Why Oil for so long?

[101101]

Thiel and Musk have asked why are we still using a 19th century power source? This is an important question. Especially now that the oil age is finally coming to an end because one major state, China, finally wiggled free of it.

The answer seems to be control. WWI was nasty and not long after it was followed by WWII. What was to stop next global war which wouldn't be survivable? In the war with the axis allies the US absorbed a few patterns. Provoke or preempt on pretext. Cut off the energy supply. Use a superior tech (shock and awe.) It did all these in the war with Japan. Its post war policy impositions reflect that in every way. Right after the war the US created a law that suppressed certain IP, patents and inventions for the claimed reason of preventing economic disruption. And that law has been used for suppression and censorship at least 5500 times since. An examination which is likely forth coming will show I think that in each case it suppressed anything that would lead away from the US being able to shut another countries lights off and drop them back into the stone age- it had mottos like "shoot em in the dark nuke till they glow." So anything that would lead away from oil and coal would be violently suppressed by any means necessary. They pre-emptively suppressed the technical development of certain adversaries to the extent feasible. Don't lose sight of the connection between weapons development and free energy. Weapons are basically about how energy is harnessed, focused and directed.

Hillary said she was pushing natural gas because it was a bridge fuel. That always seemed curious. But the logic was most countries had local gas so they wouldn't have to depend on imports. So as a environmental bridge it wasn't even a light cigarette but as a bridge away from a choke hold of US power it was a bridge and that had an allure, but not more than stunted nuclear or hydro.

This strategy of suppressing the tech and military power in other countries was effective The US has 800 bases around the world. It straight up controls the Middle East. Israel is essentially one of its bases- seen that use before. Iraq has been occupied, Afghanistan has been taken, Libya has been taken. The US and Britain over threw the government of Iran, and have suppressed it with wars with Iraq and now they embargo it. The US has changed the governments in Venezuela several times. It has co-opted Saudi Arabia. It hadn't been able to control the USSR or Russia with this game but Russia also got into this game (remember its attempts with Afghanistan) and notice how it sells gas to the EU despite natural gas's advertised purpose and the EU not needing it. Note also now how the US has suddenly developed the capacity to flood the market with its own shale and in the twilight of the age of oil (fossil fuels) the US suddenly claims to be the biggest producer. Note also that shale is not economic nor has it ever been.

Look at what has happened with weapons development. The ABM treaties dissolved apparently because the US now has an effect SDI program. Does anyone else? In the press are suddenly new weapons, things like high speed submarine cavitation based coast to coast nukes.

If China got free of this yoking which seems certain and is moving on with creating its own tech, which is obvious if they replaced 3-5% of their total energy needs of all forms with single cheap solar array which they put up in the Tibetan plateau in mere months what are the ramifications? First of all China is free of the of the life draining vampire of fossil fuels.

Presumably 3 Mile Island was done to stifle the nuclear power industry. But it may have been that 311 was about knocking back a contingent in Japan. Conflict with Japan is what appears to have formed the US policy patterns in the first place. As it was, 311 was Japan's 3 mile island as Japan would want to wiggle free, if China wiggled free. But how? Look at Judy Wood's work on 911. Maybe the energy in an earth quake signature was too much to fake with nuke, but was it too much to use a nuke or sea floor hydrolic fracturing to set off a pent up earth quake? Could it have been a directed energy weapon that displaced a volume of water or a volume of Earth or both to trigger a quake and tsunami?

Wouldn't Japan have a tendency to start to break free on the suppressed tech because of 2 things? 1 China being free to do as it pleases as is wiggled free of the lights off noose over fossil fuels (any country with nuclear or hydro had gone a long way in that direction already) and 2 because during the 08 crisis the US announced through its defense contractor Lockheed Martin in business publications that it had perfected fusion and could sell 100 mega watt bus sized generators cheaply that would would produce limitless cheap energy. Surely Trilat member Japan knew of that long ago but the US was publicly signaling the increasing tenuousness of its own policies. The result of 311 was that Japan doubled down on fossil fuels or was effectively knocked back for at least a decade on public disclosure on other directions. But how could the US get away with that? Likely not without the agreement and cooperation of a powerful contingent in Japan that wanted to keep the status quo. Note which side some of the Japanese automakers appeared to be on the CA CARB fight and note some have backslid on emissions including the one that did did the Trojan horse Prius then help Tesla get its start.

