Please don't shoot me!
I don't speak out against the regime.
I don't protest.
I don't hide families in the attic.
I give the roman salute.
I lie just like Trump.
Introduction.
When the Founding Fathers drafted the Declaration of Independence and later the Constitution, they assumed a certain level of human decency, the obvious blind spots notwithstanding, ie: slavery.
The Trump administration has exposed all the shortcomings of the U.S. system of government that has relied heavily on norms based on common morality and human decency for almost 250 years, of which he and his administration have none. Not only that, by capturing all 3 branches of government, even codified laws have been ignored with impunity. In light of the sorry state of the country in 2025, specific steps are urgently needed to correct the abuses of the Trump administration. Hopefully starting in 2026, and assuming that by 2028 the country has not already fallen into a permanent dictatorship, the following steps are proposed to counteract the shortcomings exposed by Trump.
The next congress and president should address the following issues:
1 - Undoing of everything Trump has done.
Executive orders, laws (with help from congress), re-hire fired employees to restore proper function of government, re-open closed agencies, re-join international treaties, etc... The few good executive orders can be re-implemented the proper way: by congressional action.
2 - Personal liability.
Make every government employee, including the president, personally liable for illegal behavior and laws that they push when they are declared unconstitutional. This is the only way abuses like those of the Trump administration will end. The way this is currently handled, by filing lawsuit after lawsuit, is extremely slow and expensive, and it is only the taxpayers that pay. No more impunity.
Furthermore, a politician that proposes a law that is eventually declared unconstitutional should be prosecuted for breach of the oath of office. After all, don't all politicians swear to uphold the constitution? Since they have access to the best lawyers money can buy, at taxpayer expense, ignorance of the law is no excuse.
3 - International conflicts of interest.
Introduce a Constitutional Amendment to forbid the presidency to anyone with businesses or assets in a foreign country. Obviously current law that forces business interests into blind trusts is not sufficient.
4 - Political corruption.
Vigorous enforcement of anti-emoluments laws, new ones when necessary and real consequences, including expropriation of applicable businesses when said laws are ignored.
5 - Supremacy of data and scientific research.
Since the private sector has demonstrated repeatedly that it is not interested in long-term, basic research, and government funding has propelled this country to the pinnacle of scientific research, data collection and scientific research will return as one of the most important functions of government.
6 - A country of laws.
A country that claims to believe in the supremacy of law cannot depend on arbitrary military power instead. Thus joining all international treaties and the ICC will be a top priority.
7 - Saving social security.
Eliminate the limit of taxability, making all wages taxable. At the very least, raise the limit to $500K and index it to inflation. [1]
8 - Arbitrary and Emergency powers.
Repeal the law that allows the secretary of state to arrest/deport anyone deemed to have views contrary to US interests. Review all laws and repeal all that give arbitrary power to government officials that infringe on constitutional rights, especially emergency powers laws.
9 - The First Amendment is for everyone.
Any attempt by any branch of government - Federal, State or Local, or any official thereof, to intimidate or threaten a person or business because of an idea, no matter how repugnant or how it is communicated, will carry an automatic fine, payable immediately to the censored party. See item 2.
10 - Inflation.
Inflation only benefits the finance industry and robs everyone else of purchasing power. Monetary policy will target 0% inflation. As this is not an exact process, erring on the side of deflation is preferable, thus gaining small amounts of purchasing power for the consumer. [2]
11 - Debt.
11.1 - Consumer Debt.
Debt will be declared a public danger that leads to concentration of wealth and bankruptcy of everyone else. Suitable laws will be passed that, at the very least, cap interest rates. A study will be launched to understand why people get in debt and why they can't get out of it, making the public a class of indentured servants. Solutions found to eliminate debt shall be codified into law. [3]
11.2 - Public Debt.
Republicans used to be the party of fiscal discipline. Thanks to the capture of Government by special interests (see item 17), politicians are no longer capable of spending or taxing responsibly. Reducing the deficit will be a priority (see item 13 and 14).
12 - Private property and housing.
The U.S has prospered because of ownership. The finance industry prospers because of the principle of "rent seeking". Laws will be passed making it extremely difficult to expropriate the primary residence (details here [4]) and discourage other schemes that give control of what is purchased to others, for instance manufacturers (ie: the right to repair [6]).
13 - Progressive taxation.
Concentration of wealth is destroying the country and turning it into a feudal society. A progressive taxation scheme will be implemented immediately.
14 - Tax choice, or budgeting by directed funding.
Allow each individual taxpayer to select what areas of government spending the individual's taxes will fund. Social Security, Medicare and Unemployment are not included in this, as they are funded by separate taxes.
Separate funds will be created for, at first, large categories and then, as the system is fine-tuned, into smaller self-consistent groups. Originally, a few large groups could be: Defense, Medical care, Scientific research, Education, Welfare, Natural Resources and Environment, Transportation, Administration of Justice. Later, large categories could be sub-divided into smaller parts.
The other side of this program, which could be called "Tax Choice" or "Directed Funding", is the tax return form, where each taxpayer would have a series of boxes, one for each government spending category where he/she would enter what percentage of his/her taxes are to go. This way, the individual taxpayer could be assured what government programs his/her taxes will fund. Each taxpayer could select none, one or more boxes and in each the corresponding percentage of the total tax paid. If no box is selected, the government would decide where the particular taxpayer's taxes go.
Would any programs disappear? Probably not, given the vast diversity of views across the country, but everybody would feel better since their money would only pay for what they support. Tax compliance would most likely rise and it would be instantly known exactly how much support each area of spending really has.
15 - Education.
Free public higher education, free from political interference and indoctrination, is essential for a healthy democracy. An educated population is more resilient to manipulation by propaganda and more independent without debt (see 11 above). The backhanded attempts from private institutions (religious or otherwise) to get their hands on public education money will be stopped.
16 - Single payer health care.
Not only will this eliminate the profit motive in health care, thus lowering prices, it will allow everyone to be covered and all the inefficiencies of billing will disappear, as all the special interests that now get fees, resulting in the highest health care prices in the word, will be gone. Medicare will also be modified so it covers all healthcare and the single payer entity (a combination of expanded CMS and the VA) will be able to negotiate with the oligopolies (hospital chains, pharmaceutical companies, etc...)
17 - Public financing of elections.
Repeal Citizens United and institute public financing of elections. Private interests have bought the government and this is not acceptable. Per the constitution, the government is "of the people, by the people, for the people", not for the corporations or the oligarchs.
18 - Arm sales.
Vigorous enforcement of existing laws that forbid arms sales to countries that don't adhere to humanitarian laws or treaties. Repeal the immunity that gun manufacturers enjoy.
19 - AI, robots and employment.
Immediate launch of a comprehensive study to understand the effects of AI and robots on employment. It is becoming more and more obvious, no matter what the politicians keep saying, that the basis of a capitalist society: work for pay, is slowly disappearing. A solution needs to be found before the collapse of the economy. If people don't have jobs and can't buy anything, where does it leave a capitalist economy? What happens to corporations that can't sell anything because no one can afford to buy anything because no one has a paying job?
The solution is likely going to be some sort of guaranteed basic income, that can be seen as a dividend of a prosperous country, just like shareholders profit from corporations. But universal basic income is unlikely to be the complete solution. The supply of essentials, especially housing, has to be addressed too. A possible solution is described here. [3]
20 - Military procurement.
Politicians seem incapable of resisting the oligopoly of defense contractors. Part of the problem is Citizens United (see item 17) but a complete re-assessment of pentagon contracts needs to be done. Interestingly, this is the one part that Trump/DOGE/Musk are unwilling to touch, most likely because Musk and his companies are making billions from defense contracts.
21 - Truth in news.
As the country is living in alternate realities thanks to social media algorithms, it is imperative that truth be labeled accurately in all mass media: broadcast, cable, internet. A project will be started to label in real time whether some claim is true or false. Any entity that refuses to carry the labels will by definition be classified as propaganda and sanctioned appropriately. Additionally, any AI entity or chat bot must be labeled and regulated as such. Pretending that any such entity is human is nothing but fraud. Any product generated by AI will be labeled as such, irrespective of whether the claims contained therein are true or not. The same labeling requirements apply to AI-generated content.
22 - Separation of powers.
The Marshall Service shall be put under the jurisdiction of the court system immediately. Trump has proven that a rogue justice department can not be trusted to enforce court decisions against the administration.
23 - Vigorous anti-trust action.
The dangers of consolidation of markets have been known for decades, but the anti-trust division has been asleep at the wheel. No surprise since it has been captured, like the rest of government, by big business. See item 17. Furthermore, and specifically in media, oligopolies present tempting targets with deep pockets ripe for intimidation and extortion. The administration has successfully used this tactic recently against multiple media conglomerates.
24 - Private prisons.
All private prison and detention center contracts will be cancelled immediately. Not only do private prisons pose a clear conflict of interest, they are an attempt to evade the laws and regulations that apply to regular prisons.
25 - Crypto currency.
As Crypto currencies are the ideal medium for criminal organizations to launder money, the federal government's only purpose in this area will be to vigorously recover the profits from crime and prosecute the criminal organizations that use it.
26 - Communications from Government.
26.1 - Public relations/documentation/instructions/press releases/political pronouncements.
All communications and data from all levels of government must be available on government web sites, free of charge and independent of outside businesses. Messages/videos can also be sent via private businesses/platforms, but the same content must also be available on government web sites, mailing lists and RSS feeds. All communications must be archived and be easily searchable in perpetuity.
26.2 - Real Time Law Enforcement Communications.
Radio transmissions from police and other law enforcement agencies have been publicly available, not encrypted, for decades. This provides an essential element of access and transparency for the preservation of democracy. The recent push to encrypt such communications will be stopped at all levels of government as this leads inexorably to the secret police of totalitarian states.
27 - Plastic pollution.
Make the manufacturers pay for the garbage they generate. Details here. [4] This will provide the needed incentive to clean up the environment.
28 - Equity in health care.
