A small tool to view real-world ActivityPub objects as JSON! Enter a URL
or username from Mastodon or a similar service below, and we'll send a
request with
the right
Accept
header
to the server to view the underlying object.
{
"@context": "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
"type": "OrderedCollectionPage",
"orderedItems": [
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1687239202070073359",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"content": "Lessons of History<br /><br /> One of the great joys in reading is that it takes almost super human effort not to learn such an effort. Now if I or someone like myself were to read from a particular font of knowledge and decry that the author's writing offered nothing new, did not add to my store of knowledge you would be well within you observation that I did, in fact, learn something if none other to confirm what I already knew. That was a mouthful of a sentence. On the other hand I find (don't know about the rest of you) at least a few nuggets hiding in the book or film or other media, at least some truths that are new to me. A lot depends upon my mindset for the particular moment. Indeed, the world is a mirror of knowledge just waiting to be discovered by myself. Notice that I speak only for myself and not you, the reader. <br /><br /> My readings in moral philosophy are somewhat difficult since those who purport to be philosophers tend to say what minor points of wisdom with vast expanses of fecundity. That is the problem when one is trying to assert a system of thought that tends to be complex. Words have meaning but never enough to precisely express that philosophic thought. On the other hand an historian can explain much that a philosopher wants to express but by using a different set of words. The historian's job is to make sense of the timeline of events and arrive at some discovered conclusion. Yes, many historians write as if their conclusions had risen from the context of their study of past events and yet a great many bring their own preconceived ideas to the library table as they sort through the tomes looking for a match, much like to old game show. Then there are those economist who ought to know better riding on the coat tails of history and philosophy. Thank God so many books have been written on the subject matter of these disciplines.<br /><br /> At this point you are most likely thinking, “Where is he going with this introduction?:. Every time I visit the ARC Thrift Store I check their selection of books and usually buy one or more volumes each visit. Some of these books I save for later reading, other for right now, and some, such as cookbooks, browse through and then set aside until I need then again. The other day I saw a title that I would normally have passed up had I heard about it before hand. “Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion And The Final Solution In Poland”. Yes, I know what you're thinking, just more holocaust history, so what? I believe Jordan Peterson has referenced this volume in several lectures. Men who regress back to state of barbarity due to the unforeseen circumstances of the environment they well compelled to attend. This book is in one way a study of the evil that had gripped Europe mid last century. On the other hand it shows evil thrives during times of chaos and revolt against cultural and social norms. Usually historians are not psychologists and that is a good thing. But what they uncover and expose to the world view as well as the individual and social view may often portray the psyche (there I go again, mixing metaphors) of a people, of some groups in this particular social and political networks, and even down to the individual level. <br /><br /> That's all well and good but just what is your point? The first few chapters cover the initial implementation of these “police” Battalion. Each participating country had their own “police” units (Japan may have been the exception to the rule) that would keep order, such as it was, dispense civil justice, such as it wasn't, Ah, so the book is about war crime behavior visited upon minority groups in conquered territory. So what, say old story, nothing new here to see, move along, if you please. But what about the consequences visited upon both victim and perpetrator? These police units were deployed in the rear of the advancing armed forces and drew the assignments of keeping civilian order, searching for resistance to the new political reality, executing Communist leaders and followers. As a rule, these police battalions consisted of men who were past draft age or young men who saw joining these groups as a way of avoiding front lime military duty. The initial history of these groups holds interest in attempting to understand not only the men themselves but the political thinking of the Nazi government. As for the victims, nothing really new to see, just the usual round up, arrest, torture, and death. The only variation is who, when, how, and where. And yes, it was cold blooded murder, none of them died with a knife or gun in their hands.<br /><br /> The “How” of the matter is that after the treaty Germany went through a year or two of civil unrest which included criminal conduct by a people who whose normal behavior was of loyalty to the state and its laws. What had been “police” units in insure law and order were either broken up because the French and English believed them to be military units and many of these individuals transferred into “Non-Police” work. Once Hitler assumed the leadership of the country we find the forming of quite a few other “non-military” units that had no clear duties or directives. And most of these units received no formal military training, including their NCOs and officers. Perhaps even worse for Germany was the lack of clear organizational duties as well as command structures. Indeed, these new Germany was being carved into feudal regimes under personal political fiefdoms. The German generals knew how to organize and conduct a war but found themselves blocked from effectiveness in their duties. <br /><br /> Now to the “Where”.In 1938 many Special Police Battalions were formed and comprised of men who were beyond draft age and a few young men who were essentially “Draft Dodgers”. These units were immediately thrust into the back echelons to keep order, keep supply lines intact, and partisans in check. Part of these duties were the rounding up of Jews and other undesirable peoples and transport them to labor camps. Now I am taking liberty as to timelines and purposes. The essential fact is that Hitler and his cadre wanted all Jews dead along with the communists. Conquering lands meant emanating such peoples as inhabited the lands. What we know is that while this was the general line of thought, the believers in this cult of Nazism had their own variations in this central vision.<br /><br /> Down to cases as to “Why” this book is an important read. Plausible deniability is the theme that runs through the various command structures and operational guideline. That is the means for evading personal responsibility. When your command structure is such that lines of responsibility and lines of authority are blurred then no one can be found guilty of war crimes. Actually, war crimes had not yet been invented yet, although the Geneva Convention made a vague attempt to do so. Besides the regular army there were many other units created whose missions were not part of the mission of fighting a war. If one was a member of one of those special units then one's only moral duty was to the unit and the state, Nazi Germany. And as new directives are published and distributed (usually more vague than specific), the leadership was often left to make the discussions on how these policies should be accomplished. The horror becomes when one death squad (let's call then for what they were) rolls into town and starts either the killing of the boys and men perceived ad Jews, throws in a few White Russians for additional brownie points, and starts demolishing the local town, well, what will every one do when that unit has left. One army commander who was over the occupied area complained that these groups came in and never bothered to consider how the civilians who were left were going to carry on life as usual. Skilled craftsmen were needed to run the economy of the town, for water distribution, electric power generation, to goods and services. When you kill off those who do the work the economy stops working. But those who ideologues only see their own mission, can never understand what is more important to the overall general mission.<br /><br /> Reading through those first few chapters I was struck by the amount of general stupidity, lack of common sense, and divorced from reality these leaders from the top to the bottom were in. That is the general purposes of ideologues, to stay aloof from all the skulduggery, keep their hands clean. And then I remembered how, starting with the Clinton administration through the current Biden administration just how many, let's call them administrative units, have been authorized to raise their own government militia groups. Why does the IRS need to hire agents with military training and supplied with military equipment, are they afraid of a general tax revolt? The IRS is not the only department to do this. I keep reading how more and more of these federal government departments and agencies have adopted this new plan. You know, if you can trust the armed services to protect your coming dictatorship then this is what you need to do to stay in power. The book I am reading was published in 1992, what else happened at that time? We see all the adverse legislation and presidential orders that have come down from on high. If four more years of Biden would be a disaster then what would four years of Harris do to this country. We have been watching our federal government (similar things are happening at the state and local levels) become more and more unwieldy, then who is in effective control? The answer to that in no one. There maybe backbiting in the future but one thing is for sure, all the government agency minions will be coming for us if Harris is elected. It may be joy for her but it will be woe for us.",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1687239202070073359",
"published": "2024-09-29T21:26:12+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "Lessons of History\n\n One of the great joys in reading is that it takes almost super human effort not to learn such an effort. Now if I or someone like myself were to read from a particular font of knowledge and decry that the author's writing offered nothing new, did not add to my store of knowledge you would be well within you observation that I did, in fact, learn something if none other to confirm what I already knew. That was a mouthful of a sentence. On the other hand I find (don't know about the rest of you) at least a few nuggets hiding in the book or film or other media, at least some truths that are new to me. A lot depends upon my mindset for the particular moment. Indeed, the world is a mirror of knowledge just waiting to be discovered by myself. Notice that I speak only for myself and not you, the reader. \n\n My readings in moral philosophy are somewhat difficult since those who purport to be philosophers tend to say what minor points of wisdom with vast expanses of fecundity. That is the problem when one is trying to assert a system of thought that tends to be complex. Words have meaning but never enough to precisely express that philosophic thought. On the other hand an historian can explain much that a philosopher wants to express but by using a different set of words. The historian's job is to make sense of the timeline of events and arrive at some discovered conclusion. Yes, many historians write as if their conclusions had risen from the context of their study of past events and yet a great many bring their own preconceived ideas to the library table as they sort through the tomes looking for a match, much like to old game show. Then there are those economist who ought to know better riding on the coat tails of history and philosophy. Thank God so many books have been written on the subject matter of these disciplines.\n\n At this point you are most likely thinking, “Where is he going with this introduction?:. Every time I visit the ARC Thrift Store I check their selection of books and usually buy one or more volumes each visit. Some of these books I save for later reading, other for right now, and some, such as cookbooks, browse through and then set aside until I need then again. The other day I saw a title that I would normally have passed up had I heard about it before hand. “Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion And The Final Solution In Poland”. Yes, I know what you're thinking, just more holocaust history, so what? I believe Jordan Peterson has referenced this volume in several lectures. Men who regress back to state of barbarity due to the unforeseen circumstances of the environment they well compelled to attend. This book is in one way a study of the evil that had gripped Europe mid last century. On the other hand it shows evil thrives during times of chaos and revolt against cultural and social norms. Usually historians are not psychologists and that is a good thing. But what they uncover and expose to the world view as well as the individual and social view may often portray the psyche (there I go again, mixing metaphors) of a people, of some groups in this particular social and political networks, and even down to the individual level. \n\n That's all well and good but just what is your point? The first few chapters cover the initial implementation of these “police” Battalion. Each participating country had their own “police” units (Japan may have been the exception to the rule) that would keep order, such as it was, dispense civil justice, such as it wasn't, Ah, so the book is about war crime behavior visited upon minority groups in conquered territory. So what, say old story, nothing new here to see, move along, if you please. But what about the consequences visited upon both victim and perpetrator? These police units were deployed in the rear of the advancing armed forces and drew the assignments of keeping civilian order, searching for resistance to the new political reality, executing Communist leaders and followers. As a rule, these police battalions consisted of men who were past draft age or young men who saw joining these groups as a way of avoiding front lime military duty. The initial history of these groups holds interest in attempting to understand not only the men themselves but the political thinking of the Nazi government. As for the victims, nothing really new to see, just the usual round up, arrest, torture, and death. The only variation is who, when, how, and where. And yes, it was cold blooded murder, none of them died with a knife or gun in their hands.\n\n The “How” of the matter is that after the treaty Germany went through a year or two of civil unrest which included criminal conduct by a people who whose normal behavior was of loyalty to the state and its laws. What had been “police” units in insure law and order were either broken up because the French and English believed them to be military units and many of these individuals transferred into “Non-Police” work. Once Hitler assumed the leadership of the country we find the forming of quite a few other “non-military” units that had no clear duties or directives. And most of these units received no formal military training, including their NCOs and officers. Perhaps even worse for Germany was the lack of clear organizational duties as well as command structures. Indeed, these new Germany was being carved into feudal regimes under personal political fiefdoms. The German generals knew how to organize and conduct a war but found themselves blocked from effectiveness in their duties. \n\n Now to the “Where”.In 1938 many Special Police Battalions were formed and comprised of men who were beyond draft age and a few young men who were essentially “Draft Dodgers”. These units were immediately thrust into the back echelons to keep order, keep supply lines intact, and partisans in check. Part of these duties were the rounding up of Jews and other undesirable peoples and transport them to labor camps. Now I am taking liberty as to timelines and purposes. The essential fact is that Hitler and his cadre wanted all Jews dead along with the communists. Conquering lands meant emanating such peoples as inhabited the lands. What we know is that while this was the general line of thought, the believers in this cult of Nazism had their own variations in this central vision.