The Usual Evolution to Socialism-Corporatism

There probably is a usual evolution to socialism in a society that fails to have a moderate democracy with more or less egalitarianism in distribution of wealth. As wealth becomes concentrated and government heeds the will of the most rich a state of semi-corporatism prevails. Benefits and pensions are cut to the workers, corporations invest overseas with cheaper labor costs and the masses in a formerly democratic and egalitarian society become pacified with bread and circuses, debauchery and scandal. 

Eventually the degraded and new proletarian-plebeians with formerly external proletariats invading to join the work force and keep wages low for the masses as concentrated wealth increase seek social benefits through government to replace the lost pensions and solid wages of a formerly well-off working and middle class. The insider 1% class strip jobs of meaningful benefits and use unemployment as a lever such that its better to have a job than not (true) to keep benefits and wages minimal. Hence socialism arises with socialist leaders joining with corporatists at the apex of government.

Individualism is repressed along with creativity. Socialist leaders raise taxes upon concentrated wealth and corporations to replace the tax cuts given by overly exuberant corporatist leaders in previous eras. Corporatist leaders become aware of the planetary trend toward socialism and corporatism and use the leverage of unemployment or inflation to increase their power and break up and 1% sentiment. The ecosphere declines in health in the meanwhile.

Did Pres Trump 'Promise' PM Trudeau that He Won't Laugh if Justin Wears Blackface on Video Calls?

The President of Canada wore black or brown face makeup in a Canadian Minstrel party or some sort of schoolboy non-sense long ago in the year 2000 when he was an educator or student ( I am not certain). President Trump was overheard making a call to a foreign leader overheard by a whistle-blower and in turn reported to investigators. One cannot help speculate that the promise may have been not to chastise or laugh at the Prime Minister if he wants to wear blackface on video conference calls.

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a29123631/donald-trump-national-security-whistleblower-promise/

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/09/19/delingpole-justin-trudeaus-blackface-has-made-satire-redundant/

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/whistleblower-complaint-reportedly-on-trump-contact-with-foreign-leader-touches-off-dc-firestorm

Auto Exhaust-Industrial Pollution Infiltrate Placental Tissue to Impact Feotus

An interesting study found that air pollution from automobile exhaust and other point sources of air pollution proportionally correlate to ambient environmental levels of sooty auto exhaust.  Apparently women from areas with soot and auto exhaust in the atmosphere inhale that filth and render that unto their placentas and feotus during pregnancy. So that may be why the devil seeks to get rid of air pollution regulation, promote fossil fuel development and bring vast smokestack industries to China and the rest of the world; in order to make stupid children that will vote for stupid politicians that are more amendable to brainwashing and eternal damnation.

https://www.livescience.com/black-carbon-reaches-placenta.html

Taliban Bombs Hospital- US Can't Enable Those Lunatics to Rule Afghans

The Trump administration was correct in letting the negotiations with the Taliban perish in the circular file of politics; the Afghan lunacy party of terror on fellow citizens of Afghanistan is not one that can be morally supported by anyone besides plain fascists.

Negotiations with the Taliban mean nothing more than allowing homicidal lunatics to rule by degrees. That is a policy that is indefensibly wrong, for the Taliban is nothing besides evil.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/09/killed-car-bomb-attack-afghan-province-zabul-190919042138106.html

The lunatics of the kill-Afghan citizens party until they can have power party is fundamentally crazy and it would be crazy for the U.S. Government to enable such a wicked organization to have any opportunity to take a foothold in government.

If the Taliban lunacy has cadre that wants to be in legitimate politics they need only vote, stand for office and participate in the existing democratic establishment. The democracy of Afghanistan is what the U.S. should support. The idea that the people of Afghanistan should be terrified into supporting the Taliban takeover goals might play better for leftist gun confiscation advocates in the United States than among the ordinary people of Afghanistan.

