Freedom


Clarifying what people get when they pollute and deplete less
A6FY1C Brent Delta North Sea

Clarifying what people get when they pollute and deplete less

What people get from polluting and depleting less: I used to tell people that they'd save money and time because they will. Nobody believes me. Nobody. They see buying coffee at Starbucks to go and ordering takeout as saving time, missing that those who do those things have the least time. Knowing your values so you can prioritize them and dismiss less valuable things (like takeout coffee and takeout) restores time and money. I first thought stopping things that cause pollution and depletion---particularly those that fund extraction of fossil fuels, uranium, and other nonrenewable resources---would bring deprivation and sacrifice. Now I see that many things I once thought necessary or unavoidable are unnecessary. In time and with hands-on practical experience they become repugnant and disgusting,…

0 Comments

Why do we fund our enemies by air conditioning the outdoors?

Find me a war where at least one side isn't partly funded by oil money. Find me a war that isn't threatening to expand at least regionally, maybe globally. Where is that oil money coming from? Who is helping raise fossil fuel prices, thereby increasing the resources and power of Putin and his peers? Look no further than this restaurant, running the air conditioning with the doors wide open, and all the people patronizing it. Also all its peer restaurants, stores with their doors open, etc, and all of us spending money with them. It's only April. The air outside is comfortable. Pictured below is total waste. Another view:

0 Comments

The Constitution has no extraneous protections.

I wouldn't want to live in a nation or world without freedom of speech, freedom of the press, protection of being tried twice for a crime, or any of the protections in the Constitution. I don't know anyone who would. All must enjoy the protections you do for it to work, even if you really want to deprive others of them It might be tempting to think it would be nice to enjoy freedom of speech or of the press for yourself but to be able to limit the speech or press of others, like your political enemies, but if you think about it enough, you conclude that you're better off with everyone enjoying all those freedoms. That is, you might be tempted to be…

0 Comments

What we can learn from jarring images from the Civil War Museum in Harrisburg, PA

I gave a keynote and led a leadership workshop near Harrisburg, PA---a place halfway between where I grew up in Philadelphia and where my dad grew up, in Pittsburgh, so we passed through there many times growing up. I learned that the city hosts a Civil War Museum, so arranged to spend half a day there. I recommend it. A few items affected me beyond what I would have expected. Scroll down and you'll see the leg irons, collar with spikes, and whip with spiky metal spurs (the card implied that it wasn't known if this particular whip was actually used, but even if not, just that someone made it says a lot). First a few words. I'm not sure the pictures will hit you…

0 Comments

The futures that futurists imagine are what I envision: Yet more evidence living without polluting or depleting isn’t regression

People consistently refer to life without polluting and depleting as returning to the Stone Age. The lack of historical awareness and imagination staggers the mind, or it would mine if I didn't realize that humans fill our minds with lies, or legitimizing myths, when we are induced to act against our values, to mollify our feelings. I was listening to William MacAskill (bio below) on Sam Harris's podcast. I'm not sure they would describe themselves as futurists, but they aren't far from it and in the part of the conversation I quote below, they were exploring what if artificial intelligence worked out. I quote several minutes of the conversation and share the audio, but I'll call attention to a few comments of what they imagine…

0 Comments

Colonized doesn’t mean Indigenous. Being there when colonizers arrived doesn’t mean there first.

Over and over, people refer to societies that were colonized as indigenous. For example, I see nearly all Native American groups referred to as indigenous. Here's a dictionary definition of indigenous, which covers the meaning here. indigenous adjective in·​dig·​e·​nous 1 a : produced, growing, living, or occurring natively or naturally in a particular region or environment b usually Indigenous : of, relating to, or descended from the earliest known inhabitants of a place and especially of a place that was colonized Here's another: "Being a member of the original inhabitants of a particular place." Consider Manhattan, where I live. Humans have lived here for five or ten thousand years. Europeans arrived ten percent of that time ago. If someone calls the people who lived on…

0 Comments

Every group claims Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and Douglass. Every group says the other produced Calhoun and eugenics.

