Evil-Power, Pluto-Cracy English American Style

Evil-Power, Pluto-Cracy English American Style is the dominant form of governance nowadays, despite the Kremlin’s pathetic efforts to impose again its time tested, religiously propelled evil power. The Kremlin’s evil, triumphant mentality, and subsequently its colossal empire, arose from an opportunistic adaptation by collaborator Alexander Nevskii to the Mongol conquest. 

The American form of evil is even more primeval, therein its strength.

US plutocratic mentality also arose from somewhat similar circumstances to that of Russia: genocidally propelled continental grab. (The French, who insisted on moral standards and tender footed colonization through equitable trade, failed miserably, although France was then the dominant superpower: French evil was not up to snuff!)

In either case, conquering continents had moral consequences on the mentality of the conqueror, one of them being hypocrisy, using the Christian fable to claim one’s aspiration to sainthood, and thus one’s holiness. Nevskii is a saint of the Russian Orthodox religion… And much of US anti-intellectualism arose from a strategy of not looking too closely how and why bad things happen, and thus why they perdure. All very good to achieve the world as we know it, but in need of some tweaking looking forward… 

***

European colonists of the (London-made) “West Country men” persuasion, free ranging from a lack of adult supervision during the Seventeenth Century, established a society in America which first survived and soon thrived… but only through barbarous methods.

(We have a control experiment: the most moral and Catholic “Nouvelle France”… which failed, under English assault, from too high moral standards, lack of slavery and tobacco…)

***

As early as 1609 CE, the military establishment of (West Country Men founded) Jamestown made it clear that the Natives had to be eliminated: this was the plan all along (which unfolded in the next three centurie). In 1622, that was clear enough for the Natives around Jamestown to make a determined attempt to kill the settlers to the last.

The exasperated Americans try to eliminate Jamestown in 1622. Failed in part because of a warning by Natives who were too friendly with some of the English. However, US mentality was forged one massacre at a time…

***

Up in New England, slavery of Indians and Africans had been already engaged. by the local authorities Now of course, there had been a precedent. English indentured servants could be horribly tortured to death by their wealthy masters for hunting pigs on their own, without explicit authorization… And American white cities paying for Indian scalps was next. 

After that, it was further downhill… As new sorts of evil not seen before were successfully introduced, making the land wealthy and productive. 

Judicially justified racism, English American style, had few parallels in human history. Even when the Islamists conquered their gigantic empire in the Seventh and Eight centuries, although they treated non-Muslims very badly, and could execute them for nearly no reason, they left open the possibility of becoming Muslim. 

Not so with the color of the skin in English America. 

Indeed English American judges established that colored people were aliens, so aliens that they couldn’t hold property and, in particular, slaves. So colored people became enslaved (there were exceptions). d

US plutocracy is of a particularly vicious, highly controlling sort. It controls the legislative process, so plutocrats pay very little taxes, ensuring that their power always grows. As they control the world, including up to very recently Russia and China by extending to them the self-dealing plutocratic largesse of international trade, this is a serious worldwide problem. 

The argument can even be made that both world war one and WW2 were to a great extent US plutocracy driven (European fascists were often US financed and the Japanese invasion machine was fueled by US oil for a decade).

US plutocracy is particularly vicious, because of its origin in slavery (of blacks) and genocide (of Natives). US plutocracy has inherited and been molded by stealthily cruel ways which don’t bear the qualitatives they deserve.

Class is not just about class, just like caste is just about caste, or the sort of slavery the USA had was just about slavery. Slavery has existed in most societies, but the sort of slavery the US suffered was clearly worse than any from Greco-Roman, or for that matter, Babylonian antiquity. US slavery was anchored in skin color, and slaves were rarely freed (freed Babylonian and Roman slaves could reach the top of society). 

Where does so much cruelty come from? Ecology. Man has always culled man. Wealthy and abusive families and individuals are both the cause and consequence of human evil… And evil as an absolute good, of evil as what humanity needs to be kept in check. Hence it’s not just the pathetic spectacle of the hyper powerful not being worthy of their position, which is celebrated. It’s also the evil power, the power of evil to be the ultimate giver of all destinies.   

Hence it’s not just the pathetic spectacle of the hyper powerful not being worthy of their position, which is celebrated. Evil power is also celebrated, evil as the ultimate giver of destiny.  It would be crucial progress to recognize this. 

***

And what of the future? If the future is to be steered optimally, the past, which gives not just the instructions, but the initial conditions, must be understood as well as possible,

The USA, differently from most other countries, is driven by strong immigration (directly related to the genocide, that’s the cynical angle). Thus yesterday’s mentality does not have to lead the future without sharing. Better, and even more cynically, the reason why the supremely barbarous couple of centuries of English America achieved… supremacy… over the French precisely because barbarousness is better at war… All other things being equal. .

Politically Correct people, now called “woke”, and once “pacifists”, or “isolationists”, who sobbed at the prospect of war with Hitler, have tended to ignore the fact that brutality wins, all other things being equal. This is why free trade doesn’t work without ensuring that RIGHT IS MIGHT.

When North American Natives learned of Christianism, they laughed at the silliness of that fable. They knew better what the real world was made of: cause and effect, not effect masquerading as cause. North American evil power inherited this truth from the Natives, too, something primeval, and thus very powerful.

Evolution tells us that evil in the service of goodness is called humanity… Maybe the ends do not justify the means, but the means cause the ends… Go complain with whom created God.

Patrice Ayme 

 

 

Let Ukraine Free Crimea

Illogical cowards say: Czar Putin threatened to nuke us, let’s do what he wants, whatever he wants, this is safer! Logical heroes say: a terrorist threatened to nuke us, let’s arrest him! 

“You were given the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour and you will have war.”…sadi Winston Churchill to those who ephemerally appeased Hitler. 

Prince Vladimir of Kyiv, more than 1,000 years ago, conquered Crimea from the Khazars who had invaded and occupied the peninsula a few generations earlier. So the Ukrainians liberated the Greeks! Dorian Greece had settled the area 17 centuries before Hence the Greek names of southern Ukraine: Melitopol (City of honey), Mariupol (city of Mary), etc… 

Prince Vladimir then converted to Christianity (from his original Viking faith).

Kievan Rus was the largest state in Europe, and was so democratic, it turned into its undoing when the Mongols invaded: no coherent defense could be mounted as the Mongols picked up one Kievan principality after another, finishing with the annihilation of Kyiv in December 1240. Then Alexander Nevsky, an enthusiastic Mongol collaborator who founded the Kremlin anti-democratic and theocratic doctrine, was made Prince of Kyiv. The Mongols would return to destroy Kyiv again later, and then the Kremlin, for centuries tried all it could to destroy ever more any democratic state in and around present day Ukraine.

Thus this is an old fight: obscurantism and tyranny from Moscow against enlightenment and diversity in Kyiv. 

Nowadays, though, with a small planet and nukes all over, democracy can’t afford to lose that fight, because it would be the last it would lose.  

Modern tech enables tyranny to become worse than ever. We can’t have tyrant blackmail democracy with nukes. Actually tyrants should have no nukes: hated by their own populations, they have interest to wage foreign wars to justify domestic terror, as the Kremlin did, for 8 centuries.

***

The attempted destruction by the Kremlin of a democracy has already lasted a quarter as long as the attempted destruction of democracy in Europe by the Kaiser and his goons in 1914-1918. 

“We think now is the right time to intensify our support for Ukraine,” Britain’s foreign secretary, James Cleverly, said while on a visit to Washington in 2023. “We can’t allow this to drag on and become a kind of First World War attritional-type stalemate.”

