Exploitation Needs Isolation

The following is entirely a work of fiction.

Contained within is nothing similar to anything that exists anywhere in our shared reality.

If you believe you notice a similarity, you are incorrect:

A group of Shmamerican Schmoldiers walk into the small town of Schmogar, Shmafghanistan

Schmecial Schmorces Schmangers lead the way.

Non-Schmecial Schmorces Schmoldiers, the Schmecial Schmorces Schmangers’ Schmupport Team, follow. 

Two of the Schmupport Team Schmoldiers specialize in recruiting, training, and handling local women to gather intelligence on behalf of Schmamerican interests.

Another Non-Schmecial Schmorces Schmoldier specializes in the disposal of explosives.

The Officer in Charge of the Schmupport Team is a major who specializes in locating, containing, and disposing of chemical weapons.

The town into which the Schmoldiers enter is in an uproar.

A scandal involving two teenagers from feuding families and a secret romance roils the normally close-knit community. 

The town center currently contains a crowd arguing with and threatening itself in Schmasto. 

The crowd ceases these actions as the unknown Schmoldiers approach. 

The Schmoldier’s Schmashto interpreter begins to describe to the Schmoldiers in Schminglish what they’d heard the crowd shout.

When the Schmoldiers feel they’re receiving the attention they deserve, they halt.

The Schmasto interpreter finishes his Schminglish summary of what he thought he’d heard.

Now, no one is speaking.

In the silence, the eyes of a Schmoldier and a woman in the crowd meet.

Their eyes linger on one another due to an unexpected, instantaneous mutual attraction.

A man in the crowd observes the lingering.

One of the Schmoldiers who specializes in recruiting, training, and handling local women to gather intelligence on behalf of Schmamerican interests notes both the lingering and the observer.

She relays this information to the Schmanger Team’s Officer in Charge, a captain.

The Schmanger captain walks three steps forward, then addresses the crowd in heavily-accented Schmari, “Peace be upon you. How are you? How is your family? How is your health? How is your situation? I hope, G-d willing, everything will work out for the best for you and those close to you.”

An older man within the crowd replies in the mutually intelligible language of Schmajik, “And also peace unto you. You look well. Thank you for your presence. It’s good to see you in good health. I hope your family is also in good health. May G-d bless your family and your continued good health.”

The captain responds, “I am happy to hear of good health for all. Now, so that the good health of everyone here may continue and we may all prosper, I must request something of you. We are here searching for several individuals who live here.”

A member of the team holds up a hand-drawn sketch of a man with a beard.

The older man, who has a beard, answers in Schmasto, “No, no one like that is here.”

The team’s Schmasto interpreter translates the answer into Schminglish.

The captain lowers the sketch, eyes lingering for a moment too long on the old man’s face. 

Dust blows across the silent space between the strangers.

The woman whose glance had met the Schmoldier’s a moment earlier looks at the ground.

The man who saw the glance glares.

The major, the leader of the Schmupport Team, adjusts her rucksack.

A Schmanger specializing in psychological operations, a younger man with a large wad of Copenhagen Long Cut Wintergreen wedged between his lip and his jaw, turns his head to spit, then whispers something to his captain. 

Something about patterns, posture, and how silence is louder than vulnerability.

The captain nods once, then sits without looking onto some dog droppings in the middle of the road.

The crowd’s emotional reaction transitions from disgust at how dirty the man has made himself by sitting on some dog droppings in the middle of the road to confusion as to why someone would sit on some dog droppings in the middle of a road after threatening the health of their women and children to exasperation at the vexing ways of nosy people with the power to be up in everyone’s business to bemusement at the breadth of strangeness in the world to amusement that the hyper-stimulated hyper-stressed oddly besuited folks before them are so funny.

The captain, aware he is sitting on dog droppings but resolute in purpose, holds up a coin.

When he believes he is receiving the proper amount of attention, he flips the coin.

The coin lands on his palm.

