Anyone that keeps some tabs on what is happening in phyiics knows that questions like "what is reality"? "When is reality"? "What is an event"?, etc appear to be far less certain than we thought.
I'm pretty much a "Many Worlds" guy ... if you see something happening, it DID happen FOR YOU, and it was and is always happening for YOU ... and as this article talks of, that can be true for some number of observers that share that "time/event slice" ...
We have found a new paradox in quantum mechanics – one of our two most fundamental scientific theories, together with Einstein's theory of relativity – that throws doubt on some common-sense ideas about physical reality.
Take a look at these three statements:
1. When someone observes an event happening, it really happened.
2. It is possible to make free choices, or at least, statistically random choices.
3. A choice made in one place can't instantly affect a distant event. (Physicists call this "locality".)
These are all intuitive ideas, and widely believed even by physicists. But our research, published in Nature Physics, shows they cannot all be true – or quantum mechanics itself must break down at some level.
This is the strongest result yet in a long series of discoveries in quantum mechanics that have upended our ideas about reality. To understand why it's so important, let's look at this history.
I read about it ... I'm not saying I understand it!!
A book that many will see as "Defending Trump". when in fact it is defending the Presidency and Rule of Law (with law being the Constitution).
Our Founders thought the three branches of government would each hold jealousy of their power as a higher consideration than than party loyalty -- especially in the case of the SCOTUS (since they have neither the power of the purse nor the bullet). It would have been hard for a John Marshall to hold petty party division /ideology over "free contraceptives" to be even in the same universe honoring the Constitution, as RGB and her ilk do today.
In today's essentially one party system, where the media, elite, universities, and entire Administrative State are Democrat, the pre-Trump situation was simple. if the President is a D, he is a king, he is an R, he is barely a weak Prime Minister.
Yoo covers the reason that the impeachment farce was totally a farce if anyone cared about the Constitution anymore, p56.
"An intelligence officer cannot file a whistle-blower complaint against Trump, because Trump is not a member of the intelligence community, and his phone calls with foreign leaders do not qualify as intelligence ops."
Under the Constitution, the President is THE organ of foreign policy for the US government-- the State Department, CIA, NSA, etc REPORT TO HIM ... not vice versa.
Trump’s presidency may signal a similar seismic shift in government, one that extends far beyond his own personal political interests or his low polling. Today’s federal government can trace its lineage directly to the New Deal. Large, expert federal bureaucracies exercising broad powers delegated by Congress continue to govern an economy and society that have evolved far from the world of the 1930s–1960s. Even as America races into a post-industrial society, where information has become the foundation of the most valuable goods and services, it continues to govern itself with forms suited for continent-spanning GMs and IBMs and their matching labor unions. A more spartan government, controlled by a Constitution of limited powers, may well prove more nimble and effective in the new 21st-century world than the government of the New Deal. Even while he recalls America to the society of the past, Trump may have shaken up the political system enough to allow it to adapt to the new economy of social media, networks, and AI. Presidential power provides the critical leverage to spark such significant government change, and it may be Trump’s most unlikely legacy to have preserved the constitutional authorities of his office that make such reform possible.
Yoo is WAY more optimistic than me here. Likely less than 20% of Americans today have the attention span to read through this blog post -- let alone the book!
Sadly, to return to being a Constitutional Republic, over 50% of the voting public will need that level of comprehension at a MINIMUM!
Back in the days of "Uncle Walter", "the truth" was whatever he said it was. "And that's the way it is".
That started to sound sketchy to me about the time that Jimmuh Carter started telling us that the world was flat out of oil.
My "trust in media" dial hit empty when Gungda Dan Rather was exposed as a total fraud and Democrat partisan tool by Power Line in the linked.
It turns out that "Uncle Walter" was not nearly as trustworthy as we thought he was, however the fact that a "big majority" of the country believed him helped unite the country in the same way as most people being practicing Christians with values like "God, family, community, work ethic, etc" being shared by like 80% of the population, was much less dividing than "you have to follow your own truth".
