Category Archives: Politics

GOP Evangelical Dread-Fear Machine in Action.

Note: This is a repeat of a post I uploaded in 2017. I thought it was worth posting again for the new folks.

=================

The weighty voices of the GOP evangelical propaganda wing have activated following the awful soaking that Houston received. The wagging fingers of TV evangelists were not far behind to remind us of the looming existential threat.

We’ve witnessed a burlesque of righteous-sounding preachers leaning in from the video pulpit and warning, solemnly and in no uncertain terms, that hurricane Harvey is only the latest in a series of calamities to befall our nation. Our corrupt society is wallowing in a fetid pit of sin and depravity. The storms were heaven sent they intone, to show Who is actually in charge.

It’s all so very clear to these folks. According to many evangelicals the root cause of the mass murder at Sandy Hook and hurricanes Katrina, and now Harvey is the grievous sin of omission. But of what? For failing to put an end to abortion and gay marriage. They’ve been connecting the dots and these dots lead to perdition. An existential threat is on the move. It’s Old Nick up to no good.

The conservative fear machine has kicked into full ruckus configuration. They deploy their weapons of incitement via their heavy presence on AM radio and cable TV. For elections and in the face of national debate, these evangelical conservatives know that they can dependably frighten just enough people to swerve the Republican hive mind. Who are these pliable voters? I think more than a few of them are people who for one reason or another did not take advantage of the education opportunities decades ago and now find themselves near the terminus of a life of toil.

Conveniently for those left of center, the Democratic Party is comatose and strapped into an iron lung, wheezing away the years in an undisclosed location.

9/10/17, Addendum. In case I was not clear, it’s my observation that conservative protestant evangelical organizations have become a menace to American civilization. It seems to me that the election of Trump and the support bestowed upon him by conservative Christian groups, many of whom can be found out in the open on his evangelical board, has opened the door to opaque theocratic influence on the large scale conduct of American government.

It’s axiomatic that people have an inherent right to worship as they please. So imagine the nightmare of trying to control what people believe when religion is folded into the curriculum of the public schools. What a tragic misunderstanding of human nature it would be to attempt to impose religious doctrine upon students. Public school parents would have none of it. But, a private school may have much more flexibility to teach a particular sect of religious belief. Is it a coincidence that privatizing schools is favored by many religious organizations?

Finally, there is the matter of magisteria. Steven J. Gould wrote about religion and science as being non-overlapping magisteria. A magisterium is defined as a “a domain where one form of teaching holds the appropriate tools for meaningful discourse and resolution”. A magisterium may or may not recognize an external system of laws, facts, or values. Gould maintained that science and religion were non-overlapping magisteria in the sense that the tools of science were of no use in solving religious questions.

The secular world can be thought of that which describes what is human made and of human concern. It can also be thought of as that which is independent of religion. It is not atheistic or better or worse in any way. In chemistry we might say that the secular is orthogonal or perpendicular the religious. A bolt, an integrated circuit, or a tractor would be in the domain of the secular. So would the National Electrical Code, city ordinances, and state and federal law. All of these items are contrivances made by people for purposes living a better and safer life. Added to these items would be mathematics, the sciences and engineering. That which is measurable like the volt or the kilogram have no defining attribute which traces back to religious definition.

It has been said that the purpose of government is to protect ourselves from each other. I would extend that to include the general domain of the secular. Having secular government means that subjective interpretations of religious matters must be secondary. This is owing to the reality that there are many religious beliefs in the world and the question of whose religion will prevail in an action involving the public will rapidly become intractable due to disparate beliefs. The secular world has elements of logic, measurement and guidelines for evidence or objective observation. All of these examples could be contained within a secular magisterium.

Public schools have long been the institutions where secular matters were introduced and learned. Government at all levels has been steadfastly kept within the secular domain. There was and remains to be a need for government to manage the secular details of a thriving civilization. The religious magisterium has a heavy reliance on beliefs which is a subjective matter subject to interpretation. A democracy requires a goodly amount of objectivity and evidence.

The notion of non-overlapping magisteria raises an interesting question. What if elements in one magisterium want control of elements in another magisterium? To have elements of a subjective domain in control of elements in the objective domain is to introduce chaos in both. Since neither side has the toolkit to operate in the other, we have to conclude that this circumstance makes no sense for either domain.

Bang Bang, You’re Dead.

The awful shooting in Michigan recently as well as other shootings in the last several days are a reminder- as if we need it- that this mass shooting business is not a bug but rather a feature of current American culture. It is yet more male violence. So far, Americans have failed to acknowledge that males as a group have a problem. The way we raise boys in general needs to be rejiggered to produce better citizens overall. Obviously, there are a great many good and decent fellas in the US- maybe most- but a minority are quite problematic.

Surely there must be a way to address this matter without heavy handed interference in people’s lives. This is in large part a civics problem. The question is this: How can we guide everyone to be better citizens, maybe males especially?

I am convinced that the current political conundrum in the USA is in large part due to poor education. The primary responsibility for a child’s education is borne by the parents. However, all too often the schools are held responsible for this. Yes, the expectation is for K-12 schools to properly educate students and prepare them to get along and prosper after graduation. Plainly this model is failing many students.

Presently, many parents seem to want to put the entire responsibility on the school system. Yes, the schools have much responsibility, but in the end the parents must be held accountable for their child’s education. Sitting passively and watching your child fail in school while complaining about it is as far as many can go. If your child is unable to add, subtract, multiply and divide by graduation, you have let your child down.

Having gotten a child through K-12 and college, I realize that remedial home schooling is tricky. In our case, the curriculum for math was alien to me (a PhD in Chemistry) and my teacher spouse (MA in Special Ed). Our kid was required to learn many different techniques for basic calculation and problem solving. Because using methods I learned was not in the curriculum, to instruct using methods I learned would contradict the teacher and the worksheets from the curriculum. To avoid this, I refrained from teaching my methods and tried to absorb the curriculum, which I failed.

