Energy and the Human Journey: Where We Have Been; Where We Can Go

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

To Krishna’s observation about Stallman and understanding my essay, I’ll say this…

Like Gates, Stallman is a lot smarter than me.  He is another near-1600 on the SAT, and 800 on the math, of course, which puts him well above 160 on the IQ scale.  Watching Stallman and Gates go at it over the Free Software Movement is watching two titans at work.  If you think about it, their arguments are all about the exchange game, with the world’s richest man denigrating the movement that challenges his empire.  In the Fifth Epoch, exchange becomes meaningless.  The problem, as I see it, is that neither man can even imagine the Fifth Epoch, which is normal, for all of their “intelligence.”  

As far as Stallman coming to understand my big essay, it is certainly no heavy intellectual lift for somebody like him.  The problem that Stallman had with my work and experiences was that it was contrary to his belief system.  Stallman is a materialist, as is Gates, and materialism is a great burden that prevents understanding how our world really works.  It also hampered Uncle Noam’s ability to understand, and he and Stallman were relatively gracious with me.  These are some of the greatest minds on Earth, and they did not understand.  For the record, Mr. Mentor’s mind was greater.  He was an inventive genius, similar to Tesla, and Gates and Stallman are not.  When I write about interacting with some of the greatest minds on Earth, I am not kidding.  But I found that intelligence was far from enough, to be able to hit the notes.  None of those great minds can.  

With Stallman, and I am writing from experience here, free energy was too wild a concept to credit, without somebody delivering free energy devices for scientists to study, and the suppression of free energy was an untenable “conspiracy theory.”  Those are classic Level 3 responses, and it took me many years to understand what I was seeing.  It was not until I began studying to write my big essay that the reason for the “conspiracy theory” objection to organized suppression became crystal clear, and it is a matter of faith and naïveté, not reason.

The very way that today’s science is structured focuses on material realities.  The best scientists say that today’s science has nothing to say about non-material realities, or any intent behind the creation of our physical universe.  That has been twisted, however, by materialists, to turn that approach into a form of religion called materialism, which avers that the material universe is all that exists, or multi-dimensional variations of them.  There is no role for consciousness to play, other than some epiphenomenon of brain activity.  History’s greatest scientists did not buy that, and called it an error of logic to think that way, but people such as Stallman, Hawking, and the like have, and it turned the process and findings of science into a religion.  And I know that it is a false religion, little different from the other organized religions.  My experiences informed me otherwise, when I was still a teenager.  My fellow travelers that I most respected also had those experiences, which made us different, leading us down different paths than what the Gateses, Stallmans, and Chomskys of our world traveled.  Mark’s adventures blow Stallman and Gates out of the water, as do Dennis’s, Brian’s, mine, etc.

The idea that powerful groups are consciously manipulating the world economy is anathema to people such as Gates and Stallman.  If Gates is unaware of them, he is highly naïve, especially for somebody in his position.  Gates praises imperial tripe and pals around with the greatest mass murderer alive and other war criminals, and it has nothing to do with intelligence, and everything to do with integrity.  Gates can’t tie Noam’s and Ed’s shoes on the integrity scale, but Noam’s structuralism prevents his understanding of how and why Jack Kennedy died, for instance.  Ed actually entertained the idea of Gary’s reporting, and one of LOOT’s issues dealt with the backyard photos and how they were likely forged.  That is one of many reasons why he was Uncle Ed to me, but I tried to introduce Ed to Brian several times, to no avail.  Even Ed had his limits.  

So, Stallman would have no trouble reading my big essay, and he would undoubtedly learn something new from it, but when the subject came to the GCs, Sparky Sweet’s adventures, and the like, I would lose him, as it would veer into “conspiracy theory” and “contrary to the laws of physics” land.  The demographic transition should not be hard for Stallman to understand, but his ideology gets in the way.  Stallman has yet to awaken, and that is normal and OK, and being asleep or awake has nothing to do with “intelligence.”  