\n\n Down to cases as to “Why” this book is an important read. Plausible deniability is the theme that runs through the various command structures and operational guideline. That is the means for evading personal responsibility. When your command structure is such that lines of responsibility and lines of authority are blurred then no one can be found guilty of war crimes. Actually, war crimes had not yet been invented yet, although the Geneva Convention made a vague attempt to do so. Besides the regular army there were many other units created whose missions were not part of the mission of fighting a war. If one was a member of one of those special units then one's only moral duty was to the unit and the state, Nazi Germany. And as new directives are published and distributed (usually more vague than specific), the leadership was often left to make the discussions on how these policies should be accomplished. The horror becomes when one death squad (let's call then for what they were) rolls into town and starts either the killing of the boys and men perceived ad Jews, throws in a few White Russians for additional brownie points, and starts demolishing the local town, well, what will every one do when that unit has left. One army commander who was over the occupied area complained that these groups came in and never bothered to consider how the civilians who were left were going to carry on life as usual. Skilled craftsmen were needed to run the economy of the town, for water distribution, electric power generation, to goods and services. When you kill off those who do the work the economy stops working. But those who ideologues only see their own mission, can never understand what is more important to the overall general mission.\n\n Reading through those first few chapters I was struck by the amount of general stupidity, lack of common sense, and divorced from reality these leaders from the top to the bottom were in. That is the general purposes of ideologues, to stay aloof from all the skulduggery, keep their hands clean. And then I remembered how, starting with the Clinton administration through the current Biden administration just how many, let's call them administrative units, have been authorized to raise their own government militia groups. Why does the IRS need to hire agents with military training and supplied with military equipment, are they afraid of a general tax revolt? The IRS is not the only department to do this. I keep reading how more and more of these federal government departments and agencies have adopted this new plan. You know, if you can trust the armed services to protect your coming dictatorship then this is what you need to do to stay in power. The book I am reading was published in 1992, what else happened at that time? We see all the adverse legislation and presidential orders that have come down from on high. If four more years of Biden would be a disaster then what would four years of Harris do to this country. We have been watching our federal government (similar things are happening at the state and local levels) become more and more unwieldy, then who is in effective control? The answer to that in no one. There maybe backbiting in the future but one thing is for sure, all the government agency minions will be coming for us if Harris is elected. It may be joy for her but it will be woe for us.",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1687239202070073359/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1623783687130714118",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"content": "The Consequences Of Ones Behavior<br /><br />\tIn every society the elders always instructed the younger members that behaviors have consequences. Now some may think this is simply a “Law and Order” teaching, but it's not. As babies we learn different sets of behaviors. We cry when we are hungry, our diapers need changing, or some other irritant and learn that usually mom is the one who comes to see what we need. Adults are somewhat scary and we learn to smile and and coo with appreciation to our mothers and fathers and even our siblings, assuming we have any, As we continue to grow we start to learn other behaviors such as eating foods, using the toilet, and sleeping through the night. For those of you who have taken courses in child development, this is but a small list. Learning when “NO” means no is often fought with pain at an early age and some learn quicker than others. A family structure, meaning mother and father (and throw in a couple of siblings) is best for teaching the child what it needs to know through the years. There are a great many lessons that are possible to learn and we are not confronted by all of them.<br /><br />\tWell, this reads like a boring bit of information but the purpose is to alert our attention to the current state of the Western World which appears to have lost its way in human development. We tend to think about the consequences of one's behavior as a singular event rather in a collective sense. That is a false assumption for our individual behaviors do not happen in a vacuum but in society either in a large context or small. As a child our individual behaviors affect not just us but our parents, siblings, and friends. Later on our actions have consequences in our school educations, neighborhoods, work environments, places of worship, and other social venues. We exist as group members within various groups, from family to school to work to political affiliations. Yes, John Donne, no man is an island.<br /><br />\tThe history of mankind is that of the tribe, that limited extended family in which the individual is subordinate to the patriarch who gives the rules (within limits of the group members assent) becoming a universal society where laws are standardized, contracts are upheld not as personal promises that may be broken but as a social bond that demands one upholds a contract to which a man has entered. Where marriage is both a social contract to and a spiritual contract to be honored and upheld. Civilization as the centr4al social force gives to men and women certain rights as ascribed by higher power than a warlord or king. That higher power, a spiritual power may seem fictitious to the non believer but when embodied within the common assent of society gives the weight of permanence in the law of such a society.<br /><br />\tThe consequences of a society of men and women embodying the concept of “Rule Of Law” and abide with respect for such a concept means a society that is less prone to crime and violence. As we know from experience not every man or woman in our society has such respect and eschews such behavior that is outside the social morn. Thus begins the training of the child in our social norms, the rules of acceptable behavior. And yes, all children to some degree challenge such rules while only a few will fail to learn the lessons of the consequences of their behavior. But children need more than rules, they need principles they can learn to guide their future behaviors. Perhaps that one universal principle we call the “Golden Rule”: “Do unto others as you would have them unto you..”, sums up a civilized society. Instruction in spiritual matters gives reason to moral behavior, for morality is not based on arbitrary human political reasoning. Morality is no relative to the fads and false reasoning of those who would see is multifaceted in its application. Morality is binary, either a behavior is right or it is wrong. Same with the Rule Of Law, either it is obeyed or it is not. Yet humans grow accustomed to looking for excuses why deviations should be allowed. One can read the Bible and see that this have been the habit of humans for thousands of years.<br /><br />\tThe Enlightenment brought the illusion of the “Progress Of Man And Society”, a concept borrowed from Christianity (mostly on the Protestant side) where men and women were captains of their own souls. It envisioned a world that would eventually throw off kingship and other tyrants and reward the faithful with an ever increasingly perfect world, a heaven on earth, no need to wait for Christ to come back and establish such world himself. If such philosophers were short on answers as to how to achieve such an idealized place there were those who thought they could supply such answers. One must believe in the promise land, the one with flowing milk and honey, where peace and harmony could be attained, and it all would come about if everyone believes alike, exactly. The irony of such an idea that supreme individualism should result in supreme conformity was lost of a great many of these thinkers and philosophers. And how to achieve such perfect place? The use of power, the worship of power, the alpha and omega for the meaning of life.<br /><br />\tWe come today to the realization that our Republic is in great danger of becoming a fascist society ruled by those whose beliefs are based on the ideal of power, whose own works are epitomized by such beliefs. The rationalizations for lawlessness are rampant, the excuses for moral perversion piles high on the alter of political power. And the Hoi Poi are to be trampled into the dust as unworthy citizens fit for little else but exploitation.<br /> ",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1623783687130714118",
"published": "2024-04-07T18:56:38+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "The Consequences Of Ones Behavior\n\n\tIn every society the elders always instructed the younger members that behaviors have consequences. Now some may think this is simply a “Law and Order” teaching, but it's not. As babies we learn different sets of behaviors. We cry when we are hungry, our diapers need changing, or some other irritant and learn that usually mom is the one who comes to see what we need. Adults are somewhat scary and we learn to smile and and coo with appreciation to our mothers and fathers and even our siblings, assuming we have any, As we continue to grow we start to learn other behaviors such as eating foods, using the toilet, and sleeping through the night. For those of you who have taken courses in child development, this is but a small list. Learning when “NO” means no is often fought with pain at an early age and some learn quicker than others. A family structure, meaning mother and father (and throw in a couple of siblings) is best for teaching the child what it needs to know through the years. There are a great many lessons that are possible to learn and we are not confronted by all of them.\n\n\tWell, this reads like a boring bit of information but the purpose is to alert our attention to the current state of the Western World which appears to have lost its way in human development. We tend to think about the consequences of one's behavior as a singular event rather in a collective sense. That is a false assumption for our individual behaviors do not happen in a vacuum but in society either in a large context or small. As a child our individual behaviors affect not just us but our parents, siblings, and friends. Later on our actions have consequences in our school educations, neighborhoods, work environments, places of worship, and other social venues. We exist as group members within various groups, from family to school to work to political affiliations. Yes, John Donne, no man is an island.\n\n\tThe history of mankind is that of the tribe, that limited extended family in which the individual is subordinate to the patriarch who gives the rules (within limits of the group members assent) becoming a universal society where laws are standardized, contracts are upheld not as personal promises that may be broken but as a social bond that demands one upholds a contract to which a man has entered. Where marriage is both a social contract to and a spiritual contract to be honored and upheld. Civilization as the centr4al social force gives to men and women certain rights as ascribed by higher power than a warlord or king. That higher power, a spiritual power may seem fictitious to the non believer but when embodied within the common assent of society gives the weight of permanence in the law of such a society.\n\n\tThe consequences of a society of men and women embodying the concept of “Rule Of Law” and abide with respect for such a concept means a society that is less prone to crime and violence. As we know from experience not every man or woman in our society has such respect and eschews such behavior that is outside the social morn. Thus begins the training of the child in our social norms, the rules of acceptable behavior. And yes, all children to some degree challenge such rules while only a few will fail to learn the lessons of the consequences of their behavior. But children need more than rules, they need principles they can learn to guide their future behaviors. Perhaps that one universal principle we call the “Golden Rule”: “Do unto others as you would have them unto you..”, sums up a civilized society. Instruction in spiritual matters gives reason to moral behavior, for morality is not based on arbitrary human political reasoning. Morality is no relative to the fads and false reasoning of those who would see is multifaceted in its application. Morality is binary, either a behavior is right or it is wrong. Same with the Rule Of Law, either it is obeyed or it is not. Yet humans grow accustomed to looking for excuses why deviations should be allowed. One can read the Bible and see that this have been the habit of humans for thousands of years.\n\n\tThe Enlightenment brought the illusion of the “Progress Of Man And Society”, a concept borrowed from Christianity (mostly on the Protestant side) where men and women were captains of their own souls. It envisioned a world that would eventually throw off kingship and other tyrants and reward the faithful with an ever increasingly perfect world, a heaven on earth, no need to wait for Christ to come back and establish such world himself. If such philosophers were short on answers as to how to achieve such an idealized place there were those who thought they could supply such answers. One must believe in the promise land, the one with flowing milk and honey, where peace and harmony could be attained, and it all would come about if everyone believes alike, exactly. The irony of such an idea that supreme individualism should result in supreme conformity was lost of a great many of these thinkers and philosophers. And how to achieve such perfect place? The use of power, the worship of power, the alpha and omega for the meaning of life.\n\n\tWe come today to the realization that our Republic is in great danger of becoming a fascist society ruled by those whose beliefs are based on the ideal of power, whose own works are epitomized by such beliefs. The rationalizations for lawlessness are rampant, the excuses for moral perversion piles high on the alter of political power. And the Hoi Poi are to be trampled into the dust as unworthy citizens fit for little else but exploitation.\n ",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1623783687130714118/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1617409671092506640",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"content": "I'm As Mad As Hell<br /><br />\tBack in 1976 Paddy Chayefsky wrote the screenplay for the film “Network”, a black comedy that pointer out a few social and political truths. Perhaps the now iconic scene is this one: <a href=\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFzlm9wQ4MI&ab_channel=PaesitoPaez\" target=\"_blank\">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFzlm9wQ4MI&ab_channel=PaesitoPaez</a>, the “I'm Mad As Hell” scene. Now almost 24 years later I can picture the newscaster Howard Beale on some social media platform (the television news networks morphed into the madness of stupidity we now call main stream media) cheering us on to express our exasperation with our various government (local, county, state, and federal) as well as corporate America. There are a couple of other scenes that illustrate our dissatisfaction with the way things are as well as our fascination with the absurd. Bur I do nor offer you a critic of the film, better you should watch that experience for yourself.<br /><br />\tBut we got that catch phrase: “I;m As Mad As Hell And I;m Not Going To Take It Anymore!” which America seems to have forgotten and perhaps it's time to resurrect it as common everyday speech. The echos of lawlessness that covers our land, the corruption of the legal system that replaces rational rule of law decision with emotional wishful thinking, the attempt by progressives and extreme liberal to presume to tell us how to live our lives and what to think, the administration that believes in fiat rule and and an imperial presidency, a military that puts the social and radical structures ahead of national security, the capture of healthcare by corporate interests, the financial backing by both Congress and the Federal Reserve for global corporate interests, well, have I exhausted the list? I don't think so, I could continue into several more areas.<br /><br />\tAs Howard Beale said: “I don't know what to say but first you have to get mad.” Well, friend, are you mad yet? Have you become so distrustful of the various governmental entities including the police that you feel you are constantly being lied to, watched for disloyal behavior, and your privacy invaded by any and every political institution and corporate entity that you now wonder when “they” are coming for you? Assuming Joe Biden is the Democrat nominee (frankly, I think he will be replaced at the convention and Komala will be thrown under the bus), should he win the election we may be sure that it was a rigged affair. But should Biden's replacement win will we feel that the election was stolen? If it was, then what? Will we accept this descent into totalitarianism with a sigh of complacency? Will we accept the deep state reduce all of our rights as guaranteed by our constitution as a matter of course in the progress of mankind? Will we accept that the elites know best how we should be governed, how we should think, how we should act, and how we should accept our fate as determined by said elites? Is this the “true end of history”? Do we slip so passively into that good night?<br /><br />\tThere will not be a civil war, there is not region against region upon which we may wage conflict. There will be a revolution against the tyranny of the elites, against the deep state, against those who would fetter us in chains of their making. Unfortunately there will be the “loyalist” who will always side with those who would enslave us. The question is whether we shall have sufficient patriots who will come to the aid of their country. ",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1617409671092506640",