A great many US citizens are forced to endure gun violence because any argument that might impede any aspect of anyone’s ability to own a gun is met with howls of indignation and angry hand waving arguments based on the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution. Okay, fine. Conservative politicians are loathe to touch this electrified 3rd rail of politics. Candidates for the US Congress will sometimes post pictures of themselves in ads holding a firearm with a flag somewhere in the picture. This is meant to assure conservative voters that they as patriots will uphold the 2nd Amendment to the US constitution. I understand this and I cannot believe that any liberal politician could ever separate gun owners from their guns. There would be shooting and violence. The government confiscating American citizen’s guns is in no way politically feasible.

Source: K-12 Shooting Database. The Mormon church shooting or other shootings in public places aren’t part of this data set.

For the most part, school killings were unusual prior to the Columbine shootings in 1999. What has changed? One notable change relates to the emergence of smart phones and the internet. According to Wikipedia-

If you wade into the language, you’ll find that the definition of ‘mass shooting’ might vary a bit. Sometimes the definition refers to 3 or more deaths, but for the most part there is no agreed upon definition.

As a kid I recall exploring with a .22 caliber rifle out in the grassy river bottom. Maybe it’s just me, but I was always itching for an excuse to fire the gun at something like a badger or a fish. Never shot a badger or a fish, thankfully. I’m only saying that possessing a gun and ammo gave me a sense of power and authority. My imagination tells me that there are others.

These shootings are the status quo and usually fail to generate more than a day or two of concern but ring hollow. Except for Charlie Kirk. Thoughts and prayers are offered by many, but to no useful end. Flowers and stuffed animals are left at the crime scene, but most people return to their streaming episodes of TV with gunplay being central to the show.

The prevalence of violent video games exposes young men, women and kids to wanton destruction of human beings. Some deny that these games promote violence, but the enthusiastic death-dealing and mayhem produced by the players is telling. People are immensely entertained by it. I’ve seen where the military even encourages its active-duty soldiers to play games with violent gunplay. That is the job of soldiers. Causing casualties is what they train to do because it is necessary. I get it.

Military training of combat soldiers focuses on efficient destruction, killing and survival. Could there be any room for civics exposure sometime in the soldier’s hitch? Would it be so bad if converting 1 or 2 hours of heavy physical training per week into learning about how to conduct themselves in the culture they are actually preparing to defend? Obviously, continuous training builds muscle memory and reflexes for maximum readiness, however it seems likely that trainees get into diminishing returns eventually.

We want citizen soldiers to exit the military and become productive members of society. But if they enter the military absent the basics of how a liberal democracy operates, how does nothing but weapons training and military tactics prepare them to re-enter civilian life? As a nation we exploit their best years of youthful energy and enthusiasm like other nations do, but afterwards we bump them out without practical job skills.

Liberal Democracy (from Wikipedia)-

“Common elements within a liberal democracy are: elections between or among multiple distinct political parties; a separation of powers into different branches of government; the rule of law in everyday life as part of an open society; a market economy with private propertyuniversal suffrage; and the equal protection of human rightscivil rightscivil liberties, and political freedoms for all citizens.”

If the above definition is “woke” then I’m certainly woke.

A good question is, why were these large-scale killings scarce before 1990? For the school shootings, the hockey stick curve above shows that from about 2010, the incident count exploded to 2018 where it leveled off briefly but rapidly took off again.

Before 1990 there was an internet in its infancy, but no smart phones. Unless you had access to a computer, electronic entertainment and news reached a very few people. Unlike today, people were isolated from events and politics. There were only the 3 major networks plus PBS, newspapers and magazines. All suffered from time delays owing to content production chores. The standards and practices required discipline and ‘proper’ content absent speculation and hype. There were the tabloids like the National Enquirer that indulged in gossip, but their credibility low, at least among educated people.

Today, with the 24 hr news cycle, content is broadcast immediately and most of the entire population are free to take half-baked news items and wind themselves into a tizzy.

Finally, I must say that I’m pessimistic about controlling gun violence in the US. Unless a large fraction of the population adopts something similar to how Japan schools their children, Kids will continue to process the contradiction of problem solving with guns and whatever peaceful examples they see around them.

Where is the Fourth Estate? Hello, Anybody Home?

The major media outlets and the myriad sources online seem to be failing to ask certain key questions and avoiding important topics all together. For example-

  • Who and where are these “radical leftist terrorists” the White House keeps mentioning?
  • Where are the communists, socialists and Marxists Trump keeps referring to?
  • Where is even the slightest bit of evidence for “war torn Chicago, Portland, Los Angeles, New York City?
  • Why, oh why is Stephen Miller in the our White House? Journalists, if this guy does not ring alarm bells for you, we need better journalists!
  • Is Trump really the author of his policies? Or does he just endorse the ideas of others?

Such questions should be asked loudly and repeatedly, just like the right-wing media does. The Fourth Estate is today a miserable failure.

Corporate media are primarily responsible to their stockholders like all corporations are. The vindictiveness of the Trump administration worries corporate executives and I understand that. But to have a broadcasting apparatus and not use it to closely cover the obvious lies of the Trump administration is to stand by the roadside and watch the American civilization collapse.

Hurray for France and Other Good News

This morning two quanta of good news squeaked out of the ether. First, it came out in the news that French military forces boarded and temporarily took control of the oil tanker Boracay off the French Atlantic coast city of Saint-Nazaire. The ship, also called Pushpa and sailing under the flag of the west African country of Benin, was intercepted September 28 and boarded by French military. The ship had days earlier left the oil terminal at the port of Primorsk on the Gulf of Finland near Saint Petersburg, Russia, allegedly headed for Port of Vadinar, India. This Vadinar facility is on the upper west coast of India and is the location of an oil refinery partially owned by Rosneft, a Russian oil company. As of the time of this writing the ship is near Gibraltar enroute to the Suez Canal at 11 knots. The severing of sea floor communications cables in the Baltic has been attributed to Russia-connected ships dragging their anchors and pulling the cables to the point of breakage. Apparently, the ship was observed departing from the Port of Primorsk.

