After Killing the Peace Dividend; what next

 The old joke about what one should do if they hit a lawyer jogging with their car (back up and do it again) could be well-applied to lawyer Presidents of the Democrat Party running over the peace at the end of Cold War 1.0. That is run over the peace to kill it and future peace dividends to make sure that peace is well and truly dead. If fighting and winning a war does more harm to the victor and makes his position less secure than making peace before the war, a belligerent should consider choosing the path of peace. Democrats should have considered making a peace settlement with Russia over Eastern Ukraine and Crimea rather than financing a war with Ukrainian proxies.

One may compare historical trends to weather. Some people prefer censorship of news bad to them, even news of bad weather. Weather though, like political relations doesn’t change just because one sticks one’s head up their ass so they don’t see it. Thus I write about the real political changes and some consequences likely to follow the Democrat Party’s obsession with making Ukraine an independent state affiliated with the west, through military conflict with Russia. I prefer to be on the accurate side of describing history in progress.

Shouldn’t one expect the U.S. Government to be trustworthy or honest in its efforts to keep the world peaceful? When the spokespersons of the U.S. Government seem inflexibly propagandist in expressions about Russia and Ukraine that is challenging to believe they have good character or good faith. They should at minimum be capable of expressing the opposition force point of view or rationale in regard to the conflict in order to logically react to the Russian position. I will provide and example of what the U.S. Government might say in order to seem honest...

State Department Spokesman; “We understand that Russia feels that President Clinton in effect stole Ukraine from historical when Russia was weak and effectively helpless after the end of the Soviet Union and wants it back- we just don’t give a fuck. We have plenty of money, guns, lawyers and Ukrainians to throw into the fray. We have friendly propaganda media that support our side of the battle willing to repeat our assertion that Russia is the unprovoked aggressor- and that’s just the way it is.”

The U.S. Government and N.A.T.O. positioned themselves like chess players with the white pieces against Russian defenders playing black during the post-Cold war era. White played a positional game gradually strengthening its position in former East Block countries with additions to N.A.T.O. followed by increasing sanctions on Russia after Russia took Crimea. White played like Anatole Karpov with 24 inch pythons tightening all over the board. With the ascension of historical Russian adversary Joe Biden to the White House, Russian President Vlad Putin choose to use the normal blitz chess strategy of attacking on the opponent’s half of the board instead of moving his own pieces around in some kind of positional play that loses without sorties from interior lines in some kind of ultra-modern tactic. Maybe it is comparable to Israel’s pre-emptive attack in the Yom Kippur war while Egypt was mobilizing its forces for a first strike. The initial long, inadequately supported Russian drive to Kiev where armored columns became bogged down and ran out of fuel seems to have been a bold, early checkmate effort that failed.

Even so black pieces remain in what was White’s half of the board (Eastern Ukraine) and seem set for some sort of defense against the highly publicized white counter-attack. It might be a mistake though to anticipate that the black pieces will abandon the traditional blitz chess plan of attacking on their opponents side of the board with a king hunt leading to checkmate. Russians are pretty good chess players and not usually easy knockouts.

It may be that the U.S.A. and N.A.T.O. wins its proxy war against Russia. Post-war would the U.S.A. expect a situation like it encountered in post-war Iraq where it eliminated most of the leaders of Saddam Hussein’s Baath party? Would that mean eliminating the Russia United Party? Is regime change an implicit part of the game plan of the west although they have not said so publicly? Would the U.S.A. be content in erecting a new Iron Curtain against Russia until it can foment a revolution in Russia that works? Maybe I should write on this subject in five years to learn how things worked out.

It should be a priority to the west that the world polity be not divided to the level of war. If in order to keep the world economy buzzing peacefully and humming along with modernization and ecological restoration in Eurasia that Russia have it south-western lands that were taken from it by the communists initially, restored to it, and that the Ukraine is shared between Russia and a pro-western government on the west bank of the Dnepr then that should have been the project that U.S. leadership worked on. Pursuing war rather than peace was a mistake from the start. It was a mistake that U.S. leadership seems incapable of finding even a smidgen of willingness to correct.

With the basic international policy direction toward eliminating tariffs on trans-boundary business (as in the E.U. and N.A.F.T.A. nations) building a new Iron Curtain dividing capitalism east and west is plainly a regressive policy. If Russia owned the Crimean Peninsula and its present Eastern Ukrainian holdings and peace established, sanctions ended and free trade restored within a decade the distinction of who owns the land would pale in significance in comparison to the prosperity and liberty for travel. For the west to develop a policy that results in the worst future scenario with a divided East and West without any sort of ideological economic foundation as it had with communism seems insane with the caveat that a nuclear conflict would be worse.

Following the political original sin of separating Russia from Crimea and the Ukraine during President Clinton’s (a Democrat lawyer) term of office, the Democrat Party has pursued a narrow legalistic line toward Russia. The original sin created a ripe condition for the rise of Russian sentiment to recover its lost land as it developed as a post-Soviet nation. Democrat president’s were confident of their legal right to defend Ukraine. Law I should point out is based on force. Military power is the juice that makes law effective at the international level if one wishes to assert a legal paradigm between nations rather than political common sense and statesmanship.

Democrat lawyer President since Clinton have also pursued a legalistic approach toward Russia (Obama and Biden) entirely disregarding statesmanship and common sense. So what is the cost to the United States for tripling down on force-based U.S. law toward Russia and its will to retake its lost Ukrainian land?

The peace dividend that to President Clinton may have been the opportunity o redistribute parts of the former Soviet Union to the west in the absence of a military backed governance capability of the former Warsaw pact nations was to Wall Street the opportunity to invest around the world including China and the former Soviet Union from an advantaged position. The united States, the west and even the east may have believed a new era with less military expenses would follow. Greater world security could arise without a Cold War and nuclear, biological and chemical threats. Only a few of those conditions developed, as for example, nuclear weapons proliferation seems to have increase rather than decreased.

