Author Archives: Martin van Creveld

Guest Article: The View From Olympus: A 4GW Impeachment?

Posted on by

By

William S. Lind*

As I have said many times, Fourth Generation war is at root a contest for legitimacy.  On one side is the state. On the other is a vast array of alternate primary loyalties: religion, race, tribe, gang, and locality, among others.  Around the world, the contest is going poorly for the state as a growing number of people shift their primary loyalty to one of the many alternatives, for which they are willing to fight.

Washington does not perceive it, absorbed as it is in its own struggles for power and money, but the same contest is going on in this country.  So far, to our great benefit, it has remained on the peripheries. Urban police know they are confronting it in the form of ethnically-based gangs, which are illegal business enterprises that fight.  But the mass of the American people appear still loyal to the state.

The appearance is, I think, deceptive.  On both the Left and the Right, doubts about the legitimacy of the federal government are growing.  Mostly, the doubts are about the legitimacy of the current President, although polls show public perception of Congress is also strongly negative.  There is no question many on the Left regard President Trump as illegitimate. Should a hard-Left figure such as Warren win in 2020, the Right will doubt her legitimacy.  But considering the current President illegitimate is different from thinking the state itself has lost its legitimacy.

Impeachment could change that.  President Trump’s supporters regard his election as proof their voices can be heard, that their interests will be considered in Washington.  They know that to virtually all Democrats and some Republicans, they are “unpersons”. Why? Because they are White, male, or non-feminist female, straight, and mostly Christian.  They are also struggling economically, which means they are not contributors to politicians’ campaigns. The coastal elites dismiss them as rubes and hicks inhabiting “flyover land”.  The Democratic Party, which has embraced the ideology of cultural Marxism, considers them all inherently evil “oppressors” fit only to kiss the feet of blacks, immigrants, gays, feminists, etc., PC’s sainted “victims” groups.

About 18% wanted to address male and female factors, 17% came just for male infertility and 12% came just for female infertility. cheapest price on viagra This can also increase muscle power and can also be used as a cure for men’s impotence. tadalafil generic Here viagra sample pills are some hints on the Do’s and don’ts of being a pretty girl? Now we read that Oprah Winfrey is opening a school for young girls in South Africa. It does not give the user an automatic erection simply clearing the way for the blood to get along into the male reproductive organ for longer time. viagra sales online greyandgrey.com Again, should a Warren win in 2020, President Trump’s supporters will not consider her (or him) a legitimate President.  But if the unholy alliance between Democrats and the Deep State succeeds in driving President Trump from office through impeachment or some other means, that will be a very different story.  At that point, the message to President Trump’s supporters will be, “Your votes don’t matter, because even if you elect a President, we will drive him from office and reduce you to a silent serfdom.  You and your views are entitled to no representation. You are and will remain ‘unpersons.’”

At that point, in the vast electoral sea that is red America, the legitimacy of the system itself, i.e., the state, will be brought into serious question.  And when that happens, the chance of Fourth Generation war here on a large scale will rise dramatically. When you tell people they cannot achieve representation through ballots, they start to think about doing it with bullets.

That electoral map, the one that shows the results of the 2016 election by county, has significant military meaning.  The blue votes are concentrated in cities, which cannot feed themselves. As Chairman Mao said, “Take the countryside and the cities will fall.”  Nor can they be supplied from the sea, because most of the people in the military are Trump supporters, which means the red side will get most of the ships and planes.  The military problem is really quite simple, and need involve virtually no shooting or destruction. You just put the cities under siege and wait for the starving people to come out.  It won’t take long.

The message to Washington is clear and direct: if President Trump is driven from office by anything other than a loss in the 2020 election (if he runs), the legitimacy of the state will be brought into question.  That is a dangerous business that politicians of both parties would be wise to avoid. After all, they will be the first people hanged from the nearest lamppost if widespread 4GW comes here. An impeachment that leads to the checkpoints going up all over rural America is a very bad idea.

* William S. (”Bill”) Lind is the author of the Maneuver War Handbook (1985) and the 4thGeneration Warfare Handbook (2011) as several other volumes that deal with war. This article was originally published on traditionalRight on 4.11.2019.

I Find Myself Respecting Him

Posted on by

As I have written before, I have never been able to suppress a sneaking respect for Yigal Amir. Amir, let me remind those of you who have forgotten, is the guy who, this month twenty-four years ago, shot and killed then Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.

Let me make myself absolutely clear: The man is an assassin. As such he deserves the sentence he has got, which is life imprisonment. Note that Israel, thank God (in my view) does not have the death penalty. In seventy years, the only person who was ever put to death under Israeli law was Adolf Eichmann, and he richly deserved it. Also that Israel, like many other countries, has in place a number of legal mechanisms that enables sentenced criminals, murderers included, to regain their freedom ahead of time. In practice few Israeli convicts, provided they do not die while serving their sentence, stay incarcerated until they expire.

Every time the media mention Amir they hasten to add the words, “the abominable murderer” to his name. In fact, though, there is nothing particularly abominable about him. He was born in 1970 to a religious family in Herzliya, north of Tel Aviv. His father is a religious scribe; his mother used to run a kindergarten that by all accounts was well-liked by the parents of the kids who attended it. Growing up, he combined religion with a particularly fiery form of nationalism, just as tens and perhaps hundreds of thousands other Israelis do to the present day.

Having served as an infantryman in the IDF, Amir went on to study law at the religious-nationalist University of Bar Ilan, not far from Tel Aviv. His contacts with similarly-minded students at the university drew the attention of the Security Service. But not to the point where any real measures were taken to prevent him from moving about freely and doing what he was already planning to do; and not, as I myself was able to verify on one or two occasions, to the point where approaching Rabin was made very difficult. On the evening of 4 November 1995, after several abortive attempts, Amir succeeded.

As he explained on several occasions, Amir had nothing against Rabin personally. If anything, to the contrary. His deed was inspired by a. The belief that giving away even a small part of the Land of Israel to foreigners, in this case the Palestinian Liberation Organization, was contrary to the will of God; and b. Fear that Israel’s security, even existence, would be compromised. Alone among Israeli politicians, Amir believed, Rabin looked as if he had both the will and the ability to make the move in question. That was why he had to go.

To my mind, the most interesting part in Amir’s life came after he had been sentenced. It began when no fewer than three heads of state—former President Moshe Katsav, present Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert all went on record as saying that, contrary to long-established custom, he would never be released. Look who is talking, incidentally; of the three, two have since been prosecuted and served a prison sentence whereas the third, Netanyahu, is quite likely to do so in the future.

