We Will Not Cave

Cameron Neylon, in a chapter on how research excellence is a neo-colonial agenda, states that the “concept of ‘excellence’ is an empty rhetorical construct with no common meaning and no value. In fact, it is deeply damaging to the production of research with relevance and importance to actual policy goals .”  I have identified nation, identity, truth, family, and God as “concepts or notions” that have been deconstructed or “decentered” by the Left. “Excellence” in education is here another concept that is being deconstructed and even more strongly affects the future of the West, East, North, or South.  When we come to our future we will notice that things are falling apart at the seams. This will be decried as the result of latent neo-colonial power, but it actually will demonstrate the lack of incentive and structure needed to prevent the erosion of education. Neylon goes on to undermine use of peer review that has been the staple of research, validity and reliability, for decades, st

  In  Time for Transformation: Public Policy Must Change to Achieve Health Equity for LGBT Older Adults on the NIH pubmed website (authors)  Fredikson-Goldsen and Espinoza contend that “While the ACA stands to improve the health of LGBT older adults dramatically, additional policy reforms are needed to better evaluate its effect on LGBT people, as well as policy interventions that require community engagement with LGBT people and their nonprofit advocates at the local and state levels”  This article is a harsh criticism of states that do not stand for “same-sex marriage, etc…” This shows the disparity in policy-making, surely.  On the other hand, it also shows progressives influence in so many sectors of our lives and how “they” can influence policy making by seemingly offering objective scientific evidence to promote an agenda.  Whether or not you think LGBTqi+ is plausible is not the matter here; rather it is just how flooded the areas of research have become so focused on identifyin

 The progressives tore down truth, with the postmodern move.  The progressives tore down Christianity as the colonizer and terrible hegemony.  Now they are tearing down the “human” in favor of the ecological.  So what is left is an ecosystem, its homeostasis expected to be maintained. The foundations for the humanities are now focused on deconstructing humanity (in their parlance, the humxn).  The question can be: what is the appropriate homeostasis? What system, entity, or species should be allowed to gain or lose? Due to the nature of the Earth, there is a lot of change going on.  Who is to say what the balance is, for example, should sapiens be favored, as if we could make a great effort to control the changes within the ecosystem of the Earth. Tearing down truth amounts to Enlightening others with knowledge about what can stand firm in time and what’s DNA is the fittest.  The fittest is the thing that fits its environment best.  This is the nature of natural selection, which seem

When it comes to wild research an example can follow with the work of Schell et al. This research is not for the birds, it is for equity among neighborhoods.  Findings (?) account for the loss of bird variety being in relationship or correlation with certain humxn populations.  Sapiens equality directly affects the birds. Schell et al. report that “Luxury effects extend beyond primary producers, with recent studies suggesting that colonization, species richness, and abundance of birds are related to neighborhood wealth” and  “Other studies in Phoenix, Arizona similarly found that bird diversity was greatest in parks and residential yards situated in high-income neighborhoods”  Somehow the environment in poorer neighborhood and urban areas are directly related to emissions and pollution therefore bird populations are caused to decline and variety of birds is diminished. Don’t let this bring a smile to your face. Could this research be representative of many cities’ populations? Is this

Schell et al. explain that in the article The ecological and evolutionary consequences of systemic racism in urban environments “We provide a transdisciplinary synthesis on how social in-equities – and specifically, systemic racism – serve as principle drivers of ecological and evolutionary processes by shaping landscape heterogeneity” This work is crucial to know about in light of the way public policy is written, even in the US Congress the connection between systemic racism and climate change are directly correlated.  This is not to dismiss racism as a real problem, but we will see the connection that Schell et al. and others perceive to be the case. A definition is required here “ Ecology is the study of the relationships between living organisms, including humans, and their physical environment ” is a definition given by the Ecological Society of America.  So the focus is broader and narrower than Climate Change. Schell reports that “urban biodiversity, and plant diversity in par

