Goldfish Cosmology

A goldfish in a tank universe hasn't awareness of physics beyond the horizons of the tank. It hasn't faith in a creator and doesn't believe in metaphysic's speculation about aether beyond the observable horizon or that extra dimensions exist. It's water medium is made of entangled loopy strings that synthesize the material it breathes.

 It reflects sometimes late at night on the origin of the universe tank. It's best guess is that loopy strings oozed as virtual particles from nothingness ( a controversial concept) and were drawn together by gravity, becoming entangled, infinitely concentrated and made into mash at a singularity that broke apart faster than light evolving a universal medium of water and little delicious seahorses to eat. Then the fish has a shot of bourbon before floating off to sleep.

Democracy, Corporatocracy and Republics

Corporatocracy does develop hybrid forms in different circumstances. There is also plutocracy

There are real issues that voters care about Mass illegal immigration was one this time. Voters cast ballots for candidates agreeing with their will. Of course one might like better candidates however the people might get what they deserve. The rare, smart, well balanced candidate with great ideas never makes it through the filters of common averageness that dominate American style democracy.

I should mention the R word (republic). The demos is represented by elected individuals. Direct, live voting on all political issues of a nation doesn't exist anywhere. Some few people would be needed to make issues for people to vote on and they would probably need to be elected. Pure democracy might work in small groups, yet for nations it would need to be reactionary rather than creative, because advancing in new directions would not arise spontaneously as referenda on election ballots.

Philosophical Miscellane

  I wondered why people aren't more civil. Atheists post a lot with occasional abuse on the web and that is interminable. A lot of superficial verbiage pro and con various religious opinions.

  Are people more civil now than during the 30 years war and respectful of the opinions of others about religion? The thirty years war was between the Habsburgs and other European powers that sought political and religious independence in some cases. German princes had sought to be free of the Hapsburgs since Luther and the Smalcaldian war. 8 million died during the 30 years war. Toleration of different ideas is valuable for a free society.

  I enjoyed reading much philosophy and history and understood what philosophy is eventually. It is a learning tool. Questions about cosmology and being are perennial though. Even those with faith may wonder about the nature of things and how that relates to God. An example would be the relationship of omniscience and omnipotentence to a Multiverse; is it a necessity for God to create every possible universe, and do those exist from eternity with God, or are they known yet not actualized until some function occurs.

When Aristotle wrote "The Politics", he was describing the way societies change, and the behavior of the polis. Political philosophy is part of social philosophy. In order to understand human society and politics a philosopher requires actual information, such as the willingness of people with different ideas concerning religion or many other topics to tolerate the expression of those concepts. Societies may have challenges and responses such as Toynbee described in his 'A Study of History' that prompt transitions in political cycles of society, and Toynbee's paradigm in a way is a broad expansion of paradigmata of Aristotle's Politics, yet one must understand real contemporary human behavior if one is to comprehend why people including leaders make the decisions they do, such as the Biden administration's fanaticism for war with Russia over Ukraine via proxies, One would like to know if such characteristics are common and will continue and combine with other Toynbean 'tells' such as vast public debt toward a cyclical progression toward general collapse of civilization (perhaps through W.W. III or if rationality still exists in sufficient measure to delay that. These are philosophical concerns.

Reason and the Quest for God

 Most everyone uses reason-it isn’t a rare skill. Reason can lead one to God for a number of reasons, though the spirit must draw one to Christ. A good old classical and symbolic logic text named The Art of Reasoning set out methods for distilling arguments…even so content of knowledge, learning and experience may take people to different destinations. It’s not like an arithmetic problem with one correct answer that can be found with a particular skill set.

Adam and Eve...

They had eternal life (in one direction) before the sin of disobedience. Elsewhere in Genesis it says to be fruitful and multiply. Maybe it's where and when they had sex, although it doesn't say that they had sex. Instead they became aware they were naked. Animals have no sense of that. Might have been an IQ test to determine if A and E were fully sentient. Consider the dog...does it knows it's naked (unless it has a cute little sweater)?

Sin means 'to miss the mark'. Since mankind has original sin having missed the mark of what they were supposed to do, and are hence in a fallen state replete with thermodynamics, there are sundry ways to continue erring not following the righteous course with the grace of God and the salvific work of Jesus. To follow the will of God and to be regenerated by the Holy Spirit with the Lord Jesus as one's personal savior is the way

Eternity and Contingent Being (poem)

 

Wind starts and continues
without purpose or self-defining description
customizing experience
as if empiricism were more than formulai
for developing rigorous materially grounded statements

  Beliefs could be like echoes
for ideas ricocheting tensors of tenses
toward temporal certainty
assurance of waves driven across an ocean
the storm’s purity of creation 

  Encounters of interference patterns
meanings in metaphysics
dialectical evolution
unstructured structures compiling purposefully
porpoises diving deep

  Evolving purposes
in G.W.F. Hegel-like structures
realms of absolute spirit
where sub-routines realized themselves through history
and God was like a transcending magnetic force

  One might feel a unique verse
is created like a fossilized footprint
nominalism and realism unified with temporality
words that stand still in the past
while God is eternal.

I asked ChatGPT to evaluate the poem and this is what it wrote... "This is a dense and abstract poem, deeply philosophical in its exploration of existence, meaning, time, and the relationship between metaphysical and empirical concepts. Let me break it down in two parts: grade level and meaning.

