To my mind, Trump is doing a dis-service to the American worker: when there's no work or unsatisfactory work, YOU MOVE ON!
I was dissatisfied in thinking that I would be a college teacher the rest of my life, when I was 41, so I got with the program--I trained for another career and entered the computer field, where I was much appreciated and had a fun career.
But what is Trump doing? Well, for one, he's telling the coal worker, don't worry, I put you back to work in the coal industry. Now, just about everybody knows coal as a fossil fuel is on the way out. Early in my teaching career, I lived in Athens, Ohio. The county was dotted with abandoned homes, where coal miners and their families once lived. The migration from the coal mines has taken over 40 years and is still continuing--now in West Virginia and Pennsylvania. The point is, it's time for the coal miners to move on.
The country has always been a "starting over point" for Europeans driven out by famine and mis-fortune. That's why it's so strange that anybody would be trying to resurrect the past as a promise for the future, especially, that it should be the President of the United States.
Over the past few years, I ran into un-employed persons in search of a good-paying job. Every one of these had been considering moving to North Dakota to join in the oil fracking explosion. Plenty of work up there, I reminded them, as if they needed a reminder!
Well, I don't know if Trump will be successful in his bid to return to the past and to convince others, most unemployed, to follow his dream. But I do know that the day of coal-mining is fast coming to a close.
So, former miners get with it! With the help of your close family and friends, find something you can do that has a viable future to it! Quit trying to return to the dreamy past; and importantly, learn to face reality! The world keeps changing and you need to change with it. Let the coal remain in the mine shaft!
I recommend to MOVE ON! (and, take your family with you! I did.)
.
Tuesday, December 6, 2016
Wednesday, November 23, 2016
Don Quixote in the White House, come January, 2017
Yes, and he's back chasing Wind Mills, once again!
The point is Trump's vision of the US hasn't improved upon Reagan's conceived in a time when things were vastly different--simpler.
The world is confronting a major problem with pollution and increment in climate temperature, resulting in serious flooding and catastrophic weather abnormality. But Trump, wearing Don Quixote's glasses, is hell-bent to send the world into a tail-spin. He can see no further than ISIS troops on scattered battlefields.
He's going to make West Virginia and Pennsylvania a veritable smoke-stack of pollutants. Look at China, those of you who can see that far. They're running to new forms of energy, non-coal, as fast as they can.
I think Trump's finding it difficult to find good talent for governmental positions. Else, he would be settling for Sessions (whose father I knew indirectly) and Bannon, whose a crazy outsider of federal government circles. Certainly, I've heard "Laura" explain her reticence to take a government position with the administration. Nobody wants to work for a bully, if he can make a wiser choice.
But Trump sincerely believes that the country is in need of just such a bully as he.
He dreams that the stock market hasn't spurred the economy enough. He's aiming at 4% plus GDP. I think that's called heating the economy to the point of another bubble bursting. I would perhaps go along with some spurring of the economy had Trump distinguished those who will make another killing in the stock market who are already benefitting from a strong economy and those start-up companies in need of some help. But no, everybody is to gain from tax reductions he proposes, with those wealthy benefitting the most. Even now the bankers are pouring money back into the country in preparation for a windfall they don't need. But Trump knows his own; and he's going to help his own whether or not they need it.
The average man believes in Trump because he says he is for the common man and is working on his behalf. Well, perhaps Trump will be able to withstand the criticism that he's adding a windfall to his own coffers qua presidency. He certainly will be out to convince the common man that the wind mills he's pursuing actually exist. For, every fool he convinces means a significant addition to Trump's own wealth and political power.
The point is Trump's vision of the US hasn't improved upon Reagan's conceived in a time when things were vastly different--simpler.
The world is confronting a major problem with pollution and increment in climate temperature, resulting in serious flooding and catastrophic weather abnormality. But Trump, wearing Don Quixote's glasses, is hell-bent to send the world into a tail-spin. He can see no further than ISIS troops on scattered battlefields.
He's going to make West Virginia and Pennsylvania a veritable smoke-stack of pollutants. Look at China, those of you who can see that far. They're running to new forms of energy, non-coal, as fast as they can.
I think Trump's finding it difficult to find good talent for governmental positions. Else, he would be settling for Sessions (whose father I knew indirectly) and Bannon, whose a crazy outsider of federal government circles. Certainly, I've heard "Laura" explain her reticence to take a government position with the administration. Nobody wants to work for a bully, if he can make a wiser choice.
But Trump sincerely believes that the country is in need of just such a bully as he.
He dreams that the stock market hasn't spurred the economy enough. He's aiming at 4% plus GDP. I think that's called heating the economy to the point of another bubble bursting. I would perhaps go along with some spurring of the economy had Trump distinguished those who will make another killing in the stock market who are already benefitting from a strong economy and those start-up companies in need of some help. But no, everybody is to gain from tax reductions he proposes, with those wealthy benefitting the most. Even now the bankers are pouring money back into the country in preparation for a windfall they don't need. But Trump knows his own; and he's going to help his own whether or not they need it.
The average man believes in Trump because he says he is for the common man and is working on his behalf. Well, perhaps Trump will be able to withstand the criticism that he's adding a windfall to his own coffers qua presidency. He certainly will be out to convince the common man that the wind mills he's pursuing actually exist. For, every fool he convinces means a significant addition to Trump's own wealth and political power.
Tuesday, July 19, 2016
CNN Research: Major Need for Community Policing Programs
Two days ago, CNN disclosed their findings of a search for some programs to end racial-police conflicts. To my amazement, they reported that the community policing programs--where community leaders and city police departments form teams of volunteer police persons in a community work together to end crime and violence as a working, local force. The advantage to the community is that the city fathers then seek out and obtain a list of pressing gripes the citizenry of targeted neighborhoods have--grievances against the way the police do business in their areas.
CNN noted that these community groups have been essentially abandoned because of local government budgetary restraints and commitments, if their city ever had instituted the program.
Hilary's added to this the need that the police force be trained to lower tensions and tempers in the communities they serve by being trained intensively in dealing with their people of differing cultures. It is true, that not until recently, has the US come into contact with Muslims, but now its almost commonplace that cities have mosques within their city limits. The police forces must know how particular members of their communities think and act, in contradistinction to the typical citizen! (Personally, I think a policeman must have at least an AA degree, particularly majoring in the social sciences, e.g., sociology or psychology!)
Admittedly, being a policeman today, an individual must have people skills in addition to knowing how to use a lethal weapon.
CNN noted that these community groups have been essentially abandoned because of local government budgetary restraints and commitments, if their city ever had instituted the program.
Hilary's added to this the need that the police force be trained to lower tensions and tempers in the communities they serve by being trained intensively in dealing with their people of differing cultures. It is true, that not until recently, has the US come into contact with Muslims, but now its almost commonplace that cities have mosques within their city limits. The police forces must know how particular members of their communities think and act, in contradistinction to the typical citizen! (Personally, I think a policeman must have at least an AA degree, particularly majoring in the social sciences, e.g., sociology or psychology!)
Admittedly, being a policeman today, an individual must have people skills in addition to knowing how to use a lethal weapon.
Monday, July 11, 2016
Ms. Key's Lectures on Italian Art
I'm enrolled in Ms. Key's Italian Art Class at OLLI-UTEP this summer. What I've gotten from attending are visual delights in sculpture and painting and edifices dating from the Medieval and Renaissance periods.
But what is shocking to me, who has known the art works brought to mind in the class once again, is the role of these artistic masterpieces in creating a new and modern art--namely, the art of people- watching. From the vantage point of some nearby cafe or restaurant, an onlooker is drawn to the manifold of people and things that make up a wholly new genre of artistic being: the passers-by! Look at their clothes and shoes, the packages and objects they carry along, the traffic moving about, and one enters the very artistic genre unfolding in that time and place wherein it is happening. And the evolving work has purpose and import: it reflects the need of mankind to seek meaning for all that presently transpires around him--the eternity that each masterful work of art has earned. So, gaze-watcher, enjoy another cup of coffee; next, take your place amid the others in motion, walking the promenade of an artful, useful existence!
Hooray for you, Ms. Key!
But what is shocking to me, who has known the art works brought to mind in the class once again, is the role of these artistic masterpieces in creating a new and modern art--namely, the art of people- watching. From the vantage point of some nearby cafe or restaurant, an onlooker is drawn to the manifold of people and things that make up a wholly new genre of artistic being: the passers-by! Look at their clothes and shoes, the packages and objects they carry along, the traffic moving about, and one enters the very artistic genre unfolding in that time and place wherein it is happening. And the evolving work has purpose and import: it reflects the need of mankind to seek meaning for all that presently transpires around him--the eternity that each masterful work of art has earned. So, gaze-watcher, enjoy another cup of coffee; next, take your place amid the others in motion, walking the promenade of an artful, useful existence!
Hooray for you, Ms. Key!
Sunday, July 10, 2016
Mr. Huchton's Lectures on China: Summer Session
I've enrolled in the Summer Session of the Osher Lifelong Learning Institute at University of Texas-El Paso, although I've missed some classes due to scheduling priorities.
