Trump, a legend in his own mind.
https://www.thisisinsider.com/trump-unga-un-speech-laughter-video-2018-9
I am the greatest, Billy the Kid, or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K3DI07Ibb4
Trump is a protectionist, and thinks the US is the greatest country in the world, a definition of patriotism. He is not the leader of the free world but rather a comic character.
Oh well. Emmanuel Macron is much more of a natural leader. He knows what he wants, and goes after it. He is usually right also, but that is sort of irrelevant.
Tuesday, September 25, 2018
Friday, September 21, 2018
Revisionist History
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/09/20/alberta-course-asked-students-about-positives-of-residential-schools_a_23534319/
The purpose of the residential schools was to provide education to the natives so that they could become useful citizens of Canada, as envisioned by the early politicians. This was at a time when you could shoot a native without danger of any charges, at least in the area I grew up in.
I recall a time that I went for a beer with my brother-in-law, not long after he had been in a traffic accident on a dusty road in Saskatchewan, where two Indians had died. He was greeted with something like: Gerald, I hear you killed two Indians, let me buy you a beer...
I will remind you all that the residential schools were not just for natives; but also the whites from small places where there were no schools available. I was fortune enough to have been dropped on the earth in a area where there were schools, but remote enough that some more remote children were billeted around, and went to school with us. It was a public school, not religious school. I got to know about residential schools from the stories that some told of a few years of religious residential schools, near the end of residential schools.
It was a desperate time and area, life was not easy. We had no power, phones; Heat was wood and some coal at night, when it was real cold. Father would buy a rail car of coal, and sell most of it off. We would keep about 4 pickup loads for the winter. Anyway...
Those were different times, and the was much discussion about the native problems, should we just let them die off, or should we help them, and how should we help. Education was seen as the long term solution. There was not many of them, unlike now. They have reproduced at a much higher rate than we whites. The US history says they tried to make slaves out of theirs; but that had not worked. As a culture they would rather die than work; they were considered to be worthless. That was the common opinion where and when I was raised. I do not hold that blanket opinion now, but I recognize that time management and mathematics are not part of their culture. Many think that they are special because they are native, and we took their land. We may have, but it was from their ancestors, and they became a concurred race. Get over it and figure out how to live in today's society, or live on your reserves as your forefathers did, where 50 years of age was old, and life was cruel, brutish and short. That is reality, not revisionist.
Well now you want reconciliation, and revisionism. Get over it, we the existing population, will never accept that. You will need for us to die off first. Same with immigration. It is all too much. Change can only happen so fast, and the world is over populated already. Stop reproducing for growth, only replacement can occur.
The purpose of the residential schools was to provide education to the natives so that they could become useful citizens of Canada, as envisioned by the early politicians. This was at a time when you could shoot a native without danger of any charges, at least in the area I grew up in.
I recall a time that I went for a beer with my brother-in-law, not long after he had been in a traffic accident on a dusty road in Saskatchewan, where two Indians had died. He was greeted with something like: Gerald, I hear you killed two Indians, let me buy you a beer...
I will remind you all that the residential schools were not just for natives; but also the whites from small places where there were no schools available. I was fortune enough to have been dropped on the earth in a area where there were schools, but remote enough that some more remote children were billeted around, and went to school with us. It was a public school, not religious school. I got to know about residential schools from the stories that some told of a few years of religious residential schools, near the end of residential schools.
It was a desperate time and area, life was not easy. We had no power, phones; Heat was wood and some coal at night, when it was real cold. Father would buy a rail car of coal, and sell most of it off. We would keep about 4 pickup loads for the winter. Anyway...
Those were different times, and the was much discussion about the native problems, should we just let them die off, or should we help them, and how should we help. Education was seen as the long term solution. There was not many of them, unlike now. They have reproduced at a much higher rate than we whites. The US history says they tried to make slaves out of theirs; but that had not worked. As a culture they would rather die than work; they were considered to be worthless. That was the common opinion where and when I was raised. I do not hold that blanket opinion now, but I recognize that time management and mathematics are not part of their culture. Many think that they are special because they are native, and we took their land. We may have, but it was from their ancestors, and they became a concurred race. Get over it and figure out how to live in today's society, or live on your reserves as your forefathers did, where 50 years of age was old, and life was cruel, brutish and short. That is reality, not revisionist.
