Archive for the ‘Dark Side’ Category

The Dark Sides, And Why We Need And Love Them

April 17, 2020

There are two sorts of Dark Sides. There is the Dark Side in the sense of Evil… Which all religions admit exist, independently of the Good Lord, or, and, various benevolent divinities (“Mary”, better angels, etc.). Christianism and Islamism have the same solution, Satan, inherited from Hades/Pluto or Angra Mainyu, or other child-killing gods such as the Carthaginian Cronus (or the would-be child killing god of Abraham). 

However the Bible God and his Muslim version spend an inordinate amount of time being completely enraged… So it’s even recognized that the Good Side needs the Dark Side:

“Be Angry but do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger”- Ephesians 4:26.  

If one wants to chase a lion away, prehistoric people knew very well that one can’t just turn the other cheek. Some modern “philosophers” who don’t get that one, would not have made it, intellectually and biologically speaking, three million years ago… (And that was the problem all too many had with Hitler, as Israel knows very well, baffling the simplistic Berlin, a Jewish philosopher of renown among ectoplasms…)

(I hit once a dangerous bear which had charged me, with a large rock. It didn’t like it, and fled. Three weeks later the same bear injured a grandmother and rangers killed it. Just in California in the last few weeks, there were instances of children mauled by coyotes and mountain lions; each time a charge by the parents got the ferocious beast off; I have personally charged American lions three times… and once baffled terminally an African lioness just when she was going to kill a third party…)

Van Gogh absinthe fuelled starry night delirium… The night, the time when, undistracted by reality, one can imagine worlds with more possibilities than those apparently observed so far…

And then there is the Dark Side one meets at night. After a hard day generally finished by a bit of outside exercise, bathing, preparing dinner for the higher-ups (one of them ten years old) and a bit of reading and writing, I love to extinguish the light, and enjoy total obscurity. Where does this love for The Dark come from? Is it related to the other… Dark Side? Well, it partly, just partly comes from there. 

The explanation is simple: darkness elicits melatonin, a sleep hormone and antioxydant, enabling the world of dreams, those parallel universes where imagination is master of all, slave to none. That’s when neural networks go crazy, includes those oen didn’t know one had, including what they are up to…

In a sense, dreaming is ultimate entertainment, it’s sketched with evocation of imagination. Imagination is not just entertainment, and goes beyond knowledge of facts, as it opens the landscape of possibilities, even the craziest ones

 

A relation of dreams with Evil is that, as evil all too often does, nocturnal imagination anticipates all the possibilities. Indeed quite often people engage in evil behavior in anticipation of what they imagine could be going on, or could, someday, happen. 

Dreams are both heavens and hell, among other things. Recent dreams of mine saw me being smothered by giant octopuses (once, as a child, I attacked in the sea an octopus which fought back and bit me)… perishing from heat (nearly happened for real in Africa when I was less than 2 years old), or being witness to an imaginary party where male and female plutocrats rushed around tables where free needles are there which they inject in their arms (I have seen arguably even more degenerate Pluto parties, for real, where participants ate gold… and were just as hysterical, what they call “having fun”…)

***

When people behave, not always optimally, pontificators often opine that it is out of fear. And fear is derided as something one should not just fear, but also despite and condemn. But as a mountain runner, fear has always been my friend. And not just to speed up when I spot an ominous cloud, harbinger of icy cold, hail, wind and lightning. Once on a single track path in the mountains, running around a corner (not a good idea), I saw a large rattlesnake. No time to brake. But fear was in command, paying attention, and did the obvious: accelerate, jump above it. Another time, high altitude skiing in spring, I observed a large avalanche coming my way (thanks to fear looking up in a timely manner). I displaced myself slightly on an eminence and thousands of tons of the heavy duty wet snow avalanche passed a few meters away. I could go on like that for another page (I go out in nature a lot).

What fear does first is to keep one aware and awake. The fundamental fear for the mountain runner being as simple as spraining one’s ankle, one mountain range away from the closest road. In cases like that I always tried to be as fearful as possible. Once I determine that a climbing partner is not afraid enough, I will lecture them about that, and if that’s not enough, not climb with them (in spite of these precautions my spouse and I nearly got killed by partners who were not afraid enough…) 

 

So fear is, of course, contrarily to its ugly repute from caviar philosophers, noble. Without fear to steer our species and their ancestors in the last few million years, there would be no humanity. A recent example is that Coronavirus: much more fear, early on, would have saved many lives and economic disruption. And, in the future, it will be wise to fear much more the thermonuclear, internet controlled dictatorship of a guy called Xi, elected by no one, but for an oligarchy of his fellow crooks and goons… 

 

Imagination, in other words, dreams, can feed evil, feared, imposed, anticipated or experienced and reciprocally…

Patrice Ayme

SURVIVAL IS BEST & DEFINES SUPERIOR CIVILIZATION… With A Little Help From The Dark Side (Thus, Cruelty).

April 3, 2020

Centuries Of Continuous Wars, And Apparent “Cruelty” Created What The Franks, Rescuing Civilization, Called “Europe”:

When the empire of the Romans collapsed, their closest Federates, the Franks, took over, conquering Gallia, then Germania, Lombardia, and basically all of Europe, “renovating the Empire of the Romans”, as they put it. Then the Franks pushed away the invading Muslims out of southern France, northern Spain. Later France and her Angevins and Normans conquered England, and freed Italy, Sicily and other islands from the occupying Muslims. Then, for a millennium, the superpowers of Europe were squabbling France and her subsidiary and colony, Britain. For a while, all too Catholic and Inquisition wrecked Spain became all too wealthy and uppity, having conquered the Americas. Spain then fought France (in Italy) and then France and Britain all over, resulting in the creation of the Netherlands.

***

Part of The Problem Was That The Concept of Progress Changed:

The fanatical Christians, put in charge by Roman emperor Theodosius I, were of the opinion, as Augustine put it around 410 CE, that collapsing the City of Rome was the key to fostering the City of God. The City of God against the pagans… Latin: Dē cīvitāte Deī contrā pāgānōs. That was a declaration of war against most of the population, as most of the population was “pagan” (which meant “peasant”).

For the Christian bishops in power around 400 CE, “progress” was to outlaw the death penalty (and free, or secular thinking). Thus brigands knew they would not be punished (enough) to stop them. The highways became completely unsafe, and trade collapsed. The army couldn’t be paid anymore. This was the result:

Dark Side failure: Rome proximally collapsed because its Dark, Most Cynical Side collapsed. When superstitious Do-Goodism, known as Christianism took over, in 381 CE, cruelty, the Dark Side and the tough edge to human inquiry were outlawed, under the penalty of death. As it turned out, catastrophic, most cruel calamity followed: CIVILIZATION COLLAPSED. Invasions followed the establishment of the Catholic dictatorship, to the point that the same individuals, for example the Visigoth king Alaric, were in charge. Alaric defeated the secular forces in 394 CE, under Theodosius nominal command. The same Alaric sieged and took the city of Rome in 410 CE.

***

Concepts Like “Civilization” and “Progress”, Even “Common Sense” Fell, When The USA Took Over:

So France and Britain ruled for (most of) nine centuries. Then in the Twentieth Century, fascist, uppity Germany made attempts to take over Western Europe by force. The child of France and Britain, the USA, was all too friendly to Germany… in part because not only was there money to be made, but also parents to be replaced. 

The end result is that the USA won the Second World War, even pushing its cynicism to use its dog, Stalin, to watch over half of Europe. US master minds made sure that, in countries such as France, influencers would be on the payroll. Hence an entire generation of European thinkers appeared, who brainwashed We The People that progress, education, instruction, independance, common sense, basic decency were all notions so relative, than “superior” or “inferior”, or even “civilization”, or “better”, were not absolute.

***  

Kathleen Hawes Watkins And in the absence of consensus on “progress” and “common good” – – we live in a pluralistic/multi-polity reality – – our prime directive is/should always be to avoid cruelty. 

Cruelty is taking pleasure in applying the Dark Side. But the fact is, sometimes, the Dark Side needs to be applied (see the war against Nazi Germany). And it would be difficult, ethologically speaking, to feel inclined to apply it, from duty alone. 

As I explained above, banning cruelty is very close to banning the Dark Side, our main servant to destroy bad tribes like the Nazis, or bad ideas, such as Stalinism or Theodosius’ Catholicism. 

Kathleen gave a link to Aeon, a Pluto financed site (which has blocked some of my comments, and now all comments, apparently): https://aeon.co/essays/discovering-judith-shklars-skeptical-liberalism-of-fear

Shklar defined “liberalism”[0]: something crucial to the established US order, the plutocratic elite in charge for more than a century now. US pseudo-leftists define themselves as “liberal“. 

Shklar is a Harvard professor… Need I say more? That means the establishment established that she was a positive contribution to… the establishment. Indeed Shklar obsesses about something called “liberalism“, defined as no fear (to outrage common sense), no favor (to We The People). “Liberalism” became the ideology of global plutocracy, starting way back with US plutocrats financing and helping Hitler, and blossomed with global plutocrats instrumentalizing the Chinese dictatorship… whose latest export is seen to be a carefully, and secretly nurtured virus..

In Shklar, we are contemplating a buttress of the establishment here, not a thinker throwing light on obscure yet crucial subjects. Comparing her to Montaigne, as some have done, is silly: Montaigne was NOT a university professor. If he had been, he would have had to make a career of only thinking about pleasing the establishment, and thus would not have been Montaigne [1]. That doesn’t mean Montaigne was a saint. Far from it: he was a Catholic… But a Catholic very friendly and tight with two of the greatest thinkers and benefactors of humanity: feminist author and Queen of France Marguerite de Navarre, and her husband, king of Navarre, and, after a while, of France.

So the establishment tells us that the ultimate evil, the summum malum, the sum of mal, is… cruelty? [2] What is cruelty? The pleasure provided by the deliberate infliction of pain and suffering? What is more human? Humanity has been the ultimate predator for millions of years. That means, humanity evolved in an ecology where the greatest danger to a human being was other human beings not in their own tribe. Also, human life, in part as a result of this, but also to bring down cattle and overawe lions was most optimal when tribal. Hence tribalism is part of the inherent mental organization of human, just as much as the love (the tribe)-hate (the other tribe) nature of human ethology.

To bemoan it, while being part of the mighty Harvard tribe, or any other established tribe, is hypocritical. A philosopher, the genuine article, civilization class, is a tribe of one (this dismisses Plato and Aristotle, nota bene, as Plato was Athenian aristocracy and Aristotle Macedonian plutocrat… Not to say Aristotle is not important and not a good historian of science, or good observationalist).

I am always beyond uneasy when I come across Jews who bemoan cruelty and the Dark Side: they understood nothing from The Holocaust. The Holocaust happened precisely because all too many Jews claimed that, to be a fair and decent human being, one had to deny the existence of cruelty and the Dark Side. They exist, instead, and are intrinsic, one may as well deny death… to which they are closely related. Cruelty and the Dark Side are part of the architecture of death, as managed by humanity. Claiming no architecture is needed is denying the essence of humanity.

Watch the civilized doing triage during COVID 19, for further instruction.