I noted in the two classes I've attended (having missed 2 others) the Chinese government's passion for emulating the United States as much as it finds practical in so doing. Where I find departures from the American way of making policy decisions is in certain profundities stressed in Mr. Huchton's two lectures I've attended.
For one thing, China does not seem interested in vying with the US for international world-power leadership. Instead, it wants to build an Asian nexus of countries of which it is the dominate force. For instance, while it trades with the United States, the EU countries and England; and Russia, its primary trading partners are India and Japan. It is currently reaching out to S. Korea and to Vietnam, too. And it seeks to control to some extent the South Seas, though its navy which is still relatively underdeveloped.
I also detected from Mr. Huchton's summer lectures that I've attended the reason for its copying American patents: it is doing nothing different in purpose than when the American colonists would mimic the English manufacturing of goods of the time--taking the English designs and virtually reduplicating them. The obvious way to stop that practice is simply to find another country to manufacture American goods, as for instance, India (which is also a cheaper way to go than to resource out to China). Nevertheless, in order to be even more like America, China continues to send its youth to America to be trained and skilled in the sciences and technological areas. They believe as a people that the American lifestyle holds promise in their bright future ahead.
********************
Given their propensity to pursue what they believe are the best habits of Americana, I now understand why it is China wants to control the South China Seas and wrest advantage from the Philippines. China's Hainan Province is within its scope; and its presence amounts to establishing its sphere of influence in the region.
Nor does the United States strenuously object to Iran's controlling the Strait of Hormuuz and surrounding waterways. That is to say, China's overstepping into the South China Seas is simply a physical sign of a political reality: China dominates the region, naturally, I contend.
I noted in the two classes I've attended (having missed 2 others) the Chinese government's passion for emulating the United States as much as it finds practical in so doing. Where I find departures from the American way of making policy decisions is in certain profundities stressed in Mr. Huchton's two lectures I've attended.
For one thing, China does not seem interested in vying with the US for international world-power leadership. Instead, it wants to build an Asian nexus of countries of which it is the dominate force. For instance, while it trades with the United States, the EU countries and England; and Russia, its primary trading partners are India and Japan. It is currently reaching out to S. Korea and to Vietnam, too. And it seeks to control to some extent the South Seas, though its navy which is still relatively underdeveloped.
I also detected from Mr. Huchton's summer lectures that I've attended the reason for its copying American patents: it is doing nothing different in purpose than when the American colonists would mimic the English manufacturing of goods of the time--taking the English designs and virtually reduplicating them. The obvious way to stop that practice is simply to find another country to manufacture American goods, as for instance, India (which is also a cheaper way to go than to resource out to China). Nevertheless, in order to be even more like America, China continues to send its youth to America to be trained and skilled in the sciences and technological areas. They believe as a people that the American lifestyle holds promise in their bright future ahead.
********************
Given their propensity to pursue what they believe are the best habits of Americana, I now understand why it is China wants to control the South China Seas and wrest advantage from the Philippines. China's Hainan Province is within its scope; and its presence amounts to establishing its sphere of influence in the region.
Nor does the United States strenuously object to Iran's controlling the Strait of Hormuuz and surrounding waterways. That is to say, China's overstepping into the South China Seas is simply a physical sign of a political reality: China dominates the region, naturally, I contend.
Sunday, June 26, 2016
Zero-base uniting tendencies
Now that the United Kingdom has officially acknowledged its independence as a nation, it is in position to do some zero-base union calculating as to the benefits of joining with 27 other nations in the EU.
There certainly the benefit of paying less export duties when purchasing products from the other 27 countries in EU, if co-joining with them. Of course, the UK would have to charge them less in import taxes from them.
In regard to security, the UK's interactions in the INTERPOL system won't change, including even the EU-INTERPOL version. And of course, the UK remains in NATO and remains in constant contact with the US military.
But the glaring change is in going-it-alone on immigration governmental policies and quotas. The UK's borders will be solely under their own control--at least, that is an intended consequence of leaving the EU.
I believe that no country is actually capable for long of withstanding the migration of peoples into or across any artificially-drawn no-man's land. For desperate peoples, driven and motivated, by the survival drive will accomplish penetration through any resurrected boundaries of any country. In other terms, man is driven by the herd instinct, no matter the cost in human life.
What any nation should do, when invaded by hordes of peoples is seek to accommodate the influx as best it can--as does Germany, Turkey, and Jordan, today's humane exemplars in the Middle-East migration. It will be recalled that the Roman Empire attempted to withstand the human hordes from overrunning its northern borders only to find eventually that their cities, Rome among them, were sacked and destroyed.
Natural forces combined with social exigencies ensure that the human sapiens species will always be on the move across the world, no matter what obstacles are set in his path.
It seems to me that the UK is attempting to maintain a posture of international prominence among nations as it once had a century or two previously--when the English navy ruled the seas. Not anymore, however, are its efforts as fruitful. Instead, the UK's joining with other nations to achieve a common interest among them all just makes sound sense: as in the case of lowering tariffs among most favored nations; and benefiting from EU money to go to its poorer neighborhoods.
Actually, the drive toward globalization is not that of the EU or any other particular conglomerate of nations, but of international trading itself as represented in the stated aims and goals of the World Trade Organization. That is to say, the movement oi globalization is not that of any established assemblage of governments but of trading partners in international commercial ventures, e.g., trading members of a free trade organization, such as the WTO or the regional NFTA.
.
There certainly the benefit of paying less export duties when purchasing products from the other 27 countries in EU, if co-joining with them. Of course, the UK would have to charge them less in import taxes from them.
In regard to security, the UK's interactions in the INTERPOL system won't change, including even the EU-INTERPOL version. And of course, the UK remains in NATO and remains in constant contact with the US military.
But the glaring change is in going-it-alone on immigration governmental policies and quotas. The UK's borders will be solely under their own control--at least, that is an intended consequence of leaving the EU.
I believe that no country is actually capable for long of withstanding the migration of peoples into or across any artificially-drawn no-man's land. For desperate peoples, driven and motivated, by the survival drive will accomplish penetration through any resurrected boundaries of any country. In other terms, man is driven by the herd instinct, no matter the cost in human life.
What any nation should do, when invaded by hordes of peoples is seek to accommodate the influx as best it can--as does Germany, Turkey, and Jordan, today's humane exemplars in the Middle-East migration. It will be recalled that the Roman Empire attempted to withstand the human hordes from overrunning its northern borders only to find eventually that their cities, Rome among them, were sacked and destroyed.
Natural forces combined with social exigencies ensure that the human sapiens species will always be on the move across the world, no matter what obstacles are set in his path.
It seems to me that the UK is attempting to maintain a posture of international prominence among nations as it once had a century or two previously--when the English navy ruled the seas. Not anymore, however, are its efforts as fruitful. Instead, the UK's joining with other nations to achieve a common interest among them all just makes sound sense: as in the case of lowering tariffs among most favored nations; and benefiting from EU money to go to its poorer neighborhoods.
Actually, the drive toward globalization is not that of the EU or any other particular conglomerate of nations, but of international trading itself as represented in the stated aims and goals of the World Trade Organization. That is to say, the movement oi globalization is not that of any established assemblage of governments but of trading partners in international commercial ventures, e.g., trading members of a free trade organization, such as the WTO or the regional NFTA.
.
Monday, June 20, 2016
What's the major thing wrong with Russia!
I've been asked to talk about Russia, as I know it to be.
I had a major hand in designing the Russian Federation Constitution. Essentially, I freed its satellites from the control of Mother Russia. But I could not affect the major problem with Russia itself--namely, its governmental officials and civilian workers. The entire government is corrupt--riddled with favoritism--who you know, not what you know.
Lest you think that's how it has to be--written in genes dating back to the Tartars: I disagree. The Chinese government has sent its youth replacements in governmental positions to the US for training at prominent universities and colleges and trade schools. That method seems to be working out well. And its civilization has lasted far longer.
It's true--the older President Bush was with the CIA, but he had a lot of knowledge beyond knowing how to play "king of the mountain" or "pack man."
Russia needs technocrats disparately to rule the country. HELP! Don't let the Russian people suffer under poor governments! I was brought in by the Kennan Institute that has its offices in DC and Moscow to evaluate the Georgian government that was established after the Rose (?) Conflict. I warned them not to go the way they had been trained by the Russians: you need a technocratic government throughout the state to oversee water, garbage-and-waste, etc., I urged. (Incidentally, that includes the military.) These leaders were educated in military tactics and military-like strategies yet knew nothing how to rule a country and take care of its civilian departments. Ok in centuries previous to the Nineteenth!
Until Russia is willing to submit to the people who know how to run a government and render its services satisfactory, it will be on the verge of sinking into a quagmire of inefficiencies ordered by governmental officials acting out of their own ignorance.
I had a major hand in designing the Russian Federation Constitution. Essentially, I freed its satellites from the control of Mother Russia. But I could not affect the major problem with Russia itself--namely, its governmental officials and civilian workers. The entire government is corrupt--riddled with favoritism--who you know, not what you know.