This kind of thing doesn’t happen randomly. Rather, it is an expression of deeply-held ideological conviction. There are a number of ways to describe the epic disaster of socialism, but perhaps the most basic is that socialism turns the state into an all-powerful god. In order to do that, all competing–i.e., arguably real–Gods must be extinguished. That is what we are seeing from today’s Democratic Party.
The linked scares me more than anything else I've seen this year, because if that happens in a location I'm in, I'm not raising my hand and I'm not just sitting there -- most likely, I'm just leaving through as many people as I need to -- but I don't really know.
Ever since 5th grade when I walked out of a phys-ed class because the "teacher" forced 5th graders to stand with arms outstretched until some started to cry, with the "instructor" screaming in my face, I've known some things "flip a switch" that seems to make me very calm and extremely resolved.
As a nation, those of us that don't think actual fascism, as opposed to fake "Trump fascism" are going to have to quit sitting down.
Today, at various restaurants in Washington, D.C, BLM protesters demanded that diners eating outdoors raise their fists in support. Most diners did — this is Washington — but a few did not. Those who did not were berated.
The linked gives yet another case where statistics are tools used to "make a case" that happens to be a false case. Most of the purveyors of the mythology of those stats likely know what they are doing and simply see the myth as "better" -- for their narrative, for their power, maybe even because it MIGHT "save one life".
Mostly I don't bother to cross post to FB these days, because it only adds to the power of FB, and as the meme says, in today's world of virtuous herd following, it only irritates. However, I prefer that both my friends and enemies are not completely certain of what I will do, because in this new life of seizures, neither am I.
The GOOD (and bad) news is that we are all "Karens" meaning sheep. As sheep, we all have an innate desire to follow SOMETHING or someone, and given that nature, we WILL follow. Bob Dylan did a great song on it, one of my favorites. I am a sheep of Christ's pasture. As a sheep with seizures, I get the blessing of much more regular reminders of how fragile my existence is, and how little power earthly measures have over my quality of life. I'm thankful that with the help of God, medicine can reduce my pain and confusion for at least a time. I never appreciated how wonderful it is to remember my name until I could not.
The fact of our sheephood, weakness, lack of intelligence, sin, -- much like the fact of death, is not one of our favorite pieces of our reality. We are creatures of habit, both good and bad, and we are exceptional RATIONALIZERS while only fleetingly rational if we use lots of math, physics, deep difficult and honest theology, prayer, and most of all, GRACE. Denial is another of our "strengths".
Statistics are marketing, not science, and Social "Scientists" have a ton of justified physics envy -- they are at best "soft scientists", and often just marketers of positions they "feel" to be "right. Soft Scientists didn't WANT to have to admit that fat was a lot better than carbs, and they resisted admitting their error even at the cost of millions of lives. From Communism to fascism to abortion to damaging religious belief causing millions more to commit suicide, we are all in a nice guilty crowd.
"Believe the Science" is proof of epistemological incompetence -- See Feynman. Our culture has abandoned education to the level that we no longer know our limitations -- but they are still there.
Those that seek control will work hard to increase fear. You will get sick! You will be hated! You will die! Painfully even, and we will laugh at you because you refused to do exactly what we told you to do! Ultimately we will likely murder in mass as we have before, (and currently with abortion) and we will feel absolutely certain that we MUST do it again! Often the only "moral" thing for the "majority" to do is to kill or send those who refuse to bow to the grave or gulag.
Perhaps men like Dan Crenshaw will be able to return us to at least enough "Fortitude" to comprehend it's advantage over fear and the followers who seek to make fear a virtue.
I continue to pray for our return to accepting our dependence on God.
As I cover in my review of "American Ulysses" Rushmore ought to have Washington, Lincoln and Grant displayed ... with Grant being higher priority than Lincoln. Without Grant, Lincoln loses to McClellan in '64, and Lincoln is the greatest butcher, failed president, destroyer of lives and treasure in American history.
Instead, Grant wins the Civil War and makes a tremendous effort to gain freedom for the blacks. He ultimately fails to completely break Jim Crow (he sure wounds the KKK!), but the Democrat party of Slavery, Jim Crow and the family destroying Welfare State live on still today. Black families were more intact under slavery and Jim Crow than they are under today's welfare state). Fewer than 1 in 3 blacks grow up in a two parent family today -- in Slavery and Jim Crow it was 60 to 70% !
