Cipolla's five fundamental laws of stupidity:

1. Always and inevitably, everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation.

2.The probability that a certain person (will) be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person.

3. A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses.

4. Non-stupid people always underestimate the damaging power of stupid individuals. In particular, non-stupid people constantly forget that at all times and places, and under any circumstances, to deal and/or associate with stupid people always turns out to be a costly mistake.

5. A stupid person is the most dangerous type of person.

My thoughts on Joe Rogan

For those who unaware of Joe Rogan, he is a former reality tv host,  MMA color commentator and comedian who is the principal figure behind the very successful - Joe Rogan Experience podcast. He is well known for engaging in extended discussions with guests that average around two and a half hours.  Much of his material has been well received and he now boasts a viewership that routinely dwarfs that of the mainstream media.

I have for the most part had a favourable disposition to Rogan.  Most admirably he served as a pertient avenue for freedom of speech during the Covid lockdowns, when various state actors were using the pandemic as an excuse to suppress necessary discussion on health policy. Rogan took issue with this stance providing a forum for both dissenting and established opinion.Elucidating the truth was his raison d'etre. Something I could only respect.

Rogan also helped boost the profile of Jordan Peterson and Gad Saad especially when the former was attacked by the opinion police here in Canada. Rogan's opposition to Wokeism has been relentless. The way I see it,  is that he likely peaked in 2022 (at the time of the Trucker protest in Canada) when the excesses of the global political landscape had reached peak stupidity (or so it seemed).

However soon afterward I started to notice that Rogan was shifting in focus. He was becoming more conspiratorial in nature. Sub plots around complex phenomena were highlighted with greater regularity and more time was being allotted to those voices who emphasized opaque double play invisible to us regular mortals.. 

While he still was far from the loony world of Alex Jones, Rogan seemed far less discerning with maintaining intellectual balance on his show. Outlier voices were granted more air time as Rogan pushed forward with what appeared to be his personal fight with the establishment. 

Rogan clearly relished the opportunity of taking down accepted views with hostile unsubstantiated narratives an observation that was highlighted recently  during his interview with historical podcaster and WWII revisionist Darryl Cooper.

Just as he did on the Tucker Carlson, Cooper reiterated his extreme view, based on selective fact mining and a loose interpretation of events. His central point is Winston Churchill was the war’s baddie and that Hitler has been misunderstood (a common far right position). The research and finely reviewed studies that have filled academia to the contrary be damned. Cooper had it figured out and Rogan was giving him the chance to shine.

Lacking in topic knowledge Rogan was limited in his push back, nor did he appear to want to do so. There was no need to counterbalance the Cooper take with that of a mainstream historian such Victor Davis Hanson or an Andrew Roberts. Why bother?

What mattered to Rogan and I have noticed this in his stance since then is that Cooper had stuck his finger in the eye of the MAN and that is what really mattered. For him it was good enough.

 This is where Rogan is as a person right now and Cooper had delivered.  As for the truth it can take a back seat. The medium had delivered the message.

Thoughts on History

A deference to credentialism is never a viable approach to reinforce one's argument. Nevertheless this still doesn't imply that all opinions are equally valid. They simply are not. When analyzing an event and its repercussions a theoretical interpretation must still ride on the evidence presented and the plausibility of the thinking advanced to buttress it. Primary sources count more than their secondary sources. They are less clouded by a degree of removal from the event.

While originality of thought and dissenting view should be welcomed the originality counts for nothing if it fails to adhere to the factual constraints. There is no substitution for a thoroughness of investigation. The problem with many amateurs dabbling in history is that they often fail to recognize these truisms.

 

Ten concerns that I have with the overly slick Mark Carney

1.    He has very little political experience and appears to have been vaunted into his prime minister role by a great deal of non-transparent back dealing.

2.   He is very well connected to the WEF and the Davos crowd which means that he will likely continue Trudeau’s globalist outlook. He appears to be cut from the same cloth as Macron, Starmer and Merkel.

3.   He has surrounded himself with the same incompetent politicians Joly, Friedland etc that characterized the Trudeau administration.