Going further still, in 2001 the Knesset passed the Yigal Amir Law, which prohibits a parole board from so much as recommending pardon or shortening time in prison for a murderer of a prime minister. As if the blood of a prime minister were redder than that of anyone else, his colleagues in the cabinet included. And as if any state that calls itself law-abiding has the right not only to enact personal laws but to enact them retroactively.

Internet retail stores commander cialis Get More Information offer diverse products as furnishings, domestic appliances, outfits, beauty goods, etc. We all now know that such disorders should never be entertained. order viagra on line It occurs with insignificant sexual incitement and before the individual actually wishes, it is also a symptom of unica-web.com buy cheap cialis premature ejaculation. For instance, a desensitizing spray like Stud 100 uses Lidocaine Base which is a mild aesthetic while other gels cipla cialis italia or creams can also numb the entire penis head for several minutes. But that was only the beginning. To make doubly sure Amir was also tried for conspiracy to murder, which finally led to another eight years being added to his sentence. For fifteen years he was held in solitary confinement. During the first ten of those he was under constant CTV surveillance—looking and behaving, if a short excerpt of the resulting film that was released to the public may be trusted, like an insect in a box.

Later too the “Prison Service”—itself an Orwellian expression that has its equivalents in other countries besides Israel—did whatever it could to make Amir’s life as miserable as possible. As by periodically denying him visitors, taking away TV, DVD and telephone privileges, and preventing him from praying and studying in the company of others as prescribed by Jewish religious law. Briefly, the kind of chicanery similar “Services” have engaged in from the beginning of history on. On several occasions he went to court in order to force the “Service” to observe the law. Sometimes with success, sometimes not.

The greatest act of defiance of all came in 2003-4. It started when a woman by the name of Larisa Trembovler, a doctor of philosophy who had been corresponding with Amir, announced that they were betrothed and intended to marry. Needless to say the “Service,” trying to play the role of God, objected and did everything it could to prevent the wedding from taking place. Legal analysts were of the opinion that, if the matter were brought to court, it would result in a victory for Amir; before things could get that far, though, the couple were able to outwit their tormentors and wed by proxy. Weddings by proxy are recognized in many religions, Judaism included. Which was why a rabbinical court validated the marriage.

That, however, did not put an end to the kind of chicanery Amir had suffered from for so long. First the ministry of the interior announced that it would not recognize him and his wife as a married couple. Next, after the Supreme Court forced its hand in this respect, the “Service” let it be known that it would not grant them a conjugal visit. Now Israeli law has granted conjugal visits even to the worst criminals: one such being Ami Popper, a man found guilty of killing seven Palestinians as they were waiting for an employer to pick them up. Once again Amir was able to win his case, after which he begot a son. Even as these words are being written, Amir is engaged in yet another legal battle concerning his right to correspond with some members of the public who believe he should be set free.

Let me repeat: Amir is a convicted murderer and fully deserves the sentence he has been given. What I cannot abide is the kind of retroactive and personal legislation that was called into being just against him. And the idea that, just because his victim was a prime minister, he should be subject to all kinds of chicaneries going beyond those inflicted on other convicted murderers. Watching the abovementioned few seconds’ worth of film of his life in prison, I could not help asking myself whether what the “Service” has been doing to him is not worse, morally speaking, than the crime he undoubtedly committed

Compared with the ”Service,” Amir is an oak of strength. Never at any point in his ordeal did he deny his guilt. Never at any point did he show remorse, beg for mercy, break down, grovel, or cry; briefly, put on any of the tricks people in his situation habitually use to mitigate their punishment or escape it altogether. For over twenty years now he has put to shame those who, whether as politicians or legislators or bureaucrats or wardens, have done everything they could to chicane him and are doing so even now.

For that, and for that alone, I find myself respecting him.

I Have a Confession to Make

Posted on by

I have a confession to make.

One morning thirty-seven years ago, practically to the day, I was standing in front of a class at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. The course was called, “The Scientific Revolution of the Seventeenth Century.” There were about thirty students, most of them freshmen- and women in their early twenties (Israeli students, owing to their conscript service, tend to be two to four years older than their colleagues abroad). For many of them, mine was the first university class they had ever attended.

As a teacher in such a situation, what do you do? This was supposed to be, not the first in a series of frontal lectures but a workshop based on the study of primary sources. However, the students, being unprepared, know nothing about anything. They themselves, being aware of that fact, either hesitate to speak up or go off in all kinds of weird directions. So you lower your expectations and try to explain a few elementary things; so elementary, perhaps, that they had never thought about them.

In this particular case the point I wanted to make was very relevant to the topic at hand. Namely, that whatever is regarded as “normal” today may not have been so considered long ago; and the other way around, of course. By way of an example—this was long before students were supposed to require “safe places” to protect their tender souls—I asked the class what they would say if I stripped naked right there and then. It was, of course, meant as a joke. But also as an illustration of the kind of dramatic change history, moving along, often entails.

Sitting opposite me was a student about ten years older than most. Looking me straight in the eye she shot back, “I would like it very much.” The class roared with laughter, and I, I was later told, turned as red as a beet. From that point on the ice between them and me was broken and we spent a wonderful academic year discussing the likes of Francis Bacon, Galileo, and Newton. It was, incidentally, one of the very few courses I gave in which female students took a more lively part than male ones did. More important for the two of us, she and I continued on our own steam. First we went for a coffee, and the rest followed. About a year later Dvora—her name—and I decided to join forces and start living together. We still do.
The supporting star casts are Patricia get cialis overnight Clarkson, Stanley Tucci, etc. The storeowners that sell counterfeit drugs are put cialis fast delivery robertrobb.com behind bars but it doesn’t deter people from indulging in sexual activity. This makes it safer for a person to attain generic cialis price an erection when he is sexually galvanised. Sexual disorder is one of the irritating and levitra fast delivery embarrassing conditions; where a man fails to take sexual pleasure.
Had the exchange taken place only a few years later, the outcome would have been entirely different. In any number of schools, both in Israel and abroad “flirting” with students, as well as other faculty members, is prohibited. So are making “suggestive” comments, “dating” (at what point does an extramural meeting with a student turn into a “date”?), “requests” for sexual activity, physical “displays” of affection, making “inappropriate” personal gifts, “frequent personal” communication with a student unrelated to course work or official school matters, “inappropriate” touching, and engaging in sexual contact and/or sexual relations. Briefly, anything that reeks, however slightly, of people getting to feel closer to one another would have caused those who engage in it to be censured, probably fired.