The best institution to "cancel" would be the Democrat Party --- the Jackass ought to be far more disparaged than "whiteness".
My biggest takeaway from this book is that media malfeasance, self serving politicians, corruption, and the creation of narratives that have little foundation in fact is nothing new!
ALWAYS read at least a couple views of the life of a great man -- they are never one dimensional!
What is conservatism in America today? It’s hundreds of millions of dollars a year spent fiddling while Rome burns. It’s ideas with little to no consequence. It’s getting trampled all over by History, but while yelling Stop!
And yet conservatism, in its dotage, cannot shake the nagging suspicion that it no longer speaks to the country it loves, in particular to those who have no living memory of the Cold War. This dawning realization could be amplified through probing questions: is America today more conservative than it was when the conservative movement began 70 or so years ago? Is conservatism itself as conservative as it was then? On the off chance that the conservative agenda were to be implemented, would it fundamentally transform the United States of America and lead to conservative hegemony (or would it simply save us money and buy us time)?
Across the board, the answer is a resounding no. Conservatism must therefore overhaul itself. If it refuses, then it should be left to die with the passage of time. A new Right, in any case, is already overtaking it.
This new right, which of yet has no name, is anchored in the realization that the conservative project in America today is fundamentally a counterrevolutionary one. We lost. They won. Painful as it is to admit, we no longer feel at home in our own country. In this progressive theocracy in which all must worship at the altar of Wokeness, conservatism, if one can still even call it that, is more about overthrowing than conserving. Burke’s edifying exhortation—“Spartam nactus es; hanc exorna” [Sparta is Yours: Adorn It, and the more general, You Were Born With Talents: Develop Them. Author: Euripides].
—must be altered to suit the times: Sparta was your inheritance, now reclaim her.
The "New Right" needs a name, some intellectual coherency, and some faces to represent it.
Perhaps "Creedalism" would be a reasonable new name ? Webster defines creedealism as "undue insistence upon traditional statements of belief".
Who gets to define "undue"? I suppose "there are two genders" would be and example of "undue insistence on traditional statements of belief".
In the dogma of "progressivism" are there any "traditional statements" that can be invoked without the approbation "undue"?
As the linked makes clear, "conservative" is a very imprecise term today.
I liked the linked review. As that reviewer pointed out. Dreher's "Benedict Option" covers much of the same ground from a more philosophical vs theological angle.
A couple good quotes:
Here is a quick and generally reliable rule to follow. If people have always said it, it is probably true; it is the distilled wisdom of the ages. If people have not always said it, but everybody is saying it now, it is probably a lie; it is the concentrated madness of the moment.
We are servile for mass entertainment, when we could be free with our hearts and ourselves for the worship of God, which truly builds up a human community, rather than just herding people in an aggregate of many thousands who do not know one another, and whose only common bond is that they prefer a certain style of uniform.
I found this to be the most accurate and pithy quote I've seen on "higher education". For a longer version of this sad truth, see "Excellent Sheep".
You sink yourself in debt to discover that your sons and daughters have been severed from their faith, their morals, and their reason. Whorehouses and mental wards would be much cheaper. They might well be healthier, too.
On manhood he says the following, while I believe it is wise for Christians especially to read this book, "Fortitude" is more generally reachable, and even for Christians, it may be important to read to establish enough fortitude to make it through Esolen.
But the boy must be made into a man; nor is it true that, once he has established himself as a man, he need never worry about it again. Manhood is risky. It must be publicly affirmed, and you can lose that affirmation by cowardice or effeminacy.
I could go on forever, however the book must be read by Christians who care -- summaries are not enough. We need to separate ourselves from the many entertainments and distractions that Satan has heaped upon us. As age advances, I increasingly believe that the Amish have it much more right than I had previously imagined!
Christians must repudiate the whole sexual revolution. All of it. No keepsakes, no exceptions. Remember Lot’s wife.
We know BLM -- "Black Lives Matter"
We kinda know ALM '' "All Lives Matter" is racist ... we will cover that here
I argue that in the face of BLM and the rejection of ALM, we really get NLM -- "No Lives Matter", only POWER matters.
