Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

This 40-micrometer single-celled organism with zero neurons … hunts, kills, and eats other living creatures using nothing but microtubules and geometry. Lacrymaria olor is a freshwater ciliate found in ponds worldwide and one of the most ferocious predators in microbiology. At rest, it’s a teardrop barely visible to the...

JosephJacks_'s profile picture

JJ

43,679 subscribers

74,131 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Evolution says you can turn anything into anything if you tweak it long enough. But that house of cards collapses immediately when you realize what it takes to make even a single cell. They say new cell types arise one mutation at a time. Is that plausible? Here is the issue: Different cell types are created through a massive coordinated stack of genetic information, and it's not all just about DNA sequences. First you need a whole suite of new genetic systems related to the cell: new genes for the cell’s internal systems, instructions for its specific functional role in the body, the regulators that coordinate everything, markers to tell them where to go and when, and the controls that keep the wrong programs off. But the DNA structure itself must also be manipulated. You see, every cell in your body contains the DNA instructions to make any other cell. So how does a bone cell become a bone cell instead of a skin cell? Because of how the DNA is folded. DNA is folded in certain ways for different cell types, so that only the "bone cell instructions" are able to be read by the "cell construction program." The DNA fold decides which programs are open for each cell type. This is critical. If DNA is not folded properly so that specific cell-type information can be read, catastrophe ensues. Then you need placement blueprints, so the cells form in the right place, in the right number, and lock together to form a functional tissue. These developmental instructions are passed from parent to offspring - but research shows that tweaking these master developmental programs ends badly for the child. One mutation at a time cannot invent that entire programming stack and keep it coordinated. Research has confirmed this. To convert one cell type into another in the lab, researchers have to force many changes to happen at the same time in coordination. And even when directed by the researcher, cell conversion almost always fails. Change the sequence without the fold and you cannot get a new cell type. Fold the DNA without the new systems and you can only rearrange old programs. Make the cell without the map and it shows up in the wrong place. Break one layer in the stack and the others do not patiently wait - they fail. So creating a new cell type is not simply "tweak a gene one at a time." It requires a coordinated stack of entirely new programmed instructions: > New suite of internal systems, programmed into the DNA > New functional DNA fold so only the right systems are activated > New mapping blueprints so everything goes where it's needed Step-by-step mutation does not coordinate those layers. It produces broken cells before it produces new ones. Coordination of this level of complexity has only ever been known to come from one place: Intelligence.
0:29

Evolution says you can turn anything into anything if you tweak it long enough. But that house of cards collapses immediately when you realize what it takes to make even a single cell. They say new cell types arise one mutation at a time. Is that plausible? Here is the issue: Different cell types are created through a massive coordinated stack of genetic information, and it's not all just about DNA sequences. First you need a whole suite of new genetic systems related to the cell: new genes for the cell’s internal systems, instructions for its specific functional role in the body, the regulators that coordinate everything, markers to tell them where to go and when, and the controls that keep the wrong programs off. But the DNA structure itself must also be manipulated. You see, every cell in your body contains the DNA instructions to make any other cell. So how does a bone cell become a bone cell instead of a skin cell? Because of how the DNA is folded. DNA is folded in certain ways for different cell types, so that only the "bone cell instructions" are able to be read by the "cell construction program." The DNA fold decides which programs are open for each cell type. This is critical. If DNA is not folded properly so that specific cell-type information can be read, catastrophe ensues. Then you need placement blueprints, so the cells form in the right place, in the right number, and lock together to form a functional tissue. These developmental instructions are passed from parent to offspring - but research shows that tweaking these master developmental programs ends badly for the child. One mutation at a time cannot invent that entire programming stack and keep it coordinated. Research has confirmed this. To convert one cell type into another in the lab, researchers have to force many changes to happen at the same time in coordination. And even when directed by the researcher, cell conversion almost always fails. Change the sequence without the fold and you cannot get a new cell type. Fold the DNA without the new systems and you can only rearrange old programs. Make the cell without the map and it shows up in the wrong place. Break one layer in the stack and the others do not patiently wait - they fail. So creating a new cell type is not simply "tweak a gene one at a time." It requires a coordinated stack of entirely new programmed instructions: > New suite of internal systems, programmed into the DNA > New functional DNA fold so only the right systems are activated > New mapping blueprints so everything goes where it's needed Step-by-step mutation does not coordinate those layers. It produces broken cells before it produces new ones. Coordination of this level of complexity has only ever been known to come from one place: Intelligence.