Grade Level:

The poem uses advanced vocabulary, philosophical references, and abstract concepts, which would likely place it at a college level (around grades 11–12 or higher). Some factors contributing to its high grade level include:

• Complex vocabulary: Terms like "empiricism," "formulai," "tensors," "metaphysics," "dialectical," "nominalism," "realism," and "absolute spirit" suggest a sophisticated knowledge of philosophy, science, and metaphysical concepts.
• Abstract and non-linear structure: The poem doesn't follow a conventional narrative or structure, making it more challenging for younger readers. Its meaning is more open-ended and conceptual, requiring a higher level of abstract thinking to interpret.
• Philosophical references: The poem mentions Hegelian philosophy (G.W.F. Hegel), which is typically studied at the university level in philosophy courses, particularly in discussions of metaphysics and the philosophy of history.

Meaning:

The poem explores complex philosophical ideas about existence, time, purpose, and the nature of reality. Here's a breakdown of its themes:

• Wind as an emblem of uncaused movement: The poem begins with a metaphor of wind "starting and continuing without purpose" to suggest that natural processes or forces exist beyond human definition and may be without intrinsic purpose.
• Empiricism vs. abstract knowledge: There's a suggestion that empirical science (based on observation and physical evidence) cannot fully capture or explain the deeper, metaphysical realities of existence. The poem hints that "empiricism" can be limiting when it comes to the ultimate questions of meaning and being.
• The nature of beliefs: The mention of "Beliefs like echoes" and "ideas ricocheting" hints at the way human thoughts and beliefs are constantly shifting, changing, and bouncing around in search of truth, perhaps in an effort to stabilize in a world full of uncertainty.
• Temporal vs. Eternal: The "temporal certainty" contrasts with "eternal" concepts (like God). The poem explores how human understanding is confined to time and experience, while higher truths (such as divinity or metaphysical reality) exist outside the constraints of time.
• Metaphysical and dialectical evolution: There’s a reference to Hegelian philosophy, where the unfolding of history is a process of evolution toward greater self-realization, culminating in the "absolute spirit." The idea that history and God are intertwined in a process of development suggests a dynamic, evolving universe where ultimate meaning and purpose unfold over time.
• Purposelessness and Creation: The poem invokes the idea of "unstructured structures" that "compile purposefully" — an intriguing contradiction that points to the way systems or ideas, though seemingly random or without direction, may ultimately be seen as having some purpose when viewed from a larger perspective.
• Eternal vs. finite: The poem concludes with the paradoxical image of "words that stand still in the past" while "God is eternal," drawing attention to the difference between the transient nature of human language and concepts, and the eternal, unchanging nature of divine or metaphysical reality.

In summary, the poem contemplates the tension between the finite and the infinite, the temporal and the eternal, and how human beings might understand their place in the universe. It invites the reader to consider both the limitations of empirical knowledge and the deeper, transcendent forces that might be beyond human comprehension. It suggests that purpose, meaning, and divine reality may evolve in ways that defy simplistic, materialistic explanations."

Arthur Schopenhauer and Political Sins Like War

Arthur Schopenhauer was a notorious misogynist who threw his land lady down a staircase. He did develop a rather unique worldview combining elements of Eastern philosophy with Western. Not that it was worth a damn- interesting though. His brief book ‘The Fourfold Roots of Reason’ is technically solid and a kind of reiteration of Kant’s ‘Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics’.

If he had put more time into good technical philosophy instead of his syncretistic ontology he could have made a positive contribution. Schooenhauer believed women were inferior and incarnated as such as punishment for sins in a prior life He might have used US Presidential elections as an example if he were alive today. Biden-Harris gave Ukraine another 425 million dollars of war equipment including 211 Striker combat vehicles for some attacks before the vote. Taxpayers are being punished for Democrat Party sins.

If truth means to verify a proposition there are other ways than math for that. If truth means the source of all that is including universes the only God can be true

Wittgenstein, Cohen, Quine, Kripke, Language, Wars etc.

 Wittgenstein's Blue and Brown books presented a simple anthropology of language development. It was a somewhat more pragmatic approach than Heidegger's investigation of language and concept meanings with depth in etymology. His thought about language was a part of the development of linguistic or analytic philosophy yet very early. Realism and nominalism questions about words were better understood toward the later half of the 20th century Applying logic to language and meaning as elements of epistemology developed later with people like Cohen, Strawson, Quine and Kripke. 

A thought about wars of the distant future... Weapons like scalpels will be applied to scale of conflict. To destroy a planet or galaxy different tools would be used than to excise opposition forces amid some friendly forces. If people remain stupid enough to have wars they will probably annihilate themselves anyway.

Apparently scientists already bred an ape with a human and aborted the foetus, otherwise there would have been a better alternative to Joe Biden. Seriously though, 16 million years ago a major eruption occurred- with vast left-wing lava extrusion (The Columbia River Basalt Province) from the Yellowstone hotspot and before that the Deccan Traps extrusion 66 million y.b.p. Humans have been around from about 100,000-200,000 years ago and no they wouldn't naturally evolve to a super-being in just 100,000 more years. Many people including James Lovelock and the late Jacques Cousteau have said that humanity will probably destroy the livability of the Earth within 200 years. It does seem likely. 

https://www.usgs.gov/volcanoes/yellowstone/science/summary-yellowstone-eruption-history

Unicorns in the Old Testament. Apparently Re'em was a unicorn as well as the rhino mentioned earlier ( "the scientific name for the Indian Rhino is 'Rhinoceros Unicornis") It had to do with horns. Stipes was the upright stick Jesus was crucified on and the unicorn was a symbol of Christ. I will quote a relevant piece on unicorns from a google search... "The Hebrew word re'em is mentioned nine times in the Bible and is often translated as "unicorn" in English translations. However, some modern translations use the term "wild ox" (aurochs) to describe the re'em, which is the correct meaning". I tend toward being a KJV only reader myself so far as Bibles go, because I like the language, although the Good News version is sometimes interesting too.

