If people have bad political leadership unconcerned about the ecosphere they live in the people can suffer obviously. With a finite quantity of natural resources the world with nearly ten billion people can run out of things and the carrying capacity of the planet, just like a ship’s, can be full. Some politicians have blind faith in technological solutions to environmental challenge and in my opinion that is very dangerous. One loss in bad engineering can bring complete systemic failure.
A political economy can be mal-adaptive for challenges that are external to in-place economic practices. If one has a Love Canal, Minamata Tragedy or usual environmental disaster Timeline: Ten Major Ecological Disasters that may seem to some business as usual, yet the mass extinction in progress- the 6th in the Earth’s history is human caused and obvious. Could Humans Ever Become Extinct?
Many humans are happy with an economy in which they are immersed thoughtlessly like ants scurrying about compiling dollars, stuffed sofas, homes and so forth while the real world outside their doors is in decline. Oceans are warming and becoming acidified, shellfish are threatened by the acid, global atmospheric heating is in progress too and asphalt to absorb sunshine is still be rolled out everyplace it seems- things that are o.k. if a limited number of people do it may be entirely destructive when a lot of people, or billions of people do it. Some people cannot believe or have faith that something is true until the disaster or salvation as the case may be is upon them. One hopes that such people do not always lead with Epimethean economic paradigms when a Promethean-forward looking viewpoint is necessary for human survival. Some people simply have no sense- consider for example how much cooler a natural lot is in the hot Phoenix sunshine than an asphalt parking lot, and multiply that heating effect all over the American south for any given day with all of those miles of asphalt roads etc. There are more than 4 million miles of paved road in the U.S.A.
Part of the problem of change is fundamental and logical; those with the most invested in a particular economic system are the most resistant to change for they have the most cash to lose. The historian Arnold Toynbee is his ‘A Study of History’ determined that civilizations cannot usually respond well to external challenges. The phenomena that went in to making a civilization what it is continues and cannot be replaced easily by something new. Social is much greater than the influence of a few new leaders with better ideas.
To change a society in a designed way that is a necessary and positive direction would require political platforms with specific goals continued over time to insinuate ecological sustainability generally. People commonly underestimate how really selfish ordinary people are in advantaged economic positions. Jesus was quite right when he said that the meek shall inherit the Earth, although God would need to bring tat condition into being rather than political reformers.
The United States of America is a collection of former colonies and territories that either revolted against imperial British rule or petitioned to join the union. Because the United States economic system is not the same as the government, and because people own private property and private capital rather than the government preponderantly (private capital is of far greater value today than public capital), answers to questions about when the American empire will collapse, like a souffle as it were, are challenging to answer as they are a little off the mark.
One might ask when the dollar will collapse and that would be possibly more accurate. Experts may know if it will yet the dollar is a universal floating currency held by global plutocrats and Chinese communists as well as Americans from the U.S.A., Mexico and Peru etc.
The American economic system’s wealthy people-plutocrats are part of a global community of plutocrats in my opinion, and wondering when their power will end is another interesting question different of course than the one about when the non-real American empire will end.
America was an empire for 20 years when it had the Philippines as a colony as a result of the Spanish American war, and so when the Philippines took their liberty from the U..S.A. I suppose that was the actual collapse of the American empire- in either 1935 or 1946 depending upon if one regards a commonwealth as independent.
One further could wonder if the influence of globalist plutocrats and corporations that are preponderantly American will collapse and that is a tough question. As an occasional science fiction writer I could develop innumerable scenarios for that, for instance, when artificial intelligence takes over the world, when a global pandemic crashes world population or when too much social use of dope and evil broadcast media reduces the intelligence of everyone so far that they cannot understand the complexity any more. It is sometimes fun to consider alternative dystopias and utopias as future possibilities too help realize the futility of every getting good intelligent politicians to make the world a much better place.
It
wasn't a good way to official usher in the President elect. Democrat
leaders were blind to the aspirations of millions of the political
opposition and believe just their own ideas are acceptable.
Intelligent people have empathy- that is they understand the point of
view of other people-Democrats tend to fail at that. When the Senate
returned to the chambers to wrap up the electoral vote process
Vice-President Pence and Majority Leader McConnell made dignified
speech addressing the issue. Then came Senator Chuck Schumer who
seemed overcome with hatred of President Trump. In most of American
history such abuse as Mr Schumer spewed would beg for a duel, and it
might be a good thing if a couple of politicians were shooting each
other instead of f' ing up the public business as they usual do.
Sadly I missed watching the spectacle live, It must have been a sight
watching Chuck Schumer wade into the mob throwing punches all around
leading the resistors defending the
sacred senate temple
from desecration. Democrat Presidents and vice are always lawyers- a
slum of lawyers since the Clintons, and Americans can expect
consigliary subterfuge and deceit four more years. It would be good
if someone with an economic and environmental brain ran for the job
and got the nomination. President-elect Biden showed his age when he
said that Americans will learn to respect Democrat leadership the
next four years, especially one assumes, as he exonerates Hunter's
relationship with Ukrainian paymasters while Dad was Vice-President
supporting the attack on Ukraine’s Russian rivals.
A
democracy requires leaders that comprehend the art of finding a way
for as many people to get what they want as possible without stepping
on the toes of others. Lawyers are good at their profession of
representing clients in litigation- they seek to win for a client and
make the other a loser. Lawyers have no special qualification for the
Presidency- they should work with laws rather than make them. The
Democrat leadership slum of lawyer-President since Bill Clinton have
sought to make Americans that aren’t goose-stepping sycophants of
their lunatic agenda losers. They expect Americans to learn to
respect corporate censorship, to respect the daily hate, to be nailed
down and compliant so they don’t need to hammer people into
silence.
Congressional opponents of President Andrew Jackson probably incited violence against him - an assassination attempt Jan 30th 1835. The Attempt to Kill "King Andrew" I am not really a fan of Australians, yet some of their reputed toughness of character might be better in such a circumstance as the gunless ‘insurrection’. One thinks of the line of Julius Ceasar when he is being stabbed to
death when he pulls up his toga over his head and says; "This is
violence". He was such a clown.
Democrats
are equally responsible for the mayhem that disrupted the electoral
college proceedings for they have made a custom since the Clinton
administration of having their way or no way as far as possible. They
are the actual party of intolerance along the lines of Joseph Stalin.
