Radical Noesis - Thinking outside the box

The overwhelming majority of our rapid decline has occurred since we became of aware of what we are doing. What we have largely done is to expand our impact and not mitigate it. Each of these disasters are directly linked to human activity. Instead of standing up and addressing these issues, politicians backed by industry paid experts created a propaganda campaign of debate. The "debate" was (and still is) depicted as "wild-eyed environmentalists" against the measured reason of "rational people." Many efforts have been made to quiet the critical thinking and understanding of populations from forwarding a belief in the "naturalness" of species extinction, to the faith that technology will rise to the challenge, to promoting that it just ain't so. Why? Because there is tremendous money and power involved in "staying the course." And why do the masses allow themselves to be quieted when reality contradicts rhetoric? Because it is easier to believe that; easier to not rock the boat; easier to pretend that everything is all right.

I think that most people believe that these issues are being addressed. They point to the Environmental Protection Agency, the Endangered Species Act, developments (in their infancy) into "alternative" energy sources. They buy the buy the lies that all of this is far in our future and that there is lots of time to prepare. One thing that is very clear is that there is no time. The disaster is not in front of us, but lapping up our legs. There truly is no debate about our current standing. We are in big trouble.

Part of the problem is the belief that these are "environmental" issues and that humans (particularly civilized humans) are immune to, or in control of, the environment. The reality is that humans live in the midst of that "environment." Nature is not seperate from us - we rely on it. The "environmental" disasters are also human disasters, and they will increasingly impact humans and socieites. These impacts range from economic collapse, to mass starvation, to pandemic super viruses and bacteria. These leave in their wake massive death and disruption, failed infrastructures, and chaos. The popular belief seems to be that either the world will end (and we don't wnat to think in too much detail on that), or that we will "adapt" and go on. The belief is that decision makers are charting a sane course. The reality may be far different.

What is known about how nations are dealing with the crises in our midst? Well you have a number of nations working towards reducing greenhouse gases and toxic waste. There are plans like the Kyoto Protocol to work togther on the issue of global warming. The timelines of these plans stretch for decades, and scientists are now largely in accord that the measures (if implemented) are too little too late.

But we have had over thirty years and plans have been in the works and preparations are being made. I know this is true of the United States, and I presume similar projects and plans exist elsewhere. The solution that is being prepared (and implemented) is global control. It is a plan that fully acknowledges the crises and embraces them. It is a plan created within the paradigm of if there are going to be winners and losers, then we will be winners. It is a plan to militarily control the global resources for the "interest" of the United States. It is a plan to create "fortress America" where desperately migrating populations are simply eliminated. It is a plan that says "save yourself regardless of the costs to others.

To that end, the United States moves to control oil resources and hedge in competitors with "strategic" placement of military installations and "strategic" military and political engagements. To that end, the United States developes an ever expanding arsenal of new "conventional" weapons as well as those not so conventional. To that end, the United States develops and places space-based weapons systems to strike anywhere on the planet. While much of these actions are cloaked in secrecy, the direction is clear. Read any of the strategy documents, vision documents, or posture/policy documents, and it is right there in front of you. Take a visit to the DARPA site and see what is being developed and the "vision" they are working with.

There are signals that the crisis point is near. One big signal is an article in the April 2, 2005 New York Times article "Pentagon Redirects Its Research Dollars" (or this link). The Pentagon is reducing its broad based funding for basic research and instead focusing on funding projects with a more immediate "product." The funding is shifting from researchers to military contractors. While certainly part of this is more of the same in terms of lining the pockets of the military-industrial complex, it also signals that it is time to focus resources on production and not on development.

Conclusion
While the Bush administration backed by virtually all of our so-called "leaders" minimize the problesm and take token actions, they are preparing for a far different future. Is that the future that the people want to embrace? Somehow I doubt it. Do the people placidly accept the the "acceptable costs" of calculated slaughter in order to keep the US "standard of living?" Do the people believe that these "leaders" can coldly consider the mass elimination of populations outside the United States, but not the calculated elimination of masses inside the United States? In such a scenario as we are facing, who is "exendable" and who is "worthy to be saved? I have a suspicion that the "worthy" do not include the masses of the population.

Some Suggested Resources
From Wikipedia: Kyoto Protocol; United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; Global Warming; Hubbert Peak

Hubbert Peak of Oil Production

The Story of Silent Spring, National Resources Defense Council

Peak Oil Publications List

Life After the Oil Crash (resource list)

Endgame Research Services

Millenium Ecosystem Reports