Archive for the Critical Commentary of Civilization Category

Earnings & Rights

Posted in Critical Commentary of Civilization, Ethics & Morals, History, jobs, Legal / Laws, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , on July 28, 2019 by Drogo

What is ‘earned’ or a ‘right’ is much more debatable than most people realize. 

Rights and even earnings rarely come free, you have to work and often fight to get them and maintain them. As different as they may seem, RIGHTS and EARNING can be switched in the main statement, and it still works as a philosophical statement to question. Rights and even earnings rarely come free, you have to work and often fight to get them and maintain them. What are rights and earnings is a sophistry question that has been left up to lawyers hired by oligarchs because ‘the common people are too stupid to decide because they are poor. Most people are poor because they are stupid, and stupid because they are poor’. This why democracy and socialism (the idea of how to apply democracy to capitalism) are not desired by leaders, even ones who lied about supporting the movements like dictators and presidents. 

Socrates himself is given by Plato as an example of why Democracy does not work (although this is rarely pointed out as an issue by classical scholars). Not only did Socrates question random people about the limits of their knowledge, and therefore question their democratic right to decide issues outside of their profession; but Socrates was finally killed by the system that he questioned.

For example “I earned everything I have.” is a bold statement that seems clear on its surface, but the opposite can also be seem 100% if they have taken from poor people that despite working harder also have grievances like losing homes or ability to work. Also civil rights must be proven by fighting for them against those who claim they are not rights, but only privileges. Rights and even earnings rarely come free, you have to work and often fight to get them and maintain them. That includes what are called ‘natural rights’ that people associate with being alive, like freedom or liberty. Some people may think that rights should be given, so when they fight for them under authorities it is only to get that which was theirs already. Most people think that the definition of earnings is that you should always have to work to get anything, because nothing is free least of all freedom. It is considered common sense to assume if you have something you do not deserve then you did not really ‘earn it’ even if it is legally part of their earned income, and only other people can determine if you have actually earned anything legitimately, even if they will argue of course that they are purely deserving. All of these logic problems have created massive reasoning issues within the philosophy of civilized ethics.

My 3 most important political issues: Income, Peace, Health.

Spelling, Grammar, & Accent Style

Posted in Critical Commentary of Civilization, Languages, Multimedia Communication, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on July 16, 2019 by Drogo

If i want to hear what someone has to say, i will not only look past their accents, stuttering, spelling, grammar, punctuation, case, tone, and style; i will actually accept it as part of them like a birth mark or tattoo on skin. This is probably why i think most superficial opinionated critics are over-rated. I might be annoyed with someone’s personality even, but i try to find something of value deeper than what i think seems superficial (even in critics); searching in this way can last many years.

if one thinks they can make something better than someone else, they should try to do that rather than just say they are better. If they think they have already made something better, and are punching below their weight, that is less about grievance and more about wanting to abuse others. Preferences are like tastes, each to their own.

This is coming from a student that got top marks always in literature classes, above most of my peers all through school. I certainly wrote more stories and got into crafting stories way more than anyone else i went to school with in all my schools. Some people could spell better than me, but I always got A’s. When people want to correct someone, they want to inject their own ego into the other person’s work, regardless of how objective they claim to be, or how much they want to help. My grandfather would send my mother’s personal letters back to her in the mail with mistakes circled. He may have thought he was being helpful, but it expressed lack of concern for the emotional content of an adult married daughter in her 30s communicating with an emotionally and physically distant intellectual father. Trying to correct someone else is not always correct, even though it is instinctual and habitual especially with parents.

In WV most kids in my classes could not spell as well as me, and i know that nationally im not the best ‘speller’. I still cast my spells though. so i learned early on to judge people based on spelling was a quick way to devalue their lives, because to say that what they express was wrong based on letters is like saying that accents are wrong or ‘dumb’, and if accents are wrong then their sub-culture and all the lives in it are too. The game of correction was about conformity to the standards of authority, and much less about communication, because if i cared to get to know someone, i could understand the worst speller just fine; they can spell things their ways, and i might even change my way to fit their way. I stayed unconventional from grade school on.

Finding flaws to shut powerless people down is what fascists do best, and can only culminate with that level of bigotry in society; as we give free passes to monopolies for the rich. The powerful elite should be held to a higher standard than thousands of fools who affect less lives, not the other way around (which is the way it is). Diversity in speech (speach) is beautiful as it reflects the individual.

Yes language standards allow us to agree on symbols and meaning, but dedication to rules above independent expression can be culturally costly.

I not only make mistakes, but i intentionally do not use proper cases, spellings, or grammar (grammer) when ever I want, in order to convey what i want the way i want. Fuck Grammmmerly. Write how you want. If you want someone to tell you how to conform, find a tutor that will passionately do it for whatever you offer. People will chomp at the bit to tell others how to do things.

