For the military-industrial complex it is a lethal menace, such as is sunlight for the ants under a pile of debris that is taken away to make room for a garden: The coming revolution of the political and economic system without which it would only take a few generations to leave nothing but debris of the planet. The environmental cost of war machines are so obviously totally irresponsible once the human consciousness expands across the generational horizon that it is an easy temptation to factor them out of any such calculation in an early stage. It appears perfectly reasonable to put out the debris on the street and treat the land as if it was already gone, so when it is finally being collected for incineration, the renaturation process has yet accumulated some momentum. But the political fallout of three major reactor meltdown incidents which were followed by the missile rampage (Three Mile Island), the fence breakdowns (Chernobyl) and the digital blowback (Fukushima) teaches a different lesson: With every deterioration of the state of the planetary waste, it has become ever more aggressive against its immediate surroundings. Under these circumstances, the disposal service might never arrive and all the efforts put into the garden be wasted to a predictable risk. Hence an analysis of the unsolicited remainder is mandated for the purpose to reduce its amount, its presence and its risks.
The military-industrial complex has reacted to this expansion of consciousness in several ways. Since the logical consequence, disengagement, has been excluded by its inherent stupidity, and the easiest approach, distraction, does not work any longer, there have been three basic forms of reaction: Denial, deflection and deception. Either it is denying its effects, or attempting to blame them on another faction of it, or masquerading as its own solution. As the military-industrial complex is fragmented along currency borders, the three patterns at some degree can be associated with the major currencies involved in it. But this fragmentation is kept up by its own exceptions: Denial is not only found in Unitedstates but also in Germany, deflection not only in Russia but also in Unitedstates, deception not only in Germany but also in Russia, and so forth. But in general, each of the three most bloody currencies is largely invested in one tactic since they compete among each other as well as against others in their way. While denial, specifically denial of climate catastrophe, is a well-researched subject, and deflection more of a further contribution to the increase of fragmentation than a source of competitive advantage, deception is a largely unknown risk to many in the environmental movement and the most dangerous type of waste in the mix, since it might appear as reusable.
Specifically, the worst problem begins once the military-industrial complex in its propaganda does not only assert that there was no problem or that it was somebody else´s fault, but that it was itself a part of the solution. While that appears naturally absurd at the first glance, this fact is not sufficient for it to be harmless. All the worse, once the trash on the land is no longer unequivocally identifiable as such without special skills and systematic experience, it might contaminate the gardening efforts and turn what had the potential to be a part of the solution into a part of the problem. The military-industrial contamination might enter the food chain, and the renaturation efforts due to a false reliance upon what is understood as public services have brought about the exact opposite of their intention, which is worse than no intention in the first place. The attempts of the military-industrial complex to include itself into the solution of the problems it is cause of have a visible form. With the complex spreading over several nation states and currencies, it is to be expected that the expansion of consciousness first affects it along these preconfigured fault lines. Such as the deflection tactic would, as it establishes itself next to the denial, run towards the perspective of open antagonism of its two major factions, it is likely for the third largest chunk of it to subscribe itself to the deception tactic.
In that arrangement, a military-industrial faction in fear of close-down or at least ranking degradation from the tactic of its larger rival would decide to attack the truth from behind instead of openly opposing it. Such as it is likely for the largest part of the complex to grab for monopoly powers as a means to capture fossil resources, and for its second largest part to keep up a limited sphere of influence where it captures resources, for its third largest part it is to be expected that it would attempt to pretend a farcical kind of “third way” featuring neither any claims of material supremacy nor territorial separation but of an alternative that would appear to solve the problem without solving it in order to glue together as many of the other factions down the list as it can. There might be a fourth approach mirroring the antagonism between the first two, but like everything else that could still result from the fragmentation it would not be very stable. The third faction is the borderline case of a monopolization tendency that is itself so unstable that once it produces a concentration of the war business on a small number of factions it also brings about antagonism between them.
In the case of Germany, and mirrored by the annexation regime of the so-called “European Union”, the defining criterion for the enabling of the deception is the calculation model for the development of the industrial pollution output. It would certainly raise suspicion if the hottest year on record, instead of being determined by science would be decided by diplomats, but exactly that happened with the choice of the year that is assigned as the average emission load in relation to which any percentages of decrease and increase would be expressed. With the calibration of the Kyoto treaty on 1990, Germany had obtained a covert advantage because in that year the merger of the two states it had been during the first cold war was already obtained but the economic consequences had not yet materialised. As a result of this, all the pollution that was shut down due to economic defragmentation would be counted as ecological improvement. Therefore until the obvious failure of the democratic emission reduction diplomacy, the country was in a propagandist figurehead role, resulting in widespread boycott of the fraudulent treaty.
