It was delightful day on the meadows of Fort Drum, the grass gilded by dandelions, bright and shimmering, reflecting the suns golden light. And then somthing happened, I looked directly into the sun, which is regularly discouraged, but until now, I never knew why. What I saw was something I will never forget: Nigel Farage's face beaming down at me, with sun rays protruding out of his buoyant eyeballs.
Some people see the face of Jesus carved into the clouds, some see the Virgin Mary melded into the bark on a tree, I see Nigel Farage in the sun, emitting solar blasts of UV radiation outwardly, penetrating the ozone layer and causing global warming.
Some people see the face of Jesus carved into the clouds, some see the Virgin Mary melded into the bark on a tree, I see Nigel Farage in the sun, emitting solar blasts of UV radiation outwardly, penetrating the ozone layer and causing global warming.
Now, I’m a scientific man, and I surely don’t believe that Nigel is “the Sun God”, or that the almighty celestial beings are in favor of Brexit… right? The most compelling evidence based on my profound scientific intellect points to the whole thing being what in EU circles is referred to as an “unhappy coincidence”. I heard that flowers in Brussels are wilting because they are boycotting photosynthesis. With the European elections so close, I hear sunblock and umbrellas are flying off the shelves! Word has it that John Corbyn has a draft proposal to ban solar, says we need more coal and natural gas!
All jokes aside I wanted to mention a few things about UK, US and EU and our happy future together. First of all I don’t quite understand why the Brexit question has become so much of a partisan issue in the US. Why wouldn't Nancy Pelosi want a trade deal with UK? She says she will block such legislation if Brexit occurs. What do the Democrats have against brexit? Well, for one thing Donald Trump is known to admire Nigel Farage, I will get back to you on the rest. The US is an ally of Europe, but Europe has a protected trade zone in the single market, and the people of the UK voted out off the restrictive measures within the EU, out of limited control over their own immigration laws, massive extranational payments in the 10's of billions, and restrictive trade laws.
Many are very much in favor of “Remain” as you can see, the campaign goes on years after Brexit is voted through. Many times the whims of the ‘remainers’ are nothing more than misdirected social whims to ‘be a part of something’. When the EU was founded Charles Degaul was quoted as saying he wished to 'see Britain naked' referring apparently to the unfavorable circumstances of their membership. Even from the outset, the UK was not willing to sacrifice sterling currency for the Euro. Nigel Farage says that the name ‘Nigel’ has fallen considerably in the ranking of baby names since the historic rise in his party’s prominence, although I contribute that to his overall controversial nature. However, the sun is not the only place you’ll see Nigel Farage’s face emerging nowadays as he has insinuated his 'virulent' ideology into the networks of American media as well, and is at the present an official ‘Fox News Contributor’.
The European Union is a system of countries who combine resources into a kind of ‘supra-bureaucracy’. These are old world rich countries that comprise the crux of the Union, and the bureaucracy of this conglomeration will suffer a loss of income by the departure of the UK. So there are arguments on both sides as to the future of economic and cultural affinities between these nations, as there have been countless other times throughout history. I’ve often though to myself, ‘what if in the pre-columbian days Europe was dominated by a single power?’ well that single power would most likely have been the sole power in America as well, as we had not developed into a major military superpower by that point. But Europe was always a balance of power, they never developed as a cohesive system of complacent nations, like the states in America. "I want what you have" seems to be a mindset which plays a large roll in this playing out of events.
My overall political ideology is very much small federal government, i think about 4 or 5 percent of GDP on the military is good, and that is to say it is good in the preamble to a potential global military conflict. I’m not in favor of an extraordinary number of committees, bureau’s, expositions, hearings, and layers upon layers of red tape and complications. Each complication and outer sphere of the planetary object gets a government credit card, and of course has to fly around the world because it's not like we have video conferencing or phones.
So listening to Nigel Farage, and comparing his rhetoric to the conflicting views of most of the ‘cultured’ class of writers, including one of my favorites “Misha Glenning”, I’m struck by the insistence and urgency by those who want to remain. Glenning hates Trump, and I can see the effect of being a former chief correspondent for the BBC and and the journalistic tradition of being anti trump in the European realm rubbing off on him. I also remember in his book about Yugoslavia when Germany persuaded the UK to recognize an independent Croatia, he was personally harassed and ridiculed by Serbians who smeared him with the actions of his government so he is aware of the social impact of these decisions and how they translated all the way down to the individual. Are Brits going to lose respect in Europe after an exit?
