(Applied to Sociology and Political Science)
Progressive Thinkers as of 8/25/2019
Reference: Threesology.org
Image adapted from: Wikipedia: Evolution
Notice: Cenocracy.org has come under new Sponsorship. A site-wide review has been instructed to be undertaken in order to return to the Core meaning and current interests occurring in world affairs. While the previous pages are available if you already have the Url (website address), they will not be presently available for review.
Every single government on Earth needs to honestly show its true color of Democracy. Not only has the Chinese government stepped up to the plate, but it stands there courageously ready to take on any type of doctrinal or intellectual pitch made against its efforts. When it says that the British government failed to introduce Democracy during its colonial rule, this is true. The British government did not actually want to introduce Democracy... or its overseers, assigned to their positions like long-term go-betweens for the British government in England, could not act as managerial officers participating in yet another form of absentee ownership that was so destructive to the Irish people during the Potato Famine. Yet, this is the British rationale just as it is the U.S. rationale, to provide the people with the illusion of a future possible democracy... yet none ever arrives. The British government like the U.S. government are disgusting liars and cheaters when it comes to permitting the public to establish a true form of democratic government. The elites of Government don't want to lose their control which makes slaving niggers out of everyone, where the phrase "indentured servitude" is more often used in an era where political correctness is more important than those metaphors which exemplify a greater truth. This is why the word Democracy, and the Words, Socialism, Communism, and all other models of practiced government... including Sweden's Direct Democracy, are lies and illusions which create a state of delusion one can only describe as abominations of an actual Democratic spirit which has become enslaved due to varying types of greed, lust for power, and control... no matter who gets hurt or what gets destroyed because death and destruction can always be minimized by future apologists bought and paid for by government grants.
No other government on the planet Earth is willing to declare their true color of Democracy and how the colors run the entire spectrum of all political flavors and favoritism resulting in a global representation of phony Democracy cloaked in lies and illusions. Just as the Chinese flavor of Democracy is against an actual "peoples government" with a Peoples Legislative Branch modeled on a collective Judge, Attorney and Jury duty profile; so is every single other so-called Democracy; by countries who are using their falsified brands of Democracy as a form of colonialism and imperialism in an attempt to create all countries in their "flavor-of-democracy image" so as to acquire a greater share of the world's resources (but not share it with their respective publics), instead of by the older actions of military occupation. Democracy is being used by the U.S., Britain and many other so-called Democracies, Socialisms and Communisms, as a means to affect a non-military form of controlling a country's assets. There would not be a "1%" hegemony of wealthy people and corporations exploiting the people if governments did not allow them to. They do so because the governments practitioners during a given administration receive kickbacks one way or another... directly or indirectly... and let the people be damned if they don't like it is the motto under which they work and make personal gains, even if saying the very opposite.
One may speak of backwardness being practice as a governing ideology in the following senses with respect to the three great nations on Earth:
- U.S.: Build Better Back (dealing specifically with internal views of social progress)
- China: Back On Track (dealing specifically with Hong Kong's pursuit of democracy)
- Russia: Conservativism: (dealing with a wide range of issues that compare Russia with western countries, but mostly the U.S.)
Here is an interesting example of Russia's views as seen through the eyes of Putin:
Putin: Wokeness Is Dismantling The West: Cancel Culture First Happened In Russia During Bolsheviks!
There is a growing consensus that humanity is heading towards a catastrophic war, particularly in light of the fact that there is an increased insistence by both China and Russia to increase its land-holdings which provide for greater resources and strategic positioning in their respective global domains. The usage of Atomic, Biological and Chemical armaments has reached the point of being short-term deterrents with an "acceptable losses" rationale being adopted as an actual philosophy to bring about significant alterations in global power structures.
