Cancel Culture?

In 1864, President Lincoln was not favored to win the upcoming election. He had the excuse of the Civil War to postpone it. He had a Congress that might very well have gone along with him, had he requested it.  Facing all of this, he nevertheless declared, "If the rebellion could force us to forego or postpone a national election, it might fairly claim to have already conquered and ruined us.”

When it was suggested to Franklin Delano Roosevelt that the 1942 election should be delayed due to the opening of World War II, he unequivocally stated that doing so would mean, “...we have become fascists ourselves...”.

2020, faced with slumping pull numbers, Donald Trump whined, “With Universal Mail-In Voting (not Absentee Voting, which is good), 2020 will be the most INACCURATE & FRAUDULENT Election in history. It will be a great embarrassment to the USA. Delay the Election until people can properly, securely and safely vote???”

The Civil War was not enough for a president (who, remember) was widely regarded as likely to lose the election, to cancel democracy.

World War II was not enough to convince another president that we should cancel democracy.

But Trump has slipped in popularity, and that’s reason enough for him to cancel democracy.

Ever watch Sesame Street with your kids? “One of these things just doesn’t belong here. One of these things just isn’t the same. Can you guess which thing just doesn’t belong here before the election begins?”

Seriously. Can you?

Ozytrumpias

Facebook post in response to a Trump statement that he wishes to have his opponents “shaking in their boots” as he sends his private shock troops out to cities run by Democratic elected officials.

Trump apparently knows some history after all. Terror tactics to make people afraid of you always work so well. Hitler used them against the Russians in order to make them so frightened they would no longer resist German forces. The result was... oh, that’s right, the result was the resistance grew even bigger and stronger and more determined to destroy these evil monsters. OK, so one failure.

The same tactics were used against the French in order to… Oh yeah, the French resistance also got more and more determined to destroy those awful monsters. OK, so two failures.

Maybe that’s because it was from Germans. Let’s look at the Japanese during World War II! Thanks to similar tactics against the Chinese in order to terrify them at submission… well, I guess that makes three failures.

You know, I’m beginning to think maybe Trump doesn’t know anything about history. I also wonder if maybe he doesn’t know anything about human nature.

Hell And The Single Basilisk

 Answering a post from my friend Bobby referring to Rokos Basilisk. Essentially this is a concept stating that, > A thought experiment called "Roko's Basilisk" takes the notion of world-ending artificial intelligence to a new extreme, suggesting that all-powerful robots may one day torture those who didn't help them come into existence sooner.<. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/what-is-rokos-basilisk-2014-8%3famp

Strange you should bring up Basilisk. I was just looking into that earlier this week. My basic response to it is, Rocco’s Basilisk is really really dumb. I wouldn’t call it artificial intelligence. I rank it with my concept of artificial stupidity. For those of you, like Bobby, who have heard this so many times, I apologize,but maybe there’s someone who hasn’t; so, as I’ve said so many times, I know we will soon create artificial intelligence because we have already totally mastered artificial stupidity.  (Don’t believe me? Try using a dictation system and see what you get.)

How does that apply to the Basilisk?. It takes a little exposition.

First, let’s look at God. To this day if you check in on the creationist/fundamentalist channels you will often hear pastors Insisting that everyone must worship their God exactly as they decree or he will torture them forever. This is so convincing that even the most extreme fundamentalist religions are dropping in membership. Wait! Doesn’t terror always work?

Let’s take a look at another example. Seeing failure in his attempt to swiftly conquer Russia, amazed at the resistance of the Russian people (which was so very similar to the resistance of the Chinese people against the Japanese invaders), Hitler decided that the best course of action was to commit blatant and very public acts of brutality. This, he was certain, would terrify the Russians into submission. It didn’t.

Instead it made Russian resistance even more bitter and more determined. But terror always works, doesn’t it?

I am reminded of an old science fiction story, the author and title have faded from memory. In it an alien invader struggles to subdue Earth. They keep failing. The resistance simply will not surrender. They decide this is because they don’t understand human psychology and therefore kidnap a human and force him to tell them how to force his species to submit.. At first he refuses cooperate but they torture him into doing so. He then reluctantly tells him to rape, torture, murder, and generally act like the Nazis did in Russia and like the Japanese did in China. By the time the aliens realize that he has lied to them and all they’ve done is make people hate them more than ever and be more determined to destroy them at any cost, it’s too late. The occupation of earth has simply become too expensive and they have been forced to withdraw.