Social life is not math, which explains why none of the terms in quotation marks is capable of being defined. Any attempts to do so can merely lead to ever-growing confusion and, in the end, the kind of absurd hair-splitting lawyers produce in a never-ending stream. Such being the case, the inevitable outcome is to create a situation in which everyone is suspicious of everyone else. Everyone is constantly looking across his or her shoulder, and everyone has to consider every word he or she utters for fear it will be misinterpreted. An atmosphere less conducive both to teaching and to study would be hard to find.

Looking back over thirty-seven years, both Dvora and I thank our stars for the fact that, at the time, for a student to fall in love with her teacher, and the other way around, was still permitted. On top of that, I thank mine for the fact that cracking a joke, even a “suggestive” one, in the presence of young adult was still allowed. And also for the fact that, being 73 years old and an “emeritus,” I am no longer caught up in a system that puts so little trust in both faculty and students as to surround them with prohibitions of this kind.

As some Chinese sage—I forget which one—is supposed to have said: woe the generation whose teachers are afraid of their students.

Seven Things That Will Not Change

Posted on by

Ever since the beginning of the industrial revolution during the last decades of the eighteenth century, humanity has become obsessed with change. First in Europe, where the revolution originated and gained momentum. Then in Europe’s overseas offshoots, primarily but not exclusively the English-speaking ones in North America and Australasia; and finally in other places as well. By the middle of the nineteenth century, at the latest, it was clear that the world was being transformed at an unprecedented pace and would continue to do so in the future. Those who joined the bandwagon, as Japan did, prospered; those who refused to do so fell behind and in many cases have remained backward right down to the present day. As change accelerated there appeared a whole genre of visionaries who made it their job to try and look into that future—starting with Jules Verne and passing through H. G. Wells all the way to Ray Kurzweil and Yuval Harari.

As readers know, I am a historian. As a historian, I have spent much if not most of my working life doing what generations of historians have always done and still keep doing: namely, identifying the origins of change, tracing its development, pointing out its implications, and speculating on where it may yet lead. So with Polybius who, about 160B CE, believed that no one could be so ignorant and so lazy as to fail to take an interest in the way Rome expanded until it dominated the entire Mediterranean; and so with countless authors today.

In this post, though, it pleases me to try to put the idea on its head. Meaning, I am going to focus on some of the things that have accompanied humanity for a long, long time and which, I think are not going to change. Certainly not any time soon. Perhaps, not ever.

  1. A world without war, meaning politically motivated and organized violence, is not in the cards. To be sure, starting in 1945 much of the planet has enjoyed what is sometimes known as the Long Peace. Meaning that, relative to the size of the earth’s population, fewer people have died in war each year than was the case during any other period from which figures are available. But let there be no illusions: the most important, if not the only, reason behind the decline is not the kind of sudden wish for peace (“the better angels of our nature”) some authors have postulated. It is nuclear deterrence which, by cutting the link between victory and survival, has prevented the most important countries from fighting each other in earnest.

Unfortunately experience has shown that, under the shadow of the mushroom cloud, there is still plenty of room left for smaller, but no less bloody, conflicts. Especially, but certainly not exclusively, of the intrastate, or nontrinitarian, kind as opposed to the interstate, trinitarian one. Such being the case, a world without war would require two things. First, a situation where every person and every community is always sufficiently content with his/or its lot to refrain from resorting to the use of organized violence against other people and other communities. Second, a world government capable of identifying and deterring those who would resort to it from doing so.

War is to a large extent a product of the emotions. As a result, such a government would have to pry into the brains of every single person on earth, monitoring the emotions in question and possibly using electrical and chemical methods to regulate them were necessary. That would apply both to the rulers and to the rulers. For good or ill, though, there is no indication that either of those conditions, let alone both, are anywhere close to being met.

  1. There is no reason to think the world in which we live is better or happier than previous ones. Not only is happiness the product of many different interacting factors, but its presence or absence depends on circumstances. Does it presuppose a minimum of physical comfort? Yes, of course, since those who are screaming with pain can hardly be happy. However, the extent of that comfort, and even what counts as comfort, is largely dictated by what we expect and do not expect. For all we know a bushman of the Kalahari, as long as his world remained intact, was quite as content with his lot as a resident of Monaco where per capita GDP stands at $ 162,000 per year and no one pays income taxes.

Does happiness require a belief in God? Possibly so, but contrary to what priests and imams and rabbis are always saying there is no proof that religious people are happier and less troubled than unbelievers. Does it require leisure, time in which to relax, enjoy, and think? Yes, of course, but the fact that, in Rome during the second century CE, almost half of the year consisted of feast days does not mean that the contemporaries of Marcus Aurelius were happier than their ancestors or their successors. Does it require an occasional dose of adrenalin? Yes, of course, but again there is no reason to think the ancient gladiatorial games were less able to provide it than modern football does. Does it require good interaction with at least some other people? Yes, of course, but there is no reason to believe that such interaction was less common and less satisfying in previous generations than in our own. Does it require purposeful activity? Yes of course, but then what does and does not count as purposeful is almost entirely up to the society and the individual in question. Some find happiness in risking their lives while trying to climb the Himalaya; others, in staying at home and looking after their flower beds or simply reading a good book.

To claim, so soon after Hitler, Stalin, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, and whole hosts of lesser murderers that our world is getting better and happier—that is worse than a lie. It is, rather, making a mockery of the dead.

  1. Poverty will not be eradicated. Taking 1800 as their starting point, economic historians have estimated that, in the developed world, real per-capital product has risen thirtyfold. Based on this, and assuming the benefits will keep spreading like ripples in a pond, there have been countless confident predictions concerning a golden future in which everyone will be, if not exactly as rich as Jeff Bezos, at any rate comfortably off.

However, these predictions have failed to take into account two factors. First, wealth, poverty and of course comfort itself are not absolute but relative. In many ways, what was once seen as fit for a king is now not considered suitable even for a beggar; for example, a house without a flush toilet, running water, hot water, and, in cold climates, some kind of heating system. Second, though the production of material goods has in fact increased almost beyond measure, the way those goods are distributed has not become more equal. If anything, taking 1970 as our starting point, to the contrary. The two factors combined ensure that the contrast between wealth and poverty, plutos kai penia as Plato called them twenty-four centuries ago, will persist. And so will the psychological, cultural, social and political consequences it entails.