***

One third of European Jews survived, because starting with the French and followed by the British, bombers were sent over German cities to kill German babies. Among other cruel objectives. The Germans didn’t like that. When the Germans invaded France in May 1940, their army consisted of more than six million soldiers, fueled by Soviet oil. 

Later, when the Nazis invaded and then struggled in the Soviet Union, the attacking army consisted of just three millions. It didn’t work out so well, unsurprisingly: the Nazis had too little oil and soldiers to tackle the USSR. Why so few men attacking the USSR? 

Another million German soldiers were manning the giant German anti-aircraft defence system against British bomber streams coming at night. At some point, defeating Nazi radar, British raid after British raid burned to a crisp in a deliberately set firestorm, the city of Hamburg. The fire storm was made so that civilians in underground shelters would die too.

This is how Auschwitz was liberated, by killing lots of German babies, and this is why not all Jews were not killed. The Soviets, who marched into Auschwitz, profited from absolutely gigantic US aid, given to them, free of charge; so Americans are often under the impression that to fight a war, one just needs to be industrious. No. First, one needs to be cruel. Cruel against oneself, first of all as one goes to destroy evil, la fleur au fusil.

Patrice Ayme

***

***

[0] Judith N. Shklar defining “liberalism” (in other words, Bushism, Reaganism, Clintonism, Obamaism; I put “Bush” first as dynasty founder Prescott Bush served Hitler in the 1920s, 1930s, 1940s…):“Every adult should be able to make as many effective decisions without fear or favor about as many aspects of her or his life as is compatible with the like freedom of every other adult. That belief is the original and only defensible meaning of liberalism.”

It’s of course a lie, Shklar is a liar, or incompetent, or both. Dynasties are all over the USA, especially where Shklar taught… So “favor” rules… And “fear” too: thousands of my comments were banned over the years, I was banned from sites, and even got government threats, just for my cogent discourses, where the guiding light is truth, and nothing but the truth, in full… People banned from academia for not respecting the guideline of respecting the establishment. The establishment even tried to do this to professor Raoult, for daring to say all too many truths about the COVID 19 pandemic.

***

[1] So what of Buridan, Rabelais, and Galileo? They were famous thinkers, iconoclasts, and still extremely famous university professors, all with great philosophical dimension? Doesn’t that disprove my theory that, to be a famous philosopher, one needs to be out of the university system? The answer is simple: Buridan, circa 1350 CE was adviser to four French kings, head of the university and lover to the queen, That gave him mental freedom. The situation of Rabelais was somewhat similar: a most famous professor of surgery, top of tops in Paris. And Galileo was childhood friend to the Pope (Galileo’s travails came in part of his bad character and arrogance; he didn’t understand tides, but make sure to tell his friend the Pope that his tide theory was wrong; he also got into astronomical fights with Jesuits)

***

[2] “It seems to me that liberal and humane people, of whom there are many among us, would, if they were asked to rank the vices, put cruelty first. Intuitively they would choose cruelty as the worst thing we do.”

Judith N. Shklar wrote.

OK, so what do we get from that? Shklar is cruel: that’s the worst thing she and her kind do. That’s her problem. I would define myself as potentially cruel, but would not say that “cruelty is the worst thing we do”, because, although I have seen cruelty applied to me (like in having my young uncle assassinated, or throwing a bomb or fatwa my way)… I do not know of a case where I exhibited cruelty much greater than smashing mosquitoes or using soap against viruses… But I have no doubt that, to become part of the establishment one has to partake in serious cruelty, so, indeed, Shklar has got to be cruel, as she readily admits. But then how come does she believe she is in position to teach us that we do it too? Who taught her that? Jesus Christ, the hero of Anglo-Saxon “liberalism”.

Patrice Ayme

 

Iraq US Crime Against Humanity: Why No Inquiry?

December 31, 2019

Pelosi said she had to impeach Trump for his crimes, namely talking to the Ukrainian president about corruption and going to Court instead of obeying Congress right away (all presidents have always gone to Court when ordered by Congress, it’s part of check and balances, as the Legislative branch can’t order around the Executive branch without arbitration by the Judicial Branch). Pelosi said “Our democracy is what is at stake, the president leaves us no choice but to act.“ 

But the crimes in Iraq were much higher and greater than those alleged from Trump: millions died. And the war there is still going on. How come no inquiry? Could that be because Pelosi and Biden were principals in that iraq invasion abomination?

Could it be that Democrats impeach Trump, following the strategy pure religious types, such as the Puritans, always followed, impeaching others for crimes they themselves committed, on a far greater scale? The greatest US crime committed in the last 30 years was the war against Iraq. Among other gifts, it brought us the Islamist State.

Pelosi and Bush are now among those politicians world history will forever spite. Differently from Nero, whose culpability was sometimes unclear, Pelosi has admitted to crimes against humanity and conspiring to implement them. With Bush. Just listen to the tape. The CNN tape. All Americans who thinks that’s all right have sunk to the level of Germans thinking it was alright to invade Poland in 1939.

Right now the US is reviled in Iraq. New York Times itself, a shill for the US establishment, and a proponent of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, makes that assessment (see footnotes for quotes). How come there was no inquiry? How come there is still no inquiry? Because the guy, the criminal suspect, more exactly, who authorized the Iraq War is running for president? And has the highest probability, at this point, to succeed Trump?  

US policy under Bush I, Clinton (extensive blockade, including of medical drugs), Bush II, arguably resulted in the death of at least one million Iraqis… Even before 2003

But then in 2002 the US government accused Iraq, in blatant contradiction with evidence, to be an allied of Al Qaeda (which had destroyed the World Trade Center in New York, but was also initially created and sustained by US agents (CIA) and their pawns (SIS), for many years, committing atrocity after atrocity in Afghanistan to expel Russian and French influence, in the hope of mastering Afghan mineral wealth, and preventing others to rise).

As this was not enough, the US disingenuously accused Iraq of having Weapons Of Mass Destruction (WMD), including sci fi biological weapons developed inside trucks, as demonstrated with kiddie drawing by Sec of State Powell at the UN. The lies were horrendous and insulted the world community’s intelligence. Oil man Bush was more motivated by oil and personal vengeance (because his dad had cut short the first Iraq war, and may have been targeted by Iraqis later))

The number of casualties in the Iraq War remains disputed, however a recent estimate, using the best information available, shows a catastrophic estimate of 2.4 million deaths since the 2003 invasion, including more than 5,000 dead US soldiers… and countless numbers of US soldiers reduced to suffering vegetable status (I know one US marine personally who goes from painful brain operation, to the next; he may as well be living nailed on a cross. The only clear thing is that he will die from it soon…) 

In the end it prevented durably Iraq to export oil. In turn, that, and shorting out Iran for oil exports too, enabled the US to  develop fracking on an enormous scale under Obama (who called US fracking the “fuel bridge to the future”).

Where is the inquiry in all this? How come US policy makers, some candidates for supreme office right now, were not asked formally the proper questions? Ever? War of aggression as Bush II engaged in, without proper UN mandate (and strong opposition by France) is a crime against humanity. However, as there was bipartisan support to devastate Iraq, here we are. This is no way for a democracy to operate. Foreign war should be engaged only when it seems there is no alternative, and the decisions leading to the engagement should be systematically examined later, to make sure no crime was committed, and to become an example, not just to the world, but to history and to create templates for progress and civilization. 

Unpunished crimes only encourage further corruption, not just in other countries, but in the US themselves, where power of money has never been stronger. We just learned that the Shah of Iran was able to flee to the USA, escaping Iranian justice, thanks to the influence of a major bank on the Carter administration. Never any official inquiry on this, perpetrators went on as influencers. 

Patrice Ayme

***

***

New York Times:How a Chase Bank Chairman Helped the Deposed Shah of Iran Enter the U.S.
The fateful decision in 1979 to admit Mohammed Reza Pahlavi prompted the seizure of the American Embassy in Tehran and helped doom the Carter presidency.

….“as the jet touched down, the only one waiting to receive the deposed monarch was a senior executive of Chase Manhattan Bank, which had not only lobbied the White House to admit the former shah but had arranged visas for his entourage, searched out private schools and mansions for his family and helped arrange the Gulfstream to deliver him.

“The Eagle has landed,” Joseph V. Reed Jr., the chief of staff to the bank’s chairman, David Rockefeller, declared in a celebratory meeting at the bank the next morning.

Less than two weeks later, on Nov. 4, 1979, vowing revenge for the admission of the shah to the United States, revolutionary Iranian students seized the American Embassy in Tehran and then held more than 50 Americans — and Washington — hostage for 444 days.”

***

Joe Biden Is A Perpetually Lying War Criminal Lying About His Crimes Against Humanity From 2002 To 2019:

There are two sorts of war criminals; those who deny they did anything wrong, and the others. Biden aspires to be of the first sort. However, like Pelosi, he has a videotape problem. As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee when the authorization vote was cast, Joe Biden was at the forefront of the machine to destroy Iraq (which profited to US frackers, their Wall Street backers, and fossil fuel plutocrats, all over the world, especially the USA). Biden could have blocked in 2002 the use of war against Iraq. Instead he authorized it.

The day the Iraq war was launched by Bush II, Biden told CNN: “There’s a lot of us who voted for giving the president the authority to take down Saddam Hussein if he didn’t disarm. And there are those who believe, at the end of the day, even though it wasn’t handled all that well, we still have to take him down.

Many Iraqis feel that it is the USA which has to be taken down. (The Biden quotes about Iraq are many; he tried to lie about them in 2019… then admitting he “misspoke”…)

Further on Biden said: ….”what you are sensing from some Democrats, as well as Republicans, is a frustration relating to the lost opportunities of maybe being able to do this with others, maybe, if we had others with us, not even having to go to war. So I don’t think it’s anything other than a frustration.

But I think it’s time we stop all that. We have one single focus. And that is, we’re about to send our women and men to war. The president is the commander in chief. We voted to give him the authority to wage that war. We should step back and be supportive.”

***

New York Times, December 31, 2019. in “Protesters Attack U.S. Embassy in Iraq, Chanting ‘Death to America’: “The United States has about 5,200 troops in Iraq — down from a peak of 170,000 in 2007 —  in addition to an unclear number of civilian contractors. The troops — stationed primarily at a base in Al Anbar Province, northwest of Baghdad, and at another in the Kurdish-controlled north of country — are tasked with training Iraqi security forces and helping to prevent a resurgence of the Islamic State.

After years of military and political investment in Iraq, the United States finds itself in a position where few powerful Iraqis are willing to stand up for it and its role in the country.

Condemnation of the recent airstrikes continued on Tuesday. Mr. Mahdi, the Iraqi prime minister, announced an official three-day mourning period for the men killed in the strikes, which he called an “outrageous attack.”

***

Iraq war Carnage:

Officially admitted on the US side, more than half a million Iraqis died during the Iraq War. So did 5,000 American troops. The war strengthened the radical extremism it was supposed to fight while costing American taxpayers more than $2.4 trillion, much of which went to defense contractors like then-Vice President Dick Cheney’s former company Halliburton. And George W. Bush started the war based on the lies that Saddam Hussein was helping Al Qaeda, and sitting on an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.

