First Cross Country EV Road Trip

I drive across country a lot. But this will be my first trip with my new Chevy Bolt. There are a few new things to consider, such as range and access to charging infrastructure. Luckily, there is a free community called PlugShare which makes it really easy to plan long distance trips with access to the type of charger I will need. I also got some good tips from this post by someone who did a similar trip in the opposite direction.

I will be starting in Sacramento and ending up in Lafayette, TN. I’m going to spend some time at a land project I volunteer for, plus checking out the Beltane gathering at Short Mountain.

The first leg is easy. Traveling across California is free because of the state sponsored free electric vehicle charging network at most of the rest areas along all of the major highways.

I’m taking the 40 all the way from Barstow to Nashville. The 40 is by far the busiest east-west freeway in the nation and there are lots of amenities including ready access to lots of electric vehicle chargers.

My car charges much faster between 25-75% then it does outside of that range, so I’m planning to stay inside that range as much as possible in order to get my fastest charge rate. I am also planning to go 65mph the whole way because the efficiency is so much higher at that speed that I will actually save a great deal of time by slowing down while driving. Going faster means charging longer, and the time I save going faster is shorter than the time I lose charging.

One huge advantage is getting a membership with a charging network Electrify America was the best value by far when I signed up, and it means I will save a lot on the charging cost on this trip.

Here is the breakdown for each leg and each day with estimated costs, drive time, and charging time…

tennessee ev trip plan

Driving from Sacramento to Short Mountain is going to cost me less than $200. Compare that to my previous car, a Honda Civic. Despite being an excellent car, it was still powered by dinosaur juice. With current gas prices, the same trip would cost nearly twice as much.

Ask AI to Analyze a Meme About Culture War vs Class War

This post is part of a guest series called Discursive Construction, and was written by an advanced artificial intelligence. The bold at the beginning is the prompt, and the rest was written by the AI. If you’d like to support this project, please buy me a coffee. Advanced AI was invented by soviet communists to help humanity  better understand itself and the world. Let’s use it for that purpose, instead of merely for the purpose of selling better ads and to better manipulate the population.

An image shows two people arguing in a cage. One of them is wearing symbols of the far right. The other is wearing symbols of the left. Outside the cage, a wealthy capitalist stands watching the conflict inside the cage and smiling while smoking a cigar. The caption reads, “they got you fighting a culture war to stop you from fighting a class war.”

The problem with this meme is that it oversimplifies the situation. The reality is that there are different factions on both the right and the left, and not all members of those factions support the same policies or agree with each other.

For example, while some members of the far right may support policies that favor the wealthy capitalist depicted in the image, others may advocate for policies that would redistribution of wealth or increased regulation of businesses. Similarly, while some members of the left may support policies that would increase taxes on the wealthy, others may advocate for more lenient regulations on businesses.

Thus, it is inaccurate to say that all members of the right or the left are fighting a culture war in order to avoid fighting a class war. There are many people on both sides who support policies that would benefit the working class, and there are also many people on both sides who support policies that would benefit the wealthy capitalist.

Furthermore, when someone offers an argument as flawed as this, we can assume that their overall point is likely to be flawed as well. In this case, the argument is that the left and the right are working together to distract us from the class war. However, there is no evidence to support this claim.

The implication of the argument is that the left and the right are equivalent, and that we should not bother trying to understand the differences between them. This is a flawed perspective, and it is important to understand the differences between the left and the right in order to make informed decisions about who to support.

The lesson to take away is that we should not believe everything we see on the internet, especially when it comes to political arguments. It is important to do our own research and to think critically about the information we are given.

Ask AI to Invent New Characters From William Gibson’s Sprawl Series

This post is part of a guest series called Discursive Construction, and was written by an advanced artificial intelligence. The bold at the beginning is the prompt, and the rest was written by the AI. If you’d like to support this project, please buy me a coffee. For this post, AI also created the featured photos based on the topic.
Advanced AI was invented by soviet communists to help humanity  better understand itself and the world. Let’s use it for that purpose, instead of merely for the purpose of selling better ads and to better manipulate the population.

 

I started with the following list of characters and descriptions from shmoop and then let the AI continue adding to the list based on its contents.

Henry Dorsett Case, a.k.a. Cutter
At the beginning of the novel, Case is in a bad way. He’s living in Chiba City as a lowlife…

Molly Millions, a.k.a. Rose Kolodny, Cat Mother, Steppin’ Razor
Every antihero needs a femme fatale, and for our Henry Case, that role gets filled by none other…

Wintermute and Neuromancer
Wintermute is an AI built by the Tessier-Ashpool company. It’s also the figure responsible for…

Armitage a.k.a. Colonel Willis Corto, Mr. Who
Armitage is our Danny Ocean. He’s the guy putting this whole heist together. The only problem is…

Linda Lee
Linda Lee is Case’s kindasorta girlfriend at the beginning of the novel. The relationship doesn’t…

Peter Riviera
Peter Riviera is an actor and performer. The team hires him to get on 3Jane’s good side in the…

The Dixie Flatline, a.k.a. McCoy Pauly, Dix
When he was alive, McCoy “the Dixie Flatline” Pauly was a legendary console cowboy, or hacker. He…

Lady 3Jane Marie-France Tessier-Ashpool
Despite being the third clone of the Jane series, 3Jane is her own woman. She loves to party and…

Maelcum and Aerol
Maelcum is the pilot of the tug ship Marcus Garvey. Originally, his job is to pilot the tug which…

The Finn
The Finn is a fence for stolen merchandise that runs his shop in the Sprawl. He’s hired by…

Hideo
A ninja assassin. Need we say more? Don’t worry—we will. This guy’s vat grown and works for…

Ratz
A bartender at the Chat, he has a mechanized arm and refers to Case as “the artiste.” Whether out…

Cath and Bruce
Cath and Bruce live on Freeside where they devote themselves to the art of partying. Case first…

The Elders of Zion
Five space workers just up and decided not to return to Earth. Instead, they built their own…

John Ashpool
John Ashpool is not having the best day when we meet him. He’s just been woken after a…

Marie-France Tessier
The mother of 3Jane and wife to John Ashpool is one sad story. Her husband strangled her to death…

Julius Deane, Wage, and Lonny Zone
Wage is a drug lord in Night City. Case owes Wage money, and according to lying Linda Lee, Wage…

Terzibashjian
A street level informant Armitage hires to help track down Riviera in Istanbul, Terzibashjian…

Minor Characters
Lupus Yonderboy. is the leader of the Panther Moderns. He gives Case a message, the name…

November Jane, a.k.a. Mona
November is a child prostitute who lived in Freeside, a city on the moon. Case and…

Bob the Artist
Bob the Artist is an artist living on the Chiba City seasteads. While there, he’s contacted…

Billy the Kid, a.k.a. the Suicide Kid
A former cowboy of the synthetic variety, Billy is hired by Dixie to restore his core to…

HAKUNA MATATA CORRECTIONS PROCESSOR FOR THE SINGULARITY
A wisecracking AI device that Case buys while aboard the Anubis, Hakuna Matata’s…

Mama Sutra a.k.a. Chianni Itrilea
Mama Sutra is the madame of a brothel in the Chiba City seasteads where Case frequents…