One of the things I’ve noticed about these types of outlets, fearful of everything, fearful of a brexit, fearful of European retribution and being ‘isolated’, fearful that Trump is racist and fomenting violent nationalist uprisings, fearful that Farage is in league with the Russians to weaken Europe, o b s e s s i o n with his funding out of paranoia because they cannot understand the other point of view. This kind of thinking is like the social equivalent of “oh my god, can you believe what he's wearing?” I guess a lot of media is all about prosecuting these kind of ‘thought crimes’ and accusing people of being racist, homophobic, traitors, and having the kind of aggressive masculinity that makes for horrible domestic and foreign policy. And they are always interested in staying in “together” contracts, the TPP, the Iran Deal, the EU, NAFTA, the Paris Accord and Obamacare to name a few. They want to be ‘together’ which is really not an unnatural urge in a world that can be so cold and unforgiving.
There is a conspiracy book out called Behold a Pale White Horse that talks about all kinds of stuff like aliens controlling humans and the author eventually was shot by federal marshals executing an arrest warrant for assault with a deadly weapon. I remember him talking about nations being like wombs, and that got me thinking about the kind of psychological aspects of government and citizenship. In the book Milton William Cooper talks about some wild and perceptive perspectives which are refreshing and laughable at the same time, much like Noam Chomsky's work although not similar. "Your either with us or your against us" seems like an appropriate lable for this mentality of "Europeaness", in a womb, your in a protective envirnment which shields you from outside forces, and once the UK leaves that environment, it is going to be seen by many as a potential threat by virtue of this sociological reality. Wanting to be taken care of and not exposed to risk is a fueling factor for socialism and cummunalism as a whole, and deep conformist urges tell people to 'blend in' to attain strength in numbers and a kind of public anonymity which has shielded people evolutionary against the many devastating barbaric atrocities which preclude our modern times. We hear a lot about how the west is 'individualistic', I not only do not think this is the case, I think that conformity is a deep obsession in society, if you think about it isn't one of the extraordinary number of insults that we throw around at one another "weird"? Even being called non conformist (weird) is an insult that deprives one of the feeling of acceptance and togetherness. Miulton Cooper talks about how people are willing to sacrifice so much for the feeling of being in the womb, or being taken care of by 'higher powers', you think of the exorbitant price that UK pays for EU membership as the price of admission into the club that ensures it's social popularity and security.
If you think about it the more insecure and scared people or 'entities' are about being 'alone' or 'disconnected' the higher price you can charge them for have the token membership in the exclusive club.
In giant countries like the US we don’t often interact with other countries in our daily life, and we don’t have powerful military's on our borders, so our conception of nationhood may be a bit skewed as opposed to average European nations, but the alone mentality being replaced with a ‘together’ or 'womb'; mentality is a great way to go, “if you hold too tightly, your gonna lose control!” As is usually the case with governments. They just cannot help but spend way more than they make, even if they make ONE TRILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR. They hold on too tightly, and take too much for the central government, even if the state governments can do the same job for half as much. The EU reached too far into UK’s pockets changing their laws and values, and the UK understandably would not want to be enmeshed.
Many are very much in favor of “Remain” as you can see, the campaign goes on years after Brexit is voted through. Many times the whims of the ‘remainers’ are nothing more than misdirected social whims to ‘be a part of something’. When the EU was founded Charles Degaul was quoted as saying he wished to 'see Britain naked' referring apparently to the unfavorable circumstances of their membership. Even from the outset, the UK was not willing to sacrifice sterling currency for the Euro. Nigel Farage says that the name ‘Nigel’ has fallen considerably in the ranking of baby names since the historic rise in his party’s prominence, although I contribute that to his overall controversial nature. However, the sun is not the only place you’ll see Nigel Farage’s face emerging nowadays as he has insinuated his 'virulent' ideology into the networks of American media as well, and is at the present an official ‘Fox News Contributor’.