But Nancy Pelosi doesn’t think that was impeachable. Right Nancy voted against the Iraq war then and September 2004, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi called the war in Iraq a “grotesque mistake”. However, she could have done more.  

In a CNN video, Nancy Pelosi says that she knew George W Bush was lying to the public to start a war, but she did not feel this was an impeachable offense.

Nancy Pelosi: I Knew Bush Jr Was Lying About WMD To Start War, But Didn’t See It As Impeachable

Incredible. In footage from a CNN Town Hall, Pelosi said she knew that the infamous WMD-narrative created by the Bush administration wasn’t real. She was one of four on the Intelligence Committee, as the “Ranking Member”, and she knew there was none of what the elected officials of the Bush administration claimed there was. But ‘they had made a representation”, and “they were elected”. So be it. 

Actually, only Bush II had been elected. All the other officials, including Cheney the Vice, were on his coattails. Nancy just had to impeach Bush… And Cheney. Interestingly, then she would have become president:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_line_of_succession

So lying to We The People of the World is OK, and it’s cool (even if one doesn’t become president in the process, although one could have been). That should be unsettling on its own, and Nancy should be prosecuted on this ground alone. 

There is no expiration date for crimes against humanity, and complicity therewith. So Bush, Cheney, Biden (the authorizer of the 2003 Iraq war), and accomplice Pelosi should be prosecuted for lying to We the People, and killing 2.4 million.

But the candor and casualness with which the Speaker reveals her crimes is astounding. This poorly educated girl has no moral backbone whatsoever. Even on live television in 2019, it doesn’t occur to Pelosi just how bad her high crimes against humanity sound. In an orgasm of wanton hypocrisy, she chalks up her passiveness in pursuing Bush’s impeachment to “not wanting to make [impeachment] a way of life” for Americans. Her decision to allow the president to continue an illegal war (started because of a lie she was aware of) was therefore rational because it spared us another impeachment debacle.

Pelosi’s reasoning doesn’t make sense—starting a war based on a coordinated conspiracy by dozens of the highest elected officials to imprint upon the public a Hitler sized lie is illegal. It is more than enough grounds for impeachment. The total number of Iraqis killed by US policy since 1990 may be as high as 3.4 million, and Pelosi as a top US political operator and influencer is fully responsible. So is Biden. 

***

Bush, Oct. 7, 2002: “After eleven years during which we have tried containment, sanctions, inspections, even selected military action, the end result is that Saddam Hussein still has chemical and biological weapons and is increasing his capabilities to make more. And he is moving ever closer to developing a nuclear weapon.”

HUMANISM: When TOP PREDATORS NEED LOVE

August 12, 2017

 

Yes, human beings, those top predators, need love. They do. But love is not all they need: there is no contradiction whatsoever, between being a predator and being loving. Lots of predators are loving. It’s actually the exact opposite: love generate the Dark Side. Humans can’t exist without love. But humans, even on their very best behavior, are not all about love, this is what traditional humanism thoroughly missed (although Caesar, Machiavel, Hobbes, Sade wrote a bit about the subject; Christianism acknowledges the Dark Side, just to excoriate it).

***

WE, HUMANS, DON’T JUST PREDATE, WE ARE PREDATORS. Why and What.

We, humans, are actually the top predators. We are greater predators than any other predators which ever existed. This is a simple fact, which changes all of the past’s wishful thinking. Predation defines us. Predation, received and inflicted, made us human, in the last five million years. This changes everything. 

We are also the most intelligent animals. Predation and intelligence are related.

We evolved by, for, from, predation. Predation provided hominids with high nutritional content, lots of concentrated energy. Eating meat THEN enabled to grow big brains. Such is the philosophical order of things, and it rules neurology. This is not a fancy elucubration: we have the fossils to prove it.

For millions of years, hominids learned to stand up, and evolved the genetics to roam around on two legs. At the time, hominids grabbed meat here and there, a task which probably involved quite a bit of scary scavenging. That tended to modify jaws and teeth, while hominids became ever more carnivorous. Finally the brains grew, and grew and grew, fueled by ever more meat, the most energy rich power source around.

The chronology of hominid fossils reveals the causal relationships. And it may well be a universal law valid in exoplanets: carnivores may well be, all over the galaxy, the brainiest. Most brainiest animals on Earth are carnivorous (with the exception of elephants and parrots; in particular all great apes are dedicated carnivores, even gorillas and Orangutans.) It takes a brainiac to catch fishes, as Humpback Whales and many species of dolphins, all the way to Killer Whales, testify… 

Some want to forget our creator, millions of years of predatory evolution. Call that basic denial of one’s own reality!    

Homo Ergaster, the most primitive type of Homo Erectus known (2017). From Georgia, 1.8 million years ago. Five Homo Ergaster corpses were found in underground dens of saber tooth felids, were they were dragged to be consumed. Humans are the realistic animals, realism having been learned one grisly lesson at a time! Humans could only think at the time, that the predation problem had to be mitigated. We have the opposite problem!

***

By destroying predators, we have been trying to dispose of the concept of predator, in a sort of final solution to our own nature, hell-bent to destroy and devastate the concept of humanity. A final solution exterminating what we are. How can that be? Why to self-destroy? Because denying our nature, to the point of not living according to it, profits the Elite, the Oligarchy, those among us who predate and think, and feel, accordingly.

How is this at all possible? Precisely from the spirit of predation. Human predation controls itself. It has evolved to do so, the survival of the species depended upon it. It’s its own meta feedback. Thus humanity instinctively devours humanity (and, historically, literally so!)

Hence when North Korea Kim, Japan Hirohito, Germany Adolf Hitler, engaged in confrontations they could only lose, they obey, modern weapons in hand, the oldest instinct: destroying humanity, lest there is too much of it, literally, or figuratively! This is why “reason” in a smaller context, can’t have any grip on them: their call is much greater than that! Asking them to not destroy, is asking them, not to do what motivates them, deep inside.

Human beings have been at the very top of the predation order, for millions of years. As early as Homo Habilis. That’s how humans survived in plains, steppe, desert and savannah, far from the trees. There was no refuge, except for the respect, not to say the terror, and certainly the worry, that human beings inflicted upon other beasts.

Masai children, ten-year old, can walk among the ferocious beasts, because the ferocious beasts fear human beings. I experienced and practiced the same, a little bit, at the same age, in Africa. Seeing an enormous lion communicate respect, as one respects back, is awe-inspiring. Then one knows intelligence rules, not just humans, but the beasts, the universe.

By rejecting the concept of predator and predation, thus, ourselves, recent “civilization” has been trying to reject our souls and our reality. Fanatical Pacifists will say:”Very well! High time! We have progressed! Alleluia” As if rejecting reality massively was progressive.

No, indeed. Fanatical Pacifists have not understood the most important thing: with their obsessive pacifism, they made themselves into ectoplasms lower than even sheep.

Pacifists, those admirable souls? Lower than sheep? Yes, indeed. Because, indeed, sheep themselves have a dignity, a courage, moral standards, and stand for themselves. Because indeed sheep, as a result, are not that pacific. In general, herbivores can be rather aggressive: horns and the like are not there by accident (I have had wild sheep, Ibex, pushing stones on me and others, from up high, deliberately, many times; But for a helmet, once, my spouse would have been killed, by an Ibex sent stone; also once a gigantic sheep, approaching me with a stupid, benign, absent-minded look on its face, then proceeded to push the unsuspecting me off the mountain with its sheer mass…Ever since I have known sheep can be Machiavellian).

Large predators should be reintroduced  everywhere outside of cities, and a few parks. Even in Europe. Large predators, by the way, are not the potentially most lethal: herbivores can be more of a problem. Elephants are the most dangerous beasts in Africa, followed by buffaloes (I was charged once by a cow). The key with elephants is to go up wind, and stay as far away as possible from the irascible, vengeful pachyderms with their enormously resentful large brains. All Maasai children know this.

Let’s reintroduce the entire megafauna, de-extincting species as needed (using latest genetics). Yes, megafauna will be frightening. That’s not a defect, but an advantage. Yes, it will mean we have to learn to instill respect, and make ourselves, respectful for the laws of nature, and the laws of the jungle.

By reintroducing megafauna, we will not just recover ecological balance for the planet, but mental balance, for ourselves.  

Be all we can be, and evolution meant us to be.

In particular, stop looking up at few other individuals, our leaders, as if they were gods, as if it were natural that they be our masters, with enormous powers when we have very little. No, they are not our leaders, we humans, the top predators are not meant to be led. Let’s learn that about ourselves.

Having leaders with their fingers on thermonuclear fire, fed and promoted by bankers, is not natural. Having leaders, except in a baboon troop sized organization, is not natural. It’s not a natural form of human organization. It’s not a natural form of ecology. We have organized an unnatural order of things, and conditioned ourselves to expect, and respect it. Thus the biosphere is going down the drain. Unimaginable wars are getting prepared: watch a few dictators’ antics (Venezuela’s Maduro, and the thoroughly hell-bent North Korean Kim, who affects to believe there are enough rabid pacifists around to make his thermonuclear blackmail, real cool and effective, an awe-inspiring key to a great future!)

Time to rebel. Time to rebel against an order which has imposed on us, chains and masters, because this order of  thoughts and… orders is rushing to catastrophe. Time to recover, to rebuild, a planetary environment which makes sense, and thus gives us sense, far from Absurdism. This the only planetary engineering worth having.

We are made to experience the megafauna, to be ourselves, in full. We can’t fully mentally function without that spur of evil intelligence, potentially observing and evaluating us. In particular, the laws of the jungle teach us the ever-present importance of truth, and realism.  Yet, remember: predation, received and inflicted, made us human, in the last five million years. When looking at human society, think:’This is what top predators organized.’ And how come we let it be? Are we what we are supposed to be?

How could we fix the world, the world we are destroying, if we are not fully ourselves? And how could we be ourselves if nature’s awe can’t educate and inspire us? Let’s reintroduce an environment which inspires us and teaches us respects for the laws of nature. Being able to experience living with megafauna is central to that.

Patrice Ayme’

 

WE WANT IT DARKER

November 20, 2016

Should we fear the opprobium of those who are scared that others may become afraid of our thoughts? This is the latest hilarious twist of “identity politics” in the USA. “Identity politics”, also known as tribalism, in times less twisted by unhinged euphemisms. In other words, should we bow to the worst of the Middle Ages’ theological ways and means? Quite the opposite: it is high time to fight back against intellectual fascism of the basest kind, the kind which claims to defend the sheep, by preaching it to bleat, rather than teaching the sheep to learn to think. Creating thinking means learning to debate, unafraid of all and any possible logic. But for that one has to be in the right mood. So what is the proper mood for more advanced thinking? Here it is, and even “Scripture” agrees with us:

WE PHILOSOPHERS OF THE DANGEROUS MAYBES, WANT IT DARKER. 

Those who are afraid of getting afraid, maybe, perhaps, can now stop reading: they belong to what fails, and will always fail. That includes the lack of reading comprehension, which they delve in. Those robust enough to read the Book, can hang on. Our predecessors wanted it darker, because it was the only way to greater greatness. And greatness, is not just what we are. But greatness is what we need. 

Greatness is not just what we became, and are. It is what we, humanity as it stands today, needed to survive. We evolved into greatness. (Slogan for humanity: ‘make humanity great again!’)

