Is The United Nations The Greatest Enemy Of The Climate?

October 9, 2018

In its latest report on climate change, October 2018, UN now claims that climate warming caused by human activities is reversible. That absurd claim is much more damaging than Trump clownish positions on climate change and coal. And yet, contrarily to what UN scientists claim, overshooting the target, and then cooling off will probably not work, because of nonlinear effects. Once ice is gone, ice doesn’t come back easily.

Climate change, so far, has been linear: every year a bit warmer, a bit more CO2. That’s not the main problem. The main problem is that the planet could switch to a Jurassic regime.

The UN scientific report on climate change claims that, in the likelihood that governments fail to avert 1.5 degree Centigrade (2.7 degrees F for US primitives) of warming, another scenario is possible: The world could overshoot that target, heat up by more than 2 C (3.6 F) degrees, and then through a combination of lowering emissions and deploying carbon capture technology, bring the temperature back down below the 1.5C (2.7F) degree threshold.

In that utopical UN climate round trip scenario, some damage would be irreversible, the report claims. (yes, sure, *some*). All coral reefs would die. However, the sea ice that would disappear in the hotter scenario would return once temperatures had cooled off, bleats the UN… The ice will return? This is unproven and most certainly FALSE: once the albedo of the Arctic is changed, it won’t come back, and the Arctic ocean will heat up. The Arctic ocean already contains enough heat 50 meters below its surface, to melt said frozen surface completely.

See: https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2018/09/12/prediction-the-arctic-will-melt-suddenly/

The global temperature graph up to 2018. One seems to see an overall acceleration, a nonlinearity, an exponential drawing itself… Exponentiation is the typical nonlinearity.

For governments, the idea of overshooting the target but then coming back to it is attractive because then they don’t have to make such rapid changes,” Dr. Shindell, a climate scientist at Duke University and an author of the report, said. “But it has a lot of disadvantages.” Yeah: like it won’t happen. Cheap enough CO2 capture, for example, doesn’t exist.  

Says NYT:

A landmark report from the United Nations’ scientific panel on climate change paints a far more dire picture of the immediate consequences of climate change than previously thought and says that avoiding the damage requires transforming the world economy at a speed and scale that has “no documented historic precedent.”

The report, issued on Monday by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a group of scientists convened by the United Nations to guide world leaders, describes a world of worsening food shortages and wildfires, and a mass die-off of coral reefs as soon as 2040 — a period well within the lifetime of much of the global population.

The report “is quite a shock, and quite concerning,” said Bill Hare, an author of previous I.P.C.C. reports and a physicist with Climate Analytics, a nonprofit organization. “We were not aware of this just a few years ago.” The report was the first to be commissioned by world leaders under the Paris agreement, the 2015 pact by nations to fight global warming.

The report was written and edited by 91 scientists from 40 countries who analyzed more than 6,000 scientific studies. The Paris agreement set out to make a big wishful thinking about preventing warming of more than two degrees centigrade (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit as US primitives have it) above preindustrial levels — long considered a threshold for the most severe social and economic damage from climate change. Heads of small island nations, hounded by rising sea levels, also asked scientists to examine the effects of 1.5 C (2.7 F) degrees of warming.

Absent aggressive action, many effects once expected only several decades in the future will arrive by 2040, and at the lower temperature, the report shows. “It’s telling us we need to reverse emissions trends and turn the world economy on a dime,” said Myles Allen, an Oxford University climate scientist and an author of the report.

To prevent 1.5 C (2.7 F) degrees of warming, the report said, greenhouse pollution must be reduced by 45 percent from 2010 levels by 2030, and 100 percent by 2050. It also found that, by 2050, use of coal as an electricity source would have to drop from nearly 40 percent today to between 1 and 7 percent. Renewable energy such as wind and solar, which make up about 20 percent of the electricity mix today, would have to increase to as much as 67 percent.

These requirements are not planned by most of the industrialized world. The report concluded that the greenhouse gas reduction pledges put forth under the Paris agreement will not be enough to avoid 2C (3.6 F) degrees of warming.

Despite the policy implications, which go against Trump’s climate skepticism stance, the United States delegation joined more than 180 countries on Saturday in accepting the report’s summary for policymakers. A State Department statement said that “acceptance of this report by the panel does not imply endorsement by the United States of the specific findings or underlying contents of the report… We reiterate that the United States intends to withdraw from the Paris agreement at the earliest opportunity absent the identification of terms that are better for the American people,” the statement said. The Trump position has been that a number of provisions of the Paris Accord, such as a 100 billion fund to help the Third World, are unacceptable.  However the fact remains that, after Obama’s giant fracking effort, major US states have the most ambitious sustainable energy programs (especially mighty California).

The UN scientific report emphasizes the necessity of a tax on carbon dioxide emissions. “A price on carbon is central to prompt mitigation,” the report concludes. It estimates that to be effective, such a price would have to range from $135 to $5,500 per ton of carbon dioxide pollution in 2030, and from $690 to $27,000 per ton by 2100. 

The cost of fossil-fuel emissions rose to its highest level in more than a decade in Europe, in August 2018, surpassing 20 euros a ton ($23) and adding to the cost of electricity across the continent.

Carbon emission permits have more than quadrupled from less than 5 euros since the middle of 2017 after European Union governments agreed to cut away a surplus that had depressed prices of the CO2 permit market since the financial crisis that started in 2008. Utilities and industrial polluters need the certificates to cover greenhouse gas emissions they produce.

By comparison, in fossil fuel happy USA, under the Obama administration, government economists estimated that an appropriate price on carbon would be in the range of $50 per ton (but they did nothing, as usual in Obama’s administration). Under the Trump administration, that figure was lowered to a ridiculous $7 per ton. Those with Trump Derangement Syndrome will say: we told you so. However, in the area of climate change, Trump is mostly wind: he used to be a climate alarmist (not as bad as yours truly). Now Trump has skeptic, because it brings him votes (but in truth he does nothing, same as Obama).

Whereas what the UN is doing by claiming climate change can be reversed, (with sci-fi technology) is diabolical… and will hogtie leaders such as… Trump: how can one justify thorough changes in all of society, while being told, by the UN it’s all for nothing, it’s not necessary? 

What is going on? A form of ubiquitous corruption: scientists who authored the UN report are all, directly or indirectly, government employees. They want to please their employers, so that they can be paid, be influential, and honored. Those employers themselves are trying to please their plutocratic masters (and future employers). So they engineered a completely unrealistic wishful loophole, resting on non-existing technology (efficient, cheap, mass, planetary sized CO2 capture).

9 years ago, I pointed out the UN ignored the potential for a nonlinear climate change catastrophe:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2009/11/18/2-c-is-too-much/

Now the UN has done even worse: it claims that climate disasters are coming, but won’t cost that much (1% GDP for 1C of warming), & they are reversible. BS!

Patrice Ayme

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

October 7, 2018

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…

Physics Needs Strong Philosophy More Than Ever: Scandal of the 5%!

October 1, 2018

And it has to do with the rule of the 1%! 

Philosophy is often dominated by weaklings. Sometimes, centuries of weaklings. Let’s avert our eyes from the Nazi Heidegger: fools love Heidegger, because fools love Nazi style of thinking. So does those who favor the rule of the few, because Nazi style thinking has to do with fascist thinking, thinking according to a few ideas and a few men (“Jesus”, Constantine, Saint Augustine, Muhammad, etc.)