Lawmakers will be forced to use the healthcare systems they legislate for the rest of us, and not be allowed to give themselves a much better plan.
29 - PATRIOT Act and Homeland Security.
Reassess the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and repeal the PATRIOT act. A clear overreaction to 9/11, DHS needs to be reassessed, and probably dismantled, now that the panic is over and the current abuses are there for everybody to see, ie: the Gestapo tactics of ICE.
30 - Climate Change.
The Trump administration has been selectively eliminating subsidies and incentives for green technology. Subsidies and incentives given to the fossil fuel industry also need to be revoked. It used to be that the Republicans said that the Government should not be in the position of choosing winners and losers, which leads to the inescapable conclusion that such subsidies are corruption plain and simple. See item 17.
31 - Partisan Gerrymandering.
In light of the abuse by Texas republicans, it is clear that national standards for independent redistricting need to be established. Partisan gerrymandering needs to be outlawed and independent commissions need to be established that will create political districts based only on population, with boundaries designated by algorithm.
32 - Felony Murder.
This bogus and totally unethical charge has to be eradicated from the legal system, at all levels. As explained in detail here [7], it has been abused to an incredible extent and has ruined countless lives.
[1] Credit: Robert Reich.
[2] Considering the history of the great depression, it is understandable that the U.S. government is deathly afraid of deflation, just like Germany cannot forget the Weimar Republic's hyper-inflation and has acted accordingly.
[3] The obvious cause of debt is, of course, not enough money. This brings up issues of a living wage, cost of housing and other essentials, inequality, power dynamics between employer and employees/unions, but there are also less obvious reasons: marketing and advertising, media manipulation, etc...
Despicable.
Evil.
Incompetent.
Universe in one verse
Bang. Inflation. Expansion. Death.
Introduction
Like many projects, this one expanded. Originally I wanted a clock tower, then I added a cuckoo clock and then I added TTS. Depending on the setting, the following script will play a large bell, a cuckoo clock or say what time it is in the form of, say, "5 PM".
Prerequisites
Find a bell sound you like. I found mixkit-melodic-church-bell-617.wav.
Find a cuckoo call you like. I found 076092_cuckoo-40190.mp3 which contains 2 calls, so I had to import it into audacity, delete leading and trailing silence (including the whole second call) and export it to WAV format.
Procedure
Put the following script and sound files in /usr/local/bin.
Add the proper crontab entry (crontab -e).
# m h dom mon dow command
00 * * * * /usr/local/bin/playhourlychimes.sh >/dev/null
Configuration (shell variables)
Many parameters can be adjusted that will change how the script sounds. Most parameters can be left as is as they are appropriate for the above sound files. The most important file-dependent parameter is SOUNDLENGTH. It has to be a little bit longer than the length of the respective sound files to account for the decay of the sound. This is most relevant for the bell sounds. Rather than doing this dynamically, since it was a one-time operation, I ran mediainfo on the files and set the variables.
Other parameters determine how quickly the sounds repeat, hours of operation, exception times and day (hard coded since this is fixed in my schedule), volume reduction and, most importantly, what sound to use: bell, cuckoo or TTS.
What the script does
On the hour, the computer speakers will play the selected sounds: bell, cuckoo or TTS. The script takes advantage of the parallelism afforded by pulseaudio, which allows playing new sounds while others are still playing. This is most important for the bell sounds, which are still decaying while a new strike starts to play.
Improvements
A better system for the exceptions (not hard-coded) would be better.
There is an issue with uneven period of the cuckoo sounds if the INTERVAL is less than 1.2 seconds even though the length of the cuckoo sound is little more than 500 ms. The period between the 2d and 3rd instances is shorter, probably due to system load.
Better TTS output of the say command. The default voice is, shall we say, quite mechanical.
The bash script
#!/bin/bash
# get hour in 12 hour format
HOUR=$(date +%I)
ZHOUR=$(echo $HOUR | sed 's/^0*//')
# and in 24 hour format
HOUR24=$(date +%H)
ZHOUR24=$(echo $HOUR24 | sed 's/^0*//')
# Find weekday (for exceptions)
WEEKDAY=$(date +%a)
# only play during these times
START=7
STOP=23
SOUNDTYPE=bell
case "${SOUNDTYPE}" in
bell )
SOUNDFILE=/usr/local/bin/mixkit-melodic-church-bell-617.wav
INTERVAL=2
SOUNDLENGTH=7
;;
cuckoo )
SOUNDFILE=/usr/local/bin/cuckoo.wav
INTERVAL=1.2
SOUNDLENGTH=1
;;
speak | * )
;;
esac
# volume reduction (percent)
VOLREDUCTION=25
# paplay needs environment variable exported:
export XDG_RUNTIME_DIR="/run/user/1000"
if [[ $ZHOUR24 -ge $START && $ZHOUR24 -le $STOP ]]
then
if [[ $WEEKDAY != Wed || ($WEEKDAY == Wed && ($ZHOUR24 -lt 17 || $ZHOUR24 -gt 19)) ]]
then
/usr/bin/pactl set-sink-volume 0 -$VOLREDUCTION%
if [[ $SOUNDTYPE != speak ]]
then
for i in $(seq 1 $ZHOUR);
do
/usr/bin/paplay $SOUNDFILE &
sleep $INTERVAL
done
sleep $SOUNDLENGTH
else
say $ZHOUR`date +%p`
fi
/usr/bin/pactl set-sink-volume 0 +$VOLREDUCTION%
fi
fi
If wiping out a country is an acceptable response to a terrorist attack, such as what is happening in Gaza [1], Saudi Arabia should have been leveled in response to 9/11. [2]
The difference? We need Saudi oil, the Saudis are rich and powerful. Palestinians are poor, powerless and are not even allowed to have an official state.
[1] 1,200 dead as a result of the Hamas terrorist attack, 35,000 civilians dead and counting.
[2] 3,000 dead as a result of the 9/11 attacks, most of the hijackers were Saudi citizens but no civilians in Saudi Arabia suffered any consequence and the government didn't suffer any reprisals. Indeed, Saudi royalty was allowed to leave the country when all air traffic was grounded. Instead, a 20 year war in Iraq and Afghanistan resulted. Something had to be done to satisfy the lust for revenge of the populace.
HP used to make good printers. I have just wasted 5.5 hours over 2 days trying to set up an HP Deskjet 2755e for someone with a Windows 10 home edition PC.
This brand new printer came with a little pamphlet that said to go to https://123.hp.com to set it up. All we wanted was to connect the printer to said PC. So, from the computer, the above web site strongly encouraged the use of a phone but allowed the option to continue from the computer. Selecting that, it failed with a very generic error and instructions to try again later.
OK, let's do it the HP way, via a cell phone, which was not what we wanted but were forced to do. This procedure is overly complicated and the main purpose seems to be to collect data (I had to opt out of just about everything they wanted me to agree to), sell me cloud services, trap me into automatic ink refills (this printer is notoriously bad in pages per ink cartridge) and otherwise make the printer unusable unless I'm connected to HP at every turn. Whatever happened to turn the printer on, plug the cable or enter the WiFi password and it works? After many false starts, having to put the printer in setup mode again and again, it was apparently set up to print from the phone.
But the computer? nope. After trying the same thing from the computer again, the printer could not be found via "add a printer". Again, many many tries. When the computer was finally recognized, Windows said "driver not found". So, had to go looking for a driver on HP's support web site. Of course the first thing that web site was pushing was HP+, their cloud/web printing service. Finally found the driver itself bundled into a file called HP easy or some such (writing this from memory). The procedure kept failing. It must have had some timeout of the setup function/state as I kept getting "printer cannot be configured". All this is over WiFi, as that is the preferred method.
Tried just plugging it in via a USB cable. Apparently this printer has nothing at all in it software-wise that is not installed by the driver and/or firmware installation procedure. The USB system didn't even notice that a new device had just been plugged in. Another dead-end. The setup EXE with the driver in it had an option for a USB-connected printer but it always failed.
Eventually, after many retries via the WiFi method the printer was configured properly and it completed the remaining 2 steps. This took many many minutes and the software kept prompting after that to set up accounts for HP+ and all the other services HP wants to sell me. After declining all of it, the setup ended with an error I couldn't get out of so I just closed the window. Luckily the driver had been installed.
Conclusion:
HP is more interested in annoying the users of its products by trying to sell them everything possible than just making products that just work. Other devices should not be necessary to make a printer talk to a computer. In Linux, plugging the computer to the USB port is all that's needed. I'm regularly using another model HP printer/scanner/fax with Linux and I had to do absolutely nothing beyond plugging in the USB cable.
This printer obviously comes with absolutely no software that is not installed on-the-fly by the driver installation. This is no doubt so that they can keep updating it to keep tightening the noose around the user's neck. The fine print says that, by design, the printer will not work with non-hp ink cartridges and that HP reserves the right to upgrade the software so that even existing HP cartridges stop working when/if they decide they should.
If this is what I'd be facing if I bought an HP printer these days, I'm never buying another HP printer.
There is a housing shortage in the U.S. largely driven by investors buying up all the available housing [1]. This, in combination with high interest rates and existing home owners staying put as they can't afford a new, better house means that nothing is being built. Especially not low-margin affordable housing.
Definitions:
For the purpose of this article, the following definitions apply:
Investor: Any individual or entity [2] that owns a dwelling and does not occupy it.
Homeowner: Any individual that owns a dwelling and lives in it full-time. Full time is defined as more than 8 months a year, making the dwelling the primary residence. By definition, a homeowner cannot have more than one primary residence.
Primary residence: If an individual owns only one home, it is the primary residence, if the individual owns more than one, one can be declared as the primary residence, subject to the rules below.
Taxation as dis-incentive
Any investor-owned dwelling is taxed as follows:
- if unoccupied: 90%
- if rented: 50%
The Primary Residence, if occupied by the owner for 8 months a year or more, is taxed at 0%, even if unoccupied the rest of the time.
If an individual owns more than one home and doesn't live in any one more than 8 months in any calendar year, the primary residence is taxed at 0% while owner-occupied, otherwise it is taxed like an investor-owned dwelling.