There are varieties of lotions too available in the market today http://www.devensec.com/development/Water_Resources_Protection_Report.pdf generic viagra is InteliGEN. Ordinarily known as PDE 5 inhibitor,this protein impairs PDE 5, a chemical found in the tissues particularly in the penis. buying tadalafil online High blood pressure/heart disease sales viagra [ 70% resolution]. These devices have made everybody’s life viagra cheap sale smooth and simple.

  1. Whatever some feminists may say, men and women will not play the same role in society, let alone become the same. Partly that is because nature has made them different—as is proved, above all, by the fact that women conceive, bear and give birth whereas men do not. And partly by other biologically-determined differences between them in respect to size, physical strength, robustness, endurance, risk-taking, aggression, and dominance. So fundamental are these physiological differences that they dictate much of the social order. For example, that men should be the maintainers and protectors of women rather than vice versa.

Not only are men and women different, but they want to be so. “The more like us you become, mes dames,” that incorrigible skirt chaser, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, is supposed to have said, “the less we shall like you.” Conversely, in all known places and societies the worst thing one can say about a man is that he is like a woman. It is the differences between men and women, as much as the similarities, which attract them to each other. On pain of humanity dying out for lack of offspring, had they not existed they would have to be invented. So it has been and so, in all appearances, it will remain,

  1. We shall not gain immortality. It is true that, starting in late eighteenth-century France and Sweden and subsequently spreading to other countries, global life expectancy has more than doubled from about 30 years to a little over 70 today. Moreover, and again taking a global perspective, the pace at which years are being added to our lives has been accelerating. This has led some people to reason that, if only we could increase it fast enough (meaning, by more than a year every year), death would be postponed to the point where we shall become immortal. The first person to live for a thousand years, it has been claimed, has already been born or is about to be born soon enough.

However, the calculation is flawed on four counts. First, most of the increase in life expectancy has resulted from a decline in the mortality of the very young. To that extent it represents, not an increase in lifespan but a simple statistical sleight of hand. Second, the term “global” masks the fact that, the higher life expectancy in any given country, the harder (and more expensive) the attempts to increase it further still. In other words, we have entered the domain of diminishing returns; starting in 2015, in twelve out of eighteen high-income countries life expectancy has actually declined.

Third, the fundamental underlying reality has not changed one iota. Now as ever, the older we grow the more errors creep into our DNA, the more susceptible to age-related diseases we become, and the greater the likelihood of us being involved in an accident; turning us into runners on a treadmill and leading up to our final collapse. Fourth, and as a result, it is true that the percentage of old people has been growing rapidly. However, there is no indication that the life span granted to us by nature has been increasing or is capable of being increased.

  1. The mind-body divide has always existed and, as far as anyone can see, will continue to exist. Starting at least as long ago as the Old Testament, people have always wondered how dead material could ever give birth to a living, sentient, self-aware, being. Especially in regard to the brain as the most important organ in which thought, emotion and, not least, dreaming take place. To answer the question, they invented a God who, to speak with Genesis, blew “the spirit of life” into man’s nostrils.

Darwin, in coming forward with his theory of evolution did not solve the problem; instead, he side-stepped it. Recent advances in neurology, made possible by the most sophisticated modern techniques, are indeed astonishing. In some cases they have enabled the deaf to hear, the blind to see, and the lame to (sort of) walk. Yet they are limited to studying the structure of the brain and tracing the patterns of activity that take place in it as we engage in this activity or that; at best, they duplicate a tiny fraction of that activity. They neither can nor do tell us how objective chemical and electric signals translate into subjective experiences. Leaving us exactly where we were thousands of years ago when our ancestors, while well aware that consuming certain substances led to increased awareness and others, to torpor, had no idea as to how those effects were produced

Computers can perform calculations a billion times faster than we can. However, they cannot experience love, hate, courage, fear, exhilaration, disappointment, hope, despair, and so on. Between them, these and countless other emotions shape our personality==in fact they are our personality. All are linked both to each other and to the “thinking” part of our brains; they influence our thought and are influenced by it. It is, indeed, probable that a thought that did not originate in some kind of emotion has yet to be born. That is why, even if computers and their programs grow a thousand times as sophisticated and as complex as they are today, they still won’t be able to develop anything like a human personality.

  1. Our ability to control the future, or even to predict what it will be like, has not improved and almost certainly will not improve one iota. There used to be a time when looking into the future was the province of shamans, prophets, oracles, Sibyls, and even the dead who, as in the Bible, were raised specially for the purpose. Other people tried their luck with astrology, palmistry, augury (watching the flight of birds), haruspicy (interpreting the entrails of sacrificial animals), yarrow sticks, crystal balls, tarot cards, tea leaves, patterns left by coffee in near-empty cups, and other methods too numerous to list.

Some of the attempts at prediction relied on ecstasy, others on the kind of technique broadly known as magic. Starting around 1800, at any rate among the better educated in Western countries, two methods have dominated the field. One is extrapolating from history, i.e. the belief that what has been going up will continue to go up (until it doesn’t) and that what has gone down will continue to go down (ditto). The other is mathematical modelling, which consists of an attempt to identify the most important factors at work and link them together by means of algorithms.

As the enormous accumulated wealth of many insurance companies shows, of the two the second, especially as applied to very large numbers of people, has been the most successful. But only, as the bankruptcy of AIG back in 2008 demonstrated all too well, as long as conditions do not change in a radical way. And only at the cost of ignoring what to most people is the most important question of all, i.e. what the future will bring for each and every one of them.

Do these considerations suffice to put change, that keynote of modernity about which everyone is talking all the time, into perspective?

And It Is Not the Only One

Posted on by

Snowden, Permanent Record, Kindle ed., 2019.

Let me confess: I have never been a whistle blower. Let alone a spy. I came to Snowden’s book after reading a review written by Anat Kam. Ms. Kam is a young Israeli woman who, years ago as she was doing her military service, came to the public attention by blowing the whistle on some of the Israeli Army’s illegal activities. She was caught, tried, and paid a price by spending several years in jail.

Somewhat to my surprise. I discovered that the most interesting passages were not those in which the author describes his own path to stealing official secrets and publishing them. Rather, they were those in which he reflects on the world the Net has created. If I quote them at some length then that is because they struck a bell with me.

