Watching the Cold War Wake Up from History

 Writing a somewhat historically accurate account of the background to the war in Ukraine, or more specifically deeper historical background leading up to the conflict seems useful to me. I would rather be one guy with a true account while 99% of the government have it wrong if that were the case, then be in sycophantic agreement with a majority as a mindless minion of  media/government/Wall Street/London Ukraine dibbery. With the reporting of post-modern liberalism stories; godless. queer leprechaun Sasquatch finally getting membership at the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Baseballs or whatever (hyperbole), it is useful to have a plain and simple perspective on the lineal championship contest for the age old battle to posess Ukraine. Radio reporting does allow a high percent of illogic to pass through unchecked. Evaluating verbal reports with formal logical and historical tools is not as easy as when reading written reports since radio verbiage flows on like water under a bridge and for most listeners without extensive taping archives, disappears like morning dew. People accurately recall about 30% of what they hear, said a language coach, if I remember correctly.

With the severance of Russian oil imports to the U.S.A. Cold War version 2.0 has officially commenced. That will bring on many changes and memories to veterans of Cold War 1.0 The United States spent a great deal of time, money and lives in the history of bringing the Cold War to an end. Yet there were many jobs created, many proxy wars fought in the chess game that is not a game. Sober people and the good luck of Ronald Reagan concluded the matter peacefully. Lawyers rather than realists have rekindled the conflict, and it may demand new jobs and new alignments. Clinton, Biden and Putin are/were lawyers litigating the theft of Ukraine from Russia to the west. Germany tried to wrest that plum from Russia for the better part of the 20th century. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MznHdJReoeo

 President Clinton and the Brits administered the coup de grace in 1994 (too busy to be troubled by the genocide in Rwanda in that year) with a weak Yeltsin and Russia in disarray. The Soviets withdrew from Warsaw pact nations beginning in December 1988. President Reagan invited Russian participation in the free world economy and the sentiments of Russians and others behind the Iron Curtain responded with a modicum of trust; they evolved letting down their guard against N.A.T.O. and transitioned to a post-Soviet new world order. When Soviet Russian leadership released occupied Eastern European nations from custody fifty years after the war against NAZI Germany the west was restrained in violating that trust until President Clinton and British political leadership violated that trust in 1994 reversing the Russian reconquista of Ukraine in 1945 and in effect taking up where NAZI Germany left off. For Democrats law is about forcing rival parties and people to do what they don’t want to do. They call that democracy.

They should have known that a stronger Russia would one day litigate the matter through other means if necessary. Ukraine was stare decisis to the Anglo-American legal team though the matter was not res judicata. The strong N.A.T.O. position pulverizing Serbia might have brought President Yeltsin to sign some sort of relinquishing agreement with President Clinton like V.I. Lenin had signed with German Minister Molotov to get Germany to stop war on Russia. N.A.T.O. supremacy was seen as a tool for advancing the ‘Liberal World Order ‘ (pragmatically defined as an order for queer marriage, teaching of homosexuality to schoolkids, abortions, legal dope. concentrating wealth and no religion too). Probably there should have been a Russian plebiscite- an election, rather than British direction, concerning Russian freedom to choose what to do with  Ukraine. The Anglo-American posture of 1994 bears a resemblance to that of Britain following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in the Middle East in 1918 drawing up international borders with the French.

At the level of international, state vs. state legal disputes the ultima ratio; the logic of kings, is historically, war. Those leaders that appeal to law to decide international issues may refer to their sovereign internal authority. Brits and U.S. leaders recently have expressed the opinion that rule of law- their own authority, has ruled since 1945. In 1994 the Anglo-American legal team regarded themselves as the ultimate legal authority of the Earth. Obviously they dismiss Russian authority and law in regard to Ukraine, as one expects from partisan lawyers in corporate disputes who invariably say the opposition arguments have no merit. The western position relies upon their own perception of superior power rather than of an impartial, objective regard for history. Meaningful history for the western legal team for the present dispute only extends to 1994 and 1945, dismissing inconvenient affairs before and during those periods. 

  Interestingly Russian efforts to retake the Ukraine seem to occur at approximate thirty year intervals. The leveraged Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was followed approximately thirty years later by the German occupation of Ukraine with a proximal Russian reconquista toward the end of W.W. 2. The leveraged relinquishment of Ukraine to President Clinton and the British legal team was followed approximately thirty years later by the new Russian effort for reconquista of Ukraine. That reminds me somewhat of the time that elapsed following the Dred Scott decision or Plessy vs Ferguson and Brown vs Board of Education. Correcting historical disputes isn’t always swift or final.

Cold Wars bring on economic changes; even new songs need to be written that are pro-war and of course de rigeur anti-war anthems. ”There’s no place I’d rather be, watching the world wake up from history.” Massachusetts could consider passing a law requiring school children grades 1-3 to take a knee beneath their desks in case of  atomic attack. The C.D.C . may open an investigation into political decisions leading to the brink of nuclear war to determine if they are a danger to public health. T-shirts could be sold that say Remember 1994! and Viva Oxford!

  While it may be too early for The Final Countdown version 2.0, or Alan Alda kinds of nuclear holocaust flicks, the time may be right for action-packed espionage films even though James Bond died in the last denouement. Cold War business start-ups may boom. I’ve wondered what could go into Cold War II espionage kits that could be sold on eBay for maybe $100, like maps to Russian forts, James Bond videos, disguises, miniature cameras and drones.  The kit should have a useful phrasebook for spies with phrases like; ‘My llama is Boris, I live in Soyuz Square. I like see-through blouse Natasha. Zil is parked at Bolshoi. Where are nuclear triggers?’

The total economic war of the west ion Russia presents the ironic western policy of forcing Russia to nationalize foreign business investments in their country that may be substantial. If for example someone bought a European manufactured Ford car in Russia they can no longer make payments on it and it won’t be repo’d, so in effect they own the stuff. McDonalds or whatever else was built by foreigners in Russia may begin to be operated by Cossacks or renamed McBoris'.  In the past, nationalization usually was a move communists made, hence the irony. Booking Cold War tours to Siberia via China with tour bus itineraries that could feature famous Gulags of the Evil Empire and how they kept inmates imprisoned for decades without anything besides torture and quick show trials, time share condos with fully stocked refrigerators and free, complimentary espionage kits oil at home.