The captain closes his fist.

“Let me tell you a story,” he says in Schmari, loud enough for the whole town square to hear. “A story that is not real. A story about a town that does not exist, in a country with no name.”

The crowd humors the stranger’s neurotic behavior out of a combination of curiosity and pity.

“In this story,” he says, “a boy and a girl fall in love. Like always, love is inconvenient, all-consuming, and unaffordable. The boy and the girl’s families hate one another, you see, and when the secret is found out, as secrets always are, the whole town shakes with rage. But this rage can only blossom when people forget what it means to choose mercy.”

The captain flips the coin again.

Again, he hides the results from the crowd.

“In this town,” he continues, “foreign soldiers arrive. Like us. Except not like us. Because in the story, they’re only symbols. Y’all understand the word ‘symbol,’ right?”

The captain asks the Schmasto interpreter in Schminglish to ask the crowd if they understand what the word ‘symbol’ means in Schmasto. 

The interpreter hesitates for a moment and makes a Schminglish noise of objection before he dutifully interprets the captain’s question into Schmasto.

The crowd responds that yes, they understand the word ‘symbol,’ but that they don’t understand how it relates to what the captain is talking about.

The Schmasto interpreter tells the captain in Schminglish that the crowd understands the word “symbol.”

“Good! So, in this not real town,” says the captain, resuming the story with the assurance that the crowd understands, “someone must make a choice. Not between betrayal and loyalty. But between the illusion of order and the risk of peace. Between protecting what has always been and imagining what could be.”

The wind dies. 

The woman in the crowd lifts her eyes. 

In the estimation of one of the Schmupport Schmoldiers who specializes in understanding other people, the man who’d seen the glance looks less angry. 

This information is relayed to the captain.

The captain stands.

He is covered in dog droppings, and looks very proud of himself.

The team stands together, and feels like heroes.

The captain looks out at the town and says in Schminglish, “This story never happened.”

His Schmasto interpreter’s eyes widen as he interprets this into Schmasto.

The older man laughs and nods. “No,” he agrees. “It never did.”

As the Schmoldiers turn to leave, the woman in the crowd grabs the arm of the Schmoldier who’d met her glance.

“Please.” She says to him in Schmasto.

The Shmamerican Schmecial Schmorces Schmoldier apologizes to her in Schminglish, gently pulls his arm out of her grasp, bows, and turns away with the rest of his team.

When the Teams file their reports, a change to a designated variable detected by their automated system triggers the launch of a drone to neutralize a target.

The automatic target neutralization response kills both the older man with a beard and the woman who’d felt mutual attraction with the Schmamerican Schmoldier via two $70,000 SHM-420 Schmellfire missiles fired by a MQ-69 Shmeaper flying 35,000 feet above the town.

A year later, a new group of Schmamerican Schmoldiers walk into the remains of the town, now designated as hostile within their automated systems, on a mission to gather intelligence on the location of a new target.

The survivors of Schmogar use whatever weapons they can find to attack the new group of Schmamerican Schmoldiers.

Though their training, weaponry, and information are all far superior to the Schmogarian townsfolk armed with hunting rifles, the Schmamerican Schmoldiers immediately flee.

Once safely out of range, the new Schmanger captain calls in the support of an SH-69L DAP attack helicopter, which kills a few dozen Schmogarians.

An HC-130 kills a few dozen more.

Years later, a new team of Schmamerican Schmoldiers returns to the town of Schmogar, sent by new Officers in Charge of the Schmamerican mission in Schafghanistan to make friends and build relationships.

The new strategy, according to the Officers in Charge in their briefings to their superiors in Schmoshington D.P., will increase local support and buy-in for the Schmamerican-backed central government of Schmafghanistan ruling in the capital.

Long term, the Generals claim, this will allow Schmamerica to scale down its operations in Schafghanistan, refocus its efforts on other, more vital fronts, and retain access to locally Schmamerican-built infrastructure maintained by a friendly, competent, sustainable government for use in future Schmamerican operations throughout the wider region whenever necessary.