We wanted it darker, otherwise, we would never have gone where those who did not become our ancestors  didn’t. They didn’t get there because they both did not want to, and thus, could not, dash through the dark. And feel the pull of the dark.

When our predecessors wanted to understand what others didn’t even suspect, they have got to have wanted it darker.

There is glory in the human species, only because we wanted it darker. It’s written in the scriptures, and yes, it’s no idle claim. We wrote, because we wanted it darker. Bacteria only search for more sugar. We searched darkness, through more darkness. Darkness is sugar for intelligence aspiring to ultimate greatness.

The Gate May Be Golden, But Surviving Is The Only Manifest Destiny Of A World Around A Star

The Gate May Be Golden, But Surviving Is The Only Manifest Destiny Of A World Around A Star. We Want It Darker, Be It Only Because We Need A Rest From The Light, And Need To Go To The Bottom Of Things.

Some have meekly whined that philosophers (yours truly, Patrice Aymé, much later Slavoj Žižek) went to the Dark Side by demolishing the Democratic party, this horror of the demonic side, hidden in the light of its self-glorification. However, only philosophers who love to understand the Dark Side with undisguised enthusiasm, sanctifying thoroughness, could expose the viciousness of the Democratic Party.

And thus helping to get Trump elected, over the twitching bodies of countless, half-wit, rich, politically connected entertainers, globalocrats, and wealthiest people in the world. (A difference between me and Slavoj Žižek is that The Guardian or the New  York Times interview Slavoj Žižek, whereas they censor all and any of my comments relentlessly; those pseudo-left, plutocratically owned, Main Stream Media have, correctly, perceived that I am  better informed, and thus much more dangerous, than the relatively meek, much more predictable, very official Žižek ; The Guardian is financed by Plutos like the holy  Gates conspirators. The same Plutos have owned, mostly, the New York Times, since the Nineteenth Century…)

Ah, and yes, Trump is supposed to be the Dark Side. Little do these little ones know. What Dark really is. (There is a whole tradition, dating to Rousseau, to refuse to look at the Dark Side, and, instead, of accusing civilization; De Sade excoriated Rousseau for his criminal naivety; in this, and many other related matters pertaining to the Revolution of 1789, De Sade would be proven right. Sade was right about the Revolution, because he was a specialist of the Dark Side, and thus could easily predict how the calculus of Evil would turn out, in consequence of apparently innocuous strategies full of goodness, but, also, full of long-term idiocy!)

The Romans knew well how dark darkness was: right from the start, king Tarquinus Superbus threatened their freedoms. Thereafter, over the centuries, in many wars Rome’s very existence was called into question (Gauls from the Paris area even conquered Rome around 390 CE).

When finally Rome became master of the world, ‘man is a wolf for man‘ (Homo Homini Lupus) had become a motto never to be forgotten. Judeo-Christian ideology then augmented Rome, and spread, far out of the Roman empire, even before the Roman state morphed into the Frankish state.  It is fascinating that Jews and Romans came to the same conclusion. But they were war people, that’s how they survived. And why they merged: made for each other (the Franks were even more war-like, allowing them to gobble everybody happily, in a digestive consensus).

Countless thinkers and philosophers have been tortured to death, through the ages. Just because they wanted it darker, they had to want it darker, and the commons hated them for it. (The superiority of the West mostly originates from just enough original thinking squeaking through to save the progress of civilization.)

The truth always starts dark, and in the dark. The Enlightenment always starts the hard way, in the Dark. It is the first thing they have to do: creative thinkers stop fearing the Dark Side. They have this in common with little children.

Thus, Dark Side tourism is necessary for depth. So what? No Dark Side, no humanity. (Actually this propensity and necessity, this breathing of fear, is why people love horror stories, scary movies, cliffhangers, dangerous sports, bad news, etc.)

Notice that this interest for all things dark, is a much greater vision than the well-known observation that the Dark Side is necessary for goodness to triumph over evil. Carpet bombing with flowers did not deconstruct Nazism, right. Eradication of evil, is no evil. One just want to make sure.

But physical power of evil is not all what there is to destroy. Even worse is the power of evil ideas.  We will destroy evil ideas, we can only destroy them, by bringing the fury of light, on the darkest dark.

Let’s spell it shockingly enough to leave a trace: To put it roughly, changing one’s mind, and the minds of others, is all about destroying brain tissue. One has to wreck the old mind, to build a better one. This is really about the most delicate circuitry being wiped out, and setting up a new one.

Too much light brings blindness, thus darkness. We have seen this in the US election: sixty million Americans, including millions of Obama lovers, wanted to “shake things up”. At any cost. The 60 millions who voted Trump had finally seen through the darkness, because they had not been afraid of the dark: they wanted, they had got ready for darker explanations of what was really going on. One has to love conspiracies, to bring them to light.

Blinded by this undeniable light, many Clinton fanatics went completely berserk, heaping insults on their fellow Americans, in the name, they claimed, of the goodness which defined them. Enraged Clinton supporters are pushed, by the light, into ignominous darkness. Enlightened into a darkness they are ill-trained to handle properly. Why? Because they never visited darkness before, they denied its very existence, at least inside themselves. They denied it, because they did not want it. They did not want to consider it so much, they did not see it grow into themselves and their hearts, or from the policies the “Democratic” Party supported sometimes for more than 40 years (like invading Afghanistan). 

So why do we want it darker? Not just because there is no light without dark. Not just because no ying, no yang.

WE WANT IT DARKER, BECAUSE WE WANT TO TURN ON THE MOOD, THE MOOD WHICH REALITY INFLICTS, SO MUCH WE ARE IT.

Now that I got accused of blatant Nazism, antisemitism, xenophobia, OCD, and exuberant SSitude, by crazed pseudo-progressives, let me add to the torture of my moaning victims, by rolling out a Cohen, (Hebrew: כֹּהֵן, kōhēn, “priest“), to my rescue.

Indeed, the late, great, Leonard Cohen came partly to some of the conclusions in the present essay, in his last work, released a few weeks ago: You Want It Darker. One point Leonard Cohen makes is that the Judeo-Christian scriptures depicted an intrinsically very dark picture of the human condition. Hey, don’t look at us funny: the divine condition itself is strikingly dark, so this is essay is not just a justification of man, but even god! (Yes, I am an “atheist”. Of sorts. In practice, though, and hard-core atheists don’t understand this, god exists, it’s a useful abbreviation). Here is Leonard Cohen latest, and last, title track:

“If you are the dealer, I’m out of the game

If you are the healer, it means I’m broken and lame

If thine is the glory then mine must be the shame

You want it darker

We kill the flame

Magnified, sanctified, be thy holy name

Vilified, crucified, in the human frame

A million candles burning for the help that never came

You want it darker

Hineni, hineni

I’m ready, my lord”

All right, full stop, let me provide readers with a text explanation many are going to need. Hineni, Hineni means: “Here I am, here I am”… in Hebrew.; “Hineni” was supposedly uttered by Moses. And also for Abraham, when god felt like killing his child.

“We Want It Darker” is serious psychobiology, it does not get any more serious. It is evolutionary, it is how we were made: with an irresistible attraction for what is out there in the dark. Curiosity may kill the cat, but curiosity enabled us to set a trap for the cat. By forgetting this, mad bull has lost his way.  

Back to Leonard Cohen, and his song, We Want It Darker:

“There’s a lover in the story

But the story’s still the same

There’s a lullaby for suffering

And a paradox to blame

But it’s written in the scriptures

And it’s not some idle claim

You want it darker

We kill the flame”

“It is written in the scriptures and it’s not some idle claim” You want it darker.” Yes, we want it darker, and please kill the flame. Kill that light from out there, and let’s please concentrate on what we are. What you are, yes.

Watch those ridiculous protesters in the streets, finally waking up to the fact they need to help the president of the USA, with healthy protests. Where were they, eight years ago, when Obama needed their help? To protest against the pro-plutocratic policies which were forced (let’s say) onto Obama? When a lonely and misdirected Obama was sucking at the teat of hedge funds, to better prepare him for his presidency of shoe shining? And nobody protested? (OK, I did, but I am nothing.) Why did the protesters not help Obama to stay honest and true? Why so keen to help keep Trump honest, with their unhinged Dark Side?  

They say with undiscerning grammar: ‘Trump Hate’. But that’s rather ambiguous. Where were they, for all these long years, when Obama was doing nothing? What did they advocate when a dictator started to ravage Syria? Or when billions were sent to health care plutocrats, in the guise of “covering everybody”?

Instead of protesting then, they were blinded, blinded by the light from Obama’s brown skin, and Michelle’s magnificently empty, astounding rhetoric. We want it darker, turn those lights off, and reflect on what has been really going on: a globalocracy on a worldwide satanic rampage. And even the poles are melting.

Leonard Cohen’s We Want It Darker:

“They’re lining up the prisoners

And the guards are taking aim

I struggled with some demons

They were middle class and tame

I didn’t know I had permission to murder and to maim

You want it darker

Hineni, hineni

I’m ready, my lord”

Here Leonard Cohen alludes to a precise historical facts, or how the Jews stayed supine, while the Nazis roamed. Jewish silence, or even collaboration, made Hitler’s full folly possible, historical evidence shows. Hannah Arendt wrote: “the Zionists could, for a time, at least, engage in a certain amount of non-criminal cooperation with the Nazi authorities; the Zionists too believed that ‘dissimilation’, combined with the emigration to Palestine of Jewish youngsters and, they hoped, Jewish capitalists, could be a ‘mutually fair solution.’  At the time, many German officials held this opinion…” What happened? Nobody wanted it darker. It was kept pleasant. Germans were told Jews were removed “for their safety“.

Cohen also alludes to the fact that big time murderers get away with it. That’s why the God of the Jews in the Bible gets enraged against King David. God had ordered David to massacre a tribe, and David had refused to do so. Why can’t you kill, when ordered to do so? By superior principle (“God”)? This was an important principle God tried to teach to David (and the Abraham, and to all Judeo-Christians and Jews following the “Scripture”): there are circumstances when you have permission, and even when you ought, to murder and aim.

Evolutionarily, massacring lesser human beings has been much of how humanity progressed (hence the God of the Bible insistence upon it; Mayas, Aztecs, Incas, and 99% of the world’s known religions would agree…)

However, now we know more. Not all of evolution happened that way by a long shot: ethologically driven epigenetics played an important role… for example in the disappearing act of Neanderthals (which vanished inside ourselves, I have suggested, and the most recent science increasingly confirms).

What “scripture” guessed was that the Dark Side was not just an essential characteristic of humanity, but also essential to the human condition. This is found in the Hebrew Bible, and in the older Homer. Actually the general orientation in that sinister way is found in the even more ancient Hindu scriptures and the roots of Zoroastrianism, the root of all Indo-European religions (and by “Indo-European” here I mean the region, not just the languages).

Before the pseudo-scientists start to cackle away in derision for all this mythology, let me point out that those who spent millennia concocting logic with myths did not get it all wrong. The Dark Side phenomenon is essentially evolutionary. “Evolution” is not nice. It just is. It just is God: The One who created us.