Opportunity costs to the United States for ending the Cold War should have prompted the Democrat lawyer-presidents to consider statesmanship templates for adjudicating the Russia-Ukraine issue in addition to narrow legalism in a system wherein the United States Government as the principle nuclear weapons stakeholder of N.A.T.O. was in a position of being the Supreme Political Court and Chief Executive as well. The legal advantage blinders of Democrat lawyer Presidents through every kind of sanction and punishment on Russia that it could since the reconquista of the Crimean Peninsula. The process followed by the Democrat Part’s belligerence toward Russia with false accusation against former President Trump that he colluded with Russians to steal the 2016 election from the female Democrat lawyer presidential contender Hillary Clinton left Russia with little reason to believe that the newly elected Democrat party lawyer President Joe Biden would be anything besides hostile and determined to add more sanctions upon and isolation of Russia internationally so far as it could. Because of continuing U.S. weapons build-up in Ukraine and addition of new members of N.A.TO. The Russian point of view concerning its prospects for retaking Ukraine may have been that the situation would only worsen if it waited. The election of Joe Biden to the White House in 2020 prompted the invasion of Ukraine in 2021 after Joe Biden was sworn in to office.

The decision to make Russia a lasting enemy seems to have been a strategic mistake for the United States during a time when it experienced several international challenges as well as domestic. Instead of Russia being a good free trade partner working cooperatively with the United States on numerous fronts from anti-terrorism to ecological health restoration, global warming fighting etc a new divided Eurasia likely to follow the end of a war settled through military force.

The U.S. Federal Reserve issues loans to big banks owned by the rich at very agreeable interest rates that are sometimes zero. For every dollar deposited electronically in big bank that bank for the rich can loan out four more abstract dollars appearing from nothing- virtual currency that need be repaid to the bank with real dollars, while the big bank need just repay one dollar to the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve in effect issues free money to the rich so they can buy up the planet’s resources and invest in foreign nations to get in on the ground floor. Dividing East and West along the Ukraine border changes the balances concerning full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. Today the President says he won’t negotiate on the issue of raising the nation’s debt ceiling and ability to borrow by selling i.o.u.’s to the Federal Reserve (who issues virtual dollars made from nothing to buy the i.o.u. paper). President Biden wants no limit public debt and borrowing so he can finance the Ukraine war and fund a government that can’t sustain itself through tax revenues since it cut the taxes on rich to low, low levels. There can be severe consequences to all of the bungled policy choices that first affect the poor and lower middle class adversely as the advantaged seek to make them pay for the bad policy.

The Democrat Party floods the nation with cheap foreign, illegal labor to keep wages down for the working class. The poor and middle class buy their goods at Wal-mart stocked with cheap manufactured in China goods. Good jobs were outsourced to new Chinese factories as the U.S.A. became a service economy convenient to the rich globalists running the show through Democrat party mouthpieces and of course blue blood Republicans loyal to the dollar as if it were an opioid. Fentanyl and food stamps have become the new opioids for the masses.

Instead of a world with suppressed terrorism an increase of terrorism may occur. Rather than establishing efficient trans-continental high speed transportation such as with hyper-tubes, or very fast and efficient Eurasian to North American very high speed and low pollution ground cargo hyper-tubes no progress will occur that requires Russian participation. China will be the benefiting nation.

Already the world’s largest economic power, China’s preferred nation status with Russia will synergize its growth with low cost Russian natural resources unwelcome in the west. China will also have the best position to invest in Russian development and would be capable of helping the Russian economy grow during the era of continuing western sanction against Russia that probably will continue indefinitely. A new Cold War will follow the end of the hot Russian-Ukraine conflict, if it can even be peaceably settled without use of nuclear weapons.

Strategically the United States Government has selected policy toward Russia and Ukraine that weakened U.S. national security and economic prospects. It is not unlikely that the Chinese Juan will replace the U.S. dollar as the preferred global currency within a decade or two as the Chinese economy continues a well balanced increase without compiling vast public debt during a time when the United States has low taxes on the rich concentrating wealth internationally while the domestic economy is financed with vast public debt. Military costs required to keep up with an arms race with Russia and China to force the legal will of the Democrat Party instead of peaceful statesmanship with rational expectations and real politicks concerning international power is consistent with the evolution of the Democrat party into one that uses law like play dough to bend, fold, spindle and mutilate it to whatever extent it can to have its way with political affairs.

US Gov Won't Recognize Western Russia

 The U.S. Government in sponsoring Ukraine’s war with Russia labeled Russia the aggressor, as if that was all the logic required. Blame and prosecute without second thought for fining peaceful coexistence and economic partnership. The war could still be swiftly, peacefully settled with each side halting in place and permanent borders made thereat. The U.S. Government prefered a fictitious rationale that is a convenient half-truth to justify its posture as it did with the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and W.M.D.’s for the Second Iraq War. The Ukraine is former western Russia. Russia invaded it when no other remedies were available to recover it from the Clinton-Yeltsin swindle. It was not like invading Poland, France, Finland or Germany. U.S. policy has a stench about it, of accomplishing for the Central Powers the taking of Crimea and Ukraine, a task the Central Powers could not permanently accomplish for themselves.

The U.S. Government has a cognitive deficit in failing to recognize historical western Russia and believes the Ukraine is an independent state equal to that of England, France or Denmark. Basically the U.S. Government and Democrat party leadership have bought into the Soviet Union’s boundaries as the real ones and those of historical Russia put down by the Soviets as fiction.

Russian claims on Ukraine extend backward to the founding of Kiev. Yet in the modern world since 1800 the Ukraine or borderlands were part of Russia including the Crimean Peninsula. Germany invaded Ukraine (and Russia) during the 20^th century in the Deutchland Uber Alles era that may be returning presently with expanded German military budgets and close war partnership with Ukraine. It may be just a matter of time before Germany develops a high quality nuclear weapons program with an array of high tech weapons to counter the Russian ‘threat’. An arms race of an Unholy Roman Empire that is the new European community may follow a German-Ukrainian victory versus Russia in the present Ukraine-Russian conflict. A nuclear weaponized Germany may present tactical challenges to Democrat Party national security theorists, if such exist, if they put down their burritos to think about it.