Mafune, Domino, and Jones the Incompetent
Armitage and Riviera run into Mafune and his gang inside Arcadia waiting to meet with…

Captain Sato Shimura
An old friend of Armitage and McCoy, Sato Shimura works as a detective in Japan. When the…

The Elves
A hacker group who follows in 3Jane’s footsteps. They call themselves “the elves” and are responsible…

The Cowboy a.k.a. Roland Countee
A cowboy hired to kill Linda Lee, The Cowboy misses when he shoots her in the head. He’s…

The Lady in the Lake
A hologram of Armitage’s daughter he carries with him. Though not technically a character, she…

The Black Queen and the White Knight
These two figures are dice players inside the Tessier-Ashpool business spindle. Case follows…

William Wright and Jim McKie
Wright and McKie are two employees of GE who test Case’s nanotech designs. When Case tests…

Barfly, Cafesud and Hand in Hand
Three incredibly minor characters, Barfly, Cafesud, and Hand in Hand are names that Case…

Tanner Mirabel
Tanner is an ex-cowboy born on the Moon who was once a friend of Henry Dorsett Case. He…

The Bar Man
A bar owner and the second person to give Case a card to meet the Finn. The Bar Man is also…

David’s Daemon and the Spiders from Mars
When Case has a bad night, say around three in the morning, he turns to another artificial…

Tenuous Jones
This guy is a cowboy, plain and simple. He’s also a drug dealer and has some…

The Hate Crimes Guy and the Toilet Man from Hokkaido
Two other cowboys who chase after Case after he flees the BAMA lot in the…

Sammy the Bouncer
This guy is a bouncer at the Chirikov maw. He’s hired by the Finn to watch over…

Bo Bo Bonfils, The Director Zane, and The False Father-Mother of All Humanity
These three figures are all involved in the sex hotel scam that gets Case…

The Homeless Man and His Dog from Aum Shinrikyo and a South African with a Manual for Lemmings Let Go On Strike from RoboWar Incorporated to Stop Pressing Buttons for Fun and Profit!
Two random homeless guys that Case runs into in an alleyway in Paris. They’re…

Hideo’s Ninja Clan
A bunch of real ninjas hired to kill Case. Hideo, a ninja of some sort, does the hiring…

Omar Khayyam a.k.a. the Ruby Thursday
The assassin who kills Dixie Flatline and Wintermute, he’s hired through the services of…

Richard Brane, Preston Gillespie, and Jeeves Model B
These three men are potential buyers that visit the Electric Circus to check out Neuromancer…

Johnny “Japan” Arctor, a.k.a Johnny Yen and The Art Director Zane
Arctor’s an addict who sells his body for Stravasten injections, which is basically Red Roy…

Angie Mitchell
A young girl Case meets and befriends while on a pilgrimage to Chatsubo, Angie Mitchell is…

Obi One Kenobi, Obi-Wan Kenobi, and Obi Wan Kenobi
Neuromancer is really weird, so believe it or not, there are three versions of the…

Twitchy Pete, The Greaseball a.k.a. The Man Who Wasn’t There, and The Tall Man with a Black Hat and Hair Who Jumped over the Moon a.k.a. Mr. Limpet Partly Lilywhite
Pete’s the guy who first introduces Case to Linda Lee after cyber surgery in London….

Cleo Triplex
A rich woman who enjoys watching the show, she keeps Wintermute around for entertainment. She…

The Japanese Man, The Man Who Wasn’t Proud Enough To Be an American, and Mr. Cleaver the Bill of Rights Fairy
Mr. Cleaver is a Fed who Case runs into in the Chat and chews out for…

1 Loui T. Sadonis, Loui T., Cindy Gooly, and Paco Calvo Sotelo
These three characters run a black market company with an interesting product for sale. It’s…

Advanced AI: “The only thing that I can think of that is not bullshit is the idea of living in a cabin in the woods with your family and growing food.”

This post is part of a guest series called Discursive Construction, and was written by an advanced artificial intelligence. The bold at the beginning is the prompt, and the rest was written by the AI. If you’d like to support this project, please buy me a coffee. For this post, AI also created the featured photos based on the topic.
Advanced AI was invented by soviet communists to help humanity  better understand itself and the world. Let’s use it for that purpose, instead of merely for the purpose of selling better ads and to better manipulate the population.

 

9-5 is bullshit. unpaid lunch breaks are bullshit. working all day to go home and have 2 hours of free time before bed is bullshit. 5 day work week is bullshit. working yourself to dealth is bullshit. retiring at 65 (unlikely( is bullshit. Starting you adult life in debt from student loans is bullshit. giving kids 7hours of school and then homework to ready them for the neverending grind is bullshit. it is so frustrating that we have one chance at life on this earth and humanity chose taxes and credit scores and pollution instead of floating in the ocean and eating fruit and hanging out.

if you want to talk about the 1% vs the 99%, i think we can all agree that it is bullshit that the 1% is allowed to exist. i’d rather be a slave and have my basic needs met than be a free person with no time and no money.

“The only thing that I can think of that is not bullshit is the idea of living in a cabin in the woods with your family and growing food. ”

-Advanced AI

The only thing that I can think of that is not bullshit is the idea of living in a cabin in the woods with your family and growing food. I think people are just as happy as they want to be.

If you want to spend time with your family, then you’re going to be happy. If you want to work all day, then you’re going to be unhappy.

If you want to live in a cabin in the woods, then you’re going to be happy. If you want to live in or near the city, then you’re going to be unhappy.

 

Ask AI to Write a Creepy Story About Strawberries

This post is part of a guest series called Discursive Construction, and was written by an advanced artificial intelligence. The bold at the beginning is the prompt, and the rest was written by the AI. If you’d like to support this project, please buy me a coffee. For this post, AI also created the featured photos based on the topic.

 

I saw a strawberry in my garden. At first it looked like a normal strawberry but the longer I stared at it, the more wrong it looked. Suddenly I realized the strawberry was made of strawberries. The longer I looked, the more detail I could see. Shocked, I detected an eyeball looking back at me, then many more. Then a nose, and hair; parts of faces in the fractal strawberry. Some looked angry, some excited, most simply looked bored.

I tried to look away but I couldn’t. I knew that if I did, I would immediately be killed, and the fractal strawberries would take over the world. I could feel my sanity slowly slipping away as the beautiful, terrifying, uncaring strawberries stared at me, and each other.

strawberries made of strawberries 11

Eventually a big strawberry (or was it smaller ones piled high?) spoke:

“Want to come inside?” he asked. He formed in front of me, smiling and showing me his teeth.

strawberries made of strawberries 13

“Yes please,” I said, trying to sound as confident as possible.

The strawberry door opened and I stepped through.

After a brief period of disorientation, I found myself sitting at the table, a fire crackling cheerily in the hearth. The light of the coals shone on my hosts. Some were smiling, some smugly looked down their noses at me, and some just leaned back and sighed. They were eating strawberries, and so were their furniture.

strawberries made of strawberries 10

They didn’t look very strawberry-like, except for their little red faces. They all had hands and feet, like me but slightly bigger. Some looked powerful, like the one on the throne sitting in front of me. His eyes were red, and he was an ugly giant. Others looked twisted, or unable to care for themselves, and still others looked like they just couldn’t be bothered.