Christopher J. Schell, Dyson, Fuentes, Des Roches, Harris, Miller, Wolfe-Erskine and Lambert, “We explicitly integrate ecology, evolution, and social processes to emphasize the relationships binding social inequities, specifically racism, and biological change in urbanized landscapes” The closer look at the connections between urban life and ecology is important to the development of discourse for the perpetuation of equity and inclusion. Schell et al. explain that, with a mass of research behind the ideas that connect race and ecology, “Urban ecosystems encompass complex feedbacks between human activity, built and planted infrastructure, and natural landscapes that drive unique biological processes” There is quite the argument here that should be taken seriously, because there is a great debate at the core of what it means to be human and live a sustainable life on earth, with implications about how we have, are, and plan to treat our environment.   One cannot slough it off lightly, b

Feminists dislike the prominence and attention that the transgender has received; women’s rights etc… have been too hard for . . . . Transgenderism has been a distraction so that ecological humxnities could sneak up on us Critical ecological theory has come into fashion 

check out the new book by JD RIPPER "WORDS ON THE STREET: POSTCOLONIAL PHILOSOPHY AND PUBLIC POLICY"  (on Amazon.com)  my posts are short and they are there to give food for thought 

  MUSK's questionable agenda . . . . just do a simole google search on "chips in brain," and you will find " Neuralink is Musk's neural interface technology company . It's developing a device that would be embedded in a person's brain, where it would record brain activity and potentially stimulate it. Musk has compared the technology to a "FitBit in your skull'"

There is the possibility that liberals and progressives will become a one-party system that takes over our genes, demonstrating the limited need to consider now mxnkind and humxnity, but rather seeing them as worthless. There are processes known as algorithms which are considered the basic “units(?)” of reality. DNA and genes are these algorithms in process, atoms and molecules are but algorithms, as well. Algorithms are the informational directions by which things are intended, the intentional nature of processes are algorithms. This is the gibberish which philosophers of cognitive science are presenting these days, and these are elements of the strongly held “beliefs” that many on the Left are being drawn to; in fact, they will not be able to escape once strongly embedded in these beliefs. That which is in control of the universe are algorithms, and that which controls our information collection is algorithmic.  The result of one’s next search will be defined and tracked in an algori

In Designing the Mind Santiago Romón y Cajal “there is strong evidence that we can reprogram these bad algorithms (referring to the software of the brain or the thoughts, feelings, and behavior of the brain)” This reference to change is how the futuristic is moved into the present and AI along with cognitive science plans to change and is changing human experience. Chips are already used in the brains of stroke victims. It is not as if human consciousness is not already being flirted with by science. Science aims to turn all living “humxms” into cyborgs with devices to change the very way we experience the world. It is true that cognitive scientists are in the process of learning and changing the brain and the idea that the mind is software is a big part of it.  The mind has a trinity of manifestations: thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, according to the newest science. This phenomenal trinity of experiences are thought, by cognitive scientists, to be algorithms which move human experi

  Stone puts its clearly that a Marxist government starts with groups not individuals, she presents the “building blocks of the polis” as being groups “institutions and organizations” “not individuals”     We know and individuals, families, and God’s church are to be the building blocks of society, not man-made constructs. Groups, institutions, and organizations, are divisive. “they depend on organizations to represent their interests” for Stone the key is to overlook God’s sacraments of the family, marriage, country (i.e. nation), the church, the body of Christ, and God’s children.   From the book of Genesis forward the “nation” was an institution, which postcolonialists deny and believe is a Western Anglo European and Global North concepts that has destroyed indigenous societies (through “civilizations”), but they neglect to see family as an important key in indigenous societies and even among animals.  

  In Designing the Mind it is indicated that “Our minds don’t generate emotions or cognition arbitrarily: there are patterns coded into this software, inscribed by millions, or even billions of years of natural selection. No word we speak or action we take is an isolated event, however spontaneous it may seem”   There is a huge movement out there that is pushing the notion that we are machines (perhaps by influence of philosophers and scientists) and this movement is invading our thought-worlds, and there is no slowing it down.   This movement takes the dignity out of life and we must pray against it AND stand-up against it, for we may fall prey to it. This philosophy might have its roots in the work of Deleuze and Guattari, with their idea of "desiring-machines"  