When the Cold War 1.0 ended Boris Yeltsin was the Soviet Union’s last leader. President Clinton made a deal with Yeltsin swindling Ukraine from Russia. At the time Russia was an oppressed nation that was only in the gestation stage of being reborn after seventy years of subjugation to the Communist Evil Empire. President Clinton preferred to abort the nascent Russian revival and deem it a big rump state. At the time Russian military and political power was at it’s lowest point in history. Completely ebbed, the ungoverned land may have looked to Clinton like the near east looked to Alexander the Great; ripe for the taking. Russia had no army or even leadership to oppose the west’s rapacious desire to take as much Russian land for-itself as possible. Decades would need to pass before Russian leadership could seek to reassert control over western Russia occupied by a pro-western government forces.

Bill Clinton was an Oxford trained lawyer leading the world’s greatest military alliance. He could rightly claim that western law was world law and that if Boris Yeltsin agreed to give up the Ukraine to independence then it was so...a fait accompli defensible with the ultimate reason of western military power. Even the World Court was located in a friendly leftist European nation that has values unlike those of much of the world. Ukraine President Zelinsky would clamor for war crimes charges against Russia leadership and the United States piled every sanction it could imagine upon Russia to prevent any possibility of a peaceful settlement to the conflict.

Yet the deal or swindle was unrealistic. Based on ignorance of Russian history and national character, taking western Russia and labeling it independent Ukraine was like taking title to a floodplain without an awareness that a river would eventually rise to cover the land. The Russian river of blood returned to the Ukrainian flood plain as the natural flow to drive out those that claimed and built upon it. The Biden administration has spent a quarter of a trillion dollars to dike the natural flow. Its post war economic planning would be to construct levy’s with N.A.T.O. along the floodplain. Since the rise of blood floods to the era is natural the event may be recurring in the future if the Russian political and military surge loses this season because of insufficient blood waters.

It’s not a communist river. It is not an effort to restore the boundaries of the former Soviet Empire. It is the rise of historical Russia seeking its former western land. Russia is a capitalist nation developing democracy. The President was given super-powers in time of external threat to pursue Russian national interests. Restoration of Russia’s western lands was an inevitable desire that should have been recognize and addressed a priori in the early 1990s. Taking the Crimean Peninsula away from Russia was an unthinkably dense, maladroit political mistake. Yet with other bodies to spend in the effort to prop up bad historical judgment maybe the calculations of the early 1990s seemed reasonable. The Russian desire to recover the Crimea and the rest of Ukraine was predictable, easy to recognize and the conflict simple to avoid with right political reasoning well informed by history.

I suppose that it may be possible to avoid a nuclear conflict that is an offspring of the protracted conflict. It is also possible that western investment in the war may actually secure something of a victory. Even if the west did achieve its immediate aims it may be the case that decades of adverse relations will follow between the west and Russia. Those are dangerous adverse relations with substantial opportunity costs, security and economic externalities. Paradoxically one might not be surprised if regardless of who the technical winners are, the natural flow of trade between Russia and Europe will eventually return and the losers will be those that had friends and family killed or wounded in the conflict..

It would be in the interest of the United States to negotiate an end to the war in place with a free trade zone without taxes made throughout a demilitarized zone extending several miles on either side of a new permanent border. Returning to a normal economic condition as soon as possible is the best way to let the world move forward. The United States had learned that good terms for ending a war for both sides...and especially the losers, serves to build peace instead of future war. The lesson was learned after the hard terms given to Germany at the conclusion of World War One may the final battle of that war named World War Two inevitable. The lesson evidently was lost to the west.

Right Angled Space (the poem)

 

Relativity syncopates past time
beats of Higgs drums so strikes differ
super positioned waveforms with tangles
collapsed spinning round normal spurs

Light and gravity might consider jokes
massless particles tighten mass pace
orbiting fore-selves cast at light speed
wave-knots pinwheel lore right angled space.

Social Constructs

 Social constructs don't exist in objective reality in the same way as the physics of the Universe. Social constructs are ideas constructed by sentient beings that are sometimes fabricated or manufactured synthetically interacting with mass and energy. There is much debate concerning quantum mechanics and epistemology and what is real, or if the observer is part of the system being observed these days. Science is something of an art or a rigorous art of knowledge of select things in a way. Subject-object distinctions were treated by W.V.O. Quine in his books Word and Object and The Two Dogmas of Emipricism, yet the subject has worked itself to elaboration including the Copenhagen Interpretation and the varities of proposed solutions to the Schrodinger Wave Function collapse. Sartre might have classified social constructs as ossified praxis- like highway signs for example. The problem is that physics tend to want to include everything in objective reality including the human mind and eliminate subjectivity. That's somewhat difficult to consider as one's own thought is for-oneself and sometimes for-others. Then the additional challenge of reconciling objective reality to the claim or nearly a fact fact that the Universe is just a concatenation of entangled waveforms slowed down in the Higgs field. In that case mass and energy are emergent, contingent phenomena rather than primary, objectively real things. All interesting stuff to consider.

Philosophy of Cosmology

I thought I would write this post with a few ideas that I learned recently concerning cosmology- especially that of black holes.

 Maybe it is the goodness of God that makes true physical theories beautiful. At the core of the cloud of uncertainty love may surpass even mathematics as the explanation elevating standards. That is aesthetics may be at the end of scientific researches. The live personality and goodness of God is the foundation for human understanding while quanta are captured and interpreted by minds rather than machine sensors. One can be thankful that mathematical physicists are hard at work.

It seems as if theoretical physicists are discovering philosophy enough to sprinkle some into their popular cosmology works. I don’t invariably enjoy that though I appreciate the effort. So much of philosophy reinforces other prior and subsequent philosophical works that merely selecting a few books out of historical context and going with those ideas to support contemporary opinions can leave a lot of contradictions in place apparent to those with deeper reading and contemplation of the field. One buys those popular cosmology books to learn physic’s current ideas rather philosophy, at least that’s why I read them.

