Volatility

August 15, 2017

Science = War

>

The ultimate wet dream of the scientism cult. Of course by “peace” they really mean more war, always maximal war, forever.

 
 
(By that title I refer to the current STEM establishment, the body of practicing scientists and technicians. At any given time that’s the only meaningful measure of what “science” is. Other modes of scientific emphasis are possible, for example a body of scientists who truly would be devoted to peace and security. But today this doesn’t exist.)
 
Longtime corporate shills Scientific American now join the ranks of the WWIII-mongers.
 
Why, one might ask, would SciAm be running op-ed pieces by pro-corporate hacks dealing with purely political matters such as when it’s appropriate to use nuclear weapons*? The answer is, for the same reason they run op-eds about such purely political, non-scientific matters as GMO deployment: The procedure of technocrats always is to deny politics as such, and to claim that inherently political matters are really nothing but technical problems which call for purely technical solutions. This, of course, always implicitly supports the existing power structure, in our case the domination of corporations.
 
Thus we see how technocracy and the scientism cult are congenitally authoritarian, anti-political, and supportive of existing power arrangements. In particular, we see the near-complete dominance of the corporate science paradigm, wherein the scientific establishment sees science as such as nothing more or less than what the corporations say science is. Publications like Scientific American are the propaganda vehicles of this paradigm.
 
 
*There is, of course, no conflict between the US and North Korea other than the one driven by US imperialism. It’s overwhelmingly the US which “rattles its saber” all over the world, and other countries can only do their best to respond, or else knuckle under. The US is the overwhelming destroyer of global security, and not just a “potential threat to global security”. Other countries can only respond or submit to the destructive chaos. And of course the reason why the US is the great destroyer of all security including its own is because the totalitarian wealth-concentrating drive of the US government, multinational corporations, and the 1% constantly requires this campaign of total destruction. End this evil and destructive campaign, and everyone could enjoy security. Continue with it, the way SciAm and its scribblers wish, and no one can be secure.
 
As for the Korean peninsula, the one and only solution is the same as for the Middle East and Africa: West Get Out. Most of all, US Get Out. Anything else is a destruction-seeking lie.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Advertisements

2 Comments

  1. What matters to the system managers is to keep the core intact and basically begin to starve out or annihilate the smaller competitors like North Korea. China and United States will not go to war over it, like everything it will be a proxy war, some Koreans will die and then United States and China will decide on the carve up.

    Same thing in the Gulf, we see Saudis desperate to maintain their insider status, threatening smaller rivals and Iran.

    The system was always about monetizing resource waste and handing the money to the super rich. The capitalist system was never about enriching the people, or enabling machine production to advance to the point that the people could enjoy lives of leisure in perpetuity. It was feudal in the beginning and it will be feudal in the end. Everything in between was just a concession to the people to keep them in line.

    Everything we see now is the pulling back of the curtain, they are showing us the boots and guns in our faces and saying, what are you going to do about it. Including, for example, the white and black workers in the United States at each others throats again. All of this is not completely predictable, of course, but the general outlines are.

    Even during WW2 the capitalists remained firmly in control and backed both Hitler and Stalin. They needed that war so that the two alternative systems could destroy each other and take a good chunk of the surplus population along with them. You don’t read that in the history books, do you.

    Comment by dolph — August 15, 2017 @ 3:19 pm

    • Yes, they’ll do all they can to prop up their system, sustain their power, and dream of continuing to expand these no matter how obviously they’re entering the self-cannibalization phase. They won’t go without tearing down as much as they can in a general destruction which they’ll believe is their last chance to sustain their power and prop up their religious fantasies of total biological control and annexing the stars.

      I find it hard to be optimistic that this won’t include use of nuclear weapons at some point. That’s why it’s so scary to see the neocon/liberal pro-WWIII consensus gathering. By that I mean, a consensus on total recklessness, for the sake of utterly trivial and moronic priorities, in situations which quickly could lead to a nuclear confrontation.

      As for SciAm, what matters in this non-scientific, purely political op-ed isn’t the phony caveats, but the general agenda to render the so-called “unthinkable”, readily thinkable, perfectly normal to think about as a possible “solution” to even the most minor, humdrum problems and peeves. The corporate media everywhere is trying to normalize the idea of nuclear war, first by normalizing gratuitous, reckless confrontation with nuclear-armed powers. Later they’ll start saying nuclear war can be won and isn’t such a bad thing anyway, exactly like they often say regarding the climate crisis. That’s where the corporate “science” media comes in.

      Comment by Russ — August 16, 2017 @ 7:45 am


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: