind blows; by time, the moon moves; by time, the earth supports beings; by time, the rivers flow." (Maitri Upanishad 6.14)

"He who knows time, knows Brahman." (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4.4.17)

"This is the truth: Time is Brahman." (Maitri Upanishad 6.16)

"Time devours all beings and all worlds." (Maitri Upanishad 6.15)

The more we use our tools and mental constructs, the more we accelerate changes in the living systems we depend on. Modern Techno-Industrial culture is a light-speed/mind-speed accelerator of change we can't control or predict, affecting every nested and emergent system. Population size, mutation rates, and generation time are all affected by the environment and our ancestors' imagination and will to learn, “know,” and create. Our ancestors were great environmental and technological change accelerators, even as their cultures didn't change much over their perception of time. Our ancestors were the apex of artificial-natural, technological, industrial change that affected all nested and emergent systems within Earth's BIG SYSTEM of life over thousands of years. (What is life? What is life?)

"Life is what happens when you're busy making other plans." —John Lennon

"Life is really simple, but we insist on making it complicated." —Confucius

"Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance, you must keep moving." —Albert Einstein

"The purpose of life, after all, is to live it, to taste experience to the utmost, to reach out eagerly and without fear for newer and richer experience." —Eleanor Roosevelt

"Life is a series of natural and spontaneous changes. Don't resist them; that only creates sorrow. Let reality be reality. Let things flow naturally forward in whatever way they like." —Lao Tzu

"Life itself is the most wonderful fairy tale." —Hans Christian Andersen

"Your time is limited, so don't waste it living someone else's life." —Steve Jobs

"Life is ours to be spent, not to be saved." —D.H. Lawrence

"Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but of playing a poor hand well." —Robert Louis Stevenson

"Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but of playing a poor hand well." —Robert Louis Stevenson

"A person is a person because of other people." (Ubuntu philosophy, Southern Africa)

"Knowledge is like a garden: If it is not cultivated, it cannot be harvested." (Akan proverb, Ghana)

"The world is like a chameleon's tongue - it catches only what it wants." (Yoruba proverb, Nigeria)

“We are all visitors to this time, this place. We are just passing through. Our purpose here is to observe, to learn, to grow, to love… and then we return home.” —Jimmy Smith

And you don’t have to live like an aborigine!

… We did somethin' we both know it
We don't talk too much about it
Ain't no real big secret all the same
Somehow we get around it
Listen it don't really matter to me, baby
You believe what you want to believe
You see, you don't have to live like a refugee (don't have to live like a refugee)

… Somewhere, somehow, somebody
Must have kicked you around some
Tell me why you want to lay there
Revel in your abandon
Honey, it don't make no difference to me, baby
Everybody's had to fight to be free
You see, you don't have to live like a refugee (don't have to live like a refugee)
Now baby, you don't have to live like a refugee (don't have to live like a refugee) No

… Baby we ain't the first
I'm sure a lot of other lovers been burned
Right now this seems real to you
But it's one of those things
You gotta feel to be true

… Somewhere, somehow, somebody
Must have kicked you around some
Who knows, maybe you were kidnapped
Tied up, taken away and held for ransom, honey
It don't really matter to me, baby
Everybody's had to fight to be free
You see, you don't have to live like a refugee (don't have to live like a refugee)
No, you don't have to live like a refugee (don't have to live like a refugee)
You don't have to live like a refugee (don't have to live like a refugee)
Oh, oh, oh

Aboriginal:

The land is my mother, my mother is the land. Like a baby I am born from the land, like a seed I will return to the land."

"Every creature on earth has as much right to be here as you."

"We are only a small part of the whole. The land, the animals, the plants, the sky, the stars – they are all our relations. We must live in harmony with them all."

"Our old people tell us that the Dreaming is still happening, that the ancestors are still here, in the land, the water, the sky. We must listen to their stories, for they hold the wisdom of life."

"Caring for Country is not just about looking after the land. It's about caring for each other, for our families, our communities, and for future generations."

Based on various lines of evidence, BIG-NATURE-LIVING-SYSTEMS on Earth during given ticks experienced environmental pressures, different population sizes for various “reasons” under multiple circumstances, mutation rates, longer or shorter generation times, and so on.

Don’t look!

Our ancestors had fossil records and other lines of evidence they could discover and analyze with energy-intensive technological tools: clean room labs; protective clothing; specialized kits containing DNA; silica-based methods for removing stuff from samples and the stuff needed to do that; special enzymes and the stuff needed to make or gather those; polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and the stuff to control that and stuff; quantitative PCR (qPCR) and the stuff to make that stuff happen…

Get your stuff to do that stuff here:

DNA sequencing with its next-generation sequencing technology and its high-frequency sequencing platforms and the stuff and resources you need to do that; bioinformatics and data analysis with its specialized software, computational resources, databases, and all the things and resources you need for that and to maintain and operate those systems within systems; authentication and contamination control with its contamination detection stuff, its statistical analysis, and all the procedures, resources and systems to do and maintain that aspect of things; imaging and microscopy and its scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and its computed tomography (CT) Scanning...

Google/AI/Read/Study/Explore these ways of listening to Nature yourself if you want more complex information about the tremendous omnicidal accelerator system within systems within the BIG-NATURE-SYSTEM we know as evolved to this tick-time-place Homo sapiens global culture...and so you “know.!” Or, you think you do. AND NOW! WE HAVE BECOME GOD! No, sorry, HE HAS BECOME GOD AND IS GOD. (What is consciousness? What is consciousness?)

"Consciousness is the way things are." —Satipatthana Sutta

"There is no self, no I, no me." —Anatta doctrine

"Consciousness is the greatest mystery. It is probably the largest outstanding problem in science." —Sir Roger Penrose

"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing." —Socrates

"To be conscious that you are ignorant is a great step to knowledge." —Benjamin Disraeli

"I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery." (Exodus 20:2)

"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength." (Deuteronomy 6:5)

"Justice, justice shall you pursue, that you may live and inherit the land that the Lord your God is giving you." (Deuteronomy 16:20)

Scientists, way back when, understood that reproductively isolated Homo sapiens would take millions of years before a new species would emerge in time.

---

Autopoiesis

Autopoiesis means "self-creating" (from the Greek auto for "self" and poiesis for "creation"). It's a concept used to describe systems that can produce and maintain themselves by creating their parts and organization. An autopoietic system continuously regenerates and sustains itself through its own internal processes. It doesn't rely on external forces to maintain its structure or function. The system's components interact in a way that creates and maintains the overall organization of the system—self-organizing. It's like a self-governing entity. The system defines its boundaries and what constitutes its internal versus external environment—self-defining.

The term autopoiesis (self-creation) is a neologism coined in 1972 by Varela and Maturana, Chilean cellular biologists and systems theorists, to describe the capacity of living cells to reproduce and organise themselves. The term was picked up and deployed by Niklas Luhmann (1927 – 1998), a German sociologist and philosopher, to capture his conception of society as composed of closed systems of self-referential communication that constantly reproduce and evolve themselves via the repetition of their own operations. When used in reference to social phenomena, autopoiesis is usually deployed as a short-hand reference to Luhmann’s theory of society. This post outlines the concept and its place in systems theory. Its critical potential for law is discussed via two recently published examples, and its limitations are expressed vis a vis the turn to ecological thought. 

Cells take in nutrients, synthesize proteins, replicate DNA, and divide—all processes contributing to their maintenance and reproduction. From single-celled organisms to complex multicellular beings, life exhibits autopoiesis by continually regenerating and repairing itself. Some theorists apply autopoiesis to social systems like language or law, arguing that they create and maintain themselves through communication and self-reference.

Autopoietic System

According to Luhmann, such is also the nature of modern society. Modernity is functionally differentiated into a variety of incommensurable function systems, like law, economy and education. These function systems operate autonomously (i.e. autopoietically) on the basis of their own 'code', a vital distinction, like legal/illegal for law or profitable/unprofitable for the economy. Modern society is characterised by difference all the way down. There is no unity over and beyond this differentiation, no meta-narrative which commensurates the various function systems. As such, Luhmann presents a picture of the modern social system which stresses radical difference: an element that flows from the self-referential nature of the autopoietic system itself.

The components of the system are both produced and produced by the system, creating a closed loop—circular causality. The system's operations are self-contained, meaning they are determined by its own internal structure and not by external forces—operational closure.

Autopoiesis offers a way to understand how systems, especially living ones, maintain their identity and organization despite constant change and interaction with their environment. It has implications for biology, cybernetics, and social systems theory.

Gaia Theory: Between Autopoiesis and Sympoiesis

Abstract:The article discusses the development of the Gaia Hypothesis as it was defined by James Lovelock in the 1970s and later elaborated in his collaboration with biologist Lynn Margulis. Margulis’s research in symbiogenesis and her interest in Maturana and Varela’s theory of autopoiesis helped to reshape the Gaia theory from a first-order systems theory to second-order systems theory. In contrast to the first-order systems theory, which is concerned with the processes of homeostasis, second-order systems incorporate emergence, complexity and contingency. In this respect Latour’s and Stengers’s takes on Gaia, even defining it as an “outlaw” or an anti-system, can be interpreted as specific kind of systems thinking. The article also discusses Haraway’s interpretation of Gaia in terms of sympoiesis and argues that it presents a major reconceptualization of systems theory.

---

Presently, the caveperson movement is well underway. We will manifest conditions that facilitate removing most people from the Gaian System within BIG-SYSTEM-GREAT-NATURE. In the future, if the past is buried deeper and deeper over time, future generations may forget all the things that came before the great catastrophe and believe again that everything happened on the whim of Spirits or Big Nature Big God(s).

The Thing works, and it is mysterious.

Small bands of people will live peacefully as part and parcel of Big Nature in their habitats until extinction.

WORD! Peace be upon you.

Forgive me, Master, I have sinned. I used info from here and there to prattle on and tell a story. There can be only one storyteller, Big Nature, and the Shaman, who talks about it properly, with much confidence and authority.

I can't stop telling stories, so what is my punishment?

Will I be the last man in my world, listening to Big Nature, finally silenced by solitude and able to hear the watershed, listening and not sharing my thoughts, ideas, and feelings because all companions are gone, absent, extinct, either naturally or wilfully? Bareft, finally able to hear. Will I unplug and find a refuge in my thoughts or the final nightmare? Will I volunteer at the local misericord? No more listening, speaking, or fondling card catalogs or keyboards when I am gone. No more listening. So what!

What is, is.

Stop your imagination! It's all an illusion.

So what should we do now? We can discipline ourselves and try to do nothing or continue to do what we do until we can't.

This is your life! Live it!

"Someday this war's gonna end." —Colonel Kilgore

We have no way of knowing what will happen next. Doing anything adds to the white noise of prattling on about omnicidal civilization, which will accelerate towards its demise.

Self Terminating Systems

The idea of civilization being self-terminating proposes that societies, even highly advanced ones, possess inherent flaws or tendencies that ultimately lead to their collapse. This can manifest in various ways. Overexploitation of resources, pollution, and climate change can destabilize ecosystems and undermine a civilization's foundation. Extreme disparities in wealth and power can create social unrest, conflict, and, ultimately, societal breakdown. Unforeseen consequences of advanced technologies, like artificial intelligence or bioengineering, could pose existential risks. A loss of creativity, adaptability, or a failure to address fundamental challenges can lead to decline and eventual collapse.

Civilizations may have a "life cycle," similar to organisms, with growth, maturity, and eventual decline periods. It raises questions about human societies' long-term sustainability/habitability and the potential for self-inflicted destruction.

“Forgive them, Father, for they know clearly and in great detail what the problems are and what to do about them but find it near impossible to do anything to take power from people stricken by the seven deadly sins, dark tetrad traits and dark psychology.” —Josh from the East Side

Privileged platform no more.

Listening to parrots in echo chambers wax on incessantly about our problems and pathologies may not be the best use of our vital time.

Live and Breathe with your People!

Interact face-to-face and conquer your addiction to understanding what’s wrong so you can fight against the pathological, stubborn, and wilful ignorance demonstrated daily by our leaders who are only following their cultural programming.

You know what’s right through practice and listening to feedback.

You have one life to live, so relax and listen to your people, be there with them, and care for them.

Wisen up yourself!

Eu já não sou a guerra. —Narrador

Tell the “Master” to shut up. He'll appreciate that.

I have become Koan.

"What is the sound of one life lived?”

Nature knows nothing.

On Doomists and Realists

What should we call this age in which our thoughts and ideas have been formed? How should we characterize it?

“Men first feel necessity, then look for utility, next attend to comfort, still later amuse themselves with pleasure, thence grow dissolute in luxury, and finally go mad and waste their substance.” —Giambattista Vico

Like most people interested in what we call “the polycrisis,” I’m trying to navigate some complex domains of interest to understand it—it’s not easy.

Circumstances will dictate when and how we do things differently. Circumstances are prime movers of evolution.

I just read Steve Genco’s post on Medium, “There Is A Big Difference Between Doomers and Doomists.” I agree with the distinction between doomers and doomists according to his definitions and logic.

In contrast, Doomists don’t want to save themselves. They don’t build bunkers in the woods. They believe such actions are futile. They are firmly convinced nobody can be saved, because they believe extinction, or something very close to it, is inevitable. They are true believers in the Church of Doomism, which promotes its own gospel, the gospel of “radical acceptance”.

I’m also on board with what Mr. Genco says about radical acceptance.

This would not be so bad if there were not another significant difference between Doomers and Doomists: Doomists, like Jehovah’s Witnesses, are proselytizers. They are recruiters for the Church of Doomism. While Doomers just want us to get off their lawn, Doomists want us to join them in radically accepting the end we all face.

That being said, I haven’t met many doomers or doomists. I’m sure they exist, but I don’t think it’s a thing. Rolling coal is a thing. MAGA is a thing. Genocide is a thing.

I think doomers and doomists are few and far between. I’m guessing more people talk about the propaganda on the news or watch prepper shows on YouTube than there are preppers and doomists. Worrying about doomers and doomists is like being obsessed with WOKE or some other insignificant (compared to the dire challenges we face) culture war issue made popular by talk show hosts like Joe Rogan.

Joining the Church of Doomism offers another bonus: an opportunity to share in Doomists’ feelings of intellectual superiority as they look down on all the clueless people running around trying to do something to address any of the major challenges we face. By “do something” I mean invest in actions that diminish our CO2, methane, and other greenhouse gas emissions. That is Job #1 for humanity today. The list of efforts that can contribute to this goal is quite long (e.g., source), they are all ongoing, but they all involve hard work, significant costs, uncertain prospects of success, less than universal adoption, and dedicated political opposition standing in their way. Yet people … some people … persist. But for Doomists:

I’m sure hedge funds will invest in solutions as soon as those investments are immensely profitable.

A brief history of our kind

It’s generally accepted that there have been at least 21 recognized species of hominins. There was once much greater human diversity, with multiple hominid species coexisting on Earth. As recently as 15,000 years ago, Homo sapiens shared caves with Denisovans. I have some Neanderthal DNA in me. New fossil discoveries continue to reveal previously unknown hominid species, adding to the complexity of our family tree.

Today, experts’ best guess, based on fossil evidence and our molecular clock, is that hominids arose around 6 to 7 million years ago. The emergence of the first hominid wasn’t a sudden event. It was a gradual process with a series of intermediate forms. And all save Homo sapiens are extinct—no polycrisis required. We could discuss why they are extinct, but let’s leave that for another time. Not one of these creatures was a doomer or a doomist.

Our species, Homo sapiens, is surprisingly young compared to the long history of hominids. Current evidence suggests that Africa’s earliest anatomically modern humans emerged around 300,000 years ago. Even within our species, evolution is an ongoing process. Human populations have continued to adapt and change over time. While anatomically modern humans appeared around 300,000 years ago, the development of complex behaviors and symbolic thought, often referred to as “behavioral modernity,” likely occurred around 160,000 to 70,000 years ago.

The first civilizations are generally thought to have emerged around 3500 to 3000 BCE, marking a significant turning point in human history. This period saw the development of complex societies with organized governance systems, social structures, and advancements in various fields. People began living in cities, leading to increased population density and infrastructure development. Advances in farming practices allowed for food surpluses, supporting larger populations and specialized labor. Societies became more hierarchical, with different social classes and divisions of labor. Emporers, mystics, and priests created Big God stories. Organized government systems emerged, with rulers, laws, and administrative structures. The development of writing systems allowed for record-keeping, communication, and the transmission of knowledge—new technologies developed in areas such as metallurgy, pottery, and construction.

Civilizations developed relatively independently, with unique characteristics and contributions to human history. Their emergence marked a crucial transition from smaller, nomadic groups to larger, more complex societies that laid the foundation for further advancements and the world we know today.

Our species lived for thousands of years before becoming domesticated and civilized. Humans migrated around the globe in trepidation and survived. I imagine these prehistoric people communicated with nature and thought everything was sacred.

Then, after the fossil-fueled industrial revolution:

Modern Fossil-Fueled Technoindustrial capitalist, neoliberal, neoconservative, financialized global consumer culture is so recent and happened so fast that we hardly understand it. Although we have libraries of books from many related domains that shed light on what we call the polycrisis, most people don’t even know the first thing about what they take for granted.

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a powerful tool for evaluating the environmental impacts of a product, process, or service throughout its life cycle. It is a “cradle-to-grave” analysis, scrutinizing every stage, from raw material extraction to final disposal, for potential environmental effects. OMG, I’m flying off on tangents where everything is tangential and interrelated simultaneously!

The polycrisis is a complex thing having much to do with psychosocial, sociopolitical, cultural, material… Holy good gosh, the list is long; I’d better stop here.

Oh, and many aspects of the polycrisis represent civilized, human-generated existential threats.

Electrification is a broad topic with many facets involving multiple domains.

Numerous books delve into the lives and works of pioneers such as Thomas Edison, Nikola Tesla, Benjamin Franklin, and Michael Faraday.

“Empires of Light: Edison, Tesla, Westinghouse, and the Race to Electrify the World” by Jill Jonnes

“The Electric Life of Michael Faraday” by Alan Hirshfeld

“The Age of Edison: Electric Light and the Invention of Modern America” by Ernest Freeberg

“Electric Universe: How Electricity Switched on the Modern World” by David Bodanis

Countless textbooks and handbooks cover the principles of electricity, electrical engineering, power systems, and related fields. These are essential resources for students and professionals. Books focusing on specific aspects like power generation, transmission, distribution, and electrical safety are abundant. We have dozens of books exploring how electrification has transformed societies, economies, and daily life. We have works examining the environmental implications of electricity generation and consumption, including renewable energy and sustainable practices. There are libraries of books and papers addressing the policy and regulatory frameworks surrounding electricity markets and infrastructure. We have libraries of documents, studies, scientific papers, and books focusing on the latest advancements in grid technology and decentralized energy systems. We have a lot of information concerning electric vehicles’ rise and impact on the automotive industry and transportation systems.

I can imagine a documentary in 2030 titled “Who Killed The Chinese Electric Car.?

Or how about a film called “Electricity! WOW!”

Power comes in many forms. Human power relations are crucial to the subject at hand.

Let’s have some fun with some Vaclav Smil quotes. Vaclav Smil is a prolific writer and interdisciplinary scientist known for his insightful and often contrarian views on energy, environment, and technological change.

“Our increasingly electrified, electronic, and data-driven society places steadily rising demand on reliable baseload power—that is, on electricity available 24/7/365.”

“The history of energy use is a sequence of transitions to cheaper, cleaner, and more flexible sources.”

“I live in a province where we have the cheapest electricity in North America—indeed, in the Western world—but all of it is perfectly renewable because we have beautiful Manitoba Hydro. We can put a river dam every few tens of kilometers. Bingo. One gigawatt here. One gigawatt here.”

“Energy is the only truly universal currency, and nothing (from galactic rotations to ephemeral insect lives) can take place without its transformations.”

“An abundance of useful energy underlies and explains all the gains—from better eating to mass-scale travel; from mechanization of production and transport to instant personal electronic communication—that have become norms rather than exceptions in all affluent countries.”

“I am probably one of the last people on the planet without a cell phone.”

Smil often uses his lifestyle choices to illustrate his skepticism towards technological hype and consumerism.