The reason for the length of WWI was that the Kaiser and his goons were able to avoid a full Franco-British blockade in 1914-1917, as crucial goods, typically shipped from the USA, reached Germany through the “neutral” Netherlands and “neutral” Denmark. France and Britain protested in vain: they were not going to issue an ultimatum to their rambunctious, self-obsessed US child.

***

When the US belatedly joined its democratic parents, France and Britain in war against the fascist Prussian invader, the blockade became effective. The German military and civilian economy collapsed: by 1918, the French explosive production was more than ten times that of Germany; and the Allied breakthrough in southern Europe deprived Germany of food… 

At this point, the genocidal Kremlin tyrant has few friends: India and China informed him that he must not use nukes. So Putin has decided to boost the size of his army and weapon production, the latter rendered possible by a breaching of the blockade (say through the Caucasus mountains). 

However, during a long war, tyrants can make friends, or force coups in otherwise unfriendly nations: history is replete with such examples of desperate tyrants going for broke: faced with torturous extinction, they try whatever… and sometimes they score. Putin claims to have achieved an “union” with Belarus. Well, not really, but conveniently Putin’s main opponent in Belarus died… As so many of Putin’s opponents have died recently.

The longer this war goes on, the more dangerous it gets.

And democracy, representative or not, can’t afford not to win it: should thermonuclear tyranny win, the same concept will go for broke, again and again.

Let’s not forget, as the forces of evil known as the WEF, the World Economic Forum, gather at Davos to conspire in plain sight of the entire planet, protected by 5,000 soldiers, that the WEF made Putin one of their masterpieces. Putin even became one of the architects of Davos, as the Kremlin nuclear dictator met very officially with his chairman and founder, Klaus Schwab, his evil name, to plot in plain sight.

Amazingly, so great is Putin’s propaganda control on the Western pseudo-left, pseudo-ecology, and much of the population of failed states, that many deluded souls believe that Putin, that master piece of world plutocracy, is actually an opponent of the world plutocracy.

The credulity, stupidity and venality of many on the left has been amazing consider the French and German supposedly socialist PMs around 2000 CE, making deals with the Kremlin and its agents, such as European pseudo-ecologists… How did that advance socialism, or Europe? Or on the right: consider Brexit, or the invasion of Iraq (which aimed at making fracking profitable and lift the US as the world’s fossil fuel superpower, once again…). Or consider the subprime, zero-interest, and COVID Ponzi scheme… Consider Fauci, financing the Wuhan Institute of Virology to make lethal and hyper contagious bat coroonaviruses, even more so… Biden finally fired him discreetly, and his successor’s discourse is diametrically opposed…  

***

One may wonder how come 51 (fifty-one) representative democracies are arming Ukraine? … if they are controlled by the world plutocracy? As I hold…. 

The answer is that those representative oligarchies claim to be democracies, people-powers. So world plutocracy attempted to control them, and achieved great, but not full control: appearances have to be maintained, lest mobs overrun national assemblies… 

When the armed people of Ukraine showed their power by repelling 200,000 professional maniac killers of Putin, killing many in the process, the representatives of these representative democracies, who view themselves as really representing democracy, had to get along. Now they are progressively warming up to the realities of war….  When Obama let Putin invade Crimea and then the Donbas, a process was started, as when the world let Japan invade Manchuria in 1931: Japan claimed it was reconstructing China… Representative democracies condemned, 42 to 1 the Japanese army invasion. Japan, one of the League four permanent members (with France, UK, Italy) had to resign.

In retrospect, clearly, what should have been done was to arm China and blockade Japan. By the late 1930s, Japan produced only 7% of the oil it consumed. It imported the rest, with 80% coming from the U.S., mostly California, and 10% from the Dutch East Indies. The USA waited until August 1, 1941 to block the exportation of oil to Japan. By then Japan had killed millions in China and Indochina. 

Arming China was done much later and through a Private Military Corporation, the Flying Tigers…

Wisdom teaches to do all of this, to make war, faster. Extending torture and temptation will be bad for all… So let the Ukrainian free Crimea again!

Patrice Ayme

The Greeks colonized Southern Ukraine 16 centuries before Prince Vladimir/Vlodimir freed Crimea from the Khazars, and two millennia before Kremlin Russia arose from being the tax collector of the Mongols:

P/S: The essence of the essay above was banned, censored, vilified and unpublished by the New York Times.

Democracy Against Fascism. So Boost Defenses: This Is World War Three.

This is a world war of democracy against fascism, it has to be taken with the utmost seriousness. Islamist Iran has chosen to help the Kremlin, and should be treated accordingly. Iran should be fought, and Israel should be aware that Iran is training in Ukraine. Silly Iranian drones produced in great quantity with tech grabbed all around the world, are having devastating effects. Not just in killing civilians, but in draining stocks of Ukrainian air defenses (which are refurbished S300 from the USSR, mostly).

Europe should not turn over-confident that Ukraine will win. Rifts may be appearing, because Germany is more willing to finance the US military-industrial complex… by purchasing US made systems rather than financing existing European ones which are similar or even better [1]. 

China is staying out of full involvement in Ukraine, but not out of sympathy for democracy. China is presently helping Russia a lot, for example, by buying hydrocarbons to Russia. Some experts claim that Russia would collapse in three weeks without Chinese help. An historical reminder: without Russian oil, Nazi Germany could not have fought, at all, in 1940. The Nazi tanks and planes would have stayed nailed to the ground. (Nazi Germany developped massive production from secret US Standard Oil process only later, and only later did Nazi Germany gain access to Rumanian oil fields, also in consequence of the defeat of France… Even then, Germany was not producing enough fuel, and thus, later in the war, German pilots could not be trained for little more than basic flying… This means that the alliance between the Nazis and Russia was crucial in 1939 to 1941… crucial to Nazu aggression…)

China is careful in not sending weapons to Russia that we know of, because it knows that it would lose if hostilities culminated into all out nuclear war. (In an all-out nuclear war with Russia, Western forces would direct nuclear fire not against cities, but against Russian nuclear forces. By precaution, they would also have to annihilate Chinese nuclear forces.) 

Fortunately, differently from what happened in WW1 and WW2, most democracies are reacting accordingly. Most democracies have understood that this is the war of one man against the world… So 143 countries voted against that man in the United Nations in October 2022.

Fifty (50) democracies are giving weapons or military help to Ukraine, including Sweden and Switzerland. The case of those two is interesting: Sweden and Switzerland, especially Sweden, helped the Nazis with their “neutrality” in World War 2 (Swiss help consisted in financial arrangements and crucial industrial production, for example the production of ball-bearings for Nazi war machinery… Until, by “accident”, the US Air Force bombed said factories…).

This time, confronted to this latest imperial fascist aggression, the USA is leading in the fight. This is a vast difference, with the years 1914-1917 and 1938-1940, when, very opportunisitically, cynically, and inhumanly, a treachorous USA let France and Britain fight for survival against fascism.

(The reason for the US not helping European democracies, for so many long years, when those were under fascist attack was that, as far as US plutocrats and the US Deep State were concerned, the colossal European empires stood in the way to the even more hummongous US empire to come. By weakening, damaging or even killing, France, Britain, Belgium and the Netherlands, the world promised to become  anew wilderness in which, helped by the US Cavalry, US capitalists could roam… A reproduction of how the US Wesr was won, … and exactly as it happened… This is why the US helped characters such as Mao and Ho Chi Minh, or even Khomeiny, and Muslim Fundamentalism, during that crucial juncture… Well done, Machiavellian style…)

In the present crisis, just as in World War One and World War Two, there is only one way out, the total defeat of fascism. Even more so, because, for the first time ever, a superpower used nuclear blackmail… On all concerned (the case of Japan in 1945 was different: the Japanese army had committed huge massacres, and was actually not blackmailed, but came to its leaders came to their senses, accepting surrender, within 12 hours of learning of the bombing of Nagasaki). 

