You Never Know you too might become a refugee

It seems refugees have always been in the news.  Mostly we think of people fleeing persecution.  A new reason is already developing--climate change.  In reality many of those who used to make their living farming now find it more difficult to survive and seek safer countries.

"You Never Know You Too Might Become a Refugee" (2023) is set in 2043 and might be thought of as science fiction, but unfortunately it is already happening and is predicted to get worse.  The film projects that in 2030 the United Nations declares a legal justification to be a refugee is climate change and all countries must accept them.  Unfortunately some countries refuse and even make it a crime.  England is one of them.

The Isle of Grain is used as a mythical starting point.  Two adults and their daughter are being severely battered by the weather and are aware it will become increasingly more difficult to survive.  They had applied to get to England, but were unsuccessful.  They felt the situation was so desperate that they would have to take the illegal route.

They were able to get the necessary money, but that would just about wipe out their finances.  Evading the police was an ongoing concern. Finding accommodation was difficult.  The film focuses on an interview to avoid criminal prosecution.  The interviewer suggests strongly they should have stayed where they were and have broken the law.  

The situation is not really resolved as there is no happy solution.  Some refugees die in the effort to reach safety. 

The irony is that the wealthy industrial countries are most responsible for climate change, but citizens of poorer countries suffer the most.  Donald Trump is already setting up America to close borders to climate change refugees.  To start with they deny climate change exists while allowing some of their donating businesses to profit.  They already put heavier emphasis to keep out immigrants.

This film offers a message the world desperately needs to understand, so I would like to credit some of the people for this particular effort.

Two people shared the organization of the effort.  

Teo Ormond-Skeaping, the director, writer, cinematographer and editor started as photographer and has had many photo exhibits.  He has become politically active and focuses on climate change and how it effects people.  Taking part in many international climate change for climate change.  He has 4 credits as a cinematographer, 2 as a producer, 2 as a director and 1 for editing.

Since 2012 Teo has collaborated with Lena Dobrowolska, a Ph.D. researcher.  She was a director and writer for this film.

Richard Skelton composed the music.  He has been a noted album producing musician.  Richard has 12 credits for composing.

Dominic Farrow played the father.  He has 3 acting credits.

Kaara Benstead played the mother.  She has 6 acting credits, 1 for writing and 1 for directing.

Richie Campbell played the interviewer.  He 62 acting credits, 1 for assistant directing and 1 for producing.

Nick Bartlett played a people smuggler.  He has 87 acting credits including "Topsy Turvey" (1999),  "London Boulevard" (2010) and "World War Z" (2013). 

Mike Kelson played the head of a people smuggling group.  He has 108 acting credits, 2 for writing and 1 for directing.

Jack Bense played a detention center officer.  He has 47 acting credits including "Hereafter" (2010) and "Unforgotten" (2025).

Bitu Thomas played herself.    She has been in films in English, Tamil and Hindi.  Her 16 acting credits, 1 for directing and 1 for writing include "One Life" (2023).

This film is well done and has a powerful message.  I watched it on a DVD borrowed from my local library and am not aware if it is available elsewhere.

The Sirens' Call

 

 An early quote from William James demonstrates the importance of attention; "My experience is what I agree to attend to."  As technology advances everyone gains access to more information with more competing for our attention.  What you agree to, shapes your life.

 Our attention is gathered in three ways.  First we voluntarily focus on something of interest to us.  Second we are abruptly distracted by something like a siren. Third you react to something of personal interest such as your name even if barely heard. 

We would like the time and context to focus on things of value or at least of interest, but literally millions of others would like to grab your attention.  People have developed some defenses.  The Walkman head phone at first was seen as anti-social, but is more acceptable today.  There is infinite information and finite attention.  Many look for summaries and others how to sort out what really matters.  See http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2013/05/the-signal-and-noise.html

Attention has been commoditfied.  Newspaper circulation has been a basis for advertising rates for many years.  Television has ratings in great detail.  The claims can be difficult to verify as for example one study showed that 2/3 of television viewers reach for their phone during a commercial break.  Others take a bathroom break or do some household chore.  

Google has developed a more sophisticated system:  when you click on any link you help them develop a profile identifying what interests you.  Advertisers can bid for links to likely profiles and the advertiser only has to pay when the consumer clicks on their links.   

One advantage others seeking your attention have is that humans dread boredom.  Many humans feel alienated and without a sense of purpose.  Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi is known for the concept of flow that many of us strive for.  One is happiest when one is engaged in an activity where they are so engaged they lose concept of time.  One example was riding horses where some are so engaged that is what they think of most of the time.

A model for communicating ideas was in 1858 Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas had a series of historical debates.  They would each be given an 60 minutes opening statement a 90 minute response and finally a 30 minute rebuttal.  There would be a series of debates with each man given opportunity to make their points and refute the other's points.  Today with lots of commercial pressures, political debates are more narrowly restricted.  Chris points out to understand the issues in depth we have lost.  Neil Postman in 1985 thought these debates illustrated how we have lost our ability to pay attention;  see http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2018/05/amusing-ourselves-to-death.html

Along side he points out that in society we have taught children to wait their turn and wait for a sign for them to talk.  Nowadays interruptions and time restrictions have set different standards.

Chris Hayes has a unique position being a cable newscasters as he has to contend with what news gets covered.  To stay in business and keep his job he has to find news that gets attention.  Too often he has to deal with mass shootings.  At first a lot of attention was given to the perpetrator, but realized that a key motive was to draw attention.  Shifted the coverage more to the victims.  It is still news.

Donald Trump has the biggest megaphone in the world.  He seeks recognition but achieves attention.  He has learned how to be provocative.   Almost every day Trump creates attention that is difficult to ignore despite the fact that it is nonsensical it still seems to benefit him (or his ego).

One issue that doesn't get enough attention is climate change.  A flood, fire or drought is news and does get some coverage, but usually not much for long.  Logically the issue deserves much more attention.  You cannot actually see the climate changing and while some activists are creative, they are up against well financed fossil fuel advocates.

Multi tasking has been developing with the increased access to information (and entertainment), but it obviously results in divided attention which ultimately means each focus is diluted.  Along with Chris this is a bad habit and I am conscious that something is lost in the effort, but the fear of missing something drives me on.  How about you?

Chris pointed out that each of us have a desire for recognition.  As a newscaster he has found fame among strangers.  He found himself checking ratings and his social media responses.  Personally I check blog stats and Facebook responses.  Social media encourages such behavior.

Jonathan Haidt wrote about how smart phones and social media have quickly gained the attention of our youth.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2025/06/the-anxious-generation.html

Chris admits that technology increases all the time, but there have been some interesting rebellions.  One was vinyl records that provide cover art and sound better.  Most people read news online, but he has discovered that print newspaper offer something different.

There is a lot of meat in "The Sirens' Call "and it is not too practical for my summary to give an in depth understanding.  Hopefully my description has drawn your attention and if you want a more in depth understanding you need to read the book.

Canadian Election 2025

 The 2025 Canadian election is over resulting in a Liberal minority Parliament under the leadership of Mark Carney.  The focus of many voters was how to best defend ourselves against Donald Trump, the American president.  So much so, that strategic voting reared its ugly head.  

Of course there are many issues that ordinarily decide which direction Canadians want to steer the nation.  The economy, particularly at the household consumer level is critical.  Other issues include the environment, immigration, Quebec sovereignty, energy and foreign affairs.  But this time the American president insulted Canada saying we should become the 51st state and that we (and virtually all other nations) had ripped off America.  On the eve of the election he made further comments inappropriate at the time perhaps amounting to election interference.  His statements and attitudes became a decisive factor for many voters.

