Posts Tagged ‘Aphorisms’

Aphorisms 10/26/16: Populism, ITC, Syria, Hormones, Hillary

October 27, 2016

I wrote to some “friends” who called me a liar, in public on the Internet (for saying that inequality grew under Bill Clinton). I rolled out graphs from FRED (Federal REserve Data). They replied that they just felt that I was a liar, and that was good enough. It’s all about how one feels. Thus they did not need to read anything I wrote, ever, never did, never will. Nor did they need to look at any graph I presented: so much stuff on the Internet, you know, complete with interviews of little green men. I pointed out that Obama had a “supermajority” many times over a 100 weeks period, he could have passed progressive legislation. They rolled out links saying the same exact thing inside (but not in their blaring titles), and then called me a liar again, by claiming that Obama had a supermajority at some point, although they had just proven my own point, which contradicted theirs. We live in the age of the 140 characters minds.

So maybe long essays, going deep, are inappropriate in the Internet age. And the “aphorism” approach needs to be revisited. Better to say everything in a few shocking lines than nothing new in a long book. (Nietzsche said roughly the same.)

Where Populism Comes From:

Since Bill Clinton abrogated FDR’s Banking Act of 1933, the part of GDP going to the richest has grown by 40% relative to the part of GDP going to We The People. Thank you Bill!

The alternative theory promoted by the servants and profiteers of the established order, is that populism comes from the undeniable allegations that Trump touched once the arm of a porno actress., and was like an “octopus” once in a plane, thirty-five years ago, let alone would have called an attempted murderess and Miss Universe “Ms Housekeeping”, in a private conversation. Thank you, Hillary, for going high, like Michelle Obama suggested. Is imagination higher than high? Imagination is higher than the reality that was, and create a new one, by its mere existence (this is what Quantum Theory says). Here for some imagination in action. If you think you can get away with presenting the empress, as if she had no clothes, you will be deleted by the plutocratic organizations Obama promoted:

Don't Insult the World President! Instagram accounts with up to 107,000 followers were deleted without warning when the preceding art was shown (it is to be noticed that this is is not Hillary Clinton as the latter seems to have an anatomy much more ready to resist famine).

Don’t Insult the World President! Instagram accounts with up to 107,000 followers were deleted without warning when the preceding art, in Melbourne, Australia, was shown (it is to be noticed that this is is not Hillary Clinton as the latter seems to have an anatomy much more ready to resist famine). Humor Is Disappearing, Terror Expanding.

[Facebook owns Instagram; Facebook considers female chests to be obscene, an object of well-educated revulsion, and thus a potential excuse for deletion of disrespectful, irreverent activity unbecoming a servant of the established order; and servants of that order, we are all implicitly considered to be; the alternative is deletion.)

***

Africans Are Criminals Says International Tribunal:

The International Tribunal Court (ITC; CPI in French) is a branch of the United Nations. The USA and Russia, apparently worried about their own future war crimes, have refused to become members. They did not need to worry. Since its creation in 2003, the ITC has opened ten inquiries, nine of them in Africa.

During the third week of October 2016, three African countries, Burundi, then South Africa, and now Gambia, have announced their withdrawal of the ITC. Gambia is an ill-disguised dictatorship (the president is running for his fifth mandate in December). However, the Gambian “Information minister, Sheriff Bojang, who is as black as a beautiful piece of coal, told the truth when he said that: “… Although one calls it an “International Tribunal”, the ITC is an international court of  whites who prosecutes and humiliates people of color, especially Africans”.  

As I said, Gambia is a dictatorship. However, Even dictators tell the truth sometimes. Every truth is precious, whatever its source, as any newborn is precious, even if born from hell.

***

Anything which compromises US supremacy is unfair:

Such as making Apple pay more than 1% tax in Ireland.The Obama doctrine, new paint, same old same old.

Mike Griffith, a fanatical Hillary Clinton supporter, and friend of mine, answering the preceding: “Why give up power?

It is revealing that Clinton partisans are actually rapacious, and power obsessed. Well what Obama did was to give an excess of power to hellish corporations (names unsaid, for obvious reasons) or poster boys (like the musky boy). This, by the way, was the core of Mussolini’s “fascismo” (a notion pushed by professor Gentile). Make corporations powerful, thanks to deals with the state. It failed. Why?

There are many types of power. Raw military power contradicts intellectual power. A balance of power makes the best power for the advancement of civilization.

***

If the Empress has no clothes, it does not matter who observed it:

The Economist accused Putin to have revealed some lies and manipulations of the Clinton machine. As if there was a Putin behind every US email. As if revealing a crime was more criminal than the crime. What is wrong about revealing manipulations of the US elections by American manipulators? Revealing the little plots of some Clinton helpers helps the democratic process. So, supposing Putin helped reveal the emails, he did not write them! Keep your cool, you the Clinton sycophants and servants, and learn to distinguish.

What I wrote should not be construed as support for Putin, and, or his activities, many of which I condemn. However I also condemn the fact that Clintonistas are talking obsessively about Putin when their own mess, manipulating illegally the US electoral process, is pointed out.

***

Hormonally Determined? Yes and No:

If one makes an Internet search for images on any subject, after a while, one seems to fall on pictures of women in various state of undress.

To this Kathleen Hawes Watkins answered: “Revealing the male perceptual preference for image over words. (I imagine a completely male-centric media would be all images with very few, if any words). Language is predominant in females, visual cortex predominates in males.”

Patrice Ayme I guess that makes me female, as I talk a lot… Notice too, that, historically, most of the important talking was made by men (from sexism, in part; unavoidable gender roles too). Does that make these men, who created civilization, into women? What is the real science behind that? And even if there is how do we know differences did not arise from sexism, which is already blatant in pre K?

It is true that there are sexual differences in depression (women get twice more depressed than males, presumably killing their enemies rather than crying about it). This seems to be actually traceable to real physiological differences at the cellular levels (studies in rats show). It makes all evolutionary sense, as females should be more cautious, and males more aggressive. Both behaviors improving the chances of future generations.

***

Virtuous Circle, Washington Way:

US defense contractors got 70 billion dollars of contracts, through military “help” to the Afghan army alone.

Afghan Taliban is indoctrinated in Islam schools in Pakistan. Who is the big ally of Pakistan? The USA. Who profits?  US “defense” contractors

The war in Afghanistan has thus contributed in making the  wealthiest in the US richer. One may ask whether that was not the aim all along (fostering Bin Laden, etc.). And, in a way, it has been a Machiavellian play, not at all what it looked..

US intervened in Afghanistan fully by July 3, 1979. (fostering Bin Laden, etc.). And, in a way, it has been a Machiavellian play, not at all what it looked.

***

“WE” Hillary I, And Us, the plutocrats, look down at you, low lives down there:

Hillary about low lives who want to change the world, when she was talking at Goldman-Sachs, for more than $200,000 a pop: “…we all should be really understanding… & we should try to do the best we can not to be a wet blanket on idealism.” Who is “we”?

A friend, Mr. Gartland wondered: “The royal we?” I have a more sinister  interpretation: it’s not just the royal “WE”, more probably, it’s:“We The Plutocrats”. Hillary identified with her audience during that speech, which was made of Goldman-Sachs partners. Hillary’s too many candle light dinners with Goldman-Sachs CEOs did that to her. Hillary will generalize, once most people understand exactly what it means. As a top banker told me recently: it’s a criminal organization. A criminal organization which does not just organize governments, but society and minds.

Patrice Ayme’

Aphorisms June 2014

June 11, 2014

Which Price the Market?

Market fanatics claim the markets give the best price. They don’t like taxes, nor government intervention in the “market”. They don’t even understand that it is the government that creates the market, that there is no market without government.