Lest you think that's how it has to be--written in genes dating back to the Tartars: I disagree. The Chinese government has sent its youth replacements in governmental positions to the US for training at prominent universities and colleges and trade schools. That method seems to be working out well. And its civilization has lasted far longer.
It's true--the older President Bush was with the CIA, but he had a lot of knowledge beyond knowing how to play "king of the mountain" or "pack man."
Russia needs technocrats disparately to rule the country. HELP! Don't let the Russian people suffer under poor governments! I was brought in by the Kennan Institute that has its offices in DC and Moscow to evaluate the Georgian government that was established after the Rose (?) Conflict. I warned them not to go the way they had been trained by the Russians: you need a technocratic government throughout the state to oversee water, garbage-and-waste, etc., I urged. (Incidentally, that includes the military.) These leaders were educated in military tactics and military-like strategies yet knew nothing how to rule a country and take care of its civilian departments. Ok in centuries previous to the Nineteenth!
Until Russia is willing to submit to the people who know how to run a government and render its services satisfactory, it will be on the verge of sinking into a quagmire of inefficiencies ordered by governmental officials acting out of their own ignorance.
Wednesday, June 15, 2016
Don't aim for perfection!
The Pragmatists of Twentieth Century America had it right: the cost to reach perfection in any one field of endeavor is just to high to make it a worthwhile goal for humans to reach.
For example, Candidate Trump would have the court system to enact policies that would make it a certainty that justice is always meted out. But what would be the cost to society to bring about such a end? No, humans must settle on, "It's good enough, but not perfection."
Today, we are being confronted with the prospect of automated driving by means of using artificial intelligence. I suppose, one might argue that we approach perfection in the world through our dependency on computers and other devices that augment human endeavors. This may be so, for I know it as a fact of my experience that humans, left on their own, never come even that close to achieving an ideal as a stated goal.
I must remind myself as I grow older into old age that there are body parts which no longer behave as they once did. The question I must pose to myself as a test as to whether I should pursue a remedial course of action is, am I still able to function with the use of the particular body part? If so, let it go! Enjoy must learn to live with what capabilities I have and can make use of!
For example, Candidate Trump would have the court system to enact policies that would make it a certainty that justice is always meted out. But what would be the cost to society to bring about such a end? No, humans must settle on, "It's good enough, but not perfection."
Today, we are being confronted with the prospect of automated driving by means of using artificial intelligence. I suppose, one might argue that we approach perfection in the world through our dependency on computers and other devices that augment human endeavors. This may be so, for I know it as a fact of my experience that humans, left on their own, never come even that close to achieving an ideal as a stated goal.
I must remind myself as I grow older into old age that there are body parts which no longer behave as they once did. The question I must pose to myself as a test as to whether I should pursue a remedial course of action is, am I still able to function with the use of the particular body part? If so, let it go! Enjoy must learn to live with what capabilities I have and can make use of!
The Mitt Romney Conference tentatively explores the making of a tyrant
It's necessary to piece together various discussions at the Conference to get the entire picture of a President who uses the office for tyrannical purposes.
Romney led the entry into the topic by expressing concern that a tyrant is made out of the unfulfilled desires of a people who have become despondent that their interests have not been publicly acknowledged and the people's political leaders have not been so engaged. Further, the despot is formed when he alights upon a group of individuals to isolate from the mainstream only for the purpose of accusing them of the cause of the injustices against the majority's stated demands. If Trump were in some formative stage of becoming despotic, he would single out some group standing in the way of the people's achieving their righteous will--for example, the Mexicans. He would further point to others--politicians and prominent dignitaries alike--as adversaries of the people, calling each by some pseudo name and derogatory nomenclature.
A would-be tyrant in the making then would claim that his way is the only true way to achieve the stated aspirations and hopes of the majority of the people. And, he would aspire to religious devotion in pursuing fulfillment of their desires and interests.
But, as hinted at from the information leaked what other discussants at the Conference claimed on the topic, the vital, necessary power a tyrant must have is the control of the country's military, which he would say emphatically, that without his intervention would be insufficient to maintain the security of the country he controls. He would revamp the military and the country's police forces, that is, to achieve his own ends for power over the people and for personal gain.
Shocking discussion, to be sure. My high regard for "the Mitt" is predicated on his daring and forthrightness in this matter.
Romney led the entry into the topic by expressing concern that a tyrant is made out of the unfulfilled desires of a people who have become despondent that their interests have not been publicly acknowledged and the people's political leaders have not been so engaged. Further, the despot is formed when he alights upon a group of individuals to isolate from the mainstream only for the purpose of accusing them of the cause of the injustices against the majority's stated demands. If Trump were in some formative stage of becoming despotic, he would single out some group standing in the way of the people's achieving their righteous will--for example, the Mexicans. He would further point to others--politicians and prominent dignitaries alike--as adversaries of the people, calling each by some pseudo name and derogatory nomenclature.
A would-be tyrant in the making then would claim that his way is the only true way to achieve the stated aspirations and hopes of the majority of the people. And, he would aspire to religious devotion in pursuing fulfillment of their desires and interests.
But, as hinted at from the information leaked what other discussants at the Conference claimed on the topic, the vital, necessary power a tyrant must have is the control of the country's military, which he would say emphatically, that without his intervention would be insufficient to maintain the security of the country he controls. He would revamp the military and the country's police forces, that is, to achieve his own ends for power over the people and for personal gain.
Shocking discussion, to be sure. My high regard for "the Mitt" is predicated on his daring and forthrightness in this matter.
Tuesday, May 24, 2016
Old-Age Medical Monitoring
I've had the privilege to receive good, (no---in my opinion, excellent) medical attention in my waning years.
Last Friday, I spent the entire day at the hospital, where from 9-5, I was hooked up to a blood-pressure machine and given superb monitoring care. I understand that this practice of close medical attention is to continue. It started a year ago; and every 3 months or so, I'm closely monitored; and any minor things needed are done on my body's behalf. I tell you, it's great method of care! And, a good means, too, to remind myself to behave when no doctor is around--no added salt, no sugar, and a life-long (what's left of it) of a low-fat diet.
I also believe that I've helped the medical team assigned to me for the session to evaluate my bodily condition. It's just wrong, in my opinion, to leave it up to a doctor, who sees us old people once in a while, to know what's really going on inside our skins.
Also, I advocate the principle that if me, as a senior patient, can get along with some minor discomfort or some limited us of a limb or bodily functioning organ, then don't get it fixed or altered! I was talking to someone on Sunday at church who has Parkinson's disease. Well, if he could live and function pretty well without invading the body for correction, then I believe he should leave well enough--which is not a state of perfection--alone. Don't do anything to change an obvious deteriorate bodily state and level of functioning. Getting older means just living in a deteriorated bodily overall state.
Last Friday, I spent the entire day at the hospital, where from 9-5, I was hooked up to a blood-pressure machine and given superb monitoring care. I understand that this practice of close medical attention is to continue. It started a year ago; and every 3 months or so, I'm closely monitored; and any minor things needed are done on my body's behalf. I tell you, it's great method of care! And, a good means, too, to remind myself to behave when no doctor is around--no added salt, no sugar, and a life-long (what's left of it) of a low-fat diet.
I also believe that I've helped the medical team assigned to me for the session to evaluate my bodily condition. It's just wrong, in my opinion, to leave it up to a doctor, who sees us old people once in a while, to know what's really going on inside our skins.
Also, I advocate the principle that if me, as a senior patient, can get along with some minor discomfort or some limited us of a limb or bodily functioning organ, then don't get it fixed or altered! I was talking to someone on Sunday at church who has Parkinson's disease. Well, if he could live and function pretty well without invading the body for correction, then I believe he should leave well enough--which is not a state of perfection--alone. Don't do anything to change an obvious deteriorate bodily state and level of functioning. Getting older means just living in a deteriorated bodily overall state.
The Real Reason why Trump, No!
It's embedded in the Baltimore Justice fiasco. The blacks' interests are being overlooked in an obvious attempt to keep law and order White style.
I just recently returned from trips to Washington DC and the East. I stayed in the shelters in DC, where I could discern smoldering embers. It wouldn't take much for a large-scale conflagration to come about there. The Baptist Consortium of DC clergy are doing their best to keep things in check; but it wouldn't take much to get things hot. Their line of defense won't be bought, if things get out of hand.
I saw the same thing when I visited Raleigh, NC a few years ago. The Raleigh Police were giving the blacks the line: "You know you must live by the rules!" They weren't buying it much. What would it gain them?
Now, to Trump, who should be the candidate of the Republican Party this Fall. He says he loves the blacks (I think I heard him say just something to that effect). Well, the Republican Party should have about 20% of their voters from the blacks; and he might be able to reach that level of black voters among the Republican ranks by Fall(ha!).
The point being that what has kept the lid on black insurgency in the US in recent years has been the line of black advocacy of the federal Justice Department. You take that off the table, and all hell breaks loose in the major US cities, I in my opinion. A Republican administration under a jerk like Trump is a guarantee of black outrage.
