Frankfurt School of Philosophy As Nazism Unexamined

Unexamined until now, that is…

IF YOU DON’T HAVE A HEART, YOU DON’T HAVE REASON:

Was The Frankfurt School of Philosophy Disguised Nazism?

By 1946, it dawned even on the most obdurate, that German philosophy, viewed as a mass movement, had been a disaster. Its reasons turned out to follies of the greatest infamy, with an appearance of polished intellectual superiority, which foiled the superficially minded, as long as they had a cold heart. This very infamy made those infamous “German” reasons a strong social bond, binding the German masses together, to commit mass murder, and wars of massive aggression,  twice in a generation, under the enlightenment, the sun, of Satan.

Thus, unsurprisingly, some German mini philosophers reached the same conclusion in their Fort of the Franks (Frankfurt). They “wanted to break free from the past“(Adorno). Assuredly. Their past. By denying it. (My point of view on the Frankfurt School of Philosophy will be viewed as an outrage, a counter-sense, by the traditionalists. The present essay is a reply to “How the Frankfurt school diagnosed the ills of Western Civilisation” in Aeon, May 31, 2017. In essence, I believe the Frankfurt School did not have the courage to look at the main discourse of German history. They accused the imperialism of sliding doors (!) and Hollywood movies. I accuse Luther, traditional racism, intellectual fascism, and the plutocratic effect, in other words, Germany.

The German Enlightenment was dominated paradigmatically, pragmatically, and politically, and militarily,  by one state, Prussia, which was hyper militaristic, brutally expansionist, and successful at it, outrageously racist, and a dictatorship.

Berlin In Ruins, 1945: German Philosophy’s Crown of Creation!

The top philosopher of Prussia,  Kant, didn’t just believe in slavery or the tradition of enslavement, he wrote publicly to the highest authorities to encourage them to stand firm, while enabling slavery. Kant also believed that the highest morality was to obey the authorities unquestionably, a theory Nazis were enthusiast to enact while exterminating the sort of people Prussia, and then all of Germany, as early as 1815, discriminated against grotesquely, and criminally.

Herder, another piece of German Enlightenment, sang the praises of tribalism, to a point so extreme, he rejected French style Enlightenment, wholesale (although French style Enlightenment was just a modernized version, as far as eradicating exaggerated tribalism, of the one inaugurated by imperial Rome).

With (German) “Enlightenment” like that, who would not want to reject it? The Nazis?

***

The “European” Wars of the Twentieth Century were not European wars. They were German wars. That’s a dirty little secret which does not want to be faced, especially in the USA, for obvious reasons (twice the USA stood by, watching, for years, its parents, France and Britain, suffer the brunt of mass murdering German infamy). Germany deliberately ambushed humanity in August 1914, and again by electing an exterminationist racist fascist dictatorship, and obeying it enthusiastically. OK, it was a particular type of Enlightenment, under the Sun of Satan. But it was very German, in the sense “German” had taken after the rise of the satanic Luther (who wrote about torturing the Jews for pleasure) and the monstrous Prussian State. The mass murdering aggressiveness of Bismarck, the Kaiser and Hitler, were no accident, but the fruit of generations, even centuries of very specifically German evolution of the worst type.

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2014/01/15/luther-hitler-unelected/

***

To believe that Europe became crazy in 1853-1945 is to confuse “Europeans” (sane and victimized) and Germans (culprit and insane). Nietzsche pointed it out before me, and well before German folly reached the highest heights. So it’s to confuse victims and perpetrators. Nothing to build a deep philosophy on.

To believe that “reason” caused the German atrocity of the period 1853-1945 is inaccurate: what was viewed then as patriotic German reasons caused the German atrocities. It had nothing to do with the Enlightenment in the style of Montaigne, Montesquieu, Voltaire, Diderot, Sade Lamarck, or even Rousseau.

Aeon claims that: “Far from humane liberation, 20th-century Europeans had plunged into decades of savage barbarism. Why? The Frankfurt School theorists argued that universal rationality had been raised to the status of an idol. At the heart of this was what they called ‘instrumental reason’, the mechanism by which everything in human affairs was ground up.

When reason enabled human beings to interpret the natural world around them in ways that ceased to frighten them, it was a liberating faculty of the mind. However, in the Frankfurt account, its fatal flaw was that it depended on domination, on subjecting the external world to the processes of abstract thought.”

To say that the cause dominates the effect is silly. To brandish “abstract thought” as a flaw is also silly. “Abstract” and “thought” have to be defined. If “abstract” means a model the brain created, then most thoughts, defined as neurological activity, are abstract.

In the visual system, modern neurology has revealed more than 90% of the circuitry as re-entrant. Thus abstract, calling on what the brain views as memories of what was experienced. This is assuredly typical.

“The rationalising faculty had thereby become, according to the Frankfurt philosophers, a tyrannical process, through which all human experience of the world would be subjected to infinitely repeatable rational explanation; a process in which reason had turned from being liberating to being the instrumental means of categorising and classifying an infinitely various reality.”

One would expect that Germans brought, educated, and mentally created under dictatorship, would be incapable to perceive what tyranny is, and how one gets there. This is exactly what happened under the Frankfurt School.

Far from being “rationalizing”, reason, in German culture prior to the last few years at best, was extremely irrational. German reason was irrational reason, because it tended to miss all the reason of the heart. Attacking the world in 1914 was a deliberate insanity: the German High Command thought that Russia would be slow to mobilize, and that Great Britain would come to full force no sooner than a year after France, and most of continental Europe had been defeated and occupied.

Moreover the High Command and the Kaiser decided to believe the soporific insanity of a world racial government which President Wilson had offered to share with them. (While not thinking for an instant that the US president and his colonel House may have had an “America First” agenda!)

And, somehow the very “rational” Germans naively believed that the Americans would help circumventing the British and French naval blockade (which they did, for a while, as long as it made them richer).

That set of reasons for launching all of Europe, in the atrocious infamy of World War One was not reason, it was a mad logic. And it was even more insane for average “rational” Germans to goose step behind those six men who had decided to destroy Europe… Just to save their version of German plutocracy.

From there on, it got even worse: because thousands of German war criminals had not been hanged after World War One, they felt free to do it again: surely, it would work better, on an even larger scale. Literally. A war criminal such as Ludendorff, de facto commander of the German army in 1918, never got prosecuted for his mass murdering in Belgium (in particular, Liege). So Ludendorff was probably the most important founder of the Nazi Party, and certainly the most prestigious.

Well, there was a reason: the Anglo-Saxon plutocracy had been very supportive of its German colleague in the Paris negotiations of 1919. Surely, it would happen again? (It did, but not to the same extent!)

Many are the reasons, that’s why we need a heart.

Patrice Ayme’

P/S: Instrumentalized rationality consists in adopting specific axioms to get a logic to the ends one wants to achieve… and scrupulously restricting oneself to them. (As it is, that’s not saying much: Euclid did just that, more or less, with plane geometry!)
What the Frankfurt School wanted to express was “Instrumentalized” Reason, not “Instrumental Reason“. Now generally reason is instrumentalized, that’s why we brandish it. So, per se, it’s not saying much. A better notion maybe “Intellectual Fascism“, a type of thinking where an all too-small axiomatic set is used to animate’s one’s logic, while ignoring obviously related and more impactful axioms.

In particular, axiomatic sets ignoring the questions, and solutions of the heart, like basic human love, are symptomatic of Intellectual Fascism. That was, overall the Achilles heel of most German philosophy. Cogent, but blind to more significant alternative logics.
When the Frankfurt School speak of “Instrumental Rationality” in a derogatory way, it really speaks of “Intellectual Fascism” the ends of which are deplorable…

 

 

 

 

 

France, US: Exterminating Islamists In Iraq

France ACTIVELY Hunts Islamists In Mosul, Iraq

France, now followed by the USA, has switched to a strategy of “ANNIHILATION” Of Islamists:

The right temporal prefrontal cortex activates the amygdala, an organ in the middle of the brain, in charge of fear. If the former is destroyed, the latter sleeps. Result of said destruction? Patients thus affected tends to cheat and otherwise hurt their fellow human beings.