Russian gasoline prices may drop to the equivalent of fifty cents per gallon as they keep their fuel at home. Cheap fuel prices and self-reliance on food production may allow vigorous economic activity to continue for a year or two during the sanctions regime and that may create jobs for rogue manufacturers to relocate production to Siberia. Taking advantage of cheap energy and easy access to Chinese markets. It may be wrong to misunderestimate the effect of gifting to President Von Putin free nationalization of foreign investment in Russia. The Lawyer’s  War of Ukraine may generate unusual collateral business evolutions.

  In the old days Americans sometimes laid across railroad tracks to stop transport of nuclear weapons and got legs cut off for the trouble. Nowadays they get government stimulus checks, pile up public debt and buy mint frappe lattes wondering if bitcoin bites off more than it can chew at foreign owned mid-west mining server  farms. It is good that oil prices may reach $200 per barrel as that will stimulate Chinese solar panel construction, and if the Von Biden administration ends Chinese tariffs, end inflationary spirals so recession could halt mid-flight. At the macro-economic plain, prospects for a burgeoning legal industry look good; lawsuits easily replace statesmanship as they can replace navigation on air and sea dealing with any negative consequences to randomly evolving destinations, punitively.

 

Eco Revision

 

Cranberries last through winter
forged tart by natures vinter
under snow the grown
revealed are shown
edible known
health minter

Muskeg grows all over the ground
forests rise up to wind knock down
trees die, more remain
strong in driving rain
not in vain
green grows plain

Eagles scan a forest below
looking for prey, something they know
snow battles uphill to the sky
warm flows share more dry
in death lie
eco foes.

Worst Case Inertia (a poem)

 

Sluzhba groans inertial urges sanction
draw past down to present time old tension
crew built law planks dampened smart action
wicked power used to some corrupt faction
convert world stage to unreal sightless shows
worst case molten light compaction

US law of shock and awe souls to thin air
severing human ties unbound particle pairs
colors run like temporal smoke somewhere
testy vultures share with body snares
tasting rare wine though ugly distance glows
another list raised high en clair

Bars and stars not Shelly, Keats and Fitche
elemental curds whey past actions quick pitch
land plans broadcasts govern slop info kitch
empowered plutocrats concede titch
they left that currency to slake the bank
cynch wealth can fake democracy patch.

Fur Raising (a poem)

 

Those shoes in the news sang the blues
so empty now and not a ruse
political sins
where a mess begins
worst kung fu
sappers too

Fish of civilization purr
label opponents Aaron Burr
steps neat plop and fizz
shine moons ‘bove the wiz
said the fault is his
raising fur

A few xuan more bought the bots
some mings hard learned and were taught
along a wire fence
electrical mench
pack a punch
demos not.

Steep Pitch (a poem)

 

With pieces of eight new found worlds
a way out of sure rat trap hurls
syndicalist tribes
and organized bribes
Wall Street rides
t’other side

  Everything fast stuck in place
ancestral homes of sword and mace
jet the least consist
in hope, dreams and mist
finite lists
current grace

Anarcho-vindicalism
cynics brought final schisms
diverged capsize talk
complete future shock
stop fat balk
pitch wisdom.

Concrete Spires (a poem)

 

Water so lonely, dark and deep
auden shore echo eagles reap
land moves to stark
mariner rhyme arts
three-quark marks
lever sleep

Kelp, welks and otter disappear
bear hungry eyes gaze through the years
lifelessness upstream
silent crush shushed green
mis en scene
life’s mirror

Consuming fires with prion plans
ant hill spire generations span
Promethean vibes
soon gave up and died
so they lied
with word bans.

Words, Life and Government ( a poem)

If government labels one man lem
and wealth moves power to erase write drempt
none may add one sum to silence the day
hope and truth died fading away rempt

Call of the wild where isles may scrive
evolving reflecting spirit live
emerging through darkness faith may flow
known and unknown Hegel too may rise

Where is the hope of futures gone past
all wealth was one for an upper caste
powers of thrones ate consuming two thirds
words of life tossed aside as trash.

Stabilizing S.E Alaska Salmon fishing with modern fish traps

Salmon fishing in S.E. Alaska has wild, whipsaw swings in numbers of fish from moderate abundance to near population crashes from occasionally because of the advanced technology of the commercial salmon fishery, management paradigm and perhaps deep ocean over-harvest. The long range outlook for salmon numbers is probably downward- like that of many fish stocks around the planet. Sports and subsistence share of the fishery has dwindled too. Modernizing fish traps to replace net fishing would probably remedy that.

 Fish traps have a bad reputation because of their efficiency at catching salmon in the past when the lack of management oversight by government allowed taking salmon until the population crashed. Competent government management quotas (some cynics would say competent government is an oxymoron) could assure that 51% of returning fish were free to go upriver to spawn and just 49% caught in traps and fish wheels with modern designs to catch or release fish for human food or upstream spawns.

  A Tlingit somewhere explained to me once how Tlingits (that have been using traps for salmon from well before Columbus arrived in the Caribbean) long ago took great care with the fish and gave them respect, holding up the first fish to the sky, to spirit, in thanks. Maybe that was something I saw in a Trevor Howard film- too long ago to recall accurately. Other fish were brought ashore for some other purpose for the well being of the fish. That account of tradition is something I cannot recall concisely years later, it may have been that female fish full of eggs were released or squeezed out of eggs as in that job search commercial with Russian fish squeezers, yet the salient point is that salmon were not caught to extinction with the region-wide network of traps- perhaps 1500 sites have been found by archaeologists, and were sustainably harvested.

 If an exact number of fish were caught and a slightly greater number released free to return to spawn the actual number of fish returning should increase from year to year if their habitat isn’t destroyed by encroaching effluence from mines, human sewage in great quantity with only primary treatment (nine island cities have been given federal waivers from secondary treatment because the alternative is to decree they must have mass constipation several decades), construction along salmon bearing streams, waterfront areas, usual human carelessness oblivious or indifferent to externalities harmful to wildlife and other contaminated water input from storm drain releases etc.