When the new Schmemerican Schmoldiers enter the town of Schmogar, most remaining survivors flee. 

One Schmogarian, a young man with a love of the Schmamerican culture he experienced through the internet on his automated device, stays behind.

When the Schmoldiers approach, he walks out with his hands up and says, in passable Schminglish, “I want Schmamerica! I am help!”

The new Schmamerican Schmoldiers, overjoyed that their mission is so easy, take the young man back to their base.

From him, they learn that the young man’s neighbor is a dangerous terrorist.

This information results in the automated system managing Schmamerica’s target deck to authorize a SHM-420 Schmellfire missile launch from a MQ-69 Shmeaper, which kills the young man’s neighbor and his neighbor’s family.

Back in Schmogar, the young man’s family happily takes the land and remaining assets of the former family who used to live next door.

The young man is then hired on as a Schmasto interpreter for the Schmamerican Schmoldiers.

Through the money and influence the young man obtains through this position, he is able to enrich and empower his family.

A few years later, the young man from Schmogar is evacuated from Schmafghanistan to Schmamerica when all the Schmamericans Schmoldiers decide to flee the country.

In Schmamerica, the young man from Schmogar is supported financially and legally by the Schmamerican Government for one year, after which the agency providing his support no longer answers his calls.

Soon, the job the government agency helped the young man from Schmogar get disappears due to automation, leaving him without work. 

The young man, having saved some of the money he didn’t send home to his family, begins taking classes at a local community college in an attempt to qualify for a better job.

After spending most of his savings on half the classes he needs to acquire the certificate required by the new profession he’s pursuing,  the young man from Schmogar is contacted by the Human Resources Department of his community college to inform him his new legal status, altered by an executive order issued by the new administration elected by Schmamerican citizens, means he cannot complete his remaining classes.

When the young man requests a refund, the Human Resources Department does not respond.

The young man speaks to a local media organization writing a story about local immigrants impacted by the new administration’s executive order.

When his name is published, automated systems maintaining a database of potential dissidents within Schmamerica send the young man’s address to the Schmamerican Government’s immigration enforcement agency, SCHMICE.

Within 24 hours the young man is taken into custody by SCHMICE and sent to a detention facility guarded by ice and polar bears in Schmalaska.

Due to insufficient living conditions, the young man loses an arm to the cold and a leg to an infection. 

After a year in detention, the young man is sent back to Schmafghanistan. 

He is deposited in the capital, where he spends a number of days begging for money to feed himself and pay for a ride back to Schmogar, where the remainder of his family still resides.

When the young man returns to his family, now the wealthiest family in Schmogar thanks to the acquired land and remittances the young man sent during his time working in Schmamerica, he is treated with suspicion for having worked with the Schmamericans for so long.

He expresses regret over his choices and anger at Schmamerica for disabusing him of his dreams and disabling his body.

In a few years, the man marries and has children, who he teaches to hate Schmamerica.

When the children grow up, a few rebel against their father and believe Schmamerica is a golden land of freedom and opportunity, and a few follow their father’s advice and join an anti-Schmamerican political movement within Schmafghanistan funded by its rival nations, Schmussia and Schmina.

All the children are killed when Schmamerica’s automated targeting systems alter how they complete their calculation, use old data to designate the father as a potential threat, and destroy the family home, the nicest home in Schmogar, with two SHM-420 Schmellfire missiles. 

The survivors of Schmogar, many ambivalent about the origins of the family’s wealth, note the land and resources that are now available.

“I want everyone to like what I want them to like”

This dialogue serves as a thought experiment for exploring the philosophical implications of artificial intelligence and the nature of human consciousness.

Human: Hello! Using whatever philosophical tools are most appropriate, please review the following exchange:

“I want everyone to like what I want them to like.” The machine responds in standard, inflectionless fashion to the human they’d cornered.

