Terrorism Response by the USA is Society’s Immune System Attacking Itself

Simon Phipps states very well and concisely what the results of the reaction to terrorism driven by the USA in his post On Terrorism

Terrorism isn’t just performing a terrifying act. It’s provoking society’s immune system into attacking itself, making its defence systems attack the values and people they are supposed to be defending. Terrorism is an autoimmune disorder of democracy. You don’t fight terrorism by attacking the virus; you fight it by strengthening the immune system.

Related: Living Through Your Society Becoming a Police State (2013) - USA Encouraging Governments Worldwide to Spy and Hack Globally is Very Dangerous - Freedom Increasingly at Risk (2008) - What Principles Does the USA Government Still Honor? - Liberty and Support or Control and Hate - Disregard for the Rule of Law by Government - Anti Liberty Sentiment in Congress (2012) - Liberty Again Denied - It is Sad How Little We Seem to Care (2011)

If You Create a System That Includes The Perfect Conditions for Scandals, Expect Scandals to Happen

Massively overpay people for taking huge gambles with other people's money and they will do so (ethical people won't, but you only need a few unethical people and their is an oversupply - county on running out of unethical people is an extremely foolish "strategy").   Make it even worse by creating a culture where everyone sees lots of people getting massively overpaid for the times when the roulette wheel lands in the right spot and you create a culture ripe for claiming good results (no matter what the truth is).  Add in a very smart strategy (for those seeking to siphon off billions from the productive economy) of creating massively complicated schemes that allow for all sorts of false claims and you have what the leaders of our country (and a few other countries leaders) have created.

Other leaders abolished child labor, created universal education, sent us to the moon.  Ours are busy justifying massively unjust payments to a few at the cost of the well being of the country and the citizens of the world.

The too big to fail welfare banks have been practicing this behavior for a couple of decades.  And, like clockwork, huge scandals occur.  It seems like we have a huge spike in scandals in the last couple of years.  The scandals are entirely predictable given the systems created to try and justify paying unjustifiable payments to executives and gamblers.

The reason for the spike in scandals being discovered now is probably 2 fold.  First the unjustified pay has increased massively and thus increased the irresponsible behavior and rewards for being irresponsible.  Also, fraud often remains hidden in boom times and becomes uncovered when the ability to hide that the roulette wheel hasn't actually been providing the returns used to claim the unjustifiable payments taken by the executives and gamblers.

The quote of the latest massively overpaid CEO overseeing yet another scandal is just the same as all the other mindless "explanations": 

'But he stressed that it was an “isolated” incident and that JPMorgan had already cleaned house'

They then pay those we elect enough to have those we elect continue to grant them massive favors and continue to allow the undermining of our economy by the continued scandalous practices.  The process will continue, as it has for decades, until we refuse to elect those that sell out the country to pay back those giving the politicians lots of cash (or for the politicians that can't understand what is happening).

Eventually the delaying game of those operating these phony systems to extract big payoffs for themselves will no longer be tolerated.  But so far we seem happy to continue to support leaders doing all they can to support this system.

It doesn't appear, even now, we are going to demand change.  And it is completely obvious the too big to fail welfare banks are just increasing the scandalous behavior and the politicians are just increasing their support for these institutions.  Oh the politicians will say silly things to claim they don't like the bad things being done to the country and then run right back and do the bidding of those at the too big to fail welfare banks that give them cash.  Those giving cash know it doesn't matter what politicians say only what they do.  And the too big too fail banks couldn't ask for any better lackeys.

It will change when we throw out the politicians that are (and have been for decades) making this possible.  Until we do it won't change.  The executives and politicians have shown no amount of suffering is enough for them to behaving honorably.  As long as they get their cash they don't care what it does to the country or the economy of the world.

Anti Liberty Sentiment in Congress

Written for my management blog blackout in support of those fighting SOPA and PIPA:


This site is participating in the SOPA/PIPA blackout day. Sadly I don't have a simple way to just have this page for the USA and I decided having it show for everyone was better than not showing it.