Trying to mitigate and navigate around dictators is short sighted, especially when nuclear weapons are involved. Dictators, or at least the spirit which animate them, per their reigns, are intrinsically deranged and nilihilistic: they tend to prefer to die, rather than not to achieve their cruel goals.

In the invasion of Ukraine, nuclear weapons are involved, because of “nuclear blackmail”, an expression Putin himself used (accusing others to do it, but that’s the usual trick of the perpetrator accusing the victim of victimizing the aggressor..)

European unilateral disarmament of the last few decades, and will not to impose peace and order, in the name of an unreal view of human nature, has been a catalyst for the growth of fascist dictatorships, all over the world.

In particular, Xi’s China and the Kremlin have not been blocked in Africa, Europe’s own backyard, as they should have been…

All possible weapons have to be sent to Ukraine, and Europe has to scramble to arm itself (especially with anti-missile forces). Not defending democracy is the same as welcoming fascism. Not preparing for war is lethal to peace. Not preparing for nuclear war is lethal to civilization. Disarming when facing a nuclear tyranny is preparing for a worst so bad, only the grimmest science fiction, the sort with cannibalism, has imagined it.

And all this because idiots imagined that wolves could be persuaded to eat salad, through the sheer power of example… and didn’t want to be bothered when told that was unrealistic. In other words, sheer idiocy.

The world “idiot” came from the Greek. idiotes… literally “private person”  as opposed to one taking part in public affairs, politics. “Idiot” came then to be used patronizingly for “ignorant person,” from idios “one’s own”… and then passed in Latin and later French medieval usage. In other words, idiots are individuals so preoccupied by their personal, inner world, that the world escapes them. This is what happened when self-glorifying “pacifists” took over… And decided to buy all manufacturing in China and gas in Russia… while retiring at age 60 (as is the case in France).

Similar idiocy is deployed in the climate crisis. The French Prime Minister actually declared that energy consumption in France will have to get lowered by 10% next year (because of the war in Ukraine, supposedly, coincidentaly with Macron closing or neglecting nuclear reactors to the point that half of them are stopped for maintenance and two have been dismantled). In either case, strategic idiocy… a form of hubris

No US soldier was injured during the shooting of that movie. London on fire, 1940. Where was US help? A few month before, Roosevelt had sent his right hand man, 4 star Admiral Leahey as ambassador to Vichy, recognizing this way the Hitlerian friendly junta of Petain and other traitors…

***

[1] The French Mamba made of Aster 15 and 30 missiles in a Thales and MDMA collaboration, is as good and probably better than its US equivalent the Patriot system (Italian, French and UK navies use Asters for air defense). However Germany prefers to ingratiate itself with the US military-industrial complex… And that’s ironical, not to say foolhardy, especially considering how negative Germany was about Trump (and Biden is like Trump, just more polite, as a German minister in Merkel’s government pointed out… even Trump asked Germany to boost defense spending, and that must mean not just buying more US equipment, but building a European military-industrial complex…).

Kill Nuclear Tyranny Before It’s Too Late

Abstract: Putin’s collaborators say that we should submit to him, because he threatened to destroy us. Wisdom says the opposite: we should get rid of Putin, because he threatened to destroy humanity. 80 years after Auschwitz, that should not be too hard to understand.

***

International law and the United Nations recognize that “war of aggression is the ultimate crime against humanity“… Why? Precisely because war of aggression entails many other crimes against humanity.

Recognizing this after World War Two, the International Tribunal established jurisprudence: those who launch wars are the worst criminals. Putin committed the ultimate crime. (To this Putin collaborators write a fake history where reality is inverted, or invented.) 

Thus, some Nazi leaders were executed “just” for promoting or enabling the Nazi war of aggression (Rosenberg, Von Ribbentrop, among others).

The concept that war of aggression was the ultimate crime was a recent development: World War Two became the massacre it was precisely because only France and the UK viewed it this way. In 1939, 1940, France, Britain (and their colonies) fought alone against Nazism.

Actually the treacherous US president and Nazifying US Congress applied sanctions against France and Britain for attacking the Nazis! Wunderbar! Result: At least 17 million civilians were assassinated in extermination camps, 100 million dead overall (as Japan felt it could get away with invading China, where it killed 40 millions).

***

By September 1 1939, the pattern of Hitler attacking and invading other countries was established. As Hitler refused to stop his invasion of Poland, France and Britain declared war. Soon Russia joined Hitler in his attack on Poland, and, by November 1939, Russia invaded Finland. Afterwards, thanks to Russian oil and other resources, Hitler was able to conquer Europe, but for Britain, protected by the sea, and Hitler’s collaborators: Sweden (big time), Switzerland, and Spain.

This time the invasive Russian autocrat, perhaps encouraged by the Afghan debacle and his 6,500 nuclear weapons, has attacked rather alone: China’s autocrat, Mr. Xi may have second thoughts about the “unlimited friendship”, so no Hitler to help out, and 42 democracies have allied themselves materially with the Ukrainian democracy, constituting, de facto, a super-NATO… Against the tyran brandishing with relish the extinction of humanity, lest he gets his wayand that is, to invade countries when he feels like it, or when he thinks they are not real, or should not exist. 

Pathetically, some naively argue that, precisely because Putin wants very much to kill us all, with nuclear bombs, we should surrender to him, and not irritate him in any way…. Those who know better the history of tyranny through the ages, will draw the opposite conclusion from the same facts… If you share a cage with a furious, hungry tiger, it does not matter how much you try to pet him: he will end up eating you (this has happened for real more than once). The cage we share is this planet. 

Russia’s dictatorship was losing the war of the Open Society, and the more it closed itself up, the more it lost. So it went all the way down the royal road to fascism, hoping for the best, and now settling for not as good right away. 

The Kremlin nuclear tyrant has many collaborators, worldwide, carrying his propaganda as if he was a nuclear Jesus. This propaganda is now becoming the most important part of Putin’s war effort. What Putin hopes is that his propaganda will undermine the long term effort of the 42 democracies opposing his dictatorship.

Indeed, those collaborators are motivated: Putin has proven generous in the past with his collaborators. Putin’s collaborators disseminate lies which fuel the sort of sympathy the Nazis weaponized for years. Much of the ephemeral victories of the Nazis, in 1936-1940 were made possible by National-Socialist propganda, which was very similar to Putin’s. That propaganda was particularly effective in France, as the French Communist Party was under the orders of Moscow, itself secretly, and then officially, collaborating with the Nazis. The result was that most new French fighter planes did not receive their armament (the military high command was afraid it would be seized by Nazi/Soviet collaborators). During the fatal week of May 10, 1940, France therefore couldn’t put in the air enough fighters. 

The Kremlin nuclear tyrant fosters lies, such as Ukraine not allowing COVID vaccines (it allows six, including those allowed in the US and EU), or Ukraine closing TV stations (Putin propaganda stations also closed in the EU), or being vengeful against a past treacherous president (a Putin collaborator who violated the Ukrainian constitution, caused deaths, and is the object of national and international warrants of arrest from judicial proceedings) …

However, this is the Armageddon struggle between nuclear tyrnaical terror and the open democratic society: only the latter can be sustained on a small planet.   

