On Individual Sovereignty

My latest post is found here:   http://individualsovereignty.blogspot.com/ .  I started that blog in 2007, and left it in May of 2020 to launch Ecological Liberalism.  After well over one year here, I'm returning to "Sovereignty".  While I fully appreciate the fact that numbers of people here have been rock-solid steady for the past year-plus, those numbers are too small relative to the time it takes to research & post items... and they're not growing.

During my time on this blog, "Sovereignty" had over three times the monthly hits registered here... with no new posts there.  I hope you readers who have followed my essays on Ecological Liberalism will continue to do so on the link in the  paragraph above.  If you do, thanks in advance.

Happy Trails

"HOT MONEY"...

 with General Wesley Clark & his son, Wes, Jr., & directed by Susan Kucera ("Living in the Future's Past", narrated by Jeff Bridges).  Too bad Clark Sr. wasn't elected President when he ran awhile ago.  It's on Amazon Prime, not the best production for a doc, but the content is on the mark.  It shows precisely why:

1.  the global financial world is so fragile, & why mega banks should be broken up ASAP;

2.  there's so much economic inequality;

3.  most national gov'ts (including ours) are not seriously addressing Climate Change [only some cities & States in the USA are, & that's insufficient];

4.  mostly, the transformation to clean energy is going at a snail's pace;

5.  Climate Change already has started the destruction of the worldwide financial & economic systems;

6.  the new normal will involve mass human migrations never seen before;

7.  too many people apparently fail to recognize the paradigm shift in values which must occur if we are to survive & thrive in the future; and

8.  too many people are wrong when they believe that Tech will save us in time, therefore to them, there's no urgency about any of this, no need to drastically alter politics, the economy, or the financial system...much less our values.

..........

I imagine this documentary is found not only on Prime, but elsewhere online as well.  Look for it if you really want to understand what's going on currently, and what's required to avoid complete catastrophe.  Off & on, I've been studying this for 50 years (started in 1972 at Arizona State U.), so please believe this:  humans are facing the greatest Crisis in our history, and climate disruption is only a part of it.  The "experts" think we have until 2050 to mitigate the problem & thus avoid total societal breakdown.  In all probability, I believe that benchmark should be moved to the year 2035.  Why?  Because much more than climate is involved.  

It's time for all of us to take this seriously.  Much can be done on the micro scale, & much "lobbying" (of sorts) needs to be done on the macro scale.  Politicians will engage in window dressing efforts unless there's an outcry from the ground up.  History has proven such.

Best of Due Diligence to Everyone

p.s.  STEP 1:  stop believing the Edward Bernays style propaganda put out by most of the Powers-That-Be.  For example, it will take much more than Tech to avoid catastrophe.  Don't believe anyone who says otherwise.

....................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Human Extinction?

Below is my latest email (slightly edited) to a few friends and family.

...................

If anyone has the time or interest, & it takes very little time, read the Conclusion (starting on pg 86) of this 2016 scholarly Thesis.  https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/54848306.pdf

It provides evidence of how neoliberalism essentially has (over decades) squashed the environmental movement relative to protection of our habitat.  

That has been accomplished via 3 avenues:  legislation (interpreted to include Free Trade Agreements enforced by private "courts" via the WTO), assimilation (corporations partnering with NGOs & gov'ts, corps determining policy, etc.), and financial coercion (through debt via mega banks, the IMF, & the World Bank).   It has been an assault on not only the enviro movement, but also on any social movement which opposes neoliberal policies.  Those policies include worldwide privatization, deregulation, liberalization of Finance (without adequate oversight), austerity for commoners, and mega corporate hegemony in general.

This is one of several scholarly papers which tend to support my contention that neoliberals now rule society with the aid of their political puppets... regardless of Party.

Most of the "Green" talk by the Establishment in DC today is all in the framework of neoliberal philosophy & neoliberal economics.  It's an oxymoron. It's window dressing.  It's tinkering around the edges of the Crisis.

When the political Establishment talks about "following the science", they mean the medical science.  They don't pay much attention at all to the science of ecology.  That lack on their part might be the 1st step on the path to eventual human extinction.  That's entirely within the realm of possibility.  To avoid it, we need a paradigm shift in ethics & our worldview.

.................

Not only my opinion.