Now you say, look at how the former Mayor of New York controlled that city, populated by a significant number of black residents. But, he had a large population of Puerto Rico residents to counter the number of blacks in the town. What's the population breakdown in the state of Alabama?
No, Trump as President represents a return to white supremacy; and I can't imagine the country's people will be unified under a Jim Crow rule of law.
I just recently returned from trips to Washington DC and the East. I stayed in the shelters in DC, where I could discern smoldering embers. It wouldn't take much for a large-scale conflagration to come about there. The Baptist Consortium of DC clergy are doing their best to keep things in check; but it wouldn't take much to get things hot. Their line of defense won't be bought, if things get out of hand.
I saw the same thing when I visited Raleigh, NC a few years ago. The Raleigh Police were giving the blacks the line: "You know you must live by the rules!" They weren't buying it much. What would it gain them?
Now, to Trump, who should be the candidate of the Republican Party this Fall. He says he loves the blacks (I think I heard him say just something to that effect). Well, the Republican Party should have about 20% of their voters from the blacks; and he might be able to reach that level of black voters among the Republican ranks by Fall(ha!).
The point being that what has kept the lid on black insurgency in the US in recent years has been the line of black advocacy of the federal Justice Department. You take that off the table, and all hell breaks loose in the major US cities, I in my opinion. A Republican administration under a jerk like Trump is a guarantee of black outrage.
Now you say, look at how the former Mayor of New York controlled that city, populated by a significant number of black residents. But, he had a large population of Puerto Rico residents to counter the number of blacks in the town. What's the population breakdown in the state of Alabama?
No, Trump as President represents a return to white supremacy; and I can't imagine the country's people will be unified under a Jim Crow rule of law.
Wednesday, May 11, 2016
Why Ms. Clinton should be President of the US
Today, on a talk show, Mr. Axelrod, formerly with the Obama group, made the important point that Mr. Trump, running for President on the Republican ticket, has given no indication that he has the attitudinal wherewithal to live up to the duties of the office. In this regard, he shares the lack of temperament with a Texas millionaire, also from the business world, who had declared his candidacy for that high position in the 1990s. Be it noted, that this individual sort of folded in the final stages of his attempt.
Excuses by Republican analysts for Trump's lack and his "loaded canon" demeanor during the campaign so far amount to an admission of Trump's current failure with an addendum that once Trump becomes President he will act presidential and forsake his childish ways. After all, these pundits point out, if you knew and talked with Trump face-to-face, you'd know what a kitty-cat he really is! He's not that bad!, we are assured. And, more significantly, he'll solve the employment problem in the US by whatever means he deems right and necessary, so they tell us.
But there's more involved in his attitudinal posture than simply a "fools go in where angels fear to tread" affront. But you can't see it if you concentrate on what Trump says and does. Consider his opponent, Hilary Clinton in contrast to his antics. What does she bring to her candidacy? Just like a race horse has a biological breeding, so does a Presidential candidate have a demeanor and stature that comes from associations and current commitments wrought over years of training and experience. And in this respect she comes from notable experiences wrought over the decades of her public dedication to government service.
For one thing, her husband is Bill Clinton, who as President of the US established a decade of prosperity in the country, despite his personal idiosyncrasies (which he shares with countless other politicians!). For another, as Secretary of State, she interacted with international leaders and established herself as one among them. But most important of all, she has come into her own under President Obama's tutelage, so to become an advocate for universal health care for US citizens and, critically, a dynamic force for human equality among all peoples. In other words, she has joined the movement towards globalization, a movement dating back to the Renaissance but is sweeping the world scene today in trade and commerce.
She emanates the spirit of peace through the quality shown in her endeavors and displays to every citizen a governmental concern for each's own well-being. It would be an honor to call her my President.
Excuses by Republican analysts for Trump's lack and his "loaded canon" demeanor during the campaign so far amount to an admission of Trump's current failure with an addendum that once Trump becomes President he will act presidential and forsake his childish ways. After all, these pundits point out, if you knew and talked with Trump face-to-face, you'd know what a kitty-cat he really is! He's not that bad!, we are assured. And, more significantly, he'll solve the employment problem in the US by whatever means he deems right and necessary, so they tell us.
But there's more involved in his attitudinal posture than simply a "fools go in where angels fear to tread" affront. But you can't see it if you concentrate on what Trump says and does. Consider his opponent, Hilary Clinton in contrast to his antics. What does she bring to her candidacy? Just like a race horse has a biological breeding, so does a Presidential candidate have a demeanor and stature that comes from associations and current commitments wrought over years of training and experience. And in this respect she comes from notable experiences wrought over the decades of her public dedication to government service.
For one thing, her husband is Bill Clinton, who as President of the US established a decade of prosperity in the country, despite his personal idiosyncrasies (which he shares with countless other politicians!). For another, as Secretary of State, she interacted with international leaders and established herself as one among them. But most important of all, she has come into her own under President Obama's tutelage, so to become an advocate for universal health care for US citizens and, critically, a dynamic force for human equality among all peoples. In other words, she has joined the movement towards globalization, a movement dating back to the Renaissance but is sweeping the world scene today in trade and commerce.
She emanates the spirit of peace through the quality shown in her endeavors and displays to every citizen a governmental concern for each's own well-being. It would be an honor to call her my President.
Tuesday, May 10, 2016
Corrupt Ploys: Standard Business Practice
When you stop and think about it, J. Rockefeller established the railway network that cris-crosses the nation by putting his competition out of business! Nobody, virtually, finds fault for his doing that. And in 2008, as a result of the Wall Street Financial Crisis, nobody in the banking industry (just about) was sent to prison, despite collusion among the large banks, the rating agencies, lending agencies, and governmental departments!
I think there's an important lesson to be learned here. As long as the particular society can recover successfully from the deleterious effects reaped upon it, there's really no harm done. Nobody may be held accountable.
Look at Brazil today. Ms. Rousseff is supposedly to be impeached from the office of President of the country. Now, the proceeding might indeed take place. But why, when, for instance, there's massive corruption in its oil industry, with businessmen reaping hordes from kickbacks! She could not have done more harm than these others! Nonetheless, why she may indeed be impeached is because the country is experiencing the worst recession in decades. She may be looked upon a its spiritual cause simply because of her leadership position in government! Just as the royal family was adjudged the cause of the French Revolution during a starvation era!
So a country, a culture, will adjudge its leaders by the economic and social conditions the country is experiencing. Let's go back to Rockefeller. What he did in getting rid of his competition may have been unethical, even immoral; but the results of the society were outstanding: he brought about a national rail system.
I personally have an opinion as to why the cartel giant Guzman was captured for good. He represented the means drugs were shipped from South and Central America to the US, etc. When it became fashionable to use submarines and the seas as a more profitable means for shipment, he was no longer in a position of prominence in the underworld. Well, it's just a theory,
In any case, society seems to be the real judge of whether to impose its justice on its leaders on the basis of whether it has benefited from some corrupt ploy a "heinous person(s)" has (have) used.
I think there's an important lesson to be learned here. As long as the particular society can recover successfully from the deleterious effects reaped upon it, there's really no harm done. Nobody may be held accountable.
Look at Brazil today. Ms. Rousseff is supposedly to be impeached from the office of President of the country. Now, the proceeding might indeed take place. But why, when, for instance, there's massive corruption in its oil industry, with businessmen reaping hordes from kickbacks! She could not have done more harm than these others! Nonetheless, why she may indeed be impeached is because the country is experiencing the worst recession in decades. She may be looked upon a its spiritual cause simply because of her leadership position in government! Just as the royal family was adjudged the cause of the French Revolution during a starvation era!
So a country, a culture, will adjudge its leaders by the economic and social conditions the country is experiencing. Let's go back to Rockefeller. What he did in getting rid of his competition may have been unethical, even immoral; but the results of the society were outstanding: he brought about a national rail system.
I personally have an opinion as to why the cartel giant Guzman was captured for good. He represented the means drugs were shipped from South and Central America to the US, etc. When it became fashionable to use submarines and the seas as a more profitable means for shipment, he was no longer in a position of prominence in the underworld. Well, it's just a theory,
In any case, society seems to be the real judge of whether to impose its justice on its leaders on the basis of whether it has benefited from some corrupt ploy a "heinous person(s)" has (have) used.
Fracking in Oklahoma: 60 Minute Program
The oil and gas industry in Oklahoma wants to deny the effects of fracking leading to earthquakes at the lower levels of the earth's surface that has greatly increased in recent years. They say the increase occurred before fracking was instituted.
Nevertheless, I think it's clear as reported--that 1) the method of fracking to extract oil uses much more water than ordinary methods; and, as reported in a recent 60 Minute Show, 2) a state near Oklahoma (Kansas?) cut back on deploying fracking by closing several wells where it was used, and noted a decrease in its number of earthquakes.
Nevertheless, I think it's clear as reported--that 1) the method of fracking to extract oil uses much more water than ordinary methods; and, as reported in a recent 60 Minute Show, 2) a state near Oklahoma (Kansas?) cut back on deploying fracking by closing several wells where it was used, and noted a decrease in its number of earthquakes.