Perhaps the most prominent example mixing barbarity, philosophy and stupidity is the Christianized Middle Ages: Epicurus wrote 300 books. All were meticulously destroyed by Christians. Only three letters of Epicurus survived… What was Epicurus writing about, why did Christians hated him so much? Atomic theory. The Greeks considered it highly probable, they thought they had experimental proof. They also had mechanical computers and very advanced elements of mathematics and physics which the Christians also eradicated. It requires some effort to go back to barbarity!

The Christians hated atomic theory, which denied the whole transmutation of bread and wine into body and blood of Christ: Christians “thinkers” wrote millions of pages on the divine transmutation, using Plato and Aristotle’s fishy onanistic theories of the universe. (For Plato that there was a realm of pure “forms”, nothing real, and for Aristotle that there were ten categories, including “essence”; Middle Age philosophers used those heavily… ironically my own SQPR re-institute Dark Matter as essence: my DM interacts with matter some, by causing “spontaneous collapse”… but let’s not deviate from the subject at hand…)

The first thing a decadent civilization does, is to spite philosophy, spite the lovers of wisdom: decadence springs from brute force, not wisdom.

Real, deepest physicists were, and are all philosophers:

Inventing new ideas enables to discover the intricate logic of the world. Invention starts with being a friend of wisdom: why is it that I think, what is it that they think they know and take for granted, and why? Is there a more precise, better informed way?

Anti-philosophy of pop scientists is partly a consequence of the success thus domination of the “shut up & calculate” school. Top physicist Feynman, despised the philosophers he knew. But he, himself, was a philosopher, and it showed up even in what he considered a valid reasoning to be (Feynman had a peculiar way of reasoning; same with Einstein, De Broglie, etc.) Feynman’s son became a philosopher. Physics describes no more than 5% world, it needs strong philosophy!

The other reason why pop philosophers and pop scientists are also anti-philosophy? Because their masters, those who pay them and advance their careers, are themselves in the employ of plutocrats and their organizations, who hate wisdom… as it would be lethal to them, and their organizations…

And physics needs stronger, more subtle logic!

It has always been clear to me that, on a cosmic scale, Quantum Theory makes no sense: basically physics as we affect to know it, is local. However, Quantum Theory speaks as it the world was global. This leads to a contradiction, which has surfaced in the prestigious journal Nature for all to see: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-06749-8

“Nature News 18 SEPTEMBER 2018
Reimagining of Schrödinger’s cat breaks quantum mechanics — and stumps physicists
In a multi-‘cat’ experiment, the textbook interpretation of quantum theory seems to lead to contradictory pictures of reality, physicists claim.”

Logic is ever more subtle. Consider the following cartoon from “Philosophy Matters“, a consortium of US academic philosophers (which at some point told me my smarts made me insufferably obnoxious, or words to this effect):

Cute, first order correct, but subtly wrong!

Actually, if people are already dead, they can’t die anymore. People who don’t breathe could be already dead, thus can’t die. Because one doesn’t die again. Hence the second cartoon should read: people who stop breathing, die. Context: not everything, but most of the thing!

The same goes for partisanship: people love the frenzy of the herd they belong to, and the simplistic logic it leads to.

Actually Trump has ordered the FBI to make a full inquiry. But an investigation, except for the grossest things (crime against humanity), can’t be made correctly 36 years later… Defense is automatically at a disadvantage against false memories. (BTW, Republican Senator Flake, a blonde, after been cornered in an elevator by irate women, called for the FBI inquiry, saying he would vote against Kavanaugh otherwise.)

Cute cartoon. Indeed, Justice has got to be a blonde with pink skin: always was, always will. However cute, not the whole truth, which is much more tragic. Namely it’s far from being only the so-called “Republicans” who smother justice. “Partisanship” is not the solution. The entire legislative system needs a re-think. Towards direct democracy.

“Donald J. Trump‏
Verified account
@realDonaldTrump
NBC News incorrectly reported (as usual) that I was limiting the FBI investigation of Judge Kavanaugh, and witnesses, only to certain people. Actually, I want them to interview whoever they deem appropriate, at their discretion. Please correct your reporting!”

Right. Let’s seriously investigate the fashion, and age old tradition, in the USA, of getting drunk, especially among young people, damaging their brains, and using alcoholism to get away with the basest behaviors, and habits. This goes both for the accuser and the accused here! (By the way, frazzled by his elder brother dying of alcoholism, Donald Trump does not do drugs, including alcohol.)

One can’t have the better, and progressive civilization needed for planetary survival, when too many brains of the leadership are damaged by drugs. It’s not just a question that their performances are inferior to have they could be, or should be. The mood that drug addiction gives a sense to life brings forth the tendency, the overall mentality, that the mind should be overwhelmed by out-of-this-world modes of operations, which enable the brain to forget reality as it is. And what are the greatest out-of-this-world neurohormonal regimes? All these having to do with violence, fight or flight, and will to power.

OK, those can be correct to use, but only if one knows what one is playing around, and in the full knowledge of the associated causations. And what of those 5%? They relate to the proverbial 1% who own the world. Both are able to do so because common people are tolerant of theories which explain very little, and are impossible to understand: why is gigantic economic equality necessary, how can it be deemed to be compatible with democracy? Well, look at physics: there a theory is called Theory Of Everything, and it explains not even 5%. Similarly modern economics sustains mostly 1% and is just as impossible to understand. They are made to each other, sustain the same mood of mystification!

In the Middle Ages, persons with lots of character, knew all too well that many of the official (Christian) theories were wrong: Beranger de Tour, a church authority, held that reason was god, and thus that the church should obey to reason. The pope was not amused, councils were organized to castigate Berenger, excommunicate him and deprive him of authority. But Berenger held his ground, in spite of the fact heresy could bring the death penalty, until the natural end of his life, in no small part because he was discreetly supported by the ultra powerful Duke of Normandy, a superman in more ways than one.

William the Conqueror was known to hold that the Earth turned around the sun, and mention it during banquets. Heliocentrism, even with the empirical science of the time, was pretty obvious (the small thing, the Earth should turn around the big thing, the Sun, plus, obviously, the Sun didn’t turn around the Moon, thus the Earth-Moon system; the ancient Greeks knew how to measure those distances, using shadows…) William was not afraid to mention it: once, in combat, he vanquished 15 knights. Alone. Mental courage and physical courage are two faces of the same coin.

We need stronger philosophy, the medicine of civilization. Failure of enough of a meta-critical mentality allowed the rule of ideologies which brought us the 1%, thanks to modern economics, and the 5%, thanks to the “shut up and calculate” ideology in physics. “Shut up and calculate” is exactly the ideology defended by Barack Obama in his pseudo-autobiographies, in the service of what he called “navigation” (or how to get to the top). 

Just as genes can go across species, moods can go across fields of mental activity. The overall mood of Ionian and Greater Greece and Athens before they got broken by the Peloponnesian War, was one of inquiry, that means, maximum criticism. After that, and while, and because the great fascist regimes of Rome, Carthage and Macedonia grew in power, the spirit of inquiry shrank: Greek mathematics forgot about NON-Euclidean geometry, and concentrated upon Euclidean geometry, which is much more fascist (it has stronger axioms… restricting mental freedom). Amazingly, although Pytheas of Marseilles had computed (accurately!) the size of the Earth, 23 centuries ago, after the great fascism of Macedonia and then Christianized Rome, arose, the very possibility of spherical geometry became a scientific impossibility, so intellectually fascist the minds became, for 2,000 years…

The Aztecs were defeated because, instead of being legalistic like Qin China. they were into mass cannibalism, and Cortes’ 450 men found hundreds of thousands of local allies who were strongly motivated by their desire to escape barbecues. When the Qin empire collapsed, the Han took over, and repeated Qin mentality in detail, this time to last centuries as a giant empire. And much of Qin mentality survives to this day. (All too much, come to think of it… And yes, amazingly, this essay will be read in China’s People Republic… Qin famously practiced censorship of bad philosophy, ordering the destruction of the “100 schools” (it failed), but spared what was viewed as scientifically, legally and historically significant…)

Each civilization has one mood, it pervades all. It evolves in time, not always for the best.