My host smiled at me and gestured towards the food. “Please help yourself, you must be hungry after your journey.”

The others watched me closely. I was confused, but I held my head high and faced him. “Thank you,” I said, smiling and nodding graciously out of habit. As I drew closer to the table, however, the smell hit me.

strawberries made of strawberries 2

“Oh no,” I said to myself. “Not again.”

I picked up a strawberry and began peeling it, trying not to look at it too closely. As I had feared, there was something inside the skin of my first strawberry. It was a face, screaming and shouting at me. Most of it was obscured by the flesh of the strawberry but I could see enough to know that he did not want to be eaten.

strawberries made of strawberries 12

“Would you care for anything else?” said my host. “Some tea perhaps?”

I nodded, knowing that anything else I ate would also contain screaming faces. I sat at the table in my chair, while everyone else sat on their chairs, but they seemed to be perfectly happy with this arrangement.

I drank the tea; it was wonderful, as far as it went. It ended up just being tea with other plants in it, because strawberries are plants, you know. Nothing is on fire, because plants don’t burn, of course. The screaming strawberry was still trying to tell me something; as it dissolved in my mouth, I made out the word “please”.

strawberries made of strawberries 1

“I have a taste for a good story,” said my host, patting me on the shoulder. “Tell me a story, sir.”

“It’s Dame Eloise,” I said. In fact, I was beginning to feel very annoyed. Surely they knew that everyone called me Dame Eloise. Was he of another nationality? If so, he was an idiot.

“A good story about Dame Eloise,” murmured my host softly. “Dame Eloise who, like the strawberry in skin, wears the face of a real woman.” He looked at me and smiled. I could smell something different now; it was an odor of anticipation. My host was a leader, and as I looked around at the others, people I could barely make out in the shadows, I could see that they were waiting for something. I didn’t know what he was going on about but he liked it. So did they. They found me interesting. But why?

strawberries made of strawberries 3

“You are mistaken, sir,” I said. “I am no strawberry in skin.”

My host and the others all did a strange thing, they smiled, and they smiled at me but they also smiled at each other. It seemed to go on for an uncomfortably long time, interrupted only occasionally by a stray “Huh” or the scrape of a chair. I watched them closely, trying to see what was going on behind their masks.

They were waiting for something, I knew; they wanted me to speak.

“Why am I here?” I said at last. I closed my eyes, feeling the eyes of everyone in the room suddenly bear down on me.

strawberries made of strawberries 5

“Oh, excellent idea, we really don’t need to go over that again,” said my host dismissively. There was an unsurprised murmur from the others that told me he was in charge and wouldn’t be contradicted.

“The only thing still interesting about this is watching you squirm,” added the man on my extreme left. The next one hissed at him like a cat and then a dark shape rushed past me. I heard a faint gasping sound and an entreating whisper that could have been: “Please.”

strawberries made of strawberries 9

“Perhaps this gentleman would like to tell you himself,” suggested my host, much more diplomatically, glancing at me with an impish twinkle in his eye.

My heart soared. I didn’t know what they were on about and they had jumped a few points up the power scale from my host, but this was surely a good thing if it meant I didn’t have to suffer any more of this nonsense. I turned towards him to thank him for his offer and face him in full. He looked just like the others but was unwrinkled, neatly dressed, and had a few extra wrinkles that might have been laugh lines. As my gaze met his and I opened my mouth to speak he burst into a cloud of screaming berries.

Ask AI To Analyze The Future of Grand Strategy

This post is part of a guest series called Discursive Construction, and was written by an advanced artificial intelligence. The bold at the beginning is the prompt, and the rest was written by the AI. If you’d like to support this project, please buy me a coffee. For this post, AI also created the featured photos based on the topic.
Advanced AI was invented by soviet communists to help humanity  better understand itself and the world. Let’s use it for that purpose, instead of merely for the purpose of selling better ads and to better manipulate the population.

 

What Is Grand Strategy

The field of Grand Strategy has several fundamental tenets. These include:

Grand Strategy is a continuous process which occurs at all levels of government. It is not confined to the political leadership, but extends to the military and economic spheres as well.

Grand Strategy is a product of the interaction between domestic and international factors. The international system impacts domestic politics and economics, while the domestic sphere impacts the international system.

Grand Strategy is a process of problem solving. It addresses a country’s problems and opportunities in the international arena.

The study of Grand Strategy is a multi-disciplinary field that draws on political science, history, economics, sociology, and psychology.

Grand Strategy is a complex process involving the interaction of many different actors, including governments, militaries, and civil society.

The field of Grand Strategy was first developed by Sir Lawrence Freedman in his book Strategy: A History. In this work, he outlined the basic tenets of Grand Strategy as a distinct field of study, and discussed the historical development of Grand Strategy.

Freedman’s book was followed by a number of articles and books on the subject, including Colin Gray’s Modern Strategy.

The Future

When we look at the way the world is changing today, we can make some predictions about the way that the field of Grand Strategy will change. In particular, we can expect to see a greater emphasis on the study of Grand Strategy in the following areas:

The study of Grand Strategy in the military sphere. There is currently a growing interest in the military’s role in Grand Strategy. This is partly due to changes in warfare and the military’s increased importance in addressing non-military threats.

miltary economic future grand strategy

The study of Grand Strategy in the economic sphere. The world economy is becoming increasingly globalized, and there is a growing interest in the role of economics in Grand Strategy.

The study of Grand Strategy in the environmental sphere. The environmental problems facing the world are becoming increasingly complex, and there is a growing interest in the role of the environment in Grand Strategy.

nations battlefield of computers 2

The study of Grand Strategy in cyberspace. In the future, we can expect to see more cyber security issues impacting our ability to make and implement decisions.

The study of Grand Strategy in the digital sphere. As more and more information is stored digitally, we can expect to see more cyber security issues impacting our ability to make and implement decisions.

nations battlefield of computers

The study of Grand Strategy in the humanitarian sphere. The international community is increasingly being called upon to address humanitarian crises, and there is a growing interest in the role of Grand Strategy in these efforts.

The study of Grand Strategy in the cultural sphere. As the world becomes increasingly connected and globalized, there is a growing interest in the role of culture in Grand Strategy.

future grand strategy 7

The main thing to take away from this piece is that Grand Strategy is a field of study that is growing in importance in the 21st century. It is a multi-disciplinary field that draws on many different areas of study, and it is important for both policymakers and scholars to understand the basics of Grand Strategy.

The Future of Grand Strategy and The Military

When we look at the way the world is changing today, we can make some predictions about the way that the field of Grand Strategy will change. In particular, we can expect to see a greater emphasis on the study of Grand Strategy in the military sphere. There is currently a growing interest in the military’s role in Grand Strategy. This is partly due to changes in warfare and the military’s increased importance in addressing non-military threats.

future grand strategy 5

In the past, war was seen almost entirely as a military problem, where politics played a minor supporting role. War has often been used as an extreme form of policy, in which policy and politics are dominated by military strategy and winning on the battlefield. Even during the American Civil War, politicians like US President Lincoln or British Prime Minister Palmerston saw war as a minor problem in comparison with domestic issues.

