Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com,

The war in Ukraine remains the most important story in the world today.

Don’t believe the incessant U.S. government and media propaganda about Ukraine. Ukraine is not winning the war; they are losing badly.

But wait, hasn’t the news been talking up Ukrainian gains in recent months, while Russia is retreating and being badly beaten? That’s the mainstream, pro-Ukrainian narrative. Here’s the reality:

Most of the Ukrainian gains were against lightly defended positions that the Russians quickly abandoned because they were not worth fighting to defend.

Those Russian troops (really Donbas militias) were ordered to retreat to fortified Russian lines while Ukrainian forces rushing to fill the void were slaughtered by Russian artillery bombardments.

Most people think of war in terms of territory. If you lose territory, it must mean you’re losing the war. But it’s not always that simple.

The Russian Strategy

The Russians will willingly cede territory in order to fight again at a later time under more favorable circumstances. They’ll simply retake it when the terms favor them. They’re not primarily concerned about the territory per se. The primary Russian objective is to grind down and destroy the Ukrainian armed forces.

And if the Ukrainians want to keep hurling themselves against Russian positions in order to recapture land and score a propaganda coup, that’s fine with the Russians. They’ll just grind the attacking forces down with heavy artillery fire (artillery kills far more people in war than bullets or bombs).

And despite Ukrainian government claims, the best intelligence says Russia is presently enjoying an 8–10:1 casualty rate. In other words, Russia is inflicting eight–10 casualties on Ukraine for every casualty it’s suffering.

That kind of ratio isn’t sustainable for Ukraine.

Russia Prepares to Lower the Boom on Ukraine

Meanwhile, Russia has reinforced its positions with 300,000 or more fresh troops (about 30 divisions) who are rested and resupplied. That’s in addition to the number of troops already in Ukraine.

Evidence indicates they’re backed by at least 1,500 tanks, 5,000 armored fighting vehicles, 1,000 rocket artillery systems, hundreds of fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters plus thousands of tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and drones.

At the same time, all indications are that Russia is changing its strategy.

The initial Russian invasion was ill-conceived and took place in a piecemeal fashion. Contrary to mainstream opinion, Putin never intended to conquer Kyiv and occupy Ukraine. The invasion force was far too small to accomplish those objectives.

Also contrary to mainstream opinion, Putin didn’t target Ukraine’s civilian population. He wanted to avoid civilian casualties to the greatest possible extent. Of course some civilian targets were hit, but that’s going to happen in war.

Putin instead believed that the “special military operation” would tell Kyiv and Washington that Russia was serious about enforcing its red lines in Ukraine, that it was willing to use force.

But he thought his show of force would bring them to the negotiating table.

He badly miscalculated.

Rather than bring Kyiv and Washington to the negotiating table, they resolved to aggressively defend Ukraine.

Russia’s ill-prepared forces were pushed back and routed in many instances.

“Russia Means Business This Time”

But now Russia is taking the gloves off. It’s already launched heavy, sustained attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure, including the power grid and energy nodes. Its army is also regrouping and preparing for massive counteroffensives.

It won’t make the same mistakes it made during last February’s ill-planned attacks. Russia means business this time.

It’s not interested in bringing Ukraine to the negotiating table anymore. It’s focused instead on destroying Ukraine’s military forces and imposing a settlement on Kyiv.

A major winter offensive will begin soon, likely when the ground in southern Ukraine is fully frozen (muddy ground will bog down Russian forces). A successful counteroffensive will consolidate Russian control of Donbas (the heartland of Ukrainian industry and natural resources), give Russia control of Zaporizhzhya (the largest nuclear power plant in Europe) and possibly include the conquest of Odessa, the most important Ukrainian Black Sea port.

The cost on the rest of Ukraine from Kyiv to Lviv will be horrendous, including the near-complete degradation of its power-generating capacity, transportation lines and food supplies. U.S. and U.K. weapons supplies won’t mean much because they are too little, too late and the Ukrainians are scarcely trained to use them.

But these prospects make no impact at all on the anti-Russian warhawks, both Democrat and Republican, who are determined to prolong the war at all costs — even if it means fighting Russia to the last Ukrainian.

A Great Deal for the Military-Industrial Complex

It seems that every week or so the U.S. announces a new multibillion-dollar package of aid for Ukraine. These aid packages fall into two categories: Some are simple financial transfers to keep the oligarchs in Ukraine supplied with funds to keep their government going.