This duplicity shaped the German energy policy: Any increase of the share of renewables that goes into the power supply was subsequently overcompensated with exports of fossil electrical power to other European countries and increased administrative centralism. As a result, the naive tactic of putting up a windmill or solar panel to get rid of a coal or nuke power station completely failed, and in an hostile takeover campaign small renewable suppliers were systematically bribed with subsidies receiving a fixed share of the fossil export revenues in exchange for keeping their mouths shut about the botched transition. Even though this system received a little trimming after the failure of diplomacy, as did the subsidies for the energy-munching military-industrial complex itself, the fundamental absurdity that legally binds a small renewable supplier with e.g. a handful of solar panels on a family rooftop to sell his entire output to the state, only to buy back his local consumption at a reduced price, with incentives to increase supply stronger than these to reduce consumption, remained untouched. This fraud scheme which also undermined community windmill investments has produced a caste of “genetically modified citizens” and poisoned the democratic followership of the movement to an extent that it would be enslaved as willingless loyalists of a political swindle its financial existence as subprime homeowners existentially depends upon.
With the transition and shrinking of the power grid botched into a supplement of aggressive expansion, the economic occupation of much of the rest of Europe was equipped with the sociological preconditions that would enable the regime to sell its decision to postpone quitting the operation of atomic reactors as a phaseout plan. As today everyone knows, the speculative catastrophe interval was narrowly missed by Fukushima, the “nuclear policy” experienced an u-turn by a corrupt lobbyist promoting the fringes of his electoral district as radioactive waste dump, only to be turned around again a year later by the meltdown, which spoilt the local election around the most disputed American military base in favour of the corrupted renewable supplier caste, which then proved to be a functional tool of its sponsors but not for the quitting efforts. The German post-Fukushima “phaseout plan” repeats the aforementioned mistake, trading the shutdown promise for every second reactor against a ten year postponement for the rest of them. So down to the smallest detail the German energy policy is virtually standing on its head: Although it is common sense that the decentralisation, defossilisation, denuclearisation and permanent definition of the electricity supply would bring about a shrinking of the power grid, the local talk is about the exact opposite – additional power lines allegedly necessary to compensate for renewable changes.
The determination of the reactor catastrophe interval in this context is a just as arbitrary decision as that over the calendar base. But while a specific numeric value for it can only be derived from past records, the general tendency is obvious from the circumstances: When to manufacturer claim for reactor safety is thousands or even ten thousand years, and the number of reactors on the planet is hundreds with projections nearing a thousand, the average catastrophe interval is ten or a few tens of years. Just with a little rock solid mathematics it would have to be expected to happen in every generation. Hence, the political postponement of a vital decision influencing the length of the catastrophe interval over a timespan exceeding that value is to be read as an enabling of radiological catastrophe. When the postponed reactors are scheduled to reappear on the agenda of democratic politics, it is more likely than not that the next catastrophe may already have happened. Of course, under these circumstances there is no way to plausibly talk of an active contribution to leaving the aggressive atom in the peaceful ground. The same must be said about the fossil emission diplomacy at the “climate conferences” - it was killed by postponement beyond the catastrophe interval.
Not only on the background of the electricity export figures, the German “nuclear phaseout” is a scam. The “renewable corruption” enshrined in it also is a source of political oppression: The loyalist caste has betrayed the real avantgarde of the conservation movement not only with all the worst repressive means of the police state, but also to its military occupier. While diplomats of the fascists state pretend to be friends of any environmental movement abroad, within the country against every activist there is a gang of regime thugs paid to destroy their public personalities and social relationships, and even harassing their families and employers in the most treacherous and obscene ways: In several cases of systematic identity abuse conservation activists found commercials of fossil energy corporations modelled upon police profiles, as if the government apparatus was itself like leaking reactor, an image anything but off the mark as some already died from the results of such incidents.