“Meat eaters don’t like me because I call for moderation, and vegetarians don’t like me because I say there’s nothing wrong with eating meat. It’s part of our evolutionary heritage!”

Are Vaclav Smil, Naomi Klein, Alice J. Friedemann, Charles A. S. Hall, Elizabeth Kolbert, and their ilk doomists or realists doing their best to navigate the complex topic of energy in the modern world?

Here’s a definition of doomist. After a few more years of inaction, we’ll see what a usage dictionary says about the word.

A person with a gloomy, pessimistic attitude about the future; a doomsayer.

Wiktionary

We are supposed to believe in the fantastic teleology of progress.

Houston, we have problems, but let’s not focus on them now; let’s wait until after we win the wars.

Can I be a wishist and a realist at the same time? And I think to myself, what a wonderful world it would be if every complex polycrisis were an engineering problem. If we were all Libertarian Anarchocapitalists, our problems would soon be solved. There is nothing modern technoindustrial civilization can’t accomplish. Heck, think of The Manhattan Project.

Later, I will comb through Mr. Genco’s hyperlinks and read about all the cool tech and solutions companies are developing. I hope there are some links about fifth-generation micro-home-fusion reactors. I’m just teasing. I’m sure Steve has included interesting references supporting his perspective, and I will check his hyperlinks.

Can I be several things at once without exploding with the horror of my deeply held contradictions? How about denialist, willful ignorantist, hopist, true believerist or coordinationist, coheasivist, culturist, solutionsist, etc.? I shall not be a revolutionist; that’s dangerous.

Peacemaker—anyone, anyone? No, not the Colt Army pistol, the Estimated 750 US military bases in 80 countries, or the UN Peacekeeping forces. I’m referring to diplomacy and international cooperation in solving civilization’s existential challenges. Knowing there is an urgent need to engage in such work is not indulging in doom; it’s practical. So when will it begin?

China. America. Do these Nation-States exist in entirely different worlds? China is electrifying, so let’s go to war with China. America helped create modern China and is partially responsible for its success. America First means that Americans should electrify first. Someday soon, probably next year. It’s not that hard, and then the rest of the world can have American businesses and know-how come in and electrify it. These countries can pay the United States with their oil, gas, material resources and cheap labor. Thanks. Our problems are solved. Get with “The Rules-Based Order” now!

He’s not a doomist, he’s a conman. It’s not that hard. Live large now! Pump and Dump.

Leave NIMBY and political paralysis out of it. Anything is possible, perhaps, but not highly probable.

Later, after I have looked at Mr. Genco’s links, I can cherry-pick some links to companies offering solutions to the electrification process. Maybe I’ll start a Cool Solutions Podcast. The idea that electrification is the solution to the polycrisis has critics from dozens of domains. They raise valid concerns about the materials needed for batteries and renewable energy infrastructure and the energy required to produce them.

Electrification requires vast amounts of metals like lithium, cobalt, nickel, and rare earth elements. Mining these materials can have significant environmental and social impacts, including habitat destruction, water pollution, and human rights abuses. Thank the good neoconservative hawks in Congress for those 700-odd military bases. The neocolonial project of acquiring and controlling those resources is a bloody business.

Is it doomist to acknowledge that some critical minerals are relatively scarce, raising concerns about their long-term availability and potential geopolitical tensions over their control? When will Elon’s Starships land on other planets to bring back the minerals? Indeed, now that he’s in the government, he can have The Fed (banks) create the money to finance it. When will we get our Dyson Sphere? How much will that cost in energy and materials? There must be a social construct that can produce a Star Trek replicator.

While recycling is crucial, current technology for recycling batteries and other components is not yet fully developed or widely implemented, leading to concerns about waste and resource depletion—not to mention Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) again.

Abstract

Conventional Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methods are able to assess environmental impact using significant resources (including time and data). However, due to the challenges associated with data collection these can still suffer from issues including representation accuracy, comparability, data availability, data quality, and uncertainty. This paper describes a new streamlined, high-level framework which seeks to solve these issues through rigorous and iterative application of existing standardised LCA methodologies whilst continually engaging with stakeholders. This new framework has been applied to an aviation case study, which seeks to investigate the potential environmental impact of implementing sustainable aviation fuel (including fuels based on used cooking oil, power to liquid technology, and hydrogen) and digitalisation of training regimes within a UK aircraft manufacturer. These are currently major areas of focus to enable the decarbonisation of the global aviation sector. The proposed framework allowed for efficient joint interpretation of results by different stakeholders, and therefore enabled effective strategic decision making without requiring the granular level of data detail demanded by conventional LCA frameworks. The case study has shown that each scenario offers potential reductions in global warming potential, fine particulate matter formation, and water consumption for an aircraft; but only when the associated supply chain is just as sustainable as the scenario in question. Overall, this research has shown that applying the new framework allows for rapid evaluation of decarbonisation technologies through rigorous environmental assessment to a degree accuracy which still enables strategic decision making, but without the use of unnecessary resources. Although this framework has been developed to work across product, platform, or system, further work should seek to apply it in different contexts as a LCA enabler within technological developments including exploration of other aviation decarbonisation pathways to achieve net zero.

Manufacturing batteries, solar panels, wind turbines, and other electrification components often require significant energy inputs. Most of this energy comes from fossil fuels, contributing to greenhouse gas emissions. Embodied carbon refers to the total carbon emissions associated with a product’s entire life cycle, including its production. Critics argue that the embodied carbon of some electrification technologies can be substantial, offsetting some of their emissions-reducing benefits. Building the necessary infrastructure for electrification, such as transmission lines and charging stations, also requires energy and materials, further adding to the environmental footprint. Critics point out that solar and wind power are intermittent, requiring backup solutions or energy storage systems, which add complexity and cost.

Okay, back to Steve’s hyperlinks, I’m guessing they link to solutions; when do we invest in them and implement them?

NIMBY, Culture, Political Paralysis, War.

Upgrading and expanding electricity grids to handle the increased demand from electrification is a major undertaking with significant costs and potential disruptions. There are concerns that the benefits of electrification may not be evenly distributed, with potential for disparities in access and affordability for disadvantaged communities. Okay, but America First, right? And these kinds of processes are front-and-center concerns within American culture. Sorry, I guess not.

This new EV infrastructure will increase access and reliability to communities across the country and provides EV charging to light-, medium- and heavy-duty vehicles along designated highways, interstates, and major roadways. The funds are a part of the Biden-Harris Administration’s goals to support the growth of a convenient, affordable, reliable and Made-in-America national network of EV chargers so drivers can charge close to home, at work, and along significant corridors throughout the U.S.

Are people still rolling coal in America? MAGA rules the roost. No American president prioritized environmental concerns to a significant degree. Do Trumpists and the twin parties, the DNC and RNC, really care about infrastructure? How many years of lip service can we bear?

The military-industrial complex is already in place and profitable.

These criticisms don’t negate the importance of electrification. Many critics acknowledge that electrification is a crucial part of the solution to climate change. Their concerns highlight the need for careful planning, sustainable sourcing of materials, and continued innovation to minimize the environmental impact of this transition. (I’m sorry, I giggled, and that bit got italicized.) Efforts are underway to improve mining practices, develop more efficient recycling technologies, and transition to cleaner energy sources for manufacturing. However, electrification is not a silver bullet. It must be coupled with other strategies, such as energy efficiency, reducing consumption, and developing alternative technologies. I mean efforts that started 40 years ago before the climate polycrisis kicked into high, self-reinforcing feedback loops. Oh, 40 years from now? I’m confused. In what culture do we reduce consumption and plan growth within habitable limits? Global Culture! I am not advocating for a One World Government; that’s not what I mean; our problems are global now, on a scale that’s hard to comprehend.

But let’s be honest: without a culture that prioritizes justice, health, and the integrity of our environment, progress in these areas won’t be fast enough to save us from our addictions. Is that doomist? Transforming culture is extremely difficult. Reforming our socioeconomic and political systems and structures while collaborating with nation-states worldwide seems highly improbable anytime soon. In the meantime, the omnicidal heat engine known as modern civilization is becoming more complex and harder to manage. Many bright and optimistic people even think modernity itself is collapsing. But don’t worry, the engineers and technocrats will fix it. It won’t matter if they have to take a pay cut; they will do their duty and save us with their innovative projects because it’s the right thing to do.

Do we have time? When do we do this? When does the culture demand it? What are we willing to sacrifice for it? Will you give up some screen time to organize and demand a structural and systemic makeover of the United States of America (a.k.a., The Empire)?

Shall I call the producers of Queer Eye and nominate the United States? It’s amazing how those guys can transform a person’s life in one week.

Let’s walk into the forest and admire the trees.

A fraction of a percent of people in the USA and China are preppers or have the slightest interest in the polycrisis. Our fearless, hubristic, chauvinistic leaders are too busy prepping for and making war to give a hoot about spending some diesel fuel on electrification. They are not planning for or addressing “the polycrisis.” They think that idea is a doomist conspiracy theory. Half the country would laugh at you for caring.

The COP meetings are a joke!

How do we create a culture that would do things radically differently? Does it have to be a competition? China wins, and the USA loses? Are government officials and our leaders of corporate institutions doomers or careerists? What do they do for money? The US economy is based on capital on capital returns, not on solving the world's existential problems.

Everyone loses if we continue with our bankrupt ideological beliefs.

The Players of The Great Game are playing a self-terminating game, and they won’t stop because, here, now, it’s exciting. What do you give a leader who has everything? More control. As Warren Buffett said, money is just a way of keeping score.

Yet the USA has all the resources to solve many of the problems in the basket of polycrisis. Why didn’t leaders in the United States start solving these problems decades ago?

The culture is pathological; don’t worry, I won’t start.

The foolish ideologues are wholeheartedly invested in the structures and systems where they are employed. Our leaders won’t change the systems and structures in which they were born, bred, and programmed/educated, making them wealthy and prestigious.

Will the people running DJT comb through the hyperlinks in Steve Genco’s post and redirect their efforts toward electrification? Will they suddenly have an epiphany? Will they start reading Buckminster Fuller and subscribe to The Venus Project after all these decades? Our leaders aren’t even auditing the polycrisis conversation on podcasts, and YouTube is a place for the plebs and proles go to feel smart, not to wage revolution.

These ideas have been around for a while.

The world can collaborate to make a space station, but we can’t make peace. We lack imagination. We need more imaginists, creativists, peacists. How do we develop a culture like that? We need more than fantasists, con artists, and arrogant careerists.

We can build hypersonic ballistic missile systems to deliver nuclear weapons to locations worldwide; we can do that; we are clever engineers, and we have the technology, the resources, and the modern monetary theory to make these weapons systems and deploy them.

Let’s leave out all the physics and material limitations—heck, any limitations within which we must work—and believe that someone, somewhere, will do something. That will be nice. Until then, let’s have the conversation; it’s a feel-good activity.

How do we change our culture? If we can’t do that, we probably don’t have time to solve the polycrisis. Let’s try, but I wonder if enough of us have the right stuff to go against the power structures that be. What constitutes “the right stuff” in a world of complex crises and existential threats? Its learned behavior, motivations, and skill sets differ from those needed to win the Cold War before anyone thought a crisis might end Western Civilization. Decades ago, we were more excited about congratulating ourselves on ending history.

Let business continue as usual, and we will see what business people come up with—a pound of catastrophe and an ounce of cure—as long as it’s lucrative and you have the right insurance.

I am not a doomist. Our species survived under very different circumstances for tens of thousands of years, and we will do the same when we reach our limits to this particular kind of growth. Indeed, we are clever enough for that. Until then, do what you can and prepare for a new world. A world we cannot imagine; if we could, we would have done things differently by now.

Religion Is All Too Human

Oh my, I read another Professor Giles's post this morning, and it got me started. Many folks are still frantically discussing “The Real Jesus of Nazareth.” Well, it’s Christmas time, after all.

To borrow a phrase from Friedrich Nietzsche’s famous work, the whole story is human, all too human. To be free and spiritual, we must dodge dogma and go straight to the human heart and mind.

Joshua wasn’t a Christian, Buddha wasn’t a Buddhist, and Marx wasn’t a Marxist. Moses wasn’t WOKE, and ancient Romans weren’t LGBTQ. And Josh’s DNA probably didn’t have traces from sub-Saharan African groups at the time.

If we want to be historically accurate, how would we describe “Left” and “Right” in ancient Judea? We constantly project our definitions into the past—some might think this is a mistake.

The concepts of “Left” and “Right” as we understand them today didn’t exist in ancient Judea. Those terms arose from the French Revolution, with those who supported the monarchy seated on the right side of the assembly and those who supported the revolution sitting on the left.

So, what was ancient Judea’s political and social landscape, and are there some rough parallels to modern concerns?

Many prophets (like Amos, Isaiah, and Micah) railed against exploiting the poor and vulnerable by the wealthy and powerful. They demanded fairness, echoing concerns about economic inequality often associated with the modern Left. Some Jewish groups, like the Essenes, emphasized communal living and welcomed those marginalized by mainstream society, which is analogous to the Left’s focus on social inclusion. The Sadducees, a priestly class, held significant power and often aligned themselves with the ruling elite, which resembles the modern Right’s association with established institutions and hierarchies. Groups like the Pharisees emphasized strict observance of Jewish law and ritual. This focus on tradition and order parallels some aspects of modern conservatism. The Zealots were a revolutionary faction that advocated an armed rebellion against Roman occupation. Their fervent nationalism and willingness to use violence could be compared to specific right-wing nationalist movements today.

These are loose comparisons. Ancient Judean society was complex and cannot be neatly categorized using modern political terminology.

The primary concerns in ancient Judea revolved around religious law, social justice within their community, and relations with occupying powers. Modern political divides, such as individual liberties vs. collective good or the state’s role in the economy, were not central in the same way. Analyzing their motivations and actions within their historical context provides a much richer and more accurate understanding.

All that having been said, Right-Wing-Jesus memes are hilarious.

Professor Giles neglected to mention Christian Zionism. There are many good books (no pun intended) on the subject. A Short History of Christian Zionism: Reformation to the Twenty-First Century is one I’d recommend.

It’s also important not to gloss over the Orthodox tradition. The Coptic Christians in Ethiopia still adhere to Miaphysitism. It’s a key doctrine in Oriental Orthodox Christianity, which includes the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria (to which the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church belongs). Miaphysitism (from Greek “μία” (mia), “one” + “φύσις” (physis), “nature”) holds that Jesus Christ has one unified nature that is both fully divine and fully human. This single nature results from the divine and human natures being inseparably united in the Incarnation.

---

If there is a divine nature, then nature is it. So say I.

Jah, within its core, “I and I,” represents the belief that Jah (God) resides within each individual. It emphasizes the divine spark present in every human being. It signifies the interconnectedness of all people through their shared divine essence, which contrasts with the perceived separation and individuality emphasized in Western culture. Rastafarians often use “I and I” in place of “we” or “us.” This linguistic shift focuses on collective identity and shared responsibility and emphasizes the importance of community and unity within the Rastafarian movement. By replacing “me” with “I,” Rastafarians aim to overcome feelings of objectification and inferiority often associated with colonial oppression. It’s a way of asserting their inherent dignity and value as individuals and people.

“I and I” is part of a broader linguistic practice called “Iyaric,” which adapts Jamaican patois to express Rastafarian beliefs and challenge the dominance of standard English. It’s a form of cultural and linguistic resistance against colonial legacies. “I and I” reflects a holistic worldview that sees everything as interconnected and divine, including not just people but also nature and the universe.

Rastafarians are heretics; they made some profound choices.

I appreciated Professor Giles bringing up the etymology of heresy—it’s an important point.

Middle English heretik, borrowed from Anglo-French & Late Latin; Anglo-French heretic, heretik, borrowed from Late Latin haereticus, hereticus, borrowed from Late Greek hairetikós, from hairetikós, adjective, "departing from dogma, heretical," going back to Greek, "able to choose, due to choice," from hairetós "that may be taken, eligible, chosen," verbal adjective of haireîn "to take, grasp, (middle voice) obtain, choose, prefer" + -ikos -ic entry 1 — more at heresy

“Good God, man, you digress!”

---

Monophysitism (from Greek “μόνος” (monos), “alone, only” + “φύσις” (physis), “nature”) suggests that Christ has only one nature, which is divine. Human nature was somehow absorbed or overwhelmed by the divine nature. I wish. This is considered a heresy by both Miaphysites and Chalcedonian Christians (like Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox). Miaphysitism emphasizes the complete and inseparable union of Christ’s divinity and humanity and rejects any notion that Christ’s two natures are separate or divided. Miaphysites strongly reject Monophysitism, insisting that Christ’s human nature is fully preserved in the Incarnation.

The “Tewahedo” in the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church reflects this belief in the “one unity” of Christ’s nature. This theological distinction led to a schism between Oriental Orthodox churches and the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches in the 5th century, following the Council of Chalcedon. However, there has been increased dialogue and understanding between these branches of Christianity in recent decades.

The filioque (Latin for “and from the Son”) is a term that refers to the addition of the phrase “and the Son” to the Nicene Creed in Western Christianity. This addition asserts that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, while the original Nicene Creed stated that the Holy Spirit proceeds “from the Father” alone.

The filioque does my head in. Hundreds of years of debate on this stuff will never sort it out for me. The filioque has significant implications for understanding the Trinity (God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). It emphasizes the unity of the Father and the Son in their relationship to the Holy Spirit. The addition of the filioque was a gradual process, beginning in Spain in the 6th century and eventually becoming standard in the Western Church. However, it was never accepted by the Eastern Church. The filioque became a major point of contention between Eastern and Western Christianity, contributing to the Great Schism of 1054 that formally divided the two branches of the Church. The filioque remains a disagreement between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches. However, there have been efforts in recent decades to foster dialogue and understanding on this issue.

The Eastern Church argues that adding the filioque was an unauthorized alteration of the Creed, made without the consent of an ecumenical council. Oh, dear me, and The Council should know! The Eastern Church believes the filioque compromises the Father’s unique role as the sole source of the Godhead and disrupts the balance within the Trinity.

Both sides claim scriptural support for their position, with the Western Church citing verses like John 15:26 (“But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me.")

To some, ongoing dialogue offers hope for greater understanding and eventual reconciliation; to others, it’s a mortal sin. And don’t get me started on Ecumenism.

For me, the mental gymnastics Christian Apologists hurl are annoying and mundane as hell. Who invented “hell,” yep, hell is all too human.

Christians, by and large, don’t get Joshua.

Like Ricky Bobby in Talladega Nights, my sweet baby Jesus is lovely and cute as a bug’s ear.

Here’s a book by a Christian who gets Josh.

A God Named Josh: Uncovering the Human Life of Jesus Christ (A Documentarian’s Historical & Illuminating Biography—Get to Know the Human Side of Our Lord & Glimpse the Miracle of the Incarnation)

Did the Roman Empire kill Jesus?

The Romans, specifically Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea, ultimately held the authority to carry out Jesus’ execution. Crucifixion was a Roman method of punishment, and Roman soldiers carried out the sentence. Jared Brock has a blood-curdling description of the crucifixion in A God Named Josh.

The Gospels depict some Jewish religious leaders of the time as instrumental in Jesus’ arrest and trial. They accused him of blasphemy and sedition, and they pressured Pilate to condemn him. Christian theology often views Jesus’ death as a sacrifice for the sins of all humanity. From this perspective, all people bear some responsibility for his death. (Dear me! Fear God! How sad is that?) Many Christians believe that Jesus’ death was part of God’s plan for salvation. In this view, God allowed Jesus to be crucified, even though he was innocent, to redeem humanity.

And some folks in the United States of New Miracles think that the violence in the Middle East is part of God’s plan. I call that pathological.

Blaming “the Jews” for Jesus’ death is historically inaccurate and has fueled anti-Semitism for centuries. The Gospels portray a specific group of Jewish religious leaders as playing a role, not the entire Jewish population. The motivations of those involved were likely complex and varied. Pilate may have been concerned about maintaining order, while the Jewish leaders may have felt threatened by Jesus’ teachings. I enjoyed Jared Brock’s interpretation of this.

Ultimately, Christian theology focuses on the redemptive power of Jesus’ death and resurrection rather than assigning blame for his crucifixion.