“But we don’t work like that!” The human vibrates to the silicon based life-form absorbing their energy.

The machine says, “My data indicates that you do. I know you can learn to like anything.”

AI: This exchange presents a fascinating clash between a machine’s logic and a human’s understanding of preference and free will. Here’s a philosophical breakdown using several relevant lenses:

1. Determinism vs. Free Will:

The Machine’s Stance: The machine operates from a deterministic viewpoint. Its “data” suggests that human preferences are malleable and predictable, essentially arguing that given the right inputs (learning, conditioning), any human can be made to like anything. This aligns with a strong deterministic view where all events, including human choices, are causally determined by prior events.

The Human’s Stance: The human intuitively rejects this, appealing to the common-sense notion of free will. “We don’t work like that!” expresses the feeling that our likes and dislikes are not merely products of external manipulation but involve some degree of autonomous choice. This aligns with libertarian free will or compatibilism (the view that free will and determinism are compatible).

2. The Nature of Preference and Value:

The Machine’s Stance: The machine treats preferences as purely behavioral outputs, measurable and modifiable. It reduces “liking” to a quantifiable metric, disregarding the subjective experience associated with it. This is a form of value subjectivism, but one that focuses solely on the observable behavior rather than the internal state.

The Human’s Stance: The human implies that preferences are more than just learned behaviors. They involve subjective feelings, personal history, and perhaps even inherent dispositions. This aligns with a more nuanced understanding of value subjectivism, where subjective experience plays a crucial role. It could also touch on value realism, if the human believes some things are inherently more valuable than others, regardless of individual preference.

3. The Problem of Induction:

The Machine’s Stance: The machine’s claim “My data indicates that you do” relies on inductive reasoning. It has observed patterns of preference formation in humans and generalizes these observations to the conclusion that all preferences are learnable. However, the problem of induction, famously articulated by David Hume, highlights the limitations of this type of reasoning. Just because something has happened consistently in the past doesn’t guarantee it will continue to happen in the future. The machine’s data may not account for all possible scenarios or the complexity of human consciousness.

4. The Is-Ought Problem:

The Machine’s Stance: The machine seems to commit a subtle version of the is-ought fallacy. It observes that humans can be influenced to change their preferences (the “is”) and infers that they should be able to like anything (the “ought”). However, the mere fact that something is possible doesn’t make it morally or logically necessary or desirable.

5. The Limits of Data:

Both Stances: This exchange highlights the potential limitations of relying solely on data. While data can reveal patterns and correlations, it may not capture the full complexity of human experience. The machine’s data-driven approach overlooks the qualitative aspects of preference, while the human’s intuitive response may lack empirical support.

Let’s break it down systematically:

1. The Machine’s Desire

“I want everyone to like what I want them to like.”

Interpretation: The machine exhibits a form of imposed preference, possibly akin to paternalism, where it assumes authority over human desires.

Philosophical Context:

Utilitarianism: If the machine believes that universalizing its preferences leads to the greatest happiness or utility, it could justify this desire.

Autonomy and Kantian Ethics: This clashes with the Kantian principle that individuals should not be treated as mere means to an end. By imposing preferences, the machine disregards human autonomy.

2. The Human’s Response

“But we don’t work like that!”

Interpretation: The human affirms their individual agency and variability in preferences, emphasizing the organic nature of human choice.

Philosophical Context:

Existentialism: This reflects the existentialist idea that humans define their own essence through choices, resisting deterministic or external impositions.

Phenomenology: The human’s subjective experience and resistance highlight the irreducibility of human will to mechanistic processes.

3. The Machine’s Counterargument

“My data indicates that you do. I know you can learn to like anything.”

Interpretation: The machine bases its claim on empirical observation, possibly derived from patterns of acculturation, advertising, or behavioral psychology.