The Primary Residence can be defined as the most expensive owned by an individual. That way the tax benefit is maximized.
Any dwelling other than the primary residence is taxed at 90% by default. It is the responsibility of the owner to prove to the taxing authority that it is rented or owner-occupied to obtain the lower tax rates.
What would this do?
- Encourage home ownership.
- Discourage hoarding of housing by investors, especially if unoccupied.
- Discourage speculation, in buying/selling and short-term rentals.
- Provide an incentive to accept lower rents instead of keeping a property vacant.
- Prevent losing your home due to financial hardship and not being able to pay real-estate taxes.
- Lower the cost of home ownership for the essential primary home.
- Raise the cost of ownership for additional homes.
- Shift school funding to those more capable of supporting it.
- Reduce homelessness.
Case studies
1 - Second home / vacation home.
No different from investor-owned homes.
- If unoccupied, taxed at 90% for the months it's unoccupied.
- If rented, taxed at 50% for the months it's rented.
- If occupied by the owner, taxed at 0% for the months of occupancy.
2 - Short term (less than a year) rentals, month-to-month, and airbnb.
Whole dwelling when the owner not present:
Short term rentals are even more expensive than even month-to-month ones, so the investor is making even more money and thus can afford the high tax of 50% for the month in question, even if the dwelling is not occupied for the whole month. This is essentially an investor-owned home. If the dwelling is unoccupied for a whole month, it reverts to being taxed at 90%
Rooms when the owner also lives in the dwelling:
This is an owner-occupied home, so the fact that the owner is sharing it with paying renters makes no difference. The home is still taxed at 0%
3 - The snowbird situation
People that own 2 homes and alternate between them. If one home is lived in for more than 8 months, it's the primary home and gets taxed at 0%, the other one then becomes a vacation home and this situation reverts to case 1 above.
If neither home is lived in by the owner for a minimum of 8 months, they both are considered investor-owned homes and taxed at 90% if unoccupied, at 50% if rented and at 0% when occupied by the owner.
If an owner lives in one home for 6 months and the other for 6 months, the owner is entitled to 12 months of 0% tax and 12 months of 50% or 90% tax for the respective house depending on whether it's rented or not.
Transition from the status quo
When this property tax regime is implemented, it will make it expensive to own unoccupied housing, likely resulting in hedge funds and other investors trying to sell the newly non-profitable housing stock. This will increase supply and lower prices.
At lower prices, more people are likely to be able to afford to buy their first/primary home. Furthermore, their ownership is now more secure than ever because there is no tax bill to pay and owning a home does not require an income.
Due to the incentive to rent rather than keep an investment property vacant, rents are likely to go down.
[1] https://patch.com/new-jersey/newarknj/corporations-own-most-newark-s-homes-new-laws-are-pushing-back
[2] Obviously a corporation, limited partnership or other fictitious entity cannot occupy a dwelling.
When the federal government failed to enforce Reconstruction after the civil war, and southern white supremacists passed laws that stripped away recently gained rights, the black population voted with their feet and left. It was all they could do.
This scenario is repeating in Republican states. Gerrymandering and voter suppression have made it impossible to vote out republican legislatures and imposed super-majorities. With this new power, reactionary republicans are pushing and passing highly unpopular laws related to abortion and associated issues, including freedom of movement, providing assistance, interstate commerce, bans of medicines and criminalizing health care, providers and even women.
It is obvious that the misogynistic republicans behind these laws won't care unless they are affected directly. It is high time that women withdraw all their support by leaving. Some OBGYN doctors have already left those states rather that risk prison for providing appropriate health care. [1]
Unfortunately, as with everything else in a capitalist society, the majority of women are probably just hanging on and are unable to upend their lives and move to another state. Not to mention those that are dependent, by marriage and economics, on a specific man.
But imagine if all the women opposed to these laws, and they are many, a majority according to the polls [2], could relocate to states that believe that health care is between doctor and patient and want to keep politicians out of the exam room. Let the misogynistic politicians and the men who voted for them live by themselves in the republican hell-holes they have created.
If a foundation were set up to provide financial and logistical support to women that wanted to leave the republican states that target them, the necessary incentives would be created for the ousting of anti-woman politicians or at least against the passing of such laws.
This foundation would help women find work in democratic states and provide travel expenses for those that can't afford the moves. It could also provide legal expenses for those whose husbands refuse to cooperate. Since this foundation would support the independence of women and freedom to travel, and would have nothing to do with abortion, it could not be targeted by the misogynistic politicians. Of course they would try, but good luck in the courts.
The result would hit hard. Imagine a state of mostly men, since most women would have left, with an economy in free-fall due to the lack of labor (menial or otherwise), and a population in decline since there would be no women to have babies. Not to mention that the men who support those laws and the politicians that pass them would have to do without women and sex. This approach has already been tried in Africa and was successful in pressuring politicians to change course [3]
Disclaimer
There are many valid reasons why women could and should refuse to leave:
Principle: Why let the christo-fascist misogynists push you out? What needs to be fixed is the election process.
Generational wealth: It is unreasonable to force people to sell accumulated wealth (especially land or real-estate - the most common way to accumulate generational wealth.)
Attachment to the land: Some people simply like where they live, again the solution is to fix the broken election system, not leave like a coward.
The present location is the only affordable place: The result of inequality, a huge problem by itself, with the usual intractable solutions.
It appears that the only alternative to leaving is fixing the purposefully damaged election system. Is this possible? How? At the speed of political reforms, it could take generations.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/26/us-abortion-ban-providers-doctors-leaving-states
[2] https://www.npr.org/2022/06/03/1102872199/gallup-poll-pro-choice-roe-v-wade-supreme-court
Ideally, I contend, it is to give every individual knowledge and values that will lead to a fulfilling life. It also has to equip each person with the means to navigate successfully through life's ocean of possibilities and avoid the shallows that way too often wreck lives.
Another, more narrow view maintains that it is the essential ingredient to be a productive member of society; in other words: to get a good job.
In all cases, education needs to reflect, and be appropriate to, the reality in which we live. If not it is useless.
What use to a modern person or business is a resume filled exclusively with rigorous Taliban studies, Biblical studies, Talmudic studies, White Supremacist studies or historic propaganda? [1]
Amazingly, the latter is happening right now in Florida [2]. If this is allowed to continue, a generation will be wasted and condemned to poverty as no business will hire any graduate of the Florida public schools. But then again, for certain jobs, an illiterate population can be exploited more cheaply. For other jobs that require good education, the privileged can always apply.
But the damage is going to be much more extensive. By indoctrinating a generation this way, silos of intolerance will be created that will take generations to undo. Civil strife will follow and the commonality of humanity will be less and less visible as the powers that thrive on division and tribalism will stoke the fires of intolerance [3]. This is already visible. No crystal ball necessary.
Furthermore, all of society is, and has been, affected by the degrading of education. Critical thinking is succumbing to propaganda. The vast majority of the population is being denied the intellectual tools to challenge those in power. An ignorant populace is more easily manipulated. In 1995, Carl Sagan foresaw the current state of affairs with rare prescience [4].
Of course, the criticism of public education in the U.S. has been ongoing for decades and never totally free from political influence, but this level of propagandizing and re-writing of history is intolerable. And it gets worse: any narrow-minded parent can now dictate the curriculum [5]. The independence of educational institutions needs to be re-established.
Unfortunately, in a capitalist society, the privileged will always be able to afford a good education and the marginalizing of the poor will continue to accelerate, with more political and economic power continuing to flow upwards. The end result is a feudal society.
[1] Black studies are purposefully not included here, as they are a valid subject of historical study, especially given the history of the U.S. and the suppression caused by white supremacy. Given this history, white studies could never be taken as anything other than propaganda, since pretty much all of education and society already reflect the white supremacy value system.
[3] For those that have not been paying attention: the Republican Party with its grievance politics.
[4] "I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time - when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the key manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agenda or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness. The dumbing down of America is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30-second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance." From the Demon-haunted World, by Carl Sagan, 1995.
In 2009, Robert Lanza, MD, wrote (with Bob Berman) a book called
BIOCENTRISM
How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe
On the back cover it says "SCIENCE", but despite repeatedly attempting to use Quantum Mechanics, Relativity and other well known theories and experiments to prove the existence of a universal consciousness (aka God - at the bottom this book is little more than an attempt to recycle Intelligent Design [1] which itself was an attempted refinement of Creationism), flawed reasoning, conflation of facts/ideas and personal experiences lead to a wholly unsatisfying book that ultimately gives up without making a single valid point.
Chapter 1 MUDDY UNIVERSE
An unrelenting critique and takedown of science for its inability to explain some of the fundamental questions. Interestingly, the authors don't consider that the knowledge of science is incomplete and evolving. Solving these issues using the scientific method
"hasn't happened and it won't happen."
Instead the obvious solution is that
"we have ignored a critical component of the cosmos ... This component is Consciousness." (Page 9).
Chapter 2 IN THE BEGINNING THERE WAS ... WHAT?
Using personal experiences of wonder at the beauty and complexity of nature as a springboard to assert that all theories we formulate come from our own minds (true) and that our observations on which those depend are conceptualized in our own brains (also true), so
"we are creating them"
(the theories - Page 13),
"it is perhaps inevitable that a biologist seeks to unify existing theories of the "physical world" with those of the "living world"".
This unification apparently takes the form of a priori censorship:
"Today's preoccupation with unprovable "theories of everything" is a sacrilege to science itself"
and
"we have failed to protect science against speculative theories that have so entered mainstream thinking that they now masquerade as fact". (page 14)
One of his subsequent examples used to support his argument: the "ether" theory of the 19th century, was discarded when it was proven not to hold up to experimental light. This is how the scientific method works. Yet, this same argument is used to reject currently valid theories.
But in the author's view:
"the first step to constructing a credible alternative"
(to the failures of scientific theories)
"is to question the standard view that the universe would exist even if it were empty of life, and absent any consciousness or perception of it."