Divinely Designed

22,050 Aufrufe • vor 2 Tagen

I've been asked to review and provide thoughts on the question of a potential targeting call in the Hardin-Simmons Cowboy Football / UMHB Football🏈 #d3fb game Saturday. I have synced up two videos -- one from UMHB's broadcast and one posted by In The (D3FB) Huddle contributor Riley Conlee (Riley Conlee) (if he could provide credit to the videographer of it, I'd appreciate it). There is a full-speed view and a 20% speed view of the central action included in the video. To evaluate targeting, we have to review both aspects of the rule to see what, if anything, qualifies. I want to provide the entire set of rules (9-1-3 & 9-1-4): "Targeting and Making Forcible Contact With the Crown of the Helmet ARTICLE 3. No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of their helmet. The crown of the helmet is the top segment of the helmet; namely, the circular area defined by a 6-inch radius from the apex (top) of the helmet. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 9-6) (A.R. 9-1-3-I) Targeting and Making Forcible Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI) Note 1: “Targeting” means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to: - Launch. A player leaving their feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area. - A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground. - Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area. - Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14). When in question, a player is defenseless. Examples of defenseless players include but are not limited to: - A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass. This includes an offensive player in a passing posture with focus downfield. - A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier. - A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return. - A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier. - A player on the ground. - A player obviously out of the play. - A player who receives a blind-side block. - A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped. - A quarterback any time after a change of possession - A ball carrier who has obviously given themselves up and is sliding feet- first. - A player attempting to recover a loose ball." We need to start at Note 2 to see if Kyle Brown qualified here as a "defenseless player." If not, then 9-1-4 would not apply to him here. Kyle was not a receiver or a passer per se here -- he was clearly a runner downfield and was not in the grasp of any player. As a result, he was not "defenseless" by definition. That means that the only way targeting can be called here is if the provisions of Rule 9-1-3 were violated. Rule 9-1-3 is VERY specific about the initial requirement before we can go to the question of a required indicator: "No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of their helmet." The crown of the helmet is "the top segment of the helmet, specifically the circular area with a 6-inch radius from the apex (top) of the helmet." In the videos, we see a couple of telling signs. First, Kyle appeared to actually lower HIS helmet as the contact became imminent, which is something coaches advise against for a variety of reasons, including self-preservation. But what is telling is that the UMHB defender attempted to peel off as he saw the angle of the contact he was heading toward with Brown. Specifically, he appeared to end up perpendicular to Brown, perhaps catching Brown's facemask enough to cause the helmet to fly. Yet, that contact was NOT with the defender's crown. As a result, since Brown was not defenseless by rule and because the crown of the helmet was not used for forcible contact to the head/neck area, the picking up of the flag by the officials was appropriate. That said, I spoke with an official who reviewed the videos without commentary and who landed in the same spot as I did concerning the above. They stated that if immediate replay review was available, crews will generally throw the flag and go to review (here, it likely would have been overturned by review, preserving the defender's eligibility). Since the ASC is not providing the on-field replay review yet, the officials' decision would have impacted the game by ejecting a player for the last 6 minutes of the first half until a Halftime review would have been available. For those wondering about how replay is impacting the game, I think this is a good reminder of the nuances it can impact.
0:24