Senator Schumer definitely threw gasoline on the fire of national
division so far as he possibly could. Senator Schumer and Hillary
Clinton experienced the last gasp of 'the deplorables' that voted for
President Trump- they emulated the Democrat Party custom of forcing
the law to stretch as far as possible to benefit themselves. Senator
Schumer was aghast that the Senate chamber was “desecrated”, yet
had little to say for the year of Antifah stoning and fire-bombing of
the Federal Courthouse in Portland Oregon that drew his ire equally.
Portland Oregon doesn't count in comparison to Washington D.C.
evidently.
A
democracy cannot reasonably be run in such a way that a bare majority
can expect to get away with murder and force their policies upon 49%
of the people whenever they have a majority. In a nation of 320
million people that approach isn't wise. With oodles of weapons of
mass destruction and an overpopulated world their will be dissent
sometimes rising tom use those tools of politics through other means.
Maybe some biological custom redesigner of viruses will engineer a
subtle device to cull the population of millions- who can predict the
future? The U.S.A. Should be a nation with a reputation for trying to
tolerate the political opinions and morals of millions of people
rather than ridiculing or suppressing them to extinctions as
Democrats might like to do. The art of democratic politics should be
to make each side happy whenever possible instead of just one side
with a nominal majority. I should stipulate that I.m.o. as the world
political response to Covid 19 evidenced, there may not be any
intelligent political leaders on the planet, so getting dual
political plaintiffs in a civil matter to be happy may exceed the
I.Q. Of those elected.
Democrats
want to take America to atheism and homosexuality norms- they have
passed hate speech laws and require terms of endearment or censorship
follows in the corporate bulletin board of social media, Democrats
sponsored abortion of what- sixty million fetuses, Democrats
forced homosexual marriage on the nation when the public would, have
tolerated some sort of separate civil union establishment; they
refused to respect the onions of a virtual majority and choose the
path of conflict instead of taking a course that would accomplish
what the homosexuals wanted and left the sane institution of
heterosexual marriage uncorrupted.
Democrats
forced Obamacare on the nation with a technical vote using the
nuclear option. Leaders like Chuck Schumer say the hell with the
opinion of so many Americans against it. Some day that custom of not
finding accommodation for strong American opinions may have real
deleterious national consequences. The funny thing is that most of
the opinions that are so inflammatory are easily remedied with better
ideas including that of flooding the nation with illegal alien
workers to render the political opinions of non-Democrats minority
opinions. Phasing out American political resistance by flooding the
nation with replacement workers and voters over a few decades also
riles up several million Americans.
Many
of the ideas if the red party are as wrong as that of the blue party.
I though it might be a good idea therefore to create a third party- a
white party (red, white and blue) yet that would be construed of
course as racist these days. While Chuck Schumer is irate about what
he labeled were 'insurrectionists' storming the capital like peasants
with pitchforks might have tried in some former time or perhaps SDS
radicals leading protesters to trash a government building during the
Vietnam War, he seems unaware that his economic theories are wrong as
are those of most on Capitol Hill. No one their seems to have an idea
about how to have the Federal Reserve make those zero-interest loans
to Social Security instead of big banks who can loan out 9 e-dollars
from thin air for each e-dollar deposited by the Federal Reserve.
That custom in the quantitative easing era has in effect given 200
trillion bucks to the rich since 2008, and the world economy is only
worth may 100 trillion annually- that practice seems stupid from my
humble non-economist perspective.
If
Social security has great investment managers loan out cash from the
federal reserve keeping the usual, and even a high marginal reserve
on deposit the people of the United States would benefit more or less
equally instead of just the rich when the rich have liquidity
problems or the Federal Reserves believe they do.
China
today has an economy that is an almost perfect fulfillment of Lenin's
NEP program if it were carried out to a logical maturity. There is a
mixed economy of private investment in business under communist party
supervision. America's corporate people have signed off on investing
in China for what seems like most electronic product production as
well as innumerable other manufactures. They submit to China's law
that a Chinese subject must own 51% of any business their. Meanwhile
the U.S.A. has a jackass system of the Federal Reserve helping
concentrate wealth and power in a global plutocracy and the
plutocracy invests in China while Democrats flood the nation with
illegal alien workers while drug cartels seem like one of the best
businesses in Mexico.
President
Trump was not the worst President in U.S. History as the histrionic
Senator Schumer said. Actual President Trump did a fairly good job
until 2020 when he bungled Covid management and set an especially bad
example of not wearing a mask. He also used 2020 to accelerate
gutting ecosphere health, and of course he exited office gracelessly
bringing unwanted excitement to the Capitol.
President
Trump deserves a Nobel Prize for Peace on his Middle East work and
Democrats should remember that he started no foreign wars even while
Democrats like Rep. Adam Schiff were throwing every sort of baloney
content they could at him during the great smear the President with
accusations that he is a Russian agent, dupe or general dope for
President Vladimir Putin. President Trump was not the worst President
by any means, though he does seem to have a problem with too much
egoism. He is a billionaire so his approach can't be entirely
impractical.
War is a continuation of politics through other means. War is not generally a sport with fixed rules of engagement, declarations of intent etc. It needn’t be said they are less desirable means than intelligent responses within democracy that address all of the concerns of various parties involved as protagonists. The founder’s Declaration of Independence was a succinct statement concerning the right of revolt of oppressed masses. It should be remembered that real material, spiritual and social interests in addition to natural resources should be protected where possible rather than destroyed. If the United States for example does not need a kinetic war to improve the situation, and if the war could not actually resolve the problem and would make matters worse, then other means should precede and supplant kinetic conflict.
One concern I have is social media. Quora is a good outlet for free expression though it too may have limits.
Social Media; Utilities or Corporate Bulletin Boards?
The freedom to use social media including blogs for personal and creative constructions require the media to be less flimsy than anti-global warming arguments. Writers don’t want their works to disappear when a web site goes black. To invest a lot of time in developing a product to then experience search engine listings being cut off by Google blogs after one criticizes N.S.A. or Google policy is consistent with the blog as a corporate bulletin board rather than a public utility. It is the nature of a public utility that is apparently necessary for security of free expression.
Since the first Obama administration I have experienced every place I write either disappearing, or I have been banned for using politically incorrect language occasionally. With the new Democrat administration Google managers felt it appropriate to zero my blog listings so they cannot be found. In my opinion that was noteworthy.
