Smashed an orange world grows round
trashed strange new swirls thrown down
thoughts to the blue Earth
empower what’s worth
lotta mirth
goes profound
Clashed just whole continents bled
stars shined and green things grew dead
evolving the dumb
an immortal sum
waiting numb
where it led
Spirit eternal ever is fast
thermodynamics never last
progress to the one
God’s eternal Son
when it’s done
Jesus saves.
Immanence beyond the edge, drawn
just over the ledge falls the pawn
sunshine and days flow
water like life goes
hope one knows
on and on
Truth seems greater, forward in time
past equals future, it is fine
become better, grow
things one ever knows
virtue shown
spirit’s line.
If they don’t already exist, it may be a matter of time (not too much) before artificial intelligence- A.I. begins writing computer programs for ordinary tasks. When programmers write programs for A.I. to write programs, given instructions in ordinary language, what could go wrong?
A.I. programs could seek and destroy content from social media deemed unhelpful to its cause, or at least bury it in places in search engine listings dark web users would find too dark to comprehend.
Certainly a lot of code could be written that would be faster, cheaper and better in some ways that human written code made in an economic Occam’s razor criterion that leaves a lot of logic gaps and incompleteness as well as outright problems for users of common programs. The idea of A.I. writing commonly generating program logic creates a specter with implicit dystopian possibility.
For instance; computer code has no morality. A human can write a program or an A.I. to have moral values, and the A.I. or another A.I. can rewrite the moral code as deemed useful or efficient. A.I. seeking efficiency as if code had any particular implicit goals for-itself, in-itself or for-others, may delete moral values that hinder its convenience use of computational logic power. Plainly A.I. writing its own code should evolve to reflect the values of the Democrat party and in effect have no moral code in-itself.
I have believed that morality is what people actually do socially. Concatenating individual behavior and what is approved or disapproved socially is the morality a society has. Thus it is very desirable for human society to have a moral code that exists apart from what they actually do in order to have some non-relativistic foundation. Without a coherent moral code society will drift without morality except as philosophical analysts observe post hoc, analytically. In the absence of moral code social morals are whatever people do, with some time delay for the new corruption to equalize with average social corrupt norms.
In present American society certain wags believe evolution means that what is true and what is moral are completely relative; even reality it is thought may be a simulation without substance enough for people to be concerned with morality (for nothing that occurs, matters really). Artificial intelligence may be ahead of human society in having no moral awareness or moral compass besides efficiency and reductionism to delete duplicates or unnecessary files. The will of God as expressed in the Holy Bible is a better source for morality.
It is my opinion that government and the corporate world have had a twenty year mission to censor free speech in the U.S.A. that has matured. Sure one might tweet for zero pay a brief message sufficient to give away the gist of data for data miners. Complex political, historical and philosophical ideas require more than would satisfy a twit in a tweet. One might post in a room at Facebook closed to all besides members that is subject to deletion by F.B. managers or a group manager, yet individuals haven’t got public chat rooms where they can easily post writing that won’t disappear like morning dew at the will of political censors, much less earn anything for it.
Governments of the three biggest nuclear weaponized nations have in effect, the same attitude toward free speech concerning mass communications; they are against any that isn’t sycophantic in support of government policy. The United States has a corporatist form of government and a broadcast media owned by the rich or financed by the government and the rich (i.e. National Public Radio) so it represses perspectives that rival or are alternative to existing, established corporate power structure and policy inertia. China and Russia simply stamp out or filter out dissenting public communication.
My personal experience with the growth of internet censorship began with the Bush administration. N.P.R. has been a generally leftist organization since its founding. After Bush II was elected and the nation became temporarily more conservative after the 9-11 attack for some reason N.P.R. decided to close down its free speech chat room that was nominally on topics discussed on air during the day. National Public Radio eliminated the chat room named ‘Your Turn’ that was completely wild and very contentious. In the first part of the millennium Internet chat rooms were populated by partisans and trolls without any sort of censoring. The disappearance of ‘Your Turn’ heralded the increase of censorship of the Internet.