For me I had respect for three prime minister candidates.  I had met Jagmeet Singh at a Fair Vote Canada booth here in Hamilton during Labour Day.  Although not given enough credit for getting a dental plan running I appreciated it with a recent root canal.  Elizabeth May represents my highest priority, fighting climate change.  Mark Carney with his international banking experience strikes me as truly our best prospect to deal with Trump.  The Bloc Quebecois candidate, Yves-Francois Blanchet did impress with his manner at the debate, but his focus is on protecting Quebec's francophone interest which I can respect, but not my priority.  Pierre Polievre was not respected with a least two marks against him:  "Axe the tax" was offensive as was his support for the Freedom Convoy. 

I also respected our incumbent Matthew Green and assumed he would win my riding.  I had met him as a poll clerk in a previous election.  My assumption turned out to be wrong.

Strategic voting was more prominent than ever.   Enough voters agreed with my assessment about Mark Carney and the importance of the Trump confrontation.  The Bloc, the NDP and Green all lost seats to the Liberals.  At the same time the issue encouraged the biggest turnout of voters since 2015.  Two leaders lost their seats with probably the Trump dilemma being a primary factor.

Those who follow me on Facebook or my blogs know I detest Donald Trump and love proportional representation.  My highest voting priority is actually climate change which apparently was not a critical factor for the outcome.  The Conservatives were most against any action and most boosting the oil industry.

To me it is obvious climate change requires immediate attention and in fact the parties with at least some concern received the majority votes.  Despite that, it was not a factor.  The Liberals were concerned their carbon tax was a negative factor and dropped it for consumers.  The Conservatives funded by fossil fuel interests felt climate change was not worth discussing.  The Green party was cut out of the national debates due to the rules.  It is past time when those who want environmental policies get more power.   

Minority government will force some co-operation among the parties.  I think the threat of Trump will bring the NDP, Green and even the Bloc and Conservatives together on some votes.  But proportional representation could have been as effective while respecting the true priorities of Canadians.

During the election the one issue brought us closest to the U. S. system of two parties competing for power that comes with insults and bickering that has gotten worse.  The U.S. has as many issues as any country, but voters have less real choice. 

Trump is a bully claiming the world has taken unfair advantage of Americans and he is going to reverse the injustice.  In reality the U.S. has done more than its share of exploiting other nations.  American jobs were taken away by wealthy manufacturers to shift expenses to cheap labor countries and automation.  On the other hand poor immigrants have been exploited despite contributing a lot to the American economy and culture.

The use of Fentanyl is a poor excuse to hold against Canada and Mexico.  Americans have developed a desire for all sorts of illegal drugs to be smuggled in.  Mexico and Canada both are concerned about the smuggling of American guns to our countries that have been scooped up by criminal elements.

Another concern that is increasingly of concern is Western alienation, principally Alberta.  The tar sands are a major economic driver that politicians ignore at their peril.  Proportional representation offers everyone a more realistic choice who and how they want to be governed.  There are westerners concerned about the environment and other national issues. 

Matching popular voting with actual seats won, it worked reasonably for the Liberal (with 49.27% of the seats on 43.7% of votes),  Conservatives (with 41.9% of seats and 41.3% of votes) the Bloc Quebecois (with 6.4%@ of seats and 6.3% of votes).  Not so great for the NDP (2.04% of the seats and 6.3% of votes) or the Green (with .0029% of the seats and 1.3% of votes).  Both the NDP and Green parties lack official status.  

For me, a new observation regards the two unsuccessful leaders, Jagmeet Singh and Pierre Polievre.  Under a proportional representation system they could easily have been given a seat to better represent their views.

The Trump confrontation certainly helped bring out more voters, but there are other pressing issues.  A lot of voters concluded their vote would be wasted, but in what is perceived as with an existential crisis they will adjust with strategic voting.  Canadians deserve real choices.  Ultimately proportional representation offers a much better choice than First Past the Post.  Other nations, somehow overcome the opposition of politicians who don't want to tinker with the system that got them into power.

Yes, I am preaching a bit.  Proportional representation not only offers real choices, but politicians have to learn to co-operate.  You may think it a coincidence but when the United Nations brings out its World Happiness Report it is nations with proportional representation that  hog the top spots. 

Don't be shy.  If you agree, or don't or have questions feel free to let me know.

The 2025 Canadian Election

The Canadian election is on April 28th and like all the others is the most important to date.  Elections are great opportunities to make improvements, but I am skeptical.  There are always emotional elements that seem to overwhelm important issues.  Those with big money have a way to appealing to our baser needs.  To top it off, the reality afterwards never matches the will of the people, including those who elected not to vote.

Would you like your vote to really count?  After you take time from something you enjoy or have to do and get in a line.  The candidate who gets the most votes in your riding is the only one that gets to vote in the legislature.  Every other vote doesn't advance a candidate even if they all add up to more than the winner.  Another wasted vote is the extra ones that put the winner on top.  That is why some people indulge in strategic voting.

I line up with the Greens and sympathize with the progressive parties.  It seems that the conservatives are mostly against climate change and in general seem to have less respect for civil rights.  I do respect their concern for financing as the government paying avoidable interest hurts us.  But not all government programs are bad for the budget   Health care is a prime example.  An ounce (gram) of prevention is worth a pound (kilogram) of cure.  

How about you?  Do you favor the NDP or the Liberals (against the Conservatives).  Depending on your riding you could vote for your preferred party or choose a second or even third choice for your best chance to stop the Conservatives.  Maybe you prefer the Conservatives, but you could also find yourself trying to stop the dreaded opposition depending on your riding.

Climate change is guaranteed to get worse even if government policies change as it will take time to readjust from more than a century of abuse.  Wealthy investors want to protect their investments and have more convincing resources than the rest of us.  Alberta relies a lot on fossil fuels and has the legislature to support them.

Most people think that somehow the Covid 19 pandemic is behind us.  Unfortunately the impact is still with us.  Inflation has been very definitely aggravated by it.  Consumers tend to look at current prices and get upset when they are up.  Certainly there might have been different choices made, but supplies were cut and consumer and work patterns changed.  Compared to other nations Canada wasn't so far behind.  More of us survived than in many more reckless nations.  Someone who supported the Freedom Convoy protest, like Poilievre love to point out inflation as though there was no connection to forces outside government forces.

 The fear against Conservatives leaves the progressives split.  In many elections the progressive parties (Liberals, NDP, Green) do collect more votes, but are often losers.  Bloc Quebecois are unique in that they want to be free of English Canada, but are now concerned about American influence.  I believe they could be a coalition partner with a progressive party

Don Trump is a critical election issue all by himself.  As soon as he was officially president he started making offensive statements.  He referred to Governor Justin Trudeau and Canada as the 51st state.  Since then he has become even more aggressive.   On the economic front he is promising heavy tariffs against Canada and other countries claiming to want businesses to relocate to America.  Our two economies are very integrated that optimizes both nations, although Trump insists America has been subsidizing Canada. He has shown favors to Putin from whom he has probably picked up a plan to expand America.  He feels that the Panama Canal should belong to America even suggesting military action may be necessary.   Greenland needs to be turned over as a security tool.  Mexico is also being treated very roughly.  See http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2025/03/why-isnt-trump-in-prison.html

Scary for me is Trump plans to dismantle the Department of Education and turn it over to the states, some of whom have racist tendencies.  Canada also has our provinces responsible for education. 

Taxation is always an issue.  The poorer citizens need more money to survive.  The wealthy resent sharing their wealth with ordinary people.  Governments (those that get elected) try to spread the wealth around with a variety of programs, but they have to get the money from somewhere.  Unfortunately as there is much resistance to taxes they end up borrowing money and in turn paying interest.  A progressive tax system should help, but the top end is the most resistant and has developed all sorts of wrinkles that cut their contribution.  Somehow they have to figure out a fair system benefits everyone, even themselves.