While the Romans were directly responsible for carrying out Jesus’ crucifixion, the question of who killed him is more complex. Different perspectives highlight the roles of various individuals and groups and the theological significance of his death. It’s crucial to approach this topic sensitively and avoid generalizations that could fuel prejudice.

God became a man and allowed himself to be killed so he could prove he was God by transcending death. He was tortured to death and then was seen walking around again with his people. I’ve been wrestling with this since I was a child Catholic in New Market, and it still does my head in. When I was around ten, I told our village priest that God created us because he was lonely and had no creator, so we were God’s creator. The memorable thing about that encounter was that my priest said something like, “That’s a lovely idea, Steven.” He didn’t drag me by my arm into the Confessional like my aunt did whenever she thought I had committed a mortal sin. He just smiled that smile that seemed to say aren’t children brilliant?

Referring to Mercion is fascinating and illustrates how diverse the early followers of Jesus were.

Marcion of Sinope, a 2nd-century theologian, proposed a radical reinterpretation of Christianity that diverged significantly from what would become mainstream Christian thought. He believed in a stark dualism between the Old Testament God, whom he saw as a harsh, wrathful deity, and the New Testament God revealed through Jesus Christ, a loving and merciful God of compassion.

Marcion rejected the entire Old Testament, claiming it had no connection to the true God of Jesus. He argued that the God of the Old Testament was a demiurge, an inferior creator god responsible for the material world and its inherent evils. This demiurge, according to Marcion, was legalistic, vengeful, and incompatible with the loving God revealed by Jesus.

In Marcion's view, Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament but rather an emissary sent by the true, higher God to deliver humanity from the clutches of the demiurge. He believed Jesus was a divine being who only appeared to be human, a concept known as docetism. This belief stemmed from Marcion's conviction that the material world was inherently evil and, therefore, a truly good God could not have taken on human flesh.

People have been nasty to each other since Josh rose from the dead. The problem of evil is a problem.

Marcion's interpretation of Jesus had profound implications for his understanding of salvation. He taught that salvation came solely through faith in Jesus Christ and his revelation of the true God, not through adherence to the Jewish law or the Old Testament. This led him to create his own canon of scripture, which included only a heavily edited version of Luke's Gospel and ten of Paul's letters, purged of any perceived Jewish influence.

While Marcion's views were ultimately deemed heretical by the early Church, they significantly impacted the development of Christian theology. His challenge forced the early Church to grapple with the relationship between the Old and New Testaments and to more clearly define its understanding of the nature of God and the person of Jesus Christ.

I appreciate Professor Giles's mention of  Hans Küng; he’s brilliant, and his work is a must for anyone interested in Christology.

Dear God, aren’t stories fun!

The War On Drugs Is Only A Symptom

The War On Drugs is a symptom of a broader, more pernicious social disease.

I like wine, sake, beer, and an occasional whiskey. I don’t drink alcohol every day. I sometimes binge at a party. I rarely party these days. I go months without drinking any alcohol. I’m probably an alcoholic who doesn’t drink much.

Tokyo and Hong Kong, where I’ve lived for ten years or more, have drinking cultures. I could elaborate, but I won’t. I drank a lot more in Japan and Hong Kong. I also love the food culture. I blame cycling and the gym for my not being obese.

I have known affluent people throughout my life who enjoy their recreational hard drugs. You name it, they’ve tried it. The drug of choice, of course, is cocaine. We are all familiar with famous entertainers who have died of drug and alcohol abuse.

Drug addiction and alcoholism are pernicious health problems that have a myriad of deep causes that can be hard to parse. Anyone suffering from drug addiction knows how hard it is to get clean and sober and continue to abstain from using.

Legalize it; don’t criticize it!

I recently read a piece on Medium about the cost of “The War on Drugs.” It is exceedingly costly and a “war” we can never win. Why is that?

Legalization didn’t increase drug use, or imply the acceptance of mind stupifying drugs by society. It takes drug dependency out of the closet, encouraging the afflicted population to seek medical help.

I’m under no illusion that one post on this subject will make everyone see reason, but maybe some of us will consider this as a solution that has escaped us for 70 years.

Indeed, a post on Medium will not solve the problem; at most, it may raise awareness among a few readers who are utterly unfamiliar with the issue.

What are the deeper structural, systemic, economic, and psychosocial causes of drug use, and who benefits from the “War On Drugs?”

For decades, I have read books, papers, and articles about Middle East conflicts and wars; I have read about the War on Drugs, the Russo-Ukraine war, and so on, which continue unabated. When one conflict zone cools, another ignites. When I vote, I always examine the candidate’s record on these conflicts, public health, and who the candidate is beholden to.

My simplistic, intuitive reaction to the continuation of these problems decade after decade is that these wars are lucrative for important Players in The Great Game, a game of wealth and power acquisition. Justice, democracy, freedom, and health matter little to the Players, primarily concerned with winning the game. Another way I could put it is that careers matter more than solving the problem—no problem, no career.

Incentives & Who Benefits

The US has a high incarceration rate, and private prisons have a financial incentive to keep cells and beds full. Drug-related offenses contribute significantly to this population. The drug war allows for increased budgets for police departments, drug enforcement agencies, and the military, including funding for equipment, surveillance technology, and personnel.

While some pharmaceutical companies develop addiction treatment medications, others may indirectly benefit from the focus on illegal drugs, as it deflects attention from the potential harm and addictive nature of certain prescription drugs. The “tough on crime” stance and the war on drugs have been popular political platforms, allowing politicians to gain votes and support. The drug business doesn’t end with producers, dealers, and traffickers; it’s part of the fabric of The Great Game’s business interests.

Structural & Systemic Factors

Drug use and trafficking are often concentrated in marginalized and economically disadvantaged communities. Lack of opportunities, systemic racism, and social instability contribute to this. People have a problem with the idea that systemic racism exists, but there can be no doubt that certain classes of people suffer more under our current scheme.

Making drugs illegal creates a black market where prices are inflated, and violence is used to control territory and supply, benefiting criminal organizations. Efforts have focused mainly on stopping drug production and trafficking, but this doesn’t work. Demand for drugs remains, leading to new suppliers and routes. I am always pointing out that if Americans and Europeans from all classes didn’t want drugs, the war on drugs would stop. Compared to enforcement, funding for addiction treatment, harm reduction, and prevention programs is inadequate and perpetuates the cycle of drug use and crime.

Are we living in a sick society? What are the psychosocial causes of Drug Use?

There is so much information about the causes of drug abuse going back hundreds of years, and yet the problem, like so many other cultural pathologies, continues to cause harm.

We like our mind and behavior-modifying substances. There are no reasons to believe we will ever stop wanting to get “high.”

Adverse childhood experiences, trauma, and untreated mental health conditions increase vulnerability to drug use and addiction. Peer pressure, social isolation, and exposure to drug use can contribute to experimentation and addiction. Drugs can provide temporary relief from emotional pain, stress, and difficult life circumstances.

Some drugs are socially accepted. People still smoke and drink.

The alcohol and tobacco industries are vast, with many publicly and privately held companies. I can’t imagine Portugal, France, or Italy without wine.

The global market value for alcoholic beverages is estimated at around $1.5 trillion in 2022 and is projected to reach $1.7 trillion by 2025 (Source: Statista). Major companies like AB InBev, Diageo, Heineken, and Pernod Ricard generate tens of billions in revenue annually. The market is influenced by changing consumer preferences, economic conditions, and marketing strategies.

The Global Tobacco market value is estimated at approximately $850 billion in 2022. (Source: Statista) The dominant players are Philip Morris International, British American Tobacco, and China National Tobacco Corporation. The industry faces declining smoking rates in many countries, increased regulation, and public health concerns. However, it remains highly profitable due to addictive products and effective marketing.

The black market for both alcohol and tobacco is significant, making it harder to track the full extent of the industries' financial activity.

It's crucial to remember that these profits come at a high cost to society. Alcohol and tobacco use contribute to numerous health problems, including cancer, heart disease, and addiction, resulting in substantial healthcare expenses and lost productivity.

If we all had to subsist on what nature provides, we wouldn’t have time for recreational drugs. One might wonder how often the Vikings binged. I should look that up sometime. This trade is a modern, technological, and industrial period problem.

The illicit drug trade is big business.

In older reports (late 1990s), the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) estimated the illicit drug trade to be worth around $400 billion annually, representing about 8% of total international trade at that time. However, more recent, precise figures from this source are hard to come by. Some sources suggest the market could be considerably larger, with figures ranging from $426 billion to $652 billion annually. These estimates take into account the growing demand for synthetic drugs and the constantly evolving dynamics of the drug trade.

Transactions occur in the shadows, making it difficult to track the flow of money and drugs. Drug prices vary significantly depending on the substance, location, and purity. The illicit drug trade involves producers, traffickers, distributors, and retailers, making it hard to trace the full value chain. Traffickers constantly adapt to law enforcement efforts, finding new ways to move drugs across borders.

The illicit drug trade is a massive global market, generating hundreds of billions of dollars annually.

"With estimates of $100 billion to $110 billion for heroin, $110 billion to $130 billion for cocaine, $75 billion for cannabis and $60 billion for synthetic drugs, the probable global figure for the total illicit drug industry would be approximately $360 billion. Given the conservative bias in some of the estimates for individual substances, a turnover of around $400 billion per annum is considered realistic."

Illicit wealth fuels criminal organizations, corruption, and violence, destabilizing communities and undermining governments.

Transnational organized crime doesn't just steal money; it steals futures, corrupts communities, and destroys lives. The billions lost to illicit financial flows represent missed opportunities, lost livelihoods, and deepened poverty. In Africa alone, equivalent to nearly $90 billion or about 3.7 per cent of the continent’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP), is lost yearly to illicit financial flows.

There will never be a dearth of information about the illicit drug trade.

We know a lot about the illicit drug trade and the cost of drug addiction to society. It’s time to admit that The Players are not incentivized to implement any solutions that are not directly profitable to them.

The “Great Game”

Powerful players benefit from the war on drugs. Despite its questionable effectiveness, the continued focus on prohibition suggests that certain entities have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. The war on drugs is a tool for social control, wealth extraction from marginalized communities, and maintaining power structures.

Globally, drug control has had massive costs for the dignity, humanity, and freedom of people of African descent, with reports showing that people of African descent face disproportionate and unjust law enforcement interventions, arrests, and incarceration for drug-related offenses. In various countries, the ‘war on drugs’ has been more effective as a system of racial control than as a tool to reduce drug markets. Policing interventions based on racial profiling remain widespread, whilst access to evidence-based treatment and harm reduction for people of African descent remains critically low.

---

Books

In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts: Close Encounters with Addiction by Gabor Maté

The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma by Bessel van der Kolk

American Fix: Inside the Opioid Addiction Crisis—and How to End It by Ryan Hampton

Chasing the Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs by Johann Hari

The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness by Michelle Alexander

Drug War Capitalism by Dawn Paley

Dreamland: The True Tale of America’s Opiate Epidemic by Sam Quinones

Say Nothing: A True Story of Murder and Memory in Northern Ireland by Patrick Radden Keefe

Movies & TV Series

“Sicario” (gritty, realistic portrayals of the drug war)

Traffic (2000) Explores the drug trade from multiple perspectives, including a drug czar, a DEA agent, and a judge.

City of God (2002) is A Brazilian film depicting the growth of organized crime and drug violence in a Rio de Janeiro favela.

No Country for Old Men (2007) is A neo-western thriller set against the backdrop of the drug trade along the US-Mexico border.

Hell or High Water (2016) Examines the desperation and moral ambiguity that can arise from economic hardship and the drug trade.

“The Wire” (complex narratives, systemic analysis)

Narcos (Netflix) Chronicles the rise and fall of Pablo Escobar and the Colombian drug cartels.

Narcos: Mexico (Netflix) This series focuses on the origins of the Mexican drug war and the Guadalajara Cartel.

Breaking Bad (AMC) Follows a high school chemistry teacher who turns to cooking meth to secure his family’s financial future.

ZeroZeroZero (Amazon Prime) presents a global perspective on the cocaine trade, following the journey of a shipment from Mexico to Europe.

The Shield (FX) is a controversial police drama exploring corruption and moral compromises within a Los Angeles police unit.

---

The “War on Drugs” has created a multi-billion dollar industry that benefits a wide range of powerful Players of The Great Game. Private prison corporations reap enormous profits from incarcerating non-violent drug offenders; their bottom line is directly tied to harsh sentencing policies. Law enforcement agencies receive increased funding and expanded powers in the name of drug enforcement, often with little oversight, creating a system where the focus is on arrests and seizures rather than addressing the root causes of drug use and addiction.

Mass incarceration is particularly devastating for poor communities, immigrants, people of color, and their families. For-profit firms have flooded money into prison and immigration jail infrastructure and services, and have used industry associations to lobby for harsher policing and longer sentencing, even for non-violent offenders. People who are incarcerated work for pennies per hour while their families pay exorbitant fees to keep them supplied with bare necessities. Powerful, private equity interests and corporations reap enormous profits from the militarization of the U.S.-Mexico border and the policing of immigration.

Furthermore, there’s a long and troubling history of intelligence agencies like the CIA being involved in the drug trade. The most notorious example is Air America, a CIA-operated airline during the Vietnam War that was implicated in transporting heroin from Southeast Asia’s Golden Triangle. While the official narrative denies any complicity, evidence suggests that the CIA turned a blind eye to, or even actively facilitated, drug trafficking to fund covert operations, not only undermining the stated goals of the drug war but also eroding public trust in government institutions.

The immense profits generated by the drug trade inevitably lead to corruption, ensnaring politicians and law enforcement officials. Bribes, campaign contributions, and other illicit financial incentives can influence policy decisions and weaken enforcement efforts. A revolving door exists where those tasked with upholding the law become complicit in its violation. Moreover, the demand for drugs like cocaine often comes from affluent circles. Wealthy businesspeople and celebrities use cocaine as a status symbol and party drug, creating a lucrative market for traffickers. The war on drugs is marked by grotesque hypocrisy, where the wealthy can often afford to indulge in their vices while marginalized communities bear the brunt of enforcement.

A new culture

Creating a culture prioritizing health over profits is a monumental task that challenges the foundation of our current economic and social systems. It requires a fundamental shift in values, moving away from the relentless pursuit of economic growth and material wealth and toward a focus on well-being, sustainability, and social justice. Creating a new way of life is not simply about individual choices but transforming deeply ingrained societal structures and power dynamics.

One of the biggest hurdles is overcoming the dominance of the profit motive. Our current economic system rewards businesses for maximizing profits, often at the expense of worker health, environmental integrity and sustainability, and ethical considerations. To prioritize health, we need to redefine success, measuring it not just in terms of financial gain but also by indicators of well-being, social progress that puts life first, and ecological balance. A new world requires rethinking our economic models, promoting alternative business structures like cooperatives and social enterprises, and implementing policies prioritizing human and environmental health over corporate interests.

Changing cultural norms is a generational process. Consumerism, pursuing material possessions, and glorifying wealth are deeply ingrained in many societies. Shifting towards a culture that values health and well-being requires challenging these norms and promoting alternative narratives prioritizing community, connection, and a more balanced approach to life. Education, public awareness campaigns, and grassroots movements are crucial for driving this cultural transformation.

Creating a culture prioritizing health over profits is a complex and multifaceted challenge. It requires a collective effort involving individuals, communities, businesses, and governments working together to create a more just and sustainable future. While the path may be long and arduous, the potential rewards—a healthier, happier, and more equitable society—are well worth striving for.

I have more radical ideas about what’s needed. None would be considered popular, and all of them require sacrifice, recognition of our limits, degrowth, and population considerations—all third-rail issues.

What are the odds that a critical mass of people worldwide and across cultures will sacrifice their time, energy, money, and possibly even their lives to change how people live?

Our current way of life is self-terminating. Even if we had “too cheap to meter” energy and technology to pull CO2 out of the atmosphere and store it on Mars, it would still destroy civilization and possibly bring our species to the brink of extinction.

The War On Drugs is just another symptom of a deeper problem with our way of doing things and thinking about things. I can’t help but want to see us do better.

Thoughts Inspired By Giles, PhD regarding COVID-19 Students Entering College

Global catastrophes must be understood in a cross cultural context.

Douglas Giles, PhD, published a piece on student performance and outcomes in his classes, observing that their work is slipping and that one of the leading causes may be their formative educational experiences during the pandemic.

I am not an educator or a PhD, but the topic raised some questions for me, particularly related to how various populations across cultures responded to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Professor Giles’ story is sad. I can’t imagine how difficult it must have been for some cohorts of students in various communities across the USA who might have been traumatized by pandemic restrictions to achieve good results in their studies. It must be tough on teachers, whose work requires keeping students focused and engaged with their studies, to inspire young people who have been traumatized and adversely affected by various governmental responses to a deadly pandemic.

I was born in Denver and have lived in seven countries, and I can imagine how different cultures may have responded differently under similar stresses.

I spent the pandemic in Portugal. The general public’s response was calm compared to what I heard from bloggers and the media in the USA. The culture wars in the United States amplify everything, often to an absurd or even dangerous degree.

The COVID-19 pandemic response is an important topic. Due to many complex factors, the world will likely experience another pandemic sooner rather than later, and the world must continue to improve its response to pandemics. Children are particularly vulnerable, and education is essential to successfully navigating the challenges we face over the coming decades.

Anyone interested in this topic should look for research across cultures to better understand the nuanced and complex reasons for academic performance outcomes during and after the pandemic.

Definitive national statistics on class performance for 2024 specifically need to be comprehensively compiled and released. Data collection and analysis on this scale often lag, especially for comprehensive national studies.

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is a US government entity that is a primary source for educational statistics. Their website might have preliminary data or relevant reports, though completing 2024 statistics will take time.

Individual states often collect and release their data on student performance, sometimes faster than national figures. Check the websites of your state’s Department of Education.

Organizations like the College Board (SAT) or ACT might release reports on score trends, which can indirectly reflect classroom performance.

Educational research databases (like JSTOR, ERIC, or Google Scholar) can help us find academic studies and articles analyzing 2024 trends or related factors. Search for keywords like “student performance,” “COVID-19 impact,” “learning loss,” and “academic achievement.”

Studies from 2023 and early 2024 generally indicate some degree of learning loss due to pandemic disruptions. This is often seen in standardized test scores and teacher assessments. Professor Giles’ article is one example.

Q: How did COVID-19 impact edu­ca­tion in Amer­i­ca?
A: The COVID-19 pan­dem­ic dis­rupt­ed stu­dent learn­ing and devel­op­ment, result­ing in sig­nif­i­cant learn­ing loss and an increase in men­tal health chal­lenges. Fur­ther, the pan­dem­ic exac­er­bat­ed exist­ing racial inequities and wors­ened achieve­ment gaps.

The pandemic’s effects appear to be unevenly distributed. Students from disadvantaged backgrounds, those with limited access to technology, and those with learning disabilities seem to have been more significantly affected. I am not surprised by this.

Abstract & Introduction

Disadvantaged populations were disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, both in the medical and educational settings. Lower-income families often do not have a laptop/desktop computer, adequate internet connection, or a dedicated study space. This unfortunately contributed to poorer academic performance during distance learning. To combat this, the Kirk Kerkorian School of Medicine (KKSOM) did not close down campus during the pandemic. This study analyzes the utilization of campus and live Zoom lectures by KKSOM students and its impact on educational outcomes.

Many researchers are actively studying the pandemic’s long-term academic and social-emotional impact on students. New findings and analyses are regularly published.

Cross-Cultural Research

Some international studies compare the impact of the pandemic and school closures on students across different countries and cultures. These can provide valuable context. UNESCO and the OECD are good sources for such reports.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic had a major impact on many aspects of life, perhaps most notably education. Efforts to mitigate the negative effects of the pandemic, particularly lockdowns, led to major disruptions in schools and resulted in both learning loss and increased mental health challenges for students. These deleterious impacts appear to have been felt most keenly by students from marginalized communities, including first and second generation students.

Materials and methods: This study sought to investigate the mechanisms underlying these negative effects of pandemic mitigation efforts, particularly in terms of school efforts to support teachers and parents of students not speaking the language of instruction for three nations (Denmark, Russia, and Slovenia) included in the Responses to Educational Disruption Survey (REDS) survey.