The concentration of power and wealth historically occur together. With the social networking of Wall Street and the support of free money loans from the Federal Reserve to the rich who then can mint their own e-dollars nine-fold for each dollar deposited concentration of wealth has occurred in the United States. Wall Street is global so a global plutocracy may be far advanced in development. They invest in China. Warren Buffet probably has a second home their. Plutocrats own social media in America.
Social media is used to express political opinions as well as sundry other thought and product sales. If it is a corporate bulletin board the content need be satisfactory and in effect subordinate to corporate goals and mission. Anything else could be degraded in search engine listing or deleted altogether. Corporatism spells the end of democracy and rise of plutocracy with happy minions. It might be useful for the government of the United States to create a social media site maintained by the Library of Congress that would allocate one space per registered citizen to write as much as they want without fear of it being deleted, censored or degraded in public search engine listings. Democracy of the United States in the modern era cannot exist without free speech and free speech unsubject to corporate plutocratic criteria for normal publication.
Without honest competition that won’t disappear and that isn’t biased against some social element, social media will simply become entirely owned and controlled by plutocrats. Individual writers can afford to tilt against the windmills of deep pockets of Google for less than a pico-second. If Verizon now owns Yahoo and it can delete one’s web site for using corporate defined hate speech can’t it also listen in to everyone’s Verizon phone calls with technology and censor any language it deems hateful? A democracy entirely filtered through corporate owned social media and mass communications is one that will become a complete farce. That former democracy will be nothing more than a sham maintained to keep somnolent masses contented.
Would the founders of the United States have been satisfied with rich British corporations owning all social media and communications venues? I believe that after the revolution they would have certainly permitted social media owned by corporations like the Hudson’s Bay Company or East India Company, yet they would have considered independent free speech including hate speech (which should be subjective matter of opinion) vital for democracy and therefore would have established a government operated public social media for citizens to use as a free, necessary defense against British Corporate power.
Maybe the Department of Defense should operate a social media site for American citizens that isn’t flimsy and won’t disappear the first time anyone writes something like stop the queer government or criticizes the lack of revenue sharing by corporate owned blogs. American defense asks of its servants they be sworn in to defend against enemies foreign and domestic. The oath isn’t to defend against foreign enemies and lay down for domestic enemies or to roll over for global corporations. Domestic enemies of the past were fairly plain and overt unlike today. Corporate and sedulous cults may readily take over the government, pass laws limiting free speech and put a muzzle on democracy in order to accomplish not only particular social class hegemony, but to channel the concentration of wealth as well. Adequate defense requires vigilance against KGB-Tass synthetic public broadcasting media and other agencies of socialization such as social media. Government operated channels with completely free, stable public social media outlets for the use of citizens might be necessary in order for true opinion to be found.
A world government would have a Federal Reserve bank issuing e-dollar loans at zero interest to 1% of the people who could then e-mint 9x more dollars for each e-dollar on deposit. In other words they would have unlimited wealth and concentrate power globally buying up everything for plutocracy. The plutocrats would de facto partner with Chinese Communists and tech surveillance would become ubiquitous. The masses could have mass media entertainment and thought control being programmed culturally. That would be one form of world government.
Other forms would likely be some sort of authoritarian dictatorship. Without nations for firewalls against political monopoly power would concentrate just as wealth concentrates.
Economic populism would be an improvement if it could actually exist. The prospects for that are very poor though since the party exists to serve the plutocracy that owns everything in sight. The problem is the Federal Reserve enabling of free trillions of dollars for the richest. That seems a kind of treason. Quantitative easing was the most recent culprit and the last Bush and Obama administrations let the rich have north of 200 trillion dollars. The number is so large I wonder, since I am not an economist, how it can be right.
The broadcast media is owned by the rich and many analysts and commentators are motivated more by profit for themselves than accurate scholarly work. There was nothing in the constitution in support of the government giving trillions of zero interest loans to the private sector and big business. The marginal reserve of 10% means that every dollar on deposit for a zero interest loan from the Fed allow 9 more dollars to appear out of thin air for loans to others that appear with real dollars repaid. That policy unbalances the political system so much that plutocracy develops and the democracy a sham.
Populism should equate to egalitarianism rather than sycophancy with billionaires’ special interests.
It’s been said that the Second World War was the final battle of the First World War. I tend to agree with the concept. The royals of Europe had a grand conflict that ended without unconditional surrender, Germany had a revolution that got rid of the aristocracy and put Hindenburg in power of the Weimar Republic, and the former royals were very displeased-especially with the Bolsheviks in Russia. Former royals of Germany needed a populist political figure to put them indirectly back into power -and they used Hitler to bring corporatism and themselves toward a new kind of Germany able to fight the reds on the left and the decadent royals and rival free enterprises on the right from other nations.
Hitler was a very unusual fellow with a speaking voice that had a vibration at normal speech levels with characteristics others have when shouting. He was sent by military high command to infiltrate and take over the Germany National Socialist Party which he directly accomplished- he was charismatic, and the rest is history. Crown Prince Ruprecht had a breakthrough on the front reaching in to France (some say as far as far as 200 miles). He was apparently a fairly competent military leader.
If the Wehrmacht hadn’t just run out of bodies to put into the battle Germany might finally have won the war, or nearly so until more U.S. reinforcements arrived. When the armistice occurred many veterans like Hitler felt they were cheated and could have won.
The west should have fought to unconditional surrender instead of armistice in W.W.I., or have not asked for reparations from the Weimar Republic that couldn’t pay very easily, although I am confident they could have over time being industrious people. The foreign debt was a motivator for Hitler to try other kinds of economics that were Keynesian and deficit financed. The way Hitler planned to pay the war debt was likely just with the profit of winning in war with what he must have viewed as having good prospects for victory and profit.
Republicans and Democrats have supported issuing of trillions and trillions of free dollars to the rich and that seems somewhat like treason. Those quantitative easing loans at 0% put electronic deposits in big banks, and with the marginal reserve rate of 10% generally those banks could loan out 9 dollars for each dollar in their account. That means 16 trillion given between 2008–2011 amounted to 134 trillion minus the 16 trillion that needed to be repaid to the Federal Reserve. Nothing was written in the constitution about a role of government to assure that the rich are given 134 trillion now and then and the poor, nothing. Republicans in the Senate are wailing and lamenting that 430 billion for Covid relief stimulus would bankrupt the country or need to be repaid by survivors of the future.