Well now you want reconciliation, and revisionism. Get over it, we the existing population, will never accept that. You will need for us to die off first. Same with immigration. It is all too much. Change can only happen so fast, and the world is over populated already. Stop reproducing for growth, only replacement can occur.
Wednesday, September 19, 2018
Deep Ignorance
Deep Ignorance or deep seeded ignorance or deep seated ignorance is the state of total oblivion to reality. It is the condition that occurs with denial of climate change and religion. It is, for those with the condition, a blissful state of illusion or delusion. It is the state of many flat earth people, living in a world of ignorance.
How do we deal with family that live in such a world? Ignore them, avoid them, go live my life without any interaction from with them? Zero interaction is likely the best way. Estranged.
How do we deal with family that live in such a world? Ignore them, avoid them, go live my life without any interaction from with them? Zero interaction is likely the best way. Estranged.
Friday, September 14, 2018
Letter to new atheist
https://www.atheistrev.com/2007/05/letter-to-new-atheist.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+AtheistRevolution+%28Atheist+Revolution%29
got me thinking about my coming to realize that I was an atheist. I think that I realized that god did not care about people about the same time that I realized that there was no Santa. It was all just concepts to avoid reality, and the thinking about how savage, cruel, and short life could be. Praise the Lord, an avoidance of reality method of getting through life. This offers great consolation, comfort, and ignorance of reality. Which is more important to you? I like knowledge, reality and truth.
For many years I understood that gods were concepts, and if I could believe those concepts, than I could use the benefits offered, like sobriety. But AA/OA cannot work for those who do not believe, unless the social aspects are enough to keep one sober in AA. OA is a lost cause, there were not enough people who were living in the program around here to keep me away from the food. Those who are using drugs and keeping the weight off are not good company to be around. Finally it became apparent that that approch was a waste of time.
Aristotle was good at describing the human condition without politically correct restraint. Aristotle describes the problem as; the nonrational desires are stronger than the rational desires; we do not have absolute control of our nonrational desires, aka of our bodies. Free will is just that freedom of our will, our thinking, our opinions, not control over our bodies. Many do not have complete free will, that is we know it is wrong or undesirable to do, but we do it anyway. We are unable to overcome the nonrational desires. It is a problem only for some people over some things. Oh well, in the end we all just die anyway. Consider the overweight, that are unable to stop eating enough to maintain normal weight.
Christianity does not provide such understandings. It runs over such thoughts with concepts like truth and replaces that with feel good concepts; god's will, heaven, afterlife, and other bullshit concepts. It is a block to understanding, and promotes acceptance of bad ideas, consolation and comfort rather than reality. It is a block to progress.
Ethics are relative and adaptive; that is there are no absolutes. There are few objective ethic premises, but many causal-result statement that the rational person should accept. Each child should have 16 gggrandparents. If we want to live a life of peace we need to allow others to live in a similar manner. Each person must be free to live well, and freely. Only associate with those who think similarly, aka like minded peoples; avoid people who exert a negative influence, associate only with those who are a positive influence, and the remainder of the Buddhist mangala sutra, (or suttra) ,not the Hindu wedding chain/necklace.
Reality is a bitter pill much of the time, but reality is reality. We all die. Impermanence. Non-self, we all learned from our ancestors and others, until we filter and come to own our beliefs, and then we are responsible for every thought, belief and action. This is similar to MacQuarrie Existentialism in that his concept is that after we make the decision to keep on living, we are responsible for every thought, belief and action, but I digress. The essential point is that after we own our thoughts, concepts, beliefs, we become responsible for them. Society also forces us to accept responsibility for our actions that effect others, and tries to suggest we are responsible for our actions that are driven by our nonrational desires, which we have no control over. Bullshit. These are beyond our absolute control, even if other impose this concept on us. Have you ever seen a rehabilitated psychopath or sociopath? It is just not reality. Rehabilitated overeaters do exist, but they struggle or obsess until death.
got me thinking about my coming to realize that I was an atheist. I think that I realized that god did not care about people about the same time that I realized that there was no Santa. It was all just concepts to avoid reality, and the thinking about how savage, cruel, and short life could be. Praise the Lord, an avoidance of reality method of getting through life. This offers great consolation, comfort, and ignorance of reality. Which is more important to you? I like knowledge, reality and truth.
