The Irrelevance of International Humanitarian Law

Perhaps it’s time to reevaluate the premises on which World War II has been judged.  After all, apparently the problems with genocide and ethnic cleansing which purportedly differentiated the two warring camps may have had more to do with the methods with which those two purported crimes against humanity were implemented, or perhaps the numbers involved, rather than with they’re having been undertaken.  Gas bad!  Bombs good.  That was sort of clear when Hiroshima and Nagasaki were destroyed but seems absolutely clear now with the Israeli destruction of the Gaza Strip and elimination of its troublesome population. 

Interestingly though, United States courts at both the state and federal level have ruled that execution through use of gas chambers does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment; see, e.g., Hunt v. Nuth, 57 F.3d 1327 (4th Cir. 1995), Gray v. Lucas, 710 F.2d 1048 (5th Cir. 1983) and the Supreme Court decision in Gomez v. Fierro, 519 U.S. 918 (1996).  To violate the 8th Amendment to the United States Constitution’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment it would need to involve some sort of torture, such as dismemberment (as results, for example from non-nuclear forms of bombing). 

Hmmm, so just what is the difference?

Given the foregoing, perhaps the Nazis, while extremely unpleasant towards diverse ethnic and social groups executed in gas chambers (e.g., Jews, Gypsies, sexually deviant groups as measured by standards at the time, etc.), where less culpable of crimes against humanity, at least in the manner of execution if not in numbers, than today’s Israel.  Since today’s Israeli campaign of genocide and ethnic cleansing against non-Jews in the area of Greater Israel (the Nazi concept of lebensraum comes to mind) have been deemed appropriate responses to feelings of national insecurity and reprisals for rebellion such as those which occurred during the second war to end all wars in the Warsaw ghetto and elsewhere; perhaps Germans of all stripes are owed an apology, perhaps the decisions of the Nuremburg tribunals need to be vacated, and perhaps appropriate compensation should be paid to the descendants of those executed and otherwise punished erroneously in such trials as well as in the similar trials held in Tokyo.

As current Israeli leaders have specified, no rules involving human rights or proscriptions against lesa humanidad are applicable to military reprisals against groups deemed undesirable or inconvenient in light of national objectives.

Case closed, finally!!!  It’s only logical.  Everyone is innocent except, of course, for the victims.
_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2023; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen).  Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales.  He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review, available at Substack.com, a commentator on Radio Guasca FM, and an occasional contributor to the regional magazine, el Observador.  He has academic degrees in political science (the Citadel), law (St. John’s University), international legal studies (New York University) and translation and linguistic studies (the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies).  However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta and cosmogony.  He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

In Defense of Sedition, Liberty and Democracy

Sedition is defined as “overt conduct such as speech or organization which tends toward rebellion against the established order and includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent toward, or insurrection against, established authority”.  It thus seems an essential tool for the implementation and operation of a real democracy, one free of the fetters of self-perpetuating oligarchies and thus, anathema to self-appointed elites while concurrently essential to populism in the sense that populism involves the real exercise of democracy notwithstanding institutional impediments.  Sedition would seem to have been the essence of Thomas Jefferson’s belief that the established order should be seriously challenged every generation.  However, Jefferson was great at intuitive libertarian truths albeit hypocritical as to their implementation.

Sedition was and is a sine qua non of the United States Declaration of Independence, of the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and indeed, of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.  The United States and most so-called modern democratic systems were founded on the basis of sedition.  However, sedition is considered inherently illegal in every legal and constitutional system.  It is akin to heresy in organized religions and thus, as in almost everything having to do with the exercise of power over others, its proscription is an exercise in abject hypocrisy.

Sedition, “apparently the most essential tool for a libertarian society”: something on which to reflect as the United States and other so-called Western governments drift further and further away from libertarian democracy and closer and closer towards elitist authoritarian dictatorship (assuming that they’re not already there).
_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2023; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen).  Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales.  He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review, available at Substack.com, a commentator on Radio Guasca FM, and an occasional contributor to the regional magazine, el Observador.  He has academic degrees in political science (the Citadel), law (St. John’s University), international legal studies (New York University) and translation and linguistic studies (the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies).  However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta and cosmogony.  He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

A Brief Reflection on the Latest Rationalization for Genocide

I wonder if the Israelis murder Palestinians with a joy similar to that ascribed to the Nazis as they murdered Jews (and many, many others).  Or whether instead, when the Nazis did what they are credited with having done, they did so with remorse, considering it a necessary evil, as apparently some Israelis do today.  Just how different, really, are Benjamin Netanyahu and Adolf Hitler and Harry Truman and Winston Churchill and Joseph Biden and Dick Cheney and George W. Bush, et. al.?  Interesting that they’re all political rather than military leaders.

It is horribly ironic that, as human beings, Nazis and Zionists share so many qualities and experiences, but terrible that they are not the only ones.  Terrible that their shared emotions, attitudes and actions flow throughout our history and prehistory as one group of humans finds it essential to destroy another.  As the Jews did millennia ago at Jericho and elsewhere.  As the United States did first with its indigenous population and then at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  As so many groups of humans coalesced into societies almost always seem to do. 

Obviously, despite the hypocritically noble proclamations by the victors of the second war to end all wars, like those by the noble victors of the first war to end all wars, and like those by the noble victors in so many armed conflicts before and since, the human capacity to rationalize evil has not changed at all.  It may be what defines us.  It’s who we’ve always been and seems as though it’s what we’ll always be.

We seemingly are what we are, and that has too little in it of the truly noble and perhaps none of the equitable or just.
_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2023; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen).  Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales.  He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review, available at Substack.com, a commentator on Radio Guasca FM, and an occasional contributor to the regional magazine, el Observador.  He has academic degrees in political science (the Citadel), law (St. John’s University), international legal studies (New York University) and translation and linguistic studies (the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies).  However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta and cosmogony.  He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

Reevaluating Genocide during and after the Second World War: a Critique of History and Historians

On Tuesday, October 17, 2023, Jonathan Cook published an article in Consortium News (Volume 28, Number 284), entitled “Israel’s Official Ethnic Cleansing Program”.  He’s absolutely correct, but reacting to the long term consequences of root problems is inadequate without addressing the root causes.  In this case, we historians and journalists are the great facilitators, and the hypocrisy following the second war to end all wars, popularly referred to as the Second World War or World War II, is the root cause.

The second war to end all wars was followed by a series of trials based on application of promising ex post facto ius cogens that proclaimed that genocide was impermissible under any circumstances and that violators could be subjected to the death penalty, notwithstanding provisions of domestic law under which their actions were obligatory.  The trials were held in the cities of Nuremberg in Germany and Tokyo in Japan and purportedly established the framework on which future interstate belligerency would be judged.  A number of former Axis political and military leaders were executed and, in the ensuing decades, numerous lower level personnel were convicted and punished for following orders deemed violative of the new norms for armed conflicts, even though such norms did not exist at the time the conduct in question took place.  The repugnance with which such conduct was to be judged henceforth justified the violation of the prohibition of ex post facto penal law.

Subsequent history has demonstrated that the foregoing scenario was a fraud and that the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials were mere expressions of the vengeance of conquerors on the conquered, albeit packaged in beautiful and inspirational camouflage.  That should have been obvious given the reality that both sides in the second war to end all wars engaged in blatant genocidal actions: consider Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but also the obliteration of German and Japanese cities from the sky and the utter absence of related accountability, so it ought to be no surprise that subsequent more neatly packaged and sold examples of genocidal conduct continue, not only unpunished, but as in the case of Israel and the Palestinians, even extolled.

The only real lasting consequence of the second war to end all wars seems to have been that the British quest for global political and economic hegemony was transferred to the United States and that hypocrisy continued its unabated bludgeoning of truth in what passed for journalism and history.  Genocide continues to be celebrated, most notably by adherents of the primordial Abrahamic faith during Hanukkah and Passover while the same cultural group constantly decries the genocide practiced on it (and others) by the Germans, incoherently using it as justification for its own long term campaign of genocide against Palestinians and other adherents of the junior branches of the Abrahamic faith.  One wonders if Abram realized the horrendous long term consequences of his sexual abuse of his wife, Sarai’s, handmaiden Hagar.

I have taught and researched international law at the university level and have sadly concluded that, as with so much that purports to involve moral, ethical and legal norms, it exists only as an aspiration, but an aspiration carefully kept at bay and pulled out only when it is convenient for those who wield sufficient control over the use of force to force their will on others, but who insist on being portrayed as morally and ethically justified.  We historians are largely at fault for being so inept and hypocritical in our chosen avocation, as are purported journalists for the same reason.  Indeed writers of acknowledged fiction, writers such as, for example, Gore Vidal, come much closer to the truth than we ever do, earning us a place in a Shakespearean hell alongside lawyers, clerics and politicians.  Rather than eulogized, we deserve disdain and worse because the genocidal murder of so many rests all too comfortably on what passes for our consciences.

Something to think about as we attend and participate in seminars and congresses and teach our classes and publish our articles and books and accept the compensation we are awarded for the foregoing, and perhaps, hope that there is neither a Heaven nor a Hell, other than the one we help create and perpetuate here on earth.
_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2023; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen).  Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales.  He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review, available at Substack.com, a commentator on Radio Guasca FM, and an occasional contributor to the regional magazine, el Observador.  He has academic degrees in political science (the Citadel), law (St. John’s University), international legal studies (New York University) and translation and linguistic studies (the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies).  However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta and cosmogony.  He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

A Brief Reflection on Distressing Historical Realities

How would Zionists have perceived of Adolf Hitler if instead of a final solution to the Jewish problem, he’d sought to implement a final solution to the Muslim problem?  Not using the same tactics but rather, a more subtle and gradual form of violent genocide with much better public relations?  How would the United States and the “Western Europeans” have perceived of him and his henchmen?

That seems worth considering as we see just that taking place in the tiny Gaza Strip, indeed, throughout Palestine, and in Lebanon and Syria too with Iran on the wish list; as we witness how Benjamin Netanyahu and his henchmen are perceived by Zionists, the United Kingdom and the countries that make up the NATO alliance.

The answer to the foregoing is deeply disturbing as we see the reflections of those we’ve characterized as history’s worst villains reflected in our own mirrors.  It says a great deal about the hypocrisy inherent in our purported value systems and in the history we are taught and then, in turn, teach.  Is it any wonder then that, not recognizing them, we seem utterly unable to learn from our past mistakes, to correct them, instead endlessly repeating them?