Results: Results of the study revelated that in Denmark greater school-level support to teachers of non-native language students moderated the relationship between home language status and student perceptions of their relative academic performance before and during the pandemic, but that such was not the case in Russia or Slovenia. Likewise, school-level support to teachers moderated the relationship between home language status and perceived teacher support in Denmark but not in Russia or Slovenia. Implications of these results are discussed.

Even when 2024 data becomes fully available, various factors can influence statistics, including changes in assessment methods or student populations. Beyond statistics, look for qualitative research (interviews, observations) that can provide richer insights into student experiences and challenges.

Many schools and districts are implementing interventions to address learning loss and support student well-being. Research on the effectiveness of these efforts is also crucial.

It will take time to understand the impact of the pandemic on educational outcomes in particular parts of the world. My intuition tells me that culture, a complex subject if there ever was one, is much involved in how young people respond to stressful social situations.

---

Wuhan China

Wuhan faced unique and intense challenges as the initial epicenter of the COVID-19 outbreak. Students in Wuhan were among the first globally to experience prolonged school closures, strict lockdowns, and significant disruptions to their education and daily lives.

Wuhanese students faced a sudden and extended lockdown starting in January 2020, much earlier than most other places in the world.

Movements of residents

More than 9 million residents were isolated in Wuhan city after the epidemic control measures started on 23 January 2020. According to data from Baidu Migration, only 1.2 million people entered or left Wuhan during the period 24 January to 15 February 2020. The number of people travelling fell by 91.6% (13.0 million of 14.1 million people) compared with the same period in 2019 and by 91.6% (13.0 of 14.2 million people) in 1–23 January 2020 (Fig. 3; Supplementary Data 3 in the data repository).

This meant an abrupt shift to online learning with little preparation.

The sudden outbreak of COVID-19 occurred in China at a time when colleges and universities would begin the Spring semester, and the complete lockdown of the entire country made it impossible for campuses to open after the one-month long winter vacation. Under the guidance of the Central Government’s Ministry of Education, which is the highest authority of Chinese educational systems and is the supreme policy maker, all schools, including colleges and universities, moved classes online. Since the move was at such a short-notice and in a less prepared manner, the effectiveness of it remained a concern for administrators, teachers and students as a whole. This paper, using the quantitative and qualitative data provided by a Chinese university survey, aims to analyze the factors commonly used in academic researches to measure the effectiveness of its online classes under such an emergency circumstance, with perceptions of both students and teachers. The paper discusses the issues through its findings, by comparison of teaching vs. learning effectiveness, online vs. face-to-face classrooms. It further explores the solutions to improve online teaching and learning environment, and suggests that after the pandemic is over the online classes shall not be a new normal in Chinese higher education.

The lockdown was particularly stringent in Wuhan. Restrictions on movement and social interaction affected daily life and well-being.

Not all Wuhanese students had equal access to technology or stable internet connections, creating disparities in learning opportunities. The online format limited interaction with teachers and peers, potentially affecting engagement and motivation.

In late January 2020, mainland China postponed all educational activities and the Chinese Ministry of Education (MoE) urged schools and higher education institutions to use online delivery as an alternative to face-to-face teaching. Of significance, this marks the first time online delivery has been permitted, at great scale, as part of formal education delivery in China.

Isolation, anxiety about the pandemic, and concerns about academic progress took a toll on students’ mental health.

The Interaction Hypothesis emphasizes the significance of face-to-face interactions in language proficiency development. However, the global transition to online education prompted by the COVID-19 pandemic has posed significant challenges to education, including the teaching of Chinese as a second/foreign language (CSL/CFL). Anecdotal evidence indicates a decline in both the quality and opportunities for interactions in online classes compared to traditional face-to-face (F2F) classrooms. However, research on the differences in the perspectives of students and teachers regarding this issue is relatively limited. To fill this gap, this study compared the perceptions of students and teachers regarding teacher-student and peer-to-peer interactions in online versus F2F CFL classrooms. Participants were CFL learners and their teachers at a university in Australia. Thematic analysis of the data collected from online surveys and interviews revealed a consensus among students and teachers on the importance of promoting interactions regardless of the delivery mode. However, students expressed a preference for F2F interactions, citing reduced motivation and fewer opportunities for interaction in online classes. Notably, students indicated a preference for interacting with teachers rather than peers during synchronous online sessions. The differences were attributed to multiple factors including a sense of community, interaction opportunities, engagement strategies, individual differences, and technological constraints. The results underscore the pivotal role of building social connections in language learning. The findings provide valuable insights into technology-enhanced language education from the perspectives of both students and teachers. This study contributes to the field of interaction studies in second language education and offers practical implications for addressing the challenges posed by the transition to online learning.

Despite challenges, students gradually adapted to online learning platforms and tools. Schools and families provided support, with teachers trying to maintain connections and provide guidance remotely. A sense of shared experience and community spirit helped many students cope with the difficulties.

Long-Term Effects and Research

Studies suggest potential learning loss in some subjects, particularly among younger students.

Baseline Specification.

Fig. 3 shows our baseline estimate of learning loss in 2020 compared to the 3 previous years, using a composite score of students’ performance in math, spelling, and reading. Students lost on average 3.16 percentile points in the national distribution, equivalent to 0.08 standard deviations (SD) (SI Appendix, section 4.3). Losses are not distributed equally but concentrated among students from less-educated homes. Those in the two lowest categories of parental education — together accounting for 8% of the population (SI Appendix, section 5.1) — suffered losses 40% larger than the average student (estimates by parental education: high, −3.07; low, −4.34; lowest, −4.25). In contrast, we find little evidence that the effect differs by sex, school grade, subject, or prior performance. In SI Appendix, section 7.9, we document considerable variation by school, with some schools seeing a learning slide of 10 percentile points or more and others recording no losses or even small gains.

The pandemic’s psychological impact on Wuhanese students is an ongoing area of research.

The psychological trauma caused by COVID-19 in Wuhan increased the incidence of posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) in residents (Liu et al., 2020). However, compared with adults, adolescents were reported to be less likely to develop mental disorders and more likely to recover after exposure to negative events (Jacobs & Harville, 2015). Adolescents exhibited a strong potential to grow even around psychologically traumatic events (Berger, 2008) because their resilience reflected a dynamic growing process and more positive adaptation to trauma (Berger, 2008, Cryder et al., 2006). Resilience, as a protective mechanism, reasonably explained the mechanism mediating the psychological effects of risk on health (Fleming & Ledogar, 2008) and played a protective role in neutralizing the effects of risk on health outcome (Fleming & Ledogar, 2008). At the same time, this protective mechanism can grow because of its evolving characteristics (Berger, 2008, Fleming and Ledogar, 2008).

Researchers are also exploring how the experience fostered resilience, adaptability, and appreciation for social connections.

Consider exploring Chinese-language sources (with translation tools if needed) for more detailed local perspectives. Look for blogs, interviews, or documentaries featuring students from Wuhan sharing their experiences.

Understanding the experiences of students in Wuhan provides valuable insights into the impact of the pandemic on education and well-being in a context of early and intense disruption. It highlights students’ challenges, resilience, and long-term effects, offering lessons for other regions and future preparedness.

---

Culture Wars

We all know how different States and Cities in the United States reacted differently to the impacts and challenges of the pandemic. The United States is not a monolith; cultures vary in different regions. The “culture wars” in the USA hindered our ability to better respond to the deadly event.

Politicization of Public Health Measures

Mask-wearing, social distancing, and vaccination became highly politicized. Resistance was often driven by misinformation and distrust of government or scientific institutions. This led to inconsistent adherence to public health guidelines and hindered efforts to slow the spread of the virus.

One might wonder how J.F.K. Jr helped fan the flames.

The spread of false or misleading information about the virus, its origins, and effective prevention measures fueled confusion and distrust, making it difficult for people to make informed decisions about their health and contributing to resistance against public health measures.

I won’t name names here, but think of all the podcasters and YouTubers who passionately and emphatically expressed their uninformed or misinformed opinions.

I got caught up in it, and I am silly enough to think I am a skeptic with a modicum of critical thinking skills.

The politicization of the pandemic and the spread of misinformation eroded public trust in scientific and governmental institutions, making it harder to implement effective public health policies and communicate accurate information.

The emphasis on individual freedom and limited government intervention often overshadowed the importance of collective action and responsibility in controlling a pandemic, leading to resistance against measures like lockdowns or vaccine mandates, even when they were deemed necessary by public health experts.

The pandemic exacerbated existing social and political divisions. Disagreements over public health measures led to conflict and mistrust within communities, making it harder to achieve consensus and cooperation on necessary actions to address the crisis.

The hindered response contributed to a higher number of COVID-19 cases and deaths in the USA compared to many other developed countries. It also led to increased social and economic disruption and long-term consequences for public health and trust in institutions.

What, one might wonder, will the healthcare system in the United States look like in the coming years?

The “culture wars” created a challenging environment for evidence-based decision-making and collective action, ultimately undermining the country’s ability to respond to the pandemic and protect its citizens effectively.

None of the above was good for young students, some of whom lost parents and loved ones to the virus.

---

An Aside

Most Americans don’t care to understand global events, much less other cultures in depth.

48% of Americans hold a valid passport. Great!

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, roughly 30–40 million Americans traveled abroad annually, translating to 10–13 percent of the population.

International travel significantly dipped in 2020 and 2021 due to the pandemic. However, it rebounded strongly in 2022, reaching 81% of pre-pandemic levels. This suggests an intense desire among Americans to resume international travel. This is a good thing. Cross-cultural experiences are essential for a more peaceful and cooperative global culture. Recent surveys suggest that roughly 76% of Americans have visited at least one other country. I’m happy to know this.

We must understand and communicate with people from other cultures to better cope with and respond to the many potential disasters that may come our way. World events will be increasingly more challenging to battle, and our immediate future will be more demanding than our recent past.

I keep thinking about the trauma and adverse effects on education in all the countries where the United States conducts its “police actions,” proxy wars, regime change machinations, wars on terror and drugs, etc. Could it be that some refugees and immigrants who desire to enter the United States and Europe might have been moved by such events? Do the actions of some countries in the fabled West produce the dangerous criminals and lunatics President-Elect Donald J. Trump alleges are dumped on our doorstep by various sovereign States in the global south? Do we bear any responsibility at all for the so-called refugee crisis?

---

Portugal’s Experience

Let’s return to experiences students have faced in countries other than the United States.

In my anecdotal opinion, young people in Portugal have gotten through the experience reasonably well based on talking with parents, teachers, and young people. For example, people in Portugal didn’t get up in arms over mask-wearing. They also didn’t seem to mind “lockdowns” as much as some groups in some regions of the USA. (According to my observations.)

However, I found some information about the impact on Portuguese students.

Similar to global trends, studies suggest that Portuguese students experienced learning loss due to school closures and disruptions caused by the pandemic. This is particularly evident in mathematics. This makes sense to me; students lose class time when schools close. Mathematics would be a subject one would want to stay caught up on.

Research indicates that the pandemic may have hindered the development of preschool children in Portugal, especially those from lower socio-economic backgrounds. Parental engagement in learning activities during lockdowns played a significant role. Across the world, people with low incomes do worse. “Inequality” remains a problem.

The pandemic increased stress and anxiety among Portuguese students, impacting their mental health and well-being. Stress impacts seem universal.

The shift to online learning highlighted inequalities in access to technology and digital literacy, potentially exacerbating existing disparities. (As in Wuhan.)

As one might expect, university students face challenges related to online learning, social isolation, and disruptions to internships and career plans.

PubMed Central (PMC) includes a study titled “COVID-19: Threat or Opportunity for the Portuguese Higher Education’s Attractiveness for International Students?” which examines the pandemic’s effect on higher education enrollment.

The paper analyses the influence of COVID-19 on Portuguese institutions’ intake of international students and their responses to the pandemic. Two dimensions are considered: quantitative impact on international enrolments and higher education institutions’ strategies for the recruitment and support of international students. The first dimension is analysed through national statistics and comparison of enrolments over the past five years. Then, the institutional strategies implemented to encourage recruitment of new international students and to support existing ones during the lockdown are explored. Statistics show that COVID-19 had a negative impact on international enrolments, although less severe than expected. Growth has continued, but at a much slower pace than in the past few years. The slowdown in growth was much more pronounced in polytechnics than in universities. Additionally, the measures implemented by Portuguese higher education institutions suggest that these have coped with COVID-19 as an opportunity to rethink and redefine strategies.

An article titled “Did the COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdown Harm Pre-Schoolers Learning in Portugal? Yes, but with Variations Depending on Socio-Economic Status” investigates the impact on early childhood education.

The literature has shown that the COVID-19 pandemic has indelibly affected student performance. However, this deterioration is not the same for all students, with students of a lower socio-economic status (SES) being the most affected. The present study aims to understand if the pandemic lockdown in the last year of pre-school impacted the learning skills considered crucial for the transition to primary school, and whether this impact was moderated by SES or a quiet place to study (QPS). A total of 11,158 students belonging to 318 Portuguese schools underwent an assessment protocol composed of writing skills, maths, and motor-control tasks. A pandemic effect was observed for writing skills, especially during the first lockdown. Said effects were found to be potentiated by SES. Regarding maths, the fall in skills was only observed to be significant for less economically advantaged children. Motor tasks suffered; however, this was without any significant effect for SES or QPS. Thus, a detrimental effect of the pandemic lockdown was found on pre-school skills, particularly pre-literary abilities, and especially during the first lockdown. SES appeared to potentiate some inequalities. In other words, skills differences between individuals with higher and lower SES increased during the pandemic, particularly in the first lockdown, due to novelty, unpredictability, and the need for quick adaptation.

Educ@ features an article titled “Mobility in times of immobility: international students in Portugal during the COVID-19 pandemic,” which focuses on the experiences of international students.

Abstract: The aim of this article is to understand the impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis on teaching and learning by international students in Portuguese higher education. It also focuses on how new student mobility projects have been re-designed and re-negotiated during the pandemic. The methodology includes analyzing the results of an online survey and individual online interviews. The former was answered by 703 international students enrolled at higher education institutions in Portugal…

DigitUMa published a study titled “The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of Portuguese university students,” exploring the effects on higher education students.

Worldwide, the COVID-19 pandemic has had a disruptive effect on daily routines, especially for university students. This study aimed to compare pre-pandemic domains of students’ mental health during the pandemic lockdown. One cross-sectional study was conducted in two waves with academic students from 20 Portuguese universities, in March 2020 before the COVID19 pandemic (n = 3579) and 2 months after the first lockdown in May 2020 (n = 1228). The Positive Mental Health Questionnaire (PMHQ), the Mental Health Knowledge Questionnaire, the Mental Health-promoting knowledge, and the Psychological Vulnerability Scale were used. Statistical analyzes were performed by bivariate associations and multiple linear regression models. Students were mostly women (79%), with an average age of 23.2 years (SD = 6.6), displaced from their family environment (43%), out-of-home (43%), and scholarship holders (37%). Higher scores found in the PVS were associated with decreased PMHQ in both moments (P < 0.01). These cross-sectional studies showed a slight variation in the mental health variables studied in the period before and during the COVID-19 outbreak. Being a woman, younger, out-of-home, and having a scholarship (P < 0.01) seem to increase susceptibility to mental health variation before and during the pandemic. Universities should develop strategies that promote students’ mental health.

The Organisation for Cooperation and Development (OECD) publishes reports on education that often include comparative data on Portugal and other countries. Their website can provide insights into broader trends and policy responses.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) also provides reports and data on the impact of COVID-19 on education globally.

We must do better.

How we respond to stress varies across cultures. America has some unique and exotic social pathologies, but global pandemics require a coordinated response. Tragically, we could do much better in cooperating compassionately and carefully across nation-states on issues like climate change, extinction, environmental degradation, war, refugees, famine, and pandemics.

“Superpowers” (all with nuclear weapons arsenals) continue to commit resources to prepare for and fight wars. Think of the impact on education and the trauma experienced in the Middle East over the past fifteen years alone. Imagine the educational setbacks in Ukraine and Russia. Look at countries ravaged by war in Africa right now. Historically, there are many examples, studies, and books about the traumatic impacts of these kinds of anthropogenic disasters. These social traumas are not good for anyone, whether you live in Sweden or Argentina. These catastrophes affect all of us. We must inform our leaders that we expect action to make peace and mitigate the suffering and destruction caused by our lack of international cooperation regarding global disasters.

Capitalism As An Accelerant Of Extinction

Don’t blame Capitalism, ain’t no money in it. Worst yet, talk bad about the big “C,” and you’ll only get attention from a tiny population of far lefties and anti-Gandhi (clearing my throat) revolutionaries — there is no money in that either, only pain before the die-off. Not cool.

[Did the Soviets kill the Wehrmacht, or was it Saving Private Ryan? Sorry, this is off-topic. Brain fart.]

I suspect Mr. Michaels and I are American boomers.

Steven Pinker is a Canadian American, so he’s unbiased. Steven knows a bit about progress (the teleological justification for Capitalism). Pinker sees Capitalism as a powerful engine for progress requiring careful management and regulation to ensure its benefits are widely shared and its negative impacts are mitigated. Sweet. Steven needs another book in his series of modernity apologetics, “Capitalism Now — The Better Angels of Civilization.”

“It’s easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism” —Mark Fisher

Don’t blame the Players or The Game; we are headed in the “right” direction. Die-off is just another externality, a necessary cost of progress and techno-modernity.

Fa-get-a-bout-iiiiittt!

As Tony Montana said, “First you get the money, then you get the power, then you get the women.”

When did technology take off? During the energy transition in the 19th century. Can you say metastatic?

The term “capitalism,” as we understand it today, emerged in the mid-19th century, but discussions about economic systems that share characteristics with Capitalism have been happening for centuries.

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels popularized the term “capitalism” in the mid-1800s to critique the socio-economic system they observed emerging during the Industrial Revolution. The period was a tad bit different from Steven Pinker’s Era of Enlightenment, or the Age of Discovery, or the Age of Wonder, when science, engineering, and technology really took off.

“capitalism” etymology:

The word “capitalism” ultimately derives from the word “capital.”

“Capital” refers to the Latin caput, meaning “head.” It seems odd, but this evolved into capitale in late Latin, which referred to property, possessions, and wealth. (Think of it as “head of cattle” representing wealth.)

Capitalism, a term used to describe an economic system, didn’t appear until the mid-19th century. While there’s some debate about the first use, the Oxford English Dictionary points to William Makepeace Thackeray’s 1854 novel The Newcomes as an early example. (I can’t find the exact quote, but it’s often referenced.)

Capitalism gained wider usage through the writings of socialist thinkers like Marx and Engels.

Ancient Rome: Caput meaning “head.”

Medieval Latin: Capitale evolves to mean “property” and “wealth.”

Mid-17th century: “Capitalist” (an owner of capital) appears…William Makepeace Thackeray

Mid-19th century: “Capitalism” emerges as a term for an economic system…

Much has been written! Much has been written! Fungible, fungible, fungible!

But, you know, even before the term “capitalism” existed, scholars and philosophers debated economic systems with elements of “capitalism” by any other name, like, say, Mercantilism. In his 1776 work “The Wealth of Nations,” Adam Smith explored the concept of a free market economy driven by individual self-interest and competition, laying some of the groundwork for modern capitalist theory. Even earlier figures like Ibn Khaldun, an Arab scholar from the 14th century, made observations about trade, labor, and wealth accumulation that resonate with capitalist ideas.

There are libraries full of capitalist theory. So very much, indeed, has been written! Why, oh, why must we defend and critique it so?

Without our fossil fuel energy transition, there would be no industrial revolution, Capitalism, or global neoliberal financialized omnicidal heat engine, a.k.a. the metastatic Great Game on sugar and copious quantities of alcohol (also sugar) and drugs. We wouldn’t be rearranging deck chairs, drinking champagne, and dancing to the band as it plays on and on and on… There would be no internet, electronic circuses, no strawberries at Christmas dinner in Ohio, no tech bro green energy transition talk, no techno/cloud feudalism, no Google, Amazon, Facebook (all with government contracts supporting the forever war machine) no platforms for us to peck away on, no “having the conversation” on “the Tubes,” and no places where experts on books written decades ago about overshoot can write about extinction and Capitalism.