For many years I understood that gods were concepts, and if I could believe those concepts, than I could use the benefits offered, like sobriety. But AA/OA cannot work for those who do not believe, unless the social aspects are enough to keep one sober in AA. OA is a lost cause, there were not enough people who were living in the program around here to keep me away from the food. Those who are using drugs and keeping the weight off are not good company to be around. Finally it became apparent that that approch was a waste of time.
Aristotle was good at describing the human condition without politically correct restraint. Aristotle describes the problem as; the nonrational desires are stronger than the rational desires; we do not have absolute control of our nonrational desires, aka of our bodies. Free will is just that freedom of our will, our thinking, our opinions, not control over our bodies. Many do not have complete free will, that is we know it is wrong or undesirable to do, but we do it anyway. We are unable to overcome the nonrational desires. It is a problem only for some people over some things. Oh well, in the end we all just die anyway. Consider the overweight, that are unable to stop eating enough to maintain normal weight.
Christianity does not provide such understandings. It runs over such thoughts with concepts like truth and replaces that with feel good concepts; god's will, heaven, afterlife, and other bullshit concepts. It is a block to understanding, and promotes acceptance of bad ideas, consolation and comfort rather than reality. It is a block to progress.
Ethics are relative and adaptive; that is there are no absolutes. There are few objective ethic premises, but many causal-result statement that the rational person should accept. Each child should have 16 gggrandparents. If we want to live a life of peace we need to allow others to live in a similar manner. Each person must be free to live well, and freely. Only associate with those who think similarly, aka like minded peoples; avoid people who exert a negative influence, associate only with those who are a positive influence, and the remainder of the Buddhist mangala sutra, (or suttra) ,not the Hindu wedding chain/necklace.
Reality is a bitter pill much of the time, but reality is reality. We all die. Impermanence. Non-self, we all learned from our ancestors and others, until we filter and come to own our beliefs, and then we are responsible for every thought, belief and action. This is similar to MacQuarrie Existentialism in that his concept is that after we make the decision to keep on living, we are responsible for every thought, belief and action, but I digress. The essential point is that after we own our thoughts, concepts, beliefs, we become responsible for them. Society also forces us to accept responsibility for our actions that effect others, and tries to suggest we are responsible for our actions that are driven by our nonrational desires, which we have no control over. Bullshit. These are beyond our absolute control, even if other impose this concept on us. Have you ever seen a rehabilitated psychopath or sociopath? It is just not reality. Rehabilitated overeaters do exist, but they struggle or obsess until death.
Thursday, September 6, 2018
Politics
Politics
Opinion, opinion, all is opinion. Was that Marcus Aurelius that said that or something like that. It is a real life test of a change of law, to hell with the people it hurts. It is the damage that governments do to the people that is really bad. They know only some, it is the unknown unknowns really do the damage.
What right does anyone have to impose their opinion onto others? The rule of law... bullshit. It is their opinion. Law is a concept that allows one group of people to abuse others without fear of reprisals. But if the country fractures, what then? Civil War?
Trump seems like he is headed to annihilate NAFTA. So what damage will that do? First, we will all be driven Japanese/Korean cars. But many of us do now. China will become the supplier of choice in Canada for many things. Oh well. The only constant is change. Fuck Trump.
Today an Op-ed piece has created the news of the day. Oh well.
What right do any group of non government people have in trying to force their opinions on other groups. Morals are often just traditions of the group, and these are adaptive; that is they change with the perceived conditions. So morals, ethics are just opinions of a group. So are religions, so are ideologies, and even philosophy, even tho the last two often start with a couple of premises and build from there. If we accept that a is true, then it follows that something else must be true. It is the next step, the "therefore we all should" that is in dispute.
Is the old ought (should) from an is that creates the problem. But what do I know. I think I will go dig some holes.
Opinion, opinion, all is opinion. Was that Marcus Aurelius that said that or something like that. It is a real life test of a change of law, to hell with the people it hurts. It is the damage that governments do to the people that is really bad. They know only some, it is the unknown unknowns really do the damage.