The European Union is a system of countries who combine resources into a kind of ‘supra-bureaucracy’. These are old world rich countries that comprise the crux of the Union, and the bureaucracy of this conglomeration will suffer a loss of income by the departure of the UK. So there are arguments on both sides as to the future of economic and cultural affinities between these nations, as there have been countless other times throughout history. I’ve often though to myself, ‘what if in the pre-columbian days Europe was dominated by a single power?’ well that single power would most likely have been the sole power in America as well, as we had not developed into a major military superpower by that point. But Europe was always a balance of power, they never developed as a cohesive system of complacent nations, like the states in America. "I want what you have" seems to be a mindset which plays a large roll in this playing out of events.
My overall political ideology is very much small federal government, i think about 4 or 5 percent of GDP on the military is good, and that is to say it is good in the preamble to a potential global military conflict. I’m not in favor of an extraordinary number of committees, bureau’s, expositions, hearings, and layers upon layers of red tape and complications. Each complication and outer sphere of the planetary object gets a government credit card, and of course has to fly around the world because it's not like we have video conferencing or phones.
So listening to Nigel Farage, and comparing his rhetoric to the conflicting views of most of the ‘cultured’ class of writers, including one of my favorites “Misha Glenning”, I’m struck by the insistence and urgency by those who want to remain. Glenning hates Trump, and I can see the effect of being a former chief correspondent for the BBC and and the journalistic tradition of being anti trump in the European realm rubbing off on him. I also remember in his book about Yugoslavia when Germany persuaded the UK to recognize an independent Croatia, he was personally harassed and ridiculed by Serbians who smeared him with the actions of his government so he is aware of the social impact of these decisions and how they translated all the way down to the individual. Are Brits going to lose respect in Europe after an exit?
One of the things I’ve noticed about these types of outlets, fearful of everything, fearful of a brexit, fearful of European retribution and being ‘isolated’, fearful that Trump is racist and fomenting violent nationalist uprisings, fearful that Farage is in league with the Russians to weaken Europe, o b s e s s i o n with his funding out of paranoia because they cannot understand the other point of view. This kind of thinking is like the social equivalent of “oh my god, can you believe what he's wearing?” I guess a lot of media is all about prosecuting these kind of ‘thought crimes’ and accusing people of being racist, homophobic, traitors, and having the kind of aggressive masculinity that makes for horrible domestic and foreign policy. And they are always interested in staying in “together” contracts, the TPP, the Iran Deal, the EU, NAFTA, the Paris Accord and Obamacare to name a few. They want to be ‘together’ which is really not an unnatural urge in a world that can be so cold and unforgiving.
There is a conspiracy book out called Behold a Pale White Horse that talks about all kinds of stuff like aliens controlling humans and the author eventually was shot by federal marshals executing an arrest warrant for assault with a deadly weapon. I remember him talking about nations being like wombs, and that got me thinking about the kind of psychological aspects of government and citizenship. In the book Milton William Cooper talks about some wild and perceptive perspectives which are refreshing and laughable at the same time, much like Noam Chomsky's work although not similar. "Your either with us or your against us" seems like an appropriate lable for this mentality of "Europeaness", in a womb, your in a protective envirnment which shields you from outside forces, and once the UK leaves that environment, it is going to be seen by many as a potential threat by virtue of this sociological reality. Wanting to be taken care of and not exposed to risk is a fueling factor for socialism and cummunalism as a whole, and deep conformist urges tell people to 'blend in' to attain strength in numbers and a kind of public anonymity which has shielded people evolutionary against the many devastating barbaric atrocities which preclude our modern times. We hear a lot about how the west is 'individualistic', I not only do not think this is the case, I think that conformity is a deep obsession in society, if you think about it isn't one of the extraordinary number of insults that we throw around at one another "weird"? Even being called non conformist (weird) is an insult that deprives one of the feeling of acceptance and togetherness. Miulton Cooper talks about how people are willing to sacrifice so much for the feeling of being in the womb, or being taken care of by 'higher powers', you think of the exorbitant price that UK pays for EU membership as the price of admission into the club that ensures it's social popularity and security.
If you think about it the more insecure and scared people or 'entities' are about being 'alone' or 'disconnected' the higher price you can charge them for have the token membership in the exclusive club.
