Rebane's Ruminations
November 2026
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

  • "… of shoes and ships and sealing wax/ of cabbages and kings.",  Lewis Carroll

    George Rebane

    (Written 31mar12; no time to write today Sunday, I'm pulling my scheduled club duty as rangemaster at the local rifle/pistol range.)

    On this blustery and wet Saturday morning I gathered together a few of the piles of notes I make while reading the stuff that arrives across the (virtual and real) transom here on our Nevada County ridge.  They seemed to have a common thread if you don’t put too fine a point on it.

    For openers, I enjoyed the latest contribution from Lucille Lovestedt in today’s Other Voices column of The Union (paywalled online).   That lady is a keen observer of the human condition, and a practiced friend of the written word.  Among other things on her mind these days is her more frequent run-ins in the news with the concept of Singularity (q.v. 'Singularity Signposts' category), which she interprets as the harbinger of human “obsolescence” if not outright “extinction”.  Of course, as readers here know, she has a point on both counts.  One of the Singularity preparations of this soon-to-be great-great-grandmother is to update her will accordingly to at least account for the ‘obsolescence’ scenario, which is already in full swing in the developed nations’ labor markets.  I would dearly like to know some of the particulars of her revised will; that would be a worthy read from this well-read and wise woman who has enjoyed many birthdays.

    (more…)

  • George Rebane

    KoreaNightShown below, we and our neighbors once more had our traditional annual celebration of ‘Save the Earth’ done a wee bit differently than the poor wretches in North Korea under the heel of their celebrated Good/Dear/Beloved/…/Bullshit Leader.  Those poor schlubs are forced to celebrate Earth Hour every night, while year after year we and our enlightened allies continue to feed and maintain the most obvious (visible from space) club of sovereign murderers still on the planet.

    EarthHour_2030_31mar12Meanwhile, we sit on the largest proven supply of energy within any country’s borders and play with candles one hour a year to promote sheeple solidarity in the destruction of the world’s greatest economy, the operation of which has proven to be a blessing to mankind in more ways than anyone can count.  And all that in the name of Anthropogenic Global Warming, the world’s newest state religion sustained by politically mandated, faith-based science.

  • George Rebane

    [This is the transcript of my regular KVMR commentary broadcast on 30 March 2012.]

    The modern liberal finds little fault with the continuing stream of cost increasing mandates that flow out of the country’s bureaucratic regulation mills.  Every such mandate is welcomed by the left as unquestionably promoting health, safety, the environment, equality, justice, or social fairness.  With such government diktats, what’s there not to like?

    (more…)

  • George Rebane

    The curious and inexplicable course of our polarized public discourse has been examined for some time in these pages, even to the extent that ‘The Liberal Mind’ is an RR category of collected posts on this issue.  To a reasonable person on the so-called Right, the reasoning processes of the so-called Left are an enduring puzzle, even though the outcomes of such processes are relatively easy to predict.  I don’t know whether people of the Left have similar problems understanding our reasoning processes, but I presume that they do.

    These questions are neither idle nor unimportant as indicated by the increasing level of academic research devoted to the area.  A landmark study done at University College London, reported here, discovered measurable differences in the active brain areas of conservatives and liberals when they considered socio-political issues informed by their separate ideologies.  This research indicated that with appropriate brain imaging equipment in place, it is possible to tell from the resulting images whether the subject studied is a self-professed liberal or conservative.

    Now Dr Jonathan Haidt, professor of psychology at the University of Virginia, has documented his examination of how liberals and conservatives differ in The Righteous Mind (two reports on it here and here).  The results from Haidt and his research team are both revealing and illuminating.  Even the noted progressive NYT columnist Nicholas Kristof reports that these results “help demystify the right”.

    Dr Haidt’s research indicates that Americans speak of social values in “six languages” (aka six dimensions).  Kristof states that “Conservatives speak all six, but liberals are fluent in only three. And some (me included) mostly use just one, care for victims.”  The liberals’ three languages of social discourse are in a manifold whose three dimensions are – caring for the weak, fairness, and liberty.  The conservatives share these three, with a somewhat different view of fairness and liberty, and add to their manifold of thinking/expression three more – loyalty, respect for authority, and sanctity.  These three are also tagged as “binding values” that bind people together into larger groups.