Definitely after Fukushima and with the “u-turn from the u-turn” in the phoney atomic phaseout, the relationship of purposes and means has flipped: The repression against independent activists is no longer a means for the regime to continue its “renewable scam” but the other way round Merkel´s unprofessional energy policy (which is mining her past “fence breakdown” reputation as if it would never get exhausted) is now a means to continue a repression the regime fears it cannot cease without a complete loss of face, because the human rights violations have been so bad and so many and the systematic deviation from any legal plausibility so humiliating that there need to be serious consequences against Berlin as in 1945. It should be taken as a dire warning against any collaboration with that evil regime that the 20th century fascists in their effort to substitute foreign oil with local coal when their scam imploded due to false calculations “recycled” their useless coal processing facilities in Poland for the purpose that has later become obvious as the essence of their national ideology.
On top of the obvious conclusion that all the real renewable truth about the literally wrong way of the German regime is out there buried under the toxic waste of political oppression on the model of corporate micro-lobbying, there is the less obvious but equally valid fact that the number game is not a human-friendly economic or political system. The conflict over fossil energy and its consequences merely is the most instructive example of this reality. For the few decisions that do in fact affect the lives of very large numbers of people so that a representative system might appear as a seductive reduction of coordination efforts, majority rule is not appropriate because these decisions require to be so stable that they can only result from broad consensual agreement. Likewise, for the many decisions that do not affect everyone, it is only a bargaining chip in the hands of oppressors if the unaffected are being promised to have a say in them. The matter of fact is, the current system has proven unsuitable to stop this, although precisely that would be expected to be its prescribed function. Still, the catastrophe interval and the duration of the election cycle have not yet met, which would mean the total domination of it by the military-industrial complex.
If democracy is still deemed to be better than monarchy, such as sustainability is said to be better than unsustainability, it only reveals the worldview of a parasite that delays the killing of its host merely to sustain its exploitation a bit longer. But exploitation and its requirements cannot be the ideological centrepiece of a lasting society. Under the reign of sustainability a forest might be spared of visible clear-cuts, but still experience an invisible clear-cut every century because no single tree can grow older than the human age. That sustains the exploitation but deprecates the forest into a plantation. What the conservation movements need instead of these commercially corrupted harvesting schemes is the political will and economic force to retain the inter-generational treasure from commercial utilisation. The taboo against exploitation is always higher than any business plan, and the retainability of natural treasures is the logical precondition for any permanent way of life.
* * *
- Why is the Nonproliferation Treaty Failing? (9.1.) -
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/01/514650.html
- The Death of the Inclusion Policy in the East Asian Shelf Waters (16.1.) - https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/01/514789.html
- Triple Treason in the Caucasus (23.1.) - https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/01/514946.html
- NATO. Obituary to a Nukepool (27.1.) - https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/01/515002.html
- Obey or Die - The Pathology of Organised Treason in Europe (21.2.) - https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/02/515538.html
- The Suicide Attack Against indymedia and its Cause (28.2.) - https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/02/515677.html
- What does the Invasion of Yalta Mean for the European Peninsula? (8.3.) - https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/03/515828.html
- Why is Poland a Nazi Client State? (15.3.) - https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/03/515949.html
- Palestine, the United Nations and the Refugees (21.3.) - https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/03/516041.html
- The External Cost of Spying (28.3.) - https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/03/516118.html
- How Deep Is the Atlantic Divide Really? (8.4.) - https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/04/516271.html
- Boko Haram – An Image From The Future (4.5.) - https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/05/516551.html
- The Pacific Fata Morgana and its Imperialist Origins (12.5.) - https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/05/516662.html
Specifically, the worst problem begins once the military-industrial complex in its propaganda does not only assert that there was no problem or that it was somebody else´s fault, but that it was itself a part of the solution. While that appears naturally absurd at the first glance, this fact is not sufficient for it to be harmless. All the worse, once the trash on the land is no longer unequivocally identifiable as such without special skills and systematic experience, it might contaminate the gardening efforts and turn what had the potential to be a part of the solution into a part of the problem. The military-industrial contamination might enter the food chain, and the renaturation efforts due to a false reliance upon what is understood as public services have brought about the exact opposite of their intention, which is worse than no intention in the first place. The attempts of the military-industrial complex to include itself into the solution of the problems it is cause of have a visible form. With the complex spreading over several nation states and currencies, it is to be expected that the expansion of consciousness first affects it along these preconfigured fault lines. Such as the deflection tactic would, as it establishes itself next to the denial, run towards the perspective of open antagonism of its two major factions, it is likely for the third largest chunk of it to subscribe itself to the deception tactic.