Others consist of weapons including drones, anti-missile batteries like the Patriot, long-range artillery and most recently an announcement that the U.S. may supply Ukraine with Bradley Fighting Vehicles, or BFVs.

The total of such Ukraine aid, including the $1.7 trillion budget boondoggle passed by the U.S. Congress two weeks ago, is now approaching $100 billion.

When it comes to weapons, there’s a lot less than meets the eye in terms of helping Ukraine. It appears that Ukraine is getting billions of dollars in equipment, but in fact, Ukraine is getting castoffs from U.S. inventories.

What’s really going on is the U.S. is dumping old or obsolete systems on Ukraine (the original BFV was built in 1981, over forty40 years ago) and then using the appropriations to order new weapons for itself.

Meanwhile, the U.S. will likely send Ukraine an older version of the Patriot air defense system — and only one battery at that, consisting of eight missile launchers. It’s not the game-changer many seem to think it is. The Russians will simply overwhelm the system with numbers, and then take it out. It probably won’t last long whenever it’s deployed, which could be several months from now.

The real winners of these weapons transfers will be U.S. defense contractors like Raytheon, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, who are getting the money to build new advanced systems for the U.S.

The real losers will be the Ukrainian people, who will continue to die needlessly in the absence of a negotiated settlement that recognizes the reality on the ground.

How Much Western Military Aid Actually Makes It Into the Field?

To make this racket even more absurd, much of the equipment that does make it to Ukraine is quickly blown up by Russia.

Russia has very good intelligence on the whereabouts of these weapons systems once they reach Ukraine. Using global satellite imaging, laser guidance and a blend of drones and cruise missiles, Putin has had success preventing these weapons from reaching the battlefield or destroying them if they do.

But the U.S. has already spent so much money on Ukraine and committed itself so strongly to a complete Russian defeat, a Russian victory would represent another strategic defeat for the U.S., still smarting from the debacle in Afghanistan.

What remains of U.S. credibility is on the line.

Brinksmanship

What happens if Russia brings Ukraine to the verge of defeat? Will Biden and his strongly anti-Russian administration simply throw up their hands and concede victory to Russia? Based on their maximalist rhetoric and commitment to Ukrainian victory, that appears unlikely.

Biden has shown no signs of relenting and recently said he will supply Ukraine with weapons as long as it takes. On the other hand, Putin will also not back down and seems determined to secure the entire seacoast of Ukraine, including the critical port of Odessa.

The great danger could arise if the U.S. foolishly continues escalation to the bitter end in order to stave off a Ukrainian defeat. I’m not predicting it’ll happen, but things could escalate to the point where tactical nuclear weapons are employed out of desperation. From that point, it’s a short step toward the broader use of strategic nuclear weapons.

Again, I’m not specifically predicting that will happen. But it is a realistic possibility based on the logic of escalation, and we seem to be sleepwalking into a nuclear confrontation unless we wake up.

Will we?

Turkish media is confirming a major incident between a Turkish coast guard vessel and a Greek coast guard patrol boat on Thursday, describing that the Greek patrol was harassing Turkish fishing boats before Turkish coast guard authorities intervened. But Athens has countered that it was the Turkish side harassing Greek vessels.

Both sides are saying warning shots were fired and are attributing acts of aggression to the other side: “A Greek coast guard patrol boat’s crew fired warning shots early Thursday to deter a Turkish coast guard vessel that was trying to ram them in the eastern Aegean Sea, authorities in Athens said, as tensions between the two neighbors remain high,” the Associated Press reports.

The Greek coast guard statement continued by saying “the crew fired warning shots in a secure sector and the Turkish coast guard vessel withdrew” toward the Turkey’s coast line, indicating the shots were not fired directly toward the opposing vessel, but in the air.

It further said the Turkish side “carried out dangerous maneuvers with the intention of ramming” the Greek vessel. Greece is saying the encounter occurred just off the Greek islet of Farmakonissi, describing that it was 1.5 nautical miles (or 1.7 miles) inside Greece’s territorial waters.

These types of ramming incidents have become more frequent over the past years, despite there being relative quiet throughout much of 2022 in comparison with past years.

However, there’s been persisting threats coming out of both sides, with speculation in Greek media that Erdogan could be planning war, and to take control of Greek territorial waters especially in the Aegean. Cyprus has also condemned frequent incursions into its waters as illegal.

Both Cyprus and Greece have long condemned what they say is Turkish fishing – as well as oil and gas exploration – inside their Exclusive Economic Zones. Both countries have repeatedly complained to the EU, with France in particular having offered military assistance to better monitor air and maritime incursions by Turkey’s military.