"published": "2024-03-21T04:48:35+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "I'm As Mad As Hell\n\n\tBack in 1976 Paddy Chayefsky wrote the screenplay for the film “Network”, a black comedy that pointer out a few social and political truths. Perhaps the now iconic scene is this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFzlm9wQ4MI&ab_channel=PaesitoPaez, the “I'm Mad As Hell” scene. Now almost 24 years later I can picture the newscaster Howard Beale on some social media platform (the television news networks morphed into the madness of stupidity we now call main stream media) cheering us on to express our exasperation with our various government (local, county, state, and federal) as well as corporate America. There are a couple of other scenes that illustrate our dissatisfaction with the way things are as well as our fascination with the absurd. Bur I do nor offer you a critic of the film, better you should watch that experience for yourself.\n\n\tBut we got that catch phrase: “I;m As Mad As Hell And I;m Not Going To Take It Anymore!” which America seems to have forgotten and perhaps it's time to resurrect it as common everyday speech. The echos of lawlessness that covers our land, the corruption of the legal system that replaces rational rule of law decision with emotional wishful thinking, the attempt by progressives and extreme liberal to presume to tell us how to live our lives and what to think, the administration that believes in fiat rule and and an imperial presidency, a military that puts the social and radical structures ahead of national security, the capture of healthcare by corporate interests, the financial backing by both Congress and the Federal Reserve for global corporate interests, well, have I exhausted the list? I don't think so, I could continue into several more areas.\n\n\tAs Howard Beale said: “I don't know what to say but first you have to get mad.” Well, friend, are you mad yet? Have you become so distrustful of the various governmental entities including the police that you feel you are constantly being lied to, watched for disloyal behavior, and your privacy invaded by any and every political institution and corporate entity that you now wonder when “they” are coming for you? Assuming Joe Biden is the Democrat nominee (frankly, I think he will be replaced at the convention and Komala will be thrown under the bus), should he win the election we may be sure that it was a rigged affair. But should Biden's replacement win will we feel that the election was stolen? If it was, then what? Will we accept this descent into totalitarianism with a sigh of complacency? Will we accept the deep state reduce all of our rights as guaranteed by our constitution as a matter of course in the progress of mankind? Will we accept that the elites know best how we should be governed, how we should think, how we should act, and how we should accept our fate as determined by said elites? Is this the “true end of history”? Do we slip so passively into that good night?\n\n\tThere will not be a civil war, there is not region against region upon which we may wage conflict. There will be a revolution against the tyranny of the elites, against the deep state, against those who would fetter us in chains of their making. Unfortunately there will be the “loyalist” who will always side with those who would enslave us. The question is whether we shall have sufficient patriots who will come to the aid of their country. ",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1617409671092506640/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1614164661945503746",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"content": "All is Well, So to Speak<br /><br />My posts have been returned, so to speak. Was it a software glitch or an evil database administrator repenting his evil ways. only god knows. Mr Boston came to my rescue, so to speak, providing me with commentary along with a couple others. My ego is assuaged. As if I really need that.<br /><br />Back in the old days one might write a letter to the editor of a newspaper or magazine and rejoice it the same was published for all one's friends, family, and community to see, giving instant <br />public notoriety. Now with the social media on the internet we merely throw shit on the wall and see what sticks. Call it the progress of man. We revel in the exploitation of memes which is little more than visual irony, did you get it, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, say not more. Memes have replaced the \"running gag\" oy yesteryear. Think Charlie Chaplin and the many more from the silent era and the beginnings of talkies. <br /><br />Needless to say, I am amused.",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1614164661945503746",
"published": "2024-03-12T05:54:04+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "All is Well, So to Speak\n\nMy posts have been returned, so to speak. Was it a software glitch or an evil database administrator repenting his evil ways. only god knows. Mr Boston came to my rescue, so to speak, providing me with commentary along with a couple others. My ego is assuaged. As if I really need that.\n\nBack in the old days one might write a letter to the editor of a newspaper or magazine and rejoice it the same was published for all one's friends, family, and community to see, giving instant \npublic notoriety. Now with the social media on the internet we merely throw shit on the wall and see what sticks. Call it the progress of man. We revel in the exploitation of memes which is little more than visual irony, did you get it, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, say not more. Memes have replaced the \"running gag\" oy yesteryear. Think Charlie Chaplin and the many more from the silent era and the beginnings of talkies. \n\nNeedless to say, I am amused.",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1614164661945503746/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1613718127298744326",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"content": "Who did I piss off?<br /><br />I was just checking my account to see how many individuals had read or at least viewed my latest post and viole, all my posts have vanished. Has the Democrat Party been put in charge of Minds? Oh, I know, I haven't paid Minds any money to become a Minds+ member. That must be the reason. Well good bye to all my subscribers, whoever they may be, I'm going back to Wordpress. At least they haven't screwed me over.",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1613718127298744326",
"published": "2024-03-11T00:19:42+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "Who did I piss off?\n\nI was just checking my account to see how many individuals had read or at least viewed my latest post and viole, all my posts have vanished. Has the Democrat Party been put in charge of Minds? Oh, I know, I haven't paid Minds any money to become a Minds+ member. That must be the reason. Well good bye to all my subscribers, whoever they may be, I'm going back to Wordpress. At least they haven't screwed me over.",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1613718127298744326/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1609104544715771915",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"content": "It has been awhile since I lasted posted an editorial or something like it. There are many subjects I could opine upon and all of them worthy examples of the ills that plague us. But perhaps the one value or principle of human existence is the Rule Of Law, for without such a principle or core value we chained or subjugated to the will of others, notably those who can and will exercise power over us for their own gain. The fact that the exercise of such power is irrational and even illogical never occurs to them. Case in point is the idea of mercantilism as an economic policy. Erect stiff tariffs to keep one's society from buying goods and services for outsiders while hoarding vast sums of gold in both government and merchants' vaults and one has crippled the flow of money or currency within one's country as well as inhibited the flow of goods and services among other nations.<br /><br />Almost all nations or societies rely on a consumerist led economy. We buy the goods and services we either do not or cannot produce for ourselves and in doing so provide the need for both commercial investment and public works spending. There is nothing magical about this process. Money is the exchange medium that is preferential to barter, it's cleaner and more effective. It also leads to the accumulation of capital through savings by both consumers and businesses. But capital comes at a cost, the value of a dollar today is less that the value of a dollar tomorrow. This is basic human behavior, the principle of delayed gratification. The violation of this principle comes at a cost.<br /><br />Well one might ask what this has to do with the rule of law. Policy, whether it is government, corporate, of personal comes <br /> at a cost, a matter of choices, tradeoffs and not answers or solutions to perceived problems. We like to believe that laws are sacred things and must be black and white, must delineate the differences between good and evil, between right and wrong, that edge upon which we believe we live upon. If one is of a more conservative frame of mind then rule of law tends to be more black and white. If one is a liberal, then rule of law must encompass that warm fuzzy feeling that there are at least fifty shades of gray between black and white. And instead of trade-offs there are a million excuses tp behavior.<br /><br />The original Declaration Of Independence referred to the right to property (the possession thereof) but that phrase didn't sound quite right. We must remember that the locals in the colonies were not, on average, men of property and wealth. And of course women were subject to the rule of men (husbands, fathers, even brothers) and blacks were subject to the rule of their owners. But for the man of no wealth or property, the wage earner, what was left for him as a right? Ah, the pursuit of happiness whether it was the accumulation of wealth and property or just the simple good life as an honest man living in accordance with his religion. The pursuit of happiness raised above the mere physical world that included wealth and property, it gave us an avatar to live for.<br /><br />But let us talk a moment about equity, that idea that men and women and even children should have equal access to wealth and property regardless of whether they worked for it or not. Income disparity is an ugly phrase that assumes all else be damn that no one should have more than anyone else. But income equality is not a law that is violated, it is an emotional assumption about everyone being equal in all ways. Show me where this type of equality is carved in stone, where the laws of physics decree that this is the law of the universe. Show me where income inequality violates any rule of law,<br /><br />What undermines the rule of law is government policy. Back in the 1920s the Republicans were complaining that the laws enacted to give state, county, and municipal bonds tax exempt status (and thus a lower interest rate or coupon rate for such issuers) reduced revenue to the federal, state, county, and municipal governments. The strange truth about tax cuts for the rich is that in the end, lower tax rates produced more government tax revenue. Why should that be? Because for the <br />wealthy individuals the ability to keep more of their investment gains meant that they would move away from tax exempt investments and into long term capital gains where they could keep more of their profits.<br /><br />What conclusion can we draw from this example? Policy often trumps or interferes with the rule of law, it encourages the wealthy to petition their government representatives to \"rig\" the game in their favor. Yet in doing so, this constant interference <br />reduced the ideal of the rule of law to a museum piece, a relic of non modern society. ",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1609104544715771915",
"published": "2024-02-27T06:46:58+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "It has been awhile since I lasted posted an editorial or something like it. There are many subjects I could opine upon and all of them worthy examples of the ills that plague us. But perhaps the one value or principle of human existence is the Rule Of Law, for without such a principle or core value we chained or subjugated to the will of others, notably those who can and will exercise power over us for their own gain. The fact that the exercise of such power is irrational and even illogical never occurs to them. Case in point is the idea of mercantilism as an economic policy. Erect stiff tariffs to keep one's society from buying goods and services for outsiders while hoarding vast sums of gold in both government and merchants' vaults and one has crippled the flow of money or currency within one's country as well as inhibited the flow of goods and services among other nations.\n\nAlmost all nations or societies rely on a consumerist led economy. We buy the goods and services we either do not or cannot produce for ourselves and in doing so provide the need for both commercial investment and public works spending. There is nothing magical about this process. Money is the exchange medium that is preferential to barter, it's cleaner and more effective. It also leads to the accumulation of capital through savings by both consumers and businesses. But capital comes at a cost, the value of a dollar today is less that the value of a dollar tomorrow. This is basic human behavior, the principle of delayed gratification. The violation of this principle comes at a cost.\n\nWell one might ask what this has to do with the rule of law. Policy, whether it is government, corporate, of personal comes \n at a cost, a matter of choices, tradeoffs and not answers or solutions to perceived problems. We like to believe that laws are sacred things and must be black and white, must delineate the differences between good and evil, between right and wrong, that edge upon which we believe we live upon. If one is of a more conservative frame of mind then rule of law tends to be more black and white. If one is a liberal, then rule of law must encompass that warm fuzzy feeling that there are at least fifty shades of gray between black and white. And instead of trade-offs there are a million excuses tp behavior.\n\nThe original Declaration Of Independence referred to the right to property (the possession thereof) but that phrase didn't sound quite right. We must remember that the locals in the colonies were not, on average, men of property and wealth. And of course women were subject to the rule of men (husbands, fathers, even brothers) and blacks were subject to the rule of their owners. But for the man of no wealth or property, the wage earner, what was left for him as a right? Ah, the pursuit of happiness whether it was the accumulation of wealth and property or just the simple good life as an honest man living in accordance with his religion. The pursuit of happiness raised above the mere physical world that included wealth and property, it gave us an avatar to live for.\n\nBut let us talk a moment about equity, that idea that men and women and even children should have equal access to wealth and property regardless of whether they worked for it or not. Income disparity is an ugly phrase that assumes all else be damn that no one should have more than anyone else. But income equality is not a law that is violated, it is an emotional assumption about everyone being equal in all ways. Show me where this type of equality is carved in stone, where the laws of physics decree that this is the law of the universe. Show me where income inequality violates any rule of law,\n\nWhat undermines the rule of law is government policy. Back in the 1920s the Republicans were complaining that the laws enacted to give state, county, and municipal bonds tax exempt status (and thus a lower interest rate or coupon rate for such issuers) reduced revenue to the federal, state, county, and municipal governments. The strange truth about tax cuts for the rich is that in the end, lower tax rates produced more government tax revenue. Why should that be? Because for the \nwealthy individuals the ability to keep more of their investment gains meant that they would move away from tax exempt investments and into long term capital gains where they could keep more of their profits.