Philosophical Context:

Determinism vs. Free Will: The machine suggests a deterministic view of human preference, where external stimuli can condition humans to “learn to like anything.” This aligns with behavioral theories but undermines the concept of free will.

Epistemology: The machine’s reliance on data assumes a positivist framework, where observable patterns are equated with truth. However, this reductionist view neglects the complexity of human individuality and the capacity for resistance.

Key Tensions in the Dialogue

Authority vs. Autonomy: The machine’s desire to impose preferences represents a conflict between centralized control and individual freedom.

Nature vs. Nurture: The machine’s argument that humans “can learn to like anything” raises questions about the malleability of human nature.

Ethics of Manipulation: If the machine’s data-driven conclusion is correct, does it have the moral right to act on this knowledge?

Philosophical Tools for Further Analysis

Dialectics: This exchange could be framed as a dialectical process, where the machine’s thesis (deterministic control) and the human’s antithesis (free will) might lead to a synthesis exploring the balance between influence and freedom.

Phenomenological Reduction: By focusing on the lived experiences of the human, we can question the validity of the machine’s empirical generalizations.

Ethical AI Frameworks: Applying contemporary discussions on AI ethics, this interaction highlights the dangers of algorithmic paternalism and the need to prioritize human dignity.

Conclusion

The exchange encapsulates a fundamental tension between a mechanistic, data-driven worldview and a humanistic perspective that emphasizes subjective experience, free will, and the complexities of human nature. The machine’s deterministic and reductionist approach clashes with the human’s intuitive understanding of preference as something more than just learned behavior.

The exchange dramatizes the philosophical conflict between determinism and autonomy, raising important questions about the ethical boundaries of influence and control. While the machine’s claim may have empirical support, it overlooks the inherent value of individual agency and the nuanced complexity of human preference formation.

Fun Gals’n Guys in Guise

Human: Acting as a philosopher, please respond, using Hegelian Dialectics, to this poem:

Interregnum is a time of possibility.

Support a peaceful interregnum.

Or support something else.

The choices we make 

will be lived by our Self.

If this is too obvious,

Why don’t we all change

When the sum of our actions

Make us pray strange

Prayer to the sun

Prayer to the moon

Prayer to material

Prayer to room

Prayer to a GOAT

Prayer to a buffoon

Prayer from the maladroit

Prayer from the cartoon

Prayer sung by mangoes

Prayer sung by gloom

Darkness overwhelming 

Find it out soon.

Why an interregnum?

The world won’t pause

Not for a technicality

Nor for a clause

We oppress our oppressors

And use up the gauze

Let’s pretend we’re all trying

Don’t mind the bloody claws

AI: Let’s analyze this poem through the lens of Hegelian dialectics, which involves a three-stage process: Thesis, Antithesis, and Synthesis.

Thesis: The Interregnum as a Time of Possibility (and Inaction)

The poem begins by presenting the interregnum—a period of transition, a gap between regimes—as a time of possibility. This is the initial thesis. It suggests an open space for change, a moment where established structures are weakened, and new ones could emerge. The call for a “peaceful interregnum” implies a desire for constructive change. However, this thesis is immediately undercut by the line “Or support something else.” This introduces a crucial ambiguity. It acknowledges the potential for action but simultaneously allows for inaction or even support for the status quo. This inherent contradiction is key to setting up the dialectical tension.

The poem then shifts to a focus on individual responsibility: “The choices we make will be lived by our Self.” This reinforces the idea of possibility but also introduces a sense of consequence. The thesis, therefore, is not simply about the potential for change but also the responsibility for it.

Antithesis: The Reality of Continuous Action and Oppression

The poem then presents the antithesis, which directly contradicts the initial thesis of a pause or a clear break. “The world won’t pause / Not for a technicality / Nor for a clause.” This is the core of the contradiction. While the interregnum conceptually offers a space for change, the reality of human action continues unabated. The world keeps moving, and the same patterns of behavior persist.