How would the “holocaust” be remembered had the foregoing scenario been the one that took place in the decade from 1936 through 1945? 

Probably a great deal like Hanukkah and Passover are celebrated today, and that is a terrible reflection on who we’ve become.
_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2023; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen).  Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales.  He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review, available at Substack.com, a commentator on Radio Guasca FM, and an occasional contributor to the regional magazine, el Observador.  He has academic degrees in political science (the Citadel), law (St. John’s University), international legal studies (New York University) and translation and linguistic studies (the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies).  However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta and cosmogony.  He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

On the Continuous Pillaging and Enslavement of the Palestinian People

Armed Palestinian resisters to Israeli occupation and imprisonment without trial of thousands and thousands of their brethren have shocked the “Western” world by breaking out of the Gaza Ghetto and daring to attack Israel, sort of like armed Jewish resisters once attacked Nazis in the Warsaw “ghetto”.  They dared to take prisoners to exchange for the thousands of Palestinians held without trial by the Israeli occupiers, the former but not the latter considered anathema.  After all, only Israelis have prisoners, those captured by Hamas are hostages.  As in the first war to end all wars, “Western” media has quickly demonized those it disdains, claiming, without evidence, all sorts of atrocities and brutalities involving women and infants.  Then, it was the “Huns” dining on babies; now it is Hamas purportedly raping women and beheading infants.  While atrocities are probable (the thirst for revenge tends to lead to inhumane reactions), these particular reports, like those from the first war to end all wars, are highly improbable or at least, extremely exaggerated.  On the other hand, the murder of tens of thousands of Palestinian women and children by the Israelis are well documented and credible.  But “that” was collateral damage so it doesn’t count.  And after all, the roughly forty to one ratio of Israeli to Palestinian casualties must be maintained, the score is important in this particular game.

The consequences of the Hamas led breakout were predictable, as predictable as reprisals by the Nazis during the second war to end all wars.  Collective punishment of innocent Palestinians, regardless of what “International law” prohibits or what the Nuremberg tribunals decided, is “necessary”.  And anyway, that’s not too much different than what has been happening every day, even before Hamas unexpectedly acted.  Hunting Palestinians has become similar to the extermination of the Buffalo by “sportsmen” in the United States during the nineteenth century.  Or to extermination of vermin whenever we fumigate for pests who have “invaded” our homes.  After all, as a prominent Israeli leader recently exclaimed, “Palestinians are subhuman animals”.

For three quarters of a century, European invaders have subjected the Palestinian people to the most brutal form of colonialist exploitation imaginable.  Exploitation coupled with a campaign of gradual genocide and constant pillaging and plundering.  It was necessary.  Unfortunately.  Zionists wanted the homes Palestinians had lived in for millennia, and modern Israel is beautiful and needs “lebensraum”.  And six million Jews were killed by the Nazis, which somehow justifies the annihilation of Palestinians.

The ex post facto rules applied to the losers in the second war to end all wars purportedly established an international legal structure that forbade the foregoing.  Instead, it continues unabated with the victims labeled “terrorists” and the victimizers treated as victims by a jaded and dishonest “press”.  In France and Germany, indicia of support for Palestinian rights is now officially illegal; elsewhere in the so called West, it is “unofficially” censored, the probable fate of this article.

Hypocrisy and deception “uber alles” are prevalent in everything, but especially in intercultural relations, both domestic and international.  Perhaps though, that’s not a modern phenomenon.  As I delve more and more deeply into history, it seems mined with little more than lies, obvious and verifiable falsehoods which make those aspects of history we’re forbidden from studying, like the causes and consequences of the second war to end all wars, very, very suspect.  Just how different were the Nazis (and perhaps the “allies” as well) from today’s Zionists in Palestine or the United States almost everywhere.  The perception from the Global South with reference to the foregoing seems very different from that among the populace in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom and the European Union.  But then, there is seemingly a disconnect between the populations of the latter and their governments, with those purportedly “democratic” governments disdainful of the will and opinions of those they rule.  As Abraham Lincoln, that consummate politician reputedly once said, “you can’t fool all of the people all of the time”.  Left unsaid, perhaps, was the corollary: “But you can at least try.”

I and those of my generation in the United States were once taught that restraints on liberty, restrains on the right to opine and to deliberate, where characteristics of totalitarian states, especially states such as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union and Soviet allies, and that the second war to end all wars was fought to preserve our rights and freedoms, but today, the reverse seems true.  Perhaps it always has been.  The normative environment concerning opinions involving the current situation in the Middle East in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians it enslaves is illustrative, as is the situation with the conflict between the Ukraine and the Russian Federation.  In each case, “Western” populations are exposed consistently to a barrage of verifiably false information, but pointing out its fallacies is, “verboten”, verboten not only socially but legally.  And protests, the fundamental right of citizens in a free society, are also now “out of bounds”.