Externalities are incentives with a minus sign. The fossil fuel industry, overall, is destroying the biosphere. How much is that worth?

***

Bhutan has a national happiness policy:

If one is unhappy with it, one gets kicked out. You see there are ethnic groups in Bhutan, for example Bhutan born citizens of Nepalese ethnicity (Nepal being next door, although not exactly contiguous). They make Bhutanese authorities unhappy.

“Citizen” is not exactly the word, as non-Buddhist, non-Gzonkha  speakers are not viewed as Bhutanese (even if their ancestors had lived in Bhutan for centuries). 100,000 refugees out of Bhutan from a total population of 700,000.

Morality: Buddha was just a man. Only Human Rights provide a religion for all men.

Having A Strong Currency Means Being Independent:

Financial crisis (European or not): People such as Paul Krugman have not achieved yet the understanding that the European currency did not cause the 2008 financial crisis. It is irresponsible to accuse the Euro. What was even more irresponsible was to bail-out all the bad actors, using and abusing, average taxpayers, who had been themselves victims of the crisis.

It is this bailing-out of the bad actor, without retribution, that caused the European sovereign debt crisis.

As in Bhutan, a deliberately bad analysis of what constitute happiness in the USA (king dollar) results in an aggressive mien towards innocent Europeans. It’s a policy at the New York Times, as a thoroughly negative article on Lithuania joining the Eurozone shows. (Now all the Baltic republic ex-Soviet occupied, have joined Finland, itself partly annexed by Stalin, in the Eurozone.)

***

Reflection Without Inclination Is No Option

Once I met a huge wolf in the wild, from 3 meters away. I had interrupted his hunt by accident. Where he expected the fleeing chamois, a primate ran into him. I will never forget it. He had complete capability to look at me in the eye, and he indulged in it thoroughly. He was immensely intelligent, more like a baboon than like a dog. We read each other’s eyes. Complete understanding of the situation at hand was achieved on both sides, silently, and efficiently.

So I do think that what is deficient in the wolf is not the capability, to look in a human eye (as some researchers have claimed recently). Instead, wolves do not have the inclination to look in human eyes, in normal circumstances.

In the situation the wolf found himself in with me, he was highly motivated to try to understand why, so late in the day, far above timberline, somehow the antelope he was chasing (who had just passed by me, close enough to touch) had transformed itself in the apex predator.

So I am careful with the concept of “socialization” in wolves, and other animals. The behavior space of wolves is much bigger than that of dogs. Thus they are less inclined to look to men as gods as dogs are. But that does not mean that, if properly motivated, they cannot throw a hard, analytic look at humans.

A wolf will never become as “familiar” with humans as a dog is. It’s, basically, below the dignity of the wolf. He has better things to think about.

The same sort of differences appears when comparing dogs and cats, or in general, when comparing intellectual performances of variegated species. A chimp can perform much less well than a border collie, on some tests. Because the latter is anxious to please, and the other has different things to do, plus very bad character, if demeaned, and the ability to destroy any unarmed human in seconds.

Tamarinds monkeys, submitted to experiments on fairness, got so angry with the experimenters, that they refused to go on with the experiments, opting instead to throw projectiles to their tormenters.

Pure intellectual performance does not exist. Nor does pure emotional performance. They are always entangled.

Patrice Aymé

Aphorisms November 2010

November 11, 2010

 

NATURALLY INSPIRED:

A man is gored by a so called "Mountain Goat", which then stands guard over the bleeding man, while timid hikers cannot chase off the ferocious herbivore (that particular horned individual had been known for its bellicosity). The man dies, bleeding there, undeterred a few feeble stones from the goat fearing, probably God fearing tourists.

I had to throw rocks on hungry and angry bears on two continents, in the total wilderness, even hitting them. Bears and other predators like unresisting food, but they fear stones. Mountain bears are particularly cognizant of stones. A little bit of knowledge can go a long way, when a stone is thrown precisely enough. (A noisy hit on the side is often best.)

The afore mentioned goring happened in 2010 in the Olympic national park (USA’s Washington state). In Africa, gazelles are well known to be very dangerous, as they pierce bellies readily with their sharp horns. They make nice pets, until that day comes.

An editorialist of the New York Times sanctimoniously concluded that: "The goats were introduced to give humans something to hunt. A sport. A game. A chase. For almost 100 years, we never feared them. Now, they’ve stopped fearing us, and are even pursuing us. Playing God has its consequences."

So? What are we supposed to play instead? Dead? Sheep? Impotent, as these hikers played, unable to chase off the mountain goat, that arrogant herbivore? (Actually Mountain Goats hid below their huge long haired white coats the morphology of antelopes.)

Verily there is God indeed, and it is us (we even wrote the books, did we not?) And godliness includes the usual partnership with Satan. Never forget it, on the other side of Obama’s huge smile. Actually Obama ought to be the first one to remember that. Sometimes the most moral being to be had is a very dark, very angry man, with very black thoughts.

At least such a man could chase away goats with their fake virgin white coats. An eye for an eye, maybe not. But a ferocity for a ferocity, certainly yes.

Nature was dangerous to man and its fundamental ancestors for hundreds of millions of years. That’s the balance and the poetry of the wild, and of the universe. Learn about it not, and be diminished.

Nature in its wild state is a necessary humility to learn, and earn, as deep as it gets. In this spirit, I have been through immense wilderness, unassisted, on three or four continents (and a few islands), precisely because there is no better place to learn humility and responsibility. Make a serious mistake, in the absolute wilderness, it is easy to make one, and you may die. One is far from the comfort of cities. One is far from the routine of conventional thinking living robots need, and they call themselves civilized, because they know nothing else.

***

BUSHWACKING CHRISTIANITY:

The mentally challenged G.W. Bush is going around, selling his book. Spewing lies, absurdities and stupidities, as much as he could, same as he always did. This is not just the past: immense forces, the same as those who were behind Bush, are still active.

They still want to attack Iran.

The irony with G. W. Bush, aka "Shrub", is that his Christian God told him to attack Iraq, but his attack and devastation of Iraq is leading to the extermination of the Iraqi Christian community there. In that sense, Bush is worse than the Mongols.

The Mongols killed most Muslims in Baghdad, but not the Christians; the Frank-Mongol alliance conquered Syria, but the racist, sectarian pope saved the Muslims by excommunicating the Franks. So working against one’s own camp is nothing new.

A massacre in a Christian church in Baghdad, by a bunch of foreign Arab mercenaries: 56 dead. France organized the treatment in France of 150 wounded. Oh, where is the great indignation some primitives had when the bearded one was drawn, just drawn, just imagined, with a bomb in his turban? To the criminally superstitious, the myth has become sacred, and the most dreadful reality, nothing worth mentioning.

***

OBAMA’S PRESIDENCY IN A NUTSHELL:

Well, Captain Obama has put the plane in a valley with very high walls, and it can’t fly out. Obama has led as a bipartisan, although he was elected as a democrat. That was his sin. Obama calls his reforms historical. They are nothing of the sort. They are just back room deals with the plutocracy.

And that was completely deliberate: for many months, democrats had total control of the Congress, the Senate (with a super majority of 60 votes), and the Presidency. What did they do? Sign useless pieces of paper about Guantanamo, and send 30,000 more professionally trained killers to Afghanistan (to create more of a problem where there was already enough of one). Otherwise, kill time until they could claim they had not the votes to do anything, but compose with the plutocracy.

Health care and financial re-regulation could have been done in one morning, by expanding Medicare, and re-establishing by decree the separation of bank and speculation (which had been put in place by president Franklin Delano Roosevelt).