The boarding of Boracay was good news because the ship is alleged to be part of the Russian ghost fleet quietly transporting crude oil contrary to international sanctions. French president Macron announced the ‘revelation’ that Boracay was part of Russia’s hybrid war against NATO, Europe and the USA. This follows the September 28 drone incursion of Copenhagen, Denmark recently. It is believed that a ghost ship launched the drones.

The ghost fleet oil tankers are typically quite old and not well maintained. The ships of Russia’s ghost fleet also tend not to be insured and therefore not allowed to enter many ports or canals. These ships are known to change their names and national flags to confuse observers. Because the Straits of Denmark are relatively shallow, oil supertankers are not allowed passage, so Russia’s fleet of oil tankers from Primorsk are of smaller size.

The other quantum of good news is that the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decided to uphold the lower court’s decision and declined to hear the appeal of Ghislaine Maxwell’s challenge to her criminal conviction for recruiting and grooming teenage girls for sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein. Just when a person loses their faith in SCOTUS, they manage to make a sound decision. Hurray for SCOTUS on this one decision. Well done boys and girls of the court! I imagine a wave of well-deserved schadenfreude is sweeping parts of the country about now.

Hurray for the UK!

The anti-Trump action in the UK prior to, during and after the American president’s visit has been awe inspiring for many of us in America. The grotesque and nauseating Trump has managed to emotionally unify Britain for a time in shared revulsion. Someone said that Trump speaks English like a dog walks on his hind legs.

Trump’s attempt to offer “elder statesman” advice to members of the EU and the greater collection of attendees at the UN actually blew up in his face, though it isn’t likely that he realized it. That said, he is extremely sensitive to perceived slights and is quite thin skinned even by his own admission. At the UN, Trump’s clown car of staff sycophants and pale underlings immediately assumed the escalator and teleprompter incidents malevolent acts meant to humiliate him. If they were acts of protest, then good on them.

It looks like the majority of Americans can see through his charade as a benevolent billionaire, the all-knowing sage of capitalism. If a general election were held now, it is becoming more likely that MAGA would lose control of the House of Representatives. The outcome of the 2028 general election, if Trump doesn’t interfere with it, is in doubt for the MAGA party.

Prior to Trump’s election in 2016, I don’t think he has ever led a publicly owned company. This means that he has never had to be accountable to the public. His actions are always buried within the board of directors of whom he is either the chairman or in control of some relative or other lackey.

I’ve been noticing more examples on YouTube about what foreigners, especially Brits and Canadians, really think about America: And it ain’t pretty either. The negative feelings expressed have torn through the curtain of polite silence to a full venting of the spleen. The traditionally understated Brits are aghast at the boastful American Orange Jesus. This frustration with the USA didn’t suddenly surface from the Trump era. It has been growing quietly for decades. America presumed it’s hegemony and has acted accordingly. Once the sparkling city on the hill, on close inspection we have a darker side, a grubby and mean-spirited side that persists despite all of our self-aggrandizement.

Aren’t Americans themselves embarrassed at Trump’s behavior? Yes, dammit. But due to the election cycle, MAGA congressional support and an impotent judiciary, there seems to be no way around immediate remedy. We must wait for the 2026 midterm elections and hope that the Congressional MAGA monopoly is toppled.

Even if Trump voluntarily resigns, there is the matter of his vice-president, JD Vance. As president, he would be pressured to carry out Trump’s “policies”, which so far have amounted to vengeance and the Project 2025 plan to drown the federal government by holding its head under water in the bathtub to paraphrase a republican strategist. Vance is an unknown quantity to most Americans. He was very critical of Trump before being chosen as the VP candidate. Somehow, he “saw the light” and became Trump’s VP. How would he really behave as president? Connect his dots and project into the future with a linear extrapolation, to begin with.

Trump has already done irreparable damage to US credibility and leadership in the world. I don’t see how this can be reversed back to pre-2015 days. American hegemony has come and gone now that the barnyard gate is open. New alliances in trade, absent US participation, are being set as in the case of Canada. American military leadership will linger well passed the rejiggering trade situation. America has a true talent for the military arts and sciences. Not because of American exceptionalism, but because of the vast sums that we have spent in the past plus our natural resources.

It is good for Americans to see ourselves through the eyes of foreign nations, painful as it might be. Television has a large impact on how we view ourselves. Ever vigilant for new trends or ways of keeping eyeballs fixed on the tube, broadcasters produce content that satisfies by exaggerating our merits or strengths and by burying certain parts of history. Huge corporate news organizations profit by taking a populist political stance and setting inflammatory political content on repeat cycle. Corporations are like a penis- they have no brain and all they want is more.

Second Amendment Solutions for the Left

Note: This essay is written to explore an idea theoretically. It is not a call to arms.

It’s funny that conservatives in the US have always clung to the Second Amendment to the Constitution as a lifeline against government tyranny. Maybe a liberally inflected approach should be constructed for the left? I own an antique Ruger revolver sitting in storage somewhere. Perhaps it is time to upgrade to a 9 mm pistol? Afterall, if conservatives are free to parade around with firearms as a means of intimidation, why shouldn’t a liberal such as myself.

Rednecks and incels enjoy dressing up in tactical gear with weapons bristling from their portly, scraggly bearded, tattooed torsos, claiming only to be expressing their right to carry guns in a peaceful democratic nation. If they can give a show of force, why couldn’t a liberal militia? A liberal militia would tell the MAGA militias to expect return fire.