It is ironic that many Palestinians are descendants of Jews who refused to participate in the diaspora following the Jewish revolt against Imperial Rome, instead converting over the centuries to Christianity and Islam in order to remain in their homeland, while most of the Zionists who have stolen that homeland are descendants of converts to Judaism over the centuries who intermarried with the Jews who left.  It is also ironic that, but for the tolerance of Islam for Judaism during the millennium following Islam’s founding, there might well be no Jews at all today.  But those inconvenient truths are papered over.  Papered over with silence at best and outright deception at worst.  The past is irrelevant to Zionists and their apologist unless it’s convenient, like remembrance of Nazi atrocities.  The Nazis, of course, where not Muslims, but that makes no difference.  Their atrocities are now used to justify the similar atrocities of Israeli Zionists against the Palestinian people.  As in the Holocaust, the murder of women, children, the aged and infirm are necessary in order to implement a final solution to an inconvenient problem, and as in the former case, the “Western” world stands by with eyes tightly shut, not only rationalizing its inaction, but this time, making genocide viable (albeit better hidden behind a curtain of better managed public relations).

It is to the credit of the best ethical and moral standards of Judaism that many Jews stand among the most vocal critics of the foregoing while fundamentalist Christians in large numbers have decided that acceleration of “the end times” and the return of Yeshua the Nazarene to lead them to paradise justifies all such atrocities.  Incoherence rules, as it seemingly always has.  And what passes for history will likely clean the mess up, will package it in tidy narratives full of quotes and citations to what passes for journalism.

“Never again” is an empty slogan and the rulings of the Nuremberg tribunals following the second war to end all wars are hollow.  Genocide is, in fact, celebrated annually during Chanukah (the exterminations of the Canaanite residents of Jericho) and Passover (the massacre of the first born of Egypt).  Of course, genocide and ethnic cleansing are not an exclusively Israeli phenomenon.  They are the hallmark of European colonialism, perpetuated against indigenous populations in the Americas, Africa, the Far East, Oceania and elsewhere. 

Still, one wonders how the current Israeli genocide and ethnic cleansing will be celebrated in the future, … and by whom.
_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2023; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen).  Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales.  He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review, available at Substack.com, a commentator on Radio Guasca FM, and an occasional contributor to the regional magazine, el Observador.  He has academic degrees in political science (the Citadel), law (St. John’s University), international legal studies (New York University) and translation and linguistic studies (the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies).  However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta and cosmogony.  He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

Reflections on Patrick Lawrence’s Recent Article Dealing with Cognitive Warfare

On Sunday October 1, 2013, yesterday as I write this, Patrick Lawrence published an article in Consortium news entitled “IMPEACHMENT: ‘Cognitive Warfare’ on Capitol Hill” (Volume 28, Number 269 — Monday, October 2, 2023).  It’s an important article reflecting truths obvious to any objective, cognitively competent person.  At least one would think so, but Patrick sort of makes the point that such might not be the case, and explains some of the reasons why.

I do have one issue with Patrick, his use of the phrase “liberal authoritarian ideology” with respect to this otherwise praiseworthy article.  “Liberal authoritarianism” is an oxymoronic phrase unfortunately used more and more by decent and intelligent people.  The same is true of terms like “progressive” and “leftist” when coupled with the concepts of authoritarianism, totalitarianism and censorship.  The Democratic Party is not liberal, progressive or leftist, and it is to that political party that Patrick’s observations are (or should be) directed.  Unfortunately, language has become so utterly manipulated that its capacity to serve as an efficient communicative tool is now trivialized.

It is worth noting that the term “democracy” too has been perverted.  Now, as used by the corporate media, the term demands facilitation of electoral fraud through relaxation of identity verification and use of unsecured ballots.  It is no wonder, at least to me, that opponents of such measures suspect that they’re meant to be used to improperly impact elections.  In the Republic of Colombia, for example, where I now live, where for almost a decade I chaired a university political science program, and thus, with which I’m familiar, the concept of voting without identity verification through picture ID supplemented by signature verification and ballot access available only at polling stations during actual voting would be considered anathema.  The same is true almost everywhere else in the world.  But not in many states in the United States of America, purportedly the “land of the free and the home of the brave” (at least according to slavery advocate Francis Scott Key).

There is a sort of new term that has become essential in order to understand what is happening socially, politically and economically in the United States, and to understand the gist of Patrick’s article, and that term is “Deep State”.  The Deep State is an unfortunate reality, albeit not as an organized entity but rather, as a loose confederation of like-minded villains who now control the corporate media, most of the federal bureaucracy (especially the Department of Justice, all of the intelligence agencies and the federal judiciary), with analogs at the state, county and municipal levels in a number of jurisdictions.  The two major political parties were long controlled by the Deep State, although a successful rebellion by the so called “Tea Party” has made the GOP unpredictable and thus, well, unreliable.  Because of such lack of reliability as far as the Deep State is concerned, a dictatorship (in the non-pejorative sense of consolidation of legislative, executive and judicial power) by the so called “Democratic” Party has been become essential, with all theoretical “checks and balances” disabled, which brings me to the subject matter of Patrick’s well thought out article, i.e., “cognitive warfare”, both domestically and abroad, something Cassandrically prescient dystopian authors have been warning us about for at least a century, most notably Eric Arthur Blair writing as George Orwell, in his novels, Animal Farm and 1984, but also, ironically, President Dwight David Eisenhower in his farewell address.

Patrick’s article deals with the possible impeachment of current president Joseph Robinette Biden for numerous felonies and is set in the context of the cognitive warfare with which it is being opposed.  Impeachment was once something drastic, but not so since the Clinton presidency, a presidency that accomplished so much long term institutional malevolence, from moving the Democratic Party away from its liberal roots to creating a mockery of verity, crystalized in Bill Clinton’s quote “it depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is.”  The two impeachments of then president Trump turned the concept into a partisan political stunt, as a consequence of which, all future impeachment proceedings become suspect, even one where the evidence is likely to be as obvious as it is in the case discussed in the article (remember when the emoluments clause of the Constitution was a big deal?).