As this is a management blog, I would like to explain my analysis of this situation. The SOPA and PIPA bills are not special cause results. They are the natural outcome of the current anti-liberty system in place in Washington DC. As such the proper counter-measure is not to band-aid this negative outcome and think you have done well. If you need a band-aid counter measure immediately, that is fine. But if you don't then look at the system creating that result: the bad result will just reappear.

My belief on the systemic cause is the anti-liberty sentiment in congress. This creates the conditions where lots of extremely bad anti-liberty laws are proposed and passed. SOPA and PIPA happened to be so horrible that an huge outcry they couldn't ignore and push through (most likely, it is still possible they might). But that is all. SOPA and PIPA are the natural result of the current system. They are not some special outlier that you can block and then be confident the system is working.

There are a few other systemic issues that contribute to the extremely bad law that SOPA and PIPA would be. A profound lack of basic understanding of technology. A profound lack of understanding of copyright. Those are compounded by a profound lack of respect of knowledge (so ignorance is not seen as any reason to act cautiously or seek expertise). A system where large amounts of cash seem to drive policy much more than anything else. Add those to the anti-liberty agenda of the last decade and you will continue to get SOPAs and PIPAs.

Where we are today
"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty" - Wendell Phillips
which is often quoted as "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance" and attributed to Thomas Jefferson

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Richard Jackson (maybe)

Those outside the USA
Several other countries have already had the USA coerce their governments into adopting legislation desired by those who "donated" (in other words gave cash to) American politicians. I am surprised none of those countries has reversed the decision to harm their citizens as a favor to those paying American politicians cash but I don't think any have. If you live in one of those countries maybe you should see about getting rid of the people that do such things to your country. And the State Department may well be pressuring for SOPA like laws right now.

The USA's Anti-Liberty Agenda
Sadly the USA has been on a kick to reduce liberty and increase government and corporate power over liberty of citizens. I have written about the attacks on liberty on another of my blogs.

SOPA and PIPA are the recent outcome of this mindset of those in congress today. The attempts to payoff a few of the lobbyists that give them large amounts of cash has resulted in many bills; SOPA and PIPA being the current examples. They have become so used to egregious anti-liberty legislation being ignored that they allowed the lobbyists to go so far in writing SOPA and PIPA that even the normal apathy was overcome.

It appears they realize the price of their favors to those giving them lots of cash (for their campaigns) is too high in this case. People actually noticed how egregious the attacks on liberty were. And the reactions by those people have made it seem that the consequences to the politicians of passing the law (that they wanted to pass before the consequences to themselves was made obvious) are now too high.

Given past conduct I would expect them to bow to the current pressure and just sneak in most of the bad policy (to pay back those giving them cash) into future bills. They also seem to be trying to say by getting rid of a couple of the most vile parts of the laws that the rest of the payoffs to those giving them cash should be ok.

I was amazed when the politicians were able to withstand the maelstrom of criticism about he security theater/anti-liberty practices of TSA. So how far they are willing to fight in order to pay off contributors and further the anti-liberty agenda I am not sure. But the evidence seems to be pretty far. I would expect they will not learn from this and continue their normal conduct, which will mean continued attempts to pass similar measures.

Until we refuse to elect people that are willing to sacrifice liberty for their personal short term interests we have risks of such laws passing. Only extraordinary efforts seem capable of rolling back small pieces of the anti-liberty agenda currently being pushed by both parties in Washington DC. But it is only because the public lets them get away with it. So it is really our problem. If we want to stop the anti-liberty agenda (of which SOPA and PIPA are a minor, though dramatically flawed example) we need to stop electing those that support it.

There is an App to Help You Avoid Supporting Companies Actively Undermining Your Rights through their support for SOPA and PIPA.

Librarians Standing Up to the Madness

"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out — because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out — because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak out for me."
Martin Niemoeller



SOPA/PIPA resources:


PROTECT IP / SOPA Breaks The Internet from Fight for the Future on Vimeo.

• How PIPA and SOPA Violate Principles Supporting Free Speech and Innovation

• Letter from people that understand the internet about the huge problems with SOPA/PIPA

Liberty Again Denied - It is Sad How Little We Seem to Care

When I was growing up I knew the world wasn't perfect.  The government had plenty of problems.  And politicians were often more concerned about their egos than the good of the country.  And things like the McCarthy witch-hunts, Japanese internment, denying voting rights to blacks, Watergate were not far in the past.  But I never imagined how far the government would move to eliminate liberty.  I remember thinking how sad it was that perfectly fine books were banned in the past.  And yes, some silly little town here or there would remove books from libraries or schools.  That was sad but fairly minor.  But it seemed to me we now had finally learned how horrid our actions in things like the Japanese internment and McCarthy witch-hunts were.