The true utility of a firearm is the ability to commit violence accurately from a safe distance. An arrow from the bow of a skilled archer is also capable of this, but at a lower magnitude. Slings and spears can deliver hazardous energy from a distance, but at an even lower magnitude. Body armor and shields were developed to protect the wearer from arrows, spears, axes, clubs, and stones. The lethality of a ball from an early flintlock musket or pistol might be less effective than guns from today, but they still inflicted considerable damage to people. The utility of using gunpowder to propel an object for impact was realized maybe within a century after the invention of gunpowder.

How would MAGA-types respond to a liberal militia? Having known numerous gun totin’ MAGA guys and actually being related to a few, I can say that this would stimulate gales of laughter and howls of derision. So confident are they in their legitimate sense of superiority with weapons that they would automatically reject the notion of a ‘liberal militia’. Many MAGAs are ex-military and have genuine expertise in the military arts. Their abilities are not to be underestimated.

/* Begin Anecdote */

I once had a sales assistant who was ex-army. His hobby was breeding green tree pythons and always kept a plastic shoe box with snake hatchlings in his office desk for show & tell. He would get in these moods where he would ‘joke’ that he could kill me before I even knew it was possible through stealth and excellent marksmanship. All I could say was “for your sake, I hope you don’t miss”. It was inconceivable to him that I, a non-military dude, could be a threat of any kind. Afterall, the US Army had trained him to kill efficiently. He eventually left to manage a Wal-Mart in Oregon.

/* End Anecdote */

A liberal militia. What an idea. It would have to have a secretive cache and be open only to those wiling to hold a concealed weapon permit and agree to training. But instead of hiding deep in the woods up the holler, liberals could limit their activities to the public gun range. I do not believe for a second that a ‘liberal militia’ could out gun a MAGA militia, ever. In fact, the very idea of return fire would stir their juices and make them eager for a fire fight.

But a liberal militia would not initiate a gun battle. There would be a strict policy of no first use. The idea would be that either side would know that bloodletting would happen on both sides. Sort of a mutual assured destruction.

Of greater impact could be the political effect. The presence of two opposing civilian armed forces, both resting on the same 2nd Amendment could have enough of a chilling effect on congress as to cause them to take some sort of legislative action to tamp down hostilities. Or not. The current congress could make hostilities worse.

Let’s say that violence between MAGA and liberal militias happens. it would be interesting to see if the current administration stepped in as a neutral party. My guess today is that favoritism would be shown to the MAGA side.

Why this idea? It has become apparent to me that the current political hostility fulminating in the right wing will not be lessened by expressions of respect by liberals. The Charlie Kirk fiasco has increased magnitude and urgency of right wing hostility, regardless of any empathy from the left. This matter could well take a decade or more of chaos before it quells and settles into some kind of quasi-peaceful equilibrium if left on its own.

Where is Russia Going?

What is the deal with Russia? Why do the Russian people tolerate the lack of basic freedoms we in the West are accustomed to? Dissatisfaction with their government has been there since the beginning. Hundreds of millions have been deprived of liberty and prosperity following Russian revolution.

The history of early 20th century reveals the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and the formation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR). Later, after much blood and treasure was spilled after the revolution and then through the cold war, the Soviet Union collapsed after a brief attempt at openness. Many around the world saw the collapse as a positive thing and a sign of better times ahead, especially for the people of the former USSR. There was hope in the West for a transition to some variety of Russian-tinted democracy and for freedoms heretofore absent for the average citizens of the former USSR.

To Russians in power, the very idea of a democratic republic is alien and inconceivable. There is a baseline level of distrust and fear of the infectiousness of the democratic spirit among Russian/Soviet leadership. Even the population has been convinced that the moral collapse of the West would spread to their homeland without an iron-fisted leader.

For a part of the world that has been strangling under autocratic rule and economic stratification since before the time of the Tsars, there has not been a historical Russian-style power sharing agreement between the monarchy and the nobility or the serfs from which to build upon. After generations of polarization by Soviet propaganda focused on Western hegemony and the moral turpitude of the West, there was no likelihood of building upon a Western style democratic model. The Russian propaganda engine continues to this day as strong as ever but with the help of the internet, artificial intelligence and widespread political indifference or gullibility.

The decade of the 1990’s following the collapse of the former USSR was a time of redistribution of wealth for a lucky few. Large Soviet industrial sectors were absorbed by a few private interests, producing fabulously wealthy oligarchs. This did not go unnoticed by the populace, who simmered in anger over it because they expected a freedom and prosperity dividend from the collapse. Amidst the confusion and dissatisfaction with Russian President Yeltsin, there arose a growing sense that Russia needed a strongman leader. Many even spoke admiringly of Stalin.

The collapse of the USSR left an internal power vacuum that would soon be filled by former Soviet citizens. Boris Yeltsin was elected President of Russia in December 1991 and remained as President until 1999 when his selected successor Prime Minister and former FSB director Vlad Putin took over as acting president. Putin was elected president in May of 2000.

I’ve been trying to understand why present-day Russia seems so … belligerent. My focus to start with is Putin. Rather than being a one-of-a-kind freak of nature, Putin is rather ordinary as a dictator except that his regime has a nuclear triad. Until its invasion of Ukraine, Russia also had the benefit of whatever left-over respect it may have had from its Soviet military reputation. But that has changed dramatically.

Putin has long expressed the view that the collapse of the USSR was a tragedy. He wants to rebuild the stature of Russia into a global superpower. Soviet leaders held the view that in order for Moscow to be safe from attack by the West, the Slavic eastern European countries bordering Western Russia had to be under the wing of the Kremlin. It was this deep boundary in combination with the Russian winter that helped to wear down the invasions of Napolean and Hitler. Both armies were substantially weakened by traversing the extensive farmlands and steppes of Ukraine and Poland. It is difficult to believe that this thinking has changed since the collapse.

