Free Drinks Tomorrow

Back in the early days of the computer revolution it was called “Vaporware,” promises of astoundingly wonderful hardware or software that was going to be coming out “real soon now” , only to never appear. All that came out were more promises . Vapor, distracting from the reality of ever increasing piles of bullshit.

Enter the new age of political vaporware. Huge changes, sweeping reforms, stunning revelations followed by arrests and jailings of this or that big name political malefactor. Yadda, yadda, yadda. After four years I’m just sick of it. Put up or shut up . Call me when Hillary is in Super Max, Joe seeks asylum in Beijing, and Julian Assange has been pardoned.. Y’all be sure also to let me know just as soon as that election fraud thing ends in a second term for the Donald, and even one fraudster goes to jail.

Until then, I would be quite pleased if both sides just shut the fuck up.

I don’t want free drinks in a tomorrow that’s always a day away.

I thirst for justice today.

If you could dump Trump FOREVER . . . would you ?

I have a straightforward question for all Democrats and Trump haters everywhere.

If you could dump Trump FOREVER . . . would you ?

Well, obviously that depends on whether you like the Donald or you do not. If you don’t like him ( a lot ) and you could dump him ( forever ) then the answer to the question should be a no brainer, right ?

So why don’t they do it?

It would be so easy. Just call Trump’s bluff. Count the ballots and prove that not only did Joe Biden win the presidency fair and square , but also prove to the entire world (including his most ardent supporters) once and for all, that Donald Trump is both a loser and a god damned liar. It would take all of two days , max, do do that.

So why don’t they do it ?

I can think of a reason.

Can you ?

Freudian slippage

America’s media ( and I mean all of ’em) , Social Networks and Big Tech in all of it’s manifestations are in a virtual orgy of self congratulatory celebration of Joe Biden’s proclaimed ( but not yet factual) victory over Donald Trump.

So how do they explain that unanimity of joyousness, exactly, since more than 48 % of Americans are far from happy about the outcome?

You might actually think that the media (and Social Networks and Big Tech) were all prejudiced from the start , and opposed to the wishes of roughly half of the people in America (or more than half, if that voter fraud thing proves out.)


Open Letter to Eric Weinstein

Dear Eric,

By way of introduction, my name is D. Benton Smith and there is very little chance that you’ve ever heard of me, or reason that you should have. My only credentials are self proclaimed, although on the few occasions that I’ve expressed my deeper thoughts and opinions to others they seem to have been well received and I’ve even been accused of genius by a few of them , but what do they know? At least none of them have called me crazy.

Here’s the deal. I stumbled upon a couple of your video conversations about the phenomenon for which you coined the term Distributed Information Suppression Complex (DISC) and I believe I have a significant piece of the answer to your core question.

I see the core question , in the generalized sense, as “Why is the pattern (particularly within journalism) of information suppression worsening from earlier norms to the extent that it’s now becoming (apparently) an existential threat to civilization’s sense making apparatus?”

First allow me to stipulate that information includes the entire “bandwidth” (so to speak) of truth and lies, veracity and falsity, rectitude and error, etc.

If information is suppressed on purpose then the act is one of purposeful deceit. A case might be made that the act was righteously or beneficially motivated, but that doesn’t change the fact that it was deliberate, and that it was deceitful. Deliberate deceit is not limited to bad guys or despicable purposes.

The information which gets suppressed could be true, false, or dubious, but regardless of it’s truthiness, suppressing it is ultimately going to have some effect on the success or failure of future outcomes.

Secondly, true information (being necessary to winning any contest) is therefore vitally necessary for us to obtain for ourselves (or our team) and deny to competitors . So we are compelled, on pain of death, to lie, and to trick and to withhold truth from our rivals, just as they must do unto us.

This wretched game is not exclusively an individual sport. No individual can directly observe a sufficient amount of actionable true information to enable survival. Our short-range senses and our scant available time are just too limited, and so we form partnerships and groups to distribute the tasks. We enlist the cooperation and loyalty of numerous assistants by contributing truthful information, loyalty, honesty, alliance, etc. to such ad hoc allies, and expect them to return the favor.