In giant countries like the US we don’t often interact with other countries in our daily life, and we don’t have powerful military's on our borders, so our conception of nationhood may be a bit skewed as opposed to average European nations, but the alone mentality being replaced with a ‘together’ or 'womb'; mentality is a great way to go, “if you hold too tightly, your gonna lose control!” As is usually the case with governments. They just cannot help but spend way more than they make, even if they make ONE TRILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR. They hold on too tightly, and take too much for the central government, even if the state governments can do the same job for half as much. The EU reached too far into UK’s pockets changing their laws and values, and the UK understandably would not want to be enmeshed.
What's so complicated about looking at Brexit from an Amerfrican point of view that your not sure with whom your loyalties are supposed to lie. As Americans we are assumedly in favor of our allies, notably UK Germany France- On the other hand, The EU is a competing marketplace with the US, and is notorious for being a difficult market to penetrate. One of the potential gains from a brexit is to bring the Britt's closer to the Americans, seeing as though our cultural, including linguistic and shared historic ties are more suited for a teamwork mentality. Obviously the European alliance is going to keep going, I don't believe that Macron's assertion that Europe needs an army to defend against the US is a far reaching realistic assertion, and I don't believe Merekls numerous quips about 'Europe forging it's own path' and separating from US proximity are meaningful sentiments as pertaining to the long-term health of the alliance. Europe has it's own voice in international community they are not fused to the US hip. The US military does not aspire to erect threatening regimes in Europe, the truth is that some of these members of the unique political classes of Europe understandably feel dejected by the overbearing Trump. There is nuance and subtlety in the convictions , assertions, and commonplace beliefs in regards to socioeconomic refinement in European circles that Trump understands as constituting an elitist superiority complex over himself and America which is an obvious case in point for many based on the reaction of Europe to his Presidency. He tramples into the sandbox party with his own toys and gets to work proving they they are shinier and newer than his competition, whoever they might be. This is deeply unsettling to many but it does not speak to the future of an alliance that is much greater than what should be comparably insignificant self interested economic arrangements, or the verbal rhetoric of more or less liberal voices that cause an overstated friction.
I've always liked this movie "Good Will Hunting" without spelling the whole movie out for you Basically Matt Damon is a super smart janitor at the college and this scene illustrates his ability to 'punch above his weight' at the local watering holes while competing with other males for mating privileges. This scene is a little bit irksome for me though because as you have read I am always jabbering on about the recent books I'm reading and tieing them into whatever kind of propaganda I'm trying to brainwash people with at any given time. I'm also a strong proponent of talking about what you read, as a better way to understand what you read, and also as a kind of mental replenishment that does something for the availability of the information, it kind of decompresses it and forms it into more easily used information. Of course it is also nice to talk with people who have input about what you have read but that ship sailed for me because I never find anybody to talk with me about my interests because apparently they do not exist.
In this video Matt Damon in verbally pummeling a suitor by chastising him for regurgitating the information that he read from class, accusing him of plagiarism and really trampling his soul into the muddy undercurrents of life around the whereabouts of where I stay in the land of getting nothing for all my hard fought efforts. "The memory monsters" around these kinds of places are always remembering biting bits of useful information including weaponized social tactics and offensive gestures to gain the upper hand against your efforts at forward momentum. I always in a way way felt like 'Will Hunting" from this movie, I'm more on the intellectual side as I rattle off pages of history, and use words above my pay-grade, even though I dont get any recognition and it hasn't gotten me anywhere in life, a life which has pretty much been a failed endeavor. Anyways i'm going to talk about the Yugoslav crisis in my next section so this is my introduction to that.
I've always liked this movie "Good Will Hunting" without spelling the whole movie out for you Basically Matt Damon is a super smart janitor at the college and this scene illustrates his ability to 'punch above his weight' at the local watering holes while competing with other males for mating privileges. This scene is a little bit irksome for me though because as you have read I am always jabbering on about the recent books I'm reading and tieing them into whatever kind of propaganda I'm trying to brainwash people with at any given time. I'm also a strong proponent of talking about what you read, as a better way to understand what you read, and also as a kind of mental replenishment that does something for the availability of the information, it kind of decompresses it and forms it into more easily used information. Of course it is also nice to talk with people who have input about what you have read but that ship sailed for me because I never find anybody to talk with me about my interests because apparently they do not exist.