Saturday, April 30, 2016
US committing itself to 100 years in Iraqi governance, seemingly!
It seems from recent commitments the US is making to the Iraqi central government that it will be unable to extricate itself from involvement in that country's politics for the next century, at the earliest.
The central government can't hold together the 3 Muslim groups in one unified structure. This has been a premonition for the last decade in intelligence circles and the end is near to keep up a pretense. A confederation of three regions--Sunnai, Shiite, and Kurd will work, I believe. Neither of these factions should be given independence--Iraq must stand as its unified bulwark.
But without local governance as key to preserving the cities and towns which make it up these sectors, the US will next be forced into the Muslim sect conflict that has last over a thousand years--once again!
There is no point to rehearse in this item the reasons why the Iraqi central government has no choice but to relinquish control to each of these Muslim sects and simply act as the mechanism to distribute allotments to each of them and maintain harmony among them with the help of sector military establishments and the several Muslim sector governing agencies--en toto overseen by the US military advisers.
Action must be prompt to avoid civil war in Iraq. Confederation, immediately!
The central government can't hold together the 3 Muslim groups in one unified structure. This has been a premonition for the last decade in intelligence circles and the end is near to keep up a pretense. A confederation of three regions--Sunnai, Shiite, and Kurd will work, I believe. Neither of these factions should be given independence--Iraq must stand as its unified bulwark.
But without local governance as key to preserving the cities and towns which make it up these sectors, the US will next be forced into the Muslim sect conflict that has last over a thousand years--once again!
There is no point to rehearse in this item the reasons why the Iraqi central government has no choice but to relinquish control to each of these Muslim sects and simply act as the mechanism to distribute allotments to each of them and maintain harmony among them with the help of sector military establishments and the several Muslim sector governing agencies--en toto overseen by the US military advisers.
Action must be prompt to avoid civil war in Iraq. Confederation, immediately!
Wednesday, March 2, 2016
Comment I: Visualization in Meditation Class
In the last class session of the Visualization in Meditation course at UTEP-OLLI, the instructor, Lynn Provenzano, cited how to use a picture of our secret imaginative place for meditation to enable the self to focus on a stated affirmation. Say, the affirmation is "I am at peace with myself", then the self translates the affirmation into a picture of himself in repose. Next, naming and mentally proceeding to each part of the body, from top to the very balls of the feet, the meditating self concentrates upon, then releases and lets go any tension or irritation encountered there, thereupon moving onto the next bodily part. At the conclusion of the top-down analysis, the meditating self seeks for any object--person or thing--that should be brought into our secret place in light of our particular affirmation governing this entry. Result I found in my case: I had greater clarity of who I am as the one in affirmation and what I further was in need of in order to claim rightfully that affirmation being focused upon! All-in-all, this teacher is fantastic in bringing on a fruitful meditative experience in my life!
Comments on China II: Inspired by Mr. Huchton's Lectures
3. Social Ties among the Chinese
On Monday's class, Mr. Huchton brought out that Christianity is fast growing in China. I believe the agreement which was reached in Beijing regarding the conduct of Christianity in China has had a lugubrious effect in bringing converts to that religion. I had a part in bringing about the agreement, having talked with Cardinal Mahoney's representatives in LA beforehand to know the Catholic clergy's concerns before conversing with Beijing.
He also mentioned the troubles in western China with Muslim dissidents. I think it similar to what Russia is facing in Chechyna. Islamic devotees want their independence. I have argued elsewhere that Russia ought to allow Muslims in that region to form an Independent State within the Russian Federation. China has yet to face the growing need for this newly designed governmental arrangement within its borders, which would enable a greater degree of regional autonomy. The Tibetan Buddhists also deserve greater autonomy as would be provided for through a federation grouping. Yet I believe the time is coming when its Empire will be perceived un-manageable, even with its current tribal, provincial authority.
Finally, Mr. Huchton alluded to the deterioration of the family among the poor as parents move to the cities in the east, literally abandoning the children left behind. Since the family is so worshiped in Confucianism, it is appalling that Beijing would allow family ties to become dissolved in any social milieu!
.
Wednesday, February 24, 2016
Comments on China-I: Inspired by Mr. Huchton's Lectures
I've recently enrolled in Mr. Huchton's class "China: Past and Current" at OLLI-UTEP. In addition to having been in China some 20 years ago, I've had Chinese friends over the years and feel I know the national government well. I was hoping that Mr. Huchton's class would help to keep me abreast of developments in China and though there's been only one class session I've attended, I think he's doing just that!
I'll try to keep the topics numbered in each blog item on China the same; but there'll be several comment items as the semester proceeds. So, on to my comments on China inspired by Mr. Huchton's lecture this past week.
1. Orientation to Modern China
There is some preliminary understanding about the direction that its government and people is headed. The Chinese are jingoistic: they believe their way has always been the best way. And China has lasted for countless centuries. Their way is highlighted in its art and literature and religion. Confucianism is built right into the Chinese way of modern life.
I like to posit their philosophy as a way of thinking: what I call the Asian Mind. I believe their aim is to unite Asia through the philosophy of the Asian Mind, which they contend is very different from the Western logical pattern dating back to Aristotle.
But as a major power of tomorrow, if not today, it realizes it must also take on the form of a major power. This means that just as Germany, France and England colonized in the previous centuries, so too must China. Moreover, it viewed how Russia attempted colonization in Africa, specifically, Ghana; and it has been spurred on to accomplish what Russia failed to achieve on that Continent. Its trading partners circle the globe--Australia especially benefiting.
It is impelled by a vision to unify Asia, I am convinced of it. Its current attempt is to claim the waters of the south seas as its rightful sphere of influence. It is protectionist of Asia as a mother protects her offspring to inculcate its vision of the Asian mind and to create its own cultural meccas among the other Asian countries.
It pirates the copyrights and patents from Western nations, just as the US in its early days copied from England how to manufacture and do commerce in international trade.
It is resource hungry. I believe the US has cooperated with China by opening up western Afghanistan for mineral exploration and development. The US certainly cannot develop the rich Afghanistan land, lest it (i.e., the US) be accused of going to war in Afghanistan to exploit that land for its own purpose, after Russia had pulled out. Certainly, China is developing the infrastructures in African countries for both depopulating its own native land by enabling emigration of its people to these countries and providing a steady flow of natural resources China so disparately needs at home.
Since it seems clear that China is embarked on a program of uniting Asia under its umbrella, the US has not invited China to join the TPP, I understand.
2. The African Colonization
It's my understanding that China is not colonizing Kenya, a pet country of the US State Department; nor of course, it isn't in South Africa, I don't think. It goes into countries whether or not they are democracies and it sets up its own communities, which do a lot of good in building up the local infrastructures, including hospitals, roads, bridges and buildings--apartment complexes, corporate edifices, and so forth. Huchton emphasized that not all these enterprises are appreciated by the native inhabitants, since by and large, the Chinese treat the locals as second-class citizens in the effort to modernize their lands!
Of course, China mines the riches of the lands on which their colonizes exist. Interestingly, natives in many countries must learn Mandarin in their schooling.
Do I think that China is endeavoring to take over Africa? I doubt it. For one thing, China is far away from what's happening day-to-day in the African countries. For another, Africa at this time knows nothing of the Asian Mind cause. Nor is its military sufficiently capable of extending Chinese control to African shores.
In my opinion, China is doing yeoman service to the world in its African projects. And, note that China is extending credit or other benefits to the countries who participate as joint partners in its endeavors in the several African countries.
-------------------------------------------
Overall comment: China is experiencing growing pains!
I'll try to keep the topics numbered in each blog item on China the same; but there'll be several comment items as the semester proceeds. So, on to my comments on China inspired by Mr. Huchton's lecture this past week.
1. Orientation to Modern China
There is some preliminary understanding about the direction that its government and people is headed. The Chinese are jingoistic: they believe their way has always been the best way. And China has lasted for countless centuries. Their way is highlighted in its art and literature and religion. Confucianism is built right into the Chinese way of modern life.
I like to posit their philosophy as a way of thinking: what I call the Asian Mind. I believe their aim is to unite Asia through the philosophy of the Asian Mind, which they contend is very different from the Western logical pattern dating back to Aristotle.
But as a major power of tomorrow, if not today, it realizes it must also take on the form of a major power. This means that just as Germany, France and England colonized in the previous centuries, so too must China. Moreover, it viewed how Russia attempted colonization in Africa, specifically, Ghana; and it has been spurred on to accomplish what Russia failed to achieve on that Continent. Its trading partners circle the globe--Australia especially benefiting.
It is impelled by a vision to unify Asia, I am convinced of it. Its current attempt is to claim the waters of the south seas as its rightful sphere of influence. It is protectionist of Asia as a mother protects her offspring to inculcate its vision of the Asian mind and to create its own cultural meccas among the other Asian countries.
It pirates the copyrights and patents from Western nations, just as the US in its early days copied from England how to manufacture and do commerce in international trade.