So Obama has collaborated with the plutocracy, a six headed hydra. Now that he will have to compose with a Republican Congress, it’s going to be in the open. With republicans everywhere, Obama may have to play democrat. Ultimately, a war, an expanded war, albeit expensive, could be an excellent distraction. By coincidence, Obama has tripled the war in Afghanistan, a good start, in this cynical view of the politics of the USA.

***

A PASSAGE TO INDIA: To celebrate the great victory of bipartisanship in the election, the great democratic leader goes overseas, with a giant retinue, as befits the "Leader Of the Free World". Free of what? Jobs, of course. So the Great Leader goes where the jobs are: India, Indonesia, Korea, etc. To tell the foreigners, it’s the fault of China if it supports the US financial system, and emulates the currency policy of the USA. 

Who needs jobs, when one has Wall Street?

***

BIOSPHERE, NOT ANGLOSPHERE:

Lamarck unrecognized: Anglo-Saxons know only Charles Darwin, because Darwin demonstrates the greatness of the Anglo-Saxon, and more particularly American, empire. Wallace accused Darwin to his face, and in writing, to be just Lamarck’s parrot, in spite of Darwin’s daughter exasperation that her dad would do nothing about it.

Amusingly, the Nobel prize was given in the 1960s for experiences on mice "proving" there was no Lamarckism. Verily, casual observations of rodents, and cats’ coats, showed that the laws of genetics, as understood then, were clearly coming short. Now epigenetics is official science. Why did it take so long?

Selection of the fittest characteristics was a concept invented and published by Maupertuis, the inventor of "Least Action". 114 years before Darwin’s "Origin of the Species".

***

CROSSROADS:

Some conservative New York Times editorialist (David Brooks) picked up on Woody Allen by declaring that the USA was at a crossroads. Mr. Allen said that: “More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.” Some republican outfit also calls itself "American crossroads".

The whole planet is at a crossroads. Not just the USA.

The only nation still using the Roman imperial system of units is obviously also at those same crossroads, but stuck in reverse.

The New York Times writer vaunts "German engineering", as the wave of the future, whereas" for fashion, you go to Paris". As a good "conservative" American, Brooks nurtures profusely the feeling and idea that France is irrelevant: thus there is only one serious republic, the one located in Washington, with its 14,400 officially registered ‘lobbyists" (competing for the 535 representatives of the people).

Once one has dismissed France, the rest of the world is easy to discard: China is a dictatorship, Russia is Stalinist, Great Britain has a queen, Germany is a recovering Nazi addict, Japan has lost its decades, and the other countries are not serious.

As a good red blooded conservative, the editorialist does not know, or refuses to know that there is no more border between France and Germany, and that trying to distinguish between French and German engineering when their top engineering is entangled is completely silly: is Airbus British, Spanish, French or German? All the preceding, and more. Airbus is European. Is Arianespace, which launches most of the serious commercial satellites, worldwide, German? No, it’s mostly French led, but still, overall European (it launches so much American sensitive satellites, that the Americans are carefully listened to, though). Is Eurocopter mostly French? No. It’s mostly located in Provence, but as a mostly Franco-German entity.

Europe, finally, after 1, 000 years of benign alienation which turned progressively to murderous silliness, is integrating the right way. And the world is better for it. One thing is sure: in the future, countries which reward stupidity and mental frigidity, as the USA in recent decades, will not make it on top.

***

RECYCLE GREENPEACE:

Anti-nuclear activists tried to block a train carrying nuclear waste from Normandie to Northern Germany. The giant La Hague recycling plant takes exhausted nuclear fuel for German power plants, and makes new fuel with it, using 96% of the old stuff to make new fuel. After accumulating the remaining 4% over a period of years, that waste is piled up and put on a well guarded train, to be stored in a deep salt mine (with the idea of using it some day when new technology becomes available).

So Greenpeace goes berserk, as usual, and tries to block the train, over the 1,000 kilometers of its trajectory. is Greenpeace worried about Pakistani nuclear weapons? Perhaps, but it does not show. Is Greenpeace worried about the hundreds of thousands of people killed directly every year by fossil fuels? Perhaps, but it does not show.

Instead, the civilian nuclear industry in the West arguably killed nobody, ever. The worst incident, "Three Mile Island", caused by an amazing pile-up of incompetence, mostly killed hundreds of microscopic insects, drowned inside the containment building. The grave accidents in Russia have more to do with Stalinism unchained than nuclear science properly applied. Russia had all sorts of accidents, as it did all sorts of things wrong; on land, in the sea, in reactors, in deposits, etc. it has to do with Russia being as big a nuclear power as the USA in spite of its tiny GDP, so doing everything on the cheap, using quick dirty and extremely dangerous methods (although the concept of "method" may too exalted here).

Back to European Greenpeace, edition 2010. Asked by a French journalist what Greenpeace proposes instead of nuclear energy, the pretty Greenpeace spokething was ready with her talking points: renewables, she said, and look at Brazil, with its tremendous hydropower. We have to do like Brazil; dams not nuclear plants.

Funny; they call it "Greenpeace". "Mudpeace" would be more like it. Indeed the giant Brazilian dams turn into mud provinces several times a year, and fast plants grow there, soon drowned, killed and converted in… methane, which has up to 25 times the greenhouse power of CO2. The giant dams have turned an absolutely enormous part of the Amazon into a muddy moon.

The Greenpeace idiots are not aware of this, or the fact that hydro potential has been completely tapped out in a country such as France. Even although using the nuclear plants to refill the dams in the wee hours of the morning.

Could France do more in hydro power, although the mountains and natural streams are tapped out? Sure. An idea is to use offshore wind to fill up elevated artificial lagoons, with their own hydro plants. Otherwise, one could bar the giant mount Saint Michel bay, with the world’s highest tides. It is feasible. it would be as powerful as several nuclear reactors. The project was barred for obvious ecological and esthetic reasons.

Being pretty is not all there is. Being clever is more important when taking decisions. Greenpeace ought to show the importance of cleverness, by putting it forward, rather than the importance of the superficially cute, and trying to out-fox Fox News with pretty broadcasters.

It is true that nuclear war is a huge threat, but it has nothing to do with civilian nuclear power. The argument can actually be made that civilian nuclear devour the stockpiles of military Plutonium… Because so it does. Pushing nuclear through Thorium (as India is doing) is rich in clean energy possibilities, without plausible military threats attached.

In "Greenpeace" there is "green’, and there is "peace". Greenpeace should carry the agenda of its name.

***

CHANGE OF METAPHYSICAL PERSPECTIVE:

"I think, therefore I kill": such is the motto of man, de facto, since there are men, and they think. (Note: Pascal did not think of that one!)

That is why Christo-Islamism, the planet most popular religion, is led by an homicidal god, full of indignation. God’s adulators are supposed to find Him "merciful", as He may torture you, unless if you do exactly what He wants, whatever it is. In the original, Roman imperial Christianity, and in the Qur’an, the admirers of God whine on their knees, praying that they will get to prey ("jihad").

Too bad there are nukes now, and other Weapons of Mass Destruction, which put the survival of mankind into question in case of all out war. (The nuclear war between democratic India and Fasco-Islamist Pakistan, within a decade or two, will have worldwide ecological consequences, as thermonuclear detonations over huge cities will rise stratospheric clouds of radioactive ashes.)

The whole idea of good old fashion mass cruelty and destruction was the exact opposite: to insure the survival of humankind, by pruning it just right. Thus killing is not appropriate anymore, ecologically speaking, in the grandest scheme of things.

Thus now we have to leave it at thinking: "I think, therefore I am not threatening to kill". A huge subtlety is now imposed. And it is imposed on nations. By the force of necessity.