Best,

Wade

Edited May 16, 2018 by Wade Frazier

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

To Krishna’s observation on the Scots-Irish, empires have always recruited the underclasses to do the dirty work, and my ancestors were used to populate the newly stolen continent.  Those people were previously used to colonize Ireland.  The English used the Gurkhas in India, the French and Americans used the Montagnards in Cambodia (they were used on that Special Forces mission that Dennis was on, and part of his job was injecting them with heroin, as part of their pay), the Nazis used kapos in the death camps, the Tutsis were used against the Hutus (already elevated somewhat, to be promoted to overseeing sub-elites) to the present day by various imperial players in equatorial Africa, and so on.  

As Ian Morris wrote about “people getting the thought they need,” the path to manhood in redneck America was becoming an imperial Stormtrooper.  I was raised that way, and nearly went to the Air Force Academy, until my mother prevailed on my father to talk me out of it.  Two years later, I was a confirmed pacifist, through my spiritual studies.  The irony is not lost on me that I nearly became a military pilot, raining death onto our imperial targets.  

Best,

Wade

Edited May 16, 2018 by Wade Frazier

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

To be fair to Ian Morris and his social development scale, urbanism is a proxy for organizational ability, which is going to radically change.  Coercion or threats of it are not going to be how it works.  Many channeled/mystical ideas became a lot clearer as I pondered the nuts and bolts of the Fifth Epoch over the years.  Coercion, violence, warfare – these will become obsolete in the Fifth Epoch, which Morris hints at in his work, but he does not quite see the big picture, either, as he licks imperial boots and is trapped in his Epoch in ways, with the thought that he needs (such as materialism). 

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

To Krishna’s observation that his peers are not interested in understanding how the world works, it took him years of dismay to finally understand, and that is normal.  For those who awaken, it is a standard process.  For those with a love of the truth and a desire to make the world a better place, and are willing to do something about it, it can be agonizing to discover that virtually nobody in their social circles cares in the slightest.  They only care about their immediate self-interest, and by extension, their in-group’s welfare.  This is just where the human animal is, in these days of scarcity and fear.  Only extraordinary people are willing and able to break free of their conditioning and widen their circle of caring.  That is just what it is, and I gave up judging the situation long ago, and the unawake challenge my work, with spectacular failures of logic and integrity.  

I found that it takes that realization for somebody to finally become useful for what I am doing.  Again, my best students nearly always rush out and proselytize to their social circles, to get a very rude awakening, as they are ostracized and even actively attacked.  People are social animals for reasons of survival and fear, not love and a desire to make life better for all.  

As I look at my site today, the 2002 version was largely about helping my readers get past their conditioning, so that they stop dragging around their baggage, because they can’t pursue the truth while dragging around that stuff.  Only when freed from that ball-and-chain can they begin to truly understand how our world really works, not the Establishment version, which is based on lies, secrecy, and other elite-serving factors, none of which are about pursuing the truth, but are designed to keep humanity the exploitable herd that it is today.

Ever since I found Uncle Bucky’s work, my work has been consciously comprehensive.  The theme ever since has been developing a comprehensive understanding of how our world really works, and my big essay is the capstone of that idea and the hymnal for the choir.  I’ll keep updating that essay until I can’t anymore.  

With a comprehensive perspective, people can distinguish the forest from the trees, stop hacking at branches, and aim for the root, which always has been and always will be the energy issue, particularly in our world of scarcity and fear.  Next to the energy issue, everything else happening on Earth today is noise.  But very few people understand that fact, and scientific literacy goes a long way toward understanding that issue, but the student has to beware of being seduced by the ideological baggage that can attend becoming scientifically literate.  It is not an easy road to walk, but for those I seek, it is a requirement.  But they don’t need to aspire to any more scientific literacy than is needed to digest my big essay, and it is not really a heavy intellectual lift.  It is nearly all popularized science.  People don’t need to be professional scientists to understand.  They don’t need IQs of 160 to hit the notes.  