If you want it funny, watch all the Clinton fanatics crying ignominiously, all over the world, after the defeat of their demiurge. I went to harass a few with the most courteous presentation of serious data, rolling out graphs, just to see them become even more dishevelled, haggard, disconsolate. Yet, they stopped crying, as they left their dream to enter the nightmare of reality. It’s not just that I like it Dark, but I study stupidity. As it is a part of darkness which needs to be enlightened.

But let’s reconsider what happened to the Jews under Nazism. Hannah Arendt (& others) accused the “Judenraten”, the Jewish Councils, to have helped the Nazis (I discovered this independently by reading original literature; I was pretty surprised by it; I learned of Arendt’s views decades later; she missed some documents I think even more important).

Zoroastrianism viewed the human condition as a struggle to help the God of Light against the God of the Dark Side, thanks to Truth.

Well, in truth, the God of Truth needs Light and Dark to write upon the world, with the world. The world is a book for the mind.

The philosopher Isaiah Berlin, a Latvian-British Jew, was dismayed after the creation of Israel: ‘They listened to Hitler, they did not listen to us.’ Yes, well, thank you, my Lord.

Berlin could have guessed why he had made a darker interpretation of his own writings. “Moral conflicts are an intrinsic, irremovable element in human life”. “These collisions of values are of the essence of what they are and what we are.” he wrote in “The proper study of mankind” For Berlin, this clashing of incommensurate values within, and between, individuals, constitutes the tragedy of human life.

There are all sort of philosophers: some are giants straddling across the stars, like Giordano Bruno. Most of them are smaller fry, like those who brandish the ‘human good’ like the measure of all things. It’s not. They forget that knowledge often precedes goodness.

Israel did not listen to the fry ready to get fried, because, it decided that, to survive, and, even better, to be reborn, it wanted it darker:

The Jews, waiting for Hitler like others for Godot, had forgotten that they had permission to murder and to maim. Israel now knows this. It was in the scripture, all along, and no idle claim. Philosophers of the possible want it darker, ever since their ancestors crawled on land through the mud.

The pseudo-progressives who claimed to “be with her“, are part of a vast movement which want to interdict anything which could make themselves, or someone else, afraid. This includes, naturally enough, all and any critical thinking.  So now Donald Trump will do the thinking.

Meanwhile, the Artificial Intelligence Industry (AII) has depicted itself as goodness incarnate (old slogan of Google: ‘don’t be evil’). They scream, all over:’We Want It Lighter!’. Lighter taxes, certainly: Google, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, have been cheating massively with the taxes they owe, worldwide (this will change with the reign of Trump).

Not only those companies, the most powerful in the world, under Obama, and the richest, are viewed as intrinsically good (thus harboring no interesting darkness), but view themselves as such. Hence the silly-colonization(Silicolonization) of the world, above all laws, has proceeded, in plain sight, and not seen. The globalocracy has persuaded everybody that there is no darkness anywhere having to do with themselves: in particular all and any tribalism (such as Wahhabism), is fine.

They all supported Hillary Clinton, and proclaimed themselves to be ultimate good, light personified. Thanks to control of the Main Stream Media by global plutocrats, all over (the paymasters of Clinton), they wiped their blind supporters in a frenzy. For them, the Dark Side is not interesting, it’s an object of horror. Thus, who they were imprinted to support, Clinton, her Goldman government, her plutocrats, and her globalocrats, were all goodness, and Trump and his supporters, and ideas, all Darkness, something to refuse to consider at all cost.

It’s revealing how the hatred of pseudo-liberal posers has thus no limit: they are all light, them and their celebrities, and their Silicon Valley fascist corporations, and their opponents, ultimate evil. As all and any people in such a mood, their hatred has no limit. It goes all the way to genocide. Hollywood actor Michael Shannon wants all Trump supporters to die: “But if you’re voting for Trump, it’s time for the urn.” Michael Shannon has just a high school education (no college), but is “worth” eight million dollars. (As many of the rich celebrities out there, he then is offered the supplementary power of being taken seriously, advertised widely.)

At this point, some may say:’Oh, but didn’t you want it darker? Is not a would-be genocider like Shannon, right up your alley?” No. Michael Shannon understands so little, he sees monsters all over, where, if he could see through the Darkness of those who own and created him, he would just see only transparent logic. Shannon and his ilk are afraid to learn that all they made their mental circuitry from, all they are, are lies. If they had wanted it Darker, they would have been more suspicious of the bromine of the Main Stream Media. (As indeed happened to many people who voted for Obama, and, still loving Obama as a person, voted for Trump, as they were rightly suspicious of the motives of Obama calling them to vote for Clinton/Goldman Sachs…)

Yes, we want it darker, because we are not afraid to look into the dark. Take Turkey: I am not afraid to consider the darkness, I look at what is happening there now (although I have Turkish friends who loved Erdogan, and now we avoid the subject). I know what is going-on in Turkey means: if I look at the Caliphate in Turkey, I will look deep in the dark, and questions like favoring a coup in Turkey will, eventually, arise.

(Or even expelling Turkey from NATO, and war.) I know Islam is not a religion in all ways wonderful. And I am not afraid to look inside Islam: because I like it dark. If you want to rape a child in Turkey, the ruling AKP Party suggests now that you only have to marry her: a proposed Turkish bill clears men of statutory rape if they marry (18 November 2016). As the BBC puts it:

“A bill which would allow men accused of raping underage girls to be cleared if they marry the girl has been preliminarily backed by Turkish MPs. The bill would pardon men only if they had sex without “force or threat” and if they married the victim. Critics say it legitimises rape and child marriage, and lets off men who are aware of their crime.

[OK, there are 3,000 children from underage unions, in Turkey, each year. Right now, fathers go to jail. Not good.]
Violence against women in Turkey has increased in the past decade – 40% of women report sexual or physical abuse. Statistics also show the murder rate of women increased by 1,400% between 2003 and 2010.”

Evil, the power of Pluto, Pluto-kratos, has grown and ruled ever more, because all too many did not want it darker, and thus, they averted their eyes, wishfully. Because those who do not want to harbor ill-feeling, and see it as it is, dark as it is, cannot think it, as it is.

Whereever it is very dark, it’s good to look carefully. Take the iceshelves around Antarctica. Yes, it’s dark down there in the ocean, below half a mile of ice, 500 miles from the shore. There, in the dark, much is happening: all too much warmth, 100 millions of climate in question. But we have to ask, and we have to look.

If Obama had wanted it darker, he would have the desire to break a few shells, and made an omelette: his presidency would have amounted to something, perhaps even something digestible. Instead, most of its ineffectual, slow and paralysed presidency is going to be vomited all over the south lawn of the White House starting in two months, and one day. Doing anything serious in plain sight, requires serious destruction, in plain sight (annihilating weddings in Yemen by drones does not qualify).  When president Johnson wanted to pass the Civil Rights Act and other “Great Society” laws LBJ turned off the lights, and used the Dark Side (LBJ did not have thoughts which were dark enough about Vietnam, with catastrophic consequences).

Consider terror. Right now, it’s associated to Literal Islam: a bomb here, a shooting there, collapsing buildings, here and there. Small terror relative to the one a dictator getting excited with nuclear tipped ballistic missiles would bring. Thus a deeper problem. Fighting terror is a great idea. Fighting savagery would be an even greater idea. But for that, one has to look first at darkness in the eye.

The will to see only goodness out there, the will to be afraid of fear itself at the cost of reality, is a will to idiocy, and, thus, in the end, a will to full immorality, degeneracy, despondency, annihilation…. (For annihilation, see the Democratic Party.)

The will to refuse to want it darker brings forth impotence, and hatred. And even the threat of extinction. Sea ice finds difficult to form this year, in part because scientists refuse to want it as dark as they should have wished for (and I predicted that Antarctica ice system may significantly collapse in our lifetime, because I wanted my predictions as dark as they needed to be).

Yes, the preceding has to do with epistemology, the logic of knowledge. There is no knowledge acquisition, if we are not drawn, not just to the unknown, but to the dark. The most powerful epistemology is born from the darkest mood.

Pragmatically, people who do not want to look at reality, who orders the only reality they deign to perceive to be rosy, are bound to moral impotency. They’re the ultimate nihilists.

We Want It Darker. We Need It Darker.

Patrice Aymé

Reciprocal Perversity

August 9, 2016

Reciprocal altruism is a well-known notion. What of reciprocal perversity?

Reciprocal altruism consists in a class of behaviors which are short-term adverse to an animal, yet profitable to others then, while, in the long-term, bringing a profit beyond the initial sacrifices consented.

In reciprocal altruism, overall profit blossoms. Reciprocal perversity brings the opposite effect: tit for tat escalates into Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD).

Reciprocal perversity is of the foremost importance. Indeed, when one looks at history, one sees not just a lot of altruism, but a lot of perversity. Civilization is all about industrial strength altruism. A well-functioning civilization is an altruism machine. It can also turn into a perversity machine (think of the Ottoman empire forbidding printing).

Indeed sometimes civilization are devastated by a foreign enemy. Yet most collapse into utter destruction involve perseverance into perversity. Into self-amplifying perversity. The Maya, Moche, and to a great extent, Rome’s the Sassanids’ and the Spanish Visigoths collapses being obvious examples of inner strifes being exploited by a foreign invader (the Islamists in the last three cases).

Large scale, civilizational scale viciousness, has often been in evidence, it is the most dramatic part of history, so often renewed: the Muslim invasion (in Spain), various Mongol attacks and, lately the vicious fascist regimes in Germany, Italy or Russia. China in the Twentieth Century was no walk in the park either. In all these cases mass perversity became the dominant behavior, self-amplifying, devouring the civilization: watch the most capable Roman leaders of the Late Empire being assassinated (Stilicho, Aetius, Boetius, etc.). Consider Qur’an 4; 145:

Hypocrites Are Among Those The Qur’an Condemns To The Fire Surah 4 An-Nisa; Ayah 145

Hypocrites Are Among Those The Qur’an Condemns To The Fire: Surah 4, An-Nisa; Ayah 145

And then, there is the abominable situation we are living through now. Of course. The planet is endowed with the most perverse leadership, or lack thereof, ever. A leadership hell-bent to turn the entire planet into Jurassic Park. Without the animals. Nor the plants. Maybe without much of the plankton. In the next few decades. All the leadership the planet had before, was provided by evolution, which is intelligent and one could even say conscious (as animals are). Yet evolution was not satanic (doing evil deliberately). Doing evil deliberately implies covering that will to hurt. Most of the present leadership of the planet has the effective will to hurt or even destroy, the biosphere as we know it. Instead of practicing reciprocal altruism, our present leaders practice selfish viciousness, to a scale never seen before, since there are men, and they ponder morality. Since there are men, and they ponder morality, has there ever been a greater sin, than the will to destroy everything?

Confronted to such a perversity unique in the history of animality, one can only wonder. Wonder not just about how perversity arises, but how to detect it in the leaders who present themselves, all over, and seduce us with mellifluous chatter.

I do believe that the Dark Side, deliberately called upon, was one of the main architect of human evolution: it helped evolution speed up to physically destroy the less clever hominids. Eating the enemy beats waiting for it to be all discouraged, and fade out on its own.