We are, of course, as Patrick implies, in the post truth era, a predictable successor to the era when the concept of verity was stripped of meaning through the hypothesis that verity was non-existent, all meaning being relative based on the perceptor’s cognitive functions.  The article is well worth reading, even if, as the Trojan prophetess Cassandra might have keened, were she among us: “things are not likely to improve so we’d best start to appreciate the benefits, if any, of authoritarian chaos, perpetual war and civil strife”: in essence, an updated version of Hobbes’ state of nature.
_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2023; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen).  Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales.  He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review, available at Substack.com, a commentator on Radio Guasca FM, and an occasional contributor to the regional magazine, el Observador.  He has academic degrees in political science (the Citadel), law (St. John’s University), international legal studies (New York University) and translation and linguistic studies (the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies).  However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta and cosmogony.  He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

Introspection on a Sunday Morn

Writing helps me to develop and understand concepts that come to mind intuitively or reflexibly, frequently providing unanticipated insights as I reread what I’ve written, a sort of communication mechanism connecting me to my subconscious perhaps, or perhaps just a means to add dimension to perceptions and introspections. 

Whatever the case, it’s an important cognitive tool.  

It led me recently, as I worked on a micro story, to reflect on the similarity between neoliberal and “woke” philosophies, in both cases, purportedly liberal but in fact, extreme in their exclusionary tendencies and refusal to tolerate dissent.  In each case, advocating censorship and demanding conformity in the name of liberty and thus, oxymoronic. 

Then, while writing this brief reflection, it brought to mind a similar phenomenon with reference to Christianity, how the Paulist revolution totally turned the original concept espoused by the Nazarene and his direct followers on its head, turning a positive doctrine of inclusion and tolerance into a negative exclusionary and restrictive means of control. 

Our minds, as Freud, Jung and others noted, are strange and complex instruments, capable of finding truth in the depths of deception while concurrently distorting reality to promote deceit.
_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2023; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen).  Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales.  He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review, available at Substack.com, a commentator on Radio Guasca FM, and an occasional contributor to the regional magazine, el Observador.  He has academic degrees in political science (the Citadel), law (St. John’s University), international legal studies (New York University) and translation and linguistic studies (the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies).  However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta and cosmogony.  He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

The Woke and Globalization in the Context of Hoped-for Relationships: A Soliloquy of Sorts

He considered himself an empirical philosopher.  He’d taken a number of college level philosophy courses but almost always dropped out before final exams having found his instructors unbearably opinionated and unfair in their grading schemes.  He was not always wrong about that.  The times were, in fact, sort of “a’changing”, although perhaps not in the manner Bob Dylan had expected.  On the other hand, perhaps he was wrong about that.  But anyway, he considered himself a philosopher.  After all, innovative philosophers frequently went unrecognized.  And innovative philosophies were not built upon the structures and beliefs expressed in prior philosophies.  There was a great deal to be said for “thinking outside the box”.  And he enjoyed pondering abstract notions and arguing about them with others, especially with others who were less informed than he was, especially when their rhetorical abilities were less developed than his.

On this particular day (it was morning, very early morning, although it seemed like very late at night and sleep had eluded him), he was considering something he’d found written on a discarded, or perhaps lost, notebook.  Handwritten.  What a novelty.  Who wrote anymore he’d thought when he first opened it, when computers and the Internet so easily facilitated cutting and pasting!  And when with multiple-stage-translation-programs, intralingual rather than interlingual, it wasn’t that hard to disguise the origins of materials borrowed from uncited sources. 

The “notes” in the notebook dealt with a comparison of the similarities between the sociopolitical and economic concepts of globalization and localization, and the social beliefs of followers of “identity politics” who referred to themselves as the “woke.  At least that’s how it was titled.

The author claimed to recall when “globalization” made sense, but then, according to the author, in a Marxian sort of dialectic, up had popped “localization”.  Which to the author made sense as well, although the concepts were diametrically opposed.  The first had seemed to the author a sort of Alexandrian concept in the sense that Alexander of Macedon was among the first to publicly insist that all men were equal, while the second, seemed a profoundly libertarian sociological interpretation which insisted on the collective right to be communally special, communally different, with an innate right to preserve independent cultures.  “The difference between the homogenous and the heterogeneous” the author had written.

The ‘woke’ would homogenize us all (if they could) into a society perhaps ruled by a version of Kurt Vonnegut’s ‘handicapper general’: all races comingled into one and, if possible all genders as well.” 

Interesting perspective he thought.  He’d read that book by Vonnegut.  “Harrison” something or other.  It was in a class that dealt with comparative dystopian literature.  He remembered that, for some reason, he’d confused it with a book about strange firemen whose job it was to burn books, and that he’d dropped that class when the class had found his mistake amusing.  Way too amusing.  The other students obviously couldn’t grasp dystopian subtleties, and anyway, none of the girls in the class paid any attention to him.