Sure the United States has some reprehensible political developments that render western democracy dubious to the heretical Muslim fanatics too daft to understand the Bible and the Lord Jesus Christ. Instead of allowing homosexuals to create their own bound pair or group entanglements that are equivalent before law to the laws of heterosexual pair bonding, the Supreme Court made corrupted marriage and undermined families and international relations with heretical Muslims lunatics. The High Court forced its diseased cape of doom over the nation like a cloud of pestilence and death. Tolerance of idiots in political positions like the Supreme Court is one of the down sides of democracy, yet apparently citizens of a nation aren’t accountable before God for all of the morally wicked choices of political leaders. Hence if the Taliban participated in government in the democratic establishment of Afghanistan they would not be morally responsible for vast public debt piled up by the central government if its administrators were daft enough to do so.

A fundamental principle of democracy is individual self-determination. That is required for maximum economic and spiritual development of individuals and concatenated, a society. Oppressive despotic governments are against that. Even in a democracy and a judiciary there are individuals that fail to comprehend that principle. They try to force there will and way on everyone instead of discovering avenues to allow people to pursue their own interests without forcing everyone else into submission to an onerous law.

A transnational cultural issue reinforces misunderstanding of politics not uncommonly in comparisons of one society with another. Without depth in anthropology, sociology and history of two different societies and their pace of development over centuries, in addition to evolutionary adaptations to environment and technology or tool-kits of two cultures as well as general world history,understanding with a little wisdom of why women have a certain culture in one country and not another, doesn't occur. At the least, without similar political economies women are unlikely to be able to afford the ways of another more prosperous society.

Taliban leaders should be smart enough to recognize that a fascist cadre of idiotic and heretical goons that blow up fellow citizens and convalescents are a bad choice for leadership of a nation.

Oil Pipelines targets of Economic War- Metabolism of Nexus, Cash and Oil

Recent attacks with drones and explosives on various oil targets show the easy vulnerability of oil supplies to terrorists from the air. Drones will only become more efficient predators on oil facilities as economic war takes practical dive-bombing turns toward oil-rich enemies. That is good news for alternate fuels and energy forms that become more efficient and desirable when oil goes up in price because of scarcity.

So there is a very good side to the increase in oil costs to producers and consumers that is a silver lining in the dark cloud of oil smoke and fires.

Iran knows President Trump isn't really competent on matters of war- he is a peace monger. Hence they launched weapons from Iran itself on Saudi apparently. I guess its up to Democrats to send the next Ronald Reagan to put the Iranians back in their bottle (lol).

Plainly Wall Street views the food, water and energy Nexus differently than communists that consider it in turn differently than environmentalists. The simplistic models for maximizing food production inclusive of factors such as labor, consumers, producers, land area, flow and fund resources etc. do not calculate that the minimalist approach to ecospheric integrity will probably crash the whole ecosphere in which the Nexus itself is an invasive, displacive antagonist when it becomes the sole paradigm for world resource.

While any Nexus can be subject to market forces, and while any system can be made more efficient, synergetic and better adapted to an environment, fossil fuels are plainly bad and should be replaced by electric or hydrogen vehicles as soon as possible. People are too slow to change when all the leadership is poor. The Democrat Party is a catalyst for the worst style of capitalism in the present Demographic and ecospheric circumstance; they are more interested in promoting themselves within the capitalist equation than in changing it toward truly sustainable environmental economics.

Though the terrorists hitting Saudi oil production had no environmental good intention motives (probably), the interrupt on oil production that drove up prices does at least provide a boost toward solar energy sales as well as interest in hydrogen fuel cell manufacture and in theory, superconductors.

A Good On-Line Reading of the KJV Bible

I found a good audio app for reading the King James version of the Bible. It is available here.

https://www.bible.com/en-GB/audio-bible-app-versions/1-kjv-king-james-version

or here...

https://www.bible.com/en-GB/bible/1/MAT.5.kjv

Does NFL Have Racist Rules on Bling?

When Odell Beckham wore a $350,000 watch during an NFL football game last Sunday he experienced mild social chastisement for wearing the costly bling. It was said that select expressions of bling violate NFL rules. One must ask, since bling has been associated with African Americans who want to show their wealth, if NFL anti-bling rules are racist levers savagely designed to keep free-expression down? Should anti-bling rules be considered hate crimes?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/browns/2019/09/10/browns-odell-beckham-jr-keep-wearing-richard-mille-watch-games/2276256001/

Pro athletes with hundreds of millions of dollars in the bank or in investments may feel a need to make their wealth obvious to the public. Pro football stars contribute greatly to the advancement of society and lift tens of thousands of homeless people out of poverty in Los Angeles.