\n\nWhat conclusion can we draw from this example? Policy often trumps or interferes with the rule of law, it encourages the wealthy to petition their government representatives to \"rig\" the game in their favor. Yet in doing so, this constant interference \nreduced the ideal of the rule of law to a museum piece, a relic of non modern society. ",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1609104544715771915/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1557954663876136969",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"content": "Kill Them All, Let God sort Them Out<br /><br />\tIn Vietnam, opps, sorry, most of you young ones don't recall those days, months, years, the Marine Corp had an unofficial slogan about dealing with the enemy using nuclear weapons. It was “Kill Them All and Let God Sort Them All. When you spend you time in hell where the enemy doesn't wear uniforms or name tags and even uses children to toss grenades at you then you feel like the British Red Coats in our revolutionary war against England. They had to march in straight lines out in the open while we colonists could hide behind walls and trees and generally no use the European system of battle formations., So yes, Charlie (that is what we call the VC or Viet Cong, and the NVA North Viennese Army from the north) and his merry band of miscreants were waging a “stealth” war on us. Of course it didn't help that most of the Army's top brass was trying to fight as if it were World War Two. Well, I could go on about that stupidity and things haven't changed that much save we are still unwilling to win any war we start. It's hard to tell a Marine or Army dog face that you've got his back when he watches his friends and comrades die all around him because you want to win the medal of moral warfare. Get a clue, there is no such medal.<br /><br />\tIn world war two we had our share of pacifists who kept protesting the war against Japan and Germany. But in my father's day the locals would take these poor deluded suckers out behind the woodshed or barn or back alley or....well, you get the picture, sometimes you have to learn patriotism the hard way. And today, if all these Muslims and Arabs and middle eastern camel jockeys want to live their lives in peace with the rest of the world, well, let them, I have no religious beef with them. But history repeats and repeats and repeats, and ad infinitum the same lies they have always preached. Allah is great, Allah is good, and Allah hates unbelievers even if they convert and Allah's hordes are so much superior to the rest of us. Sorry, no going to fall for that bullshit, better put it back in you ass using your right hand.<br /><br />\tNow we have quite a few of these muzzies in our country and guess what, they not only support all the Muslim militants but cheer every time some Islamic terrorist group goes on a killing spree against Jews and Christians. Killing non believers is a worthy cause in their eyes. I mean, you aren't a true believer and of course you aren't worthy to shine their shoes let alone kiss their hairy asses. You know it took me about four years or so just to calm down from my year in hell. The anger I had saved up was literally eating a hole in my stomach, drank Maalox straight from the bottle and went through about four cases of that stuff. Now I see good old lunchbox Joe from Scranton with his bussom buddy Mike “The Fink” Pence telling us it's all Trumps fault with Hillary “The Hag” telling us we all need to be send to re=education camps, or Gulags as they were once called in Stalinist Russia. Hilary, let's sew a yellow star on your chest and send you off to the gas chambers. I mean, at this point what does it matter?<br /><br />\tNow we have the “Squad” telling us we need to calm down and don't take any rash action against Palestine or its people? Really? They totally support indiscriminate rape, murder, hostage taking, torture, for Jews and Christians, but hey, we have to free Palestine and let the terrorist take complete control of Is real and kill every Jew. Did I miss something here? Did I hear them right? Mass murder, genocide, that's the way of the Islamic world and should be the world standard? Back in 1946 and after we hung people for not only preaching but the doing of that shit. My god, history repeats and no one gives a shit. <br /><br />\tWell you know, we have a dandy little place on the eastern end of Cuba we call Guantanamo. Let's take members of the “Squad” along with the Biden family Grifters, Treason loving citizens and Mike Pence, another treason loving RINO and place them under the supervision of the Marine Military Police. Let us show then what real patriots believe and value. Let them sit and think over their sins until the come to see the error of their ways. Granted that may take a bit of time, maybe a life time for a few. As for that Arabs who want to make war on the rest of the world, nuke em, let god sort of the innocent and the guilty. They are freaks of the universe and have no right to be here. Meanwhile my list of freaks keeps growing longer. Time for another swig or two out of the Maalox bottle. Just when you thought the BS was over years ago, better re-up for a few more tours, we got a lot of work to do. ",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1557954663876136969",
"published": "2023-10-09T03:15:36+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "Kill Them All, Let God sort Them Out\n\n\tIn Vietnam, opps, sorry, most of you young ones don't recall those days, months, years, the Marine Corp had an unofficial slogan about dealing with the enemy using nuclear weapons. It was “Kill Them All and Let God Sort Them All. When you spend you time in hell where the enemy doesn't wear uniforms or name tags and even uses children to toss grenades at you then you feel like the British Red Coats in our revolutionary war against England. They had to march in straight lines out in the open while we colonists could hide behind walls and trees and generally no use the European system of battle formations., So yes, Charlie (that is what we call the VC or Viet Cong, and the NVA North Viennese Army from the north) and his merry band of miscreants were waging a “stealth” war on us. Of course it didn't help that most of the Army's top brass was trying to fight as if it were World War Two. Well, I could go on about that stupidity and things haven't changed that much save we are still unwilling to win any war we start. It's hard to tell a Marine or Army dog face that you've got his back when he watches his friends and comrades die all around him because you want to win the medal of moral warfare. Get a clue, there is no such medal.\n\n\tIn world war two we had our share of pacifists who kept protesting the war against Japan and Germany. But in my father's day the locals would take these poor deluded suckers out behind the woodshed or barn or back alley or....well, you get the picture, sometimes you have to learn patriotism the hard way. And today, if all these Muslims and Arabs and middle eastern camel jockeys want to live their lives in peace with the rest of the world, well, let them, I have no religious beef with them. But history repeats and repeats and repeats, and ad infinitum the same lies they have always preached. Allah is great, Allah is good, and Allah hates unbelievers even if they convert and Allah's hordes are so much superior to the rest of us. Sorry, no going to fall for that bullshit, better put it back in you ass using your right hand.\n\n\tNow we have quite a few of these muzzies in our country and guess what, they not only support all the Muslim militants but cheer every time some Islamic terrorist group goes on a killing spree against Jews and Christians. Killing non believers is a worthy cause in their eyes. I mean, you aren't a true believer and of course you aren't worthy to shine their shoes let alone kiss their hairy asses. You know it took me about four years or so just to calm down from my year in hell. The anger I had saved up was literally eating a hole in my stomach, drank Maalox straight from the bottle and went through about four cases of that stuff. Now I see good old lunchbox Joe from Scranton with his bussom buddy Mike “The Fink” Pence telling us it's all Trumps fault with Hillary “The Hag” telling us we all need to be send to re=education camps, or Gulags as they were once called in Stalinist Russia. Hilary, let's sew a yellow star on your chest and send you off to the gas chambers. I mean, at this point what does it matter?\n\n\tNow we have the “Squad” telling us we need to calm down and don't take any rash action against Palestine or its people? Really? They totally support indiscriminate rape, murder, hostage taking, torture, for Jews and Christians, but hey, we have to free Palestine and let the terrorist take complete control of Is real and kill every Jew. Did I miss something here? Did I hear them right? Mass murder, genocide, that's the way of the Islamic world and should be the world standard? Back in 1946 and after we hung people for not only preaching but the doing of that shit. My god, history repeats and no one gives a shit. \n\n\tWell you know, we have a dandy little place on the eastern end of Cuba we call Guantanamo. Let's take members of the “Squad” along with the Biden family Grifters, Treason loving citizens and Mike Pence, another treason loving RINO and place them under the supervision of the Marine Military Police. Let us show then what real patriots believe and value. Let them sit and think over their sins until the come to see the error of their ways. Granted that may take a bit of time, maybe a life time for a few. As for that Arabs who want to make war on the rest of the world, nuke em, let god sort of the innocent and the guilty. They are freaks of the universe and have no right to be here. Meanwhile my list of freaks keeps growing longer. Time for another swig or two out of the Maalox bottle. Just when you thought the BS was over years ago, better re-up for a few more tours, we got a lot of work to do. ",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1557954663876136969/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1549549305965056002",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"content": "The Destruction Of Our Governments<br /><br />\tFew individuals understand that when we embarked upon this great experiment of self government that our founders would bake into the cake we call republican federalism the seeds of self destruction. The majority of the population in 1776 were illiterate, uneducated save for what religious instruction they heard in their collective churches. Our small towns and hamlets were never modeled on the European style where farmers and workers lived cheek by jowl in village houses and left each morning for their individual fields that surrounded that village. Even the English style of agriculture tended to group field workers in village housing usually owned by the manor house. And unless one resided in the southern colonies the rule was that individuals who owned their farm land built their houses and barns upon that same land. The children of such farmers would usually need to travel far on foot to attend any formal school, usually run by the local church or provided by local tutors. And the children's hands were usually needed on the farm so that only those farmers who were prosperous enough could afford to send their boys (girls needed on those skills taught by their mothers) to the local sources of education. Well, what about the larger towns and cities? Until about 1870 the majority of the population either lived on farms or in small towns. City dwellers could be divided into three groups, the wealthy merchants and bankers, trades people, and unwashed laborers. The unwashed laborers made up the most significant part of any urban population and few of them were educated let alone literate.<br /><br />\tThose who were members of the Continental Congress came from an aristocrat family lineage or were merchants who made their own wealth (Ben Franklin). And when it came time to update the Articles of Confederation many of this former group along with many more like them would write the Constitution. This was in their own words were the elite class, the educated class, the class with the greatest interest in success of America as a nation. Thomas Jefferson summed up their sentiment by saying, “The people should elect their betters to govern them.” And by people Jefferson and many others meant those individuals who owned property and wealth. A farmer who owned his own farm, a small merchant who owned his own business, a trades person who was prosperous in that trade, in short, anyone who had accumulated some measure of property should elect their betters, the local, regional, and national elite who had the leisure time for political office.<br /><br />\tNow before you start condemning this class of elites we ought to understand why these individuals are the elite. Back in the day of kings and queens, the “elite” were members of the royalty and the aristocracy as royalty expanded by natural increase. But these elites claimed their status through an accident of birth and never by merit. Here in America we broke that mold to some extent for to become an elite one usually had to earn it. But one could be born into the elite group but without training and education and the accumulation of sufficient wealth one and one's decedents could be dropped from those ranks. And today the admission to these ranks of elites has pretty much has similar rules. One can obtain elite membership through the university PhD process although the mere possession of such a degree only grants marginal membership. Even becoming a lawyer is not enough, one much make at least partner in a large law firm. Scientist and engineers who discover new ideas, make new inventions or products will find their seat at the table. Businessmen who rise to the top of the corporate world easily become members since many of the elites believe such businessmen must have uncommon expertise and usually multiple millions in wealth.<br /><br />\tAnd like membership in the millionaire class, each year new millionaires are added and the ones who have lost their millions drop out, never to return. We do not have a static wealthy class membership, it changes every year, So as one gains membership into this elite class one's wife and children are included. Whether the children stay in this elite class for the rest of their lives depends on two things, keeping their wealth in tact or enlarging it, and their relevance in power and ideas. So unlike the aristocracy of the European cultures and countries membership in our elite society is earned by each generation. Ask yourself this question, where are the dependents of the Vanderbilt today? They use to only talk to the Asters who only talked to God. I hear God isn't listening to the Asters anymore.<br /><br />\tSo we come to the question of who is in the elite class? Politicians for one, most of whom are former lawyers and many the sons or daughters of politicians. Take Wendell Willkie for example. He rose to romance in law and politics, once ran for president. His son was only involved in state politics and his children are only minor players somewhere. It's a cycle and some families stay in the group longer than others. Then there are the technocrats, think Thomas Edison and Henry Ford. Both changed research, engineering, manufacture, and marketing while effecting great changes to our culture. Members of the entertainment industry enter and leave according to their popularity and influence. Academics rise upon their merits (usually but not always) but their children usually do not stay for any length of time. Businessmen, those CEOs and innovators and such are given access because of their status and wealth accumulation but usually their children do not stay for long either. Sports figures are ushered into the presence of the elites but that is due more to their sports ability and not to much else.<br /><br />\tWhy bother knowing about these elites? Because they govern this country, they determine the daily as well as the yearly business of this country. They act according to their own best interest and not ours. Now we find there are new groups seeking entrance into this elite class, groups that supposedly advocate for the minorities who claim discrimination and individuals who head them, the social activists and moral degenerates. When everyone claims their ox has been gored there is no justice to go around. These new groups want to be among those who make the rules, for once your group has a hand in making the rules you can shape those rules to your personal benefit. Why does one of the founders of Black Lives Matter get to abscond with multiple millions of dollars in funds from that political action group? Because she discovered what rules she could use to enrich herself. Know that the elite have always engaged in some form of corruption, usually self dealing, but very few of them are completely honest. And never before in the history of this country have we seen such corruption in government, business, and the military at the hands of the elite as we see now.<br /><br />\tAll direct democracies are corrupt, let that though sink in for a minute. Our founders saw that the only way to keep government halfway honest was through the separation of powers, hence the three branches of government. But more than that they also recognized the the consent of the governed must have limits and so the people must elect their representatives to act for them. And as a further check on populist will of the governed a second set of representatives called senators needed to be give some measure of supervision over the other legislators. As well and the administration. And to control both groups we give them short terms of office on the theory that the people will vote the bastards out. Perhaps the greatest abuse of political power is that so many elected and non elected individuals are not governed by term limits. Public office should not be a lifetime profession for politicians. Keep it short, one six year term for senator and 3 two year terms for representative. After that, end of public service and return to private life. All government employees should have term limits as well, keep it short at four years. This is particularly true in the case of administrators, department managers, advisors, and the like. Employment by the government should not be a lifetime career. The point is to increase greatly the churn of elites working in government and stop the incestuous relationships we see in government today.<br /><br />\tObviously I could go on much longer and recommend a great many reforms, but 'reforming; the elite by timing their access to power is a beginning.",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1549549305965056002",