***  Patrice Ayme

Aphorisms End October 2010

October 28, 2010

 

REASONING IS NOT RANTING

The fashionable word "rant" is ubiquitous, to qualify essays. The idea is not to take oneself too seriously, in self deprecating Anglo-Saxon fashion. But it is abused. Subtly, confusing a discourse, any discourse, with a rant, allows most people to say anything whatsoever, because, supposedly, everybody is ranting. Ranters get rent from ranting, and intellectuals get despised as ranters.

Intellectuals don’t generally rant. Intellectuals generally reason. And reasoning is not ranting.

***

TRADE DOES NOT BRING PEACE, BUT PLUTOCRACY BRINGS WAR:

Montesquieu in "L’Esprit de Lois", in 1758, celebrated trade ("commerce"). Wherever there is commerce, the ways are sweet ("les moeurs sont douces"), and, wherever the ways are sweet, there is trade. However, by the end of the 19C, it was considered as obvious, in England, that German travelling salesmen were bringing England down, and should Germany disappear, England would be much richer.

We know what happened next.

A prime motivator of the German fascist aggression in August 1914 against France and Russia (and Belgium, Luxembourg, etc.) was the certainty that the Prussian generals had, that the terms of economic expansion were unfavorable to their economic advantage.

The fact that Russia was democratizing while developing economy at an extremely high rate, from French investment, in the world context of the French world empire (let alone the empire of its "cordial ally", Great Britain) let the fasco-plutocratic structure inside Germany and Austro-Hungary facing its own demise at the hands of its own parliaments.

So the "Prussian Staff" generals (encouraged by the government of USA president Wilson) decided that, the earlier a war against Russia and France, the better. As the assassinated Archiduke, the Kaiser’s closest friend, was a very strong, albeit grim, partisan of peace, his disappearance spelled opportunity.

***

WHEN BASIC MATH REFLECTS BASIC NEUROLOGY:

The question of being relates, in the most skeletal fashion, to the foundations of mathematics. That, in turn has consisted in trying to find out what the basic concepts are. For example, sets. However, category theory concentrates instead on relations.

The basic law of category theory is associativity: f(gh) = (fg) h. This, of course, has a direct neuronal interpretation: the interconnection between neurons, and how electrical impulse goes along associatively.

***

From the Oxford web site:

clip_image001

Archive reveals public enthusiasm for Anglo-Saxons

considering the Anglo-Saxons invaded Britannia in a war which lasted generations, and the British army fled to Celtico-Roman Armorica, thereafter named "Bretagne" (from Britannia)… This is a bit of a stretch.

Charlemagne finished the Anglo-Saxons in a 30 year war (coagulating them finally with Christianity). The Northern Germans had stopped Rome, with a heavy defeat under emperor Augustus, when three elite legions, their auxiliary troops, and fellow travelers  were annihilated  in an ugly three day battle in the drenching rain, between a swamp and a forest, made possible by betrayal. In his testament, Augustus recommended to his successors to leave the unconquered parts of Germany alone (a strategic mistake, as Julius Caesar knew).

The Franks, themselves Germano-Celts, spent three centuries conquering the entirety of Germany, and then more.

***

ANAL PHILOSOPHY:

Jimmy_sanfrancisco wrote:

English speaking philosophy employs the resources of modern mathematical logic (particularly the predicate calculus, but others as well: intentional logic, modal logic, etc.) when doing philosophical thinking, and Continental philosophy does not. Another important difference is this: many English speaking philosophers don’t believe in the traditional demarcation of philosophy from science: philosophy IS science looking at itself; otherwise put, philosophy IS nature looking at itself.

Ergo, playing Socrates, I have deduced that nature being philosophy, is also science, thus demonstrating that everything is absolutely all.
An aside: most research mathematicians know nothing about modal logic, as a theory. But they are expert practitioners of it, for their daily bread. I would assume that so is anybody who seriously thinks.
Finally: analyein "unloose, release, set free," from ana "up, throughout" + lysis "a loosening," from lyein "to unfast". Everybody seriously thinking is analytical.

I will propose that "Analytic philosophy", also known as the "linguistic turn", is just a trick to shun most of philosophy, thus making it compatible with the USA imperialist machine known as "American exceptionalism" (aka "Wall Street").

Linguistic “philosophy” turned philosophers into delicious mussels, clinging to the base rock of imagined certainty, to be tasted at leisure by the plutocrats.
***

IMPERIUM FRANCORUM: STILL ORDERING AROUND:

One of my readers makes fun of me. After I said something positive about the Franks "Dearmother" lets go the usual derision of all too many Americans relative to anything reminding them of France. Said she: "The French did everything good, didn’t they?"

Well, everybody knows about the Roman empire. But the empire of the Franks, Francia, has lasted longer, named, and spawned what is commonly known as "Europe". The later word, under the present meaning was invented by the Franks, indeed. So was the place: 90% of the European Union is the Imperium Francorum (all but Scandinavia and Ireland, keeping in mind that the reconquest of Iberia from the Muslim hordes). " Certainly the Imperium Francorum and its descendant regimes (including the USA) have proven more important to civilization than Rome itself.

The Franks demonstrated that the Greco-Roman empire was a deviation from civilization, similar, but worse, than the American enslaving south, and for similar reasons. The Franks demonstrated that the Greco-Romans could be overcome, and that is why they claimed to descend from Troy.

***

DID THE GOOD SAVAGE THEORY, INDUCE SAVAGERY?

The myth of the good savage was believed in the France of the Ancient Regime. However Captain Cook then got stabbed in the back, and was eaten. The Comte de la Perouse, the other great explorer of the Pacific of the time, was then savagely attacked in Samoa (among other places). La Perouse stopped believing in the “Good Savage”. But the later event was unknown, and the former not properly meditated when the French Revolution came around…

By 1793, the French Revolution has turned very bloody. Of course, a coalition of all the old regimes in Europe had attacked the French republic. Nevertheless one may wonder if the myth of the good savage did not influence the populations: if the savage was so good, would not being savage make someone good? A new crime to attribute to Rousseau, the disparager of civilization…

***

EVOLUTION IS DIABOLICAL, THUS GOD:

How does evolution induce progress? Though diversity, and then competition between the diverse forms, to select forms with superlative survival. Thus the interest of sex, and thus the interest of… racism. Interestingly, as archaic Homo Sapiens (H. Rhodesiensis and, or H. Heidelbergensis) split into Homo Neanderthalis and the other one(s), specific genes were evolved by the superior (as far as living in Arctic climate) Neanderthal form, to be then re-injected into the "main" Homo Sapiens Sapiens line.

Thus the engine of evolution is conflict, to determine who, and what is superior. Superiority being defined by annihilation, or infeodation.

***

IDEAS ARE IDEAS, AND "MEME" WAS A BAD IDEA:

Amusing development. Here is Richard Dawkins, around October 26, 2010: " My original purpose in introducing the concept of memes really was not to produce a theory of culture, but rather to say that Darwinism doesn’t have to be tied to genes. It can work wherever you have a self-replicating code. We should actively be looking around for other examples of self-replicating codes which are “doing the Darwinian thing.” The important thing is not to get too hung up on genes when you’re doing your evolutionary biology."

That reproduction is geometrical, not just about DNA, I have harped on for a long time, happy to see Dawkins insisting on it now.

All along I held that using the concept of "meme", at least in culture, was completely idiotic. Because "meme" tried to replace an existing concept, the IDEA. If we called the exact same things by different names, just for the heck of it, mass could become "krutch". The only thing to be gained would be confusion, and it has a name: slang. Or rather slang is too much a compliment to pay for this sort of confusion.

Now Dawkins has changed his story. In his new usage, though, meme comes across another existing concept, REPLICATOR. It is useless to duplicate replicator with meme. It is true that biology reproduces (sort of), and that DNA based genes and their 1990s genetics are only part of the story. Epigenetics also reproduces, and so do various geometrical structures (including little factories inside bacteria). But there is no need to create a new slang for it: we are confused enough, already.