Be Well

Reframing the Crisis

 https://mahb.stanford.edu/blog/the-nature-and-overshoot-crisis-reframing-the-discussion-of-climate-change-and-biodiversity-loss/

While anthropogenic climate disruption is a massive problem requiring immediate attention, let's not marginalize other assaults on the ecosphere.  The article at the link above demonstrates that loss of biodiversity and other related disasters are interconnected to climate change, and every bit as important.

At the root, the ongoing crisis we're facing is as much a question of ethics as anything else.  The hubris of humans in relation to other species and the environment is (in general) beyond the pale.  We have to correct that if we expect to survive and thrive in the future.

We do have a model or two with which to work.  Indigenous societies around the world and certain Eastern religions have understood for thousands of years the importance of treating Nature as sacred.  It turns out they are on the mark.

As Barry Commoner said in 1971, "Nature knows best.".  Our technology has accomplished amazing things, but sorry to say, it also has egregiously damaged our global habitat.  As a species and overall, our attempts to improve human well-being have brought us to the beginning of our own extinction.  Unfortunately, that's true not only in the ecological sphere, but also in the social sphere.

It will take a paradigm shift in ethics if we are to survive and thrive.

Two books which point the way:  The Sacred Balance -Rediscovering Our Place in Nature, by David Suzuki; and The Web of Meaning - Integrating Science and Traditional Wisdom to Find Our Place in the Universe, by Jeremy Lent.

........................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

A Pioneer in Systems Theory and Sustainability for Spaceship Earth

Boulding's work goes all the way back to the 1960's.

 https://www.inspiringquotes.us/author/3917-kenneth-e-boulding

A sample of his thoughts---

“Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist.”

-- Kenneth E. Boulding

“As long as man was small in numbers and limited in technology, he could realistically regard the earth as an infinite reservoir, an infinite source of inputs and an infinite cesspool for outputs. Today we can no longer make this assumption. Earth has become a space ship, not only in our imagination but also in the hard realities of the social, biological, and physical system in which man is enmeshed.”
-- Kenneth E. Boulding

“Physicists only talk to physicists, economists to economists-worse still, nuclear physicists only talk to nuclear physicists and econometricians to econometricians. One wonders sometimes if science will not grind to a stop in an assemblage of walled-in hermits, each mumbling to himself words in a private language that only he can understand.”
-- Kenneth E. Boulding

“Economics has been incurably growth-oriented and addicted to everybody growing richer, even at the cost of exhaustion of resources and pollution of the environment.”
-- Kenneth E. Boulding

...............

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

For 20 Years - "One Lie After Another"

https://twitter.com/ScottHa85992272/status/1432141855588769793?s=20 

Link to a piece by the well respected journalist, James Risen.  Finally, what really happened in Afghanistan for 20 years.  Imperial hubris, opium trade, killing of civilians, warlords, corruption, horrendous mistakes, and lies about it all.  When will we ever learn?  A paradigm shift is needed.  We the People don't want perpetual war.

........................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

p.s.  Surprisingly quickly, Twitter unblocked my account.  [For context, see the posts immediately previous to this one.]

Twitter Update

Found a way to contact Twit even when you're blocked from Twit.  It's convoluted and somewhat hidden; I really just stumbled upon it.  Once you find the "Contact Us" button, it's still convoluted...and more hidden.  If anyone really needs all the excruciating details, contact me.  Here's the message I finally was able to submit to Twit  ---edited a bit:  [It's a lot like the last post, but don't miss my commentary after the quote.]

......................

 "1. As a senior citizen & a night owl, I do not have regular sleep hours.  Plus, I get only 4 -6 hours of sleep per 24.  Those are not any more than 2 consecutive hrs of sleep at a time.  Much of my awake time is online.  I SUSPECT all that has caused your algorithms to block me from Twitter because of SUSPECTED AUTOMATION.

2.  Apparently, your algorithms were programmed in such a way as to make them incapable of handling this:  I DON'T HAVE A CELL PHONE, & don't want one.  That means I can't give you a MOBILE number to get a code to verify my acct.  HELLO.

3.  Just prior to being blocked for suspected automation, I passed the "I am not a robot test" by ID-ing "taxis" in a series of photos.  Still blocked.  Really, Twitter?!  That action on the part of your algorithms MAKES NO SENSE WHATSOEVER.

4. You have a problem.  Those algorithms in that scenario are incapable of handling a simple situation.  I am NOT automated in any way.  I have NOT violated any of your policies as far as I can determine.  All I have is a land line for a phone. My email is abstractcowboy@gmail.com.  I live in NM, USA.  I'm a former Biology & Ecology teacher, & a former employee of Sacramento Environmental Management Dept., HazMat Div.