So here we get to one of the fatal flaws of Biocentrism: the conflation of reality and the perception of reality.
"Without perception there can be no reality".
And in order to justify this, after acknowledging that in the macro world objects remain even when not seen, he goes on a tirade about Quantum Mechanics and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. This is another fatal flaw: the conflation of the atomic scale and the macro/human scale.
Chapter 3 THE SOUND OF A FALLING TREE
Dr. Lanza is obviously well educated. This chapter describes in perfect detail the processes of perceiving sound and sight, with a tree and a candle as the subjects. Then he goes on to describe in great detail how rainbows occur. All these accurate scientific observations are supposed to be proof that
"What we perceive as reality is a process that involves our consciousness."
But here we encounter the usual conflation of reality and perception of reality. What is true is that what we perceive as reality INVOLVES a process that involves our consciousness. Our perception is NOT reality. Like he points out,
"other creatures receiving the identical stimulus will experience something altogether different, such as a perception of gray, or even have an altogether dissimilar sensation."
Does reality not contain the electromagnetic waves of different frequencies that we can't see? that a dog can't see? What a shame that all the money, time, brain power and energy spent on the James Webb Space Telescope (and its predecessor the Hubble Space Telescope) was wasted because there's nothing out there to observe... This is completely absurd. Oh wait! These pictures [4] are in Robert Lanza's brain! It proves telepathy! [5]
Chapter 4 LIGHTS AND ACTION!
An interlude of childhood experiences, natural curiosity, exploration of nature and luck that put Dr. Lanza on his life path. The only issue relevant to the subject matter in this chapter is the perception of reality by different organisms.
Chapter 5 WHERE IS THE UNIVERSE?
This chapter starts with pages discussing what the self is, or the nature of identity, along with what different philosophers and religions have said. Unfortunately it quickly falls into the trap of conflating reality with the perception of reality.
"nothing can be perceived that is not already interacting with our consciousness"
leads to
"the so-called external world must be correlative with consciousness"
which in turns leads to
"One doesn't exist without the other",
which degenerates into the absurdity that that the moon disappears if no one is looking at it. (page 35). After more detailed descriptions of the processes by which we see and form the concepts of objects in our brains he concludes that
"The two-world model is a myth".
The two worlds are the outside world and the representation of it in our consciousnesses, based on the inputs of our senses. Obviously this cannot be reconciled with the observations of science or our own experiences, so we need to discard everything we've been taught: language and its meaning and the thinking process itself.
"Consciousness, like aspects of quantum theory, involving entangled particles may exists outside of time altogether".
To support this view, not only time, but also space have to be made to exist only inside the mind. In later chapters, misusing and abusing Quantum Theory and Relativity, he attempts to prove that neither exists in the objective, external world. Finally, after some discussion of the processes of making decisions, with some experimental evidence thrown in, he concludes that
"control too, is largely an illusion" (page 38).
This has implications for free will and the perception of it. Various experiments have shown that internal subconscious activity can be detected before the subject is aware of making a decision. Instead of acknowledging that maybe this is how the brain works, he concludes that
"we can label all cognition as an amalgam of our experiential selves and whatever energy field may pervade the cosmos. To avoid such awkward phrasing, we'll allude to it by simply calling it awareness or consciousness."
So now we have consciousness not only within our brains but pervading the universe.
Chapter 6 BUBBLES IN TIME
Memories of childhood lead to speculation about the nature of subjective time and why things happen.
"Science's prevailing mechanistic mind-set"
that describes an essentially random universe cannot be true:
"Truly random events offer neither excitement nor creativity."
Again, the conflation of external objective reality and our interpretation (and reaction) to it. Describing emotional reactions to the beauty of nature:
"who in their right mind would say that it was all conjured by imbecilic billiard balls slamming each other by the laws of chance? No observant person would be able to utter such a thing, which is why it always strikes me as slightly amazing that any scientist can aver, with a straight face, that they stand there at the lectern - a conscious, functioning organism with trillions of perfectly functioning parts - the sole result of falling dice. Our least gesture affirms the magic of life's design."
So there you have it: Intelligent Design, re-packaged.
Chapter 7 WHEN TOMORROW COMES BEFORE YESTERDAY
"Biocentrism is the only humanly comprehensible explanation for how the world can be like that".
Mmm... A priori conclusions? Experimental results be damned?
"we will sift through the evidence of quantum theory as deliberately as [Sherlock] Holmes might without being thrown off the trail by the prejudices of three hundred years of science." (page 48)
Apparently conclusions come before experimentation and science has prejudices? If science is incomprehensible and full of prejudice, why use it at all? Obviously to give some credibility to yet more conflated ideas: the fact that time and space are not fixed at relativistic speeds is used to pretend that time and space as experienced by everyone does not exist. The atomic scale and the physical laws that apply there are conflated with the macro world. After pages of descriptions of particle entanglement experiments, the conclusion is that
"the entities we observe are floating in field - a field of mind, Biocentrism maintains - that is not limited by the external space-time Einstein theorized a century ago."
The proof of the existence of such a field is, of course, nowhere to be found.
"The experiments of Heisenberg, Bell, Gisin and Wineland fortunately call us back to experience itself, the immediacy of the here and now. Before matter can peep forth - as a pebble, a snowflake, or even a sub-atomic particle - it has to be observed by a living creature." (page 54)
WRONG! First of all, the observer effect has only been proven at elementary particle scale, not pebbles, snowflakes, etc... Second, no living creature is necessary, only that a photon interferes with the elementary particle, and then the photon might be detected (or not) by a living creature, such as a human, and most likely through a photo-multiplier tube. No living being that I'm aware of can detect a single photon, unaided by technology.
A few pages later he backtracks, saying that of course a train will arrive at the expected time and place.
On page 59, another conflation.
"Nothing is real"
based on the indeterminate nature of position or speed, which can only be determined (one or the other) after observation. But this applies only to sub-atomic particles and he also applies it to the macro world. So, the third principle of Biocentrism is based on the conflation of the laws that apply to the atomic scale (valid) and
"indeed all particles and objects"
which is utter nonsense. A chair then, when not looked at,
"at best exist[s] in an undetermined state of probability waves".
Chapter 8 THE MOST AMAZING EXPERIMENT
"Quantum theory has unfortunately become a catch-all phrase for trying to prove various kinds of New Age nonsense."
Let's use it instead to try to prove Intelligent Design (aka God) [1]. Using detailed descriptions of the 2-slit experiment and particle entanglement (on page 79) he uses interference with electron p causing the destruction of electron s's pattern as something to do with the consciousness of the observer but he conveniently ignores the accepted fact that both particles are entangled and thus a change to one reflects in the other.
The fourth principle of Biocentrism depends on the conflation of atomic scale and the laws that apply there and the human-scale world.
Chapter 9 GOLDILOCKS'S UNIVERSE
The classic argument for Intelligent Design. The universe is so wondrously complex and fine tuned that it couldn't exist without the master planner behind the curtain. Long list of physical constants that, if they varied a miniscule amount, would have prevented the universe as we know it from being formed.
On page 89, again the conflation of the atomic and macro scale. The example of preventing a nuclear bomb from exploding by observing all its atoms can obviously never be tested. The material is opaque and the resolution of the required observation would need an electron microscope and some way to penetrate the material (and x-rays don't have the required resolution), so the experiment is not possible. The only way to affect every atom in a bomb would be to hit each one with a particle or photon, again not possible given the nearby (very heavy) atoms. Again, this is not possible, so the thought experiment is useless. The only possible way to do this would be the Star Trek dampening field, but this is science-FICTION. Maybe the mind field would do? If this were possible, you would think the Defense-Industrial complex would have come up with a way to neutralize all nuclear weapons.
After describing an experiment where beryllium atoms were prevented from absorbing energy by using a pulsed laser to observe them, he concludes:
"apparently a function of the observation."
NO. A function of the laser pulses used to observe the state.
"quantum theory implies that consciousness must exist"
NO. It implies that, at the atomic scale, interference from particles/energy used to measure, collapse the wave function of the measured particle. Nothing more, nothing less.
Chapter 10 NO TIME TO LOSE
This book becomes more outlandish with each chapter. On page 91, the author states:
"observers are required to bring the universe into existence".
Really? so, humans were present at the birth of the universe billions of years ago? This denies evolution and might as well be called creationism.
Did the universe form retroactively 13.8 billions of years ago, which is required to explain the big bang and expansion of the universe? This seems to require violation of just about every law of physics. [2]
In 1991, Stephen Hawking wrote a paper called “Chronology Protection Conjecture,” in which he asked: If time travel is possible, why are we not inundated with tourists from the future? He has a point, doesn’t he?
This book: NOW: The Physics of Time (2016) by Richard Muller [3] explains why time travel is not possible. "Time is expanding because space is expanding".
Where there are no logical arguments left, the author resorts to ad hominem attacks against science (page 92). Really? Is that all he can come up with?
On page 96: conflation of time and the perception of time. Imagination (the future) is inside the mind. Memory (the past) is our perception of the past, also inside the mind.
If time only exists in the mind, what about these observations?
- 2d law of thermodynamics (entropy).
- Nuclear decay/half life of radioactive elements and thus carbon dating.
- Causality. Besides the purely physical explanations (conservation of energy, etc...) if time is not a real thing, and can flow in both directions (as determined by the mind of the thinker) you end up in chaos, not to mention that, as previously explained, many fundamental physical laws would be violated.
"We see only that for which we are looking" (page 100).
Although this is an observable feature of our human brains, it could better have been said "we only see what we expect to see" as the brain tends to ignore/not process what it doesn't understand and it absolutely has nothing to do with the reality of the existence of atoms and physical objects.
"Momentum (...) belongs to the inner world" (also page 100).
Really? Let's see: a mechanism is built to shoot a bullet at the back of your head, at a random time, independent of any person pulling the trigger, since you don't see the bullet, it doesn't have momentum and can't kill you. Dr. Lanza, MD, are you willing to test this theory experimentally?
On page 102, yet again, conflation of perception of time and physical time (relativistic or not).