I've been asked to review and provide thoughts on the question of a potential targeting call in the Hardin-Simmons Cowboy Football / UMHB Football🏈 #d3fb game Saturday. I have synced up two videos -- one from UMHB's broadcast and one posted by In The (D3FB) Huddle contributor Riley Conlee (Riley Conlee) (if he could provide credit to the videographer of it, I'd appreciate it). There is a full-speed view and a 20% speed view of the central action included in the video. To evaluate targeting, we have to review both aspects of the rule to see what, if anything, qualifies. I want to provide the entire set of rules (9-1-3 & 9-1-4): "Targeting and Making Forcible Contact With the Crown of the Helmet ARTICLE 3. No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of their helmet. The crown of the helmet is the top segment of the helmet; namely, the circular area defined by a 6-inch radius from the apex (top) of the helmet. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 9-6) (A.R. 9-1-3-I) Targeting and Making Forcible Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI) Note 1: “Targeting” means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to: - Launch. A player leaving their feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area. - A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground. - Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area. - Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14). When in question, a player is defenseless. Examples of defenseless players include but are not limited to: - A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass. This includes an offensive player in a passing posture with focus downfield. - A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier. - A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return. - A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier. - A player on the ground. - A player obviously out of the play. - A player who receives a blind-side block. - A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped. - A quarterback any time after a change of possession - A ball carrier who has obviously given themselves up and is sliding feet- first. - A player attempting to recover a loose ball." We need to start at Note 2 to see if Kyle Brown qualified here as a "defenseless player." If not, then 9-1-4 would not apply to him here. Kyle was not a receiver or a passer per se here -- he was clearly a runner downfield and was not in the grasp of any player. As a result, he was not "defenseless" by definition. That means that the only way targeting can be called here is if the provisions of Rule 9-1-3 were violated. Rule 9-1-3 is VERY specific about the initial requirement before we can go to the question of a required indicator: "No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of their helmet." The crown of the helmet is "the top segment of the helmet, specifically the circular area with a 6-inch radius from the apex (top) of the helmet." In the videos, we see a couple of telling signs. First, Kyle appeared to actually lower HIS helmet as the contact became imminent, which is something coaches advise against for a variety of reasons, including self-preservation. But what is telling is that the UMHB defender attempted to peel off as he saw the angle of the contact he was heading toward with Brown. Specifically, he appeared to end up perpendicular to Brown, perhaps catching Brown's facemask enough to cause the helmet to fly. Yet, that contact was NOT with the defender's crown. As a result, since Brown was not defenseless by rule and because the crown of the helmet was not used for forcible contact to the head/neck area, the picking up of the flag by the officials was appropriate. That said, I spoke with an official who reviewed the videos without commentary and who landed in the same spot as I did concerning the above. They stated that if immediate replay review was available, crews will generally throw the flag and go to review (here, it likely would have been overturned by review, preserving the defender's eligibility). Since the ASC is not providing the on-field replay review yet, the officials' decision would have impacted the game by ejecting a player for the last 6 minutes of the first half until a Halftime review would have been available. For those wondering about how replay is impacting the game, I think this is a good reminder of the nuances it can impact.

Frank Rossi

10,688 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

The Three Hidden Layers of Beauty in Swan Lake: When the Human Body Becomes Art The wonder of classical ballet does not lie in how difficult the movements are. Its wonder lies in a paradox: The techniques that demand the greatest discipline and control appear to the audience as the most natural movements imaginable. The audience does not see the tension in the muscles. They see only beauty. In Swan Lake, three essential techniques help create this unique artistic language. They are not merely dance movements, but three ways in which the human body transcends its own limitations and becomes something more graceful. 1. Port de Bras: When the Body Finds Its Inner Flow A master calligrapher does not create a beautiful stroke with the fingers alone. Each line emerges from the coordination of the entire body: posture, wrist, arm, and even breath. The arms in ballet operate according to a similar principle. When Odette extends her arms, the movement does not simply begin with the hands. It travels through the connection of the back, shoulders, and arms before flowing all the way to the fingertips. As a result, the audience does not feel as though they are watching an arm being raised. They experience a stream of movement unfolding before them. Just as a melody is not created by a single note but by the harmonious relationship among many notes, the ballet arm is no longer perceived as separate parts. It becomes a unified line. At that moment, human hands begin to take on the shape of a swan's wings. 2. Pas de Deux: When Two People Create a Single Movement Imagine two people supporting one another as they walk across a narrow path. What allows them to move together with ease is not who is stronger. It is understanding: When to step. When to pause. When to move forward. And when to offer the support the other person needs. A ballet pas de deux works in much the same way. Siegfried is not simply lifting Odette. Nor is Odette a passive body being carried through space. Both dancers participate in a continuous dialogue through movement. The man provides stability and support. The woman actively expands her body into the surrounding space. When their coordination reaches its highest level, the technique gradually disappears from the audience's awareness. It is no longer one person lifting another. It becomes an image of trust, harmony, and mutual support. In that moment, the audience no longer focuses on the physical effort involved. They experience only a sense of lightness, as though the body itself has transcended its own weight. 3. Cambré: When Softness Is Built Upon Strength Imagine a suspension bridge stretching across a vast gap. Its stability does not come from complete rigidity. On the contrary, its curve allows it to distribute force, absorb movement, and maintain balance. If it were too rigid, it would become vulnerable to external stress. If it were too flexible, it would lose its ability to support. Its strength lies in the balance between the two: Soft, yet stable. Flexible, yet structurally sound. The ballet body functions according to the same principle. When Odette performs a cambré, the audience sees a beautiful curve. Yet behind that curve lies a highly precise system of control. The spine opens with intention. The chest continues to lift upward. The neck lengthens. The entire body maintains balance. The curve is not a collapse. It is an expansion into space. Just as a suspension bridge does not fight against force but works in harmony with it, the dancer does not struggle against the body but learns to master it. This is perhaps ballet's most beautiful paradox: To create the appearance of effortless grace, the artist must possess an extraordinary degree of inner discipline. The Source of Swan Lake's Beauty These three techniques do not exist in isolation. They resemble three stages in the elevation of the human body. Port de Bras: The body learns to become a flow. The arms are no longer merely tools for creating shapes; they become a channel through which emotion is carried. Pas de Deux: Two bodies learn to become a harmony. Strength is no longer expressed through effort, but disappears into the subtle coordination between two people. Cambré: The human being learns to find balance between softness and strength. The curve is no longer simply an external shape, but a symbol of control, harmony, and grace. Together, these three layers of beauty form a journey: From the movement of the body. To the connection between people. To the balance within the human spirit. And that may be why Swan Lake is remembered as more than simply a beautiful ballet. Behind its flawless choreography, audiences do not merely see a well-trained body. They see something deeply human: The desire to transform heaviness into lightness. To transform limitation into beauty. To transform discipline into freedom. That is the enduring vitality of classical ballet — an art form in which the body does not merely move through space, but becomes a language through which humanity reaches toward a higher harmony.
8:05