In that arrangement, a military-industrial faction in fear of close-down or at least ranking degradation from the tactic of its larger rival would decide to attack the truth from behind instead of openly opposing it. Such as it is likely for the largest part of the complex to grab for monopoly powers as a means to capture fossil resources, and for its second largest part to keep up a limited sphere of influence where it captures resources, for its third largest part it is to be expected that it would attempt to pretend a farcical kind of “third way” featuring neither any claims of material supremacy nor territorial separation but of an alternative that would appear to solve the problem without solving it in order to glue together as many of the other factions down the list as it can. There might be a fourth approach mirroring the antagonism between the first two, but like everything else that could still result from the fragmentation it would not be very stable. The third faction is the borderline case of a monopolization tendency that is itself so unstable that once it produces a concentration of the war business on a small number of factions it also brings about antagonism between them.
In the case of Germany, and mirrored by the annexation regime of the so-called “European Union”, the defining criterion for the enabling of the deception is the calculation model for the development of the industrial pollution output. It would certainly raise suspicion if the hottest year on record, instead of being determined by science would be decided by diplomats, but exactly that happened with the choice of the year that is assigned as the average emission load in relation to which any percentages of decrease and increase would be expressed. With the calibration of the Kyoto treaty on 1990, Germany had obtained a covert advantage because in that year the merger of the two states it had been during the first cold war was already obtained but the economic consequences had not yet materialised. As a result of this, all the pollution that was shut down due to economic defragmentation would be counted as ecological improvement. Therefore until the obvious failure of the democratic emission reduction diplomacy, the country was in a propagandist figurehead role, resulting in widespread boycott of the fraudulent treaty.
This duplicity shaped the German energy policy: Any increase of the share of renewables that goes into the power supply was subsequently overcompensated with exports of fossil electrical power to other European countries and increased administrative centralism. As a result, the naive tactic of putting up a windmill or solar panel to get rid of a coal or nuke power station completely failed, and in an hostile takeover campaign small renewable suppliers were systematically bribed with subsidies receiving a fixed share of the fossil export revenues in exchange for keeping their mouths shut about the botched transition. Even though this system received a little trimming after the failure of diplomacy, as did the subsidies for the energy-munching military-industrial complex itself, the fundamental absurdity that legally binds a small renewable supplier with e.g. a handful of solar panels on a family rooftop to sell his entire output to the state, only to buy back his local consumption at a reduced price, with incentives to increase supply stronger than these to reduce consumption, remained untouched. This fraud scheme which also undermined community windmill investments has produced a caste of “genetically modified citizens” and poisoned the democratic followership of the movement to an extent that it would be enslaved as willingless loyalists of a political swindle its financial existence as subprime homeowners existentially depends upon.
With the transition and shrinking of the power grid botched into a supplement of aggressive expansion, the economic occupation of much of the rest of Europe was equipped with the sociological preconditions that would enable the regime to sell its decision to postpone quitting the operation of atomic reactors as a phaseout plan. As today everyone knows, the speculative catastrophe interval was narrowly missed by Fukushima, the “nuclear policy” experienced an u-turn by a corrupt lobbyist promoting the fringes of his electoral district as radioactive waste dump, only to be turned around again a year later by the meltdown, which spoilt the local election around the most disputed American military base in favour of the corrupted renewable supplier caste, which then proved to be a functional tool of its sponsors but not for the quitting efforts. The German post-Fukushima “phaseout plan” repeats the aforementioned mistake, trading the shutdown promise for every second reactor against a ten year postponement for the rest of them. So down to the smallest detail the German energy policy is virtually standing on its head: Although it is common sense that the decentralisation, defossilisation, denuclearisation and permanent definition of the electricity supply would bring about a shrinking of the power grid, the local talk is about the exact opposite – additional power lines allegedly necessary to compensate for renewable changes.
The determination of the reactor catastrophe interval in this context is a just as arbitrary decision as that over the calendar base. But while a specific numeric value for it can only be derived from past records, the general tendency is obvious from the circumstances: When to manufacturer claim for reactor safety is thousands or even ten thousand years, and the number of reactors on the planet is hundreds with projections nearing a thousand, the average catastrophe interval is ten or a few tens of years. Just with a little rock solid mathematics it would have to be expected to happen in every generation. Hence, the political postponement of a vital decision influencing the length of the catastrophe interval over a timespan exceeding that value is to be read as an enabling of radiological catastrophe. When the postponed reactors are scheduled to reappear on the agenda of democratic politics, it is more likely than not that the next catastrophe may already have happened. Of course, under these circumstances there is no way to plausibly talk of an active contribution to leaving the aggressive atom in the peaceful ground. The same must be said about the fossil emission diplomacy at the “climate conferences” - it was killed by postponement beyond the catastrophe interval.