Locs. 626-55

“One of the greatest joys of those [early] platforms was that on them I didn’t have to be who I was. I could be anybody. The anonymizing or pseudonyimizing features brought equilibriums to all relationship correcting their imbalances. I could take cover under virtually any handle or “nym,” as they were called, and suddenly become an older, taller, manlier version of myself. I could even be multiple selves. I took advantage of this feature by asking what I sensed were my more amateur questions on what seemed to be the more amateur boards under different personas each time…

I am not going to pretend that the competition wasn’t merciless, or ha he population—almost uniformly male heterosexual, and hormonally charged—didn’t occasionally erupt into cruel and petty squabbles. But in the absence of real names, the people who claimed to hate you weren’t real people. They didn’t know anything about you beyond what you argued, and how you argued it. If, or rather when, one of your arguments incurred some online wrath, you could simply drop that screen name and assume another mask, under cover of which you could even join in the mimetic pile-on, beating up on your disowned avatar as if it re a stranger. I can’ tell you what wet relief that sometimes was.

In the 1990s, the Internet had yet to fall victim to the greatest iniquity in digital history: the move by both government and business to link, as intimately as possible, users’ online personas to their offline legal identity. Kids used to be able to go online and say the dumbest things one day without having to be held accountable for them the next. This might not strike you as the healthiest environment in which to grow up, and yet it is precisely the only environment in which you can grow up—by which I mean that the early Internet’s dissociative opportunities actually encouraged me and those of my generation to change our most deeply held opinions, instead of just digging in and defending hem when challenged. This ability to reinvent ourselves meant that we never had to close our minds by picking sides, or close ranks out of fear of doing irrevocable harms to our reputations. Mistakes that were swiftly punished but swiftly rectified allowed both the community and the ‘offender’ to move on. To me, and to many, this felt like freedom.

Imagine, if you will, that you could wake up every morning and pick a new name and a new face by which to be known to the world. Imagine that you could choose a new voice and new words to speak in it, as if the ‘Internet button’ were actually a reset button for your life. In the new millennium, Internet technology would be turned to very different ends; enforcing fidelity to memory, identitarian consistency, and so ideological conformity. But back then, for a while at least, it protected us by forgetting our transgressions and forgiving our sins.”
Taking right kind of treatment for viagra overnight no prescription Click This Link your sexual problem can be treated effectively. So make sure to have cialis samples generic as per the suggestion of the doctor which says to have one 100mg pill an hour before the person starts to make love or carry out their sexual activity. The Bottom Line With every age comes responsibility, so why let something like erectile dysfunction it can be extremely hard to see all of these problems going on. see this link order viagra online The severity of viagra sale male impotence may be related to (but not limited to) immune issues, inflammatory conditions, and endocrine problems.
Locs. 986-92.

“It’s nearly inconceivable now, but at the time Fort Meade [home of the National Security Agency, MvC] was almost entirely accessible to anyone [the same applied to other sites with which I was familiar, including the Capitol MvC]. I wasn’t all bollards and barricades and checkpoints trapped in barbed wire. I could just drive onto the army base housing the world’s most secretive intelligence agency in my ’92 Civic, windows down, radio up without having to stop at a gate and show ID… That’s just the way it was, in those bygone days when ‘it is a free country, isn’t it?” was a phrase you heard in every schoolyard and sitcom.”

Locs. 3963-73

“It [the NSA) was, simply put, the closest thing to science fiction I’ve ever seen in science fact: an interface that allows you to type in pretty much anyone’s address, telephone number, or IP address, and then basically go through the recent history of their online activity. In some cases you could even play back recordings of their online sessions, so that the screen you’d be looking at was their screen, whatever was on their desktop. You could read their desktop. You could read their emails, their browser history, their search history, their social media postings, everything. You could set up notifications that would pop up when some person or some device you were interested in became active on the Internet for the day. And you could look through the packets of Internet data to see a person’s search queries appear letter by letter, since so many sites transmitted each character as it was typed. It was like watching an autocomplete as letters and words flashed across the screen. But the intelligence behind that typing wasn’t artificial but human: this was a humancomplete.”

End of quotes.

By now, in addition to reading everything, they can see and hear everything. Too often, even when your computer or smartphone are turned off. If some scientists are to be believed, soon enough they will be able to reach into your thoughts as well as your dreams.

All this, in a country that has long claimed to be the land of the free and the home of the brave. And it is not the only one.

Guest Article: What Comes Next?

Posted on by

By

Larry Kummer*

As a Boy Scout Troop leader, I met a group of extraordinary men. Men with integrity, strength of character and body, successful in the world. The opportunity to work with these men was the largest influence we had on the young men in the Troop. “More is caught than taught.” That is, we lead by example. We have kept in touch with our Scout as they moved out into the world. We advise them, hear of their deeds – and they watch us.

What is the big lesson these young men learn from us? One by one, they see marriages fail. Most divorces are initiated by wives. This the background of their lives. This is a core reality of our time.

From my work helping the Blue Star Moms and editing the FM website, I have come to know some impressive veterans. Strong men who are impressive in several dimensions. Today I got yet email from one, a message I see quite often. His wife attacked their bank accounts, served him with a “protective order,” and filed for divorce. These orders claim harassment or assault, and are an easily deployed and powerful tool used mostly by women in divorce cases (see here and here).

In decades as an investment advisor, I have seen the same drama played out countless times.

 

Girls’ Game

There is much chatter these days about men using “Game.” It is mostly big talk and imaginary posturing.

In fact our time is shaped by Girls’ Game: romance the man, stage the party-of-her-life, marry, have kids, divorce when they are in school – then get community property, child support, and independence. The husband provides support during those first few difficult years raising the children, then is dumped. She then gets the children she wants without the bother of having a husband. It is the logical strategy for women raised to value their independence above all else.

Sound data is rare, since In 1996 the National Center for Health Statisitics discontinued funding to states for the collection of detailed marriage and divorce data. We saved pennies per person! (The elephant is powerful but prefers to be blind.) But perhaps a third of marriages end this way. The shadow of this frequent event affects most families.

Girls’ Game was an immense success for the women of the Baby Boomer and Millennial generations. Combined with increased access to higher education and careers, this is the closest any generation of women has come to “having it all.”

One result of Girls’ Game: in 2005/06 less 60% of US adolescents (11, 13, and 15 years old) lived with both birth parents (per the OCED Family Database), the lowest level in the OCED. Today probably even fewer do.

Any drug that doesn’t contain this chemical can’t cure lowest price for cialis impotency. Along with the growth robertrobb.com order cialis of this disorder in men, they can start to eat medicine known as Kamagra jelly for the treatment of ED. In this case study, the patient was not trying to levitra vardenafil 20mg get pregnant. Very similar to get more generic viagra prices, this drug has huge and unnecessary risk when brought from offshore websites.  

What do young men learn from this?