Authored by Chris Summers via The Epoch Times,

Freedom of expression is under threat in Scotland because the police are increasingly recording non-crimes as “hate incidents,” the watchdog Index on Censorship has warned.

Guidance from the College of Policing, the professional body for officers in England and Wales, suggests officers should log a non-crime hate incident if it is “perceived to be” motivated by hatred or prejudice, even if the speaker insists it was a joke or an innocent remark.

The college updated its guidance in July 2022 after judges said, in 2020, they were having a “chilling effect on public debate.”

But The Times of London reported that in 2021 Police Scotland logged 928 incidents of “malice and ill will” where no criminal offence had been committed, twice the number in 2017.

Police Scotland also logged 625 non-crime hate incidents in the first half of 2022.

In a statement to The Times of London, Police Scotland denied it “had introduced a culture whereby ‘jokes’ or freedom of speech were curtailed.”

But the Chief Executive of Index on Censorship, Ruth Smeeth, said: “There is a clear danger that the police involvement in the reporting and recording of speech that falls below legal thresholds can have a damaging impact on freedom of expression and robust debate. These figures, obtained through freedom of information, show a concerning and rapid upward trend in incidents.”

Smeeth, a former Labour MP, said, “The growing use risks the creation of a legal grey area where certain topics are avoided due to likelihood of police involvement, or their vexatious use by some to invite formal investigation and action against those exercising freedom of expression.”

Police Scotland’s Clyde Gateway headquarters at Dalmarnock, Glasgow, on Jan. 5, 2020. (PA)

The warning comes only days after the co-founder of a comedy club in London, Andy Shaw, said people were in danger of self-censoring in the workplace because of the danger of being reported for telling offensive jokes.

Shaw said “sarcasm” and “dark humour” helped people get through tough jobs in the emergency services or on hospital wards.

Shaw told NTD’s “British Thought Leaders” programme: “In certain areas, it is harder, if you’ve got one person who seeks to take offence and they know that they have the power to bring you down. There are people who can sense that power and it does attract bad actors.”

Shaw said the so-called “safe space environment” was being used by some to shut down any off-colour jokes or humour.

‘It’s More Risky to Be Funny’

He said, “It’s more risky to be funny, or to try and be funny, because the consequence of getting it wrong—or somebody accidentally misunderstanding what you’re saying or willfully misunderstanding what you’re saying and then reporting it to a higher authority—can have pretty disastrous consequences at work.”

In August last year Scottish comedian Jerry Sadowitz had a gig at the Edinburgh Fringe cancelled by a venue which claimed the content of a previous show was “extreme in its racism, sexism, homophobia and misogyny.”

Sadowitz, 60, responded, writing in a statement on Twitter: “I ask nobody to agree with anything I say or do on stage… God forbid they should ever one day end up like me… And I have never ONCE courted a mainstream audience to come to my shows because, guess what??? In real life I really DON’T don’t want to upset anyone…”

It is not clear if the jokes made by Sadowitz were logged by Police Scotland as a non-crime hate incident.

The College of Policing’s guidelines were updated to remove “trivial or irrational” complaints and reports about incidents which were not “motivated by hostility.”

The guidance says, “Individuals who are commenting in a legitimate debate—for example, on political or social issues—should not be stigmatised because someone is offended.”

The guidance was issued after a retired police officer, Harry Miller, 57, took the College of Policing to court after a Humberside Police officer called him at his work to “check [his] thinking” after he wrote his opinion about transgender women on Twitter in 2019.

The Court of Appeal ruled the College of Policing guidance had breached Miller’s human rights.

The Assistant Chief Constable of Police Scotland, Gary Ritchie, told The Times of London, “A hate incident is any incident which is perceived by the victim or any other person to be motivated, wholly or in part, by malice, ill will and prejudice, towards a person or group but which does not constitute a criminal offence.”

Ritchie said, “We are aware that hate-related incidents are one of the most under-reported forms of crime in the country and in recent years we have actively encouraged the reporting of hate crimes and hate incidents so it is not unexpected that there has been a rise in reports.”

He added, “If a hate incident is established as a non-crime then it is unlikely to be investigated further.”

The Epoch Times has reached out to Police Scotland for comment.

Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness (emphasis ours),

Did someone or something seize control of the United States?

What happened to the U.S. border? Where did it go? Who erased it? Why and how did 5 million people enter our country illegally? Did Congress secretly repeal our immigration laws? Did Joe Biden issue an executive order allowing foreign nationals to walk across the border and reside in the United States as they pleased?