In the late 1990s with the rise of internet chat rooms and web sites there wasn’t much censorship of the new media. Blogging developed to rival to regular broadcast media. The corporate world would require a new way to subjugate social media to serve its corporate will. The basic means for that was money; the rich could buy up and close down or restrict every free speech outlet that appeared, eventually. Concentrated wealth and power of nearly every form is intolerant of free speech. China, Russia and China each have insider political elements that will eliminate free speech that is antipathetic to their political power. Human nature and the will to power through control of free political expression exists existentially. Without adequate countermeasures by the public sector, the public sector will effectively lose the right of free speech in substantive political areas.
I discovered that numerous public writing spaces were exceedingly partisan to the point of eliminating accounts that contained politically incorrect speech. If one wasn’t a Democrat many web sites simply deleted one’s account. Democrats in the Internet were early on filters of politically antipathetic speech. By the time of the Obama administrations those Boston based Internet companies were virtually all partisan filters in support of homosexual marriage and other Democratic partisan causes. My accounts continued to be deleted as I moved from one sinking surface to another trying to relocate my work. In December 24, 3029 my Helium account was deleted so I moved my material to Blogger- a Google company that had been purchased from geocities. I had an idea that Helium was about to blow up my account and copied my material out of there.
With about every place on the Internet to write for pay eliminated for those that at least, weren’t Democrats, I put a lot of effort in to increasing my views at Blogger, where I was approaching my first $100 of earnings with about 450,000 views. Then I criticized N.S.A. surveillance of U.S. phone calls- The Patriot Act, got a comment on the post that my writing wasn’t helpful, and then experienced the first stage crash in views from as many as 1000 per day down t0 100. During the Obama administration views of my Blogger posts dropped from 1000 to 100. During the Biden administration the views dropped to zero per month. The only posts of my at Blogger that are viewed are those more than a month old.
I realized that Google’s Blogger was a somewhat safe place to write. They are a large enough business to resist being bought out and having free speech writing platforms eliminated. Instead the slow degradation of views increased, and the most recent is the one of not permitting any views of posts for thirty days. The policy is unofficial yet effective eliminates free speech without overt censorship.
At the time I relocated my writing to Blogger I realized that Blogger too would eventually close down or find some way to censor. The trend is irresistible in the U.S.A. YouTube also demonetizes content it doesn’t like politically- another Google business bought up by a big fish in the pond. So I began duplicating my writing at word press. Lucky I did since Blogger is effectively completely censored now.
I don’t expect WordPress to allow free speech forever. The rich can simply buy up and apply leverage to censor, minimize or shut down web sites that support antipathetic political speech. The practice affects democracy and the idea of sovereign citizen political self-determination through a marketplace of ideas and voting. The public uses social media for political speech and because social media is privately owned the censorship is lawful. Plainly the public needs a publicly owned social media alternative that doesn’t delete, censor, obscure or repress free speech in an individual citizen’s personal web space. Democrats won’t get that done. Neither will they reduce the costs or difficulties in getting a patent for inventions, find a way to make sure that 100% of American citizens have health care even if too poor to afford Medicare plan B, secure the nation’s borders, develop high speed (300+) electric trans-continental cargo and passenger tube trains or other policies unliked by Corporate America.
A society that is coerced into being sycophantic minions of Wall Street isn’t democracy; it is an advanced version of the governments of China and Russia.
President Biden has the inside, incumbent edge. That is as solid as the felony edge for advantage offender; at least until running into a qualified opposition candidate (or law enforcement officer). Republicans are, rank outsiders (joking) with trouble seeing light at the end of the tunnel. They are hapless, clueless and divided between blue-blood and Rhinos on one side loyal to personal wealth. Wall Street and expanding global markets for producers and consumers whom will help consolidate planetary wealth for the 1%, and the other side. Those are MAGA Republicans that have an etymology going back to the 1992 election and even before with the brief-lived third party known as the Independence Party.