The problem is that the individuals, partnerships , clans, tribes, nations and empires who comprise these cooperating “nested” collaborations are all trapped in the same unavoidable conundrum that we also are individually subject to: To survive we must be truthful, honest and loyal . . . and . . . to survive we must lie, cheat and steal. In other words, being on the “good” side does not preclude lying, cheating and stealing. Those ultimately destructive actions are just as necessary on the one side as they are on the other.

Distributed Information Suppression, therefore, is just the advanced and more organized version of simple lying by omission and distraction. It looks a little different ( more coldly dispassionate about who gets targeted perhaps) because it is being carried out by cold and dispassionate corporate apparatchiks.

DISC, however, is not the only “truth obliterating” misdeed that looks a little different when scaled up to Modern Empire size. Gas lighting, for example, also doesn’t look quite the same when manifested on the global internet scale as it does on the person-to-person scale either. But it’s still the same mechanism whereby one competitor tries to make the other competitor come to wrong conclusions and make big mistakes based on deceitfully intended data.

These necessities cultivate a veritable marketplace of lies, wherein any single sin or virtue can be used as currency to purchase or sell any other sin or virtue. These transactions constitute a very very large portion of how individuals and groups of all sizes invest their time, effort and intellect so as to get from cradle to grave with maximum personal comfort and minimum physical damage to the organism. All at the expense of their rivals. The entire system is predicated upon deception.

As a mathematician you can appreciate better than most just how many combinations and permutations of truth/lie , trust/betrayal, alliance/enmity ensue from these factors interacting within the lives of seven and a half billion people. That it is an overwhelmingly large number is profound understatement.

Back in the day, the absolute technical limitations of primitive technologies more or less prevented this horrifying reality from reaching a critical mass around the world all at once. It was not physically possible to monopolize communications or monetary exchange in 1920. In 2020 however it is way more than possible. It’s universally standard operating procedure. Prior to the First World War, attempted DISC type activities caused intermittent localized wars. Today it is causing globally paralytic chaos. But it’s the same beast.

The basic mechanism (lying) is simplicity itself. It’s the complexity generated by the sheer magnitude and pervasiveness of the lying that’s killing us now.

There is only one thing that might stop it, but that one thing is so improbable that its attainment is practically impossible.

A very large number of individuals would have to become aware that the consequences of using no-holds-barred deceit to achieve unlimited victory are predictably and inescapably catastrophic. So long as humans routinely cheat to win then the habit is unlikely to abate.

What is much more likely is that the catastrophe is unavoidable, and on a grand scale. The unpredictable logics of evolution are therefore going to play out as they will. On the small scale, however, and between small numbers of exceptionally honest or clever people, there is still some legitimate hope.

Universal Basic Income ? Whazzat?

Let’s get right to the point : So-called Universal Basic Income is not one bit crazier than the Universal Basic Outgo that we already have.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, the critics of UBI ( all of them rich guys) say that giving people something for nothing will not only make us go broke, but also encourages laziness by paying people to be lazy. Maybe so. Just like slapping people with an unpayable debt the moment they’re born is a bad thing because it turns more than half of the entire population of earth into slaves who can never escape from servitude to unelected undeserving uncontrolled unprincipled oligarchs who live off of the debt collection.


Should not sauce for the goose also be sauce for the gander?

Using physical force (or the enforceable threat of it) to make me pay a tax on food, shelter, clothing and the ground I sleep upon is not a logical extension of some fundamental truth or natural justice . It is a purely arbitrary , human-made rule devised by rulers ( all rich guys.) Maybe that’s a good thing and maybe it’s not, but one thing about it is for sure in either case: it’s “made-up” , invented, and artificial.

It’s just Unviversal Basic Outgo isn’t it?

How is that fair? How is that not crazy as bat shit?

If I am arbitrarily born into debt and servitude it seems to me both fair and logical that I also get a few “free chips” in compensation. That way I can at least stay alive (barely) on an ongoing basis so as to keep trying to dig my way out of the hole I got thrown into at the git-go.

Presumption of Prejudice

Looks like there will soon be a new Justice of the Supreme Court to pick, and the city of Washington, DC, prepares it’s forces for combat.

