Category Archives: politics

Sheep

Posted on by
2

That boring sheep from the last article started me on a train of thought, because a piece by Bach crossed my mind, “Sheep may safely graze“. Here are the lyrics:

Sheep can safely graze
where a good shepherd watches over them.

Where rulers are ruling well,
we may feel peace and rest
and what makes countries happy.

What a comforting thought that is: the people in charge will do their job well, so that normal people can mind their own business – have jobs and families, have a pint of beer with friends after work, know that if there’s a genuine danger the government will raise the alarm, and it won’t just release a bioweapon and then enforce vaccination with an experimental gene therapy drug intended to reduce their number and fertility, or launch a war against a country that’s deemed to be too independent and successful and it needs to have its wings clipped, and if millions die, even better for the environment; the closer we are to no life on Earth, the closer we are to the goal of zero carbon emissions. How comforting it would be to think that the international groups running the global governments aren’t attacking agriculture in order to reduce the amount of food produced, with the goal of raising the food prices so that all the poor people would starve, and middle class would be reduced to poverty, and only they, the super rich, would remain as the new feudal elite of the world, owning all the real estate and running all the governments.

This is a Christian thought, originating from the epistles of St.Paul, who stated that every form of worldly government exists because God allowed it, basically meaning that the government is installed by God, and people need to obey it because by doing so they obey God. Interestingly, this goes completely against Jesus, who stated that the world is under the power of Satan, the Prince of this world, but I can see how the people in power must have liked the idea that Christianity will robe them in the mantle of Divine authority, and so this notion became the cornerstone of medieval politics.

The Augustinian imagery of civitatis Dei would be a flock of sheep representing the faithful Christian people, with the shepherd representing the Church, and sheep dogs representing the worldly powers that maintain order, guarding against the wolves, the outside evils that threaten. The Holy Spirit permeates the entire society, from the shepherd to the sheep, making them all obedient to the Lord in their respective roles, and traveling safely through this world while Satan roars in frustration beyond the fence in the dark.

There’s also the evangelic image of sheep representing a soul faithful and obedient to God, where sheep are the good entities that need to be able to mind their business of grazing safely while the shepherd and his dog keep guard from wolves and thieves. It’s a nice image, because, again, it makes it sound as if people just need to remain faithful to God and they will be protected.

It also creates the material for the enemies of God, who ridicule the faithful people, because the sheep are not protected because anyone truly cares for them; they are protected because they are useful as a resource, for food and clothing of those who keep them. Essentially, while the sheep think they are being protected, they are merely being kept for the dominant predator who keeps them, and the wolf is just unwanted, weaker competition.

But no, that’s not how things actually work, and the evangelic image is actually misunderstood, or stretched too far, because the metaphoric God’s sheep, the ones obedient to the will of God, don’t feel like sheep grazing on a meadow. They feel like tigers and dragons, like lords of their respective domains, they are the angels and heavenly powers, through whom God’s imperium is distributed, and the fact that they are fully obedient to God in fact means that they also embody the sovereign power that is no longer merely transcendental in God, but invested through them. They can create worlds, cast judgment upon souls and see the judgment being executed, forgive sins, and ease burdens. The sheep of God is the angel with the flaming sword, whose power is such that you would shit yourself on sight.

Those more deserving a comparison with the flock of sheep are those walking the wide and well paved path through life – basically, grazing on a meadow in front of a slaughterhouse, being marked and assigned various uses by their worldly owners. Those on the narrow path leading to salvation can no longer be perceived through this imagery, because they are something else; not the sheep of the world, but not yet truly the sheep of God either; rather, they are God’s sheep in training, passing through various trials and dangers, and if they remain faithful, they get to be trusted with power and authority of God.

And no, they are not calmly grazing. Their alert sight scans the world, and their power glows in their eyes, ready to be released in glorious and terrible ways at any moment, if the will of the Lord flows through them into action. Having survived all the trials Satan invested this world with, and having kept faith throughout, makes such beings incredibly alert, wise, hardened and sharp minded, as their will is honed to cut through all illusion, evil and sin. Their armour is dented and the hilts of their blades are well worn, and their will and love shine like the Sun through and above all clouds, bringing happiness and safety of God’s indomitable power.

Why

Posted on by
Reply

A Ukrainian military unit raped and killed eight women and murdered at least 14 other civilians in the village of Russkoye Porechnoye, a captured Ukrainian soldier has admitted during interrogation by Russian investigators.