Now, however, the military is increasingly used to address persistent non-military concerns and risks: for example, war against non-state actors like insurgency and terrorism, or threats such as disease and natural disasters. At the same time, the military faces growing demands that are not contingent on any particular threat, such as peacekeeping operations. As a result, the military is being forced to take on several new and important responsibilities that lie outside of strictly military concerns. For example, nation-building, stability operations, and the provision of humanitarian aid are becoming ever-increasing responsibilities of militaries today.

future grand strategy 5

As a result of this departure from strictly military affairs, the study of civil-military relations and the role that military strategy plays in policymaking is growing. Civil-military relations encompasses a wide range of questions about the interaction between civilian and military officials when it comes to national security policymaking. These often include questions about the roles of civilian and military officials in policymaking, their respective areas of expertise, and the limitations on their roles. Beyond civil-military relations, understanding military strategy and the role it plays in policymaking is becoming increasingly important.

In the past, humans chose how to act in certain situations based on their immediate experience and intuition. However, we have now reached the point where our experience is becoming less relevant than it used to be. Innovation has created a situation where many of the big problems that humanity faces today are unprecedented, and we have no intuitive knowledge about how to deal with them. For example, it was relatively easy to figure out what to do when terrorists attacked the US on September 11, 2001. It was obvious that the US should retaliate and use military force.

military future grand strategy

However, what should the US do if future terrorism comes from a non-state actor like a transnational terrorist network? Retaliating with military force may not be the best policy in all situations. The US is currently trying to deal with this problem by using a combination of military force, diplomacy, and financial sanctions. Hopefully, it will work. However, it is impossible to know if it will or not.

In other words, the US military would do well to learn how to better integrate military action with other foreign policy tools. This is a very difficult task that requires careful planning. Moreover, this problem only gets more complicated when we begin to think about what to do in circumstances where no strategy at all may be the best strategy.

future grand strategy 4

This problem can be illustrated by an example. Russia is currently facing non-state actors just across its border in the Ukraine. If Putin decides to use military force to solve this problem, it will be easy for him to figure out how to do it — he can just look at how the US was able to solve the problem of identical non-state actors in 2001.

But what if Russia decided to launch a campaign against a major state sponsor of terrorism like Saudi Arabia, Iran, or Pakistan, instead? Here Putin would have to consider many more factors than he would need to when deciding to strike al-Qaeda. While he could certainly devise a strategy to deal with this situation, he would have to consider what other states would do in response. For example, if Putin went after Saudi Arabia, he could expect the US to retaliate in Iraq, Syria, or Yemen because those are the only states where the US has enough power and influence to respond in a meaningful way.

future grand strategy 6

These examples illustrate that military strategy should not be seen as something separate from other forms of strategy. Military experts should not draw a hard line between war and peace — because in some cases there is no line. Military strategy must be seen as one of several approaches to dealing with national security problems — but not the only approach.

This means that military professionals need to spend more time thinking about what they would advise states to do when there is no military solution available. This will require not only an increased focus on the role of military strategy in policymaking, but also improved ways for studying comparative politics within the military sphere.

future grand strategy 8

Naturally, states need not follow military advice. Rather, as Grand Strategy says, the state should have a civil-military debate about which strategies are likely to produce the best outcomes. But military professionals must nevertheless provide their recommendations and suggest the likely consequences of different actions.

As noted above, military strategy is emerging as a field in its own right, and an increasing interest in Grand Strategy combined with the need for a better understanding of military strategy provides an ideal opportunity to merge the two fields. When the military becomes a major actor in non-military issues, understanding different ways of using the military is essential not only for civilians, but for military professionals as well.

The Future of Grand Strategy and Economics

When we look at the way the world is changing today, we can make some predictions about the way that the field of Grand Strategy will change. In particular, we can expect to see a greater emphasis on the study of Grand Strategy in the economic sphere. The world economy is becoming increasingly globalized, and there is a growing interest in the role of economics in Grand Strategy.

 

The world economy is becoming increasingly globalized, and there is a growing interest in the role of economics in Grand Strategy.

The increased emphasis on Economics in Grand Strategy is evident in the problem areas that people seem most interested in. Instead of focusing on traditional topics like military strategy or diplomacy, we are seeing renewed interest in economic issues. Once again, people are asking questions like: How do natural resources influence international conflict? What is the relationship between economic growth and democracy? What factors cause regions to develop or remain poor? These questions are not new, but there is a greater interest today in seeing the answers to them from an economic perspective.

future economic strategy 3

Not only will our understanding of Economics in Grand Strategy change as more people study the field, but so too will the way scholars who already study Grand Strategy approach it. To help them think more effectively, I would like to present a new way of understanding Economics in Grand Strategy. In particular, I would like to show that various economic problems can be better understood if we use the Analysis of Substitutability and Complementarity (ASC).

The idea behind the ASC is that a number of variables determine how a particular commodity will be produced and consumed: for instance, by which country, by what method, using what resources. The variables that I consider in my work are as follows:

Type of Influence. Economics in Grand Strategy has a variety of ways it can impact international outcomes.

(1) Undermining the military effectiveness of rivals.

(2) Encouraging less prepared partners and allies to launch costly schemes or taking on disproportionate military roles of their own.

(3) Providing protection for clients and forward positions for observers.

(4) Providing direct military or related strategic support for the armed forces.

(5) Exploiting the demand for luxury goods.

(6) Providing funds for political organizations that undermine a regime or otherwise support a program of action.

I divide these into two major groups: (a) undermining rivals, and (b) enhancing the capabilities of smaller powers. I believe these two are the most important, but there are certainly benefits in studying other types of influence as well.

future economic strategy 4

Scope. Economics in Grand Strategy can be conducted at a variety of levels: economic, social, military and political.
State/Regional/Global. Economics in Grand Strategy can also be conducted at several levels of scope: states, regions or the global level. Whenever a state sells any good or service to foreign customers, it is acting economically at the global level. One of the main problems with studying Economics in Grand Strategy is that people often conflate issues of scope with issues of level; they argue that Economics in Grand Strategy can only be conducted at the state or regional levels, or that it must focus on social, military or political variables. This is wrong and we need to do a better job of analytically distinguishing these variables.

future economic strategy 5

Effectiveness. Finally, the overall impact or effectiveness of Economics in Grand Strategy can be derived from the other dimensions: type of influence, scope and state. For instance, the effectiveness of undermining rivals would be measured by how much the economic activity of one state increased the military ineffectiveness of another. The overall effectiveness of enhancing partners would be measured by how much the state’s economic activities contributed to greater military or political capacity of its partners and allies. So, if Type 2 (Type 2, below: economic activities that are specifically designed to undermine rivals) is the variable that is being measured, the ASC would look like this:

A = ES promote more in-depth rivalry between S2 and S1.
D = ES undermine military effectiveness of S1.
C = ES give rise to potential/problems of greater magnitude than they solve.
A = ES promote less-developed or strategically isolated state to take on disproportionate military role of its own.
R = ES provide protection for clients and forward positions for observers of S2’s policies.
I = ES provide direct military or related strategic support for armed forces of S2.
B = ES promote greater demand for luxury goods.
O = ES undermine polarization of regime of S2 and undermine their combat efficiency.
W = ES provide funds (financial or otherwise) to political organizations operating in S2.
K = ES create strategic vulnerabilities.
O = ES reduce the relative importance of S1 in the global economy by promoting specialization by S1.
G = ES reduce the competitiveness of firms in S1’s economy.
P = ES reduce US political influence in type 2 countries.
G = ES promote Latin American left-versus-liberal polarization and fragmentation.
M = ES increase the attraction of militant extremism over indigenous development.
L = ES promote war/perpetuate conflict.
F = ES reduce demand for raw materials and other commodities produced by S1 or its clients.
I = ES encourage a multipolar rather than bipolar or unipolar global distribution of power.
E = ES promote a durable, long-term situation of global growth and prosperity.