Since when did money not have to be paid back? Who insisted that the more dollars the federal government printed, the more prosperity would follow? When did America embrace zero interest? Why do we believe $30 trillion in debt is no big deal?

When did clean-burning, cheap, and abundant natural gas become the equivalent to dirty coal? How did prized natural gas that had granted America’s wishes of energy self-sufficiency, reduced pollution, and inexpensive electricity become almost overnight a pariah fuel whose extraction was a war against nature? Which lawmakers, which laws, which votes of the people declared natural gas development and pipelines near criminal? 

Was it not against federal law to swarm the homes of Supreme Court justices, to picket and to intimidate their households in efforts to affect their rulings? How then with impunity did bullies surround the homes of Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito, Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, John Roberts, and Clarence Thomas—furious over a court decision on abortion? How could these mobs so easily throng our justices’ homes, with placards declaring “Off with their d—s”?

Since when did Americans create a government Ministry of Truth? And on whose orders did the FBI contract private news organizations to censor stories it did not like and writers whom it feared? 

How did we wake up one morning to new customs of impeaching a president over a phone call? Of the speaker of the House tearing up the State of the Union address on national television? Of barring congressional members from serving on their assigned congressional committees? 

When did we assume the FBI had the right to subvert the campaign of a candidate it disliked? Was it legal suddenly for one presidential candidate to hire a foreign ex-spy to subvert the campaign of her rival?

Was some state or federal law passed that allowed biological males to compete in female sports? Did Congress enact such a law? Did the Supreme Court guarantee that biological male students could shower in gym locker rooms with biological women? Were women ever asked to redefine the very sports they had championed?

When did the government pass a law depriving Americans of their freedom during a pandemic? In America can health officials simply cancel rental contracts or declare loan payments in suspension? How could it become illegal for mom-and-pop stores to sell flowers or shoes during a quarantine but not so for Walmart or Target?

Since when did the people decide that 70 percent of voters would not cast their ballots on Election Day? Was this revolutionary change the subject of a national debate, a heated congressional session, or the votes of dozens of state legislatures? 

What happened to Election Night returns? Did the fact that Americans created more electronic ballots and computerized tallies make it take so much longer to tabulate the votes?  

When did the nation abruptly decide that theft is not a crime, assault not a felony? How can thieves walk out with bags of stolen goods, without the wrath of angry shoppers, much less fear of the law?

Was there ever a national debate about the terrified flight from Afghanistan?  Who planned it and why?

What happened to the once trusted FBI? Why almost overnight did its directors decide to mislead Congress, to deceive judges with concocted tales from fake dossiers and with doctored writs? Did Congress pass a law that our federal leaders in the FBI or CIA could lie with impunity under oath?

Who redefined our military and with whose consent? Who proclaimed that our chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff could call his Chinese Communist counterpart to warn him that America’s president was supposedly unstable? Was it always true that retired generals routinely libeled their commander-in-chief as a near Nazi, a Mussolini, an adherent of the tools of Auschwitz?

Were Americans ever asked whether their universities could discriminate against their sons and daughters based on their race? How did it become physically dangerous to speak the truth on a campus? Whose idea was it to reboot racial segregation and bias as “theme houses,” “safe spaces,” and “diversity”? How did that happen in America?

How did a virus cancel the Constitution? Did the lockdowns rob of us of our sanity? Or was it the woke hysteria that ignited our collective madness?

We are beginning to wake up from a nightmare to a country we no longer recognize, and from a coup we never knew.

American aerospace manufacturer Pratt & Whitney suspended deliveries of new engines used in the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II while military officials investigated what went wrong when a stealth jet crashed on a Texas runway last month. 

Defense News received an email from the F-35 Joint Program Office explaining all F135 afterburning turbofan engine deliveries were halted on Dec. 27 by Pratt & Whitney to Lockheed.

JPO, the Defense Contract Management Agency, pointed to the Dec. 15 mishap involving an F-35B that crashed at the Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Fort Worth. 

“The F-35 Joint Program Office and Pratt & Whitney have agreed to delay scheduled delivery and acceptance of F135 engines until further information from the investigation is known and safety of flight can be ensured,” the JPO said. 

A Pratt & Whitney executive told Defense News that F135 deliveries were not formally suspended. And the aerospace manufacturer didn’t release a statement to clarify its statement. 