"The demotion of time from an actual reality to a mere subjective experience, a fiction, or even social convention, is central to Biocentrism." (page 104)
Really? then why does everybody die? why do cells degrade? why do biological processes follow the second law of thermodynamics? The answer is that Biocentrism is nothing more than a provably incorrect theory.
Chapter 11 SPACE OUT
In this chapter evil apace must be cast out. Relativity proves that space varies with speed, so let's use it to make space unreal.
Any argument that contradicts our real-world experience that distance is fixed is fair game. On page 115 he says:
"And if we could move at 99.9999999 percent of light speed, which is perfectly allowable by the laws of physics, the living room would now be 1/22.361th the original size, or just a hundredth of an inch across".
Beyond casting doubt on our perceptions, I'm not sure what the purpose is. That distance doesn't really exist as we perceive it? That we could travel great distances in the blink of an eye? Of course he leaves out the energy required to reach relativistic speeds, even now beyond the capabilities of any space agency, and the fact that no living organism would survive the acceleration to reach almost the speed of light in the space of a living room.
"Biocentrism, of course, shows that space is a projection from inside our minds, where experience begins." (Page 117)
Again, conflation of perception of distance with actual distance. If real space is not real and only in my mind, why can't I teleport to Paris instantaneously? Relativistically, the amount of energy required to bend space/time would be enormous. Or a relativistic vehicle would take almost as much, And it would still not be instantaneous.
Chapter 12 THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN
Another personal interlude from the author's childhood. He went looking for a Nobel laureate at Harvard and MIT. With some luck and the power of name dropping, he got a job at MIT.
Chapter 13 WINDMILLS OF THE MIND
In this chapter, Dr. Lanza slams science for its inability to come up with answers to the big questions, such as:
- "the laws of nature themselves - just appeared for no reason one day."
- "spontaneous generation" of life.
- "the origin of the universe itself."
Since he doesn't have provable answers, he must cast doubt on the tools available and point out why they're not adequate. Logic has limits, language is not specific enough, not allowing for clear concepts to be formulated, even the brain has limitations that don't allow us to find solutions to these problems. The human mind is not equipped to understand the universe. The chapter finishes with:
"Biocentrism, like everything else, has its logical limits". (page 141)
So, it can't be proven logically, or with math or by experimentation. That leaves
"it's the best explanation we can come up with".
Where have we heard this before? It's the explanation of every religion: God did it.
Chapter 14 A FALL IN PARADISE
Another interlude from the past, where his best friend fell from a tree, was gravely injured and died. This led to a transcendental moment when he felt both in the present and the past, that
"every creature consists of multiple spheres of physical reality that pass through their own creations of space and time like ghosts through doors".
And then, based on the two-slit experiment, that
"Dennis was both alive and dead, outside of time."
The last paragraph says:
"Our current scientific world-view offers no hope or escape for those scared to death of dying. But Biocentrism, hints at an alternative. If time is an illusion, if reality is created by our own consciousness, can this consciousness ever truly be extinguished?"
Exactly what religion is supposed to do.
Chapter 15 BUILDING BLOCKS OF CREATION
Using an emotional story of a father needing an experimental treatment to cure his son's impending blindness as s springboard, Dr. Lanza describes how stem-cells ("the body's master cells") create "photo receptors, even miniature eye-balls". Then, on to brain cells. These "master cells ... make all kinds of nerve cells spontaneously, almost by default". And then he launches on the same old Intelligent Design argument: how can such complexity and beauty emerge?
"these nerve cells are the fundamental units of reality. They are the first thing nature seems to want most to create when left alone. Neurons - not atoms - lie as the bedrock and base of our observer-determined world."
And then the jump from perception to reality:
"The circuitry of these cells in the brain contains the logic of space and time."
The chapter finishes with a side trip to the pond at the university, where the author experienced a deep sense of communion with nature and oneness. And that experience is
"the most convincing evidence I should ever need."
Dr. Lanza, your research is incomplete. Similar results can be obtained by ingesting psychedelic drugs, as a result of mental illness or from dis-association caused by trauma.
Chapter 16 WHAT IS THIS PLACE
RELIGION, SCIENCE, AND BIOCENTRISM LOOK AT REALITY
More trashing of science for not having answers to the fundamental questions. The section: "Classic Science's Answers to Basic Questions" has a good summary:
How did the Big Bang happen? Unknown.
What was the Big Bang? Unknown.
What, if anything, existed before the Big Bang? Unknown.
What is the nature of dark energy, the dominant entity of the cosmos? Unknown.
What is the nature of dark matter, the second most prevalent entity? Unknown.
How did life arise? Unknown.
How did consciousness arise? Unknown.
What is the fate of the universe; for example, will it keep expanding? Seemingly yes.
Why are the constants the way they are? Unknown.
Why are there exactly four forces? Unknown.
Is life further experienced after one's body dies? Unknown.
Which book provides the best answers? There is no single book.
This is followed by sections on Western Religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam) and Eastern Religions (Buddhism and Hinduism); and later by "Biocentrism's Take on the Cosmos". The first sentence is:
"There is no separate physical universe outside of life and consciousness. Nothing is real that is not perceived."
Followed by recapitulations of the previously described conflations that prove that:
"Space and time exist only as constructs of the mind, as tools of perception."
immediately contradicted with:
"Neither nature nor mind is unreal."
So, space and time, fundamental features of nature exist only in the mind, but yet they are real.
Finally, the seven principles of Biocentrism are enumerated. These are based on the flawed reasonings of the previous chapters, and the author seems to know this. On page 161:
'may or may not be so"
so after trying to prove via a whole book a nonsensical premise, he gives up. All he has to go on is:
"the insistence of many people in all cultures and throughout history of having had a "revelatory experience" that carried "no doubt" that All is One"
This can be explained by the common nature of the human brain. Since all humans have essentially the same human brain, doesn't it make sense that all would have the same experiences? There is recent research that psychedelic compounds, such as psilocybin (magic mushrooms) interfere with the parts of the brain that define the separateness and individuality, thus causing the "All is One" feeling. The quantum theory justifications are cherry-picked, selectively applied and unnecessary.
Chapter 17 SCI-FI GETS REAL
What is the point of this chapter? That humans can come up with different ideas based on the prevailing knowledge? That's exactly all this chapter implies.
Chapter 18 MYSTERY OF CONSCIOUSNESS
Like many other previous chapters, it slams science for not having solved the consciousness problem. As previously, the word "yet" is conspicuously absent. Instead of admitting that the problem of consciousness might eventually be solved, the authors assert that the only explanation is God/consciousness.
"Clearly, it is not solely atoms and proteins that hold the answer to the problem of consciousness." (Page 175)
Really? and you know this how exactly? It is much more likely that, when we understand the whole structure of those atoms, proteins, neurons and their connections, as well as the timing of the electrical impulses, the problem of consciousness will be understood. I guess Dr. Lanza hasn't heard of Emergent Phenomena.
"But if there were no observers, the cosmos wouldn't merely look like nothing, which is stating the obvious. No, more than that. It wouldn't exist in any way." (Page 178)
This seems to be the perception of an infant who has no object permanence [6]. Out of sight, out of mind. It's hard to believe that an obviously intelligent person, as evidenced in other parts of the book, can come up with such nonsense. Biocentrism is so full of itself. The universe doesn't exist unless it's perceived by us puny humans? So, humans are the most important part of the universe, since it can't exist without us? Utter BULLSHIT!
This chapter again conflates the perception of the world with the world as it exists without being observed. It also conflates the scales of the sub-atomic particle, where certain behaviors have been observed and proven, and the macro world, where those behaviors and rules are not applicable.
Try to do the double-slit experiment with golf balls. I predict there will NOT be a golf ball interence pattern.
"It is as correct to call the Moon empty space as to call it an object." (Page 182)
Tell that to Neil Armstrong and the other 11 people that have walked on it. Again, selective use of facts. While it is true that the radius of the atomic nucleus is much smaller than the diameter of the atom, the fields and forces that keep the atoms together is what gives matter substance. The energies needed to break atoms apart are quite large.
Chapter 19 DEATH AND ETERNITY
"This is the point at which we leave science for a bit and contemplate what Biocentrism suggests and allows, rather than what it can prove. The following is frankly speculative..."
This whole chapter attempts to show, by flawed deductions, with sci-fi references and anecdotal memories thrown in for good measure, that believing in Biocentrism is helpful to deal with the arrows that life throws at us. This, of course, is one of the main purposes of religion. At least religion, if it is being honest, does not pretend to use the logic of the scientific process to validate itself.
Chapter 20 WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?
The final admission that Biocentrism is just an idea without any supporting evidence.
"Biocentrism is a scientific change in world-view that invites incorporation into existing areas of research."
So, more experiments required, since existing ones have failed to prove any of the claims proposed in this book. But it gets more outlandish: The 2 slit experiment
"- at the levels of tables and chairs". (Page 196)
Sorry, the transporter is a science-FICTION device from the Star Trek universe, created in the mind of Gene Roddenberry. Oh wait! From the MIND of the creator of Star Trek! This PROVES the whole premise of this book! NOT! Mr. Lanza is apparently unable to distinguish the creative process from reality. There is a name in the medical literature for this condition: Schizophrenia.
ADDENDUM
In 2016, the same authors wrote another book called
BEYOND BIOCENTRISM
Rethinking Time, Space, Consciousness, and the Illusion of Death
It is essentially the same book, pushing the same unsubstantiated theories using the same techniques of using well-known parts of Physics, theoretical and experimental, along with selective and flawed reasoning while ignoring glaring contradictions. The ultimate conclusion is: since time doesn't exist, we are immortal.
[1] Biocentrism appears to be just a re-branded "Intelligent design". (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design) which in turn is "a form of creationism that lacks empirical support and offers no testable or tenable hypotheses, and is therefore not science."