The dilemma of many voters is that their riding has a history and maybe even current polling suggesting a party they want to avoid.  The closest they can get to that is to vote for an opposition party that has the best chance to upsetting the hated one.  This works against all parties in particular ridings.  Sometimes their vote does make a difference, but not always. and not their preferred candidate.

There is a better system adopted by much of the world.  Proportional representation allows your preferred vote to make a difference.  It encourages all politicians to be politer to their opponents because there is a good chance they will have to work with them.  More people are willing to make the effort to vote and even to study the issues.  More views are considered before policies locked in.

To understand how unjustly voting is distorted under our First Past the Post system check out the recent Ontario provincial election...http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2025/03/ontario-voters-were-cheated-again.html

Don't be fooled by ranked balloting.  Only one candidate is elected per riding and although you may have contributed to the winner it is not necessarily your first choice that would better reflect your preferences.. 

Should you get a chance to talk to a candidate ask them what they think of proportional representation.  Tell your friends and neighbors.  Candidates want to know how they can get more votes.

Ice

 The world watches as America has been taken over.  Trump and his crew are changing the laws for their personal benefit.  The suckers who voted for them have not quite caught on yet, but the conversions will start slowly.

 I live in a fairly safe place among the Great Lakes.  Last year I only shoveled my sidewalk on a corner once.  There was more ice than on previous years.  This year there has definitely been a much more serious problem with ice  and  on the Valentine weekend more snow than I can remember.

Climate change is dismissed, often with a laugh.  But the situation only gets more obvious.  Looking in your own backyard only tells a small part of the story, but the evidence is getting closer to home each year.

Most of us in Ontario have figured out that climate change is for real, but haven't suffered too much yet.  Americans have had lots of opportunities to reflect on the changing weather.  Mammoth hurricanes have hit the Southeast whose myopic citizens mostly voted for Trump crooks.  Forest fires have been more severe on the west coast who mostly have voted other than Trump, but their votes don't have as much impact.  From my Canada we have had severe forest fires that sent smoke to New York City.  

Do you really believe that self serving bullshit from the Trump gang?  Don't be too embarrassed to admit you made a serious mistake, but unfortunately we will all suffer for at least a couple of years.  I understand (I do believe scientists) that the effects will continue for quite a few years to come regardless.  The solution will take time and a lot of effort and sacrifice.  Trump's oil buddies will resist as much as possible. 

The weather was only one big LIE.  There are many others being uncovered.  Remember always the rich take care of themselves for they feel the need for more money.

It is hard to understand Trump siding with Putin.  One bully to another might be one explanation, but it seems likely Putin has some sort of hold over Trump.  In any case favoring Putin over Ukraine is very bad for the rest of the world.  Rewarding criminal behavior only encourage more of it.   Ultimately the more money comes from the rest of us.

The rich get richer and the poor continue downhill.  The law is made by rich people who got elected by the masses.  It is no accident about inequality.  Too many of us are easily manipulated, but at some point you need to WAKE UP.  The smug think saying "Woke" is an insult, but they are the ones who are dishonest.  The Greens were not wrong, just didn't get started soon enough.

As a Canadian perhaps you think my opinion doesn't matter.  The whole world is watching and suffering and hoping somehow the powers that be come to their senses or in other words WAKE UP.

Should we go extinct?

This book caught my attention from a radio segment and its scary message tied in with my feelings on the Trump ascendancy.  In some ways this is just a personal rant, but one I believe gaining ground.  Increasing numbers of people are reacting to despair over our future in different ways.

The author is deliberating with the basic question, is humanity justified in continuing?  You can't get any heavier that that.  Todd feels humanity has unleashed animal cruelty, poverty and natural disasters. 

He spends a fair amount of time discussing factory farms.  Dairy cows are used as an example.  They are impregnated, then separated from their offspring.  They are scientifically monitored and when it is calculated that their milk production is uneconomical they are slaughtered for ground beef.  This cruelty is not thought of by humans.  Forests are cut down for grazing depriving wildlife their natural habitat.  In my area coyotes are encroaching on urban areas to seek food.  Manure from farm animals are a major source of global warming.  Inequality assures that large numbers of people consume cheap food, easiest provided by factory farms.  A vicious circle leading to the farm factories and more climate change.

The Amazon Rain Forest is of critical value to all of humanity.  A few years ago, Jair Bolsonaro, the president of Brazil decided to reverse conservation efforts and open up the Amazon Basin into grazing land for livestock.  He was eventually thrown out, but as Brazil is a relatively poor country there is pressure to provide food.  The Amazon is a major carbon offset, but it is being contested by corporate interests.  The author suggested that the American Republican party should direct money to make sure the Amazon remains a vital carbon offset.  At the moment that seems extremely unlikely as short term interests dominate.

It is true that many decisions are controlled by a small minority elite for their own benefit, but most of us go along supporting the system and so also are guilty.

The recent American election provides a prime example that it is not just a small minority totally responsible for our ongoing disaster.  Why did those who suffered from the recent American hurricanes turn around and vote for climate deniers?  If honesty is a critical virtue why did so many vote for obviously dishonest people and support those who want to distort history (slavery, killing the indigenous for their land)?  Trump is just a clever egomaniac with money, not afraid to lie and exploit ignorance and prejudice for his benefit while others cater to him for their own selfish reasons.  The real danger is us who voted for him and his like.

Many of us want to do the right thing, but actually contribute to the unfairness of life.  The key to our hypocrisy is to keep a distance from suffering.

 Might we go extinct from climate change, nuclear explosion, or a pandemic?  There is a decline on birth rate around the world.  This means a likely schism will develop between the young and old.  There will be fewer young to support an aging population.  A view on declining birth rates;   check http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2024/12/empty-planet.html A danger is that reasonable people will not have babies, while others who will carry on our harmful habits will have more.  The world needs more reasonable people.

There are decent people including some who want to help develop society in a more positive direction.  Carl Sagan once suggested that the reason we have had no contact with aliens is that any civilization able to attain the necessary level of technology possibly self destructed.  A long time ago in our history leaders were not chosen by an expensive process, but by the simple will of followers.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2014/07/selected.html

Todd May explores many different perspectives about whether mankind should continue or not.  Some of you might find his thinking too technically philosophical.  He doesn't make a decision.  Nobody really wants to see mankind end, but things will have to change.

I don't believe that the future will be easy.  My wish is more people will follow a guide from Steven Covey;  "Seek first to understand, then to be understood".  I believe the world needs more good people and that our efforts should be directed to encouraging good people, not greedy ones.

Post Election 2024

As a Canadian I look at the American election as insanity.  The two most heard excuses for their choice were the economy and immigration.

The economy really means the cost of living which certainly merits serious concern.  The big question should be "Why"?  A little overlooked history should have been noted.  Obama took over a financial crisis and over eight years turned it to a rising economy.  Trump's first action was to put in a large tax reduction that not only added to the deficit, but also increased inequality.  Others can argue about how he handled the economy after that, but in general jobs were lost and inflation moderately increased that is until the pandemic crisis that Obama warned was possible.  Not Trump's fault, but he acted almost criminal in his management--mocking experts and discouraging masks and vaccines.  Lots of jobs were lost, businesses closed and critically supply chains were disrupted.   A few businesses were able to take advantage and others went under

There are many ways a government might approach the problem--an important component would be to pump in more money.  Climate change didn't stop and agriculture suffered meaning food prices went up.  Climate instances have increased and have had a negative impact on prices.  Money was borrowed and some was printed, otherwise the job situation would have been pretty bleak.  Trump negotiated a deal with Saudi Arabia designed to increase oil prices.  These last four years of recovery have been difficult times with difficult decisions required.  Compared to the rest of the world it must be said the Biden administration made the better choices, but Americans really didn't care how other nations fared.  Did voters really think the world has fully recovered from the Covid pandemic?