Anyway, it is nice to win the war of memes…

***

DARWIN DID NOT RECOGNIZE EVOLUTION FIRST:

Another war to win is the silly Anglo-Saxon identification of evolution theory with Anglo-Saxons in general, and Darwin in particular. Maupertuis invented the idea of natural selection through comparative advantage (and published it in books circa 1748; but of course these books are in French, the original English which the presently devolved Anglo-Saxon does not read). Lamarck invented nearly everything in evolution later attributed to Darwin, even doing to mollusks what Darwin imitated with finches.

Now of course, being fully penetrated of the grandeur of the Anglo-Saxon, then allows to justify the invasion of Iraq and its puppet, Anglo-Saxon friendly regime. Or hide below the carpet the considerable Anglo-Saxon support for Hitler, emanating from the same. Of these little plots, a civilization is not made, though…

***

IT MATTERS WHO DISCOVERS WHAT AND HOW:

Another point; by not having the correct sequence of who invented what, one does not get the logic behind it. It’s no coincidence that Maupertuis also invented the PRINCIPLE OF LEAST ACTION. Who said that was less important than Newtonian mechanics? By the way Newton’s First Law was found by Buridan, 250 years earlier, and why this got forgotten has a very important bearing on the notion of civilization, and how to preserve it (the Catholic church came to hate the hyper famous Buridan, a century after he died).

The exact history of sciences is tightly related to the valuation of the notions which give rise to the science.

***

GLORIOUS PUPPETS:

Some Harvard smoke and mirrors historian comes up with the Harvard-serving theory that Obama is this rare breed, a "philosopher-king“. Good to learn that there are kings, and a fortiori philosophers, in the USA.

The historian who had organized a conference on the subject of Obama’s mind, sniffed that: “There seemed to be skepticism regarding whether Obama’s intellectual background actually translated into policies that the mostly left-leaning audience could get behind,” the historian, Mr. Hartman said "Several audience members, myself included, probably view Obama the president as a centrist like Clinton rather than a progressive intellectual as painted by Kloppenberg.”

Clinton was not a centrist. He was a Goldman Sachs puppet (he nominated Rubin CEO of Goldman as Sec of Treasury), Reagan loving (he nominated Rubin’s pet and Reagan adviser Summers as Sec of Treasury), and Clinton sold the future for an illusory prosperity. When he went into Bosnia, it’s because the French and the British had been there militarily for a very long time, and the French were shooting back heavy guns at the Serbs. Better to control them?

Clinton actually sold futures for the future, literally. Now Clinton is immensely rich, as his friends the worldwide dictators and plutocrats made sure he would get rewarded, for encouraging his successors (the Obambis to come). Clinton has carried a bag of rice for Haiti, to show his heart is pure, true. But the heart is not pure, the prison should be obscure, but so it is as the leopard has spots, hiding itself with light and shadow..

***

PEOPLE VERSUS THE BIN LADEN WITH HELL:

Osama bin Laden had a new message. This time it was addressed not to the French government, but to the French "PEOPLE". "If it is your right to force free women to not wear veils, it is our right to cut off the heads of invaders." Progress: bin Laden implicitly recognizes the "equation" (the word he himself uses). On one side the French People, on the other, the regal "we" of Al Qaeda, a would-be theocracy.

***

LEARNED NOTHING; YES WE CAN’T:

Obama comes on John Stewart’s Comedy Central show. Trying to imitate O’Reilly’s “The Factor”, Obama uses countless times the concepts of “folks” and “frustration”. There are never problems; those are being solved, but the “folks are frustrated”.

Stewart reminds Obama that he had said during the campaign new ideas needed new people, and then he brought in Larry Summers, and it looked like the one Larry Summers Stewart knew from the past (when the republic was sold to the plutocrats, under Clinton; and in exchange those who sold it became very rich and influential). For the one time in the interview, Obama is forceful. Says he decisively:"In fairnessLarry made a heck of a job!"

Fairness? Summers is the plutocratic servant who destroyed the separation of bank and speculation. He should not just have no job, he should be in jail. Instead the incompetent, unknowing Obama offered him a job, and the job, it turned out, was to fork trillions (yes trillions, whatever the propaganda is saying) of dollars to those who had created the crisis. Obama claims the financial crisis cost just 1% of GDP (which is not true, but he uses the occasion to imprint that notion; whether he believes in it is not clear).

Then as the audience of Jon Stewart’s show gasps, laughs incredulously, and grumbles its disapproval about "In fairnessLarry made a heck of a job!", Obama starts to chuckle uncomprehendingly. Stewart tells him:”You don’t want to use that phrase, DUDE!”

One can see Obama’s eyes spin. What did he get himself into? Are the folks resisting all the lies? Then Obama pirouettes and backpedals with acrobatic coolness, his comedian skills in full view. He flashes his giant seductor’s smile says:”I am sorry!” He adds hurriedly:"pun intended!" Sure. You can see him swimming desperately for the proper countenance that a man who would have been, after all, joking, would have had.

All of Obama’s ethical sense, displayed in fifteen seconds, in his sense of “pun”: say what they want to hear, whoever they are, whatever it is, it’s all a joke anyway. Thus the cockroach runs unerringly, waving its antennas. Jon Stewart may be the most powerful man in the USA, but it’s all too clear what he thinks. Obama is a better comedian: it is a rare moment when his guard is down (as long as one plays in the sand box delimited by his doctored data, which I do not).

Some will say: all politicians lie. No, not necessarily. Themistocles did not lie. It’s rather modern politicians, ever since Adolf Hitler promoted his "Big Lie" technique, who have been into lying. The most amazing part was that Obama thought that the audience would not object to Larry Summers, the number one architect of modern plutocracy. He probably thinks only who he calls with spite the "Ivory Tower Left" would know about the derivative universe which shipped all the jobs to China.

As the interview goes on, Obama declares that the "special interests" have the right to express themselves in a democracy. So they will always be there. No kidding. Plutocracy forever. A billionaire in California spends 150 million dollars of her own money (yes, 150, millions), trying to buy her election as governor. It’s expensive to lie on TV to that extent. Cool.

Obama calls that democracy, no doubt. But it’s venality, corruption, and unlawful in most countries. As it should be. Officially the USA is now 22th country in corruption, sinking fast, but that does not count what Americans view as legal. Four or five years ago, the USA used to be number one, the less corrupted country, but of course it was a self evaluation, because as I said what is legal there and nowhere else, does not count. So we are talking about an upper bound with that 22th rank. The arm of USA corruption is long: watch Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize, for waging war, but American war, no doubt a higher calling.

By the way, the democratic politicians are getting even more money from the “special interests” than the republicans…

Two-thirds of Iraqis killed were civilians: no inquiry. Could Obama get another Peace Prize next year? For pacifying the idea of justice?

A memo with the secret deal between health care plutocrats and the White House in writing, with the four main points, in black and white, has come to light. That included the engagement, by the White House,  of not expanding Medicare Part B.

The deal basically shows that Obamacare was rigged by the plutocrats, for their own benefit (as the progressives suspected, but the fools were arrogant enough to put things in writing).

(There are more than 14,000 officially registered paid lobbyists in Washington, for 535 lawmakers. That’s 30 lobbyist for each lawmaker. Just in Washington. "Special interests" is a euphemism for big money. It seems clear that Obama, just as the Supreme Court of the USA, confuses plutocracy and democracy, the greed and the soul… although they are not compatible.)

