I say Nay to horseplay.

Self Subsidized Renewables

In order to effectively use resources and energies, there must be systematic reorganization of our production techniques, and distribution systems. To reduce waste, and to promote innovations, I propose that production methods in manufacturing be limited in scope and variety, slightly, in order to allocate more resources, monies and energies towards alternative energy such as solar power.

Examples of this can range from manufacturing of luxury goods, to basic manufacture of disposable goods. For this purpose, I will use televisions. Policy would be implemented such that, instead of purchasing new and unnecessary goods (those which include no increased efficiency in energy) which are of many varieties, supposedly to compete for consumer's tastes
there should instead be fewer options, of more reasonable and efficient style, where the cost and resources saved would be re-invested into something with long term benefits, such as the solar energy example.

In manufacturing there is inherent waste, and this waste is something which also has held back the production of solar energies to some extent, until this point in time. In order to effectively implement this system, there must be consolidation and evaluation of resources with a broader range and more thorough understanding. There must be focus on internalizing hidden costs, such as roads which must be maintained to carry goods, and the cost of transportation for materials. The public throws substantial amounts of money into novelty and disposable type petroleum based, and otherwise inefficient goods. The energies to make plastic toys, and many computer games, phones, decorative items and other such goods, are often compounded not only by the elements of waste in manufacture and purposeful obsolescence, but also by the cost of distribution, sending specialty products; transport fuels, real cost of fuel, should be used in the sense of all the indirect subsidies.

Because of substituting not only the purchase of unnecessary goods, but also discouraging their manufacture (avenue could be free market) and using those saved energies towards creating solar energy, we may be capable of conserving money and resources, and in the process get return on that change, in the form of more renewable energy, and efficient manufacturing systems.

In summary, what is proposed is a novel concept of subsidizing currently less economic but ecologically desirable renewable technologies, via a substitution of value from "wasteful products" to offset the higher costs of the renewable technology. This could be implemented by taxes on such "wasteful products" , and also by raising taxes on current energy sources to internalize hidden costs currently not accounted for. The subsidization of the renewable technology will stimulate new investment in renewable technologies and will create numerous new businesses and jobs for society.

-
E&R.J Gulotty

New American Citadel

To the Powers that Be, and Will Be.

Mr. or Mrs. Power Elite,

First, I must extend congratulations to you, for your ongoing dominion over your nations, and near total global hegemony.

In order to ensure the loyalty of the people in this country, and to protect from foreign intruders and influences, it is imperative that a New American Citadel be fortified from the existing models
To best facilitate this project, I will outline parts of the citadel which are at least partially constructed.

The most important and seemingly well maintained pillar of the citadel, The Controlled Morale and Media of Citizens. In order to effectively organize our citizenry, and what they believe to be in their best interest, we must maintain and fortify our current systems for CMMC. These include ongoing radio, television and internet broadcasts, as well as newspaper publications, and even phone services and advertisements promoting our interests. The past managers of this system have done well to proliferate the types of message we require, however; there is an area of increasing concern, and that is the growing popularity of free publication of ideas and concepts, as the dissenters organize to share ideas, our way is increasingly threatened. As future guardians of this dominion I implore you to find more thorough ways to marginalize and discourage. If your efforts fail to quash the dissent, this could morph from one of our most pleasing successes, to one of our greatest failures. Consider this your only warning, should the citizens have access to relevant information, you may have to watch for Coup D'etat.

Among other key elements, a part of your responsibility is the constant manipulation of social norms and other policy, such that even the most well meaning and active dissenter will become disoriented as to what the enemy is (you), and what is necessary to be done against it (revolution). First and foremost, create effective rifts between the people, these rifts must be a combination of social scenarios, in order to be effective; they will in essence, be factions built by your design. Employ ideology to promote your cause. You will need to make a charade of creating a whole new faction for people to follow, in order for them to feel active enough to make up for their guilt for serving their needs before others. They must feel that they've accomplished something by joining... make it in some way exclusive, this will also be effective to keep them from organizing against you, as they will be busy trying to defeat small opposition from other factions you create. To create your factions, and guarantee they will organize tightly against one another, you must maintain that desired exclusivity. One part of your job in creating the factions is to focus on at least one unalterable* feature of the people who are to join it. For example, area of upbringing/nationality, religion, race, gender, economic status, etc. (* unalterable can be loosely defined.. it will be effective so long as they feel it is a part of their identity) Also, this must be achieved with the relative illusion of inclusiveness.