When such individuals get in political control, they will hurt on a massive scale. To try to appeal to their moral sense, which they are not neurologically equipped to have, because they mechanically cannot have a feeling of guilt, is asking the Moon to fill up our plate, it’s pointless. So one cannot reason with them, the basic motivation for reason being absent. Instead, to get rid of them, of their mental infirmity, one has to put them physically out of commission. Why? One cannot persuade them with flowers, or logic, or anything at all. Except, maybe the prospect of annihilation (of their freedom, or even, their lives).

One sees here that moral sense (right lateral prefrontal cortex) can only be implemented with fear (the amygdala). Thus, to instill social moral sense, one needs social fear.

In other words, to fight Islam, one needs Islamophobia, in the (strict) sense of fear of Islam. Those who intent to apply Islam’s orders to the letter, literally, that is, should be rendered so afraid that they cease and desist. But what to do with those without fear circuitry? 100 million years of primate evolution hold the answer, it was created long ago, by our revered creator, evolution itself. Here is a hint:

French Soldier In Helicopter Created Dust Storm In Mali. Notice the length of the gun he is carrying. Obviously a weapon made to leave a lasting impression.

***

It Is Smarter That France Clean House In Iraq:

French citizens have been killed by Iraqi artillery and ground troops using location coordinates and other intelligence supplied by France during the extermination of the extremists in Mosul, Iraq. The occasional firing of very long-range, very precise French “Caesar” guns has also proven effective (they look straight out of gigantic battleship, but are carried on very large trucks, and their shells go further). 

Live Firing Of French Caesar Gun In Afghanistan. The 70 kilogram Shells Deploy Winglets And Self-Guide to the place a laser illuminates.

French special forces have enlisted Iraqi soldiers for months to hunt and kill French nationals who joined the senior ranks of Islamic State, say Iraqi officers and current and former French officials.

Iraqi commanders leading the fight for Mosul said French special forces have provided to Iraqi counterterrorism troops the names and photographs of as many as 30 men identified as high-value (senior) targets. A great number of French citizens have been killed by Iraqi artillery and ground forces, the commanders said, using location coordinates and other intelligence supplied by the… French.

French nationals with allegiance to Islamic State will never return to terrorize France, said current and former foreign-affairs adviser to the French government. Wisely, the warriors for civilization have come to the conclusion that no quarters should be given to the enemies of civilization: progress.

During the Franco-Algerian civil war, some extremists advocated, in propaganda they published all over the world, to kill little girls in the most torturous ways. The idea was that civilized people would leave Algeria, leaving the countries to monsters to exploit in peace. At the time, intellectuals of the “left” (with the exception of Camus), behaved as if this was kosher. Well, it was not kosher. Bouteflika is still “president” of Algeria. In the 1950s, he was one of the principals of FNL. The fact such people are still in power, 70 years later (!) is directly related to staying silent, when confronted to the horrors they advocated.  

Officially, not counting secret agents, the Air Force and French Navy, 1,200 French troops assist Iraqi forces to retake Mosul. Times have changed since 2003, when France refused to join in the assault against the secular regime in Iraq.

The French special forces direct Iraqi soldiers to target French Islamic State fighters. A senior Iraqi police official showed The Wall Street Journal a list of names of 27 suspected Islamic State killers sought by France, accompanied by photos. The list is updated as men are killed in Mosul, the official said.

France sent its elite forces into Mosul to locate French Jihadists, a Western security official confirmed.

About 40 French special forces operate state-of-the-art intelligence-gathering tools, such as surveillance drones and radio interception devices, to help locate the enemy, said senior Iraqi and French government officials.

“They are dealing with them here, because they don’t want to deal with them at home,” said a senior Iraqi counterterrorism officer directly involved in coordinating with the French special forces. “It’s their duty. It’s common sense. The most lethal attacks overseas were in France.”

US Defense Secretary, 4 star general Mattis, just confirmed on TV that the USA switched to a policy of “ANNIHILATION” of the Jihadists, especially the foreign ones, so that “they won’t return home”. 

A spokesman for Iraq’s Justice Ministry declined to say whether the government has any foreign Islamic State fighters in custody (but Islamist fighters were seen taken alive!) Iraqi commanders said most of the fanatics fight to the death.

“If anyone is alive, in jail, because they surrendered, they will be executed in Iraq for joining Islamic State. And France won’t intervene. It’s a convenient solution.” said a current French official familiar with the matter. So much with Macron being sweet with infamy.

An estimated 1,700 Frenchmen have joined the Islamists in Iraq and Syria, according to the Soufan Group, a New York-based organization that researches extremism. French government officials have estimated that hundreds of those men have either died in battle or returned home.

Other Western countries have lists of their nationals fight with the Islamic State. But only France is engaged in actively hunting to destroy them in Mosul, Iraqi officers said.

A massive French October airstrike that year aimed at, and killed French Jihadists near Raqqa, Syria, by deliberately striking a compound known to be full of foreign fighters. The French government cited a provision in the United Nations Charter that allows member states to use ANY means of “legitimate defense” if under attack. (Famously, after 9/11, France threatened to use nuclear weapons against any country harboring terrorists, after a particularly outrageous attack. Pakistan took the threat badly.)

France’s laws and constitution offer little protection to citizens who take up arms with the enemy to fight the government, said Michel Verpeaux, a professor of constitutional law at the Université Panthéon-Sorbonne in Paris. Such traitors were routinely condemned to death, and executed in 1945.  

“The French are fighting not a state but an armed group,” Mr. Verpeaux said. “It’s a highly uncertain situation with few legal rules.” Even if French citizens were fighting for a state, they would be at risk for summary execution, according to the laws of war.

The government proposed to strip citizenship for those joining terror groups to bar their return home, as the U.K. has done, a proposal that met stiff resistance in the French parliament.

Dozens of French nationals fighting with Islamic State have been killed in the battle for Mosul, two Iraqi officers said. The seven-month offensive by Iraqi forces and international allies is close to exterminating remaining Islamic State fighters from the western part of Mosul, the religious fanatics last major holding in Iraq. The Islamists hold only ten percent of Mosul, the Old City, a labyrinth of small streets, but with still 200,000 innocent civilians therein.

***

Home Away From Home:

French special forces often move through Mosul without Iraqi military partners. There are millions of Arabic speakers in France, many of origins in North Africa, and tough love for Islam (that’s why their ancestors emigrated from North Africa) . They search homes abandoned by foreign Islamists, as well as command centers in search of physical evidence or documents that link their citizens to Islamic State, two senior Iraqi counterterrorism officers said.

In April, French special forces swept through a medical clinic near the Mosul University campus, checking the identities of the wounded against their list of French nationals working for Islamic State. The French forces, often wearing Iraqi uniforms and driving vehicles with Iraqi military logos, are particularly concerned about any chemical-weapons specialists working at the university, according to a senior Iraqi commander who coordinated with French forces.

Mosul University was used by Islamic State as a command center until Iraqi forces recaptured the campus in January, the Iraqi commander said. The French special forces have a forensics team that collects physical evidence—tissue and bone from the dead and wounded, as well as discarded drinking cups and utensils—to find DNA matches with the men on their wanted list, Iraqi and French officials said.

The team collects bone samples from dead insurgents and run the DNA collected through a database to compare with the DNA of French nationals suspected of joining Islamic State, according to the former foreign-affairs adviser to the French government. A team of four French special forces went door to door in the neighborhood in January. Two of the soldiers checked the identities of residents while the other two men stood guard. “They have their own targets,” an Iraqi counterterrorism officer said as he passed such a scene.