Immigration does bring out emotions.  One question seems to be unasked--why the increase and desperation?  Climate change plays a role, but also so do repressive governments.  Expect more immigration pressure.  Gwynne Dyer in a recent blog pointed out the pressure definitely will increase and anticipates the borders can be sealed by actually shooting violators.  It is past time for greater global co-operation.   Read more:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2024/10/intervention-earth.html

What should have been unforgiven was Trump's efforts to discard a bi-partisan effort to deal with the immigration crisis.  Trump was pretty open about it--he wanted an issue to campaign on.  As we got closer to the election, both the economy and the border situation markedly improved, but one would not know it from the bombast coming from Trump.

It seems these two issues were so important that voters could overlook character in their assessment of who should make the national decisions for the next four years.  Trump with high priced legal help (much paid by his adoring fans) has evaded courts that he seems to realize have incriminating evidence that could put him in prison.  The fact that he intimidates those who do not cater to him--that he uses excessive bragging and blaming others.  The fact that he has a relationship with Putin that bodes ill for Ukraine (and others) doesn't seem of concern.  He also seems to favor Netanyahu who is avoiding a two state solution (and also prison).

Perhaps the biggest disappointment was that the recent victims of hurricanes for the most part voted for climate change deniers.  They had been lied to and still preferred to believe the misinformation rather than actual facts.   

Some will claim the Democrats should have ditched Biden before and found someone better than Kamala Harris.  My very personal view is that Kamala was the person with the right temperament and ability, but being a woman of mixed racial heritage probably did offend some sensibilities.  The Republicans highlighted by Trump did exert pressure on Biden, so much so that the Democrats felt they had to do something.  Although many would disagree the arrangement with the Biden administration was basically working--Biden made good decisions and took expert advice.  If he doddered around where cameras could catch him and let himself take a cold to a debate that obviously created a problem that Trump was quick to exploit.

I revealed my preference for Kamala more than four years ago.  See http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2020/02/the-iowa-caucus.html

Lots of things will happen in the next four years.  Climate change will become more evident.  Foreign powers will take advantage of American isolation.  Chinese leverage will likely be boosted.  Regulations of all sorts will be alleviated with untold effects, not all of which will be good.  Almost for certain inequality will increase.  Will the voters wake up?

College educated voters respond better to the Democrats, but in truth most did not study the facts enough.

A great plan to benefit those at the top has reached another level.  Check  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2024/05/monopolies.html

Thank you for letting me vent.  

Intervention Earth

 It is easy to find a book (or article) on climate change, but the vast majority of citizens pay little heed.  With all the turmoil in southeastern American states voters keep rewarding climate change deniers.  Florida is perhaps the most vulnerable part of America, but their popular Governor Ron DeSantis has gone to great lengths to remove  the concept of "climate change" from state legislation.  Floridians need to wake up.

Climate scientists not only examine the current situation, but also the distant past.  One fact is that there have been five mass extinctions with the most recently one being 66 millions years ago. We are now in an inter glacial period.

A big concern is when we might hit a tipping point.  Most of the predictions we learn about are based on a linear projection.  It is very possible that the rate may dramatically increase as much carbon dioxide is trapped in permafrost that is melting.

 Immigration from the Global South will increase not only directly for climate change, but indirectly for fallen states.  It will get so bad that nations of the Global North will actually seal their borders by shooting any who try to cross.  Borders are going to get tougher and the pressure will grow because climate change will hit the Global South more harshly sooner,  even though they did not cause the problem.

Scientists conclude that lowering emissions alone will not be enough.  The longer there is delay the more expensive and/or risky will be any solutions.  Gwynne after interviewing over a hundred climate scientists share that belief.  There are possible solutions.

Geo engineering is offering a variety of solutions.  It is hoped that emissions will be lowered enough (will take decades and maybe centuries) while geoengineering provides temporary and/or risky solutions.   There is some opposition to the idea of geoengineering, even amongst scientists.

 Some knowledge has been gained by massive volcanoes.  Strong enough to spew sulphur dioxide over vast areas scientists learned that sun rays were deflected enough to lower the  overall global temperature, without danger to nature, but only temporarily.  This has set up projects to launch sulphur dioxide or suitable alternatives to the atmosphere.  Not without great expense and likely encountering unexpected side effects.  There is the danger of widening ozone holes. 

There are many science projects, but we don't really know how they would work out.  Gwynne who has a military background examines many options.

No solution will be done quickly and we can expect to endure increased droughts, hurricanes and rising sea levels for several years with compounding effects. 

Mankind is supposed to understand co-operation, but the reality is that not only is there plenty of denial there is also plenty of disagreement over the best approach.  Global politics is in some ways a mess.  The author thinks it is likely that some states will fail because of food failures and others will lock themselves up.

Adapting will fail.  The voters on November 6th can demonstrate against climate denialists by how they vote.  It might be too much to expect denialists to lose in the hurricane ridings, but it would be positive if they gave a scare to politicians as that might create pressure to get the ball rolling in the right direction. 

Gwynne Dyer has has been a favored author.  Here are other blogs about him.

http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2017/04/gwynne-dyer.html

http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2017/06/war-as-explained-by-gwynne-dyer.html

http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/12/growing-pains-as-seen-by-gwynne-dyer.html

http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2023/04/the-shortest-history-of-war.html

The Choice

 A very momentous decision is about to be made.  The "Free world" could be led by an egotistical maniac with dictatorial tendencies.  Or the choice could involve someone who has a record of actually improving lives and thinks much deeper.  Or some might vote for a third party, but with the U.S. electoral system the way it is that would be counter productive.

An important element of the decision is that many people have a very distorted view.  

Going back a few years the Democrat, Barrack Obama took over a mess left by the Republican George Bush.  Almost right away he stopped the downward spiral and gradually turned the economy around and after eight years he handed over a growing economy to Donald Trump.  One of Trump's first priorities was to reduce taxes, particularly for the wealthy.  This helped pump a lot of money into the economy, but it also increased the deficit that Republicans declared would be covered by the improved economy (not so).  Another feature was that it increased inequality.  To better understand Republican priorities check  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2024/05/monopolies.html

Things seemed to be okay while a few economic factors declined, but were easily overlooked.  When the Covid 19 Pandemic started the Americans were unprepared (some Republican budget cuts didn't help).  Trump took over the government publicity.  He mocked a well respected expert, Dr. Fauci.  At one point it became a conservative thinking to resist the need for masking and vaccinations.  His actions likely caused a huge number of deaths and made the economy worse.

Beyond Trump's mishandling, the pandemic affected the entire world, rich and poor.  At one point it was necessary for governments to spend large amounts of money.  People were not spending money as jobs were scarce and supplies were difficult to find as many scooped up and hoarded what they could find.   Businesses were adjusting to new conditions and supply lines shriveled.  While Trump was still president inflation went down to less than 2% (because people were not buying), but quickly changed when large amounts of money was put into the economy.

When Biden took over more money was spent and a lot of energy applied to attracting jobs.  Consumers were ecstatic and started buying again.  Supply lines were still in recovery.  Another factor was climate change that affected food supplies (fires, floods or droughts) meaning some products were scarce.  Inflation was a result of money pumped in and supply chains being diminished.  People seemed to think Biden was the cause of the misery of high inflation.  Granted prices are difficult compared to five years ago, but the question should be, who is to blame?  Who offers the better solution?

They seem to think Trump's economy was better, but was it?  Biden's economy has outperformed all other wealthy nations that had undergone the same  pandemic.  But Americans have a tendency to think only of themselves.

Trump didn't just damage the economy, some of his other moves also had long term consequences.

The International Climate Agreement was abandoned.  The Republican conservatives (note those with vested interest) mocked climate change.  It is hard to understand how urgent, but the evidence is mounting and still there is resistance.  The United States is the natural leader, but those in control are protecting their selfish interests.  What are the consequences of not effectively dealing with climate change?