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

As I have written, I’ll write more about Ian Morris’s work later, and I’ll use some of his work in mine, but I wanted to note something that he and others have long written about.  In his view of the vast sweep of the human journey, he states that the primary motivations of humanity have always been:

• Greed
• Laziness
• Fear
  

Not only that, he makes the case that psychopaths have made the world safer, as their “productive” wars brought more people under their rule, and enslaving humanity and skimming the cream is the most productive elite activity; dead subjects can’t be skimmed from.  Those are literally the foundations of his arguments.  I am not going to say that he is necessarily wrong, but that is not exactly a prescription for a future that I want to be part of.  Adam Smith wrote similarly, arguing that only self-interest has made this world a better place, and all benevolent intent has been futile.  How inspiring.   

Of course, that the GCs are psychopathy on a global scale, and capitalism on steroids, is something that Morris can’t even imagine.  

There is a path out of this mess, and it has to be based on love, not playing to the deadly sins and calling them virtues.  I admit that until scarcity ends, greed and fear will generally be the primary motivations of humanity, but once scarcity ends, a lot can change, in ways that we have a hard time imagining.  Uncle Bucky wrote Utopia or Oblivion, Morris’s theme for the future is Singularity or Nightfall, and I write of the Fifth Epochal event or the Sixth Mass Extinction.  Morris’s prescription is supporting the American Empire until Singularity arrives.  Again, not too inspiring, and for a Brit working in the USA, that is quite a conflict of interest.  

Best,

Wade

Edited May 17, 2018 by Wade Frazier

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Before I leave Ian Morris’s work behind for now, some odds and ends.  First and foremost, the human journey has been all about plundering one energy source after another, to exhaustion, and then plundering the next one, with collapses attending the inability to tap the next source, as the societies ran into energy-capture ceilings.  Morris got that part right, but very lightly touched on what the environmental costs are for that undertaking.  I found it odd that Morris used a lot of Jared Diamond’s work, and Diamond blurbed Morris’s books, and Diamond is big on environmental collapse while Morris really did not deal with the subject much.  Morris linked societal collapses to climate change, which almost always was about droughts, but not how human energy practices contributed to it.  The Mediterranean used to be ringed by lush forests (hippos lived on islands which are deserts today), which are all gone, as it has been all turned to desert and semi-desert, all the way to Afghanistan.  That contributed in a big way to the aridity that has collapsed civilizations, along with soil loss, etc.  Several times, Morris remarked on how what was once a breadbasket of farms is now a desert, such as what was Carthage.  The human impact turned it into a desert.

But Morris at least got it right that energy capture trumped all, for human social development.  What he also got right, kind of, was that what is coming, if humanity survives the transition, is so mind-bogging that he could barely imagine any of it.  Of course, he was completely trapped in conventionality, as only a Stanford professor can be (Brian sipped that sherry, before he woke up), and could not seem to imagine any energy sources beyond nuclear and solar, and he really could not seem to understand the transformative effects of absolute abundance, as he just saw novel war technologies, not an elimination of the very reasons for warfare.  And very ironically for me, the energy technologies to usher in that hard-to-imagine future are older than I am.  A lot of the development and organized suppression of independent efforts to develop such technologies happened in California, where Morris lives, for another rich irony.  

To be fair to Morris, his work is more about Eurasian dynamics than global ones, and his tome is devoted to why the West is more developed than the East…for now.  What he also gets right is that while geography had plenty to do with explaining the West’s ascendance, today’s conceptions of geography will become meaningless in the Fifth Epoch.  Morris is big into Kurzweil’s Singularity, but I am not a big fan of it.  My vision for the future is along the lines of hewing toward this world, not some Borg-like human-machine hybrid.  Territorial constructs such as nations will vanish in the Fifth Epoch, as will cities, races, and other aspects of the human journey that will pass into the dustbin of history.  Morris does get some of that right, to his credit, and I suppose that for a college professor, when he is not doing imperial bootlicking, his work is not bad.  I’ll use some of it in my big essay, mostly around Third Epoch societies, which is really the focus of Morris’s work, as he professionally excavated some of their ruins.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Some odds and ends from recent reading…  I recently read The Rise and Fall of the Dinosaurs, and I am going to compare it to another book I have been reading, Gaining Ground, on the migration of fish to land.  Both are fine books in their own ways, but both are difficult to recommend for what I am doing.  I have seen Gaining Ground described as popularized science, but it really isn’t.  It is highly technical, suitable for graduate students.  The Rise and Fall of the Dinosaurs has kind of the opposite problem.  It is popularized science, but almost too much so for what I am doing.  It is written by a young scientist in the field, and is written almost like a “Dear Diary” account of his career so far, as he breezily describes his adventures (which admittedly are pretty amazing for a man in his mid-30s).  That book has no footnotes, but has sources at the book’s end.  I like notes, and rarely recommend books without them.  