Illusions of inclusiveness can be maintained by having representatives from each faction shuffled in to another faction. Past tense works great in this. For example, let's say one of your factions is Wealthy Conservative White Males, which you will call "Righteous Change" (see you've actually surpassed your needs for unalterable feature, with white, male, and wealthy) in order for them to not inspire unison between the other factions (which will put pressure on you) there must be at least one carry over member, which is where the element of past tense comes in. If you can get somebody who is, say, African American, then you can parade them out whenever you are accused of being exclusive, better, to avoid scorn for playing up races, you can have a member that was Formerly Poor (and maybe they came from the soviet block, just for kicks) Your faction will be a thriving barrier between other factions and change, and you don't even need to break out the payroll.

Dependency and fear. The more dependent the people are on you, the better. They must fear every other race, custom, and nation but their own, and should they have different customs than you, Mr(s). Elite make sure they wouldn't even realize it. If your hobbies are flying in private jets, buying land, or eating organic, the plebus had better not be able to tell. Perhaps consider, showing up at a rodeo/nascar race, or carnival, make public speeches without being well dressed, hell, why not mess up a few times too!

Be sure also, in your maintenance of the CMMC, to have many fingers pointed, especially if you can direct attention to something controversial, focus again, on things people believe to be fundamental, like right to life/pro choice, evolution.. Note: do not focus on something you do not want people to realize! Health care, for example, may result in more people throwing insults toward you, than will promote your interests elsewhere. Be sure to convince them of some evil that is greater and more faceless than the evil that you build. If you need to lie to make something more evil than you, you're doing a great job of being the best elite you can be.

Socio-political Mobility. Your policies should always hint at the aforementioned concept. Particularly each plebian must believe that the way to become a Power Elite, is not by being born into it, or otherwise predetermined to belong, and holding tons of cash (as you and all other real elites are). The plebs must believe that they too can wield unimaginable power, if of course, they somehow know you to exist, and on top of that are aware of how powerful you are. Generally deception is not too tricky with this, as it is easy to make it seem like your faction is one that nobody (in the plebs, at least) would want to join. Make it seem tedious, and complacent, better, make it seem like it is a "public service" you will see no hands in the air from volunteers.

These factions will help to sabotage any valiant efforts by any part of the population. As is evidenced by the stagnant activities in the house and Senate. The one voice that would spark change is marginalized by how small a percent of the total power they have, and so nothing will alter the status quo. The status quo, naturally, is whatever you want. So long as you can keep the factions rallying against things which are unrelated to their personal needs, and instead seek to limit one anothers' you will experience little opposition.

Of the key pillars of your Citadel, the following is the most dangerous to you, and to those who oppose you. You must maintain a force of influence beyond even the most preposterous measures of "diplomacy." You must have, for your enemies and those among the factions who somehow felt they had the courage to dissent, some sort of violent (read very bloody and horrible) retribution for those individuals. Secret torture prisons are good. Public ones are even better. Then should there actually be someone in the world more evil than you, they won't know themselves as such, and you will maintain that control. Your force of violence can manifest many ways. The favorite of abusers like you has often been rampant missile programs, and growing armies, building bases all over the globe, maniacal weaponry for use in battle, like the modern depleted uranium bullets, use of nerve gas, chemical warfare. But these are not the most frightening violence in the long run. No, they for the most part, have been defeated in the past. The most convincing and frightening violence you can commit, is one against your own people.

For the relatively short term, you can utilize Police brutality, interrogations, and imprisonment using the force of the government. Short term you can utilize the scared and paranoid public towards ostracizing the dissenters, and instilling fear of retaliation in them. This will make your enemies and your people pliable to an extent. But the most effective long term I can pass down to you, is the nature of the most sacred pillar in your reign over the people, the maintenance of constant, blinding poverty. The people must fear at all times that they will die if they do not have money, which they will never ever receive enough of, and because of this fear, the people will bend. They will not threaten their employment, if they are lucky enough to have it, by staging protests. They will not threaten the government which provides just enough for them to die on. The sweetest part of this deal, my future or present leader, is that all their work will benefit somebody, and that somebody is you.