 I should note that it should be possible to develop new forms of sewage treatment or to give tax incentives to people that use electric no-flush toilets in the region. It might be possible to process human sewage and sewage from fish farms (filtering out the crap in so,me way) together (if clean, pollution-free fish farming legal criteria can be created that would permit fish farms meeting that criterion) to produce exportable fertilizer for agricultural sales.

There are people that don’t realize that deep pocket capitalization fundamentally rules the world these days. Environmental laws can be rolled back by politicians in the pocket of wealth- and that usual includes most.  Environmental protections need be effective forever while environmental exploiting legislation need occur just once for victory. Despoiling the environment has the odds on its side in the long run. To defeat that a little better approach need be made to supplement environmental protection. That is, economic need be made to cohere within environmental protection so despoilers and exploiters of natural resources  face economic competition with local politicians that support the local environmentally compatible industry such perhaps, as clean fish farming could present that potentially might be able to produce as many fish as natural fish taken from fish traps, sports and subsistence fishing.

Human activity makes change occur to the environment. ecological economics for sustainability are required if mal-adaptations with global investment pressuring resource exploitation is not to be the default use. To get ahead of population, demographic and political pressure deleterious to long-term salmon numbers stabilizing the salmon fishery and probably eliminating bi-catch in the process with new design paradigmata fish traps simultaneously with the rise of a clean fish farming industry may be optimal. The competition to conserve salmon is from Wall Street logic rather than white and black immigrants to S.E. Alaska. The human population may be stable now, yet that is unlikely to remain the case in twenty years to the rest of the century. Global warming and illegal immigration will drive more people north. Gold and silver mines will impact fishing and development of more business will reduce the influence of salmon fishermen whom are petty bourgeois yet not deep pocket capitalists. As S.E. Alaska becomes more like Puget Sound and every soul in the region can afford an electric powered boat traveling at high speed, like even the Atlantic coast S.E. Alaskan  wildlife may fade to become a memory. The pressure of global warming and over population can drive humanity to plunder the environment like locust. Getting sustainable fish farming in on the ground floor- buying in early, may serve to catalyze the environmental protection of the waters and land that sustain fish farming and plentiful fish traps, sports and subsistence fishing. Deep planetary capital would face higher environmental challenges when exploiting the natural resources of the region, unlike today when many oppose any change to a reduced salmon fishery with little political power compared to that of Wall Street.

Strategic Blunders and End Games for Planetary Plutocracy

Reigniting the Cold War and dividing the world economy roughly in half (the U.S. administration claims the G-7 comprise 50% of the world economy today) between those that side with Europe and the U.S. more than Russia and China in order to isolate and punish Russia for taking over the Ukraine militarily may be a strategic blunder. Though the corporate broadcast left and social media seem to believe political dissent from their narratives necessarily are treason and should be repressed, I shall venture my own opinion about the consequences of the corporate left policy of the United States in regard to Russia and Ukraine. The founders at least believed political pluralism was fine and citizens need not be sycophants of the will of concentrated wealth and power.

 Bringing the super-rich to try to own Russia may have been an inevitable, unsaid yet implicit aim of Democrat leaders when the Soviets peacefully withdrew from eastern Europe. Taking advantage of the weak is a traditional capitalist path to wealth. Seizing Ukraine from a weak Boris Yeltsin while the former Soviet Union was in disarray set the grounds for the present conflict. I am at a loss to understand how the U.S.A. and Britain had any legal standing in 1994 to participate in agreement with President Yeltsin to give away Ukraine to someone other than Russia. Were Britain and President Clinton at war with the Soviet Union or Russia and President Yeltsin just a signer of a surrender document? Was President Clinton the actual winner of the Cold War? Did President Yeltsin have a legal power to give away Ukraine in Soviet or C.I.S. law that precluded a need to ask Russians if that’s what they wanted?he principle of ‘We stolt it fair and square’? Maybe democratic liberty of Ukraine is a kind of ex post facto way to firm up the democratic kosherness of the deal; the art of the deal is important.

https://www.coursera.org/lecture/erasmus-philosophy-skepticism/the-creation-of-contextual-relevance-and-common-ground-in-politics-nD4Xo

Democrat party leaders hatred of Russia and prosecution of the Russian collusion narrative with President Trump (that was entirely false evidently) served to heighten tension with Russia and create the atmosphere that brought the Ukraine crisis to fruition. Democrats formally ending the Reagan-Gorbachev peace dividend era brings a new decade or two of intrigue, strife, increased defense spending and maybe inflation to Russian-American relations. European eastward expansion into Russia required conflict, a crucible and regime change with supporting narratives if global plutocracy goals to rule the entire world were to be fulfilled. All the worlds a bank, and the people merely pawns mixing metaphors strutting about during their hour, working for wages and the rich, signifying nothing as objects of broadcast media viewpoints. Opposition is be evolved away...

The United States and Europe have aging populations and allow in second and third world migrant replacement populations to provide cheap labor no longer available from domestic sources. The new browner U.S. population may not have the same political goals as plutocrats or share their vision of world conquest through concentrating wealth to enfeof the rich as ad hoc aristocrats.

China has a somewhat younger population with rapid economic and military growth prospects. Bringing them closer to Russia and Russian military and natural resources will greatly enhance the power of the competing Eastern economic block that is no longer simply communist. The United States may have bitten off its nose to spite its face blinded by greed to expand N.A.T.O. eastward. U.S. leaders may have prompted evolutionary forces to find alternative planetary channels for anti-American forces to conduct business in.

The U.S. administration failed to get Mongolia to join its alliance of all traditional enemies of Russia to line up against it including a rearming Germany. Getting the former NAZI power to rearm $110 billion worth is a great achievement of the Biden administration sure to benefit the U.S.A. in the long run. Maybe Germany can development nuclear capability to increase the scale of total nuclear war reassuring to N.A.T.O. members. 