It is resource hungry. I believe the US has cooperated with China by opening up western Afghanistan for mineral exploration and development. The US certainly cannot develop the rich Afghanistan land, lest it (i.e., the US) be accused of going to war in Afghanistan to exploit that land for its own purpose, after Russia had pulled out. Certainly, China is developing the infrastructures in African countries for both depopulating its own native land by enabling emigration of its people to these countries and providing a steady flow of natural resources China so disparately needs at home.
Since it seems clear that China is embarked on a program of uniting Asia under its umbrella, the US has not invited China to join the TPP, I understand.
2. The African Colonization
It's my understanding that China is not colonizing Kenya, a pet country of the US State Department; nor of course, it isn't in South Africa, I don't think. It goes into countries whether or not they are democracies and it sets up its own communities, which do a lot of good in building up the local infrastructures, including hospitals, roads, bridges and buildings--apartment complexes, corporate edifices, and so forth. Huchton emphasized that not all these enterprises are appreciated by the native inhabitants, since by and large, the Chinese treat the locals as second-class citizens in the effort to modernize their lands!
Of course, China mines the riches of the lands on which their colonizes exist. Interestingly, natives in many countries must learn Mandarin in their schooling.
Do I think that China is endeavoring to take over Africa? I doubt it. For one thing, China is far away from what's happening day-to-day in the African countries. For another, Africa at this time knows nothing of the Asian Mind cause. Nor is its military sufficiently capable of extending Chinese control to African shores.
In my opinion, China is doing yeoman service to the world in its African projects. And, note that China is extending credit or other benefits to the countries who participate as joint partners in its endeavors in the several African countries.
-------------------------------------------
Overall comment: China is experiencing growing pains!
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
There's Gold in Asteroid X123--Yes Sir!
In my Class on Controversies in Science at OLLI-UTEP the other day, Mr. Kappus, Instructor, mentioned that on one asteroid water--the H2O variety--has already been posited as present.
That got me and the Instructor to enter into a fantasy discussion that may very well turn out to be true: There might be some asteroids, meteors, or just rocks flung out into space floating around the sun that contain all manner of minerals.
He voiced the opinion that there would have to be two spacecrafts--one positioned near a space object and the other at some distance above it, both working in consort to locate potential mineral finds and dig or blast them out from their rock beds.
If its natural to assume that the earth isn't the only planetary object containing minerals such as gold, it seems sensible to populate the entire solar system with mineral probing spacecrafts (unmanned) to explore for them.
Indeed, I think Mr. Kappus with his space-probing vision has chosen wisely the field of geology for a career, since it is that scientific field which is devoted to ascertaining mineral presence in any rock formation on whatever space object!
That got me and the Instructor to enter into a fantasy discussion that may very well turn out to be true: There might be some asteroids, meteors, or just rocks flung out into space floating around the sun that contain all manner of minerals.
He voiced the opinion that there would have to be two spacecrafts--one positioned near a space object and the other at some distance above it, both working in consort to locate potential mineral finds and dig or blast them out from their rock beds.
If its natural to assume that the earth isn't the only planetary object containing minerals such as gold, it seems sensible to populate the entire solar system with mineral probing spacecrafts (unmanned) to explore for them.
Indeed, I think Mr. Kappus with his space-probing vision has chosen wisely the field of geology for a career, since it is that scientific field which is devoted to ascertaining mineral presence in any rock formation on whatever space object!
Tuesday, February 16, 2016
OL: Preponderance of evidence--Manmade Climate Change since 1850
Listening to Mr. Kappus' lecture on Climate Change in the Scientific Controversies class of OLLI this past week, I culled out 3 important reasons for thinking humans have greatly affected the earth's climate change cycle:
1. There's been a noticeable rise during an earth's temperature cooling phase since the coming of the Industrial Revolution that brought about industry's usage of fossil fuels for energy--CO2 and CO4.
2. We're now experiencing an even sharper rise in temperature for which there's no other explanation as obvious as we earthlings are relying on fossil fuels at an ever increasing rate.
3. Scientists have been able to reproduce this phenomenon in its "greenhouse experiments."
1. There's been a noticeable rise during an earth's temperature cooling phase since the coming of the Industrial Revolution that brought about industry's usage of fossil fuels for energy--CO2 and CO4.
2. We're now experiencing an even sharper rise in temperature for which there's no other explanation as obvious as we earthlings are relying on fossil fuels at an ever increasing rate.
3. Scientists have been able to reproduce this phenomenon in its "greenhouse experiments."
Friday, February 12, 2016
OL: Controversies Re: Science--Topics' Additions
I'm taking a course through OLLI-UTEP (see Progress Tracking, John, What's Up) on "Controversies in Science" and I'm offering at the next session 3 more topics for the class to discuss:
1. The Unconscious. Have psychologists given their acknowledgement to the existence of the unconscious, as proposed by Sigmund Freud? That's the area where repressed thoughts and experiences are theorized to be kept along with the many forgotten memories. The area is supposed to be accessed through conscious remembering hypnosis and dreaming. And what is this area's value to a functioning mind?
2. Is fear a motivating emotion? Are the Syrians on the move because they're so motivated? If so, how does that square with the New Testament's exhortation that the believer be not troubled--God is in charge! "Casting all your care on Him..."etc.
3. The radio program Coast to Coast, aired each nighttime across the country, has for years promulgated the view that aliens periodically land on earth, especially in Zone 51 in Arizona. Supposed specialists on the topic have even theorized that at the end of the Ice Age, aliens came with an advanced technology that has enabled civilization as we know it today to develop on the planet. Could science come up with a probability estimate as to the likelihood of such claims to be factually accurate?
1. The Unconscious. Have psychologists given their acknowledgement to the existence of the unconscious, as proposed by Sigmund Freud? That's the area where repressed thoughts and experiences are theorized to be kept along with the many forgotten memories. The area is supposed to be accessed through conscious remembering hypnosis and dreaming. And what is this area's value to a functioning mind?
2. Is fear a motivating emotion? Are the Syrians on the move because they're so motivated? If so, how does that square with the New Testament's exhortation that the believer be not troubled--God is in charge! "Casting all your care on Him..."etc.
3. The radio program Coast to Coast, aired each nighttime across the country, has for years promulgated the view that aliens periodically land on earth, especially in Zone 51 in Arizona. Supposed specialists on the topic have even theorized that at the end of the Ice Age, aliens came with an advanced technology that has enabled civilization as we know it today to develop on the planet. Could science come up with a probability estimate as to the likelihood of such claims to be factually accurate?
Wednesday, February 3, 2016
Extraneous-2: Comment on US Military Budget, etc.
US Military Budget
Defense Secretary Carter is appearing before Congress this week to present the Administration's military budget. I think he's covering the list of priorities pretty well, as I understand this list.
But one thing that needs emphasizing. With the increased use of drones and the further implementation of automation in the military-regardless of branch--there's simply not the need for the level of troops reached in past years. I would hope that Congress will not be swayed by the hawks in their midst who go so far as to urge increased troop strength. Their arguments in industry would amount to dismantling automated data processing and bringing back Nineteenth Century business methods. Today, I believe, we've gone way beyond other militaries, including China and Russia, etc. in the use of technological warfare and the reliance upon automated cybernetics Please no return to the Stone Age for the sake of those Congressional members who long for the past!
Specifically, the day of battlefield (or area) engagements is drawing to a close. The great battles among navy fleets are simply in the history books, no longer on oceanic waters. The era's end even more rapid on land.
The Nostalgic Election, 2016
With the candidacy of Hilary Clinton, the Democrats display a longing for the prosperity of the 1990s under the Presidency of Bill Clinton.
But it is clear that the Republicans have never forgotten Ronald Reagan! They've turned to another entertainer of glamorous notoriety for Presidential candidacy, though not of Hollywood origin, in Donald Trump. In my hearing his speeches, I cannot but return to yesteryear when the simple folksy message of Reagan reverberated to the heartbeats of his many hearers, including me. Yes, and even as President Ronald reduced the tax rates for wealthy citizens and sounded the drumbeats of war with Russia and Grenada that no doubt pleased a non-distinguished following of soldier Oliver North, so we should expect greater leniencies in the financial tax burdens among the wealthy if Donald T. becomes President and just as similar, international faux pas.
Nevertheless, Bill had his intent to take on welfare mothers so as to get them working, thus exhibiting a desire to better the lot of the taxpayers, while Ronald made a deal with Iran to release American soldiers to show a direction he was going to promote American interests. That earnest desire to improve American democracy is missing from the dialogues of the current crop of Presidential candidates; and certainly is not evident in the declared plans of candidates Hilary and Donald, should either be elected as the New President.
Defense Secretary Carter is appearing before Congress this week to present the Administration's military budget. I think he's covering the list of priorities pretty well, as I understand this list.