There is a present difference of opinion and popular exposition on the topic of reality and if the Universe or time are real or illusory. There is also a debate concerning the human mind being real or simply a working concatenation of sense data feedback loops that believes its real though it phenomenally exists in a quantum field simultaneously with characteristics of monism and plural. In another post I wrote about waves comprising everything that exists which is created. Waves echo about space-time perhaps interfering with their own forms thereafter generating fractions of waves and compounding forms comprising the heart of a contingent Universe.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ER_nbf-fKRk&pp=ygUWc2hvb3QgaGlnaCBhaW0gbG93IHllcw%3D%3D

Nominalism and realism are useful terms in the philosophical practice of analytic philosophy a.k.a. linguistic philosophy. Language is made up of words with smaller (and larger) units that are variables comparable to algebraic variables. They are given values through association with real objects and other words. Some theoretical physicists like to use the word ‘relational’ to describe the nature of words and the quantum field too when they are using English instead of math. Relational has a smart sound to it since it shares a root word with Einstein’s relativity theories.

The word ‘reality’ is a variable and has different meanings to different people on different occasions of use. Reality as a word has a meaning within a given lexicon of words. If a theoretical physicist argues that time is real, he is in effect saying something like A=B, and needs to assign values to each variable himself. So the question of what is real requires the word ‘real’ to be defined by the scientist. It is itself a relation referent item with its value selected from a lexicon of word-meanings. What is real can have a nearly infinite number of answers if one want to be argumentative about the point.

Rather than philosophy though, I wanted to write about ideas of physical cosmology since those are what I need to make a few notes about to recall later.

It is possible that gravity, space-time and the quantum world of mass energy are all tied in together. A singularity with an infinite concentration of mass-energy and apparently space-time too exists at the start of a Universe (relatively speaking) and also within the event horizon of a black hole.

I believe that mass-energy compaction is finite in a black hole singularity because there is a limited amount of mass-energy that went in to it. An infinite amount of mass would be required to make compaction infinite or the compaction would halt. Each Universe that exists like ours believed to start with a big bang and hyper-inflation presumably had a finite quantity of energy-mass, so no black hole in the Universe could have more than that quantity. Sure a black hole could compact to a smaller degree infinitely in an Eleatic sort of way, yet that would at least seem to violate some kind of quantum principle. Neither should a singularity be able to shrink with infinite density because at some point it just might not exist. If the singularity is taking space-time along with it into the singularity it should have a big rip and cut itself off from the space-time outside the event horizon. Obviously the event horizon continues to exist though, so the infinite shrinking must have a finite limit in some sort of proportion to the amount of mass-energy that went in to it.

Plainly it is possible that a singularity could have severed itself from space-time altogether and went really infinite imploding inward or going through to some other form or place in another Universe and the change wasn’t outwardly noticed by those outside the event horizon because of the time difference within and without an event horizon. Scientists seem to think that space-time may itself be a thing comparable to quanta and is composed of granular units that are extremely small; maybe too small to theoretically measure. Space also may have energy embedded in it, or actually be a form of energy, so it can emit virtual particles in empty space that briefly appear and then return to nothingness of space-time. Probably there is a true empty space that holds the unified field of space-time. Waves from the start of the Universe issued from an unknown source (i.e. God) mave an built interference patterns producing a big bang. Waves after a big bang and hyperinflation may have broken up into enough string patterns to comprise the mass and energy forms present in the Universe. Waves existing outside of spacetime yet containing space-time and mass energy of the Universe may be the source of virtual particles appearing in the space-time field because of ordinary fluctuations.

Inquisitive individuals have considered basic questions of space and time, or space-time for thousands of years. The Pre-Socratic philosophers Parmenides and Heraclitus considered the question of volume and space and if the Earth had killed off space when it occupied space or if nothingness still existed and Earth was just occupying it. They also wondered if everything is in motion or if nothing is; issues for another day.

Plainly nothing would need to exist for something to exist in a space. That necessary nothing would be necessary for the modern idea of a space-time field to exist too, and for a singularity-at-the-start of the universe to occur in. Science doesn’t consider the question much because all scientific equations apply only to the space-time field that is the mass-energy universe and only fairly recently did science learn about space-time items like virtual energy, the accelerating expansion of space-time, dark energy etc. There is also the lexicon problem in that space and the unified space and time term space-time can have different referent meanings. Before the beginning of space-time there was nothingness. Nothingness can only be compared to being;with just nothing there are no relational objects or ideas to relate to. God could cast a word into the darkness of nothingness making waves.

Einstein of course created the idea of a unified space-time that has material-like qualities of being warped or curved by gravity. Gravity seems to be an intrinsic characteristic of mass energy. Mass-energy curves space; that makes a lot of sense if space-time is itself a sheet of energy that is very dilute, while mass and energy are very concentrated. Singularities would have space-time compacted to a finite point in black holes. Thereat a singularity could be like a knot tied in space time, or like a niche built in a wall to place a vase with flowers in that doesn’t go any further. Space-time stops at a singularity but doesn’t end there. It could be that when a singularity with enough mass collapses to a given point that the singularity of unravels itself like a knot being untied and returns to being a wave outside of space-time.

Compacting time is like a thickening of space. If one rides at the center of a spinning disc one rotates faster than at a distant circumference. Relativity is like the difference in position between a rider at the center or the edge of the disk. The warp of space-time inward toward the center makes time travel seem slower to those traveling along the edge beyond an event horizon. At the event horizon space-time is thicker. At the singularity where space-time is thickest some like Hawking say time stops. If time stops space has ended too. Yet that would plainly be a local phenomenon and perhaps somewhat improbable. It would require too much time for those outside the horizon to learn the answer as their experience of time is much thinner.

Black holes have a vast amount of mass and energy. If it were released instantly a good sized one might incinerate much of the known Universe or create another inflation of space-time. There may be an equivalence of space-time with mass and energy at some stage; possibly being an explanation for the first hyper-inflation of the Universe.

The idea that singularities can’t release mass, energy or space-time is intriguing. Hawking speculated that black hole event horizons may leak virtual energy yet a singularity is far from an event horizon. The singularity is almost infinitely far away in space-time terms in regard to thickness. Maybe some particle pairs super-positioned or entangled inward and outward of an event horizon are separated with one going in and the other escaping out, yet that would only mean that the singularity’s efficiency at destroying or absorbing mass that goes within the event horizon is less than 100% rather than implying that black holes evaporate eventually. Because of the distance in space-time of a black hole singularity from the event horizon it would require an infinite time for the leakage to occur anyway, if it could at all.