What right does anyone have to impose their opinion onto others? The rule of law... bullshit. It is their opinion. Law is a concept that allows one group of people to abuse others without fear of reprisals. But if the country fractures, what then? Civil War?
Trump seems like he is headed to annihilate NAFTA. So what damage will that do? First, we will all be driven Japanese/Korean cars. But many of us do now. China will become the supplier of choice in Canada for many things. Oh well. The only constant is change. Fuck Trump.
Today an Op-ed piece has created the news of the day. Oh well.
What right do any group of non government people have in trying to force their opinions on other groups. Morals are often just traditions of the group, and these are adaptive; that is they change with the perceived conditions. So morals, ethics are just opinions of a group. So are religions, so are ideologies, and even philosophy, even tho the last two often start with a couple of premises and build from there. If we accept that a is true, then it follows that something else must be true. It is the next step, the "therefore we all should" that is in dispute.
Is the old ought (should) from an is that creates the problem. But what do I know. I think I will go dig some holes.
Wednesday, September 5, 2018
Once more
https://centerforinquiry.org/blog/in-god-we-rust-holy-hats-pregame-prayer/
It comes from the Greek Republic. Or Latin Vox Populi, Vox Dei. Approximately the voice of the people is the voice of god.
The voice of the people is god, and in that god we trust.This is not the christian god but the voice of the people... well maybe it was or not.
It comes from the Greek Republic. Or Latin Vox Populi, Vox Dei. Approximately the voice of the people is the voice of god.
The voice of the people is god, and in that god we trust.This is not the christian god but the voice of the people... well maybe it was or not.
Sunday, September 2, 2018
Free Market and Game Theory
Free Market and Game Theory
Every Conservative seems to believe in a free market. But game theory shows that free market are not the best scenario when there are many producers and many consumers. That drive prices too low in oversupply, and it is only good for consumers. It times of short supply, it is good for the producers. But the producers make decisions to get into/leave/forced out, and the market is in flux all the time. Not good if it takes years to adjust your output. How long are you willing to not make wages? How cheap are you willing to live? Free markets do not work where the ability to supply exceeds the demand. Marketing boards or Quota system produces a much fairer to the producer but not for the consumer. Consider the milk situation in Canada verse the US.
This is exactly what is predicted by game theory now. The Conservatives have a wrong plank in there platform. Oh well, I am a centralist, and look at issues one at a time. No party represents me very well.
We had a regulated electrical price system in Alberta but the conservatives applied their free market wrong concept to it, and now we pay through the nose every month. Games just do not work without rules. Oh well, wrong policies are common.
The world is overpopulated. That is a fact that cannot be disputed when we consider the carbon dioxide level. It should be one of the criteria in any immigration policy. With Canada open borders, we are letting in too many people without skills, and then supporting them, when they cannot earn a living in our economy.But Trudeau know best. On Immigration, he is over the line. On refuges, who are not willing to follow our laws... do not know our laws...he is over the line. What is one to do? Vote Green?
Every Conservative seems to believe in a free market. But game theory shows that free market are not the best scenario when there are many producers and many consumers. That drive prices too low in oversupply, and it is only good for consumers. It times of short supply, it is good for the producers. But the producers make decisions to get into/leave/forced out, and the market is in flux all the time. Not good if it takes years to adjust your output. How long are you willing to not make wages? How cheap are you willing to live? Free markets do not work where the ability to supply exceeds the demand. Marketing boards or Quota system produces a much fairer to the producer but not for the consumer. Consider the milk situation in Canada verse the US.
This is exactly what is predicted by game theory now. The Conservatives have a wrong plank in there platform. Oh well, I am a centralist, and look at issues one at a time. No party represents me very well.
We had a regulated electrical price system in Alberta but the conservatives applied their free market wrong concept to it, and now we pay through the nose every month. Games just do not work without rules. Oh well, wrong policies are common.
The world is overpopulated. That is a fact that cannot be disputed when we consider the carbon dioxide level. It should be one of the criteria in any immigration policy. With Canada open borders, we are letting in too many people without skills, and then supporting them, when they cannot earn a living in our economy.But Trudeau know best. On Immigration, he is over the line. On refuges, who are not willing to follow our laws... do not know our laws...he is over the line. What is one to do? Vote Green?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)