Men trod paths blazed for them by prior generations. Young men do not just learn from the strong men around them. They aspire to be like them (“role models” in modern cant). Today’s young men look at these older men and see that their education and career success – decades of hard work in the rat race – mean nothing to the wives that dump them (other than cash). Many draw the logical conclusion: “if these big men couldn’t make marriage work, I probably can’t either.” Some will take this logic one step farther and drop out of the rat race. This might explain a mystery that has economists guessing.

“During the 1996–2016 period, the nonparticipation rate increased the most for younger men of prime working age, those age 25 to 34. In terms of education, the largest increase in nonparticipation was seen among men with the middle levels of educational attainment – those with either (1) a high school diploma but no college, (2) some college, or (3) an associate’s degree.”
— “Men’s declining labor force participation” by Douglas Himes in the BLS’ Monthly Labor Review, May 2018.

A man with few aspirations can live just fine outside the rat race. No great career, but steady work. No long-term relationships with women, just casual sex (much, little, or none depending on one’s taste). Lots of booze, drugs, sports, and games. No ties to the community, nation, or religion – none of whom have done much for them.

Patriarchy was the reward to men for running the rat race. This is the implicit subject of countless books, plays, films, and TV shows. One of the best – most stark, no sugar-coating – is the wonderful film A Thousand Clowns (1965).

 

What comes next?

America provides special courses for girls. Scholarships for girls. College programs for girls. Films are carefully scrutinized for correct attitudes about women. A flood of media in every form counsel women to own the future. Governments are taking the first step to enforce quotas (e.g., California), although informal quotas are commonplace in public and private agencies.

I wonder if all this is in vain, and if men’s decisions will shape the future of America. Will the men of Generation Z join the rat race, marry, and help build communities for the 21st century? Not many need choose a different path to radically change America in ways we cannot predict – but are unlikely to be good.

 

* Larry Kummer is a former investment and portfolio manager and the editor of the Fabius Maximum Website. The original of the present article can be found at

https://fabiusmaximus.com/2019/09/15/teaching-boys-about-marriage/.

Where the Boys Are

Posted on by

On this website and elsewhere, I have often written that one possible outcome of modern feminism will be renewed attempts to separate the sexes. As of this moment, that prediction seems to be coming true. Separate kindergartens (“in single-gender… classrooms at one elementary school in Western Michigan.”). Separate schools. Separate playgrounds (“Separate Playgrounds up at More Schools”—The Denver Post, 31.5.2008). Separate parking places. Separate taxis. Separate railway- and underground carriages. Separate rows of seats on aircraft. Separate elevators  (“Office Workers Face Sex-Segregated Elevators,” Schmooze, January 2012). Separate floors in hotels (in Tokyo). Separate swimming pools and sports facilities. Separate streets (in the orthodox neighborhoods of Jerusalem, just a few miles from where I live). Soon, perhaps separate queues at shopping centers and entertainment facilities such as theaters, movie houses, and the like.

All these, and many more, either exist already or have been seriously proposed. In a handful of cases, the objective is to protect men against their own lecherous instincts. But mostly it is to defend poor defenseless females of all ages against those wicked, but unfortunately strong and powerful, creatures known as males. Males whose only aim in life is to touch them and fondle them and rape them if they can possibly get away with it.

As the old unlamented apartheid regime of South Africa had it, “separate but equal.” In the process, moves towards gender integration that took decades, sometimes centuries, to accomplish are being reversed one by one. Often the outcome is a regression to earlier arrangements. An excellent example is the recent trend towards what is called “Women only co-working spaces.” No doubt those who came up with the idea see themselves as daring innovators. In fact all they are doing is to put back the clock to the last two decades or so of the nineteenth century. As the first really large corporations made their appearance in the U.S and Europe, management looked for personnel who could do routine, physically not too demanding, work such as bookkeeping, correspondence, filing, and general administration. The normal solution was to recruit the daughters of the lower middle classes and have them work from the time they left school—generally at the age of sixteen or so—until they got married five or six years later. To assure worried parents that their daughters’ morals would not be corrupted, which God forbid, the women in question were concentrated in halls of their own. There they came under the supervision of somewhat older female employees and males were not allowed to enter. Contemporary photographs often show row after row of neatly dressed women sitting behind their desks; hence what one author has called, The White Blouse Revolution.

Unfortunately for feminists, the renewed move towards separate facilities for women is unlikely to empower women. Instead, if I am allowed to venture another prediction, it will result in men and women looking on those facilities, and the women who inhabit them, as second rate. The fact that, in every known society, whatever men do is regarded as the most important has been well documented by female researchers among others. So has the fact that, whenever women enter a field or profession, that field or profession will start going downhill in terms of both prestige and income.

There is a certain logic behind this. Integration or separation, now as ever the worst thing people of both sexes can say about a man is that he is like a woman; the best thing people of both sexes can say about a woman, that (as long as she does not grow a beard and speaks in a bass voice) she is like a man. In the words of the famous nineteen-fifties-vintage singer, Connie Francis:

Where the boys are, someone waits for me
A smilin’ face, a warm embrace, two arms to hold me tenderly

They think they have to go it alone and admitting they don’t have the answer viagra generic sildenafil will permanently mar their reputation. Action of mechanism: Kamagra tablets are manufactured with a chemical or viagra online prescription neurological reaction monitored from the brain that trigger the dilation of the blood vessels, which allow the erectile chambers to become flooded with blood to get firm erection during the sexual encounters. Many people lead normal lives in spite of buy sildenafil uk them. The main difference between the two is that the Kamagra Oral Jelly buying viagra in usa can be purchase from online pharmacies to treat your erectile dysfunction problems and should be used for this purpose alone. Where the boys are, my true love will be
He’s walkin’ down some street in town and I know he’s lookin’ there for me

In the crowd of a million people I’ll find my valentine
And then I’ll climb to the highest steeple and tell the world he’s mine

Till he holds me I’ll wait impatiently
Where the boys are, where the boys are
Where the boys are, someone waits for me
Till he holds me I’ll wait impatiently
Where the boys are, where the boys are
Where the boys are, someone waits for me.

Or in those of the Bible: Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

When the Drones Come Marching In

Posted on by

Contrary to the common wisdom, drones are not new. Perhaps the first to build and use them were the Austrians in 1849; besieging Venice, which had revolted against Habsburg rule, they launched two hundred balloons that carried 33 pounds of incendiaries each. How effective they were, and what role they played in the city’s ultimate surrender, is disputed to the present day. Drones, in the form of remotely-piloted gliders and aircraft, were also employed by the German Luftwaffe during the last years of World War II. They scored their greatest success on 9 September 1943 when a contraption affectionately known as Fritz-X hit the brand-new Italian battleship, Roma, in the waters between Sardinia and Corsica and sank it. Others were used against installations such as bridges, with mixed results.