5.  Stop blocking me from your site.  Unlike your algorithms, I AM NOT A ROBOT.   I've passed that "not a robot" test on Twitter a gazillion times.  If you don't believe the results of those tests, why even have them?  This is not rocket science.  Sincerely, Scott Haley"

.....................

We'll see how they respond.  I realize this is a somewhat trivial matter; however, it is indicative of the mindset of High Tech companies.  For the most part, they don't seem to care one whit about folks who use their venues.  It doesn't seem to matter that we're the only reason they have paying ad clients.  They make it as difficult as they can for someone to contact Support.  Then you wait an ungodly amount of time to hear back.  Why?  Most likely because the companies haven't hired enough CSRs to handle the load.  Or, like some companies, they refer you to a "Discussion Forum" where nonprofessionals give helping you a shot.  That's often nothing but a nightmare.  C'est la vie in an overpopulated world, eh?

Back when I was a young man (1960), the population of the USA was HALF of what it is now.  Fewer customers for Biz.  Companies bent over backwards to help you, and keep you coming back to their operation.  You younger folks have no idea of how different it was then in that regard as compared to now.  It's astounding.

........................

Not only my opinion.  Happy Trails

A Question & a Hunch: Is TWITTER discriminating against or censoring accounts which DO NOT violate their policies?

 I've been on Twitter for a bit over a year.  There and elsewhere online, I've often been critical of High Tech companies, Mega Biz in general, neoliberalism, and corporatism.  A few times in the past, Twitter has stopped me from accessing my account because they suspect its "automated".  That may be because I'm a senior citizen and don't have regular sleep hours.  Plus, I'm a night owl, not an early bird.  In any 24-hour period, I get maybe 4 - 6 hours of sleep.

Yesterday they blocked/throttled me again, saying the account "appears to be automated".  [This time, I can't find a way to get around it.]  I've tried to contact them, but as you know, High Tech companies don't want you to contact them.  That would require them to hire support staff.  After unsuccessfully trying different things to reach them, I sent the following email to this  address:  tweet@twittermail.com...found it online, don't know what it is ---

"Twitter thinks I'm a robot...even after ID-ing "taxis" in a series of photos.  They won't let me into my acct.  They want a mobile phone number so a code can be sent.  I guess the robot algorithms of Twitter were not programmed to be capable of dealing with this:  some people, like me, don't have a cell phone; and don't want one.  Let me into my acct...am not a robot.  Obviously, your algorithms are the robots."  😀

High Tech companies utilize algorithms which often are not capable of handling the myriad of situations arising in online scenarios such as the one above.  That's why they need live people as support staff.  But the Head Honchos of some of these companies appear to not care much at all about their users, only about their advertising clients.

One analytic website (I didn't note the name) says Twitter has done this - blocked access because of "suspected automation" - to thousands of T. accounts.  We're not suspended for violations, but blocked temporarily because of Twit suspicions.  "Try again later", they say.  For those with cell phones it's a brief glitch; although, I don't know that for certain.  Trying again later has not worked for me this time.

What's really ignorant on Twit's part is:  to prove you're not automated (a "robot"), you're given a series of photos from which you have to ID the ones with a bus, a train, or a taxi, etc.  Even if you pass that test, sometimes the algorithms still prevent you from accessing your account... because of suspected automation.  That makes no sense whatsoever.  [I hope Twitter isn't one of the companies claiming to have Artificial Intelligence:]

All the above generates the title of this essay.  I'm NOT suggesting that Twitter is, for a fact, discriminating.  I'm saying this:  I SUSPECT they might be.  Their blocking of people who moments ago passed the "I'm not a robot" test is highly suspicious activity on their part.  [Sometimes you're required to pass that test three times in a row, & then you still get blocked.  That's either really faulty algorithms or massively bad policy, or maybe, attempts to rid the site of some people & their ideas.  People who have not violated any of Twit's policies.]  That's just a hunch, not a fact.  Given the scenario above, it's a plausible guess, or at least, a remote possibility.

If anyone knows how to contact whatever paltry support Twitter has, please let me know.  Keep in mind, though, I can't get on their site at all, so the method of contact must be email or a toll free telephone number (I do have a land line).  Also, please let me know if any of you have had similar problems.