In this video Matt Damon in verbally pummeling a suitor by chastising him for regurgitating the information that he read from class, accusing him of plagiarism and really trampling his soul into the muddy undercurrents of life around the whereabouts of where I stay in the land of getting nothing for all my hard fought efforts. "The memory monsters" around these kinds of places are always remembering biting bits of useful information including weaponized social tactics and offensive gestures to gain the upper hand against your efforts at forward momentum. I always in a way way felt like 'Will Hunting" from this movie, I'm more on the intellectual side as I rattle off pages of history, and use words above my pay-grade, even though I dont get any recognition and it hasn't gotten me anywhere in life, a life which has pretty much been a failed endeavor. Anyways i'm going to talk about the Yugoslav crisis in my next section so this is my introduction to that.
I think their should be a celebration in Europe that peace has been so long lived, even in eastern Europe and the Balkans, and in the Baltic states we are not seeing an escalation. Nationalistic clashes are understandably worries that have historical routes, now it’s a good thing to feel pride about your nation, your city, and your culture, but situational cross cultural separatism drives crises like those in Yugoslavia, and Chechnya. This is one of the reasons why ancient empires like the Persians and the Chinese transported dominated peoples across the empire, generally to conquer territories you get some factions with previous rivalries on your side then you crush your shared enemies, and transport the dominated peoples to a far off land where harmony can be reached, at least in theory.
I’m surprised in 1991 NATO didn’t jump into the Yugoslav fray earlier in the conflict, and I am surprised at European reluctance to act to stop the violence, because to be honest, how often do internationally mediated cease fires ever give way to lasting peace? They are temporary bandaides. In fact on the surface I am pleased with the American response to renewed aggression in 1999 between Bosnian Albanians and Serbians by bombing Belgrade until they came to an understanding. It was the beginning of a second Yugoslav war since 1991. It makes so much sense after reading about the grueling atrocities and mass killings, blockading and starving Sarajevo, raping 20,000 women, setting children on fire, sending mortar rounds into a bread line in a blockaded and starving city (Sarajevo), an act which then gets sent up for UN investigation to determine whether Bosnia is 'bombing its own people for PR’.
4 years of this grueling conflict from 91-95 wanted to carry on into the 2000’s, with a second round, the NATO forces acted without Russia and China’s approval on the UN permanent security council,- it's my understanding that Yeltsin didn’t want to talk with Milosevic because he had supported the coup against Gorbachev, even though the Russians did want to end the sanctions regime against Serbia so that it could afford displacement of its Bosnian community, the Bosnian Serbs who were even more militant than the Serbian Serbs, or something like that.
The hatred of the NATO action is another case from my little hypothesis about the fear of anything that is stronger than you are, just keep slapping it away and disagreeing until you become right by virtue of the loudness of your voice. Run a remedial search on YouTube of the NATO bombing and you will see that every video is about the horrible nature of it, yet none admit that yes, it probably did prevent another genocide, mass atrocities, including rapes, burning people alive, kidnapping politicians, and murdering journalists. The journalists themselves wont admit that NATO saved them because they are busy vibrating their keyboards into the shape of heavily balanced remarks comparing the scientific nuanced frameworks they developed against the strong, easily understood backbone of force. "Vance–Owen plan", the "Carrington–Cutileiro" peace plan, the "Owen Stoltenburg" plan and finally the "Dayton plan" named after Dayton Ohio where Clinton was getting busy.
You do what your mom and dad say, but if you have twelve mom and dads squabbling around in the pantry disagreeing with each other, trying to solve the conflict by striking a balance that is not possible when you have hundreds of thousands of blood revenge rivalries burning with white rage to the point you are having a incomparable tendency to mutilate the faces of the victims, or burn the inmate camp intern alive and put his body underneath the window of the retention gym, before forcing a mother to shove a pistol down her sons throat and pull the trigger. These things you cant comprehend, in many cases because we are fortunate enough to not live in these ugly struggles for national dominance. SO the American Dayton plan had the risk of not working because the conflict started back up in 99, what are we supposed to do about it?
I’m surprised in 1991 NATO didn’t jump into the Yugoslav fray earlier in the conflict, and I am surprised at European reluctance to act to stop the violence, because to be honest, how often do internationally mediated cease fires ever give way to lasting peace? They are temporary bandaides. In fact on the surface I am pleased with the American response to renewed aggression in 1999 between Bosnian Albanians and Serbians by bombing Belgrade until they came to an understanding. It was the beginning of a second Yugoslav war since 1991. It makes so much sense after reading about the grueling atrocities and mass killings, blockading and starving Sarajevo, raping 20,000 women, setting children on fire, sending mortar rounds into a bread line in a blockaded and starving city (Sarajevo), an act which then gets sent up for UN investigation to determine whether Bosnia is 'bombing its own people for PR’.