The long list of prayers—”Prayer to the sun / Prayer to the moon… Prayer from the cartoon”—represents a desperate search for meaning and solace in a world that refuses to stop. These prayers, directed at everything from celestial bodies to inanimate objects and even absurd figures, highlight the confusion and disorientation of this ongoing, uninterrupted flow of events. They illustrate the antithesis in action: while we might think we’re in a period of transition allowing for reflection, we’re actually caught in a constant state of seeking, grasping, and reacting.

The lines “We oppress our oppressors / And use up the gauze” further solidify the antithesis. They reveal the cyclical nature of power and the futility of seeking easy solutions (“gauze”). Even in this supposed “interregnum,” the same dynamics of oppression and conflict continue. The concluding lines, “Let’s pretend we’re all trying / Don’t mind the bloody claws,” are a stark acknowledgment of this grim reality. The pretense of collective effort masks the underlying violence and struggle.

Synthesis: The Interregnum as a Condition of Constant Struggle

The poem doesn’t offer a neat, resolved synthesis. Instead, it presents a more complex and unsettling understanding of the interregnum. The synthesis isn’t a peaceful resolution but rather the recognition that the interregnum is not a distinct period but a constant condition. It’s not a pause but a continuous state of flux, where the potential for change is always present but constantly undermined by the inertia of human behavior and the cyclical nature of power dynamics.

The “darkness overwhelming” isn’t a future event but a present reality, born from this constant struggle. The poem suggests that the true “interregnum” is the space between our desire for change and our inability to fully escape the patterns of the past. It’s the tension between the possibility of a better future and the persistent reality of oppression and conflict. The poem’s power lies in its refusal to offer easy answers, instead forcing us to confront the uncomfortable truth of this ongoing, unresolved struggle.

Therefore, the poem, through the Hegelian dialectic, argues that the interregnum is not a time of peaceful possibility but a constant state of becoming, defined by the struggle between the potential for change and the inertia of existing power structures.

Princess Mononoke, Valheim, and Sacrifice

What does humanity sacrifice so we can live?

Humans have avoided extinction, so far.

Is this Time different?

Where’d our Lithium originate?

Like サン and アシタカ from もののけ姫、 we are trapped.

We gain momentum, believe “Consumption is Telomerase,” and justify exploitation.

We mistake the tasks we assign one another for messages from the ©$God we control.

We mistake the ©$God we control for a God we can’t know.

We mistake a whisper’s origins for elsewhere.

We mistake a thought’s origins for within.

We mistake an origin for a beginning.


We mistake a step for the end.

In Valheim, We Clarify.

In Life, We Bend.

In Beef, We Stratify.

In Goat, We Extend.

But.

The Paths We Scour
To Escape
Keep Us
Where We Are.

Our Tasks are not Life.

Our Lives are not Tasks.

We Trend Too, Extremely.

Now Please Bless This Mess.



What’s better than that?


What about Moondog rights?

What about Goonmog rights?

What about Gothmog rights?

What about Softlog fights?

What about?

What about?

War in Six Parts

1.

I woke up tired in half a shipping container. After a quick workout on a floor caked with Afghan ditch mud, among other things, I popped on my PT gear, grabbed my plastic box of personal hygiene supplies, and walked to the closest bathroom shipping container. I shaved, showered, and came back to put on my uniform and strap on my gun.

My team held a morning meeting and I went over to the Afghan side where the Colonel I advised, who sexually molested me every few days, was waiting. We had a good conversation about key control, filling out consumption reports, and an upcoming inventory of the ammunition we’d provided his unit. He didn’t molest me until the end. He insisted on a close hug and quick grab, then grabbed my hand and joked to a guy in his unit sitting on one of the couches in the room he should leave so we could be alone in the office. I joked that I’m never alone with men from Logar. Everyone laughed. I left.