The Three Hidden Layers of Beauty in Swan Lake: When the Human Body Becomes Art The wonder of classical ballet does not lie in how difficult the movements are. Its wonder lies in a paradox: The techniques that demand the greatest discipline and control appear to the audience as the most natural movements imaginable. The audience does not see the tension in the muscles. They see only beauty. In Swan Lake, three essential techniques help create this unique artistic language. They are not merely dance movements, but three ways in which the human body transcends its own limitations and becomes something more graceful. 1. Port de Bras: When the Body Finds Its Inner Flow A master calligrapher does not create a beautiful stroke with the fingers alone. Each line emerges from the coordination of the entire body: posture, wrist, arm, and even breath. The arms in ballet operate according to a similar principle. When Odette extends her arms, the movement does not simply begin with the hands. It travels through the connection of the back, shoulders, and arms before flowing all the way to the fingertips. As a result, the audience does not feel as though they are watching an arm being raised. They experience a stream of movement unfolding before them. Just as a melody is not created by a single note but by the harmonious relationship among many notes, the ballet arm is no longer perceived as separate parts. It becomes a unified line. At that moment, human hands begin to take on the shape of a swan's wings. 2. Pas de Deux: When Two People Create a Single Movement Imagine two people supporting one another as they walk across a narrow path. What allows them to move together with ease is not who is stronger. It is understanding: When to step. When to pause. When to move forward. And when to offer the support the other person needs. A ballet pas de deux works in much the same way. Siegfried is not simply lifting Odette. Nor is Odette a passive body being carried through space. Both dancers participate in a continuous dialogue through movement. The man provides stability and support. The woman actively expands her body into the surrounding space. When their coordination reaches its highest level, the technique gradually disappears from the audience's awareness. It is no longer one person lifting another. It becomes an image of trust, harmony, and mutual support. In that moment, the audience no longer focuses on the physical effort involved. They experience only a sense of lightness, as though the body itself has transcended its own weight. 3. Cambré: When Softness Is Built Upon Strength Imagine a suspension bridge stretching across a vast gap. Its stability does not come from complete rigidity. On the contrary, its curve allows it to distribute force, absorb movement, and maintain balance. If it were too rigid, it would become vulnerable to external stress. If it were too flexible, it would lose its ability to support. Its strength lies in the balance between the two: Soft, yet stable. Flexible, yet structurally sound. The ballet body functions according to the same principle. When Odette performs a cambré, the audience sees a beautiful curve. Yet behind that curve lies a highly precise system of control. The spine opens with intention. The chest continues to lift upward. The neck lengthens. The entire body maintains balance. The curve is not a collapse. It is an expansion into space. Just as a suspension bridge does not fight against force but works in harmony with it, the dancer does not struggle against the body but learns to master it. This is perhaps ballet's most beautiful paradox: To create the appearance of effortless grace, the artist must possess an extraordinary degree of inner discipline. The Source of Swan Lake's Beauty These three techniques do not exist in isolation. They resemble three stages in the elevation of the human body. Port de Bras: The body learns to become a flow. The arms are no longer merely tools for creating shapes; they become a channel through which emotion is carried. Pas de Deux: Two bodies learn to become a harmony. Strength is no longer expressed through effort, but disappears into the subtle coordination between two people. Cambré: The human being learns to find balance between softness and strength. The curve is no longer simply an external shape, but a symbol of control, harmony, and grace. Together, these three layers of beauty form a journey: From the movement of the body. To the connection between people. To the balance within the human spirit. And that may be why Swan Lake is remembered as more than simply a beautiful ballet. Behind its flawless choreography, audiences do not merely see a well-trained body. They see something deeply human: The desire to transform heaviness into lightness. To transform limitation into beauty. To transform discipline into freedom. That is the enduring vitality of classical ballet — an art form in which the body does not merely move through space, but becomes a language through which humanity reaches toward a higher harmony.