French special forces have recently focused on Republic Hospital, a large complex in Mosul’s Old City, according to two Iraqi Army officers who worked with them. The Old City, a warren of densely populated streets and alleys, is a commercial center and the last district in Mosul controlled by Islamist fanatics.

The French forces suspect that the remaining high-level Islamic State commanders, including some Frenchmen, are holed up at the hospital.

***

Turn Not The Other Cheek To The Devil:

In other, yet related, news Noriega, ex-dictator of Panama, died in a Panamanian jail, of a brain tumor. He had been overthrown by President G. Bush in 1989. Bush used to be the head of the CIA, and Noriega was one of his agents. Noriega spent the rest of his life in prison, first in the USA, then in France, and finally he was returned to Panama. Was one making sure he could not describe exactly the way the US plutocrats managed Central America?

Some will view the preceding as an apology of war and violence. No. Describing the Moon is not making an apology of the Moon. The Moon is there, we may as well write about it.

The connection between the prefrontal cortex, in a small area may a square centimeter, and the center of fear, and the combination of both engendering moral sense is something for future robot manufacturers to contemplate.

Absent such a connection, one contemplates irredeemable evil. Not that it is the only way to get to evil, neurologically speaking: all people are susceptible.

Once confronted to irredeemable evil, it has to be eliminated. This is what France is doing in Syria. 1302 years ago (yes, a bit more than 13 centuries!) France was fighting the Islamists in Aquitania, France. Fighting Islamists in Iraq is progress. Iraq is also where the secular Roman emperor Julian died from a wound suffered in combat.

The Christians hated Julian, they called him “The Apostate”. Julian’s sin was to die decades before his time. Fighting evil is best, as long as one wins.

***

Colliding With Evil Head-on, Is The Ultimate Method:

And now more than ever, civilization needs to win all the time. Now, indeed, evil can fire a few rockets, and kill maybe more than 50 millions. And such an enemy exists: North Korea has made explicit threats of annihilation. How to stop those threats? By scaring North Korea, not just with annihilation (a given), but with complete impotence. How? By shooting down those rockets.

For the first time the US fired an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) from somewhere in the Pacific, and tried to shoot it down with a “Midcourse Interceptor”. Some of these tests had been successful in the past against IRBM (INTERMEDIATE Range Ballistic Missile). ICBM try to go around the Earth before falling back on the ground, so they go faster. The Interceptor makes a head-on collision, that’s the idea. Electronics has vastly improved since the latest tests, in 2014. The relative interception speed is close to ten miles per second (15 kilometers per second). That’s around ten times faster than a high power rifle.

Interceptor bases are located in Alaska and California (next to Silicon Valley). In case of attempted strike by a single rocket on Los Angeles or San Francisco, the Alaska base will fire more than one missile (how many exactly is classified).

The interception was successful.

Was it successful enough to activate sufficiently Kim’s amygdala?

Time will tell.

Peace is not just about offering flowers, or understanding, or even scaring evil into reason. In the worst cases, peace requires to annihilate evil first. This is a very simple truth, known for three million years. That’s it’s not understood nowadays by so many “intellectuals” show that all too many confused progress in understanding with bleating idiocy. Glad to see the French government finally sees what our ancestors understood even before man became fully man, namely that evil exists, and needs to be annihilated. It’s also reassuring to see that France’s prodigal child, the US, faithfully execute on parental guidance. Hopefully the war against Islamists will not have to be pursued for another 1302 years, but will be over much sooner!  

Patrice Ayme

Search Engines Censorship & Defamation

On The Fascists Who Own And Dominate Us, And What We Read, And Want to Crank It Up.

When Google Plots to Make Patrice Ayme’ Disappear:

One of my readers was struck by the fact that I claimed that “extravagant wealth was outlawed in Rome”. This was indeed the law under the Republic. When, thanks to globalization, some of the wealthiest Romans were able to invest overseas, they build giant fortunes (the philosopher Seneca, who taught Nero, and died from it, used to joke that he didn’t know how many latifundia, absolutely gigantic farms with armies of slaves, he owned and on how many lands). When the Gracchi brothers saw this, they tried to reinforce the wealth limitation laws.

By then the wealthiest could afford private armies, not just private ships. Those armies were used to kill the Gracchi (although they . Their laws had been passed though, and for the following generations the “Populares” would try to have them enacted. This all ended with the assassination of Iulius Caesar, who was the most famous and most capable leader the “Populares” ever had. Now we have a situation arising which potentially equals the worst. Socrates had been condemned for “corrupting the youth”. Google apparently suggests users of its search engine to find the same about my work:

Patrice Ayme wants to limit wealth absolutely? Google suggests you find this hateful, violent, harmful to children, sexually explicit, etc…

How did I find this? To help my reader, I did a search under the key words “Rome Absolute Wealth Limit”. (As can be seen in two places, up and down, on the screen.) It produced thousands of hits all of them headed by my own:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2014/05/31/limit-wealth-absolutely/

So far, so good, and not surprising.

Google, in its generosity, let me appear on their search engine. That’s not a given. It used to be a given. Long time ago, so did Yahoo let me appear on their search engine. I would search “Athens direct democracy” on Yahoo search engine, and proudly find myself at the head of the list. Then, one day, I disappeared from Yahoo. Completely. (Now it’s Yahoo which will disappear!) It is as if someone had decided to ban me. I told some people in the Silicon Valley about it. Including employees of Yahoo. They told me I was paranoid. Even a San Francisco Bay Area homeless bum told me so. (At that point, I knew how deep the search engine propaganda was!)

But I was still on BING and Google. Then, one day only my essays older than ten years survived in BING. All others disappeared, even when typed in full. I interpreted this as being banned from BING. Just as I am banned from the New York Times. Such bans are highly successful. I am especially banned from outwardly left sites (Daily Kos, etc.) The plutos who own or hold them are afraid that what John Lennon called the “fu…ing peasants” find out that, instead of being free and master of their destinies, they are just the opposite… And all their ideas are precisely those their masters wanted them to have.

The surprise came from reading on the right of my essay title as produced by Google something new:

“REPORT INAPPROPRIATE PREDICTIONS”

With a down arrow.
I clicked on the arrow and found that readers were given the following choices to evaluate my work:

Hateful

Sexually Explicit

Violent

Dangerous and harmful activity

Other

***

Only my essay was thus adorned (out terns of thousands).

By the way, Google “Legal Department” wants you to request “content change”.

It is my (frequently repeated) observation that it is Western plutocrats who make Islamist propaganda possible, with their optical fibers, satellites, and software.  That, no doubt is a  hateful, violent, dangerous and a harmful activity. Many plutocrats could be hurt while shooting that movies…

The questionnaire above leads readers to identify “limits to wealth” to “limit to growth” and the latter to hatred, sex, violence, harm, and the cause of “poor schooling”. It is clearly oriented to censor any suggestion that extreme wealth should be limited. Indeed the title of my essay was unambiguous: “LIMIT WEALTH ABSOLUTELY”.

To all the preceding, search engines will reply that they are private companies, they do what they want. No, twice wrong: private moral persons, including companies have to respect the law. Now those technologies are news, Justinian refurbishment of the law, 15 centuries ago didn’t anticipate them. Yet, as Montesquieu pointed out, there is a “spirit of the laws” (“Esprit des Lois”).

All and any private company which becomes a global social utility, has, since Roman times, and Athenian times, be the object of special laws requiring special social duties. If search engines exert bias of no social utility (a fortiori if they are self-serving), they should be constrained to do so.

In other news, Prince Harry received Barack Obama at Kensington Palace. They discussed, we are told, mental health and the Manchester attack. The implication being that one is related to the other. In other words, there is no Islamism hostile to civilization, just crazy people out there. Those crazed people justify the police state, including finding those who think there should be limits to wealth crazy and harmful. This is disinformation: the Internet and TV, let alone hordes of career semi-intellectuals, have vigorously pushed Islamism, in the last 80 years, throughout the West.