4.     He has a personal vision, as outlined in his book ,that is strongly rooted in with the Net Zero Environmental philosophy. When actioned such policies have been disastrous in Germany and other parts of Europe.

5.       He seems as based on his rhetoric so far that he does not personally have solid grasp of the nuances of the Arab-Israel crisis.

6.       He says almost nothing about his plans for dealing with the broken judicial and criminal enforcement system in the country.

7.       He will likely not do away with the DEI encroachment in federal government.

8.    His new found nationalism is not  believable. The Liberal party mishandled immigration and  lampooned Canadian essentialism  under Justin Trudeau. Fast forward to now and  Carney now wants us accept that his anti-Trump stance is grounded in an intrinsic pro-Canadian mantra.

9.       His supporters make him out to be an economic whiz kid even though his record at the Bank of England was sketchy at best.

10   The backtrack on the Carbon tax seems to be an election ploy. Expect this lost revenue to surface elsewhere in a tax as Carney prioritizes his Net zero vision.

Two Months in - The pros and Cons of Trump 2.0

These are the Positives of Trump 2.0:

• Taking a broad stroke to DEI  by removing these programs from the federal government and related institution. People should not be judged, promoted or hired on any other category than individual merit.
• Securing the border, stamping down on illegal immigration and deporting violent aliens.
• Ending student visas for external political troublemakers and rabble rousers on University campuses.
• Forcing universities through the withholding on funds to deal actively with anti-Semitism on campus. Next stop anti-White racism.
• Auditing of Federal government budgeting (through DOGE) to reduce gross waste and the mismanagement of funds. Closing down of inefficient federal branches.
• Issuing a federal ban for men competing in women’s sports
• Changing the leadership in the FBI to enhance a global cleanup of that organization.
• Setting in motion a process for ending the ineffective Department of Education.
• Pushing Europe to increase their individual nation funding of their own defence.
• Using pressure on Panama to end their deal with Chinese related groups regarding control of both ends of the canal.
• Dealing a blow to the Houthis for their attack on shipping in the Red Sea.
• Forcing Hamas to release hostages taken on October 7^th. Trump has shown strong support for Israel.
• Removing aid to the South African government for their racist policies.
• Restabilising a necessary cooperation between Space X and NASA as seen by the rescue of the stranded astronauts.
• Beginning the process for the recognition of the Lumbee tribe in North Carolina.
• Replacing Steve Bannon with Elon Musk as a key advisor. Bannon is a walking media disaster and a fraud.

Here though are the Negatives

• Raising Tariffs – While it is likely part of the ‘art of the deal’ this is a terrible way to negotiate with countries especially if they are traditional allies as Canada is with the US. Flip flopping with respect to tariff start dates is also adding much uncertainty to the global and US economy.
• Focusing on Trade deficits as economic polic.One cannot look at trade deficits with another country and necessarily see it as a bad idea without looking at the sum total of trade with all nations. The United States runs a trade deficit with Canada as it is heavily reliant on Canada’s natural resources to drive its industrial machine. Trump is veering into the Mercantilist trap if he sees this as an ongoing economic policy.
• Childish name calling – While Justin Trudeau was a poor Canadian prime minister and should never have mocked Trump behind his back (as he foolishly did) – Trump needs to do better than his 51^st state or Governor Trudeau jibe. Two wrongs don’t make a right. He has also re-energized the moribund Canadian Liberal Party in a way that could well salvage election victory, from a once likely defeat.
• Threatening to annex Greenland is another ill-timed approach that is damaging relations with another ally (this time Denmark)
• Removing security clearances from Mike Pompeo and John Bolton indicates a pettiness that further augments the notion that Trump doesn’t tolerate dissent or difference of opinion. Not only is the optics terrible but both men (who are well established American patriots) don’t deserve such treatment.
• Some of Trump’s selections for top positions in government are somewhat dubious. Both Tulsi Gabbard (a far leftist who was somewhat of a Bernie bro) and RFK Jr (who has a tendency to sink into conspiracy theory) spring to mind. Steve Witkoff, the Middle East, who has controiversial close ties with terror supporting Qatar still has the jury open on him.
• Trump should never have allowed his differences with the Ukrainian leader Volodymr Zelenskyy to spill out on stage as they did in the White House Meeting. The meeting should have been held behind close doors. The events that unfolded painted a picture of the POTUS as not being an honest broker between Russia and the Ukraine. If anything it appeared to greatly embolden Vladimir Putin who is the actual aggressor in this war.
• Trump needs to tone down his uncontrolled deference to exaggerating numbers and statistics. Superlatives are useful for salesmen not as an instrumernt for winning the public trust as leader of the free world.