Admitting the existence of the Dark Side is a key feature of Abrahamism. The religions of Christianism, Islamism, Buddhism and Confucianism criticize fiercely a number of behaviors. However leaders, and practitioners of those moral codes are often in complete violation with them. Such is the problem of hypocrisy, at the core of the main moral systems: their main proponents, to a great extent, lived in exact opposition to what they preached (consider “Saint” Constantine’s murderous activities; Buddha, to some extent, himself detect this deviationism into hurtfulness, against himself and the like, and thereafter, moderated himself).

One of the main engines of perversity is hypocrisy. Uncontrolled perversity and hypocrisy cannot be tolerated in an army. This is why it is so severely criticized in the Qur’an, and graced with “the fire”. (The Quran gives advice on how to detect hypocrites; I will try to improve on that in a future essay, by considering what one could call “neurological volume”.)

The two candidates for the presidency of the USA are plutocrats. It is of the essence to find how likely the depictions they make of their positions are far removed from the truth (hint: more so with the tightly controlled Clinton, watch her eyes controlling what effect she makes on crowds, than with the erratic Trump, who says it, as he feels it).

More generally, one needs to assert the same degree of truthiness, or lack thereof, among leaders and makers of world public opinion (say when we are presented with ecological solutions… which are often the exact opposite of what they are claimed to be… such as when president Obama presented the methanification (“natural gas“) of the USA through fracking as a “bridge fuel”. It is actually an ecological disaster on a planetary scale).

Only when We The People realizes how much we are lied to, will things move in the right direction. Polls show that 2/3 of Americans believe the USA heads in the wrong direction. Still, there the USA heads, because the entire society is entangled with perverse lies, let alone vicious conspiracies (such as multi-billionaire, state supported, hedge funds managers paying fewer taxes than the “nurses and truckers I saw on I-80“, as Hillary Clinton herself belatedly admitted… when Bernie Sanders was breathing down her neck. She may have “forgotten” this statement, since…). 

In the last few weeks of the Nazi Reich, just putting out a white flag brought the death penalty. Average Germans had no choice, but vicious choices. If they tried to surrender the place where they lived to the advancing United Nations armies, they risked their lives and those of their loved ones. Similarly, if they helped the desperate Nazis.

When a society becomes vicious enough, most actors therein, just to survive, have to turn vicious. This is why civilizational collapse proceeds generally through previously unimaginable horrors. Not only victims can turn against each other (as victims in Nazi death chambers would), but the main perpetrators have interest to live no one alive behind, so that vengeance would be impossible. Consider the so-called “Augustus” killing his young relative Caesarion (son of Cleopatra and Augustus great Uncle and adoptive father, Julius Caesar). Consider the utter destruction of Baghdad by the Mongol, Armenian, Frankish, Georgian and Chinese army in 1258 CE (total eradication of the Muslim population, end of Islam with brains, and its “House of Wisdom”). The perpetrators wanted no avenger looming in the future. Committing perverse acts leads to further, greater perversity: such was the main moral trajectory of the Nazis.

Just as the greenhouse effect launched by man feeds on itself, so does perversity always. This is why democracies have to strike their own perpetrators hard. From time to time. The French Republic did well to condemn to death the famous Marshalls (Petain), hero of Verdun, and condemn and execute many others, including ex-Prime Minister (Laval), World War One heroes, and a celebrated writer (Brasillach), for fascism, racism and treason, in 1944-46.

Next time France gets invaded, collaborators may evoke the precedent (of up to 50,000 executions which happened for betrayal of the Republic and, or human rights; the official number, found in De Gaulle’s memoirs, volume 3, is 11,000) to justify greater moderation in their action.

None of this is pie in the sky, something which happened in the past and will never happen again. Quite the exact opposite. The threat form perversity unchained has never been greater. (A small living example is the blossoming, worldwide, of the financial plutocracy engineered by the Clintons, and ever since pushed further by ulterior agents.)

The present technologies we have are completely unsustainable (just contemplate phosphates destroying the seas, insecticides destroying the pollinators, drinkable water running out, greenhouse gases building up, acidic seas, etc.). Sustainably, and limited to the present technologies, the human population would have to be strictly less than one billion. The transition from more than eight billions to less than one, will be rather perverse. The nice solution is to develop more advanced technologies (and, foremost, advanced robotics, which could help considerably with making agriculture more sustainable, say by destroying noxious insects one by one; or thermonuclear fusion, which would allow to conquer the solar system, terminate fossil fuels, and make obnoxious stuff off-Earth).

The perverse solution, the one chosen today, is to let perversity run its course, by electing ever more perverse leadership by perverse individuals, or perverse systems of thought (“Austerity”, Globalization of Plutocracy, Salafism, various hyper-nationalisms). And this is exactly why the two main candidates to the job of president of the USA are so perverse. It is a case of evolutionary adaptation to an increasingly perverse environment.

How could Mutually Assured Destruction, MAD have evolved, biologically? Well, the devil is in the little details that, ultimately, one species, or tribe, or race, gets completely eradicated, and the other, not quite so much. Often this results in opening vast ecological niches to survivors, favoring their descendents, and even further speciation out of their descendancy. Watch nasty little mammals eating morbidly cold dinosaurs’ progeny (not proven, but likely).

Thus MAD is one of the main engines of evolution.

Patrice Ayme’

Plutocracy Causes Cancer

April 4, 2016

PLUTOCRACY CORRUPTS NOT JUST SOULS, BUT BODIES

The most advanced countries claims not to be corrupt. They publish propaganda to this effect every year. The USA has even a “Foreign Corrupt Practice Act”, which is not just used to eliminate rivals, but to bludgeon in the mind of its naïve citizens, that the US is not corrupt. That the most advanced Western countries are not corrupt, is mostly an opinion about themselves that the powers which rule these countries have imprinted their subjects that they should hold it. And we will show here that it is obviously wrong.

Indeed, if the most advanced countries are as little corrupt as they claim to be, why do they fester with so much cancer? Should we not view cancer as a form of corruption? A corruption of the body? An objective form of corruption, which does not lie? Could we then see this map of true corruption appear objectively, by looking at the world’s cancer rate?

Hard To Swallow. Rate of Stomach Cancer, Worldwide. Euramerica Festers With Most Corrupt Stomachs. Could It Be From Poisons Ingested To Make Plutocrats Ever More Powerful?

Hard To Swallow. Rate of Stomach Cancer, Worldwide. Euramerica Festers With Most Corrupt Stomachs. Could It Be From Poisons Ingested To Make Plutocrats Ever More Powerful?

Could it be that this corruption of the body come from a corruption of the institutions?

Arlene Blum, famous mountaineer and scientist put it in a Science Magazine editorial, March 11, 2016, “Tackling Toxic:

“Most Americans believe that if a chemical is in their cosmetics, their coat, or their couch, someone is making sure it’s safe for their health. In reality, little toxicity information or regulation is required for 80,000 industrial chemicals used in commerce in the United States. To address this, legislation to update the ineffective 1976 Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) is currently moving through Congress. The hope is that it will lead to improved regulation of chemicals, but the extent and timeliness of the reform are not certain. In the meantime, the widespread use of harmful chemicals continues to pose a threat to our health and environment.

In 1977, Bruce Ames and I published a report that a flame retardant in children’s pajamas called “brominated Tris” was a mutagen and potential carcinogen. Three months later, it was banned from children’s pajamas, only to be replaced by “chlorinated Tris.” We determined that this too was a mutagen, and it was removed from pajamas. Such regrettable substitution of a harmful chemical with a less-studied cousin is like “a game of whack-a-mole,” according to Donald Kennedy (former editor-in-chief of Science and former commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration).*

Unfortunately, highly fluorinated chemicals are now getting the regrettable substitution treatment. These chemicals provide stain and water repellency in outdoor clothing, nonstick cookware, furniture, carpet, cosmetics, and food contact paper. However, they are highly mobile, have no known degradation pathways in the environment, and can persist indefinitely.

Perfluorooctanoic acid, commonly called C8, has an estimated half-life of 2.3 years or more in humans and is associated with cancer, elevated serum cholesterol levels, and other health problems. C8 was phased out of consumer products in the United States last year, a half-century after toxicologists first revealed its potential for harm. It was replaced with numerous perfluorohexanoic acid (C6) compounds that are more rapidly excreted by humans but also show extreme environmental persistence. Are these replacements safe? There is limited research thus far on the toxicity of the C6 alternatives. However, they are increasing in the environment and in human blood, and they share the potential toxicity of their C8 relatives.

One solution to the regrettable substitution problem is to address entire families or classes containing toxic chemicals rather than tackling them one at a time. For example, the Green Science Policy Institute, an organization of scientists that promotes the responsible use of chemicals, has called for a 50% reduction over the next 5 years in the use of six families of chemicals in consumer products, whose studied members have been found to be harmful: highly fluorinated chemicals, antimicrobials, flame retardants, bisphenols and phthalates, organic solvents, and certain metals. Before using such substances in products, we should ask “Do we need this chemical, given the potential for harm?”

Worldwide Incidence Of Cancer, Age Adjusted. Rich World, Rich In Subjugation To Plutocrats, Rich In Corruption, Rich In Cancer

Worldwide Incidence Of Cancer, Age Adjusted. Rich World, Rich In Subjugation To Plutocrats, Rich In Corruption, Rich In Cancer

The good news is that companies are starting to act: Kaiser Permanente, IKEA, Levi Strauss & Co., and Crate and Barrel are phasing out highly fluorinated and other chemical classes of concern from the products they buy, produce, and/or sell.

Scientists can contribute by evaluating health and environmental impacts across a chemical’s life cycle and looking for safer alternatives. They can make policy recommendations and collaborate on consensus documents. In 2015, 230 scientists from 40 countries signed the Madrid Statement, expressing concern regarding the persistence and toxicity of both the highly fluorinated C8 chemicals and the C6 alternatives. Scientists can catalyze dialogue and action among manufacturers, retailers, and large purchasers and have an immediate impact in reducing the use of harmful chemicals.

Such actions by the scientific community can, along with meaningful TSCA reform, improve the health of the population and the environment. Most important of all, it will make our planet healthier and safer for future generations.

  • * D. Kennedy, Science 318, 1217 (2007).
  • ‡ A. Blum et al., Environ. Health Perspect. 5, A108 (2015).

Dr. Blum works at UC Berkeley in the world’s most famous laboratory detecting the carcinogenicity of products. It was founded, many decades ago, by Dr. Ames, and is now the golden standard in that field. Dr. Ames noticed that mutagenicity implied carcinogenicity, and found easy in vitro tests for the former.

So none of 80,000 industrial chemicals used everyday in households and foods have been appropriately tested.

This is probably why so many people die of Parkinson (Andy Grove, founder of Intel just did so, at 79). In any case this is why the hundreds of thousands of California Monarchs which used to fly around, have disappeared (I saw one yesterday, just one, next to the flower they prefer, but which now have become very rare). Parkinson was unknown before Parkinson identified it in the 1820s in England.

This is also no doubt why the cancer rate of brain tumors has quadrupled since 1950.

Meanwhile a few people control half the wealth in the world… PRECISELY because the mood reigns that, among other things, chemicals should not be tested appropriately, or known thoroughly. It may well be why autism rates have blossomed.