This essay is dumb, because it breaks rules.

Easy to be superficially critical.

 

 

*

B.D.U.: Boot Camp Diary Unauthorized

Posted in Biographies, Book Reports, Critical Commentary of Civilization, Military, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on July 15, 2019 by Drogo

Title – BDU: Bootcamp Diary Unauthorized
Subtitle – My Un-Official Air Force BMT Journal

This non-fiction historical book is a real 2006 memoir and analysis of Air Force Basic Training (BMT), including some personal auto-biographical experiences and opinions. This journal has been made public to document the psychological treatment of young soldiers by the Military Industrial Complex (MIC) training system. It is based on a secret diary inside an official notebook that the author kept during training, despite constant antagonism by the Training Sergeants (TIs). While not every experience is included in this first edition for Amazon, it is unabridged compared to the official summary edition submitted to commanding officers. This more expressive version contains strong adult language. Airman Stowell (also author of ‘Operation 10 COW’) provides specific details and general summaries from original notes and actual documents about BMT, and is both honest and patriotic. Mouth-piece propaganda for our conventional establishment will seek to discredit authentic journals like this, as individual civil rights are threatening to authoritarians who want ritual hazing and brain-washing to be a confidential surprise (despite films showing historical accounts dramatized, see ‘Band of Brothers’ and ‘Full Metal Jacket’). It is the US ‘War On Terror’ training version of war time stories that have been attacked for showing realism in their home countries (see Solzhenitsyn & Grossman). There is no top secret information revealed here, but it is a personal perspective for national self-reflection about the unethical tyranny of psychologically conditioning soldiers to perpetually operate on hate, anger, and fear. If you like this type of work, please write a supportive comment on Amazon’s sales page for ‘BDU The Book‘, thank you!

Long live our American ideals of freedom, democracy, and peace!!!

“I’m a historian by profession. I’ve probably read several thousand journals and diaries in my time, including ones by soldiers and others living through the Revolution, Civil War, Spanish American War, and others. This book reads true, both in content and form. One would expect a diary to be disjointed and have a grammar glitch or two here or there. Someone undergoing the physical and intellectual traumas of this type, and writing on the run to boot, is not going to write with the polish of a Victorian sitting at his desk on Beacon Hill.” – thank you so much Professor Michael Swanson

Listen to an Audiomack recording – BDU Book Reading

Please show support even by simply clicking that the nice reviews were helpful, as most consumer critics do not care what their words mean to the author, and do not take into account the pains of writing and publishing controversial content.

AF BMT 1b

 

 

*

Science As Process

Posted in Commercial Corporations, Cooperative collaboration, Critical Commentary of Civilization, History, Science & Math, Sustainability, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , on April 8, 2019 by Drogo

Scientific Sustainable Issues

 

I trust people who are dedicated to provable facts, and able to negotiate about debates on what constitutes “evidence”. Environmental data is debated by those scientists highly educated while it is gathered and for years afterwards in universities that are socially liberal but academically conservative; which is a reflection of conventional society and group societies and trade organizations. There will always be the fringes that ask questions, and push limits. i side with scientific consensus, regardless of corporate propaganda (probably just because i have never been bribed enough), but i always remember that minority questions can change the course of scientific progress on issues. Human philosophical rationality can be used to determine all scientific or factual conclusions, for example to determine what defines pollution and how much pollution is allowable in a given area; and those conclusions will change to adapt to the data.

2 Climate Change Theories

Posted in Artificial Chemical Products, Climate Change, Commercial Corporations, Critical Commentary of Civilization, Military, Science & Math, Technology - Vehicles, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 3, 2019 by Drogo

Scientific vs Corporate

The main climate change theory i will call the Scientific Climate Theory presented by the majority of scientists is that artificial CO2 and other man-made (in addition to natural) factors are primarily contributing to overall global warming, which causes climate change in various ways, sometimes temporarily cooling during warm seasons (which seems like a contradiction but is not because the overall trend is warming according to annual temperature averages). This consensus in Science is supported primarily by Centrist Left Wing and Radical Liberals politically, who believe that the time for debate is over and it should not be a political issue because it is true and not just an opinion.

The minority climate change theory i will call the Corporate Climate Theory, supported by extreme skeptics of science and government (deniers), is that environmentalists are lying about the data evidence to hide that most of it is naturally either being caused by Solar irregularities or Geo-tectonic magnetic seismic shifts and volcanic activity or both. This is the side that defends those totally uninterested or ignorant in climate science as well, who doubt there are any problems with pollution that can affect global conditions. One of the issues they bring up is that storm flooding (cold) and (heat) droughts are opposites, and should not both be results of global warming. This proposed paradox does not take into account the melting of the polar ice which raises sea level, and the chaos that can result from this regarding flooding and more severe storms, freak cooling periods in some areas, but overall prolonged intense heating of the global atmosphere. Minor theories are usually supported by Radical Right Wing Conservatives and Libertarians (Corporate Centrists tend to pay lip service and not want any action on it), who believe no one should interfere in the rights of corporations to pollute, and are currently dismantling the EPA, NPS, and other branches of the government under Trump.