Patrice Ayme

Frightening McCarthyism Style Senate Hearings For US Supreme Court

September 29, 2018

Abominable sexism is all over the planet. It needs to be fought. The sword of mental progress should decapitate sexism. But a sword works best when it has not been shattered, by striking too hard an object of no value, gaining naught. This is the problem caving to the Kavanaugh hearing hysteria. I am for the hearing, not the hysteria. [Thereafter Kavanaugh will be K and his accuser F.]

This is a philosophy site. Philosophy means loving wisdom, which can’t be accomplished without hating stupidity. And thus, in particular, hating the stupid (Sade, Hugo, Nietzsche did that well). Thus, creating philosophy has rarely been perceived as nice by most contemporaries. New philosophy exists by finding ways to contradict yesterday’s wisdom, uncovering stupidity, thus the stupid.

Individuals with over-wrinkled (F), marked, or reddish faces (from alcohol blown capillaries, watch K’s ruddy face and pink cheeks) and, or neurologically frazzled behavior (both K and F) show evidence of alcohol damage to various tissues. Thus, ex-old drunkards testify in front of the US Senate. Yes, because they both admitted to heavy  drinking of alcohol… while underage, and thereafter. K has made many statements about the festive state alcohol put him into, during many public events he was invited to in the past. Accuser Ford? The woman was a drunkard at the time… and what was a 15-year-old girl doing at a drunkard’s’ party  with older boys? If not for enjoying inebriety, trouble and illegal behavior?

A few points to which the USA seems most immune to: 

  1. crimes, except against humanity, shouldn’t be prosecuted 36 years later: no serious defense can be set-up.  
  2. Even more importantly, both K and F were children at the time… Ah, but the professional prosecutor who interrogated K said that even “horseplay” (what children do) could be sexual in nature, thus… a crime!  

A grotesque standard was established by the prosecutor: “sexual behavior” was defined as “genitals touching” (whatever “genitals” are) voluntarily or not, through clothing or not (this probably makes jammed subway people and football/rugby players sexual behaviorists engaging in “unwanted sexual behavior”). Puritanism gone mad, and vicious: because people are really sent to prison in the USA for behaving, at some point, for a second or two as if they were in Tokyo or Paris subways… This is deep inside the violence, judicial or social of the US: prosecuting what are basically non-crimes, enables the prosecution and law enforcement, and legislating bodies to ignore real crimes, as if it was not their fault. They just ran out of attention, cognition, reflection, time and energy you see. Instead they all worry about the hand of a child, perhaps, on the mouth of a drunk 15-year-old girl… 36 years ago.

An entirely grotesque process then. Kavanaugh the judge was the object of 6 FBI inquiries prior, before his various nominations as a judge. The accuser suddenly remembers in 2012, under “therapy” what happened in 1982. I have been assaulted much more severely, more than once… A tendency is to forget assaults, just to get inner peace, not to suddenly remember them. But never talking about them after they happened? No way. One is forced to share trauma.

***

Before gaining altitude, in a follow-up essay on sexism, to come later, let me reiterate the obvious:

Dreaming is best done above the clouds, for those who search ultimate wisdom, freedom

I am no philosophical friend of Kavanaugh, but mostly his enemy. In particular, I don’t like show-off Christians (they are liars: who can believe all the Jesus fable? Lunatics? Pedophiles?)

Nor do I like drunkards: the good judge was always one of them. I believe drunkards tend to forget, make up stories to fill-in the missing memories (I believe Ford was sexually assaulted in one of her drinking bouts, and that’s why she drank; whether K jumped on top of her, horseplaying, I don’t know, and it doesn’t matter: these were kids, but they shouldn’t have been drinking alcohol). Even more, drunkards can’t live with themselves. Socrates was a drunkard, and proud of it. But how can one be proud of “know thyself” and yet proud of messing up with one’s ability to gather knowledge?

However, this is a witch hunt: the alleged assault, had it happen, barely qualifies as such. It qualifies as horseplay on steroids. And the fact is, the accuser didn’t go to the police (she had probably committed crimes herself, hence her lack of alacrity to testify then or now).

Real assault, something I am all too familiar with, is something quite different. One doesn’t wait 30 years to “remember” it, as Ford claimed. One wants to share it with others, share the sense of injustice. I had a few near-death experiences (some from assault), and I am not mute about it, never was. It’s actually normal to mention violent occurrences… as long as one has nothing to do with the situation which led to the aggression.

Next: why sexism should be eradicated. Ah, last but not least: the prosecutor, a woman, was morbidly obese. That’s a form of violence, even lethal violence. Some will say:’Oh, but she kills only herself.’ No, she enjoys millions of women to view putting a hand on a mouth, or “genitals” through clothing somehow colliding with some other organics under clothing, as a most major crime. But dying of obesity pretty soon? That’s the American way.

I see a violence in obesity, as I do in prosecuting hand on a mouth 36 years later, or judging children as adults, 36 years later, but not of the parents who failed to provide supervision… 

Another point: while I am as anti-sexist as they come, I can see perfectly that sexism is a two-way road. Clearly, in the society at large, women are not on top proportionally to their number and, or, education. However, that should be no excuse for the self-described (pseudo) “resistance” to mimic McCarthyism, just worse. Some may scoff that, surely, this is not as bad as McCarthyism.

But consider this: the original population of Western Europe and North America is not reproducing, it’s actually dying, at a very fast pace by historical  standards. It’s not as fast as the collapse of the Aztecs (which went from say 16 million in 1520 CE to one million in 1600 CE). However, the Aztecs, like other American Native got crushed by Eurasian disease their genetics was weak to resist: it was a special situation. Now EU authorities say they need to welcome (mostly Muslim) immigrants, because European youth is collapsing.

Maybe, tighten the seat belts, please, maybe what is collapsing quite a bit too much, is good old machismo (I will not Tweet this, lest I lose plenty of followers…) If men of a particular ethnicity are going to be terrified of all and any “horseplay” with women, that particular ethnicity won’t just stoop to the level of fanatical Islam in its relationship between men and women. It will also implode. White Euro-American populations will also be replaced by Fundamentalist Muslims, because the latter reproduce aplenty… The reason is obvious: Fundamentalist Muslim males are not living in terror of approaching women when, and where, and how it really matters as far as survival of the “race” is concerned. Differently from all these disheveled white men on the run…

And the worst? All this is fake. The anti-machismo movement is supposedly to help women… But, in the end, it just helps those who have it all…  Those old white men it pretends to excoriates… By removing the fangs which could tear them up, and only fangs will do.

The point of this essay is this: whenone is civilized, it’s important to be civilized in-depth. In depth, Kavenaugh represents much that I condemn, and despise. The sort of aggression Ford claims she was victim of, I also despise and condemn, however much she assiduously prepared herself to be a victim of, with systematic drinking. However, one can’t judge civilization in-depth alone, especially regarding individuals. After all what is going down in-depth is hard to ascertain. Whereas superficial forms are easy to observe: acceptable form, appearance, politeness have also to be extended too, it’s a matter of civilization one can see and judge easily. When Feinstein and other “Dems” (Demons?) sat on the accusation against Kavanaugh, keeping it secret, until they could spring it at the last moment, they were sabotaging the (pseudo) democratic process of Supreme Court generalissimo selection.