Jon Stewart presses Obama for having run as a reformer, and turned to superficial papering over, whilst the corruption festers below. Then Obama, apparently as always, anxious to please and seduce, recognizes that his slogan should have been :"Yes, we can, BUT…".

He emphasizes the “BUT”, and leaves it at that for a moment: “BUT…” Yes, we can, BUT…I am not kidding, that is what he said. Case closed. Yes, we can’t? Move on.

***

Patrice Ayme

***

In full fairness, ultimately Obama added, finally, on his second try:”It will not happen overnight.” Certainly. What happened overnight was that nothing was done which is clearly attributable to the Obama administration (most programs were started under Bush, and those were, understandably favorable to the plutocracy).

Aphorisms 08/2010: Babysitting Instructive?

September 1, 2010

BABY SITTING AS THE WORLD’S OLDEST PROFESSION, and other tales.

***

BORING AS A MACHINE: Oopss… I forgot to watch Obama making his Oval Office address on the Iraq war. I guess my subconscious agrees with my loud discourses on those who know what to say, because they are  reading it on their teleprompter. Instead I got distracted, mesmerized, listening to my baby continuous babbling as she watched pretty islands and world maps on the History Channel… Obviously a more genuine discourse, more prone to reconcile us to the honor of the human spirit.

***

WHAT THE TELEPROMPTER WILL NOT SAY: The last day of August, Obama read from his teleprompter solemnly. About the end of the Iraq war. Supposedly. End of the war, start of the occupation. The USA are keeping many enormous bases. What for? Official line being to keep the peace.

Under the French fourth republic, the Israeli defense ministry had an office inside the French defense ministry. Israeli nuclear weapons were developed, and tested, in common with the French. Don’t forget the French republic was Hitler’s deadly enemy, and did not rest until it persuaded Britain to join in attacking Hitler. Some talk a lot about conquering desert savages sitting on top the oil, whereas France had the will, and guts, to do something radical about Nazism, and its allies, Stalin and various American plutocrats. It was not straightforward, right.

In May 1967, the Israeli chief of staff visited France. Within weeks Israel attacked the Arab air forces (Nasser, Egypt’s dictator, having received false reports from the USSR, had been blockading Israel, and massing his army for attack; he was pre-empted by Israel, who destroyed enemy air forces, achieving air supremacy over Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Iraq, within the morning of June 5, 1967.)

De Gaulle, the French president, a prima donna peeved for some reason, and anxious to pose as the friend of the Arabs (which was his safe racist position, especially considering all that oil), decided to boycott Israel. That was a problem, because all major Israeli weapons were French. (Ways around were found, and Nixon was all too happy to help, soon after, and replace France in her own garden.)

Official visible French Israeli relations were not too good in the next 43 years. A summit in irritation was reached in Lebanon, when the French army, mandated by the UN, threatened to fire sophisticated Mistral missiles at the Israeli air force, if the Israelis persisted with aggressive overflights. The French Mistral is significantly faster than its American anti-aircraft equivalent. The Israelis decided to fly somewhere else, such as Turkey.

So what happened last week? Well, the Israeli chief of staff visited France, spending several days in various French army bases.

Think Iran. Think American bases in Iraq, a good jumping point. Think the French nuclear umbrella generously extended to the UAE. The French opened there their first new foreign basis in more than 40 years (40 years again!)

In other words: an attack on Iran is being prepared, or, at least, discussed. All what is missing, is a casus belli. The Iranian fanatics, anxious to buttress their dictatorship with some foreign aggression, are trying ever more to suggest some: an Iranian state journal just declared the French president’s wife a "prostitute", who should be executed.

***

KEEP THE RICH UNTAXED, OR ELSE… Latest noise from USA politics: all his hyper rich sponsors have turned against Obama, or so they want us to believe, because they suspect he wants them to pay more than the lowest tax rate in the USA, which they enjoy now. Actually the richest 400 taxpayers pay an average rate of 17% on their average 340 million dollars income (source: Geithner).

***

GENETIC VARIATION FROM SEX: I was reading in some scientific publication that why sex evolved is still a mystery. Whereas few things are clearer: sex allows to try all sorts of genetic combinations, as long as it is operating in conjunction with high infidelity. If one of these combinations is more successful at surviving, it will have a longer life, and, or, more sex, hence, in any case more descendants. Thus the trait will tend to perpetuate itself. This is a small variation of so called "Darwinian selection".

Whereas cloning would not allow the superior trait to appear to start with.

***

WITH DEMOCRATS LIKE THAT, WHO NEEDS REPUBLICANS?

Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. [Lincoln, Gettysburg address.]

Government of the people, by the plutocracy, for the plutocracy, shall perish with the earth. And who has been controlling the Congress since 2006, and the presidency since January 2008? Well the alleged, self proclaimed demos-crats, those who claim to rule in the name of the people.

Geithner pointed out that the richest 400 in the USA had an income of 340 million each, last year, and paid an average tax of only 17%. After 4 years of control of the senate and the Congress, plus two years of presidency by the alleged, self proclaimed "democrats", this is pretty telling.

DEMOCRATS, OR DEMONCRATS? That is the question. Who is better? The enemy facing you with a lance, or the friend stabbing you in the back?

***

WHERE EVIL COMES FROM: Sometimes, it is not enough to do our best, it is necessary to be evil.

This is a slight modification of a statement of Churchill. This also something that men have known since ever, and ever. And in particular the leaders of civilizations. It is also part of what motivated Obama to go into Afghanistan, thinking he was very smart, as usual.

***

GANDHI, OR PACIFISM IN THE WRONG CONTEXT, IS PLAIN EVIL:

Gandhi meant well, in his context, the context he had in his head. But his context was bad, as seen by hundreds of million, from outside his head. Being dressed literally and figuratively in Hindu garb caused the rift with the Muslims. Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the leader of the Muslims, used exactly that argument, and it is correct. Jinnah had not engaged in civil disobedience, as Gandhi had… Until 1946.

Later, war of Pakistan (Muslim majority) with Kashmir (which had an Hindu Maharaja) started. Perhaps to prove he was still Holier-Than-Thou all, and that he was not an anti-Muslim simpleton, Gandhi insisted that Pakistan ought to be paid its financial part of the partition.

Gandhi went on a hunger strike to insure that, making a lot of people very angry against him. He was accused to not have done enough to prevent the partition of India and Pakistan. Gandhi’s assassin had plenty of time to justify himself during his trial, India being a democracy. The assassin explained very carefully that he acted against "Gandhi’s perpetual weakness" vis a vis Pakistan. After a first assassination attempt, from the same crowd, Gandhi himself admitted that the extremely highly connected assassins may have been right. Gandhi was despaired: his non violence had not worked. At deepest level. The philosophical level.

In biblical mythology, Satan was a fallen angel, but an angel nevertheless. Sometimes it is better to look evil in the eye.

Why? Because Gandhi was too much stuck inside his religious-nationalist Hindu box. It’s highly ironical since, as I said Gandhi meant so well; sustainability, ecology, caring for the small and poor, rejecting economic exploitation, dependency, and violence under all its forms.

Anyway, ten million people died, and it’s far from over. The same sort of forces being still at work.

***

WE CASH, THEREFORE WE CARE: President Obama informed us that "What I’m doing now with Malia and Sasha is they’re getting an allowance," Obama told ABC’s "Good Morning America.

"They’re starting to get old enough where they may be able earn some money babysitting. They’ve got their own saving accounts." Great, I happen to have an eleven month old of my own, and no baby sitter meeting my, and those of my spouse, exacting standards. It’s wonderful to do one’s own babysitting, but it takes a lot of time, teaching baby to not hit the delete button.

Babysitting is an American rite. It teaches (girls) that human interaction can be profitable in a sense that the IRS understands. Other countries are more careful with this. Why?

