Saturday, May 03, 2014

Tony Trischka Lost live


Friday, May 02, 2014

New Rurouni Kenshin trailer




YT channel

Hello Hypergamy

The Single Life: Where Do We Go From Here
All the Single Ladies

The dwellers in the androsphere would be skeptical of their claims, or that they are not partially responsible for t heir unintended singlehood...

Dolly Parton, 'Blue Smoke'


Thursday, May 01, 2014

Falling on Deaf Ears




Or Exceptions that Remind Us Why Public Education Should be Avoided and Defunded


Where the UK is, the US will follow?


John Michael Greer's Latest Book


Marié Digby, "Korewa"


Wednesday, April 30, 2014

The Lexicon of Sustainability Book Release Party


Ha Ji Won's Last Photo as Empress Ki


Sig Sauer MCX


Slow Food Youth Club


Ambitious, Much?


Raj Patel, Land Reform


Lee Young Ae at a Cartier Event


Alan Jackson, "A Million Ways to Die"


Lupin III Teaser



Continuing to Impress With Their Choices



Condoleeza Rice and John Kerry? Is this supposed to balance things out? I expect more silence from the archbishop.

News About Star of the Sea and the New Oratory in SF

Regarding The San Francisco Oratory of St. Philip Neri

Important Message From the Chaplain

YouTube | Announcement of The San Francisco Oratory of St. Philip Neri

Who's the Real Asian-American?

The liberal neo-Yankee wannabee? Or the ethnonationalist?


Tuesday, April 29, 2014

Means to End or End to Means?

Not Of It: Urban Churches - "We're On a Mission From God" SoJourn Houston's Story

"...church leaders around the country should be doing everything they can to reconnect the social bonds of our communities."

Christian churches and ecclesial communities should do what they can to mitigate the disintegration of community, but what is their priority? Being a social club or witnessing to God? If they give a faithful witness to God, loving Him and their fellow Christians, the building up of community through evangelization and conversion will follow. But a watered-down Christianity in the form of liberal Protestantism? It has no staying power. As for developing friendships with non-Christians - there must be some sort of common moral ground first.

More on Michael Ruppert


There's a Difference Between Communal Support/Charity and the Welfare State



A wrong-headed piece from nef; the author should realize that concentrating power in the state so that it can administer welfare to the have-nots (many of whom are victims of the state) does them no favors.

Do We Need Their Tribute?


There Is Still an Agenda to Be Pushed

Soldier and Super-Achiever Commits Suicide
Fanfare About Her Life, Silence About Her Death
Portrait of a Pioneer

Meanwhile, More propaganda. Their "Warriors":

Monday, April 28, 2014

How Much Inequality Can a Polity Tolerate?

Aristotle had his answer - was it developed by Christians in the medieval period? How can one condemn the inequality that we find today without condemning one of its causes, namely the modern nation-state? One also needs to take into account the wealth (and the concentration of wealth) that was made possible through cheap energy.



Rod Dreher, Egalitarian Pope Francis and Twitter Is Not A Format For Complex Moral Discussion

James Howard Kunstler:

The first mistake of Piketty fans such as New York Times op-ed ass Paul Krugman is the assumption that the dynamic labeled “capitalism” is an ism, a belief system that you can subscribe to or drop out of, depending on your political correctitude. That’s just not true. So-called capitalism is more like gravity, a set of laws that apply to and describe the behavior of surplus wealth, in particular wealth generated by industrial societies, which is to say unprecedented massive wealth. The human race never saw anything quite like it before. It became both a moral embarrassment and a political inconvenience. So among the intellectual grandiosities of modern times is the idea that this massive wealth can be politically managed to produce an ideal equitable society — with no side effects.

Hence, the bold but hapless 20th century experiment with statist communism, which pretended to abolish wealth but succeeded mainly in converting wealth into industrial waste and pollution, while directing the remainder to a lawless gangster government elite that ruled an expendable mass peasantry with maximum cruelty and injustice.

In the other industrial nations, loosely called “the west,” the pretense to abolish wealth altogether never completely took, but a great deal of wealth was “socialized” for the purpose of delivering public goods. That seemed to work fairly well in post-war Europe and a bit less-well in the USA after the anomalous Eisenhower decade when industrial labor enjoyed a power moment of wage arbitrage. Now that system is unraveling, and for the reason that Piketty & Company largely miss: industrial economies are winding down with the decline of cheap fossil fuels.

Piketty and his fans assume that the industrial orgy will continue one way or another, in other words that some mysterious “they” will “come up with innovative new technologies” to obviate the need for fossil fuels and that the volume of wealth generated will more or less continue to increase. This notion is childish, idiotic, and wrong. Energy and technology are not substitutable with each other. If you run out of the former, you can’t replace it with the latter (and by “run out” I mean get it at a return of energy investment that makes sense). The techno-narcissist Jeremy Rifkins and Ray Kurzweils among us propound magical something-for-nothing workarounds for our predicament, but they are just blowing smoke up the collective fundament of a credulous ruling plutocracy. In fact, we’re faced with an unprecedented contraction of wealth, and a shocking loss of ability to produce new wealth. That‘s the real “game-changer,” not the delusions about shale oil and the robotic “industrial renaissance” and all the related fantasies circulating among a leadership that checked its brains at the Microsoft window.

Of course, even in a general contraction wealth will still exist, and Piketty is certainly right that it will tend to remain concentrated (where it isn’t washed away in the deluge of broken promises to pay this and that obligation). But he is quite incorrect that the general conditions we enjoy at this moment in history will continue a whole lot longer — for instance the organization of giant nation-states and their ability to control populations. I suppose it’s counter-intuitive in this moment of the “Deep State” with all its Orwellian overtones of electronic surveillance and omnipotence, but I’d take the less popular view that the Deep State will choke to death on the diminishing returns of technology and that nation-states in general will first degenerate into impotence and then break up into smaller units. What’s more, I’d propose that the whole world is apt to be going medieval, so to speak, as we contend with our energy predicament and its effects on wealth generation, banking, and all the other operations of modern capital. That is, they’ll become a lot less modern.

An academic 'proof' about what sort of system under which we live:
Princeton Concludes What Kind of Government America Really Has, and It's Not a Democracy
Simply Calling the US an Oligarchy Is Not Enough (original) - I should keep an eye for more from Jerome Roos.
Loosening the Grip of Oligarchy



Fructose


Sunday, April 27, 2014

Benefits of Minimalist Footware


Douglas Gayeton, Local



Douglas Gayeton
The Lexicon of Sustainability

The Lexicon of Sustainability: Q & A with Filmmaker Douglas Gayeton

This Is The Lexicon Of Sustainability - Douglas Gayeton At Work from lexicon of sustainability on Vimeo.


Also by Douglas Gayeton: Slow, Life in a Tuscan Town

Monty Python Reunion Show


Montserrat Figueras