Applying full adult justice on children, decades later, only an unacceptable civilization would do this. As Kavanaugh himself said:’What goes around, comes around.” In their fight to death against Trump, the “democratic” powers that be play a dangerous game: they create a precedent of using any sort of propaganda, however improbable (Trump as Russian agent… when Trump is on tape as having exactly the same opinions when the USSR already existed and Trump was fighting… Ronald Reagan’s plutocratic globalization).

One should not forget (should one know it) that the Roman Revolution which ended up with Augustus as dictator, started with legitimate gripes of the soldiers of Octavian army. Centurions went ahead, one bared and brandished his sword at the… Senate, the Roman Senate, and declared that if the Senate didn’t take the right decisions, his sword would. We are not yet there, and Trump is craftily surrounded by generals. But this is the nuclear age, and history goes fast….

Patrice Ayme

***

***

Note: The pseudo-left has also issued scathing comments about the Senate being full of old white men (as the tips of all hierarchies)… First that’s grotesquely ageist, a form of discrimination just as bad as discrimination against children, as the old can’t defend themselves well. Worse: there is a reason it’s called a “Senate”. Like in “Senior”. It’s about older people giving advice, because they have little personally to gain in giving poisonous counsel. Age discrimination is one of the worst thing: it is not just unfair, it deprives humanity of wisdom. Learn.

France Parented the USA: So Why Forget? Because The Child Played (And Plays) Vicious Games, Partly Reflected In How It Neglected Its Parent.

September 24, 2018

Tremendous efforts are vested by the elite to tweak the mentality of those they subjugate. No detail is spared. Details impact emotional logic, and can fabricate fake minds, apt at serving only the masters who set them up. And that starts by instilling a perverse, twisted sense of history.

Even the names of aircraft carriers can be tweaked, perverting the sense of history and even of democracy: once named after the major battles which made the USA (Lexington, Yorktown, Saratoga, Bunker Hill, Belleau Woods), now they are named after unelected celebrities (Ford) or undistinguished president (there is a “Reagan” carrier, but no “Nixon”, or “Carter” carrier… The idea being Reagan is vastly superior to Carter or Nixon… although history will judge otherwise… and no carrier should be named after them. JFK, an authentic Navy war hero, who died a martyr, avoided nuclear war, send Earth to the Moon, is another matter, he deserved a carrier…)

Why do the French get downplayed in their importance in the American Revolutionary War?

One French army, commanded by Washington, plus two French armies, commanded by Lafayette and Rochambeau, and the French fleet, commanded by De Grasse, converged on Yorktown, and, after heavy bombardment by French siege guns commanded by De Barras, forced the surrender of the British army.

The irony is that the French themselves learned, and learn, history from the real supreme victors of 1945, the USA, or more precisely, what the USA mostly means, US plutocrats, their media, universities, businesses, with their CIA, Deep State and another 16 “intelligence” agencies in tow.

If one were a French intellectual in the 1950s, and one wanted a lucrative career, one had to sing the praises of the US, or the USSR, or both (Sartre and De Beauvoir did both, after earlier collaborating with the Nazi authorities). Significant details such as the French declaring war (and attacking) Hitler in 1939, while Hitler was allied to the USSR (which provided Hitler with all sorts of goodies, including crucial oil), had to be forgotten.

So had to be forgotten, the troubling double game of the USA at the inception of both WW1 and WW2. The machinations the USA and its moral persons and agents engaged in, favoring fascism and working against the French Republic, should have been seen as particularly outrageous, especially in light of how the USA came to be. Indeed, the French monarchy of Louis XVI was the main agent of creation of the US Republic, and deliberately so. Most probably, without France, the USA would never have come to be. Hence the USA is the baby France brought to this world, and the refusal of the USA to do anything in May-June 1940 to prevent the fall of France is ignominious. If the USA had given an ultimatum to Hitler, his generals would have made a coup.

German generals had asked precisely for such an aggressive attitude, on the part of the USA, as early as 1937, to get rid of the Nazis; after a clear declaration, on the part of the USA, that the USA would side with France against Nazism, the generals had all the excuse they needed for a coupinstead the plotting German generals got denounced by the USA and the UK… to Hitler himself; hence in 1940, German generals could only feel that the USA, or the powers which mattered in the USA, those which controlled public opinion, were in agreement with the Nazi invasion of France! They didn’t guess they were the victim of another bait and switch, just as in WW1…

Had the USA sent such an ultimatum, requiring the immediate German evacuation of France, German generals could have said the Nazis imperilled Germany, as it was obvious to all Germans they couldn’t win the grand coalition of France-Britain-USA. Thus a loud and clear US intervention in 1940 would have brought quick German surrender… Instead, when Hitler declared war to the USA, December 11, 1941, all of Germany, and, in particular the German army, was so deeply committed to Nazi racial and other criminality, that they couldn’t back out…

Even by late June 1940, France was far from defeated: the French air force was poised to gain air supremacy (after enormous Luftwaffe losses and exhaustion), and the French army and fleet could lock up the Mediterranean, and pursue the war from southern France, Corsica and especially North Africa (which the Germans demonstrated later they couldn’t cross seriously, just because of the small islands of Malta, which stayed unconquered).

The Canadians intervened: they landed in Brittany in June 1940, but their divisions were promptly beaten back. A US intervention, the US had aircraft carriers, would have persuaded the French Assembly to keep on firing on the Germans (who had already suffered enormous losses).

The US Deep State attitude during WW2, driven by the French hating plutocrat Roosevelt, anxious to gain control of all European empires, was to destroy as much of France as they could get away with. Hence the attempted grabbing of New Caledonia, the bombing and annihilation of French ports (the Germans had no more boats), and the plan to occupy France as if it were Nazi Germany (that failed because the USA depended upon the one million men French army in 1944, and most US generals were sympathetic to the French cause, and even admired some of their French colleagues, for example “Hannibal” Juin, victor of Monte Cassino, and who could have finished the war in weeks, had he been given free rein…)

However, after the war, the CIA is known to have had at least 50 top French influencers in the media on its payroll… And the real influence was probably much greater. Top French intellectuals did as they were paid for: they rewrote all of French history in a negative light, starting with Vercingetorix and Caesar. Grossly underestimating the French crucial role if the American Revolution was part of it.

The French and US Constitutions of 1789 were proclaimed only three weeks apart. That’s no coincidence: France and the USA actually had a common revolution, and probably its main character was not the American Founding Fathers as much as the tragic figure of Louis XVI, who did in America what he was afraid to do in France (although he feebly tried there, persistently, but all too weakly).

If enough US citizens had known the history of the USA and of the ideals they embraced, better, in 1939, they would have supported the French Republic against the Nazis, the USSR and Imperial Japan, and Fascist Italy … As Great Britain (a monarchy!) reluctantly did, in the last few months. History would have turned out differently: no Auschwitz, etc. But US citizens didn’t know France gave birth to the USA, as much as she did (and twice, as France also gave birth to Britain in 1066 CE, complete with outlawing of slavery there…)

Those who don’t learn history are condemned to make it worse, today. more than ever

The greatest and final battle of the American war of independence was at Yorktown: one US army, two French armies, and the French fleet, cornered the British army, and forced its surrender. After inflicting grievous losses on the Japanese carriers, the US aircraft carrier Yorktown was sunk at the Midway battle, a tremendous US victory on attacking Japan.