The author of Gaining Ground actually helped coin the term Romer’s Gap, and her recent findings are closing that gap.  She also takes on Peter Ward’s ideas of oxygen’s role in evolution, particularly at the Devonian Extinction, as her evidence does not show an oxygen-drop event associated with it, although it likely was a low-oxygen time on Earth.  Fascinating material, but her work is not really popularized science.  The Rise and Fall of the Dinosaurs covers interesting recent findings (that author wrote an article that is the cover story for the current issue of Scientific American, which is why I got his book), but the book is almost more about his journey than it is the findings.  For the record, the two key takeaways from his book (and recent article) for me are that dinosaurs evolved in moist temperate lands and were confined there as relatively marginal beasts, to only conquer Earth when its competitors died off in a mass extinction and Earth got a lot wetter, and that it was definitely a bolide event that did them in.  There are still many lively controversies about dinosaurs, and many will outlive me, but there is going to be a very high hurdle for those who argue that the bolide event did not wipe the dinosaurs out.  Mammals were never going to rise and overtake them.  Rats and raccoons were never going to displace T-Rexes without that bolide event that wiped the slate clean.  Dinosaurs were doing fine until the very end.  

I have also been diving into that great controversy in anthropology: the Hobbes versus Rousseau views of early humans.  It looks like that controversy will not stop anytime soon.  That controversy is part of Uncle Ed’s work on Pinker’s imperial apologetics, and I found myself rereading books in my library, such as Demonic Males, the Anthropology of War, War Before Civilization, and other works, as well as plenty of Internet surfing and Douglas Fry’s Rousseauian work, which Frans de Waal wrote the foreword to.

Richard Wrangham and de Waal are the most prominent chimp researchers in the West, after Jane Goodall, and both say that for human traits found in chimps, the rebuttable presumption has to be that those traits were passed down the human-line split from chimps.  It did not have to be that way, but that is what likely happened, such as chimps’ kissing and their politics, which are crude versions of human politics.  After a career spent studying chimps and bonobos, de Wall put chimp social intelligence on par with humanity’s, which is an amazing statement.  

Only two animal species have patrilocal, male-bonded territorial dynamics that launch lethal raids on their neighbors, to steal territory and females: chimps and humans.  They also have a direct evolutionary relationship, and Rousseauian theorists have a big task ahead of them, to make the case that the human line lost that trait, to re-evolve it later.  It is far more theoretically economical to argue that the human line never lost those traits.  There is some evidence that maybe the human line became matrilocal again, like monkeys are, and reduced incisors in Ardi’s species is some evidence of it, but for what it is worth, while I definitely promote the bonobo way of life, it was economically conditioned by their food supply’s doubling (the human journey was economically conditioned the entire way, to today), and I think that Hobbes is still the victor.  But I also make it very clear that the human journey had many golden ages, which were always about the early days of exploiting a new energy source.  Then it was peace and plenty, for a time.  In those early days of Earth’s conquest, and when Homo erectus lightly populated Eurasia and Africa, it was likely fairly peaceful, as territorial disputes were easily resolved by simply moving to the next river valley.  It did not start getting violent again until the easy meat ran out, and the human line became fiercely territorial again.  

The Fifth Epoch would likely mean a permanent golden age, as the free energy technology that I am aware of won’t lead to exhaustion of the energy source, at least not anytime soon, and likely never.  

Time to begin my busy weekend.  