Prince Harry was famous for running around naked in Las Vegas, while high on drugs. (This was immortalized in many pictures. Hard to deny.) Now in the British plutocracy, he disposes of historical palace, to pose next to Obama’s eternally plastic grin of bon banania… Nothing changed since the vague revolt of the punk wave, 40 years ago (the Sex Pistols attacked the Queen, but, in the end, the insults didn’t work. What works is to detail the exact nature of the subjugation mechanisms. And this the plutos understand perfectly, that’s what they want to block.).

The aim was to divide We The People and put civilization itself, and its spirit, under suspicion. Now we are reaching higher heights: saying that we should limit wealth absolutely, Google suggest, is hateful, harmful, violent, sexually explicit, and endangers schooling itself.

Sometimes dictatorship comes in stealthily. There is nothing stealthy about forbidding to read advanced materials (if one is not found in search engines, one does not exist). The Catholic Church did this for six centuries during the Middle Ages, by putting books at the “index”, and extended its rule, and the plutocrats (“aristocrats”) who were  along for the ride, by just as much (it finished with a number of extremely bloody wars and revolutions in Britain, Germany, France, among others…).

Meanwhile Merkel just came out storming from her meetings with Trump. Merkel is a physicist, she is usually careful, and always rational. However, Merkel was firm, not to say Hitler style, making great gestures with a closed fist:“We Europeans MUST take our destiny in our own hands…” Zehr gut (just what Trump said…).  German rebellion against the USA plutocracy, at last. OK, so now the obvious ally in this endeavor is just west: Frankreich, France. The European Union has been clear (but so far rather impotent) about the abuses of US search engines (tweaking searches for self-service, and tax evasion). Time to do something about it. I already contacted two lawyers…

Life is a war, or it’s not worth living?

Patrice Ayme’

Counterbalance Representative Democracy By Direct Democracy

“Representative Democracy” is a contradiction in adjecto. I propose to complement it by making direct democracy the overlord of the present system.

The seven leaders of the seven richest countries met in Sicily for the G7 Summit of 2017. Meanwhile several rescue ships rescued more than a thousand refugees from the sea. Each. That’s thousands of people a day. It looks as if much of Africa is a sinking ship, and the rats are leaving. But don’t worry: there is no colonialism in Africa (what there is now there is neocolonialism-plutocratic exploitation, without administrative interference, and that’s much more efficient as an extraction mechanism).

So here you seven individuals deciding for the world. What the world will do, what the world should do, what the world is capable of, what the world should learn, etc.

They were a bit discombobulated by Trump, who was described as “unpredictable”. And firmly committed to be uncommitted on “climate”. Whatever “climate” is.

G7 2017 Meeting In Taormina, Sicily, in a Greek Theater, 25 centuries old. The gigantic Etna volcano is erupting in the background, emitting copious amount of CO2. CO2 indigestion is how the super enormous mass extinction of 251 million years ago, between Permian and Trias worked: massive CO2 emissions by the Siberian Traps made two-third of the planet too hot for life. Yes two-third. And yes, we are heading straight for it, within a couple of generations. However, Trump didn’t get the message from Vulcan!

The disagreement with Trump on climate is a gigantic tale, on its own. Indeed, it’s not clear what “climate” means. Climate, done correctly, should mean, first, to curb carbon burning, thus, a carbon tax. However, what European leaders have meant by “climate” mitigation is not this.

As demonstrated by the extreme pollution problems in some European countries, including France! And the fact Europe let its car makers get away with extreme pollution for years (it’s the despised USA which found the diesel cheating trick of European car makers). Fighting the “climate”, for European leaders, has consisted in giving hand-outs, hush money to the poorest countries (maybe to pursue quietly the neocolonialism as described above?) Many of these poorest countries have the world’s highest indoor pollution, by a very long shot, due to carbon burning, indoors, precisely…

The low-level of understanding in these “climate” related problems is directly a consequence of the lack of debate. That, in turn, is a consequence of the lack of direct democracy. Why should people think hard about what is really going on, when it will make no difference, anyway?  

The seven brains we have to lead us all to extinction. World Think & Action Leaders. From Left to Right: Donald Tusk, President of the EU Council, Trudeau PM Canada, Angela Merkel Deutsch Kanzler, Donald Trump US Entertainer, PM Italy (one of many), 39 year old French President Emmanuel Macron, Shinto Abe PM Japan, Theresa May, British PM, and, far right, Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission (and advocate of sophisticated Tax havens) pose for a family photo during the G7 Summit in Taormina, Sicily, Italy, May 26, 2017. REUTERS/Philippe Wojazer

Macron, a smart cookie, but not a scientist, lectured Trump on climate, and the US made it known the great leader was happy to have learned so much.

Teresa May, the British so-far-unelected Prime Minister,  insisted that one should start watching what is going on in the Internet, and cut off Islamist propaganda. Indeed, it’s Western plutocrats who control access to TV and Internet (because they control fibers and satellites), as I have said many times. Facebook and company, but also the satellite operators should be viewed as objective accomplices of murderous propaganda: after all they are the ones transmitting it, and it would not be transmitted otherwise. At least that’s what I say, and I am happy to see our great leaders oozing in that general directions, as the mental slugs they are. 

As Reuters put it: “After lengthy deliberation, the (short, 6 pages) final G7 document included a separate threat, that was inserted into the 2016 G7 statement, to take additional action against Russia, if warranted, for its intervention in Ukraine.”

But the more general question is this: why so much power in so few hands? Why are seven brains in charge of the imagination and learning of the planet?

It should be now obvious that elected politicians and the deep state have too much power. Their power should be counterbalanced by direct democracy! It can be done. Republican Constitutions should be tweaked.

This is what happened in Switzerland. The Swiss Constitution had a provision for direct vote on legislative proposition (also known as referenda, or plebiscites). However, that was not applied much until the last 30 years, when the practice blossomed. Any proposition compatible with the broader constitution having gathered 100,000 signatures,  can be presented to the direct vote of We The People.

Scaling that up for France would mean nearly 800,000 signatures, and for the USA, 4 million.

California has such a system.

I claim that the main reason for the wealth of Switzerland and California is this system of direct vote of We The People for propositions: it keep politicians more honest, financially and intellectually, than elsewhere.  

Direct vote makes We The People much more cognizant of the real problems. This is demonstrated by the fact that public opinion in general swings around when a proposition is proposed. Often people are 60% for it, and end up voting 60% against it, and reciprocally.

Some will object that a direct referendum brought us Brexit, a catastrophe. Well, what brought us Brexit was a devious media owned by plutocrats which drove people persistently into deliberate disinformation and misinformation, for decades. That should be completely unlawful, and I have advocated a ministry of truth (no, I am not kidding, and yes, I have read Orwell’s “1984”. Precisely!)

What happens when the popular vote passes a law contradicting existing laws, or simple rationality? Well, then a debate ensues. An example is the popular vote against free circulation which the Swiss people passed. (After an immigration of the order of 13% in ten years, mostly from the rest of Europe, explaining the vote!)

The European Union was furious and took sanctions within hours (by intelligently, I am ironical, cancelling the Erasmus program for Switzerland; Erasmus enables youth to go study in other European countries). The Swiss government was livid. Ever since the EU has been furious and the Swiss government livid. But nothing else much has happened (that reminds us of Brexit, present and future…)

In other words, when contradictions between We The People and  the elected government appear, the debate deepens. And that’s good.

Adding plebiscite to the existing elected representatives system is easy to do, there is no contradiction: elected Swiss legislators usually integrate the propositions in the laws of the country. 

G7 2017. In Attendance, A Slovenian Fashion Model Named Melania, Lower Extremities. These Stilettos Are made To Walk On You. Extravagant Wealth, Hence Power, Should Be Unlawful In Any Republic. And It was, In Republican Rome, For Centuries. Not Meant To Express A distaste For Melania, far From It. But To Express A Distaste for The Mood That It Is PC To Have Some Think It All, Do It All, Have it All, While 8 Billions Despondently Watch, Powerless In All Ways, And Those Stilettos Are Walking All Over Us. And the biosphere too.