The first link gives proof to what anyone that has paid attention knows -- George Floyd died of a drug overdose. However that does not fit the current narrative mandated by Deep State power, which is where the second link comes in. Introducing "Ibram X Kendi" and "anti-racist".
Kendi belongs to the generation of activists who understand affirmative action to be an immovable part of the U.S. Constitution — and he has reason to understand it this way, if the complaisance of the Supreme Court is anything to go by. He does not even pay lip service to neutral treatment. If practical equality for blacks is the imperative, discriminating on their behalf is going to be necessary, and Kendi grasps the nettle:
"The defining question is whether the discrimination is creating equity or inequity. If discrimination is creating equity, then it is antiracist. If discrimination is creating inequity, then it is racist. . . . The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination"
So the idea of "equality" has not produced the results that Kendi deems "just", therefore current Affirmative Action" is racist. An aid to understanding this is "Dog Whistle Politics" -- if a black person says you are racist and you attempt to defend yourself, that proves you are racist.
In African-American studies departments you can address racial problems in an atmosphere of esprit de corps and ideological unanimity. Because they traditionally had a different academic culture than other university departments, it long seemed natural to ignore them. But their very isolation has turned them into mighty bases for consciousness-raising, dogma construction, and political organizing. They are Internet Age equivalents of 19th-century Fenian Brotherhood lodges. It is from these hives of like-minded activists that the country’s human-resources departments have been staffed. That helps explain how, within hours of the first urban protests in June, hundreds of far-flung corporations had spontaneously and independently produced identical press releases and Facebook posts, identical right down to the catchphrases.
Americans were doubly stunned: First, that these intra-corporate cliques could compel one celebrity after another, starting with New Orleans Saints quarterback Drew Brees and Oklahoma State football coach Mike Gundy, to endorse Black Lives Matter, which most Americans had considered a radical movement just days before. Second, that they had been asked to surrender so much that they once considered part of their constitutional heritage, starting with rights of association and speech. These limitations seem to be restricted to the relations between companies and their employees, and thus of no concern to the Constitution at all. But the ultimate cause of the restrictions is the pressure brought to bear on corporations by regulators and litigators in the name of civil rights.
As is well covered in "The Great Society", Democrats upgraded to "Racism 3.0" via the Great Society -- this time power is coming for YOU! Racism 1.0 was Slavery, 2.0 was Jim Crow ... the coin is POWER! Race is mere mechanism. Power doesn't care what color the people it enslaves are. and the "whip" is more effective when it is the Administrative/Deep State rather than packs of dogs, shotguns and nooses.
Kendi’s aim is to broaden the privileges of those entitled to fling the word “racist” around, and to extend its power to ever more marginal misdeeds.
All this requires is a few redefinitions, and here the law appears to be on Kendi’s side. With its Bostock decision this spring, the Supreme Court went into the business of policing transphobia, a word that was not even in the dictionary when Barack Obama arrived in the White House. Most Americans can’t yet spell it, but anyone can be haled into a courtroom for it. In late June, when YouTube removed several videos it described as white-supremacist from its site, everyone cheered. The Financial Times even called the move “inexplicably delayed.” But “white supremacism” is in the eyes of the beholder. In Kendi’s book — which, it bears repeating, has been for much of this summer the best-selling nonfiction book in the United States — the line between white supremacists and climate-change deniers, between white supremacists and opponents of Obamacare, is hard to draw or discern, and a harried schoolteacher who doesn’t call on enough black students is a racist abuser deserving “zero tolerance” from the law.
Can enough Americans tear themselves away from their entertainments and distractions to get this at some level?
First of all, a big thanks to "Seattlepi" for doing a review of this hyper excellent work for our times ... as the reviewer says -- "I recommend this book to anyone who finds the current political environment disturbing, whether you think of yourself as Left or Right or in between. Yes, Crenshaw is a Republican, but this book is not about political parties. He critiques ideas on both ends of the political spectrum."
One of the many favorite quotes: ""You have a duty to try hard to not offend others, and try harder to not be offended"!
On page 164 he talks about why it may be that suicide rates among the religious are lower than the general population.