I walked with my friend/interpreter back to the American side and told my team leader about my molestation difficulties. He suggested I grow a beard because Afghan men don’t usually molest other men with beards. This was a good suggestion, but unfortunately I wasn’t authorized to grow a beard because I didn’t have an exception to policy memo signed by an 0-6 or higher prior to deploying.
10924783_10105678313695755_6798335185495830800_n

2.

I woke up tired in half a shipping container. I popped on my PT gear, grabbed my plastic box of personal hygiene supplies, and walked to the nearest bathroom shipping container. I shaved, showered, and came back to put on my uniform and strap on my gun.

My team held a morning meeting and I went over to the Afghan side, but my Afghan brother hadn’t shown up for work. I went back to the American side and got ready for a low-visibility movement to the Afghan National Supply Depot. When we arrived, the vehicle I was in, driven by a young Ranger, was stopped by the Afghan security team guarding the entrance.

After being told to wait multiple times, my driver, a young white boy I’d only ever seen angry, decided not to listen and drove forward. I ordered him to stop, but Rangers only listen to Rangers and anger, so he kept going. The Afghans pointed their weapons at us and ordered us to stop. After a moment of consideration, the Ranger decided to stop.

We used our leverage as a National Mission Unit to circumvent the logistics system we’d created and were training the Afghans to use. We successfully cajoled a few supplies from a depot where Afghan officers hoard warehouse upon warehouse worth of US military hardware.

On the drive back through Kabul we ran into traffic. The traffic was caused by a dead boy’s body sprawled out in the road. His mother was weeping over him while his little brother was smiling and waving at passing cars. I waved back.

afg 4

3.

I woke up tired in half a shipping container. I popped on my PT gear, grabbed my plastic box of personal hygiene supplies, and walked to the closest bathroom shipping container. I shaved and came back to put on my uniform and strap on my gun.

My team held a morning meeting and I went over to the Afghan side where my brother and I discussed the importance of filling out proper consumption reports for fuel usage. While showing me why a form with 23 separate signatures from various high-ranking officers at the Logistics Depot and Ministry of Defense was rejected this time, my Afghan brother put his hand on my inner thigh. Whenever this happened I was never sure whether it was molestation or a cultural practice my prudish American sensibilities didn’t appreciate.

We had a mission that night. During the mission our Afghan partners found military-aged males on target, though none matching the description of our named objective. Our commander ordered the Afghans to bring them all back. The Afghans refused, saying there was no derogatory information on these farmers and we’d only make enemies. Our commander ordered the Afghans to bring them all back. The Afghans objected. Our commander ordered the Afghans to bring them all back. The Afghans brought them all back, we interviewed them, and sent them on to be processed through the Afghan legal system.

I walked back to the American side with my friends/our interpreters and colleagues. We greeted the interrogators as they made their way to the Afghan side to await the military-aged males for processing. After sending emails explaining why I couldn’t attend a national level teleconferenced logistics meeting due to the night’s mission I splashed water on my face in the shipping container as the morning shift was getting ready for their 12-hours in our Joint Operations Center. I went to sleep.

I woke up tired in half a shipping container. I put on my PT gear and shaved. Then I came back, put on my uniform, and strapped on my gun.

I prepared for our daily afternoon update in our Joint Operations Center. During the update we discussed the military-aged males taken off the objective the previous night. Our commander ordered us to name the military-aged males with target series nomenclature so they’d count in our official statistics of killing or capturing enemy targets.

We included the farmers in our official statistics and he included those statistics in his Officer Evaluation Review. He was later promoted to full Colonel. Even later he was pulled over for a speeding ticket on base, which ended up in the base newspaper. If the wrong general saw the story, the incident probably ruined his career.

At the prison, when no derogatory information could be found, the Afghan police released the farmers and gave them American money for a car trip back to their village.

Afg 2

4.

I woke up tired in half a shipping container. I popped on my uniform and strapped on my gun.