During the next few decades drones only played a marginal role in warfare. That, however, began to change in 1982 when the Israelis employed them with considerable success during their invasion of Lebanon. Some were used for conducting reconnaissance in front of the advancing armored divisions; others, to confuse and attack Syria’s anti-aircraft defenses until there were literally none left. Since then drones have multiplied and developed. As those who build and sell them never tire of pointing out, range, endurance, speed, maneuverability, payload, accuracy, and so on have all improved beyond recognition.

However, the most important developments in the field are seldom mentioned. They are, first, the fact that drones tend to be much smaller, cheaper—some come at less than $ 200—and more expendable than manned aircraft. And second that, being smaller, cheaper, and more expendable, they are capable of being used, and sometimes even produced, not just by states and their armed forces but by many other groups and organizations as well. Especially since the advent of GPS, almost anyone can build a drone in his garage. And indeed quite some people have been doing just that.

To gain a full perspective on the matter, consider the following. Starting at least as far back as the Peloponnesian War, the largest and most bloody wars were always waged by great powers against one another. In 1949, the year in which the Soviet Union became the second power to own nuclear weapons, this kind of warfare became obsolete. As additional countries acquired nuclear weapons during the following decades, they too were prevented from fighting each other in earnest. In time, it was this development that led to what many political scientists call The Long Peace.
Other devices of treatment can vary from role playing to changing anxious deeprootsmag.org on line viagra thoughts about speaking. Go Healthy Man can make the most enjoyable sex moment. viagra cipla deeprootsmag.org The most viagra 50 mg buying that popular products include Hot Goat’s Marijuana and Blue V Pills. You can look at them as bricks in the building block of body and these depends over direct source of energy for performing all the generic viagra rx discover over here functions properly.The medicine regulates enormous flow of energy by absorbing essential nutrients and vitamins.
But that is only one side of the coin. While nuclear weapons have been preventing great powers from seriously fighting each other, drones have been working in the opposite direction. As the American experience in fighting the Taliban, as well as the Israeli one in fighting organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah shows, when it comes to fighting guerrillas and terrorists drones are of limited use. Neither in Afghanistan, nor in Gaza, nor in Lebanon, did they enable their owners to break the other side’s fighting spirit and win the war. Perhaps, to the contrary: as recent events in the Gulf illustrate all too well, they made it possible for these and similar organizations to extend their reach, striking at targets dozens and perhaps even hundreds of miles away. The effect of drones, in other words, has been to help level the ground on which non-state and state belligerents fight each other. It is in this, above all, that their importance lies.

And the future? I am not saying that drones are invincible. With the possible exception of nuclear weapons, no weapon is. Drones can be brought down either by anti-aircraft defenses or by other drones. And they can also be fought by electronic methods, meaning that the command and control systems on which they depend can be interfered with. That, for example, is what the Iranians did back in 2011 when they captured an American Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel near the city of Kashmar.

But make no mistake. As far as anyone can see, nuclear weapons will continue to limit war among the most important powers. Meanwhile drones, becoming increasingly sophisticated, will help make it easier for non-state organizations to confront the powers in question, thus presenting the world with a new challenge that is not just military but political as well. And one that states and their militaries better take seriously before it is too late.

The Last Unknowns

Posted on by

For about a year now, I have been working on a book in which I hope to address some of the most fundamental questions that have long faced mankind and presumably will continue to do so for quite some time to come. Doing so, I was fortunate to stumble across a book by the title of The Last Unknowns. Edited by John Brockman, of Edge Organization, and published in June 2019, it contains a list of about a hundred questions of exactly this kind. Prominent among the authors is a Nobel Prize winner, the psychologist Daniel Kahneman, who wrote the introduction. The rest form an impressive list made up of professors—mainly of physics, computer science, brain science, biology, evolution, and ethics, and education—the heads of various research institutes, and journalists. All with the occasional entrepreneur, artist and musician thrown in.

I read the book for A to Z. Twice. As I did so, it occurred to me that I might list what I considered the most interesting questions and, based on my studies so far, try to provide brief answers for them. Doing so, I can only hope my readers will enjoy the intellectual exercise as much as I did.

So here goes.

Q. Are complex biological neural systems fundamentally unpredictable?

M.A (My answer). Perhaps. If so, we might as well give up any hope of ever gaining a complete understanding of such systems, with all the consequences that such a lack of understanding implies.

Q. How would changes in the marginal tax rate affect our efforts and motivation?

M.A. Raising taxes to confiscatory levels, as in some Western countries during the late 1960s and 1970s, is certain to reduce effort and motivation. And vice versa: in trying to stimulate an economy, few things are as useful as a cut on taxes. Ask Lyndon Johnson in 1964.

Q. Will it ever be possible for us to transcend our limited experience of time as linear?

M.A. In the past, there have been many societies that did not experience time as linear. The way they saw it, it was either static or cyclic. So why not in the future, too?

Q. How can science best leverage reason to overcome the heroic passion for war?

M.A. First, who says war is exclusively the product of unreason? And second, suppose we do in fact succeed in getting rid of the passion in question; won’t doing so also put an end to some of our noblest qualities, such as curiosity, comradeship, courage, entrepreneurship, and self-sacrifice?

Q. Will the appearance of a new species of talented computational intelligence result in improving the moral behavior of persons and societies?

M.A. No. If there is one field in which computers and everything they stand for are irrelevant, it is morality.

Q. What is the hard limit on human longevity?

M.A. The book of Genesis, which was probably put together about 800 BCE, puts it at 120 years. Limiting ourselves to cases where the documentation may be relied on, during the three millennia since the just one person is known to have live longer: to wit, a Frenchwoman named Jeanne Calment who died in 1997 at the age of 122 years, 164 days. And even in her case it has been suggested that the relevant documentation was counterfeit.

Q. Why are we so often kind to strangers when nobody is watching and we have nothing to gain?

M.A. It depends on what you mean by “so often.” As long as this is not spelt out, the question remains meaningless.

Q. Is there a way for humans to directly experience what it’s like to be another entity?

M.A. No.

Q. Will a machine ever be able to feel what an organism feels?

M.A. Probably not. Computers may be sufficiently intelligent to beat the world’s master at chess; but there is no indication that they are, or ever will be, able to experience such things as love, rage, etc.