But one thing that needs emphasizing. With the increased use of drones and the further implementation of automation in the military-regardless of branch--there's simply not the need for the level of troops reached in past years. I would hope that Congress will not be swayed by the hawks in their midst who go so far as to urge increased troop strength. Their arguments in industry would amount to dismantling automated data processing and bringing back Nineteenth Century business methods. Today, I believe, we've gone way beyond other militaries, including China and Russia, etc. in the use of technological warfare and the reliance upon automated cybernetics Please no return to the Stone Age for the sake of those Congressional members who long for the past!
Specifically, the day of battlefield (or area) engagements is drawing to a close. The great battles among navy fleets are simply in the history books, no longer on oceanic waters. The era's end even more rapid on land.
The Nostalgic Election, 2016
With the candidacy of Hilary Clinton, the Democrats display a longing for the prosperity of the 1990s under the Presidency of Bill Clinton.
But it is clear that the Republicans have never forgotten Ronald Reagan! They've turned to another entertainer of glamorous notoriety for Presidential candidacy, though not of Hollywood origin, in Donald Trump. In my hearing his speeches, I cannot but return to yesteryear when the simple folksy message of Reagan reverberated to the heartbeats of his many hearers, including me. Yes, and even as President Ronald reduced the tax rates for wealthy citizens and sounded the drumbeats of war with Russia and Grenada that no doubt pleased a non-distinguished following of soldier Oliver North, so we should expect greater leniencies in the financial tax burdens among the wealthy if Donald T. becomes President and just as similar, international faux pas.
Nevertheless, Bill had his intent to take on welfare mothers so as to get them working, thus exhibiting a desire to better the lot of the taxpayers, while Ronald made a deal with Iran to release American soldiers to show a direction he was going to promote American interests. That earnest desire to improve American democracy is missing from the dialogues of the current crop of Presidential candidates; and certainly is not evident in the declared plans of candidates Hilary and Donald, should either be elected as the New President.
Thursday, January 28, 2016
Migrating: Natural Propensity of Humans ( and Birds)!
How did all the continents become populated with members of the human species? Obviously, human beings love to travel! Sometimes, as is presently the case with migrating Syrians and Africans, it's out of fear of being killed, but many times it stems from a thirst for adventure or for searching for a land flowing with milk and honey--as in the story of the Jews' plight from Egypt.
Migrants don't always get a warm welcome in the lands they journey to. Witness how many Americans yell to the Hispanic migrants entering the US, "Go home where you belong!" But occasionally, migrants receive a warm welcome--as in the case when the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, recently encouraged fleeing Syrians, "Come to Germany!" The issue of whether the migrants enter legally or illegally is a matter of how the country to which they go regards them, e.g., the legal status bestowed on them, not how they feel about themselves and what within is driving them forth.
Note that birds are simply tolerated by the countries they fly over and nest. Nevertheless, occasionally, even birds are shooed away as being pests!
In the instances of humans on a migration track, countries may find reason to welcome them. Youthful Hispanics on the prowl in the US are tolerated by those governmental officials who see the migrants as potential workers, capable of helping to pay for aged citizenry in their retirement years. Moreover, US business finds Hispanics non-complaining, industrious workers and family-oriented, willing to work for what wages are offered them, making fewer demands on corporate management.
Regardless how receptive any particular people or government may be, migrants are on a self-propelling mission to go wherever their inner Spirit moves them! They have so acted in accord with their nature as human beings; and they will so act in millennia to come!
Migrants don't always get a warm welcome in the lands they journey to. Witness how many Americans yell to the Hispanic migrants entering the US, "Go home where you belong!" But occasionally, migrants receive a warm welcome--as in the case when the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, recently encouraged fleeing Syrians, "Come to Germany!" The issue of whether the migrants enter legally or illegally is a matter of how the country to which they go regards them, e.g., the legal status bestowed on them, not how they feel about themselves and what within is driving them forth.
Note that birds are simply tolerated by the countries they fly over and nest. Nevertheless, occasionally, even birds are shooed away as being pests!
In the instances of humans on a migration track, countries may find reason to welcome them. Youthful Hispanics on the prowl in the US are tolerated by those governmental officials who see the migrants as potential workers, capable of helping to pay for aged citizenry in their retirement years. Moreover, US business finds Hispanics non-complaining, industrious workers and family-oriented, willing to work for what wages are offered them, making fewer demands on corporate management.
Regardless how receptive any particular people or government may be, migrants are on a self-propelling mission to go wherever their inner Spirit moves them! They have so acted in accord with their nature as human beings; and they will so act in millennia to come!
Thursday, January 21, 2016
Code for 'US must lead militarily to defeat ISIS'
I suppose if the US had unlimited resources, then anytime an American was attacked or killed by ISIS, the US could simply send forces to wherever and wipe out the offending enemy hostile cell or army grouping. But this is simply wishful thinking on the part of right-wing conservatives in this country. Moreover, if the US were to go after every hostile enemy who would harm a US citizen, as a first-line defense of its sovereignty, then at some point even our allies would come to hate us-- certainly to be afraid of us, lest at some juncture we turn on them! The US would have created a hostile world environment in which to act.
The Argument for US leadership in the cause to defeat and obliterate ISIS
Ever since the Arab Spring event swept over the Middle East, Islamic rebels have sought to establish their own caliphate while expanding their own power and might in the countries caught in political chaos, e.g. Libya, Yemen, even Egypt. As the leading power in the world with the largest military of any country, it behooves the US to recognize its primary and essential mission to eradicate this marauding radical Islamic force not only to protect its own borders but to re-establish what peace and stability there was in the region prior to the advent of the Arab Spring movement. Moreover, ISIS' military aggression has led to the displacement of millions of persons living in the region, giving rise to the emigrant problem for EU countries.
It is assumed that the US could call upon international cooperation, as through its heavily supported, NATO.
US involvement in serious conflicts and destabilizing situations around the world
Be it recognized that the US is already confronting and attempting to cope with many threatening situations having implications for the peace and stability of geographical regions in the globe or for the smooth conduct of international trade and commerce:
1. China's aggressive posturing to overtake its lack of innovation by pirating copyrighted and patent materials from US companies. Its further aggression in the Asian seas near Japan and the Philippines so as to establish its claimed right to control these waterways.
2. North Korea's development of ballistic weaponry capable of delivering nuclear bombs and devices even to US shores.
3. Potential threats from Russia and China to shut down electrical and communications grids in the West.
4. The US' own debt that has reached un-heard-of levels heretofore.
5. The US' efforts to aid the European nations amid worldwide economic slowdown; and to establish a viable EU, retaining the UK within its structure.
6. Doing whatever is necessary militarily and diplomatically to preserve the independence of formerly Russian-controlled states, as in the Ukraine.
7. Maintaining some 700+ installations in over 170 countries as a deterrent to the collapse of governments worldwide.
The list is yet longer. The point being the ISIS crisis is only one among many that threaten not only world peace but the US' ability to function as a unitary nation.
Nevertheless, I am convinced that with the advent of Globalization, there's a lingering desire on the part of international financiers to hope with glee that the US might be involved so deeply around the world as to cause its own demise. These individuals, mindful how the Netherlands dominance gave way to British and French colonization and that to US influence in world affairs, are looking forward to establishing yet another dominant nation or state-cluster in need of goods and services that mean astronomical profits for them.
The US' Priorities List of degree of involvement
Obviously, the US must engage in prioritizing how to allocate its resources and restrict its degree of involvement in any particular threatening or destabilizing situation.
Moreover, the US recognizes that not only is military might available to handle conflicts but diplomacy.
So the Code for 'US must lead militarily to defeat ISIS' is to my mind that the US should rush towards its own destruction!
The Argument for US leadership in the cause to defeat and obliterate ISIS
Ever since the Arab Spring event swept over the Middle East, Islamic rebels have sought to establish their own caliphate while expanding their own power and might in the countries caught in political chaos, e.g. Libya, Yemen, even Egypt. As the leading power in the world with the largest military of any country, it behooves the US to recognize its primary and essential mission to eradicate this marauding radical Islamic force not only to protect its own borders but to re-establish what peace and stability there was in the region prior to the advent of the Arab Spring movement. Moreover, ISIS' military aggression has led to the displacement of millions of persons living in the region, giving rise to the emigrant problem for EU countries.
It is assumed that the US could call upon international cooperation, as through its heavily supported, NATO.
US involvement in serious conflicts and destabilizing situations around the world
Be it recognized that the US is already confronting and attempting to cope with many threatening situations having implications for the peace and stability of geographical regions in the globe or for the smooth conduct of international trade and commerce:
1. China's aggressive posturing to overtake its lack of innovation by pirating copyrighted and patent materials from US companies. Its further aggression in the Asian seas near Japan and the Philippines so as to establish its claimed right to control these waterways.
2. North Korea's development of ballistic weaponry capable of delivering nuclear bombs and devices even to US shores.
3. Potential threats from Russia and China to shut down electrical and communications grids in the West.
4. The US' own debt that has reached un-heard-of levels heretofore.
5. The US' efforts to aid the European nations amid worldwide economic slowdown; and to establish a viable EU, retaining the UK within its structure.
6. Doing whatever is necessary militarily and diplomatically to preserve the independence of formerly Russian-controlled states, as in the Ukraine.
