Robert Reich: Why the CONSTITUTION prevents Trump from running for high office in 2024, and much more

 This might be arguable, but it makes perfect sense to me; and for any new readers here, I'm not a Republican or a Democrat.  I must admit, though, I believe Trump is not only incompetent for high office, but dangerous as well.  In my opinion, he's the worst President we've had in my lifetime, and I'm eighty years old.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5ffe7MYSo8

Of course, we must keep in mind that about half the time our elected officials in the Fed Gov't ignore the Constitution, and do whatever is expedient in various situations.  If you don't think so, consider the following.  A few Laws passed by Congress clearly violate the Fourth Amendment.  FISA and the FISA Court violate the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.  The PATRIOT Act violates the Fourth Amendment.  In addition, the NSA - created by President Harry Truman, but not revealed to the Public until 1975 - absolutely violates the Fourth Amendment.  Many legal scholars agree with all the above.  So does the ACLU.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBbELqqSyek

How can this be in the "Land of the Free"?  How are these violations permitted by We the People?  I think it's due to poor education, Establishment propaganda, and distractions via the Rat Race and "bread & circuses".  We the People have lost our vigilance because we're under-educated, over-propagandized, and too busy to notice the erosion of our freedom.  AND/OR - we've become apathetic because we don't believe anything can be done about the decades-long coup by the Corporatocracy.

Surely it's not that last item above.  People are waking up.  Worldviews are changing.  Peaceful change is underway in many areas.  Not much is coming from the Top down, so communities are making changes from the grassroots up.  Those changes are in agriculture, in employment, in consumption, in politics, in resilience, in ethics, and in lifestyles.  Because of all that, Oligarchs/Plutocrats seem to be a little more worried lately.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbbgfnpJN9w

....................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Biden & Russia, JFK & USSR, and World Peace

This clip presents a portion of the JFK "Peace for All Time" speech, June 10, 1963.  Then there's commentary by the award-winning publisher of The Nation magazine, Katrina vanden Heuvel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNOQLkp0E5w

Included in the commentary is a brief comparison to the view of Peace held by today's national politicians.  Quite a difference, and not very flattering to Biden, et al.

JFK's Peace speech has been hailed all across the political spectrum as one of the greatest talks ever given by a U.S. President.  One thing is sure:  it demonstrates the almost complete lack of statesmanship in most of today's politicians.  The difference between JFK and them is stunning.

.................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

WOW! Jeffrey Sachs: a voice of reason in a sea of outmoded western world hegemony REDUX

 The clip at the link below is so crucial to world events of today that I'm (in a sense) reposting it here slightly edited:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgMPIhBLp1I&list=WL&index=74&t=59s

Equally important is Sachs here:

https://www.democracynow.org/2022/8/30/wests_false_narrative_china_russia_ukraine

My primary interest in world affairs for many years has been ecology and sustainability.  Nevertheless, it became clear to me a long time ago that without a sane foreign policy in DC and elsewhere, the world would be facing continual eco-catastrophes.  Why?  Because Earth is one giant ecosystem, and overcoming eco-problems requires global cooperation.  Global conflict pretty much destroys any chance for those efforts.  If things don't change significantly, there will not be a sustainable planet for our grandkids.

Please listen carefully to Professor Sachs' presentations.  His life has been devoted to sustainability economics, mitigating poverty, and helping countries in crisis.  He works not only in academia, but also as an advisor to various world leaders.  This interview pulls no punches.  Plus, his grasp of modern industrial history is superb.

..................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

An Editorial Review from Online Book Club

 https://forums.onlinebookclub.org/viewtopic.php?p=2237558#p2237558

If you truly want to be a positive force in the transition to a sustainable Earth, have a look at this Review of my first book.

Thanks, and be well.

Ecologist William E. Rees on: overshoot, carbon dioxide, cities, and human thinking

 In this short clip, Prof. Rees is interviewed by another comprehensive thinker, Prof. Nate Hagens (The Great Simplification, also on YouTube).  This is an excerpt from a longer talk.  If you wish to increase your ecological knowledge, don't miss this---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1vX03h7w9c&list=WL&index=67

It seems to me that too many of our public & private Powers-That-Be are stuck in reductionist (as opposed to holistic) thinking.  As a result, as a species we're not yet approaching the mitigation of the Eco-Crisis in any comprehensive manner.  Here are a few specifics---

1.  Why is there no U.S. Dept. of Sustainability, or same in any other country?

2.  Which of the Powers-That-Be is addressing the soil crisis, or the acidification of the ocean, or the massive pollution of the ecosphere by micro-plastics, or pollution by endocrine-disrupting chemicals, or biodiversity loss (there is a bit of progress with this one), or how all these and more are linked?

3.  Which of the Powers truly understands the need for economic  development which is sustainable, as opposed to mindless economic growth which perpetually produces more mountains of rubbish (thus overwhelming Earth's waste-neutralizing capacity)?

4.  How many of the Powers really grasp this concept:  if we don't address the human overpopulation problem, Nature will - via massive starvation, famine, disease, and untimely death?

5.  How many of the Powers understand that technological advances are one of the main reasons we are now in a socio-eco-econ-ethical Crisis of the Ages?  Why?  Because those Tech advances were almost blindly implemented, with little thought to possible unintended consequences, and even less thought to monitoring & regulating their implementation.  A prime example is the petrochemical industry.  It has brought us great convenience, and monumental damage to health and ecosystems.  It's folly to believe that Technology alone now will save us.

Holism v. Reductionism---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_kbt7h1YRw&list=WL&index=63

..........................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

HOPE, from one of the greatest...

 conservationists on the planet---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BH3VzkG8u2o&list=PLpCH1XIO3lYtRELTupGHOfrbylNlPhPKR&index=3

Here's an important snippet from this less-than-6-minutes talk:

"...the absurd idea that we can have infinite economic growth on a planet with finite resources."  Amen.

Unfortunately, probably 90% of our politicians believe in that "absurd idea".  We can change that, IF we have the desire & will to do so.

A few cardinal rules re our current Eco-Crisis:

1.  Ecological overshoot will not be mitigated enough by advances in Technology if we continue to pursue infinite economic growth.

2.  Earth's waste assimilating/neutralizing capability is being overwhelmed by our pursuit of perpetual growth.

3.  Healthy, natural ecosystems are crucial to our thriving on this planet.

4.  Economic development does NOT require constant economic growth.

5.  Yes, Earth does have a carrying capacity, and that applies regardless of technological advances.  While those advances can somewhat increase said capacity, such is true only up to a point.  Beyond that point, Nature tells us to back off, slow down, and cultivate some ecological sense.

............................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

So-called "A.I." ALREADY is replacing humans in the workplace

Best guess:  the situation only will get worse. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9reoRGBydrU

The title of this piece reads "So-called..." because the original definition of Artificial Intelligence was:  a machine which recognizes itself as a separate being.  To my knowledge, we're not yet anywhere near that scenario.

Nevertheless, what we have now can be a bane to society, and potentially dangerous beyond the pale.  Politicians worldwide need to get a handle on the use of A.I.  What are they waiting for - the first disaster?  Even the creators of A.I. already are warning us.  Who would know of the dangers better than them?  Nobody.

.......................

Not only my opinion.  Take Care