When the USSR collapsed it left much more than empty senior positions and titles to fill. The Soviet governing apparatus was abandoned when the Kremlin finally conceded that the USSR was economically unsustainable. Even a culture built upon bribery and corruption needs an all-encompassing structural skeleton to manifest its national identity and sustain an economy, security and a global presence. Even a corrupt government needs some sustainability.

Unfortunately for present day Russia, extensive government bribery and corruption in all sectors was already baked in from Soviet times. On a practical level, getting things done involved bribery. Bribes were expected and paid as a matter of routine in the military and all other areas of government. Today there have been show trials with certain high-level officials being tried, convicted and imprisoned on bribery charges. It gives the population bread and circuses to consume and hopefully optimism for a brighter future.

The USSR and later the Russian Federation did not have the benefit of English common law which evolved from the Magna Carta. Born of earlier conquest by the Rus, the Bolsheviks had nothing to build upon for a more democratic legal system like the American colonists had. Overall, Bolsheviks forcibly switched from monarchy to an autocratic socialist empire. Conquest of the tsarist Russian empire by the Bolsheviks was difficult because there were numerous groups vying for power, leading to the Russian civil war following the 1917 revolution.

Although Putin and the cranky Dimitry Medvedev have done a bit of nuclear saber rattling, the West has been concerned about Russian nukes since their very first test in the late 1940’s, so not much new here. Putin’s stern public warnings about nuclear retaliation were not necessary for the Western experts to be on alert. This apparent “virtue signaling” in the form of a public warning by Putin is just a part of Russia’s overall hybrid warfare approach. They’ll use every word and inflection uttered by Russian and Western media as well as the Kremlin to fortify their propaganda with doubt, suspicion and existential threats. They are also actively injecting propaganda into every media stream in the West they can manage. Putin’s dire public warnings about lowering the threshold for a tactical nuclear release were meant to cause a great clenching of public sphincters with the usual fear and loathing leading to internal political pressure for its enemies.

/*begin anecdote/*

Russia’s triad of Soviet-era nuclear weapons have been aging in storage. Are Russian nuclear bomb designs immune to shelf-life issues? By comparison, American-style nuclear weapons have a relatively short shelf-life because of their boosted triggers. According to one source, the entire US nuclear arsenal of nuclear triggers are boosted. American nuclear trigger designs have a short shelf-life stemming from tritium’s 4500 +/- 8 day half-life or 12.32 years (NIST, 2000). US fission triggers have a hollow core which contains a 1 to 1 deuterium-tritium mixture. This booster gas undergoes fusion during ignition in the center of the core and increases the fission yield by the release of abundant 14 MeV neutrons into the surrounding fissile material. With the use of a booster to breed neutrons, the critical mass of fissile explosive is reduced because more neutrons are dispersed to initiate a runaway fission while under intense compression. The reduced mass of fissile material in a bomb is also resistant to unintended ignition by a nearby source of neutrons, like a nearby nuclear explosion.

Tritium is 3H, with 1 proton and 2 neutrons. It undergoes a beta decay where a neutron decays to a proton and an ejected electron, forming 3Helium with 2 protons and a neutron. So, wouldn’t you know, 3Helium is a poison with a very high neutron capture cross section. An aging booster gas loses its tritium potency as well as gaining an effective neutron poison.

But for this application to work, an ongoing supply of tritium is required. Tritium must be produced in a breeder reactor or accelerator. In addition to its short half-life, tritium decay is problematic to monitor because of its low 5.7 keV average beta radiation energy. Tritium atoms or molecules can be detected and measured by mass spectroscopy, but its beta decay radiation requires special equipment to detect. Tritium emits very low energy, low penetrating beta particles which are limited to 6 mm of travel in air and are blocked by the dead layer of skin cells on the surface of the skin. Getting through the window of a Geiger-Muller tube is a problem. So, measurement of tritium activity requires a liquid scintillation detector or an ionization chamber. A sample of radioactive material is dissolved in a vial of scintillation cocktail and run through a scintillation detector which detects faint flashes of light corresponding particle emissions. Perhaps detectors using scintillation crystals like cesium iodide are available for tritium detection.

/*end anecdote/*

A History of Conflict

The lands of Eurasia have, over time, been overprinted with layers upon of layers of conflict over thousands of years. While it may seem reasonable to assume that the current national borders of Europe have finally overcome the urge for military conquest, this seems over-optimistic. The ease with which Putin dashed in to grab large tracts of Ukraine in 2014 show that land-grab invasions are not just left to the past.

The more you learn about the last 4000 years of history of the lands covering the British Isles to Portugal to Mongolia to north Africa and the Levant, the more apparent it is that battles of conquest and defense have overwhelmingly been the norm.

There have been so many armies who have fought bloody battles and died or prevailed on the Eurasian landscape since before Roman times, it is a wonder that there aren’t still great heaps of bones wrapped in rotted battle gear. As always, much remains below the surface in history.

Putin’s Botched War

The Putin-Ukraine war is a war of conquest begun by a dictator who somehow didn’t understand or foresee the accurate weapons made available to Ukraine by the USA and Europe. He misunderstood the willingness of the West to come to Ukraine’s aid, but also and maybe more importantly, the magnitude of the relative sophistication of Western armaments and war materiel. This was a major blunder. While Russian military intelligence should have kept the Kremlin updated on Western weaponry, Putin should have asked more penetating questions. But perhaps most importantly, he underestimated the combative spirit of the Ukrainians and their president.

How did Russia manage to fall so far behind the West in the art of war? A high reliance was placed on its giant fleet of tanks, armored personnel carriers and artillery. Much of this equipment was left over from WWII and the cold war. In contrast to its ground operations, Russia’s use of airpower in the early days of the war was weak and ineffective. Western military strategy has a high reliance on air power.