For new things you must make, there are only a few, and seldom are really necessary, so long as nobody knows the extent of your potential. First, complete control of science and innovation, by law as well as influence through things like grants, and further, organizations like the FDA, as well as Ethical review committees, which can destroy science with which you disagree. Second, as has been done throughout history, you must create and file lists of suspected terrorists, communists, anarchists, etc. To be on this list must first require some sort of incredible (as in not -credible) story, as well as a connotation of horrifying effects, should somebody find themselves on this list. The list, by the way should be constantly expanding, and in spite of complications with facts, and other such nonsense, the accuracy is unimportant, especially if during a wrongful arrest, you find drugs.

Create along with this citadel, through policy and censorship, and denial, an actual physical citadel, especially one that is expensive and ineffective. Hire inept guards to watch while so-called enemies carry their children over the citadel and prepare to set systems to harass them and accuse them. Have hometown favorites support this and other decisions, and he public will support it as well, make sure to drive away the idea of xenophobia, or anything we are called out for by nations we provoke and invade..

Through the effective organization and maintenance of those pillars you will be able to have your powers almost indefinitely, with few if any drawbacks, and with small measures of effort, rather than legitimate struggle at any point. Congratulations, to you the powerful, and remember, God's blessings go to those who create things. Like gods.

Expansion and the Role of Government

When I was about seven years old, my dad decided it was about time to try some sort of parent style advice. He said to me, “you know, there’s a few things you’ll need to remember when one day you go out into the world.”

After a few WC fields quotes, like “never cheat an honest man, never give a sucker an even break,” he said something that still sticks with me.

He said, “don’t do anything that will result in you losing your liberty. If you do something wrong because you’re angry, and don’t see you’ll later regret, you’ll find that you’ve traded all of your freedoms, for a life with a cell mate named bubba, or in your case, bubbaette.”

The reason why he wanted me to know this, was because the way he’s lived his life, it has shown him, that aggression will only lead to further suffering. and the key to avoiding aggression is to have a plan to counter it.

==

In our history, we decided we wanted a government where they would protect us, help us organize our needs and resources, and make our lives more stable. According to social contract theory, consent is the basis of government. It is because people have agreed to be ruled that governments are entitled to rule. In other words we give them our consent, to make laws regarding how we will live, and in return they have an obligation to do what is right by us. Our government for a lot of people, is like a father figure, they are obedient to its requests, but expect they will be cared for in return. In times of crisis, we look to our government to help us.

When there is famine, we look to the government to provide relief, When there is wrongdoing we look to our government to find justice, and provide compensation. When there are enemies at bay, we look to the government to protect us, specifically to our President, The Commander In Chief.

We expect our government to provide us with certain unalienable rights, including right to life and liberty. We expect those rights presented in the Bill of Rights and Constitution, we expect them all, and in return it is understood that if we act illegally and to the detriment of other citizens or to the government itself, it is within the right of the government; on behalf of the people to give punishment for those actions. If we kill another person, it is expected that some sort of justice will be sought on that person’s behalf, we expect that should we attack the liberties of others, we will be punished for it, by having our liberties abridged. We expect that should any part of the government do anything destructive to these ends, wrongfully limiting these rights endowed to the people, that it is within the rights of the people to alter or abolish said government.

In those times of crisis, we allow Expansion of Government Power.

Within the tenure of the Bush Administration, Government Powers have Expanded to Protect National Security. As a result of this there have been three key responses that I have seen, and I will organize them into three “camps,” there are several topics where they bridge into one another, and that is to be expected.

The first camp, consists of people who believe the government is acting within its rights to protect the common good. They agree when the President says, for example, “law abiding citizens need not be concerned.” They expect based on historical trends, that the government will act to their benefit, and that the systems of checks and balances will help ensure this.