Best,

Wade

Edited May 19, 2018 by Wade Frazier

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Living where I do, across the street from Microsoft’s headquarters, and being a user of the Internet, I can’t help but be aware of Bill Gates.  Some page was thrust on me today on Gates’s reading recommendations, and here is one of the many lists out there.  Gates is big into Vaclav Smil, and I have a few of Smil’s books.  They are nice compendiums and surveys, but Smil is not a big thinker.  I read the end of his Energy in Nature and Society today, and he finished the book with quite a rant, going on about how high energy consumption was no guaranty of anything other than obesity and destroying the planet, and it ended with this sentence:

“Our best hope is that we will find the determination to make choices that would confirm the Linnaean designation of our species – sapiens.”  

I almost had to laugh.  It is a version of Brian’s query: Is humanity a sentient species?

Read Smil’s books, and not a word about Tesla, not a whiff of zero-point energy, but it is about wringing more hydrocarbons out of the ground, although he acknowledges how global warming makes it a risky play.  Smil’s prescription is about slicing up humanity’s scarce energetic pie more equitably.  Another “reshuffle the deck of scarcity” prescription to our woes.  Gates recommends Pinker’s imperial tripe, and you will never hear a word about Uncle Noam or Ed.  

That is the kind of mainstream “leading thought” out there.  Gates, Smil, and Pinker are not helping, and Gates literally promotes nuclear fission.  These are the mainstream’s “visionaries” and leading thinkers.  

The greatest wipeout of alternative energy in world history happened in Seattle, while Gates was grubbing after his billions, and he seems to have been entirely oblivious to it.  It is kind of surreal to understand how the world works, on vital issues of human survival, to see all of those talking heads with their heads buried deeply in the sand.  Brian was beside himself over that situation, as he was shut out of “progressive” venues that feted doomsayers such as Heinberg.  The biggest event in the human journey won’t come easily.  

Best,

Wade

Edited May 29, 2018 by Wade Frazier

[Wade Frazier]

Thanks Krishna:

Yes indeed, since Darwin, the idea that humans have domesticated themselves has been a prominent idea.  Interesting paper, and what I found particularly interesting is how Wrangham’s formerly ridiculed Cooking Hypothesis has been cited more frequently over the years, and called “strong” in that paper.  On the video, maybe one day.

Almost funnily, yesterday I also came upon a paper that argues that men almost drove themselves to extinction by warfare, in the ultimate Hobbesian scenario.  The Rousseau/Hobbes battle among anthropologists is alive and well.  I seem to be one of the few people out there that argues that both are true.  When there was plenty of energy to go around, it was a golden age of peace and plenty.  When the easy energy ran out, it was a battle to the death.  One of my favorite Star Trek clips sums it up well.  

Best,

Wade

Edited June 1, 2018 by Wade Frazier

[Wade Frazier]

Thanks Krishna:

The whole paper is here.  Always good to read Wrangham.  Good stuff.  I think that I’ll reply to his paper in a way that will make it into my new thread on comprehensive thinking.  Human aggression certainly has evolutionary roots, and as you and I have written (as has de Waal, etc.), humans have aspects of both chimp and bonobo behavior.  But I think that in the past 10,000 years, and probably the past 60,000 years, variations in human proactive and reactive aggression had everything to do with the economic situation.  In a world of plenty, proactive aggression made little sense (raiding one’s neighbors, for example), and reactive aggression is almost always going to be some kind of scarcity reaction (fighting over food, mates, space).  In a world of abundance, both proactive and reactive aggression will largely vanish.  

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Briefly, before I resume my busy day, my Ed bio project, and noting how fraudulent the academics and intellectuals are in their attacks, and how Dennis was subjected to far more spectacular and even deadly attacks, are partly done to help disabuse people of the social approach to free energy, as well as the many other delusional approaches.  They won’t work.  There is no student body, university, or “progressive” institution, much less any Establishment institution, such as those in Washington, D.C., that is going to help with this Epochal task.  I constantly get free energy newbies who think that their social circle has the right stuff, and that is their egos and naïveté talking, but it is a typical lesson to learn, even a necessary one, to come to the understanding that virtually nobody is home, anywhere on Earth.  It is just the reality of the planet we live on, and there is no use judging it, but pursuing what might work.  