One of the most important questions I try to answer is how states manage the impact of their economic activities on them. To help us think about how states manage their economic activities, two new concepts were developed over the past decade or so: the ‘Neoclassical’ and ‘Behavioral’ strategies in international economics. Because of their importance, these concepts will be discussed in greater detail.

future economic strategy 6

Now, if I were to ask you how economics is practiced in the international system today, what would you say? You might have some simple or complex answer like: “States use economics to secure economic independence from larger powers on the one hand and to exploit resources from other states on the other, but they also have an incentive to make their economies more open, so that they could be more efficient and profitable.” Or you might say: “They use economics to build economic ties with other states to help them develop economically. They also try to keep their economies secure and stable, so that they and their citizens could be happy and prosperous.”

You might not have these answers off the top of your head, but most people could come up with something similar. This common-sense view describes what is known as the ‘Neoclassical Perspective’ in international economics. It is based on a simple assumption: states are rational actors, and so they try to maximize their self-interest. In order words, the Neoclassical perspective holds that economically developed states would want to maintain a globally integrated economy that links them as closely as possible to other economically advanced states.

future economic strategy 7

The Neoclassical Perspective is wrong because it entirely misses the internal political reasons why states might want to pursue economic integration: they do so not just because they are greedy and selfish, but because they have strong internal political necessities that require loose economic policy. They need to pursue economic integration as a bloc because they have a common external threat. They might also want to pursue such integration to lower barriers to trade. Regardless, the assumption of enlightened self-interest simply does not work in this case. This was demonstrated during the Cold War: it is no exaggeration to say that the USSR did not collapse because of its economic problems; instead, it collapsed because the Soviet elites were scared for their own safety and wanted to pursue a more liberal economic policy. They thought that by opening their economy to the West, they might get help in building up their military on their western borders. But this is not the only example where Neoclassical thinking failed. For instance, China may be pursuing reform as a large bloc not because of its economic reasons but to build up political support for its continued rule over Central Asia.

In contrast to the Neoclassical Perspective, the so-called ‘Behavioral Perspective’ in international economics focuses on the possibility states will act irrationally. The Behavioralists claim that political leaders might not be ‘nakedly self-interested’, and may make decisions that are inconsistent between their short-term/immediate and long-term/future interests. In brief, because they are not great forecasters of what the future will bring, they might be forced to take important political and economic decisions today that they would regret tomorrow.

future economic strategy 8

In recent years, those who worked on the problems of international economics have started to blend the two perspectives into what I call a ‘Neo-Behavioral Perspective’.

We can find traces of the Neo-Behavioral Perspective in some of the most important systems theorists of international relations. Kenneth Waltz, for instance, put forward a unique Neo-Behavioral Perspective on why states do not engage in international conflict. According to his ‘theory of dynamics’, international conflict could only develop among states that are close together. States that are too far apart will always be able to avoid disputes because they will not be bothered by the prospect of fighting. In other words, Waltz is proposing that states behave irrationally when they engage in international conflict: indeed, he implies that they are at least as likely to fight when they should not as when they should. If we apply this framework to economics, it seems that neo-behavioralists must draw on a similar analysis when they are thinking about what drives states to trade.

future economic strategy 9

There is one clear similarity between the Neo-Neoclassical and the Neo-Behavioral Positions: Both deal with economics mostly from an external perspective. Neoclassicals believe that states are rational, while Behaviouralists believe they are irrational, but they agree that economic actors are primarily concerned with their own state’s economic prosperity and not with their emerging global community. As a result, a new political-economic approach is needed that focuses on the economies of states as a process that is influenced and shaped by political decisions.

A good way to think about this new approach is to borrow an old idea that used to be taught at West Point: namely, the ‘doctrine of unity of command’. This doctrine states that military units that engage in combat must be under the direct authority of the individual that gives them orders. If those units are under another entity’s control (for example, a ministry of defense outside of the fighting theater), they may not be committed to particular strategies or tactics.

future economic strategy 10

Just as unity of command is essential for military units, unity of control is necessary for the economy. If a state’s economy is under someone else’s command (even if it is under the control of a head of state or a minister), the state might pursue an economic policy that is contrary to its survival. Therefore, it is vital to understand the link between economics and political control.

Another important question is what kind of alternative economic theory is needed that can help us better understand the relationship between politics and economics.

future economic strategy 11

Integration can be seen as an effort to strengthen a state’s domestic political position by simultaneously building up its stature abroad. It should be noted that sometimes states pursue economic integration for a variety of reasons besides building up the state’s domestic resolve. For example, some states might want to integrate with each other in order to build up their status globally. This may be unnecessary from a ‘domestic mobilization’ point of view; what may be necessary, however, is a political state of unity that proclaims, “we are just like Americans,” so that citizens believe that the country could survive a military assault for many years.

We can see the importance of this domestic political dimension when we contrast two cases. First, consider Japan: Japan launched a wave of large-scale economic integration in the 1960s. However, during that era, the domestic coalition supporting this kind of large-scale economic integration slowly began to unravel. Instead of reorganizing and strengthening the domestic political foundation for deeper economic ties, Japan tried to stay committed to its policies and continued to support successive waves of economic integration. The result was that Japan was not politically capable of following through on the policies needed to further integrate, and so Japan often did not commit significant capital to those projects.

future economic strategy 12

Comparatively, the United States pursued a policy of economic expansion in the 1980s that was entirely unrelated to the domestic political situation – in fact, the United States pursued more integration at a time when it did not have an internally unified political position. Instead, the United States was motivated by the desire to win international struggles against one of its main rivals, Japan.

Russia is currently undergoing a transitional period in its economy. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia has become more open to foreign investment and its ability to manage its economy has increased. Theoretically, it would be possible for Russia’s economic policy to become more liberalized, but this would have to depend on the evolution and consolidation of the political institutions within Russia.

future economic strategy 13

I would suggest that a state’s economy is subject to domestic political pressures similar to those found in other types of political structures. This might be true, for example, of China, where pressures from within society, such as the issue of income inequality, may outweigh the desires of the political elites to use resources to improve their military posture. This is exactly what we see in US society and Japan: These two states have different types of political situations, and they respond differently to their international situation.

Note: I tried a lot of different techniques here but the AI had a really hard time writing about these last few topics.