Russkoye Porechnoye, home to around 300 people, fell under Kiev’s control in August last year during a Western-backed incursion into Russia’s Kursk Region. Russian forces liberated the settlement earlier this month, where they discovered decomposing corpses of civilians stashed in basements throughout the village.

On Friday, the Russian Investigative Committee released new evidence on the massacre, including footage of the interrogation of Yevgeny Fabrisenko, a soldier with the 92nd Separate Assault Brigade. Fabrisenko stated that he was deployed to the village on September 28 alongside his immediate commander and two other soldiers.

According to Fabrisenko, their company commander explicitly ordered them to “cleanse” the village of Russian civilians. The unit remained in Russkoye Porechnoye until October 3, during which they raided homes, raped women, and executed men on sight. Those who resisted were tortured and killed, he admitted. (source: RT)

Yeah, that’s a thing. Getting my mind away from this kind of things would be a sufficient reason for getting into photography again, and taking nice calm pictures depicting good states of consciousness. Also, I’m God’s favourite trash can, the equivalent of a sewage collector that processes shit and lets out clean water, and whatever needs to be processed has been increased lately, which is making my life absolutely miserable. I could say this is why I’m getting back into photography, and people would believe me.

But no, those are not the primary reasons; at least, they are not the only ones. The primary reason is that I felt, multiple times, that this nightmare will soon be over, and I got glimpses of what awaits beyond. I’m trying really hard not to think about that, because I’ll go insane, simply because it’s not already here. I’d rather think whether this picture would look better if taken with a FE 50mm f/1.4 GM.

Yeah, it’s not working. I’m getting concurrent streams from the global astral field – genocidal rage against this or that group, chaos that looks like astral substance that’s been crushed in a blender, things that feel like elixir of lobotomy that makes my brain numb as if injected with novocaine, terribly stupid ideas on how to make this world go on, and occasional flashes of the other side, as if someone is showing me the future. I really, really wish I could make it all go away by thinking about cameras and lenses, but it’s an illusion that actually makes things worse, so I’m trying to not get too carried away. But in any case, there are worse things in the world than poor little pink flowers getting shot. 🙂

There are, however, better things beyond the horizon than I dare to even think, or remember what I’ve been shown. Yeah, I just did. I must be a masochist. 🙂

What the …?

Posted on by
Reply

Just in case, I looked at the official Los Angeles plan in case of nuclear war:

IMMEDIATE ACTION FOR NUCLEAR EVENTS

If a nuclear event is occurring or about to occur:

GET INSIDE a sturdy building as quickly as you can, even if you are far from the blast site. Go to a room without windows on the lowest floor that’s close to the center/core of the building. If you are unable to get inside, take cover behind a sturdy object and stay low to the ground.

STAY INSIDE the building. Shelter-in-place. Do not go outside or look out windows to observe the blast and fallout, as this can expose you to radiation and cause serious damage to your eyes.

STAY TUNED to updates from public safety and government authorities or trusted media sources. Some communications systems may be down. During emergencies, simple text messages often work best. You may also want to have a battery powered or hand-crank radio.

My immediate thought was that this doesn’t make any sense, since the houses in the LA area are made of super-combustible material, as evidenced in the recent fires where the houses burned down faster than trees. The main hazards in a nuclear blast are overpressure and thermal radiation, which means fires and 3rd degree burns. The entire LA building code is a terrible match for sheltering in situ in case of a nuclear blast. Then I thought I already saw identical instructions a while ago, and indeed, it’s the city of New York. It looks like someone in FEMA figured out they don’t have any realistic plan in case of a nuclear war, so they made a plan-like list that is now mindlessly copied everywhere, including places where such “plan” would amount to suicide.

This is so stupid I don’t know whether to laugh or cry, because I know how those morons are thinking: they need to “have a plan”, because someone could ask them what’s their plan for x, and now they can say “we have a plan for x, go to our web site, it’s a great plan”. However, let’s see what it all means.

Back in the 1950s, people in America were taking nuclear war very seriously, and the plans were made by the people who actually made the atomic weapons in Los Alamos, and who had first-hand experience with nuclear blasts, having observed the tests from the closest possible proximity. What they recommended was widely ridiculed later, but as I learned more about the nuclear weapons, I got to understand their thinking.