There is no more US carrier named “Yorktown” in the present US fleet. But the most modern US nuclear carrier is named “Ford”. “Ford”, although US president, was never elected to that office, nor to the office of Vice-President, which he was honored with before. One would guess that democrats and republicans want to forget how one guy can get to the highest offices of the land… without election. But, no, now we have an aircraft carrier to celebrate this strange accession. Strange in a democratic republic, that is…. So, say the history people learn, forget how the USA came to be, through a revolution co-engineered with France, in a republican, democratic spirit, but instead, celebrate now an unelected US president: a telling difference between yesterday’s hopes and ideals, and today’s decadence into plutocracy!

The excellent movie “Gladiator” presents a nice alternative history of Rome. It could have happened that way, indeed. The Republic could have been re-established because of a courageous general. But it wasn’t. Why? The probability that the Republic would come back was low. We the People of Rome expected dictatorship. At some point all minds have become too perverted by fake history, inappropriate mentality! Mental inertia is in command, all the way down to the direst oblivion…

Indeed, Roman fascism and plutocracy soon fell into more of the same, adding hysterical militarism, then apocalyptic, beyond idiotic Christianism, followed by the weird alliance of the wealthiest, with the most religious and barbarian chieftains.

Should we want to avoid the new Dark Ages we often seem to be cruise towards, we need to see history as it really was, not according to manipulative agendas. Yes, France gave birth to the USA at the battle of Yorktown, and yes, the USA betrayed the French (and the Poles, and the Brits, and the Jews, and all the other victims of Nazism) in 1939-1940. That’s real history, not to be confused with fake hysteria.

Patrice Ayme

Why Plutocrats Hate France: Liberty, Equality, Fraternity

September 19, 2018

Illegal Immigration: The New African Slave Trade. Luxembourg Thieving Plutocracy Kills Italy!

September 17, 2018

LUXEMBOURG’S Admits Having An EXCREMENT PROBLEM. Solution: KICK LUXEMBOURG OUT OF THE EU! (For thievery, genocide!)

“I heard some colleagues say that one needs immigration because the European population is aging. Salvini, Italy’s Interior Minister declared. He then explained that he has a vision of the matter which is “completely different”, a vision according to which one must first help Italians “to have children as a few years ago”. Salvini then evoked an African youth which “replaces” European youth… before zeroing onto the case of Luxembourg:

“Perhaps in Luxembourg there is this need to replace European youth by African youth, but we in Italy, we feel the need to help our children to make other children”, he declared.

And Salvini then broke the camel of giant European hypocrisy, by going one truth too far: And not to have new slaves to replace the children we don’t make anymore. I prefer to help Italians found families.

The Luxembourg foreign minister Jean Asselborn (Luxembourg has a foreign minister, whereas Catalogne, which is 15 times greater in population, doesn’t) then exploded, in French, cutting into Salvini’s speech time. Asselborn claimed that Luxembourg had helped Italy, more than half a century ago, by allowing Italians to work there (and send money back to Italy). Actually, many Italians of two generations ago, helped building up modern Luxembourg, and their ephemeral presence was legal.

Ignoring those basic facts, which made his interruption grotesque, the irate Luxembourg potentate concluded:THEREFORE SHIT! (He used the words ”Alors merde”; I made an exact translation). Like a furious chimp, he pursued by throwing a few objects around, the way chimps do when they are furious. Salvini calmly commented on the lack of “good education” of the Luxembourg chimp, and, undeterred, proceeded to describe all sorts of trafficking the EU tolerates.

According to the Luxembourg foreign minister’s moral imperative, if Harvey Weinstein thought his grandparents “helped” somebody, 50 years ago, by employing them, he has now the right not just to rape them, but also to kill their next generation, by making a healthy life impossible. The very rage of Luxembourg shows the master exploiters of Europe are perfectly aware they are losing ground. This is serious stuff: they are traitors, they should be tried, and send to the slammer. One can see they are starting to guess they are in deep trouble…

The fertility rate has been high in the UK, because of the massive immigration (much of it, illegal). The original English population is stuck at 40 millions… since the 1930s! Spain’s population has been growing tremendously, in spite of a catastrophic lack of fertility, thanks, once again, to ultra massive (legal) immigration. Nordic countries have boosted their population by importing Muslim immigrants, on the order of 10% of the population. Indications are that the Nordic Natives are getting fed-up (see last Sunday’s elections in Sweden). Germany has imported millions of Muslims, to foster population growth. Italy has officially 700,000 known and documented illegal immigrants (more than 1% of the population). Italy’s fertility rate is just as catastrophic as Germany’s. France was OK, but recent governments of traitors have taken anti-natality measures… After the 2008 crisis, Portugal lost more than 10% of its population…

Illegal immigrants to Italy get 37 Euros a day. In France, they get even more. But millions of French and Italian citizens live on a small fraction of this, even after government “help”. One can see the illegals getting fancy haircuts (yes, Africans getting fancy haircuts), speaking on large brand new smartphones (which many millions of French and Italians can’t afford!)… As they amble around, having to work not.      

Thus we are talking ethnocide there: make the life of a population, in this case the Italian Native population, so impossible, it can’t reproduce anymore (a problem zoos have learned to correct, by making their animals happy; the European animals are so unhappy, however, they can’t have children anymore…)

Nothing plutocrats don’t love there. Genocide was always the ultimate weapon of plutocracy in mature form. Plutocrats love ethnocides, especially of the population they rose from, because that population knows where they came from, and how. Thus Roman plutocrats did all they could to weaken Italy (hence preventing a return to the Republic… That only started to squeak back in as Charlemagne endowed Venice with freedom… Four centuries later, several republics followed in italy…)

Salvini wondered if Luxembourg couldn’t find a “more normal person”:

Matteo Salvini

@matteosalvinimi

Paragona i nostri nonni emigrati ai clandestini che sbarcano oggi, vuole più immigrati in Europa e conclude urlando: “Merda”.

Ma in Lussemburgo, paradiso fiscale che non può dare lezioni all’Italia, non hanno nessuno di più normale che faccia il Ministro???

(Translation: He [Luxembourg’s Minister] compares our emigrated grandparents to the (clandestine) illegals who disembark today, he wants more immigrants in Europe and concludes by howlering: “Shit”.
But how come in Luxembourg, a tax haven that cannot give lessons to Italy, they have nobody more normal which could be Minister??? #Asselborn)

Salvini underestimates how difficult it is to find someone not satanic in charge in a plutocracy like Luxembourg. The ex-PM of Luxembourg, now head of the EU Commission, is a notorious drunkard. The powers that be in Europe, love that (because his drunkenness will prevent him to become dangerous to them!)

Both Mr Salvini (from the “League” supposedly right-wing) and Luigi Di Maio, his partner in the government (from the Movement Five Stars, supposedly left-wing), on Thursday rebuked a petulant European commissioner for likening populist leaders in Europe to “little Mussolinis”.

Pierre Moscovici, the EU’s economics affairs commissioner, an ex-Economy and Finance (“Socialist“) minister for France, compared the current economic climate with the rise of Fascism and Nazism in the 1930s and said that while Europe was not menaced by a new Hitler, there were plenty of “little Mussolinis”.

The remark drew a furious response from Mr Salvini, who has always insisted the League has nothing to do with fascism or anti-Semitism, accused the French politician of insulting Italy and said he should “wash his mouth out”.