Conservatives want a proven conservative in the seat, and their political rivals quite predictably want the exact opposite. Both sides are preparing themselves to do whatever it takes to get their person into that extremely powerful position.

To which I say, “Why all the fuss? If a new Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America is fair , then what difference does it make whether they hail from the Left or Right? A fair person is fair, right?”

The entire room (from both sides of the aisle,) their eyes aghast, turn to face me with complete , total (and rather unkind, to be honest) astonishment. They all look at me like I’m totally, inexplicably and unfathomably deranged !

Of course (they all believe to the marrow of their bones) it is existentially important that any new Justice of the Supreme Court be prejudicially committed toward one political belief or the other [conservative, or liberal, as the case may be) ! How could the dispensation of Justice possibly even be possible if conflicts were decided by someone not favorably disposed to one mindset over the other? Since judges will “judge” things in favor of their own predilections (in other words, their own prejudices) then the only way to assure good judgments is to have judges whose prejudices are of the correct orientation, right? A self evident truth to every partisan.

This Presumption of Prejudice is so fundamental to everyone’s core beliefs that unfairness is simply assumed without question. Not only does it go without being said, it goes without even being thought. The idea of a truly impartial judge is below laughable, because nobody actually wants it. No one wants fairness or justice. No one wants impartial logic. What people want is victory, for their side, period.

The Smarter of Three Thieves

Three thieves are at the train station to admire the dazzlingly new locomotive train sitting on the tracks, sun gleaming from it’s new paint, polished brass and lavishly furnished coaches. Each of the three lusts to possess it for themselves.

Climbing into the cab they inspect the gauges and levers and things which its engineer would use to control the machine.

The smarter of the three speaks first, “I know that the both of you want to steal this wonderful device, too bad you’re too stupid to know how to do it.”

“That is untrue and unfair,” the two say in their individual ways. “We wish to steal nothing, and therefore do not care one fig about the ways such a crime might be done. You, on the other hand, are so low that you would steal it yourself if you were able, but are just bluffing about knowing how to pull it off.”

“I would never entertain such a dishonest thought,” replies the smarter thief, “But as for knowing how to drive a train, why that’s simple. You just pull back on that big brass throttle lever, there, right between the two of you.”

The two less clever thieves glance at the throttle lever and immediately begin long and complicated strategies and ploys to gain control of it. Their game to outwit each other begins with sly and misleading maneuverings (mostly verbal) but openly hostile conflict is inevitable and soon the competition degrades into a violent physical struggle.

While the two are thus engaged with each other, and oblivious to all else, the smarter of the three thieves exits the cab, hitches a switch engine to the entire train, and hauls it away.

The Best We Can With What We Got

There is certainly a lot of smart in the TAE cohort , but I suspect a lot of years as well. I, for one, am definitely a geezer (72).

Advanced age changes both perspective and skin in the game, both of which then necessarily change the strategy. My strategy is unavoidably different than the strategy of a young couple with toddlers (and on top of that my own life has been so extremely unconventional that it’s utterly unusable as a model for anyone .) Some of the specific skills acquired, however, are very much applicable by anyone at any time.

Foremost among the implements in this modest tool bag is the certain knowledge that the present moment (and all of its conditions) are the absolutely inevitable consequence of previous actions by someone or other. In other words, the present is the result of the past and you can’t change the past. But being totally honest about what the past really was can help direct the little bit of power we have to shape the present ( and the future consequence of the things we do in shaping the present with some goal in mind.)

If there is a present lack of resources like time, money, possessions or mobility to achieve an immediately desired objective then that is just a fact. And that fact is the consequence of earlier actions by self and others. It’s worth noting, too, that no matter where someone is on the scale of ‘have and have not’ there will still be the feeling of lacking resources needed to get some particular wanted thing’

All you can do then (in fact all any of us can do, at any time ) is to recalculate the problem into terms of “what must I achieve that is within the capacity of the resources which I either have now or can get my hands on in time to help.”

The bitter irony is that this problem is the SAME problem faced by both Bill Gates, and the Ethiopian herdsman who is one goat away from death by starvation.