Russia was completely unprepared for the evolving drone tactics used against them. Drones were able to provide intelligence and pinpoint delivery of relatively small bombs at critical locations on launchers, vehicles, individual soldiers and in trenches. While Russian tanks were covered with reactive armor, the Ukrainian drones could place bombs in weak spots on the vehicles or even drop them through crew hatches to the interior where propellant and warheads could be ignited.

Post-War

To the discredit of both Russia and Ukraine, extensive use of land mines as well as cluster munitions has been made. The immorality of these munitions lies in what happens to the left-over mines and cluster bomblets remaining after the conflict. After the war, the lands are going to be recovered and farmed or rebuilt. Land mines and cluster munitions are well known to remain extremely dangerous for decades. Other conflict zones that have been so mined have left a legacy of death and mutilation for civilians.

At some point, the victor of the Putin-Ukraine war will want to salvage the scrap metal of the many thousands of vehicle carcasses left on the battlefields. One question relates to the explosive reactive armor (ERA) on the exterior of the destroyed tanks. ERA consists of a sandwich of a metal “flyer plate” facing the incoming projectile, a layer of high brisance explosive, and another metal flyer plate facing the tank armor. In order to respond to a high velocity kinetic or shaped charged projectile, a high shock-velocity, highly energetic explosive is needed for fast response to impact by a projectile. The ERA must be insensitive to small arms fire.

A great many videos of the destruction of tanks show that a tank can be destroyed and its crew killed by artillery or drones, but a large fraction of the reactive armor remains. The reactive armor contains enough high explosive to diffuse some of the incoming projectile’s energy release, yet seems to be rather insensitive to the shock of a hit a few feet away. This unexploded reactive armor will need collection and disposal.

Ukrainian farmers will need to level out the thousands of bomb craters in their fields so their equipment can traverse the ground. Obviously, Sappers or bomb disposal crews will need to de-mine the roads and pathways. Extensive trench systems will need to be filled in to recover the croplands. The environmental insult to the bombed-out battlefields is already substantial. The environmental toxicity of explosive residues may need evaluation.

Finally, in victory the brave people of Ukraine face the daunting prospect of rebuilding their homeland. Generations of children have been exposed to serious trauma and violence that no one should have to face. Their childhoods have been stolen from them and their educational prospects badly damaged.

If Russia prevails, the citizens of Ukraine face loss of their national identity and progressive Russification. All of the post-war issues given above will still be present, but the economic and social upheaval resulting from a vengeful Russian takeover will be traumatic. Many Ukrainian fighters and political leaders will no doubt be jailed, sent to gulags or perhaps defenestration.

A Russian victory in Ukraine signals bad times ahead for the rest of eastern Europe and the Baltic states. These countries, Poland in particular, already understand this and are preparing for this eventuality. Putin has previously expressed a kinship with the Slavic peoples of Eurasia and this may be part of his motivation for establishing a Russian empire.

The Fall of the American Empire

As bad luck would have it, this aggressive act of Putin’s Russia coincided with a political catastrophe in the United States. The Republican Party (GOP) in America has adopted the old Tea Party platform including libertarians and ultraconservative evangelical Christians to morph into a party of fanatical fascists, sometimes called Christo-Fascists. This is a reprehensible development that has taken decades to pull off. These Make America Great Again (MAGA) people have decided that American democracy doesn’t work. They favor a weak, authoritarian flavored democracy, similar to what Orban in Hungary has led.

The combination of the election of Donald Trump along with allowance of dark money OK’d by the US Supreme Court, the fanatical support of MAGA voters and a detailed coup strategy penned by the Heritage Foundation and funded by numerous billionaires has turned America around the corner towards an ultra-nationalist dictatorship. Trump ignores the courts, the legal role of the congress, and has lately taken a fancy to sending troops into US cities.

Some knowledgeable scholars have offered that American hegemony, in place since the end of WWII, is all but over. Some estimate that the American empire reached its peak influence perhaps 15 years ago and has been in decline since then but Americans haven’t paid attention. Trump, with his claims on Panama, Canada and Greenland as well as his manic desire to impose tariffs on globally has sent American credibility into the waste bin. The global economic upset caused by Trump has forced former friends to forge new alliances, leaving America behind.

Even if the stars lined up right and Trump and Vance disappeared tomorrow, a return to the previous status quo is unlikely to happen. The rapid trade disengagement by Canada suggests that they have had serious doubts with the USA already and this Trump fiasco was the last straw. There has been grumbling by other nations in the past that the American 4-year presidential cycle leads to excessive and frequent foreign policy changes that cause difficulties for them.  

Trump’s “America First” declaration and radical disengagement with previous foreign policy has left an apparent power vacuum in the world. This has not gone unnoticed by anyone. Of course, the BRICS nations (Brazil, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Russian Federation, South Africa, and United Arab Emirates) are taking advantage of this sea change and are considering moving from the US dollar as the principal reserve currency. America is willingly abandoning its historical global stabilizing ability in exchange for a more libertarian internal structure.

Deconstruction of the USA

The idiot RFK, Jr

The very idea that a person like RFK, Jr, would land in Trump’s cabinet as the Secretary of Health and Human Services seemed so farfetched as to be bad pulp fiction. Yet there he is.

I have no special insights or knowledge on HHS other than what I read. Everything that could be said about the pathetic case of RFK, Jr, and his place in pseudoscientific madness has already been stated by better writers than I.

If you wanted to purposely obliterate certain patches of modern medical developments from the last 120 years, there are few better hatchet-men than RFK, Jr. RFK, Jr., is not without a certain charisma. His strength of conviction is taken as a measure of truth. He is a talented speaker despite his speech impediment and, like most popular speakers, is a performer playing to the entire USA. His compelling position on the stage lends a credibility to his assertions. His slashing of HHS funding and staff is jaw dropping in its extent and coverage.