Anyone who inherits a shoe or .50 cents is an heir with a lower case h. No one should expect the poor to stupidly throw away whatever they are lucky enough to inherit. Instead they inherit, invest or use whatever they have and move on to work howsoever they can to upgrade their situation. The poor can’t live on interest, dividends and lies. Heirs with a capital H are people that inherit wealth- maybe more than a half a million dollars, or several million dollars, in modern American terms. They can afford to live on interest and dividends and some can seek to take over corporations and make acquisitions globally, even in a small way. The media sometimes support the rich and victimize the poor, even using the poor as political decoys for the rich, and if they deem it politically useful, to pretend the poor are Heirs. What would happen to the financial fortunes of Heirs that publicly supported Russia as stakeholders in Ukraine?

Political inheritance is also a thing almost everyone gets; when Democrats muck it up they lower the value to all. War is not as good as peace. Rational political settlements are better than conflicts. One needs to understand the opposition viewpoint to make rational negotiated settlements. One cannot have just an our way or no way attitude and expect a negotiated settlement. Democrats consistently have acted as a one-party and no other in Democracy way this millennium whenever they could. Presently they have been trying to get rid of the filibuster rule in the Senate, and that would eventually be useful for one-party rule too.

Europe and the U.S.A. plainly don’t need more and better weapons rather than ecological economic reform to reverse global warming. U.S. administrators have deep faith in wealth and the power of Wall Street  bankers, politicians and media to define their own narratives and impose their will upon poor, isolated nations like Russia, and it may be so if wealth is their god.

Russian and Chinese nuclear capabilities combined are equal to or greater than those of the United States. It is possible that North Korean nuclear and economic capabilities will develop faster in alliance with the newly strengthened eastern block with good long term growth prospects. Iranian nuclear development may quicken with Russian technical support should they choose to provide that. It is possible alternatively, that a quick Russian defeat to Ukrainian forces supplied with N.A.T.O. arms will bring a Russian withdrawal on weak terms to a nation nearly broke as a result of devastating Western sanctions crippling the Russian economy. Then China would be the final holdout to global domination by Wall Street as global investors flow into a post-Putin Russia to make the economy sufficiently queer and corporatist to satisfy the Plutocracy of Earth.

If President Putin acts creatively and does the unexpected; perhaps establishing an independent Western Ukraine while keeping the east bank of the Dnepr for Russia, he may discombobulate U.S. leadership that has been loading up on anti-Putin and anti-Russian narratives in support of the New Cold War. President Putin may find the costs of keeping all of the Ukraine high while westerners fund protracted insurrection in occupied Ukraine and supply a host of advanced weapons to keep casualties and terror rolling. 

In the several days that have passed since the Russian invasion began the offense has stagnated at Kiev and the west has promised military support for Ukraine resistance forces. I have no idea what tactics President Putin had in mind yet the choice to waste time on Kiev is perplexing. Seemingly he just needed to halt at the Dnepr and secure the east bank while letting western Ukraine keep Kiev. It is doubtful that putting the Russian up opposite N.A.T.O. nations by taking west Ukraine was a good idea then or now. Keeping West Ukraine as a buffer probably was tactically better. The farmland of the east is an important breadbasket for Russia and getting farming going seasonally was important to restoring normal economics while West Ukraine licked its wounds before building up a N.A.T.O. Supplied military to consider an eventual counter-offensive.

One knows that modern urban warfare is difficult and usually results in creating a pile of rubble challenging to hold by either side; consider the battles of Stalingrad and Leningrad or as has been pointed out, Aleppo. Building up defensive positions in East Ukraine able to survive a counter-invasion might have been a better strategy. As it is, garrisoning troops able to suppress populist insurrection and guerrilla war, as Russians know, is challenging. They learned that in Afghanistan and though Europeans are Afghans they have much better equipment and technical prowess at the art of war. What President Putin’s plans are is a mystery, yet with R.T. news apparently censored from American viewers of the Internet (I haven’t checked yet being in a rural area without Internet access) one cannot learn what Russians think about it, as one could,listening to Tariq Aziz from Iraq right up to the American invasion based on a mistake about W.M.D.’s.

It should be possible to partition Ukraine along the natural Dnepr River and establish an easily recognizable international border. Free trade for each nation on the Dnepr along with demilitarization and low tax policies could catalyze a renaissance of trade and commerce, industrial and technical productivity for both nations after civilian populations return. Plainly two nations- East and West Ukraine, would comprise a partisan gerrymandering favorable to Russia and probably adequate to establish security for Russia against the specter of total war by traditional western enemies beginning with an advanced location on Russia’s southern flank with a N.A.T.O. knife poised on its soft underbelly. West Ukraine can be a demilitarized neutral zone of value to east and west. Russia could withdraw the bulk of its forces from the east after order is re-established.

It is possible that Europeans nations will gradually defect to the newer eastern block as economic opportunities and concern about nuclear war bring them a pragmatic preference to make friends rather than enemies of Russia and China. Russia may be able to launder exports and imports through China finding a surfeit of work-arounds without onerous terms. Nations like Vietnam or Brazil may choose to buy and sell to Russia; perhaps the U.S. won‘t want to put sanctions or penalties on many nations, especially those of Latin America, for violating the New Berlin Wall dividing Russia from the west.

It is challenging to say that all of the encrypted e-currencies like Bitcoin won’t facilitate Russian economic transactions or that Russians cannot mint their own block-chain currencies. With so many Muslim nations to their south Russians may have need not to look weak and easy prey as a stuffed west could appear after President Biden’s flight of U.S. forces from Afghanistan. Because of the western leadership corruption creating homosexual marriage it is possible that Muslim nations may find it practical to align themselves with Russia rather than the United States as need arise, and that Russia will stop interdicting Muslim terrorists on their way west or even share intelligence on Asian terrorist organizations so long as they do not attack Russian interests. The U.S. may have great relations with rich, royal Muslims these days, yet the populist crowd of fundamentalists may choose not to go the American way, and work with Russia when it can, in spite of Chinese insults to its Muslim population.