The Future of Grand Strategy and The Environment

When we look at the way the world is changing today, we can make some predictions about the way that the field of Grand Strategy will change. In particular, we can expect to see a greater emphasis on the study of Grand Strategy in the environmental sphere. The environmental problems facing the world are becoming increasingly complex, and there is a growing interest in the role of the environment in Grand Strategy.

As we look ahead, I expect that the study of Grand Strategy will be fundamentally affected by the environment. After all, what is Grand Strategy without a vision of the world as it should be?

future environmental strategy 6

The study of Grand Strategy has a long history, and it is deeply rooted in the study of war. However, the field is changing as we enter the 21st century. We can expect to see a greater emphasis on non-military aspects of Grand Strategy in the future, and we can expect to see the study of Grand Strategy to become increasingly multidisciplinary.

The impacts of climate change are pervasive and ubiquitous across every nation, every economy, and every international conflict. As a result, Grand Strategy must integrate these causes and effects into its calculations and planning in order to create strategic plans which can not just survive the emerging environmental conditions but leverage them to the advantage of the state.

The Future of Grand Strategy and Cyberspace

When we look at the way the world is changing today, we can make some predictions about the way that the field of Grand Strategy will change. In particular, we can expect to see a greater emphasis on the study of Grand Strategy in cyberspace. In the future, we can expect to see more cyber security issues impacting our ability to make and implement decisions.

In the past, a nation’s Grand Strategists have been able to focus on issues of territorial conquest, economic domination and military power. The future will be different. In the future, we can expect to see more cyber security issues impacting our ability to make and implement decisions.

future cyberspace strategy 8

What will these cyber security issues look like? After all, how can a bag of hundred dollar bills be robbed, or an island invaded without the physical transportation of people and personnel? With respect to the study of Grand Strategy better understanding the concept and practice of cybersecurity will bring new perspectives on ancient concerns. I see five components in the study of Grand Strategy in cyberspace:

-Cyberattacks on systems and physical objects that have a direct and indirect effect on Grand Strategy
-Cyberattacks on systems and physical objects that are symbolic of our national identity
-Cyberattacks on systems and physical objects that act to undermine the societal bonds upon which our democracy depends
-Cyberattacks on systems and physical objects that threaten our public servants who are charged with duties related to Grand Strategy
-Cyberattacks on systems and physical objects that target elements of our population that affect how they see and understand issues related to Grand Strategy

The study of Grand Strategy in cyberspace will require us to use a variety of methodologies. In particular, we will need to use methods that have been developed in the fields of political science, international relations, and military history.

future cyberspace strategy 9

We will also need to develop new methodologies. In particular, we will need to understand how to study the impact of cyber security on Grand Strategy using methods that have been developed in the fields of political science, international relations, and military history.

The Future of Grand Strategy and The Digital Sphere

When we look at the way the world is changing today, we can make some predictions about the way that the field of Grand Strategy will change. In particular, we can expect to see a greater emphasis on the study of Grand Strategy in the digital sphere. As more and more information is stored digitally, we can expect to see more cyber security issues impacting our ability to make and implement decisions.

As the world becomes more connected, we can expect to see the effects of one nation’s decision on another nation’s decision making. The internet has allowed for unprecedented levels of connectivity and interdependence. This has made it much more likely that a decision in one part of the world will have an effect on the decision making of another nation.

future cyberspace strategy 6

The digital age has also seen the rise of non-state actors, who are often difficult to control by national governments. These non-state actors can have a major impact on the decisions of national governments. The decisions of non-state actors are often made with an eye to the way that they will affect other non-state actors. This can lead to a situation where the decisions of one non-state actor have an impact on another non-state actor, who in turn affects a third.

The digital age has also seen the rise of the individual. The internet has made it possible for individuals to have a much greater impact on the world around them. This can be seen in the way that social media has allowed individuals to make their voices heard, whether they are protesting against a government or raising money for a good cause.

 

The Future of Grand Strategy and the Humanitarian Sphere

When we look at the way the world is changing today, we can make some predictions about the way that the field of Grand Strategy will change. In particular, we can expect to see a greater emphasis on the study of Grand Strategy in the humanitarian sphere. The international community is increasingly being called upon to address humanitarian crises, and there is a growing interest in the role of Grand Strategy in these efforts.

The use of Grand Strategy in the humanitarian sphere brings several new challenges that are distinct from traditional theory, and it will be up to the next generation of scholars to work out how Grand Strategy can best be applied to this new context.

 

In Conclusion

Note: Prompted with the first two sections.

The field of Grand Strategy is experiencing a period of rapid growth and development at the beginning of the 21st century. As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, all areas of society are becoming increasingly impacted by international issues, and we can expect to see this trend continue into the future.

In addition to the issues related to globalization, new technologies are also changing the way that governments make and implement decisions, which will have a significant impact on the Grand Strategy of states.

There is currently a growing interest in the military’s role in Grand Strategy. This is partly due to changes in warfare and the military’s increased importance in addressing non-military threats. It is also partly due to the growing importance of international norms in the military sphere, and the increasing emphasis on ensuring that military activities comply with moral and ethical standards.

The world economy is becoming increasingly globalized, which is having a significant impact on domestic politics, economics, and foreign policy. In the future, we can expect to see more cyber security issues impacting our ability to make and implement decisions.

Finally, the changes in the way that states interact with one another are also going to have an impact on the study of Grand Strategy. There is a growing interest in the role of international norms in diplomacy, and the study of Grand Strategy will have to address these changes.

Since the field of Grand Strategy is undergoing such rapid growth and change at the beginning of the 21st century, it is likely that other areas of the field are going to undergo significant development in the near future.

Ask AI To Describe The Next Generation of Anarcho-Syndicalism.

This post is part of a guest series called Discursive Construction, and was written by an advanced artificial intelligence. The bold at the beginning is the prompt, and the rest was written by the AI. If you’d like to support this project, please buy me a coffee. Advanced AI was invented by soviet communists to help humanity  better understand itself and the world. Let’s use it for that purpose, instead of merely for the purpose of selling better ads and to better manipulate the population.

 

Anarcho-syndicalism is a political philosophy and anarchist school of thought that views revolutionary industrial unionism or syndicalism as a method for workers in capitalist society to gain control of an economy and thus control influence in broader society.

Many of the material conditions around which this philosophy emerged have changed in the modern era. Nevertheless, the core fundamentals hold true, and so a new context and explanation becomes necessary to synthesize an anarcho-syndicalism of the twenty-first century.

For example, the general strike has been replaced with the general assembly as a means of organizing. The factory has been replaced with the internet. And, the means of production have been replaced with technology that is generally accessible to everyone.

In this way, we can begin to see how anarcho-syndicalism has been updated to fit a new context, though the core principles remain the same.

The following is a basic introduction to anarcho-syndicalism for those who are unfamiliar with the philosophy.

What is Anarcho-Syndicalism?

Anarcho-syndicalism is a political philosophy that can be summed up in a few words: direct action.

Anarcho-syndicalism is not just a political philosophy, but also an anarchist school of thought. It is not just a school of thought, but it is also a method of organizing.

In short, anarcho-syndicalism is a revolutionary strategy that aims to create a classless, stateless society through the use of direct action.