The more I learn from different traditions, the more I find each group claims that their intellectual and cultural forebears are the people everyone likes and says the others descend from the ones everyone dislikes. I grew up in liberal, progressive households and schools. I learned that people who worked for liberty and freedom, and who fought against slavery and tyranny were the ones our traditions descended from. I learned that conservatives and libertarians just wanted profit. They would sacrifice the things we valued, like liberty and freedom, in favor of helping themselves. Hence, they were responsible for slavery and laissez-faire practices that caused hunger and poverty. I didn't learn to see the world from their perspectives. When I started to, in recent decades, I…

0 Comments

Did America wrongfully denigrate “I’m from the government and I’m here to help”

President Ronald Reagan said in 1986: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help.” The quote has an appeal. Many Americans loved him. He was in his second term. I've been reading about slavery, abolitionism, the Civil War, and Reconstruction. One part seemed relevant: when the Union army liberated slaves from captivity. Were they not from the government, there to help? I don't think the slaves considered those representatives of the government terrifying. How about when schools were desegregated in the Civil Rights era. People from the government came to protect students in the minority, enabling them to practice their rights. How about during Reconstruction, in the early part, when it was working, when…

0 Comments

More on Eric Williams’s “Slavery was not born of racism: rather, racism was the consequence of slavery”

I found a piece that expanded on something I wrote in Sustainability Simplified about how racism developed. Since I found that we needed to change culture to restore sustainability, I've been learning about abolitionism and related issues, since abolitionism is an example of humans changing global culture where no one thought it possible, then it happened, started by a small number of visionary people. In my book, I wrote: Oxford-educated Trinidadian historian Eric Williams wrote, “A racial twist has thereby been given to what is basically an economic phenomenon. Slavery was not born of racism: rather, racism was the consequence of slavery.” Recently, historian Ibram X. Kendi agreed. He wrote, “I had been taught that racist ideas cause racist policies. That ignorance and hate cause…

0 Comments

The United States situation regarding pollution and depletion

We are living in the wake of the corruption of otherwise great people, in particular George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison, as well as their peers. They risked their lives to promote liberty, freedom, equality, democracy, and national security. They claimed those values were universal but defended them for themselves and their peers only. Their corruption was not to extend them to their slaves. The legacy of their corruption follows a direct line to John C. Calhoun and Jefferson Davis, then to Margaret Sanger, Henry Ford, and Ford's dear friend Adolph Hitler, through to today's persistent, enduring racism and greatest risks to national and global security. Still, I don't blame them. They didn't ask to be born into a slave culture. They couldn't help…

0 Comments

Why consistency? Self-awareness and integrity

I write about sidchas and standard procedures a fair amount. I don't remember how often I clarify the main reasons for doing them. You might think the point of fitness-related ones to be fitness. I'm proud of fitness results, but they're more a side effect. One of the big benefits is mental freedom. I think many people consider diet and exercise sources of stress, never knowing if they're doing enough or if they're doing them right. Making sidchas for the most important parts of your life means you always know they're taken care of. You never have to worry about them. The most important parts of life are easy to put aside here or there, then soon you've lost them. I consider the three pillars…

0 Comments

More wealth or stuff doesn’t mean freedom: Distinguishing freedom from abundance and prosperity

You've probably heard people say, "Even poor people today can do things beyond what kings and emperors of the past could dream," talking about cell phones, airplanes, and so on. Yes, but technological power doesn't necessarily lead to people valuing life more. Most people value freedom. Money and technology can enable us to do what we couldn't otherwise, but what if it comes with a loss of freedom? If you have nice stuff but if someone tells you what to do, you can't walk away and you have to do what they tell you to, what's the stuff worth? What if it comes at the loss of liberty, equality, democracy, and national security? You can talk to people on the other side of the world…

0 Comments

Heritage Foundation promoting socialism, as usual. Charlie Kirk did too.