Thanks.  Be Well

INTOLERANCE on the Political Right and the Political Left

 https://theintercept.com/2021/08/23/portland-police-proud-boys-protest/

Portland's bizarre experiment, indeed.  The Portland, OR Police Chief apparently is not aware of this:  when protesters and counter protesters are in the same place at the same time, the job of the police is to keep the two groups separated.  Hello.

Instead, there were multiple incidents of physical attacks, and even a bit of shooting at one another.  So, what's all this hate, lack of civility, and idiocy about?  From an email of mine (edited)--

The Criminal Childish Boys (AKA, proud boys) are not insisting on individual rights; they are insisting on totalitarianism - they expect everyone to believe & act as they do, even if it contravenes other peoples' rights (e.g., the right to wear a mask during a pandemic, or the right to voice an opinion, or the right to be in public without being attacked).  The Left has a much milder version with something similar to totalitarianism - their "Political Correctness" and "Cancel Culture".  

Intolerance spans the entire political spectrum.  "Think & act as we do, or we'll denigrate & harass you... because we know what's best for everyone."  On the one hand (the Right), "God told us"; and on the other hand (the Left), social evolution told us.  In either case:  "We're right, & you're wrong.  Period.".

Both the Right & the Left are "True Believers" in the worst sense, although, the Right is a tad worse about it than the Left.  Not too much worse, though.  One thing is clear to me after being a keen observer of American politics since Mr. Benson's American Gov't class at HPHS in 1956:  both the Right & Left are intolerant of "the other side", and almost totally so.  Of course, that's a general statement; I'm sure there are a few exceptions.  Those exceptions do not invalidate the general statement.  

 Until that intolerance is overcome, our country will continue to be divisive and often violent.  What a genuine tragedy.  The Big Picture is way beyond Right & Left, but it seems too few see it.  The Media don't help.  Whether corporate or noncorporate, ALL of them are slanted one way or another.  Most likely, that's because of intolerance for "the other".  There's no objective News at all anymore.  Perhaps there never was.

Political prejudice reigns supreme (in general) among people on the Right & the Left, which means each views "the other side" as ALL (or at least, an overwhelming majority) having the same characteristics as the few who are running the show on each side.  As long as that continues, we will not have a civil society.  Ever. 

 The truth is, no group ever has been as homogeneous as what the Right & Left say the other side is today.  I've known some super fine people in my life.  About half were on the Right, & half were on the Left.  They all were civil to each other.  The younger folks of today could take a lesson from that.

....................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

MULTIPLE APPROACHES and TOOLS are required to attain sustainability

The articles below propose that it may not be wise to focus on only a single approach when tackling the implementation of sustainability.  The complexity of a paradigm shift in this arena requires multiple approaches and tools.  Specifics are given.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800921002019

[Integrating the green economy, circular economy and bioeconomy in a strategic sustainability framework]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210422416300843?dgcid=raven_sd_recommender_email

Exploring the governance and politics of transformations towards sustainability

From watching/reading the Corporate Media, one would rarely ever be aware of the tremendous comprehensive work being done in the field of sustainability...for at least the last twenty years.  Some of it goes back forty years plus.  More writers and activists should spread the word.  Once in awhile, I get the feeling that some people think "Going Green" is simply a matter of passing laws.  Passing laws may not be easy, but it's a picnic compared to the research and implementation of sustainability for Spaceship Earth. 

................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Consciousness, Nature, the Myth of A.I., & Reality

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyu7v7nWzfo&list=WL&index=68 

 Research on Consciousness has exploded in the last quarter century. The piece at the link above relates some of the surprising discoveries. One of them is that it's highly likely an organism does not have to be as intelligent as Homo sapiens to possess Consciousness. Another is that it's even more likely something has to be biologically alive in order to possess Consciousness. 

 That means: don't believe the hype being promulgated by Mega Corporations about Artificial Intelligence . The original definition of A.I. was:  an artificial machine conscious of itself as a separate "being". Tech Whiz Kids are nowhere near creating such a machine. A bunch of algorithms which can predict certain outcomes or make certain choices based on input does not constitute a conscious being.  A.I. does not presently exist... and likely never will. I leave it to you to guess as to why certain large corporations want us to believe it does exist. 

 The research also shows that, despite some people believing otherwise, human beings are a part of Nature. We are not separate from, superior to, or in any way above Nature. We are Nature.  That is one of the core principles of ecoethics and ecocentrism.  To believe we must conquer Nature gives us license to destroy Nature, and too many people appear to be doing exactly that... often at will.