My take on it? Luxembourg is a filthy tax haven, destroying the European all classes which are not hyper wealthy: tax avoidance is Luxembourg one and only industry, and its main clients are the biggest tax avoiders in the world (GAFA and the likes of whom owns The Economist, and other media).

What to do? Italy is a large country. However the four large European countries are undermined by tax thieves, and plutocratic friendly policies… to the point that their population is collapsing (except for those which cheat with massive immigration, like Great Britain, hence Brexit, a reaction to that massive illegal immigration from a furious UK population). The tax thieves should be kicked out of the EU, now that their ring leader, the EU has committed apoptosis (=suicide). I personally know small European Plutos who avoid taxes, using the Isle of Man to do so (I am thrilled to see what they will invent after Brexit…)

Luxembourg should be kicked out of the European Union (with Ireland and the Netherlands, all for making their economies around tax evasion from the rest of the EU).

And Salvini is right, and I have said so myself in the past: to let young, illegal Africans come to Europe, through traders, is a new form of slave importation (and it is deliberate, as it is meant to replace lack of European babies!) Enough is enough. Time to dismantle plutocratic Europe, let’s start with Luxembourg: a little warm-up.

Some will suggest I am over-aggressive. Filippo Grandi, the UN’s High Commissioner for Refugees, on Friday warned populist politicians across Europe not to “create space” for racism by using aggressive language. “The language of politicians must not create space for racist attitudes,” Mr Grandi told a press conference in Rome. In July the French Constitutional Court decided there was a “principle of fraternity“: illegals had to be helped (except to actually cross the border). But racists accusing others of racism is probably older than civilization. Adolf Hitler started his career defending (“German”) minorities, while stridently accusing others of racism. One attacks best when one is felt to be morally superior. Actual physical aggression is preceded by acquiring the perception of high moral ground.

Europe, as it is, is not sustainable (actually its population is supposed to collapse, according to the EU itself… among other problems). So it has to change drastically… the alternative being death, and that, indeed is ultimately extreme. Holding back descriptions of what actually is happening in Europe is forcing countries such as Italy, to disappear (fertility rate: less than 1.4 child per woman, who can’t have children from lack of jobs, while illegal migrants swim in money). Disappearing a country surely is the most extreme form of racism!

Compassion is great. However, it can be lethally misleading if fed with erroneous data.

Patrice Ayme

***

***

Note 1: I talked to professional immigrant smuggler for an hour. A loquacious Italian citizen, black as charcoal, originally from Ivory Coast, she told me in superb French that the illegal immigrants actually don’t see the 37 Euros per day “given” to them. Instead the money goes to “humanitarian” organizations, which confiscate the money. She viewed those “humanitarians” as crooks. We had an excellent, friendly conversation (no doubt in part from my African culture, in which I am at home… Contrarily to what some may too easily feel, I am not anti-immigration (having being an immigrant myself all my life!)… And I am not anti-African. I am against treating European Natives so badly they have more reproduction problems than pandas in zoos… By the way she was actually in the process of smuggling several African Natives (from several African nations, all young men), leading them across the towering mountains of the French border…

***

Note 2: French version of the gist of this essay: Le Luxembourg est un sale paradis fiscal détruisant l’Europe avec ses pourris ultra-riches évitant les impôts: la est sa seule “industrie”. On devrait éjecter le Luxembourg tout de suite de l’Union Européenne. L’immigration de jeunes Africains est en effet une nouvelle traite des esclaves. Il est temps de démolir l’Europe des ploutocrates.

Here is the French version of Salvini: “J’ai entendu certains collègues dire qu’on a besoin de l’immigration parce que la population européenne est en train de vieillir.”Il explique ensuite qu’il a une vision des choses “complètement différente” dans laquelle il faut d’abord aider les Italiens à “faire des enfants comme il y a quelques années”. Il  évoque ensuite une jeunesse africaine qui “remplace” la jeunesse européenne, avant de citer le cas luxembourgeois. “Peut-être qu’au Luxembourg il y a ce besoin, mais nous en Italie, nous ressentons le besoin d’aider nos enfants à faire d’autres enfants” déclare-t-il ainsi. Et d’ajouter la goutte qui fait déborder le vase: “Et non pas d’avoir de nouveaux esclaves pour remplacer les enfants que nous ne faisons plus.”

Prediction: The Arctic Will Melt Suddenly

September 12, 2018

So far, the Arctic sea ice has melted at a pace which is best fitted with lines. 10.4% per decade, more exactly. It sounds reasonable, in first approximation, to suppose that will keep on that way. However, most changes start, in first approximation, linearly, before fitting higher power curves.

In the case of Arctic sea ice, a number of mechanisms seem possible to go from linear to nonlinear.  For example, the more sea ice melts, the warmer the sea gets, the harder it is to form sea ice. Such a self-feeding mechanism is an exponential.

However, we, humanity just found a huge new mechanism to potentially melt all ice, and it is operative. It is even of our own making! As with the Fall of Rome, one cause leads to others, which then can feed back on the first.

The discovery?

A blob of warm water, 50 meters below the surface of the Arctic ocean. Why does not come to the surface, if it is warmer than the water above it? Because it is abnormally salty, thus denser.

How was it created? The Chukchi Sea has become ice-free much too much of the year. It is just north of the Bering Strait, and lies on top of the flooded Beringia land bridge between Eurasia and North America. So it is shallow: average depth, 71 meters only, and warms up well. The Chukchi Sea warms up so much it becomes salty, and that salty water sneaks north below cold upper waters (it is blocked from going south by the Strait.

The redder, the more heat content in the Chukchi sea… When the Arctic Ocean starts to churn, the sea ice will all melt…Study lead author Professor Mary-Louise Timmermans, of Yale University (yes, a woman) said: We document a striking ocean warming in one of the main basins of the interior Arctic Ocean, the Canadian Basin… the upper ocean in the Canadian Basin has seen a two-fold increase in heat content over the past 30 years.

The researchers traced the source to waters hundreds of miles to the south, where reduced sea ice has left the surface ocean more exposed to summer solar warming.

Professor Timmermans added: This means the effects of sea-ice loss are not limited to the ice-free regions themselves, but also lead to increased heat accumulation in the interior of the Arctic Ocean that can have climate effects well beyond the summer season.

 

What next? A strong storm, an Arctic hurricane (they happen!)  could push cold waters out, and that would force the warm water up. I would venture to say that this is exactly what happened in August 2012 (generating thereafter the smallest Arctic sea ice ever recorded, by a long shot).

The same will happen again in the future, on a grander scale.

And all the Arctic sea ice could melt, thus warming the Arctic ocean enough to melt all ice, and that in turn, could warm up the ocean enough that summer to prevent the return of the ice thereafter…

It goes without saying that, after the Arctic ocean is ice-free, trillions of tons of methane hydrates laying inside the shallow sea floor will fiercely erupt, freeing trillions of tons of methane. It has happened in the past, and can be violent enough for tsunamis. It is actually already started, albeit on a small-scale, relative to what it could become. Methane is a greenhouse gas with more than 25 times the warming power of CO2 (the “forcing” effectiveness to be a bit more technical). Thus our effort to engineer a man-made Jurassic climate will make great strides. Maybe we will see class 5 hurricane strike Canada?

Fun springs eternal!

