Theme: Crisis

(FB 1546008419 Timestamp) THE COLD WAR AND POST-COLD WAR ERAS IN TWO ARTICLES – LITTLE IDEAS HAVE VAST CONSEQUENCES —“The Cold War was bookended by two articles: “The Sources of Soviet Conduct” (based on the “Long Telegram” ) in 1947 and the “Clash of Civilisations” in 1993. Both articles were published in the journal Foreign Affairs.”— THE SOURCES OF SOVIET CONDUCT http://www.historyguide.org/Europe/Kennan.html THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS 1) Summary https://www.beyondintractability.org/bksum/huntington-clash 2) Original Article (~28pp) The only copy of the original Foreign Affairs article that I can find is on Scribd, so publisher must be working hard to keep it off the internet. I’ll update this with 3) Book In our library.

(FB 1546195671 Timestamp) THIS IS WHY WE DON’T NEED A MOB. by Bill Joslin With the current state of affairs, in the first world, a total breakdown of civility would occur through spontaneous short term, erratic street violence (riots, looting. Which congregated, then disperses to re-congregate elsewhere) inside the OODA-LOOP of authorities. (See Toronto G20 tactics of black bloc) From a standpoint of cybernetics, this creates a circumstance and action with in third parties. Party one: rioters, party two: law enforcement… Party one renders party two ineffective which results in party three (everyone else) to react. Law enforcement will either up-authoritarian tactics (see kettling of Toronto G20 on day three) which makes life unbearable for party three, or if law enforcement doesn’t ramp up authority, continues to demonstrate their ineffectiveness – which party three then loses faith in law enforcement (i.e. status quo) (see Sons of Odin and block watch groups in the UK around emerging no go zones) In other words, men of action – tradesmen, army, engineers (as Tom laid-out) will take matters into their own hands – no out of political ideology, heroism or profit, but rather to protect their loved one, their community and their property. By establishing small territories of peace and security (neighbourhoods, two or three block radius) – other in surrounding areas will migrate too or join in their tactics. Essentially what they do is create the first two commons – monopoly of violence over an area (territory) and trust. (See “warlords” in eastern Ukraine with community courts and patrols)… Naturally, organically, instinctively – they create the very foundation of of the changes we seek – without any affiliation, central command, ideology, thought leaders. What we need to do is ensure they understand what it is they are doing, why they do it, and why they had to do it(property, reciprocity). This is so they don’t seek to re-establish status quo and hand over their safe zones to the old regime – we must show them WHY THEY MUST LEAD and continue to do so. We dont need a mob, an army etc, because good men, in times of need, will stand and defend their loved ones, their kith and kin and Their property. Our societies are not filled with gun owning, would-be-revolutionaries. They are filled with dad’s, husbands, brothers – sheepdogs, who don’t want to see the commons they spend their days building and maintaining totally destroyed for ideological agendas. In the US these guys tend to be the ones who own guns – they tend to also be cautious (because they have something to lose) and tend to be the last to a fight, and the last stand if it can message to that. (Which is why the state of affairs continues unchallenged as of yet) (I’ll take these guys over well versed, well trained, ideologues any day. Zealots chap my ass)

(FB 1546195671 Timestamp) THIS IS WHY WE DON’T NEED A MOB. by Bill Joslin With the current state of affairs, in the first world, a total breakdown of civility would occur through spontaneous short term, erratic street violence (riots, looting. Which congregated, then disperses to re-congregate elsewhere) inside the OODA-LOOP of authorities. (See Toronto G20 tactics of black bloc) From a standpoint of cybernetics, this creates a circumstance and action with in third parties. Party one: rioters, party two: law enforcement… Party one renders party two ineffective which results in party three (everyone else) to react. Law enforcement will either up-authoritarian tactics (see kettling of Toronto G20 on day three) which makes life unbearable for party three, or if law enforcement doesn’t ramp up authority, continues to demonstrate their ineffectiveness – which party three then loses faith in law enforcement (i.e. status quo) (see Sons of Odin and block watch groups in the UK around emerging no go zones) In other words, men of action – tradesmen, army, engineers (as Tom laid-out) will take matters into their own hands – no out of political ideology, heroism or profit, but rather to protect their loved one, their community and their property. By establishing small territories of peace and security (neighbourhoods, two or three block radius) – other in surrounding areas will migrate too or join in their tactics. Essentially what they do is create the first two commons – monopoly of violence over an area (territory) and trust. (See “warlords” in eastern Ukraine with community courts and patrols)… Naturally, organically, instinctively – they create the very foundation of of the changes we seek – without any affiliation, central command, ideology, thought leaders. What we need to do is ensure they understand what it is they are doing, why they do it, and why they had to do it(property, reciprocity). This is so they don’t seek to re-establish status quo and hand over their safe zones to the old regime – we must show them WHY THEY MUST LEAD and continue to do so. We dont need a mob, an army etc, because good men, in times of need, will stand and defend their loved ones, their kith and kin and Their property. Our societies are not filled with gun owning, would-be-revolutionaries. They are filled with dad’s, husbands, brothers – sheepdogs, who don’t want to see the commons they spend their days building and maintaining totally destroyed for ideological agendas. In the US these guys tend to be the ones who own guns – they tend to also be cautious (because they have something to lose) and tend to be the last to a fight, and the last stand if it can message to that. (Which is why the state of affairs continues unchallenged as of yet) (I’ll take these guys over well versed, well trained, ideologues any day. Zealots chap my ass)