7. Maintaining some 700+ installations in over 170 countries as a deterrent to the collapse of governments worldwide.
The list is yet longer. The point being the ISIS crisis is only one among many that threaten not only world peace but the US' ability to function as a unitary nation.
Nevertheless, I am convinced that with the advent of Globalization, there's a lingering desire on the part of international financiers to hope with glee that the US might be involved so deeply around the world as to cause its own demise. These individuals, mindful how the Netherlands dominance gave way to British and French colonization and that to US influence in world affairs, are looking forward to establishing yet another dominant nation or state-cluster in need of goods and services that mean astronomical profits for them.
The US' Priorities List of degree of involvement
Obviously, the US must engage in prioritizing how to allocate its resources and restrict its degree of involvement in any particular threatening or destabilizing situation.
Moreover, the US recognizes that not only is military might available to handle conflicts but diplomacy.
So the Code for 'US must lead militarily to defeat ISIS' is to my mind that the US should rush towards its own destruction!
Wednesday, January 20, 2016
Code for 'Make US the leader of the world again!'
Once upon a time, when the civilized country of Germany allowed Hitler to rule on the grounds of the false claims in biological science that hailed the Aryan Race as the model of perfection in human development, the US became the leader of the Western world in a struggle against Fascism in both Italy and Germany. Through WWII and for several decades thereafter, the United States, by championing scientific innovation, continued to lead the Free World; and the countries aligned with it. as if it were the parent of a sometimes recalcitrant brood of kids--those in need of training and guidance, and occasionally, scolding and correction!
Meantime, other nations emerged on the global scene, such as China and African Third World entities in search of the knowledge and know how, which the US was providing to its Western allies. These "backward countries" were smart learners--sending their leaders' offspring to universities and colleges in the US to be trained in the ways promulgated according to scientific rules and principles.
What resulted is that the United States maintained its position of leadership as it evolved a global economy through the decades after WWII, dominated by a class of decision-makers known as technocrats, all sharing a common core of knowledge and practices approved through scientific inquiry. And the emerging global economy took on a nomenclature of its own centered around the concept of Globalization, understood as a technocratic economy controlled by technocrats. thoroughly trained in the application of scientific knowledge to the world's problems.
Before WWII, globalization was in the works worldwide but more narrowly engineered. Ever since the 17the Century, Europe ventured forth into the hinterlands of Asia and India and Africa for sake of trade and commerce for resources and raw materials that could be used in the manufacture of goods back home. Thus, the rise of commercial giant nations as the Netherlands, then England and France dominating the sea lanes, bearing all kinds of goods for exchange with the less
technologically advanced countries, but resource rich. What globalization added was that countries designated Third World could become just as advanced as the most advanced in the West--yes, and that includes even as advanced as the US! And, as more and more of once 'backward nations' are ever gaining in their wealth and power, the less there is need of a teacher-nation to dominate the world scene, bingo: the US loses its political posture as 'king of the hill.'
'Make the US the leader of the world again!'
So now, in this Presidential election year, there is a whole political group of "Conservatives" who yearn for the good old days when the United States "taught" the rest of the world how to live in accordance with the technocratic rules and principles developed through science. And they point to Iran in order to claim that there's still need for an all-knowing eye of scientific acumen. But if so, they have yet to demonstrate that it is the US who should assume that role in the modern era. And it is far less compelling that the US has something unique to offer, since the world already lives in technocracy.
Better is the model espoused by the Iranians that all nations should be treated as equal partners in a joint venture of cooperation to overcome social and political differences that threaten world peace and tranquility. According to this plan, no nation is 'king of the hill'; and differences existing among nations must be settled through negotiation whenever such differences need resolve. Interesting, this is precisely the position of President Obama.
Meantime, other nations emerged on the global scene, such as China and African Third World entities in search of the knowledge and know how, which the US was providing to its Western allies. These "backward countries" were smart learners--sending their leaders' offspring to universities and colleges in the US to be trained in the ways promulgated according to scientific rules and principles.
What resulted is that the United States maintained its position of leadership as it evolved a global economy through the decades after WWII, dominated by a class of decision-makers known as technocrats, all sharing a common core of knowledge and practices approved through scientific inquiry. And the emerging global economy took on a nomenclature of its own centered around the concept of Globalization, understood as a technocratic economy controlled by technocrats. thoroughly trained in the application of scientific knowledge to the world's problems.
Before WWII, globalization was in the works worldwide but more narrowly engineered. Ever since the 17the Century, Europe ventured forth into the hinterlands of Asia and India and Africa for sake of trade and commerce for resources and raw materials that could be used in the manufacture of goods back home. Thus, the rise of commercial giant nations as the Netherlands, then England and France dominating the sea lanes, bearing all kinds of goods for exchange with the less
technologically advanced countries, but resource rich. What globalization added was that countries designated Third World could become just as advanced as the most advanced in the West--yes, and that includes even as advanced as the US! And, as more and more of once 'backward nations' are ever gaining in their wealth and power, the less there is need of a teacher-nation to dominate the world scene, bingo: the US loses its political posture as 'king of the hill.'
'Make the US the leader of the world again!'
So now, in this Presidential election year, there is a whole political group of "Conservatives" who yearn for the good old days when the United States "taught" the rest of the world how to live in accordance with the technocratic rules and principles developed through science. And they point to Iran in order to claim that there's still need for an all-knowing eye of scientific acumen. But if so, they have yet to demonstrate that it is the US who should assume that role in the modern era. And it is far less compelling that the US has something unique to offer, since the world already lives in technocracy.
Better is the model espoused by the Iranians that all nations should be treated as equal partners in a joint venture of cooperation to overcome social and political differences that threaten world peace and tranquility. According to this plan, no nation is 'king of the hill'; and differences existing among nations must be settled through negotiation whenever such differences need resolve. Interesting, this is precisely the position of President Obama.
Monday, January 4, 2016
Reformed Islam of today neither Sunni nor Shia'
While Reformed Muslims are from Sunni and Shia' traditions (or may identify with some other tradition) the distinctive feature of the movement as I conceive it (viewing it from a non-Muslim perspective) is its attempt to make Islam a vital force in today's cultural milieu. Specifically, women are not only to be acknowleged as equal to men but must be treated thusly in everyday affairs. Morevoer--importantly-- the concept of jihad as an aggressive, hostile response to supposed injustice has no longer relevance to the modern era. That is to say, tendencies to embrace traditional attitudes out of respect to the Islamic past that did aver behaviors (which may have been appropriate) in another cultural epoch have no place, I believe, in the modern practices and beliefs of a Reformed Islam.
Nevertheless, I heard, just today on TV, one or another analyst of the contemporary strife between these two major Islamic traditions contend that through the one or the other the believer can rightfully claim to be Reformist. To my mind, such an appellation amounts to nothing more than wishful thinking.
The point I'm trying to make is that just as in Christianity, the Reformation from Martin Luther on wrought significant attempts by enlightened clerics to overhaul Christianity so as to appear meaningful in the manifold of contemporary changing social climates, even so (I now contend) Islam must embrace a changing world with the Muslim changeless message of the importance of prayer and dedication to Allah in one's life--that we are called to draw nigh to the Creator. I can't emphasize enough that Islam as a religion, not as a political force, has a grounding in human hope and dedication to life-giving principles vital for mankind irrespective of cultural situations. Please, don't attempt to resurrect an Islamic past that no longer is relevant to the world of today! Focus upon the divinity Islam enables us to find, no matter our generation's situ.
Put succinctly, a Muslim has every right to claim the divine truth of Islam based on his religious encounters, but he ought not thereby to claim exclusivity for Islam as The Way to experience God. For there are many ways a person knows the Creator and eternal Life-Force; and a cloud of witnesses, only some of the Islamic faith, attest to God's power in their own lives.
Nevertheless, I heard, just today on TV, one or another analyst of the contemporary strife between these two major Islamic traditions contend that through the one or the other the believer can rightfully claim to be Reformist. To my mind, such an appellation amounts to nothing more than wishful thinking.
The point I'm trying to make is that just as in Christianity, the Reformation from Martin Luther on wrought significant attempts by enlightened clerics to overhaul Christianity so as to appear meaningful in the manifold of contemporary changing social climates, even so (I now contend) Islam must embrace a changing world with the Muslim changeless message of the importance of prayer and dedication to Allah in one's life--that we are called to draw nigh to the Creator. I can't emphasize enough that Islam as a religion, not as a political force, has a grounding in human hope and dedication to life-giving principles vital for mankind irrespective of cultural situations. Please, don't attempt to resurrect an Islamic past that no longer is relevant to the world of today! Focus upon the divinity Islam enables us to find, no matter our generation's situ.
Put succinctly, a Muslim has every right to claim the divine truth of Islam based on his religious encounters, but he ought not thereby to claim exclusivity for Islam as The Way to experience God. For there are many ways a person knows the Creator and eternal Life-Force; and a cloud of witnesses, only some of the Islamic faith, attest to God's power in their own lives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)