One might speculate that even black holes have quantum super-positions all over the space-time universe so they could sometimes escape. Yet if space-time is local and infinitely niche'd far away from normal space-time, and if space-time is a unified energy field, that would probably include all super-positioned waveforms too that are actually wave segments captured in the Higgs Field. Waveforms trapped in the space-time field and trapped in a singularity should be entirely isolated from waveforms beyond the event horizon. Plainly one may wonder if the spatial area between the event horizon and the singularity is a true void empty of all space-time leaving the event horizon as a distant time-residual wake or splash like that from a boat or a diver from a high board slicing into a pool.

Skeinz Matter (the poem)

 

Flaggots of wark
grimpt peach
cinder blocks
reliable Nitszche
superbanz
phoed from cray dullk
true graves

Sluber landz
governance
reliably subsversive
regressive bites morph change
arranged broad castes
smattering reign drops
fatter planz.

No Guns in the Drunk Tank (the poem)

 

No guns in the drunk tank
they’d shoot themselves and others too
no guns in the drunk tank
they’d kill themselves and others new
no guns in the drunk tank
they permutate so death comes due
no guns in the drunk tank
the party’s come to town
no guns in the drunk tank
stinking rank cut-em down.

Government Half Truths, Flim Flam, Spin Spun and more

 “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”-Upton Sinclair

Considering the policy implementation and ideas of the administration and its state sponsored affiliate broadcast media organ NPR I was reminded of the Godfather’s method of persuading a Senator to toe the line by placing a severed horses head in bed with the Senator while he slept. A day after Elon Musk’s Starship blew up four minutes after launch Elon Musk’s Twitter rescinded its labeling of NPR as a state sponsored broadcast affiliate. Those rocket launches can be subject to a lot of government, spooky Democrat Party mal-intentions. Maybe its a good idea to elect someone to manage Ukraine war funding that hasn’t had a son employed in Ukraine serving as a door for Ukrainians to lobby the White House.

Issues abound to go over if one had the time or interest. Personally I believe neither major party is capable of running a competent Presidential candidate any more. Skepticism is the appropriate response of the times.

The first issue is the Christian school shootings that left six dead. The sole remedy Democrats envision and bludgeon the public with is to bite a chunk of the 2^nd amendment and eat it raw. The second is the budget negotiation embedded in the U.S. public debt limit; the President says the sky’s the limit on public debt- that he wants no limit on public debt so he can send another quarter trillion dollars of weapons to Ukraine to kill Russians during the new fiscal year without any trouble about maintaining a tight budget.

Mass shootings are a cultural problem rather than one of Americans having too many guns. Democrats flood the nation with illegal aliens to provide Neo-slave illegal labor and to prevent good wages for black and white legal laborers. That bumps out economic stability and helps flood prisons with urban Negroes that creates prison jobs for a few and reduce competition for desk and sundry indoor good-paying jobs preferred by women.

Mass shootings just didn’t happen in schools before the Clinton administration’s surge of killings from Colorado to Oregon when it was all the rage. One might get the impression that mass shootings and gun murders are at least fifty percent a strictly black American issue yet it may be that is simply because of the problem of black gangs. Even if guns were banned much printing guns with 3-D printers and fitting them with quality barrels and hammers would make them about as effective, yet less safe, than manufactured weapons. Criminals would have a flourishing business making and selling guns to criminals somewhat more easily than they can produce fentanyl and heroin I would guess. Democrats may wish to be able to disarm Americans to more readily intimidate them politically and socially with thugs and goons at the door.

Mass shootings and targeted killings were probably enhanced by the rise of cell phones too. Cell phones and a profusion of automobiles among youth allowed gangs to go mobile nationwide with coordinated attacks and even murders for public relations. Those are cultural phenomena that eating the raw meat of the second amendment won’t mitigate. A nation promoting homosexual marriage and mass illegal migration into its urban core areas while saturating the southern countryside is likely to have a rise in cultural displacement and conflict phenomena. Public education may have declined in quality as well for a number of sociologically based reasons. The decline is more one of education failing to adapt to the tech era rather than that of the educators of today being inferior to those of the past.

Plainly though hundreds of Americans die each year from mass killings. It would be possible to save 25,000 lives each year in the nation if automobiles and trucks were banned from the streets. If streets were given over to bicycle rides countless pedestrians mowed down from behind by fast moving and increasingly silent automobiles would be spared. Because Democrats drive cars they have no concern about replacing cars with fast underground electric guided transit tubes crossing the nation to save lives.

No matter, there are other issue to consider. One is that of the U.S.A. censoring political speech in social media. Because social media is the primary venue for American political discourse wherein citizens can directly express political ideas the rise of Obama era censorship was a caustic additive. It’s basic ingredient for growth was the homosexual lobby to expropriate and redistribute marriage from heterosexuals. Democrats decided that any political speech that included terms they didn’t like was hate speech. It might be an example of hate speech whereby a writer said that darkness overcame the Earth each night if a censor construed darkness as a code word for African-American equivalent to braggot. Corporate owners of social media purged their ranks of dissidents to homosexual marriage and supported the elimination of free speech in mass of writers using even a few words on a corporate hate list lexicon.

The rich and queer corporate social media power to define what is or isn’t hate speech was bent from the start yet effective as a surge of political to let a Democrat Congress push homosexual marriage in to law, yet the residual effect was to leave the left controlled corporate censorship of social media intact. It was able to find ways to delete antipathetic political speech in additional ways. Tucker Carlson and Dan Lemon being fired recently could team up at a minor news network to form the core of a radical tell-it-like-it-is analysis staff. Fox News paying vast punitive damages sought to eliminate controversy that might interfere with recovery of profit and CNN wanted to eliminate a male that had stepped over the narrative line paint by the numbers approach to news to improvise a personal pail of shade to throw on Nikki Haley in response to Haley’s bucket of shade thrown on President Joe (the old) Bidem. In my opinion Donald Trump would crush Joe Biden at shuffleboard mano y mano. The 2024 Presidential race could lift some real sleepers to the finals.

