Friday, November 20, 2015

Thirty Three Betrayers

The governors who have petulantly told the Federal government they didn't want any Syrian immigrants have failed us. Obviously, it is not a good idea to bring in Syrian immigrants that we can't vet right now, but the reason I call these governors betrayers is because, once again, they use misdirection, and symbolic gestures that solve nothing.

It is, however, within these governors' power to train and arm most of their citizens. Think about it. A lot of these guys are allegedly pro-gun too, and they can shift that debate, if every citizen who is able bodied and competent has a civic duty to keep and bear arms. Don't forget to supersede the gun-free zones, and, of course, everyone will need to be able to carry concealed.

Anyone proud of these governors needs to check themselves. Why should you be proud of people who don't do what they actually can do and instead posture? Many may think this idea is overkill, but so what? Part of the reason the Paris attacks happened the way they did is because the people can't legally carry there.

And from a political perspective, there is nothing to distinguish these people. That's why Trump can win, assuming he stays in, doesn't get assassinated, and commits to spending (some) money. They feed right into his characterization of them- weak. If you are a governor, and you want credibility in this day and age, you have to risk. You have to show yourself putting yourself in potential danger from the federal government in the service of your people.

Tuesday, November 17, 2015

Intelligence Agency Theatrics

Schneier informs us that Paris Attacks Blamed on Strong Cryptography and Edward Snowden.

This, is, of couse, balderdash, as is all the intel people showing up on television talking about how the Paris attacks were 'sophisticated.'

You could hand a similar tactical problem to a boy scout troop, circa 1984. They very likely could come up with a better plan, by a campfire, with a map and a newspaper of upcoming events. Oh, and there would be no chatter.

After years of just hearing this stupid word on the news- chatter- there's this background assumption that bad guys go around talking about whatever bad stuff they are planning, and if we just had encryption and could track everybody, we could catch them.


People don't have to talk. Secondly, agencies don't listen in real time, they can't. They try to record everything. The outcome would be the same- may be the same, because we aren't necessarily hearing what is true from these intel people- we are hearing what they think will make them seem important to us. They could literally have every single cell phone call from everyone of these terrorists- whether anything was revealed or not- and it wouldn't have mattered.

If we fire all these idiots and then pay to get every with a basic competency level decent training and a gun, wouldn't we save money and human life?

I think the above would be true all by itself, but it would most certainly be true if we stopped playing war and immigration games.

Update: The terrorists didn't use encryption.

Monday, November 16, 2015

Why The Military Industrial Complex Ought To Support Trump

Nearly all our potential leaders are sold out to the M.I.C. in one way or the other. Additionally, since bureaucratic rot has been allowed to take hold, there are more and more military activities being performed completely by 'private' entities.

Our more pathetically bought political candidates offer the M.I.C. a return to the cold war. Rebuild the sixth fleet, says Fiorina. Nearly every nut job says put a no fly zone over Syria- something that will only effect Russia and the Syria government- not our putative enemies.

While the lucrative military contracts may be attractive, the newer permutations of the M.I.C. will not find pushing Russia (and China) around so attractive.
You want to sell the government a military solution, but, ideally, you don't want to get shot.

Think Italian city-states and their mercenaries.

So, Trump, first of all, actually sounds sane in comparison to the rest, which means he is unlikely to get people blown up. Secondly, Trump's wall and his deportation force would provide lucrative contracts for the new wave M.I.C. Third, this would likely be the beginning of wide scale gazafication, which is extremely lucrative for the
new wave M.I.C..

It starts, as it must, with one wall, once it is perceived as a solution, then it is just as easily implemented everywhere, in no small part because of all the idiots who insist on letting people in- even assuming Trump is actually allowed to get them out in the first place. The left, as we see in Paris, shall double down on insisting on letting people in, while smaller jurisdictions and private owners will need M.I.C. services- especially should the continued refusal to allow anyone to defend themselves directly remain in force.

So, wall, surveillance and drone tech, plenty of paid positions for employees or contractors, and home for dinner. Or, meddling in the Ukraine, Syria, the South China sea, or some other place where there are still professional militaries unaffected by modern progressive nonsense. If I were involved in the industry, I'd pick Trump. It will be both lucrative and more conducive to long term health.

None of this, of course, is what I want, but I am pretty sure gazafication is what is coming.

Friday, November 13, 2015

Revelation & Discovery

The arena in which atheists and Christians can agree and work together is the arena in which revelation and discovery have the exact same evidence signature.

Many Christians are afraid of this arena, because the have been effected by a modern illness in which the limits of space, time, locational consciousness, etc- are all secretly attributed to God. This is one of the reasons people tend to think there are other places somehow fundamentally more existential than this one- they have to place God in his own realm, very far away from us, so that their model of God works.

But, the discovery that particular proclivities, for instance, substantialy increase rates of disease, death, and substandard outcomes for the next generation is objectively indistinguishable from the revelation of the same. A person reports the manner in which he found out about it, and even in everyday mundane science, if you investigate, tidy little narratives unravel, and science itself appears to be combination of randomness, mysticism, and no small amount of charlatanism.