    (more…)

  • George Rebane

    Looking at the various reports and coverage of the ongoing oral arguments presented to SCOTUS on the future disposition of Obamacare, I notice a distinct logical disconnect between how the Right argues their case to repeal Obamacare, versus how the Left defends the rationale of maintaining their legislative coup.

    All the leftwing Obamacare apologists defend the insurance mandate’s inclusion under the interstate commerce clause by citing how one person’s uncovered illness impacts the cost of everyone’s healthcare, and moreso the impact of the overall tax burden (at least for those paying taxes).  In short, the Left argues the comprehensive inter-connectivity of all commercial aspects of society, thereby justifying the involvement of government in every aspect of our lives.

    The counter from the Right is yes, all of society is inter-connected at various levels to various degrees.  But since the Constitution does not contemplate our being the pawns of government bureaucrats and corrupt politicians, where then should be the limits to such encompassing inter-connections beyond which government may not tread?

    The Left is totally blind to these concerns since it cannot conceive of any human activities that are beyond the purview of an overarching government.  And therefore both sides are again talking past each other while asking SCOTUS and the voters to (unknowingly?) contemplate utterly different perspectives of governance when considering Obamacare.

  • George Rebane

    Historian Francis Fukuyama recently interviewed technology entrepreneur, philanthropist, venture capitalist, futurist, and PayPal founder Peter Thiel about government and current technology advances.  One of the salient points Thiel made about our government is that “we should debate whether it should be decentralized or centralized, but what the United States has today is an extremely big government, a quasi-socialist government, but without a five-year plan, with no plan whatsoever.”  Planning is hard, and generating a reliable plan is demonstrably impossible when undertaken by government bureaucrats.  Although there have been a few successes when technologists have been the planners for technology projects.  In any case, why would Thiel call our government “quasi-socialist”, hmmm?  (Here is the entire American Interest interview.)

    This morning’s dose from National Propaganda Radio on Obamacare was a real doozy.  Legal analyst and correspondent Nina Totenberg was on a panel reviewing the healthcare law now argued in SCOTUS.  She helpfully pointed out that the universal healthcare insurance mandate was necessary to keep the “freeloaders” from getting more than their deserts at the expense of those who pay taxes and insurance premiums.  A moment later she explained the additional benefit in Obamacare that provides for government subsidizing the premiums of those considered too indigent to make their own payments.  Apparently progressives are immune to such logical lateral accelerations (now also called ‘pivots’) since no one on the panel evinced any audible pain or discomfort.

    I should also point out that on that NPR segment, no one could be found with a criticism of that landmark legislation.

    Finally, here’s a bit of clarification from Clark and Dawe on the concept of ‘quantitative easing’ that has now crept into the lexicon of that small minority still tracking current events with the goal of finding some light at the end of any of the tunnels comprising the rabbit warren of geo-economics.  This YouTube video is guaranteed to draw a chuckle from those who have been attempting to decipher the august pronouncements of The Bernank.

    [27mar12 update]  Jeff Ackerman writes a long overdue piece – 'Dose of reality for Nevada City' – in today’s Union (unfortunately it’s paywalled).  In it he shines a bright light on Nevada City, one of our county’s looniest locales that the local lefties have been trying to destroy as a tourist destination and feasible business environment for local merchants.  It seems that in this go-around the person who is intending to deliver the next body blow to our historic and quaint town is none other than one of its leading citizens and former mayor Ms Reinette ‘Happy Havoc’ Senum.

    Reinette is doing her part for world socialism by coordinating with the national occupiers to “create economic havoc” on 1 May (the international collectivists’ May Day) by calling for a general strike by Nevada City residents.  The city is already in dire straits after years of fiscal and public policy mismanagement, and now it is asked to again kick itself in the butt with another stupid show of solidarity with movements designed to end America as we know it.  Does anyone see any common ground with people like these?