A first Russian officer, 21 year old, is on trial for killing a civilian. There are several witnesses, including other Russian soldiers, who were arrested with him. The officer admitted his guilt, apparently an act of madness, as he and other soldiers were fleeing after commandeering a car, consecutive to the destruction of their armored vehicles.

Evidence for thousands of war crimes is being gathered in Ukraine, by many countries, the UN and even French military war crime specialist units (NATO boots on the ground!) There is a precedent in Bosnia and Serbia of arresting war criminals who led countries and states. 

***

Besides repeating absurd lies on facts, Putin collaborators try to distract public opinion by points of detail, or by exhibiting a complete lack of an ethical core, a moral desert… presented as the epitome of wisdom.

It will not work this time. If the second world war had been won in 1939-1940, few would have died. It was not won, because France and Britain fought Germany, Russia/USSR, Japan and Italy in 1940, plus very bad luck. This time it’s just one fascist dictatorship against 42 democracies, which reacted promptly, this time.

History does not always repeat itself as stupidly as before. Civilization can learn, and does.

Have to do world war against a rogue nuclear armed tyranny? Do it early, before the nuclear tyrant has subjected too many minds with abject infamy.

Putin delendus est!

Patrice Ayme

 

The cartoon of Stalin and Hitler killing Poland was drawn on September 20, 1939. So some US citizens had a fair idea of what was going on. At the time, Britain had basically no army, so France was facing basically alone the coalition of Germany, Italy, Japan and the USSR. Hitler used massive Soviet resources to invade France… and the Soviet fifth column or threat thereof.

***

In an eerie repeat of history, Russia’s Ambassador to Venezuela claimed that   the Soviet Union did not invade Poland on Sept 17, 1939 and that it was in fact Poland, not the USSR, that collaborated with Nazi Germany.  His explanation of how half of what was then Poland came to be under Soviet occupation is similar to the arguments of Russian liar Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine.

Ambassador Vladimir Zayemsky’s delirium appeared in “Correo del Orinoco” on Sunday, Sept 20, 2015, under the title “The Truth as Historical Imperative”.   This venal character pretends that there has been an increase in attempts to attribute “supposed” crimes during the Second World War to the Soviet Union, and calls Poland the worst liar. A few years later, the Putin dictatorship removed memorials to some of the massacres that the USSR committed against Poland (for example Katyn, which dozens of thousands in the Polish elite).

By engaging in what he calls a campaign of lies, Russian authorities claim that Poland tries to divert attention from its own crimes during the Second World War.  Zayemsky claims that the Soviet Union did not invade Poland on Sept 17, but merely took back territory which Poland had illegally stolen. However Polish territory was settled internationally in Versailles in 1919, when Poland was made free from the German occupier.

Reality is that the Soviet Union invaded Poland, without a declaration of war, on Sept 17, 1939.  This was according to the Secret Protocol to the USSR-Naziland, Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of Aug 23, 1939. Two months later, the Kremlin tyranny invaded Finland. Nine days later, the USSR was kicked out of the League of Nations…

HUMANITARIAN NO-FLY Zones Over Ukraine: Use Missiles To Interdict Anti-City Missiles

Surely preventing the bombing of cities could not possibly offend Putin? Why not then close Ukrainian skies to missiles targeting cities? That requires only anti-missiles missiles, not pilots. One can’t argue it’s an offensive move: it prevents civilian deaths. Surely Putin will not throw nuclear bombs at us for not being war criminals?

Call that humanitarian no fly.

There would be a tremendous military advantage to engage the monster weapons Putin has been using: check if, indeed, in real life situation, the anti-missile systems of the West really work.

If we do not want to do this, we want to “slowly die” as President Zelenskyy put it after protesting Russian missile strikes in the middle of Ukraine:  https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1500472014452273157

A little reminder is in order: on May 10, 1940, and for the following 5 days, the French and British discovered to their dismay that, in spite of their inferior quality and inferior numbers, the Nazis performed better militarily.

The reason had to do with the fact the Nazis had been fighting a modern war, in Spain, for more than 3 years. The Nazis had trained for war by making it, the French and the British, because of their coward governments, had not. This included, and was initiated by, the government of the Jewish Prime Minister of France, Blum, who appeased Hitler in 1936. So here we had a Jew, Blum, who could have crushed Hitler, and choose not to, unilaterally in the name of peace. Well, Jew Blum is directly responsible for the death of 6 million Jews… Among a few dozens of millions innocents who died with them. 

The Nazis had a wireless radio in each tank, and knew how to integrated tanks and aviation.

The French and the British figured out these things by the end of the first week of combat. However, by then the Nazi army had cut the main French armies and small British Expeditionary Force, from behind, depriving them of fuel, ammunition, food and logistics. 

The US have the Patriot family of missiles and France-Italy have the Aster family. Patriot can see and intercept on 120 degrees, whereas the more modern Franco-Italian Aster sees and intercepts all around, 360 degrees, up to 20 kilometers in altitude, and 100 kilometer radius. It can intercept the Russian Iskander missile.

“MFR detection… Hostile target… Missile ready… Aster fired… Interception… Killed.” In just a few seconds, the French anti-air warfare destroyer (AAWD) Forbin’s crew detected and intercepted a supersonic target, flying at more than 3,000 kilometers per hour, a few meters above the surface.

The same Aster 30 exists in a truck mounted version.

Less ambitious is the Crotale missile, also truck mounted, made by Thales (like the Aster). Crotale moves at 1,200 meters per second (3/4 mile per second) and maneuvers at 35gs. Ceiling is 9,000 meters, and range 10 miles… Crotale VT1 covers 8 kilometers in ten seconds. In various versions, over the years, 6,000 have been sold worldwide…

Russian President Vladimir Putin has described sanctions imposed by Western nations over his invasion of Ukraine as “akin to a declaration of war”.

“But thank God it has not come to that,” he added. So is it, or is it not? Are we at war, or not? Putin doesn’t know, yes and no, Putin is at war with his own brain… So shall we take him seriously when he warned that any attempt to impose a no-fly zone over Ukraine would be seen as participation in the armed conflict?

Hey, aren’t we already at war? Surely a few trucks carrying defensive rockets around Kyiv doen’t even qualify as a “special military operation”?

French made Crotale tested by the PAKISTAN-ARMY. The truck can travel 80 kilometers per hour. Once launched, the rocket covers the first five miles in ten seconds By then it goes at 1,200 meters per second and can maneuver at 35 gs, 35 times the acceleration of gravity. Why not defend Lviv and then Kyiv and Kharkiv and Odessa with these?.

Many still take Putin for what he is not: a legitimate ruler. Many also take Putin for a reasonable interlocutor. He is not. One example: Putin wrote and said, many times, and explained in elaborate fantasmagoric details why Ukraine was a part of Russia. But on 3/5/2022, at the Aeroflot headquarters, he threatened Ukraine, saying that, if Ukraine kept on resisting, it would not be a state anymore.

In other words, ten days into his war crime, Putin threatened to do to Ukraine what he had been insisting since July 2021 was the reason to attack Ukraine in the first place, destroy Ukraine as a state.

Putin is a pathological liar, potentially the most significant liar in the history of humanity. He is not reasoning, he is poking around for advantage. To prevent logic to be used against him, he tells the grossest lies. The German Chancellor, Scholtz, a Socialist, reported that Putin told him he was not attacking cities. Putin of course knows that the German Chancellor knows that Putin is lying. But Putin does this, because it forces its interlocutors to accept his logical universe. Putin is deliberately unreasonable, and uses this as an instrument to confine the debates, leaving only “solutions” he wants.

In any case, Putin’s own illogical logic can be used against him. If he claims he is not attacking cities, then, why would he object to short range anti-missile missile systems to defend Ukrainian cities from the Nazis that Putin sees roaming in his head?