"The reasons for this are likely complex, but I believe that one reason is a sense of meaning that is greater than ourselves. Without it, nihilism can infect the head and the heart. and with it a sense of emptiness, a sense of being lost. If we are truly just walking skeletons stuffed with meat and tissue, following the commands of our firing neurons, then what is the point of it all"?
Page 140 has an insight that could save our culture -- although without the PRACTICE of some of the mental toughness regimes outlined in the book, unlikely. The pressure to conform to the "virtue" of outrage is huge.
"This normalization of outrage has consequences. The result is an equally extreme -- and unhealthy -- view the outrage mob as a bell shaped curve, with the most nuanced responses in the middle ("I'm sorry you took my comments that way but this is how I meant it"), the most subservient responses on the right side ("I apologize deeply for my insensitive comments"), and the most unapologetic on the left ("I'm not resigning!")" ... "Everyone has two options now: show deep shame, or show no shame. The middle option of showing a little amount of shame in proportion to the actual offence is hardly an option at all,. There is simply no reward for it. No grace is given, no outrage will subside"
... and so we get more outraged! Social Media and the media in general encourage outrage because it gets "more clicks", and increasingly the political parties follow the same devastating strategy -- breaking up friendships, families, community, and our nation itself. The tough minded person will typically (not "always"!) be making amends from the middle of that curve, or just being silent. Why? Because they actually didn't mean to give any offence, and if they DID want to offend you, you would be very well aware of it! Mostly they operate from a place of "stillness" (in the book), so what they do and say is "intentional". That doesn't mean it is "right", nor is there any "all/always" -- even SEALs are human, just maybe a bit "better human" than most of the rest of us in the "stillness" factor.
Yes, respecting SEALs means a form of "hierarchy" -- a bad word for some in our time. Only you can decide if ultimate "wokeness", or "ultimate fortitude and resilience" are in your goal set -- or if they are compatible in any way with your "identity".
In this age where "identity" is often seen as immutable, and CRITICAL at the same time, this book is a threat. It claims that there are things such as "better and worse", and that certainly, ALL LIVES MATTER ... a statement that is seen as damning as saying "I am a witch" in Salem MA in 1692.
I've bought a number of copies of this book and I'm handing them out to some. If you get one, it DOES NOT mean that I think you are someone that really needs it. We ALL need it -- and I'm in the top 1% of the needy!
It ends with a statement that is at a minimum a good start for creating a nation with fortitude. Perhaps to "SEAL our future?" ...
“I will not quit in the face of danger or pain or self-doubt; I will not justify the easier path before me. I decide that all my actions, not just some, matter. Every small task is a contribution toward a higher purpose. Every day is undertaken with a sense of duty to be better than I was yesterday, even in the smallest of ways. I seek out hardship. I do not run from pain but embrace it, because I derive strength from my suffering. I confront the inevitable trials of life with a smile. I plan to keep my head, to be still, when chaos overwhelms me. I will tell the story of my failures and hardships as a victor, not a victim. I will be grateful. Millions who have gone before me have suffered too much, fought too hard, and been blessed with far too little, for me to squander this life. So I won’t. My purpose will be to uphold and protect the spirit of our great republic, knowing that the values we hold dear can be preserved only by a strong people. I will do my part. I will live with Fortitude.”
The Barr hearing was another great example of the fact that the US government has turned into a partisan farce. The only "rule of law" is that Democrats Deep / Administrative State win ... end of story. If the real rulers -- meaning the Democrat / Deep-Administrative State declare that riots, attempting to burn federal courthouses, etc are "good", they are -- Barr was appointed by a Republican, he is a pariah! He can be treated as such!
Barr replied that U.S. marshals and other federal agents have a duty to guard Portland’s federal courthouse from people tossing fireworks and trying to vandalize and break into the building. He said they are under siege in that building and need help dealing with a nightly barrage of fireworks, fires, and attacks. Multiple law enforcement personnel have sustained serious injuries, Barr said.
“We are on the defense, we are not looking for trouble, and if the state and the city would provide the law enforcement services that other jurisdictions do, we would have no need to have additional marshals in the courthouse,” the attorney general said.