The Iran Agreement had been negotiated by Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia.  Basically it was to force Iran from advancing to a nuclear weapon.  At the time Iran had maintained all its requirements.  It seems likely first that Trump was pressured by conservatives who detested Iran, but also by  Israel who wanted it broken.  Another perspective on Iran:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/10/the-iranian-dilemma.html

Was an opportunity to steer Iran in our direction missed?  The consequences have been disastrous.  Iran has gravitated to the orbit of Russia and stirring up trouble in the Mid-East.

The Israel connection was strengthened.  Trump's first foreign visit was to Saudi Arabia, but partly the aim was to get a business deal for Israel.  They moved their embassy to Jerusalem.  These moves were without consulting Palestine.  There was already a lot of resentment.  Did Trump's decisions increase or decrease that resentment?  Netanyahu seems to feel if Trump wins in November he can continue his war against Hamas.  Trump has some strong hints he supports Netanyahu.  Check http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2012/07/crisis-of-zionism-book-review.html

Immigration is a concern.   Ironically America NEEDS immigrants, both to do the grubby work, care for an aging population, but also to innovate for the future.  Educated Europeans are not as anxious as they once were.  They already have less inequality.  A bi-partisan solution favored by border guards was blocked by Trump who felt he wanted the issue to campaign on.  Does racism play a role in anti immigration rhetoric?  Businesses love cheap labor.   

Trump admires Putin, or maybe he has personal reasons for supporting his interests.  He claims he could end the conflict very quickly.  It is speculated that he would make land adjustments based on military positions.  We can't be sure what he would really do, but we do know he has been behind Congressional delays in funding Ukraine's battle against an imperialist enemy. 

Any one is entitled to make a mistake, but perhaps some voters have been mesmerized by style.  Exaggeration, blaming, mocking non supporters are not the marks of  a leader.  Lying should be unacceptable.  Inciting an insurrection is grounds for prison.

That is all on the one hand.

Joe Biden may have appeared under the weather in a critical debate and long term his age is a legitimate concern.  But he made good choices, perhaps with the help of well chosen staff.  Not sure of his motivations under pressure, but he made a choice for the betterment of America.

Kamala Harris has a sterling record of getting results that improved lives of people.  I suspect her plans are more progressive than conservatives would like, but the U.S. has a long way to catch up to what needs to be done. The Republicans in general are still resistant, even mocking efforts to fighting climate change.  See http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2024/09/kamala-harris-truths-we-hold.html 

 The choice seems a no brainer.   But maybe we will come to better appreciate their educational system.

 In June 2016 I suggested the election was an IQ test; http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2016/06/the-american-iq-test.html

WAKE UP AMERICA BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE

As a Canadian I am alarmed over American politics, especially as a conman is believed by enough voters to get himself elected a second time.  One realizes Americans don't want to be lectured by a foreigner, but they are being conned and it affects the rest of the globe.  Hopefully some Americans who have been led astray will catch the message.

America seems to be in a doze.  They are overlooking things that are critical.  Education is attacked by people who are afraid of the truth--Blacks, Asian and Gays have been abused, but have contributed to the overall welfare.  It will take maybe another generation to soften racist and homophobic attitudes so more of us can work together. 

Something that should be screaming for attention is climate change.  As time goes by the more sacrifice  money, property and lives will be required.  There is no location that is free of climate change.  We now understand that forest fires distribute harmful smoke that affect breathing.  Florida and Texas are significant not only for their size and the direct impact of climate change, but also for their pig headed opposition.  The situation is beyond having to take someone's word.  Few are beyond the effects of climate change.

Some voters are most alarmed by scary immigration and others about escalating food prices.  There are many factors in these issues, but most definitely climate change is part of them.  Get to the root and many problems come down to a workable size.  

Immigrants are actually badly needed due to the fact that Americans are having smaller families.  Although pictured as bringing in bad things, they actually have been critical helping to raise living standards throughout American history.  We need to realize why the increased desperation.  One factor might be to escape authoritarian governments, but another big one is climate change.  Climate change has resulted in droughts, hurricanes and floods.  Higher temperatures have caused deaths.  Trump intervened to stop the implementation of a bipartisan plan as he felt he needed a talking point.

The economy today follows the economy of past years.  When Obama was inaugurated he inherited a mess.  He turned around the situation and handed over a growing economy to Trump.  Trump immediately had a major tax reduction favoring the very wealthy.  This move increased inequality and the national debt.  Before Covid things started to reverse, but Covid was a major disaster he mishandled.  Supply lines were disrupted.   Money was injected into the economy.  Under the Biden-Harris administration the U.S. recovered better than any other industrial nation.

There is much more to consider, but Trump thinks only of himself.  Kamala Harris is someone he doesn't understand, but she understands the middle class.  Trump lies about a wide range of issues--his audience size, immigration, crime rates, climate change etc.  The choice may seem simple, but logic plays only a small role.

How Borders Make and Break Our World

Borders are lines.  The lines represent control.  The author starts off with some concepts we take for granted and gives fascinating examples of how some borders have been set.  Then he steers us to the future and how we will have to adjust our thinking.

Humans have been making territories for thousands of years.  Mainly to protect what they consider their own.  

In Scandinavia we are told about boundary procedures between Norway and Sweden which have the longest European boundary between two nations  One interesting aspect was a recognition of the Sami who herd deer across those two nations plus Finland and Russia.  The Sami were involved in the foundation of the World Council of Indigenous People.  

The Roman Empire was pretty impressive in its extent.  I had been told as a young student that Hadrian's Wall was built to keep out the fierce Scots.  The author points out it really marked the northern most boundary of the Empire.

China is known for the Great Wall.   Modern times have called for new measures.  The concern is to keep out undesirable messages from the outside world.  Incidentally to keep discontent inside.  In 1998 China built its first firewall out of fiber optics.  It required a lot of manpower as monitors.  Other countries, such as Russia, Iran, Egypt and Venezuela found the Chinese strategies could be copied to help keep out western notions.

Israel and Palestine had been subject to a lot of historical factors.  In 1947 the United Nations recommended for the creation of two independent states; one for the Jews and one for the Arabs with the city of Jerusalem being an international city.  Military action went against the Arabs and their found their territory being occupied.  The border became controlled by the Israelis and they started exploiting the Arab lands by destroying such things as olive trees and setting up housing for Jews.  Israel has received more support from the Americans (evangelicals a key element) than Palestine received from Arab nations.

Charles Mason and Jeremiah Dixon two English surveyors were hired to settle the border between Pennsylvania and Maryland that had earlier been bounded by two different royal grants.  One step in the procedure was to use detailed astronomical measurements. The Mason-Dixon came to be associated with the division between the North and the South.  The fugitive slave law allowed bounty hunters to cross the line to retrieve escaped slaves.  Relating this story to an American visitor this past weekend I was told that Toledo was mis-located in Ohio as it actually when proper surveying should have been in Michigan.  This was so disruptive that it was decided to keep the borders the same.  To compensate Michigan was awarded the Upper Peninsula that had no land connections.

 North America had their divisions before Europeans began to impose their own lines.  The indigenous tribes were concerned also about hunting grounds and food growing areas.  The French, Spanish and English carved up most of North America and the lines changed with wars and treaties.  A Mexican Revolution created an independent nation.  By 1848 Americans attacked Mexicans and the net result was a redrawing of the border with the Americans taking over all of California, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah and Texas and parts of Kansas, Oklahoma and Wyoming.  Many of the people in those areas considered themselves Mexicans or indigenous.

Donald Trump  announced his candidacy for President with claims that he would build a wall that Mexico would pay for.  Appealing to a large segment he promised he would stop the murderers and rapists.  What is overlooked is that America needs immigrants to keep their economy going.

Pandemic have crossed borders for centuries.  The Black plague cut European populations more than half and was little understood.  One of the first strategies was to isolate victims.  Venice added ten days to a previous standard of 30 days isolation.  To get better protection they extended their watch and were able to divert ships from heading their way.  In effect they extended their borders.