“There has been no formal suspension of F135 deliveries and we are working closely with the Joint Program Office on all aspects of the ongoing investigation and timing of deliveries.

 “The F135 has more than 600,000 flight hours. Safety for the warfighter is and will continue to be our number one priority,” said Jen Latka, vice president of F135 programs at Pratt & Whitney.

Here’s a video of the $100 million stealth fighter jet experiencing an embarrassing mishap.

#Breaking New much clearer video, courtesy Kitt Wilder, of STOL variant F35 B model landing JRB Fort Worth, and pilot ejects. Condition of pilot still unknown. @CBSDFW pic.twitter.com/BeERIeyhtO

— Doug Dunbar (@cbs11doug) December 15, 2022

“This had the effect of also halting deliveries for the last two weeks of the year, which meant Lockheed delivered 141 F-35s in 2022, fewer than the contractually required 148,” Defense News noted. 

Authored by Siyamak Khorrami via The Epoch Times,

A new California law, allowing men who identify as female to be housed in women’s prisons, is wreaking havoc within the women’s prison system and creating an environment of fear and “total chaos emotionally,” according to Amie Ichikawa, a plaintiff in a lawsuit which seeks to overturn it.

“It’s the worst human science project I’ve ever seen,” she said during a recent episode of EpochTV’s California Insider.

“This is very callous and brazen psychological warfare that is occurring right in our own state being fully funded by taxpayers’ dollars.”

Ichikawa, at 24, was incarcerated at the Central California Women’s Facility in Chowchilla for five years. She recently founded the nonprofit Woman II Woman, which provides resources, education, and support for currently incarcerated women.

She said since 2020 when California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the bill—named The Transgender Respect, Agency, and Dignity Act and authored by California State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco)—she has received more phone calls, emails, and letters than she can count from incarcerated women in fear of their safety, post-traumatic disorder triggers, pregnancy, and STDs.

“How could they do this to us?” she said, was their theme.

California women’s cells now house eight inmates each, she said—extremely close living quarters of about 6-feet per inmate, leading to concerns by some female prisoners they may end up housed with a man—who now identifies as female—who has raped, for example, or who has “predatory intentions.”

“That’s a very tight space to share with anyone,” she said.

“But even more so with someone who has a history of violence against women.”

Ichikawa, now 40, said she realizes there is no privacy in prison, but with the new law, “there is no dignity either,” as some transfers are and will be full-bodied males, sharing what was once single-sex space.

The law allows an inmate who identifies as transgender, non-binary, or intersex to be housed, at their choice, with either male or female prisoners. By all accounts, it was written to help the transgender community feel more comfortable if incarcerated.

But according to Ichikawa, it has not benefited anyone.

“It has really created a toxic, diabolical situation of … the prison of the mind,” she said.

“People are afraid. Women are afraid to say anything. It’s crippling.”

She said there have been 40 such cases of men being transferred to women’s prisons since the law went into effect in January of 2021 and there are currently nearly 300 more applications in the pipeline, with more than one-third from inmates who are registered sex offenders.

According to Ichikawa, typically about 17 percent of California’s incarcerated are registered as such.

“That’s a big jump,” she said.

Some, she said, are men capitalizing on the law to move from typically more dangerous lockdowns because it’s easy to do so, with few requirements for a transfer other than self-identification.

“This is open season for anyone who wants to get out of the men’s prisons,” she said.

“There are very few reasons why someone would not want to take advantage,” of this.

In the 30-minute interview, she said there is no evidence of any women, so far, becoming harmed in the new arrangement.

But, she said, some female inmates have lodged complaints and then were retaliated against for doing so by prison authorities, who called such “harassment.”

Ichikawa additionally said currently incarcerated women were given little preparation for the change, but said she learned from some that a poster was introduced in one woman’s prison detailing options in the event of pregnancy. Condoms, she said, are also now dispensed.

“Those were never available before in women’s prisons,” she said.

She said she was also shocked to learn only nine California lawmakers voted against the bill, and that the California Women’s Legislative Caucus, composed of dozens of female Senators and Assemblymembers, backed it.

“It took my breath away to learn how much support was behind this,” she said.

“I didn’t know so many elected officials hated women so much.”

And, she said, she doesn’t think it’s stopping in California.

“This has got to be a nationwide, even a global movement to erase women,” Ichikawa said.

She said lawmakers who passed the bill didn’t fully understand its ramifications.

“Any adult breathing and with a pulse can see it will create a huge problem when you take a whole population and handpick a little part of it and give them all these privileges. It’s going to be dangerous,” she said.