China has been making economic gains in Latin America and Russia for some time, and it will benefit from Russian scientific and technical assistance that is now of a free market sort rather than communist. Instead of exporting communist revolution the Eastern Block will be exporting economic upgrades and material opportunity that many lack in under-developed regions of the world. Making friends rather than enemies with Russia probably was the better choice for the United States. 

With full normal economic relations between Russia, Europe and the U.S. Chinese militarized might have been seriously dampened. As it is one hopes they don’t make a tactical blunder themselves in light of the add of Russia to their team generally, and decide to invade Taiwan or become intoxicated with a Chinese version of the Japanese Greater Co-Prosperity sphere and invade nations themselves drawing the world closer to actual nuclear war. Political patience and tolerance is hard to use sometimes, yet in the newly divided economic world China would seem to have everything to gain as the world’s middleman and economic power center.

  A President probably should not work international politics in such a way that the threat of nuclear war increases or that the nation is put in a place of potential economic harm itself compelling world nations to choose between the U.S.A. and its economic block or everyone else including Russia. Progressive strategic degradation of the U.S. position instead of increasing security and economic and environmental well-being is wrong. Democrats are bent on an our way or no way, better dead than red (Republican) course. Americans will need to wait to see what Republicans can accomplish to normalize global economic relations after Democrat Party Russia haters are voted out of office eventually.

Republicans may no longer be a good answer to challenges presented in the modern world to international relations- who can say? Public opinion still matters though, at least to planners manipulating public opinion in order to benefit elites. So what if world public opinion shifts to regard the U.S.A. employing politician lawyers with killer drones happy enough to splatter foreigners or get them to kill one another in protracted, yet avoidable conflicts- that can’t be good for business. Sometimes one must have a creative intellect gene to find peaceful solutions to global challenges. Bureaucratic minions   hate that.

Democrats apparently may seek to build support a long-term insurgency in Europe’s Ukraine region to resist  Russia's reconquista. Yet one may ask; is creating a protracted guerrilla war in Europe a good idea or an optimal way to stabilize the troubled region? Is construction of proxy war inducting Ukrainian and Russian casualties an intelligent plan? 

Can’t politicians think of an intelligent way to return the Ukraine to a fully normalized economic and social condition ending sanctions on Russia- bringing them into E.U. close-quarters trade and N.A.T.O. cooperation while demilitarizing Ukraine? Should Russia allow a Ukrainian, militarized N.A.T.O. threatening it more menacingly than than the WW 2 Nazis of Germany? It is possible that real living conditions for Ukrainians could be much the same as before the conflict under Russian suzerainty if Russia were economically integrated with Europe. 

 It could be that incompetent American leadership is suitable for a plutocratic shadow government politicians owe allegiance to. Wall Street aristocrats are globally positioned. In fact down-sizing U.S. political power may actually benefit the plutocracy and grease a more efficient planetary approach to consolidating wealth. The U.S.A. has moved more toward establishing an Orwellian division of vaguely warring empires almost somnambulist, automatically.

 Pejorative American narratives will continue to increase as minions line up behind bureaucratic story lines. A dirth of intelligent creative problem solving will descend like a fog of ignorance enshrouding knuckle-heads in pursuit of lucre. President Putin will become the new Napoleon ending democracy by taxing the rich 55% and forcing the lampshade of authoritarianism over the masses with green economic reform even as heroes of D.C. prepare a House of Special Purpose on the island of St. Helena where they can exile Von Putin after Wellington blades capture the fugitive and flush him far down the South Atlantic while a new generation of Ukrainian resistance hero amputees provide interviews to media and entertainment news with footage of new horrors of war alternating with news of Democrat Party replacement politics moving conveyor belts of social progress ahead and stock reports indicate Wall Street is patching 40,000 and public debt scooping 40 trillion.

Yuman Victory (a poem)

 

Someday if all the forests die
rain drops may dream of you and I
echo no one there
crossing in the air
rushed anywhere
darkened sky

Rivers run empty, no one cares
mass ellipses flow with pattern pairs
digital waves rise
of uncertain size
to the prize
lifetimes share

Wicked snares trap octopi caught
toss them new lap bubbly snack pot
do more stir things too
remarkable stew
sloppy goo
wealthy sought.

Pro Fates Con (a poem)

 

Empty spaces may crumble gone
when structured lives mumble on
time slows down too fast
all is one at last
somewhere past
pro fates con

From a real human point of view
there isn’t anything they can do
a trite horseshoe toss
just chose who is boss
lost time costs
death is new

Were those eastern lands really stolt
Solomon cut with lightning bolts
iced cream wealth zone
expends news to own
power loan
clanging tolt.

Dimensional Templates (a poem)

 

The Good Lord transcends all time
evolving like a network vine
dimensions and fields come together
lighter than space, like a feather
fields are weather
solids fine

Simply cancel math subtraction
positive with new invention
unknown spots of each shape place
uncertainty fills most field space
motions base
dilation

Synthetic visions are of thee
what will become and ever be
evil clings to organic hooks
to cancel hope if body took
the ground shook
spirit sees.

US Misunderestimated Ukraine-Russia Scenario

 U.S. policy makers have consistently underestimated the consequences of wresting away 100% of Russia’s ancestral homeland in the Ukraine and reallocating it to others than Russians. In 1994 Russian power was at a low point and its throat exposed to top dogs of the west. The last great try at colonization by the west developed in the Clinton-British axis of annexation. Anyone that had read a Russian history book would have realized that a Russian wish to retake their homeland would emerge not too far in the future after Boris Yeltsin relinquished Ukraine near the end of his life. The time apparently has arrived. 