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/panthers-cam-newton-outfit-jokes-buccaneers

Bling should not be repressed in the NFL. If I were a pro football star I too might feel the temptation to wear a watch three times greater in expense than that of Odell Beckham (or a $25 dollar Casio from Wal-Mart). Timing is very helpful in sports and football plays. A watch that is a smartphone can provide instant intelligence from a Universe of analysts with detail able to provide an edge over the competition with cheap or no (lol) watches worth even $100,000.

Kierkegaard and Bureaucratic Irony

I completed a course on Kierkegaard and Socratic irony from the University of Copenhagen. It was an excellent view into how Kierkegaard interpreted Socrates and the Socratic method of finding the truth through questioning tradition and discovering why what people believe is wrong. Kierkegaard applied that process even to the church and its ossified ecclesiology, wherein people did not find Christ for-themselves. I used the information in several essays. Fundamentally the course was very enjoyable and enlightening concerning a deeper view of historical European philosophy. The course is useful for those seeking to understand why bureaucrats are such klutzes at forming good policy to address challenges of the modern world including the ongoing mass extinction.

https://www.coursera.org/learn/kierkegaard

https://www.inverse.com/article/59208-omega-3-shortage

Tradition and history are important for cultural continuity. Yet it isn’t an either/or criterion of choice challenging people. That is people may and even must question tradition in order to refine or reform it- as Luther did, and as contemporary Christian clergy seem to have forgotten to. A priesthood of believers for example, is possible today to actualize Luther’s notation that all Christians are priests.

Today’s elites may share views of society as objects-for-others as did select intellectuals of the European Romanticist milieu. Feuerbach, Marx and Fichte were students of Hegel. The era of German romanticism was in full swing with the idea of Socrates about irony and subjectivity, relativism vs. naive empiricism experiencing radical development.

Apparently Hegel in his criticism of Socrates felt that the negation of truth or knowledge in outward social structures in favor of individuals discovering the truth for-themselves, went too far, insofar as it left everything negative and a vacuum. The romantics liked that and some developed the concept so far as to be virtual nihilists with a self-defining ego and the only meaningful fact.

Hegel developed his idea of the historical dialect of the world spirit realizing itself, and Marx and Engels followed along adapting the paradigm to their own purposes. Hegel though was wrong about the world spirit for several reasons, and off the mark about his criticism of Socratic irony i.m.o. Yet he was right that one should have a positive doctrine (Marx tried to propound one, however the positive doctrine should be conditional, contingent and pragmatic rather than explicitly comprehensive and explanatory universally and inclusive of the political environment.

Probably Darwin came closer to actualizing a positive doctrine similar to Hegel's evolving dialectic, yet without any sort of spiritual or socially deterministic pretension. Evolution obviously does not progress in a bifurcated dialectic yet is discrete, although all within a unified physical law paradigm that is thermodynamically deterministic.

I believe that God set the Universe into being and transcends quantum cosmological explanatory paradigms. So he may entail determinism and indeterminism concurrently due to his omniscience and omnipotence. Temporal points of view may aspire toward a reductionism that present a political point of view as natural law. That generally would be in error.

Should Pres Trump Plan for State of the Union Alt Venue?

It might not be too early for the President to plan for and locate an alternative venue for the State of the Union speech. Last time Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi had an intifada-tantrum and banned the speech for some time. If an alternative hall had an option for use the speech might have gone ahead on the scheduled date at the alternative venue with a coalition of the willing of Representatives and Senators not minions of Spkr Pelosi in attendance.

It seems improbable that in an election year House Democrats would not weaponize the State of the Union and ban it making demands that the President do such and such, roll over etc. before he will be allowed to darken the door of the House. If the Speaker uses the State of the Union speech for a negotiating and political humiliation tool while censoring the President again, President Trump should have a plan B for the House of Representatives. 