Patrice Ayme

Truth And Science Have Replaced Fangs and Claws In Human Beings

Science, and, more generally, truth, is a moral imperative.

Humanity has become a singularity, a nonlinear phenomenon: it has taken over the biosphere, and acts as a virus against anything alive. Climate change caused by humanity is exponentiating: it is growing ever faster at an increasing speed proportional to itself, as the direct impact of humanity is amplified by the natural effects it unleashes. 

Coronavirus is an effect of that exponentiation of humanity. If humanity’s nefarious impact is increasing, we need to exponentiate science too, to learn to compensate. That means much more financing, but also much more orientation of young people towards truth and knowledge, rather than towards the latest celebrity or sport figure. 

Science is not a new phenomenon: humanity evolved from it, and is its biological vector. It required quite a bit of knowledge to survive in the wild, 200,000 years ago, while being human, that meant without the fangs, claws, strength, or the trees to take refuge in, of the chimpanzees.  Humans became truth machines. 

Civilizations are characterized by their moods. Their attitude relative to science, and, more generally truth, is what determines their survival when facing ecological deperishment or devastation, and the attending invasions. An aggravating factor today is that we have one world civilization, using resources at several times the sustainable rate. 

 

The general increasing stupidification obvious in school test scores is caused by those who own the media, and have interest to keep humanity silly and unaware. 

 

***

Related to the preceding, Stephen Jones kindly congratulated me for my “Very thoughtful prose” on Masters of War, but wondered: What’s the beef with giving Nobel Prizes? That part didn’t resonate with me.

Thanks Stephen! I don’t like prizes in general, the way they are attributed now. One point is that the Nobel prizes are part of the establishment, that’s why Sartre declined his Nobel. The establishment behaves as the highest judge and donator, it’s all about mutual back scratching, at best. Giving prizes makes the thinking establishment acknowledging the superiority of the powers that be. That’s the wrong priority, as it turns truth into a way to create flesh and blood celebrities, as if this was the ultimate aim, all along, of thinking..

But that’s just part of the problem with prizes. Obama got a Nobel for no discernible accomplishment. All together, the establishment celebrates famous people… rather than famous ideas. And thus teached the youth that the celebrity of people is more important than the celebrity of ideas… Contrarily to what happens with young children.

Now this observation is not new: Albert Einstein didn’t get the Nobel for Relativity because the Nobel Committee knew Lorentz (who got the Nobel thanks to Poincare)… and Poincare, got the theory before… Still Einstein got the fame for Relativity, and that’s, actually, a theoretical problem (his approach denies a global frame… yet it exists, at least mathematically). So prizes: 1) reinforce the establishment. 2) do not put the fame where it should be… thus distancing from people what science is.

Are prizes necessarily bad? Am I sour because of what once happen with a prize of mine, long long time ago? Am I so anti-establishment because I am not part of it? Yes to all the preceding. Prizes could be mainly useful when they push ideas and authors who have been ignored, but deserve a good look.

At it is, the establishment is very monolithic, and prizes, medal, memberships, prestigious appurtenance and other ceremonial ribbons are what enables the establishment to claim gravitas, respect and diversity.

The freer wisdom is, the greater. And there is no better way to cage than with caresses…

Patrice Ayme

***

***

Notes: 1) The Nobel Com spread the disinformation that Einstein didn’t get his Nobel in 1921, for Relativity supposedly because Bergson didn’t like Local Time Theory. That is disinformation: Poincare, beefing up on Lorentz, invented this, Local Time. Bergson got the Nobel (in philosophy) later.

***

I developed my objections to prizes in early 2015…

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/01/06/how-plutocrats-buy-god/

And the NYT followed suit in the Fall:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/10/06/the-folly-of-big-science-prizes/

Biased Leading Questions Can Be Worse Than Outright Lies. False Contexts Are The Worst.

A question can build a context. Stupid, even criminal, question found in Quora, an instructive temple of erroneous contexts:

Are the French the primary cause for the two World Wars by having awakened German nationalism after annexing Lorraine, Alsace, and the Napoleonic wars?

As this was a question which naturally arose to those who know a modicum of history… The question is criminal because it is, implicitly, holocaust denying.

This indeed is the sort of leading question a Nazi would ask. Actually the Nazis asked that question, and answered it their way, the same way as in the question above. Nazis thought, and said, that the Jews and the French caused World War Two (so don’t blame us for Auschwitz, the French did it…) Many English readers, following Barbara Tuchman and her ilk, believe, as it is asserted in lying versions of history, that blame has to be spread around for the launch of World War One. Actually, that’s completely false: the German Second Reich attacked (with the hidden support of racist President Wilson of the USA).

The attack was so carefully planned that  that misleading details were carefully included. The German emperor was sent in vacation incommunicado, for the whole world to see, to instill a festive mood of holidays as usual, a false sense of security, among the future victims (France, Russia, Britain, Belgium, Luxembourg). The idea was that, if the commander-in-chief, the Kaiser was solidly vacationing, he certainly was not planning war. Meanwhile, the German High Command prepared for full mobilization as fast as possible, and full attack, concentrating the entire army onto france.

And it is of course not true that plain German nationalism was the main engine of the two world wars: Why would German nationalists risk destroying Germany? Instead there were other engines in the German motivation to savagely attack the world twice: the hatred-against-everybody (French, Slavs, Jews, Danes, Norwegians, British, Russians, etc.) was a solution of the German plutocratic elite to deflect legitimate anger of the German people against the oligarchy towards convenient scapegoats, prepared to take all the blame… That hatred of the French, the Jews, the Poles, the Russians, the Slavs, etc., generalized as a hatred for Human Rights, 1789 style: as demonstrated by the deliberate genocide of the Natives in Africa by the German military. Especially in Namibia.

Nor was that hatred a new mood that the German empire just creatively invented as needed (although there was some of that, as Nietzsche pointed out, as he saw it unfold under his unbelieving eyes); hatred to death made into a religion was the old cement of Christianism, see the very Catholic Roman emperor Theodosius I, who instituted the death penalty against unbelievers in the early 380s; that approach found its full bloom into Islamism which incorporated in its foundational text, the Qur’an, By the 1500s, the right of religion to kill those who disagreed was refreshed, thank to Luther, who, like Saint Louis before him, wanted Jews to die in horrible sufferings:

Luther: Hitler, Unelected.

German nationalism was created deliberately by Prussia, as a cementing mood in the 18th Century (and it also brought income as the Jews were specially taxed). Prussian nationalism involved solid hatred against Jews, Poles, Austrians, and, soon enough, the French (initially France was the model the Prussian leaders followed, especially king Frederik the Great, though…) It enabled Prussia to seize the wealthy, mineral rich Silesia (grabbed from Austria-Hungary, in a succession of wars) and more than double its territory.

Not that the dictator Napoleon, who opposed the young blonde queen of Prussia, who died soon after her confrontation with the tyrant, was anything but a crazy dictator, So right, Napoleon infuriated the Prussians: but not always for good reason: the French removed the racist anti-Jewish, anti-Polish laws of Prussia, and reinstituted independent Polish political power around Warsaw…

Moreover, the war against monarchic and then republican France which caused Napoleon was caused by plutocratic aggression against the Human Right constitution of 1789. Including aggression by Prussia, with holocaustic threats:

How Genocide Starts.