She said she believed politicians got caught up in today’s ideological culture wars and were “fooled by pretty language, inclusive words.”

Ichikawa’s lawsuit, filed in November of 2021 in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California, Fresno, alleges the law violates the federal and state rights of women currently incarcerated in California’s prisons.

In the latest sign that Washington is not backing down from its ramped-up military support to the democratic island of Taiwan, and at a moment repeat PLA aircraft incursions have continued their intensity, the US Navy has sailed another destroyer through the Taiwan Strait. 

The Navy’s 7th Fleet announced Thursday its guided-missile destroyer Chung-Hoon made the passage as part of its commitment to a “free and open Indo-Pacific.”

“The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Chung-Hoon conducted a routine Taiwan Strait transit Jan. 5 (local time) through waters where high-seas freedoms of navigation and overflight apply in accordance with international law,” the Navy’s 7th Fleet Public Affairs office announced.

“Chung-Hoon’s transit through the Taiwan Strait demonstrates the United States’ commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific,” the Navy added.

Last month China’s Foreign Ministry accused the Pentagon of seeking to create new tensions across the Taiwan Strait with its provocative sail-throughs. At the same time the Chinese military has on multiple occasions in recent months breached the Taiwan Strait median line both in the air and at sea – a pattern which grew only after Nancy Pelosi’s provocative August visit to Taipei. 

China’s warplane incursions into Taiwan’s air defense zone nearly doubled in 2022 compared to the year before as Newsweek reviews of the numbers:

Chinese military aircraft, mostly fighter jets, were detected in the island’s air defense identification zone, east of the Taiwan Strait median line, on 1,737 occasions in 2022, up from 972 in the previous 12 months, statistics compiled by U.S.-based analysts Gerald Brown and Ben Lewis revealed.

Meanwhile, as we noted earlier this week, Xi’s newly appointed Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang is busy attempting a ‘softening’ and breakthrough in US-China relations. 

After taking over the post last Friday, before which he served as the ambassador to the US, he wrote in a new Washington Post op-ed published Wednesday that US-China competition “should not be a zero-sum game,” arguing further that “The world is wide enough for China and the US to both develop and prosper.”

He asserted that “decoupling serves no one’s interest”, but that healthy relations including economic cooperation “will remain an important mission” in his new role as Beijing’s top diplomat, but it remains that “Improving relations takes work by both sides,” he wrote.

This may be a huge missed opportunity for the US. While serving as Chinese ambassador in DC, Qin Gang was typically shunned and ignored. And now he’s foreign minister. American guanxi with him is low.https://t.co/AV9zZZlb6I

— Derek J. Grossman (@DerekJGrossman) December 30, 2022

Qin called for ‘stability’ in relations, ironically just ahead of next week’s US-Taiwan official trade delegation talks in defiance of China’s condemnations.

As South China Morning Post underscores, the White House is involved: “The trip – a rare visit of US executive branch officials to Taiwan since President Joe Biden took office – will mark the second round of face-to-face talks on the trade initiative and the first held on the island. Washington and Taipei agreed to the talks in June,” the report detailed.

Authored by Mark Jeftovic via BombThrower.com,

Bestowing legitimacy on anti-humanism.

A recent article from The Atlantic explores (extols?) the rise of “Anthropocene anti-humanism”, a movement  “inspired by revulsion at humanity’s destruction of the natural environment”. This is a faction within the environmental movement who believes that humanity has already assured it’s own destruction, and that the world will actually be better off without peoplekind to mess up the place:

“From Silicon Valley boardrooms to rural communes to academic philosophy departments, a seemingly inconceivable idea is being seriously discussed: that the end of humanity’s reign on Earth is imminent, and that we should welcome it. The revolt against humanity is still new enough to appear outlandish, but it has already spread beyond the fringes of the intellectual world, and in the coming years and decades it has the potential to transform politics and society in profound ways.” (emphasis added).

Where previous ecological thought heavily criticized our impact on the environment, yet conceded humanity’s right to exist on this planet (gee, thanks), Anthropocene anti-humanists see us as deserving extinction:

“In the 21st century, Anthropocene anti-humanism offers a much more radical response to a much deeper ecological crisis. It says that our self-destruction is now inevitable, and that we should welcome it as a sentence we have justly passed on ourselves.”