Covid 19 intensified protections.  Immigration and tourism was halted while each nation tried to impose their restrictions.  Trade was greatly impeded and a common excuse for inflation was supply chain problems.  I remember reading years ago that the Japanese developed the concept of Just In Time Inventory which during Covid was upended.  We are still recovering, but have learned a few things including co-operating with other nations behind other borders.

Climate change is affecting everyone, although not evenly.  Your geographic location is key, but so is your wealth.  The author brings efforts in Africa to our attention.  A big concern is the spread of desert regions.  One strategy is to plant trees, but although lots of trees have been planted it has not worked.  Poor natives have found wood to be one of the valuable assets they have access to.  New strategies put a greater emphasis on soil restoration.

Ceuta and Melilla are two Spanish posts at the northern tip of Africa.  They are like magnets for refugees from sub Saharan Africa.  The Spanish Government has fortified both locations, but no matter the barriers the refugees keep coming.  Like the United States border draws refugees from Ecuador, Honduras and Mexico.  For many they really could be classified as climate change refugees.  

Americans and Europeans think the hordes of people are mostly just seeking economic benefits which is true, but tied into loss of opportunities due to climate change.  Those most affected by climate change are also the most poor and had little to do with causing climate change.   Humans have always sought better land when natural circumstances have changed.  Movement hindered by borders.

While mankind has spent tremendous effort to shore up lines other forces such as climate change and pandemics have shown little respect for these lines.  A political force in America and Europe is to fight immigration tooth and nail.  But maybe it is time to declare global citizenship and tackle the problems that really affect us all. 

Some more relevant thoughts:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/04/move.html

Deep Sea Mining and the Future of Mankind

This is an opinion post which will clash with monied interests.  Stats will be available elsewhere and are likely argued over.  My contention is that mankind is headed for a disaster.  Climate change is denied by many in power while others see opportunities to enrich themselves.

Recently heard a CBC radio spot on deep sea mining.  On one hand it was pointed out that dealing with climate change we need to get more minerals that the earth is running out of.  Those essential for electric vehicles minerals are available in our oceans.  On the other hand it is very likely that there will be a negative impact on climate change.  

Quite the conundrum--we need to mine the oceans and we need to deal with climate change.  Have we learned about how mother nature works?  Forest management is supposedly more professional and long term, but as I write this the weather is noting that we will have smoke in our air again, even though we live hundreds of miles from any forest fires. 

Time to examine root causes.  Greed has been a motivating force, tending to be short term.   Man has always been able to find more resources and have decided we know best how to use them.  It seems the earth can support more people than ever, but can it really?  There is still a lot of misery in the world and we can feel Mother Nature fighting back.  

What to do?  I am in favor of cleaner methods of mining and maybe better recycling, but is that enough?

The core problem is overpopulation with the rest of the world catching up to the wealthier west in their standard of living.  Medicine has prolonged life and hopefully more of us will survive longer to enjoy life's beauties.  Remote tropical islands had faced similar problems and developed drastic measures in some cases involving infanticide or senicide.  Can we take a long view? 

 We know trends that lower birth rate.  Gender equality, has lowered birth rates in western cultures and seems to work in other cultures.  Getting more industrialized (or westernized) is another way of looking at it.  Many births are not planned and could be avoided with sex education and making contraception more easily accessible.  If these do not solve the problem we may have to consider more serious steps. 

Do you think we have a choice?  Or do you care what happens to later generations?

A man who had a bigger understanding of the universe was Carl Sagan.  He had many relevant things to say; check http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/06/cosmos-revisited-40-years-later.html

Naomi Klein, an environmental activist is worth studying her perspective.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2015/02/this-changes-everything-deserves-major.html

cow

 Several years ago I decided not to drink milk although up until the decision it was one of my favorite drinks.  My decision was based on health reasons--my daughter's swim coach had told them not to drink milk before a meet as it would be slow to digest.  At about the same time my son and daughter's choir master told them not to drink milk before a concert as it would clog up their throats.  Researching only reinforced and amplified these concerns.  Fortunately there are alternatives--almond milk, cashew milk, oat milk, even water.

 At one time in our history cow's milk enabled Europeasn to boost their health economically.  As civilization advanced breeding, machinery and business evolved to control cows and the associated business.  The dairy industry is important to Canada and is a critical element of trade negotiations.

 "Cow" (2022) demonstrates that cows do in fact suffer.  Shortly after birth their ears are punctured to tag them.  We see a mating, but we are also aware that artificial insemination is becoming more common.  After insemination a veterinarian is there for an invasive procedure to determine not only if they are pregnant, but also when the cow might start producing milk

Calves that are not deemed likely profitable milkers or breeders (mostly male) are disposed of.

We are shown lots of grass eating.  The cows convert the grass to milk and also skin, bones and methane which become environmental concerns.  Environmentalists are concerned that land that could help mitigate climate change is being diverted for land that aggravates the planet's problem.

We watch calves being born, possibly a breach birth as a team of people are pulling on a rope.  After a brief interlude the calves are put out of the reach of their mothers who are agonizing over the separation.

In some ways the film is boring in the same sense that life of cows IS boring.  Humans are constantly looking for some stimulation, but with farm animals stimulation is limited to what is profitable.

The film ends with no warning with a cow being shot dead that supposedly was taken away by bulldozer.

Cow's milk is good for calves just as human milk is good for humans.  I had read that goat milk is becoming important not only for taste, but also it is supposed to be healthier and closer to human milk.  It has become so popular that there is a problem of what to do with the male goats as most Canadians have not developed a taste for goat meat.  Many of these male goats will be killed and never eaten by humans.   There are marketing efforts to get more Canadians to eat goat meat.  I will be looking for substitutes for ice cream and cheese.

Andrea Arnold was the director.English born she began her tv. career as a dancer and acted .  She graduated from the American Film Institute in 1991.   Three times winner of the Jury prize at the Cannes Film Festival.  Won Oscar in 2005 for best short film, live action.  Currently up to 67 film awards,  Her       films include "Fish Tank" (2005) and "Wuthering Heights" (2011).

Magda Kowalczyk, the cinematographer was born in Poland  and had graduated from Polish National Film School and the Budapest Cinematography Masterclass.   Has filmed in the United Kingdom, Poland, United States and Israel.

Jacob Secher Schulsinger was one of the editors.  His film credits included "Force Majeure" (2014), "The Square" (2017) and "Big Little Lies" (2019). 

Watching this makes us aware of some of the consequences of our decisions are unpleasant.  Many are apathetic, but others do care.

Not sure where this film can be accessed, but I was able to get the DVD from my local library.

The American Midterms: We live in Anxious times

The American midterms are not quite over and there could yet be significant changes.  Partly because of procedure changes and personal preferences the more prolific mail votes need to be verified more carefully (and slowly).  The final tally will not be available until at least December 9th.  

We were set up for a red wave, but fortunately enough rational people made wiser choices.  There will be Republican obstructionism ramped up, but not unified.  Enough voters rejected bullying, extremism and the lack of real Republican solutions that Democrats are able to maintain some power.  Many voters understood inflation is a problem, but could see that it was not entirely Biden's fault.  The pandemic left a lot of hard feelings and ongoing problems, but some realized the Trump administration was more responsible.  Still it must be admitted that the popular vote for Republicans was millions more than for Democrats which to me reflects poorly on national intelligence.

Apparently the Democrats will control the Senate (even without Georgia).  The House is unsure as of this post, but very likely Republican with a small margin.  This means the Democrats will be able to appoint judges and cabinet ministers without Republican support.  The filibuster will still restrict legislation.  The House will be able to block legislation that does not meet Republican requirements.

It is likely that the Republicans will be argumentative among themselves and with a tight margin the absence of a few members could be decisive. 