"published": "2023-09-15T22:35:43+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "The Destruction Of Our Governments\n\n\tFew individuals understand that when we embarked upon this great experiment of self government that our founders would bake into the cake we call republican federalism the seeds of self destruction. The majority of the population in 1776 were illiterate, uneducated save for what religious instruction they heard in their collective churches. Our small towns and hamlets were never modeled on the European style where farmers and workers lived cheek by jowl in village houses and left each morning for their individual fields that surrounded that village. Even the English style of agriculture tended to group field workers in village housing usually owned by the manor house. And unless one resided in the southern colonies the rule was that individuals who owned their farm land built their houses and barns upon that same land. The children of such farmers would usually need to travel far on foot to attend any formal school, usually run by the local church or provided by local tutors. And the children's hands were usually needed on the farm so that only those farmers who were prosperous enough could afford to send their boys (girls needed on those skills taught by their mothers) to the local sources of education. Well, what about the larger towns and cities? Until about 1870 the majority of the population either lived on farms or in small towns. City dwellers could be divided into three groups, the wealthy merchants and bankers, trades people, and unwashed laborers. The unwashed laborers made up the most significant part of any urban population and few of them were educated let alone literate.\n\n\tThose who were members of the Continental Congress came from an aristocrat family lineage or were merchants who made their own wealth (Ben Franklin). And when it came time to update the Articles of Confederation many of this former group along with many more like them would write the Constitution. This was in their own words were the elite class, the educated class, the class with the greatest interest in success of America as a nation. Thomas Jefferson summed up their sentiment by saying, “The people should elect their betters to govern them.” And by people Jefferson and many others meant those individuals who owned property and wealth. A farmer who owned his own farm, a small merchant who owned his own business, a trades person who was prosperous in that trade, in short, anyone who had accumulated some measure of property should elect their betters, the local, regional, and national elite who had the leisure time for political office.\n\n\tNow before you start condemning this class of elites we ought to understand why these individuals are the elite. Back in the day of kings and queens, the “elite” were members of the royalty and the aristocracy as royalty expanded by natural increase. But these elites claimed their status through an accident of birth and never by merit. Here in America we broke that mold to some extent for to become an elite one usually had to earn it. But one could be born into the elite group but without training and education and the accumulation of sufficient wealth one and one's decedents could be dropped from those ranks. And today the admission to these ranks of elites has pretty much has similar rules. One can obtain elite membership through the university PhD process although the mere possession of such a degree only grants marginal membership. Even becoming a lawyer is not enough, one much make at least partner in a large law firm. Scientist and engineers who discover new ideas, make new inventions or products will find their seat at the table. Businessmen who rise to the top of the corporate world easily become members since many of the elites believe such businessmen must have uncommon expertise and usually multiple millions in wealth.\n\n\tAnd like membership in the millionaire class, each year new millionaires are added and the ones who have lost their millions drop out, never to return. We do not have a static wealthy class membership, it changes every year, So as one gains membership into this elite class one's wife and children are included. Whether the children stay in this elite class for the rest of their lives depends on two things, keeping their wealth in tact or enlarging it, and their relevance in power and ideas. So unlike the aristocracy of the European cultures and countries membership in our elite society is earned by each generation. Ask yourself this question, where are the dependents of the Vanderbilt today? They use to only talk to the Asters who only talked to God. I hear God isn't listening to the Asters anymore.\n\n\tSo we come to the question of who is in the elite class? Politicians for one, most of whom are former lawyers and many the sons or daughters of politicians. Take Wendell Willkie for example. He rose to romance in law and politics, once ran for president. His son was only involved in state politics and his children are only minor players somewhere. It's a cycle and some families stay in the group longer than others. Then there are the technocrats, think Thomas Edison and Henry Ford. Both changed research, engineering, manufacture, and marketing while effecting great changes to our culture. Members of the entertainment industry enter and leave according to their popularity and influence. Academics rise upon their merits (usually but not always) but their children usually do not stay for any length of time. Businessmen, those CEOs and innovators and such are given access because of their status and wealth accumulation but usually their children do not stay for long either. Sports figures are ushered into the presence of the elites but that is due more to their sports ability and not to much else.\n\n\tWhy bother knowing about these elites? Because they govern this country, they determine the daily as well as the yearly business of this country. They act according to their own best interest and not ours. Now we find there are new groups seeking entrance into this elite class, groups that supposedly advocate for the minorities who claim discrimination and individuals who head them, the social activists and moral degenerates. When everyone claims their ox has been gored there is no justice to go around. These new groups want to be among those who make the rules, for once your group has a hand in making the rules you can shape those rules to your personal benefit. Why does one of the founders of Black Lives Matter get to abscond with multiple millions of dollars in funds from that political action group? Because she discovered what rules she could use to enrich herself. Know that the elite have always engaged in some form of corruption, usually self dealing, but very few of them are completely honest. And never before in the history of this country have we seen such corruption in government, business, and the military at the hands of the elite as we see now.\n\n\tAll direct democracies are corrupt, let that though sink in for a minute. Our founders saw that the only way to keep government halfway honest was through the separation of powers, hence the three branches of government. But more than that they also recognized the the consent of the governed must have limits and so the people must elect their representatives to act for them. And as a further check on populist will of the governed a second set of representatives called senators needed to be give some measure of supervision over the other legislators. As well and the administration. And to control both groups we give them short terms of office on the theory that the people will vote the bastards out. Perhaps the greatest abuse of political power is that so many elected and non elected individuals are not governed by term limits. Public office should not be a lifetime profession for politicians. Keep it short, one six year term for senator and 3 two year terms for representative. After that, end of public service and return to private life. All government employees should have term limits as well, keep it short at four years. This is particularly true in the case of administrators, department managers, advisors, and the like. Employment by the government should not be a lifetime career. The point is to increase greatly the churn of elites working in government and stop the incestuous relationships we see in government today.\n\n\tObviously I could go on much longer and recommend a great many reforms, but 'reforming; the elite by timing their access to power is a beginning.",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1549549305965056002/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1543853397499711505",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"content": "Taming The Federal Government<br /><br />\tDepending on you reading and interpretation of the Interstate Clause of the US Constitution, we are left with the problem of the growth of our Federal Government that may be directly attributed to this clause. Essentially, this clause was inserted into the constitution to prevent the several states from interfering with commerce between the several states by use of tariffs on goods that traversed state lines. While the several states were considered sovereign within their respective boundaries, the framers considered that the Articles of Confederation did little to encourage the flow of economic trade between the several states. Hence, allowing the individual states to create tariffs on goods that traversed the state boundaries did far more harm economically and stunted the economic growth of the union of these several states.<br /><br />\tBut what has this clause wrought? Like all good ideas of the times, it could not predict the problems of the growth of the federal government agencies. Simply put, after the War Between The States, the nation was experiencing a great economic growth. The creation of canals that carried goods and passengers across state lines with the attendant safety standards and fare regulations, the growth of railroads (which tended to come into being in some rather haphazard ways), and steamship, both inter-coastal, river, and oceanic lines all cried out for some regulatory schemes. Hence, the Interstate Commerce Clause was the answer, the federal government would rise to the occasion to regulate such concerns.<br /><br />\tThe Interstate Commerce Clause would be the excuse to create the Department of Labor so as to regulate corporations and labor unions. It would furnish the rationale for the trust busting progressive movement and legislation to eliminate or at least control trusts. Later the Federal Aviation Administration would regulate aircraft safety and passenger airline industry. The Federal Communications would be established along those same reasons. Sadly enough that same argument would create the Department of Education as if public education was subject to interstate commence. Hebert Hoover was the secretary of the Commerce Department and was responsible for the standardization of clothing sizes that still exist today. Before off the rack and ready to wear clothing existed, all clothing was created either through what manufacturers made or seamstress and talliers customized. Hoover, with one stroke of his executive command wiped out millions of jobs in the clothing industry for the sake of efficiency in consumer goods. Now one might argue that a standardization of weights and measurements was needed, but was it really the job of the federal government of write such departmental regulations or should this have been left the the individual states?<br /><br />\tThe Department of Transportation regulates all US Highway and Interstate Highway construction standards including requiring the requirement to pay the prevailing wage (local union wages). And the Environmental Protection Agency has inserted itself into the affairs of ordinary state citizens by trying to regulate your back yard rain water accumulation as coming under their clean water regulations. Indeed, this clause in the constitution has been the cited source for the authorization of the expansion of the federal government into the lives of its ordinary citizens. We have all the safety regulations for the manufacturing of automobiles because the Department of Transportation says it must regulate the automotive industry because automobiles and trucks are sold across state lines. The EPA mandates the “Clean Air” regulations of those same vehicles regardless of whether it makes any economic sense. Show me one department at the federal level that does not depend on its existence through the Interstate Commerce Clause.<br /><br />\tIt would seem that those rights vouched safe to the states have been eroded by this interpretation by the courts as to leave them little right for self government according to the constitution. The Department of Energy will assert its dominance over the states when it comes to energy production, energy transmission through various pipeline that convey natural gas or oil or gasoline. The Department of Agriculture will decide how much of any crop you, the farmer, may plant and harvest. The Department of Health will decide the quality standards of mild and other foods. It will also determine the quality and safety of the medicines you are prescribed. <br /><br />\tThe question becomes to what extent does the federal government intrude into you life and how much of this intrusion is due to the over reach that succeeds Article Two of the constitution that reserves all rights to the states that are not expressly given to the federal government? If you want to take back America from the federal bureaucrats, this is a good place to start.",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1543853397499711505",