The second camp, consists of people who believe that while the Expansion of Government power is meant to protect national security; to achieve that security the government has threatened many personal freedoms, and in fact acted to the detriment of the people. Only if the government is not infringing upon their liberties such that their daily lives are changed will they support its actions They believe that many of the methods employed by the government, are not justified by their intentions. And while in some cases “in order to do good, you must first do evil” they do not endorse recent activities which in their view have not been acceptable even in such circumstances.

The third camp, is made up of people who do not believe nearly any part of the Expansion of Government Powers are in their best interest. They are instead likely to point that the government is responsible for infringements on liberties disproportionate with the things they claim to provide. They are also likely to ask whether the public in fact gave their consent, and may condemn the Governments actions as paranoid aggression, and atrocities.

There are prominent examples supporting the ideas of each camp, and so I plan to address them in order of approval of what the government is doing.

The camp which depends on the idea that the government is following its contract with the people to do what is in their best interest, will be willing to cope with any limitations put on them because of that understanding. When the current administration feels it is necessary to revoke the right of habeas corpus, the people who are part of this camp will probably refer to President Lincoln’s decision to do so, as a support for the current activity. They see how Lincoln, in response to mass chaos and rioting, imposed Martial Law, and revoked habeas corpus. They will argue that Lincoln had in mind the best interests of the people, and in spite of personal conflict in doing so, after intense thought, decided it would be necessary to revoke those rights, temporarily.

They believe that efforts to protect national security ensure protection of their rights and liberties, and that what threatens the government, threatens them, and should be responded to as such.

This means that there are a litany of concerns the government has their consent to act on. If Illegal Immigration poses a threat of criminals and drugs and weapons coming into the United Sates, then the members of this camp will be willing to authorize the government to minimize and prevent that activity.

If there is a threat of terrorist actions by people in other countries, the members of this camp will approve of the United States intercepting telecommunications from those areas, to scan for areas of concern.

Should there be a threat of domestic terrorists, or “home grown terrorists” the members of this camp will authorize increased surveillance, the formation of task forces, and increased punishment for individuals caught with materials implicit in terrorist activities.

Just as somebody who is seen with a big bag of dope and a wad of cash is arrested on suspicion of dealing drugs, if you are caught with a bathtub full of acetone, guess what, this camp will allow your arrest, and see the reasoning behind it as “beyond doubt”

Many people who participate in ways encouraging this Expansion of Powers, are parts of the government themselves. People like John Yoo, and the advisor to V.P Dick Cheney, David Addington. You may remember them from the frontline programme, Cheney’s law. Yoo was the guy responsible for the memorandum which led to the definition of torture being so limited that it would be almost impossible to be guilty of it. Yoo justified his argument using the Constitution and Federalist Papers, he believed that the Executive branch was destined to be as powerful as he intended to make it, and felt that his argument was supported using those documents.

As I mentioned earlier, many citizens feel that if you are innocent, there is no need for concern. They believe that government action against individuals who commit acts of treason, espionage, or sabotage, or groups who threaten National Security, is in the best interest of the majority and serve the common good.

===

This same quality is in the second camp as well, the idea that the government should protect against those threats. They agree with that, but also feel that the government has acted is a way that itself is threatening liberties and the rights of citizens. When the government deceives the people in order to gain support for something it is doing, the members of the second camp will be disgusted with that betrayal and refuse support, even if the cause would otherwise be worthy.

The second camp, will for example be offended, should they learn that some precaution the government has taken, is in fact unreasonable. If there is a fear that, in airlines for example, that there are individuals seeking to use explosives to damage a plain, members of the second camp will consent to have their bags searched, or the carry on items monitored. If they worry that there are terrorist plots where individuals on a plane mix small vials of liquid to make a horrible explosion, they’ll be okay with only being allowed 3 oz of tooth paste. This is something which to them seems a small concession. But should they learn the ridiculous and improbable circumstances in which that would be possible, they will be disinclined to capitulate to that particular guideline. Further, when they hear just how ridiculous it is, in more vivid detail, they will probably refuse other requests as well. In fact, they have learned how ridiculous it is, you see the substance in question, for the liquid bombers TATP, would take somewhere between 8 hours and three days to get the desired result, even in perfect conditions, so such precautions are extraneous.