It seems pretty clear petrol is not practically limited in supply its source is abiogenic petroleum genesis from something like thorium decay- Russians have thought that since the 70s. So why would would Saudi Arabia want to sell off all of its assets if they weren't running out? A few reasons. Its form of government makes it suspect to begin with. So it is in a hurry to leave petroleum behind if the end of petroleum is obviously eminent and it is because of China being obviously free of the petrol vice, meaning the gig is up- if the world's largest economy (China now by any sober measure) is free of that grip so are the rest. Look at the BRICs block. Also trying to start something with China over CCP clearly isn't going to work because its dead obvious that fossil fuels crashed the global economy right before CCP just like in 07-08 and did so in line with the long and ever increasing and every worsening pattern of fossil fuels caused crashes even global crashes. CCP is just an attempted smoke screen cover for this latest possibly last straw crash (to make another useless bailout easier)- another so transparent pretense that it is laughable. People got sick in China first so China can't be blamed for a response that was too slow even when its response seems to have been the most effective even against other nations that got advanced warning and even where if they try to claim China didn't warn them early enough and had a duty to warn them earlier, they themselves had a duty to know and surely did know.

The economics of fossil fuels surely don't work, fossil fuels were about tying up capital resources around the world consistent with US domination, tying up resources so they couldn't be used for more constructive purposes. Consistent with US reserve currency status and with creating artificial scarcity (like keeping a virus down in a vial with pollutants) to stunt the development of competitor societies and with hedging deflation to protect the rich. And for this in artificial ways when people would invest in this scam the were also investing in US defense which was rewarded personal economic gain.
Fossil fuels have inherently low scarcity inducing economic efficiency because of inherently low thermodynamic efficiency that runs the entire supply chain along with high externality costs.
They are broken in the way that the cotton gin made cotton more broken and the tech needed to fix their deficiencies would obviate their use- so pure scam beyond about 1950- simply slavery part 2 just when formal slavery was ending in the US around 1950.

But the claim is scalar directed energy tech, time-space tech has been around since not surprisingly "Tesla" in the 20s certainly by the 50s and also that clean safe fission based nuclear has been around the 50s but never used because the only kind that would be tolerated was the kind that could be used to make weapons and had other damning externalities like being unstable, prone to melt down and prolific production of permanent contaminants on the level of fossil fuels- half steps were also tolerated like French Breeders to keep up appearances- but my guess is the allies came down on true clean safe nuclear harder than they clamped down on nukes.

Continued

 

[101101]

Continued

All this was also coupled with a dumbing down education system domestically where civics and philosophy weren't taught and science was restricted not to people who had depth in science but to people who could correctly solve a mass of problems on timed tests- not culling for free creative thinkers who could move things forward but more for people who would accept programing without much question. With lead in the gas to dumb people down and possibly with vaccines that made people more autistic the US couldn't even get the super collider done. Now more and more its a surveillance state pushing spying on all of its own citizens and creating a permanent record that can be used to discredit any of citizens that might speak up and pushing dumb surveillance capitalism and cultivating an inbred non-contributing idiot criminal class of hereditary wealth. Even contemptuously referring to its own citizens as 'consumers' as if they are mindless livestock and hypocritically trying to justify its panoptic cowering fear based surveillance state by pointing the finger at other states. Interesting that CCP just missed the super bowl with its idiotic $10,000 average ticket price, they could have shut that too. $10K per seat is the triumph of distraction and intoxication over and the awareness necessary for the common defense. It is like we need a time machine to bring back our parents and grand parents and great grand parents so they they can make America free again or finally free, we don't even have the language or vocabulary because we've been robbed of it, in large part by fully sponsor captured media, parties and legislatures.

Notice how the centers are hit. 311 threatened Tokyo with its cloud. 3 Mile Island threatened NY City and everything in between with its possibly Chernobyl like cloud. NY city was even closer to the disaster center than Tokyo. Chernobyl certainly set nuclear back in Russia and the EU. UK is now doing laughable fossil fuel powered submarines. Notice how NY city had its subways flooded for a month. How NY City was where 911 was at. How NY City was where OWS was at. How NY city is the epicenter of CCP- and presumably the real fear target of 3 mile island- being only 177 miles away. But the wind never blew anything at NY and like a divine wind it blew away from Tokyo where 100 million people were trapped in a bottle neck.


Where do we go next?
My speculation is that we have to realize that while it is hard to have the good life without private property, private property itself is not sacrosanct. It is far from the most important basic ingredient in the good life or the life worth living. We were on the right track for we started to understand that we can't own other people, not even our children even while they are still children. But we didn't go far enough. Would you say that any nation owns you or that you own that nation? Would you willingly accept either arrangement? I wouldn't. It follows that if we can't own people we can't own organizations composed of people. We know that in the context of nations but we need to know that in the context of organizations generally. There are some things that recommend ownership of organizations but from long experience we know they are far from worth it. An apparent positive aspect may hold where someone that thinks they own an organization (impossible for clear thinking individuals) and will identify with the organization (a delusion) and link the energy in their own egoistic self-development to the development of that organization. But that only goes so far and we end up with the idiocy of boards and execs and managers and supervisors and all this dehumanizing unnecessary hierarchy and tripe and hide bound useless formality and system of petty offense. Another seeming advantage is we as a society can jail owners and separate them from what they take to be their property as a means of curtailing bad behavior in organizations. But in practice this hasn't worked that well even though it is a feature.