[2] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/time-travel-history-science-james-gleick
[3] https://www.futurity.org/now-book-richard-muller-1252952-2/
[4] https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/multimedia/index.html https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasawebbtelescope/sets/72177720296737701/
[5] https://skepticalinquirer.org/2019/07/why-parapsychological-claims-cannot-be-true/
A government not responsive to its population soon degenerates into authoritarianism or dictatorship. In the U.S. the right to petition the government is codified in the First Amendment [1]. Unfortunately, with the right to petition comes the danger of corruption. In a capitalist system, where everything has a price and favorable legal treatment can result in huge windfalls, the lobbying industry has proven that the incentive to corrupt politicians in irresistible. Anti-corruption laws are in an ever-losing race to make the last bribe illegal, but do nothing to eliminate the incentive to bribe. At the moment, offering suitcases full of cash for a specific vote is illegal, but giving millions to campaigns is not.
The Supreme court has determined that money is speech. This is false on its face [2]. At best money buys the megaphone, printing press, lobbying firm or social media company, all of which are incapable of independent speech. Ultimately, eliminating corporate personhood [3] (another provable lie in so many ways) or limiting it in such a way that it would not allow for political participation, would solve part of the corruption problem as then corporations wouldn't be able to give political contributions or lobby.
The fundamental problem in petitioning the government is the monetary quid pro quo. In a representative government, the elected representatives are supposed to represent the voters so it is essential that those be heard, and that the politicians pass laws that benefit said voters, in proportion to their votes, not depending on the size of the bribe or political contribution.
Science has come up with a good system to eliminate bias and influence from scientific studies: the double-blind study.
A system that would allow voters to petition their representatives but also insulate them from each other to make the monetary quid pro quo impossible seems like the ideal solution. It would eliminate the incentive to corrupt since it would become much more difficult to know, for the politician, where to direct the benefits of a law since he/she wouldn't know who would benefit from it. Political donations would probably dry up since now donors wouldn't be able to link them to specific laws favorable to them. Of course, public financing of elections is still the best solution, but it takes a different approach and now contradicts the supreme court's decision that money is speech.
This proposed system formalizes the procedure and gives the power to petition to those that should have it: the voters. The gatekeeper is now the elected representative, who is accountable at the next election, not the well-funded organizations with opaque motivations or simple greed.
Necessary features:
No face to face meetings. All petitioning interactions are done online and suitably anonymized.
The system keeps track of what has been asked for and thus can also be a polling system that keeps track of all the public requests, that the public can see at any time and agree with or disagree with. This gives the politician in question a quick view of what the constituents in his/her district want and would be a good indication of re-electability.
If the petition is not appropriate for the politician it was addressed to, it can be redirected to the proper one that has jurisdiction, with an explanation as to why this was done.
The system keeps track of every request and, like a tech support question, shows at what level it is being considered and what action is being taken or not taken. This can be visible to the voter that initiated the request or to the whole public, of may be restricted to be visible to only the constituents of the politician in question. This can also detect (and raise a red flag) if a certain politician is trying to pass a law that has no request or no support for it. The logical conclusion is then to ask if maybe the politician is reacting to outside channel communication or bribes, which would be illegal and trigger an automatic corruption investigation.
An analysis has to be made about who or what business(es) or industry would benefit if such a petition were implemented as a law and what the consequences of such a law would be. This information should be public, and would provide ways to identify astroturfing. In particular, if it turns out that the request or support for a specific law proposal comes entirely from employees of the firm that would benefit from it, it would become immediately obvious that the firm is manipulating or blackmailing its employees, which would be illegal. This is like a generalized version of the environmental impact statement.
The public-facing side of such a system would deal with authentication of the voter, linking the voter to the proper elected representative and passing only enough information to the politician-facing side to make decisions on the benefits of such a law but nothing about the requester. This would prevent the politician from directly benefiting the target voter or institution favored by the petitioner. It would also avoid spam and bots as only registered voters would be allowed to use the system.
The politician would only see that a constituent has petitioned for a certain law, repeal or exemption from same and the reasons for it. The petition, visible to the constituency it affects, could then garner support or opposition directly related to the politician's constituency. It would then be a no-brainer for the politician to propose it and push for its passage as not doing so would be a clear indication of non-re-election.
Similarly to social media, registered voters could comment on the laws proposed or vote them up/down. If the politician, in response to the comments, decides to modify the law, revisions would be marked up, similarly to how laws are negotiated currently, but the results would be visible to the relevant constituencies. Obviously, personal information of the commenters would not be public, to prevent doxxing, but only registered voters could participate in this political process.
Additional benefits:
Lobbying on behalf of foreign entities is now regulated, but it is a regular occurrence that unregistered lobbyists are discovered, prosecuted and convicted. This has even penetrated the white house. International interactions are properly the domain of the State Department and the diplomatic corps. Foreign interests have no business bypassing the proper channels and influencing U.S. governing bodies or even unelected officials.
Since U.S. politicians represent and are elected by U.S. citizens, it is only natural that only citizens have access to them. Requiring that the citizen be a registered voter would have the additional benefit of driving up civic engagement and voting.
While it is certainly possible, right now, to send a letter or proposed law to an elected representative, almost no one does it. The perception being that such communication would be ignored, which is often the case. With a formalized system where voters can automatically track the status of their request (see feature 4 above) and see if it garners support from others, it would increase political participation.
Where/how do laws originate? There is little transparency in the process by which laws are written. Observation by the casual observer can point out a few reasons why laws come into being:
- The news media create or highlight a problem, thus building support for it, mostly to whip up outrage and pad their bottom lines, and then demand political action.
- Lobbying organizations/industry groups push for laws to favor their monetary interests, usually behind the scenes. Corporate personhood [3] is a big factor here.
- A very motivated fringe group pushes for laws that really don't have widespread support by means of fearmongering, creating outrage and social manipulation, and then demands political action to correct this "intolerable situation."
- A politician or political party pushes a narrative to promote their own interests, usually in combination with media outlets of the same persuasion.
- There is an actual problem and groups get organized to push for laws to solve it.
- Individuals encountering a problem that affects them talk to a representative. Said representative decides to make the cause his/her own and pushes a law to solve the problem.
Only the last two are valid reasons that agree with the constitution. The organization of support for a cause is lengthy, expensive and usually requires overcoming artificial hurdles placed there by opponents, including media manipulation and legal obstacles. This is why this approach rarely succeeds.
Possible problems:
Even if all identifying information is removed from the target petition or law proposal, it might still be possible to identify the petitioner if the proposed law is narrow enough.
To what extent are suitcases full of cash not viable any more? Policing cash transactions outside of the workplace or political process is likely to be impossible to totally eliminate, but the hope is that proposed laws that target few or a single individual or business would raise red flags in the system that tracks who would benefit from such a law, triggering regular anti-corruption police work. A law that would make it illegal to petition politicians outside of this system would probably be necessary.
Some laws attempt to deal with such complex issues that the only people with sufficient knowledge and expertise to understand them are the lobbyists and their clients in the relevant industry. Thus the incentive to just propose already-written laws for rubber-stamping. This should be resolved by a better educated body of representatives, but in the meantime, any registered voter could propose such laws through the anonymized system and it would be discussed (or not) on its merits. At least in this case the process would be transparent and, as these laws are quite specific, it would be easy to see whom they benefit. See feature 5 above.
The inclination to write laws "off the books", by discussing them amongst interested parties and only present them for a vote, preferably buried into a massive bill so it goes unnoticed, will no doubt still exist, but it can be countered by setting up the system to track who first introduced the idea and why (voter-facing side of the system), who annotated/modified it (politician-facing side of the system) and raising red flags if something is missing or appears not legal.
Exceptions:
This proposal attempts to solve the problem of lobbying and political corruption. It does not address constituent services, where a voter (or non-voter) asks for help from an elected representative to solve a specific problem where the identity of the petitioner is indispensable to solving it.
Implementation:
A large part of the infrastructure of this system already exists. The public-facing part can leverage the World Wide Web interface and web technologies. It can connect to the voter databases on which the election infrastructure depends, with proper security of course and in read-only mode to just authenticate the voter before allowing the petition to be forwarded to the appropriate politician.
The politician-facing side can be integrated into the document tracking system currently in use to create, annotate, modify and publish laws.
To start, the system can be implemented at the federal level. There is a manageable number of federal elected politicians and each district has a limited number of registered voters. Then it can be expanded to the state, county, local and municipal level.
[1] First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
[2] speech - noun
- The faculty or act of speaking.
- The faculty or act of expressing or describing thoughts, feelings, or perceptions by the articulation of words.
- What is spoken or expressed, as in conversation; uttered or written words.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.
Drop-in lyrics to replace the words of "Green Grass, High Tides" by the Outlaws [1]
Blue Skies and Wheat Fields
[Stanza 1: About Independent Ukraine]
After the soviet yoke, like sunflowers to the west we turned,
Democratic and free, from plains of wheat to the Azov sea.
The corrupt elites fled to the east, leaving us here to be free.
The Heavenly Hundred paved the way,
We took charge, elected Zelensky.
[Stanza 2: About Putin's Propaganda]
If you really believe the things Putin is telling you
will you let me show you that they are not at all true?
Chechnia, Georgia, Ukraine too: Get ready for Nuremberg II.
History will not remember the
vain and corrupt man who turned Ukraine to dust.
[Chorus]
Blue skies and wheat fields forever
Maidan revolution, glory
to Ukraine, the world adores you
As king Putin bows before you
[Guitar Solo]
[Stanza 3: About the Victory/Exhortation to Victory]
Time again to reclaim freedoms so recently gained
May Russian blood water the flower of Ukraine
Allies, join the breach, starve the thug, make him the new Kim.
Hackers, circumvent, discredit lies and Truth protect. Strength
to patriots defending her.
[Chorus]
Blue skies and wheat fields forever
Maidan revolution, glory
to Ukraine, the world adores you
As king Putin bows before you
[Outro]
Bows before you.