The Heritage Foundation states: "Heritage’s mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense." Those words may sound nice, but talk is cheap. What happens when it comes time to act? From Kevin Roberts of the Heritage Foundation and his podcast cohost: After years of rigorous research, I am proud to announce the release of The Heritage Foundation’s newest paper, “Saving America by Saving the Family: A Foundation for the Next 250 Years.” In creating this pivotal paper, our scholars challenged outdated assumptions, studied other nation’s attempts to reverse declining families (both successful and unsuccessful), and put our best minds to work to create actionable solutions.…

0 Comments

Visiting the Jackie Robinson Museum

The Jackie Robinson Museum offered free admission this weekend. I didn't know about it and don't remember how I learned of the offer, but it turns out it's a 20-minute walk from my front door so I took them up on the offer. I recommend the museum to anyone. I presume most Americans know Jackie Robinson as the guy who "broke the color barrier" in baseball. Scroll to the bottom of this page for the overview of his life from Wikipedia, which is fascinating. This museum shows his life from childhood, born in Cairo, Georgia, his father disappeared, his mother brought his family to relatives in Pasadena, California as part of the Great Migration, becoming a star athlete (along with his brother). He was UCLA's…

0 Comments

Civil war results: obligation to kill old friends

People read prediction of environmental problems like climate change or biodiversity loss and think the problems we face will be from things like crop failure or heat exhaustion from a warmer globe or lack of plants from honeybees dying. Those results won't cause the most suffering. They will provoke what causes the suffering, but fighting between people and societies will cause the most suffering. I'll illustrate. Say crops start producing smaller yields globally. Before people start starving, people will realize a resource is dwindling. While we live in mostly democratic societies, every nation also has systems that give different people different levels of access to resources when they become scarce. In other words, we live in dominance hierarchies, at least to some extent. Some people…

0 Comments
Did Thomas Jefferson start scientific racism?
Thomas Jefferson

Did Thomas Jefferson start scientific racism?

I was watching a dialog on Slavery and the Constitutional Convention hosted by the US National Archives (see the video below). Thomas Jefferson My upcoming book focuses on many relevant things, especially how culture induces people to act against their values, then to create beliefs to rationalize and justify the behavior violating their own values. Thomas Jefferson represents one of the most prominent cases of someone who promoted liberty, freedom, equality, and democracy to the point of risking his life for these values for himself and his peers. He didn't extend them to his slaves. A renowned and accomplished historian and lawyer, Paul Finkelman (bio below) said the following, which I found interesting and relevant. Most of us have been induced to violate our values…

0 Comments
Jobs don’t just mean working in a dominance hierarchy. They mean working for the whims of people with rank.
Affluence Without Abundance, by James Suzman

Jobs don’t just mean working in a dominance hierarchy. They mean working for the whims of people with rank.

Before the Holocene, our immediate-return egalitarian ancestors lived in environments in which each person could access their material needs. People who were hungry could, on their own, climb a tree, dig up a root, or hunt an animal. For needs like safety from predators, they'd have to cooperate with others, but they had the freedom and responsibility to make those relationships work. By contrast, living in dominance hierarchies mean that some people control access to what others need. By definition, if you have rank, you control something others need. When we say people need jobs, we imply that if they work hard they can provide for themselves, but today, to the extent our societies are based in dominance hierarchy, that work differs from then. Then,…

0 Comments

Meditation thoughts: What is meditation?

I lead a meditation group that meets in person a couple times a month. We've found we can get a laugh if we talk in the group about talking about meditation to others who don't meditate by saying, "I can't meditate. My mind is too crazy to empty it of thoughts," or words to that effect. Why does it make us laugh? Because it's like a knee-jerk reaction that betrays a misunderstanding of meditation closer to its opposite. Everyone's mind is full of thoughts we can't help. Meditation doesn't empty your mind. Meditation can do many different things for different people, but a common goal is to find comfort with the eternal state of all human minds: scattered like yours. We know that what they…

0 Comments

There will always be something just beyond our grasp we crave. Or we can learn to stop craving.

