Author Archives: rdmyers75@hotmail.com

Turchin’s End Times

I got through Peter Turchin’s book End Times. It is definitely an interesting book. To summarize, organized human societies tend to develop a “wealth pump” whereby the wealthy and powerful influence the rules of the game to appropriate an ever larger share of a society’s wealth and power for themselves, at the expense of ordinary people. “Ordinary people” is not just the median or what we think of as the “middle class”, it is the bottom 90% of the wealth and income distribution. He shows hard evidence that the policies enacted in the U.S. represent the preferences of the top 10%. Not only are the preferences of the median citizen under-represented, they have NO statistical bearing on what is actually enacted. This situation tends to eventually reach a point of instability unless intentional and effective steps are taken to “shut down the wealth pump”, which happens occasionally. Instability can sometimes look like outright collapse into chaos, but it can also look like fracturing or breakup of a society into smaller entities, as happened with the “fall” of the Roman empire.

What makes the book a little different than other “cyclical theories of history” is first that he backs it up with statistical evidence gathered from many societies over a long period of time. Second, it is not the “immiseration” of the common people that leads to instability, but actually the growth of the “elites” due to the wealth pump. At some point, there are more elites that want to be in power than available positions of power. They fight amongst themselves, and their rhetoric may allow them to gain a following among the masses, but their preferences and interests still represent the rich and powerful class of which they are a part, and switching from one elite faction to another will not shut down the wealth pump.

R.I.P., Vernor Vinge

Vernor Vinge died on March 20, 2024. I am not sure it is necessary for a person to have a “favorite author”, and I might not give the same answer every day, but if pressed I might come up with Vernor Vinge. I stumbled first across his essay The Coming Technological Singularity: How to Survive in the Post-Human Era around the same time I stumbled across Bill Joy’s Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us and Eric Drexler’s Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnology. At some point I read Ray Kurzweil’s The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology. These four works really expanded my imagination about the range of possibilities for the future of our species and civilization, and I recommend them to others.

These works also got me interested in science fiction not just as a form of entertainment, which it certainly is, but as a way to further expand my imagination. Some science fiction is painful to read, but the best science fiction expands your imagination painlessly as you are being entertained, and Vinge was just a fantastic storyteller, maybe even the best ever. I love Rainbow’s End as much for being a great novel as for opening my eyes to what augmented reality could mean as it begins to take hold. A Fire Upon the Deep and A Deepness in the Sky are two of my absolute favorite books, and Children of the Sky is also wonderful for everyone who loves A Fire Upon the Deep. Rest in peace, Vernor Vinge.

Netanyahu

This is an article from 1996 in something called the Washington Report for Middle East Affairs. Here are some facts about Benjamin Netanyahu as reported by this article.

  1. He went to high school in suburban Philadelphia. (I looked up elsewhere, and it was Cheltenham high school. This is a public school district in a not particularly posh area.) Then MIT.
  2. He was a dual U.S.-Israeli citizen, at least at that point of graduating MIT.
  3. He has gone by at least four names. One of the three alternates is just a shortened version, but the other two are John Jay Sullivan and John Jay Sullivan Jr.
  4. His social security file is marked “classified”. According to this article, that suggests he may have been on the payroll of the CIA or FBI.
  5. To run for office, he had to give up his U.S. citizenship, which he did legally in Israel. But in the U.S., at least according to this article and in 1996, he was still legally considered a U.S. citizen. (This situation is not unusual though, as I know plenty of people in ambiguous dual citizen categories in their home countries for one reason of convenience or another. An innocent one is because someone lives in the U.S. but wants to visit family in their home country for an extended period without applying for a tourist visa.)

The article veers into some interesting territory from there, but I found these apparently fact-based nuggets interesting.

weather forecasting

This is interesting. It is not 100% clear to me what the measure of accuracy is below, but the plot shows how much weather forecasting has improved over the last 50 years or so. A 3-5 day forecast is highly accurate now, and 3-5 are not that different. It’s interesting to me that there is such as large drop off in accuracy between a 7 and 10 day forecast – that is not necessarily intuitive, but useful even in everyday life. A 10-day forecast is basically a coin flip, while check back 3 days later and you are closer to 80/20 odds. This is based on pressure measured at a certain height I think, so it doesn’t necessarily mean forecasts of precipitation depth and intensity, rain vs. snow vs. ice, thunder and lightning, tornadoes, etc. are going to be as accurate as this implies.