4 years of this grueling conflict from 91-95 wanted to carry on into the 2000’s, with a second round, the NATO forces acted without Russia and China’s approval on the UN permanent security council,- it's my understanding that Yeltsin didn’t want to talk with Milosevic because he had supported the coup against Gorbachev, even though the Russians did want to end the sanctions regime against Serbia so that it could afford displacement of its Bosnian community, the Bosnian Serbs who were even more militant than the Serbian Serbs, or something like that.
The hatred of the NATO action is another case from my little hypothesis about the fear of anything that is stronger than you are, just keep slapping it away and disagreeing until you become right by virtue of the loudness of your voice. Run a remedial search on YouTube of the NATO bombing and you will see that every video is about the horrible nature of it, yet none admit that yes, it probably did prevent another genocide, mass atrocities, including rapes, burning people alive, kidnapping politicians, and murdering journalists. The journalists themselves wont admit that NATO saved them because they are busy vibrating their keyboards into the shape of heavily balanced remarks comparing the scientific nuanced frameworks they developed against the strong, easily understood backbone of force. "Vance–Owen plan", the "Carrington–Cutileiro" peace plan, the "Owen Stoltenburg" plan and finally the "Dayton plan" named after Dayton Ohio where Clinton was getting busy.
You do what your mom and dad say, but if you have twelve mom and dads squabbling around in the pantry disagreeing with each other, trying to solve the conflict by striking a balance that is not possible when you have hundreds of thousands of blood revenge rivalries burning with white rage to the point you are having a incomparable tendency to mutilate the faces of the victims, or burn the inmate camp intern alive and put his body underneath the window of the retention gym, before forcing a mother to shove a pistol down her sons throat and pull the trigger. These things you cant comprehend, in many cases because we are fortunate enough to not live in these ugly struggles for national dominance. SO the American Dayton plan had the risk of not working because the conflict started back up in 99, what are we supposed to do about it?
This crap happens when you have the Nazi sympathizing Croatian “Ustasha’s” pitted against the Soviet backed Serbian “Chetniks” in WW2 enacting atrocities against each other including the genocide of Serbians by the Croatians in “jasenovic” concentrations camp. When Germany was defeated the communists with the help of General Tito overran “Yugoslavia” which prior to WW2 was a kingdom rife with discontent created by the Versailles treaty, even though it had been in poplar Slavic imagination since the 17th century. The Serbians were very communist and favored assumedly by the soviets and hence were very influential in other governments in the 6 Yugoslavia republics, Montenegro, Bosnia Herzegovina, Serbia, Croatia, and Macedonia. No Albania was not in Yugoslavia even though it had major minorities in Macedonia and made up the majority of Kosovo, and in fact were major aggressors and targets of the Serbs. the Serbs developed a reputation for unfairly having authority in government from their minority positions, and gaining militant footholds in “Hrvatska vojna krajina” regions, which were ancient defensive lines used first by the Hapsburg empire to demarcate against the Ottoman empire, and later by the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
The Serbs allegedly had unfair control of Yugoslavia and after the death of the massively strong anti nationalist General Tito you could “cut the air with a knife” in Yugoslavia, because if you have ever met a Slav from this region they are extremely stubborn, masculine, and headstrong, they really have a kind of phenomena about them which is fascinating and is very much representative of the exact type of mindset rife for nationalist warrior ethos encouragement to put it very awkwardly.
Russia is definitely going to complain about the use of NATO in Yugoslavia, and you can definitely see the numerous RT pieces on YouTube labeling the bombing as a kind of war crime. But what I have a problem with in our modern society is the 'insta-labeling' of things as good or bad based on very primitive and ill informed judgments about the nature of their use. A representative democracy assumes the citizen has the fortitude to rationally and objectively gauge how they feel about things based on enough evidence, and the Yugoslav bombing gives a very easy target for the opponents of violence to condemn violence as a very simplistic act of 'good will'. Green deal treaties to save the earth are easy to jump on board with, they promise to save the earth and enmesh our country with all kinds of regulations and foreign control; but they give us access to the 'club' which according to the mouthpieces we need by any means possible. We are going green in society, we are saving more and more of the planet every year, especially since it makes economic sense to do so. I don't see why we need to completely overturn our economic model and introduce new taxes and foreign rule to produce clean energy, you just invest in R & D and keep moving forward; all the frenetic predictions about the planet ending by now have been false, I think we can wait a couple years for the technology to catch up with the Armageddon bandwagon proponents before Nigel Farage finally roasts us into our final grave.