So to summarize, both agree that there will be more severe climate chaos like weather that is out of season. The Scientific Climate Theory says that artificially caused CO2 pollution from industry and agriculture is mainly to blame, as it can clearly be shown to increase during the Industrial Age of civilization, and not anytime in human history before this. It does have some similarities to pre-historic massive volcanic periods, but other chemical evidence and current factors rule out volcanoes as the main cause in CO2 levels currently. The most extreme Corporate Climate Theory is our government is lying to us to hide that our Sun is growing closer or more intense; which can be debunked by talking to actual scientists who observe the Sun independent of the government, and that it would make no sense for the branches of the government like the EPA or NPS or Pentagon to give false support for environmentalists, because most of the government is controlled by Corporate interests, and they do not benefit by belief in environmentalism. Corporate Green-washing is not what interests people who care about quality of life for all animals and humans, nor the military who takes the threats of Climate Change seriously due to the causes of wars that are tied to natural conditions like resources, property, shelter, and all the economics related to environmental issues. The money being made by Scientists or environmentalists currently, still pales compared to the profits of fossil fuel polluters, so the theory of profit motive causing scientists to lie about climate data is bunk as well. The debate is over for rational thinkers, but the corporate socialism vs democratic socialism debate is just beginning for a world run and terrorized by capitalists.

Philosophical Anarchism

Posted in Cooperative collaboration, Critical Commentary of Civilization, ecovillages, Legal / Laws, Sustainability, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 29, 2018 by Drogo

Anarchy is absence of supreme government leaders, company authorities, or laws. Anarchism is rejection of central state or group hierarchy for collaborative democracy and independent freedom. Anarchy does not mean ‘let chaos rule’, but can be messy as individuals express themselves voluntarily. Lack of direction from a boss can be scary for many who prefer to be told what to do. Another problem is the political vacuum of anarchy allows despots to use charisma and power to shatter the ideal potential of anarchy and democracy, and create populist structures of obedience to corrupt state systems.

Anarchy is a natural feeling for many people who have an intuitive reaction to any perceived authority over them; which maybe related to our pre-history. Civilization is considered new and brief compared to thousands and thousands of years when humans must have lived more or less like other wild animals with no writing, and no language rules, in primitive anarchy. This anti-authoritarian type of human nature can manifest in complex egalitarian cultures, and thus can create advanced anarchy systems based on cultural capacities. Proudhon considered anarchism to be a political philosophy for “stateless societies based on voluntary associations”. Having no desire for authoritarian companies or governments, anarchists often try to organize and maintain voluntary institutions (like SCOD).

Labor unions (aka trade unions) are groups or collectives of workers, organized to represent their job interests within capitalism. Unions are similar to trade guilds, except they are often employees of companies that need to negotiate with bosses using social pressure and collective protest bargaining, with threat of striking vs lay-offs to enforce contracts. Safety standards, living wages, and benefits are labor themes.

Philosophical anarchism often relates to democracy, communism, socialism, and labor unions because they all are systems to empower workers to control leaders, companies, and governments by the people being responsible for their power. The term ‘worker’ (proletariat) represents the bulk of citizens or their families, and therefore the masses of society. When the workers have to power to vote directly and frequently on their bosses, companies and governments become decentralized and depend on social networks and sub-cultures.

anarchy

[see also Mondragon, Mother Jones, Emma Goldman]

The Horror of Lovecraft

Posted in Book Reports, Critical Commentary of Civilization, Individuals / Members / Monsters / Creative Writing, Memorials / Obituaries / Epitaphs, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , on October 19, 2018 by Drogo

The thing about writing horror is that you basically admit you are really sick and twisted. His racist writing describes accurately how people like him would think as they narrate the events. For me it shows how the concept of evil is a human perspective, based on what we fear; from fish people to aliens. To write about your fears shows your weakness and vulnerabilities, in my opinion. Lovecraft shows how fear is a scary illness from hating ethnic differences to being petrified of anything resembling fish or squids. Another aspect of Lovecraft is that his “heroes” do not ever really “win” against the demonic powers that spread, as migrants in NY did while he was living there, and they were thriving while he was failing. Clearly Lovecraft shows how conservative culture always dies of entropy as progressive immigrants take over, for better or worse, depending on who you are. That he describes the changes in culture as evil in fictional demonic terms exaggerates his own feelings to an absurd level of parody, which i feel he must have been conscious about to marry a Jew.

RIP H.P. Lovecraft  1890-1937