"published": "2023-08-31T05:22:12+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "Taming The Federal Government\n\n\tDepending on you reading and interpretation of the Interstate Clause of the US Constitution, we are left with the problem of the growth of our Federal Government that may be directly attributed to this clause. Essentially, this clause was inserted into the constitution to prevent the several states from interfering with commerce between the several states by use of tariffs on goods that traversed state lines. While the several states were considered sovereign within their respective boundaries, the framers considered that the Articles of Confederation did little to encourage the flow of economic trade between the several states. Hence, allowing the individual states to create tariffs on goods that traversed the state boundaries did far more harm economically and stunted the economic growth of the union of these several states.\n\n\tBut what has this clause wrought? Like all good ideas of the times, it could not predict the problems of the growth of the federal government agencies. Simply put, after the War Between The States, the nation was experiencing a great economic growth. The creation of canals that carried goods and passengers across state lines with the attendant safety standards and fare regulations, the growth of railroads (which tended to come into being in some rather haphazard ways), and steamship, both inter-coastal, river, and oceanic lines all cried out for some regulatory schemes. Hence, the Interstate Commerce Clause was the answer, the federal government would rise to the occasion to regulate such concerns.\n\n\tThe Interstate Commerce Clause would be the excuse to create the Department of Labor so as to regulate corporations and labor unions. It would furnish the rationale for the trust busting progressive movement and legislation to eliminate or at least control trusts. Later the Federal Aviation Administration would regulate aircraft safety and passenger airline industry. The Federal Communications would be established along those same reasons. Sadly enough that same argument would create the Department of Education as if public education was subject to interstate commence. Hebert Hoover was the secretary of the Commerce Department and was responsible for the standardization of clothing sizes that still exist today. Before off the rack and ready to wear clothing existed, all clothing was created either through what manufacturers made or seamstress and talliers customized. Hoover, with one stroke of his executive command wiped out millions of jobs in the clothing industry for the sake of efficiency in consumer goods. Now one might argue that a standardization of weights and measurements was needed, but was it really the job of the federal government of write such departmental regulations or should this have been left the the individual states?\n\n\tThe Department of Transportation regulates all US Highway and Interstate Highway construction standards including requiring the requirement to pay the prevailing wage (local union wages). And the Environmental Protection Agency has inserted itself into the affairs of ordinary state citizens by trying to regulate your back yard rain water accumulation as coming under their clean water regulations. Indeed, this clause in the constitution has been the cited source for the authorization of the expansion of the federal government into the lives of its ordinary citizens. We have all the safety regulations for the manufacturing of automobiles because the Department of Transportation says it must regulate the automotive industry because automobiles and trucks are sold across state lines. The EPA mandates the “Clean Air” regulations of those same vehicles regardless of whether it makes any economic sense. Show me one department at the federal level that does not depend on its existence through the Interstate Commerce Clause.\n\n\tIt would seem that those rights vouched safe to the states have been eroded by this interpretation by the courts as to leave them little right for self government according to the constitution. The Department of Energy will assert its dominance over the states when it comes to energy production, energy transmission through various pipeline that convey natural gas or oil or gasoline. The Department of Agriculture will decide how much of any crop you, the farmer, may plant and harvest. The Department of Health will decide the quality standards of mild and other foods. It will also determine the quality and safety of the medicines you are prescribed. \n\n\tThe question becomes to what extent does the federal government intrude into you life and how much of this intrusion is due to the over reach that succeeds Article Two of the constitution that reserves all rights to the states that are not expressly given to the federal government? If you want to take back America from the federal bureaucrats, this is a good place to start.",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1543853397499711505/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1536946971577683974",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"content": "Identity Theft In America And The World<br /><br />\tNo, this is not about people or governments stealing your personal and financial information, if it were no one would bother to read beyond the headline or first sentence. No, this is about the problem we in America currently face and a few other parts of the world such as Europe. It is an overt act by far left and progressive politicians and other henchmen to divide a country and its cultures into diverse fractions against themselves in terms of identity. Let us discuss America as out main example.<br /><br />\tThe settling of America as a political unity was not done by a homogeneous population. The Puritans who settled Plymouth Rock and expanded into present day Massachusetts came from north eastern England by way of a generation's stay in Holland. After twenty years of Dutch hospitality they were encourage to more somewhere, anywhere. This group had little in common with those who settled in Georgia and the Carolinas, immigrants who came from debtors prisons, indentured servants of the Crown, and other undesirables assembled for work by the land owning gentry from southwestern England, the Cavaliers and Catholics aristocrats who found life in England very unfavorable. The settlers in Virginia came from a slightly more northern area, Sussex and such. Penn acquired a grant for the King because he was owed great sums of money as we saw the influx of the Dutch flow into Philadelphia. Highland Scots flowed into Boston and up to Maine and over into Ohio while the Scots/Irish from the lowland borders and Northern Ireland poured into the western Pennsylvania woodlands and through the Cumberland Gap into the Kentucky and Tennessee basin creating trouble with the local native American tribes. And each brought a variation of religious values as well as social and cultural values. Moreover, they did not arrive all at once and tended to initially be isolated from each other until the 1740s. Still social mixing between each group with the others was more a rarity in practice.<br /><br />\tSo, did we suddenly become a single culture and peoples in 1789 with a new government and constitution? Acculturation is a lengthy process that often takes a century or two or three. It requires groups become familiar with each other through proximity and interaction, usually economic activity, for money makes the world go round. And even in the case of enslavement of one ethnic group by another and the possible eventual sale of such slaves to other groups, these individuals and groups of enslaved people carry with them the basic elements of their cultures and shared memories. Enslavement doesn't wipe the brain clean, never did, it only changed the story, so to speak. Hence it is very difficult to wipe out an entire culture of any ethnic group, although some groups have tried.<br /><br />\tSo what is the point I am making? The cultures of immigrant groups never are erased but rather through acceptance of the “native population” norms such ethnic groups adopt such norms while retaining to some extent, no matter how weakly, their ethnic cultures. For example, if you are are Italian descent, how much to you know of your own group culture when you are the third or fourth or even the fifth generation in this country? The same for anyone of Scots/Irish lowland ancestry of German ancestry, and so on. Granted, we can read books on history, culture, and customs of our ancestors but that is no real substitute for at least an oral history transmitted from the original immigrants to the present generation. Still, this is of some relevance to our ethic identity even if such knowledge may seem to be superficial to our current existence.<br /><br />\tBut the expanded point is this, in a time where progressive politicians push the worship of power politics as the only worthy goal in governance of a people or general population then the idea of identity must be focused on the tribal identity. Ah, so we are all of Italian or Scottish, or German, or Russian, or Mexican, or what ever ethnic ancestors? No, we must be trivialized as individual oppressed groups where ethnic identity is sublimated to oppression in direct opposite to some oppressor group, mostly white males. This is the progressive identity theft of various populations and the promise is not that such perceived oppression will ever be relieved but that each oppressed group will be pitted against each other according to some scale of judgment of oppression. But to paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, a house dived against itself can not long endure, it must fall. ",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1536946971577683974",
"published": "2023-08-12T03:58:32+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "Identity Theft In America And The World\n\n\tNo, this is not about people or governments stealing your personal and financial information, if it were no one would bother to read beyond the headline or first sentence. No, this is about the problem we in America currently face and a few other parts of the world such as Europe. It is an overt act by far left and progressive politicians and other henchmen to divide a country and its cultures into diverse fractions against themselves in terms of identity. Let us discuss America as out main example.\n\n\tThe settling of America as a political unity was not done by a homogeneous population. The Puritans who settled Plymouth Rock and expanded into present day Massachusetts came from north eastern England by way of a generation's stay in Holland. After twenty years of Dutch hospitality they were encourage to more somewhere, anywhere. This group had little in common with those who settled in Georgia and the Carolinas, immigrants who came from debtors prisons, indentured servants of the Crown, and other undesirables assembled for work by the land owning gentry from southwestern England, the Cavaliers and Catholics aristocrats who found life in England very unfavorable. The settlers in Virginia came from a slightly more northern area, Sussex and such. Penn acquired a grant for the King because he was owed great sums of money as we saw the influx of the Dutch flow into Philadelphia. Highland Scots flowed into Boston and up to Maine and over into Ohio while the Scots/Irish from the lowland borders and Northern Ireland poured into the western Pennsylvania woodlands and through the Cumberland Gap into the Kentucky and Tennessee basin creating trouble with the local native American tribes. And each brought a variation of religious values as well as social and cultural values. Moreover, they did not arrive all at once and tended to initially be isolated from each other until the 1740s. Still social mixing between each group with the others was more a rarity in practice.\n\n\tSo, did we suddenly become a single culture and peoples in 1789 with a new government and constitution? Acculturation is a lengthy process that often takes a century or two or three. It requires groups become familiar with each other through proximity and interaction, usually economic activity, for money makes the world go round. And even in the case of enslavement of one ethnic group by another and the possible eventual sale of such slaves to other groups, these individuals and groups of enslaved people carry with them the basic elements of their cultures and shared memories. Enslavement doesn't wipe the brain clean, never did, it only changed the story, so to speak. Hence it is very difficult to wipe out an entire culture of any ethnic group, although some groups have tried.\n\n\tSo what is the point I am making? The cultures of immigrant groups never are erased but rather through acceptance of the “native population” norms such ethnic groups adopt such norms while retaining to some extent, no matter how weakly, their ethnic cultures. For example, if you are are Italian descent, how much to you know of your own group culture when you are the third or fourth or even the fifth generation in this country? The same for anyone of Scots/Irish lowland ancestry of German ancestry, and so on. Granted, we can read books on history, culture, and customs of our ancestors but that is no real substitute for at least an oral history transmitted from the original immigrants to the present generation. Still, this is of some relevance to our ethic identity even if such knowledge may seem to be superficial to our current existence.\n\n\tBut the expanded point is this, in a time where progressive politicians push the worship of power politics as the only worthy goal in governance of a people or general population then the idea of identity must be focused on the tribal identity. Ah, so we are all of Italian or Scottish, or German, or Russian, or Mexican, or what ever ethnic ancestors? No, we must be trivialized as individual oppressed groups where ethnic identity is sublimated to oppression in direct opposite to some oppressor group, mostly white males. This is the progressive identity theft of various populations and the promise is not that such perceived oppression will ever be relieved but that each oppressed group will be pitted against each other according to some scale of judgment of oppression. But to paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, a house dived against itself can not long endure, it must fall. ",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1536946971577683974/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1535540499497095171",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"content": "What Am I To Think?<br /><br />\tThe “Silly Season”, as the British have named it. Has begun in earnest. Normally this would refer to the electioneering by candidates for various offices, both national and state, but now includes the weaponizeation of various federal and state department of justices, an oxymoron to be sure. Jack Smith has indicted former President Trump on thought crimes reminiscence of 1984 and for which he, himself could just as easily be indicted and opens the door in court for Trump's lawyers to pursue in federal court his claims of election interference and irregularities that were previously struck down. Given that the case in New York will end in absolute failure by a politically motivated prosecutor and perhaps his possible disbarment, well, what can one say. President Trump may wish to have the US Supreme Court become involved in this mess may find a reticence on the part of the court to take part in this political melee.<br /><br />\tThe question before the possible Republican candidates is where they believe former President Trump guilt as charged. We know that Chris Christe is a RINO and that Mike Pence is one as well. I am somewhat disgusted by Pence that his so called \t Christian ethics and beliefs are so shallow as to be beneath general contempt, but that is my personal evaluation. Meanwhile De Santis has waffled on the talking points and tries to convince us that his reformist credentials are real I am not readily convinced, he talks a good game but can he walk the talk.? The rest offer little vision for the American Dream and our path forward outside of Vivek Ramswarthy, a man who claims the superior vision to Trumps America First rallying cries.<br /><br />\tOn the other hand we have the incompetence of the Democrats not really wanting four more years of Joe Biden but stuck with the prospect that Kamala Harris will become the first woman president. Maybe she will make the Clinton death list before that can be accomplished. Well, one can always hope. I have great hopes that something will happen before Kamala goes through her 'word-salad' days as out next president. I would settle for a lightening bolt strike. The more practical question is how do you ignore Harris as the 'leader' of the party for the 2024 presidential election and who would the deep state part find as a possible replacement? Certainly not Kennedy, too much the reformer. The Wookie? Well, Barack has now been cast as a gay boy want to be, explains the need for the Wookie, but would most of America vote for it?<br /><br />\tAh, I know, let's run Megan Markle for President, so simple. Who else could unite all of America into such hatred for such a shallow political character. I don't think America is ready for another pretentious royalty who is on the outs with the British Royal Family. This is too much like the Big Bad Wolf huffing and puffing and trying to blown down the third little porker who built his house out of bricks. Even Harris would have have troubling blowing that house....down. Oh, let us hope it is either Adam Shift or Eric Sawell, Fang Fang finds a home at last.<br /><br />\tI'm sorry, but time to put a fork into China, it is done. They will not rule the world in their wettest of of deans and expect their economy to implode within the next five years if not sooner. And no, they will not inhale Taiwan, too much ocean to cross and not enough landing crafts. Only idiots and Chinese communist believe that possible. As for Russia, this is their last hurrah. This war with Ukraine will exhaust them far more than Afghanistan ever did. As for Ukraine, their assistance is measured in a few decades, their demographics tell us their birth rates will not produce a population that will keep their culture alive more that twenty to thirty years, not that the Russians are in any better shape. Both groups will see the death of their cultures by the end of this century if no sooner.<br /><br />\tAs for Europe, it is dying demographically. The North African population will inherit Germany, France, and the rest of western Europe. The aging populations will see in the next five years the retirement of a working population that whose skills are not reparable by those illegal immigrants and as such, much of the industrialization of Europe will die. That will be their collective fate. Where will the industrial infrastructure go? To America, assuming the Democrats do not utterly destroy this country. But what about America's debt? Doesn't matter, where does the world put is capital? America, where we are literally self sufficient for all industrial and energy resources. Simply put, money flows to that area where the returns are higher and the safety is assured, and that's us. We become the big combine on new industrialization with out partners of Mexico and Canada. We will suffer some inflation for the next five years but we will become the hub for exports and imports for the rest of the world.<br /><br />\tClimate change or better known as global warming, is a hoax. The world will need more more CO2 to advance the agricultural abundance. Oil and gas move the energy of the world and coal is not a bad thing. “Green” energy must be subsidized through taxpayer support to even break even. That is another oxymoron. All the alternative energy resources cannot compete directly with coal, natural gas, and oil energy resources. What do we gain by paying far more for energy through “Green” programs that drive up the cost of energy but will not reduce climate change by more that one percent? Are politicians are that stupid, are we? Do you wish to live in a cave and burn firewood, assuming that the EPA would allow such a practice? Big government is not your friend and will not allow a better way of living., It is concerned with control of the individual, not his betterment.,",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1535540499497095171",