🎼🌺Music Love♥️

13,833 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

This video is one of the first times I thought biology was “cool.” It shows a neutrophil cell chasing a bacterium. Originally recorded in the 1950s by David Rogers at Vanderbilt University, the video gave me a deeper appreciation for life, even at the level of a single cell, because the neutrophil's movements seem so intentful, purposeful, aware. It wasn’t until recently, though, that I actually tried to demystify the neutrophil’s movements and understand how they happen. Here's what I learned: 1. The neutrophil's surface has thousands of protein receptors. Molecules secreted by the bacteria collide with these receptors. When that happens, the proteins change shape, slightly, and initiate a signaling cascade. 2. The neutrophil “knows” where to go because of a discrepancy in bound vs. unbound receptors. The side of the cell closest to the microbe will, probabilistically, have more "bound" receptors than the other side (because the molecules secreted by the microbe have a concentration gradient). This is how the neutrophil figures out which way to move. 3. Each bound receptor activates several G proteins located inside the cell membrane. Each G protein, in turn, switches on PI3K enzymes. In this way, the original signal is amplified; a single "activated" receptor might cause ~100 copies of PI3K to get switched on downstream. 4. The PI3K enzymes stick phosphates onto lipids in the cell membrane. The side of the neutrophil facing the bacterium now has more phosphates than the "back" side. Phosphate-binding proteins, such as GEF, accumulate and then recruit Rac, thus activating it. Rac, in turn, acts like a molecular switch, ultimately recruiting Arp2/3. (TL;DR: A bunch of proteins get activated, and the high phosphate concentration at the leading edge is the key signal for all this.) 5. At any given moment, the neutrophil has millions of actin molecules. These are the proteins used to build the cytoskeleton. Half of the actins are already “assembled” into filaments, but the other half are just floating around. Arp2/3 acts as a nucleator, grabbing onto actin and then starting a new cytoskeletal branch. More actin is assembled at the leading edge (where the Arp2/3 has accumulated), where they each push on the cell membrane with ~2 piconewtons of force. Hundreds of actin chains, pushing together, causes the cell to form protrusions. 6. The assembling actin chains push the cell at a speed of ~20 micrometers per minute (the length of about ten E. coli cells placed end-to-end.) As all of this is happening, another signaling cascade, nucleated at the back end of the cell, is dismantling actin filaments and recycling them. All this happens over a span of about 30 seconds. Much of this process is invisible; what we see, instead, is "just" a cell chasing its prey. But that's the wonderful thing about biology: A singular observation is usually more than enough fodder for a lifetime of work. The well is deep. There is always more to learn.
0:28