 International law goes just so far; it settles disputes between agreeable powers. U.S. Presidents have steadfastly refused to be bound by international law concerning foreign charges they have committed war crimes etc. They are unwilling to sit in the dock at the Hague for judgment and confer immunity from prosecution upon themselves necessarily. As U.S. Presidents they have taken the position that they are above the law, or obey a higher law (cynics might say that is Wall Street mutual funds and sovereign growth funds). Absolute monarchs and others with absolute power claim that sovereign right; it goes to show the problems with international law among disagreeable powers. Real politic isn’t about lawyer claims with paper; instead it acknowledges actual historical and contemporary realities and doesn’t try to turn back the tide because Democrats get a legal injunction banning it from returning. Getting Russia to agree to a good aboriginal land claim settlement like Nixon did with Alaska natives to get the trans-Alaska pipeline built would be an expeditious way to move on with post Cold War rapprochement and economic integration with Europe, America and Russia instead of building a half century of conflict. To fail to recognize Russian aboriginal claims on Ukraine is like failing to recognize French rights to Paris, British rights to London, Italian rights to Rome etc. Alienating and severing those claims may have seemed practical to President Clinton and other British educated lawyer-politicians in 1994 as they sought quick profit severing Ukraine and treating that Rus homeland as if it had been an occupied Eastern European nation that deserved independence as might Poland or the Baltic states. Reasonable foresight would have partitioned Ukraine in such a way that Russia wasn’t skunked. As it is Democrats can finally investigate possible Russian collusion with President Ronald Reagan to end the Cold War.

  Brits and Spaniards were pretty good at trampling aboriginal rights in the age of exploration. The U.S. rectified that history to a limited extent in an era before people generally made those concessions. The United States may pursue Clinton-British Russian aboriginal land claims to extinction in Ukraine further leading to renewed Cold War and a permanent state of hostility. Russian national identity includes at least part of Ukraine if not all.

Tribalism is a forerunner of nationalism, yet when nationalism is depreciated in favor of globalism it is tribalism that tends to return via identity politics. Democrats have dumped so much racial/tribalism politics that the word civil rights itself tends to be regarded as race rights aka tribal rights. Nationalism would actually be a step forward from that.

 Israel is fundamental a race reservation in the global community with a democracy. Their are compelling reasons why Israel needs a reservation to avoid extinction or genocide as perhaps their may be concerning American Indian reservation. The trouble with reservations is that some advantaged, large tribes within nations don’t like that and seek to eliminated them. If all people are equal before the law in some nations that can mean operative genocide, hence reservations still exist in an age of nations and sometimes a planetary civilization. Russia’s eastern Slavs are a large racial group, and the largely non-Slavic western tribes have long sought to annex the ancestral homeland of the Rus with various degrees of luck. It should have been easy to make a land settlement agreement through negotiation if inertia didn’t drive Democrat party government policy to solely help itself, exert its one-party rule domestic practice abroad and ignore objective justice for-itself.

  U.S. leadership recently has made much of a ‘rule-based system’ that has existed since 1945 to support its worldview. In the administration’s opinion, Russia would be said to be violating that system if it actually invades Ukraine. In 1945 Europe was a shambles, and was divided between nations occupied by Communist allies and Western allies. Without the Soviet Union it is doubtful that the Nazis could have been defeated without liberal use of nuclear weapons by the weapons. For the west to achieve victory the Soviet had to defeat the million Nazis attacking eastward into Russia. German troops and aircraft occupied with attacking the east and Leningrad were not available to defend in the west against allied invasions through Italy and France. Without the Soviets the conflict would have taken more years to complete and Germany might have developed jet aircraft and the atomic bomb in the while. To wrest Ukraine away from  Russia; the principal Soviet component, was to terminate the system that had existed since 1945 based on rules and regard for national integrity. 

The buzz phrase ‘rule based system’ deserves a comment. Logically any form of government has rules and a rule based system. There is no particular merit in having rules in-themselves; they need be good rules to have merit, and are valid so long as they are relevant, functional, practical and just. For example, Genghis Khan had rules; they just weren’t good for Russian interests and Russians didn’t acquiesce in them willingly-dissenting for quite a number of years.

British lawyer-leaders including President Clinton may have regarded Ukraine as comparable to a Poland that should be independently after the end of Soviet post-war occupation of areas liberated from the Nazis, and that was a fundamental error. U.S. lawyer-Presidents of the modern era may view international affairs from the perspective of the adversarial system of justice wherein a lawyer advocated from each side make arguments against the other. If a President is a lawyer he should have a magisterial justice system viewpoint concerning international affairs as an impartial judge considering actual historical facts objectively to decide the merits and advantages of a case between two plaintiffs that are concurrently defendants.  It is ironic that President Clinton, educated in Britain that has a magisterial system, took a one-sided point of view and failed to consider the historical facts well enough to establish a long-term balance with fair apportionment of Ukrainian resources. It is good to benefit short term U.S. interests yet not at the expense of long-term public and historical justice. A President should have the wisdom of Solomon in dividing up failing empires if he wants to make international rules himself. If one is acting as an international magistrate one need separate from personal proprietary national interests, for if one does not, one may act as a king, fuhrer etc. with implicit bias.

Washington D.C. may not want to recognize it, but the Soviets were America’s primary strength ally in winning the Second World War. Russia- the Soviets- defeated the Germans on the Eastern side and rolled up their occupied European states right up to Berlin. Stalin wasn’t a nice guy, yet he was brutally tough and able to fight the Nazis more with blood than treasure. The other allies of the United States were important in the war, and Brits too delivered or escorted ships reaching Russia around Scandinavia to deliver supplies, yet it was the 20 million casualties the Russians suffered in their resistance that broke the back of the German war machine as much as the landing at Normandy and campaign through Italy. 

Britain was an important instrument for the American victory in the west providing intelligence, soldiers and material. Britain too had supplied the Soviets with tanks and other military equipment before the United State, yet when the U.S. entered the war Britain had retreated from Europe with the military escape across the channel home from Dunkirk. When Hitler launched Operation Typhoon against Russia he gave up maybe a million men (approx) to protracted, losing war and trashed vital and relatively safe East European regions for  manufacturing weapons potentially including an atomic bomb factory.

 The European states that became part of the rule based system after 1945 were either attacked by Germany, occupied by Germany, or at war with Germany or other axis powers. In short, the American and Soviet-Russian victory rule based system was achieved through war rather than diplomacy. When President Clinton and his British counterpart stole Ukraine they effectively divided the ‘rule-based system that had existed since 1945’ in twain and made a new system entirely ruled by western former allied and former axis powers against our former ally – Russia. The western alliance is primarily ruled by the primary western nuclear bomb power; the United States. The Democrat party believes it can define domestic and international rules itself to benefit Wall Street’s short term interests and Russia must submit. If the United States invades a country or supports foreign civil wars Democrats believe that is consistent with their inherent right to rule as it were, by decree to benefit plutocrats. Democrats haven’t advanced a single environmental bill through congress since the 2020 election and apparently have no plan to before the expiration of the present Congressional term, though they campaigned on the issue, in to benefit Wall Street short-term profits apparently.