The University-Government-Industry R&D Complex

Until Trump, the USA had accumulated considerable technological ‘soft power‘ internationally since WWII. An element of that soft power is the American University-Government-Industry research complex. The government funds basic university research across the spectrum of science and the universities provide basic research and training of scientists and engineers. Industry taps into this valuable technology resource for skilled technologists and develops applied science for their projects.

The USA has been a very productive engine of ingenuity, especially since the beginning of WWII. However, our dear leader’s administration has been deconstructing agencies in the name of rooting out the deep state. In reality he is busy putting in place his own deep state.

Project 2025, hosted by the Heritage Foundation, amounts to a libertarian coup backed by libertarian hardliners and supported by conservative protestant evangelical Christians. I’m trying to be fair to the evangelicals, but they have woven Trump into their Christian eschatology. They may still support #47, but many are holding their noses in doing so.

Why not remove the university research funding and leave it to industry? To our neoliberal friends that might sound appealing. Universities could continue to produce scientists and engineers but leave the R&D to industry. After all, letting the open market take care of R&D is one of the goals, right? Let industry produce and pay for their own R&D talent.

The problem will be that new R&D chemists hired into a company at the PhD level would have to be trained on how to execute chemical R&D. Normally this happens in graduate school and in a post doc appointment. But wouldn’t business prefer to hire walking, talking, trained, young and energetic chemistry researchers? I think so.

In #47’s administration, research efforts are being discontinued willy nilly by inexperienced and scientifically untrained actors whose only goal is to rack up dollar savings. Their amateur appraisal of what constitutes valuable scientific activity is cartoonish.

Having been in both academic and industrial R&D, my observation is that basic and commercial science can be quite different activities. Universities have a continuous stream of fresh students and post docs to do the actual work of research at a time period in their lives when they are the most productive and at a far lower labor cost than could industry. Benefits, if any, are quite modest.

The current approach simultaneously trains scientists and engineers while at the same time developing basic science and engineering for the price of a one or more grants. In the process, the advanced instrumentation and the many subject matter experts walking around in the building aid academic research greatly. If a transformation (i.e., a reaction) goes poorly, an academic lab may try to find a mechanism. A commercial R&D lab exists solely for the purpose of supporting profitable production. This means developing the best routes for the fastest conversion and highest yields of chemicals into money. Along the way, commercial chemists may discover new chemistries or have unexpected outcomes. If they are lucky, any given R&D ‘discovery’ may lead to a new product or better control of a reaction. The result of commercial R&D may be more profitable processing but also it may be of scientific interest.

The role of the university is quite different from the role of industry in our society. Universities are funded to provide leading edge research. Here, knowledge is acquired by exploring the boundaries of particular chemical transformations or in the realm of calculation. The driving force in academic R&D is funding and publication. Every scientist wants to be the first person to discover new processes and compositions. It is not uncommon in academics for a research program to finish with a sample of 2 milligrams of product for spectroscopic analysis. For a proof-of-concept result, a sample small enough to analyze and still get a mass for the yield closes the work.

The preferred role of industry is to take up where academia leaves off. If a known composition and/or process is commercially viable, the captains of industry would prefer not to fund enough basic R&D to get a product to market. Thirty minutes on SciFinder should provide an indication of the viability of a process to produce a given chemical substance. They would prefer their chemists work on scaleup to maximize the profit margin of a market pull product rather than wading into the murky waters of technology push.

You learn to do laboratory research by doing laboratory research. Reading about it is necessary but not enough. The success of much research requires broad and deep knowledge and specialized lab and instrument skills.

The industrial end is a bit different from academia. In applied science there are two bookends in business-to-business product development-

In order for a company to allocate resources for an R&D project, sales projections, cost and margin studies must be performed to convince management to proceed. A great starting point is with a known substance and a good public domain procedure for it. This is where academia really shines. Industrial R&D will collect academic research papers on all aspects of the production of a new product.

One serious caveat for industrial R&D is the intellectual property (IP) status of all of the compositions of matter and the processes used therewith. In chemistry, IP is divided between the composition of matter and the method or process. Chemistry patents are often written with Markush claims that use variables to enrobe vast swaths of compositions of matter within patent coverage.

Some academics file for patents as inventors, leaving the ownership costs to the university assignees. The thinking has been that the university may someday collect license fees from the invention. The wild-eyed inventors may honestly believe that industry will beat a path to their door wanting licenses. More chemical patents of all kinds are allowed to quietly expire unlicensed than most realize.

Research IssueUniversityIndustry
Discovery of new chemistryBuilt to excel in itCan do but would much rather avoid the expense and time
Publication of resultsCritical to career growth and scientific progressResearch developments are confidential
Patenting IPMixed views. Some patents may provide revenue to the university. Patents that are contested are very expensive to protect.Patents enforce exclusivity for 20 years and cement competitiveness of the assignees.
R&DMuch time and care can be spent on the research. Research is distributed through publications and seminars.Prefers that existing R&D be applied to scale-up and process improvements
Career growthStudents, post docs and professors can choose academics or industryScientists can take the business path or stay on the R&D path
Safe and smart technologyAcademics have the ability to pursue environmental and safety matters with the chemistry.Industry is a slave to quarterly growth. Changes that will increase the quarterly EBITDA are most favored by the C-suite and the board of directors.
“A patent is only as good as the latest attempt to invalidate it”. -Arnold Ziffel.

Some loose talk about patents

Many in academia view a patent as a publication that they can stuff into their vitae. While being awarded a patent is a validation of an idea, it also means that the examiner was unable to find a reason to deny the patent. Citizens are entitled to patents and the USPTO must find a reason to deny the application. The language in a patent application must be internally consistent, be written in the ‘patent dialect’ and provide a description for others to understand the claimed art enough to avoid infringement. The USPTO does not require that the reality of the claims be proven. (I’ve been involved in 2 technology startups based on patents that were not proven by prototyping because it was not required by the USPTO. Both were business disasters because the claimed art didn’t work well enough).