After the break up of the Carolingian empire found in the Treaty of Verdun of 843 CE, it was not clear who got what, as “Francia” was broken in three pieces (later reunited, then broken again, etc…)

The natural border of Gaul ought to be, as under Caesar, on the Rhine. Germania was, in Roman times, naturally, on the other side of that mighty river. The Francia of the Franks itself extended, for centuries, to Eastern Europe. So Lorraine (from Lothar), Alsace? Details. Countries such as Belgium were fabricated to weaken France. The Netherlands itself, a country France created, turned against its creator because of the dictator Louis XIV, and conquered England to use the latter as a weapon against France….

All these wars were caused by the lack of the minimum unification necessary to establish peace throughout Europe. Thus, naturally Europe should be one confederation, a giant Switzerland… Brexit is the wrong turn there, and should be severely punished… Brexit is actually the wrong mood: Britain had to stay inside and fix the system from inside. Francia Occidentalis, later known simply as the kingdom of France made that same exact mistake in the Tenth Century: the Western Franks excluded themselves from the rest of Francia, just as Britain is excluding itself from the rest of Europe. The Western French spurning of Europe brought 10 centuries of wars. 

Many Middle Age most magnificent buildings were destroyed by the German invasion of 1914. In particular the tallest castle was destroyed (still is). Deliberately in Fall 1918. Here the Saint Quentin Basilique being rebuilt in 1919.

One talk a lot about fake news. Worse are outright lies. But the example above (and Quora is full of them) shows that leading questions which posit the wrong mood introduce erroneous contexts.

Erroneous contexts boil down into erroneous moods. Moods are vaguer and more general than contexts, thus more ubiquitous and more effective, more emotionally, hormonally grounded as the foundations of mentalities

Contexts are local logos, local logics, neural networks in AI parlance. They are full of axioms, theorems, corollaries… Refuting one theorem, changes nothing, if one doesn’t refute the axioms. Because any theorem is a consequence of the axioms. So an individual may concede a point out of politeness, politics, convenience, bad faith, craftiness, influence of the moment. But, if they don’t refute the axioms, nothing will change.

For example, in present French society, fearing Islam (Islamophobia) is identified with racism. Funny thing is that fearing Christianism, which is enshrined in French law, is not identified with racism  (so the implicit racist assumption is made that Islam is associated to a “race’, by the very people who identify Isma with racism!)

Only refuting the contexts they are the foundations of, can change the moods. A nonlinear task.

You want to change the world for the better? Change the contexts, and change the systems of thought. From outrageously false to as good as one can make them. Better moods will follow, and sustain the whole enterprise of truth.

And what’s beauty? Beauty is truth, that is, nature. And more beauty is more nature, more truth.

Nazism was ugly, in great part because it was a lie. Nazism was a factory of the most grotesque lies. So let’s quit the habit, that is, the crap.

Patrice Ayme

***

***

Note on the irrational mood of condemning Islamophobia: The Qur’an has 124 verses of tolerance, but even more of various horrors (for example, homosexuals are to get the same treatment as in the Bible, a “rain of stones”, and “apostates” those deemed to have stopped believing in Islam are to be killed).

As early as the second chapter of the Qur’an, the “Cow” (the first chapter is just an introduction of one page), one finds:

2.190. Fight against those who fight against you in the way of Allah, but do not transgress, for Allah does not love transgressors.

2.191. Kill them whenever you confront them and drive them out from where they drove you out. (For though killing is sinful) wrongful persecution is even worse than killing. Do not fight against them near the Holy Mosque unless they fight against you; but if they fight against you kill them, for that is the reward of unbelievers.

2.192. Then if they desist, know well that Allah is Ever-Forgiving, Most Compassionate.

2.193. Keep on fighting against them until mischief ends and the way prescribed by Allah prevails. But if they desist, then know that hostility is only against the wrong-doers.

It gets worse in other chapters, including the famous “Verses of the Sword” {“Slay the idolaters wherever you find them…“), which, to boot are the latest verses written in the Qur’an, hence supersedes all the milder stuff… (according to an axiom hidden in the Islamist doctrine idea of abrogation (naskh)…)

All too many statements, axioms of the Qur’an are about killing. “Unbelievers”. Clearly, those not embracing it, should fear such a religion. But, guess what? Those who condemn Islamophobia as “racism” have not read the Qur’an (or then special versions where all the violence was edited away). In other words, they hold an idea, a mood, but not what piece of reality (lethal threats are fundamental axioms of the Qur’an, of Islam, then).

***

***

To come back on World War One, the German Second Reich attacked, this is beyond any shadow of a doubt. Anybody doubting that, is a Nazi (somebody sharing the same foundational mood as the Nazis, believing Germany was attacked, when it was actually the other way around…):

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2017/07/20/genocidal-racist-fascist-imperialistic-plutocratic-germany-plotted-to-attack-the-world-in-1914/

***

***

Deficit Obsession, an example of false context: The European Union, like the French Republic in the 1930s, has decided that government budgets should be balanced. It’s not clear if this is a theorem (consequence of higher principles) or an axiom (something out of the EU Qur’an). The practical consequence has been that fundamental economic functions found themselves without money, and degenerated.

For example the French railways degenerated, saddled by a huge debt, for years. In Germany, a similar debt was reimbursed by the government. After years of crisis, the French government decided to imitate the Germans and pay the debt of the railways…

Under Obama the US deficit was above 10% for years. It even reached 15%… Trump is running a 6% deficit officially. More in truth because of secret military/intelligence budgets. Guess what? USA GDP is growing at 1%… Every quarter. Unemployment: 3%… The point: there is enough money for running economy in the USA. There is even enough to give to GE, so GE could buy Alstom, its French competitor…

In the 1930s, France practiced monetary austerity, thus starving her economy, and her armed forces (thus an other factors in not intervening in 1936, when germany went on the attack in two places). Meanwhile Britain, the USA and Germany went into full deficit spending. Conclusion: Britain had a superlative Navy and Royal Air Force in 1940 (including long-range bombers which would ruin Germany), the US had a 24 fleet carrier fleet by 1941, more than double what the Japs had, and Hitler had enough tanks to slice France in two…

OF MANY MINDS WE ARE, Therefrom Our Volition’s Enormous Inertia

“PENSÉE UNIQUE“, INTELLECTUAL FASCISM, MONTAIGNE, HOW TO BUILD A BEAUTIFUL VOLITION AND WISDOM IN FULL.

Many view the following as smart, deep and wise, what we could call the empty-headed view of wisdom:

““When I dance, I dance; when I sleep, I sleep; yes, and when I walk alone in a beautiful orchard, if my thoughts drift to far-off matters for some part of the time for some other part I lead them back again to the walk, the orchard, to the sweetness of this solitude, to myself.”

― Michel de Montaigne

I, myself, and me, Michel, or how to focus on numero uno? Is that the epitome of mountainous wisdom?

This thought of Montaigne reflects a whole current of thought back in Eastern Eurasia. Where is the wisdom in that? Right, sometimes one should confer with oneself, I do it nearly 24/7. But who established scientifically that mono-thinking is superior to multi-tasking?

What is the difference between mono-thinking and “Pensée Unique“?

“Pensée Unique” is the ultimate instance of intellectual fascism, organizing one’s thinking around few, all too few thoughts, and emotions. “Pensée Unique” goes hand in hand with Political Correctness, the latter being possible only with the former.

Oriental thoughts masters, and Montaigne were, and are, searching for a vacuum, where none is to be had.

In truth, the brain is an intensive, gigantic and ultimate multitasker: giving haphazard orders to the brain is like giving haphazard orders to the ocean. One has to be smarter, and more conniving than barking out orders to billions of entangled neural networks. (Yes, entangled, and probably not just classically so: quantum entanglement has now been demonstrated over 500 nanometers…)

When Montaigne danced, he could do so because many parts of his brains synchronized. OK, right, when a cockroach is looking for food, it probably does not let its thoughts wander. And the species has been around thousands of times longer than ours. Is that why we should imitate them?