By the way, the idea of real democracy is not new: “plebiscite” comes from the Latin “plebs”. The “plebs” was We The People of Rome. The “plebs” formed a national assembly, and practiced direct democracy within (demultiplying with a system of “tribes”). That part of the Roman political system was a direct democracy (Athens had a functional equivalent, more direct, but also more unstable).

The least we could do, as the biosphere is facing the greatest crisis in 65 million years now, and, soon enough, in 251 million years, is to mobilize all our mental energies. This is not accomplished by letting seven brains think it all. Or even seven thousand brains (the number of influential people, worldwide is less than that).

Giant Tower Woman With Shaggy Hairdo Overlords us insects With $51,000 jacket by Dolce & Gabbana. In a respectful show of humility for average losers, this is a few thousand dollars below the US median family income. Make no mistake, I love colors.

Mobilizing all our mental energy is not done by putting seven brains in command, however eager they are to dominate us all. Or, rather, precisely because they are so eager to dominate us all.

In other, yet related news, Donald Trump had to follow the other leaders, as they walked around the streets of Taormina, in a golf cart. The joke was that he got somewhat left behind, because the cart was not American made. OK, Trump is older than the rest (70, whereas Abe and Merkel are 62; May is 60). Age is a good thing for leadership. Healthy age.

Nevertheless, clearly, the great leader has abused golf carts. Trump claims he does not do drugs, including alcohol, inspired, as he was by his older brother’s alcohol addiction, which brought his early demise. However, golf cart addiction is also a life threatening addiction. In several ways. First it makes people impotent, as Trump himself demonstrated at Taormina. Second, by making them physically impotent, it also makes them mentally less potent than they would be if they learn to practice physical independence from technological hand-outs.

“He came here to learn. He came here to get smart. His views are evolving which exactly as they should be,” Trump’s economic adviser Gary Cohn hopefully said on Friday. Well, Trump should learn from Angela Merkel (who is also overweight) that he is definitively not in good shape, at least physically speaking. And we are even worse, as most of us sincerely believe that this parody we are subjected to should be called democracy, lest we are found out-of-order.

Patrice Ayme’  

 

Martian Fluvial Flows, Placid and Catastrophic

Mars lost most of its magnetic field about four billion years ago (ours is doing fine, thanks to a massive nuclear reactor below our feet, keeping extremely fluid a titanic ocean of iron upon which Earth’s mantle floats…).

As a result, solar wind and cosmic radiation have since not been deflected from hitting the Red Planet straight on. Instead, this terrible radiation interacts by direct slashing impact with the Martian ionosphere. We now know this happens mostly during the horrendous, but frequent, Coronal Mass Ejections. This constant whipping keeps the atmosphere much thinner than it would otherwise be as the solar wind action constantly tears away atoms from the outer atmosphere.

Before the loss of (most of) the magnetic field, it’s considered that there was an ocean of water, on Mars. And there were massive water flows, dwarfing anything ever found on Earth. Here is Kasei Valles:

.

The area shown a above is three times the area of France. The altitude differences are of the order of 6 kilometers between highest (red) and the lowest (blue) terrain…

Should that be true, the possibility of life having started on Mars is very high. As Mars cooled faster than Earth, it’s possible that Martian life appeared hundreds of millions earlier than life on Earth. And that this life on Earth was actually Martian life, transported by impacts.

After that, the planet died.

Still, it’s mysterious: periodically its rotation axis tilts to 40 (forty) degrees. Then poles melt, and the atmosphere thickens…Could then temperature jump up? Could that explain the water flows observed on Mars (we know they are water flow, because, thanks to a French made laser on board Martian robot Curiosity, thousands of rocks have been blasted and their chemistry revealed!)

So what about those massive flows on Mars?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outflow_channels

The massive flows seem to have happened 3,700 million years ago, during the early Hesperian.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hesperian
We know this by crater counts). Methinks that there was then water on Mars surface. Water, and ice. Massive outflows have happened on Earth as recently as 18,000 years ago (Younger Dryas, etc.) When massive glacial dams released oceanic sized sweet water lakes.

I simply think that’s simply what happened on Mars. Simple is beautiful…

Our friend Ian Miller, a research scientist with a long career, proposes a completely different mechanism, the science of which is beyond mine. If nothing else, this contrast between my hare brained simplicity in this matter, and Ian’s sophistication, shows the rich possibilities that working scientists have to consider, when trying to push science forward. And, by the way, even “failed” scientific models can be very useful (actually most ancient scientific models have “failed”, more or less… As they were replaced by more advanced science)

Scienta: fluctuat, nec mergitur!
Science is agitated by the waves, but does not sink!
Patrice Ayme’

ianmillerblog

Despite the fact that, apart localized dust surfaces in summer, the surface of Mars has had average temperatures that never exceeded about minus 50 degrees C over its lifetime, it also has had some quite unexpected fluid systems. One of the longest river systems starts in several places at approximately 60 degrees south in the highlands, nominally one of the coldest spots on Mars, and drains into Argyre, thence to the Holden and Ladon Valles, then stops and apparently dropped massive amounts of ice in the Margaritifer Valles, which are at considerably lower altitude and just north of the equator. Why does a river start at one of the coldest places on Mars, and freeze out at one of the warmest? There is evidence of ice having been in the fluid, which means the fluid must have been water. (Water is extremely unusual in that the solid, ice, floats in…

View original post 762 more words

Real Civilization Does Not Confuse Civilization and Superstition.

Another day, another Jihadist attack aimed at children. The Islamist State has long given instructions to kill children. Twenty-two killed, 60 maimed in Manchester at a concert for children. A 22 year old cultural Libyan exploded himself. The “multicultural” assassin was technically, but not culturally, a Brit. Time to face reality.

An eight year old little girl died, among others. Who is responsible? The  savage who exploded himself, according to Islam, or those who, misleadingly, call Islam a “civilization”? Excited, nihilistic maniacs, or those who, in the philosophical establishment, call their religion civilized?

Here is a Sword Verse, one of a great many in the Qur’an, Surah 9, verse 59:

“But when the forbidden months are past,

then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them,

and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)…”

[Partisan Muslims whine that this is out of context; actually the context is much more terrible than that: all sorts of people are supposed to be killed, according to Literal Islam, for example homosexuals, just because they are homosexual, following explicitly the Bible, are supposed to “rain stones on homosexuals”. By the way, that’s ironical, as Muslim societies are INTRINSICALLY homosexual!]

Islam is not a civilization, it’s a superstition, and it has been highly successful precisely because this superstition gives a lot of pretexts to kill all sorts of people, while claiming warriors will be pals with god. Islam is not a civilization. How can we take seriously those who confuse “civilization” and superstition? Instead, indeed, Islam is just a superstition. And a pretty nihilistic one at that. “Nihil” means nothing in Latin, it’s related to annihilation. Muhammad explained from the beginning that Islam aimed at annihilating the Greco-Roman and Sassanid (Persian) empires.

Islam orders that society and superstition should not be separated. Said otherwise, Islam orders society to become a “theocracy” (power of god).

Tenochtitlan, Sixteenth Century. This is a civilization. It separated governance and superstition, because a civilization has to separate reality from fancy.

This is primitive. Serious civilizations separated, and separate, superstition and political governance. In Japan the Shogun heading the government was no priest. Nor was the Chinese empire a theocracy. An even more enlightening civilization was the Mexican one. The (more or less central) Aztec government separated the religion and the government: the emperor had diverse titles (including “speaker”), but he had no religious title. The Aztec emperor was not a priest. The two top priests of Tenochtitlan were at the head of the Aztec Church, a completely distinct hierarchy from political governance (which comprised war, justice, commerce, finance).  