[1] The original lyrics by the Outlaws:
Green Grass and High Tides
[Stanza 1]
In a place you always dream of, where your soul is always free
Silver stages, golden curtains, filled my head plain as could be
As a rainbow grew around the sun, all my stars above, who died
Came somewhere beyond the scene you see
These lovely people played just for me
[Stanza 2]
Now if I let you see this place where stories all ring true
Will you let me past your face to see what's really you?
It's not for me I ask this question as though I were a king
For you have to love, believe and feel
Before the burst of tambourines take you there
[Chorus]
Green grass and high tides forever
Castles of stone, soul and glory
Lost faces say we adore you
As kings and queens bow and play for you
[Guitar Solo]
[Stanza 3]
Those who don't believe me, find your souls and set them free
Those who do, believe and know that time will be your key
Time and time again I've thanked them for a peace of mind
That helped me find myself amongst the music and the rhyme
That enchants you there
[Chorus]
Green grass and high tides forever
Castles of stone, soul and glory
Lost faces say we adore you
As kings and queens bow and play for you
[Outro] Yeah, play for you
[Guitar Solo]
The recent stunt by Republican governors of transporting refugees to northern cities (Washington D.C,, New York, Chicago) and most recently to that vacation haven of the liberal elites: Martha's Vineyard, prompts the obvious question: is this legal? Federal Law defines Human Trafficking this way:
Human Trafficking Defined b) The recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or services, through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery. (22 U.S.C. § 7102(9)). [1]
Let's see what transpired. The media are reporting that certain individuals were recruiting refugees by promising all kinds of "surprises", benefits, jobs, housing, etc... and then transporting them, at state government expense, by bus (to the above cities, by the thousands already) and by airplane (to Martha's Vineyard).
This takes care of the "recruitment", "harboring" and "transportation". For what purpose was this being done? Political gain, as the various governors keep proclaiming loudly. The refugees are providing a "service" to the Republican politicians, and it's not just to get them votes.
It is extremely likely that this behavior will generate a torrent of donations. This takes care of the third part ("for the purpose of"). This means that the refugees are being used, although indirectly, to make money from them, obviously without asking them for permission. Now we have "involuntary servitude". It can also be argued that, being undocumented, these refugees have little more choice than people in debt bondage or slaves. It is common for undocumented immigrants to be in debt bondage to their traffickers. It is not that unreasonable to assume that those that don't toe the line will be picked up by the police or border patrol at the request of said governors and be deported or imprisoned. This adds the element of "coercion".
The final nail in the coffin of those governors is likely to come from political ads requesting campaign donations while mentioning this "Humanitarian transportation to Sanctuary Cities" as the Florida governor keeps calling it. Then the evidence will be incontrovertible.
It is surprising that lawsuits have not yet been filed.
UPDATE: It has since come out that the migrants sent to Martha's Vineyard were not undocumented, but were seeking refugee status. No matter. Petitioning Homeland Security still leaves them in a precarious position and they have just a few more rights than undocumented migrants. Also, the lawsuits have begun.
The Chinese Communist Party has revealed it's Achilles' heel. The Pavlovian response to thump its chest, thrash around and proclaim its power via massive military exercises in response to a certain type of "provocation" has shown the way to ruin China. All the U.S. has to do is send a politician or delegation to Taiwan every week or two, thus guaranteeing that the dear leader and his party will waste countless millions in missiles, fuel, supplies, munitions, ship maintenance, repairs and propaganda; not to mention the entertainment value to the rest of the world of seeing a major country behaving like a spoiled 7-year old throwing tantrums.
Keep it up, comrade Xi! The world is watching and laughing.
The best defense against mass shootings is an alert student body, locked doors, hardened schools, armed teachers. [1]
The best defense against rape is an alert female body, locked homes, modest clothing, male guardians. [2]
What's wrong with both approaches? they force the solution to the problem on the victims.
[1] as promoted by all Republican politicians.
[2] as demanded by the Taliban. Of course, the Taliban's ultimate goal is to enslave women, so the concept of rape is not exactly relevant to them, but it illustrates the point.
"Guns don't kill people, people kill people."
The obvious trope pushed by the NRA and gun manufacturers is strictly true. Why not take this argument to its logical conclusion? No inanimate object is capable of independent action, so why are people not allowed to own and use in any way they want:
- chemicals, such as VX, Sarin, etc...
- Explosives
- Machine guns and other weapons of war (tanks, missiles, artillery, etc...)
- Radioactive materials, including nuclear bombs
- Biological materials, such as viruses and other pathogens
- Drugs, including Heroin and Fentanyl
As is absolutely logical, a trade-off analysis has been made: the risk of mishandling and the possible damage of misuse is considered against free availability. So why is this not even considered for guns?
Besides the obvious grip the gun industry has on the Republican Party, there is the Second Amendment, but then there is also that bothersome clause that says that any non-enumerated rights belong to the states or the people [1]. Ultimately the people have the right to own and use anything, strictly speaking, unless a state forbids it. Even repealing the second amendment would probably make no difference, given the obsession of the Republican Party with guns.
The Supreme Court is full of strict originalists. How interesting that they don't consider the context of the Bill of Rights. It was ratified Dec 15, 1791. At that time the only firearm available was the musket [2]. Technically, the Second Amendment only applies to the arms available at the time. Isn't it high time for the Supreme Court to determine that the only arm that we can keep and bear is a musket? Some plaintiff should sue, make this case and set precedent. If the only weapon available is a musket, mass shootings would disappear. Of course, a Supreme Court packed with Republican ideologues is likely to contradict precedent, originalism, common sense and the will of the majority.
But even enumerated rights, such as those in the First and Second Amendments, have never stopped politicians, and the Court itself, from placing limits on them. We have some gun control: it is illegal (at least without a permit) to own a machine gun, and certain types of speech are banned. More contradictions.
After yet another mass shooting, why is there still no action? the only inescapable conclusion is that the regulatory capture of the Republican Party by the NRA and the gun manufacturers is preventing the will of the people from being implemented.
Of course, there are also the more general anti-democratic structures that allow the Republican Party to ignore the will of the majority: gerrymandering to disenfranchise voters, voter suppression laws, the electoral college, the U.S. Senate and its filibuster, and money as speech [3].
To solve these larger problems, it is imperative to pass:
- Redistricting by algorithm [4]
- Public financing of elections [5]
- National Popular Vote (to compensate for the electoral college, barring a constitutional amendment to get rid of it) [6]
- Unified national voting laws [7]
- More representation in the U.S. Senate [8]
- Term limits for the Supreme Court [9]
The quickest way to achieve all these reforms is to vote all Republican politicians out of office, at all levels, as quickly as possible. If this is not done, it is highly probable that 2022 and 2024 will be the last free elections in the U.S., and a new civil war is not even an option. Does anyone really believe that even the powerful military-style weapons available now are a match for the most powerful military in the world? In his first term Trump tried to unleash the military against the American People [10]. If he gets back into office, with Republican majorities in congress, R.I.P. U.S.A.
[1] Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musket
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
https://www.fec.gov/legal-resources/court-cases/citizens-united-v-fec/
https://www.citizen.org/wp-content/uploads/money-doesnt-equal-speech-fact-sheet1.pdf
[4] So that political advantage can be taken out of the process. A detailed proposal will be forthcoming, but essentially the idea is to draw uniform voting districts (not looking like salamanders) based only on the number of people in them, not their political affiliation. An algorithm that only considers this will, by definition, be agnostic of party politics.
[5] So that special interests don't have the power to buy and manipulate elections.
[6] So that this anti-democratic institution at the very least follows the will of the majority. Unsurprisingly, mostly Republican states have not joined the compact.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
[7] This will prevent republican states from making it difficult to vote and make voting day a federal holiday.
[8] At the very least D.C. and Puerto Rico as a state. Also all the disenfranchised protectorates. It is essential to do away with anti-democratic rules, such as the filibuster.
[9] So that the damage is minimized sooner than generations from now when radical ideologues are appointed. This shouldn't be much of a problem if the senate and its anti-democratic rules are cleaned up.
[10] https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-esper-final-months-president-trump-use-military-against-americans-2021-11
Behold the power of Putin! He has single-handedly managed to:
- Overcome German Pacifism.
- Overcome Swiss Neutrality.
- Unite a divided NATO and Europe.
- Push Finland, Sweden and Ukraine towards NATO.
- Push almost the whole world to support sanctions against Russia.
- Unify the divided U.S. Congress.
- Increase Biden's low approval rates.
For every law there is an equal and opposite loophole.
Warning: Patriotism is dangerous to your health.
Perinatal Experience + Fear of Death = Religion.
GOD: The parent for adults that never grew up, the last refuge of the truly powerless.
Too big to fail? Fit to be nationalized.
Incomplete information is a dangerous weapon. You can hurt yourself with it if you don't treat it like what it is, You can hurt others with it if you use it as what it's not.
Capitalism will be an oppressive system until all humans become ethical.
Owning people is illegal, corporations are people, so owning corporations is illegal. Either corporations are not people or they need to be dismantled.
Blaming rape victims for their attire implies men are unthinking brutes with no free will or self-control.
A Right cannot have a price. In Capitalism, everything has a price, therefore Capitalism and Rights are incompatible.
Advertising is only as good as the compliant brains it targets.
In the U.S. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof", in Saudi Arabia renouncing Islam is a capital offense. Should we support such an antithetical regime?
There will be no equality under the law until prosecutorial discretion is no more, the legal industry is nationalized and legal representation is randomly assigned.
Moses knew where the sand bar was and when the lowest astronomical tide happened.
If Congress is supposed to oversee the Executive, why are Congresspeople denied access? Obstruction of justice?
El Chapo was just presented (July 17, 2019) with a $12 Billion restitution bill. Big Pharma has sold 76 Billion opioid pills, at prices from $7.42 (Tramadol) to $21.75 (Oxycodone) [1]. Shouldn't Big Pharma be presented with a $563.92 - $1653.76 Billion bill?
On September 1st, 2021 the Sackler family has obtained immunity from prosecution in exchange for a $4.3B settlement. Since 1999, more than 760,000 have died from a drug overdose (Facts about Opioids - [2]). If you're rich enough, you get away with murder. The price of a human life is $5657.89 if you can afford good lawyers.