In truth longevity of cockroaches has to do with their stupidity: were they more clever, they would have bigger brains, eat more energy, and thus would have been more prone to extinction, like T Rex. However, even coackraches let their thoughts wander: turn the light on, they will notice it, although all they thought about a second before was food. They are therefore multitasking: part of their brain is out to detect the exposition light brings them.

If we are into wisdom, we are into brains, and if we are into brains, we are multitaskers.

Drus, peak of death, Chamonix, Alps. I should have died at the location of the upper dust cloud, more than half way up, in the hidden very steep ice gully on the right. That I didn’t is a mystery (had I kept on falling, after huge rocks hit the ropes in the ice gully, by partner would have died too).

The ability to multitask does not mean that the wise should be incapable of concentrating. Just the opposite. Concentration comes naturally, when the situation requires it. I tend to be a scatterbrain, in the noble sense of the term, yet, I am a mountain climber, an activity which, like mountain running, requires concentration (so does deep-sea diving which I still do when next to a non-freezing sea).

More than once, I found myself in desperate situations when only hyper concentration and resulting superhuman strength and agility were required to bring my survival. However, the way survival was achieved reveals how the brain works. The last time this happened was 15 months ago, when I broke a crucial hold in an overhanging traverse where falling was an option implying death and, or, a very grave injury (and thus helicopter rescue, at best). But I didn’t fall, and i am still mystified by it.

I have faced, at least once, certain death, and I pulled it off. How? I don’t know. In cases like that the brain is so fully concentrated that the short-term memory system ceases to work. Motor neurons all fire together, and the frontal lobes, the strategic thinking is actually employed tactically, 100%.  Yes, it’s addictive. When I mountain run on snow, going down at high-speed, and I have to visualize trajectories carefully, to avoid blatant ice, and finishing in the trees, downslope, at 5 meters per second, I sure have to concentrate. I am not like the presumably half senile Montaigne, proud of being able to dance by only thinking about dancing, an occupation I could engaged in, with a blindfold.

So I don’t know what the admirers of  “Pensée unique” hope to achieve. An early death of the mind?

I go the other way:

When I run, I think. When I sleep, I think. In both cases I think, but not in the same way. That’s the trick of superior wisdom acquisition. By not thinking in the same way, I mean not with the same parts of the brain, not with the same neural circuitry, not with the same neurohormones. I try to approach any subject from many different paths, many different neuronal pathways, many different neurohormonal environment. Thinking becomes a sum over all neurohormonal and neurological pathways.

It is indeed amazing how different a subject become, when one is ten miles from the closest human being, running on snow on top of a mountain ridge, much of the brain monitoring the next ten strides, one after the next, besides searching for ice and other indications of various traps.

Of all the things I have thought about, all of them literally got run in the ground at some point. Thinking, when running, is conducted bare boned, as the brain eats oxygen (and I only do mountain running, which demands very high brain activity to select placements and trajectories whereas running around a track can be conducted with a blindfold, holding someone’s hand)

Thus, thinking about a given subject when conducting a brain intense sport forces the brain to consider only the essence of a problem. Similarly, and for the same reason, multitasking forces into concentrating into the essence of any subject, by forcing mental concentration on the bare bones aspects of said subject. Another effect is that reducing by force the usual neurological, and neurohormonal approaches to a subject enables said approaches to rest, and thereupon, reduce themselves to a more concentrated essence, and being approached afresh.

“Free will” or more exactly, volition, is not free: it is a prisoner of our own brain, its neural networks, its experiences, associations, theories and emotions. All those, in turn, were built progressively, over years and even decades, nonlinearly feeding on themselves, and back to the environment they evolved from and modified in turn (in that environment, typically, one’s family).  Volition is a house we helped built, and also a robot we inhabit.

This fits with the rolling cylinder metaphor familiar to the ancient Greco-Romans. Cicero, in De Fato (43), presents Chrysippus’ metaphor of the rolling cylinder as follows: “‘In the same way therefore, as a person who has pushed a roller forward has given it a beginning of motion, but has not given it the capacity to roll, so a sense-presentation when it impinges on the will, it is true impresses and as it were seals its appearance on the mind, but the act of assent will be in our power, and as we said in the case of the roller, though given a push from without, as to the rest will move by its own force and nature.”

Some impulse, say a sensation gets something to roll (or not) according to its nature, inertia does the rest.

The Greco-Romans didn’t have inertia as an explicit concept, they touched it there. Rolling cylinders were used as an important example which Galileo Galilei rolled away with, establishing deep laws thanks to smart experiences involving them. (too bad Greco-Roman society, then, had become adverse to too much thinking, they could have discovered Galileo’s physics)

This distinction between impulse and subsequent evolution, is actually fundamental to differential equation theory: the initial conditions are a different input from the structure of the equation itself. Different initial conditions can give completely different results, from the same differential equation.

The nidopallium in birds is involved in executive functions, and higher cognitive functions. One intricate behavioural process governed by the nidopallium in birds is migration. There is significant neuronal recruitment to this region of the avian brain during migratory flight. It enhances cognitive potency in the nidopallium.

Thus birds benefit from improved navigational capabilities during migration, prompted by the significant changes in spatial sensory stimuli. This illustrates that neuroplasticity in the brain, avian, or not, depends upon the mission. We build the cylinder we are going to roll, depending upon what we do, and, or, plan to be doing. But, once it’s mostly built, our existing neural networks, and the neurohormonal machinery bathing them, presenting enormous inertia, is how volition rolls.

The great masters wanted concentration? Well, the best way to get it is through deconcentration, and subsequent recreation.

One may wonder why so many sages insisted so heavily that “Pensée Unique” is the way of wisdom. The reason is always the same: the elite, the establishment is plutocratic in nature. That means it rules, fully using the Dark Side. That works best when the people’s operating system is a sort of sheep mentality, transforming them into the placid “sheeple” (sheep + people). This is a generalization of Nietzsche’s dual morality model of European civilization: Christianism for the masses, lion (“blonde beast”) for the aristocracy.

It goes without saying that all and any wisdom propagandized to the masses for more than a generation or two was sustained and amplified by the aristocracy (power of the best), truly a plutocracy (power of evil). By telling the masses they should concentrate on the task at hand with one and only one thought, “Pensée Unique” at any given moment, the elite told the masses they worked best as robots, and made sure no wandering thoughts would compromise the established order.

Montaigne was the first of his very wealthy family to achieve nobility status. That implied that Montaigne didn’t have to pay taxes (just like today’s plutocrats). He could just live off the considerable revenue of his immense domain, making wine (the domain still does).

Montaigne knew higher-ups intimately: not only his friends forced him to become mayor of Bordeaux, but he was a personal friend of the King of Navarre, selected and elevated later to King of France, Henri IV (and one of the best leaders civilization had).

Montaigne was a sage, one of the best groundbreaking thinker ever. He broke free of some of the stranglehold of wisdom, Greco-Roman style. He was not always right. For example Montaigne was against the colonization of America, whereas the Greeks’ spirit was to colonize away… And it’s easy to argue Montaigne was wrong on colonization: it’s impossible to pretend, that, in the fullness of time, we are not all descendants of colonizers, because, we are. Even inside Africa, colonization started long before Neanderthal genes made it all the way to South Africa.

Science can, and always does, beat back received wisdom, make it much more nuanced. Yes, the world is local, as field theory has it, but not really, as Quantum Physics, and the dismayed Einstein himself, established, and now confirmed with countless experiments. Truth is true, but in a certain context, thus will always surprise us, as contexts change. Thus so it should be with minds, especially when they think anew..