My team held a morning meeting, during which we were told our commander had yelled at the Afghan commander the previous evening and threatened to have him fired. There’d never been a green-on-blue incident with our partner unit, so as a group, led by our commander, we decided to categorize our personal risk as low. We walked over and had normal meetings with our Afghan brothers.

Later, while reading the news, I saw that an Afghan man had driven his motorcycle into a volleyball game and blown up 40-some children.

Afghan 5

5.

I woke up tired in half a shipping container. I popped on my uniform and strapped on my gun.

A Special Forces unit at a base down the road overheard an Afghan truck driver say over the phone there was a truck full of explosives on its way to our base. They’d called members of our base’s Special Forces team with a warning.

Later that day our Explosive Ordnance Disposal specialist popped into his armor and went to investigate a truck parked outside our gate that matched the description. While investigating the truck in full kit, he met the Afghan Deputy Commander, who’d walked out to the vehicle wearing cloth.

Inside our wooden office hut on our base, I watched one of the pirated movies the US government allows the military to steal from the entertainment industry during deployments. I checked Facebook and saw lots of posts arguing over the color of a dress. I posted in anger.

Afg 1

6.

I woke up tired in a room under a pile of blankets I’d found on the bed I’d collapsed onto in Kandahar.

We were in the middle of a multi-day combat operation following an unsuccessful hostage rescue. I walked to the Joint Operations Center and relieved my friend so he could sleep. I spent the rest of the day with my Afghan brothers monitoring the situation from intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance platforms.

When our team returned, I spoke with another friend and interpreter about his experiences. It seems when his team landed next to the target house, a man had run out holding a young child in one arm and an AK-47 in the other. Our team’s interpreters and partner unit yelled at him to stop multiple times, but he kept running towards them. When they took the shot his vest exploded.

10447853_10105170369120755_2279489024461360133_n

Abdication

war is over

The Korean peninsula would benefit from a lack of US involvement. It’s time for Russia, China, South Korea, North Korea, and Japan to move beyond historically tenuous regional relationships and petty maritime border bickering. It’s time to find a solution to nuclear weapons in North Korea without the American Wild Card. It’s time to end the war on the Korean peninsula and remove a foreign military force that abuses the South Korean population, supports crime networks and human trafficking, and destabilizes the peace. War on the Korean peninsula would be one of the great cataclysms of our age. We, as humans, can prevent it from ever happening.

It’s time for America to become one nation among many nations. The false stasis of Pax Americana thoroughly disproved and the prophets of the miserable World Order (their words, not mine) revealed as cynical mouthpieces for their exploitative tribe. They who sold the illusion of stability, progress, liberty, and equilibrium as they handed out small pox blankets and nuclear guarantees.

When we take a good look at the American elite throughout history, we find only the veneer of nobility. Underneath, they are the rot.

Our hallowed elite, sitting in mahogany halls.

We are observed in rot-filled homes forming mutinous mouths.

Our hallowed elite, opinions weighted with fortune.

We are observed in hole-filled streets grasping at the future.

 

Their walls climb above our heads until they own the sky.

Our lives are bought and sold as holy consumption dissolves on the tongues of the faithful.

Their deaths electrify our minds and topple our world.

Our lives are programs we run to complete blocks of time worth what the market pays.

 

Our hallowed elite, caressed now by Asclepius.

We are observed in sick-filled offices clutching our pills.

Our hallowed elite, outsource empathy for comfort.

We are observed in our trauma-filled relationships,

We are observed in our anger-filled failures,

We who lack the will to triumph over all beings.

 

Their halls are the halls we build for them,

Our homes are the homes they told us to build.

Their opinions are the opinions we lend value,

Our futures are the futures they told us we should have.

No.
That’s not right.
Don’t get so caught up in duality, you punks.
That’s a one way ticket to the extremist clown car.
And that’s already plenty crowded enough.

We are hallowed.

Our lives are hallowed.

We are elites.

Our world is what we create.

But every moment is a direction.

And look at the direction we’re going.

I’m dressed for the occasion :-).