The Intellectual Wilderness There is nothing more useless than doing efficiently that which should not be done at all.

2021.11.24 11:08

Geopol: What use are peaceful protests?!?

A little over half the population in the (loosely defined) West currently feel unrepresented by their governments, particularly in the context of draconian and laughably ineffective (if the stated purpose is to be believed…) COVID measures, universal media shenanigans and election troubles.

In a video I did a few months ago I explained how the mutual capacity for violence is the root of negotiation, how negotiation begets cooperation, how cooperation signals become trust signals, how that leads to the emergence of society and culture, and over the long term how this phenomenon impacts the development of intelligence and empathy.

In the philosophical context of the discussion about negotiation being an emergent, natural phenomenon I have been asked how should one interpret the role and utility of peaceful protests. This particular question has popped up a lot over the last two years in various forms, but particularly over the last week it has become a theme of its own so I’ve decided to do a video on the subject (actually two: a short take and an extended take).

Below are both the short and long takes, with links to them on Odysee, Rumble and BitChute — just pick whichever one you have the most comfort with (or have an account on — “don’t forget to like and subscribe!” — ugh… I do tire of that but I suppose it actually does work as a mental plant in the mind of the viewer… I mean, you’re thinking of liking and subscribing if you happened to read that and now you can’t not think about it because I’m going on and on here so…).

Short Version




Long Version




2021.03.11 16:40

Geopol: Mutual capacity for violence is the root of negotiation

Misunderstandings about the root of political interaction has come up repeatedly lately so I’ve decided to do a few videos that discuss the roots of geopolitics. In the video below I discuss how the mutual capacity for violence is the root and essence of negotiation.

2007.08.13 09:47

The Surge and Politics

Filed under: Ancient Posts — Tags: , , , — zxq9 @ 09:47

It seems that the much vaunted Surge is working in Iraq. I’ve been pretty slow to say anything of the sort, as I was not sure how to rate the “success” I keep hearing in the media. Weren’t the media types almost uniformly calling Iraq a huge waste of life, waste of time, America’s Vietnam, etc. for the longest time?

And now it seems that good news in Iraq is going to be very bad news to Left-wing Democrats who have based their entire last 7 years of political life on talking smack about the Iraq war, how bad it is and how everything bad, ever, is George Bush’s fault… (in honesty, the last 7 links were satire sites, here’s the opposite view… in a very schoolboyish, whiny tone…)

The biggest problem in Iraq is the absolute lack of leadership there. None of the Iraqis wants to make a decision, no matter what level of government they work in (or out of). The cultural concept of a “leader” in the Middle East (outside of Israel and maybe Jordan) is about defining someone whom the people serve, whereas the West views a leader as someone who serves the people. Very different views.

Some Iraqis seem to get it though, and it looks like there is finally some pressure building within their own socio-political structure to actually do something. Apparently the “civil war” in Iraq is more of an Al Qaeda ready-made media spin than a reality, and the calm permitted by the Surge is something at least a few Iraqi leaders want to take advantage of before its over. This is a golden opportunity for them to work together and actually settle their society a little, or at least unify against the looming Iranian threat (an Iran which has pretty scary plans for everyone in the region…). That said, the idea that the dusty bits of Iraq and the muddy bits of Iraq will suddenly see each other as part of a whole more than they see each other as proxy threats from Iran or Saudi is slim.

This new focus on civil leaders getting things done is probably thanks to the US Army’s new direction. While the media was busy characterizing the Surge as a combat technique, the real focus was always on providing enough troops not to beat up the enemy, but rather to have enough folks to leave behind in town once the ass-kicking was over with. The US Army has not lost any field engagements so far. This is often overlooked. The US Army focused on working with the Air Force and locals (generally lead by US Special Forces) to whip ass at an unprecedented rate. The enemy doesn’t stand a chance on the actual battlefield. If they did, they would have tried to invade the US a long time ago. That’s why the resort to terrorism, because they are not very difficult opponents in an open fight — it is interesting that enough of them are misguided to actually try fighting in the open, but that’s another subject.

The whole point of the Surge is to address local issues that make or break local societies. Fixing electric problems, getting shipments of food running like they are supposed to again, water services, sanitation, etc. All the things the Americans are spending so much money on trying to fix. We have plenty of troops to whip everyone’s ass in Iraq. America could, if it wished to, easily kill every single person in Iraq. But that’s never been the point, regardless what the hate-blinded over at The Guardian may think. The Surge gives us enough people to beat the terrorists out, keep them out for a time, and still have enough people to prod the local and national Iraqi leaders to actually do their jobs. Its sort of like having SF advisers for the political side of the nation, not just the military.

A note here on defining “terrorists” and how control works in Iraq: When we’re talking about Iraq today we’re not talking about 9/11 type terrorists (though some of these guys would love to volunteer for Wave 2), we’re talking about local, petty terrorists who act like unhinged mafia types. The game in Iraq is about local control and motivating local resources to make a drive at national control. Since no region is powerful enough to assert authority over the other two, Iraq is fundamentally unstable — so the next alternative is to look outside for assistance for your side. If you’re in the dusty bits that means Saudi, if you’re closer to the muddy bits then that means Iran, and if you’re a Kurd that means anybody else because you know you’re probably fucked if you can’t get an international energy deal going or convince the Russians to love you. So the “Surge” is providing some local stability but its not the thing that is really calming the violence — its the political interplay that the local stability is fostering so that the various factions can reassess their alignment with the US.

2007.08.12 09:43

Negotiating with Terrorists

Filed under: Ancient Posts — Tags: , , — zxq9 @ 09:43

Korea Finds Escape from Its Real Issues,

Rewards Terrorists Again Instead

South Koreans can rest easier knowing that their government is following many an EU member’s lead and doing something a Taliban affiliated group likes. This sounds horrible when I stop the sentence there, of course, but South Korea is trying to do only enough to expedite the release of two of their unfortunate expat nationals being held hostage. Nevermind that the hostages have already demonstrated their fatal misinterpretation of reality by deciding to go there and spread the wacko Korean version of Jesus in Afghanistan; even if they are returned to South Korea what is to prevent them from getting killed another day when they try to kiss a speeding train for world peace or crash the party aboard Shoemaker-Levy?

So negotiating for worthless individuals. Negotiating is something terrorist groups like because it prolongs the public agony and enhances the effect of the kidnapping. The whole point of the kidnapping is either to gain publicity or get paid — or sometimes both. Government negotiations ensure publicity (which is all terrorism is, in a sense, when its not just business) and give the appearance of a fresh crisis daily simply by being on the news every day. The average media consumer doesn’t remember what he saw the last hour, much less what he saw the other day, so the more times the same story runs the more crisis situations there appear to be.

There are downsides to negotiating with terrorists, of course. Doing something a Taliban group likes means doing something that successful civilization has found to be detrimental to itself, which means doing things at odds with the philosophies that promote human progression. It demonstrates what misguided Koreans do when imbued with a warped sense of post-Puritan Christianity (or what some of their leaders do…). Then again, the Korean thought process is a bit baffling at times, their special brand of fervent Christianity aside.

Powered by WordPress