 Finally, what the brain perceives are energy impulses coming from objects. Everything is energy. Matter consists of bundles of energy vibrating much more slowly than light, or gamma rays, or radio waves, etc. The implication of it all is clear: all things are made of one thing, and it's all part of a whole. 

 It's encouraging to live in a time when researchers in all fields of Natural Science are seriously studying Reality, and discovering (or confirming) its intrinsic properties. 

 The real mystery is Consciousness. If it only exists in sentient beings, or there as well as elsewhere, then does that mean all sentient beings have intrinsic value? I think it does, which means we humans need to discard our hubris and view all beings possessing sentience as having much more than only utilitarian value.*** That's another core principle of ecoethics  and ecocentrism. 

***For example, the way in which elephants and certain other domesticated and wild animals are treated by some humans (all around the world) is outrageous, immoral, and unethical.

Going Green without adopting an ecocentric (as opposed to anthropocentric) worldview is, in my opinion, an oxymoron.  It's counterintuitive.  It will result in failure.  No sustainability for Spaceship Earth.  Luckily for us, many people appear to be recognizing such.

............................. 

Not only my opinion. Be Well

Monetary Policy, Billionaires, Income, Wealth Tax, Inflation, & More

Below is an edited email I recently sent to family & a few friends.

.............................

If things were on the up & up in private Finance & Fed Gov't monetary matters:  the price of an ounce of gold would be $21,593; and

the price of silver would be $3,054 per oz.

In 1913, the year the Fed Reserve started operating, gold was $28.82;

silver was $2.66.  Now they are about $1,814 and $25, respectively.

NOTE:  be sure to read at least the "p.s." below.  Something very few people know, & quite interesting relative to today.

The median new home price now is $357,700.  In 2000, it was $165,543.  In 1980 it was $47,200.  In 1940 it was $2,948.  [We've been told over & over that the Fed Reserve is controlling inflation.  Hmmm - really?  In 1961, I bought a new pair of Levi's jeans for $3.95 in Colorado.  Today, those same jeans are around $50 or so.  Since 1961, the per unit cost of producing jeans has gone down.]

Adult worker median income is now $35,567.  So, HALF of U.S. adult workers make less than that.  [And Jeff B. Amazon thanks us all for making possible his HAM-the-chimp-astronaut flight to the edge of Space:]

The U.S. national debt is now over $28.5 trillion.  The principal never will be paid off; interest payments are around one billion $ per day.  Total U.S. debt (public & private) is a tad over $85 trillion.  [Worldwide debt is $281 trillion.]

Source:  U.S. Debt Clock

I leave it to each of you to assess what this all means for the future.

p.s.  The Super-Rich are fighting like crazy against a legislative bill which would impose a wealth tax on billionaires only of 3 cents per dollar of income.  3 cents.  It would pay for most of the Gov't programs being proposed lately.  Apparently it's too much to ask of billionaires, all of whom stood on the shoulders of society to get where they are.  [There's no such thing as a self-made billionaire.  Society provided them with education, infrastructure of many sorts, medical care, opportunities, social networks, communication, a civil habitat, & more. Yes, they helped pay for all that, but then, so did we all.]

Keep this in mind:  the 1st permanent U.S. Income Tax did not apply to wages.  It was only on passive income, and it only affected the top 2% of U.S. citizens.  It was promoted as a "Soak the Rich" tax just before being passed into Law.

https://twitter.com/ScottHa85992272

..............................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Terrestrial Vertebrate Populations and the Ongoing Sixth Mass Extinction on Earth

If you would like a good grasp of Earth's sixth mass extinction, the link below explicitly explains the urgency of it in graphic terms.  The scholarly article is relatively short, well illustrated, and right on the mark.  Are you pressed for time?  At least scroll down a bit at the link to Figures 2 & 3, (especially Fig. 2) and don't just glance at them.  Study the "key" at the bottom of each one, and then the three different columns of each Figure.

http://www.ceres.ens.fr/IMG/pdf/ceballos-etal-2017-pnas.pdf

Some people (even some who should know better) don't believe there is an ongoing sixth mass extinction.  Furthermore, they don't see biodiversity loss as being of any major importance to humans.  Most likely, that's because they don't yet see any large numbers of individual species going extinct, and they aren't considering the decline of populations as important or significant.  Finally, they apparently don't understand the role of biodiversity in natural ecosystems, or how human survival is related to those ecosystems.