There's a lot of charlatanism about, but it is easier to call out in religious circles. Scientific studies are supposed to be reproducible, so we tend to lend them more credence, but there is a lot less reproducing going on that is generally assumed. Various climate scientist have even decided to hide the data from which they drew their highly unreliable models.

I remember a discussion with someone about the evolutionary psychology surrounding people's belief in God, versus the actual existence of God. She, it appeared, could not understand my point here.

Wednesday, November 11, 2015

Hypothesis: Religion Has Always Been Mostly Free Market

Paul warned about women seeking after new teachings, and I don't think it was particularly different in pagan eras. Today, we bemoan the situation, as modern communications plus marketing messages to the widest possible consumer audiences means the planet being blanketed with spectacularly stupid things.

But naturally, people ensconced in our modern progressive narrative will suggest that there were evil state churches hither and yon. Well, the facts presented tend to be accurate, but the narrative never is. If the lords of Christendom had any property rights at all, one would have to- at least to some extent- admit that a 'state' church would be a much simpler affair than one existing now. Put simply, it would be an expression of the property owner's will as to what he wanted on his property.

Regardless, the Church of England, for instance, had little to no influence on the free market of religious ideas in England. Indeed, almost any sort of tripe can masquerade as Christian, since most folks tend to take a tribal view of it. The people may say they think this or that doctrine is important, but this is seldom true. Sentimentality that appears to be in accord with whatever tribe you want to get along with gets you a free pass, while worrying about doctrinal matters shall get you ostracized.

Within the realm, though, where everyone is safely CofE, or safely Roman (Catholic or otherwise), or safely Japanese (I am guessing) a wide range of religious practices are sold.

What are they selling?

Mystical answers to life's problems- different problems. There are many ways, but if you wanted a way to the supermarket and ended up at a donut shop instead, you would be a little disappointed.

Additionally, these mystical answers tend to have things in common. Better feels or practices to become better. People pay a lot for better feels, no matter how transitory they may be. In fact, I suspect most modern entertainment actually takes up a relatively low-level space in what should be understood as a religious realm.

But then there is that other side- the practices to improve, which tend to mesh well with Christian practices. Since the Trinity is a mystical answer to the human problem of not being able to achieve perfection, it was attractive to most who were attempting to improve themselves- all except those who were most vainglorious and unable to admit to themselves that no matter how good they were, they weren't perfect yet.

Friday, November 6, 2015

A reminder that most people don't read like me

I had to use a tablet a few times this week to try and catch up on things. It was mostly endless scrolling with my finger.

In other words, not a satisfying blog reading experience.

I suspect the window is closing already. Nobody reads much anyway, and now the window may be closing.
There are still many who never got online, and some folks do but experience it through their phones.

Somehow I can't imagine Unqualified Reservations gaining the status it did on phone sized screens.

Seems like a regression.

Friday, October 30, 2015

Phyletism: An Unconvincing Heresy?

Having recently been reminded that this idea of phyletism exists, and that it was condemned at or near the time when the revolutionary virus had become widespread, I have begun to wonder if this supposedly great evil is somewhat less evil than is supposed. Perhaps this is another 'evil' in the sense that it is a bureaucratic nightmare if the people stop seeing this or that bureaucrat as a legitimate one because he doesn't happen to be of the people.

I seem to remember somewhere in the Shahnameh some mention of Christians, complete with their bishops, showing up on the field of battle. I definitely know Erasmus had an unkind word or two to say about such things too. But it seems to me 'thou shalt not kill' and Christ's blessing of the peacemakers would be enough to condemn this.

There are a range of insults a modern person could suppose might happen in a phyletist church, but to an ancient christian, these insults would be sins against hospitality, and have little to nothing to do with any sort of institutional racism.

From Wikipedia:

The term phyletism was coined at the Holy and Great pan-Orthodox Synod that met in Istanbul (then Constantinople) in 1872. The meeting was prompted by the creation of a separate bishopric by the Bulgarian community of Istanbul for parishes only open to Bulgarians. It was the first time in Church history that a separate diocese was established based on ethnic identity rather than principles of Orthodoxy and territory.[2]

On 10 August 1872 the Synod issued an official condemnation of ecclesiastical racism, or “ethno-phyletism,” as well as its theological argumentation

We renounce, censure and condemn racism, that is racial discrimination, ethnic feuds, hatreds and dissensions within the Church of Christ, as contrary to the teaching of the Gospel and the holy canons of our blessed fathers which “support the holy Church and the entire Christian world, embellish it and lead it to divine godliness.”

The importance of the old standards have, undoubtedly, been subsumed by the new anti-racist standard. In the West, churches of every denomination have been badly effected by the revolutionary movement and the subsequent dysgenic effects on IQ over the years. It is doubtful the East is immune, though I do believe the relative anarchy largely kept doctrine and liturgy untouched.

I have a dim view of modern nationalism. I believe Bismarck basically destroyed Germany in order to create the modern German state. There are, however nations, and the Bulgarians may have been responding in self-defense more than anything else. I don't know. Google searches on this are a bit frustrating.

People of today tend to have a disordered view, and it can be seen in the lack of family formation, misguided evangelization adventures, and the tendency to assume European civilization can run just as well if you just plug a bunch of other warm bodies into it. If there is no Christendom, there is no place to live as a Christian.