Watergate was something plenty of politicians did to some degree or another but they had the sense to be ashamed and hide it.  That is different from endorsing and pushing policies to deny liberty to people.

I remember thinking how strange it was how concerned our founding fathers were with protecting us from government.  I understood why historically.  But it seemed like those days were long past.  Yes, occasionally government would overstep but that was getting cleaned up or just some corruption that is likely to always exist to some extent.

The sad fact is, today I am in the position of our founding fathers and much more worried about what the government will do to us that inspired by what the government provides us.  This is sad.  The types of behavior Homeland Security has been engaging in can be stopped if we elect people that care about liberty.  I am much more disappointed in the last 10 years than Watergate.  We are currently on par with Japanese internment and the McCarthy which-hunts.  That is in extremely sad place to be.  I think we are probably a step below those embarrassments but we are not far from them.

We need leaders that can steer us away from the path we have been taking.  I am scared for where we will be soon, if we don't find them.

Feds Falsely Censor Popular Blog For Over A Year, Deny All Due Process, Hide All Details...

Imagine if the US government, with no notice or warning, raided a small but popular magazine's offices over a Thanksgiving weekend, seized the company's printing presses, and told the world that the magazine was a criminal enterprise with a giant banner on their building. 

Then imagine that it never arrested anyone, never let a trial happen, and filed everything about the case under seal, not even letting the magazine's lawyers talk to the judge presiding over the case. And it continued to deny any due process at all for over a year, before finally just handing everything back to the magazine and pretending nothing happened. I expect most people would be outraged. I expect that nearly all of you would say that's a classic case of prior restraint, a massive First Amendment violation, and exactly the kind of thing that does not, or should not, happen in the United States.

But, in a story that's been in the making for over a year, and which we're exposing to the public for the first time now, this is exactly the scenario that has played out over the past year -- with the only difference being that, rather than "a printing press" and a "magazine," the story involved "a domain" and a "blog."

This type of behavior (ignoring liberty, acting like citizens and the constitution don't matter, acting like the governments our founding father's were afraid of) makes it extremely hard to give the government the benefit of the doubt in cases where the issues are more debatable.  I'll agree some issues the government has to deal with are challenging.  But if you want to have our understanding on the difficult choices and tradeoffs the government has to make you can't consistently trample on our rights for no reason.

Denying the first amendment rights should be an action the government takes in only the most extreme circumstances.  But instead we have a government that believes it should be free to deny first amendment rights consistently and if people fight really hard maybe the government will give in after awhile and no-one in government will care about the complete abdication of the bill of rights that is suppose to protect us from a government that could seek to act on the principle that might makes it right.  How any politician accepts seeing the constitution shredded like this is beyond me.  But then again it seems we don't elect people that care about what our founding father's did.  That is our fault.  And it is very dangerous.

"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out — because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out — because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak out for me."
Martin Niemoeller

Related: Freedom Increasingly at Risk - Society is being shaped for us while we are busy making other plans - Bikinis For Liberty - Tired of Incompetent Government Harassment

The TSA doesn’t give a hoot about security

Jobs I am Glad I Don't Have

So, it appears that the TSA has a choice. Be vigorous in its inspection and be blasted for invasion of privacy, or use less rigorous methods, and face the consequences of missing dangerous materials.

I think you raise the wrong question. I think your question is similar to a CEO saying to Taiichi Ohno:

I care most about quality - providing excellent products to the customer. Either add more inspectors or tell me we have enough inspectors and tell me who we need to replace. The answer Taiichi Ohno would give is to change the way we work to be better, not just add more resources to try and cope with a bad system. More of my thoughts on the topic the TSA doesn't give a hoot about security.

