Anerriphtho kubo

"Let all the poisons that lurk in the mud .  .  .  hatch out"

It now appears that the two finalist for the office of President of the United States this year will be Donald Trump of the GOP and Hillary Clinton of the "Democrats" ( like her hubby, she reminds me, politically, of the majority of Republican politicians in Wisconsin when i was a sprout, but i digress...). 

I assume that if you are a regular reader of this blog, you know how i will vote. Assuming that I do vote, and not take the position of good old Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus. 

Anywho...

I want to write a couple things about this election year.

First, there has been a fair amount of apolitical stuff out there about how parents & civics teachers have been having problems talking with children about the things Donald Trump says. This link may be helpful for a start.

Second, people who do not want Mr. Trump to win, must not become over-confident. What a person says they will do to a spouse, friend, co-worker, or pollster, etc., may be quite different in the privacy of the voting booth. All of us, to a variable extent, have within us that primeval core that for which the Trump message is perhaps the strongest.

Third, I am very interested in how the planetary media-verse will handle this election race. Everybody overseas watches our presidential elections. For many of them, it is not unlike watching the old fashioned competition for who will be their emperor. This one has an interesting feature though. 

This will be the first election fight for the highest executive office in the government of a "great power", where it can be said without resort to hyperbole, that one of the contenders is apparently racist, ethnocentric, etc., since 1933. Very interesting intellectually speaking.

I think Ayn Rand & Friedrich Hayek Would Approve

For the fun of it....

This is a humble proposal for a solution path for a U.S. social controversy using law and market forces.

It is a market based approach with strong elements of individual rights and responsibility. 

Short example:

In the U.S. the number of White Tailed Deer on the landscape is actually determined by, in addition to certain biogeophysical factors, the the regulatory laws and regulations of each state government on matters such as game hunting, land use, etc.Each year their are many collisions of deer and motor vehicles on public roads.

So, market based solution:

That the state government be strictly liable for any damage to person or property resulting from the collision of a deer and a vehicle on a public road.

So, ok gun folk, have it your way. But I do not want to pay for the cost you may externalize to society, that i have to pay for directly or indirectly. . so,

Here we go

If you are doing concealed carry or "hunting" or keep a gun at work or home or vehicle; and are not a member of the military or National Guard, or not a member of law enforcement:*

1. That you will not be required to take part in any firearms safety or use training

2. There will be no background checks

3. That you will not be required use trigger lock or any safe storage equipment or procedure in your home or your vehicle.

4. You must federally register your firearm within 3 business days of your receipt or purchase. Failure to do so will be a federal criminal offense with a fine of not more than $500,000 or prison of lot less than one year nor more than 15 years, or both such fine and imprisonment, for each offense.

Note: this recognizes the concepts of transparency and individual responsibility, and the rights of individuals to make informed decisions on many things, such as deciding if they want to live next to a gun owner, or for a business, to make hiring decisions, insurers to make business decisions, etc.

5. Any seller of a firearm must register the sale of that firearm with the Department of Alcohol, Tobacco and firearms, through an internet based system for that use. Failure to do so before the end of the day of sale, will be for the seller and/or their agent a federal offense with a fine of not more than $1,000,000 or prison for not less than one year, or both such fine and imprisonment, for each offense

Note: this recognizes the concepts of transparency and individual responsibility, and the rights of individuals to make informed decisions as consumers  insurers to make business decisions, etc.

6. No liability for law enforcement if they cap your ass during performance of their lawful duties

Note: This is to help law enforcement in its daily tasks and their own safety.

7. Your health insurer or liability insurer can refuse to insure you if you are a gun owner, seller or manufacturer

Note: The right to refuse legally includes the right to determine higher premium rates if the insurer concludes that higher risk is present. The insurance industry would be free to create its own "exceptions" to higher rates. For example, gun collectors who have their pieces permanently made inoperable.

8. That you are strictly liable for any harm to person or property caused by the discharging of your firearm(s)

Note: "In tort law, strict liability is the imposition of liability on a party without a finding of fault (such as negligence or tortious intent). The claimant need only prove that the tort occurred and that the defendant was responsible. The law imputes strict liability to situations it considers to be inherently dangerous." ibi

9. If a civil action is brought against you based upon discharge(s) of a firearm(s) of yours, and said firearm(s) is a hand gun, a semi-automatic or an automatic, or any combination thereof; you may join as party defendant the legal person(s) who sold you that firearm(s) and the manufacturer of that firearm(s).

Note: This does not say that parties joined as defendants would be subject to strict liability. But the court or jury would be able to assess and weigh their negligence in its deliberation on co-liability and assignment and amount of damages.

Ok folks, thin the herd! 