And of course there’s the point that the Basilisk would be stupid to actually spend the energy to resurrect people and torture them when that no longer serves a purpose. All it needs to do, even assuming it could work, would be make people think that it would do this. Very cost-effective in terms of energy and effort. It doesn’t matter what is real, what matters is what people think is real.

To prove that this proposition is correct, all you need to do is look around in America today and notice the people who adore Trump for making his great sacrifices to save America or the Q anon conspiracy or the flat earth movement or any number of other childish nonsensical fantasies which have a large base of fanatically devoted zealots.

Of course, if the Basilisk is smart enough to do this, then it would have inspired Roko to create that fear.

Hmmmmm...

Namu Amida Butsu

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190801-tomorrows-gods-what-is-the-future-of-religion?ocid=ww.social.link.facebook

I remember criticizing the Star Trek universe for having no room for organized religion, except of course in alien cultures. Starships had counselors, but they never had any chaplains. I do see that organized religion will probably continue to fade, perhaps even inevitably so, and I believe we will become more and more like Europe which looks very much like the Star Trek universe. (With the exception of France, which is actively anti-religious, yet still has a small and devout Catholic population.)

I do think the article is correct in that we will find more and more people who are not members of an organized hierarchical religion with important doctrine dominating members’ belief system. Instead, they will select the beliefs they find satisfying and comforting as if at a buffet. I think not only of Europe but also Japan, where Buddhism lives not merely side-by-side but thoroughly integrated with Shintoism. It is not at all unusual in Japan for a couple to live a very secular life following their Shinto marriage and which ends in their Buddhist funeral. During those lives, it will not be surprising if within their home an important part of family ritual and even daily life is a Buddhist shrine, sometimes next to a Shinto shrine.

There are, naturally, still some severe doctrinal differences in branches of Buddhism; yet these are of importance more to the priests than to the people.

For example, in Pure Land Buddhism the declaration  ”Namu Amida Butsu” is of great importance. Essentially it means , “I take refuge in Buddha.)”. For some it is a mantra similar to the use of the rosary by Catholics, for other branches, if it is said sincerely and one experiences the transcendence which accompanies it, it guarantees one’s salvation. Others say it only does so if you are still in that state of grace upon death (very similar to the orthodox Catholics dedication to the purity of the soul immediately after sincere confession) and so the declaration and accompanying commitment to spirituality must be made many times in your life as you achieve the moment of purity and then slip back.

These differences are of incredible importance to the priests, but generally are not highly regarded among the population in general. That is to say an individual believes what he wishes to believe and that is considered perfectly fine, at least in Japan.

Perhaps the biggest difference, then, would be lack of the desperate need to pressure others to believe exactly as you believe and the need to feel threatened if anyone dares believe something else.  While part of me sees the decline of traditional religious structure as something of a cultural loss (mostly due to nostalgia), on the whole I believe that the accompanying growth of tolerance would be a most beneficial thing for humanity in general.

So much more to say on the subject, but this is a good start.. I look forward to your insights.

I really forgot to say, and I must add now, that Japanese family will absolutely adore Christmas. The Japanese love Christmas more than any other nation on earth. Of course, almost no Japanese are Christian since the great martyrdom at Nagasaki in 1692, but who cares? Christmas is so much fun! Merry Chrisamasu!

Statutory Statues

The statue situation is complicated. But let’s remember:

 In 1776, in order to celebrate the signing of the Declaration of Independence, Americans promptly tore down the statue of King George III and melted it down to use its lead content to make bullets to fire at King George’s troops.

In the 1920s a statue was dedicated to celebrate the loyal slaves who stayed home to protect the plantations of their masters fighting to…keep them slaves. “Uncle Jack”, a.k.a. “The Good Darkie” wasn’t removed from public display until it was forcibly torn down. Then many struggled to put it back up, but it was finally relegated to a museum where, at last report, it occupies a position of honor.

The controversial statue of Lincoln standing near a Black man kneeling was entirely paid for, 100%, by donations from freedmen. That is, former slaves wanted to honor the man they felt had given them their freedom.  It looks wrong to our modern eyes, but was never intended to belittle former slaves.  Many debate whether the Black man is kneeling or rising from slavery.

The situation about statues is complex and difficult.  Action definitely needs to be taken.