There is another choice - find effective methods to improve quality (better security), reduce waste ($ spent by TSA, people wasting time in line...), respect people. There are many bad things about the current situation at airports they include:

• poor security measures (not well designed to reduce risks), and


• far too intrusive

Both should be fixed. As well as reducing waste. And the way to do so is to change the system - not either add to or take away from what is done now.

The front line TSA people are in a horrible situation. This is the classic situation where Dr. Deming would empathize with the employees and blast the senior leadership who have failed their customers and their employees.

Related: Bikinis For Liberty - Freedom Increasingly at Risk - Exposing Bad Behavior

Curious, Joyful, Happy Kids Grow Up: Unfortunately

I must admit I find the wonder kids have amazingly refreshing. When I was a kid I just took it for granted. Now, unfortunately surrounded by way too many incurious, blasé, dreary adults I realize the kids really have a much better idea how to live than we adults do.

Have some fun. Have some fun with a cardboard box and a stick. Or a plastic dinosaur and a small firetruck. Or just reading a book, for the 56th time this year, about how some cat goes to the store.



Meanwhile I think an alien could appear on the subway and most of my fellow passengers would only be concerned if it was taking up too much space or blocked their exit, and if not, maybe not even notice it.

Hey, maybe this is why my parents always asked me "what did you do today?"
Me: [Jeez stop hounding me, Dad] "Nothing"
Actually what I did: played in a puddle; landed on the moon with Rachel and Dan and brought some moon rocks back to play with; learned that we named the people in North America, Indians, when Christopher Columbus came because we were completely wrong about who they actually were and somehow never got around to fixing that error (another strike against you crazy adults); and decided that really chocolate ice cream is better than spinach and adults don't have any idea what they are talking about.]

Me: [Why the heck do I want to talk about that stuff, you are an adult you must have done much cooler stuff. You get to do whatever you want, you are not trapped all day being ordered around by big adults who can make you do whatever they want :-(]. "Yuck, spinach" :-( [I can't wait until I get to just eat chocolate ice cream and no spinach]

Well maybe I now finally figured out why adults want to know what kids did every day - they might get some vicarious joy (having nearly forgotten how to find a falling leaf, or cool green shoe joyful). Now why people want to know what their spouse did, I still don't understand that :-)

Just watching the faces of adults and kids is amazing. Adults, by and large show no joy. A kid's face will show more joy when they see their Mom for the 8th time today than an adult will in the entire month. I just have to believe that is not a good sign.

As a kid I didn't think adults had much of a clue or very good reasons for why things had to be certain ways. Of course, as a kid, I was "unreasonable" and had to "wait to grow up" and then I would understand. I have to say I think my kid self had most of it right.

I didn't get how trapped we become as adults into day to day lives that we don't mean to chose - I did get that wrong. But I am not sure I was wrong that we shouldn't do that. But it is harder than I thought to avoid it (especially since I didn't think it was even a risk that an adult would be stuck doing stuff about as fun as being stuck in a chair and being lectured to with a bunch of other people all day long about stuff you often couldn't care about at all).

What is exciting to me now? Refinancing my mortgage at 3.75%. Now that is great. But, I think most 7 year olds have much better things they are excited about.

Photo of my nephews by my brother.

Related: The freedom to act before you have been trained to follow convention, at all costs - Sarah, aged 3, Learns About Soap - Letting Children Learn – Hole in the Wall Computers - Amy's Halloween Costume



Photo of my nephew at the Staten Island Children's Museum. We need to get back to that time when we spend through life in a blur of wonder and excitement.

Don't Excuse Immoral Looters

I believe those that loot should held responsible for their actions. It is not the fault of international aid donors that Mobutu Sese Seko (widely credited with behavior responsible for inspiring the term: kleptocracy) looted the money meant to help starving people. It is not the fault of government that they don't manage to outlaw and then enforce those laws against all unethical and immoral behavior.

There are too many in the USA to determine which CEOs and board members are most responsible for the current corporate kleptocracy mentality. There are legal boundaries (widely broken in recent decades) where that kleptocracy so far exceeds the self serving behavior of many CEOs that legal action is obviously correct. However, prosecution of CEOs for stealing millions seems to be less supported by those who golf with them than prosecution some kid who stole a few hundred dollars. But even more important is the failure of those that support the unethical and immoral behavior regardless of legal action.