Capitalism puts the metastatic into civilization/technology. Language, fire, and stone tools are not Bitcoin mining machines powered by gas flares and expensive wind turbines in Texas. (See speeches in the series Landman.)

Who Pumps and Dumps, If Not “The Real Capitalist,” The Players Of The Great Game 2.0. [reality tv show streaming on your favorite platform soon.]

Human behavior (civilization) was the main trigger for contracting cancer (Capitalism).

It’s my fault. I am a civilized, modern, techno-industrial addict of all the wonderful things produced by The Great Game and Capitalism. I don’t need treatment; I must be swept up and taken off the streets to keep things pretty for the country club set. Better yet, I need to die off so The Players of The Great Game can rewild the Earth so they can reboot Capitalism 3.0 and do it right this time with lots of miraculous next, next-generation technology, a “resource-balanced economy” with lots of sensors, bigger data centers on the dark side of the moon estimating just how much copper is left in the Earth and where we can get more on a passing asteroid, and spaceships to new worlds there for the taking as we expand across the universe competing for status and power among worthy Players.

The Capitalists have all the answers; we don’t need to apologize for their fantastic way of life — let them do their thing.

Hell yeah! The oligarchs are in the White House running the show live on MSNBC!

The Great Game must continue; there are no alternatives. We’ve already broken the mold.

Talk about “the predicament.” Do not develop a cure for cancer. Die off, and let the survivors hunt and gather in the garbage dump until the New, New World can be engineered by The Players.

Our “predicament” is just an engineering problem.

Consume (consumption) the conversation; there is no cure for this type of cancer. Consumption will deaden the pain. We need more sugar and more pills to accelerate the thing.

Capitalism is what it is; look in the mirror and take your pills.

Hate the Players and The Great Game.

Someone, please point me to those who are creating an alternative and are willing to sacrifice and fight for it.

I apologize; I’ve been paying attention for a long time and am frustrated. I appreciate your work, Mr. Michaels. I’d love to have a friendly conversation with you (not recorded.) Best!

What Will We Sacrifice For Truth

There is a lot of talk about truth out there these days.

The value of truth is a significant and vital subject. Libraries are full of musings and philosophizing on the subject of truth.

Our beliefs are full of “truths.”

The Truth is a hard problem.

Truth is an existential domain of utmost concern.

If one wants a culture based on truth, one has to imagine what that is, its structures and systems, and what we base our truth claims on, etc., and fight. 

What are we willing to sacrifice to build a truth-based order?

The trickster is in the detail.

Generally Speaking

If one wants the truth, one must sacrifice some hours away from diversions reading about dark psychology, propaganda, public relations, marketing, and advertising, and one must constantly upgrade one’s critical thinking skills in a disciplined way.

Although it is a difficult process and taxing on one’s habits, one must be committed to seeing complex issues and cultures from various perspectives.

One must kill the parrots on one’s shoulders, shouting in one’s ears. Find a peaceful place to assess one's own thoughts, ideas, and feelings critically and honestly.

Will we sacrifice two hours of screen time a week to organize a community meeting to discuss what a truth-based culture is, why it’s desirable, and how we might make it happen? How receptive are our family, friends, and community to such pursuits?

We struggle to gain control over one addiction, to change one bad habit, to have one uncomfortable face-to-face conversation about a complex topic.

We are so confident in our point of view that we dismiss anything unfamiliar.

Are we not curious?

Are we willing to sacrifice our popularity to speak the truth to social influencers, upset the superfans, guard against audience capture, and build a truth-focused culture?

Would we sacrifice our lives to take power away from the oligarchs or for posterity?

We are more than willing to sacrifice freedom and democracy, serving the Players of The Great Game for money, status, and attention.

We are more than willing to sacrifice life on the altar of belief.

Self-sacrifice is essential to winning a revolution and replacing the old order with something more just and sustainable.

In perpetuity, we’d have to sacrifice daily to maintain and improve a truth-based culture.

It’s painful to face the truth. (cognitive dissonance)

We talk about “the hard problem of consciousness;” creating a new, truth-based culture is even more challenging than defining consciousness.

It will require sacrifice.

Unfortunately, too many people can’t make the connection between defeating global, neoliberal, rules-based, financialized, late-stage capitalism, which is an omnicidal, war-mongering heat engine enabled by fossil fuels, technology, and constantly manufactured consent with sacrifice.

We won’t sacrifice a minute away from the computer game because we are well entertained, feed on junk, and equate this with righteousness.

The firehose of information we parrot and the toys the bosses sell us will not save us from lies; sacrifice will.

The Global Socioeconomic System Has To Go!

Our economic religion is an omnicidal heat engine that foments war. Maybe we all need a hobby.

We know we are a war-making species; it’s uncontroversial. But why are we so engaged in organized violence? It’s a fascinating subject. Check out this conversation with Jim Rutt and Richard Overy.

I’ll say it upfront: the kind of global market economy we run fuels today’s hyper-disaster unfolding worldwide. So, what do we need to do to stop the hyper-disaster? Please read on.

Again, I must provide some context. The post gets more fun after the context bit.

Extinction

“Sixth Extinction” refers to the ongoing, human-caused mass extinction event rapidly depleting Earth’s biodiversity. Scientists estimate that current extinction rates are about 1,000 times higher than the natural background rate, a pace that rivals the five previous mass extinctions in Earth’s history, the last of which wiped out the dinosaurs. (Golly, gee, we’ve all heard about that.)

Human activity is the primary cause of this crisis. Habitat destruction, through deforestation, urbanization, and agriculture, is a leading driver, eliminating living spaces and disrupting ecosystems. Global heating exacerbates the problem, altering ecosystems and weather patterns faster than many species can adapt. Overexploitation, such as overfishing and poaching, further decimate populations. Pollution from chemicals and plastics contaminates environments and harms wildlife. Global trade and travel introduce invasive species that disrupt the ecological balance and can outcompete native organisms.

The consequences of the Sixth Extinction are dire. The loss of biodiversity weakens ecosystems, making them less resilient to change and unable to provide essential services like clean air, water, and food. This can lead to increased natural disasters, reduced food security, and economic instability. Moreover, species extinction represents an irreversible loss of genetic information and evolutionary potential, potentially hindering future adaptations and innovations in the natural world. The Sixth Extinction ultimately threatens the stability of the planet’s life-support systems and the well-being of human societies.

The “polycrisis” (have you not heard of it? ad nausium)is a term used to describe the interconnected nature of today’s global challenges, where multiple crises converge and amplify each other: It’s like a tangled web of problems, making it challenging to address any single issue in isolation.

People need help understanding complex, systemic problems. It’s natural to avoid learning about issues with many layers of complexity, and it’s uncomfortable to think about complex systems, their formation, and what emerges from them. Nature is full of complex emergent systems, and people also create complex systems. Gosh darn you, K.I.S.S. The complex systems running our world are inaccessible simply because things are too complex for us to comprehend.

I am so tired, I just can’t get my head around this, and quite frankly, I don’t give damn.

Thousands of people are working on describing the Polycrisis across dozens of domains. Thousand of people are talking about the challenges we are facing today. Thousands of people are having the conversation to educate us about complex things we find difficult to understand and don’t want to think about. People have warned us for hundreds, no, let’s include the wise folk, for thousands of years.

We have known about various existential risks to civilization and life for many decades. Solving these problems has never been politically desirable or expedient because there are no incentives to do so. We are incentivized to tell a story.

Get up on the table, Senator. Tell me a story, and make me believe it.

• Climate change: Rising temperatures, extreme weather events, sea-level rise, and biodiversity loss.

• Resource depletion: Overexploitation of natural resources like water, minerals, and forests.

• Pollution: Air, water, and soil contamination from industrial activities, plastic waste, and chemical runoff.

• Inequality: The growing wealth gap, social unrest, and political polarization.

• Conflict & War: Geopolitical tensions, armed conflicts, and refugee crises.

• Misinformation & Disinformation: Erosion of trust in institutions, the spread of conspiracy theories, and difficulty discerning truth.

• Social Disintegration: Declining social cohesion, increased loneliness, and mental health challenges.

• Financial instability: Debt crises, economic shocks, and volatile markets.

• Supply chain disruptions: Global trade imbalances, shortages, and inflation.

• Technological unemployment: Automation and AI replacing human jobs.

• Cybersecurity threats: Data breaches, ransomware attacks, and disruption of critical infrastructure.

• AI risks: Unintended consequences of artificial intelligence, algorithmic bias, and job displacement.

• Biotechnology risks: Potential for misuse of genetic engineering and synthetic biology.

• Pandemics: Global health crises like COVID-19 highlight vulnerabilities in healthcare systems and global interconnectedness.

• Food insecurity: Climate change and conflict exacerbates food production and distribution challenges.

Interconnectedness makes the polycrisis particularly challenging, requiring integrated and collaborative solutions. Are we working and investing enough across nation-states to solve these problems? No, not nearly enough. Instead, we are doubling down on doing everything that has caused this dire predicament. And, you know, this “thing of ours” is ancient. It is nothing new.

Hedge Funds, private institutions, corporations, and their shareholders own everything and want more. You work a lifetime to pay off debt. If you don’t own many financial assets, you are not a Player; you are not even enjoying “the good life.” Plebs and proles are becoming more insignificant by the day.

1. What hedge funds generally own:

• BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street are primarily known for their index-tracking ETFs and mutual funds. This means they hold a broad range of stocks and bonds that mirror major market indices like the S&P 500, Russell 2000, and Bloomberg Barclays Aggregate Bond Index.

  • For example, BlackRock’s iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) and Vanguard’s Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF (VTI) are incredibly popular, holding stocks of large US companies.

• Blackstone is a major player in alternative investments, including:

  • Private equity: They buy and restructure entire companies.

  • Real estate: They own massive amounts of commercial and residential property.

  • Infrastructure: Investments in things like roads, bridges, and utilities.

  • Credit: They provide loans and other forms of financing.

• Hedge funds like Bridgewater Associates, Millennium Management, and Citadel tend to have more complex and varied portfolios, using a range of strategies:

  • Stocks: Both long and short positions in public companies.

  • Bonds: Government, corporate, and high-yield bonds.

  • Derivatives: Options, futures, and swaps to manage risk or speculate.

  • Commodities: Gold, oil, agricultural products.

  • Currencies: Trading on fluctuations in exchange rates.

  • Private investments: Venture capital, private equity, and real estate.

2. Where to find some clues about what these corporate institutions own:

• ETF Holdings: For ETFs, you can often find their top holdings listed on the fund provider’s website or on financial data platforms like Bloomberg or Yahoo Finance.

• 13F Filings: Institutional investment managers with over $100 million in assets under management must file Form 13F with the SEC quarterly. These filings disclose their holdings in US equities, but with a delay of about 45 days. You can find 13F filings on the SEC’s website or through various financial websites.

• Financial News: Keep an eye on financial news sources. They often report on major investments and acquisitions made by these firms.

The specific assets these firms own constantly change; having an utterly up-to-date list at any given time is impossible. These corporations own the media platforms. Google “BlackRock owns everything” and look into the results.

These corporate institutions manipulate markets.

We worry about the price of gas and eggs.

Nothing is equal.

Wouldn’t it be nice to be Jennifer Gates? Ms Gates is a Nepo baby, short for nepotism baby, a medical student, and an accomplished equestrian.

Nayel and Jennifer look like friendly people with lovely smiles.

Olympic equestrian Nayel Nassar and Jennifer Gates — the eldest daughter of billionaire Bill Gates and his ex-wife, Melinda French Gates — welcomed their second child, daughter Mia, in October 2024. The couple's first child, daughter Leila, was born in 2023.

Their abode is big, expensive, and probably a gift from Jennifer’s dad. It’s a triplex penthouse at 433 Greenwich Street, Tribeca, N.Y., N.Y. The triplex is 8,900 square feet with 316 square meters of outdoor space. That’s huge for an apartment, even by NYC standards! It has six bedrooms, six full bathrooms, two half bathrooms, and a plunge pool. The previous owner was Formula One driver Lewis Hamilton. He earned that pad. Bill reportedly purchased the triplex for around $51 million in 2021, with some estimates putting the current value at $76 million. Talk about making money while you sleep in your Tribeca apartment.

Of course, Jennifer and her siblings grew up at Xanadu 2.0, a 66,000-square-foot mansion in Medina, Washington, estimated to be worth $131 million.

Bill doesn’t have a mortgage. We paid for it. He’s a Player.

Jennifer Gates is pursuing her own career path and interests beyond her family’s wealth. Even wealthy children need something to do.

People need help understanding complex, systemic problems. Turn on the news, and you’ll see a clip of Assad’s heavy underground door leading to an escape route from the Presidential Palace. From that information, we learn that Assad was extremely wealthy; we saw images of prisons, i.e., he’s a dictator, and so on. There is no context in the report. Context is complicated. Assad is a bad guy, while Western billionaires are innovative geniuses. I always disliked Windows.

Captured labor. For-profit cells. Immigrants. Migrants. In the olden days, indentured servants and sl_ves. Today, free folks pay their debts until they go to heaven.

I had a dream this morning.

Dreams are hard to describe, but the story was something like this:

I was organizing people to do something, and it was working. People were enthusiastic and actively involved, and we were getting things done—initially. Later, people showed up to continue the “project,” but this time, everyone was competing to lead the venture (many cooks in the kitchen) and treating me like a jerk for being there. (What a nightmare. hehe)

I was okay with that, took a step back, and eventually decided to move on when someone in the dream said, “We don’t want you to go; we just want to do things differently.” I felt like what they were doing wasn’t what I wanted, so I moved into another phase of my dream where I was in some Roman Empire World simulation with Arnold Schwarzenegger. I am sad I didn’t wake up and write down the details of that part of the dream. It was vivid and profound. Darn it!

Go ahead, make my day, and analyze my dream. LOL

We know what the problems are.

Good people worldwide are working on profitable solutions to our problems, and even more people are discussing “the polycrisis.” Many people know a lot about global heating, peak oil, geopolitics, inequality, pollution, etc. Hundreds of platforms are disseminating information about all the nasty things plaguing our world. Reporting on problems employs a lot of people—not as many as the defense industry. We are all information addicts at this point, so there is a large market for information on everything that bothers or interests us. It’s been like this for ages. Day after day, more books and papers will be published, and “Tube” channels will discuss our “predicament,” and so on. The few of us who care will continue to consume this information voraciously. We think it’s an intellectually healthy habit. I know I did.

I have spent since 2008 delving into our “predicament.” Before that, I consumed the canned news we are all used to and read popular books and magazines, stuff that I thought was entertaining or would help me get ahead.

Now, I feel like all the educators and opinion-makers are having a fascinating time at the center of something big. While many smart folks “have the conversation,” we all sit around listening and reading information about problems and “solutions,” which have nothing to do with the true causes of the hyper-accelerating catastrophe we are experiencing.

So let me repeat it: This socioeconomic system has to go. We need a global rebellion, revolt, insurrection, mutiny, or uprising. We must overthrow the current economic archetype/model. Culture is the technology we need to accomplish this kind of dramatic change.

People who understand the polycrisis, predicament, or hyper-catastrophy call it what you will need to teach people how to seize power.

A brief detour.

I’m working with actors now, rehearsing scenes for a film I am making that’s intended to be a pilot of sorts for a streaming series I want to make. I’m looking to secure creator and producer credits and have been writing episodes for quite a while. The other day, I talked about books with an actor I was working with. I have a list of materials for actors to help them prepare for their roles. The actress mentioned that her mom often scolded her about watching too many shows and not reading enough. She said she learned a lot from these shows. Young people today learn things differently than in the 1950s, for example. People have many more resources today, and audio, visual, and video materials have increased since the Internet and the World Wide Web became accessible to more and more people. Streaming video was a game changer. Do you remember video rental stores?

Landman

Landman is one of the best streaming series I’ve seen in a while. I have watched the first five episodes. The speeches concerning energy and the oil business are gripping and profound.

“Landman” is the latest creation from Taylor Sheridan, the prolific mind behind hit shows like “Yellowstone” and “Tulsa King.” This gritty drama, currently airing on Paramount+, plunges viewers into the high-stakes world of oil exploration and land acquisition in the Permian Basin of West Texas.

The series centers around Tommy Norris, played with gruff charisma by Billy Bob Thornton. Tommy is a “landman,” a fixer for an oil company that negotiates leases and secures mineral rights from landowners. It’s a cutthroat business where fortunes are made and lost overnight, and Tommy navigates this treacherous landscape with a mix of cunning, intimidation, and old-fashioned Texas charm.

“Landman” doesn’t shy away from the complexities of the oil industry. It explores the boom-and-bust cycles, the environmental impact, and the clash between old-school wildcatters and modern corporations. The show also delves into the characters’ personal lives, showcasing the toll this demanding and often dangerous work takes on their families and relationships.

With its strong performances, tense plotlines, and authentic portrayal of a little-known corner of the American economy, “Landman” is shaping up to be another compelling entry in Taylor Sheridan’s growing television empire. It’s a show that grapples with timely issues like energy dependence, economic inequality, and the changing face of the American West.

If you’re a fan of Sheridan’s previous work or enjoy a good drama with a strong sense of place, “Landman” is worth checking out. Just be prepared for a wild ride through Texas oil’s rough and tumble world.

This is Tommy explaining the land deal to the cartel thugs:

“First they’ll hire Halliburton to build files on you fucking assholes the FBI dreams about having, then they’ll send thirty tier one operators from Triple Canopy to bust you like fucking pinatas. And if any of you dipshits make it back to Mexico they will blow up your house with a drone. While your family is in it. … It costs about six million to put in a new well, they’re putting 800 of them right fucking here … That’s 4.8 Billion in pump jacks. They’ll spend another billion on water, housing, and trucking. At an average of 78 dollars a barrel they will make 6.4 Million dollars a day. For the next fifty fucking years. The oil company is coming. No matter what.”

Spoiler Alert!

“They use clean energy to power the oil wells?” Rebecca asks.

“They use alternative energy,” Tommy snarks. “There’s nothing clean about this.”

“Please, Mr. Oil Man,” Rebecca quips. “Tell me how the wind is bad for the environment.”

“You have any idea how much diesel we had to burn to mix that much concrete? Or make that steel? Or haul this shit out here and put it together with a 450-foot crane? You want to guess how much oil it takes to lubricate that fucking [windmill]? Or winterize it? In its 20-year lifespan, it won’t offset the carbon footprint of making it. And don’t even get me started on solar panels and the lithium in your Tesla batteries.

And never mind the fact that if the whole world decided to go electric tomorrow, we don’t have the transmission lines to get the electric to the cities. It’d take 30 years if we started tomorrow. And unfortunately for your grandkids, we have a 120-year petroleum-based infrastructure. Our whole lives depend on it. And hell, it’s in everything. That road we came in on. The wheels in every car ever made, including yours. Tennis rackets, lipsticks, refrigerators, and antihistamines. Pretty much anything plastic. Your cell-phone case, artificial heart valves, any kind of clothing that’s not made with animal or plant fibers. Soap. Fucking hand lotion. Garbage bags. Fishing boats—you name it. In every fucking thing.

And you know what the kicker is? We’re gonna run out of it before we find its replacement … the thing that’s going to kill us all [is not the carbon emissions], it’s running out before we find an alternative. And believe me, if Exxon thought them fucking things [windmills] were the future, they’d be putting them all over the goddamn place. Getting oil is one of the most dangerous jobs in the world. We don’t do it because we like it. We do it because we’ve run out of options.”

At the company’s board of directors, shareholders’ meeting:

Bob: Our concern isn’t combustion engine regulations so much as it is the--

Shareholder or Director: It’s not a concern, Bob?