Progressives exaggerate positions that Conservatives take, over-generalizing that the use of force is the rule of law and policy making for Conservatives, whereby Progressives see their governing as soft and caring.  Martha Stone puts it this way: “Conservatives’ . . . view of coercion . . . commands back-up by threat of force, but libertarians are wont to see it in any government rule or regulation . . . coercion is an idea about what motivates behavior rather than a behavior itself . . . we can’t draw a line between influence and coercion---influence in all its fuzziness, varieties and degrees of strength is one of the central elements of politics, and we see it at the heart many policy dilemmas”   The thing to remember is that policies are now being made by Progressives and the rule of law is greatly being implemented by  influence and coercion and force, as we lose our liberties day by day.   We will not cave to the Progressives’ use of ideology and force as a means of governing, w

 Soon we must step out about gender. Why are we so fearfully opposed to or fearfully unable to have a discussion about the matter?  We know the appropriate way to think about these matters, but we will not even have a dialogue.  What is the problem with our culture that we will not address the gender problems that exist?  In every debate, there are two sides, and dialogue can have several sides or perspectives.  In Public Paradox, Deborah Stone writes about how in the US there is the pursuit of self-interests and not collective interest.  Stone indicates that Europe has a more salient model that addresses culture and politics under the "rubric of 'integration policy'" this policy focuses on the values and behaviors of otherised groups.  Why does Stone consider the European model better than the US policies? Why is the world so riveted on addressing US issues?  We must speak about these matters instead of sticking our heads in the sand.  

Avram Alpert writes (most recently) that “part of why material growth does not get properly distributed is that it is undone by an increased scramble for the money to acquire positional goods.  Some of the scramble will occur through what are effectively auctions, such as real estate markets and access to politicians for those who can pay the most” In other words, as in Marxist ideology, there is the belief that quite comfortable people who live the comfortable life who horde riches find it easier to gain wealth because the system is set-up to help them prosper.  Alpert’s book The Good-Enough Life was written in 2022, just when Marxism and other theory of the Left began to show a lot more swag. Writers are taking bold steps in writing more powerfully than ever and manipulating people with their language.  This statement comes in a book with an innocent and benign title.  It is written elegantly with nice prose of disconcerting nature for those who may seek to retain their status and n

Deborah Stone writes "economics textbooks usually neglect the mention that the real Crusoe was able to salvage a veritable micro microcosm of industrial society from his shipwrecked vessel -everything from gunpowder and muskets to cables and nails" This is an example of the Leftist way of looking at a shipwreck and the way it was reported in textbooks which has traditionally been narrated as an exploration when indeed it was a series of massacres.  The elimination of culture should in turn require the elimination of Western ideology. One only needs to look at the relics of the colonists acquisition of cultural land people women and children.  

 I cannot believe it when they say the numbers are rising again.  It's that blasted screen lying to everyone.  People need to find out from their friends and neighbors and people that they know at work about the true numbers not the numbers they hear about as they watch the screen.  People are fused to the screen and everything it pukes out they believe is real when it is not.  Reality is reality and virtual reality is virtual reality there is a difference.  We will not cave we will not let robbery happen.  Don't let the screen steal away every fiber of your being you're very mind body and spirit, your soul.

I really believe that we as Christians will face, a time soon in the US, when we will have to report that we are Christ’s children. There will be real physical persecution and emotional mental maltreatment.  You and I will have to confess with our mouths and believe in our hearts that Jesus Christ is raised from the dead and that the power of the real fact of the resurrection delivers us from sin and will raise at the end and has raised us with that power from sin. (Romans 10:9)  Jesus is more than a prophet or a great teacher he is the Son of God.  Romans 10:9 9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 

Can an unlearned man have wisdom?  Is it wise for a man with access to learning to ignore and/or despise it? Can a person with excess knowledge be too wise to ignore more knowledge?  For "fools despise wisdom and instruction" Proverbs 1:7  You don't have to have all knowledge to be wise, for sure. Having knowledge is not fun, but it is necessary.  Please understand that we are to love excellence and display excellence.  It is often a complaint that this stuff is "too academic"  Ideology is what I am writing about, and these are the issues young people face today.  I am willing to discuss whether or not there is the need to immerse oneself in worldly beliefs, which end in nihilism and depression or skepticism, even atheism. This is the road to destruction, that the need to learn more about . . . since our children's world is folly, then, therefore, it should not even warrant a lick of attention?  Attention to detail is a necessary part of life and the livelih