If BLM was in any way honest, the Democratic Party would absolutely have to be "cancelled" -- name changed, symbols removed, and all democrats from history expunged. If you actually look at history, Aunt Jemima is a far better symbol to hold in reverence for blacks than the democrat jackass.
“Aunt Jemima is representative of the countless Black women who were and are the essential workers,” she added. “Nancy Green in particular is the ideal woman to salute.”
However, as classic work by Robert Fogel and Stanley Engerman has shown, despite the horrors of slavery, overall, during the pre-emancipation era, about two-thirds of enslaved families had two parents—far more than today. More recent revisionist work has stressed that, while forced separations were always an important part of the picture, the two-thirds figure remained dominant (Wilma Dunaway is especially handy on this). And this tendency continued into the Jim Crow era, contrary to a false sense one might have of daily life in a black ghetto of the 1930s and ’40s—think Richard Wright’s 12 Million Black Voices or Claude Brown’s Manchild in the Promised Land. Namely, it is wrong to suppose that, amid the misery of those neighborhoods, all but a sliver of children grew up without a dad. That is a modern phenomenon, whose current extent—fewer than one in three black children are raised by two parents—would shock even the poorest black folk 100 or even 50 years ago.
When "progressive" politics is your religion, "truth" IS power -- and whatever means you use to get and control that power -- Slavery, Jim Crow, Welfare, Deep-Administrative State, etc is "moral"!
Woodrow Wilson was the father of the modern administrative state, and of the theories of a “living constitution” that enable its untrammeled growth. Born in Virginia in 1856, Wilson was a child of the Confederacy, a student and at times an admirer of its governing system, a sharer of many of its worst prejudices, and an apostle of the same theories that animated its administrative innovations. His father was a preacher who delivered sermons offering biblical defenses for slavery and sided with the Confederacy even at the expense of permanently alienating his northern relations. Raised in Virginia, Georgia, and North and South Carolina, Wilson recalled in his youth seeing Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee in person. A speaker dedicating the “Silent Sam” Confederate monument at the University of North Carolina during Wilson’s first year as president of the United States recalled:
A year or two ago diplomas were given by our University to all the students who had interrupted their studies to enter the military service of the Confederacy. Mr. Wilson, then President of Princeton University delivered these diplomas. One man only of the Class [that Matriculated in 1862] wearing the Confederate uniform, came forward to receive that highly prized token. It was the humble individual who now addresses you. At the dinner, later in the day, Professor Wilson greeted me with the remark that in many years nothing had so much touched and warmed his heart as the sight of that Confederate uniform.
Flynn has been assessed as "not guilty" by the Justice Department. In the old days, we had now abandoned idea of EVERYONE was assumed to be innocent until proven guilty. Now we have the system where if there is an R by your name, you are existentially guilty -- a stain which can't be removed even by a department of Justice, if that DOJ is reporting to a president with an R next to his name.
Miranda needs to be re-written -- "If you are a member in good standing of "The Party" (TP-D) you are INNOCENT as long as TP affirms your good standing. If you are not affirmed as as being fully and unqualified as a member of TP, you are GUILTY! and you will be prosecuted in any way TP desires, including death. You have been warned!"
The link is worth the short read -- the punchline is just because the law exhonorates you, the mostly TP controlled judiciary may still convict!
In the meantime, though, Judge Sullivan gets to continue his lawless harassment of Gen. Flynn, and Flynn’s legal fees continue to mount.
Old news for readers of this blog ... one standard for Democrats, the opposite standard for Republicans. The well known totalitarian "standard" -- the "standard" is whatever power says the standard is TODAY! It may be the opposite of what it supposedly was a minute ago, however THIS minute you better bow (or maybe kneel).
In April of 2005, Senator Barack Obama took to the floor of the United States Senate and passionately spoke out against Republican efforts to end the filibuster. Then a rising star in the Democratic Party, Obama noted that despite the pressure partisans might feel, it was imperative to “rise above an ‘ends justify the means’ mentality because we’re here to answer to the people — all of the people — not just the ones wearing our party label.”
This week, Obama made precisely the opposite argument during John Lewis’s funeral, contending that eliminating a vital check on partisan power was justified as long as Democrats got the policies they desired.