Not everyone is loyal to the U.S.A. or its laws, constitution or history. Neither do they honor the sacrifices of those that gave their lives for national defense. After all, they are simply dead, and the living can eat, drink and be merry with clever things to say about the symbols of the nation. Malcom X was given an exemption to the W.W. II draft because he told the recruiter that he just wanted to be in the Army so he could kill white people; he might have been telling the truth. It is an old topic-many have grievances about the nation and American history and would destroy it if they could, or make it something entirely else, or seek remedies that preclude loyalty to the U.S.A. presently or even expressions of loyalty if they actually were to try to bring about rectification of social reality with constitutional ideals.

Utilitarianism, Libertarianism and Egalitarianism

Utilitarian is an ethical system for political philosophy. It was invented by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. Its primary direction is for the greatest good for the greatest number of citizens. Obviously there has been much development and theory concerning that. Utilitarianism may exist within nearly any form of modern government.

Libertarianism is a political outlook companion of a laissez faire kind of national and international political economy where people are free to determine their own actions so far as possible. It is less than pure anarchy, and is generally unrealistic so far as governing a modern society goes.

Egalitarianism is a political situation where people are generally on an equal social, political and financial track, and with upward, downward and lateral social mobility normal for all classes. It is not quite a classless society yet does not have hard social stratification either.

Amazon Forest Fires Exemplify Degradation of Ecosphere

  I think many people actually don't know what an ecosphere is. I have learned that for many first worlders comfort is more important than abstract thought about world environment. It is unwise to overestimate popular intellect content. There are probably three transcendent opinions regarding the state of the ecosphere of Earth; it is in decline, it is allright, it is improving. Politically one may do something restorative, do nothing, or do something wrong.

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-09/uoct-dac091019.php

Another factor is population. Humans usually degrade ecosphere reducing its extent in area and biodiversity-quality and quantity. For example,one burns down Amazon forests to grow one particular crop for the market, for example. That is a reduction in ecospheric quality with the loss of hundreds of thousands of species for a handful of species. Sterile urban growth reduces ecospheric area and health for obvious reasons. Technology to reverse ecosphere decline includes whatever might be invented or applied innovatively.

https://earther.gizmodo.com/amazon-forest-fires-soar-past-100-000-causing-spike-in-1838007724

 I have considering building artificial mountain ranges as an idea for humans to live inside in order not to displace ecosphere-yet of course that would change it too. There was a federal law about wetlands such that there was to be no net loss of wetlands. That worked kind of to prevent wetland loss. A no net loss of surface ecosphere or biota law would stimulate innovation yet might be too challenging and radical for those that actually develop real estate.

https://www.inverse.com/article/59208-omega-3-shortage

President Putin Probably Has No Invasion Plans for the Near Future

President Putin's reconquista of the Crimean Peninsula helped piece back together historical Russia. The Crimean Peninsula was part of Russia for about the same time as New England was part of the United States; should the U.S.A. give New England back to the previous owners, or just cut New England loose from the U.S.A. so it could come out as Blue Soviet Nude England?

During the confusion following the end of the Soviet Union, Russia was at a military disadvantage, President Clinton’s policy helped wrest away Russian lands that pre-existed the Soviet Union in the drive to erase the former Soviet Union. It was a bad policy in regard to Crimea.

I believe President Putin is fairly conservative in asserting natural Russian rights as far as international relations go. Invading any nations that weren’t part of the historical Russia in a settled and obvious way isn’t likely, unless it is in some sort of proximal self-defense requisite situation that does not presently exist. There probably is no Von Putin  deus ex machina plan building up to  beat down weak Europe.

Restoration of Russia does not mean restoration of the Soviet Union. Personally I prefer restoration and stability for nations and the ecosphere. The Bahamas could use some restoration now, except it should involve ecospheric building syntegrity.

State's AG Google Investigations Like USA vs Microsoft?

Google is being investigated by 50 state attorney generals for monopolistic practices. Google is too popular and its success has reinforced its wealth and market position in searches. Google it is a synonym for internet search.

