Just what we always suspected...
The blog to end all blogs. Reviews and comments about all and everything. This blog is NOT affiliated with YouTube, Wikipedia, Microsoft Bing, Gemini, ChatGPT or any commercial vendor! Links don´t imply endorsement. Many posts and comments are ironic. The blogger is not responsible for comments made by others. The languages used are English and Swedish. Content warning: Essentially everything.
Saturday, June 8, 2019
Sunday, June 2, 2019
Come at me, Wolodarski
Jag insåg just en sak. DN tog avstånd från både hamnarbetarstrejken och pilotstrejken. Däremot stödjer de klimatstrejkande skolbarn.
Hmmm...
Kan det vara så att DN helt kallt antar att Greta Thunberg är harmlös?
Jag har nämligen väldigt svårt att se Wolodarski stödja något *verkligt* radikalt. Och jag tror inte han vill åka kollektivt heller. Han använder nog hellre Uber.
Jävla hycklare.
Yes, I decided to join the thorium cult
Peak oil be damned. I officially decided to join the thorium reactor cult. Now, build´em or else I nuke you with fissile material!
Saturday, June 1, 2019
Breaking now: Greta kan visst flyga över Atlanten
Sluta byll-shitta, Greta Thunbergish kan visst flyga över Atlanten utan att öka halten av koldioxiden, yao...
Thor´s hammer
Can nuclear power based on thorium save the world? That would be...interesting. Especially since thorium is named after a certain giant-slaying Indo-European god known for his huge hammer!
MED till attack mot Virtanen
Jag stödjer ju inte MED, men den här recensionen av Virtanens bok är ändå rätt så intressant...
Vår samtids feghet
Saturday, May 25, 2019
Lawyering the mistletoe
“Fridlysta
växter” is a book in Swedish about plants and somewhat-allied organisms
protected by law in Sweden. As usual, illustrator Bo Mossberg´s name is more
prominent on the front cover than that of the actual author, one Hans Rydberg.
The reason is Mossberg´s local fame in Sweden – I suppose we could call him “the
Lars Jonsson of plant and mushroom illustrations”. The book, published in 1995,
was a collaboration with the Swedish “Sierra Club”, the Naturskyddsföreningen
(NF). It´s both a field guide of sorts and an extended pitch for the specific
form of environmentalism represented by the NF. Since the work is in Swedish,
it´s of limited use to outsiders, but could perhaps be an interesting
collectors´ item if you like plant illustrations. A weird detail is that the
list of protected plant species at Swedish Wikipedia is from 1996, suggesting
that very few updates have been made since the time this little book was
published!
Rydberg
argues that the entire system of making specific plant species “protected by
law” doesn´t really help much. The right of landowners to exploit their land
always takes precedence, and the best way to save threatened plant species
isn´t to protect them one by one, but rather to shield entire areas from
outside exploitation. After all, plants are part of wider eco-systems while
being less mobile than many animals. Also, most of the legal protection is
local or regional rather than national. Only the orchid family is protected all
over Sweden. Nor is there a correlation between a plant being rare and a plant
being legally protected!
That being
said, Rydberg is strongly into the myth of “biodiversity”, something Nature is
not (despite the romantic conceptions of many Green activists). He admits that
floral diversity is often the result of *human* activity, most notably certain
old fashioned agricultural practices. Take away these, and Nature suddenly
becomes more homogenous (butterflies follow the same patterns). But if so,
eco-activists must admit that they are making a human-centered choice between
two human-created landscapes, not choosing “natural biodiversity”.
Otherwise,
I loved the book for all the weird facts (or factoids?) it contains. Thus, it
turns out that a species of bacteria is protected by the Swedish nanny state.
Well, almost: Nostoc zederstedtii (the scientific name of this Something) is a
blue-green alga and visible to the naked eye, but research suggest that these algae
are actually closer to the kingdom of the bacteria, where they form a sub-group
all their own known as cyanobacteria. The species in question can´t be plucked
(or whatever it is humans do with cyanobacteria) in Lake Vettasjärvi in
Lapland. Skipper, you have been warned. The lichen Letharia vulpina is
protected, which makes me wonder, since it was used in bygone times to poison
wolves – another protected species and apparently a favorite of the Swedish
conservationist movement. Could there be a connection, LOL? Many of the
protected species grow at the small island of Rörö off the Swedish west coast,
including a highly aberrant variety of raspberry, known in proper Latin as “Rubus
idaeus f. anomalus”. Hybrids where one of the parent species is legally
protected are sometimes also legally protected – and sometimes not. (I suppose
we could call this the “one seed rule” or something to that effect.)