Quick Questions I have answered on Quora

Why has Europe failed to match the power of the USA?

The two world wars greatly weakened Europe. It also fostered a mindset that encouraged self flagellation and a national drop off in the will to power. Add to that a declining birth rate, the adoption of cradle-to-grave socialism and a reluctance to spend on its own defense and the reasons for the decline become obvious. In many ways the individual European countries have lost their identity. Poorly crafted immigration policies have not helped. For the record, until recently (although the jury is still out) the US was not far behind.

Is Turkey's relationship with its allies being affected by Erdogan's actions?

Yes. Erdogan’s shift toward a type of Islamic nationalism runs contrary to NATO’s western liberal ideals. Turkey’s presence in NATO is equivalent to having a fox in the hen house. It needs to restore Ataturk type secularism in its national outlook or leave.

Why are more and more people now believing in conspiracy theories compared to, let's say, 10 years ago?

The proliferation of various news sources and the failure of the legacy media to report objectively on key issues. This is further compounded by the drop off in trust regarding key institutions. Some of it is unfortunately warranted.

Which religion do you think will still be in existence in 20 years time?

All of the major religions will be around. All boast adherents in the millions (albeit to different orders of magnitude) and twenty years is not a long time in religious history.

Why did the Roman Empire choose Christianity over Islam?

Islam was not around in 313 AD when religious tolerance was granted via the Edict of Milan. Nor did it it exist in 380 AD when the Edict of Thessalonica made Christianity the official religion. Muhammad, the founder of Islam lived between 570 and 632 AD.

Stoicism

I have been reading considerably on the philosophy of Stoicism, whose central tenet is the concept of virtue. In its essence Stoicism isn't so much a philosophy but a way of life. It is rooted in a pragmatism that can be applied to our experiential existence. 

Here are some key points about Stoicism:

1. Its origin goes back to the time of Ancient Greece and the thinking of Zeno of Citium who agued that 'The goal of life is living in agreement with nature.'

2. However it was the Romans especially Seneca the Younger (and his notion of time management), Epictetus (on Resilience) and the philosopher Emperor Marcus Aurelius (most famous for the wisdom outlined in his work Meditations) that developed the framework for Stoicism.

3. Stoicism divides the realm that personally impacts an individual into aspects that one can control (internals) and those that are beyond our control (externals). It is the former that it focuses on. In this regard it asks us as an individual to harness our perceptions, decisions and attitudes towards a 'Call to Action'.

4. One's work, fitness and personal relationships are aspects we can manage as well as the challenge of facing our death.

5. Virtue is key to Stoicism . It through virtue that we can navigate the struggles and turbulence of life. Four factors define virtue viz. wisdom, courage, justice and temperance.

6. Wisdom extends beyond knowledge. It urges us to understand the world and seek out truths. Courage requires that we use rationality and strength to face adversity and avoid choosing paths of ease that do not permit us the opportunity to grow.

7. Justice requires that we balance kindness and fairness in making decisions and finally temperance challenges us to control our emotions and desires.

8. It is through a focus on virtue that we cultivate character. and gravitate towards Eudaimonia which is the stoic goal of happiness and flourishing.

9. Virtue requires perspective and an understanding of the impression (initial perceptions) and assent (processing of said perceptions) to regulate our beliefs. A view from above is necessary to transcend our material existence. This will allow us to motion towards tranquility and an embrace of Amor Fati (loving one's fate).