Reflections on Olber's Paradox

 

Olber’s Paradox is interesting to consider. The Universe probably isn’t static nor “filled” with stars since they are so far away. Visible light requires sentient eyes to view it and regard it as visible anyway. Before eyes existed the Universe might have been in effect without light. One knows at any rate that light is an excitation or phenomena in an electromagnetic field and photons travelling in space are affected by the spatial curvature of the Universe because of gravity, or perhaps spatial curvature itself is a reciprocal of gravity as it were and that varied over the course of the expansion of the universe. Photons are nearly mass-less particles and their timeless journey can end or transition as they encounter different fields and mass or energy in the Universe.

“Olbers’ paradox is a cosmological paradox that asks why the night sky is dark if the universe is infinite and contains an infinite number of stars“

I suppose that it is possible that photons could encounter a kind of anti-virtual particle phenomena wherein photons disappear from the Universe into whatever field virtual particles emerge fro as the Universe flexes it’s quantum soup of some kind of tomato bisque. I don’t know why for that matter that a virtual energy field should be evenly distributed through the Universe and not for-itself associated in some way with a ratio to real fields and mass of the Universe. Perhaps they model the distribution of gravitational fields of the Universe, although nothing can travel faster than light that is subluminal. Of course mass-less 2 dimensional particles travel at light speed. Quantum entanglement could occur between photons and virtual energy. I have thought the concepts of timeless, mass-less particles and a Universe of time and space something of a paradox itself.

Harris Against Freedom of Choice for States in Preference of Federal Dictatorship

VP Harris primary support is from women that want the federal government to force abortion on all of the states  Women for Harris don’t want states to have the freedom to choose what they want for-themselves.

In some instances like slavery federal rules, so long as they are morally sound positions, should prevail. On most other moral issues states and the citizens thereof ought to decide for themselves how they want to live and regulate themselves.

Select environmental concerns are compelling and require federal oversight when people lack knowledge of emergent issues of a complex nature. The nation however can survive and thrive if Californians and Bostonians have abortions and those from Idaho and Texas don’t. Federal law for abortion is not critical; a dictatorship of federal Democrats is not even desirable.

Laser Beams for Power Streams Between Stars

 Because there is no foreseeable technology to travel faster than light between star systems it is worth considering the fastest way to power space modules to a substantial portion of the speed of light. Scientists have pointed out that using enough energy to power a spacecraft if the fuel was aboard the vessel would be too massive, the criterion moves to establishing a stream of energy outside the craft it’s ‘engine’ can draw upon to approach equalization of its speed to that of the laser beam, reaching perhaps 3/4s of the speed of light.

Coherent light- laser light travels at light speed. A very large laser beamed aimed at a target star light Proxima Centauri- 4.6 light years away, would need to be very strong and powered by the sun or a fusion reactor in space near the edge of the solar system. There would need to be a way to tap into the laser beam and convert the photons into electrons and possible an electro magnetic field some configuration that would move the ship forward. Perhaps an on board energy converter could tap into the beam periodically to continue to advance its rate of acceleration closer to the speed of light of the laser beam. The technology would in effect let a spacecraft catch a ride on the laser beam’s energy.

When the first star connection was established, star a to b, then a connection could be made from star b to c. after delivering components to build more laser star links to star b for making a connection to star c. The travel time using the fastest present space engine tech is 88,000 years to Proxima Centauri where with a laser beam to provide power for energy to let a reciprocal electrons power tie-into to the beam travel at light speed the time would be reduced to about eight years.

In order for a stable platform from which to send a laser light star link it might be necessary to locate some Lagrange Point equivalents for the solar system rather than the Earth. On the other hand it could be useful to construct a network of solar system encompassing laser beam platforms on the out edge of the solar system forming a rough sphere around it- balanced for gravitational elements of course, and from those platform each sending a laser beam to some point in space where the beams are gathered with mirrors and combined into a solitary powerful beam initially aimed at Proxima Centauri for a decade when a ship is using the tech for travel.

Some future generation may discover the way to innovate the first few laser star links, if the present war-mongering one being led into nuclear war chicken with Russia doesn’t incinerate future generations by actualizing M.A.D. policy.

It might be feasible to map gravitational currents/fields of this galaxy and use them to sail between select areas by letting the gravitational pull draw a spaceship forward toward the speed of light. Obviously micro-gravity sailing technologies might improve when the causality of gravity is better understood. Still, I like the possibility and recognize that boosting start up acceleration might be desirable with a different technology.

The Harris Meme; "What can be, unburdened by what has been"

Perhaps the phrase Kamala Harris uses (‘What can be, unburdened by what has been’) isn’t a quote from Karl Marx. It does require a little examination though. For in an historical context the past and present are a continuum. what has existed in the past often exists in the present; such as national boundaries in some cases. It might be useful if warring with Russia over Ukraine to ignore the burden of history of Russian ownership of Ukraine for centuries if one is a Democrat obviously. The past is not so easy to dismiss.

Everything that exist in social reality-physical infrastructure for example, immediately becomes part of the past as the present moves on. Yet buildings built yesterday or last century remain part of the present-even with the persistence of memory in a few after they are demolished. Plans implemented in the past were designed with the future in mind sometimes requiring decades to mature.

 And there is the matter of special and general relativity and parameters for a finite speed of light- 186,282 miles per second. Given the expansion of space-time and the vast distance scales of the Universe photons flying about and reaching Earth nearly entirely originated from the past to impact human senses as the present; that is the past is what arrives in to be the present appearance of starlight- and even sunshine.