It matters not to some how many are killed so long as those whom are left are those whom one is in favor of. The destruction of entire cultures is being reviewed from the vantage point of "collateral damage", since the whole of a given culture may well remain in tact, albeit with a lesser population from which to breed a stronger one. The obliteration of entire religions, business sectors and governments have become mathematical variables being used as part of military strategies of how and when to strike and with what armament(s) under which guises to serve as the better excuses from which public illusions and delusions will develop to offset the need for a lack of particular points of infrastructure which will need to be put into place over time. War is coming as an alternative to waiting for some global intervention to bring about a change in the global distribution of power struggles, instead of waiting for some global crisis such as economic decline and its host of ensuing problems such as famine, sickness, lawlessness, etc... Neither does the occasion of a global pandemic bring about the need for a global restructuring of power since too few business, political and religious elites become infected and die. The short life span of humans makes the need for introducing some alternative means for bringing about significant changes in global events, that war is seen as the best expedient since it is something that can be achieved unlike the hope for awaiting some natural disaster.
Yet, the foregoing views are not knew. Others have thought about the insecurity under which the peoples of the world are forced to live due to one or another political and historical and personal philosophy of one or another leadership. Indeed, it is not uncommon to find someone who thinks that the irradiation of one or some other culture would be of great value to humanity. A similar idea is presented in the notion of thinking about how the resources of a given place in the world, if in the hands of another culture, might well use them more proficiently, such as for example if all of the U.S. resources were in the hands of the Japanese, Norwegians, or Germans. Indeed, if one other another region's resources could be over-taken by another culture, they might well serve the whole of humanity better.
While a deep philosophical change has been in the wings for sometime regarding Cenocracy.org, it is rather fortuitous that the following article was posted as if being made to order:
Russian Citizens Are Now Being Prepped for Nuclear War
With respect to China, its growing sophistication in weaponry means it doesn't need hundreds of Nuclear bombs. There is no need to pay for and stockpile hundreds of bombs if a few uniquely designed ones will do whatever it would like to do. Its "no first use" policy doesn't mean it won't use nuclear weapons first, if it can convince itself that delaying the usage of one first is tantamount to dropping a bomb on its own people. There are several articles which have been written about China and its nuclear bombs orientation, one of which is this which may be of interest to some readers: Understanding the Risks and Realities of China’s Nuclear Forces. Here's an older link: The Dangerous Myths about China's Nuclear Weapons by David Logan
- A Report on Atrocities in French Indochina (1933) (This should read: French atrocities in French Indochina)
- Building the Panama Canal, 1903–1914
- The Tour de France Is a Tour of Macron’s Problems by Robert Zaretsky, a professor of history at the University of Houston’s Honors College and the author of Victories Never Last: Reading and Caregiving in a Time of Plague.
- The Treaty of Versailles and its Consequences by James J. Atkinson — Europe Between the Wars, Dr. Julián Casanova, University of Notre Dame,16 December 2002. (One of the salient points to stress is that the Treaty exposed how deeply the ideological rift actually was between supposed allies. This rift is increasing today.)
We must ask why anyone needs to build up a military readiness, if all leaders are claiming they desire peace. Hence, no world peace is being planned, nor even desired unless it conforms to someone ideological impulses be it for business, government or religious reasons. They all want power, position, and a heavy-handed ability to dominate some pecuniary advantage.
While the buildup of China's navy and other navies around the world has been ongoing for sometime, China gets our attention because of its overtly aggressive assertion that Taiwan belongs to it, and trys to intimidate Taiwan's leadership into giving mainland China's leadership an uncompromising deference, which it has not yet done.
Not only is China out-fitting itself with greater military ability, but securing for itself a means to supply those who might, at some future date, be a useful ally or unwitting partner in China's own motivations for securing a greater foothold on the globe via tactics which the Nazi's did not use but may have done so if the Nazi regime had thought of it as a viable alternative over the old strategy once used by many different "hordes" which thought to subdue by overwhelming force. While such a tactic is good when confronted by those either ill-equipped or untrained to fight back as many peoples in the past (as well as today) were, such is not the case when a military force like China is confronted by similarly well-resourced and trained opponents existing today.
China is known for taking the "Long-view" approach as a viable strategy which involves creating unconventional partnerships which need not be maintained after China achieves its longer term goals where presumed smaller goals (like getting Taiwan into its fold) are mere distractions.