People are rightfully concerned about the environment and conservation, and being an activist for this agenda is very laudable. I have been known to consider chloro-floro-carbons detrimental to the environment, those are the refrigerants that you get fined $40K for if you trash them into the environment. I dont think the correct future lies in the denial of human related climate change, but in the moderation of the panic- because scaring people into thinking the world is on fire is a very volatile proposition especially when combined with a political agenda that involves people spending even more money on a government that cannot be trusted to spend the money we already give it responsibly! And especially when that additional money will be used to curb our economy even further by increased regulations and restrictions. And especially since historically the ballooning of the bureaucratic state is likely to be rife with pay for play and corruption which is assumedly already rampant in our government especially in the contracting market that we have already seen with the failure of so many subsidized green enterprise with 0 profitability, huge government handouts, and conveniently have millionaires and billionaires sucking off of them like mosquitoes.
I personally like Ocasio Cortez, I find her refreshing, I think she is pretty, and i like the casual nature that approaches politics with. I like the fact that you can go from waitressing to joining congress in this country, and the fierce rhetoric that she growls out into the airwaves. I dont think the green new deal is in the works for our country. Steve Bannon is my go to guy for defending my pale horse Freudian political safe zone, and he has gone as far as advocating 40% or 50% taxes on the rich. I dont think people are going to vote for things that are outside of their self interest, and I personally think going green is tied to immediate economic self interest for voters outide of the stock market where they can already go.
In conclusion i just want to state that I had a 24 hour 'CQ' shift for the Army which means I was on a kind of guard duty and was reading writing and animating the whole time so it was very productive, now the SGT who was with me was watching a video where this guy was giving little questionnaires asking "do you have any republican friends?" and there are so many people that would not associate with republicans, and think they are bad people. It's disconcerting how many young people have these preconceived notions about even respecting the person-hood of somebody who disagrees with them. It's also disheartening to hear how many associate republicanism with racism and bigotry, and homophobia and overall hatred, it seems like they are practicing a kind of prejudiced hatred against republicans.
The Serbs allegedly had unfair control of Yugoslavia and after the death of the massively strong anti nationalist General Tito you could “cut the air with a knife” in Yugoslavia, because if you have ever met a Slav from this region they are extremely stubborn, masculine, and headstrong, they really have a kind of phenomena about them which is fascinating and is very much representative of the exact type of mindset rife for nationalist warrior ethos encouragement to put it very awkwardly.
Russia is definitely going to complain about the use of NATO in Yugoslavia, and you can definitely see the numerous RT pieces on YouTube labeling the bombing as a kind of war crime. But what I have a problem with in our modern society is the 'insta-labeling' of things as good or bad based on very primitive and ill informed judgments about the nature of their use. A representative democracy assumes the citizen has the fortitude to rationally and objectively gauge how they feel about things based on enough evidence, and the Yugoslav bombing gives a very easy target for the opponents of violence to condemn violence as a very simplistic act of 'good will'. Green deal treaties to save the earth are easy to jump on board with, they promise to save the earth and enmesh our country with all kinds of regulations and foreign control; but they give us access to the 'club' which according to the mouthpieces we need by any means possible. We are going green in society, we are saving more and more of the planet every year, especially since it makes economic sense to do so. I don't see why we need to completely overturn our economic model and introduce new taxes and foreign rule to produce clean energy, you just invest in R & D and keep moving forward; all the frenetic predictions about the planet ending by now have been false, I think we can wait a couple years for the technology to catch up with the Armageddon bandwagon proponents before Nigel Farage finally roasts us into our final grave.