Artificial intelligence is just the latest instance of a technology that, by polluting and depleting, deprive people of life, liberty, and property without due process of law. People think of the perks it might bring them despite violating the Constitution. So they convince themselves that it will actually benefit those it hurts. They can't say exactly how, but they think if we just use more of it, it will somehow harm less than if we use less of it or not use it. I'm a fan of technology and innovation. I'm a bigger fan of liberty, freedom, equality, and democracy, which I don't see working if we don't enforce the Constitution. If we have to choose between a technology that violates the Constitution and honoring…

0 Comments

Where the problems with social media come from and the big result, part 1

I've meant to start developing a view for a while but I keep not starting because I haven't fully developed it. I'm going to bite the bullet and write a few ideas down, not yet complete and coherent. Sorry if it ends up confusing. When the internet was starting to become mainstream, say the 1990s, people looked forward to it democratizing communication compared to the press and broadcast since anyone could communicate to anyone else. Yet today social media creates many problems. Two of the top ones are (again, speaking loosely as I'm developing my thoughts) Cancel mobs Algorithms determining what messages to propagate determine culture These problems seem tyrannical. How did what seemed moving toward democracy became that way? Dominance hierarchies form when there…

0 Comments

What I wonder when people ask how I get by

People ask me all the time things like "how do you get by without flying?", "How do you get by without a contract with the power company?", and "how do you get by producing so little trash?" I know they're thinking about material things and mainstream values of acquiring more stuff even at the expense of relationships so from their perspective I'm depriving myself and sacrificing. From my perspective, I'm avoiding hurting people. I'm living by the US Constitution, which says that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law even though the US government isn't enforcing it. Pollution and depletion deprive people of life, liberty, and property without due process of law. The government gains revenue and…

0 Comments

Limited government advocates and big government intrusion. What am I missing?

I don't write much about the type of politics covered in daily newspapers, but I can't help commenting on a pattern these days I haven't seen anyone comment on. Regular readers know I'm interacting more with institutions that promote limited government, such as the Cato Institute, Heritage Foundation, Manhattan Institute, and Hillsdale College. Since I grew up in liberal, progressive households and school systems, but don't fly, I consider it like exploring different cultures. Anyway, these institutions like the Trump administration, which I struggle to see as limited government. It's not limited in its market interference, in its reach into citizens' private lives, in interactions with states, or even limiting the federal government with its DOGE intents to limit the federal government. I see talk…

0 Comments

Allowing pollution and depletion stifles innovation and creativity

Another cloudy day means I have to post fast. My main battery remains empty. My backup battery is running out. The forecast was for the clouds to break before the sun set, but they didn't. I'm posting about innovation and creativity because I've found several places selling or developing human-powered generators. To cook, heat an apartment, operate an elevator, or other operations that require more power than humans can output for long, they don't work, but to power a phone or laptop, a generator attached to a stationary bike or rowing machine would do fine for converting sugar and fat in fruit and vegetables to battery energy. Alas, the demand for energy is met through sources that violate the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence,…

0 Comments

Dr. Larry Arnn on Churchill on technology and modern life

I recently finished Hillsdale College's course on Churchill, hosted by the school's president, Dr. Larry Arnn. If you don't know, the school is as conservative as schools get. Arnn is also on the board of the Heritage Foundation, also as conservative as they come. Both institutions support policies and activities that pollute and deplete. To my mind, activities that pollute and deplete deprive people of life, liberty, and property without due process of law and violate the principle of the consent of the governed---that is, they violate the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence. People at those institutions haven't seen that problem yet, as far as I can tell, but it looks like they violate their values. A different, though similar, violation appeared to Churchill.…

0 Comments

Having the number of kids you want is freedom. People, especially government, telling you otherwise is usually coercion.

The news keeps covering that population is growing less fast than before. Note that it is still increasing, just the rate of increase is slowing. They overwhelmingly treat it as a problem. They say so because they use economic models built to show population growth always helps, which is wrong. Their models saying something is a problem wouldn't necessarily mean it was a problem even if their models weren't wrong. In any case, how is people having the number of children they want a problem? Isn't people choosing how they live freedom? By the same token, isn't trying to get people to have more children coercion? In my post Are more people always better? I showed the medals of all the nations I could find…

2 Comments

End of content

No more pages to load