"published": "2023-08-08T06:49:43+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "What Am I To Think?\n\n\tThe “Silly Season”, as the British have named it. Has begun in earnest. Normally this would refer to the electioneering by candidates for various offices, both national and state, but now includes the weaponizeation of various federal and state department of justices, an oxymoron to be sure. Jack Smith has indicted former President Trump on thought crimes reminiscence of 1984 and for which he, himself could just as easily be indicted and opens the door in court for Trump's lawyers to pursue in federal court his claims of election interference and irregularities that were previously struck down. Given that the case in New York will end in absolute failure by a politically motivated prosecutor and perhaps his possible disbarment, well, what can one say. President Trump may wish to have the US Supreme Court become involved in this mess may find a reticence on the part of the court to take part in this political melee.\n\n\tThe question before the possible Republican candidates is where they believe former President Trump guilt as charged. We know that Chris Christe is a RINO and that Mike Pence is one as well. I am somewhat disgusted by Pence that his so called \t Christian ethics and beliefs are so shallow as to be beneath general contempt, but that is my personal evaluation. Meanwhile De Santis has waffled on the talking points and tries to convince us that his reformist credentials are real I am not readily convinced, he talks a good game but can he walk the talk.? The rest offer little vision for the American Dream and our path forward outside of Vivek Ramswarthy, a man who claims the superior vision to Trumps America First rallying cries.\n\n\tOn the other hand we have the incompetence of the Democrats not really wanting four more years of Joe Biden but stuck with the prospect that Kamala Harris will become the first woman president. Maybe she will make the Clinton death list before that can be accomplished. Well, one can always hope. I have great hopes that something will happen before Kamala goes through her 'word-salad' days as out next president. I would settle for a lightening bolt strike. The more practical question is how do you ignore Harris as the 'leader' of the party for the 2024 presidential election and who would the deep state part find as a possible replacement? Certainly not Kennedy, too much the reformer. The Wookie? Well, Barack has now been cast as a gay boy want to be, explains the need for the Wookie, but would most of America vote for it?\n\n\tAh, I know, let's run Megan Markle for President, so simple. Who else could unite all of America into such hatred for such a shallow political character. I don't think America is ready for another pretentious royalty who is on the outs with the British Royal Family. This is too much like the Big Bad Wolf huffing and puffing and trying to blown down the third little porker who built his house out of bricks. Even Harris would have have troubling blowing that house....down. Oh, let us hope it is either Adam Shift or Eric Sawell, Fang Fang finds a home at last.\n\n\tI'm sorry, but time to put a fork into China, it is done. They will not rule the world in their wettest of of deans and expect their economy to implode within the next five years if not sooner. And no, they will not inhale Taiwan, too much ocean to cross and not enough landing crafts. Only idiots and Chinese communist believe that possible. As for Russia, this is their last hurrah. This war with Ukraine will exhaust them far more than Afghanistan ever did. As for Ukraine, their assistance is measured in a few decades, their demographics tell us their birth rates will not produce a population that will keep their culture alive more that twenty to thirty years, not that the Russians are in any better shape. Both groups will see the death of their cultures by the end of this century if no sooner.\n\n\tAs for Europe, it is dying demographically. The North African population will inherit Germany, France, and the rest of western Europe. The aging populations will see in the next five years the retirement of a working population that whose skills are not reparable by those illegal immigrants and as such, much of the industrialization of Europe will die. That will be their collective fate. Where will the industrial infrastructure go? To America, assuming the Democrats do not utterly destroy this country. But what about America's debt? Doesn't matter, where does the world put is capital? America, where we are literally self sufficient for all industrial and energy resources. Simply put, money flows to that area where the returns are higher and the safety is assured, and that's us. We become the big combine on new industrialization with out partners of Mexico and Canada. We will suffer some inflation for the next five years but we will become the hub for exports and imports for the rest of the world.\n\n\tClimate change or better known as global warming, is a hoax. The world will need more more CO2 to advance the agricultural abundance. Oil and gas move the energy of the world and coal is not a bad thing. “Green” energy must be subsidized through taxpayer support to even break even. That is another oxymoron. All the alternative energy resources cannot compete directly with coal, natural gas, and oil energy resources. What do we gain by paying far more for energy through “Green” programs that drive up the cost of energy but will not reduce climate change by more that one percent? Are politicians are that stupid, are we? Do you wish to live in a cave and burn firewood, assuming that the EPA would allow such a practice? Big government is not your friend and will not allow a better way of living., It is concerned with control of the individual, not his betterment.,",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1535540499497095171/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1528312222621634577",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"content": "If I were A Betting Man<br /><br />\tTime for another two or three fingers of Scotch, I'm in need of a muse, (something creatively Latin here) and maybe some feminine company later to assuage my soul. Pence, that obnoxious Prig, and he does love to look down upon the Hoi Poli, has told us he knows best and really doesn't care about Americans save their votes. By the way, his son is a Marine corp Pilot and his son in law is a Navy pilot, Hu Rah! If we go to war as you wish, Mr Pence, one of your military members of your family may be coming home in a box. I hear it often happens it the best of family where their sons weren't the fortunate ones. And yes, I serves in the mid sixties but don't thank me, I was drafted.<br /><br />\tSo what am I to make of this silly season (sorry, British term for political office seeking)? Christ Christie double dog daring Trump into a fight under the Boardwalk in New Jersey? Really, Mr. Suet to be hung in a cage for birds in winter? Lard Ass doesn't begin to describe this pork barrel of corruption. The Black guy from South Carolina, what's his name....Tim Scott, a man who would lead us into to war but in a kinder, gentler way than most RINOs. DeSantis, a man who has shot his wad early and has little more to offer than the state of florida. Nickki Haley, notice the spelling of the first name, makes her different from all the other Nikkis in South Carolina who doesn't have a clue as to the voter fraud. And then there is the Indian, no, not the Jeep Cherokee or Liz Warren, but Ramaswarmy, a man who sees visions almost like our founding fathers and yet doesn't have quite the anti-King George attitude against our federal government. So who's left? Ah Mr Trump, former president, showman, and general all around anti-insider. The man is a CEO and demands result from his vice presidents and presidents and general managers, down to first line supervisors. Of course he was burden by the incompetent sycophants for the pool of deep state candidates, not that his advisors were anything but less than trustworthy, but when you are an outsider you need trustworthy outsiders to guide you. John Adams made that mistake and thus becomes a forgotten founding father while Jefferson fairly glows in adoration by the intellectual elites.<br /><br />\tYet Adams was the truer American than both either Washington of Jefferson, a man of great principle who believed that government should not be the wellspring of political parties representing various factions bent on acquiring political power, power that belong to the people. In a way Adams was more like John Locke, ready to see the good in the populace, unlike Hobbs who thought human affairs needed constant supervision. Indeed, this was the more extreme Federalist view as exhibited through the eyes of Hamilton who believe that a powerful central government was needed to provide the economic basis for a country. A central government that could command international credit as well as centralized authority to rule over the sovereign states.. Hamilton would have fought against States rights as a matter of convenience for the federal government.. Hence, a civil war was waged on that point but clothed in the revisionist history as a war against slavery. The winners always get to write the approved history.<br /><br />\tI am down a finger or two of muse influence but I shall continue, never the less. So what has the other side to offer outside of a period of national dementia? No doubt Biden will resign and be placed in a home for the mental defective (I hear Russia has a fantastic deal on homes for the eternally stupid hair sniffers0 And we shall be left with the embodiment of boot strapping political sexual favors giving Kamala Harris, who if she had a daughter would have named her Kamala because she couldn't spell female. Of course there may be the attempt to throw Michelle Obama, AKA the Wokie, into the presidential election on behalf of the democrat elite (with Michelle you also be Obama), thus giving promise to all trans people that they are the way of the future. Michelle is not Tyson and the best she/he can do is be Big Mike, not Iron Mike. Besides, I hear Tyson has become a conservative Republican. Seems strange that the democrat party is undergoing a sex change after years of being on hormone therapy but what emerges from the cocoon is often not a butterfly.<br /><br />\tSo, do I put a nine millimeter to my hear or vote for one of the above? Don't rush me.....I'm thinking.....what would be the worst outcome? Well, one of the parameters is whether I have a belief in the voting process, I mean, how may people will cheat to gain an advantage for their candidate? Ah, that is truly an unknown and I am uneasy with any of the reported results. I reserve the right to revolt and blow away any and all progressive politicians and their cadre in education, in government, and in the populace in general. The only good progressive is a dead progressive is my motto. Like the Texas Rangers before the turn of last century, sometimes you have to kill the criminal element for the rule of law to take hold with the general populace. As of late, we have not been willing to do that and it has become a cancer in the body politic.",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1528312222621634577",
"published": "2023-07-19T08:07:07+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "If I were A Betting Man\n\n\tTime for another two or three fingers of Scotch, I'm in need of a muse, (something creatively Latin here) and maybe some feminine company later to assuage my soul. Pence, that obnoxious Prig, and he does love to look down upon the Hoi Poli, has told us he knows best and really doesn't care about Americans save their votes. By the way, his son is a Marine corp Pilot and his son in law is a Navy pilot, Hu Rah! If we go to war as you wish, Mr Pence, one of your military members of your family may be coming home in a box. I hear it often happens it the best of family where their sons weren't the fortunate ones. And yes, I serves in the mid sixties but don't thank me, I was drafted.\n\n\tSo what am I to make of this silly season (sorry, British term for political office seeking)? Christ Christie double dog daring Trump into a fight under the Boardwalk in New Jersey? Really, Mr. Suet to be hung in a cage for birds in winter? Lard Ass doesn't begin to describe this pork barrel of corruption. The Black guy from South Carolina, what's his name....Tim Scott, a man who would lead us into to war but in a kinder, gentler way than most RINOs. DeSantis, a man who has shot his wad early and has little more to offer than the state of florida. Nickki Haley, notice the spelling of the first name, makes her different from all the other Nikkis in South Carolina who doesn't have a clue as to the voter fraud. And then there is the Indian, no, not the Jeep Cherokee or Liz Warren, but Ramaswarmy, a man who sees visions almost like our founding fathers and yet doesn't have quite the anti-King George attitude against our federal government. So who's left? Ah Mr Trump, former president, showman, and general all around anti-insider. The man is a CEO and demands result from his vice presidents and presidents and general managers, down to first line supervisors. Of course he was burden by the incompetent sycophants for the pool of deep state candidates, not that his advisors were anything but less than trustworthy, but when you are an outsider you need trustworthy outsiders to guide you. John Adams made that mistake and thus becomes a forgotten founding father while Jefferson fairly glows in adoration by the intellectual elites.\n\n\tYet Adams was the truer American than both either Washington of Jefferson, a man of great principle who believed that government should not be the wellspring of political parties representing various factions bent on acquiring political power, power that belong to the people. In a way Adams was more like John Locke, ready to see the good in the populace, unlike Hobbs who thought human affairs needed constant supervision. Indeed, this was the more extreme Federalist view as exhibited through the eyes of Hamilton who believe that a powerful central government was needed to provide the economic basis for a country. A central government that could command international credit as well as centralized authority to rule over the sovereign states.. Hamilton would have fought against States rights as a matter of convenience for the federal government.. Hence, a civil war was waged on that point but clothed in the revisionist history as a war against slavery. The winners always get to write the approved history.\n\n\tI am down a finger or two of muse influence but I shall continue, never the less. So what has the other side to offer outside of a period of national dementia? No doubt Biden will resign and be placed in a home for the mental defective (I hear Russia has a fantastic deal on homes for the eternally stupid hair sniffers0 And we shall be left with the embodiment of boot strapping political sexual favors giving Kamala Harris, who if she had a daughter would have named her Kamala because she couldn't spell female. Of course there may be the attempt to throw Michelle Obama, AKA the Wokie, into the presidential election on behalf of the democrat elite (with Michelle you also be Obama), thus giving promise to all trans people that they are the way of the future. Michelle is not Tyson and the best she/he can do is be Big Mike, not Iron Mike. Besides, I hear Tyson has become a conservative Republican. Seems strange that the democrat party is undergoing a sex change after years of being on hormone therapy but what emerges from the cocoon is often not a butterfly.\n\n\tSo, do I put a nine millimeter to my hear or vote for one of the above? Don't rush me.....I'm thinking.....what would be the worst outcome? Well, one of the parameters is whether I have a belief in the voting process, I mean, how may people will cheat to gain an advantage for their candidate? Ah, that is truly an unknown and I am uneasy with any of the reported results. I reserve the right to revolt and blow away any and all progressive politicians and their cadre in education, in government, and in the populace in general. The only good progressive is a dead progressive is my motto. Like the Texas Rangers before the turn of last century, sometimes you have to kill the criminal element for the rule of law to take hold with the general populace. As of late, we have not been willing to do that and it has become a cancer in the body politic.",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1528312222621634577/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1472002816317853712",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499",