This video is one of the first times I thought biology was “cool.” It shows a neutrophil cell chasing a bacterium. Originally recorded in the 1950s by David Rogers at Vanderbilt University, the video gave me a deeper appreciation for life, even at the level of a single cell, because the neutrophil's movements seem so intentful, purposeful, aware. It wasn’t until recently, though, that I actually tried to demystify the neutrophil’s movements and understand how they happen. Here's what I learned: 1. The neutrophil's surface has thousands of protein receptors. Molecules secreted by the bacteria collide with these receptors. When that happens, the proteins change shape, slightly, and initiate a signaling cascade. 2. The neutrophil “knows” where to go because of a discrepancy in bound vs. unbound receptors. The side of the cell closest to the microbe will, probabilistically, have more "bound" receptors than the other side (because the molecules secreted by the microbe have a concentration gradient). This is how the neutrophil figures out which way to move. 3. Each bound receptor activates several G proteins located inside the cell membrane. Each G protein, in turn, switches on PI3K enzymes. In this way, the original signal is amplified; a single "activated" receptor might cause ~100 copies of PI3K to get switched on downstream. 4. The PI3K enzymes stick phosphates onto lipids in the cell membrane. The side of the neutrophil facing the bacterium now has more phosphates than the "back" side. Phosphate-binding proteins, such as GEF, accumulate and then recruit Rac, thus activating it. Rac, in turn, acts like a molecular switch, ultimately recruiting Arp2/3. (TL;DR: A bunch of proteins get activated, and the high phosphate concentration at the leading edge is the key signal for all this.) 5. At any given moment, the neutrophil has millions of actin molecules. These are the proteins used to build the cytoskeleton. Half of the actins are already “assembled” into filaments, but the other half are just floating around. Arp2/3 acts as a nucleator, grabbing onto actin and then starting a new cytoskeletal branch. More actin is assembled at the leading edge (where the Arp2/3 has accumulated), where they each push on the cell membrane with ~2 piconewtons of force. Hundreds of actin chains, pushing together, causes the cell to form protrusions. 6. The assembling actin chains push the cell at a speed of ~20 micrometers per minute (the length of about ten E. coli cells placed end-to-end.) As all of this is happening, another signaling cascade, nucleated at the back end of the cell, is dismantling actin filaments and recycling them. All this happens over a span of about 30 seconds. Much of this process is invisible; what we see, instead, is "just" a cell chasing its prey. But that's the wonderful thing about biology: A singular observation is usually more than enough fodder for a lifetime of work. The well is deep. There is always more to learn.

Niko McCarty.

127,322 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

CBS you can tell by the way they say oh we dont know if that is Epstein is not implying murder. They are leaning in to the Alex Jones internet conspiracy that Epstein is still alive. To do that you would need a body swap. They have ZERO reason to keep this guy alive and risk a jail break in with lol a body double. This isnt the movies. He had too much heat. When an asset had been burned they becomes a liability. When that happens and there is a threat of a plea bargain, they will kill you just as they killed Robert Maxwell. Jean Brunel also died in prison or was that a body swap too? And yet Maxwell is still in prison left her to rot and she’s not talking. They did not drag a corpse of a 66 year old look alike and plant it in the prison and hire a bunch of actors to pretend like they worked on him then pay off a medical examiner to look at a different body and say it was suicide yet leave injuries on that body consistent with murder and also take photographs of that body that look just like a dead Epstein Then for no reason at all have his brother order a second autopsy (why do that if its all a conspiracy) and the second autopsy contradicts the official story because the new pathologist found a broken bone in his neck and ruled it murder. He had a broken bone in his neck something we only learned because of a second autopsy. Dr Michael Baden, is a friend of Larry Johnson who I interview all the time. He saw the body as did Epstein’s own brother and said he was murdered by strangulation. Look at the gash on his neck. Now if you were going to Hollywood fake this why make a gash like that and a broken bone? This conspiracy is beyond stupid. it is like the survivor going around saying they saw him turn into a lizard. Alex Jones wants to turn this into a tar baby the same way he did to 911. They are trying to kookify this whole thing. The attack is two pronged. One mouth says they broke him out AND he is living in Israel. That type of lie automatically associated the anti-Israel crowd with being retarded. It is the same thing they did with Judy Wood on 911 where they were super anti-Israel but then had magic DEW weapons. The other mouth is blaming Russia.
9:45