Not only on the background of the electricity export figures, the German “nuclear phaseout” is a scam. The “renewable corruption” enshrined in it also is a source of political oppression: The loyalist caste has betrayed the real avantgarde of the conservation movement not only with all the worst repressive means of the police state, but also to its military occupier. While diplomats of the fascists state pretend to be friends of any environmental movement abroad, within the country against every activist there is a gang of regime thugs paid to destroy their public personalities and social relationships, and even harassing their families and employers in the most treacherous and obscene ways: In several cases of systematic identity abuse conservation activists found commercials of fossil energy corporations modelled upon police profiles, as if the government apparatus was itself like leaking reactor, an image anything but off the mark as some already died from the results of such incidents.
Definitely after Fukushima and with the “u-turn from the u-turn” in the phoney atomic phaseout, the relationship of purposes and means has flipped: The repression against independent activists is no longer a means for the regime to continue its “renewable scam” but the other way round Merkel´s unprofessional energy policy (which is mining her past “fence breakdown” reputation as if it would never get exhausted) is now a means to continue a repression the regime fears it cannot cease without a complete loss of face, because the human rights violations have been so bad and so many and the systematic deviation from any legal plausibility so humiliating that there need to be serious consequences against Berlin as in 1945. It should be taken as a dire warning against any collaboration with that evil regime that the 20th century fascists in their effort to substitute foreign oil with local coal when their scam imploded due to false calculations “recycled” their useless coal processing facilities in Poland for the purpose that has later become obvious as the essence of their national ideology.
On top of the obvious conclusion that all the real renewable truth about the literally wrong way of the German regime is out there buried under the toxic waste of political oppression on the model of corporate micro-lobbying, there is the less obvious but equally valid fact that the number game is not a human-friendly economic or political system. The conflict over fossil energy and its consequences merely is the most instructive example of this reality. For the few decisions that do in fact affect the lives of very large numbers of people so that a representative system might appear as a seductive reduction of coordination efforts, majority rule is not appropriate because these decisions require to be so stable that they can only result from broad consensual agreement. Likewise, for the many decisions that do not affect everyone, it is only a bargaining chip in the hands of oppressors if the unaffected are being promised to have a say in them. The matter of fact is, the current system has proven unsuitable to stop this, although precisely that would be expected to be its prescribed function. Still, the catastrophe interval and the duration of the election cycle have not yet met, which would mean the total domination of it by the military-industrial complex.
If democracy is still deemed to be better than monarchy, such as sustainability is said to be better than unsustainability, it only reveals the worldview of a parasite that delays the killing of its host merely to sustain its exploitation a bit longer. But exploitation and its requirements cannot be the ideological centrepiece of a lasting society. Under the reign of sustainability a forest might be spared of visible clear-cuts, but still experience an invisible clear-cut every century because no single tree can grow older than the human age. That sustains the exploitation but deprecates the forest into a plantation. What the conservation movements need instead of these commercially corrupted harvesting schemes is the political will and economic force to retain the inter-generational treasure from commercial utilisation. The taboo against exploitation is always higher than any business plan, and the retainability of natural treasures is the logical precondition for any permanent way of life.
* * *
- Why is the Nonproliferation Treaty Failing? (9.1.) -
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/01/514650.html - The Death of the Inclusion Policy in the East Asian Shelf Waters (16.1.) -
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/01/514789.html - Triple Treason in the Caucasus (23.1.) -
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/01/514946.html - NATO. Obituary to a Nukepool (27.1.) -
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/01/515002.html - Obey or Die - The Pathology of Organised Treason in Europe (21.2.) -
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/02/515538.html - The Suicide Attack Against indymedia and its Cause (28.2.) -
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/02/515677.html - What does the Invasion of Yalta Mean for the European Peninsula? (8.3.) -
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/03/515828.html - Why is Poland a Nazi Client State? (15.3.) -
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/03/515949.html - Palestine, the United Nations and the Refugees (21.3.) -
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/03/516041.html - The External Cost of Spying (28.3.) -
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/03/516118.html - How Deep Is the Atlantic Divide Really? (8.4.) -
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/04/516271.html - Boko Haram – An Image From The Future (4.5.) -
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/05/516551.html - The Pacific Fata Morgana and its Imperialist Origins (12.5.) -
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/05/516662.html
Homepage:
Comments
Display the following comment