Make no mistake: I don’t mind the devil, if, and whenever, it serves civilization: for example, I do not condemn the massive bombing campaigns against the populations who had supported the mass murdering fascist regimes of Germany and Japan. It was the cheapest way, by a very long shot, cheapest not just economically and militarily, but also, overall, in human lives, to win the war.

The Aztecs distinguished completely their superstitious religion from governance, That reflects, and encourages, the ability to distinguish reality from a fiction “above” it. Governance has to be grounded in reality, thus divorced from fiction.

The “West” did this, and did it all along, under the Roman Republic. The separation of church and state was re-asserted formally when (all too Catholic!) emperor Justinian ordered a (“Pagan“!) law professor to head a commission to refurbish Roman Law (by then nearly 13 centuries old, and full of obsolete considerations). Justinian gave just one instruction: to separate secular from religious law. Justinian’s refurbished law was immediately made law in the empire of the Franks (Imperium Francorum), which held (most of) Western Europe.

Thus, both Aztecs and Western Europe separated superstitious church and reality-based state.

A real civilization does not confuse civilization and superstition.

A civilization is the ultimate achievement of humanity. A superstition is a butterfly’s dream. And when a superstition is just a dressing for nihilism, it’s nothing to be proud of. Nothing. Not that nihilism is nothing, far from it.

Where does nihilism comes from? Nihilism is a characteristic of human ethology. The greatest enemy of man is not just man, but the enormous destruction which man can bring to terrestrial ecology. Thus, the enemy of man is man, squared. Including oneself. To destroy that ecological destruction man brings, it’s best to destroy men. That’s where the nihilist instinct comes from. When there are more people than the ecology can stand, people have to die. Thus more so in the desert. Thus the nihilist essence of Islam! Thus the attachment of Islam to the regions with a difficult, unforgiving, ecology.

The civil war in Syria followed a spectacular drought which starved Syrians massively. War in Syria has displaced at least 25% of the population, solving the ecological problem in a way few will find amusing, soon all over reproducing, if the greenhouse keeps on getting worse, as it will.

Nihilism of Islamism: religions for a devastated and devastating future?

Patrice Ayme’

Trump: Deradicalize Islam. Good.

Remember that whereas an army marches on its stomach, a people is ruled by its mind, and minds can be fabricated industrially. Except for tiny soap boxes such as yours truly, the media in the West is controlled, or owned, by the world’s wealthiest people. And wealth is power.

Trump gave a speech in Saudi Arabia to an assembly comprising 50 “Muslim majority countries” heads of state. A Muslim friend of mine heard the beginning of the discourse and concluded:”He put some water in his wine!” Which is French for getting reasonable.

But I expected no less. Trump was not doing his first foreign trip, starting with Arabia, to call for a Muslim ban. But his message was nevertheless radical. Trump basically called to de-radicalize Islam. That may look innocuous, but de-radicalize means to tear of the roots. There are practical ways to do it, fast.

Flower Power! Oh My Terrifically Great Friends Again Thanks For These Gigantically Beautiful Blossoms! President Franklin Delano Roosevelt Radicalized Islam In 1945. At Great Bitter lake. Me, Trump Shall Deradicalize Islam Now. Saudi King Salman on the right. Real king Ibn Salman, his son, on the left. US Nuke Officer Hidden Behind Trump.

To understand the plot between plutocrat FDR, Wall Street, Oil Men, and Saudi Arabia Founder, the colossal warrior, Abdulaziz Ibn Saud, one needs to be aware of the Great Bitter Lake conspiracy:

GREAT BITTER LAKE CONSPIRACY

(That plot was established days after FDR gave half of Europe to Stalin at Yalta, not so much to make Stalin strong, but rather to make Europe weak.)

A picture can teach a thousand ideas. Melania Trump and Ivanka Trump went all over the highest spheres of Saudi Arabia, glamorous hair all out. Here is Melania Trump visiting a school in Riyadh.

Three Americans Females Showing Hair  In This Picture. First Lady Melania Trump visits the American International School in the Saudi capital Riyadh on May 21, 2017. / AFP PHOTO / GIUSEPPE CACACE

Other essays reflecting some of my moods:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/03/19/perspective-islamophobia-is-not-racist/

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/03/12/god-here-dog-there/

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/01/10/how-plutocracy-fosters-islamism/

Obama gave a speech in Cairo, at the beginning of his eight years of service to the established order.Obama’s pseudo-intellectual claim::”Islam is great!”, a cosmetic change from “God is great!”, the rallying cry of the radical Muslims. Islam is great because Islam invented all this things which, actually came from Greece, Persia, India, etc. Obama insisted that he knew “as a student of history… civilization’s debt to Islam was great”. “Islam“, said Obama, “carried the light of learning through many centuries and paved the way for Europe’s Renaissance and the Enlightenment” These are basically lies: contrarily to what Obama claimed, Arabs did not “invent the order of algebra“. The (mostly) transmitter of that Greco-Indian knowledge was from Central Asia! The (part) inventor of the Zero AL KHWARIZMI was from present day Uzbekistan,  nearly 3,000 Kilometers from Saudi Arabia. Attributing algebra To “Islam” is even more stupid than attributing Analytic Geometry To Christianism!

Obama utterances were devised to sound educated, but they are conducive to a mood which is all lies. Basically Obama was trying to persuade us that religious obscurantism is conducive to intellectual enlightenment. It’s total poison, which has poisoned Western minds, ever since the Western plutocrats determined that there were few things better to make us all stupid…

From left to right, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah Al Sisi, Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz al-Saud, first lady Melania Trump, and U.S. President Donald Trump open the Global Center for Combating Extremist Absolutely Beautiful And Touching! Just One Caveat: All New And All Superior Thinking Always Starts Extreme!

Trump’s deradicalization proposition is more correct than Obama’s hypocritical professiorally professed admiration..

Christianism was deradicalized: this enabled civilization to take off again. Deradicalization did not happen in five minutes: it started when the Franks established a secularist emperor, a school teacher. That was well before the end of the Fourth Century.

Christian deradicalization is nearly complete.

Good.

Took 16 centuries.

High time to do Islam now.

What moral right do we have to? Well, our distant ancestors had a hand in Islam, because, if nothing else, Christianism mentored Islamism. Then, of course, Islam conquered half of the Greco-Roman empire in a few decades. Islam did so because it was so radical.

Four centuries later, the Turks converted to Islam. Islam, radical Qur’an version, says that if one dies, fighting for Islam God, one goes to sit next to Islam God thereafter (what’s the difference between that and a sort of denied homosexuality?). In any case, Islamized warriors are as dangerous as they can get (short of being clever, of course!). The Turks moved thousands of miles, and, in a few decades conquered all. Or, at least Armenia, Kurdistan, Anatolia. The rest of the Middle East, including Arabia, and then North Africa, followed.

All very good, but then the Qur’an Fascist Principle (S4; v59) says all dictators should be obeyed as if they were Muhammad (that gave an opening to Sufi, Philosophical, Islam, and, more prosaically, Islam as dictatorship).

Now, of course, with modern weapons, peace is not a choice, but a necessity.

Yes, time to de-radicalize.

And how to de-radicalize? First, top intellectuals have to realize that radical, literal, fundamental Islam is as much a catastrophe as radical, literal, fundamental Christianism, which is basically synonymous with the Dark Ages, of which it was part, cause and consequence. That will change the mood importantly. Arabia has to understand that fossil fuels are on their way out, and it may happen much faster than expected: desalination using massive energy from photovoltaics can keep Arabia livable, but then what to do? Well, become more intellectual, as Abu Dhabi is already trying to do. Clearly a superstitious obscurantist interpretation of a Dark Age religion is in the way.

Secondly, radicalization has proceeded from TV channels such as Al Jazeera. I have linked to Al Jazeera more than once on this site: it has some good articles. But it also has horrendous fundamentalist, knife between the teeth, preachers. Time to change this. All the Fundamentalist, Wahhabist, extreme Islamism transit through Western owned and launched telecommunications satellites, a vivid demonstration of Western plutocracy and Fundamental Islam of the worst type.