  • George Rebane

    Dear Readers, I have returned from a two week sojourn to warmer climes.  Great times, many insights, and good conversations with new people, but lousy connectivity in the RV parks where we parked our little trailer – reliable wi-fi seems to be climbing the same slow ladder of availability that phones experienced a century ago.  Apologies for the sparse postings and sparser comments.  Thank you for continuing the discussions as the election season heats up in the midst of major events starting with SCOTUS on Obamacare, and an eerie silence from Israel (almost as if there were some preparations going on).

  • George Rebane

    OneWorldOrderA regular correspondent reminds us that the drumbeat for Agenda21’s one-size government suits everyone is continuing apace.  The formerly prestigious, now leftwing Scientific American, laments that none of its prescriptions from green energy, through gun confiscation, to man-made global warming can be implemented without the much stronger arm of a much bigger brother.  In its ‘Effective World Government is needed to stave off Climate Catastrophe’, it counsels again –

    Unfortunately, far more is needed. To be effective, a new set of institutions would have to be imbued with heavy-handed, transnational enforcement powers. There would have to be consideration of some way of embracing head-in-the-cloud answers to social problems that are usually dismissed by policymakers as academic naivete. In principle, species-wide alteration in basic human behaviors would be a sine qua non, but that kind of pronouncement also profoundly strains credibility in the chaos of the political sphere. Some of the things that would need to be contemplated: How do we overcome our hard-wired tendency to “discount” the future: valuing what we have today more than what we might receive tomorrow? Would any institution be capable of instilling a permanent crisis mentality lasting decades, if not centuries? How do we create new institutions with enforcement powers way beyond the current mandate of the U.N.? Could we ensure against a malevolent dictator who might abuse the power of such organizations?

    As reported in recent posts, President Obama and his minions high, low, and local are there to help.

  • George Rebane

    President Obama signed a new EO a couple of days ago that describes what powers the executive branch will assume during a self-declared national emergency.  The 16mar12 EO references and updates previous EOs that have been in force to handle similar extreme situations in the land, but there are some items in this one that make my neck hairs tingle.  Maybe it’s just because I’ve lived under the tender mercies of two all-encompassing and benevolent states run by Uncle Joe and Der Adolph.

    When I finished reading the EO it was clear that the general provisions for such an EO are needed in times of a national emergency such as a war, massive natural disaster, or wholesale terrorist attack.  During times like these it is important that available material, service, and security/defense resources come under co-ordinated central control for the duration.

    But the 16mar12 EO requires no such massive emergency to have its provisions kick in.  Instead, the Secretary of Homeland Security is empowered to declare one by simple fiat.  Once invoked, the EO becomes the autocratic law of the land for an indefinite period, and with no provisions for or requirement to seek the advice and consent of Congress.  Nowhere is Congress required for implementation of these prescriptions which effectively allow the takeover of the country by the executive branch for as long as the President deems fit.

    The EO also provides for a new 'Praetorian Guard' surrounding the President that effectively isolates his cabinet from bringing their problems and conflicts to his resolution.  They must communicate such problems, sure to arise in profusion, through intermediaries empowered to summarily resolve them.  Additionally, provision is made to implement a new legion of czars who can be assigned across the land to carry out ad hoc provisions of the EO as they are needed.  In short, a whole new scheme of governance is enable by this EO that totally bypasses what is provided in the Constitution.

    The new EO is not that long, and I recommend that you read it (here) In addition to the above, please note that in the guts of it the President isolates himself from his Cabinet whose contending members must come to him only through his new Praetorian Guard.  And also note, that the contemplated ‘emergencies’ may last for years during which Congress is advised only through annual reports.  This looks like the basis for running the country under a new kind of command authority that is effectively a form of martial law under civilian control, in short, a means of establishing autocracy over the land.

    This EO has every appearance of being the basis for the promised fundamental transformation under the guise of an update and extension of previous provisions to handle more normative national emergencies.