I stipulate that an exceptional well qualified candidate beyond age 80 with a clearly articulated platform responding to real challenges could serve as President, yet neither Joe Biden or Donald Trump fits that criteria. Rather they are qualified in aspects of personal greed and ambition that places their own interests before that of others. I do not doubt that some people in advanced years may be outstandingly greedy until their last breath.

I agree that hate speech can exist. The test of what is or isn’t hate speech is well compared to the debate over what is or isn’t art. Political speech should be protected if one wants to have a democracy in fact rather than ostensibly. Using a few politically incorrect terms in an otherwise political essay or comment is a world away from simply writing a purely hateful piece without valid political ideas. Maybe it is comparable to the debate over pornography and art. One shouldn’t censor a DaVinci painting with a half naked man as pornography because one knows it isn’t, though a Monet with flowers and clothed women may be safer, while there are cases farther toward the gray area with landscapes and naked bathers, a naked women coating herself in chocolate, and simply naked women in lewd acts. Some pornographic actors and actresses might consider their methods artful-in-themselves of course. I believe nowadays it is simply graded or labeled for viewer opportunity to decide if they want to experience the content. In the social media censorship of politically antipathetic writing even a single word in a thousand that is not approved by the censors is cause enough for deleting not only the essay but all of the author’s writing; a complete ban from that social media outlet.

One might wonder why the rich that own social media should so aggressively support the suppression of free speech. The reasons are many and I will speculate about them even though one must infer from sociological stasis rather than direct knowledge of a body of collusion that intended it.

The rich and powerful throughout history have sought to totalize their control of society. One may approach the political summit of fascism from three-hundred and sixty political degrees; from socialist and communist to democratic and authoritarian etc. Controlling free speech and limiting it to those that reinforce the values of the powerful is as old as government so it is a natural evolution of social media to make it controlled by the values of the rich, or rather the values the rich want the masses to have. It wouldn’t be appropriate for values of piracy, amorality, greed and fascism to be prevalent among the masses after all.

The world’s demographics of eight billion souls living on a planet that can support just two billion at an American level of consumption means conflict is inevitable and the choices is more one of how the conflict to reduce world population will occur than if it will. It would be wrong to believe that the rich and powerful haven’t considered how they might manage the conflict to their advantage.

The M.I.T. economist Lester Thurow commented in one of his books circa 1999 that the traditional family structure doesn’t work anymore and that radical change has to happen. The traditional family structure with is propensity for economic expansion is like an inverse pyramid increasing from the bottom up demographically, and everyone in it expects a better standard of living than that of the preceding generation. Elites thus may have decided to put some intention on economics to radically change the political economy of the United States that would annihilate traditional families and heterosexual marriage with reproduction as normative. Promoting homosexual marriage was a brick in the wall sealing traditionalists in the past with a cask of amontillado.

Elon Musk’s Starship is the biggest rocket ever launched. If one could load it with a hundred passengers and 100 others like it each day and send them to Mars only 3,650,000 people from Earth could travel to Mars in a year. In a century that would be 365 million people. Plainly with the present Earth population being more than 8 billion just a tiny minority of the Earth’s human population could relocate to Mars if the Earth ecosphere collapses and it becomes uninhabitable as a result of war or abuse.

I have felt for decades that electro-magnetic mass drivers are the best way to have continuous heavy lift launches from Earth to Earth orbit; one need just overcome the friction into orbit minutes challenge to create in effect, a space-train machine gun.

Chinese rocket pardigmata are far more than a thousand years old while electrical mass drivers are fairly recent; humanity is slow to change its economic infrastructure methods. Government prefers paradigms with precedent. Government would rebuild a lapsed Cold War simply to avoid challenges of adapting to peace.

War is a traditional practice. It is naturally human to apply methods of war to solve human over-population and resource depletion challenges. Creating civil conflict mto distract the body politick from expecting resolution of environmental and economic challenges is s.o.p. In my opinion that is the paradigm Democrat Party elites and the rich have applied to the political economy of the United States. It is necessary in that paradigm to suppress free speech to expedite the conversion of the masses to atheism and amorality, A spineless, amoeba-like electorate following designated leader-actors as mindless followers is preferable to a restive, free society lacking political wisdom.

Stimulating race conflict always was a good way to direct concerns of the masses away from the poor quality of leadership. Everyone has a race and skin color so no one is ever completely free of being viewed by others as an object with racial characteristics. Economic class is more meaningful than race to ordinary citizens, and race as an issue is used by elites to distract from class economic concerns such as raising taxes on the rich. If poverty was structurally eliminated it is likely that race conflict would fade away. The struggler for income adequacy for the poor and social equality for the masses through economic parity are perennial challenges that collaterally impede the mass political effort to bring the world ecosphere to a state of full recovery from human economic insults and debasement.

My preference is for an informed electorate with actual free speech in a democracy or republic synthesis. It has been noted that a democratic society well-informed that willfully follows a particular course of action is the most effective of numerous forms of governance in mass action. Solving the world demographic challenges though real rather than ostensible democracy is the only way besides the second coming of Christ that traditional liberal values including that of traditional families and heterosexual marriage can persevere.

The dystopian scenarios of elite marionettes behind the scenes pulling the strings of a sham democracy like that of the United States are many. Humanity may be conformed like amoral sardines before losing their minds altogether via some new dope or doped product. The big sleep may peaceful transition billions of souls overnight ti the great beyond leaving the elites and immune minions to repair the mostly vacant planet’s ecosphere.

It should be possible to continue the present structure alternatively with nuclear family forms intact and protect the individual civil and human rights including the second amendment intact. That would require eliminating poverty directly with guaranteed basic income and taxation of the rich at a war level of 90%. Ecological economic practices need be implemented and jobs restoring the ecosphere created with government policy. Patent exclusivity should be reduced to five years with royalties of ten percent going to patent holders after five years. Border security should be total without illegal entry in order to allow sane democratic policy accounting to actualize into being. The United States should be a coordinator of neighbor nation ecological economic political economy transitions that conserve the ideal of technological progress adapted to be non-exclusive with the ideal of restoring the planetary ecosphere to health.