When the Federal Reserve was started the U.S.A. was still on the gold standard. The Federal Reserve was helpful in assuring liquidity and provided some protection for depositors. When the dollar became free floating during the Nixon administration the stage was set for future unscrupulous use of Federal Reserve loans.
President Reagan and Arthur Laffer seemed to understand that the need to run a balanced budget was as important as during former times. Many viewed Reagan stimulus deficit spending as a white-washed Keynesianism and apparently that view was wrong. It was difficult to entirely revise the classical view of economics to the free floating dollar paradigm.
During the 2008–9 financial crisis their was a paradigm shift in Federal Reserve application of creating liquidity such that enabling hundreds of trillions of dollars to appear out of virtually thin air for the rich has become normative- and that policy has hidden deleterious impacts on democracy, for it reinforces the concentration of wealth and economic segregation of citizens from political power. Georgia Republicans and Mitch McConnell need to trick Georgia voters into believe they are not at fault for withholding a $2000 stimulus check in order to keep control of the U.S. Senate in the January 6 special election. Republicans either do not comprehend the vast unearned political transfer of wealth to the rich or simply are sadistic and enjoy victimizing the poor.
Big business and banks should never be regarded as ‘too big to fail’. banking and making loans is fine when the money arises from the private sector and isn’t just the result of a federal prop. It would be far better for democracy in the United States if money from the Federal Reserve that goes to assure liquidity in the private sector primarily emerged from the people of the United States in a broad base such as social security accounts.
The Federal Reserve could make zero interest loans [periodically to all social security accounts and that money could be managed en mass/concatenated and available for loans to the private sector as big banks do presently. The money multiplier of 9 to 1 would go to Americans broadly as citizens rather than to special, globalist interest. If the private sector needs special free money from the public sector it should be the public sector as actual American citizens that profit from the action as well as private sector businesses directly borrowing cash at a reasonable yet low rate of interest.. This would have numerous salutary effects.
For one thing social security would remain solvent. The U.S. Government already borrows from social security and leaves i.o.u.’s. In the future it might be possible when retiree and disabled American accounts are flourishing to forgive federal indebtedness. Loans to the private sector would be more independent from domination by corporate networks controlled by 1% of the people, and special very low loan rates could be given to students and independent small businesses. There is nothin at all remotely American about the Federal Reserve helping the rich to have more free money in a few years than the poor would earn all together in a thousand lifetimes.
Neither party really has much good sense regarding ecological economics either. When the Federal Reserves enables trillions and trillions to be dumped to the present unsustainable economic infrastructure owners that makes changing the political economy improbable. Because the rich own the broadcast media Americans can be conditioned rather easily to accept being ‘managed’ by a plutocracy. I should mention that I personally am not an optimist about meaningful positive economic reform developing.
Heidegger was interested in the phenomenal, root meanings of words. Examining language in such a subjective way might bring some to classify him as an existentialist. In that way of classification it might be said that Plato and realism was in opposition to extremist left nominalism and Heidegger was an innocent bystander. If all language is about language and classification that people make up for pragmatic reasons then it might be fair to say that things-in-themselves differ from words about them.
What can be said about reality in itself- the mass that is the steady state of mass perceptible to humans that completely defines it? Nothing I.m.o. Even structures that are man-made are founded in mass and energy that are described incompletely with word structures. In that circumstance one finds Sartre’s existential parameters congruent with Bishop Berkeley’s Three Dialog s concerning idealism. One cannot really say that the shared energy field that everyone encounters isn’t a complete production of God, or a simulation real for-itself generated by a sentient field.
I was informed recently by a friend who is a professor of the philosophy of economic comedy about developments in the field of the dialectical progression of money to self-awareness through history. Evidently the Reagan administration realized for-itself that with a free-floating dollar the Federal Reserve could simply issue low or no interest loans to big banks and with the federal requirement that banks keep 10% marginal reserves on obligations such as cash deposits, the rich that own the banks could in effect electronically mint 9 times the loans to their friends and compatriot rich people. The custom of enabling the Federal Government to in effect give trillions of free dollars to the rich did not really get started in a large way until the financial crisis of 208-9 wherafter it has issued through the marginal reserve multiplication nine-fold of zero and low interest ‘quantitative easing’ dollars, about 200 trillion dollars. I should ask Dr. Mojoke, my professor friend about it, however I believe the world income annual is about 99 trillion dollars, so 200 trillion over a dozen years is a fair amount of easing.
In the process of unbalancing traditional economic relationships with quantitative easing the federal government accelerated the concentration of wealth since they were not issuing trillions of dollars of free money to the poor and middle class who in any event had now facilities for multiplying zero-interest federal loans nine-fold. A different approach to restoring economic slumps that was fair and balanced with equal measures of free money going to citizens equally was required and that would have overstretched the meager economic intellectual resources of classical economic theorists. It was with that realization by Dr. Mojoke seated in a lotus position under an apple tree had his great insight about not only the invention of new cash multiplying structures in federal social security accounts that would manage and loan money to qualified, stable borrowers with professional class investment fund managers, the doctor also foresaw the rise of Bic-coin as a self-aware monad evolving to realize itself through monetary policy over history.
Dr. Mojoke foresaw that electronic currency trading would evolve to self-aware monad of Bic-coin that would as self-aware units be non-counterfeitable and useful in-themselves as well as in electronic trading. Bic-coin in larger clusters would have an increased capacity for artificial intelligence and intelligent thought. A billion units of Bic-coin thinking together would be very clever and in fact able to optimize structural designs for human biological living such as waterless microwave sewage processing in deserts ( I asked the doctor how he found that example and he informed me that he saw the value of propane or electric powered Incinolet toilets used for off the grid structures). Cluster of Bic-coin would become standard units of exchange able for-themselves to organize assembly of planetary materials for print-on-demand lunar and Martian structures or form transport vehicles able to rise from dust and transport Americans along electronic in-line highway grids made of solar photon absorbing and storing materials with a high albedo.
Mojoke said that he didn’t mind the rich loaning out money they’ve worked for, that it was just the Federal Reserve dumping trillions of interest free electronic cash in quantitative easing that was a fowl kettle of fish. Apparently Mojoke believes that the U.S. Government and Federal Reserve should not serve a tiny minority of the public and render everyone else peons of globallists.
I suggested to Dr. Mojoke that the new Biten administration might invest in the development of Bic-coin and innovate better and more egalitarian methods for stimulating the U.S. economy diverging from the evolving history of offering up free trillions to a global plutocracy wishing they would trickle down to Americans and not just runt the government with so much compiled capital. The doctor said; “That’s a laugher”.