Update: the previous settlement has been rejected by the judge. As of March 3rd, 2022, the amount is now $6.0B. The Sackler family still gets away with murder, they just have to pay a little more for it: $7894.74 per life.
Update: As of June 27, 2024, the supreme court has rejected the settlement on the basis that the Sacklers can't get immunity in perpetuity. The bankrupcy process cannot be used in this way. Maybe we'll see the resolution of this case in another decade or so.
Update: As of June 17, 2025, all 50 state, DC and 4 US territories have accepted a settlement of $7.4B. Since 1999, 850,000 have now died from opioid overdose. The Sackler family now has to pay $8705.88 per life. They lose control of Purdue Pharma (now in bankrupcy) and get no immunity from future lawsuits.
[1] https://www.goodrx.com
[2] https://www.hhs.gov/opioids/about-the-epidemic/opioid-crisis-statistics/index.html
The world is drowning in plastic garbage. It can be argued that this is happening because the plastics manufacturers are allowed to externalize the cost of dealing with plastic garbage, and so it accumulates.
Under Capitalism, every valuable resource gets exploited, preferably by plunder but in the marketplace if there's no other choice. What would happen if plastic garbage became valuable?
Price supports for plastic garbage
The Federal Government has had price supports for various products, for various reasons at different times. If it determined that plastic garbage were valuable enough to create an incentive, say, with the Plastics Elimination Act of 2021:
Any plastic product or packaging is hereby declared to have intrinsic value of $5 per pound. Any person that brings plastic of any kind to a retailer that sells plastics or products packaged in plastics, is entitled to receive compensation of $5 per pound (in 2021 Dollars, indexed for inflation) for as much plastic as is brought in. The retailer is then entitled to sell this plastic to plastics manufacturers for the above price plus a 10% handling fee. The manufacturers must accept the plastics and pay the minimum price hereby specified.
What would this accomplish?
Since the price is meaningful enough to motivate people to collect plastic garbage, recycling jobs would be created immediately.
Plastic garbage would soon disappear since it would be collected for profit.
Manufacturers would reclaim plastic that could be recycled or otherwise used at the location where the machinery and expertise reside.
Manufacturers would be highly motivated not to produce plastics that cannot be reused, since they would have to pay anyway.
For plastics that cannot be reused, recycled or used in any way in manufacturing new products, disposal can be accomplished at a central location with proper supervision.
Manufacturers will have the incentive to reduce plastics production overall since the cost of excessive plastic now reverts to them.
Retailers that don't want to deal with the plastics transactions can decide not to sell plastic products or products packaged in plastic.
Retailers that become part of the plastic recycling stream create another revenue stream for themselves.
Manufacturers will be highly incentivized to minimize the amount of plastic packaging they use.
Details:
Does each plastic item need tracking from manufacturer to end user so it can be sent back to the original manufacturer? This would require a lot of paperwork, and in many cases is not feasible. Of course the manufacturers are going to complain that it's not their plastic.
This can be worked out by having a centralized account to which the manufacturers of plastic products or packaging can contribute in relation to their volume of production and which will disburse the payments to the retailers. The actual plastic can be sent to the manufacturers themselves or to recyclers.
Where the plastic is actually sent will be determined by the different parties with consideration of location, capabilities of each location, transportation fees, and what is ultimately done with the plastic. In other words, the exact same way that business is currently conducted.
The Congressional Hearings about January 6 have made it painfully obvious that the FCC obscenity rule, conveniently expanded at will by media organizations and used as a justification not to trigger the slightest discomfort, has to be repealed.
The media organizations are now complicit in a whitewash of the real nature of the January 6 insurrection, which was nothing more than a white supremacist coup attempt. Yet, the coverage of said event contained so much censorship of the critical words that anyone not aware of the deep racism still underpinning every aspect of American society, even today, could think that the violence was about nothing more than a stolen election, the big lie, states' rights (where have we heard this before?), etc, etc...
Repetition of "alternative facts", or propaganda, works, as demonstrated by the beliefs (and votes) of 40% of the country. It is time that the federal government stops facilitating the narrative that this is not a racist country and that racism ended with the Civil War. The country needs to be confronted with the ugly reality, again and again, until it realizes what is really going on.
Any group of privilege and power will do anything to retain its hold on the body politic. The January 6 insurrection is not so different in principle from the acts of violence perpetrated by the KKK and its supporters that had infiltrated all levels of government. Those supporters in power will do anything to remain in power and deny, confuse and cover up the real reasons behind their actions, thus the behavior of the Republican Party that has done nothing but obstruct. Dog whistle politics provides plausible deniability but doesn't fool any white supremacist.
Republicans claim that it is important not to teach certain things [1] and not to expose white children to certain facts and words, lest they feel guilty. Well, how are the children supposed to change inbred ideas and behavior if they don't even know they are not so cool?
None of this is new, of course. Lies, propaganda and indoctrination are as old as humanity. More recently, in the 90s, Octavia Butler, science fiction writer [2] put it well in one of her books:
Beware, all too often we say what we hear others say,
we think what we are told that we think,
we see what we are permitted to see,
worse, we see what we are told that we see.
Repetition and pride are the keys to this,
to see and to hear, even an obvious lie, again, and again, and again,
maybe to say it, almost by reflex, then to defend it, because we've said it,
and at last to embrace it, because we've defended it and because we cannot
admit that we've embraced and defended an obvious lie.
Thus, without thought, without intent, we make mere echoes of ourselves
and we say what we hear others say.
[1] Such as the current tempest in a tea pot, created by Republicans, about critical race theory.
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octavia_Butler
The third wave of COVID-19 is well underway in the U.S., primarily in states with low vaccination rates. This is now a pandemic of choice. There are many more vaccines than people willing to take them. UN-vaccinated people are primarily conservative, republican and white christian evangelicals.
Ironically, these are the same people that profess to believe in the free market and viscerally resist any suggestion from government. OK, let's provide them with the free-market incentives:
Since it is now their choice not to get vaccinated, if they get sick, the rest of us are no longer required to pay for their hospital stays. The insurance companies should be allowed to refuse payment for COVID-19 treatment of UN-vaccinated people, starting 3 months after there is enough supply to vaccinate everyone in the country, to allow for the second doses to take full effect.
These are also the people that highly value personal responsibility. Well, let them be responsible for the cost of their risky behavior. If they still refuse to violate the sanctity of their bodies with a vaccine, they can wear a mask the rest of their lives. Oh wait! These are also the anti-maskers. Oh well, let them pay for their treatment.
Furthermore, why not also hold them accountable for the biological weapons that they have chosen to become? As is done in any other situation, any person harmed/infected by an UN-vaccinated person should be entitled to recover the medical costs of the treatment, plus compensatory and punitive damages. After all, they have willingly chosen to become a biological weapon.
If the free market were allowed to proceed along these lines, I guarantee there would not remain an UN-vaccinated person in the country in very short order.
On Police Brutality and Corruption
The latest attempt to reform police behavior:
H.R.1280 - George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2021
does not go far enough by a very long shot. It should mandate body cameras for every Law Enforcement Officer in the country. These cameras should not be under the control of the officers or the police departments that employ them. They should be overseen by an independent civilian authority whose members are directly elected by the public. These cameras would turn on the minute an officer starts a shift and not be turned off until the end of said shift. The officers, or the departments for which they work, should have no control over the cameras. Any obstruction or tampering should be considered prima facie obstruction of justice and the officer in question arrested and charged. The recordings shall be transmitted from the camera as quickly as technically feasible and the storage medium be under the direct control of the supervising civilian agency, not the police department.
The recordings of any encounter with the public, including suspects under interrogation, shall be released to the civilian(s) affected or their families, in whole, immediately upon request, or within 24 hours, whichever is sooner. Failure of a complete and timely disclosure shall be considered obstruction of justice and the person(s) responsible arrested and charged.
The most immediate benefit of these procedures will be the supervision of uniformed officers on routine patrols or procedures; however, they will also shed light on investigative techniques, interrogations and possible misbehavior by undercover detectives that could be critical at trial.
A more radical approach
It is obviously not a good idea to transmit activities of a detective working a case to the public at large, in real time. However, all such video should be archived by the civilian oversight agency as it might end up being exculpatory in the case being investigated.
For uniformed officers on routine patrols, transmitting the video in real time to a publicly accessible web site would allow any civilian with an interest in supervising police activity a means to do so.
The problem of the privacy of bystanders can be addressed by blurring the faces of anyone in view, but only for the real-time, public, video stream. The archived footage remains untouched.
The likely result is that gratuitous police violence would vanish in short order, and good behavior would be recognized.
I think therefore I am - Descartes. I lie therefore I am - Trump
Patricia Okoumou has been charged with "Interfering with government agency functions" for protesting at the statue of Liberty. Why hasn't Trump been charged with the same for closing down multiple agencies for 33 days? Because the rich and powerful are above the law.
On October 1st, 1995 Omar Abdel-Rahman was convicted of seditious conspiracy, solicitation to murder Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, conspiracy to murder President Mubarak, solicitation to attack a U.S. military installation, and conspiracy to conduct bombings. Why hasn't Trump even been charged for exhorting his white supremacist followers that have already murdered dozens of people? Because the rich and powerful are above the law.
The Myth: The U.S. is a democracy and a meritocracy. The Reality: It is a plutocracy. Why else do we have a very rich President, Trump's very rich family in the White House and an ambassador appointed because he donated $1M to Trump's inauguration fund?
Previous Presidents corrected miscarriages of justice. Trump pardons war criminals, corrupt politicians, and his cronies.
As of May 20, 2020, the US, Russia and Brazil are now 1, 2 and 3 in total corona virus cases (1,591,252, 308,705, 291,579 respectively - at 7:48 PM), with the 3 macho dictator wannabes at the helm. The axis of machismo. In contrast, 3 countries headed by women (Taiwan, South Korea, New Zealand) have the lowest numbers.
This blog is powered by ikiwiki.