Make no mistake; President Bider is a spoiler upstaging real ecological economic progress. While no Democrat party candidate has ever expressed competence in ecological economics or presented a viable platform to transition the nation to one without displacing the masses and throwing them into gross, mass chaos, neither has President Biden understood the challenges facing the nation. Instead he has invested in a completely avoidable protracted war in Europe and proclaimed that his administration has done more than any other to implement good ecological policies, that were not much at any rate. Most Presidential executive actions to legislate from the White House through regulation are reversible by the next antipathetic President.

Alaska Oil and Gas During Hot and Cold Wars

 Alaska’s economy has relied upon oil and gas revenues since the 1970s to fund government. Nationalization of ARAMCO by the Saudi government led up to the Arab oil embargo in 1974 fully prompting development of Alaska’s north slope oil fields to relieve gasoline shortages of the 48 states. The state government of Alaska experienced dumb luck financing continuing to this day although state politicians tend toward being clueless on how to diversify or understand reasons why it’s a good idea.

State government hasn’t an income tax to fund government. Historically when one industry funds government budget it also tends to elect industry sycophants who work against diversity and common sense. The phenomenon isn’t so simple now as it was. The economy regarding oil is far more complex than it was in the early 1970s. Politicians may not understand what is good for the state economy in more than one way.

Usually Americans in political circles tend to regard pure greed as the summun bonum or ultimate good that is a bulwark and the sole remedy for communism and all the hateful sharing and caring networking that can follow communist revolution. At least in theory communist dictatorship would result in sharing and caring rather than crass social media censorship and economic marginalization of political dissidents and their nefarious opinions. Well, no matter, the union of communism and corporatism was firmly forming a synthetic economic hybrid before the Ukraine war as Wall Street invested as junior partners in China. Alaskan politicians sought permission to export liquid natural gas and oil to China and other points east instead of just down south to the 49 states that no longer relies on Alaskan oil or gas production because of a global glut of fracking field resurrection of spent oil fields. The U.S. became the largest exporter of oil after fracking.

For a generation in the future Alaskan oil and gas may be superfluous as concerns 48 states consumer demands that are slacked. President Biden recently made an executive regulation that will in effect require more than 50% of new U.S. auto sales to be electric cars within a fairly short time frame- that quickened transition to electric vehicles will also undercut Alaskan oil export sales and royalties to pay for state government. If Canada creates recharging stations along the Alaska Highway- at Burwash Landing Destruction Bay, Beaver Creek, Watson Lake, Fort Nelson etc. electric car sales even in Alaska will increase.

Oil and gas, it’s what Alaska has instead of diversity. It also has a crowed state government city in Juneau located in a region with modestly declining demographics. S.E. Alaska has a great rain forest and wildlife that are endangered from human encroachment and economic development. Affluent nations have myriad new toys and technology that permit increased efficiency in locating, harassing or killing wildlife from game cameras to fish finders and g.p.s. maps. S.E. Alaska is valuable for the world ecosphere (as are Amazonian rain forests) and much political sentiment exists to preserve it intact and free of gross economic devastation as possible. Politicians from around the state make the haj to Juneau every winter to vote to develop more oil and gas before returning home after wringing their hands for some months about the problems funding state government without raiding the Permanent Fund created to share some of the North Slope oil revenues with ordinary citizens.

Recently U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski met with Ukraine President Zelinsky and expressed complete supporter for the war on Russian forces in Eastern Ukraine. The Zelinsky negotiation manifesto was a complete demand for unilateral Russian surrender of all of Ukraine for a peace settlement and perhaps more concessions concerning emasculation of Russian President Vladimir Putin before he is sentenced for war crime. From the point of view of Senator Murkowski, who inherited her first term via appointment from her father the state governor at the time, hostility to Russia is a logical continuation of the U.S. political/military/industrial complex of cold war against the Soviet Union. Her father was a U.S. Senator too when politics were easy. In the 1980s one need vote to increase defense spending and oil and gas development while hating on Russia a.k.a. the Soviet Union. Institutional memories and habits are slow to change if not impossible.

Contemporary Democrat Progressives have occasionally found common cause with Senator Lisa Murkowski as have the modern equivalent of blue dog democrats. In funding the war against Russia sharing its historical lands taken by Germans and Bill Clinton Democrats and Senator Murkowski have in effect created a new bi-partisan political Regressive movement. It is tough to predict if political Regressivism will outlast its founder President Biden if he isn’t re-elected. Yet the new Cold War 2.0 seems strongly supported, as strongly as regressives support increasing public debt. The Regressive movement is convenient for 80 year old Joe Biden who needn’t update his international relations policies from those of 1980.

Super-translational attributes of select physics in regions of comparatively flat space-time would allow clumps of energy mass information to appear in waves dissimilar to those in areas of more space-time curvature with fewer super-translational qualities present. Apparently the two circumstances are mutually exclusive. Peace, prosperity and economic selections are sort of like that too. For the unreflective players in U.S. economics and politics greed is the primary directive in political theory. Like the Harlem Globetrotters, to be in the game a hapless opponent is needed like the Washington Generals to be up on game after game. For American green the opposition is communism. Any mention of negativity to the green alliance immediately encounters the challenge of supporting the communist team. Unfortunately for the restricted logic loop of the pure greed team, there are more economic theories and criticisms than varieties of flowers under the sun that have nothing in common with communism.

The straw man of communism does not make greed the sole alternative nor even a correction choice for adapting the Alaskan and U.S. economies to the present political complex of compresence. The decision to make Ukraine independent instead of Russian was a bad choice made by the greed party, yet it allowed a future cold war and hot war to develop that increased weapons sales from U.S. arms manufacturers. That economic choice was counter-productive in the long run as it harmed the economy of Alaska and the west while halting much environmental support or transitional to ecological economic practices along the Arctic littoral.

Governments and the choice of capital location do influence business, capitalism and additional economic phenomenalities. The question isn’t simply of too little or too much government. The choices of government policy in support for or opposition to various business, demographic and environmental challenges may induct support or opposition from capital. Popular reliance upon concentrated capital or business to determine formation of the political economy and to respond to externalities to business concerning ecosphere such as mass extinction and habitat degradation is grossly incompetent. Reliance on something or someone to find a solution for a problem that it has no interest in or even awareness of isn’t even vaguely rational. Adam Smith never believed that business could replace government. Adam Smith believed that people could conduct their own business best; not those of all the people best, which is the role of government.