Q. Will scientific advances about the causes of sexual conflict help to end “the battle of the sexes”?

M.A. I hope not. In the words of a 1950s popular Israeli song, take the “battle” away, and all that remains will be the plumbing.

Q. How do I describe the achievements, meanings and power of Beethoven’s piano sonata Appassionata?

M.A. Don’t even try. Instead, listen to it many, many times. Better still, play and replay it as well as you can.

Q. Why do we experience feelings of meaning in a universe without a purpose?
It is good for your kidney without side effects. downtownsault.org viagra sales in canada All the people tadalafil without prescription that pharmacy store of the all classes cannot afford it. Masturbate Before Sex Another practical technique you can try is masturbating before sex. purchase generic levitra Possible solution for ED or Erectile browse this link cheap soft viagra Dysfunction? Erectile Dysfunction is a terrible menace to suffer from during the healthy ages.
M.A. No one knows or is likely to know. But the fact that we do experience such feelings is perhaps the strongest argument against the idea that the biological depends entirely on the physical.

Q. How will we know if we achieve universal happiness?

M.A. I once stayed in southern California where the sky is always blue and the temperature always around 25 degrees. Having asked what living in such a climate was like, I was told that, after a couple of weeks, one no longer notices. Similarly, chances are that, once we achieve universal happiness, we’ll get used to it, take it for granted, and start feeling unhappy once again.

Q. Have we left the age of reason, never to return?

M.A. Has there even been an age of reason?

Q. Will humans ever embrace their own diversity?

M.A. They’d better, because they have always been and will always remain diverse. Furthermore, where there is no diversity among people they will go right ahead and invent it.

Q. Are stories bad for us?

M.A. How can they be, given that it is they who give us our identity?

Q. What will be the use of 99 percent of humanity for the 1 percent?

M.A. Similar to the use 100,000 men who built the great pyramid had for the Pharaoh who put them to work. Does that mean they lived in vain?

Q. Is scientific knowledge the most valuable possession of humanity?

M.A. Some would argue that our capacity for love is.

Q. Are the laws of physics unique and inevitable?

M.A. Scientists like to think so. However, they cannot prove it.

Q. How can AI and other digital technologies help us create global institutions that we can trust?

M.A. The one thing that can generate trust is trust. That is why technology can only help us in a very marginal way, if at all.

Q. Is a single world language and culture inevitable?

M.A. Not only isn’t it inevitable, but it will never come to pass. The reason? Where there are no differences, people will go right ahead and invent them. And doing so won’t take them very long, either.

Q. What quirk of evolution caused us to develop the ability to do pure mathematics?

M.A. This question might seem quirky at first sight. However, it has the power to blow away our entire Darwin-based view of the world. Evolution theory teaches that only “useful” qualities survive by being passed to the next generation. So how did our ability to do pure math, which is of no use whatsoever, survive?

Q. What does it mean to be human?

M.A. To be capable of anything.

*

To which I’d like to add one question of my own:

If the brain is a computer and thought equals computation, why do so many people find math the most difficult of all subjects?

White Trash

Posted on by

In America and elsewhere, what has not been said about right wing “extremists”? That they are ignorant (which many are). That they are bigots (which many are). That they are boorish (which many of them are). That they are racists (which many are). That they are anti-Semites (which many are). That they are Nazis and supporters of Adolf Hitler (which some of them are). Also, that their number and penchant for violence, including lethal violence, is increasing. To the point where, the FBI claims, it now presents a serious threat not just to the victims and their neighbors but to society in general.

What is not often said is that, practically without exception, they are white men. People who, following over half a century of civil rights, women’s lib, gay lib, and immigration (both legal and illegal), have been turned into the most denigrated, most marginalized, most abused group in America. Nigger and Dago and Chink and Greaseball and Kike and queer and poofster (and butch) are out and may, if those who use them are unlucky, lead to legal action. But Honkey, a derogatory slur meaning, originally, “white devil,” is in. So are “Hick,” “Hillbilly” (“often used as an insult and racial slur against White folks who live in the country”) “Redneck” “a poor white person without education, especially one living in the countryside in the southern US who has prejudiced, unfair and unreasonable beliefs”) and “White Trash.” To engage in homosexual, or lesbian, or “transgender” sex is chic, and anyone who considers it revolting had better old his or her peace. But for a man of any color to have or merely try to have normal sex with a woman is to invite accusations of harassment, exploitation, abuse, and rape.

Every time a black person or a gay person or a woman have problems at school or at work, then that is because they are discriminated against. Every time a white one does, then that is because he (or, less often, she) has personality problems. One reason why all this is permitted is because straight whites have long turned into a minority in their own country. And whereas middle-upper middle- and upper class white men generally know how to defend themselves against such slurs if they really want to, blue collar men, whether because they do not have the necessary education or for other reasons, often do not. The emphasis, which in many places had been turned into a legal requirement, on “positive discrimination-–as if discrimination could ever be “positive”—and “diversity” ensures that, when it comes to finding work, they are often relegated to the end of the queue; the consequences of this for their income and prospects hardly have to be pointed out.

Psychological research has “discovered” that many right-wing extremists are thrill-seeking, impulsive, inflexible, obsessive, angry, have problems in facing anger, Above all, they have a desire to hurt others. In short, they are walking compilations of evil qualities. As so often, academia contributed by providing the necessary footnotes, thus causing the hunt to become respectable. What is hardly ever asked is whether the people in question may possibly have some reason to be what they are supposed to be—and whether some of the reasons in question are in any ways based on fact.
With a proper cialis india price faith and teaching methods, we can improve them much batter. Your associate will enjoy your effort and improve your bedroom maneuvers as soon as again. find out this link now cialis sale uk This herb helps uplift the spirit sildenafil sale and increases energy levels. I’m neither of those, yet no amount of Sex Capsules and Male Enhancement Pills can prevent that. levitra price http://amerikabulteni.com/page/79/
All these trends, and others like them, got under way in the 1960s and accelerated in the 1970s. In the 1980s they were to some extent held in check by Ronald Reagan; since then they have turned into a Niagara, particularly under Barak Obama. What might have happened if Hillary Clinton had won the 2016 elections hardly bears thinking about. Concentration camps for whiteys (said to be a “derogatory ethnic slur”), perhaps?

The outlook? As a Jew, I have no reason to sympathize with the kind of “white trash” I am referring to. Still, unless there is a radical change, “white trash” unquestionably will continue drinking beer, buying weapons, and chewing their wrath. A few, no doubt, will go of the rails and engage in terrorism, fourth-generation war, or whatever it is called.

Culminating, more likely than not, in something like The Handmaid’s Tale.