Microsoft was sued by the U.S. Government and found responsible in 2000. An appeals court overturned the verdict. Eventually a settlement was reached. The main problem was the packaging of windows with internet explorer and the difficulty computer producers had in detaching them and using other products.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.#Judgment

Google has been sued a lot by various governments and has paid out billions and billions. Fifty states A.G.s are investigating Google, perhaps with mixed motives in possibly filing suit, since Internet sales compete with local brick and mortar sales in states. States have started taxing Internet sales- even from out of state purchasers sending a gift to someone in a state.

https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/9/20857440/google-antitrust-investigation-attorneys-general-advertising-search

Alternative operating systems to windows are slowly spring up though windows continues to be the world number one in sales if not friendliness. Users tend to feel like renters rather than owners because of the way the software is written. Google isn't like that, though taking down Google plus killed the business sites of lots of people that had invested in building their site up, without providing an easy continuity migration on a downsized location without all of the empty space.

Google is a leftist leaning political entity concerning politics although it is not leftist financially. It is challenging to say what remedies might be made to bring Google into a more competitive position regarding advertising. Google maps have changed the way humanity views the world- literally. Maybe Google could spin off some of its search functions and ties to open source, commercial-free operating Linux systems in order to render search functions available through non-commercial portals. That would be quite a substantial change for-itself.

Automatic Peace Deal for Afghanistan

Afghanistan is fortunate enough to have an automatic, self-igniting peace deal built in that does not require anyone to sign. If the Taliban stops hostilities against its own people, the government and Americans in that country peace automatically breaks out. No one needs to sign anything.

The United States should be prepared to back up the lawful Government the remainder of this century if need be. It could be our new Germany with permanent garrisons established in country to defrappe general war, terror, werewolf return and so forth.

https://nypost.com/2019/09/08/taliban-more-americans-will-die-after-secret-camp-david-talks-cancelled/

The Taliban want to rule Afghanistan through terror on their own people. Not all Muslim Afghan citizens or others want a Taliban theocracy to decree what should be. The Taliban would need to accept Democracy as the lawful form of government and just go back to the plough, madrass and mosque to busy themselves while people choose for-themselves how to run their own life.

Of course the Taliban should be against censorship as authoritarian government like to impose as they declare opposition political speech to be 'hate speech'.  The Taliban party would be one party in Afghanistan yet Democracy would be firmly established and extremism of any sort that would destroy democracy would not be allowed. Neither theocratic or communist governments, royal or authoritarian would be permitted.

The United States should keep troops in secure forts for a century in order to prevent the area from simply becoming a vast, extremist theocracy that support terrorism on the west. Democracy isn't so bad until extremists take over and corrupt moral foundations and censor free speech. Rectification then need occur is a society is lucky enough to be free to work that.

Challenges and Responses During the Great Depression

F.D.R.’s response to the depression rescued millions of Americans from the worst extremes of poverty created by the Wall Street collapse of 1929–33. Unemployment reached 25% in 1933, yet was cut in half by 1935 to 12%. In some rural Oregon counties the unemployment rate reached 1933 levels during the Carter administration in the late 1970s. Banking runs were a problem

Economic Recovery in the Great Depression

One theory that is popular as an explanation for the great depression, it was not limited to the United States, was the tie of money to gold stocks in nations and the need to export gold to sell to help recovery. Nations with a surplus of gold did not spend it. National economies exporting gold contracted with money supply and those receiving it din’t expand money supply. A book Golden Fetters (1992), Barry Eichengreen explains the cycle leading to depression. It is briefly described in the url above from which I paraphrased/abbreviated some of the information in this paragraph.

There is a break in linear time of recovery for the depression of the 1930s- it was the Second World War. The war-time economic requirements for rationing and production of war goods manufacture from civilian plants that had produced consumer items changed things a lot. It was a jolt none should want to try to use in the future. An unintended yet necessary response to the facts of European and Asian wars of aggression by non-Democratic countries, it brought the U.S. economy to the far side of the rabbit hole in the late 1940s in a new political economy. Taxes on the rich were raised to 90% during the war, and Military spending was 42% of G.D.P. The tax rate only slowly tapered off over decades after the war permitting government science, technology and defense research as well as the Interstate Hwy System and numerous electrification projects.

https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/defense_spending

There were new technologies, ways of production, changes in demographics, education and social arrangements that were great. Mass production for war might have been reflected in the knowledge of mass home construction in the 1950s. So many people became internationalized that globalism was stimulated for more than elites. Continuing military intervention and foreign intelligence gathering was required to address a very destabilized and rapidly decolonizing world; not to mention the fission and fusion bomb races.