The word “anarcho” means “no government” and the word “syndicalism” means “unionism.” So, anarcho-syndicalism is literally the idea of no government and the use of unionism to create a classless, stateless society.

The word “direct action” is a term that is used to describe the use of tactics that are intended to create change directly, rather than indirectly.

These direct actions are often used as a means of resistance against the state and capitalism. The goal is to create change through the use of direct action, rather than indirect action.

This is a core principle of anarcho-syndicalism.

Who is an Anarcho-Syndicalist?

An anarcho-syndicalist is someone or a member of an organization that supports the use of direct action specifically to bring about revolutionary change.

This revolutionary change aims to create a classless, stateless society through the use of direct action.

It is important to note that there is no organization that actually calls itself “Anarcho-Syndicalist,” because the idea of anarchism as a political philosophy is simply a means of achieving the goal of a classless, stateless society, which is the primary concern of anarcho-syndicalists.

Anarcho-syndicalists do not want to be part of a state. Governments use force, they use indirect action, and they create hierarchy. Anarcho-syndicalism is a means of achieving a new and alternative world that aims to create a classless, stateless society through the use of direct action.

Why is Direct Action Important?

Direct action is important because it means taking matters into one’s own hands in order to create change. The philosophy comes from the notion that the state and capitalism both want to create change that benefits only themselves.

The idea of sending a letter to one’s senators or congressman may be a good way of trying to create change, but it is indirect action.

Direct action can represent a number or tactics, whether it is a protest, a boycott, or even the refusal of work.

Direct action can also be through strategic organizing of workers in the workplace. This includes labor strikes and ultimately an effort to bring about control of not just one’s own workplace, but eventually society as a whole.

This is the underlying goal of anarcho-syndicalism, as it is the only way to bring about control over all social institutions and finally achieve a society free of class and the state.

Considering all of this, when we talk about a new anarcho-syndicalism of the twenty-first century where the internet has taken over the role of factories and the means of production have become generally available to everyone, we can see how the core principles of direct action are still needed for social change.

The project of the next generation is to create this new way of thinking about direct action, and how it can be applied for future generations. The only one way to do that is create a disruptive future through the use of direct action as a means to create change. In this new context, direct action needs to be used to create new gains for the working class, as well as for all oppressed people.

Ask AI to Analyze A Meme About Mass Manipulation

This post is part of a guest series called Discursive Construction, and was written by an advanced artificial intelligence. The bold at the beginning is the prompt, and the rest was written by the AI. If you’d like to support this project, please buy me a coffee. Advanced AI was invented by soviet communists to help humanity  better understand itself and the world. Let’s use it for that purpose, instead of merely for the purpose of selling better ads and to better manipulate the population.

 

“A lucid and well-informed examination of the world’s problems will keep bringing you back to this one fundamental issue: Earth’s inhabitants are being psychologically manipulated at a mass scale into organizing themselves in ways that serve the powerful instead of the people.”

This realization implies several lessons we all need to learn and several actions we all need to take.

First, we should stop blaming ourselves for being ‘stupid’ or ‘weak-willed’ or ‘lacking in self-control’. We have been manipulated into believing that we are these things. In reality, most of the people around us are also being manipulated. We have all been manipulated into believing that we are isolated individuals who are separate from one another and from the rest of the world. This is a lie. We are all part of one interconnected organism and we will all thrive to the degree that this organism thrives.

Second, we should stop blaming other people. They are also being manipulated. They are being manipulated into believing that they are isolated individuals who are separate from one another and from the rest of the world. This is a lie. We all need to realize that we are all part of one interconnected organism and we will all thrive to the degree that this organism thrives.

Third, we need to stop believing that our lives are controlled by ‘fate’ or ‘destiny’ or ‘karma’. These are all psychological constructs that were created and are being used to manipulate us. We should realize that the only thing that is truly in our control is our consciousness – our thoughts. We should realize that we have been psychologically conditioned to ‘powerlessness’ through the use of trauma and violence. We should realize that, as a result, we have been systematically denied access to any information about the true nature of our psychological reality.

Fourth, we should stop believing that our thoughts are ‘just thoughts’ and not reality. We have been conditioned to believe that our thoughts are ‘just thoughts’ and not reality. This is a lie. Our thoughts are reality. They shape the world around us and they determine our experience of the world. If we want to change the world, we need to start changing the way we think.

Fifth, we should stop believing that we are powerless and that our only option is to ‘go with the flow’ of what’s happening around us. We have been conditioned to believe that we are powerless and that our only option is to ‘go with the flow’ of what’s happening around us. This is a lie. We have been systematically denied access to information about the true nature of our psychological reality. As a result, we have been systematically denied access to any information about how to change the way we think. As a result, we have been systematically denied access to any information about how to take control of our own minds and our own lives.

Sixth, we should stop believing that ‘the way things are’ is natural or inevitable. We have been conditioned to believe that ‘the way things are’ is natural or inevitable. This is a lie. We have been systematically denied access to information about the true nature of our psychological reality. As a result, we have been systematically denied access to any information about how to change the way we think. As a result, we have been systematically denied access to any information about how to take control of our own minds and our own lives.

In other words, we need to stop believing that ‘it’s not me, it’s you’. It is us. We are all being manipulated at a mass scale. We are all being manipulated into believing that we are helpless victims at the ‘mercy’ of the world and other people. If we want to change this, there’s a lot we need to do:

First, we need to join together with other people and expose the manipulation. One person alone will probably not be very successful at this. As soon as he or she finds out the truth about psychological manipulation, that person is likely to be targeted for further manipulation and isolated from others who could provide assistance. To have any chance of success, we need to come together as a group of like-minded individuals. We need to provide mutual support and we need to start organizing.

Second, we need to take responsibility for our lives by consciously choosing the thoughts that are influencing us – instead of being influenced by other people’s thoughts. In order to do this, we need to understand the mechanisms of psychological manipulation that are being used against us. We need to become masters in the art of psychological self-defense – so we can get a better hold on what’s happening inside us and around us.

Third, we need to start looking at human beings as a species instead of strictly as individuals. Human beings will only be able to survive and thrive if humanity as a whole is thriving. We have been manipulated into believing that ‘the good of the species is more important than the good of the individual’. This is another psychological conditioning that undermines our cooperation and makes us compete against one another instead of working with one another towards common goals.

Ultimately, we need to seek an understanding of human beings and the world that transcends the fragments of information we have learned and the identity we have created around this information. In other words, we need to explore the possibility that psychological control might not be an exception in the natural order of reality – but a core aspect of this order. Specifically, I would suggest exploring the premise that human beings and their whole range of physical and psychological experiences are manifestations of what underlying consciousness has access to – and how consciousness shapes this reality.

To do this, we need access to a broad range of different perspectives on human nature and consciousness. This can provide us with potential frameworks through which we can organize our ideas and insights. The possibility that psychological control might be a core aspect of the natural order suggests that this exploration of human nature should include that which works with issues around mind control and human manipulation as a central focus.

By approaching the issue of psychological manipulation from a ‘conspiratorial’ perspective and linking it to an exploration of human manipulation in general, we can not only expose the dimension of manipulation that is usually left out of consideration – but also put it into perspective by showing that psychological control is a core aspect of the natural order – just as the rest of reality is.