I tend to regard the Universe as being simultaneously monistic and pluralistic. It originated and in a deep sense continues to be made of one phenomenal thing- even if that is energy in motion and of an inexplicable ultimate form. What was, is, substantially speaking, yet the forms have changed. If everything is spirit and an emanation that upsurges into being within protocols of form and change that apparent pluralism exists on the surface of the monism that is the foundation of phenomenality.

Why should those present be burdened by public debt or bad decisions of the past such as entering into war via the Zelinsky government over Ukraine with Russia? It’s convenient for politicians to ignore the past-sometimes even their own political record. The past is not a burden. Public debt of 33 trillion dollars from bad political choices by party leaders is a’burden’, as are the failure to conserve the ecosphere’s nine critical areas for human livability on Earth with six already surpassed and a seventh edging closer. One cannot simply declare oneself to be unburdened by the past when it exists in the resent.

What is possible is to maximize efficient use of present resources and opportunities; politicians rarely accomplish that.

Does Harris or Trump Know What the Nine Planetary Boundaries for Eco-health Are?

 It is worth mentioning that neither presidential candidate of Republicans and Democrats mentions the nine planetary boundaries for a healthy Earth and how six have been passed already. Apparently a seventh- ocean acidification- is also approaching.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/earth-is-on-the-brink-of-breaching-a-seventh-of-nine-planetary-boundaries-that-support-life-180985144/

Degrading the environment to such an extreme extent requires sound ecological economic competence to change. It is my hope that if Mr. Trump wins the 2024 election and gets the wars to stop across the pond a Democrat challenger in 2030 might appear with a competent plan to at least try to push back the degradation with a completely different approach to economics and environment since they are integrated in a destructive way presently. For the Harris campaign to operate with a what me worry blissful disregard for the status of the ecosphere is disheartening. Humans should do better than that.

Maybe it will require a Republican to actually get anything done. it would be good to fill the drying up Great Salt Lake with desalinated sea water too. Such hopeless day dreaming is all that may develop concerning either prospect.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adh2458

Will AI Replace Nobel Prize Committee Next Year?

 Maybe it's just a matter of time before Artificial Intelligence monitoring world scientific developments replaces humans on the Nobel Committee to select prize-worthy achievements. Maybe they would be more accurate. Perhaps the prize for literature would go to someone writing a graphic novel (a cartoon book) like Magnus Robot Fighter.

One might want Magnus Carlsen to defeat all those 4000 rated chess engines and for a math genius to out-calculate quantum super-computers yet each aren't too likely.

Questions about Kamala Harris as a Secure, Comfortable Establishment Insider

 The nation faces quite a choice this election between the affirmative action legacy candidate seeking promotion to her level of incompetence potentially and Donald Trump, the last capitalist in a sense from the nation before the complete swamp of dopiness flooded it. I believe one question about Kamala Harris that is relevant is would she take a natural female receptive role if President and make the U.S.A. a bimbo of Europe and its rise with the EU and NATO expansion into potentially taking the leading role in the trans-Atlantic relationship.

Germany has less than a half trillion dollars of public debt. If one may use the term lem; in this case not used as a synonym for "nigger" as public radio use the depricative (I should clarify that because of the controversial nature of lem and nigger as hate speech. One might say 'don't hire that lem' instead of using the n word which is politically incorrect) then Germany's economy isn't a lem (meaning lemon) while that of the U.S.A. is nearing that stature with 33 trillion dollars of public debt. The U.S.A. need be somewhat more independent and self reliant and not just leave the public sector as a lem holding the bag on the massive debt that generate result with real austerity some day.

In his farewell address George Washington expressed concern about establishing permanent foreign alliances that would impact the sovereignty and security of the United States. N.A.T.O. is a prime example of the problem of a foreign alliance that has outlived its founding reason for being and seems to insist on a hostile relationship with Russia in order to have a reason to exist. The Ukraine issue should have been settled by diving the country in half and just moved on. Instead since the end of the Cold War 1.0 N.A.T.O. has increased in size and became an existential threat to invade Russia long before Russia took the Crimea back as it has owned it for hundreds of years- even before the Soviet Union captured Russian government for nearly 70 years.

One wonders is Democrats have forgotten world history and the violence and conflicts that occurred in Europe over the millennia. The U.S. should have been happy to let the original N.A.T.O. just continue as a kind of appendix that isn't used much, not a threat yet of actual deterrence value. Expanding it created a monster. It is a potential future rival to American military power sometime when the U.S.A. doesn't agree on some critical policy concern. It is also part of the Orwellian expansion into some kind of 1984 three global blocks at perennial enmity or war sort of circumstance...and such an egregious bit of idiocy without good sense or political aesthetic value.

Democrats were happy t bring about a conflict rather than rationally settling in without violence. They could have used the mostly non-violent transition from the Soviet Union to Russia in an albeit imperfect allocation of boundaries as an example. Instead the methodically increased the numbers of N.A.T.O. and the E.U and seemed to further try to marginalize Russia. Obviously the decision of the Democrat Party and EU members to prosecute Russia as an adversary building up military stores in the Ukraine to defend its western affiliation was a result of the founding of Ukraine at the end of the Cold War 1.0 as an independent state and unavoidable since Democrat Party leaders had no intention in any way to relinquish any part of Ukraine to Russia. Kamala Harris has expressed her full intent to continue the war until it is free of Russians; in other words until  the last Ukrainian is dead on the battlefield.