De-radicalization of Islam has to go through the domestication of many a Western plutocratic individual or institution. No doubt the media, owned by the same “moral” persons, will find therein another secret reason to hate Donald Trump even more…

Muslim potentates should mull all this carefully: they, too, are being manipulated!

Patrice Ayme’

QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENTS MAKE TIME AN ARROW

Through Wave Collapse and the ensuing Entanglements it sometimes brings, QUANTUM PHYSICS CREATES A CAUSAL STRUCTURE, THROUGHOUT THE UNIVERSE, THUS, AN ARROW OF TIME.

Actually it’s more than a simple causal structure: it is an existential structure, as localization creates materialization, in the (Sub-)Quantum Theory I advocate. (It’s a theory where there are no dead-and-alive cats, but particles in flight are not particles… Contrarily to what Einstein thought, but more along the lines of Niels Bohr, horror of horrors…) It also means that time, at the smallest scale, is a nonlocal entanglement. This is not a weird new age poetry, but pretty much what the raw formalism of Quantum Physics say. I throw the challenge to any physicist to contradict this in any way. It’s completely obvious on the face of it.

You read it here first, as they say (although I may have said it before). Is time absolute? How could time be absolute? Where does the Arrow Of Time (Eddington) come from? Is there something else which grows with time?

The old answer is entropy, traditionally denoted by S.

Boltzmann’s equation S = k log P says that entropy augments during the evolution of a system. P indicates the number of states accessible by the system. Entropy was a construction from later Nineteenth Century physics, a successful attempt to understand the basic laws of thermodynamics (mostly due to Carnot).

A big problem for classical thermodynamics: what’s a state? That’s not clear.

However Quantum Physics define states, very precisely. However, very specifically: a situation, defined in space-time, what Bohr and Al. called an “experiment” (rightly so!) defines a number of possible outcomes: the latter become the “states”, a basis for the Hilbert Space the “experiment” defines.

Classical statistical mechanics does not enjoy such precisely defined states. So why not to use the states of Quantum Physics? Some could object that Quantum “experiments” are set-up by people. However Quantum Interactions happen all the time, independently of people. As in the Quantum experiments set-up by people, those Quantum Interactions grow something: Quantum Entanglement. ( Self-described “Quantum Mechanic” Seth Lloyd from MIT has also mentioned that entanglement and the arrow of time could be related.)

Quantum Entanglement has a direction: from where singularization (= localization = the collapse of the Quantum wave packet) happened first, to the distant place it creates the geometry of (yes, entanglement creates geometry, that’s why it’s so baffling to specialists!) 

Quantum Physics, Or, More Precisely, What I call QUANTUM INTERACTIONS are irreversible processes. Hence the Arrow Of Time

So we have two things which grow, and can’t be reversed: Time and Wave Collapse/Quantum Entanglement. I propose to identify them. (After all, Maxwell proposed to identify electromagnetic waves and light, just because they are both waves and went at the same speed; it turned out to be a magnificent insight.)

Quantum Wave function collapse is time irreversible (actually, the entire Quantum Wave deployment is time irreversible, because it depends only upon the geometry it’s deployed in). The mechanism of wave function collapse is philosophically a matter of often obscure interpretations, and arguably the greatest problem in physics and philosophy.

My position here is perfectly coherent: I believe the Quantum Waves are real. (So I do not believe the waves are waves of ignorance, and an artefact, as some partisans of Quantum decoherence have it). Those objective waves are real, although not always in one piece (that’s how I generate Cold Dark Matter).

By the way, it is the collapse of the Quantum Wave which “creates” the Quantum Entanglement At least that’s how the mathematics, the description of the theory has it! The picture it creates in one’s mind (first the wave, then the collapse, then the entanglement) makes sense. Actually I am arguing that this is how sense makes sense!

Quantum Entanglement is a proven experimental fact. All physicists have to agree with that. Thus the Quantum Wave has to be real, as it is the cause of the Quantum Entanglement! (I am pointing out here that those, and that’s now nearly all of them, who believe in Entanglement are incoherent if they don’t believe in the wave too!).

Jules Henri Poincaré had seen that time and space were not equivalent. That was meritorious, as Poincaré had proposed the original ideas of “local time” and “local space” theories, which are the fundamental backbones of Special Relativity (they are deduced from the constancy of the speed of light).

Even Einstein publicly frowned on the concept of “spacetime”, which identifies space and time; “spacetime” was proposed by Minkowski, Einstein’s own professor at the EHT… They may not have been friends, as Minkowski compared Einstein to a “lazy dog”; Einstein, of course, respected Poincaré so much, that he grabbed the entire theory of Relativity from him, including its name…

Quantum Physics does not outright treat time as equivalent to space, quite the opposite (although Quantum Field theorists have tried to, and do treat space and “imaginary time” as the same!). In fundamental Quantum Physics, time is a one parameter group of transformation, not really a dimension.

When a glass falls and shatters, Classical Mechanics is at a loss:’Why can’t it reassemble itself, with as little work?” Classical Thermodynamics mumbles:’Because Entropy augments’. (That may be a tenable position, but one will have to count the states of the glass in a Quantum way. Even then, the full energy computation will reveal a lack of symmetry.)

I say, simply:’A glass which has shattered can’t be reassembled, because Quantum Interactions, and ensuing entanglements happen.’ The resulting topology of cause and effect is more complicated than what one started with, and can’t be reversed. Quantum Interactions and ensuing effects at a distance they provide with, create a partial, nonlocal, ordering of the universe. Time. (Once a set has been physically defined, it has been thoroughly interacted with, Quantum Mechanically, and then it becomes a “well ordering”!)

So what’s time? The causal structure of the universe as determined by irreversible, causal Quantum Wave collapse and Quantum Entanglement.

Patrice Ayme’

WISDOM IS KNOWLEDGE Tempered By Value

Wisdom is taking measures to avoid getting hotter than in 450 million years. ASAP. (I have long brandished ominously that possibility, not just to frighten the Bourgeois, and poke them out of their jet-setter life style, but because there was a solid scientific reasoning behind it. Now, it turns out that the scientific community is starting to realize that there is something to my threats… More details in future essays.)

Wouldn’t that be nice for those who promote ignorance, if wisdom had nothing to do with knowledge?

It is often said that Socrates would have been told by the Delphi Oracle that he was the wisest, because he knew nothing. Actually, that statement, stricto sensu, is an invention. Socrates was not that dumb. Don’t let soporific plutocracy descriptions of Socrates lead you astray!

What Socrates actually said was that, in some particular cases, he was wiser than someone else, because, on that particular matter, he knew enough to know he did not know, whereas his opponent thought he knew, when he shouldn’t have had that feeling (Diogenes and Cicero later made a caricature of Socrates’ fully appropriate considerations, this is where the “error” comes from; I suspect said “error“was perpetuated, and is now repeated ad nauseam, because the erroneous statement that ultimate wisdom is to be as knowledgeable as a barnacle, promoted idiocy thereafter, a help to abusers; in particular, plutocrats).

If all we know is that we don’t know, we, indeed know just enough to know we don’t know: a good beginning to feel motivated by the spirit of inquiry. The assertion attributed to Socrates is just plain stupid, as it identifies wisdom with ignorance. Much of Socrates’ thinking consists into low quality running around in circles adjudication of thoughts, being decisive about nothing much… But not so blatantly!

Verily, wisdom is knowledge. Wisdom is a web of knowledge. Real knowledge, namely relating what’s not obvious to an ant, or a dog. Not knowledge consisting in cataloguing the appearance and location of grains of sand on a beach. So wisdom is knowledge tempered by value.

t There is more knowledge to gather in the sand on a beach than we, or anything, can ever know. But that kind of knowledge is not wisdom, but its opposite.