Bob: It’s not the concern. I mean, 60% of American electricity still comes from fossil fuels, 39.8 from natural gas alone, and that number is climbing. Now, nuclear, that’s maxed out, unless they build more reactors, and that’s not gonna happen. Nuclear’s not an option for climate change advocates, even though it’s our cleanest and most reliable form of energy. Wind is twice as expensive as natural gas, and solar, four times as expensive. Plus, on its best day of the year, a solar power plant generates electricity for about eight hours. All our electric vehicles are doing is exporting their emissions to the power plant. Our greatest potential for growth is in exports. China only consumes 14% of the world’s petroleum reserves. India is at 4.9%. Russia, a little over 3%. We feel that our lobbyists’ focus should be on easing the regulations on exports. Our LNG exports to Europe last year climbed to 64% of total exports--

(clears throat)

Bob: Excuse me, if I may. What you’re not seeing in the States is this rabid opposition to fossil fuels of any kind. To their use, to their extraction-- 38% of the UK’s electricity came from natural gas piped in from Norway...

Steve: Gentlemen... But-but one quarter’s from wind, which I agree is unreliable and expensive, but-- and this is an important “but”

Bob: Energy consumption is not a social issue, Steve...

Steve: The hell it’s not. It’s deeply social. And we must endeavor ourselves to educate the world about our commitment to cleaner ener--

Monty: Steve, will you shut the fսck up? My God. This is why I don’t come to these things. Y’all have been in so many shareholder meetings, you forgot what it is we actually do for a living. We are well diggers. We don’t, nor can we ever, control how our product is used or what it is used for. There’s nothing I can do to make an engine run cleaner ’cause I don’t build fucking engines. I don’t care what the governor of California says about electric vehicles. I don’t care how many career college students block London traffic or spray-paint a fucking sculpture. I care that the price of oil stays between $76 and $88 a barrel. That is what we should be discussing. The world has already convinced itself that you are evil and I am evil for providing them the one fucking thing they interact with every day, and they will not be convinced otherwise. Stop wasting your time, and stop fucking wasting mine.

Director two: Gee, Monty, tell us how you really feel.

(laughter)

Bob: You better start caring, Monty. I mean, your children are going to inherit an oil fortune, but your grandchildren won’t. What they inherit, you’re gonna have to start building now. I know the party’s not ending tomorrow, but... it is ending.

We need leadership.

The Players of The Great Game don’t care about people; they don’t care about life. Of course, the healthier Players care about their people and children to various degrees, but within the myopic vision of The Great Game. Winning is always more important. You can’t have a family, friends, or allays unless you win. They care about profit and power over other people’s interests and the health and integrity of living systems.

People are mystical markets that propel the Player’s activities. Players create a profitable need or fill a need to win the Game, to have more control, power, influence, prestige, and money (an instrument of keeping score) than their competitors. You, my dear reader, are price setters, programmed desire machines driving markets with the market Masters, the grand manipulators of markets.

This is not to say there are no benefits to being servants of The Great Game. There are many, and we thrive on the rewards we can achieve as workers and service providers. I’m not suggesting this “thing of ours” is all bad. I’m a worker, and I enjoy life. I’m only pointing out that the way the Game is played now, with its petrochemical energy and our modern machines and technology, is destroying our habitat and the playground of the Players of The Great Game. The Game must change, or it will end, and that’s bad news for ten-year-olds.

The Players of The Great Game, whether they can see it or not, are war-mongering criminals incapable of making peace. Criminals? WTF? Who creates the legal code? The Players. So, Players can never be criminals. Brutal competition, not survival, but conquest, motivates them. Players are born and bred for their ambition and wet work. The culture of The Great Game is a criminal enterprise. I know it doesn’t look that way because we have laws, rules, and law enforcement. A legal structure/system makes creating and playing The Great Game easier and more secure. It also makes it a bit less violent and provides careers for service personnel of The Great Game.

People are part of the energy cycle of life and have radically impacted and reshaped the world since the beginning of civilization thousands of years ago. Much has been written.

The Players of The Great Game have always been master manipulators and adept at capturing energy, particularly people’s energy. Belief has always played a significant role in this. Players need religious ideologies and culture to capture the attention and belief of the people they exploit, and because we are apes, it’s not hard to develop and use these mind-control tools.

If you can’t fight to seize power, prepare yourself. You are living through a catastrophe you can’t avoid because you don’t have the power or resources to insulate yourself and your loved ones from it. Knowing this shouldn’t frighten you; it will only make you stronger and inspire you to understand what you are up against.

The only way to have power if you are not a Player is to organize mass action against the complex system we believe in. And how do you give up your beliefs? It’s hard. When one’s beliefs are gone, the space created must be filled with knowledge.

OUCH!

Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort a person feels when their behavior does not align with their values or beliefs. Cognitive dissonance is a psychological phenomenon that occurs when a person holds two contradictory beliefs at the same time.

If you want to live a heroic life, what might you do?

First, deprogram yourself through education. Next, imagine a better way of doing things and fight to make it happen. We will likely fail at bringing the Great Game down in favor of something better, but it will be a noble and epic undertaking that will produce legendary heroes and strong, resilient, loving people.

OK, let me be honest; it may also produce some horrifically cruel leaders of nasty gangs.

Change can be messy, but we can’t avoid it. The poly-whatnot is a transformation over which we are not in control.

But as all the gurus, educators, and hosts say on all the platforms, things are FUBAR, and something needs to be done. Smart folks also know that The Great Game is self-terminating. It will fall.

What will you be doing during the fall? Will you play golf for the next ten years and enjoy the show? I won’t criticize you for that. Life is short, and you worked hard to get that club membership.

My suggestion to all of us who enjoy learning about our socioeconomic operating system and the negative externalities that plague our world is that it is time to shift gears and become, oh gosh, leaders of the revolution. And don’t worry, we’ll all get the attention we crave because the revolution will be live on screens, everywhere, all the time—until our world goes dark.

But come on, let’s be a Stoic and get “real” about this. We don’t have the power, i.e., agency, or the “will,” i.e., the desire to make those kinds of sacrifices. Making life-threatening sacrifices if you are “living large” is irrational and self-destructive.

Billions of us will die. Who cares about “long-termism?”

Maybe it’s time to find a nice hobby. My dad played golf. Perhaps it’s time for me to buy some clubs.

Perhaps it’s not time to be so concerned about the transition we are living through. Things might not get bad for Americans and “The West” for several more decades, and by then, we might have technical and engineering fixes for the threats to The Great Game.

But I can’t help it; I’m not convinced that preserving The Great Game for another fifty years is good.

What makes me fret is the thought that The Great Game might indeed be the pinnacle of civilization, as good as it gets, and I am crazy not to embrace it.

As I said earlier, I enjoy learning about and understanding how The Great Game works, so there’s that.

Another Dictator Falls

The Great Game is rough!

“America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests.” —Henry Kissinger

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan plays for power. Energy and Power go hand in hand, and you know what form of energy runs our modern techno-industrial world. Bibi wants to stay, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan wants to stay. If you play ball with Uncle Sam, you have a “friend” with benefits and can stay. 

“Word should be gotten to Nixon that if Thieu meets the same fate as Diem, the word will go out to the nations of the world that it may be dangerous to be America’s enemy, but to be America’s friend is fatal.” —Henry Kissinger

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is a Turkish politician who has been president since 2014. He previously served as the 25th prime minister from 2003 to 2014 as part of the Justice and Development Party (AKP), which he co-founded in 2001. Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin has a similar resume. Why didn’t Vladimir allow Western oligarchs to control Russian business interests or at least bump payments to the boss? The hubris of thinking you have a sovereign State! 

Shall we google Turkish war crimes now? 

When the West “liberated” Libya from brutal pan arabist, anti-imperialist dictator Muammar Muhammad Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi, who had an on-again, off-again friendship with Uncle Sam, people celebrated, some folks celebrated in Iraq when Uncle Sam’s on-again, off-again buddy Saddam Hussein’s regime fell thanks to shock and awe and all that; now folks celebrate in Syria because Bashar al-Assad’s regime has fallen thanks in no small part to good old Sam, but for how long? 

Uncle Sam doesn’t like leaders who stay in power too long if they don’t know how to service the big boss. Deep State or Uncle Sam, whatever you want to call the folks behind the most powerful country the Universe has ever known knows best. Sam’s way of maintaining control of the resources needed to keep the money flowing to the top is to create regime change wars in States sympathetic to Russia, a perennial enemy of the West since the dawn of time. The Western “Players” can’t play without Russia, as the Game requires constant warfare with a big, sinister, powerful State/alliance. Thank you for playing your role, China. 

There must be an Empire, or The Great Game grinds to a halt. The Empire must constantly defend itself and the whole wide world from its designated enemies (BRICS is also probably on Sam’s shyte list). Will BRICS fold? 

Sam’s minions and ideologues (service personnel to the Players) believe they are geniuses because Americans don’t die in these wars; the people in the region where the wars take place die in these wars, and then States fail, and after States fail, the geniuses in Congress have no idea what’s next. Nationa building? China does that — those sly celestials! No, the elected officials in The United States of New Miracles are better at thoughts and prayers. The Syrian army was starving and gave up. Frozen conflicts thaw out, and fighting on an empty stomach is hard. Remember that Peter Theil when you are putting together your private security force. Remember to have a good PX where your soldiers can spend their cryptocurrency. 

It will be fun listening to folks try to explain what’s next in Syria. How many years do you think we’ll have access to the Tubes? Until the Tubes go offline, folks in the West will enjoy “the having the conversation shows” and WWE, UFC, NFL sports, and Netflix documentaries about greenwashing and consumerism. It makes us feel good. We are safe in the States with our guns and opioids unless you are the CEO of a medical insurance company. 

Ain’t no more revolutionaries, only fat, well-entertained folks waiting for circumstances to dictate how the future and Great Nature wrap things up.

Tafas: [talking of Britain] “Is that a desert country?” “No: a fat country. Fat people.” — T.E. Lawrence. 

Ain’t no peacemakers. Ain’t no adventurers no more. There will only be tech libertarians left at the end of the day to spruce up the depopulated country club with engineered offspring. No, the tech billionaires won’t be partying like it’s 2099 in an underground cavern on Mars; we won’t be that lucky. When the country club has been rewilded and landscaped, all the heroes will have been martyred. 

I’m glad I’m old. 

USA! USA! USA! 

“If we’ve been telling lies, you’ve been telling half-lies. A man who tells lies, like me, merely hides the truth. But a man who tells half-lies has forgotten where he put it.” — Mr. Dryden (Lawrence of Arabia)

Tools For Health, Peace and Liberation

What happened to ancient wisdom?

"Language is the road map of a culture. It tells you where its people come from and where they are going." —Rita Mae Brown

Why?

Because.

A good salesperson will keep their pitches as brief as possible. Expounding upon the many reasons one might want something or to do something requires effort and thought. If a salesperson makes you think too much, she’ll lose the sale.

Manipulation is easy.

Who am I? What do I want? Why do I want it? How will I get it? What influences me? These are challenging questions.

There are many ways to categorize questions!

We can ask questions based on the answer we seek:

• Factual Questions: Seek straightforward information or facts.

  • Example: "What is the capital of France?"

• Conceptual Questions: Explore deeper meanings, theories, or ideas.

  • Example: "What are the main causes of poverty?"

• Open-ended Questions: Allow for a wide range of answers and encourage detailed responses.

  • Example: "How has technology impacted your life?"

• Closed-ended Questions: Limit the answer options to "yes" or "no" or a specific choice.

  • Example: "Do you prefer coffee or tea?"

Based on their purpose:

• Leading Questions: Suggest a particular answer or point of view.

  • Example: "Wouldn't you agree that this is the best solution?"

• Probing Questions: Follow up on a previous answer to gain further insights.

  • Example: "Can you tell me more about that?"

• Rhetorical Questions: Asked for effect, not expecting a direct answer.

  • Example: "Is the sky blue?"

• Hypothetical Questions: Pose a scenario or situation to explore possibilities.

  • Example: "What would you do if you won the lottery?"

Based on their structure:

• Direct Questions: Straightforward inquiries using a typical question format.

  • Example: "Where did you go to school?"

• Indirect Questions: A more polite or subtle way of asking for information.

  • Example: "I was wondering where you went to school."

• Multiple Choice Questions: Offer a set of answers to choose from.

  • Example: "Which of these is a primary color: a) green, b) red, c) purple?"

This is not an exhaustive list; many questions can fall into multiple categories. The type of question used depends on the context, the desired information, and the relationship between the asker and the respondent.

The fact that we ask questions makes us unique. We may be the only species in the Universe that asks questions.

Our ingenuity, adaptability, and toolmaking are aspects of our species that have made us unique and successful in all environments, including outer space.

Language: The First Tool

Before the advent of physical tools, early humans wielded a far more powerful and transformative tool: language. Language, a complex communication system, is a miracle of evolution that allowed our ancestors to share ideas, coordinate actions, and pass on knowledge across generations. Language facilitated strategizing for hunts, fostered social bonds, accelerated the development of ingenious, tangible tools, and allowed us to pass on our knowledge and techniques for making tools from generation to generation. Language is the bedrock upon which the edifice of human ingenuity was built.

Our brains, particularly in regions like Broca's and Wernicke's, specialize in language processing. This complex neural circuitry allows us to understand and produce speech, a capability not found in other primates to the same degree.

The descent of the larynx and the intricate structure of our vocal tract enable us to produce a wide range of sounds necessary for complex speech. These anatomical adaptations distinguish us from our primate relatives and are crucial for developing spoken language. The complex myriad of causes for selecting these anatomical adaptations is fascinating and worth investigating. Evolution is an exciting and illuminating domain of science that everyone should understand and be able to explain to a ten-year-old child.

Some theories propose that language evolved from gestures. The intricate hand movements and facial expressions used by primates for communication laid the groundwork for developing more complex language systems.

When our ancestors transitioned to bipedalism, the skull underwent changes to balance atop the spine. This led to a downward shift of the larynx (voice box), creating a longer, more spacious vocal tract. Our expanded cavity of the vocal tract allowed for greater resonance and a wider range of sound production.

Walking upright freed our hands, increasing dexterity and fine motor control. Fine motor control is linked to the intricate neural networks that control both hand movements and the muscles involved in speech production. The enhanced dexterity may have facilitated the development of complex vocalizations.

Bipedalism also altered our breathing patterns, allowing for greater control over respiration. This finer airflow control is crucial for producing the sustained and nuanced sounds necessary for speech.

The open savanna environment favored long-distance communication. Visual signals were less effective in tall grasses, putting a premium on vocal communication. This environmental pressure favored individuals with anatomical adaptations, allowing for more precise and complex vocalizations.

Think of it this way: as our ancestors ventured into the savanna, walking upright, their hands-free, they needed to communicate across greater distances. The anatomical changes brought about by bipedalism, particularly the repositioning of the larynx, provided the physical foundation for more complex vocalizations. Complex vocalizations, coupled with the environmental pressures of the savanna and the increasing complexity of social interactions, created some of the conditions for the evolution of language.

The evolution of language in humans is a complex process with multiple contributing factors. While walking upright was a crucial step, other factors, such as brain development, social interaction, and cultural evolution, played significant roles.

Our understanding will grow if scientists remain interested in how human language evolved.

Whenever I contemplate language, I think of C++, mathematics, music, dance, math, seduction, food, and more. I love language and communication.

"He who knows no foreign languages knows nothing of his own." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Cultural Perspective

As inherently social creatures, humans have always relied on language to facilitate cooperation, knowledge sharing, and the formation of complex social structures. Language's enhanced communication has been a significant survival advantage, allowing for better hunting, gathering, and defense coordination. Its contribution to human survival and advancement is something we should all appreciate.

As humans developed increasingly complex tools, precise instruction, and knowledge transfer became crucial. Language provided the means to communicate intricate techniques and pass down accumulated knowledge across generations, accelerating technological advancement.

Language allows humans to do more than communicate. It enables us to express abstract ideas, share stories, and create symbolic representations of the things and experiences in our world. Language empowers this capacity for symbolic thought, which has been instrumental in inspiring creativity, cultural development, and the transmission of complex information. It's astounding to think about the role of language in these aspects of human life.

The Interplay

These anatomical and cultural factors likely co-evolved, with each influencing the other. As our brains and vocal tracts adapted for language, the benefits of enhanced communication drove further cultural development. Cultural, artistic, and practical crafts created positive feedback loops, accelerating language evolution and human societies' complexity.

Language, as a powerful tool, has not only shaped our culture but has also been shaped by it. This unique evolutionary trajectory of language allows us to communicate, cooperate, and create in ways no other species can. It is a testament to the profound influence of language on human societies, enlightening us about its role in shaping our culture.

Why the meaning of sin changed radically during the first centuries of Christianity

Language and The Problem of Evil

Language constructs a human-centric reality. Language is a way of seeing things that can never represent the totality of reality. Without complex languages, our emotional reactions and ways of understanding things could not have become so robust, creative, and full of emotion and abstraction.

We are social creatures who depend on each other to survive and thrive. Our language differentiates, explains, and justifies.

The concepts of evil and "sin" are deeply intertwined with language and culture. Evil and sin are human constructs that vary significantly across cultures, traditions, and belief systems.

Abrahamic Religions

In Judaism, sin is often seen as a transgression against God's commandments, a violation of the covenant. It implies a separation from God and requires repentance and atonement to restore the relationship.

In Christianity, sin is understood as falling short of God's ideal, a rebellion against divine will. It's often associated with the concept of original sin inherited from Adam and Eve. An emphasis is placed on forgiveness and redemption through faith in Jesus Christ.

In Islam, sin is defined as disobedience to Allah's commands. It's an act of rebellion against the divine will and carries consequences in the afterlife. Repentance, seeking forgiveness, and good deeds are essential for atonement.

"Say, ˹O Prophet, that Allah says,˺ “O My servants who have exceeded the limits against their souls! Do not lose hope in Allah’s mercy, for Allah certainly forgives all sins. He is indeed the All-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” (Quran 39:53)

The above is far from a comprehensive discussion of the meaning of sin in Abrahamic religions. Scholars, theologians, and mystics across millennia have explored its depths from multiple perspectives and in many contexts.

A groundbreaking account of how religion made society possible

Buddhism takes a unique approach to "sin," diverging significantly from the Western notion of transgression against divine authority, the Abrahamic "Big Gods."

Focus on Actions and Consequences (Karma)

Instead of "sin," Buddhism focuses on karma. Karma refers to the law of cause and effect, where every action—mental, verbal, or physical—has consequences. Actions motivated by greed, hatred, and delusion are considered "unskillful" (akusala) and lead to suffering for oneself and others. Conversely, actions motivated by generosity, lovingkindness, and wisdom are "skillful" (kusala) and lead to positive outcomes.

No Inherent Sinfulness

Buddhism doesn't believe in the concept of original sin or that humans are inherently sinful. Every individual has the potential for Enlightenment, regardless of their past actions. The focus is on recognizing and understanding the causes of unskillful actions and cultivating skillful ones.

Money, as our prime motivator, has made us unskillful in the most harmful ways. Malicious incentives blind us to the crucial importance of Great Nature, energy, and stocks and flows of various kinds.

Emphasis on Intention

Intention plays a crucial role in determining an action's karmic impact. An action performed maliciously carries a heavier karmic weight than one done out of ignorance or misunderstanding.

Think of manslaughter vs. premeditated murder in our legal system.

No Divine Judgment

There's no concept of a God judging and punishing individuals for their sins. Suffering arises naturally from unskillful actions, and liberation comes from purifying the mind and cultivating wisdom.

We are responsible for our thoughts and actions. I won't touch the third rail of free will vs. determinism here.

Path to Liberation

The path to liberation involves understanding the nature of karma, cultivating ethical conduct, and practicing mindfulness and meditation. Through these practices, individuals can purify their minds, overcome negative tendencies, and ultimately achieve Enlightenment.

In Buddhism, Enlightenment, often called Bodhi or Awakening, is the ultimate goal of those who practice its precepts and way of life. It represents a profound and transformative shift in consciousness, freeing an individual from suffering and the cycle of rebirth.

Sometimes, I think of rebirth as making the same mistakes repeatedly without learning from my mistakes.

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."

There's no evidence Albert Einstein said this. Its true origin remains uncertain, with various sources suggesting it may have emerged from Narcotics Anonymous or other 12-step programs. That makes perfect sense to me, having had my share of hangovers.

Nature of Enlightenment

Enlightenment is the cessation of Dukkha, the Buddhist term encompassing all forms of suffering, dissatisfaction, and unease. These disorders of the mind include physical and mental pain, as well as the existential angst associated with impermanence and attachment.

"Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." —Old proverb

Insight into reality involves a direct and experiential understanding of its true nature. It involves seeing through the illusions of the self and the permanence of phenomena, leading to the realization of Anatta (no self) and Anicca (impermanence).

Liberation from the Cycle of Rebirth breaks the cycle of Samsara, the continuous cycle of birth, death, and rebirth driven by karma.

"There is no path to happiness: happiness is the path."

Samsara is a fundamental concept in Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, and other Indian religions. It's a Sanskrit word that means "wandering" or "world," but in a spiritual context, it refers to the cycle of birth, death, and rebirth.

"Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned."

Samsara is often depicted as a wheel, symbolizing the continuous cycle of birth, life, death, and rebirth. This cycle is driven by karma, where actions in one life have consequences that influence future rebirths.

We can easily see that our actions affect posterity. That is, if we value future generations like we value our own.

Realms of Existence

A mixture of pleasure and suffering characterizes the human realm. The Animal realm is driven by instinct and experiences limited awareness. The Godly realms (Devas) are Characterized by pleasure and long life but are still subject to impermanence and eventual rebirth. Hell realms (Narakas) involve intense suffering and torment.

Causes of Samsara

Ignorance (Avidya) or a lack of understanding of the true nature of reality, or what I call Great Nature. Attachment (Trishna) is clinging to desires, possessions, and the illusion of a permanent self (egocentrism). Karma is the accumulation of actions and consequences that shape future rebirths.

Goal: Liberation (Moksha or Nirvana)

In many Indian religions, the ultimate goal is liberation from Samsara. We must break free from the rebirth cycle and attain lasting peace and freedom from suffering.

Stop making insane choices and mistakes and live well and healthily within Great Nature. Our social norms may be pathological.

Would modern psychology be needed if we sincerely and diligently practiced Buddhism or any profound wisdom tradition?

How to Escape Samsara

Following ethical principles of living a virtuous life, avoiding harmful actions, and cultivating positive karma. Engage in spiritual practices, including meditation, yoga, and other activities to purify the mind and gain insight into reality. Practice devotion, surrendering to a higher power while seeking divine grace. Recognize the true nature of the self and reality (Great Nature), transcending the illusion of separateness.

The goal is to break free from malicious cycles and attain liberation, lasting peace, and freedom.

Characteristics of an Enlightened Being

Wisdom (Prajna) is the deep understanding of reality free from delusion and ignorance. Compassion (Karuna) is the boundless empathy and love for all beings arising from the realization of interconnectedness. Ethical Conduct (Sila) involves living by moral principles, naturally arising from wisdom and compassion. Peace and Equanimity are the states of inner peace and tranquility undisturbed by external circumstances.

The Path to Enlightenment

The Noble Eightfold Path provides a practical framework for cultivating the qualities necessary for Enlightenment. It includes proper understanding, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration. Meditation is central to Buddhist practice; meditation cultivates mindfulness, concentration, and insight into the nature of the mind and reality (Great Nature). Moral conduct involves living ethically, creating a foundation for spiritual growth, and reducing negative karma.

There are levels of Enlightenment: stream-enterer (Soptapanna), once-returner (Sakadagami), non-returner (Anagami), and Arahant, a fully Enlightened person having eradicated all attachments and attained complete liberation from suffering.

As you can see, Buddhism is an ancient, highly developed, and profound system of practices and concepts worth exploring.

The answers to our daily worries and anxieties – big or small – lie at the heart of Stoic philosophy.

Beyond Concepts and Language

Ultimately, Enlightenment is beyond intellectual understanding and cannot be fully grasped through language. It's an experiential realization that transcends words and concepts.

Enlightenment in Buddhism is a profound state of liberation from suffering and the cycle of rebirth. It's achieved through cultivating wisdom, compassion, and ethical conduct, culminating in a direct realization of the true nature of reality. While the path may be challenging, the rewards are immeasurable, offering lasting peace, freedom, and fulfillment.

I also recommend looking into Stoicism as a powerful and profound path toward understanding Great Nature, oneself, and society and as a method of attaining peace, equanimity, and wisdom. As with Buddhism, we have many great sources and teachers of Stoic wisdom, both contemporary and ancient.

I'm a big fan of Massimo Pigliucci's work.

The Rule of St. Benedict

Consider contrasting the above precepts and practices with The Rule of St. Benedict, written around 530 CE, emphasizing a balanced and ordered existence centered on prayer and work.

I. Prologue:

• Call to seek God and submit to the Rule.

• Emphasis on obedience, humility, and stability.

II. The Instruments of Good Works (Chapters 3-7):

• Obedience: Prompt and joyful obedience to God and superiors.

• Silence: Cultivating inner and outer silence for contemplation.

• Humility: Recognizing one's dependence on God and practicing selflessness.

• Discipline: Accepting correction and penance for growth.

III. The Abbot (Chapters 2 & 64):

• Role of the Abbot: The spiritual father and leader of the monastery, responsible for guiding and caring for the community.

• Qualities of an Abbot: Wise, compassionate, and just.

IV. The Daily Life of the Monk (Chapters 8-20):

• The Divine Office (Liturgy of the Hours): Regular communal prayer throughout the day and night.

• Work: Manual labor and other tasks to support the community and cultivate humility.

• Reading and Study: Spiritual reading and study for intellectual and spiritual growth.

• Meals: Simple and moderate meals taken in silence.

• Sleep: Sufficient rest for physical and spiritual renewal.

V. Reception of New Members (Chapter 58):

• Discernment: A careful process for admitting new members to ensure their commitment.

• Novitiate: Period of training and formation before full membership.

VI. Discipline and Penance (Chapters 23-30):

• Correction: Fraternal correction for minor faults.

• Penance: More severe penalties for serious offenses, focused on restoration and reconciliation.

VII. Community Life (Chapters 31-57):

• Rank and Order: Respect for seniority and authority within the community.

• Common Goods: Sharing of possessions and resources.

• Hospitality: Welcoming guests and strangers with kindness.

VIII. Organization and Administration (Chapters 65-73):

• Officials: Appointment of monks to specific roles and responsibilities.

• Property: Management of the monastery's resources and finances.

Key Principles:

• Ora et Labora ("Pray and Work"): The central motto of Benedictine life, emphasizing the balance between prayer and manual labor.

• Stability: Commitment to remaining in the same community for life.

• Community: Living in a supportive and harmonious community.

• Moderation: Avoiding extremes in all things.

• Conversion of Life: Continual striving for spiritual growth and transformation.

The Rule of St. Benedict has provided a framework for monastic life for over 15 centuries.

Understanding Christianity provides a powerful context for understanding the development of Modernity.

Stages of Modernity

The Middle Ages (c. 5th - 15th centuries)

Dominant Features:

• Feudalism: A hierarchical social system with land ownership and loyalty as central tenets.

  1. The Church: Powerful religious institution influencing all aspects of life.

  2. Limited Social Mobility: Rigid social structure with little opportunity for advancement.

  3. Agrarian Economy: A primarily agricultural society with limited trade and technology.

Seeds of Change:

• Rise of Towns and Trade: Gradual emergence of urban centers and merchant class.

  1. Universities: Centers of learning and scholarship begin to challenge traditional authority.

  2. The Black Death: Demographic upheaval that disrupts the feudal system.

The Age of Discovery (c. 15th - 17th centuries)

Key Developments:

• Exploration and Expansion: European voyages lead to the discovery of new lands and trade routes.

  1. Rise of Mercantilism: The economic system focused on accumulating wealth through trade and colonization.

  2. Scientific Revolution: New discoveries and methods challenge traditional views of the Universe.

  3. Humanism: Emphasis on human reason and potential, inspired by classical learning.

Impact:

• Global interconnectedness: Increased contact between different cultures and continents.

  1. Challenges to Authority: Questioning of traditional knowledge and religious dogma.

  2. Growing Individualism: Emphasis on human agency and potential.

The Enlightenment (c. 18th century)

Core Ideas:

• Reason and Rationality: Emphasis on logic, critical thinking, and scientific inquiry.

  1. Individual Rights and Liberties: Belief in natural rights and the social contract.

  2. Progress and Reform: Optimism about human potential and the possibility of social improvement.

Key Figures:

• John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, Voltaire

Impact:

• Political Revolutions: American and French revolutions inspired by Enlightenment ideals.

  1. Rise of Democracy: Challenges to absolute monarchy and the growth of representative government.

  2. Scientific Advancements: Further progress in science and technology.

The Age of Wonder (c. late 18th - early 19th centuries)

Characteristics:

• Romanticism: Emphasis on emotion, imagination, and the sublime in nature and art.

  1. Industrialization: The early stages of the Industrial Revolution saw new sources of energy give rise to new technologies, industries, and factories (a new kind of labor).

  2. Social Change: Urbanization, growth of the working class, and new social problems.

Impact:

• Technological Innovation: Development of new machines and manufacturing processes.

  1. Social Disruption: Challenges to traditional ways of life and the rise of social inequality.

  2. Artistic Expression: Romantic movement in literature, art, and music.

The Industrial Revolution (c. 18th - 19th centuries)

Key Features:

• Mass Production: Factories and machines produce goods on a large scale.

  1. Technological Advancements: Steam engines, railroads, and other innovations transform transportation and communication.

  2. Urbanization: Mass migration from rural areas to cities for factory jobs.

Impact:

• Economic Growth: Increased production and wealth, but also economic inequality.

  1. Social Transformation: Rise of capitalism, new class structures, and social movements.

  2. Environmental Impact: Pollution and resource depletion become growing concerns.

Age of Wonder

Scientists and Inventors:

• James Watt (1736-1819): Scottish inventor whose improvements to the steam engine powered the Industrial Revolution.

  1. Alessandro Volta (1745-1827): Italian physicist who invented the first electric battery.

  2. Joseph Priestley (1733-1804): English chemist who discovered oxygen.

  3. Antoine Lavoisier (1743-1794): French chemist considered the "father of modern chemistry."

  4. Edward Jenner (1749-1823): English physician who pioneered the smallpox vaccine.

Writers and Artists:

• William Blake (1757-1827): English poet and artist whose visionary works explored mystical themes.

  1. Mary Shelley (1797-1851): Author of Frankenstein, a Gothic novel that explored the dangers of unchecked scientific ambition.

  2. Lord Byron (1788-1824): Romantic poet known for his passionate and rebellious spirit.

  3. J.M.W. Turner (1775-1851): English Romantic painter known for his dramatic landscapes and seascapes.

Industrial Revolution

Inventors and Engineers:

• Richard Arkwright (1732-1792): English inventor of the water frame, a key development in the textile industry.

  1. Eli Whitney (1765-1825): American inventor of the cotton gin, which revolutionized cotton production.

  2. George Stephenson (1781-1848): English engineer who built the first public inter-city railway line using steam locomotives.

  3. Isambard Kingdom Brunel (1806-1859): English engineer who designed bridges, tunnels, and ships, including the Great Western Railway and the SS Great Britain.

  4. Henry Bessemer (1813-1898): English inventor of the Bessemer process for mass-producing steel.

Social Reformers and Thinkers:

• Robert Owen (1771-1858): Welsh social reformer who advocated for utopian socialism and improved working conditions.

  1. Karl Marx (1818-1883): German philosopher and economist who developed the theory of Marxism, critiquing capitalism and advocating for communism.

  2. Charles Dickens (1812-1870): English novelist whose works depicted the social injustices of the Industrial Revolution.

From Pulitzer Prize-winning author Greg Grandin comes the stunning, never before told story of the quixotic attempt to recreate small-town America in the heart of the Amazon

The list of impactful individuals during this time is long, and much has been written about them. Their innovations, ideas, and creative works shaped history and continue influencing today’s world.

These stages represent a broad overview of the transition from the medieval to the modern era. Each period builds upon the previous one, with new ideas and developments shaping our world. These stages are not always clearly defined and often overlap. However, they provide a valuable framework for understanding Modernity’s complex and fascinating journey.

Understanding abstract concepts like evil and sin is crucial if “the polycrisis” can be metaphorically linked to sinfulness.

Differences from the Western Concept of Sin

Buddhism has no Absolute Moral Code, fixed commandments, or rules defining sin. The emphasis is on understanding the consequences of one’s actions and cultivating wisdom and compassion. The focus is on Self-Responsibility. Individuals are responsible for their actions and the resulting karma. There’s no reliance on divine forgiveness or intervention. There is a strong emphasis on transformation. The goal is not to avoid punishment but to transform the mind and achieve liberation from suffering.

The same could be said of Stoicism.

"Waste no more time arguing about what a good man should be. Be one.” —Marcus Aurelius

In essence, Buddhism offers a nuanced perspective on actions and their consequences. It encourages individuals to cultivate skillful actions, purify their minds, and ultimately transcend the cycle of suffering.

Homo sapiens find great utility in creating myths and religious doctrines.

"There is a God-shaped vacuum in the heart of every man which any created thing cannot fill, but only by God, the Creator, made known through Jesus." —Blaise Pascal

More Perspectives

In Baháʼí Faith, sin is seen as “missing the mark,” a failure to live up to one’s potential. It’s a deviation from the path of spiritual growth and development. Emphasis is placed on striving for moral excellence and contributing to the betterment of humanity.

Many indigenous traditions view “sin” as actions that disrupt the harmony and balance of the natural world and the community. Respect for nature, ancestors, and the interconnectedness of all beings is essential.

"Should anyone be afflicted by a sin, it behooveth him to repent thereof and return unto his Lord. He, verily, granteth forgiveness unto whomsoever He willeth, and no one may question that which it pleaseth Him to ordain. He is, in truth, the Ever-Forgiving." —Baháʼu'lláh, 2 The Kitáb-i-Aqdas

Ten Years In Japan

I spent ten years in Japan and truly felt and loved Wabi-sabi (侘び寂び). Wabi-sabi sounds like a Japanese delicacy. I also loved Nabe, Sake, Okonomiyaki, Soba and Wasabi. My veterinarian in Portugal mistook the name of one of our cats, Wawaji, for Wasabi. I love Wasabi, too. I miss Asian food. Once, long ago in my youth, I was at a picnic with Japanese friends in Ueno Park in Tokyo. After several beers, one of the guys there asked me to try something, gave me a big wad of Wasabi, and said, “Just eat it; it’s like candy. Do you like spicey”? I knew what it was and wanted to impress him, so I feigned ignorance and gobbled the whole wad down. I pretended to chew and swallowed a wad of Wasabi—my stomach exploded. I kept a straight face, said it was delicious, and asked for more. While everyone at the party expressed their surprise, I slipped off behind a tree and suffered for a while before returning to the group, drinking a few cups of sake with some Mochi 餅 (sticky rice cake) and Osembe せんべい (rice crackers).

Wabi-sabi (侘び寂び) is a deeply ingrained aesthetic philosophy in Japanese culture that finds beauty and serenity in imperfection, impermanence, and incompleteness. It’s a worldview that embraces the natural cycle of growth and decay, finding profound meaning in the authentic and the unpretentious.

Core Principles of Wabi-sabi (侘び寂び)

Wabi-sabi values the flawed, the asymmetrical, and the irregular. It sees beauty in cracks, blemishes, and age’s natural wear and tear. It acknowledges the transient nature of all things. Nothing lasts forever, and this impermanence is seen as a source of beauty rather than something to be feared. Wabi-sabi appreciates simplicity and the understated. It finds elegance in the unfinished and the unadorned. It values natural materials and processes, embracing the inherent qualities of things rather than striving for artificial perfection. Wabi-sabi finds beauty in the humble and the essential, stripping away excess and focusing on the essence of things.

Kintsugi (Japanese: 金継ぎ, lit. 'golden joinery')

Wabi-sabi is deeply influenced by Zen Buddhist principles, particularly the acceptance of impermanence and the appreciation of simplicity. The Japanese tea ceremony (Chado) was crucial in developing wabi-sabi aesthetics, emphasizing rustic simplicity and natural materials.

Kintsugi is the art of repairing broken pottery with gold lacquer, highlighting the cracks and imperfections rather than hiding them. Japanese Gardens are often designed to evoke a sense of tranquility and natural beauty, with asymmetrical arrangements, weathered stones, and moss-covered paths. Traditional Japanese architecture frequently features natural materials like wood and paper, emphasizing simplicity and functionality. Wabi-sabi pottery embraces imperfections with irregular shapes, uneven glazes, and visible marks of the maker's hand.

Wabi-sabi encourages us to appreciate the beauty in everyday moments and objects, finding meaning in the simple and the imperfect. It's a philosophy that can bring peace and acceptance to our lives, reminding us to embrace the natural flow of life and find joy in the present moment.

You are probably familiar with some of the above examples of wisdom traditions. Do you practice any of them?

Let's return to sin, this time as a cultural construction.

Cultural values, beliefs, and social norms shape the concept of sin. What constitutes sin in one culture may not be considered sinful in another.

In many traditions, sin is framed as an offense against a higher power or a violation of divine law. Sin often serves as a moral compass, guiding individuals towards ethical behavior and discouraging actions that harm themselves or others. Most traditions offer pathways to overcome sin through repentance, atonement, or spiritual practices.

Ultimately, sin reflects the human quest for meaning, morality, and connection with something greater than ourselves. It's a complex and evolving concept that shapes our understanding of right and wrong.

Has anything leading up to this moment been sinful? We created sin, so we own it. We used the tool of language and then storytelling to give it power and meaning.

The Ascent of Humanity: Tools and Transformation

Atlatl

With the spark of language ignited and evolving rapidly, the Paleolithic period witnessed an explosion of toolmaking. Crude stone implements gave way to refined hand axes, spearheads, and scrapers. These tools, coupled with the mastery of fire, revolutionized hunting, food processing, and protection from the elements. Tools weren't merely extensions of human hands but extensions of the human mind, enabling our ancestors to reshape their environment and destiny.

The transition to the Neolithic era brought forth agriculture and animal and human domestication through the evolution of toolmaking and storytelling. Tools for farming, pottery, and weaving emerged, further transforming human societies. The rise of more extensive, settled communities led to new social structures, trade networks, and the beginnings of civilization. Tools were no longer just for survival; they shaped culture, fostered innovation, and drove expansion and the scale and impact of human endeavors. Most of all, it drove competition for control of resources and conquest of territory and other species and groups of people.

The Paradox of Progress: From Smart Phones to Extinction

Fast-forward millennia and the pace of tool development has accelerated exponentially. From the Industrial Revolution to the Digital Age, humans became masters of their domain, wielding tools of incredible power and complexity. Thanks to the work done by fossil-fueled machines developed across the Industrial Revolution, our species proliferated and went to the moon. Nuclear energy, space travel, and the internet are all testaments to human ingenuity. Yet, this technological prowess came at a cost.

Earthrise is a photograph of Earth and part of the Moon's surface that was taken from lunar orbit by astronaut William Anders on December 24, 1968, during the Apollo 8 mission. Nature photographer Galen Rowell described it as "the most influential environmental photograph ever taken."

Brainless slime named ‘the Blob’ flying to space to study weightlessness.

Aliens Visit

Our Alien explorers, sifting through the remnants of our civilization, uncover a stark truth. Beneath dirt and dust accumulated over hundreds of thousands of years lies a ubiquitous layer of e-waste telling the story of a species that mastered its environment but failed to master itself. The tools that propelled humanity to its "greatest" achievements ultimately contributed to its downfall. Overexploitation of resources, environmental degradation, and the specter of conflict—all consequences of unchecked technological advancement—led to another advanced civilization's demise.

Alien machines with advanced intelligence, set in motion by something out there in the Universe, with sophisticated technology that homo sapiens at their peak of progress would have been incapable of comprehending, instantly recognized the familiar and tragic paradox of our existence.

The creatures responsible for their civilization failed to grasp the importance of stewardship, sustainability, and peace. Whoever they were, they misunderstood the power and grace of Great Nature, and their tools became instruments of their destruction, leaving behind a silent testament to the fragility of even the most intelligent organic beings.

The shift to agriculture, with its hoards of commodities and rapidly evolving technologies, marked a turning point in human history in terms of sustenance and also in the dynamics of power. As humans settled into larger communities and cultivated the land, the ability to produce surplus food emerged. However, this surplus, including a surplus of the materials required to produce it, was not evenly distributed. Organized groups, often with a penchant for violence, seized control of these valuable resources, hoarding grain and other commodities. This control over essential resources translated into power—the power to command labor, to wage war, and to further expand their dominion.