The author had continued (in handwriting that seemed too perfect to be a man’s), writing that: “of course, until real equality was attained” (according to the “woke” with which the author was in contact, evidently the notebook involved some sort of research project was involved), “all races, genders, nationalities, religions (at least their secular versions), sexual proclivities, etc., had to be represented in everything public, and to the extent possible, everything private as well.  No one’s feelings could be hurt under threat of dire legal sanctions and civil penalties.

A delight to trial lawyers everywhere” the author had noted, underlining the phrase for some reason.  The notes continued, now in sort of a narrative fashion, as though meant to be read somewhere, perhaps to a class:

The “woke” envision a “globalized” version of social interaction at every level.  Pretty much today’s version of the world as portrayed by Hollywood.  Unfortunately, a clash among “woke” constituencies erupted when the “Trans” (males who insisted they be treated as females, sort of like full time cross dressers as they used to be called, although the difference between trans and gay men seems sort of subtle, at least to me) insisted on competing on an equal basis in female sporting events, and feminists realized that the despised patriarchy, albeit in drag, was once again depriving women of competitive rights to equality in everything. 

Ironic” the author had noted.  Apparently wondering how that scenario would play out, a sort of “unstoppable force facing an immovable barrier”.  At least that was the metaphor the author had used.

Then the author had added a “note”:

Note: what happens if a Trans person also identifies as a lesbian?  Seems as though that would be a man who identifies and dresses like a woman but still prefers intimate relations with women.  Interesting.

The author had then continued, slightly changing focus:

Traditionalists, at least of the antithetically anti-woke variety on the dialectic scale, those who insist that biological diversity is a reality and that there are only two genders and are thus, according to the “woke”, automatically racist misogynists, anti-Semites, fascist warmongers and patrons of genocide if they refuse to accept alternative views on gender (even if they clung to pacifism, internationally and domestically), have sort of sprung up in a reaction against the “woke”, albeit in a sort of anarchic fashion, apparently tending to be libertarian.

He put down the notebook, wondering what kind of person the author was, sort of hoping it was a woman, a pretty one, preferably slender. 

He thought of getting up and rummaging around his refrigerator for a beer, he was pretty sure there was at least one left.  He kept different kinds of beer in his refrigerator, mainly for effect.  Cheap beer for when he was alone and dark beer for when he had company he wanted to impress.  Lowenbrau dark, he loved how old and European the brewery was, apparently it was still brewed in Mucich.  The cheap beer he drank straight from the can but the dark beer he liked to serve in frozen beer mugs he kept in the freezer section.  He had a similar formula for wines and tequila, although he didn’t drink those straight from the bottle.  He had fancy wine and shot glasses for special guests, sometimes professors but usually coeds, and plain old glasses when he drank alone, … which was not all that often.  He had to hoard his money wisely. 

It was late (and very early concurrently, as we noted earlier) so he just put the notebook down, and shuffled off to his bed, still unmade but the sheets were relatively clean.  He always changed them when he hoped one of his female guests would consider spending the night.  That was not all that often but he’d gotten sort of lucky a few nights before.

The next morning he went off to a class he was auditing, well, auditing without the professor’s or the university’s knowledge, the class where he’d found the notebook,  It was a big class in an auditorium style room and, even though roll was called on occasion, no one noticed that his name was not included.  It wasn’t as if he was fascinated by the subject, but it was a good place to meet sort of interesting people, some of whom were attractive women who under normal circumstances would not pay much attention to him.

After the class he walked to a sort of down and out, twenty-four hour, seven days a week diner whose prices (if not necessarily the food), appealed to him and had the soup and sandwich special, a BLT and French Onion soup, then headed towards Central Park.  He liked to walk along Central Park West and imagine that he had an apartment in one of the buildings that adjoined “the” Park.  He liked to go by the Dakotas where John Lennon had once lived and where he’d died. 

He wondered what Yoko Ono was really like.  His friend Bill hated her and called her Yucky-Oh-No, blaming her for the Beatle’s separation.  But he didn`t care, he was a Stone’s man himself.

He sort of drifted into the heart of Park and watched a softball game being played next to an impromptu touch football game.  The players kept getting mixed up and the softball guys became annoyed when the touch football guys drifted onto the space the softball players had claimed as their own, after all, it was set up for softball.  But the Park was everyone’s.  Some middle-aged women were playing soccer on the opposite side.  After a while though it started to drizzle so he headed back to his garden apartment. 

“Garden apartment” he mumbled, “right, it’s more like a subterranean cave”.  But it was what he could afford, and after all, he was playing the role of an undergraduate student.  Cement block and wood plank bookshelves and all, decorated with multicolored candle residue set in old bottles of Chianti.  It was a studio apartment but the bathroom wasn’t bad, and it wasn’t really all that tiny.  “Less to cleanup” he thought to himself.

When he walked in his door he spotted the notebook on the floor by his bed, picked it up and placed it on the table that doubled as a desk and dining space.  “Got to clean this up a bit” he thought, hoping someone interesting would drop by.  Oddly enough, that happened sometimes.  So he made his bed, without changing the sheets, and even washed the dirty dishes in the sink that served both the kitchen and the bathroom.  It was never a good idea to leave dirty dishes there if someone ever showed up and needed to use the John.  He wondered what “John” had to do with bathroom functions, but for some reason it did.  He decided he’d Google the question after he was through cleaning up and decided what to do with his evening.