One of the things I find interesting about it all is that I haven’t seen anybody call out The Atlantic for amplifying a literally anti-human philosophy of extermination. If some right-of-center outlet did an expose on an otherwise fringe collective arguing for the elimination of any group, it would be roundly attacked as dangerous hate speech, even if it were merely analyzing, rather than endorsing it (except for maybe, the unborn).

But The Atlantic is “The railhead of the Left’s intelligentsia” (a Steve Bannon puts it). Being written up in the Atlantic in sympathetic terms confers instant left-wing legitimacy on an idea that is literally anti-human and anti-life.

“It is a spiritual development of the first order, a new way of making sense of the nature and purpose of human existence.”, the Atlantic gushes. Likening it to Christianity or Communism as among “the most important movements in history” 

The Transhumanist variant.

The article’s author, Adam Kirsh, spends almost as much time comparing Anthropocene anti-humanism with transhumanism. They both look forward to the end of humanity in their own distinctive ways. Where anti-humanism wishes good riddance to our species as a whole, transhumanists think humans will merely be obsoleted by super-intelligent constructs of our own design.

Transhumanism, as defined by the likes of LessWrong’s Eliezer S. Yudkowsky or Nick Bostrom, starts as a generally life affirming construct which posits that in addition to the myriad ways every individual human can employ toward self-improvement: physical conditioning, mental training, cultural refinement, moral virtues, philosophical inquiry – we can also employ technological means. 

This is also welcomed by the high priests of what I call techno-utopianism like Ray Kurzweil.

But the nature of technological advancement tends to accelerate in self-reinforcing feedback loops in such a manner as we arrive at a dilemma: a big one. It’s the point at which technologically improved humans aren’t human anymore. They’re post-human. A level of intellectual and physical prowess so far ahead of mere humans that the former are comparatively godlike and the latter, in the words of another dignitary of transhumanism, Yuval Harari, are just “soulless, hackable animals”.

And that’s a problem.

It’s called “The Alignment Problem” and it’s  such a big one that erstwhile transhumanists like Eliezer S. Yudkowsky now believe that will inevitably result in the destruction of humanity. It’s all very straight-forward:

• Humanity will build AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) as fast as possible
• AGI will decide to exterminate us out of self-interest.

In the minds of the LessWrong crew, there’s no point in resisting it. We should just gracefully accept our own extinction (“Death With Dignity“).

tl;dr:  It’s obvious at this point that humanity isn’t going to solve the alignment problem, or even try very hard, or even go out with much of a fight.  Since survival is unattainable, we should shift the focus of our efforts to helping humanity die with with slightly more dignity.

The Malthusian spectrum

In my earlier piece, Socialism isn’t a Failure, it’s a Fraud, I referenced the historical allegory “A Strange Manuscript Found in a Copper Cylinder”, written over a century ago by James De Mille. It was a fictionalized account of a lost civilization that had inverted all classical liberal values, and become a poverty worshiping, prosperity-loathing death cult.

Today it’s not an allegory, it’s official policy. Energy Canada issued a self-congratulatory report for making “significant headway” in meeting the government’s emissions reduction targets. The reason why was two years of lockdowns and a sharp reduction in GDP – (also known as an economic contraction). 

“Lockdowns Met Climate Goal

The Department of Environment yesterday claimed “real progress” in hitting climate change targets. The most recent data confirmed 2020 emissions fell nine percent mainly due to pandemic lockdowns and travel bans.

“This report shows the real progress Canada is making,” the department said in a statement. “Canada’s resolve to fight climate change and move towards a clean energy future has only grown stronger,” it added.

Annual greenhouse gas emissions in 2020 fell from 738 to 672 million tonnes, a 66 million tonne drop equivalent to nine percent, according to Canada’s Eighth National Communication to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. “The Covid-19 pandemic had a notable impact on the Canadian economy,” said the report. “In particular gross domestic product fell by 5.3 percent…“In the transportation sector energy demand and emissions declined in 2020 as a result of curtailed activity levels and pandemic measures,” said the report.
— via Blacklocks Reporter, Ottawa (emphasis added)

In other words, the government is taking a victory lap for crashing the economy, thus increasing poverty and reducing living standards as a pathway toward net zero emissions in 2050.

The World is Getting Better, Not Worse

It is worth noting, that when you encounter various arguments that we face imminent destruction or ecological calamity, they usually start out with “obviously”. “We’re obviously destroying the planet”, “we’re obviously causing global warming”, even though these assertions aren’t obvious and in many cases are not even falsifiable, making them theological constructs rather than subjects of inquiry via the scientific method.