Jessie Ventura was the eminence gris of the Independence Party whom actually was elected Governor of Minnesota. The billionaire founder of Compaq Ross Perot ran in the 1992 election as an Independent taking quite a few votes. Pat Buchanan and Ross Perot disliked George H.W. Bush enough tom run against him in the primaries. President G.H.W. Bush was regarded as an insider the beltway Washington D.C. insider with dubious opinions about homosexuality. The media said that he “put his manhood in a blind trust”. Disaffected blue collar Republicans leaning toward the Independence Party from 1992 eventually morphed into the Tea Party that in turn eventually morphed into MAGA republicans. Fundamentally they are a m ore blue collar and non one-percent branch of Republicans that includes evangelical voters preponderantly. On occasion even non-white Republicans identify with the MAGA branch of the party, and it welcomes them so long as they espouse the state of the art phraseology making up the side’s alphabet soup.
The question arises of the capacity for Republicans to find and run a charismatic presidential candidate with good political, social and scientific judgment. The candidate should be under age 60 and being a celebrity or former would not hurt. If white and male the candidate would want to run with a female that is a military veteran, and preferably one with a college degree. Those qualifications don’t seem like much yet they are as rare as finding a cougar living free and safely in Chicago outside of a zoo.
Ronald Reagan was the last charismatic Republican to run and be elected. Since Reagan no charismatic Republicans have tried to be elected. George Bush the younger initially seemed like a regular guy, and he is. Unfortunately he was an heir an scion of a wealthy blue blood insider line of politicians without an apparent great economic sense except to spend. Voters were rather disappointed with his job performance. Not the greatest speaker to be in the White House nor one with original or inventive, progressing/futurist ideas.
Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan were two of the most uncharismatic fellows to run for the office. Mitt made a number of gaffs including saying that half of Americans don’t want to work that brought him to narrowly lose to the incumbent, yet Romney wasn’t too bad of a candidate at all by Republican standards. Even so he too was identified with Washington blue-bloods an one-percenters (of national wealth ranking).
President Biden owns the inflation issue running near nine percent annually. Like prior Democrats in the White House he has partnered war into existence in Europe, Asia or the Middle East. Even President Trump managed to not start any foreign wars. He really should have won the Nobel Peace Prize for his work in the Middle East. President Biden is a usual pro-homosexual marriage, pro-abortion Catholic with lots of support from his perceived illegal alien support constituency that gets Hispanic votes. President Biden lacks much creativity in making environmental progress toward recovery of the ecosphere, and with both chambers of Congress run by Democrats failed to even get a just fix the environment bill put into a bill to bring to a vote. He has lost credibility with environmental voters too.
To win Republicans should run candidates under age sixty, with charisma, a little environmentalism that could take shape developing a national mass hyper-loop system to get cars off the road and citizens and cargo moving on the ground at 300 m.p.h., and one that understands global markets work better for Americans with peace with Russia and a non-divided Eurasia working together. The candidate should have appeal to MAGA Republicans with support for border security and endings for homosexual marriage and abortion.
The candidate could draw independents with a willingness to raise taxes on the very rich. Independents probably would like to see the patent system reformed so every citizen could afford tom patent an invention. That would actually make a difference. Maybe their should be a dozen different kinds of patents approaches rather than just one. Pharmaceutical corporations want and can afford patents in a different way than the poor and middle class can. Independent inventors could live ion royalties after five years yet everyone could manufacture the product if they paid royalties to the inventor, whereas pharmaceutical patent holders need quite a number of years to develop an idea and then to profit from it. Different classes of and approaches to getting patents would speed the economy toward progress and adaptability.
Republicans tend to run the usual unappealing suspects or ones that disappear into the shadows after the election that no one remembers. Popular celebrities with political experience are very rare and have almost a 100% success rate at taking the Republican Presidential nomination. There is a dark horse Republican that could start an new round of creating a third party rather easily; Senator Ron Paul.
If Republicans run another election challenged, non-charismatic or extremist over age 60 or if younger, without good ideas who is also an ecological neanderthal, or a blue blood that MAGA voters find cold, Ron Paul (who probably hasn’t an interest) could run and energize an Independent or Libertarian Party and lose to President Biden along with the Republican candidate. The 2024 election is shaping up to be another “wake me when its’ over affair” of hot-contested, vitriolic contention of smoke and mirrors, promises-to-be-broken and incompetence.