In the meantime, the drizzle morphed into a driving rain which sort of decided his evening plans for him.  A pleasant evening at home, or it might have been if his aparta-studio had been a bit larger and had had a fireplace, one with real logs and a warm fire burning.  And if he had some brandy, but for the moment, his tequila would do.  So he got his salt shaker out, cut up a lime and half-filled a water glass with the amber liquid he liked best.  Dinner and drink combined he thought, as he opened a bag of nachos, humming Margaritaville to himself and imagining he was in Key West

After his sort of dinner he picked up the notebook again, speculating on who the owner might be, imagining that it belonged to one of the more attractive women in the class he was sort of auditing.  There were a few, and he wondered if he could use it as an excuse to meet one or more of them in a gallant sort of way, certainly a reasonable ice breaker.  But he wanted to read it first, not because he was all that interested in its contents, but he wanted to be able to pretend that he had been just in case the owner seemed worthwhile.  He could develop and rehearse a few lines first, just in case.

So he opened the notebook and continued reading:

There is a confusing sort of middle ground”, the author had written.  “The ‘woke” insist on the right to personalization in matters of style, of dress, tattoos, interpersonal intimate groupings, but certainly not in matters of political opinions where only those whose opinions are ‘correct’ ought to be ‘allowed’ to share and express them.  To the “woke”, effective censorship is the hallmark of a free society.  On the other hand, ‘traditionalists’, at least younger traditionalists, don’t seem to give much of a damn what they wear, as long as it’s fairly clean.  At least that’s been my experience with those I know and classify that way.

I wonder if that means anything” the author had written, “If it provides any psychological or sociological insights?”  There was a telephone number circled in red with a date about a week ahead.  “Hmmm” he wondered, “should I call and try and find out to whom the notebook belongs?”  Or perhaps, he thought, he could pin a note in the classroom where he’d found it with his own name and phone number asking the owner to contact him, but then he decided that might put his surreptitious attendance at risk.  “Drats!” he mumbled to himself, putting off deciding what to do, … if anything.  The notebook had some sketches, not bad, and some geometric drawings whose meaning was utterly unclear.

Then he sort of decided it was time to sleep, or rather, he just fell asleep with his night lamp still on and dreamt of riots and chaos and rats and roaches.  In his dreams that evening, after the episode with the non-human vermin, somewhere outside of time and space, the shade of Maximilien François Marie Isidore de Robespierre smiled, chuckled, … perhaps even laughed uproariously, albeit maniacally, … he just couldn’t seem to stop.

He woke late with a foul taste somewhat inexplicably in his mouth and a throbbing ache behind his eyes, as if he’d spent the night drinking, which he most assuredly had not.  So, first things first, he went to the multipurpose sink and brushed his teeth, then took a few aspirin, or ibuprofen, or, well, something to exorcise whatever was playing in his head and making it pound.  Then he took a hot shower and changed into not quite clean, definitely grubby clothing, … stay at home clothing, no shoes or socks necessary.

He’d pretty much finished the notebook and was wondering what to do with, or about it, which led him to reflect on its context in an introspective manner.  He liked introspection.  He was an empirical philosopher after all.

We wondered where on the personality spectrum dealt with in the notes he fell, or whether he had a place there at all.  Too much of his personality was reflective, depending on who he was with and what he hoped to accomplish with respect to them.  Did he hope to impress them with his erudition or merely induce them to like him, or to at least consider him tolerable?  Or did he want to make them feel insecure and inferior?  Or was he merely hoping for a one night stand free of subsequent mental, emotional or medical entanglements?

To “wake” or not to “wake” he thought to himself, “that is the question.  Whether it is better in the ….” But he couldn’t recall the rest of the quote he wanted to play with.  His head was still not quite right.  Of course, he realized that his attitude towards being or not being among the “woke” would in all likelihood depend on whether the author of the notebook was male or female (he voted for female), and if female, whether she was attractive or not, and if attractive, whether or not there were any possibilities for any kind of relationship with her, whether ephemeral or meaningful.  An awful lot of variables and all centered, assuming the best, on what her position was with respect to the “woke”.

And that was not quite clear to him, although it seemed she (assuming it was a she) found them superficial.  Then again, the author seemed to find both groups superficial.

Well, at least for the nonce, perhaps his habitual boredom would not be at the fore.

He wondered if it might not be wise to actually register for the class he was purportedly auditing.

_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2023; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen).  Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales.  He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review, available at Substack.com, a commentator on Radio Guasca FM, and an occasional contributor to the regional magazine, el Observador.  He has academic degrees in political science (the Citadel), law (St. John’s University), international legal studies (New York University) and translation and linguistic studies (the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies).  However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta and cosmogony.  He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

The True Meaning of Life and all that Rot (Literally; or is it “figuratively”?)

Philosophy is an interesting human concept, our very own innovation designed to concurrently enlighten and befuddle us.  It both opens our minds and channels them into narrow calcified tunnels with light so distant as to become virtually invisible, and hence, rendering real knowledge ungraspable.  At least that’s frequently the case.  But not always.  Take the “meaning of life as an example.  Is it really as complicated and unfathomable as we´ve made it?  Or, is it rather simple and basic?  Based on the following hypothesis, you be the judge.

Sooo, about the “meaning of life” about which we[1] humans spend so much time wondering and, with regards to which, we spend so much time bemoaning the absence of answers.  At least some of us.  At least during certain stages of our lives (for example, during the onset of puberty at adolescence, then as we approach midlife crises, then as we approach what we refer to as our third or golden years, and finally, as we face transition beyond the veil). 