Other countries are typically modern versions of old civilizations. The USA, alone in the world in that regard, claims to not being attached to old civilization (hence the importance of the Bible, for the average American: it’s the only anchor they heard about). In any case, in other countries, it is understood that one has to be careful when teaching children what the ultimate motivator is.

Babysitting is a good idea, in some ways: it teaches altruism, empathy, the human condition. But babysitting-to-earn-money instills a supplementary metaprinciple: getting money is more important than any of the preceding. Look at the preceding statement of Obama. Its key concepts are: allowance… earning… money… accounts. All of this is enabled by babysitting.

IN THE USA, BABY SITTING IS VIEWED AS THE WORLD’S OLDEST PROFESSION. Trust Obama to teach the true values. Those dear to his dear "friend" the well named Jamie Demon (or something like that).

It is understood in older civilizations that money should not be taught to children as the ultimate motivator. Why? Because money, ultimately is power onto people, and it is important to teach tomorrow’s people that there are other ways to interact with other people. Many of these other ways are known to marmoset monkeys, and marmoset monkey societies could not work without. How can the USA function without mental capabilities necessary to keep marmoset society together?

It is going to be interesting to see what happens when a civilization which has been imprinted to unlearn what marmosets know is confronted to what money can’t buy.

***

Patrice Ayme.

Contexts Vary, Ideas Stay.

August 1, 2010

 

Abstract: Even dedicated readers have complained about my essays being too long and hydras of logical complexity. So I am going to inject some Nietzschean wisdom, by bringing out, from time to time, sets of aphorisms. After all, Pascal and Montaigne did this before Nietzsche.

***

THE APHORISM, OR CONTEXT AS VARIABLE:

…"it is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a book. What others do not say in a book…" Nietzsche declared in the "Twilight of the idols". The idea of the aphorism method is that ideas can hold in a few symbols. In that case, it’s the context which becomes the variable. That will of course sound erroneous to the inflexible, simplistic mind. A crab feels it has it all figured out: it knows what the context is.

But the wise knows that the context is precisely what we cannot be sure of. A given, short idea, can always be made better by tweaking the context. Example: Dirac had a theory of holes with negative energy; it all became much clearer by broadening the context with the new concept of antimatter.

Thus Obama decided to move an enormous army to Afghanistan, because he was sure of the context. Then, but only then, a few months later, he found out a few realities about Afghanistan, which prevented his plan to work. Obama’s context had been entirely erroneous. (But, by then, Obama’s plan was on. Too bad Obama does not interface with someone with a deep, alien culture; now millions will get hurt, trillions will be wasted, just because of Obama’s Americano-American cultural little box, and mental inertia.)

Oh, OK, here is the neurological angle: in my vision, ideas are neurological connections, and each of these connections can be described by a few symbols. So, fundamentally the aphorism is a piece of neurology. Since we arbitrarily bind it and limit it by giving it an horizon, we exclude the wider neurology, i.e., what we call in sheer philosophical parlance, the context (the verb "horizein" in the Greek "aphorismos"; it means to demarcate, define, bind, limit).

Nietzsche, and others before him, thought that to build a philosophical "system" was hubristic, erroneous. Research in fundamental logic supports that position, ever since Godel and company showed that no logical system was complete.

***

Aphorisms can be only a few words, or a few pages. They are pieces of logics, floating free in the atmosphere of dynamic contexts. Here is an example:

OBAMA IS CONFUSING STABILIZATION WITH STIMULATION:

Recently Obama said that his "stimulus" saved the states (who were going to fire essential personnel). True, but also part of the problem: when you save crucial state jobs, you are not stimulating, just saving the ship.

***

And another:

WHAT RACISM IS:

Racism consists in making hateful generalities about people one has previously somehow grouped up together, whether they like it, or not.

Therefore communautarism, tribalism, and the like, avowed or imputed, are necessary conditions for racism. In that sense, when the victims engage deliberately in communautarism, and tribalism, the victims often cooperate with their oppressors. Equality eschews deliberate inequality in "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity".

***

WEALTH IS GOOD, FLAUNTING IT IS BETTER, SEEING HOW FAR ONE CAN GO, ECSTASY:

What we have here now is plutocracy. Capitalism, per se, is not the problem. Capitalism existed for a very long time before private banks were given the quasi monopoly of money creation. Banks have monopolized all the money that could possibly exist, and more. And, unsurprisingly, and related to the preceding, we also have a depression, as the sinking long term averages of the median income shows.

The hyper wealthy are embarked in a race of hubris. They want to see how much they can get away with. The more they get away with it, the happier they feel, because they feel ever more powerful, and the obsession they develop with that feeling of superiority allows them to forget their pathos, and the human condition. Money is an aphrodisiac, flaunting it, even more so.

So here we are: money ever more impudent, ever more happy with its impudence. How to get out of it? Well, first, cognition. But Americans are taught early on in life to admire the rich, and that believing in conspiracy is a mental disease. So when Clinton and Obama were told to select the same people from Goldman Sachs to lead the USA, Americans see no conspiracy. Verily, they do not even know that "conspire" means breathing together. All they know is that seeing conspiracies is bad, even dangerous.

It does not matter that even Clinton admitted, even before he was sworn into office, that he had been told by Goldman Sachs’ Rubin that "… my reelection hinges on the Federal Reserve and a bunch of fucking bond traders?" Got to be hard for Clinton, with his tendency for cheap fornication, to see the traders getting all the action.

81% of Americans, supposedly, according to a recent poll, see no problem with money in politics. Little American minds have been well conditioned for servitude. Time to spring the trap.

***

THE CLINTONS’ TROUBLING WEALTH:

In the meantime, feel awe for the fortune of the Clintons and their 5 million dollar marriage for their hedge fund manager daughter and her Goldman Sachs husband. Respect. Admire. Kneel. After all, that this the future of America. We see no Teddy Roosevelt this time, ready to crack down on exploding hyper wealth. Just bipartisan traitors playing wimps to give themselves an excuse. At best.

And we see nobody wondering how come the Clintons, long elected politicians and civil servants with modest, or moderate income, came into so much extravagant money. Explaining it all by the touring circuit of Clinton (where, officially, he made 40 million dollars over the years) does not come near explaining the outrageous spending on the wedding. I believe in conspiracies: history is so full of them, it is not much besides that. And I believe that when people who cannot possibly be that rich, are that rich, that they are getting pay-backs.

After all, it’s Clinton who allowed the Goldman Sachs guys to dismantle FDR’s work and spirit (even Summers has made a lot of money from Goldman, and Rubin chaired it). Clinton has been a major traitor to the middle class, and that is why he poses so well as its friend. Clinton is a big fat bait, with a hook inside.

Chelsea Clinton, 30 years old, a hedge fund manager, is marrying a Goldman Sachs investment banker, age 32. What does the FAA, the Federal Aviation Administration do? It forbids flying below 2,000 feet in part of New York State, at the behest of the Secret Service. In the Secret Service’s mind, Chelsea is some great princess. And it wants to impress this on us. We are very far here from Norway, a democracy where politicians have to pay their way, down to the last dime. (It’s no coincidence that Norway is twice wealthier, per capita.)

Elevating those who have no rights is exactly how aristocracies were always born out of plutocracy: look up here, small people, these are your lords, even over the heavens they reign, and to you, pathetic insects, the heavens themselves are closed. Who elected the Secret Service, that institution which closes the heavens themselves?

In the next step down, people will have to go on their knees as Princess Chelsea Clinton passes by. Her dad, with a symbolic bag of rice on his shoulder, is a giant of hypocrisy, double dealing, treachery, a real life Janus.