In biology, a population is a group of similar organisms (e.g., mammals, birds, amphibians, etc.) or often, a specific species (e.g., Canis lupus).  Population studies of any group of organisms are done in a particular geographic area.  Populations exist in specific areas.  So, for example, the arctic fox is not found in the tropics.  :) 

Prior to any species going forever extinct, there's a significant decline in their population numbers.  The decline happens in different areas, and rates of decline may vary from place to place.  If the decline continues, ultimately the inevitable result is extinction.

The point being:  simply because species are not yet totally disappearing in massive numbers in no way means a mass extinction is not underway.  Why does it not mean that?  Because declines in populations precede final extinction, and currently, population declines are significant.  For example, since 1970 the worldwide populations of wildlife vertebrates on land have declined by 68%.  It's even worse in aquatic habitats.  [Source:  Living Planet Report 2020, by the World Wildlife Fund.]

That's a wake-up call.

....................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

The massive EV problem in the USA

 It's the fault of our Government.  Specifically, AC v. DC relative to converter infrastructure is not standardized at charging stations, and also is often nonexistent.  Large numbers of U.S. consumers never will buy EVs until this changes.

https://twitter.com/ScottHa85992272/status/1417707779666628611?s=20

and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLcqJ2DclEg&list=WL&index=81&t=911s [At least watch from about 12:30 to 18:00. That's the core of the piece.]

Europe has it right on this one.

....................

Not only my opinion. Be Well

"The Big Kahuna, Part II"

 Below is an email I recently sent to family and a few friends.

...............

 In the last month or so---

1.  Michael Burry ("The Big Short") says:  the worst Crash in history ("the mother of all crashes") is coming...

https://markets.businessinsider.com/currencies/news/big-short-michael-burry-deletes-twitter-predicts-epic-market-crash-2021-6  AND -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QhXIQAAo2E

2.  Ray Dalio (who has managed a $150 billion Fund for decades, & from whom nat'l gov'ts have sought advice) says:  the Asset Bubble is about to collapse, & it will be "worse than 2008"...  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73Gpg6KDFsI

3.  Bill Gates has sold large blocks of his stocks in companies this yr - he sold 100% of them in Amazon, Apple, & Twitter...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcuIswW3B3o

4.  Warren Buffett also has sold large amounts of his stock portfolio this yr., and says massive inflation is coming.

5.  On the other hand, a few economists & financial gurus are saying the inflation will be temporary, followed by Depression-like deflation, thus causing the Crash.

Does all this definitively prove anything... obviously, no... but it does suggest that people a lot smarter than me are extremely worried about the big kahuna being just around the corner.  [I thought it should have hit 4-5 yrs ago:] 

So, you have nothing to lose by preparing accordingly.  At the very least, having extra household goods on hand (& rotating them as needed) is no big deal - Crash or no Crash, you'll use them anyway.   

Everyone Be Well, & Be Prepared... just in case

End of Reminder   

..........

Contrary to what the gentlemen above are saying, irrational exuberance currently seems to be the flavor of the day in government and on Wall Street.  To some degree or another, it all reminds me of the Tulip Asset craze a long time ago in the Netherlands.  As a species, will we ever learn the consequences of Bubbles?

Not only my opinion.

Land Use RE: Energy and Mining Resource Extraction Footprints

 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800921001646?dgcid=raven_sd_via_email

In case the link doesn't work---

From the journal, Ecological Economics, Volume 187 -

"Energy matters: Mitigating the impacts of future land expansion will require managing energy and extractive footprints".

High Tech (& Tech in general) gobbles up such a large amount of natural minerals, and all of us gobble up such a large amount of fossil fuel energy, that those two categories have an ecological footprint almost as large as agriculture when it comes to the disruption of natural habitats.  This is one of the main reasons that biodiversity is rapidly plunging.

The authors of the above article propose mitigation actions for the future.

The human land use dilemma is growing, and overconsumption plays a major role.  Here's only one example:  no one really needs a new cell phone every year or two.  The production of just ONE phone uses up about 500 pounds of natural resources, and that requires more & more extraction from the land.

As to energy, nearly all of us in highly developed countries use too much of that.  The situation must undergo a paradigm shift if the world is to achieve sustainability.

The entire downhill slide we're on as a species is driven by the rat race of unlimited growth and too much consumption.  From what I've seen, too many people seem to believe we can continue on with both of those if we just convert to a Green Economy.  That's erroneous thinking.  Many studies have shown it to be so.  Links to some of them have been posted on this venue for the past year-plus.  "Going Green" and continuing on with the growth & consumption of the past decades simply are not compatible.