Bad Political Engineering

 I thought it might be useful to mention an observed human political characteristic of the age of social media that is rather common; that of manufacturing worst-case scenarios for any potential new economic infrastructure without finding anything positive. One cites what facts from abroad one can and conflates them in elegant straw man arguments in order to have a case for disaster.

  One can use the paradigm of a hospital operating room for an example perhaps. One finds that in some African hospital people became infected with a blood born pathogen, maybe Ebola, and use that example as a reason why all hospitals should be banned (because they can be a source of blood born pathogen contamination and disease transmission. Worst-case political engineers would exclusively cite the inadequately examined African circumstance as the only meaningful element in a political situation to build a new hospital.

 Another example is the controversial paradigm of salmon fish farming. Opponents cite every pre-existing negative element concerning fish farming as the only factors involved. They worst-case the entire fish farming paradigm and find no positive elements, nor do they look for any. Positive engineering seeks out solutions for technical challenges regarded negative.

  Norway has a a lot of fish farms that produce something like a five-hundred million fish for market at any given time, while natural fish catches account for just five-hundred thousand. Worst-case engineers would cite the relationship as a proof that fish farms harm natural fish runs, without proof that any relationship exists. In theory farm fish and natural salmon runs are entirely separable and have no effect upon the other. Natural runs decline predominantly because of two causes; over-fishing and habitat destruction. It is possible for some poorly engineered fish farms to adversely impact natural habitats. That too is a result of bad government management. Bad government management can be caused by lack of effort by managers to finding positive remedies to technical challenges.

 Norway’s situation of poor natural runs could be caused by long-term human encroachment on natural run water columns in rivers and streams inn addition to over-fishing with fish farming being more of a restoration of salmon to Norway than a cause of the decline and fall of natural salmon runs. Fish farm technology can be improved and even brought ashore, waste may be reprocessed and not added to the sea, fish may be fed with land-made fish food and in short very low impact on the sea can be effected. It is also possible to restore some natural runs, yet vast structural displacement or extirpation of natural water drainage system ability to support salmon reproduction may be nearly irreparable.

In the modern era worst-case engineering of political arguments often attack ecological economic transitions to more effective forms of infrastructure to adapt human economic activities to the natural environment with ecospheric sustainability. Worst-case political engineering is also used to block technological upgrades to existing infrastructure. Of course it is possible to advance existing infrastructure or ecological economics with such neglect of external factors that social elements do suffer harm. In other words worst-case engineering may occur through neglect, or en passant in the political game of finding positive upgrades to human economic and social culture.

Fish Traps vs. Commercial Fishing in S.E. Alaska

Fishing for king salmon in S.E. Alaska isn’t good. Most of the big fish are gone and with the Eleatic reasoning of humans fights over dwindling fish supply become intensified yet petty. Historically though, native Tlingit people didn’t need commercial fishing fleets at all to exploit the fishery resource as they developed a region-spanning network of fish traps to catch all of the fish they wanted without extirpating the resource through intense competition and overuse.   An integrated fish trap network spanning S.E. Alaska could replace the entire commercial fishing fleet on interior waters and create better sports and subsistence fishing too while bringing up to the present efficient fishing management of the pre-Columbian era.

Before going too far in this post, I should mention that when I wrote a brief piece on the members-only Wrangell page at Facebook inquiring if fish farming was a good way to create new jobs in the area, among a few initial good relies I received several abusive ones including death or dismemberment threats, that I was able to dampen down as the author creating the thread. The topic is difficult to bring up in these small communities where population is in decline some people cohere with inertially or historical inertial micro-economics without circumspection concerning macro-economic facts regarding world supply and demand. There is a paucity of philosophical thought or conjecture in the public sector concerning what better ways might exist to do things, though it should be self-evident. Language is something of a luxury beyond necessary use.  Kill the fish-eating ducks (to get more fish-someone once said that to me).

I don’t know if it was the native sector or the white people and others sector that was providing the threats- maybe both. One native fellow with a white name mentioned interference with native culture as a problem. Many Tlingit are of mixed race and may identify  with both cultures, and realistically Tlingits and other Alaska natives are mostly already saturated by and integrated with the national culture sometimes; traveling abroad to work.

Some locals apparently believe that the region will not be pressurized more by global warming and demographic increase challenges and change can be frozen, driven out or rolled back. I was told by one fellow that the Wrangell Institute still bothered him years ago and I didn’t know why as I got here years after the place closed. Recently the news that Canadian sites where native youth were buried in mass graves at boarding schools prompted an inquiry that is ongoing at the Wrangell site, closed since the 70s I believe. The Wrangell Institute inquiry is ongoing to determine if any bodies were buried there at what was an educational institute run by the US Government for native Alaskan youth. While forensic archaeology of such matters is necessary, present day economics and changes cannot be sustained upon archaeology and require investments too. To get out front ahead of changes decided by global powers it might be a good idea to develop an economy that could adapt and employ Tlingits and other Alaskans the remainder of the 21st century.

Fish traps were banned in Alaska for salmon fishing during the time of U.S. ownership of the territory and native Tlingit infrastructure had long fallen into disuse and wasted away probably during the period of Russian colonization when ships and boats with canon dominated the waters of S.E. Alaska. American fish traps were not regulated well if at all in the early 20th century and caught so many fish that the resource crashed, twice, and so fish traps were banned.