No wonder Obama is so well inspired. Michelle Obama is taking a little vacation to Spain, with "minimal staff". Who elected her, where is it in the constitution? (Answer: nowhere; Ms Washington was not queen of America. By the way, the word "first" as in "first man" (in the Senate), was Augustus’ title. Augustus was Rome’s first real dictator for life.)

Minimal staff: Michelle only reserved 30 rooms in a five star hotel (we are told).

***

ALL THE COMMENTS ONE DARES TO PRINT, AND NO MORE:

I comment a lot on the New York Times, which is gracious enough to publish me a lot. I appreciate the difference with 2003, when I had to send to the New York Times enlightening, but ominous parallels with Nazi propaganda. Then the NYT was pushing for war, by believing and spreading all the obvious lies of Bush. Ingratiating itself to Bush and his lovers (most of the USA at the time), was mission numero uno. Some of these editorialists (Tom Friedman, Roger Cohen, among others) have, since, operated a 180 degree turn. Friedman has written an excellent editorial on Afghanistan [NYT, July 31], where he picks up on the theme familiar in these pages of double dealings, conspiracies within conspiracies, etc..

Paul Krugman, though, was always against the war. Last year he was for a much larger stimulus. Although, differently from me, he did not explain on what the much bigger stimulus was going to be spent on.

The New York Times censored my comment on Krugman’s muscular, and excellent editorial. Said Krugman: "President Obama rode into office on a wave of progressive enthusiasm. But, for many reasons, that has given way to progressive disillusionment. Krugman wonders, as we all have: "Why does the Obama administration keep looking for love in all the wrong places? Why does it go out of its way to alienate its friends, while wooing people who will never waver in their hatred?…

But Mr. Obama has a responsibility, too. He can’t expect strong support from people his administration keeps ignoring and insulting. "

In all of this, Obama’s persona is the deep, although boring question. He made a campaign profoundly compatible with my ideas, as expressed on this website (and its predecessor, Tyranosopher.com). But, once he was sure to get to power, he embraced the plutocrats with a vengeance.

Why did Obama embrace the plutocrats? He obviously loves money and power. Most ambitious people do. But, with the people of high moral standards, there are other, higher, more domineering values. However, Clinton had shown before that Janus was the way to (considerable) riches.

To answer the honorable Krugman’s question, I sent the following comment, which was censored by the New York Times. OK, I called Obama a "child", gravely injuring the elected dictatorship’s dignity.

But, if anything, Obama’s behavior in Afghanistan is a demonstration that he is a child. A child with big toys. One of his toys is the U.S. Army. After he decided to triple the legions there, the child discovered that Afghanistan was not at all as he thought it was. If he had not been a child, he would have been endowed with enough cynicism to suspect that all his sycophantic advisers, all of the old school, and the military-industrial complex could perhaps not be trusted. So I sent the following, to help Krugman:

Something is deeply wrong with Obama’s psychology. He is apparently looking for his father among the fatherly figures of the republican party. Why fatherly? Because they are so sure of themselves. Obama is not. He did not have a real father, at home, so he did not grow up as children who have a father do, and hides it behind grand airs. One grows from having a dad, by learning to oppose him intelligently. From there self assurance comes.

Meanwhile Obama’s economics reigns: stimulus in Afghanistan and saving the plutocrats, whatever it takes. It is leading to a deepening depression. Of course, Obama’s economics is not really Obama’s, it is, as under Clinton, that of the Goldman crowd.

Sad, childish, pathetic.

I will add this: Obama was not at his mother death bed (I flew around the world to get to my dad’s unexpected death bed; it’s still a major pain, but also a major anchor of my value system, and always will be, as it should; if you betray your own, you will betray all, any, and whatever). Tellingly, Obama visited his dying grandmother, his practical mother in Hawai’i.

Obama had refused to follow back his mom to Indonesia, after re-establishing his roots in Hawaii (I can understand this). So he was, de facto, abandoned by both his dad and his mom. Thus he probably, deep inside, wants to punish those who love him (or claim to). Hence his attitude relative to his supporters (and relative to Europe, as disillusioned Europeans have started to say). Hence his insistence that Michelle is "his rock", because he had to lay a foundation somewhere, since he even rejected his… cultural race.

***

WANDERER AND HER SHADOW:

The same day that the NYT rejected my Obama pop psychology, Roger Cohen in "Modern Odysseys" described beautifully his family’s wandering-Jew adventures, on three continents, including Africa… A bit like Obama, quite a bit like me. So I sent the following comment:

"The wanderer has to learn to love her shadow."

which the NYT published, and recommended. Sometimes we don’t just do the best, but what is necessary (Churchill).

***

Patrice Ayme


Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Patterns of Meaning

Exploring the patterns of meaning that shape our world

Sean Carroll

in truth, only atoms and the void

West Hunter

Omnes vulnerant, ultima necat

GrrrGraphics on WordPress

www.grrrgraphics.com

Skulls in the Stars

The intersection of physics, optics, history and pulp fiction

Footnotes to Plato

because all (Western) philosophy consists of a series of footnotes to Plato

Patrice Ayme's Thoughts

Striving For The Best Thinking Possible. Morality Needs Intelligence As Will Needs Mind. Intelligence Is Humanism.

Learning from Dogs

Dogs are animals of integrity. We have much to learn from them.

ianmillerblog

Smile! You’re at the best WordPress.com site ever

Defense Issues

Military and general security

RobertLovesPi.net

Polyhedra, tessellations, and more.

How to Be a Stoic

an evolving guide to practical Stoicism for the 21st century

Donna Swarthout

Writer, Editor, Berliner

coelsblog

Defending Scientism

EugenR Lowy עוגן רודן

Thoughts about Global Economy and Existence

Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Patterns of Meaning

Exploring the patterns of meaning that shape our world

Sean Carroll

in truth, only atoms and the void

West Hunter

Omnes vulnerant, ultima necat

GrrrGraphics on WordPress

www.grrrgraphics.com

Skulls in the Stars

The intersection of physics, optics, history and pulp fiction

Footnotes to Plato

because all (Western) philosophy consists of a series of footnotes to Plato

Patrice Ayme's Thoughts

Striving For The Best Thinking Possible. Morality Needs Intelligence As Will Needs Mind. Intelligence Is Humanism.

Learning from Dogs

Dogs are animals of integrity. We have much to learn from them.

ianmillerblog

Smile! You’re at the best WordPress.com site ever

Defense Issues

Military and general security

RobertLovesPi.net

Polyhedra, tessellations, and more.

How to Be a Stoic

an evolving guide to practical Stoicism for the 21st century

Donna Swarthout

Writer, Editor, Berliner

coelsblog

Defending Scientism

EugenR Lowy עוגן רודן

Thoughts about Global Economy and Existence

Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Patterns of Meaning

Exploring the patterns of meaning that shape our world

Sean Carroll

in truth, only atoms and the void

West Hunter

Omnes vulnerant, ultima necat

GrrrGraphics on WordPress

www.grrrgraphics.com

Skulls in the Stars

The intersection of physics, optics, history and pulp fiction

Footnotes to Plato

because all (Western) philosophy consists of a series of footnotes to Plato

Patrice Ayme's Thoughts

Striving For The Best Thinking Possible. Morality Needs Intelligence As Will Needs Mind. Intelligence Is Humanism.

Learning from Dogs

Dogs are animals of integrity. We have much to learn from them.

ianmillerblog

Smile! You’re at the best WordPress.com site ever

Defense Issues

Military and general security

RobertLovesPi.net

Polyhedra, tessellations, and more.

How to Be a Stoic

an evolving guide to practical Stoicism for the 21st century

Donna Swarthout

Writer, Editor, Berliner

coelsblog

Defending Scientism

EugenR Lowy עוגן רודן

Thoughts about Global Economy and Existence