I shall digress a little to say that it should have been possible to deescalate not only nuclear weapons supplies globally, it should have been and still is possible to freeze the increase of conventional weapons supplies. An arms race instead of an ecological economics race to transition the world population to sustainable yet progressive economic methods is Counter-productive to the security of prospects for human survival on the planet.

President Reagan's revolutionary break with Cold War mentality that allowed the conflict to end and peace with Russia to development wasn’t understood or taught in elite political climes. President G.H.W. Bush kind of understood it and continued the plan with a neutrality that wasn’t adverse. However President Bush received a lukewarm reception himself in his own nation. Eventually the magnetic orientation of the eastern establishment in the U.S. resumed its magnetic orientation away from peace with Russia to hostility with the new Russia. The magnetic attraction of the Cold War recurred with a vengeance expanding N.A.T.O. and building up Ukraine.

The Zelinsky Manifesto wasn’t understood by the next-generation cold warrior Senator Lisa Murkowski to be a policy that would be directly harmful to the Alaskan oil and gas funded economy yet it would seem to be. Sanctions and war upon Russia through Ukraine along with a western cap on the sales price of Russian oil and gas forces Russia to sell its oil and gas to China and perhaps India to replace its lost market share to the west. China gains a vast reliable oil and gas supplier in Russia who cannot sell oil on the market to the west. Even Russia’s gas pipelines to Europe halted perhaps permanently. China was Alaska’s preferred destination for its oil and gas.

As it is today with oil and gas prices dropped since fracking started opening the floodgates to a generation of renewal of exhausted oil fields Alaska oil sales to China seem dismal. China would might be unwilling to rely on fossil fuel purchases from Alaska because of the political leverage the west would gain in making China rely on energy from the west. The U.S. government for several years before the Ukraine hot war sought to stop Europe from buying gas and oil from Russia. China is like Europe in that regard. The Zelinsky manifesto and full support by Senator Murkowski stopped dead prospects of substantial Alaska sale of fossil fuels to China. What about Japan?

Japan uses a lot of fossil fuels- even coal- for producing electricity. Surely it will buy liquefied natural gas from Alaska? That probably isn’t a reliable market either. Japanese scientists are some of the world’s best. Japan technologists developed bullet trains before the rest of the world. It isn’t improbable that Japan will develop the first super-conductor power line for a national energy grid. For some time it has been known that a super-conducting power line inside of a pipeline filled with liquid hydrogen is feasible. Especially in a long, narrow nation like Japan building a superconducting power line looping around to power industry, electric cars, homes and businesses is a practical prospect. Power in the line could be input from wind, solar, hydrogen fuel cell, geothermal and other non-polluting technologies; hence Japan might be good for short term sales yet bad for reliable purchases of Alaska fossil fuels even for a generation. Technology and science is evolving too quickly to make Japan a buyer of Alaska fossil fuel regardless of the resolution of the Zelinsky manifesto.

The practical remedy for the Alaska government’s financing issues is a sales tax and relocation of the state capital to Fairbanks. Fairbanks is located near the geographical center of the state. It would well serve diversified business development around the majority of the state coordinating service to the north, south and western coasts as well as the east along the Canadian border. In Juneau, where the capitol is presently located, legislators vote to ask for more oil sales then flee homeward when hordes of tourists from cruise boats arrive in the spring. The capital is located far away from the center of Alaska and its locations of future economic diversification. Juneau was picked for the capitol during the sailing then steamship era when Seattle seemed far away. Most business was done in S.E. Alaska and natural resources harvested were sent to Seattle. So Juneau was a natural location when telephone lines didn’t exist and jet aircraft were not even on the radar screens of science fiction authors. People wanted government located where the action was.

Some say the capital move issue is stare decisis and res judicata. Yet relying upon wrong choices repeatedly still allows a bad choices to remain. One need not repeat bad choices because there is a precedent to do so. Some will also say that Fairbanks is ‘too’ cold. Most Alaska legislators are from places where it is also ‘too cold’. Besides, legislators should just be in the capital a few months before going home. It is probable that there are enough year round bureaucrats and other governments workers that can be recruited from the regions of Alaska that are ‘too cold’ to staff state government if government workers from Juneau that retire to the San Juan Islands or Arizona choose not to go north.

Twenty or thirty years ago Juneau needed government jobs for employment. The cruise industry had not yet developed so well as it has today, and fishing was in steep decline. Frankly, the quality of life in Juneau would improve a few years after the state government left. Housing prices would drop and the homeless housing issue find some relief. An arts and recreation including skying and outdoor activity for tourists could increase. The University of Alaska at Juneau could expand with more housing, buildings and educators and emerge as a go-to college for environmental studies. Tourism from cruise ships and fly in packages increase. More fish growing for harvest could locate in Juneau. I would guess that a couple of years after the state finished relocating to Fairbanks the city of Juneau would recover its population, jobs and develop a far more diversified sustainable economy.

The Zelinsky manifesto brought the end of any chance for resuming abolition of Cold War 1.0. It received complete support from Senator Lisa M. I wonder though if the impact that supporting hostilities with Russia that are likely not to end within a generation will have on the Alaska economy.

Advocates for the return to Cold War relations with Russia tend to say they are fighting against authoritarian while the west is increasingly corporatist with democracy moving toward ostentatious nominalism under the real power of concentrated wealth. They also tend to ignore the fact that Ukraine was part of Russia at least since 1800 until it was wrested away for a time by Nazis and Lenin Retaken by the Soviet Union during the Second World War it was then returning to Russia as well in a real sense; Russia was the core of the Soviet Union. When the west took advantage of the disarray in Russia at the end of the cold war to declare Ukraine independent it laid the foundation for abolishing the peace of the world. A particular kind of willful blindness is required to disregard Russia’s historical claims and lack of legal remedies available from a very biased west. A special kind of blindness is required to fail to find peaceful means to restore good relations with Russia and a better future for an Alaska economy too that doesn’t rely on fossil fuel sales to fund the state government budget.