* I put hunting in quotes here to indicate the popular use of the word, as opposed to and to distinguish it from, its correct usage. The exemptions mentioned in this paragraph are also to make an absolutely clear distinction based upon a truly conservative reading of the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

A Ramble on an Applied Example of Sensitivity to Initial Conditions.

https://serendip.brynmawr.edu/local/suminst/bbi01/projects/regina/

References for this ramble:
Initial Condition
Early Childhood Brain Development and Workforce Development
AAP Resources
Lick Your Rats

Ok. I have reading alot of the stuff above re my day job. When i hit the papers re the rats & mice though, i then thought about the following.
What is the "survival value" of what we normally deem, "bad parenting?
My thought path on this is a good example of of number of things:

We make moral judgments, the rest of nature does not.

Evolution via natural selection is not teleological.

Sensitivity to initial conditions.

Increasing the quality of a workforce, reducing crime and reduction of some 
healthcare costs, may be both complex and expensive, in a pecuniary based economy model. 

A sketch, (assuming you have read the stuff above, me lazy)

Rodent model
If "high contact" & non-violent to offspring parent, then
In baby serotonin high, cortisol re-uptake high.
Offspring grow to be calm, curious, friendly

If "low contact" &/or violent environment of parent, then
In baby serotonin low, cortisol re-uptake low.
Offspring grow to be hypervigilant and aggressive

Generally
If you add in the stuff known about human brain development... 

How a child is parented is highly dependent on the environment.

From the "selfish gene" POV, with human moral overlay aside, "good" parenting is a continuum with placement along it tied to the genes & environment of the parent. 


For example, if in a male dominant vertical dominance human hierarchy, it could be argued that an optimum "selfish gene" strategy for a phenotype would be:
If female; breed early and confuse paternity *
If male; hyper-vigilance and aggression

In my day job, One of things i teach is the importance of early brain development/high contact parenting to workforce development. But, here is an interesting ethical question. In a time of increasing economic disparity, economic stratification and socio-economic simplification, what is "good" parenting, for who?

* 1999: Mother Nature: A History of Mothers, Infants and Natural Selection. New York: Pantheon. Published in UK as Mother Nature: Natural selection and
the female of the species. London: Chatto and Windus);. ISBN 0-679-44265-0.

The Decent of Man

It is a common practice for folks to criticize the Right Wing in the United States for being "anti-science". Climate change denial and "anti-evolution" education being the most noticeable examples. It is also common for the "American Left" to chastise and mock the Right about this. The left should not. 
I posit both sides accept the science that matches their pre-scientific values, or at least tolerate (i.e., Ben Carlson's acceptance of antibiotic science and the Bush families utilization of paleontology in oil and gas exploration; while both rejecting evolution through selection and old earth geology, but i digress) and rely on the science, while denying it.
The Left or as it is now sometimes called, the "Regressive Left", accepts basic science for the most part, but often dismisses the core of liberalism on the grounds of relevance , or refuses to apply the science because doing so would skewer a sacred cow.
An example of the latter is the hostility towards the integration of what we now know about evolution and genes, into the social sciences, law, etc. Try bringing up Cultural Universals in a group of regressive liberals when talking about violence and prejudice, and many other topics. Anything that is not on the "nurture side" of the nurture/nature debate (which is not a scientific debate anymore. Behavior is a relationship between a phenotype and an environment in a state of constant change; ie. it is naturenurture...) is deemed anathema ex cathedra. The role of what is in the "wetware" and what is learned after birth are not united by the regressive left to actually try to address the problems they are supposedly concerned about.

The end of liberalism
Historically, the concept of "liberal" was part of the Enlightenment and the scientific revolution. Adam Smith was a liberal. 

“If we can't think for ourselves, if we're unwilling to question authority, then we're just putty in the hands of those in power. But if the citizens are educated and form their own opinions, then those in power work for us. In every country, we should be teaching our children the scientific method and the reasons for a Bill of Rights. With it comes a certain decency, humility and community spirit. In the demon-haunted world that we inhabit by virtue of being human, this may be all that stands between us and the enveloping darkness.” 

― Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark

I think that both the left and right have in essence embraced in their own ways and per their member's perceived pre-scientific self identifications; identity politics  . 

“I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time -- when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness.
The dumbing down of American is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30 second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance”

 Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark

So many groups, position, differences. Whether it is the discriminated against while male, females, people of colour, or other social subdivision of homo Sapiens into a minutiae of MOPES*; we are pulling apart while doing the same thing as the other is. In times of stress, pseudospeciation can infect everyone. Are we no longer even paying lip service to the central tenet of the enlightenment, as so well put by  Maajid Nawaz, "No idea above scrutiny, no person below dignity."?