It seems in recognizing that we can't own people and therefore can't own their associations we certainly can't own organizations (anything else is idiot slavery by another name,) we will have to accept organizations made up of friendships and lose affiliations and reject organizations composed of people constantly trying to control each other with money- we can't rent each other that is just prostitution. These organizations will be less militaristic and less able to perform in many ways, product quality may suffer but they will be composed of free people and that is more important for the good life than other considerations. Their products are not always inferior, look at open source software and Linux etc. Its no the gig economy either because the exploitation element is gone, free people aren't about trying to abuse each other with money. It is not a utopia either.

I've noticed that it is immature people and idiots that want power, because mature people see that its projective and see through it, they know you can't hurry another person's experience or development without damaging it so that shun power. Its just obvious to them. Then there are less developed people who think tasks and things matter more than people and they treat people as objects as means to an end of their own direction. So they abuse people and hurt people to get what they want. Do we really think organizations run by idiots perform all that well or where by accident they have a temporary run of luck that it is really worth the trade off? How long can we make excuses for these structures and their real outcomes?

We know these looser affiliations work with independent contracting- part of why we've venerated small business so much because these people seem to be making contributions of their own accord but in relative freedom at the boundary at least where the one contracting is doing the work directly but even there it is not a level playing field. The union concept is ridiculous in that a mass of people's interests are said to be equal to a tiny minorities over money and they don't even get control over how their pensions are invested lest it displace the bs class of sit on their arse useless entitled capital- utter bs designed to keep an oppressor class going. Imagine the insanity of tolerating a class of people who constantly ***** that other people are not doing enough work (for them of all things) when they were born with a silver spoon in their mouth and have never done an honest day's work in their lives because they think it is beneath them and other people were born to serve them.

If you or anyone else wants to change the behavior of free people there is only one sure way to do it. Reason with them. Listen and in return be listened to and come to an agreement. Everything else is SOL. The life not free is a life not alive a life not worth living- at least from my perspective. Trading liberty for security will lead those we care about and ourselves to lives we don't want.

 

[101101]

Need to add a little more to the above. It must be understood that we can't have a society where one person does all the work and another takes all the gain. So for instance the living wage is really the wage that allows the employee to be come a competitor even if its Boeing Aircraft that is the employer. Also, can't have investors that are like credit cards that can't be paid off- can't have useless mindless parasitic rent seeking that converts the lives of others into property. Beyond a basic income there needs to be real contribution attached to income or it is simple theft that needs civil and criminal penalties. We have to consider the social utility of the wealth of the wealthy- and in general its net negative. The idea that the wealth of the wealthy contributes to stability is beyond stupid the exact opposite is true. The idea that the wealth of the wealthy is required for large projects is also false. So the idea that the wealthy can for instance avoid taxes on wealth that wasn't earned or was a function of other people's money (their time, effort and property) is utter criminal nonsense- its called unearned (un-deserved or suspect) income for a reason!

It is crucial to understand what a basic income is really about to understand its absolute necessity. A basic income is about insuring that everyone is above the level of physical need so they don't do anything for money they otherwise wouldn't like sex work if that isn't something they were interested in to begin with. Its about a level playing field on tasks, time, effort and opportunity. Rich f(s) can lean to shine their own shoes and wipe their own arses. Can't have some sick f's luxury becoming the source of forced depravity for others. This is why we aim to decrease the value of capital and reduce money's coercive power and reject the moronic ownership society nonsense- the ownership society is code for going back to slavery. All that tripe is about using language to effectively own other people and treat them as property- a delusional impossibility for clear thinking people and impossible for any just society. In very simple terms if there is some job that some rich f wants to benefit from having someone else do that can't happen unless the other person in interested in doing it and gains equally from it and where the task is also just even if it means the rich f forfeits their claimed wealth in a full transfer as the cost of the transaction. Its understanding that the wealth of the wealthy is suspect even where it creates aspiration and is likely based on past practice forfeit or actually theft demanding just retribution but most of all its just superfluous beyond what raises all boats. Its is also intolerable for the children of the wealthy to have work made optional if that is not extended to everyone else- if that is not the case that wealth has to be confiscated through probate or other means and this is why it is so important to index the BI and make it high enough so people can always opt out of work without stigma, work must be voluntary- just as military service must be voluntary- if the society or war isn't worth fighting for or is opposed no politician or patrician-ed group of pricks should be able to force it without a more immediate destruction of the effort by the citizens.
The sun provides the energy and the robots do the work. We are way past the time were people should in any way be able to tell other people what to do for money.