Montaigne objected to colonization. It was not really original: the first to object to colonization were the Native Americans Jacques Cartier debated with on ther Saint Laurent, in 1534.

So France bungled the colonization of America. Philip II of Spain, himself the son of a wise emperor native French speaker, didn’t have this pangs of conscience: he sent an armada, exterminated the French in the Carolinas, who left only a name behind (and maybe some genes among the Natives). To be a saint, when confronting evil, does not destroy evil, it helps it out.  

Montaigne objected to colonization on moral ground, he wanted the savages to be free and prosper. But, actually, the French “mission civilisatrice” and trade colonizing model, would have saved the Native Americans from the holocausts which lay in their future as they were left to the tender mercy of the English “West Country Men” and other Bible, holocaust stomping colonizers of the enslaving and scalping sort.

Montaigne would have discovered that possibility, had he debated all the possibilities. He wanted to save the savages, he insured their ruin.

Of many minds we are. And the more minds of which we are, and cultivate, the more human we get.

Patrice Aymé

HUMANISM: When TOP PREDATORS NEED LOVE

 

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’

 

Colonization All Over. So Why So Bad?

It goes without saying that colonization was a terrible thing, whine those who want to look good to themselves and other whiners. Colonization was a crime, they insist. At least that’s what PC people howl on every roof, as part of their unwitting campaign of rage against civilization. Because civilization, which was not civilized, caused colonization, this evil of evils, they crowe. Right.

We the descendants of the colonized shall howl from every roof what victims we are.

We the descendants of the colonizers, shall howl on every roof what criminals we are.

We the bipolar paranoid schizophrenic stand as accused, and may as well be mowed down by Islam driving SUVs, trucks, jumbo jets, and non sense, all over us.

***

Indeed, ladies and gentlemen, who does not descend from colonialists and colonizers?

All the Americas were colonized.

All of Oceania was colonized (twice at least).

Was the colonization of Australia by aborigines (who are part Denisovans), 50,000 years ago, a bad thing? It killed a lot of marsupials!

Sénégal: Organized, unified, but never really colonized! A very rare case!

Japan was colonized (twice at least). Japanese civilization started for real, when the archipelago was colonized. By the Chinese.

Some will say China was never colonized. Well, there used to be 100 nations with 100 languages in China, as recently as three centuries ago (the emperor himself recognized then, in a very sophisticated intellectual exchange with the Jesuits; and he expressed both his will to respect that, and his incapacity to do otherwise). However, nowadays, Mandarin (just one language) is taking over, all over. And all Chinese are forced to assimilate with the Borg in Beijing. That’s colonization therein. Is it bad? My daughter is learning Chinese, or, more exactly, Mandarin. She will be able to talk all over.

Madagascar was colonized (thrice; from Indonesia, Africa, France). Even Greenland was conquered by the Inuits, who pushed away the Vikings… (On their way, the Inuits had annihilated previous denizens in the northern Canada archipelago…)

Most of Africa was colonized multiple times. By descendants of Neanderthals (!), Bantus, Phoenicians, Greco-Romans, Arabs, etc.

All of Russia is a huge colony, all the way to Kamchatka. “Russ” initially means Eastern Swedes.  The Eastern Swedes, Viking style, invaded the huge placid rivers of Eastern Europe, all the way down to the Black Sea (where they could trade with the Romans). In the Tenth Century, Vladimir of Kiev conquered Crimea from the local Khan (Mongols who had themselves conquered centuries earlier the Greeks, who had conquered a millennium prior, etc.)  

Even China was momentarily (a few centuries here and there) conquered by Buddhists, Tibetans, Mongols, Mandchous…

Arabia was greatly colonized by Persia, much later Turkey (Ottomans) for centuries.

Europe?

Europe, shortly before Rome rose, was invaded by the Celto-Germans, who covered up the entire continent, all the way to Anatolia. When Caesar invaded, Gaul (“Gallia”) was made of 60 nation-states.

Much of India was invaded, colonized by white men coming from the north, central Asia, four thousand years ago, or more. That’s why India and Europe enjoy the same Indo-European language family.

Egypt was invaded by the Arabs, more exactly by Caliph Omar’s army. Never recovered (whereas Egypt had recovered from colonization by Black Pharaohs, Nubians, Sea People, Libyans, Greeks and Romans). Egyptians themselves had to decolonize the Sahara desert and concentrate on the Nile Valley and adjoining oases.

***

A real question is: which places in the world were not colonized?

Paradoxically, much of West Africa is one of the most pristine, uncolonized places.

West Africa is generally viewed as having been a French, British, Portuguese colony, and that’s superficially true.

West Africa also exported a lot of slaves (to the Americas).

However, West Africa was one of the much untouched places. (Contrarily to whiny repute!)

Not like Europe: all old European languages were wiped out by the Indo-European, Celto-German invasion (or close to it: Basque is a tiny remnant of what once was.)

And don’t brandish southern Europeans as old stock: the Middle Easterners came from the Fertile Crescent, with their futuristic crops (wheat, etc.) and their genes, 9,000 years ago. Another invasion to run over the many Sapiens invasions all over Europe, in the last 100,000 years. Neanderthals made it to North Africa, big time, and their genes to South Africa, but apparently not to West Africa.

***

A real question: when is colonization good, when is it bad?

From the point of view of the invaded, one will guess that colonization is often bad. Yes, but not always. The invasion of Gallia by Caesar would end up creating the strongest part of the Roman empire, Francia, and the Birth of the West. Viewed that way, it was a good thing. And it sure is a good thing if there was no other way to get that good thing. Was it? We don’t know. Was Caesar innocent of the invasion? We don’t really know.

***

“Colonization” in West Africa was mostly a joke, or more exactly, civilizing: ten French officers ordered around 5,000 Senegalese soldiers who, truly, conquered Sénégal. So, in truth, Senegal conquered Senegal under French management. In truth, there were basically no colons in Senegal: the land stayed property of the Senegalese (compare with the USA, where Indian lands were nearly completely distributed by the colonial government in Washington to the European colons!)

A big argument for the “colonization” of Africa was the eradication of slavery, which was endemic, pandemic, chronic, extensive and ubiquitous in Africa (the globalization of African slavery to the Americas, escaping the long arm of European law, has not been properly characterized…)

Here are the national languages of Senegal:

Balanta-Ganja Hassaniya Arabic Jola-Fonyi Mandinka Mandjak Mankanya Noon Pulaar Serer Soninke Wolof

Some of these languages are tonal, some are not (making them a different as latin and Chinese!) It goes without saying that packing such different nations in so tight a space (less than 200,000 square kilometers), result in mayhem, just to keep the population stable. So Senegal has, rightly so, just one national language.

***

Colonization is good when it brings lots of progress, and less mayhem:

This should go without saying. However, the usual interpretation of (hard) multiculturalism is that all cultures are equally worth of respect. This thesis implies that progress does not exist. So we may as well regress, and have plutocracy.

So we see who these proponents of hard multiculturalism were trying to seduce: the powers that be.

By refusing to see when, how colonization has been, and could be, good, they refuse to bring reason to judge destiny. A silly attitude, considering how fast destiny moves these days.

But of course fundamentally hypocritical.

At least, nobody can accuse me to be a hypocrite. I don’t under (hypo) criticize. It’s much more fun, to over-criticize… And criticize all over… Colonization: assess, but don’t deny, its crimes, just as its merits. And remember the fine lines between colonization and immigration.

Patrice Ayme’