Is there really a substantial different orientation for American women concerning jobs, natural security and the deaths of foreigners in wars that could be prevented with U.S. leadership to settlement that bring people like Kamala Harris to feel entitled to have everything their own way? Do they take their position in life for granted- as if it were usual to have vast incomes without dirtying their hands? Should they when buying a ‘starter home’ with their $120,000 annual income and spouse’s $40,00 feel that is normal and usual- that they have some right to a higher standard of living than that of most of the world’s working men? Do they just want more of the same inertia of prosperity and ecological inefficiency moving forward without the slightest concern for the decline of natural resources ad the ecosphere? U.S. politicians that have their relatives getting government jobs are hardly inspirational to those that haven’t got relatives in high elected positions.

Do American women and politicians of the left believe that the crass consumerism, abortions, atheism and fossil fuel engines while the country has 33 trillion dollars of public debt is the best way to shape an economy? Economists may say that illegal migration doesn’t hurt the gross national product yet that is somewhat meaningless to the people without good income because wages were undermined by surplus labor. The G,N,P. Can be great and yet it can also mostly go to the 1% and the 10%. Of course their economists would say everything is wonderful.

Some wonder if flooding the nation with illegal migrants while expanding the conventional economy without ecological economic reform and while waging a economic and limited military global battle with Russia, China and the BRIC nations while concentrating wealth paying for government programs with public debt is likely to be sustainable. Others wonder if Kamala Harris has a clue.

If I Knew a Half Century Ago What I Know Now

 I was considering what the world would have been like if I knew the future a half century ago. That is, if I knew then what I know now. Since I like to consider and write about contemporary history, wouldn’t the future have never become what it was if I wrote about events consistently with accuracy before they occurred?

In my opinion the greatest change would have been that of the Reagan administration. If I had written before the 1980 election that the conservative Republican President would change the political landscape so much in international relations and with the Soviet Union as to bring about the end of the Cold War then that circumstance might not have occurred. Imagine instead if the end of the Cold war in December 1988 when the Soviet began drawing down the Red Army from East Germany were replaced by a Clinton-Biden-Obomb-em-Harris, Yellin, Stoltenberg axis of mooning administrations elevating the world to the brink of nuclear war as at the present time in history.

Presidents intelligent enough to find ways to peace when the outlook is for the dark and stormy clouds of nuclear winter are rare. Snoopy writing from his dog house writer’s loft given a knowledge of the pinball courses of political relations with future knowledge; knowing the whipsaws of changes in presidential administrations and approaches to achieving a stable and peaceful world order where ecological progress and full, meaningful life opportunities for all within a freedom of spirit social paradigm, would be a paradox. Political analysis are limited in validity to a context of limited omniscience or rather, no omniscience at all  in regard to the temporal exstasis in which space-time flows. There is no Snoopy sniffing the future of world destiny that will bark at the approach of evil and wag for the good. Presidents instead need use rational prioritization of political concerns to actualize good developments instead of actualizing existential desires emanated from their own desires. Social reality isn’t an existential extension of personal egoism as it may seem for Democrat Party leaders, it is an interactive, heterodox fact where sharing of Ukraine is all that is required to restore historical balance for the time being.

Harris Rolls Dice on Winning Ukraine without Nuclear War (How the World May End)

 When I learned that the Biden-Starmer-Harris crew were considering giving permission to Ukraine to attack Russia with N.A.T.O. long range missiles Friday the 13^th (does that increase the gravity or the irony) that was the first time in my life that I had considered the prospect that nuclear war could follow Saturday. The Harris-Biden-Starmer team is playing nuclear chicken with Russia; a game at a higher level with potential for liberal deaths for all.

Following several years of top hand on the baseball bat mode of escalation with Russia in the use of conventional weapons to turn the tide of war there way, the Harris-Biden-Starmer entity failed to recognize the different context having nearly reached the W.M.D. level. It is a glass ceiling completely opaque to the Starmer-Harris-Biden entity. They should not aspire to reach that top floor.

I could think about the second weekend of NFL football games and the lesser, peripheral concern of potential global thermonuclear war brought to the U.S.A. and the rest of the world thanks to the historically illiteracy of the Harris-Biden-Starmer entity as a multi-tasking venture. When the first N.B.A. game is played in late October concerns about nuclear war will be muted with remote control. For most Americans it is more convenient to focus on important issues such as football, and not on unrewarding ones like terrorists with nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.

The Ukraine-the borderlands, have been a target of western conquest for centuries. Poland, France and Germany among others have invaded Russia to seize land. The gamble that Russia won’t use nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction to defend its historical region of existence when pummeled by a vast array of western military power is a bad one. It is a paradox that mothers against drunk driving would probably advocate Harris for President if they did such endorsements yet would not have a concern about candidate Harris’ full-bodied support of war with Russia over Ukraine. The Democrat feminine vote evidently does not regard nuclear war as anything more than externality or a bluff, yet it isn’t.

If N.A.T.O. begins attacking deep within Russia with Ukrainian cut outs the premise is that Russia cannot retaliate on the west because all of the N.A.T.O. nations would attack en mass because of treaty obligations. There are numerous cut outs available for Russia to use to attack London, Paris, Amsterdam and Los Angeles with nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. ISIS, Hezbollah, Taliban and other Muslim groups in contact with Russia’s Iranian allies come to mind; they might be too happy to supply clandestine infiltrators to deliver a gallon of novachuck nerve agent, a suitcase nuke in a homeless guy’s backpack or a designer virus. Plausible deniability would cover each as the nuclear weapons could have been stolen during the era following the end of the Soviet Union when they were left unsecured across former Soviet territories.