Fried
Chicken, Stimulus Checks and the Marginal Reserve with Quantitative
Easing...
(Quantitative
Easing gave trillions and trillions to the Uber Rich)
It seems that Republicans don’t understand how the political economy has changed since the 2008–9 financial crisis so they have a preponderance of people that still believe in anachronistic ideas concerning money supply and the rich. President Nixon took the U.S.A. off the gold standard and President Reagan first realized the potential of using easy money to promote economic growth without causing inflation- the rich get the easy money and buy everything on the planet with it or hold on to it as leverage over the government.
During
the 2008-2009 financial crises the U.S. Government stepped in to stop
the bleeding on Wall Street. It provided a vast loan package and
continuing support with trillions and trillions of zero and very low
interest loans to wealthy financial institutions. Big banks are free
to issue in electronic loans nine dollars more or less (I am not a
banker-the marginal reserve requisite is 10% perhaps) for every
dollar they have on deposit so those trillions (maybe 16 trillion)
allowed big banks to produce from thin air 90 trillion dollars. The
total amount of free money to plutocrats enabled by the Federal
Reserve could be as much as 200 trillion dollars. Fortunately
Senators like Rand Paul are concerned about the $600 dollar direct
payments going to Americans in the present financial stimulus
observing that ‘money doesn’t grow on trees’ (as if it were the
Tongass National Forest the administration would like to strip log
with clear cuts). Preventing ordinary Americans from getting fewer
than a half of one percent of what goes to the rich from the Federal
Reserve incentives vigilant Republicans; the poor or their proplits
cannot be allowed to increase.
When
money was based on some valuable commodity like gold the value of a
currency was tied to its relative scarcity. If one printed out many
dollars each would become worth less if the quantity of gold remained
the same. When President Nixon took the dollar off the gold standard
the dollar had nothing besides its value to none in particular to
determine its worth. In an age of general relativity that isn’t too
unreasonable; the dollar is a commodity used as a tool for economic
exchanges after all instead of something valuable in itself.
Still,
the idea of giving the super rich trillions of free dollars to keep
their Wall Street index value from crashing below 10,000 is difficult
for many Americans including myself to understand very well. The
treasury prints out paper dollars and the Federal Reserve loans out
electronic dollars. Most financial transactions are done
electronically these days and there actually isn’t too much cash as
a percentage of all of the dollars in circulation. Why doesn’t
inflation occur so dollars buy less when so many are being made to
keep banks and big business afloat and to send $600 direct payments
to Americans that earn fewer than $75,000 annually? Why haven’t
Starbucks coffees reach $100 dollars a cup yet one wonders. The
answer may be that all of the cash that Wall Street got from the
Federal Reserve wasn’t put directly in to circulation. The original
loan amount goes back to the Federal Reserve so the Street had just
the paltry sum of 64 trillion dollars to play with. With that they
could buy up Wall Street- or the one percent could, and the inflation
occurred in the indexed rise of Wall Street shares to the point that
the DOW is now over 30,000.
Just
because the rich are much richer and Wall Street much more costly it
doesn’t mean that Wal-mart needs to charge more for groceries
although they might anyway. There is a difference between real goods,
physical corporations and such capital and dollars. A brick is still
a brick if is priced at $1 or $100 dollars. So long as Wall Street
average share prices rise more or less together there need not be too
much of an effect on the over-all relationships toward production and
corporate welfare. CEOs can still get 5000 times the salary of an
average worker (just guessing).
The
tremendous hyper-inflation of Nazi Germany before the war occurred
not because Hitler had too many Reichmarks printed; it happened
because there wasn’t enough gold to back up the Reichmarks value
proportionately. The dollar though is on an economic relativity
foundation. With so many ought in to the corporatism kickback loop it
is wrong to leave anyone who is poor out of the benefit. A Guaranteed
minimum income and free health care for the poor should be something
Senator Paul should think about the next time a Pat Paulsen imitator
of Darth Vader says to him; “Rand, Rand- I’m your father; money
doesn’t grow on trees.”
In
the free-floating currency of the dollar context money supply may not
be as important as the real material and intellectual properties that
can be counted as capital. Money supply need be adequate to allow the
flow of trade and commerce and tight money could be a problem itself.
It is possible that avarice in the owner class could prompt corporate
to raise retail prices to consumers if consumers have any money to
spend in order to have all of the money they possibly can. Political
economy managers need to be concerned with such matters as well as
for keeping the real capital based on sustainable environmental
parameters.
One
of the problems of civilizations that bring them to fall is the
tendency to develop a particular economic model until it crashes from
over-use. The physical infrastructure of a civilization may grow to
be inappropriate and destroy the human spirit of workers and
designers in addition to building mass species extinction and
environmental collapse. It may be the case that those most invested
in the present economic system would be the last to know and most
resistant to rational realistic transition to a new economic
continuum.
The
2008-9 financial crisis and decade of ensuing issue of free money to
the rich was the wrong way to keep the economy of the U.S.A.
Functioning. It was an opportunity to direct coalitions of the
willing businesses to participate in ecological economic reform and
sustainability. The daft policy of throwing zero interest federal
reserve loans to the rich rendered democracy somewhat defunct and put
plutocratic global corporatism into ascendance. Intelligence was
required in governing and idiot technocrats dumping cash to the rich
was what followed. NPR has often called the Covid 19 pandemic the
'pendemic'. Repression of free speech and democratic free expression
is quite normal during the rise of dictatorships and oligarchy's of
sundry sorts. Some of the broadcast media believe economic exogamy
is the be and end-all for existence; self reliance and independence
however are not necessarily economically endogamous and strong
nationalism can lead in new directions such as ecological economic
reform. Coupled with Darwinist inspired atheism and Nietzchian
philosophic inspiration an existential abandonment of moral norms and
nationalism seems necessary for a brave new world order wherein for
Americans the sole economic survivors are plutocratic supermen. The
hubris and deceit inherent in the view that enables irrationality to
overcome reason and fake populism to alternate with corrupt elites to
manage the 'herd' of citizens ought to give some a realization that
the death of democracy won't end well for ordinary people.
Plutocrats
of the modern era are far more sophisticated and subtle in defeating
in detail democracy, potential rival political economic trends and
independent innovations of individuals. So long as the populace is
stupid, drunk, doped, deceived or misled into unintelligent political
economy there are no political issues to trouble the rising minority
powers of plutocrats.