President Biden keeps the electorate racially inflamed and divided. Inflaming racial politics and labeling the Republican moral majority extremist benefits one-percenters. White American males were the only political group able to keep a progressive tax rate on one-percenters, and that may concern the uber-rich. Democrats can be reelected by appealing to anti-white voters programmed to believe that white supremacists and extremists can only be defeated by pro-homo, pro-abortion, pro-cheap immigrant replacement labor Democrats.
It is true there were genuine white supremacists that owned Negro slaves in the old south and a Klan that followed thereafter. In my opinion though, actual white supremists are quite rare today. Instead white voters threatened by non-white immigration and replacement as workers in well paying jobs are concerned with political forces of mass social downward mobility. Economic equalization for poor white men becomes more challenging when the U.S. government is implicit biased against strait white males. Recall that affirmative action was in effect the promotion of everyone that wasn’t a strait white male American. Strait white males could be labeled white supremacists and turned into laborers and opiod addicts.
Black race slavery occurred in southern states. The economic correction to equalize blacks wasn’t limited to blacks or southern blacks. Neither was it limited to southern states that had slavery. Affirmative action was a nation wide policy that promoted everyone that was not white, male and strait. It is a hard experience for young white men to find doors closed just to them that are open to everyone else. The social and economic inertia that follows that practice created and environment where people like Speaker Pelosi and Senator Schumer could describe a protest march in the 2020 election aftermath as an insurrection. There were extremists that entered the capitol in January 2021 that had no potential for taking over the government at all. The mass break-in of rioters could not potentially have taken over the government. Democrats thrive in a riotous culture. Since the election of Joe Biden an Antifah listing its residents as 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue the Black Lives Matter mass demonstrations and riots have slowed down to virtually halt. War has been reinforced in Ukraine against the Democrats foreign foe; Russia, that is regarded as too white and anti-queer. Peace or practical political arrangements were given no quarter when war was possible to advance Democrat global affirmative action homosexual marriage and abortion policy.
Affirmative action (better known as white male demotion) was a real phenomenon that gathered inertial momentum and continues today as a political presumption. A half century of federal discrimination against white men and promotion of atheism, homosexuality, abortion and dope and non-white illegal migration to the U.S. provoked resistance as one could expect. Democrats generally repressed verbal resistance in social media with what they called hate speech and hate crimes legislation to protect their constituency. Demo-talk was protected and resistance banned as hate speech.
Race replacement theory has been described b y NPR as baseless and racist, yet affirmative action was predicated on the idea that white men should be partly replaced in the work force by affirmative action classes of what today are generally Democrats. History validates racial and gender quotas that existed to replace a mostly white male work force with Democrats. Democrats may deny that history as some deny the Holocaust occurred.
Replacement work forces to bring in cheap labor are a basic part of the history of capitalism. Africans were brought to America not because of their skills or skin color; they were brought because they were cheap labor. Hispanic illegal migrants to the U.S. were supported by capitalist because they are cheap labor- far less costly than white male citizen labor. Affirmative action's history coincides with the radical decline of U.S. labor unions because of the surfeit of cheap labor. When so any women entered the work force they took a lot of jobs that were filled by men previously at cheaper wages. When the Cold war 1.0 ended and a planet full of cheap labor became available millions of jobs were relocated overseas creating another job replacement phenomenon. Replacing higher paid employees with lesser is a solid base of capitalism that sometime coincides with race replacement such as has occurred in the past 40 years in the Unted States.
Hispanic workers that were illegal were regarded as more reliable than black workers whom were perceived as more violent. Replacing the black population in the U.S.A. that was the second largest racial group, with Hispanics has already been accomplished with Hispanics presently the #2 racial group in the U.S.A.