Our World in Data

There is some suggesting that AI (meaning purely statistical approaches, or AI choosing any blend of statistics and physics it wants?) might make forecasting much faster, cheaper, and easier yet again.

immigration by the numbers

This post on a blog called Demography Unplugged is a nice piece of data journalism. I have been trying to figure out if there is really a “border crisis”, or if challenges that are typical at the border are being exaggerated and cherry picked in an election year.

Measuring immigration is tricky, and this article explains how people try to do it. Basically, you want to know net migration, which is determined both by people coming in and people leaving, which both happen constantly. The Census Bureau surveys the foreign born population periodically and changes in this number are one way to do it.

Immigration really is up significantly over the past year or so. This is partly post-pandemic recovery, but it is also up significantly compared to what it has been historically even in comparably good economic times. They are coming to work. They are not coming disproportionately to commit crimes, although take a large enough group of people and there are going to be some crimes that can be cherry picked and publicized by disingenuous media outlets and political campaigns. There is no evidence I am aware of that terrorists are trying to sneak across the southern border, although of course we need to be alert for this at all ports of entry.

Some are sneaking in, but many are legally applying for asylum, after which most are allowed to enter the country while they wait for a decision on their case. This can take years, and even after a decision is made, there typically are not aggressive efforts made to find and deport them.

They are probably not taking a lot of American jobs that Americans would actually want. They are taking low wage jobs, paying taxes, and not receiving government benefits in return. Unemployment is low. Remember the labor shortage during and after the pandemic, when immigration was mostly shut off. And remember how prices shot up at least partly as a result of that labor shortage? I suspect the uptick in immigration is one factor holding wages and prices down now. The business community loves low wages, which presents somewhat of a dilemma because they also hate taxes, and the same party that advocates for low taxes also advocates for low immigration. This party generally is fine with having a dysfunctional immigration system as long as they can pin the blame on the other party.

So if you want to decrease immigration, you can let people apply for asylum at the border but not let them in until/unless their cases are decided in their favor. That exports the problem to Mexico and creates a humanitarian dilemma, which is what Trump chose to do and will do again if he gets the chance. Eventually word would get out and people would stop coming in such large numbers, but people would (and were) hurt in the meantime. You could drastically scale up whatever processes allow people to apply at U.S. embassies in their home countries. And finally, you could just try to help those countries solve some of their issues that make people want to leave, which would also be solving some of your own issues at home.

Also remember, these are relatively good economic times, and the climate change shit has not really hit the migration fan yet.

nuclear reactors on the moon

According to Breitbart (yes, I occasionally peruse Breitbart to see what propaganda spin they are putting on current events and because they occasionally pick up on a story others do not), Russia and China are considering a joint moon research base powered by a nuclear reactor. NASA is also considering a research base powered by nuclear power. This makes sense to me in a technological sense. What is concerning is the end of an era of international cooperation symbolized by the International Space Station, which Russia has said it is backing out of this year. An international moon base would just make a lot of sense rather than competing national bases.

Now, for some fun science fiction references. In Kim Stanley Robinson’s 1993 novel Red Mars, which I enjoyed unlike his recent book Ministry for the Future which I couldn’t finish, the first thing humanity does when it gets to Mars is build a nuclear reactor.

In the 1968 Godzilla entry Destroy All Monsters, it is assumed that by the year 1999 humanity will have settled their differences and established an international moon base led by a world government. This is important because they will need to cooperate to deal with threats such as aliens and monsters.

And finally, let’s just watch the Russian space station Mir blow up in the 1998 movie Armageddon. In 1997, there really was an explosion and fire aboard the actual Mir, which the cosmonauts present were able to put out. In 2001, most of the station was intentionally burned up in Earth’s atmosphere, and the rest allowed to crash into the Pacific Ocean. The Mir was originally a Soviet project. NASA had plans to put up its own competing space station, but after the fall of the USSR the two countries agreed to cooperate on the International Space Station instead. Seems long ago now.