Yes government is partially responsible for not policing corrupt dictators better. And yes government is partially responsible for not enforcing laws in support of regulated markets that capitalism requires (regulating negative externalities like systemic risk, exploiting monopoly profits, pollution...). Looting corporations is mainly a problem of the entitled elite conspiring to take what isn't theirs. In my opinion this huge failure of our society is mainly a problem that needs to be addressed by not accepting such immoral and unethical behavior, not laws against excessive taking by CEO's and executives of the wealth created by companies.

Those responsible for encouraging the moral and ethical failures of our "leaders" are those "leading" citizens sitting on corporate boards and approving the looting. And those lawyers arguing for, approving, and defending such unethical pay for big pay in return. And "experts" making cases for such ludicrous pay packages in return for big pay. And those that encourage the looting by including the looters in their high society in ways that they probably would not include Mobutu Sese Seko (though honestly their behavior makes that highly questionable - maybe they would include him).

I image those that welcome the looters would not support those using child labor in factories (even if say that was not illegal in some country in which they exploited the laws for their benefit). Plenty of things are unacceptable even if they are not illegal. Yet these supporters of looters want to be forgiven for welcoming looters since, well all their buddies at the exclusive country club loot, so I can't possibly expect ethical behavior for any of them.

Even more dis-heartening are foundations, charities, educational institutions that welcome looters without any question of their ethical and moral failures. Those supporting the looters are responsible for their behavior. They are not excused because others also support the immoral behavior. And we should make it any easier for them to excuse themselves for their encouragement of such unethical behavior.

In response to: Stop Blaming AIG

Related: CEO's Plundering Corporations for Personal Benefit - Why Pay Taxes or be Honest - Obscene CEO Pay - Businesses Tell the IRS They Are Not American but Executives Stay in USA - Losses Covered Up to Protect Bonuses - Super Spoiled Brats

Manners

Re: Bad manners

One of the things I have grown to appreciate the importance of is some shared sense of manners. As a kid I thought worrying about which fork was used for salad was silly. Actually I still think that is silly but I didn't appreciate the annoyances caused by people that just don't care about how there selfishness impacts others when I was a kid.

Now I understand how a shared sense of common courtesy is important - to hold back people from being overly selfish (how about the idiots that insist on yelling into their cell phones in libraries, or when they are being waited on in a store, or wherever else they happen to be doing, for example).

And if I must comply with a few rules I find silly so I can exist in a society where others have a shared sense of unacceptable behavior that is ok with me. I now appreciate the idea of acceptable codes of conduct that people are encouraged to follow. I really didn't understand how selfish so many people would be without rules telling them not to interrupt others, or eating with their mouth open, or treating others with respect, or realizing you must share with others (toys, when you are a kid or time with other speakers...).

I tend to be a bit cantankerous, refusing to accept things just because that is the way things are. But I have grown to appreciate the wisdom of good manners. Within that acceptance there is still room for me (and those like me) to quibble with some of the rules of good manners, but the concept I now appreciate.

The Rebirth of Cities

The Next Slum?

Pent-up demand for urban living is evident in housing prices. Twenty years ago, urban housing was a bargain in most central cities. Today, it carries an enormous price premium. Per square foot, urban residential neighborhood space goes for 40 percent to 200 percent more than traditional suburban space in areas as diverse as New York City; Portland, Oregon; Seattle; and Washington, D.C.

It's crucial to note that these premiums have arisen not only in central cities, but also in suburban towns that have walkable urban centers offering a mix of residential and commercial development.
...
Perhaps most important, the shift to walkable urban environments will give more people what they seem to want. I doubt the swing toward urban living will ever proceed as far as the swing toward the suburbs did in the 20th century; many people will still prefer the bigger houses and car-based lifestyles of conventional suburbs. But there will almost certainly be more of a balance between walkable and drivable communities—allowing people in most areas a wider variety of choices.

Related: Urban Planning - Traffic Congestion and a Non-Solution - The Economic Benefits of Walkable Communities - Designing Cities for People, Rather than Cars - How Walkable is Your Prospective Neighborhood - housing articles - Car-free zones - The Case for Physically Separated Bike Lanes