Their plan was to evacuate the political and military leadership into nuclear bunkers or high in the air, in order to preserve the chain of command and have control over the situation. The next idea was to evacuate the major populated centres, but they soon realised that this can’t be done. Basically, you’d have to do it in a timely and orderly manner, have enough shelter space, with food, water and fuel, for population of every major city. They ran simulations and figured out that an order to evacuate would cause instant widespread panic which would block the roads and make evacuation impossible. Even if they managed to evacuate, they couldn’t possibly care for hundreds of millions of people. Also, an order to evacuate would necessarily be given too late, because they would avoid giving it until the rockets were already flying, and then it would be too late for anything other than sheltering in-situ. If you gave the order early enough, the enemy would take it as a sure sign that you are preparing for a first strike, which would increase the probability of pre-emption, and it would make the political solution less likely. Also, when you give the order to evacuate everything, your society essentially ceases to exist. Your economy is no longer there. You started spending the supplies of last resort. No, that’s not something you want to do unless the nukes are already in the air, and then you have 20 minutes max, which is not enough to evacuate anything. It is, however, enough to move into your own basement, essentially to shelter in-situ.

So, let’s make a list of the dangers of a nuclear strike, and see what kind of measures would make sense.

If you are close enough to the blast, nothing can help you. You are dead. In some rare cases, being in a very deep bunker would help, but that calculation doesn’t matter for the urban centres, only for the military command bunkers. Basically, the urban centres are impossible to evacuate in time because of the traffic, there aren’t enough shelters for the population, and for them, the only advice you can give them is to shelter in situ, avoid the windows and all kinds of objects that could become airborne in conditions of overpressure, hide from the debris and cover yourself with a white reflective cloth to reflect as much infrared as possible; that was actually tested and it helps a lot. Similarly, paint your house white, because it reflects most of the radiation. Dark stuff burns much more quickly. Also, yes, duck and cover. Hide under a desk, a chair, and cover your head and face with clothes in order to protect yourself from heat and debris. Depending on the strength of the blast, you will either die or not, but if you take those measures you will reduce probability of all kinds of injuries that would get you killed in the aftermath even if they are not that serious normally, because forget medical care, that’s not happening. Also, the area where the nuclear blast is absolutely deadly is quite small compared to the area that is quite survivable if simple protective measures are taken, and you can’t do anything for those in the ground zero of the blast anyway. Imagine concentric circles of the target – those in the black centre are dead anyway, and no measures could save them. Those on the periphery of the target might survive with the simplest of measures, such as avoiding the windows, hiding under a desk and covering themselves with a white sheet. Between those two, there’s a gradient of probabilities, circumstances and luck.

So, their thinking was that the most likely targets are going to be military sites and urban centres (black on the target). For those, nothing could be done. Those close to the blast (grey on the target) are mostly fucked; probability of serious burns, lacerations, radiation injuries, being buried alive in the ruins etc. are very high, but some general precautionary and protective measures could still help them. However, the largest percentage of people are going to be more lightly impacted (the white on the target), and very simple measures such as “duck and cover” could drastically improve their outcomes.

There’s a very good reason why those protective measures were introduced in the 1950, only to be completely abandoned by the 1980s. You see, in the 1950s there was a very limited number of nuclear weapons, and delivery vehicles were very primitive. The calculation was that America had to deal with a dozen or so hits in the urban centres, at worst. However, by the 1980s, as the number, yield and sophistication of the nuclear weapons grew exponentially, it meant counting on thousands of hits in the urban centres, with hydrogen bomb MIRVs. The calculation then became obvious – nothing can be done to save the population once the nukes are in the air, so all efforts must be directed at avoiding the nuclear outcome.

However, we are no longer in the 1980s. Neither America nor Russia have tens of thousands of nuclear weapons armed for the first strike. Sure, the number is still high, but have in mind that those are mostly battlefield weapons, not the intercontinental ones. The expected number of intercontinental warheads expected to actually strike is numbered in the hundreds, and since those are precious, they will aim mostly at the military installations. Striking at the cities is useless for the first strike, and exists only in the plans for a retaliatory strike. As the number of deployed nuclear weapons grows, it becomes tempting to wipe out the urban centres as well, but as things are right now, very few if any urban centres would be targeted. This brings us back to the 1950s and the “duck and cover” exercises, because they become very relevant if we assume that civilian targets will be at the periphery of any nuclear strike, unless they are considered of military importance.