Ralph Nader on Gaza

I haven’t made up my mind on the Gaza situation, and therefore I haven’t talked a lot about it. And I probably shouldn’t, but I want to get my own thoughts in order. You can stop reading here if you want.

The October 7 attacks were horrific and it is entirely understandable why Israel would choose an overwhelming and violent response. In case we forget the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. invaded not one but two sovereign countries after those attacks, and occupied them for 20 years. There were not so many video cameras in those countries as we have in Gaza now, so the civilian suffering was not in the western public eye to the extent it is now, but the suffering was undoubtedly horrible. This is more like the Vietnam war, which was very public and which people had a very visceral reaction to.

Second, there are people in positions of power on both sides who espouse hateful, racist ideologies. These people have intentionally monkey-wrenched the peace process at least since the hopeful moment of the Oslo accords in the 1990s. The participants in that peace accord were murdered by racist ideologues (one assassination 100% documented; the other somewhat obviously poisoned in my opinion, but maybe not established 100%.) Antisemitism has been a problem since Roman times, and is a problem throughout the Muslim world today. Hateful, fundamentalist ideology also drives the settler movement. I do have a position on the settlements – I agree with the international consensus that they are wrong and illegal, and they need to stop.

Now to war crimes. I am not an expert on the subject, but I know there is an international consensus against collective punishment and against ethnic cleansing. The Israeli government is quite clearly engaging in these two things under any logical textbook definition, and I don’t think this is justified as a response to the original attacks. As for genocide, I don’t believe they are intentionally exterminating civilians, which is what many people associate with genocide. Under the UN definition of genocide, the ethnic cleansing (forcible and permanent moving of populations) counts as genocide, and they are guilty of it. There is a question of whether the Israeli government intends the movement to be permanent, but I am convinced that there is at least an element within the Israeli government that would like to reduce the Palestinian population of Gaza permanently by forcing people across the Egyptian border. I have always found the UN definition problematic though because some of its sub-parts are so obviously more violent and evil than others. There are degrees of unimaginable depravity. For example, murdering 6 million people is a higher plane of depravity than taking children away from their parents for reeducation to destroy their traditional culture and language (the Chinese approach in Xinxiang, the U.S. treatment of Native Americans well into the 20th century – of course, the U.S. military shot and displaced plenty of Native Americans in support of settler colonialism in the 19th century, lest we forget).

So back to civilian suffering, which is horrible. Is it justified as unavoidable collateral damage in an otherwise proportionate response to the original attack? I can’t answer this, but it seems there is much more that can and should be done to alleviate the suffering. The extreme ideological elements on both sides seem mostly indifferent to this suffering.

I promised to get to Ralph Nader. He says the real death toll is closer to 300,000 than 30,000. The 30,000 counts only official deaths reported by hospitals, while he believes there are hundreds of thousands of bodies buried under rubble that have not been counted.

With virtually no healthcare left, no medications, and infectious diseases spreading especially among infants, children, the infirm, and the elderly, can anybody believe that the fatalities have just gone over 30,000? With 5,000 babies born every month into the rubble, their mothers wounded and without food, healthcare, medicine, and clean water for any of their children, severe skepticism about the Hamas Health Ministry’s official count is warranted.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas, which he helped over the years, have a common interest in lowballing the death and injury toll. But for different reasons. Hamas keeps the figures low to reduce being accused by its own people of not protecting them, and not building shelters. Hamas grossly underestimated the savage war crimes by the vengeful, occupying Israeli military superpower fully and unconditionally backed by the U.S. military superpower.

The Health Ministry is intentionally conservative, citing that its death toll came from reports only of named deceased by hospitals and morgues. But as the weeks turned into months, blasted, disabled hospitals and morgues cannot keep up with the bodies, or cannot count those slain laying on roadsides in allies and beneath building debris. Yet the Health Ministry remains conservative and the “official” rising civilian fatality and injury count continues to be uncritically reported by both friend and foe of this devastating Israeli state terrorism.