I wanted to wish readers a Merry Christmas 2020 and a Happy New Year for 2021, though my blog seems to be completely censored for the past few days with zero readers except for a subscriber. The days before I had between 50 and 100 each day.
Since the Obama administration when I criticized N.S.A. surveillance of Americans I lost 90% of the views. Formerly more than a 1000 each day was easy. I haven't got a penny of increase from blogging here the past decade or so when the $67 in the account froze and there it remains in spite of everything I have tried to fix it.
When I dropped the sentence "as if google has never trimmed bloggers" in a post that must have triggered the complete censorship status as present. Well, no problem, then the sound stopped on my Thinkpad so now the sound device manager reads "dummy output" or no device present. So my blogging for the next year will likely be minimal at least for a while with tech issues.
Recently I realized that the most rich were in effect given 64 trillion dollars via quantitative easing. Perhaps corporatism has gone so far as to merge into a kind of imperialism globally with any dissent deleted one way or another. Still, things could be worse, and there is the great hope and faith in the works of the Lord Jesus Christ.
During the
2008-2009 financial crises the U.S. Government stepped in to stop the bleeding
on Wall Street. It provided a vast loan package and continuing support with
trillions and trillions of zero and very low interest loans to wealthy
financial institutions. Big banks are free to issue in electronic loans five
dollars more or less (I am not a banker) for every dollar they have on deposit
so those trillions (maybe 16 trillion) allowedbig banks to produce from thin air 80 trillion dollars. Fortunately Senators
like Rand Paul are concerned about the $600 dollar direct payments going to
Americans in the present financial stimulus observing that ‘money doesn’t grow
on trees’ (as if it were the Tongass National Forest the administration seeking to strip log with clear cuts and a spaghetti plate of roads).
When money
was based on some valuable commodity like gold the value of a currency was tied
to its relative scarcity. If one printed out many dollars each would become
worth less if the quantity of gold remained the same. When President Nixon took
the dollar off the gold standard the dollar had nothing besides its value to
none in particular to determine its worth. In an age of general relativity that
isn’t too unreasonable; the dollar is a commodity used as a tool for economic
exchanges after all instead of something valuable in itself.
Still, the
idea of giving the super rich trillions of free dollars to keep their Wall
Street index value from crashing below 10,000 is difficult for many Americans
including myself to understand very well. The treasury prints out paper dollars
and the Federal Reserve loans out electronic dollars. Most financial
transactions are done electronically these days and there actually isn’t too
much cash as a percentage of all of the dollars in circulation. Why doesn’t
inflation occur so dollars buy less when so many are being made to keep banks
and big business afloat and to send $600 direct payments to Americans that earn
fewer than $75,000 annually? Why haven’t Starbucks coffees reach $100 dollars a
cup yet one wonders. The answer may be that all of the cash that Wall Street
got from the Federal Reserve wasn’t put directly in to circulation. The
original loan amount goes back to the Federal Reserve so the Street had just
the paltry sum of 64 trillion dollars to play with. With that they could buy up
Wall Street- or the one percent could, and the inflation occurred in the
indexed rise of Wall Street shares to the point that the DOW is now over
30,000.
Just because
the rich are much richer and Wall Street much more costly it doesn’t mean that
Wal-mart needs to charge more for groceries although they might anyway. There
is a difference between real goods, physical corporations and such capital and
dollars. A brick is still a brick if is priced at $1 or $100 dollars. So long
as Wall Street average share prices rise more or less together there need not
be too much of an effect on the over-all relationships toward production and
corporate welfare. CEOs can still get 5000 times the salary of an average
worker (just guessing).
I.M.O. a guaranteed minimum income is requisite to assure that no citizen is excluded from substantial economic participation. Business sadists and networks can have hidden semi-overt and covert agendas and policies that render work impossible. With a totalized national economy under the power of network financial elites any citizen can be deleted from real income.
The
tremendous hyper-inflation of Nazi Germany before the war occurred not because
Hitler had too many reichmarks printed; it happened because there wasn’t enough
gold to back up the reichmarks value proportionately. The dollar though is on
an economic relativity foundation. With so many ought in to the corporatism
kickback loop it is wrong to leave anyone who is poor out of the benefit. A
Guaranteed minimum income and free health care for the poor should be something
Senator Paul should think about the next time a Pat Paulsen imitator of Darth
Vader says to him; “Rand, Rand- I’m your father; money doesn’t grow on trees.”
In the
free-floating currency of the dollar context money supply may not be as
important as the real material and intellectual properties that can be counted
as capital. Money supply need be adequate to allow the flow of trade and
commerce and tight money could be a problem itself. It is possible that avarice
in the owner class could prompt corporate to raise retail prices to consumers
if consumers have any money to spend in order to have all of the money they
possibly can. Political economy managers need to be concerned with such matters
as well as for keeping the real capital based on sustainable environmental
parameters.
One of the
problems of civilizations that bring them to fall is the tendency to develop a
particular economic model until it crashes from over-use. The physical
infrastructure of a civilization may grow to be inappropriate and destroy the
human spirit of workers and designers in addition to building mass species
extinction and environmental collapse. It may be the case that those most
invested in the present economic system would be the last to know and most
resistant to rational realistic transition to a new economic continuum.
A government may rightly help citizens in time of emergency- that is good behavior. yet it should be impartial and stay with the principle of equal justice. When the government simply serves the rich that is bad conduct for a democracy. Providing perhaps 130 trillion dollars of free cash to the rich via the 5 to 1 electronic mint root based on quantitative easing deposits was wrong yet should not be held as a reason to further victimize the poor. The revolution of the rich in a decade long financial coup need be corrected somewhat presently.
Maybe one should ask what 'saving the world' means in a given context. If the wicked want to victimize others, and the saved have no interest in victimizing anyone then it is plain that the meek need go to heaven and the wicked someplace else such as eternal hell. The people in hell would victimize each other in hell and may hate those in heaven yearning to victimize them. Further, the 'world' someplace in the Universe far from the exact center may be depleted of life because of mass extinctions and global warming and is empty, while some capitalists in hell want to spend the world ransoming it to get themselves bailed out of hell. Maybe some communists believe saving the world would mean enslaving everyone or like the Khymer Rouge deleting intellectuals. and that it is necessary that everyone must get stoned.