Let’s re-engineer a few dinosaurs and pterosaurs, once Canada’s Arctic archipelago is covered with forests, as we are at it…

Patrice Ayme

    

 

From the “Deep State” to the “Steady State”: Anti-Trump Derangement Reaches New Lows…

September 7, 2018

The New York Times published an anonymous essay claiming to be authored by a “senior administration official”, to the effect that Trump is a flaky child, and the country is saved by “resistance” inside the Trump administration by the “steady state”. Trump is not just immature, but: 

The root of the problem is the president’s amorality. Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision-making.

Although he was elected as a Republican, the president shows little affinity for ideals long espoused by conservatives: free minds, free markets and free people. At best, he has invoked these ideals in scripted settings. At worst, he has attacked them outright.

Free markets”? What is “free” about Chinese market domination? 375 billion dollars of deficit in 1917! … With the US alone. Adding the European deficit, one gets more than half a trillion dollars in deficit. So many good jobs, and know-how lost! … And the consequences are major, even ecologically: France, for example, has no recent development of solar PhotoVoltaic, the cheapest unsubsidized energy in 2018. Why no French PV? Because, argue the French higher-ups, the solar panels are made in China, and purchasing them would aggravate the already catastrophic French trade deficit! 

Chinese market domination is enabled by governmentalism:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/synthesis-found-governmentalism/

Governmentalism works: all serious civilizations have known this. The Greek city states, especially Athens, practiced governmentalism extensively. So did its enemy, the Achaemenid empire. Rome practiced governmentalism, even more so. Western Europe also did, led by the Merovingians, Carolingians, the French monarchy, and the Anglo-Normand state.

Governmentalism was practiced for so long, it spawned a trade subsidiary: mercantilism.

So why doesn’t the West practiced it as much as it used to?

The trade imbalance and de-industrialization of the West is not an happenstance, but a plot: Chinese market domination is enabled by collusion with global plutocracy.

As I have explained many times, the scheme was inaugurated when the Roman Republic degenerated: the Roman plutocracy became strong from not paying taxes, and weakening the core of the empire, Italy, which had given birth to it. Now we are repeating it, on a planetary scale.

***

So will sneer that Trump is no anti-plutocrat, but that he is not of them himself. Right. However, in disagreement with most other plutocrats (and no, it has nothing to do with Putin: Trump is on the record with his positions since 1970… If anything Trump influenced Putin first, not vice versa!)

Several ideas Trump promotes are lethal to the existing plutocratic establishment (anti-”free” trade, anti massive immigration, anti deindustrialization, denouncing the vested, biased opinion of most media, etc.) The more Trump pushes those iconoclastic ideas, the more the plutocratic establishment is hurt, because it rests on them. Soon, at this rate, lethally hurt… For example “trade”, like “art” are viewed as absolute goods by all old fashion parties be they “left” or “right”. Never mind that they are tax eschewing. No attention is paid by the media that those augment the plutocratization exponentially. And why would the plutocratically owned media undermine beliefs which enables it to exist? Instead the “liberal” establishment insists that having a Supreme Court justice who won’t fancy abortion at 8 months, for no good reason, undermines democracy.  Brandish red herrings, and thrive!

***

Although Trump has helped civilization to sink lower than ever, this is not the worse problem. The worst is that his opposition is worse.I replied to the anonymous editorial. Here is my comment below. It apparently baffled the New York Times (charitable interpretation!), which started by NOT publishing my ideas (the NYT published another 10,000 comments on the anonymous ed in the meantime)! Thus the readership was kept safe from subservience.

***

One has to look beyond Trump. One has to look beyond the present “administration”. One has to look beyond the present political system, that so-called “representative democracy”. One has to look at reality: “representative democracy” puts too much power in too few hands. This cannot end up well, because the physical power is increasing while the brain power (the few hands in power) is not.

Thus, “Representative democracy” has to be contained. Notice that “representative democracy” is a contradiction in adjecto. Demos kratia means people power. It does mean the few ruling, that’s oligarchy. Oligarchy is what we have, but we call it democracy. And when, as is the case, just one man has power, that is tyranny (rule of the one). Thermonuclear tyranny. We came very close to all-out thermonuclear war during the Cuban Missile Crisis. If the two leaders had been a tiny bit more crazy…

At some point just one Russian officer, in a particular submarine by chance, prevented the firing of thermonuclear torpedoes against an US aircraft carrier.

Giving too much power to a few men was long tried: contrarily to repute, kings were often elected (such as the founders of the Merovingians and the Capetians). It is the principle of kinship, too much power for one man, which was at fault.

To contain the exaggerated power of a few men, one has to go back to DIRECT democracy, as Athens (and Rome to some extent) practiced, enabling them to advance civilization. In the Internet age, We The People can vote directly in plebiscites. This is done in Switzerland,  very successfully, albeit partly, in California. They both balance the usual representative system with the direct voting system.  

***

I was disappointed that the NYT didn’t publish my comment, and sneered that it was naturally more interested to exhibit Trump Derangement Syndrome symptoms, rather than addressing the deep issues at hand. Then I did something I didn’t do for a while: I sent a protesting comment. Here it is:

***

I sent a comment to the NYT which was cogent: the problem isn’t so much Trump inasmuch that there is too much power in too few hands, but my comment doesn’t seem to have been published (I got no notice to this effect!) The solution to too much power in too few hands is more direct democracy, not just changing one man, and vest another with the same powers. Why doesn’t the NYT believe that the entire principle of representing one country by one all-powerful man is not at fault, and not relevant to the problem at hand?

***

What happened? Ten hours later, the NYT published my protesting comment! … Another 39 minutes after that, a full day after submission, the NYT published my initial comment… A rare case where protesting worked.

***

One can see that great care is bestowed to determine which ideas We The People is exposed to… 

Obviously plutocrats hope that, or at least, hold that, if civilization collapse, they will make out like the bandits they are. This is what happened, indeed, when the Roman state collapsed: the aristocracy survived by making alliances with the invading barbarians. Thus the relative status of the wealthiest improved while everybody else suffered or died… History repeats itself. However, history repeats itself less than ever. Where it used to whisper, it now roars, where it used to crawl, it now rushes, and where it uses to advise, it now lies.

Ideas drive civilization. Sometimes they drive it into the ground. The “fittest” civilizations survived. But, now we have just one world civilization. Just as there is no planet B, there is no civilization B. That’s it. There is no alternative. Only the best ideas, better ideas can save it, by helping it to morph into a sustainable form.

One will not get there by preventing We The People to be exposed to more sophisticated ideas. Because better ideas will be more sophisticated.

Patrice Ayme

Up In Smoke: EVIL OF BANALITY, Not Just Banality Of Evil!

September 2, 2018

Slash And Burn Planet: What Could Go Wrong?

Satellite pictures show that the planet is burning. Is that evil? Yes: when the biosphere goes up in flames, the end is near, just ask dinosaurs in a theater near you. Is that banal? No: it never happened before.

Yet, philosopher Hannah Arendt is most famous for describing evil with her concept of the “banality of evil”. She rolled out her banal notion in connection with Nazi mass criminal Eichmann. Arendt’s banality has been intensely criticized. She retorted that she wanted to make sure the devils of Nazism would not be admired. That’s banal too, and shouldn’t be the point.

Arendt’s grudge, that evil shouldn’t bring fame, is, by itself, an entire logical system implicating the notion of divinity. It’s vast, yet it’s one fundament of evil. However, precisely because it’s a pillar of evil, it makes Arendt’s attempt to belittle Nazis’ celebrity status, by claiming their evil was most banal, futile: evil, personified long ago,  achieved so much fame that Buddhism introduced Mara as their own version. Personalizing evil was known earlier as Angra Mainyu, and, a thousand years later, well before the Bible, as Hades, Pluto, etc.