People are rightfully concerned about the environment and conservation, and being an activist for this agenda is very laudable. I have been known to consider chloro-floro-carbons detrimental to the environment, those are the refrigerants that you get fined $40K for if you trash them into the environment. I dont think the correct future lies in the denial of human related climate change, but in the moderation of the panic- because scaring people into thinking the world is on fire is a very volatile proposition especially when combined with a political agenda that involves people spending even more money on a government that cannot be trusted to spend the money we already give it responsibly! And especially when that additional money will be used to curb our economy even further by increased regulations and restrictions. And especially since historically the ballooning of the bureaucratic state is likely to be rife with pay for play and corruption which is assumedly already rampant in our government especially in the contracting market that we have already seen with the failure of so many subsidized green enterprise with 0 profitability, huge government handouts, and conveniently have millionaires and billionaires sucking off of them like mosquitoes.
I personally like Ocasio Cortez, I find her refreshing, I think she is pretty, and i like the casual nature that approaches politics with. I like the fact that you can go from waitressing to joining congress in this country, and the fierce rhetoric that she growls out into the airwaves. I dont think the green new deal is in the works for our country. Steve Bannon is my go to guy for defending my pale horse Freudian political safe zone, and he has gone as far as advocating 40% or 50% taxes on the rich. I dont think people are going to vote for things that are outside of their self interest, and I personally think going green is tied to immediate economic self interest for voters outide of the stock market where they can already go.
In conclusion i just want to state that I had a 24 hour 'CQ' shift for the Army which means I was on a kind of guard duty and was reading writing and animating the whole time so it was very productive, now the SGT who was with me was watching a video where this guy was giving little questionnaires asking "do you have any republican friends?" and there are so many people that would not associate with republicans, and think they are bad people. It's disconcerting how many young people have these preconceived notions about even respecting the person-hood of somebody who disagrees with them. It's also disheartening to hear how many associate republicanism with racism and bigotry, and homophobia and overall hatred, it seems like they are practicing a kind of prejudiced hatred against republicans.
I like partisanship and the clashing of ideas, it reminds me of the fact that evolution is made possible by the duality of the sexes, and the ability for them to find better counterparts to strengthen the line. If we had only one thing to choose from we would not have the ability to differentiate between the two different paths., and the presence of competition causes us to streamline and be more inclusive with our populous. But people make a vital error when they take things too far! It's really sad that people can't be respectful to one another and have opposing views, we live in the most peaceful times on the planet yet it seems people are ready to burst out of these peaceful times and plunge into a bloodthirsty war of words just because the preconceived notions we are infused with, and the inherent urge to find bad guys to blame all of our self conscious problems on. being from a family myself that has strongly different believes politically than I do, it has been really sad to witness, espcially as a person that doesnt have many friends or much of a following, and has had so little success in finding reliable work or respect, to have my own respect within my family threatened just because of my different ideas and sympathies in our "free" public arena for ideas. Its not very free for the many people caught on the wrong side of the firing lines when the punches start flying and the blood starts spraying, especially for those of us who do not have sacred protected support systems, friends or reliable employment, "wombs" as Milton Cooper calls them, and yet we venture out anyways to spread our own thinking, and are met with forces destructive to free thought.
Something is really unsettling about the brexit ordeal.. Farage party shoots to the tops of all the lists on forcasts for this next election, after Brexit already won, and was not implemented. You would think that the media would fall in line with the public opinion and try to ameliorate its own supposed support base. But it seems like the UK media is actually trying to change the opinion, tell people what to think. The interviews I have heard with farage have been accusatory and disrespectful, and even in the US with pelosi denying trade deal for UK, it seems like this is a 'blanket' of 'reeducation', it seems very unnatural to me and I'm left skeptical about the origins of the remain campaign, irrespective of whether or not I want either option. I'm interested to see what happens with the upcoming vote and how this whole thing plays out.
Something is really unsettling about the brexit ordeal.. Farage party shoots to the tops of all the lists on forcasts for this next election, after Brexit already won, and was not implemented. You would think that the media would fall in line with the public opinion and try to ameliorate its own supposed support base. But it seems like the UK media is actually trying to change the opinion, tell people what to think. The interviews I have heard with farage have been accusatory and disrespectful, and even in the US with pelosi denying trade deal for UK, it seems like this is a 'blanket' of 'reeducation', it seems very unnatural to me and I'm left skeptical about the origins of the remain campaign, irrespective of whether or not I want either option. I'm interested to see what happens with the upcoming vote and how this whole thing plays out.