Ralph Nader

Strong words. If true, it is an impressive piece of propaganda for the Israeli government to question the Hamas estimate as being too high by a factor of 10, when it is actually too low by a factor of 10.

As for the aftermath of the operation, I picture something like the Chinese government’s approach in Tibet and Xinjiang, where the location and behavior of individual people is individually tracked and people are taken away for incarceration or reeducation. This also meets the UN definition of genocide, but at least it would be relatively bloodless compared to the intense suffering we are seeing now (and Chinese government’s genocide is relatively bloodless compared to the U.S. invasion and occupation of neighboring Afghanistan). For Palestine, I don’t see much hope for a return to the optimism of the 1990s any time soon.

Belarus

This might seem like a random topic, but Peter Turchin got me interested in Belarus. By his telling, sure, Lukashenko is a thug who has tortured and disappeared his political rivals, but he is a thug who has delivered some economic success and quality of life for his people. He has blocked potential oligarchs and maintained something along the lines of the original vision of Soviet state-owned means of production. In Russia (again by Turchin’s telling), the oligarchs got the upper hand in the 1990s and early 2000s, after which Putin crushed them and at least partially restored economic and political power to the bureaucratic government. In Ukraine, the oligarchs completely got the upper hand after the fall of the Soviet Union, took over the country and the political revolutions and counter-revolutions since then are oligarchs fighting amongst each other.

Numbers below are from the CIA World Fact Book and rounded by me. It’s a little unfair to look at the numbers for Ukraine right now, but we can compare Belarus to Poland, Russia, and Germany. Belarus is the poorest among these, but the distribution of wealth is significantly more equal (similar to a Scandinavian country in fact). Life expectancy is significantly higher than Russia and similar to Poland. So you might say yes, Belarus appears to be the closest thing to a Soviet workers paradise where nobody is rich but people have jobs, put food on the table, and get medical care. Russia is richer but strikingly unequal, and some combination of poor nutrition, poor mental and/or physical health, substance abuse, violence and/or poor health care holds down life expectancy. Germany is wealthy and healthy, although fairly unequal.

BelarusUkraineRussiaPolandGermany
GDP per capita at PPP$20,000$9,000 ($12,000 pre-war)$28,000$35,000$54,000
Ginni Index2427363032
Unemployment Rate5%9%5%3%4%
Average Life Expectancy (years)7570727682
CIA World Fact Book

what are U.S. special forces up to?

Naked Capitalism has a long article which links to a lot of other long articles.

SOCOM carries out the United States’ most specialised and secret missions. These include assassinations, counterterrorist raids, long-range reconnaissance, intelligence analysis, foreign troop training, and weapons of mass destruction counter-proliferation operations[.]

One of [SOCOM’s] key components is the Joint Special Operations Command, or JSOC, a clandestine sub-command whose primary mission is tracking and killing suspected terrorists. 

Naked Capitalism

Training other countries’ militaries at their invitation seems okay. The question is always who is running that country, what is their human rights record, etc. Tracking and killing terrorists is problematic because just designating someone a terrorist makes it okay to kill them. Like for example, any individual involved with an “Iran-backed group” in Syria, Yemen, or wherever. Which are countries our troops are most definitely not invited to be in. If you have troops on the ground in a sovereign country that you are not invited to be in, how is that not a war against that country? These are often “disputed territories” of one sort or another, but again if you can just label as place you want to invade a disputed territory and then invade it (as Russia has done repeatedly), that is clearly problematic.

Finally the really scary thing about special forces is they can kill politicians and take over countries, if they want to. Including ours. Let’s hope they don’t want to, but if someone ever wants to do that and has control over the special forces, this is the direction a straight-up military coup could come from. They would just come up with a narrative that it is necessary to “protect the constitution”, and the demands of the dead founding father-gods would then trump whatever living civilians are actually nominally in charge at that moment. Don’t worry about the other branches of government – the Cowardly Congress will go along with it, and the Supreme Court will decline to hear the case.