There is
also an interview with a bureaucrat at the agency responsible for environmental
protection. It, too, is fun reading. Thus, you can´t remove orchids – unless you
mow the lawn (or, I suppose the golf course) when it (weirdly) suddenly becomes
OK to simply move on over the damn things. “Remove” is to be interpreted very broadly
in other contexts, though. Thus, you can´t take a legally protected species
even if it has been removed by somebody else and then simply left for dead. You
can pluck the flowers of a legally protected species at your own backyard, provided
*you* planted them there from seeds bought at a respectable vendor, but you
can´t remove them from areas outside your private property even if you suspect
they are feral descendant of your own legally reared plants. In the county of Västmanland,
landowners can remove and sell mistletoe from their trees, but in the rest of the
country, they can only fell the trees and destroy the mistletoe, but not sell
it…
If you are a Paleo-Pagan Druid living in Sweden, the pro tip would be to buy land in Västmanland...
If you are a Paleo-Pagan Druid living in Sweden, the pro tip would be to buy land in Västmanland...
LOL!
Wow, do
you need to be a lawyer to sort these things out? Gotta love it! OK, I admit. I
read books like “Fridlysta växter” mostly for the entertainment factor…
Bogus social workers?
Could there be a natural explanation to this? Please leave your comments below...
They are all in on it
“Konspirationer”
is a Swedish book by Gunnar Wall, a left-wing radical writer who could be seen
as a “moderate” conspiracy theorist. I´ve previously reviewed his book
“Konspiration Olof Palme” on the 1986 assassination of controversial Swedish
Prime Minister Olof Palme. He reaches the conclusion that Palme might have been
killed by elements from the Stay Behind organization, rogue or otherwise. The
Swedish government, police and secret service covered up the whole thing since
too many awkward questions about “neutral” Sweden´s role in NATO operations and
Palme´s opposition to the same would have been aired had the investigation been
conducted on proper lines. I believe Wall might very well be on to something,
maybe even the truth. In this case, it´s obvious that *somebody* was conspiring
somewhere, since people connected with the government secretly continued to
harass the militant Kurdish group PKK (the supposed assassins) even after the
prosecutors called off that particular angle of the investigation. (Nobody today
believes the PKK did it.)
One of the
chapters of “Konspirationer” also deals with the Palme case – I admit I didn´t
read it. Instead, I concentrated on some of the other sections, all of which
deal with US conspiracies: the JFK assassination, Watergate, and government foreknowledge
of 9/11. The two latter are well-argued, while the JFK chapter could perhaps
have needed a better editor, with too many facts or factoids presented in
random fashion. Also, Wall is unsure whether Lee Harvey Oswald was a genuine leftist
critic of the establishment or just an agent provocateur. That being said, few
people outside the mandarin conspiracies-never-happen intellectual “elite” would
question that of course Oswald didn´t act alone (or at all), JFK probably being
killed by Cuban exiles and the mafia. Wall believes the rabbit hole goes
deeper: it wasn´t simply revenge for screwing up the Bay of Pigs invasion.
Rather, the JFK assassination was part of a broader agenda from the side of the
military-industrial complex to get rid of a powerful politician deemed “too
soft on Communism”, most notably in Vietnam. (Wall believes that Kennedy wanted
to leave Vietnam.) Wall believes Palme and Dag Hammarskjöld were murdered for
the same general reasons.
The most
shocking chapter in the book deals with 9/11. It seems al-Qaeda´s “unexpected”
and “unprecedented” attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001 wasn´t so
unexpected and unprecedented after all. Quite the contrary: the US
administration had received multiple warnings of various kinds shortly before the
event from foreign intelligence services, “war games” featuring hijacked planes
and attacks on landmark monuments had been conducted for years by various
agencies, and al-Qaeda was publicly acknowledged as one of America´s top
enemies. Yet, it´s as if the entire US administration simply looked the other
way when the warnings of an impending major attack grew louder and louder. This
is in stark contrast to the actions of the Bush-Cheney administration *after*
the attack, when they suddenly showed firm resolve to go after al-Qaeda and “the
axis of evil”. And even then, the resolve was selective: Afghanistan was
attacked, while Saudi Arabia and Pakistan (two major al-Qaeda sponsors)
continued being treated with kid gloves as valuable US allies. Iraq was attacked,
too, despite having nothing to do with al-Qaeda (nor WMD´s). But they sure as
hell had oil…
Wall doesn´t believe that the 9/11 attacks were “planned” by the
US government itself, nor that they had direct foreknowledge of the terrorist
plans. Rather, by deliberately lowering America´s guard, the administration
made it easier for al-Qaeda to strike, an event which could then be used as an
excuse to attack Afghanistan and Iraq, get the “Patriot” Act adopted,
strengthen the military-industrial complex and perhaps line the pockets of
senior officials with shares in oil companies. It was a kind of false flag
operation by default. One reason why al-Qaeda could be used in this manner were
the cozy relationships between the United States (including the Bush family) and
various Saudi oil interests (including bin-Ladin´s family). Also, the Islamist
militants themselves were “assets” of the Agency since at least the 1980´s war
against the Soviets in Afghanistan.
