i don't know if what's happening in the united states right now is a targeted purge or a structural coup, but i don't get the feeling that this is short term, and i'm not convinced it's going to be reversible.

america is shutting itself down. scrawl a note over the american flag on the moon: out of business.

i'm trying to think about when the last great collapse of liberalism was. i suppose it depends on how you define the current age: did we start in the renaissance? is that wave form what is coming to a close?

i think there's an argument that part of what created the middle ages was the technological development not in weaponry but in agriculture. it seems crude by today's standards. but, life required a lot of hard work, so there wasn't a lot of time to study. after all, antiquity is full of civilizations being slaughtered, and it just kept on. something else stepped in after the romans fell, and created a much deeper shift in how societies were organized. it wasn't until the technology became efficient enough to allow leisure that it did, and liberal thoughts could be once again entertained.

that's a bad precedent, for us. that process took a long time. but, i told you i just read that asimov text, right? i'm thinking more about inri067, spoke - my eulogy for the civil rights era and secular liberalism as we understand it.

what i'm searching for is a successor, but we're really at the end of this. we can't hand it back to a decayed europe, which in fact merely precedes us in corruption. china and russia and saudi arabia are empires. and, africa remains in disarray.

if there is hope, it is in south america, but it is absurd to suggest they could challenge america at any time in the near future. perhaps the better hope is that the people of the americas can co-operatively work to take back the government in the united states before it collapses.

if we're in a similar technological moment that produced the dark ages, it's not going to be because our lives are too labour-intensive, but because they are not labour intensive enough. some of us are perhaps likely to forget how to do anything at all, but i must push back against the standard dystopic view, as i think a subset of humans would take advantage of such freedom to become scholars and general patrons of the arts. the dark ages produced an aristocracy of management. the new illiberalism will no doubt be an aristocracy of knowledge.

and, freedom means different things to different people. so, the battle will remain the same: fight hierarchy wherever you see it.

but, what if the networks come down? if this witchcraft is destroyed?

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

what i remember from the election was jill stein projecting the idea of being unsure which of the two is the lesser evil, which implied the suggestion that maybe it might be trump, but it was an attempt to put them on par with one another, and have voters question their calculus, rather any kind of endorsement of trump. phrased another way, it was a clear suggestion that hillary was at least as bad as trump.

her perspective has, i think, been demonstrated to be fairly reasonable by the unfolding of events in other places in the world, but i can understand how it may ring hollow for those almost solely focused on domestic american politics. arguing that trump may turn out to be a lesser evil in some ways is not an endorsement of him, but an indictment of clinton.

we're in quite a bit of trouble when foresight becomes conflated with treason.

http://www.newsweek.com/2017/09/08/jill-stein-interview-russia-trump-645722.html?utm_source=internal&utm_campaign=right&utm_medium=related2

jagmeet singh must cut his beard

but, why did trudeau go see the aga kahn?

see, when you talk of lobbyists, you usually refer to a system where for-profit entities bribe politicans to carry out favours for them, exclusively to make them more money. the aga kahn is relevant in context due to money that it is giving away. it's just an incorrect contextual analysis.

you have to wonder if, maybe, it wasn't trudeau trying to bribe the aga kahn, to get an audience in which to get some spiritual guidance. this guy is kind of a weido, i think, actually. he'll be talking to dead dogs in no time.

no, really - i think it was probably trudeau that was buying the audience, here.

and i'm just not swayed by the seriousness of the accusations.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

see, i don't doubt this at all. it was pretty obvious.

but, there's an added complication that she probably doesn't remember the worst of it.

i always found crystal castles frustrating, in that it demonstrated some potential for abstraction but never really explored it. it was clear that the intent was always profit above everything else; you can hear the disinterest in the 'art'.

but, you'll note that there is an accusation, here, followed by charges and an investigation. that's how these things need to operate.

http://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/canada-news-pmn/crystal-castles-songwriter-being-investigated-by-police-sex-crimes-unit

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

the government is making a mistake in being meek about this aga khan non-issue. i know they're hoping it blows over, but that's old media thinking; what they're doing by not challenging it is making it seem more substantial than it is. people tend to interpret a humble argument as a sign that a more powerful argument doesn't exist.

democrats make this mistake all of the time, because their voting base is so much more conservative. liberals in canada, however, have not tended to make this mistake. one expects a more throaty argument from a liberal prime minister than this.

what they should do is change the law around private travel to include an exception for situations where the destination cannot be reached in any other manner, then throw it back at the conservatives when they vote against it, as it will make them seem unreasonable.

when you give the tory media in canada an inch, they take a mile. it's going to be framed terribly. and, due to the way that the government has mismanaged it, it actually might do them some serious damage, after all.

i'm curious as to who sophie brought to the island in march, though. the justin/sophie story is kind of unusual, to say the least. i've kind of suspected it as a political marriage for a while, now. his father's marriage was pretty arranged as well; it's going to be interesting to see if justin ages to look like his father, at all.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard

i want to repeat a point that i made several years ago about syria.

it's less that assad has to go, as an individual. it's more that syria needs a change in actual leadership - in military leadership. and, it's up to the russians, now, to ensure that this happens.