True, any knowledge comes with a context. Any logic comes with a “universe”. To know something, to know a logic, is to know that context, that universe. One should not be so stupid as believing that whatever one knows has universal value. If one jumps naked through a ten story window, one will die from the fall, at least, on Earth. If one jumps through a window on the asteroid Ceres, and then one will die from trying to breathe in a vacuum, blood boiling.

I will give examples in science and climate. The latter with an eye to policy. I have long advocated that, for climate, catastrophic calculus, computing only with the worst possible cases, was the path to wisdom. Indeed, we now know that, for three out of the five known mass extinctions, the process involved was exactly the same as now the unfolding catastrophe known as the Anthropocene we are contributing to: a CO2 exponentiation, a blow-up of CO2 (propelled, literally, by volcanic activity).

Wisdom then? A carbon tax!

Wisdom is a tax!

Wisdom can be simple. Wisdom can be just a tax!

Patrice Ayme’

Advanced Morality: First, Learn To Be Polite With The Truth

Another self-glorifying US historian explains in Aeon magazine that “Democracy needs politeness”. And what is the ultimate form of politeness? Political Correctness! Political correctness, or the transformation of reality into insanity. Indeed, the “historian” Steven Bullock claims that: “Autocrats shouted, cursed, and bullied, while American revolutionaries used politeness as a tool of radical politics.”

That’s statement is a piece of towering disinformation.

First, although kings and queens occasionally “bullied”, uppity peers, of the kingdom, they would very rarely stoop to shouting and cursing. That would be to admit weakness, dearth of “majesty”.

Second, the principal “radical” character of US politics after getting rid of British rule was that the frontier which the monarch in London had imposed was shattered, and Indian lands got stolen on an imperial scale.  

Look carefully at the “Proclamation Line” on the west side of the colonies. That was supposed to their frontier under the British Rule. That was the real cause of the war.  The Real Cause Of the War Of Independence Was the “Proclamation Line of 1763”. It prevented the expansion of the English American colony to the West, thus it blocked a very nice land grab. The “Boston Tea Party” is a system of thought designed to disguise the main motivation for what really happened.

Steven Bullock describes British and US plutocracy as if they belong to a universe where all rules are upside down. Says he:

“Britons and Americans of the 18th century applied these ideals of sympathy and respect to public as well as personal relationships. Seeking restrained and responsive leadership, the 18th-century ‘politics of politeness’ offered a powerful challenge to angry and overbearing authoritarian rule. For many contemporaries, this critique often seemed broader and more compelling than the discussions of legal and constitutional issues that are better known today.

Politeness developed in Britain, and Europe as a whole, but its political applications became especially important in 18th-century British America…”

Why upside down? Because there was nothing polite about the British and American empires. They both conquered large swathes of the planet over record time, and held to those. No morality was held back: to defeat France, Great Britain used Prussia as a weapon. Prussia was a hyper militaristic, extremely racist state. Now people bemoan Nazism: it’s fashionable. However, 1756 Britain made support for (what would become) Nazism a reality. Prussia murderously discriminated against Jews and Poles. That was part of what Mr. History Professor sees as “politeness”. Also, the reason why the french Revolution did not propagate to England was not so much that England was more democratic, as Voltaire affected to believe. Actually, England was more effectively plutocratic, under democratic disguise: French peasant owned their land, not the English peasants (in England, aristocrats held everything).    

Actually, there was nothing new about politeness: it was already expected in Republican Rome. What was new in the Middle Ages were the “Courts of Love” which made explicit what were polite relations between men and women. That surely did not exist in Rome: Rome was very sexist. The Republic was very sexist, and the empire, a little bit less so. Not as sexist as present-day Islam, but still one had to wait the extreme Late Roman Empire to see one “Augusta” meaning one supreme Roman leader who was a woman. The Franks and later the French and “Renovated Roman Empire” they created had many supreme leaders who were women, well before Eleanor of Aquitaine (queen of France and England).

In truth, what was “compelling” in Britain, is that, if an admiral lost a battle to the French he was shot and that was it. Idiots with a smattering of knowledge of perverted history will call that polite! Britain was actually a horrendous dictatorship relative to France in  more ways than one, and proved it by attacking France with its utmost in 1792, in at least two ways: by financing and exciting Prussia, once again; unfortunately for the cowardly British plutocracy, Prussia was defeated next to Paris at Valmy, September 1792; the other way was by directly invading Provence.

Bullock hints that we are not polite enough, that compromises democracy, when we call libidinous greedsters for what they are, leeches upon civilization, horses of the apocalypse of the biosphere, he disingenuously bemoans.

However, first there is no democracy as it is. About 2,000 people take all the important decisions in the West or the USA, and set the important moods. They are themselves puppets of the worldwide wealthy class of the.01%, or so.

Democracy in Athens meant a quorum of 6,000. That would mean a direct vote by around 20 million people for any decision, in a country such as the USA. Not just a few hundred baboons mostly selected by their ability to seduce the rich enough to run for elections.

Secondly, politeness is all too often a way to disguise viciousness: by affecting to treat others one speaks to kindly, surely, one could not be treating anybody shabbily. Surely, by talking falsely now, with exaggerated deference, one invites others to do the same.

And surely enough, most of the US Founding Fathers founded a pseudo-democracy which was the most successful holocaust machine devised in the last 6,000 years of known civilization. The American Natives were mostly exterminated and certainly evacuated, from an entire very nice, temperate continent. Hey, such polite people! Who could suspect the polite Jefferson to have sex with children, enslave, and grab Indian lands as vast as Western Europe, so that his tribe could colonize them after murdering the original owners?

When the Ancient Regime’s police in Paris told Jefferson that he could now keep slaves in France, and politely asked him to let them go, and, if they decided to stay, pay them wages, Jefferson politely agreed. But he lied, politely, because the best lying is very polite, and most productive that way.

Then, when asked politely by the children he had enslaved whether he would free them once they had returned to America, Jefferson politely said he would do so. Not because Jefferson was genuinely truthful, but because his disingenuous politeness made it so that the children he was abusing and enslaving would not run away in Paris, and ask for help from the French authorities.

Just as Christianism as founded by the so-called “Church Founding Fathers” around 400 CE, was the most polite, greatest anti-civilizational ideology in the history of known civilization. Thereupon, the Dark Ages. It is surely not polite to point this out.

Instead, one should set-up a “Muslim Appreciation Month” as California did it in 2016.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/california-recognizes-august-muslim-appreciation-awareness-month-n621851

Surely, if we appreciate Islamism, we appreciate Christianism, thus the Dark Ages! All very polite, with obscurantism! Appreciation as a principle is a manipulation, just as encouragement and punishment as principle are abusive manipulations. Especially when applied to non-handicapped children.  Encouragement, punishment are not ingredients in a recipe, to be kept in balance to taste just right (contrarily to what traditional Chinese pedagogy has it, which keeps a balance of 5:1 between encouragement, the wén 文, and punishment, the wǔ 武!). Verily, encouragement and punishment should be the fruits of reason.

To be frank is to be polite with the truth.

Appreciation for truth is what we need now. It’s the antidote for Political Correctness. Political Correctness is that, if it feels right, it’s right. Political Correctness, replacing truth by hedonism, is the exact annihilation of the essence of humanity. OK, it’s not polite to point that out. But it’s the truth, and it’s because of it that the greatest, most brutal life extinction in at least 65 million years is proceeding now (and it could get worse).

A small example: Yes the Bush government and the Bush family lied about why they invaded Iraq, and then lied about why they let Iraq be devastated. That was a violation of Geneva convention, and people who deliberately violate the Geneva Convention on a massive scale surely are criminals against humanity. Being “polite” in this matter would amount to become an accomplice of these grave violations.

Conclusion: One has to learn to be polite with the truth, not higher-ups, who are little more than thieving baboons who ran away with democracy.

Patrice Ayme’