Sure wish I could paint a kinder picture of the clockwork we live in, but to the absolute best of my knowledge the only bright spot is that we demonstrably do have awareness and free will. With them we not only will but shall do the best we can with what we’ve got.

Two rules for happy surviving

Let’s first stipulate upfront that we ARE now in a situation which poses a significant threat to our lives and/or well being in one way or another.

In any disaster that’s serious enough to significantly threaten your life there are just TWO immediate objectives:

#1. Do whatever it takes to remain alive. If there is mortal danger, then don’t fall victim. In other words, Don’t get dead. If it’s a false alarm then make your call on whether it is or not and proceed accordingly. In either case, you HAVE TO BE ALIVE in order to move on to the next vitally important step.

#2. Do whatever it takes to prevent this sort of shit from ever happening to you again.

Now there is one additional major point to make, which is also painfully simple (although not at all obvious) and that is the plain fact that . . .

. . . those places (or systems) that come through the crisis with the least amount of damage are going to have a distinct advantage (at least temporarily) over those people that get the stuffings kicked out of them. (example: New York and Paris had a much nicer 1946 than Berlin and Hiroshima.)

If you need or want to know what is going to happen next in this house of mirrors then look to those places (and systems) that are traversing and emerging from the crisis in relatively undamaged condition. Those places are simply the ‘who/what/where’ that they are, and probably not at all who you expected.

Senegal, Africa, for example.

And why are these types of enclaves of reason the right places to look for role models and crystal ball into the future? Because they are the ones best applying objectives #1 and #2 (above.)

I can tell you with extremely high probability (like 100%) that having just been through a more or less existential threat to existence everybody is going to do their damnedest to make sure nothing like this ever happens to them again. If the Covid 19 debacle was any kind of serious then bet the farm that the people who emerge from it are going to be even MORE serious. No more bullshit.

They are going to at least try do whatever it takes to never have a replay of this pandemic, or any similar threat to their physical and financial health. Those two objectives SHALL be the narrow focus of everybody’s actions going forward, and until further notice.

I strongly recommend re-examining the information and projections and solutions in terms of the above facts. Is the WHO a dead monster walking (thus safely now ignored) or does it require a proactive coups de grace? Is electro-finance (as per usual) going to recover or is the smart money moving into local agriculture and cottage industry?

The answers to both questions are already out there, in usually overlooked places. Heads up.

A call to (cognitive) arms

The World Health Organization is a consortium of stakeholders who envision themselves as the developers, manufacturers and distributors of the vaccine. They want to be seen as the indispensable solvers of a problem, so the problem must be ( and must be seen to be) as big as possible.

Should they accomplish their objective that means not only would they have powerful authority to direct unimaginable sums of money towards the people & organizations tasked with developing, making and selling the drug, they would actually BE those recipient individuals and organizations. Nice. Talk about having your cake and eating it, too. (Of course all of the above would be done within the framework of profitable business, so those same stakeholders would also be claiming any profits that might accidentally slip though the cracks along the way.) Inextricable rat-lines to, from, and through China are woven throughout this scheme. As are banking and OLD old money (Think European dynasties). As are numerous official intelligence agencies stretching back to (at least) the run up to WW2.

In addition to the above mentioned benefits, is a very special bonus prize : once established as the sole controller of a thing that people must receive in order to live, then this consortium becomes the de facto owner of the whole shootin’ match. Not duke; not earl; not prince. King of the hill, and the globe it rode in on. So you see now how they really do want to have that, right ? And have you seen any of them do any really big, consequential, actions towards achieving it ?

The above described consortium of stakeholders is not the only consortium of stakeholders on the field. I see at least three others, and maybe a fourth if you count the extremely loose-knit cohort of “wild card” independent thinkers and doers. The disorganization of this fourth quasi-group defies description.

The thing of it is, this isn’t a spat or jostling for better seating at the shit show. This is a war. It has already been twice as disruptive of human activity as world wars one and two put together. Hey, people, the WORLD is in lockdown. Wake up and smell the gun smoke . And remember, it’s always the noncombatants who suffer the most casualties. Call this a call to cognitive arms. You must choose sides and start thinking. Then you best start doing , based on your absolute best damned estimate of what really IS , and what the hell is actually going on around you. Time’s wasting.