India and China’s leaders met recently with President Putin perhaps to discuss what response should be taken to a war upgraded to an existential threat on Russia’s existence by the Biden-Harris-Starmer entity. Tactical nuclear weapons- perhaps neutron bombs with the beryllium sheathing absent, might be employed to counter Ukrainian advances into Russia along with or without full-bodied N.A.T.O. invasions of Russia after the initial round of weapons fo mass destruction are deployed. Russia hasn’t proven ability to defeat conventional western attack on Russia. Candidate Harris called Candidate Trump ‘weak’ at the debate and said that Putin would ‘eat his lunch’. Ms. Harris is a completely enthusiastic votary of Democrat Kool-Aid narratives on Russian-Ukraine-Clinton history. She is determined that conventional war to recover all of Ukraine for western power need proceed. Plainly Candidate Harris is incompetent with global economics, history and military affairs and acts with a cognitive deficit in failing to perceive the likelihood of nuclear war with her partisan, one-sided war policy. The war is harmful to U.S. economic interests and is an existential and possibly Eleatic ,Empirical, Metaphysical and even pluralist threat as well. No matter how hard Ms. Harris acts to spend hundreds of billions more on that war it will fail militarily syncopation even though she may intend to litigate nuclear war and win.

I should point out the the late Harvard historian Henry Kissinger was against the war, and other professors of Russian history realized that Russia would not accept the loss of all of Ukraine and the Crimea without a fight. The political insanity of the Democrat party is barely making a ripple on their political pond of thought. Drunk with power Democrats believe they cannot lose and need not share Ukraine with its historical Russian owner, and in that regard they are probably wrong. It is bad risk to gamble on world civilization not ending with nuclear brinkswomanship continuing year to year.

Before closing this post I will try presenting the conflict from a Russian point of view so far as I understand it. Russia regards the Ukraine as part of Russia stolen by the west repeatedly and lately at the end of the Cold War. Because President Clinton stole Ukraine once more by levering the last Soviet President Boris Yeltsin into giving it up to an independent status instead of insisting that Russia keep it, Democrat Presidents ever since have reinforced the theft and developed a belligerent attitude toward Russia by building up N.A.T.O. membership after the end of the Cold War when peace and economic development should have made that unnecessary. For Russia the west plainly was intending something that wasn’t good, and preparing for a war that it probably realized would need to occur eventually when Russia recovered from the break up of the Soviet Union and was militarily stronger.

Western leadership has historically made war on Russia to take as much of the country as it could, usually without success, Hitler and Napoleon among others. They are pretending with false consciousness that Ukraine is historically an independent nation like that of Germany, England and Poland etc and that Russia is simply waging a war of aggression. That is a dissimulation of historical truth, yet a dissimulation they would assert so far as to bring the world to the brink of nuclear conflict over Ukraine. Sharing Ukraine perhaps with a border along the Dnepr would be a practical political adjustment yet is one that so far the west has eschewed in preference to war.

The United States has sent hundreds of billions of dollars of weapons to Ukraine and that was partially matched by N.A.T.O. members. The unelected President of Western Ukraine wants to use U.S. and N.A.T.O weapons to attack old Russia as well as recovered Russian Ukraine targets like the Donbas and Crimea. Russian leadership apparently will stipulate and tolerate

to a certain extent N.A.T.O. weapons being used in Ukraine, because Russia too can use third party supplied weapons in Ukraine. Yet N.A.T.O. weapons used to attack outside Ukraine; to attack old Russia would be different. For Russia to be equal it would need to attack N.A.T.O. members in retaliation. Ukraine is the bone of contention and N.A.T.O. members and old Russia should be left out of targeting with missiles for parity. Evidently the British P.M. and other leaders want to argue against parity and equanimity and claim that Ukraine is already an independent nation that Russia is attacking and therefore N.A.T.O. weapons can be used to attack Russia. That is itself is a new doctrine with the premise that any nation regarded by N.A.T.O. as having invaded another can be targeted with N.A.T.O. missiles. The nuclear war at the end of the road is not a civil argument over property among lawyers.

Cause for World War III simplified

Fact Checking; "It Takes a Village" (Utopia)

 Was village life the compassionate conservative Utopia it is sometimes held by liberals to be? Villages did have muddy streets with Neo-feral pigs running amok about them eating whatever they could find. Outhouse were often within walking distance unlike modern urban areas where one need walk a mile to find a Starbucks with toilets that can be utilized for the purchase of a seven-dollar mochafrappe.

  Village life in European locales allowed accountant free peasant living since the local Nobel owned the land and crops produced by countless hours of toil and sweat. Women’s rights to labor in the home annually during their reproductive years followed the ecstatic pleasure of the Nobel taking first use of a newly wed wife on the wedding night followed by a few decades of servicing the oaf.

  Peasants received free military service opportunities with rival Nobels often being at war. Nobel lands were bucolic settings for the original cores of Hatfields and McCoys. Student loans were forgiven a priori for peasants because they received no education besides practical free on the job training in careers servitude swine herding, haying, mucking stables and such for the Nobel. Peasants in Utopian primitive communism shared equally in starvation during lean times when the Nobel’s wars cost the peasant’s winter food supplies in taxes to finance. The Lord Jesus was nearly stoned and thrown from a cliff in his own home village. Swift prosecution of non-conformist ideas with death by villagers saved the public the exorbitant costs of appellate judicial review.

Occasionally bouts of bubonic plague were liberally compensated with no-cost burials for villagers. Foreign imports weren’t much of a problem in not much existing with copious tariffs on goods costing fewer than 800 quid snipping that sort of direct trade off by the balls. Nobels knew the wisdom of stopping villagers from engaging in direct trade with foreign producers that cut out the Nobel middlemen that owned big table retailers.

Conclusion; Village life was somewhat Utopian although it was mostly village idiots that believed it smoking dope for aesthetic relativism.