The rise in unemployment did not halt or solve all of the preexisting social and political, health and conservation issues of the U.S.A. Work continued in the private sector to better life, to invent things and to be productive as government reaction to the high unemployment and banking problems worked from a different direction. The Dust Bowl, floods, cancer. lack of electrification and modern sanitation, meat inspection, organized crime, lack of telephone network saturation etc…those items effected challenges and response continuing for decades.

About Ancient Giants

I think people continue to manufacture new myth content, mostly with good intentions, regarding ancient giants.

https://gigantomachia.typepad.com/gigantomachia/ 

I think many ancient myths had a basis in fact. Before common literacy way back in the day of oral story transmission a lot of detail was lost. So if some smaller group of homo sapiens met and fought a larger group of humans; perhaps a head taller, they were fighting 'giants'. Pegasus might have had a similar origin; a Saudi Arabian or Iraqi white race horse that could 'fly' in comparison to the plodding though strong European horses. 

The contact and interaction of humans with pure bred neanderthals continued until 30-40,00 b.c. Some of them may have been larger boned, and some hybrids a little taller than smaller people. Partial hybrids that were more robust and taller than pure humans could be the giants referenced (they interbred) Modern Europeans still have 2 or 3 percent Neanderthal genes. It is easy to see in some political leaders.

Potential Vectors of Change in Political Economy

A political economy interfaces politics and economics. For the U.S.A., when government regulation quality and understanding is lacking the private sector and government investment goes to seed; the ecosystem declines, economics serve capital concentration entirely for its own sake rather than national citizenry well-being, national financial balances run tens of trillions of dollars of deficits, and wealth is concentrated to the point of creating a virtual aristocracy or plutonomy.

Remedies exist that are obvious, yet the corporatism phenomena of the private sector merging with the government that becomes a servo-unit for it following it about has negated the selection of quality political candidates and oversight.

Patents can be reformed such that exclusivity exists for just three years with 10% royalties to patent holders from anyone in the common domain era after three years, Regulations can be made to reward quality production that reduces mal-effects on the ecosystem. Capital acquisition by individuals can be capped at a percent of the national income that is low enough to prevent political power from being concentrated as well as economic, and ecological economics can become a guiding principle for the political economy, instead of being a vague outline in the shadows.

Conflict isn't inevitable with shared items. In primitive societies with few kinds of tools people will give an item admired by someone else to them, since it reduces jealousy or conflict, and is easily replaced. Scarcity of an item is an element in the function of covetousness and conflict over an item. Few are jealous about sharing air because their is a lot of it. Some are jealous about water where it is more rare, others have a lot of it and would toss a bucket of it on someone to cool them down. Exclusive use of an item or space may be necessary to produce a particular article. In a global economic system individuals and corporations rather than nations take profit from resources of other nations (unless one has a state socialist government then that government does harvest the resources of other nations).

Hume- Is, Ought and What Not of Moral Norms

"All prescriptive theory" is quite a large field that isn't even finished. Formal logic and the square of opposition has the A proposition being 'All are". One learns to be very careful with that. All are x or None are x can allow zero exceptions to be true. Hume wanted to disprove cause and effect relationships, so he necessarily would have pointed out the looseness of 'is' propositions to 'ought' or should propositions, quite reasonably. 

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/square/

Prescriptive theories can be applied in fields beside moral philosophy, and in some case the formal logical tests would be applied equally and in others the tests fall outside of simple formal logic and within larger structures for analysis that might best be compared to dead reckon'd sailing judgments. Rather than being logically rigorous propositions formally the use was analytical. One could say for instance that 1 + 3 equals 4 and the answer they provided is 5, and they ought to have written '4'. That kind of statement is reasonable.

 Moral propositions though, unlike Kant's categorical imperative that has some logical validity in a dead reckoning sort of way, are descriptive of actually existing human behavior and suggestions to improve that in some cases. In others it could be a simple observational use of the word 'ought' for a moral circumstance where variant behavior did not comply with the prevailing idea of the normal correct behavior. 