Only when the awakened really awaken to that reality are they going to be any use for what I am doing.  Otherwise, they chase their delusions that lead nowhere, and they can get wrecked lives and worse out of the deal.  I learned these lessons the hard way myself.  Again, my best students almost always do that for a little while, until they realize its futility (they were trying the easy way out), and then they come to me, ready to do the work and learn.  Only then can progress be made with my approach.  But time is short.  This path is teaching me patience.   

Best,

Wade

Edited June 7, 2018 by Wade Frazier

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Krishna:

To your Martin Luther question, your buddy Ian Morris would also place Luther and what happened in a larger context.  I think that it is legitimate to wonder how influential New World societies were in triggering the Enlightenment, and Europe’s rise of reason and science was definitely influenced by the reintroduction of “pagan” Greek teachings via captured Islamic libraries.  I think that what Luther did was influenced by the same dynamics that caused the New World events, and the erosion of Biblical infallibility by discovering lands not described in the Bible was part of it.  I would say that Martin Luther’s work and the “discovery” of the New World had the same ultimate cause, which was the rise of Europe.  Luther and Columbus were affected by the process of European expansion.  The printing press was invented a half-century before Columbus’s fateful voyage, and the Church intended to use it for further Catholic hegemony, but it backfired.  Rising literacy ended up being a threat to Church authority.  It was better for Church hegemony to have illiterate peasants, with a priesthood interpreting the “good book” for them, than a literate and rising middle class.  

The 1521 Diet of Worms, in which Charles condemned Luther, happened at the height of his power, as his armies marauded through Europe, he was the Holy Roman Emperor, plunder rolled in from the New World (the Aztecs were conquered in 1521), and the Church had never had such success in recruiting members of the flock, with thousands of the native survivors baptized daily.  But it soon began to unravel, and when Charles stepped down in 1556, the Crown was nearly bankrupt.  In 1559, the infamous Index of banned books was first published, and wars soon raged across Europe.  When the dust finally cleared in 1648, the Church would never regain its hegemony in Northern Europe.  The fighting extended to the New World, and the big losers were the natives.  

The fitful rise of science began then, too.  One deforested imperial contestant turned to coal, and the Fourth Epoch began.  Those were chaotic, seminal times, and untangling the dynamics is not easy.  Morris credits the increase of Europe’s effective hinterland by learning to sail the oceans, and I will not disagree, but it was an unparalleled disaster for the world’s peoples, with an unprecedented demographic catastrophe that depopulated three continents, another continent had its people forcibly enslaved to replace the quickly decimated natives of the New World (and the Arab slave trade was nearly as bad), and that “stimulating” Transatlantic trade network was wholly evil, as its principle products were slaves, sugar (effectively a drug), rum, and gold and silver bought with millions of native lives.  It was a rape-and-plunder economy.  England’s first capitalist “bubble” was over the slave trade, and the rape of India began about when the Industrial Revolution began taking off.  

For me, during my studies, seeing what Europe used its increasing technological prowess for (conquering humanity), and what the USA did with its postwar hegemony, it was all evil, in my opinion.  White people had a chance to unite humanity with a rise of living standards that would be epochal in significance, but it used its advantage to slaughter and enslave humanity.  You may be a high-caste beneficiary who is eating imperial crumbs, but the vast majority of your countrymen live lives of misery to this day, thanks to the rise of Britain.  I wrote about Jimmy Wales being a neo-con, and that has plenty to do with the propaganda article on Ed today at Wikipedia.  Wales married Tony Blair’s secretary, and met her at the capitalist enclave at Davos.  I don’t need to remind too many people that Blair played Mussolini to Bush’s Hitler.  When they had their pre-invasion “summit” in the Azores, it was literally hosted by a fascist (Portugal is Spain’s little buddy).  I truly hope that Blair is remembered like Mussolini is, but that won’t happen at Wikipedia. 

Best,

Wade

Edited July 23, 2018 by Wade Frazier

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Krishna:

Ah yes, Wikipedia, the necessary evil these days.  Your advice makes sense if you can see the edits.  Virtually everything that I did there was erased, on the flimsiest of pretexts.  The extreme reaction to my work that you just witnessed has been a typical reception for many years.  You would think that I was the world’s greatest plagiarist and copyright violator, given what happened.  It was the Internet equivalent of Dennis’s spending two years behind bars, and nearly dying there, for failing to file a form.  My work means the end of the world as we know it, and at some level, people understand that, and hence the violent reactions, although they can rarely admit it to themselves.  I try to not take it personally.  