I like Hegel quite a lot. The 'Realms of Absolute Spirit' if I recall correctly is a kind of summary of the 'Phenomenology of Mind'. Some might like the idea of the Spirit coming to evolve itself to realization in history, yet the notion of a two-part dialectical evolution seems rather quaint today with quantum mechanics and quantum field theory. I.M.O. God or Spirit is eternal rather than temporal. He issues the Higgs Field rather than becoming created himself within it.
Wave-particle duality hasn't much to do with Hegel I think. It is possible to regard Spirit as the Author of the Higgs Field of course. GWF Hegel is somewhat removed from that context however. The Higgs Field has two-dimensional energy that can be phenomenally entangled so it appears to slow down to sub-light speed and have mass. One might consider Hegel's paradigm with Plotinus and the Intelligence though (from the Enneads or 54 Tractates) in that neo-Platonist paradigm.
There are many interesting historical researches going on
today in addition to cosmology that provide much
information to consider for Christian philosophers and the thoughtful. I think
it is the case that some established church authorities have sought to freeze
various structures in place because the contemporary dogmatics support the
economic positions of the authorities and that can lead to schisms and reform
such as that Protestants established in the 1500s.
There is repression of Christians in China.It may be possible that Chinese authorities may be concerned with pre-trib eschatology as well as social and economic power. Pre-tribbers believe the world is approaching doom and they will be raptured out of it, while post-tribbers such as myself tend to believe the apocalypse of the New Testament occurred in the first century A.D. culminating in the fall of Jerusalem and the Temple and that this is an era to build up the Kingdom of God.
Secular authorities including communists always want to build up their own power about as far as they can. One need be inventive to liberate oneself and society generally from repressive ruling power when it is not useful for social progress. I believe a Priesthood of Believers reform is necessary to maximize evangelical and ecclesiastical benefit from the New Testament. During the pre-literate, feudal era a more commercial or pro-priestly class of superior Christians was perhaps necessary to let the peasants learn the gospel, yet that is quite ineffective and almost counterproductive today with mass literacy and mass communication. Commercial priests tend to resemble small business guys primarily interested in their own economic situation receiving tithes. I think a Priesthood of Believers church structure were all share small-group liturgical roles would benefit western Christians and be non-threatening to communist authorities too.
Chinese rulers are probably mindful of the Taiping Rebellion led by a Christian who believed he literally was Christ's brother. Ten million were killed in the Taiping Rebellion. Poor theological understanding can lead to conflict. https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-19977188
I took a philosophy course or two from a fellow who had a degree in anthropology too. His desk for years had a copy of Barret's book 'Irrational Man' on it. There are other contexts for rationality than the standard apparently at least in regard to social structure. If one reads Sartre's Critique of Dialectical Reason' one may discover that it is possible to view social behavior something like ant hive behavior. Then the question arises do the ants think about what they are doing as a species applying mass production where it ought to be limited and selected more carefully, really (e.g. mass species extinction, global warming, mobile wheelchair fossil fuel engine society)? https://www.secondsale.com/i/irrational-man-a-study-in-existential-philosophy/9780385031387?gclid=CjwKCAiArIH_BRB2EiwALfbH1DS3ExaMd9xuyqazDYXhEp3lXZK_VvgXvyn3MEZ_sP0W8ql6jGzEUhoCUKEQAvD_BwE
I have learned more about the history of the first
civilization over time in Summer (southern Mesopotamia). Abraham was from the
city of Ur. Summer was established circa 5400 b.c. so it was an old
civilization by the time he got the call from God to exodus about 2100 b.c.
That was a period when Summer-Akkad was in the final throes of its span and a
good time for Abraham to leave.
Abraham and family journeyed northwest Syria and over to Israel or Canaan. That region was between the two great early
civilization of Mesopotamia and Egypt. Learning that some of the information
Abraham brought to Israel with him from Ur where he probably worked as a scribe
has similar paradigmatic concurrence with ancient Sumerian data such as the
flood during the end of the Wisconsin ice age should not be troubling to
Christians. Instead they should be thankful that Abraham brought the truth with
him.
Maybe the new vaccine will
defeat the new strain of the Covid 19 virus. One hopes so. The new British
version of Covid 19 (is it Covid 20) that is easier to catch has appeared with
a terrorists timing just after the start of vaccines against Covid 19. Like a
terrorist that bombs someplace saving a second device to use when first
responders arrive, the new version of Covid 19 has appeared after a year
developing a vaccine for the virus that has killed about 320 million Americans. If new lethal versions of the bat shit virus appear as commonly as common colds it may require so sort of new protocol to adapt human life and economic procedures.
The Trump administration set
a precedent for dealing with the virus that should not be followed by future
administrations. It fundamentally let the virus rage and citizens die while
waiting for a vaccine to develop. What was needed was an effort to let the
economy work and people stay alive together while vaccines were developed
though innovation. At the least some sort of infection preventing head gear
should have been invented and distributed.
A policy to just let people
die while waiting for a vaccine to develop isn’t something to emulate
politically. If a more lethal disease ever arrives the lack of capacity for the
nation to survive seems substantial. In an era with vast biological and
computational research that would support production of criminal synthesis of
designer weaponized viruses political players should have more realistic plans
for national defense to viral vectors of biological death.
Since the
discovery in 2012 of the Higgs boson and confirmation of the existence of the
Higgs field a lot of work has gone into producing popular explanations of what
the Higgs Field is and how it supports the existence of the mass. Metaphysics
could be said to be the physics that one doesn’t know. For me the Higgs Field
and the way it supports the apparent existence of mass was and remains mostly
metaphysics while for some physicists it is less so. There is a video a couple
minutes in length that summarizes how the Higgs Field works to produce the
appearance that mass exists.
Photons and
other particles of a class called bosons are massless. Photons are the force
carrying particles of the electro-magnetic field. There is a duality of
articles as waves. A particle might be said to be like the peak of a wave where
strength is greatest when observed. Sub-atomic particles acquire mass and
existence simply through bouncing around or being slowed down in the Higgs Field
from a massless speed of light condition to a slower than light condition with
mass created with the acquisition of a third dimension from relativistic
effects instead of thetwo-dimensional
condition of massless particle-waves.
Mass is an
apparent state of massless particleslocked into a steady state of slower-than light being observed by
sentient beings like humans embedded in the somewhat illusory or virtual mass
of the Higgs Field. I have wondered why gravity also travels at the speed of
light- it is the standard speed or normal condition of massless particles, and
the answer may be that gravity attracting mass is also an illusory or secondary
characteristic of mass existing as a secondary or contingent element within the
Higgs Field and that also raises the question of the curvature of space with
mass as in the general theory of relativity.