Ecological economics and the concept of a Steady State Economy have been around for years and years.  They've been marginalized and denigrated by the "growth" Establishment, particularly by the Plutocrats (both private and public).

If we are to survive and thrive, it's time for a major change.  To overcome the Establishment propaganda, education - formal & informal - and activism are key.

...................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Deconstructing "The Dasgupta Review"

 A controversial examination of "biodiversity economics"---

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14747731.2021.1929007

I believe the scholarly article found at the link above is right on the mark.  The commodification of Nature in general is fraught with serious problems.  More importantly, it appears to avoid what's really needed in order to stop and reverse biodiversity loss:  a paradigm shift away from neoclassical/neoliberal economics.

Putting a seemingly Green twist on such economics will not suffice.  Offsetting, creating "natural capital" financial MARKETS, etc., is still tinkering around the edges of the problem.  Such markets rarely, if ever, have been kind to natural ecosystems.

Above all else, two things are crucial to quelling our ongoing Eco-Crisis:  the natural, voluntary reduction of human population; and the complete shift away from neoliberalism and its failed economics.  The first can be accomplished through education and incentives.  The second, believe it or not, will be a tougher nut to crack.  Recent history proves it to be such.  Neoliberal economics should be long gone by now; however, ongoing Edward Bernays style propaganda and indoctrination keep it hanging on.  It will take persistent and consistent education to break it loose.  So far, catastrophes resulting from adherence to neoliberalism have not done the job, which I find baffling.

..............

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Major threats to life on Earth that we must address in 2021

Chomsky and Prashad: There are 3 major threats to life on Earth that we must address in 2021: The Noam Chomsky Website

Tick-tock.

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Political Corruption Reigns Supreme in the USA

Here's how to combat it peacefully---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJy8vTu66tE&list=WL&index=70

The video is about six years old, but still applies today.

Another of my comments on it is posted here---

https://twitter.com/ScottHa85992272/status/1404229654702137355?s=20

I've been preaching this for about 20 years, and Harvard Prof Lessig explains it better than I ever could.  Every adult in the world should watch this short video.  Here is PRECISELY how corruption operates in the USA.  It has been going on for decades, and continues today.

...................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

DENIAL

The elephant in the room.  No one in power wants to talk about it.  Denial is the order of the day.

https://mahb.stanford.edu/blog/the-psychology-of-denying-overpopulation/

Sustainability will be elusive until we recognize and deal with the problem of overpopulation.  It could be addressed with education and incentives, but politicians are loathe to even broach the subject.

The brief article at the link above delves into important aspects of this situation.  Highly recommended.

..................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

"We Are a Plutocracy: Jeffrey Sachs Slams Biden for..."

 At the link below is a brief, 3-part post of mine.  For Parts 2 & 3, look below the photo at the link.

https://twitter.com/ScottHa85992272/status/1400936951021191168?s=20

The piece is from Democracy Now.

In general, Plutocrats are committed to unlimited growth and overconsumption. If ever we are to reach sustainability goals on Spaceship Earth, we must stop allowing the Super-Rich to rule the roost. Step One would seem to be: get private mega donations out of political election campaigns.

The Plutocrats claim such money is "free speech". Not when it's given to candidates or their campaigns, it isn't. It's then nothing more than corruption, buying influence. The use of it would be free speech if the donor used it to run an ad in the media, expressing support for the candidate. This is not rocket science. 😌 It's merely common sense.

Get mega money out of politics.

..........................

Not only my opinion. Be Well

A Most Interesting Question

Title of a journal article in Ecological Economics, Volume 185, to be published in July, 2021:

"Beyond ecosystem services and nature's contributions: Is it time to leave utilitarian environmentalism behind?".

From the "Highlights" of the article (preceding the Abstract)---

"We plead for a paradigm shift, away from utilitarian, anthropocentric and dualistic conceptions of human-nature relations."

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800921000963

As Homo sapiens attempts to move toward sustainability and all things "Green", it seems to me that we're still missing an important underpinning to the success of those efforts.  It's known as ecocentrism.

In the dozens of articles on the circular economy, the doughnut/donut economy, etc. which I've read, the ideology of anthropocentrism appears to prevail.  Is that, as Lynn White proposed decades ago, due to the Judeo-Christian worldview of the Nature-Human relationship (which sees humanity both superior to and separate from Nature)?  Perhaps, but I really don't know.