While Wall´s scenario may seem outlandish
to some – he implies, after all, that Bush-Cheney didn´t give a damn about
3,000 dead on Manhattan – later events in the Middle East (not mentioned in the
book) certainly point in the same direction. In Syria, al-Nusra (really
al-Qaeda) controls a buffer zone around the Israeli-annexed Golan Heights. Even
establishment media admits that Israel is really collaborating with al-Nusra,
and it´s difficult to believe that the United States aren´t aware of the
situation. Note also how US ally Saudi Arabia brokered the rise of ISIS and how
NATO member Turkey bought oil from their faux caliphate in northern Syria. Some
American foreign policy experts have proposed *not* to destroy ISIS, rather
using the terror cult as a geopolitical counterweight to Iran. Somehow, all
this sounds vaguely familiar… In the murky underworld of the secret services,
with all their provocations and counter-provocations, the Islamists (perhaps a
bit like Oswald) are both assets and potential patsies at the same time, while
the Straussian Princes of Darkness spin their geopolitical (and lucrative)
cobwebs. It´s not a pretty picture of the United States of America that emerges
out of these pages…
In the
case of Watergate, we know pretty much what happened, so here the
conspiracy-deniers are on very thin ice. Wall points out that the pundits use a
different strategy to minimize the conspiracist impact in this case,
essentially trying to portray Watergate as a quixotic burglary attempt somehow
connected to Richard Nixon´s election campaign. To Wall, Watergate in this
strict sense was simply a smaller part of a paranoid presidency gone completely
out of control in a situation in which political and social tensions in the
United States had reached a boiling point due to the Vietnam War. Part of that
war was in itself a “conspiracy” of sorts, since the bombings of Cambodia and Laos
were initially secret!
In an
introductory chapter, Wall discusses the notion of conspiracies in general,
including a few others which have been revealed and well-documented, such as
MK-ULTRA. I used to be a de facto conspiracy denier myself, but I now think it´s
obvious how extremely weak this position is (except on the highest level of
history – I don´t believe in the Babylonian Brotherhood or David Icke´s
reptoids from the 666th dimension). Wall points out the paradox that
conspiracy-deniers use “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” as an example that
conspiracy theory is fake. Yes, the Protocols were a forgery by the Czarist
Russian secret police, the Okhrana. But the success of the Protocols, and the
fact that millions around the world believe it to be authentic, is *in itself*
a successful conspiracy, precisely the thing deemed impossible by the literati.
It struck me when reading the book that another argument often used by
conspiracy-deniers is equally paradoxical: the claim that conspiracies, if they
do happen, are always exposed in Western liberal democracies. Watergate would
be an example of this. But isn´t it strange that the *exposure of actual
conspiracies* is used to deny conspiracy theory…?
As a radical leftist, Wall
believes that even Western democracies have powerful elites, often with hidden
agendas. These clash with the stated liberal goals of Western political
systems, especially when the secret services and various vested economic
interests are involved. Indeed, Wall frequently just appeals to our common
sense: do we *really* believe that the people in charge have nothing to hide?
How naïve and trusting are we, in the god-forsaken year of 2019? (Or 2014, when
the book was published.) A funny thing about “Konspirationer” are all the proven
conspiracies it doesn´t even mention. Thus, during the 1980´s, people in the
Swedish arms industry really did smuggle weapons to nations deemed beyond the
pale by the proper authorities (Kuwait and East Germany if memory serves me
right). Meanwhile in the US, Oliver North and other elements in the Reagan
administration were busy carrying out their end of the Iran-Contragate
conspiracy. Perhaps the chapter on Palme mentions all the revelations surrounding
Stay Behind?
To crack a
joke: Where are all these non-existent conspiracies, anyway?
A sequel
to “Konspirationer” would be interesting. Today, even mandarin liberals believe
in (or at least pretend to believe in) at least one conspiracy theory. Yes,
that would be the Russian collusion narrative according to which Trump stole
the presidency with the aid of Vladimir Putin, Julian Assange and a Twitter
troll named Natasha Trolska Twitterskaya. And no, this one I don´t believe, but
it sure is interesting how *fast* it infected all the conspiracy-denying
liberal and Neo-Con circles. It´s almost as if some kind of conspiracy is being
hatched here, although not the one we´ve been led to believe…
It will be
interesting to see if a leftist such as Gunnar Wall will tackle this
problematique.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)