If we turn our attention for the moment in an attempt to identify underlying cognitive patterns of strategy being exhibited in a culture's preference for one game over another, it appears that the Chinese prefer games such as "Go" (Weiqi) or Majiang (Mahjong), with Chinese chess called XiangQi. In this commentary we find two distinctions between one type of game played by the masses, and another played by the Elites: (Which is the most popular board game in China, Xiangqi or Go?)
Since military, political, religious, business, etc., activities are viewed as games by game theorists, identifying those games most popular in a given culture can help one to get a glimpse of the strategy which might be employed by an opponent of a given culture, unless they realize this and use yet another type of game strategy... and yet, because certain games appear to be culturally based, this "culturalness" may in fact be an underlying mode of thinking that is incorporated into the basic education system where multiple games such as soccer, or football, baseball, cricket, polo, poker, billiards, etc., may also have a hand in creating some type of impression which a person may use though are unaware of.
The point being, the popular games used by a given culture may create a cognitive activity of inflexibility to an extent a person unknowingly expects some sort of rule (behaviour) to occur such as in the simple case of people in a conversation giving each an opportunity to speak, much in the manner as two children playing on a seesaw in a schoolyard. No doubt there are those in the far East who think they have been nurtured from youth to think in a better strategy than the West (and vice versa), because they were introduced to a superior strategy since youth... both by playing "in the box" of stated rules and the options a person has if not playing by such rules... whereby alternative strategies can only be contoured in response to the shape in which a given set of rules are themselves outlined. A give set of rules creates a given type of enclosure and it is that enclosure which dictates the type of alternative strategy one will employ to "think outside such a box". In other words, in order to think outside a given box, one must have a box to think outside of. The type of box or presumed enclosure (set of rules), thus influences the strategy one will use to think outside it and not necessarily much further than such a tree-line, shore, precipice, wall, etc... For example, when the first rules of football playing were established, the idea of running with a ball was a strategy that did not enter into consideration... until it came to startle those when a player decided to run with a ball. Indeed, we can well imagine that many of today's sports with old dates of originations had moments when the traditional and conventional behaviors of players came face to face with one or more others who by intent or impulse decided to toss, kick, run or employ some other strategy their opponents where not prepared for.
Whereas different cultures have preferential board games that some come to view as symbolic micro-variant forms of macro-variant social events, all games have their advantages and disadvantages if one confines themselves to the stated rules of play. In war strategy, there are supposed to be rules by which all countries play by, but since there are so many violations of the rules set out in the Geneva Convention. Here is condensed list offered by the Red Cross: Basic rules of the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols. Imagine, the world's people come to accept that conflicts are a reality to expect and that despite this, they should "play by Nice rules" of conduct. Such an idea is just as stupid as many of the laws the public has to defer to.
However, China, Russia, The U.S. and others... quite often express a strategy used by Alexander when confronted by the Gordian knot. All too often we see military activity being romanticized such as Alexander's impulsivity being referred to as a bold move, or that Military campaigns are called "theaters" and soldiers sometimes referred to as actors. Yep, State sanctified murder and other blood-lettings are minimized and labeled so as to conceal the destruction and death of both people, the environment and infrastructure. In the case of Alexander, instead of trying to unravel the knot that was customarily thought to require a certain type of behavior as all knot untiers have used, Alexander simply severed the knot in two with his sword. Similarly, Aesop's Fable of the Bundle of Sticks is yet another tale which can be applied to the idea of identifying basic strategies. In this case, if one tries to break a bundle of sticks as it is presented to them as a single composite, their impulsive strategy is caught off-guard by someone who is less strong and simply unravels the bundle to break each smaller stick by themselves. Observers of world events often are so busy shooting at a row of carnival ducks set into place by the intentions of those who want the observers to be involved with different forms of discussions; thereby enabling the carnival display workers (called "carnies") to pick their pockets.
Date of Origination: Sunday, 25th August 2019... 6:11 AM
Date of Initial Posting: Sunday, 25th August 2019... 7:25 AM
Latest Update: Saturday, 1st January 2022... 1:22 PM