An example for that might be that a baby is crawling across a street amidst heavy traffic, the mother is laying on the sidewalk knocked out from a falling brick, and a passerby walks past the scene and allows the baby to be squished by a truck when he could have easily rescued the tyke from the rode. While not legally responsible to rescue the infant, a police officer that saw the scene from a distance says to his partner the "the rogue ought to have saved that baby".   

https://www.livescience.com/solution-to-worst-prediction-in-physics.html

Experience of exigent circumstances are rather subjective and conditional, yet descriptive and normative (prescriptive) ethics describe situations in space-time, Situations that are recurrent can be emergent though not unique. Consider the Nurmagomedov vs Porier UFC 242 fight- It was like a martial arts match where each knew various katas or forms. None were unique or original, and there are lots of prescriptive analysis about what ought to have been done to get outcome A, B. or C. Prescriptive ethics about what people think they should do probably never would be over regarding humans. Hume's Fork (good point) about empiricism and rationalism going separate paths, disregarded by Kant, might be a subject of more modern philosophical research in the developments of 20th century empiricism and Ayer's book 'Language, Truth and Logic' wherein only empirically based statements-more scientific ones, had validity and the remainder were psychological and subjective. W.V.O. Quine broke that paradigm in 'The Two Dogmas of Empiricism'. Epistemologically speaking the separability of the world and statements about it was renormalized or returned to something closer to a Kantian rather than Humean position. I think a lot of moderns like Dewey's paradigm of everything being subjective, and so they like Hume's ideas. He seemed to want to dismiss common ideas about the relation between words and objects-fair enough, yet he went too far in several ways, from a much later point of view in regard to subsequent developments.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normative_ethics Normative ethics are also known as prescriptive ethics, They are usual contrasted to descriptive ethics. Hume created an epistemological battle taken up by Kant. The resolution of the epistemological war was settled by logic and logical analysis of the relation between words and objects. Ethics falls into valleys between the hilltops of epistemology and logic. Subjectivists like Hume later tended to justify moral paradigms with epistemology that broke the ties between rationality and the world itself experienced by individuals. Prescriptive theory is an ethics about what people think they should do in a particular circumstance, descriptive theory is about what people actually do.

Jehovah and Allah

The Bible has several references to names of God. Jehovah in particular is an evolution or product of a medieval Latin translation of JHVH- YHVH- Yahweh-consonants that were used to refer to the unspoken name of God, or Adonai, back in the day when it was thought wrong to actually say aloud the name of God. The medieval Latin word for JHVH was "Iehouah".  English had a great vowel shift, yet that probably isn't relevant, one discerns the upgrade to Jehovah. 

If you remember the Northern Kingdom had the term Elohim for God. The suffix 'him' is a plural term. That was just the way those people referred to God when a single God amongst a pagan society with many gods was novel. The Encyclopedia Britannica relates that the Arabic word Allah probably originated with the Hebrew term for God el. Allah probably is from the Arabic al-Ilāh meaning 'the god' in the singular from the Hebrew word for God el. So the answer would be for the question of does Allah and Jehovah refer to the same God is perhaps best said that God is not an object, though the intention is the same. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Yahweh

Why One World Government is a Bad Idea

A single world government is one of the older ideas around. I thought of it a very long time ago myself. It’s a sophomoric idea that consolidators first think of. It isn’t good.

A single world government would be oppressive, repressive and monopolistic to the point of dictatorship. A hierarchy would result with ranks seeking to serve yet reach the peak of power. Like an absolute monarchy or dictatorship an error in government policy would doom everyone that felt they weren’t already doomed by the onerous decrees of the sole planetary power.

Competition in the marketplace of ideas is requisite for producing good ones. Today in the U.S. Democracy politicians already ignore good ideas and go with popular ones that ensure political support and positive reinforcement from powerful special interests. With one government ruling the world there would be no marketplace of ideas or competition with the ideas of the government. The government would be the absolute authority on everything negating the intellectual productivity of virtually everyone not high on the table of ranks.

About the only good reason for one world government is the establishment of a Military dictatorship capable of forcing everyone alive to follow a particular environmental plan to save the planet. It would be a benevolent military dictatorship as well as a very bad idea. There are many better ways to go. If one really desires a world government then wait unto the return of the Lord God and be content with nations and national independence until then.