7 months, 3 weeks ago
Lately there has been a lot of talk about robotic devices. First it started with simple innocent robotic vacuum cleaners. Now are some embryonic yet quite promising attempts at walking, humanoid robots, their utility easily imaginable. Now the focus is self driving autonomous cars and military drones. And in Japan, there are in development some very life-like female robots which one can easily imagine will become "fully functional" at least for their "intended purpose" very soon. Considering the demand for such "companionship", these life-like robots will become in very large demand. On another front, military drones are in heavy use today and are fully capable of taking human lives and frequently do, along with many collateral deaths. For the greater good, we are told. For the greater good. These are the mainstay of "defense" in countries and areas with US interests but where the US does not want the mess and the Hassle of " boots on the ground". But, we are told, the actual death button is pushed by a human being in a nondescript building in some central state 15,000 miles away. Years ago, many of these developments were foretold or imagined by Isaac Asimov. A great writer as well as a consummate philosopher. He however, was imagining a more human oriented somewhat caring robot, meant to serve and protect mankind. His vision was for robots to be mans servants, not their oppressive Masters. Meant for Mankind's growth and betterment. In fact,in his book "I ROBOT" he went so far as to put forth 3 important and overriding LAWS. LAWS that all robots would follow. These Laws being for the betterment and safety of mankind. His laws were as follows:
7 months, 4 weeks ago
I suspect that a Clinton/Corporate Media campaign used myriad depictions of the "populist" Donald Trump to distract us from the message being promoted by Bernie Sanders - and then that strategy gained momentum, got out of control… and Trump won the election! This could be seen as a cause for optimism: it seems that the voters had prevailed in the General Election, voting for the "populist" Donald Trump to win over the corporate-sponsored Hillary Clinton. Joy was misplaced however, and short-lived.
Fake News? Censorship.
This morning's reflection over three cups of coffee:
A Shape for Social Revolution, cont.
Money is the thing that drives American society. Now it drives our government as well. Why exactly does money have such influence over man? Some might believe that this dynamic has always been so, somehow built into our being - but no. Money is an abstract concept, while individual security, social status, and political power are the underlying driving forces. And in our current political system money is used to buy political power.
I used to be concerned about an event like Hitler's Reichstag fire decree, a Patriot Act on steroids, when a terrorist act excuses the suspension of constitutional liberties, that allows a politician to shut down newspapers, jail opponents, and eventually rule by decree. As long as at least two political views could battle it out, all will be well. Crimes against humanity, I argued, only happen in dictatorships.
The recent WikiLeaks revelations showed me how wrong I was. The coup that I was apprehensive of has already happened, and it was so gradual that no one noticed. Hillary doesn't have to shut down media outlets, she already aligned them on her side. Prevailing opinion is not achieved by force, but by overwhelming Chomsky style consent. Subtle negotiations with the FBI make her jail worries go away. In the face of global climate catastrophe she can stick to burning carbon, while protesters are thrown in jail by local authorities. This putsch, this coup was not one like General Pinochet against President Allende, defending the constitution alone with a machine gun. It was a gradual erosion of the checks and balances in government, a numbing against bold faced lies, so that the truth has no place to hide. The consequences are war, mass casualties, four lost years in an effective battle against climate change. Because of all of this I will not acknowledge Hillary Clinton as the democratically elected President of the United States of America, but as the head of an illegitimate regime like in any other Banana Republic.
The question is how do we resist, because resist we must, our conscience tells us so. Is it sufficient to look to prior champions against oppression, such as Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., or do we need to develop new strategies and tactics that can restore the rule of law and abolish the rule of men and women?
Keep carbon in the ground would be one concrete goal that puts us at odds with the regime. Six corporations control all media in the country. Can we break them up into 24 via Antitrust laws? These are just two examples of direct action. The movement that I hope will develop over the coming months and years will find its - our - own direction.
Thomas Auzinger— feeling determined at Hillborough Nj.