  According to David Mosse “there is a critical view that sees policy as a rationalizing discourse concealing hidden purposes of bureaucratic power or dominance, in which the true political intent of development is hidden behind a cloak of rational planning” This is the type of policy implementation that stalls that process of getting things done. The suspiciousness (like the postmodern hermeneutic of suspicion) that this approach takes contains the very type of critiques that are married to (you guessed it) the academy.  No one is trusted to affect the changes that policy (born in the academy) has for a particular population according to such a critical view .  There is another approach to policy making, the instrumental view. Still, both views “ divert attention away from the complexity of policy as institutional practice, from the social life of projects, organizations and professionals and the diversity of interests behind policy models and the perspectives of actors themselves ”

Elias G. Carayannis et al explain that the “impact of our pursuit of prosperity at any cost on the environment triggers displaced people floods and viral pandemics undermining the standard of living and more importantly the foundations of trust in institutions and in a better tomorrow feeding populist movements and autocratic trends in democracies as well as emboldening dictators” There are quite a few assumptions here, that there us a relationship between pursuit of prosperity and the degradation, as well as decline of the foundations that make society better (whatever that means). There is also the assumption that there is a direct relationship between happiness and natural and biological (or man-made) manifestations (e.g. pandemic). These assumptions are at the bottom of the diatribe of liberals and has been their war cry for decades. Are these assumptions sustainable, given the emotional connectedness between these issues and the ones who propagate them. There has been the co

  It is clear that the intention is to get more and more articles from the universities and colleges “churned out” as they shape policy making. The academics know what they are doing. As they admit: “Thus academics should remain reflexive in what the purpose of their research is, and who really benefits. Moreover, a praxis of decolonizing such research necessarily entails taking time in a way that is at odds with the current culture of speedy and multitudinous productivity in academia: the rapid churning out of articles from ‘the field’ should raise appropriate questions about how, why and for whom that research is being conducted ” (still using Marshall‘s and Gani’s work cited to continue to get you to understand the type of influence the Left has in our government)

The Left pretends to have not had traction in the past several decades, thus promoting the “rapid churning out of articles from ‘the (international relations) field’ should raise appropriate questions about how, why and for whom that research is being conducted”  The following is the result of the Leftist cries for more power (or to remain in power) As it stands, this is where the Left gets its power, by strong considerations that are at issue as “not just whom but also what we consider as worthy of scholarly and policy attention, and how inclusive we are of alternative methodologies” This is the type of practice that is happening now between the university and the government. For those who recognize colonizing policy-makers, there should be an “appreciating (of) the power —both practical and ideational—generated by collective social action , whose impact cannot (and should not ) be individualized to one or a few visible and often romanticized protagonists (leaders in US policy making)

Marshall and Gani speak of taking a “more critical focus on the academic–practitioner nexus renders visible the otherwise unseen ways in which mechanisms of race and imperialism condition not only peoples, but also knowledge and practice” In speaking of “mechanism(s)” I am reminded of the way in which there is a very strong “connection” between the university and policy makers to the extent that mechanical language is used to discuss the “connection”   It may not seem apparent, but anyone who has watched debates on the floor of the congress, they notice that there is a connection between the academy and policy makers and taxation and spending for projects overseas and at home. The prominent players on the Left are embedded in the Education system as it presently stands and use profusely the language of academia, attracting a considerable entourage of followers among young people.

  For those who don’t believe they need to be educated on what their children face in college and how that affects the way policies are made, I challenge you to just YouTube just one of these names: Gayatri Spivak, Homi K Bhabha, Edward Said, Stuart Hall, Trinh T. Minh-ha (Thi Minh-Ha Trinh), Mao Zedong (otherwise known as Mousy dung), Judith Butler, Franz Fanon, et al the postcolonialist writers you can find. Listen to them bash the US and conservative values.   Academia as knowledge-supplier for colonial policies