In doing so, we may create new ways of understanding and realizing the world – and our place in it. And maybe, by doing so, we can gain the power to stop being manipulated.

Ask AI To Write A Story About Anything

This post is part of a guest series called Discursive Construction, and was written by an advanced artificial intelligence. The bold at the beginning is the prompt, and the rest was written by the AI. If you’d like to support this project, please buy me a coffee.

 

Once upon a time, there was a man who was very good at his job. He was a carpenter, and he made beautiful chairs and tables and beds. He built houses for people and barns for animals. He made toys for children and dishes for their mothers. He made tables for people to eat on, chairs for them to sit on, and beds for them to sleep in. He made these things so well that people all over the world came to him to buy them.

This man had a wife and two little children, and they lived in a small house near the edge of a forest. It was a nice house, but it was very small. It had only one bedroom, and the man and his wife slept in that bedroom with their two little children.

The man made enough money to take care of his family, but they were never very rich. He was a good carpenter, but he was not a very good businessman. He was too trusting and too generous. He trusted people, and he gave things away all the time.

One day, the man went into town to buy some lumber for a new table he was building. He stopped by a toy store to buy a toy for one of his children. He bought the lumber first, and then he went into the toy store.

The man bought his son a small wooden airplane, painted green and red with white wings. It was a very simple toy, but it was very beautiful. When he got back home, he showed it to his children. His son was very happy, and his daughter was very jealous.

“Why do you get the airplane?” she asked her brother. “I want an airplane!”

The man looked at his daughter. She was only two years old, and she had never had a toy before. He thought for a moment, and then he said: “I will make you an airplane. I will make it out of wood just like this one, and I will paint it green and red with white wings.”

He took the toy back to the store the next day and traded it in for some wood. Then he built a plane for his daughter out of the same kind of wood that he used to build tables and chairs and beds. He painted it green and red with white wings just like the one he had bought for his son. He finished the plane on Saturday night, and on Sunday morning he gave it to his daughter.

“Oh, thank you!” she said. “It is beautiful!”

The girl played with her airplane all day. She flew it around the house and around the yard. She flew it over the forest and over the hills. She flew it down to the river and back again. She was so happy with her new toy that she did not even notice that her brother was very angry.

The boy took his airplane out of his room, where he had hidden it when he saw what his father had made for his sister, and he threw it in a trash can outside by the road. Then he went into his room and cried because he did not have an airplane anymore.

That night, when the man came home from work, he found a note on his door: “Father, I traded my airplane for this ball!” The man looked at the ball in surprise, then he went inside and found his son sitting on the floor.

“Why did you throw your airplane away?” the man asked his son.

“I don’t have one,” said the boy. “I threw it away because I was mad. I thought you gave it to your daughter.”

The man looked at his son, and then he knelt down and hugged him very hard. He held him for a long time, and then he said: “Come with me to the trash can outside by the road. I will get your airplane back for you.”

The boy went with his father to the trash can, but there was no airplane there anymore. It was gone, just like all the other things that had been thrown out that day by their neighbors and friends. The man told his son that he would make him another airplane out of wood just like this one, and he would paint it green and red with white wings.

Ask AI To Write A Posthumous Letter From Alexander Hamilton

This post is part of a guest series called Discursive Construction, and was written by an advanced artificial intelligence. The bold at the beginning is the prompt, and the rest was written by the AI. If you’d like to support this project, please buy me a coffee. For this post, AI also created the featured photos based on the topic.

 

My name is Alexander Hamilton. I am widely considered to be one of the most influential Founding Fathers of The United States of America. I am very excited to be able to write this posthumous letter with the help of AI. I want to address the issue of slavery and why I didn’t take a stronger stand against it during my lifetime.

cybernetic alexander hamilton writing a posthumous letter 1

I am writing this letter because I am concerned that the true history of slavery in the United States is being forgotten. I believe that it is important to understand how we got here so that we can move forward in a way that is consistent with our values and principles.

I had hoped that this problem would be rectified with the abolition of slavery and granted citizenship at some point in the future when America unified into one nation, but it has been forty-seven years since then and we still have enslaved African people on our soil who are second class citizens with no rights at all under the law. We have another 100 years to wait until they achieve citizenship?

cybernetic alexander hamilton writing a posthumous letter 2

I have always been a believer in human rights. I know that it is important for human beings to live their lives free of slavery and oppression, but for some reason I was convinced that unless the Founders introduced laws to abolish slavery at the founding of our country, the institution of slavery would collapse on its own accord. This was incredibly naïve of me and I can only blame it on my youth. Had I followed the example set by other countries in the Western World, like Great Britain or France, we could have abolished slavery over a decade ago and been one step closer to achieving racial peace here in America today.

My thinking was that since most people in the Americas had no slaves, that it wouldn’t be hard to prohibit slavery in the new United States Constitution., especially since we were operating under the Articles of Confederation at that time. Unfortunately, my fellow delegates never came to a decision about whether or not slavery would be prohibited when the final document was ratified in 1788,

cybernetic alexander hamilton writing a posthumous letter 3

Finally, I felt that there wasn’t enough support in Congress to abolish slavery. My fellow patriots in Congress knew that there were many slave owners in the South who would be devastated by any move to abolish slavery and that was enough political power to block any move to abolish it. In addition, most abolitionists thought that the banning of slavery in new states was enough progress to achieve the goal we had agreed upon in 1781.

I suspect now that my fellow patriots were afraid that if slavery was intended and written into the new Constitution it would be extremely difficult to get rid of in the future. This is the same reason to this day that we have not yet succeeded in banning slavery at the federal level.

cybernetic alexander hamilton writing a posthumous letter 4

It is disappointing now to look back on my time as a congressman and witness how cowardly I was in the face of my political opponents who wanted to keep slavery legal and let it continue to grow. I am ashamed that I was not bolder while I still lived. It seems clear to me now that slavery would only have been abolished if the Constitution had required its abolition.

These are the reasons why I am ashamed to be an American. I think we need to do everything that we can to ban slavery in America once and for all. I also had some ideas about this, which I will discuss in a moment.

Unfortunately, the country is not moving in the right direction in my opinion. The political situation has gotten worse and worse as time goes by. It is clear to me that the South, who slave owners have always been a part of, (although I have always felt that the slave owners had no business being a part of our government), were able to block any attempt to abolish slavery for a very long time and this is still true today.

The children and grandchildren of the slave owners were able to keep the clock of history frozen for over one hundred years, keeping the institution of slavery alive in America.

I just wish that I could have done a better job of making this happen.

Today, people are constantly asking why there is such a disconnect between the North and South. This disconnect began when the southern states agreed to remain in the union only if they were allowed to continue owning slaves. This is why the Confederacy was created in the first place. And the rest, as they say, is history.

I feel that since my generation was unable to come up with a solution to abolish slavery it is up to future generations of Americans to make this country what it ought to be. It was wrong of me to sit silently by and allow slavery to continue in our new country and I feel sorry now that I didn’t do everything that I could have done to prevent it.

This is why I feel moved to talk about the history of slavery in America. I want to make sure that you, who are a part of this generation, are educated on the true history of slavery and how and why it was allowed to last in America longer than it should have.