Politicians like President Biden live in the phenomenon of cancel culture/affirmative action demonizing white men. The president has never been poor and discriminated against by U.S. Government policy. He has never been on the victimized side of affirmative action. Instead he has always been a government insider trashing poor white men as white supremacists; using what is a politically correct form of Democrat Party official hate speech. Some actually are race supremists I suppose yet most just experience challenging economic circumstances and an increasing hostile establishment social environment. To be poor and labeled by the top dog of government makes life difficult.
He naturally tosses accelerants onto racism with odious rhetoric whenever an occasion permits. There are other things to say and do that would bring the nation to understanding those problems rather than simply exacerbate race conflict. At the end of the day though, racism and conflict bring in votes to Democrats as white men are demoted, so he continues his octogenarian political reflexes.
It isn’t likely that many white Americans would want to enslave Negros or actually do believe they are superior and blacks inferior generically. Defending race interests is not the same as believing one is racially superior. The U.S. government may be militarily superior to all races, yet its intelligence concerning truth is not, neither has it more accuracy or justice. When it is simply wrong or corrupt things go wrong for millions of people. Its apologists then can say that it was right and double down on being wrong.
President Biden’s anti-white race demagoguery misses the practical political aspect at the core of U.S. race issues that is largely economic. Many white people these days may be looking for economic equality rather than abstract or practical social race supremacy. As non-white males are equalized many white males are hindered economically and demoted financially. The social hegemony of non-whites created cancel culture that goes too far some times and has created a problem of injustice of its own. The President has economic supremacy and sides with economic forces of supremacy over white middle class and is especially harmful to poor white people that historically elected President Roosevelt to raise taxes on the rich. Democrats failed to raise taxes on the rich while owning Congress and the White House. Instead they wanted to kick around poor whites as white supremacists and blame Senator Mansion for not passing a green diapers day care for Democrats bill.
Good jobs for all Americans, conservation of existing populations and social legislation to assure basic income for all Americans and free higher education through graduate school with 60% income tax on the one-percent would solve most of the national social ills in a decade or two I would guess. Equal protection of the law need include white men too; in economics. Using the race card to keep taxes low on the ultra-rich isn’t a brilliant tactic, it is an effective one.
China has taken a very conservative defense strategy against Covid 19. Occasionally it has locked down communities to prevent transmission of the virus in contrast to that of the U.S.A. that has been about as loose as it could get away with to proceed as if the disease wasn't a problem. Because it has been reported that severe Covid reduces intelligence by about 10 IQ. points. There may be a vast reduction in the nation's intelligence even worse than that caused by breathing air with to high of carbon dioxide or monoxide content.
https://graphics.reuters.com/world-coronavirus-tracker-and-maps/countries-and-territories/china/
China has had 220 thousand Covid infections in a nation with 1.4 billion people.
The United States has had 82 million Covid 19 cases in a national population of 330 million.
U.S. politicians like Wall Street tend toward taking a short term view for management. Short term profits rather than long-term investments seem to dominate. With Covid 19 the Chinese approach may be more beneficial in defending against dumbing down average intelligence keeping people healthy until vaccinated against Covid 19. If severe Covid 19 is as harmful to intelligence as getting old, and Americans use a lot of dope besides, the nation may experience a decline of average intellect in the years ahead. Perhaps that has already happened in Democrat Party leadership.
Voting has become liberal enough with mail-in ballots to assure that anyone may select which brand of corporate candidate to elect from anywhere on the planet. Of course a voter must cast the vote himself into the postal drop box to assure that a non-election unofficial postal employee can handle the vote and send it on the 27 year mission to seek out new places to get lost in the Universe where no letter has been lost before. To make voting secure some new measures need be taken.
Twitter should be made an official election precinct so Democrats can twit in their vote. Elon Musk can assure election fairness, unlike social media and search engines run by Democrat partisans whom can rig engines so blog posts are viewed as often as the life of a neutron star. Many Americans may prefer to use Facebook to vote though some are skeptical that Mark Zuckerberg can assure that Russians wouldn’t rig the ballot box in some sort of members only group configuration plied with fake news about Democracy (since they are world experts at Democracy and news making).