 

Democrat Part of Deceit, Accusations and Lies

 Democrats are the party of accusations, lies and deceits. After they started the civil war to keep their tradition of slavery alive and lost they were kept out of the Presidential office until F.D.R.- a northerner, took office to usher in the Second World War. Sure Hitler was to blame, yet F.D.R. did lead the U.S.A. into a war that some genius might have found a way to honorably avoid through some clever theoretical politics.

President Truman faced the same challenge as F.D.R. in having a war thrust upon him in Korea and failing to find a way to develop a theoretical political way of settling the dispute without armed conflict. He did however fire General MacArthur who wanted to end the communist regime in China then. The present Chinese government in a way may be regarded as the legacy of the Democrat Party’s Harry Truman, who also dropped the first two atomic bombs ever used in war.

The Democrat Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson each got the Vietnam war started and burning strongly for more than a decade without being able to find a way to avoid or conclude it. Kennedy and Johnson also failed to do anything more than exacerbate the Cold War with the Soviet Union. The Cuban Missile Crisis and Bay of Pigs were notable incidents, Francis Gary Power’s U-2 flight was shot down in Soviet air space. No reduction of nuclear arms build up occurred during Kennedy and Johnson administrations-quite the opposite in fact developed.

President Nixon- a Republican elected in 1968 after  Democrat youth rioting outside the Chicago Democrat National convention could not prevent the party from running the Minnesotan Hubert Humphrey from taking the party nomination to lose in November, ended the Vietnam War with a gradual draw down and sent the late Henry Kissinger to Beijing (or Peking as it was known too) to begin diplomacy to develop normal diplomatic relations and economic ties. That process continued after Nixon was forced from office for the Watergate burglar, Nixon said that he thought the country was undergoing civil war.

President Reagan- a Republican, ended the Cold War working with Soviet President Gorbachev. He hoped to end the threat of nuclear weapons and to develop a united, peaceful Europe and world economic environment.

President Clinton- a Democrat, was convicted of perjury lying to congress. He took the Ukraine- the borderlands, away from Russia where it belonged, from the totally weak final Soviet President Boris Yeltsin in the transition to a post Soviet new world order. Of all the nations that ad there full independence restored by the Soviet troop withdrawal starting at the end of the Reagan administration, Russia was the only nation that lost land rather than recovering it, like Germany had for instance. The theft of Ukraine from re-emerging Russia  set the stage for the present Ukraine-Russia war.

Democrats under the Obama and Biden administrations built up N.A.T.O. eastward in former Warsaw Pact nations presenting an existential threat to Russia. They supplied vast weapons inventories to Ukraine even before the Crimean reconquista by the armed forces of Russia. Following the reconquista  a vast range of sanctions, dire threats and imprecations were placed on Russia and Russians-including seizures of the assets of Russian millionaires and billionaires, some of whom had economically benefited the Clinton Foundation. The countdown to conflict in Ukraine steadily built until climax after the election of President Biden.

Democrats elected just lawyers for President after Harry Truman’s one term administration. They returned to the successful F.D.R. model of lawyers who felt law and government structures were entirely malleable tools for Democrat Party power, in effect made to support Democrat party goals. The modern civil rights movements came to be understood as the anti-strait white male civil rights movement. Special interests rights were custom legislated. Antipathetic language became proscribed as ‘hate speech’. The concept of law as impartial justice that should prevail in democracy was lost.

 In democracy the purpose of the law isn’t to implement an abstract concept of justice or retribution. Its essential reason for being to to let individuals live securely and pursue their self-interest. In an authoritarian government alternatively the purpose of law is to reinforce the power and will of the ruling class. Though the democrats have not gone full-hog authoritarian or royal, that is the direction they are headed. Sometimes the particular genius of a ruling class needed to take power is to have the support of the masses in so doing. Plebeians supported Julius Caesar. His son Octavian known as Augustus was more  the most powerful Senator rather than emperor yet still required support of the commons.

After Charles Darwin’s publication his evolution theory and the rise of pragmatism and investigations into truth theory gradually people lost faith in not only the belief in God and the veracity of the Bible, because of its different creation narrative fro that of Darwin’s Origin of the Species, fascism developed in Europe and a concept that truth was entirely subjective arose. The Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics brought even the nature of reality to be questioned. Secularists might well believe nothing is real and that subjective epistemology and subjective perception actual determined what the content of the objective world is that was subjectively perceived. That idea was itself incomplete, and reality was not solipsistically homodox (is that a word?), it was instead heterodox though far more complex than was or could be definitively understood, even by philosophers and cosmologists.

Even so the popular notion that truth was self-defined and proprietary made lying more acceptable. Democrats gradually learned to apply the premise of ‘kill them all and let God sort them out later with truth replacement theory. With truth replacement theory it is better to accuse first, best and far more often than to be a passive defender with lame opposition denials to accusations. Political pejorative use-truths (ref Sartre) were justifiable and common. The big lie; the colonialist’s false interpretation of events, became normal for the Democrat Party and intensified following Al Gore’s loss to George W. Bush in the 2000 Presidential election where after the party went full lunatic use-truth civil war with Republicans, though that was suspended for a time after the Sept 11, 2001 terror attacks. 

Democrats use-truths brought them to full accusatory mode on President Trump’s first term of office when they brought with all of their power the accusation of Russian collusion with Donald Trump to become elected. It was a ludicrous and false charge continued for years, followed by an impeachment and every possible charge they could send his way. Democrat Party lawyers continued their prosecutorial mode even running a former prosecuting attorney for President vs Donald Trump seeking re-election. For Democrats prosecuting Russia in  with all conventional weapons in order to win the court battle for truth (the Democrat Party has an historically false narrative of Russia’s relation to Ukraine) will continue until nuclear war is achieved and victory is theirs. With the existential criteria of subjective definition of truth the Democrat Party isn’t able to quit its prosecution of war for there is no other means (what is peace and sharing?).