In any case and in general, humans do seem to be filled with hubris... especially regarding nonhuman life.  That's a problem when we profess to be "going Green".  In my view, there will be no successful sustainability without the adoption of ecoethics on a massive scale.  Ecoethics will not be the prevailing philosophical standard without a paradigm shift in our view of the natural world.  In the meantime, our efforts toward sustainability - though laudable and a good first step - still amount to tinkering around the edges of the socio-eco-econ-ethical Crisis.

Nonhuman life has intrinsic value, not just utilitarian value.  The Earth is not here for us to "subdue" (from the Book of Genesis in the Bible).  The spark of life in all beings is the spirit of Universal Consciousness.  

As Barry Commoner stated in 1971 (in his book, The Closing Circle):  "Everything is connected to everything else".  We humans are not separate from Nature; we are Nature.  We don't "come into the world" when we're born.  We come from it.  All beings are Universal Consciousness expressing Itself.

Without the above worldview, I don't see how we can live in harmony with Nature, or have any significant degree of sustainability.

Not only my opinion.  Be Well 

Is Biodiversity Offsetting Working as it Should?

 Plus, what are the ethical objections to such practice?

https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cobi.13603

Commodification of Nature is a path requiring delicate navigation, and care must be taken to ensure an ethical, successful outcome.

Offsetting exploitation impacts seemingly is a great idea; however, certain problems need to be addressed.  The article at the link above, found in the journal, Conservation Biology, is a good start.  In particular, see the Abstract and Table 3.

...................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

"Decolonization or Extinction: Indigenous Red Deal Lays Out Plan to Save the Earth"

 https://www.democracynow.org/2021/4/22/the_red_deal_book

At the link above, two indigenous scholars lay out the following.

1.  How/why we're still tinkering around the edges of solving the Socio-Eco-Econ-Ethical Crisis upon us.

2.  Neoliberalism, neocolonialism, and neoimperialism still are the flavor of the day.

3.  The Biden Crew is not adequately addressing the above problems.

4.  Our relationship with Earth is in dire need of a paradigm shift.

The lambasting of Biden may seem excessive to some, but I believe it's right on the mark.  Like Obama, he's a wolf in sheep's clothing when it comes to the Oligarchy v. the rest of us, or ecological ethics v. mega corporate greed.  [Nevertheless, both men are orders of magnitude better than Trump.  But that alone will not rescue Homo sapiens from disaster.]

The two interviewees are proposing the adoption of  ecoethics, and that's the first step toward sustainability.

...................

Not only my opinion.  Happy Trails

The real reason why we're still in Afghanistan...

and never will leave completely unless we undergo a paradigm shift in economics.

https://campbellmgold.co.uk/archive_blowing_in_the_wind/afghanistan_mineral_riches.pdf  [Article by James Risen.]

Almost fifteen years ago, the USGS and the Pentagon discovered the probability is extremely high that Afghanistan is awash in mineral riches totaling about one trillion dollars.  Not only common minerals such as iron and copper are buried there, but those crucial to modern day industry (e.g., lithium) as well.

The world is at a point where mineral resources - especially rare earth minerals - are more and more difficult to access.  Afghanistan has never been mined to any significant degree.  Done in 2007, the USGS used highly sophisticated aerial survey equipment in a study which shows the country is ripe for extremely productive mining.

World leaders who are not pursuing sustainability are prone to believe that when it comes to critical natural resources, it's a "dog-eat-dog" world.  Sometimes such thinking results in long-term planning involving resource wars, or financial wars, or best case - diplomacy.  For decades, we've had all the above on planet Earth.

One way or another, the richer countries are going to get access to needed natural resources.  That's especially true when the country is on an unsustainable path, which currently is the case in the USA and many other well-off nations.

Sustainability is one of the keys to a peaceful future.  Ecological economics is the best path forward.

......................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Wisdom, Indeed

 These gems of wisdom apply not only to the paradigm shift to sustainability, but also to almost any field of endeavor.

https://www.stuartbhill.com/

Professor Hill (a social ecologist) has compiled a list of ideas which are both brilliant and crucial to the implementation of significant change.  If ever there was a time for positive collaboration, ecoethics, and dedication to a bright, sustainable future, that time is now.

KUDOS to Stuart B. Hill, and profuse thanks.

...........................

Not only my opinion.  Happy Trails