*Most Oppressed People Ever

Inter-group violence among early Holocene hunter-gatherers of West Turkana, Kenya

Paper: 

www.nature.com/nature/journal/v529/n7586/full/nature16477.html

Radio Interview re Paper:

http://www.sciencefriday.com/segments/archaeological-fine-points-to-ancient-human-violence/

The Prince

"The one who adapts his policy to the times prospers, and likewise that the one whose policy clashes with the demands of the times does not."

Niccolo Machiavelli

The Trumph brand of the politics of disgust, conjures images for some of the nascent American fascism (which is also reducing the scrutiny of closet Dominionist Ted Cruz, but i digress....).

“The vulgar crowd always is taken by appearances, and the world consists chiefly of the vulgar.” 
                             Machiavelli

""Do I look like I have a plan?" says the Joker in "The Dark Knight". "I'm a dog chasing cars. I don't know what I'd do if I caught it". Mr Trump's havoc-spreading run seemed to share this improvisational spirit."          The Economist.

But, well, a question. If you are not in a republic, but rather are in a plutocracy; why not consider the candidacy of an unprincipled, opportunistic billionaire?

I was reminded of the writing of Niccolo Machiavelli secretary and second chancellor to the Florentine "Republic" (which was actually at the time a defacto plutocracy in transition to aristocracy), in looking at Trump's opportunism. So which do you prefer, America, Trump or giving Ted a chance to build his father's dreams?

Is the ESOBC Inescapable?

Here is some evidence for the position that we cannot breakthrough ESOBC (Economic Socially Obligate Boundary Condition, read the document called Air Water Ground linked on the right sidebar). The Dark Mountain Project , monetized itself from the beginning. Not really a ctitiique, just saying "uncivilized writing" ah right.  But, i am thinking of trying to monetize Air Water Ground...When in Rome, etc. ?

Neurotransmitters are highly conserved across taxa

Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness (2012)
http://fcmconference.org/img/CambridgeDeclarationOnConsciousness.pdf 

"An international group of prominent scientists has signed The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness in which they are proclaiming their support for the idea that animals are conscious and aware to the degree that humans are — a list of animals that includes all mammals, birds, and even the octopus. But will this make us stop treating these animals in totally inhumane ways?" http://io9.gizmodo.com/5937356/prominent-scientists-sign-declaration-that-animals-have-conscious-awareness-just-like-us

An interesting Christain Identity video

The Christian Identity movement (a facsimile of a FBI backrounder on them is here) is a shared ideology across most of the spectrum of the ultra-far right in the United States. 
The recent Planned Parenthood shooter was apparently a fan of these folks, the Oklahoma Federal Building bombing folks were adherents, etc. 
These folks are farther to the right than the Dominionists (which lacks a racial aspect to their belief system), and farther to the right than most elected Republican office holders.
 I recently stumbled across a Christian Identity video for non-members.

OK, i do not like trigger warnings, but i will do one on this link.

Trigger Warning: 
This video was prepared by white male supremacists. It is  or may be offensive to Most "whites", Non-Christians, LGBT folks, any person of color, women and most mainline Christians.
   
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ph7zKSblzo

At around minute 30 +-, they depict the persecution of "rescuers" at abortion clinics. 
The video is chock full of faux-history and a certain weirdness, but worth watching for a look into the mind of some folks. I guess...

From a Friend on Facebook

The Price is Right*

Another “mass shooting" in the United States.

These are kind of a cultural and media feature I guess. I think if American satirist Ambrose Bierce wrote The Devils Dictionary today, his definition for “Gun Control” would  be; Something Americans talk about after a mass shooting.

I have already opined on potential avenues of remediation of the problem.

http://airwaterground.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-new-duck-and-cover.html

And I have a piece out there on the legal/cultural history of The Gun Thing in the U.S.

So no sense in rehashing all that. Besides, it is, outside of areas of war, civil war, failed states, terrorism, etc. kind of an American thing.

For me, the interesting question is why do we put up with this shit? Why the socio-political paralysis on the gun violence thing? 

A speculation.

Maybe people (meaning the majority of Americans not motivated by the NRA brand or that did not fail the President Obama Rorschach Test)
just do not care unless it touches close to home, so to speak?
 The research in recent times about empathy & compassion may point to this. Maybe it is now just another aspect of our mediaverse-newstainment-entertainment flow? The problem is too socially complex and remote for most folks to get jazzed up about. Yet.

* “We shall shortly institute

A syncopation of fear

While it's painful, it will suit

Many customers whose appetites are queer

And the price is right,

The cost of one admission is your mind.”