A modern system of fish traps to replace commercial boats could allow comprehensive and exact management of actual numbers of fish taken in the region and let adequate numbers of fish swim on upstream. To spawn. Regulation of fisheries and capitalism can be good, poorly regulated, bad. Sports and subsistence fishermen too would have a chance to take a good number of fish. In some locales the opportunity to catch a 50 lb king the next 30 years is non-existent. You may wonder why salmon fishery management shouldn’t be so simple?

https://www.newsecuritybeat.org/2017/02/ocean-fish-stocks-on-verge-collapse-irin-report/

https://www.fao.org/state-of-fisheries-aquaculture

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/07/fish-stocks-are-used-up-fisheries-subsidies-must-stop/

https://globalsalmoninitiative.org/en/our-work/the-future-of-aquaculture/

https://www.seafoodsource.com/news/aquaculture/rabobank-norway-china-to-lead-the-progress-of-offshore-aquaculture

https://wholeoceans.com/ land based aquaculture

 Politicians and pressure from commercial fishermen prefers a sloppy,  inexact, exclusive way of dominating Alaska salmon fishing. Power politically continues to support inefficient . Volatile, unstable stocks fishery management. Salmon fishing with such an exclusive group controlling it creates a tiny minority political foundation probably unable to adequately defend salmon spawning environments against antipathetic development upstream from polluting mines, from shoreline housing development and pollution from various sources such as flush toilets and sewage waste effluence releasing drugs and other chemicals into the water. Occasionally politicians that support gross logging are elected to bring insults to the Tongass forest that is the region where fish return. 

 Because salmon swim in the open ocean before returning to specific rivers to spawn at various intervals a vast numbers of fish are lost to international fleets taking fish in extra-territorial waters. With poor fishery management and inefficient use of resources because of the unwillingness to use Tlingit fish trap network infrastructure paradigmata, another way need be found to increase the annual stock of fish in S.E. to meet world demand for salmon; good fishing for sports and subsistence sectors, jobs for more Americans and a stable, sustainable fish supply, and that could be new age fish farming. There are problesm with present fish farming methods that should and probably could be overcome with rational systems analysis corrections, research, applied new tech etc. before fish farming were to exist in Alaska. The state could set some very high, ideal goals for fish farming that if complied with would allow fish farm developers to go ahead.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/feb/11/global-salmon-farming-harming-marine-life-and-costing-billions-in-damage

  Fish farming was banned in Alaska too. Worries about pollution from salmon excrement, contamination of local native fish stocks by genetically engineered or foreign fish, and pressure from the commercial fish special interest groups prevailed to make fish farming in the state illegal. Yet with new technology and  regulations the state of Alaska could conditionally allow fish farming the meets criteria for non-pollution, non-genetic engineering and non-foreign species. Those might be rigorous criteria for the new industry to meet yet the financial incentive exists. Norway’s comparatively dirty fish farms send the salmon excrement into the sea in areas with good currents for dispersal. Even so they produce 400 million fish at any given time and if those fish were worth $5.00 apiece when grown that is a two billion dollar sustainable prize.

Regulating fishing to use non-polluting, healthy fish farms and fish traps that renewed the ancient Tlingit network of fish traps could create enough aquaculture to defrappe the ingression of environmentally unsound and ecosphere eradicating shore business that is typical of the contemporary global unsustainable economic practices. Alaska native capitalists could join with other investors to create thousands of jobs and double the number of salmon caught and marketed from S.E. Alaska.

Ministry of Love Guidelines on 'Hate Speech' Impinges Free Speech for Authors?

Did Mark Twain write 'hate speech' and would his works be permitted at p.o.d. sites today (like Lulu and Kindle)??

Using the N word qualifies as hate speech today. Lulu has a new user list of rules that can get one banned without compliance. If one must be in agreement with a ministry of love's lexicon and not use proscribed words to publish, the intent of the word may be less of an issue than the presence of the word at all. If one hates injustice and writes about that- characters in a novel might not be permitted to use realistic speech, the ministry of love's guidelines may prevail and the book erased from inventory. I belileve this most recent limiting of free speech follows Spotify's posting of nerw rules because of the Neil Young- Rogaine thing.

Hi- I just signed in to the lulu page and signed a compliance with new criteria thing, yet I wonder how that will affect publishing at security for authors. Can one still use characters with realistic speech an opinions in writing fiction? Must authors screentheir own writing content and take out anything a Ministry of Love corporate guideline would regard as hate language?   Need all characters be in compliance with loving Democrat party people and use their sort of lingo?

                                                    thanks, 

                                                                   Gary C Gibson

P.S. I have 41 original works here I believe it is, so am wary about capricious and viscious corproate delettions of content.  

Democrat's Day Care Bill Impinges Global Warming Bill

 President Biden’s new try to get a day care for democrats bill through congress shouldn’t be packaged with an anti-global warming bill for it doubles the prospects of failure. Packaging two controversial bills together each with different opponents is simply senseless and appears to be even disingenuous. Old Joe Biden's concern preference for old machine politics seems to subvert a modern green reform bill. Maybe the Demos are waiting for a female President to seem modern.

Anti-global warming technology and regulations sponsored by the US, government deserve a bill of their own with a work-around the objecting Senator Mansion who wants his coal cake conserved. There are innumerable anti-global warming bills one can pass that would let Black Lung Matters continue for the time being able to slow carbon emissions, heat absorbing asphalt sprawls, auto exhaust etc. that could be written into an Environmental Bill unobjectionable to Senator Mansion.

It should be possible to include more and better infrastructure in a Green energy anti-global warming bill to double-down on creating sustainable jobs and living conditions form the future. I especially like the super-conducting power lines within a liquid hydrogen cooled pipeline running along interstates underground that was featured in a Scientific American article years ago. To wean the nation off fossil fuels requires better, cheaper, more efficient alternative technologies to exist.

When voter-consumers walk into a store they will buy whatever is best generally. If two different products are available they will bin the better one in other words, so building the start of a super-conducting energy infrastructure nationally to energize very high speed electric trains in tubes, homes and business would be a good idea. California showed that getting even modest high-speed trains has a zillion costly challenges making it nearly impossible to upgrade/ President Biden is proving that Democrats are incapable of getting any kind of substantial energy bill passed, and that the rich don’t give a dirp about government efforts to move ahead on investments to reduce global warming enough to get Republican support for a pure clean-energy, infrastructure, anti-global warming bill.