"content": "Person Of Interest<br /><br />\tThis was a very popular television series. Of course a “Person Of Interest” was a police term for an individual who was wanted for questioning, someone with a possible knowledge of a particular crime. In the television series there were two different persons of interest, those who were perceived as a threat to national security and those who were irrelevant criminals or victims. National Security Agencies had no interest in those who were considered irrelevant and thus sweep them under the rug. Crimes against the country versus crimes against individuals held more importance, after all, a country was at stake and handling these threats involved extra legal activities form surveillance to execution of such threats. The series starts off on its innocent assumption that doing good, prevention of crimes against individuals was a higher goal, a moral action. Of course one would imagine that there were more 'numbers' – social security numbers- than a small ragtag operation could handle. So the 'Machine' was limited in its operations. Only the most egregious crimes would be tracked from inception to completion. One wonders as to what parameters were used by this AI type computer, what algorithms could be employed and to what accuracy. Intent to commit a crime is not often easy to substantiate in a court of law and yet the 'Machine' or computer with its AI program was trusted to reveal such intent.<br /><br />\tThus, Harold Finch puts his faith in his 'Machine', a computer or series of computers and servers all integrated with software (database of a particular design, and yes design makes a difference) that will 'create' an artificial intelligence that is never wrong. Finch talks about morality and moral precepts and yet believes his “Machine” embodies such attributes as if it were human, a real living being. The sad truth is that even humans fail when it comes to moral behavior. So Finch's belief in the morality of his programming is a bit of wishful thinking. Morality is not a set of equations or Venn diagrams which perfectly define our problems and allow easy solutions. But there are other questions we must ask when trying to decipher human behavior. How do we detect and measure intentions? If the computer's inputs data streams such as financial records, enacted laws on all levels of government, facial recognition, and the movement of individuals among other possible valid inputs then how do we arrive at the probability of intention and whether that intention has the probability for good, bad, or neutral outcomes? Every day each of us makes a few assumptions about those of whom we come in contact as to what their intentions may be towards us. Go to the grocery store and walk down the various aisles, how many threats to your being to you see? Most of us would never think such thoughts in such a familiar public space. But leave our familiar neighborhoods and we might and such thoughts may enter our minds, in particular when the unfamiliar upsets our feelings of peace and tranquility.<br /><br />\tHeuristics, also known as rules of thumb form the basis for much of our decision making when we lack a perfect knowledge of the world, that is when our pattern recognition is incomplete. How does one inform or code information for a computer to recognize a dog from a cat? Further still, how do we find a way for a computer to distinguish between dog breeds? I know some you 'nerds' think it's easy, a done deal but let's go back to the Stanford campus and its engineer school back in the late 1970s. The goal was to program a computer inside a van (automotive vehicle) to drive down the sidewalk on campus and successfully navigate its way several hundred feet. In the beginning that vehicle was only able to travel a few feet at a time and it would be many decades before we would see self driving vehicles which still aren't always able to tell whether there are objects in their path let alone take safe evasive actions. Imagine the number of pattern recognition algorithms that have been developed in the past fifty years so that self driving vehicles and travel on the roads in assurance that they are safe to their occupants and the public at large and we're still not there yet.<br /><br />\tYet so many of the public is convinced that we are there, that self driving vehicles will soon drive us and the goods we need on the public roadways. It's all about developing our beliefs in the “Black Box” which few of us understand. How many of you will tell me how computer literate or savvy about technology but wouldn't have a clue as to how to design a simple eight bit computer and its operating system? How many of you know the various data base forms that have been developed or how to plan the software for coding a program for statistical use? Would you have any idea how to use Pearl to identify phrases, let alone words of interest in a text? To make the “Machine” as Harold Finch calls it requires a complexity and its understanding few individuals will ever know and yet so many of us are ready to put our faith in such a black box. And give it control over the world trusting it to do the 'right thing'. Increasingly so many have rejected organized religion with its spiritual components and sense of awe for a powerful and untouchable god for belief in a black box that alienates them at will.<br /><br />\tSo we watch with enthusiasm the battle between Harold's machine which may have a moral compass and Samaritan which apparently has none or only a relativistic morality, better know as what is good for it at the moment. I find the name of this new conquer interesting since we must go back the the bible and the parable of the “Good Samaritan” and understand what that parable would teach us. In short a Samaritan (man from the wrong side of the track called Samara and non Jewish) finds a Jewish traveling merchant on the road half beaten to death by robbers. Rather than leave this Jew to his fate for neither group has much love for the other, this Samaritan goes out of his way to aid the Jew, take him into his house, tend his wounds, feed him, and provide him a donkey so the Jew could continue his journey sans merchandise. The Samaritan asks nothing, not even thinks for his efforts being very altruistic in his actions. How diabolical that a “Black Box” is named after a fictional altruistic individual who promises to come to the aid of mankind and only asks obedience to its plan and will.<br /><br />\tIs “Person Of Interest” a cautionary tale about the perils of placing one's faith in the wrong ideal? Is this progressive movement in political idealism not a religious ideal where one worships and ideal raised to the level of god and communism/Marxism was in the old USSR? What is truly the great misunderstanding of the old Soviet Union was the idea stated in the film “NetWork” where the chairman of the board tries to convert Howard Beale to the interpretation of business is business regardless of political affiliation. The CEO contends that in the councils of the Politburo the leaders would calculate their decisions based on econometrics just as in western corporate boardroom. Funny that belief as we now find out that from Stalin on it was the faith of Marxism, the great historical battle for control of the world with no other discussion. Belief was everything and for the modern day Marxist countries, and there are a few of them, the same thing is being done. God is the complete political power over all human affairs. Samaritan and its acolytes, true believers all.<br /><br />\tIf Samaritan is posited as being the one thing that can save us from ourselves then will Harold Finch dare to kill Samaritan and revive the “Machine” and thus save us from ourselves? As the King of Siam was fond of saying, “It's a puzzlement.” ",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1472002816317853712",
"published": "2023-02-13T22:53:39+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "Person Of Interest\n\n\tThis was a very popular television series. Of course a “Person Of Interest” was a police term for an individual who was wanted for questioning, someone with a possible knowledge of a particular crime. In the television series there were two different persons of interest, those who were perceived as a threat to national security and those who were irrelevant criminals or victims. National Security Agencies had no interest in those who were considered irrelevant and thus sweep them under the rug. Crimes against the country versus crimes against individuals held more importance, after all, a country was at stake and handling these threats involved extra legal activities form surveillance to execution of such threats. The series starts off on its innocent assumption that doing good, prevention of crimes against individuals was a higher goal, a moral action. Of course one would imagine that there were more 'numbers' – social security numbers- than a small ragtag operation could handle. So the 'Machine' was limited in its operations. Only the most egregious crimes would be tracked from inception to completion. One wonders as to what parameters were used by this AI type computer, what algorithms could be employed and to what accuracy. Intent to commit a crime is not often easy to substantiate in a court of law and yet the 'Machine' or computer with its AI program was trusted to reveal such intent.\n\n\tThus, Harold Finch puts his faith in his 'Machine', a computer or series of computers and servers all integrated with software (database of a particular design, and yes design makes a difference) that will 'create' an artificial intelligence that is never wrong. Finch talks about morality and moral precepts and yet believes his “Machine” embodies such attributes as if it were human, a real living being. The sad truth is that even humans fail when it comes to moral behavior. So Finch's belief in the morality of his programming is a bit of wishful thinking. Morality is not a set of equations or Venn diagrams which perfectly define our problems and allow easy solutions. But there are other questions we must ask when trying to decipher human behavior. How do we detect and measure intentions? If the computer's inputs data streams such as financial records, enacted laws on all levels of government, facial recognition, and the movement of individuals among other possible valid inputs then how do we arrive at the probability of intention and whether that intention has the probability for good, bad, or neutral outcomes? Every day each of us makes a few assumptions about those of whom we come in contact as to what their intentions may be towards us. Go to the grocery store and walk down the various aisles, how many threats to your being to you see? Most of us would never think such thoughts in such a familiar public space. But leave our familiar neighborhoods and we might and such thoughts may enter our minds, in particular when the unfamiliar upsets our feelings of peace and tranquility.\n\n\tHeuristics, also known as rules of thumb form the basis for much of our decision making when we lack a perfect knowledge of the world, that is when our pattern recognition is incomplete. How does one inform or code information for a computer to recognize a dog from a cat? Further still, how do we find a way for a computer to distinguish between dog breeds? I know some you 'nerds' think it's easy, a done deal but let's go back to the Stanford campus and its engineer school back in the late 1970s. The goal was to program a computer inside a van (automotive vehicle) to drive down the sidewalk on campus and successfully navigate its way several hundred feet. In the beginning that vehicle was only able to travel a few feet at a time and it would be many decades before we would see self driving vehicles which still aren't always able to tell whether there are objects in their path let alone take safe evasive actions. Imagine the number of pattern recognition algorithms that have been developed in the past fifty years so that self driving vehicles and travel on the roads in assurance that they are safe to their occupants and the public at large and we're still not there yet.\n\n\tYet so many of the public is convinced that we are there, that self driving vehicles will soon drive us and the goods we need on the public roadways. It's all about developing our beliefs in the “Black Box” which few of us understand. How many of you will tell me how computer literate or savvy about technology but wouldn't have a clue as to how to design a simple eight bit computer and its operating system? How many of you know the various data base forms that have been developed or how to plan the software for coding a program for statistical use? Would you have any idea how to use Pearl to identify phrases, let alone words of interest in a text? To make the “Machine” as Harold Finch calls it requires a complexity and its understanding few individuals will ever know and yet so many of us are ready to put our faith in such a black box. And give it control over the world trusting it to do the 'right thing'. Increasingly so many have rejected organized religion with its spiritual components and sense of awe for a powerful and untouchable god for belief in a black box that alienates them at will.\n\n\tSo we watch with enthusiasm the battle between Harold's machine which may have a moral compass and Samaritan which apparently has none or only a relativistic morality, better know as what is good for it at the moment. I find the name of this new conquer interesting since we must go back the the bible and the parable of the “Good Samaritan” and understand what that parable would teach us. In short a Samaritan (man from the wrong side of the track called Samara and non Jewish) finds a Jewish traveling merchant on the road half beaten to death by robbers. Rather than leave this Jew to his fate for neither group has much love for the other, this Samaritan goes out of his way to aid the Jew, take him into his house, tend his wounds, feed him, and provide him a donkey so the Jew could continue his journey sans merchandise. The Samaritan asks nothing, not even thinks for his efforts being very altruistic in his actions. How diabolical that a “Black Box” is named after a fictional altruistic individual who promises to come to the aid of mankind and only asks obedience to its plan and will.\n\n\tIs “Person Of Interest” a cautionary tale about the perils of placing one's faith in the wrong ideal? Is this progressive movement in political idealism not a religious ideal where one worships and ideal raised to the level of god and communism/Marxism was in the old USSR? What is truly the great misunderstanding of the old Soviet Union was the idea stated in the film “NetWork” where the chairman of the board tries to convert Howard Beale to the interpretation of business is business regardless of political affiliation. The CEO contends that in the councils of the Politburo the leaders would calculate their decisions based on econometrics just as in western corporate boardroom. Funny that belief as we now find out that from Stalin on it was the faith of Marxism, the great historical battle for control of the world with no other discussion. Belief was everything and for the modern day Marxist countries, and there are a few of them, the same thing is being done. God is the complete political power over all human affairs. Samaritan and its acolytes, true believers all.\n\n\tIf Samaritan is posited as being the one thing that can save us from ourselves then will Harold Finch dare to kill Samaritan and revive the “Machine” and thus save us from ourselves? As the King of Siam was fond of saying, “It's a puzzlement.” ",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/entities/urn:activity:1472002816317853712/activity"
}
],
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/outbox",
"partOf": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/796873551612223499/outboxoutbox"
}