the russians know better than anybody else what it is to experience a serious existential crisis; they are certainly best positioned, of all the major powers, to understand the psychology of the assad regime. on one of the days i spent waiting for the isp, i read one of the foundation texts that i skipped as a child. it was the one where seldon was wrong. so, i have this psychohistory on my brain, and the recognition of it as psychobabble. but, if you leave the assad regime - the regime, not the figurehead - in place, it will necessarily retaliate, which means launching a counter-attack on the saudis.

the saudi regime needs to fall, but not like this - not at the cost of a major proxy war that will draw in the turks and who knows else - israel, america and maybe even china.

the russians, unfortunately, are relying on this regime. when i made those comments, and i realized even at the time that this responsibility is putin's, i did not realize the remaining extent of the cold war connections between the kremlin and the assad regime, nor how easy it would be to reactivate them. the russians, however, are not foreign to purges, not even in foreign countries.

the assad regime does, in fact, have to go to ensure a peace. the americans are right for the wrong reasons. but, it's not likely to.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

if we're going to leave this up to government, the government has to listen.

cbd levels on the marketing is certainly a good idea. some consumers will seek higher cbd levels for medicinal reasons, while seeking to minimize thc levels. it's rarely going to work the other way. so, this is a request from concerned citizens that is absolutely reasonable, and that i dare suggest a market mechanism would more effectively generate. if government is going to control this, it needs to make the extra efforts to be responsive to reasonable requests.

the way they're planning on selling it strikes me as some kind of surreal joke, as though these policy makers determined their concept of the marijuana industry from gangster rap videos. one government representative suggested it would look something like a jewellery store. gotta protect tha bling. and, they're going to pat you down like you're buying from the mafia, or some mexican drug cartel. who is it that often compared the government to the mafia? again, it's like they got their concept of buying from hollywood films.

it's strange how fiction may actually create reality, in this context. well, how would these bureaucrats know any better, really? they have no first hand information, no empirical basis to draw deductions from. all they have is the depiction that is handed to them. and, this depiction is ubiquitous - it is across the spectrum of hollywood. it is not in independent films, but these bureaucrats can't be bothered with those, either. when fiction becomes ubiquitous like this, and government controls the commerce associated with it, the propaganda cannot not become reality. so, the government will create what it understands: an experience like going to see a kingpin.

it's crazy. of course.

they have to listen better. that's how to interact on an empirical basis, in context.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/patty-hajdu-pot-regulation-1.4461879

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

so, what am i doing this weekend?

well, i've got four days of cheap electricity, so i can work at a normal pace. i don't know what my electrical costs are going to be in this unit. i know that i'll get a credit applied eventually, but the process appears to be cumbersome and inefficient, so i don't know when. i tried to get them the information for mid-november, but they're telling me i need to wait two cycles, and not providing a coherent answer as to why. i got the thing escalated, at least. i don't know when to expect a response.

but, i'm conserving electricity in the mean time. my first bill should not be high, at least. the major cost is the fridge. i don't know after that. i need to get data before i can react to it.

i'm probably going to get some solar lamps and put them in the windows, then never turn the lights on. i have five giant windows in this apartment, six including the one in the bathroom. i really don't need lights at all. i'm going to need to check costs and crunch numbers to see if it makes sense, but it no doubt does. if they're around $20 each, it will make sense immediately. if they get to more than that i'll need to see...

i'm also considering getting a ups and using it as a battery, but that's going to again be determined by how much it costs and what my actual electrical costs end up being. what i could do with this is suck down electricity over night for use in the day, ensuring that i'm only paying off peak costs (except for the fridge and the cable modem), and i'm able to operate at will with the electrical.

the other thing i'm considering is just getting some solar panels and hooking them up to a battery. this would be intended for extraneous usage, like extra guitar effects or synthesizers. i'm just going to need to get an understanding of base usage, first.

the way this works is that they calculate the bill - and i have to pay something like $25/month just to use it - and then subtract $68 from the end of it. so, i'll get something like $40/month for free once it's set up. i actually don't expect my base usage to exceed this: fridge, other kitchen appliances, computers, tv, etc. but, if i decide that i want to spend all night every night for a month recording guitar parts through five processors, that's when it starts to add up - and where a solar source could be useful. like i say, i have these huge windows. but, i don't know where the technology is, and i don't know if i'll really need it.

see, the credit is cumulative. so, if it comes in at less than $68, i can transfer what's left to the next month. i don't actually expect this to be uncommon, especially if i get the solar lights up. that will mean i could see myself building credits - and that i can use those for my recording spurts.

right now, i really have no idea at all how this is going to play out.

but, i'm going to pick up where i left off, which is at compiling the blu-ray disc. i'm going to use it as an opportunity to double check all of the liner notes. that should be a day or two, at least...

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

yeah, but now go find a video of a polar bear ripping the heart out of a seal's chest and tell me how you feel about it.

climate change is bad news and everything.

but, bears are monsters.

why can't we have solidarity with something other than apex carnivores? and, why does this, of all things, generate empathy.

fucking humans.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.