I’ll have a little more to say about Wikipedia, but not a whole lot.  Like so many things, its performance falls far short of its promise, and it is nearly a parody of an encyclopedia today.  I refer to it too, but warily.   When the story of life on Earth gets to the human parts, especially current events, Wikipedia can become worse than worthless, with all of the ax-grinders doing their thing, and Wikipedia may well have been captured by the intelligence community, with its neo-con co-founder.  

On Illich, maybe you can write something on what Illich is missing about the Fifth Epoch  (a little homework ).  It lies outside of his view of the possible.  Without clean and abundant energy, a world of abundance cannot come to pass.  I have rarely seen a pundit or philosopher who could really understand abundance, as they fall off the rails into thinking in terms of exuberant, sustainable, and the like.  Until people can release their epochal conditioning, they really can’t begin to imagine it, which is why I always say that a person has to be awakened already, or they won’t begin to understand.  The GCs know exactly what I am writing about, which is why they keep the lid so tightly on it, as they keep humanity oblivious of its potential, keeping people at the level of survival and temporarily sating their addictions.  It is not easy to enslave the awake, not in the Fourth Epoch.

The arrival of decentralized, clean, abundant energy will be the biggest event in the human journey, and will wipe away nearly all of the social structures that Illich theorized about, such as nations, exchange institutions, etc.  Illich focused on transportation, but that is a tiny aspect of the issue.  That conversation that I imagine the choir one day singing has never been heard before, and truly, only a relative few are going to be able to hear it, but they will be enough.  

Best,

Wade

Edited July 29, 2018 by Wade Frazier

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Krishna:

You mean this section?  I don’t plan on updating that essay soon, but I may put something here, or maybe somewhere around here.  I plan some significant revisions to my Third Epoch chapter, and writing more about the thin energy surplus of agrarian societies, and how that made them unstable, is planned.  Of course, when invaders commandeer agrarian economies in mercantile/imperial efforts, it is a catastrophe for the conquered, and I’ll write some on that subject.  Over the long years of study, I finally came to understand what self-determination really means and how costly it was when people were prevented from pursuing it, as they lived in various forms of bondage.  

I know where your heart is, and writing a little more about India is appropriate for my work, but probably more in the big essay.  That section in my Lies essay where the rape of India is covered is more about the contrast between what I was taught and what my adult studies revealed.  English royalty is more popular in the USA than in the UK, for another one of those diaspora effects.  A bit of trivia on Late Victorian Holocausts; I was studying it during my epic meeting with Brian in Sacramento in August 2001.  I had the book with me on that trip.  I think that I first read of the rape of India in Noam’s Year 501, around the same time that I read American Holocaust, which was my big wake-up call on what the European “settling” of the Americas was really like.  

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Krishna:

We will see what I add to my big essay.  Maybe a little more on those subjects, but feeding the peasants is not a thrust of my work (the exchange game), but making them richer than Bill Gates, and only free energy can do that.  

Tverberg’s latest is the short version of my big essay, at least until free energy comes into the picture.  OK, it is anecdote time.  I periodically contact people who might be interested in free energy.  They are few and far between to begin with, but Tverberg is a member of a milieu of financial bloggers who at least have some understanding of how our world really works, and they rightfully place the financial economy as a superficial exchange mechanism, not important in of itself, which is a sophisticated understanding that few of the financially trained ever learn.  After years of reading those energy bloggers, I thought that somebody might be home.  Wrong again.  A few years ago, after my big essay was published, I contacted several of those leading energy bloggers, including one who actually writes that free energy is almost here.  The only one that I heard back from was Tverberg, and while it was nice getting any reply at all, her response was to direct me to the Post Carbon Institute, where Richard Heinberg holds court.  I had to laugh.  This is how inbred the field is today.  It is an improvement in ways over thinking that money means anything, but those people usually become Level 3s.  

Best,

Wade