My bias is that climate change needs to be the priority.  Yes the economy is critical to getting through the week.  The threat of nuclear war can not be ignored.  Autocracy is taking over huge chunks of the world. Inequality is increasing.  Violence around the world seems to be increasing.  The pandemic and fear of future ones are likely to be a leveler.   http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2020/01/the-great-leveler-violence-and.html  There are a lot of grounds to be anxious.

Al Gore pointed out that we need to fix democracy before we can fix the climate while some citizens seem to feel a need for an authoritarian.    

Donald Trump was a braggart, a blamer and most of all a LIAR.   He should have been kept out of it, but couldn't resist for his own ambitions, ego and perhaps fear of legal issues.  Fortunately he didn't stay out of it and triggered some rational thinking, but perhaps is still part of the stirring pot.

How does one sort out all the problems and how do we make decisions to make things better?  

Politicians cannot do anything until they get elected.  The successful ones are smart to get attention and funnel their concerns.  The smart voters study the issues and take a long term view.

People have short memories.  It was only a very few years ago that people were dying in large numbers messing up things for those who survived.  Large numbers of people were shocked and desperate while others were outraged at they were inconvenienced and  hurt by these unexpected circumstances.  Net response for many was resistance to advice guaranteed a messy situation that soon metastasized to global economic problems and consequently social.  The adjustments are continuing and most of us do not really understand the dangers.

Scientists understand better what we are up against and what might work.  It is too bad that humans have come to discount so called experts.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/07/expertise-too-often-shunted-aside.html

If climate change is not dealt with we can expect more economic problems.  Insurance  companies are hard nosed and they are raising rates.  Still most people are unconcerned until climate disasters hit closer to home.  Bear in mind that large groups of people do not share a concern for climate change and to date are easily convinced other things such as the economy are more critical.  Or social concerns such as gay marriages, Critical Race Theory and abortion are priortized.

Georgia uses 50% plus 1 criteria. which is a fairer way--losers can better accept the will of the majority check:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2017/03/two-round-elections-food-for-thought.html.  Other states use a ranked system to determine who gets elected.

Americans rejected superior candidates such as Beto O'Rourke, Elaine Luria, Val Demings and also accepted election deniers such as Ron De Santis, Ron Johnson and JD Vance.  I enjoyed Vance's book.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2017/03/hillbilly-elegy.html

January 6th hearings will likely be curtailed as soon as Republicans can arrange it and replaced with some truly spurious hearings.  Elaine Luria was one participant who demonstrated her ability, but was rejected.  Will there be another hearing before the Republicans take over?  I hope so.

Another concern is that some of the Republicans have indicated that they want a check on money sent to Ukraine.  It has been said Putin delayed a military withdrawal from Kherson to encourage Republican voters.

Speaker of the House will be contested by the Freedom Caucus and Mitch McConnell under attack although his advice was largely ignored and would likely have been helpful for their cause.

For the next month or so the Democrats will control both Congressional houses.  The Lame Duck session is usually limited, but must be taken advantage of while possible.  The Democrats should expect obstruction in new term and need to get as much done before.

Donald Trump has a very high opinion of himself, but for many of us his thinking is distorted.  His credibility is diminishing, but he still has loyal fans.  At his first declaration we learn that he hired people to applaud him.  It looks like we can look forward to many distortions and lies stirring up divisions.

January 6th hearings

There have been and are many investigations regarding Donald Trump, but  the House Committee is the one that has been televised and publicized the most.  Legal technicalities (and political interference?) have tied up progress.  The people have been given an opportunity to learn about his crimes. 

At the moment one last hearing is scheduled.  The hurricanes Fiona and Ian were too big a distraction.  Hopefully there will be no delays as the midterms are less than 4 weeks away.  Although apparently the hearings were having a minimal effect on voters they were watched by many swing and independent voters.

 The Trumpers may not have a rational response to the overwhelming evidence that Trump is an egotistical con man who would go to enormous efforts to retain power, but they have a different set of motives.  They feel it is too bad Trump is being dragged through courts.  They most likely realize he had done a few illegal things, but they don't matter.  He has tried to give them what they really want.  In some cases that is racist or Biblical and in other cases it is tax cuts and de-regulations.  For a few an outspoken celebrity draws more attention than regular politicians.

But actually he has pulled a fast one on them as well as non Trumpers.  Inequality has increased, consumer protections have decreased.  Division which hurts everyone has increased.  International co-operation took a shellacking.  Regulations intended to protect consumers/voters have been cut while up to the cabinet minister level appointments have been made to many wanting to undermine or ignore regulations.   To be better understand how racists hurt themselves check:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/06/dying-of-whiteness.html

 For some an indictment or even just a legal barrier to running would be a reason "to take off the gloves."  How do we avoid a civil war?  It may have lots of violence or more likely isolated violence and endless legal wrangling.  And for sure lots of disinformation.

Some Americans think their economic difficulties are unique and the fault of the Democrats' government.  The rest of the world is also confronted with economic problems with a lot of the same causes.  The Covid Pandemic is the underlying cause of supply chain problems which caused governments everywhere to give out cash which mostly had to be borrowed.  Inequality is rising in most western nations and is exacerbated by corporate gouging.  Climate change is squeezing everyone, resulting in food shortages.  On top of that Vladimir Putin has had his ego challenged.  Trump was involved with all of it.

The evidence is compelling, but too many are afraid of Trump and others too blindly loyal.  Some calm voices are required from the Republicans and certainly the media.  The midterms could complicate affairs if more deniers gain power.

The hearings themselves have been handled well.   The incriminating evidence has come from Republicans giving them more credibility.  It seems one hearing spurs more evidence and allows some insiders the courage to testify.  Timing is everything.  October surprises are the goal of the underdog and in fact do make an impact.  If the Democrats lose control of the House the hearings will be cut off and probably replaced by some trumped up political hearings.  

A last minute hearing could backfire and take from other efforts.  The voters are upset over inflation and crime, issues that do have a Democrat side to them that could be shouted louder.  It is hard to guess what game changing evidence is available, but some voters are undecided and it could make a difference.  They need to get more information out to the public.

When a voter feels a candidate has good character they are inclined to feel their policies are well meant.  One wonders how voters could support power hungry liars.  Whose best interests are being fought for?

It is not a good idea to predict the future, but events of the next four weeks can have a very long lasting effect for the entire world.

Andrew Bacevich: The Age of Illusions

 Andrew Bacevich is a contemporary of Donald Trump, although they have never met they lived in what the Chinese like to call "interesting times."  Bacevich feels we have all been too obsessed with Trump, so much so that we have failed to understand the forces that made him possible.  

The Cold War ended between 1989 and 1991.  It was supposed to be about Capitalism and Communism and when the Soviet Union collapsed it was hailed as a victory for the freedom loving Capitalists.  Bacevich disagrees asserting that underneath all the ideological rhetoric the real dynamic was for power.

For many it meant a loss of a defined enemy.  The Military became voluntary which attracted high school grads at the poorer end of society.  University graduates and the better off declined to join the armed forces.  The American president became the most powerful man in the world as he can trigger a nuclear war.  There is a vetting process for presidential candidates and to be successful one must undergo scrutiny by Wall Street, the National Rifle Association, the Israel lobby, Koch Brothers, Evangelical churches among others.

During the Vietnam War, many either fought or resisted (by protests and draft dodging), but another group avoided it.  That included Donald Trump with more than one deferment.  Andrew Bacevich served in Vietnam and stayed in the military for 23 years and eventually became professor of history and international relations at Boston University.

George W. H. Bush was the first post Cold War president and one of his accomplishments was a successful limited war.  

Bill Clinton was very astute and charismatic.  Amongst other things he broke up restrictions for banks that later led to problems.  Pushed globalization which meant expanding U.S. trade with many American jobs being taken over by lower wage countries.  Considered risk averse he did authorize military actions in Somalia and the Balkans.