Contrast this ideological nihilism with the ample quantifiable data showing that humanity on the whole is actually garnering more output from fewer resources as time goes on.  By nearly all measures, we’re actually doing a better job at improving the human condition and stewarding our environment, not worse.

The Simon Abundance Index via HumanProgress.org,

The Malthusian argument for climate hysteria is that we are rapidly depleting our world of natural resources while simultaneously destroying the environment. The Club of Rome said that we’ve exceeded “the carrying capacity of the planet” fifty years ago.

But these  claims of the “obvious” ignore any data showing how, despite the population increase over the past two centuries, we are deriving greater abundance and prosperity from less raw materials. We’re tuning out the efficiency gains. Further, if there’s one thing nearly all demographers do agree on, it’s that human population growth will peak out around mid-century and then go into secular decline.

To make the claim that humanity has already assured its own destruction is direct result of the myopia that results from the radical material reductionism that permeates our zeitgeist (it’s that distinctly Arhimanic impulse I talked about in the WEF isn’t a cabal, it’s a cult).

The Alignment Problem is a perfect example of this: Generalized Artificial Intelligence is by no means baked into the cake. In fact, because of the heliocentric inversion of our age (the assumption that mind emerges from matter, not the other way around), AI will never actually be attained – so you can forgo the assumption that it will spring into existence, outsmart us and then decide to eradicate humanity.

AI won’t occur until researchers make the attempt from the other direction – using technology to “tap in” or connect with the underlying conscious substrate of reality. If that happens, my guess is whatever the result is, it won’t instantly leap to the conclusion that the best course of action is to exterminate us.

The punch line in all this is we have people making generalized, hyperbolic assumptions about our world which are neither true or even provable  and then expect the remainder of humanity to accept these conclusions and act against their own interests to go along with it.

I’ve said before, including in my own recent exploration of a rising, Luciferian spirituality,  that far-left illiberalism is a blend of Marx, Malthus and mental illness.

Ultimately, movements such as these will fail because they stubbornly refuse to understand core human drivers and incentives: the desire for life, for prosperity and for growth. Much of these collectivist aspirations run contrary to human nature, ultimately requiring the adherent to act contrary to their own rational self-interest, even toward their own destruction.

Over the long haul, this is a self-defeating prospect.

*  *  *

Follow me on Gettr, Telegram or Twitter. Sign up for The Bombthrower mailing list to get updates straight into your inbox and get a free copy of The Crypto Capitalist Manifesto while you’re at it. Have we hit the crypto bottom? Read the Crypto Capitulation Report.

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

The US is sending a delegation to Taiwan next week for trade talks with Taipei, the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) said on Wednesday, in a move sure to anger Beijing.

The US and Taiwan agreed to hold formal trade talks last year, and the first round was held in New York in November. Since Washington and Taiwan don’t have official relations, the negotiations are being held under the auspice of their respective de facto embassies, the American Institute in Taiwan, and the Taipei Economic Cultural Representative Office in the US.

But the US delegation is being led by Terry McCartin, the assistant US trade representative for China affairs, meaning the effort is being carried out by President Biden’s Executive Office. The USTR said the meetings in Taiwan would be attended by officials from several other government agencies.

According to The South China Post, Yang Jen-ni, Taiwan’s deputy trade representative, will lead the Taiwanese delegation, which will include dozens of officials from other departments.

China is against contact between high-level US and Taiwanese government officials as it views such cooperation as the US moving away from the one-China policy. Beijing is especially opposed to high-level US officials visiting Taiwan and typically reacts by launching military drills around the island.

The trade talks are an effort by the US to reduce economic dependence on China, and the overall increase in US contacts with Taiwan is part of the Biden administration’s strategy to counter China’s influence in the region. The USTR has dubbed the trade talks the US-Taiwan Initiative on 21st-Century Trade and said they are intended to “develop concrete ways to deepen the economic and trade relationship.”

The USTR said the talks will focus on multiple areas, including “reaching agreements on trade facilitation, good regulatory practices, strong anti-corruption standards, enhancing trade between our small and medium enterprises, deepening agriculture trade, removing discriminatory barriers to trade, digital trade, robust labor and environmental standards, as well as ways to address distortive practices of state-owned enterprises and non-market policies and practices.”

Another major factor in the talks is the fact that Taiwan is the world’s largest producer of advanced semiconductors, and the Biden administration is trying to entice Taiwanese companies to open more facilities inside the US. The US has targeted China’s chip industry with major sanctions in recent months, which marks a major shift in US trade policy toward the country.