Because the mainstream broadcast media and much of the main Internet social media corporations fill their ranks with Democrat Party affirmative action legacy employees that media entirely supports the Democrat Party narrative use-truths. Because Democrat Presidents founded so many wars and military conflicts (even President Obomba fomented several Middle East and North African conflicts and helped build up the anti-Russia approach for European and N.A.T.O. politics militarily) and are totally invested in war with Russia over Ukraine (possibly just in Ukraine) there is no main stream broadcast media opposition to the war as there was in Vietnam. American youthful voters and Democrat Party members are somewhat paralyzed into inaction in opposition to the party narrative and what is likely to develop into a nuclear war. The passivity of the left acquiescing to war-mongering leadership is a amazing yet edifying spectacle to experience. Maybe an explanation is the Democrat support for legal and copious dope to pacify the public.

Proxima Centauri B nine years Distant with Electro-Mag Accelerator?

 

Proxima B is the nearest planet in another star system that might allow humans to live on it with appropriate adaptations. Primarily that would entail creating a way to filter out x-rays from the sun. With conventional chemical rocket space craft it would require 80,000 years to get to Proxima Centauri B, yet if travelling at half of the speed of light the time required for the journey would be somewhere around 8 or 9 years. That 4.26 light year distance would not seem so far with initial electro-magnetic acceleration.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxima_Centauri_b#:~:text=The%20stability%20of%20an%20atmosphere,X%2Drays%2C%20as%20Earth

It is possible to create a very vast electro-magnetic accelerator somewhere within the solar system that would be 100-300 million to a trillion miles in length capable of moving a charged module habitat inside to half light speed. The spacecraft would coast the rest of the way and use ion engines to begin slowing down with the help of gravity fields of stars on the far side. E-mag accelerators may be temporal and exist just when launches are required and could be built in a variety of ways using solar and/or nuclear power sources, perhaps with solar system planetary configurations at optimal configuration to host participating fields. Just a thought.

On Ukraine-If You are in a Hole Stop Digging it Deeper

The Biden administration has proven the truth of the axiom of the First Law of Holes that says; “If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging it deeper.” Digging a vast economic and political hole in Ukraine through several Democrat administration in order to conquer land historically belonging to Russia was a feat of historically illiterate, bureaucratically minded union leadership quality personal egoist sociopaths.

The pathetic cost in human lives physically, injuries of war physically and psychologically is vast and the numbers keep compiling. There never was a reasonable chance of the west defeating Russia militarily to keep all of Ukraine for itself. Russians tend to be tough fighting on their home turf, and if they were actually to have lost the conflict would probably swiftly escalate to battlefield nukes to defrappe western military forces. The west would have to accept that or upgrade to M.A.D. retaliation basically.

President Biden is the worst reasoning war mongering President in U.S. history. He again moved to provide Ukraine’s government with up to 72,000 artillery shells per month for the rest of 2024 assuring more deaths, more property destruction and more impossibility of developing or investing in peace for the remainder of his term of office. A Harris or Trump administration would have hard choices to make about where to go with that conflict. Trump has said he would move toward peace and Harris has said she would go for the Biden approach she has supported for several years. Voters would be happier if she would just stipulate that she would accept President Putin’s reasonable peace plan or just go for the Russia gets the east bank of the Dnepr River and West Ukraine the western side.

The costs of rebuilding Ukraine will be great- in the trillions, and Ukraine will probable expect Europe and the U.S. to pay for it. I am somewhat offended by the idea of paying trillions to rebuild a nation that could have had war avoided with a practical peace plan a priori to adjust the wrong settlement of the Cold War boundary of Russia and Ukraine.

The Biden-Harris war lunacy has done great harm to world opinion about the United States since many perceive it as the school yard bully that could intimidate small nations and overstepped its power with Russian Ukraine. Democrat leadership about Ukraine is like maladroit engineering that mistakes its estimates of how easy it would be to build a dam across the Bering Strait bud decided to invest a trillion dollars to get something started anyway just to discover that tide and currents wash away the work.

The Biden-Harris war plan has restored the unity of the remaining communist block and strengthened it by forcing Russia to turn to a much closer relationship with that mixed economy state and neglect developing free enterprise capitalism. The negative effects of the conflict for the United States are great and will contribute to future economic issues for Americans. The astounding stupidity of the approach is what is breathtaking. How did the United States fall to such a low level of leadership after Ronald Reagan for twenty years of Democrats?

I should make a disclaimer here concerning Ayn Rand Republicans. Rand’s ‘Atlas Shrugged’ followers don’t recognize that she wrote in favor of the 1% CEO and shareholder people and was in a sense against the 99% of the public that aren’t CEO and owners of big businesses. She should have written a sequel for labor that isn’t union and demonstrated why hard individual work counts, or should count if there was an actual meritocracy in the U.S.A. Piece work of an objective nature is the only way to have real meritocratic labor and that doesn’t form the primary structure of what labor works on.

In the U.S.A. the six guys leaning on their shovels chatting will go farther and get better pay than the individual who thinks working better than others competitively will win out. Life does not recognize that kind of individual effort. That kind of worker burns out while being ignored.

There are so many unfair labor values empirically that union labor does have a way of getting a substantial chunk of change for numerous workers, although obviously union labor does have an element of a pyramid scheme structure to it- not all workers could be in unions without the wages paid becoming nonsensical and uniform while business would be inflexible and maladaptive. One would develop a Soviet Union or sovereign union sort of structure with the main difference being that government leaders might be CEOs instead of Union executives. In short a Hitler-Mussolini corporatism rather than a Soviet corporatism.