Members of the second camp will argue that in many cases where privacy is pivotal, the ends do not justify the means. Where the first camp will view telecommunication interceptions as worthwhile and necessary, the second camp will be concerned about how the companies involved were retrospectively given amnesty. In fighting terrorism globally, the members of the second camp would probably advocate intervention only when approved by our allies, and the U.N. In our war with Iraq, members of the second camp will say that what the U.S is doing is trying to provide fertile grounds for democracy, and that is a good thing, but they probably will not agree with the liberties taken from the Iraqis to promote security there. or the forces deployed by our government which are not part of the volunteer army.

Currently some members of the U.S government are contemplating war with Iran. Dick Cheney has “been mulling the idea of pushing for limited Israeli missile strikes against the Iranian nuclear site at Natanz and perhaps other sites, to provoke Tehran into lashing out. around “ The members of the second camp would probably condemn this action as antagonistic and interventionist.

Members of the second camp are kind of like bandwagon fans, which are also called "fair-weather fans" who support their team only when it is winning. They will often ""jump" on and off the "bandwagon" of the teams having the most recent success. They generally don't care if their adopted team has a bad season, or even a bad game, as they ultimately don't care too much about the team. The second camp members feel like they are winning, if their personal freedoms are not infringed upon, but should the government infringe upon their rights too much, they will likely “jump off the bandwagon.” Like the fair-weather fans will not care if their team has a bad season, the members of the second camp will not take action to alter or abolish a government which abridges privileges of people other than themselves.

=====

This inaction would probably be unacceptable to more active members of the third camp. The third camp is close to, or full on belligerent in its dissent of many of the aforementioned government actions. They are likely to see habeas corpus as the litmus test between a Democracy, and a totalitarian regime. They will address the U.S involvement in foreign affairs, in terms of empires, saying that where the Government claims to be promoting freedom and democracy, that it really is promoting Capitalism, and political leverage. When members of the third camp hear of rendition, they are appalled. If they should listen to people like Fran Townsend, where she claims that information gained in interrogating less than a third of the one hundred people, who we claim to be ‘not torturing’, included 8500 pieces of intelligence on threats. The members of the third camp will find this type of thing disgusting.

Members of the third camp are likely to compare the coming “Next Generation Identification” system, which collects information like fingerprints, facial features, and other information to make a searchable database, to past infringements on privacy, and the ill motivations behind those. They will look at this system, and habeas corpus, and the war on terror, and draw connections to 1950 when the FBI had planned massive arrests, under then chief J Edgar Hoover; to counter what they felt was threats of ‘treason, espionage and sabotage.” The U.S; declassified documents revealed that “Mr. Hoover wanted the president to suspend the centuries-old legal right of habeas corpus, which protects individuals against unlawful arrest.
The FBI director planned to detain the suspects - whose list of names he had been compiling for years - in US military and federal prisons.” A note by Hoover in the document indicated that: "The index now contains approximately 12,000 individuals, of which approximately 97% are citizens of the United States," The members of the third camp know, using retrospective judgment, that had they done this, it would have been unnecessary, and they can look back on it, and condemn it. The new database has been received similarly, because of the parallels they see between the war on terror, and the McCarthyist witch-hunts.

I am generally a member of the third camp. But I think there is actually room for; a necessity even, for there to be people from all three camps. There needs to be a balance, and in order to achieve that you need to have people who keep the government in check, and those who allow it to provide what functions it does. The way you or I espouse a given system of government is the same way we would espouse a given ideology. Because people look to the government expecting different things, our satisfaction with the role it plays is driven by that. The value you put on your liberties, the considerations you will take to protect them, are driven from the core of who you are. You may prefer to be protected and denied, as is the case with the first camp. You may think that it is true, that innocent civilians need not be concerned with what the government is doing. You may be part of the second camp, whose satisfaction is attained so long as the ends justify the means. Or you may be like me, and see the efforts toward national security, as efforts which abridge liberties, and proliferate suffering and control, much like the aftermath of an aggressive mistake is life in a cell with bubbaette, these are the sometimes horrifying downsides of the Expansion of Government Powers in times of crisis.