It is likely
that several very complex cosmology issues have very simple explanations when
they understood.One might ask what
came first; the Higgs Field or the Universe? Since the Universe is simply mass
that seems to exist in the Higgs Field and the Higgs Field encompasses all of
known space the Higgs Field seems primary with all of its contingent and
secondary apparent qualities of mass, space and time occurring within it.
What is the
Higgs Field in-itself? Field theories account for things like the
electro-magnetic field, what empowers the Higgs? The Higgs could exist like a
dendrite with information in it between two neurons of God; it really is metaphysics
to me. Creating a virtual Universe with
virtual space, virtual gravity, virtual mass and virtual time (itself within
relativistic criteria) within a Higgs Field possibly of two dimensional energy
seems greater than just adding water to a packet of instanverse. The Higgs
energy and energy for-itself are just about imponderable. One may discern the
effects yet not the energy-as-itself. That may be the prime mover as it were.
In human
history there is a story of Sargon being found as an infant floating in a reed
basket and taken to the Akkadian court where he was raised andbecame the greatest warrior and king of the
bronze age debatably.He unified the
Summerian-Akkadian civilization under the rule of the Akkadians for a change.
Moses arrived in a similar way and nearly ruled Egypt as a prince before
leading the Israelis from captivity in a similar fashion. The boy in a basket
story may be something like the stork method of accounting for arrival for
superior warrior-political leaders in ancient history- a simple yet effective
lead-in to the salient facts. The apparent characteristics of mass, gravity and
space-time observed from within may eventually have simple explanations when
another Einstein rolls down the river of time.
The U.S. Government doesn't 'hack' into telephonic communications anywhere without a good reason, and the American broadcast media never listens in to cell phone communications. Neither has Facebook or Google ever rigged or hacked emails or chatrooms nor have their employees ever rigged search results or skimmed earnings from bloggers. Unlike the Russian Government the U.S.A. only does defensive hacking for self-defense purposes; never anything offensive or splicing like in to trans-Atlantic broadband cables under the oceans or elsewhere. Apparently the U.S. DOD Cyber Warfare team may have planted malware in the Russia electrical grid yet if they did that was probably a charitable effort to increase its efficiency and was misunderstood by nandering naybobs of negativism.
Dick Durbin has expressed a broad Wall- Street sentiment to marginalize Russia even before the new, honest Biden administration takes office. The President elect has explained convincingly that his brilliant son Hunter is a victim of political opponents trying to get to him. There obviously was no chance that Ukrainian entrepreneurs were trying to get to him for influence and military supplies to war eastward on traditional Russian lands. The $400,000 of undeclared income from Burisma in Ukraine for expert advice from someone without any experience might have put President's Trump 2016 campaign designer Paul Manafort in jail perhaps, yet Manafort was guilty of packaging Mr. Trump properly to win, unlike 2020 when he was finally nabbed by the Mueller Investigation.
Plainly Republicans may seek their own Jerry Nadler to nail President Biden with high crimes and misdemeanors if they can win the House in 2022. In my opinion what is obvious- even more than a Pompeo win over President Biden in 2024, is the problem of Americans seeking antipathetic relations with Russia for short-term Wall Street proplits presenting great long-term externalities of lost opportunities to the United States. Seeking amicable relations requires intellect Democrats lack. With a strong Russian integration into western economies defense costs and threats to the United States will be far less than with Russia forced to ally itself more with China and various anti-American global alternative actors. China requires U.S. investors to surrender to Chinese owners 51% of the stock of any corporation doing business there. Russians may offer a better deal for U.S. investors. Its good to get in on the ground floor sometimes.
There are some that feel Capitalism unto enslavement of the masses for their own good is the only alternative to socialism and communist dystopia. Actually there is democracy and egalitarian free enterprise with intelligent ecological economic political economics as a middle ground that is more feasible for human survival on Earth- if that is a concern to some.
Someone wrote that U.S. politics has become dominated by emotion instead of reason and that plainly seems true i.m.o. Best one can hope for is a Pompeo vs Biden 2024 race and Biden loses, then in 2028 it will be Pompeo vs. Harris and the latter may win. I would like a candidate with a degree in Ecological Economics with a semblance of classical political pragmatism regarding a democracy, yet that is as unlikely to happen as a million dollar per citizen stimulus check. I ran across a good quote in a book I read recently; "The truth is treason in an empire of lies".
Is the ocean one thing or a word describing countless (though finite in number) molecules of H2O? The question of monism and pluralism is fundamental concerning everything that exists, and of events and processes, therefore it was a common concern of pre-Socratic philosophers not simply because they might have shared the issue once it was thought of by a single individual. Parmenides and Heraclitus approached the problem of monism and pluralism from different yet not antipathetic points of view. In that regard they share a concern that hasn't been terminated as worthy of inquiry from fields as diverse as quantum mechanics, Multiverse theory and perception. Compound objects composed of numerous parts in solid objects and sub-atomic particles entangled in three dimensions with the Higgs field reflect the one and the issue as do organic beings.
One might wonder what logic is and how it exists in relation to epistemology. It is also possible to ask if logic is static or if it is subject to relativity (as reshaped by spatial deformation vis Einstein's General Theory for example). If logic is recognition of relationships among objects or ideas as objects then it could be that logic is a kind of pattern recognition with which one may process information and make extrapolations from a given position concerning a series as in math theory or mathematical metaphysics.- If one is looking for a consistence in logic, that would be a necessary consistence of relations and patterns, shapes and occurrences that would comprise a system of logic. It is therefor challenging to say that logic is inflexible or must be regarding certain relations that must transcend particular logical systems and need be present in every logic system.-Because the issue becomes a little obtuse I shall leave it here for the present with the observation or agreement with a point made above concerning the utility of valid logic within a given system of logic rather than considering a Universal logic, though the Universe itself materially as particles embedded in a Higgs Field apparently seems to have a logical structure for everything in it at the quantum level.
One may have classical logic-Aristotelian logic and move through history to Leibnitz's mathematical logic, Frege and modern symbolic logic and onward to deontic , modal and other new logic systems. Maybe the proliferation of systems of logic supports the concept of logic as a formal system for representing abstract relations of fact and fiction useful for inductive as well as deductive reasoning.