George W. Bush surrounded himself with "experienced" politicians who helped drag him into the Iraq War.  At one time he answered the rhetorical question, "Why do they hate us?' with the answer "They hate our freedom." 

Barack Obama seemed he would be a peacemaker, but got involved in mid East conflicts and Libya.  Infuriated some by negotiating the Iranian Peace Agreement and the Paris  Climate Change agreement.  Obamacare got off to a rocky start with much resistance.  Gay marriage became legal nationwide in 2015 with large parts of the country stunned by this new freedom.  Of course anything done by a black man would be resented by segments of the population.

As we approach the 2016 election, Bacevich draws our attention to the state of the nation.  Poverty on the increase, retirement savings diminished for many, homelessness on the upswing, opioid deaths at new record, 24.7 million fatherless children, 40% divorce rate, highest incarceration rate in the world, 40 million regular visitors to porn sites, 33,000 killed by firearms.  In short a lot of despair.

A lot of candidates offered to run the gauntlet.  Hillary Clinton expected an easy nomination, but ran up against Bernie Sanders who put up a strong fight.  He believed that without economic democracy there could be no political democracy.  Hillary with a slick presentation was able to finally win the Democratic nomination, over the man labeled a socialist.

On the Republican side, tv. celebrity Donald Trump assessed the situation better than his opposition.  Despite his libertine reputation he was able to garner evangelical support as unlike his rival for their support, Ted Cruz because he was more credible to bring about an abortion ban.   Michael Cohen had another perspective on this angle (and others).  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2021/11/disloyal-michael-cohen-version.html   Although easily criticized Trump was loved by the media who gave him a free platform for his message. 

Donald Trump is criticized for dividing the country, but Bacevich claims it was already divided and Trump not only recognized it, but was able to exploit it.

The book was published in 2019 and Bacevich was well aware of many flawed policies of Trump as well as his behavior and he was uncertain about the 2020 election.  He felt "...American politics will almost surely remain a forum for hyperbolic promises."  He would like to see stewardship replace the notion of increasing consumption.  He also feels freedom should have obligations as well as rights.

American technology has boosted speed, efficiency and precision, but has tended to convenience and relief from boredom which has allowed corporations to gain greater control of our lives.  We are close to the limit of how much we can tame nature and some acknowledge climate change is only one risk, with others including pollution, littering of plastic, deforestation, etc.  America is losing its political and cultural domination of the world.

In conclusion Bacevich maintains real necessary change will not come from the top down.  In the past Americans have rallied around causes that forced government action, such as abolition and the Depression.  He suggests a worthy and necessary cause is climate change which could lead to "a conception of citizenship that seeks to harmonize individual freedom with the common good."  His last sentence, "For Americans to shirk that responsibility will almost surely pave the way for more Trumps--or someone worse-to come."

Not sure how he would react to the January 6th insurrection, except as proof there are more factors involved than worship of Trump and that some elites will go to great lengths for power.  One hopes that Americans will wake up and realize there are higher priorities than hating others and overcome an egocentric view that they are "exceptional."  It will be difficult for Americans to accept they are only part of huge world.

Cosmos: Revisited 40 years later

The title is well explained by Carl Sagan,  "The cosmos is all that is or ever was or ever will be."  He further points out genetic connection between trees and animals.  In effect this subject is the most all encompassing blog I have ever attempted.

 Originally released to PBS in 1980,I can remember viewing it in parts with Dan Lovranski, a second cousin to my wife.   This version had updates and another more recent version with Neil DeGrasse Tyson is further updated.  A copy of the book has been on my shelf for a few decades and proved useful.

Science can be difficult to explain to non scientists.  They used animated segments, art work dramatized video reenactments.  Locations visited, included Siberia, Alexandria,Egypt; Calcutta, India; a Navajo reservation, Angkor Wat, Rome, Paris and Tokyo.  Carl Sagan is a good showman and very articulate presenting his case,

 Carl Sagan, not only was a legitimate scientist but has been a popularizer of science which some resented.  He inspired many and was thought provoking   Carl Sagan suffered a lot of criticism for his popularizing efforts, but also was able to penetrate the public's disregard for science.  For some he opened the door to a more detailed study of science and how science impacts public issues.  There is room for detailed studies, but honestly they don't have the impact with the public if they cannot be explained.  It is a similar skill to putting an 800 page book into a two hour movie--something gets left out and something is subject to distortion.

Carl was an advisor to NASA and helped develop some of the ideas.  Robotic mobile equipment and determining difficult landing choices.  He helped develop message to aliens on a disc to include different languages, music and mathematics symbols.  He failed to make contact with aliens.  The odds indicate there must be other developed life forms.  One speculation was that perhaps as other societies reach the technical capabilities to communicate they self-destruct, which hopefully makes us take a closer look at our own projection.  He advocated for more robotic missions rather than manned flights.

The concepts of infinity and eternity are incomprehensible.  He gives examples of large numbers and pointed no matter how large number one can devise you can always add one to make an even bigger number.   Sagan points out the Hindu religion is the only religion that deals with the infinite universe.  In addition to long time scales they have the concept of destruction and rebirth.  

He suggests perhaps the spark of life may have come from meteors. Likely life was one cellular for millions of years, but gradually we evolved towards the variety we see today.  Sagan points out that all life is connected including trees and humans.  Plants need carbon dioxide while animals need oxygen.  Plants convert energy from the sun that provide animals with energy and building blocks.  The brain evolved and Sagan points out we all have a connection to a reptile brain.  He speculates may that aliens might have  more developed neuron system that allows them to think much faster. 

Knowledge  is accumulated gradually.  One of the early breakthroughs was from Erastothenes, a scientist in Alexandria was able to calculate the circumference of the world by the shadows of a stick in two different parts of Egypt.  He posted that the world was about 40,000 kilometres around and that was amazingly close considering the primitive tools available.  

Science is built on small understandings.  Isaac Newton made a big breakthrough regarding gravity, but admitted that  "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."  Sagan recounts many small steps with such as Euclid, Hypatia, Johannes Kepler, Leonardo Da Vinci, Albert Einstein and many others.

The Russians were first to land a rocket on another planet, Venus.    We learned about the surface beneath an impenetrable cloud like atmosphere that was essentially lifeless.  Sagan was one of the ones that realized there was a greenhouse effect and further considered such a prospect could be in earth's future.

Mankind is vain, including many leaders and would be leaders.  Too many of us take for granted our good life and assume the best is yet to come.  As "Cosmos" points out life is fragile. It has taken billions of years for life to evolve to its current point with humans on top of the ladder.  Knowledge has gradually built up and  we truly do understand much more than our ancestors, but it has gone through many dark periods where we have lost many thoughts and calculations.   Best to remember that species have died, civilizations have disappeared, even stars die.  Climate change and a nuclear winter are real risks. Last episode was about the big risk--did other civilizations self destruct--nuclear war--lost knowledge

Communication with foreigners has always been a challenge, but more so with aliens.  Sagan suggests we look at animals, especially whales who have shown ability to "speak" over thousands of kilometers. Cuneiform writing on rocks was an early precursor led more sophisticated form and with the invention of paper, ink, and printing on wooden blocks in China.  Moveable printing in Europe allowed the more rapid spread of information.  Now of course ideas spread electronically.  Writing allows us to communicate across ages and over great distances where before we relied on word of mouth.

 Misinformation and misunderstandings are common.   Wild speculations (including his own) can capture the public's fancy, but real breakthroughs generally come through tedious calculations.

In short, Carl Sagan opened up our awareness to the Cosmos.   We are really very small, but part of a glorious entity.  Will we learn how to get along?  Will we use the accumulated wisdom of the year for a happy future? 

Earlier blog:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2012/10/carl-sagan-and-our-future.html