After all, latest generation insecticides, neonicotinoids, a way to make insects smoke, and, thus, die, give a sort of Alzheimer to bees (and probably not just bees, methinks).

The same mood that dangerous people doing dangerous things should be left in peace plotting with their co-conspirators, means that, when Apple Inc. does the “double Irish” tax avoidance scheme through the British Virgin Islands, to become the most “valuable’ company in the world, little people thank Apple to be so vigilant about their iphones’ vaunted secrecy.

Corruption does not have to involved lots of money. Thanks to 2,000 strikes by Russian aircraft Palmyra was just liberated from the Wahhabists. Documents just read by French TV in Palmyra, show that an Islamist fighter could buy a woman for six months, for the modest price of three Euros. Yes, three.

Meanwhile, a leak of 11.5 million documents out of just one law firm in Panama shows much greater lawlessness than expected.

That leak, with just one law firm, shows how Global Demonic Plutocracy (GDP) pays the political leaders which it employs.

Let’s notice in passing my astounding foresight: I wrote on this site last week that Obama went to Argentina, to celebrate the reinstitution in Argentina of made in the US corruption. Sure enough, within days, the Argentine apparent Criminal In Chief, Mr. Macri, the new president, offered money to Vulture Funds based in New York. No doubt those New York Vultures billionaires could have fed discreetly the companies that said law firm is managing for Mr. Macri, the Argentinian Corrupter In Chief. The way it works is that local natives lend their names to head said companies, nominally speaking, allowing the likes of Mr. Macri, or the president of Iceland, or Ukraine, to be paid by Global Demonic Plutocracy.

It would be interesting to add up how many people the GDP kills each year. Considering everything, all the avoidable causes of death fosters onto us by the greedsters, it may well be above twenty millions. And this is even before the next large wars its policies may bring (as they did in 1914).

It’s a lunatic asylum out there, and, naturally, the inmates are not happy, when informed of that fact. After all, they elect their leaders, lionize plutocrats, and live exactly as they are told to live: by not taking great pleasure in asking as many uncomfortable questions, as they can possibly imagine. Instead the average male becomes an expert at sport scores of celebrities, like the despicable Mr. Messi (many times the best soccer player in the world, whatever that means for those addicted to sport scores…). Messi is one of 140 celebrities nabbed in the Panama papers. He is probably not one of the 150 sport celebrities given elicit drugs by this British doctor (his clientele was local, British super rich “sport” figures). It was long obvious that Spanish and British (let alone American) sport figures are drugged out (just look at their medals!)

That’s alright: those addicted to the scores of drug sports do not deserve any better.

But when we are all condemned to lunch, diner and what not, with Satan, and to eat the foods his obsequious servants the plutocrats, have concocted to poison us, I think we should draw a line…

Patrice Ayme’

No Force, No Moral

February 27, 2016

Abstract: Why didn’t Obama outright jail the Crook of Apple Inc., on the ground of aiding and abetting terrorism? For the same reason as he became lupine Putin’s obsequious butler. Morality, the Roman mores, depends upon force always. However, masters’ servants are not reputed for the creative application of force.

***

The universe is created by force. Giant supernovae explode, generating the heavy elements which can then combine and create chemistry. Some want to say the universe is not about force, just harmony, love, etc. Yes, the universe, the human universe, is also about love and harmony. But fundamentally, it’s a balance of forces.

Unbalancing those forces lead to holocausts. Or, as we can now clearly see, even worse.

Did Obama Understand What His Primary Mission Was?

Did Obama Understand What His Primary Mission Was?

… Or is it that the job of the leaders in Washington is to let the world down, so that they can come on top? (And New York’s Daily News is not cynical enough.)

The universe, and our knowledge of it, is not just about force, violence, but also about chance, serendipity.

The new LIGO observatory of space deformations detected gravitational waves when it had just been turned on for its first engineering run, after being closed for improvements, during five long years. It was supposed to officially open four days later. The observed Black Holes have masses too large for usual astrophysics. Collapsing stars are supposed to give BH no more than 11 solar masses (long story), a third of what was observed here. This is an important new riddle emerging.

There is a brand new ceasefire in Syria. Putin rules, Obama cleans his shoes (some will say that’s what, for psychological reasons, this is to be expected: after all, Putin is a wilful white man, a killer, a conqueror, an invader, not a self-important, obsequious butler).

In 2013, The French Republic was ready to strike Assad. Assad had crossed the ‘red line’ of massive, blatant usage of nerve gas (in a suburb of Damas). Who had set the ‘red line’? The USA. The President of the USA had declared, solemnly, that if Assad used chemical weapons on its own people, the USA would take him out. Indeed, the war in Syria had started with peaceful protests. Assad reacted with gunfire, and then unleashing, and feeding (by buying its oil), the Islamist State. So Assad, son of his dictator father, was as culprit as possible.

The legitimacy of it all? 1) Human Rights. 2) Syria is within the European defense zone, so to speak (as demonstrated by the refugee problem). 3)Syria as a French Protectorate (given by the SDN, after the Turkish empire got ejected). 4) Further back, Syria was part of the “Oriental Part” of the Roman empire for seven centuries, until it was invaded by the Muslim Arab army which killed all males of weapon bearing age.

One can view the latter invasion as an UNJUST war, and such wars can be reversed.

The Roman Republic rightly made a big deal of JUST wars, which were basically defense wars: Rome was attacked, and then the aggressor was taken out. This is what happened, until the Third Punic war (in which Carthage was in the right, and the right-wing, plutocratic fanatics in the Senate, in the wrong). The next problem was Caesar’s Bellum Gallicum, where there again, Caesar’s adversaries pointed out that he, Caesar, had been the aggressor in Gaul (although the situation was complex, since the (misled) Helvetii had attacked, and Caesar initially intervened to help allies against the (future) Swiss. But then Caesar and his ten legions exceeded the mandate…

In any case, re-establishing democracy and republic in places which knew these under Rome is, arguably a just war.

Instead, Obama showed the defense of human rights by the USA was a lot of hot air. Putin invaded Ukraine 6 months later. Now he is making Syria into a client state. If he follows his model in Chechnya, he will kill up to 15% of the population, to install firmly his own Pluto.

(Said Pluto in Chechnya would have killed Boris Nemtsov, exactly a year ago to the day, with four bullets in the back, below the Kremlin; that’s convenient, as the Chechen Pluto is head of state, so hard to prosecute.)

Now that it is established the USA is hot air, nobody fears it. China is promptly installing radars on islands just off the Philippines, that it just created. Obama will punish the Chinese dictatorship by looking haughty until Mr. Xi and his goons surrender.

Where does Obama’s mentality comes from? Well, European pacifists are pretty much to be accused. The only European country defending Europe’s Lebensraum (vital space in German; a term Hitler used; that does not mean it never has any validity), is the French Republic, with troops on the ground in combat in Syria, Libya, Mali, Niger, Chad, Cameroon, CAR, etc. This sort of pacifism caused two extended world wars which ravaged Europe.

In World War One, the Netherlands, with its accomplice the USA, extended the war by three years by breaking the Franco-British embargo. In World War Two, Sweden, the Netherlands and Belgium helped considerably in the defeat of France in 1940, and the subsequent French-Nazi ceasefire (which lasted, in practice, less than two years; yet, the evil was done, and dozens of millions died).

Obama’s lack of spine is not just about refusing to confront the Russian Caesar. Now the dark Pluto heading Apple refuses to release the communications of a mass murdering Islamist State terrorist. Why was that crook not charged with aiding and abetting mass murdering terrorism? Because such people are supposed to lead the world, and not be led by the world.

Were I president, I would arrest the crook, and apply the Patriot Act to him. He would then disappear from view. Then I would ask the same question to the second in command at Apple, five minutes later. Upon refusal, he would also be on his way to Guantanamo or somewhere. And so on down the line in the next hour, until one could crack the codes in the damn phone.

Instead we have the sorry spectacle that Apple makes the laws. Just like Apple gets its profits, hundreds of billions of them through the British Virgin Islands, to pay no tax whatsoever, Apple is supposed to keep on deciding what the law is.

It’s a matter of knowing what dominates: the law of We The People, with its equality of taxation, or the law of Them The Plutocrats, with the principle that Plutocrats decide what the law is.

Instead, civilization made laws in accordance with ethology, where all human beings are equal. Civilization arose from force, and so did the imposition of morality, which is not viable, without.

Don’t ask Obama, he is a lost little boy, in a land of big Plutos roaming, who are everything, whereas he is not much, and he needs to love them, should he want a job, next year.

The more sinister, and deeper level of analysis, of course, is that the USA’s plutocracy profited immensely from the weakening of European democracies in the Twentieth Century. Thus, cynics will argue, the morally lazy Obama is actually in the tradition of the most efficient American patriots: paying lip service to the morally correct, while implementing the dirtiest. But then, of course, most European leaders are accomplices to that… A curiosity explained by the nature of global plutocracy, and its Anglo-Saxon headquarters (including Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, etc.) Several European leaders were partners at Goldman Sachs, and, one would gather, are still partners with Goldman Sachs. That may explain why the leaders of Goldman Sachs were not arrested for cooking the books in Greece.

What is most interesting in all this, is that common people are starting to notice that something is askew: most Americans think the country is “heading in the wrong direction”…

Patrice Ayme’

VIOLENCE IS THE PRICE OF LOVE

January 22, 2016

We will try to show why, in species, VIOLENCE IS THE PRICE OF LOVE. Both are entangled, evolutionary speaking. As a species grow in its capacity to express love, so grows its capacity to defend that love, strongly, that is, violently. The relationship is mathematical.

Human beings arise from love: a baby without tender loving care, simply dies.

Some will inevitably argue, disingenuously, that the care does not always have to be “tender” and “loving”; let’s insist, however, that tender loving care for a baby is roughly the strongest instinct of human beings, precisely because, without it, the species would not exist. A vaguely normal human being, in a vaguely normal state, cannot resist the need to take care of a baby who needs care.

(That does not mean an enraged, or hateful human will not kill a baby; it means such an amount of lethal rage is unusual… otherwise the species would not exist. A more normal rage is to kill the parents, and keep the baby. It is of note that the Nazis deliberately killed, in the most atrocious circumstances I have been appraised of, in the entire history of humanity, very small children in World War Two. This fact, by itself, because it happened in most literate and intellectually exacting Germany is enough to cause considerable pause. But this is not the main axis of today’s essay.)

However the Dark Side of the mental force exists. All over intelligent species.

Love Is Strong With Parrots. Grab One, The Other One Will Fight.

Love Is Strong With Parrots. Grab One, The Other One Will Fight.

The Dark Side of the human mind causes pause: was it unavoidable that a species with a Dark Side became the most intelligent species on Earth? We will see that, indeed, it was bound to be the case. Where does this Dark Side comes from? How does it relate to Love? Does the Dark Side enable Love?

The obvious answer, which is not good enough, is that Homo is a carnivorous genus. Even some chimpanzee groups have been observed to adopt a systematically carnivorous diet (eating meat every day). In the case of humans, there is a further complication: chimp like humanoids need (some) trees. Without much trees around, our humanoid ancestors were easy to catch (differently from, say, bats, which are so hard to catch, they can live 40 years). To be safe away from trees, our ancestors had to instil terror in potential predators.