    I would be more comfortable if Congress would raise its hackles and demand a review of the EO's invocation provisions, the breadth of its implementation, and its exclusion of Congress from any ongoing role in governance once the EO is invoked.  (A correspondent has already questioned the evolution of this body into the new “Candyass Congress”.)

    The lamestream media’s silence on the matter is understandable.  However, Fox News’ reticence to critically analyze the impact of this EO seems to fit in with the recent withdrawal from its traditional aggressive coverage of the portents of big government growing bigger.  It’s almost as if the feds had some dirty pictures of Rupert Murdoch with which they could shut down his US operations.

  • George Rebane

    We watched a DVRd recent ’60 Minutes’ piece on a fifty year program by Texas ranchers to conserve over 150 African game species on their own range lands.  Through their own efforts they have taken contributions from the nation’s zoos and built up the herds/flocks, in the process saving many species that were on the brink of extinction in their native Africa.  The ranchers help pay for this by providing controlled hunting under the aegis of state and federal laws.  The animals are thriving and the enterprise has been a win-win-win all around.

    Enter the eco-idiots, a breed that marbles our nation like a disease.  There is a faction that has been working diligently to make hunting of these animals illegal.  Their imminent success promises to shut down the entire conservation program/business.  Their only ‘reason’, besides rank insanity, is that the animals should be taken back to their native Africa and put on nature conserves where dysfunctional governments will allow poachers to kill them off.  In short, the animals should only live in their native habitat that can no longer protect them from extinction – period.

    The program's nausea factor was increased by the female correspondent continuing to ask each rancher interviewee ‘If you love and want to save these animals, then why do you allow hunters to come and shoot them?’  The obvious economic answers washed off her little brain like water off a duck’s back.  Now consider the millions of like-minded viewers out there for whom such reportage makes sense.  Pass the barf bag please.

    Anthony Watts has published another substantial summary of the scientific controversy over the now notorious temperature ‘hockey stick’ cooked up by Michael Mann over twelve years ago.  Locally, Russ Steele has been tracking the political controversy over anthropogenic global warming (AGW) that has become a public policy control tool for Agenda21 politicians, and article of fervent faith to the scientifically dimwitted.  The review of Mann’s latest book on this controversy again illustrates the sleaze in ‘the debate (about AGW) is over’ that is promoted by the politically correct grant hungry ‘scientists’ and their government handlers.

    It is remarkable that the AGW question has not been submitted to a small panel of acknowledged experts who are independent of the government gravy train; a panel similar to the one assembled after the space shuttle Challenger disaster.  The amount of draconian public policy that has already been made by nations, and the more that is contemplated has all been done in the face of a constant stream of evidence that shows the error of the original and revised AGW conclusions.  Would such an issue of global importance be swept under the rug if it were not the only game in town that allows the socialist one-worlders to impose their diktats on the rest of us while we destroy thriving economies on the road to their new world order?

    We are attending a Mercatus Center conference in Scottsdale.  As supporters of that institute at George Mason University, we have benefitted from their research into public policy issues that seek to buttress the preservation of rights summarized in The Bastiat Triangle (q.v.).  Of late I have become more and more impatient with what conservatives have traded for progress – namely, preaching homilies to the choir when they assemble (see my ongoing hissy fits about ‘Candyass Republicans’).  At these meetings we are regaled with speeches and presentations that document and memorialize noble accomplishments of free enterprise achieved under the umbrella of liberty.  We are again told how the future would be brighter for all, were we to successfully contain the many-headed monster of collectivism.  But everyone attending such conferences already knows this material chapter and verse, and that is why they wind up only being kumbayahs for conservatives.

    This time, instead of having our bellies rubbed one more time, I would like to hear of some, or even any smidgeon of progress made in halting socialism and successfully educating our electorate, then students to reject the ‘solution by redistribution’ messages that originate from the Party of the Fixed Pie and wash across the land.  And if there is no such good news to report, then tell us what we can do to advance liberty and change direction.  Absent that, why gather us together to attend what can only be characterized as the moral equivalent of a wake?

6 comments on From Human Obsolescence to Technology Ebooks and Climate Models