Arendt admitted she was not really motivated by truth, but by what she viewed as the higher mission of belittling Nazism. This is of course troubling. Philosophers of ethics, and psychology, should know that (the philosophy known as the religion of) Hinduism  identified evil with untruth… No need for endowing evil with a personality! (In the matter of evil as untruth, Hinduism was probably inspired by the earlier Zoroastrianism; although Angra Manyu, later Hariman, personalized evil too, just to make sure…).

***

In truth, there is nothing banal about maximal evil. Horrendously evil acts accomplished by intelligent persons, are a metaphysical assertion: my belief in me, they say through their acts, or my god (me again!) is so great, that I can do the worst, and call it good. Self-satisfaction ensues, and that’s the ultimate. The song of the ultimately narcissist.

***

So what of these fires? Much of the American Pacific Northwest had the world’s worst pollution, during much of summer 2018. Some fires will have lasted many months. The devastation is unprecedented. I predicted as much, and more: the places I know which are ready to burn, have not burned yet. Consult the suitably dramatic personal observations last winter solstice:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2018/01/10/climate-catastrophe-california-forests-dying-giant-fires-coming-in-2018/

CalFire, the Californian state fire department, observes that large trees are desiccated, ready to burn, all over the state.

August 2018. Human Activity Covers Planet with huge smoke clouds (in red and orange), from CO2 induced warming, hence burning, or slash & burn agriculture in Africa… Blue clouds: salt; white clouds: dust… even the massive forest fire near Berlin is visible…https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2018/smoke-from-siberian-fires-reaches-canada

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2018/fires-overwhelming-british-columbia-smoke-choking-the-skies

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2018/agricultural-fires-seem-to-engulf-central-africa

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2018/ongoing-fires-in-sweden-quelled-by-weekend-rains-finally

***

***

So is it banal to observe that the planet is burning, or banal not to observe it? In any case, not to do anything about it is evil. Most will say that they can’t do a thing to prevent it. Well, no. Remember the Nazis. Who were the Nazis? Most Germans, actually. They went along, they collaborated with the Nazis, and the first thing they did was NOT to observe what was going on. It was banal for Germans, while enjoying Nazism, NOT to observe reality.

Actually, Hannah Arendt observes as much. She (implicitly) deduces that the judges of Eichmann should have said as much: the Nazi ideology was the normalcy of Germany, Eichmann was culprit of being extremely normal, all too normal. Mass murderer Eichmann was no freak: instead, he should have been executed as an official scapegoat, in lieu of, or as an extreme version of the ordinary German collaborating with the Nazi state.

And that collaboration consisted, first of all, by not seeing what was going on.

Yes I know that some will see in this an anti-Trump allusion; yet, clearly, the US Deep State is the major culprit of much evil, on a scale that makes Trump, so far, insignificant.   

As Margaret Kimberley @freedomrideblog put it:

McCain, Bush, and Obama all killed thousands of people. Trump has a much smaller body count but he is the one being vilified today. (Of course he has at least 2 more years so he can catch up.) And no I’m not a Trump supporter.

Trump Derangement Syndrome is a cover-up to dissimulate much greater horrors: in particular that globalization which is mostly a world plutocratitization, or new ways, such as Obama droning children personally, as executor-of-the-innocent-in-chief. Or Obama, Bernanke and their European homologues directing thousands of billions of dollars towards the wealthiest institutions in the world, apparently to reward them for causing a worldwide financial crisis…

The real Nazi-like phenomenon in the USA has been the incapacity to see what the US Deep State did, or didn’t do. And the same critique can be extended to Europe: Europeans have not even seen that Nazism itself was an instrument, and partly, a creation of the US Deep State. Eichmann learned that the hard way, when the Brits and Menachem Begin refused to further the negotiations for exchanging a million Jews against 10,000 trucks (“Forget the damned trucks!” would Begin later interject…) The mood, of ignoring the holocaust of the Jews, came from Washington…

One sees best, with simplicity: had the USA wanted to stop Nazism, at any point, it would have been enough to expose the Nazi crimes for all the (German) population to see, and warn that any civilian, officer or soldier thus implicated would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Because the USA didn’t try, was careful NOT to try, to stop Nazism by making a threatening scandal, as the German generals had asked as early as 1937, one is led to observe that the US Deep State wanted Nazism around.

Learning that the Nazis were preparing to further exterminate part of the Alsatian population, French general Leclerc warned that:

“The German army doesn’t obey anymore, when dealing with civilian populations, to the laws of war. Villages are systematically burned, inhabitants shot to death, or deported… I warn officially the German Command that I will, step by step, proceed to make formal observations, and that I find out, every time, the name of the officers who are responsible. Whatever the number of weeks, or months during which Germany will succeed to extend the war, she will have to surrender. I will employ all my influence so that justice will be done.”

(Général Leclerc to Général Feuchtinger.)

Result: the Germans and their Nazis (was there a difference?) stopped their exactions, their mass criminality, in Alsace.

What was the main point there, the basis of it all? Leclerc observed reality.

The planet is burning, let’s observe reality. When Angela Merkel pushed, and pushes, to burn lignite (the worst coal), she is a mass criminal. When Obama pushed for fracking (“bridge fuel” he called it!), and to export coal to China, he was a mass criminal (yes, Trump is trying to extend that… but coal is condemned, even China doesn’t want it anymore; the real problem is fracking…). And Trudeau in Canada is just a fake: the oil from bituminous sands are the worst. And Trudeau doesn’t have the excuses of the Third World countries with nothing but fossil fuels to export: Canada is wealthy… Yes, I know, some will say they didn’t see a fire coming to their neighborhood yet. However the disruption caused by a gathering nefarious climate change can’t be underestimated, and is already happening (see the African refugee crisis, the war in Syria, etc.)

So just look before you even think, but honestly… Now, to see what others don’t want to see, requires to ban banality. Thus expunging the evil of banality needs to become one of the moral commandments to obey. Should we fancy civilization to survive longer than expected.

Nietzsche promoted the Eternal Return of the Same, something which, strictly speaking, never happened. Instead, the universe is a force that goes. The closest thing to an eternal return, is the return of human creativity… Easily spontaneously spawning, as long as we ban banality!

Patrice Ayme

***

***

Here is part of the French original of Leclerc’s warning, which stopped the Nazis dead in their mass murdering tracks. The Western “democracies” had ten years before that to express a similarly strongly worded warning to the Nazis and their obsequious servants, but they didn’t:

Facing the Vor Vogensen Stellung (1re ligne de défense), before dashing through Alsace with the giant Second Armored French Division, Leclerc a connaissance d’exactions allemandes. Il adresse une lettre de mise en garde au Kampfkommandant de Baccarat :

« L’armée allemande n’obéit plus, vis-à-vis des populations civiles, aux lois de la guerre. Des villages sont systématiquement brûlés, les habitants fusillés ou déportés… L’ordre de déportation de la population de Baccarat et de celle de Raon-l’Étape vient d’être donné… J’avertis officiellement le commandement allemand que je vais faire, au fur et à mesure, des constats et que je relève, chaque fois, les noms des officiers responsables. Quel que soit le nombre de semaines, de mois pendant lesquels l’Allemagne réussira encore à prolonger la guerre, elle devra bientôt s’incliner. J’emploierai tout mon poids à ce que justice soit faite. »

— Général Leclerc au Général Feuchtinger  

Leclerc’s maneuver was not banal. Had he been banal, he would have done nothing, like all other Allied generals before him, and thus, he would have partaken in evil…