I think I may have found it (it being “the” answer), at least as far as “we” humans are concerned, but, notwithstanding the conclusions of Douglas Adams (wherever he is now that he’s passed beyond the veil), it has nothing to do with the number forty-two.

I would warn readers that the answer’s a bit humbling and hardly grandiose.  Rather, it’s quite utilitarian, although still rather important.  And it applies narrowly and specifically to only one of life’s realms, thus other forms of life have other primal purposes since, when we ask what the purpose of life is, we are referring to the purpose of life and its meaning among we humans.  Accordingly, the answer lies there. 

But what are our premises?  After all, every well thought out answer starts with premises.

Well, interestingly enough, there seem to be just three.  First[2] we have to acknowledge that we humans are part of the animal kingdom, or at least evolved therefrom[3]; second, that the animal and plant kingdoms are both an innovation of our joint forefathers eukaryotes; and third, that those animals possessed of alimentary canals which process ingested nourishment into waste, are our direct ancestors.  There!  We’re set.  Sort of.

Based on the foregoing, the reality with respect to the meaning of life, or perhaps, more accurately, our lives, is that the primary and perhaps sole purpose and function of the denizens of the branch of the animal kingdom of which we’re a part was supposed to be, according to nature (our progenitor), the proliferation of vegetable species, most importantly fruit, beyond their normal range.  That was to be accomplished through the combination of our innovative freedom of movement, compared to the plants we were digesting, and our excretionary functions.  Consequently, we were not “forbidden” to eat the fruit of life, but, as Eve would in no uncertain terms conform, impelled to do so, and to digest it, and having digested it into a compost that included seeds and the fertilizing agents necessary for propagation, excrete the residue to spread vegetable life far and wide.

The plant and animal kingdoms (all multicellular animals), of course, constitute only two of the five currently recognized living realms, the others being fungi (moulds, mushrooms and yeast), protists (amoeba, chlorella and plasmodium) and prokaryotes (bacteria and blue-green algae) but in the context of our foundational inquiry, we are only concerned with the first two, and with respect to those, original purposes soon became complicated and convoluted, perhaps resulting in our current confusion and despair.

While our original purpose for existing as part of the living realms was clear, the animal kingdom duchy (sort to speak, or perhaps principality) of which we are part soon deviated as carnivores insisted on intruding onto the alimentary premises which the vegetable kingdom found imperative, and rather than consuming plants and fruit, especially fruit, they insisted on a form of primordial cannibalism and expanding on that, we humans evolved into omnivores, consuming anything and everything that did not consume us first.  But that was not enough for us, we then degraded the importance of our excretions.  Indeed, we disdained and contained them through nonproductive (at least from the vegetable kingdom’s perspective) purportedly salutary practices, such deviation from our primary purpose having been erroneously premised on cultural misinterpretation of our role, our “prime directive” as Gene Roddenberry might have put it, and then, of course, misdirection.  Since then, we’ve invented myriads of fields of reflection and introspection trying to rediscover the purpose we ourselves rendered, if not obsolete, at least anachronistic.

Following the hypothesis that no good deed goes unpunished, at least for long, the animal kingdom, duchy of which we are a part, through the intervention and innovations of we humans, has and continues to conquer and devastate our creators in the vegetable kingdom, indeed, in all five of life’s realms, which may be the source of the rumor spread by Friedrich Nietzsche to the effect that “God”, whoever or whatever that was (hint, it’s obviously nature) is dead, although Nietzsche was merely projecting nature’s future.

Interestingly, the foregoing also implies another epiphany, one that involves the identity of the “adversary, to whom some humans unfairly refer in their purportedly sacred writings as Lucifer, or Satan, or Shaitan, but which more accurately, was a certain Hêl él[4].  In fact, if the foregoing is accurate, the adversary was in fat not some deviant archangel but rather, a certain Robert Thom, the Scott[5] who initiated sewage treatment in the city of Paisley[6]; the clearest and most expansive example of the law of unintended consequences. 

If only plants could speak what stories they could tell. 

Sooo, … about artificial intelligence …!
_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2023; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen).  Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales.  He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review, available at Substack.com, a commentator on Radio Guasca FM, and an occasional contributor to the regional magazine, el Observador.  He has academic degrees in political science (the Citadel), law (St. John’s University), international legal studies (New York University) and translation and linguistic studies (the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies).  However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta and cosmogony.  He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.


[1] I know, I know, it should be “us”, but I don’t really like the way “us” sounds in this context, and, … I am the author, with all rights to “poetic license”, sooo, “we” it is.

[2] I know, I know, … again.  “Premises, premises”, but what can we do without them.

[3] The “derived therefrom” phrase preemptively addresses arguments insisting that we are qualitatively different than animals.

[4] Look him up, it’s worth it.

[5] I hate to admit that the English may have been correct when some postulated that the devil was most certainly a Scott.  But evidently, at least in this one instance, it appears they were on to something.  I guess the axiom that no one is always wrong may, in fact, be somewhat correct.

[6] Although the Minoan civilization of Crete and the Roman Empire used underground clay pipes for “sanitation” purposes.  So perhaps the identity of the “adversary” is all too securely hidden.