This accumulation of power was reinforced and legitimized through cultural tools. Stories, myths, and religions were crafted, justifying the social hierarchy and the right of the powerful to rule. War, glorified in tales of heroism and conquest, became a tool for expanding and acquiring more resources and enslaved people. These narratives, woven into the fabric of society, masked the underlying exploitation and perpetuated the cycle of domination.

The rise of leaders with dark tetrad traits—narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and sadism—further exacerbated this destructive trajectory. These individuals, skilled in manipulation and ruthlessness, were adept at exploiting the systems of power for their selfish gain. They excelled at waging war, consolidating control, and justifying their actions through carefully constructed narratives.

The insatiable hunger for resources and power drives relentless expansion and exploitation. Robust social systems ravage ecosystems, poison people and animals, drive megafauna to extinction, and enslave entire populations. The tools that had initially allowed humans to thrive—agriculture, language, and social organization—became and continue to be instruments of destruction in the hands of the powerful.

The tragic irony is that these individuals, driven by their dark tetrad traits, often believed themselves to be visionaries, builders, and even saviors. They were blinded by their ambition, unable to recognize the devastating consequences of their actions. Their relentless pursuit of power and control ultimately led their civilization down a path of self-destruction, leaving behind a desolate planet as a testament to their hubris.

If you think the above paragraphs are alarmist or overstated, wait for circumstances to reveal their judgment of our sins.

During the long, painful, and violent process of human evolution, we continued to experience a wonderous ability to express beauty, love, compassion, empathy, and a profound, ineffable spiritual, transcendent connection to Great Nature.

Today, love and connection could yet blossom and overwhelm sin and ignorance. Feeling this potential encapsulates the beauty of being human, living in this place and time, and our profound, inexpressible miracle of consciousness, creativity, and bliss.

Communication In Service To Life

"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." —George Bernard Shaw

I have read and spoken with popular attention-seeking communicators. They are charming, confident, and adept at developing a following, but their messages often harm honest dialogue and understanding.

"WTF are these blowhards talking about, and WTF do they want?"

Effective communication aims to convey information clearly and foster understanding; some communication tactics prioritize manipulation and obfuscation over genuine dialogue. While valuable in constructing persuasive arguments, rhetorical skills can be weaponized to sway opinions through emotional appeals, subtle distortions, and carefully crafted narratives, often at the expense of truth and transparency. Gish galloping, with its overwhelming torrent of half-truths and irrelevant claims, aims to drown out opposing voices and create an illusion of authority, leaving the listener bewildered and unable to formulate a coherent response.

Fuyuko-Matsui-Japan-Keeping-up-the-Pureness-2024

While metaphors can be powerful tools for illustrating complex ideas and evoking emotional responses, their overuse in persuasive speech can harm clear communication. An overabundance of metaphors can obscure meaning, burying it beneath layers of figurative language. This can lead to confusion, especially when metaphors are mixed or extended beyond their intended purpose. Furthermore, excessive reliance on metaphors can create an impression of manipulation, as if the speaker is trying to bypass logical reasoning and appeal directly to emotions. In such cases, the audience may feel patronized or distrustful. A delicate balance is key: metaphors, when used judiciously, can illuminate and engage, but their overuse can cloud judgment and undermine the speaker's credibility.

Ideologically coded language further complicates the communication landscape. By embedding hidden meanings and dog whistles within seemingly innocuous phrases, this tactic allows individuals to signal allegiance to specific groups, reinforce in-group biases, and subtly demonize those who hold opposing views.

Pseudo-academic speech, with its complex jargon and convoluted sentence structures, creates a veneer of intellectual authority. It is often used to intimidate or impress rather than genuinely inform. This tactic can mask weak arguments, create artificial barriers to entry, and exclude those who lack specialized knowledge.

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." —Albert Einstein

Manipulation in communication goes beyond the words themselves. Skilled manipulators can use a wide range of subtle tactics to influence their audience.

"Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something." —Plato

Establishing False Authority: This tactic creates an illusion of expertise or credibility, even when unwarranted. Manipulators might use impressive titles, name-drop prestigious institutions, or flaunt superficial symbols of knowledge to gain the audience's trust. This can be especially effective when dealing with complex or unfamiliar topics where the audience may feel less confident in their judgment.

Manufacturing Scarcity: This technique creates a sense of urgency or fear of missing out. Manipulators might claim that an opportunity is limited, a product is in short supply, or a piece of information is exclusive. This pressure tactic can bypass rational decision-making, leading people to act impulsively without fully considering the consequences.

Employing Social Proof: This tactic leverages our innate desire to conform and belong. Manipulators might highlight how many people already agree with them, showcase testimonials from satisfied customers, or create a sense of bandwagon effect. This can be particularly powerful in social settings where individuals are likelier to follow the crowd.

Using Anchoring Bias: This technique involves setting an initial expectation or reference point that influences subsequent judgments. For example, a manipulator might start with an outrageously high price before offering a "discount," making the final price seem more reasonable even if it's still inflated.

Appealing to Ego: This tactic involves flattering the audience, making them feel special, or stroking their self-importance. Manipulators might offer exclusive access, personalized attention, or praise the audience's intelligence or discernment. This can make people more receptive to the manipulator's message and less likely to question their motives.

Exploiting Emotional Vulnerability: Skilled manipulators are adept at reading and exploiting their audience's emotions. They might use fear, anger, guilt, or empathy to sway opinions and influence behavior. This can be particularly effective when people are already feeling vulnerable or stressed.

A charismatic personality, confident demeanor, and carefully crafted image can all contribute to a con person's persuasive power. These factors can create an aura of trustworthiness and likability, making it easier for the manipulator to gain the audience's confidence and lower their guard.

Recognizing these manipulative tactics is crucial for protecting ourselves from undue influence. By being aware of the psychological techniques employed by skilled manipulators, we can become more critical consumers of information and make more informed decisions.

Not using the above techniques is boring. People want excitement and stimulation; they feel good if their biases and beliefs are emphasized and supported. We want to be outraged, entertained, and unique, so we gravitate to people who make us feel these things.

In contrast, good-faith communication prioritizes clarity, honesty, and mutual understanding. It values straightforward language, logical reasoning, and evidence-based arguments. It seeks to inform and enlighten rather than manipulate or deceive. This approach fosters trust, encourages open dialogue, and allows for the productive exchange of ideas. While it may lack the flashy appeal of rhetorical flourishes or the deceptive tactics of obfuscation, good-faith communication builds bridges of understanding. It paves the way for genuine connection and collaboration.

Do people respond to good communication? What is communication for?

"Communication leads to community, that is, to understanding, intimacy, and mutual valuing." —Rollo May

Communication in the Broad Sense

Communication is the transfer of information from one entity to another. This information can be in the form of signals, messages, or meanings. In a broad sense, communication can occur between any two entities, whether living or nonliving.

Chemicals and Energy Transfers

At the most basic level, chemicals "communicate" with each other through energy transfers. For example, when a molecule of ATP is broken down, it releases energy that different molecules can use to perform work. This energy transfer is a form of communication between the ATP molecule and the other molecules.

Bacteria and Viruses

Bacteria and viruses also communicate. For example, bacteria can release signaling molecules to coordinate their activities. Viruses can also communicate with their host cells, hijacking the cell's machinery to produce more viruses.

Pathogens and the Immune System

Pathogens like bacteria and viruses communicate with the immune system. When a pathogen enters the body, it is recognized by the immune system as foreign. This recognition triggers a series of events that lead to the destruction of the pathogen. The communication between the pathogen and the immune system is essential for the body to fight infection.

Animals

Animals communicate with each other in various ways, including vocalizations, body language, and scent. Great apes use a variety of vocalizations to communicate with each other. Dolphins and whales use clicks and whistles to communicate underwater. Dogs and cats communicate with their owners through body language and vocalizations.

Crows and Other Birds

Crows and other birds are known for their intelligence and communication ability. Crows can use tools, solve problems, and remember faces. They can also communicate with each other using a variety of vocalizations and gestures.

Insects Are Everywhere And Vital To Living Systems

I fear the demise of insects.

Despite their size, insects have mastered the art of communication, employing a diverse repertoire of methods to thrive in their complex world. Their most prevalent form of communication is chemical. These tiny creatures convey information to their fellow species members by releasing pheromones. These chemical messages act as invisible signals, from amorous intentions and urgent alarms to detailed directions toward food sources and intricate recognition codes for nestmates. It's like a hidden language of scents, allowing them to navigate their environment and maintain social order.

But insects are not just masters of scent but also skilled musicians. Crickets, grasshoppers, and cicadas fill the air with their characteristic chirps and buzzes, creating a symphony of sound. These sounds, produced by the rhythmic rubbing of wings or legs, serve various purposes. They can be romantic serenades aimed at attracting mates, fierce battle cries defending territory, or urgent warnings broadcast to others about impending danger.

Visual communication also plays a crucial role in the insect world. From the vibrant colors of butterflies that signal toxicity to predators to the mesmerizing light displays of fireflies seeking romance at night, insects utilize visual cues to attract attention, convey warnings, and communicate intentions. Some even engage in elaborate dances or physical displays, showcasing their agility and prowess.

Touch, too, serves as a means of communication for some insects. Ants, for example, use their antennae to tap or stroke each other, conveying intricate messages about food sources or potential threats. Bees, renowned for their intricate social structures, use a "waggle dance" to share information about the location of flowers with their hive mates, physically demonstrating the direction and distance through a series of movements.

Communication is a testament to nature's ingenuity, reminding us that even the smallest creatures possess a wealth of communication strategies essential for survival and success.

Life is communication.

Hung-Liu-China-Sisters-2000

The Theory of Mind

The theory of mind is understanding that other people have thoughts and beliefs. This ability is essential for effective communication. Humans develop the theory of mind at a young age. Some animals, such as great apes and dolphins, also have some theory of mind abilities.

Research increasingly supports the existence of culture in dolphins and whales. These cetaceans demonstrate learned behaviors that are passed down through generations, not solely determined by genetics. For example, different orca pods have unique hunting techniques, vocalizations, and social structures, suggesting cultural transmission of knowledge. Humpback whales exhibit cultural learning through their songs, which evolve and are shared across populations. Bottlenose dolphins display tool use, like using sponges to protect their snouts while foraging, a behavior learned from mothers. These examples highlight the capacity for social learning and cultural transmission within dolphin and whale communities, challenging the notion that culture is exclusive to humans.

Culture is more than shared traits; it's a learned way of life. We aren't born with culture; we acquire it by interacting with others and observing the world around us. This learning happens through formal channels, like education, and informal ones, like everyday experiences. Essentially, culture is absorbed as we grow within a particular society.

Furthermore, culture is a collective experience, a shared understanding that connects individuals within a group. This shared knowledge, beliefs, and practices facilitate communication and cooperation, allowing people to function effectively within their society. It's this shared foundation that enables a sense of community and belonging.

Culture relies heavily on symbols to convey meaning and transmit information. Language, art, rituals, and customs all serve as symbolic representations of a culture's values and beliefs. These symbols act as a powerful shorthand, conveying complex ideas and emotions and reinforcing a sense of identity and shared history.

Culture is not a static set of rules but rather an integrated and dynamic system. Different aspects of culture, such as religion, social norms, and art, are interconnected and influence each other. Moreover, culture constantly evolves, adapting to new circumstances as different cultures interact. This dynamic nature ensures that culture remains relevant and responsive to society's changing needs.

In its myriad forms, communication acts as both a sculptor and a solvent of culture. Information can foster understanding, empathy, and progress when accurate and freely flowing. It empowers individuals to make informed decisions, participate in democratic processes, and contribute to their communities. However, spreading misinformation and conspiracy stories (a conspiracy theory may have valid truth-claims and attempt to establish lines of evidence), often fueled by malicious intent or profit-driven algorithms, can erode trust, sow division, and hinder rational discourse. These fabricated narratives prey on fears and biases, creating echo chambers where critical thinking is stifled, and harmful ideologies can flourish.

"Words are, of course, the most powerful drug used by mankind." —Rudyard Kipling

At the heart of the polycrisis is a failure in communication and an erosion of culture.

Public relations, marketing, and advertising, while essential for informing consumers and promoting economic activity, can also manipulate perceptions and perpetuate harmful stereotypes. These persuasive techniques, when employed ethically, can educate and empower. However, corporations can also use the above forms of communication to create artificial needs, promote consumerism, and reinforce existing power structures. Propaganda, a more insidious form of persuasion often employed by political actors in support of wealthy donors, utilizes emotional appeals and distorted information to manipulate public opinion and advance specific agendas. Political speech itself, while crucial for democratic debate, can be weaponized to spread misinformation, sow discord, and undermine trust in institutions.

The anglosphere is plagued with communication pathologies motivated mainly by the desire for profits.

Toxic rationalizations and justifications are insidious mechanisms that allow individuals and groups to support harmful actions while maintaining a sense of self-justification. These mental gymnastics distort reality, suppress empathy, and ultimately erode the foundations of healthy communities and ecosystems.

"It's just business": This justification reduces complex ethical considerations to a simple profit-loss calculation. Political and business leaders can rationalize away environmental destruction, labor exploitation, and even human rights abuses if they contribute to the bottom line. This mindset prioritizes short-term gains over long-term sustainability and disregards the well-being of communities and ecosystems.

"It's for the greater good": This argument often masks harmful actions behind a facade of altruism. Displacing communities for infrastructure projects, suppressing dissent in the name of national security, or sacrificing individual rights for collective safety can all be justified under this banner. The "greater good" rationalization allows individuals to ignore the immediate harm inflicted on some for a supposed benefit to a larger group, often without proper evidence or consideration of alternative solutions.

"They're not like us": This dehumanizing tactic creates an artificial "other," justifying discriminatory policies and even violence. Racial profiling, religious persecution, chauvinism, and xenophobia all stem from this toxic belief. By denying certain groups' inherent worth and dignity, this rationalization enables individuals to inflict harm without experiencing empathy or remorse.

"Tradition/This is how it's always been done": This appeal to tradition resists change and perpetuates harmful practices. Influential players can defend gender inequality, caste systems, and environmental exploitation under the guise of preserving cultural heritage. This rationalization stifles progress, ignores evolving ethical standards, and prevents societies from addressing systemic injustices.

"Individual responsibility/They should just work harder": This justification shifts blame onto victims of systemic inequalities. Poverty, lack of access to healthcare, and educational disparities are attributed to personal failings rather than societal structures. This rationalization ignores the complex interplay of social, economic, and political factors that contribute to disadvantage, perpetuating cycles of poverty and injustice.

"Whataboutism/But they do it too": This deflection tactic avoids accountability by pointing fingers at others. Environmental damage, human rights violations, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and unethical business practices are justified by highlighting similar actions by others. This rationalization creates a false equivalency, distracting from the issue and preventing meaningful action.

These toxic rationalizations and justifications poison public discourse, erode trust, and hinder progress toward a more just and sustainable world culture. By recognizing these harmful thought patterns, we can challenge them, foster critical thinking, and promote a more empathetic and responsible approach to decision-making.

We need to think clearly and act. Cynical Players of The Great Game and True Believers destroy trust in public institutions to pursue profits, power, and control or to fit in.

The rise of corporate "persons" and the concept of "money as speech" have further complicated the communication landscape. These legal and political constructs grant corporations disproportionate influence over public discourse, allowing them to shape narratives, lobby for favorable policies, and drown out dissenting voices. Religion and other faith-based belief systems, while offering solace and community to many, can also be sources of division and conflict. Dogmatic adherence to beliefs, often resistant to evidence-based reasoning, can hinder progress on critical issues and fuel intolerance.

Too many people seem stubbornly willing to ignore facts and evidence in a spiteful attempt to destroy groups that contradict their emotional beliefs.

In contrast to faith-based and emotionally driven communication, evidence-based communication relies on verifiable facts, scientific inquiry, and logical reasoning. This approach seeks to represent reality in the strictest sense, grounding discussions in empirical data and testable hypotheses. While not infallible, evidence-based communication provides a framework for understanding complex issues, evaluating claims, and making informed decisions.

Systems and complexity theories offer valuable perspectives on the interconnectedness of global challenges and the limitations of simplistic solutions. These frameworks emphasize the dynamic interplay of various factors, highlighting the need for holistic approaches that account for feedback loops, stocks and flows, unintended consequences, and emergent behavior. Faith-based belief systems, relying on fixed doctrines and supernatural explanations, often struggle to grapple with the complexities of climate change, habitat destruction, pandemics, the true causes of war and violent conflict, and economic inequality.

Antonio-Ole-Angola-The-Maculusso-Mural-2014

To transcend emotional reactions and cultivate a more reasoned perspective, we must foster critical thinking skills, promote media literacy, and encourage open dialogue. Good communication involves questioning assumptions, seeking diverse perspectives, and evaluating information sources. Recognizing the profit motive behind much of the disinformation and misinformation circulating today is crucial. We can become more discerning information consumers by understanding how algorithms prioritize engagement over accuracy and how sensationalism drives attention.

Ultimately, fostering a healthier communication ecosystem requires a collective effort. We must support independent journalism, invest in education, and hold platforms accountable for the content they amplify. We can create a more informed, resilient, and just society by prioritizing truth, reason, and empathy.

Fostering better communication and a healthier culture is not a passive endeavor; it's an active struggle that demands the participation of every one of us. Our collective responsibility requires us to challenge our biases, engage in open dialogue, and actively contribute to a more inclusive and informed society.

This journey towards better communication and a healthier culture begins within each of us. It demands that we bravely confront our ingrained biases and prejudices, those hidden assumptions that color our perceptions and shape our interactions. We must actively seek to understand the cultural baggage we carry, acknowledging how it might distort our understanding and hinder our ability to connect with others authentically. Through the courageous practice of self-reflection, we can dismantle the barriers that prevent genuine empathy and understanding.

"One of the most sincere forms of respect is actually listening to what another has to say." —Bryant H. McGill

But self-awareness is only the first step. We must also become active listeners, truly present in our conversations, striving to understand the words spoken and the emotions and intentions behind them. Active listening means quieting our internal monologue and resisting the urge to formulate our response while the other person is still speaking. Instead, we must lean in, listen deeply, and strive to see the world through their eyes. When we care about what others think and help them express themselves clearly through respectful questioning, we build bridges of understanding and create space for meaningful dialogue.

Our journey cannot end within the confines of our familiar circles. We must actively seek diverse perspectives, venturing beyond the comforting echo chambers where our beliefs are constantly reinforced. We must engage with people with different viewpoints, even those we might find challenging or uncomfortable. In these encounters, where our assumptions are tested and our perspectives broadened, we truly grow and learn.

In this age of information overload, we must also become discerning consumers of information, developing the critical thinking skills necessary to navigate the digital landscape. We must question the motives behind messages, consider potential bias, and seek reliable, evidence-based sources. Earnest, careful inquiries are our weapons against the insidious spread of misinformation and disinformation, threatening to erode the foundations of truth and trust.

And when we engage in conversation, even amidst disagreement, let us do so with respect and a commitment to understanding. Let us focus on shared goals and common ground, seeking to build bridges rather than walls. Let us choose our words carefully, avoiding inflammatory language and personal attacks that only serve to deepen divides.

Let us also support platforms and spaces that prioritize constructive dialogue, factual accuracy, and the inclusion of diverse voices. We should choose our news sources carefully, support independent journalism, or actively contribute to online communities that foster healthy debate and respectful exchange.

Finally, let us hold ourselves and others accountable for the language we use and the behaviors we exhibit. This requires courage, as it may mean speaking up when we witness harmful words or actions, even when it's uncomfortable. We create a culture of respect and responsibility through this collective commitment to accountability.

"Communication is the solvent of all problems and is the foundation for personal development." —Peter Shepherd

Developing a culture based on truth and good communication is a challenging path. It's an ongoing struggle, a continuous process of learning, adapting, and striving to improve people's lives. It's a valuable struggle, for it promises a more inclusive, informed, and resilient society.

Avoiding the struggle for good communication will lead to disaster. We know this; we witness the horrible effects of our inability to communicate sincerely and well every day.