Once in Senegal, I saw a chimpanzee hanging from a tree barely bigger than he was. It was in an area with low bushes and a few miniature trees. The relative sizes of the humongous black and hairy chimp, and the tiny tree were strikingly disproportionate. So was the incredible rage of our fellow humanoid. Our mere presence seemed to have unhinged the universe. Mr. Chimp shook the tree so badly he nearly broke it, and then disappeared, bounding, shrieking, and howling, as if he were on a mission to go destroy the universe, somewhere, somewhat, out there. It was very impressive. The entire zone was full of lions. But no lion in his right mind would come anywhere near such an insane maniac.

That was the whole idea.

Baboons are omnivorous, like chimps, and that mean that, like chimps, they love meat. And the hunt. Moreover, chimps and leopards love to eat (smaller) baboons, and that only boost the baboons’ aggressive disposition. But the further twist with baboons is that, like humans, they (some of them) conquered the savannah.

All these primates have to be hyper aggressive to survive, so they are hyper aggressive.

Would they be less aggressive if they were NOT carnivorous? That’s unlikely: look at elephants: they are immensely intelligent, they know who they are: make a dot above their eyes, bring a mirror, and they inquire (few animals can do this). They have colossal memory, understand much human language, and can be tamed, directly from the wild. However, elephants can be extremely aggressive. Poachers use the elephants’ aggressive solidarity to kill them: kill one, and others come back, charging.

Are there non aggressive very intelligent species? It’s not clear that one can find a single example of a thoroughly pacific, highly intelligent species.

Walruses, who scratch food with their huge teeth at the bottom of the sea, can turn violent and hyper aggressive if they perceive, or imagine, a threat; walruses are used to fend off Polar Bears, and human hunters. Siberians know them as the “tigers of the sea”. They will charge a boat. Some whales are pretty pacific: typically they eat plankton. Hunters such as Humpbacks and Sperm Whales are something else.

In 1820, the whaleship Essex was deliberately charged twice, with extreme violence, by a huge bull Sperm Whale, and sunk in the middle of the Pacific. It is clear that the whale plotted the attack, and conducted it with extreme gusto. Another five cases of major boats sunk by whales are known. Specialists of whale neurology believe that the whale acted in protection or vengeance (at least one of its group had been harpooned earlier, although it counter-attacked and broke the line).

Sperm Whales have the largest brains on Earth. Those brains are more more complex – in certain ways – than those of humans (much of the brain process sound in an exquisite way, both for hunting with the sonar and for communications far, far away…). Their cerebral cortex is much more convoluted than the human cortex. Sperm whales are social creatures with strong bonds, staying in stable social groups, keeping constant companions throughout their lifespan. Webcams have shown they often dive all together, within a meter or so of each other (and they can be 25 meters long, like the one which sunk the Essex). Whalers of old used to harpoon a calf, keep it attached and alive, and then harpoon the adults who came to its rescue.

First Mate Chase survived the harrowing, 4,000 miles navigation across the sea, complete with drawing straws to find not just who was going to be eaten, but who was going to kill dinner (ironically enough, this cannibalism happened because the crew refused captain Pollard’s suggestion to sail to the Marquesas, from fear of… cannibals). Owen Chase recalled: “I turned around and saw him… directly ahead of us [nearly 2,000 feet, 550 meters, away], coming down with twice his ordinary speed… with ten-fold fury and vengeance in his aspect.

“The surf flew in all directions about him with the continual violent thrashing of his tail. His head about half out of the water, and in that way he came upon us, and again struck the ship.

“The ship brought up as suddenly and violently as if she had struck a rock and trembled for a few minutes like a leaf.”

Even parrots will attack to defend their mate. Approaching an island at sea, swimming and diving, I was attacked relentlessly by giant gulls (goelands). I have avoided the dangerous crossing to that island ever since.

As intelligence grows, so does love. And thus so does the necessity of defending said love. Ultimate defense means not just violence, as Israelis and Palestinians inflict on each other, but it means inflicting, and suffering, death.

Love cannot be separated from the Dark Side. Love causes the Dark Side, be it only as a defense. The Dark Side is the price of Love.

The preceding is an explanation, and an apology of violence, in some ultimate circumstances, but should not be construed as a pretext to institute or amplify violence, just because a philosopher justified it some time (and so did Christ and Muhammad). Just as there are many types of Christianism and Islamism there are many types of violence, and many “non-violent” religions and philosophies allow many sorts of violent reactions to mitigate a violence previously imposed on the innocent. (This is the obvious way in which to reinterpret violent Jihad.)

There is an even more devious, and therefore irresistible consideration to entertain: carnivores eat herbivores, thus have to outsmart them. Hence the violence meat eaters live by, is, by itself, a contributor to higher smarts. And indeed, except for elephants, animals with higher smarts are carnivorous (yes, even orangutans love meat). Therein a quandary. And a disturbing cosmic perspective.

The thin red line between heavens and hell seem to fluctuate in human hearts greatly from the nature of the physical law. It does not mean we have to hide our hearts in the sand, Quite the opposite.

If we want more goodness, the modern theory of evil, violence and intelligence tells us that we will have to think more of physics, not just psychology.

Meanwhile, please do not ask the extraterrestrials what they had for dinner. You may not like the answer.

Patrice Ayme’

How Humanism Dies

January 19, 2016

Humanitarians Killed By Jihadists

Some of those who have Islamophilia claim that we obsess too much about Islamist terrorism. However, terrorism terrorizes. Everybody.

Merkel invited a million marvellous Muslims in Germany, and a few thousands of them, Muslim men, went on a rampage against German women in Cologne. The Qur’an has lots of passages about “women that your right hand posses”. (One can do plenty of things to those!)

Read the Qur’an, ladies and gentlemen, oh yes, read the Qur’an, and then you talk. The Qur’an is much much more fun than the completely insipid “50 Shades of Grey” (a book about a vaguely sadistic guy and a vaguely masochistic girl engaging in vaguely reprehensible practices). The Qur’an brims with fully endowed sadism, and uncomplexed total sexism.

Franco-Moroccan Leila Aloui, A Teenage Jihadist Faced Her, And Absolutely Had To Pump Her With Three Bullets. Too Beautiful. She Took Four Days To Die.

Franco-Moroccan Leila Aloui, A Teenage Jihadist Faced Her, And Absolutely Had To Pump Her With Three Bullets. Too Beautiful. She Took Four Days To Die.

But do not gun killings as in the USA kill much more? The question has been asked by the Islamophiles (some of them no doubt pedophiles, as pedophilia is part of the sacred Islamist texts). Yes, they do: more than 300,000 in the USA in a decade. Murder, one by one, as in the USA, creates a pervasive mood of fear. Yet, it is not mass terror: the victims generally know their assassins (and many are gun lovers).

Whereas mass terror affects everybody, all the time. And it is capable of destabilizing entire countries. Some say: let those countries go. The objection to this is simple: how many North Korea do you want?

Bush and Blair made a deal with the bloody Libyan dictator Gaddafi, the “Deal in the Desert” in 2004. In exchange for dropping his nuclear bomb and chemical weapons program, Gaddafi got non-prosecution for mass murders committed in the West, oil going to Britain, and then lots of prisoners sent over by Blair and Bush, to torture to death, etc. And Gaddafi also got a lasting friendship: Blair called his friend the despot to try to save him from the wrath of the French led assault onto his satanic kingdom.

Leila Alaoui, already a famous photographer, 33 years old, was on a mission from Amnesty International. Leila, a talented artist, in the company of researchers from Amnesty International,  photographed young women who had been forced into marriages, by Islamist abusers. Some were as young as 11 (eleven) years old.

Leila was shot three times when she went to buy a salad, and found herself in front of a Jihadist. He had no idea who she was, except that she was obviously a free woman. She lost a lot of blood. A young African passing by picked her up, brought her to the hospital. She asked about her driver. She was not told that her driver, also from Amnesty International, had been burned alive in his car.

The Jihadists in Ouagadougou shot everybody in sight. They assassinated a six member Canadian family who helped, in a humanitarian effort, with a school since December. And two famous Swiss humanitarians, ex-MPs who had also been on an humanitarian effort were also killed. Then the Jihadists went back to finish the wounded. Many played dead. The Jihadists set the hotel on fire. Many burned alive.

French special forces were flown from Mali, and wiped the terrorists out. If you want peace, first make war.

Meanwhile, Oxfam, a British charity, came up with its annual report on inequalities.

62 billionaires own as much property as 50% of the world population, 3.6 billion people. Since 1998 the 10% richest got most of the increase in riches.

Moreover, Oxfam found that 7,000 billion Euros of tax evasion, mostly from corporations. This is 12% of world GDP. It’s more money than the GDP of any country, except the USA and the EU.

Meanwhile, French industrial production collapsed by 50% in 15 years. It’s not all a simple, direct effect of globalization. Something more subtle is at work.

What? Why? ENA, the National Administrative School, a sort of French Harvard played a big role. Know not knowledge, but how to “Mange”, I mean “Manage”, that is, exploit, fellow men. Big French companies selected the most “intelligent” 20 year olds, those who got to the likes of ENA, coincidentally those children are those of the elite. Many of these companies had been created by “privatizing” large French public companies. Something similar happened with Russia at the same time, with the same sort of “advice”, in the end emanating of that same source of neo-capitalism, Harvard.

Volkswagen instead replaced its CEO by an employee who started at VW as a teenage apprentice.

French savings go mostly to life insurance, which, “strangely”, by French law, cannot go to investments in industry (or maybe it’s not so strange when one realizes that the legislative process is increasingly dominated by the financial plutocracy!). Instead French savings gets to government bonds, and, first of all USA government bonds, thus feeding the American financial plutocracy (as it fits into the Quantitative Easing scheme).

Just as Quantum Entanglement entangles the world as one, plutocracy entangles the world with its satanic mood. Meanwhile, a national union government arose in Libya.

What for? Franco-American attack on the Islamist State in Libya. The idea is to have the new Libyan government ask the United Nations for help. Then the West could eliminate the Islamist State in Libya.

Some will say it will make the situation worse. However, sometimes all we can do is mitigate. Come to think of it, life is all about mitigation. Only god knows the ultimate ends, and this is why he does not exist. But we do.

In recent decades, it has dawned on Non Governmental Organizations of the humanitarian type that the preceding is correct. Humanitarianism without enough force of law is a non sequitur. 

Without military force to impose the law, the law of man, ethological law, the work of humanitarian NGOs cannot be done. (Yes, there was this systematic bombing attack against Medecins Sans Frontieres/Doctors Without Borders in Afghanistan. But that was no doubt nothing that Obama and company ordered. Both France and the USA, differently from Russia, have tried with greater attention to detail than ever, to limit “collateral damage”.)

Obama evoked these ambiguities in his Peace Award Nobel Lecture. Indeed. Only evil against evil can fight for the greater good. Goodness is the product of careful applications of evil calculus. Absent the application of force by goodness, evil moves in the moral vacuum, unopposed.

Patrice Ayme’