Patents can induce a high credibility impression that may or may not be valid. Patents are commonly used to impress investors and are found stapled to a business plan. The startup may have an attorney on the board of directors who is supposed to serve as council. The attorney may or may not be a patent attorney. But if they do not possess patent and technical knowledge, they can only help with word smithing documents like NDAs, contracts, and sitting in on meetings to catch the odd procedural misstep. They can bring confidence and comfort to the startup founders with business structure, agreements, and negotiations etc., sorta like a big ole’ teddy bear for the CEO.

Summary

One of the purposes of government is to protect ourselves from each other. Another purpose that has worked well until now is that gov’t has been able to blunt many of the harsh and brutal forces of nature like disease, famine, drought, earthquakes and storms.

The USA has excelled in medical research for decades. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was begun to assure that food and drugs were safe for the public to consume. Every new drug developed in the USA has a paper storm trailing behind it. To be compliant with FDA generally, a sizeable amount of operational rigor must be demonstrated and practiced. Food safety in restaurants and in the food supply chain as well as drug development and testing are all subject to complacency or outright evasion without gov’t oversight. People and organizations will always drift away from safe practices if nobody is watching and auditing.

Time to Dump Chuck Schumer

C’mon Democratic Party!! Don’t waste time trying to convince Schumer to pull his thumb out of his a$$. For everything there is a season and the MAGA win in the November 2024 election marks the end of Schumer’s season and the freshening spring season for MAGA. Out to pasture he needs to go. Maybe he can get an adjunct professor slot at a university teaching economics recitation sections.

It is time for Democrats to match the ferocity of MAGA’s political rhetoric. Being polite, using history and logic or even shaming them is a complete waste of time. They are on a libertarian high from years of carrying forward Reagan’s antigovernment rhetoric.

Civility should always be tried first in any conflict, but continued civility is a fool’s errand in the face citizens who voted for and continue to support Trump’s authoritarianism.

It’s time to get mad. Very mad. Not with violence but with pressure and votes. What the MAGA GOP is presently doing to our beloved country may well be irreversible to some extent. I don’t care to live in a country satisfied with Trump authoritarian leadership. Trump is replacing what he calls the “deep state” with an even darker deep state of his own design. The cult of the Orange Jesus needs to be driven out.

It all boils down to votes. The Dems need an effective ground game to get people to the polls. Political actions that do not produce more liberal or at least anti-MAGA votes is a waste of effort.

Each voting Dem should bring along one liberal non-voter or at least anti-Trump non-voter to the polls the next few elections. The mantra for Democrats should be- “Anti-Trump + 1”.

Robet Reich pointed out in today’s (3/25/25) Substack email that what he calls the Pillars of Civil Society are under attack by the Trump administration. The pillars are- the universities, science, the media and the law.

Source: Robert Reich substack newsletter, 3/25/25. You may recall that he is something of a talented cartoonist.

The legacy media, at least, is covering Trump at roughly the level of entertainment news. There is some tut-tutting and rubber necking by the big news shops like NBC, CBS and ABC. NPR continues to try to be as neutral as possible allowing listeners to decide for themselves what is outrageous. The well-known MAGA friendly broadcasters are

Tyranny is Pulling up the Driveway

Roughly half of the American electorate sits immobilized while watching the American version of democracy slowly crossfade into some lesser form. We can lament in the (n + 1)th essay about #45/47’s inauguration and how that very day they begin deconstructing the federal government. But, by now whining about Trump and the GOP is nothing more than preaching to the choir.

As a practical matter in opposition, liberals are left to make phone calls to our representatives or slap a bumper sticker on our Subarus. The real power lies in the ability to donate cash to the party or the candidate. Even a heartfelt protest in front of a building or an assembly of the faithful listening to the other side’s politico is rarely effective in any measurable way.

Tyranny is a word often used by 2nd Amendment gun enthusiasts as a euphemism for government. Libertarians and Republicans are fond of it in particular. But if the mandate is to prevent tyranny, will they recognize it from Trump?

The words “Competitive Democracy” is appearing more frequently in the Googlesphere. A decent explanation is found below-

This whole Trump takeover of the federal government seems to have a libertarian flavor. No social safety nets, low taxes, expanded freedoms, diminished regulatory oversight and privatization of everything. Every service we get from the government would be privatized. Our every need or problem should be viewed as profit opportunity by a capitalist. Our present form of health care is like this.

My sarcastic definition of Libertarianism: it is the theoretical foundation of a Dickensian world where upward mobility of the lower class is near impossible, with the upper class comfortably nested across a yawning gap of wealth.

All of the open talk of upcoming fascism and authoritarianism makes me wonder if tyranny isn’t already pulling up the driveway to stay for a while. Isn’t tyranny what the 2nd Amendment gun crowd was always going on about? Will they notice that tyranny is presently being installed in the USA? Or is it the flavor of tyranny they prefer?

Trump is quickly placing loyalists into every part the federal government that uses power. He has the DOJ, CIA, FBI, Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, the US House & Senate, Inspectors General and more. He is consolidating power for himself. He has even started on the military.

Loyalty to Trump is demanded. But, isn’t loyalty to Trump just political loyalty? He often replies to criticism saying that his critics are “just being political.” He is placing political loyalists into positions of power to “fix” a condition that he previously called the swamp. The swamp was a federal workforce that were supposedly loyal to liberalism, according to him. He is replacing one allegedly unloyal group with his own loyalists. He is filling the offices with his own weaponized staff.

Typical Trump- he makes accusations of impropriety while he is doing it himself.

Trump’s adoring cult followers can somehow see around his wide load of character flaws and felonies to steal a view of a fabulous future he dangles before them. Is this a new dawn of a great America or just another America under a cult of personality?