So, what would be the reasonable advice in case of a nuclear exchange? First, don’t be on the X. This means evacuating early and being nowhere near the expected target zones, or the zombie apocalypse zones of the aftermath, which for the most part means the urban centres. Second, expect to shelter in situ and have at least two weeks of supplies that would guarantee that you don’t have to exit your shelter early. Third, adhere to the “duck and cover” principles as laid out in the 1950s; those guys built and tested the nukes themselves and had hands-on experience with that stuff, and knew what they were talking about. Fourth, have a radiation sensor so that you can know what is safe and what is deadly, and fifth, yes, have a radio or some other means of getting the public broadcasts, especially the ones of local importance.

 

Consequences

Posted on by
7

I’m watching the news on the LA fire. The wind over night made everything worse. The fire is spreading and the firemen are having very little control over the situation, regardless of the fact that they brought in all kinds of ground and air assets. Simply put, they allowed the thing to grow too big and now it’s beyond control. They can try and clear the fuel from the fire path, but it’s questionable at this point. The aerial assets are the only ones doing anything, but it’s too little and too late. So, it’s time to consider the consequences.

The economy is going to react to this, but it’s unclear how, because the stock market in America is deeply into the red zone of complete insanity. The first-order analysis would be that the impacted businesses from the area will suffer, the real estate prices will drop like a rock since this will be the final incentive for the rich people to leave, since there’s nothing binding them to the place anymore. Sure, they saw it all go to hell for years but it’s a big thing to sell your house and leave everything you worked most of your life for and rebuild everything in Texas. Also, if your job is there you may not be able to leave at all. But still, one would expect most to leave, and few to rebuild. One would expect the shares of the construction companies to go up, and the insurance companies to go down, but since this is America, it might actually be the other way around. Normally, I would expect gold to go up, since rich people everywhere will understand the need for highly mobile capital; however, since gold is hard to get across the border, crypto assets might be preferred, at least until people realise those are worthless in a real disaster.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory is currently in the fire zone. It’s evacuated, but it is still unclear how affected it will be by the fires. This is a major strategic asset that controls all kinds of automated probes across the Solar System. All of this will be affected and control might be relocated to the Space Command bunker in the Cheyenne mountains or something.

All kinds of woke bullshit will be downgraded after this, and this will ripple out throughout both culture, politics and the economy.

However, this is all assuming that the fire is contained where it is now, and this is unlikely. Most likely, it will spread throughout the more populated LA areas, and the amount of chaos that would produce is hard to imagine – it would be almost on par with a nuclear strike. Around 18M people live in the wider area, and most of them are nowhere near as rich as those impacted so far. If they all have to relocate, and they will if the complex structures are disrupted enough, this will be a zombie apocalypse across America. I’m continuing to watch this closely, but I’m also being careful not to remove my eyes from other points of interest, because this fire increasingly looks like a man-made thing, and it might all be a distraction from something else. Possibly, a way to remove important assets from the X in time, in a more-less controlled manner. You see, I’ve been reading the cold war texts about the plans for the evacuation of the LA metropolitan area, and I know they decided it’s impossible and nothing there can be saved. Maybe someone decided to be proactive. So, the second-order analysis is that this might be a way to evacuate the most important people and assets from the area that is expected to be hit by nuclear weapons and impossible to evacuate at that point.

Fire in LA

Posted on by
4

I normally wouldn’t comment on something as arbitrary and random as a natural disaster, but this is different, because what’s happening there is a result of idiotic politics:

Basically, California is leading the rest of America in gender politics, virtue signalling and other leftist bullshit, and this was, similar to the recent fires in Australia, caused by the leftists prohibiting fire fighters from performing controlled burns of the underbrush in order to reduce the amount of flammable material for fires. Also, they are unable to organise transport of water into California, which is naturally a desert, from other places where water is plentiful, because of trivial political reasons such as saving some stupid fish species. However, this is worse than Australia, because in America they fired a huge number of people who resisted the covid vaccine mandates, and are hiring only the politically desirable combinations of black, brown, female and gay, regardless of any kind of merit. Also, their choice of equipment is much worse than what we have in Croatia, which is remarkable considering how much money there is in California. As a result, they have no water, no competent people, and they created the conditions for the perfect firestorm by intentionally failing to do any kind of preventative groundwork. When, inevitably, fire struck, as it normally does in an arid environment such as California, all the political idiots everywhere started babbling nonsense about climate change, which is probably the only factor that demonstrably had nothing to do with the situation.

To me, this kind of insanity and ignoring the physical realities is expected for a civilisation on its way down, but I don’t really pity them, since they are the most arrogant idiots that forcefully spread their idiocy to the rest of us, and the sooner it becomes obvious that they are simply wrong and their path is not to be followed, the better.