CBS you can tell by the way they say oh we dont know if that is Epstein is not implying murder. They are leaning in to the Alex Jones internet conspiracy that Epstein is still alive. To do that you would need a body swap. They have ZERO reason to keep this guy alive and risk a jail break in with lol a body double. This isnt the movies. He had too much heat. When an asset had been burned they becomes a liability. When that happens and there is a threat of a plea bargain, they will kill you just as they killed Robert Maxwell. Jean Brunel also died in prison or was that a body swap too? And yet Maxwell is still in prison left her to rot and she’s not talking. They did not drag a corpse of a 66 year old look alike and plant it in the prison and hire a bunch of actors to pretend like they worked on him then pay off a medical examiner to look at a different body and say it was suicide yet leave injuries on that body consistent with murder and also take photographs of that body that look just like a dead Epstein Then for no reason at all have his brother order a second autopsy (why do that if its all a conspiracy) and the second autopsy contradicts the official story because the new pathologist found a broken bone in his neck and ruled it murder. He had a broken bone in his neck something we only learned because of a second autopsy. Dr Michael Baden, is a friend of Larry Johnson who I interview all the time. He saw the body as did Epstein’s own brother and said he was murdered by strangulation. Look at the gash on his neck. Now if you were going to Hollywood fake this why make a gash like that and a broken bone? This conspiracy is beyond stupid. it is like the survivor going around saying they saw him turn into a lizard. Alex Jones wants to turn this into a tar baby the same way he did to 911. They are trying to kookify this whole thing. The attack is two pronged. One mouth says they broke him out AND he is living in Israel. That type of lie automatically associated the anti-Israel crowd with being retarded. It is the same thing they did with Judy Wood on 911 where they were super anti-Israel but then had magic DEW weapons. The other mouth is blaming Russia.

Ryan Dawson

11,669 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

This is mind ATP Synthase The energy pump that powers every cell in every lifeform on Earth, slowed down by over 1,000x. Without ATP Synthase, life cannot exist. This little nano-machine is made up of a minimum of 8 distinct proteins, all designed perfectly to fit together and operate in a coordinated system that takes in ADP and turns it into ATP, which the cell uses to power metabolic processes. It's designed to only allow certain molecules in & out. Any mistakes, and it could flood the cell with toxic waste in a matter of seconds, killing everything. Each protein building block must fit perfectly together, much like all the pieces inside your phone. Without all the proteins fit & working together from the start, ATP Synthase cannot function, and Life cannot exist. But making things even more complex, ATP Synthase doesn't operate alone. It's located inside the cell membrane, where it actively works with other molecules to ensure the ATP it creates gets to the right place. It's a whole integrated network of energy movement within each cell, without which, Life could not exist. All these pieces must exist together, from the beginning, for Life to be possible. Which means it can't arise piece by piece through evolution - because the very process of evolution requires the whole system. Life requires this system in order to produce the energy it needs to replicate & evolve - but replication & evolution is supposed to have created it. You can't have one without the other. There are no simpler versions - it's literally all or nothing. This is clear evidence of an intelligently designed system. What more evidence do you need?
0:21

This is mind ATP Synthase The energy pump that powers every cell in every lifeform on Earth, slowed down by over 1,000x. Without ATP Synthase, life cannot exist. This little nano-machine is made up of a minimum of 8 distinct proteins, all designed perfectly to fit together and operate in a coordinated system that takes in ADP and turns it into ATP, which the cell uses to power metabolic processes. It's designed to only allow certain molecules in & out. Any mistakes, and it could flood the cell with toxic waste in a matter of seconds, killing everything. Each protein building block must fit perfectly together, much like all the pieces inside your phone. Without all the proteins fit & working together from the start, ATP Synthase cannot function, and Life cannot exist. But making things even more complex, ATP Synthase doesn't operate alone. It's located inside the cell membrane, where it actively works with other molecules to ensure the ATP it creates gets to the right place. It's a whole integrated network of energy movement within each cell, without which, Life could not exist. All these pieces must exist together, from the beginning, for Life to be possible. Which means it can't arise piece by piece through evolution - because the very process of evolution requires the whole system. Life requires this system in order to produce the energy it needs to replicate & evolve - but replication & evolution is supposed to have created it. You can't have one without the other. There are no simpler versions - it's literally all or nothing. This is clear evidence of an intelligently designed system. What more evidence do you need?

Divinely Designed

28,434 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

This is how DNA turns coded information into functional proteins - the building blocks of the nanomachines that keep the cells in your body alive. This complex process highlights the sophisticated interconnected systems of Life which must all exist together from the beginning, or Life doesn't happen. First, an RNA molecule is copied from a short segment of DNA. Without the specifically ordered DNA information, RNA cannot form, proteins cannot be built, cells stop working, and life ceases to exist. Life is information first. Once the RNA Molecule is created, it gets ejected from the Polymerase where it was built, and it travels through a complex molecular machine called a Nuclear Pore Complex (NPC), which is an information recognition device that controls the flow of information in and out of a cell's nucleus. The NPC is highly complex - composed of about 500-1,000 protein subunits, derived from a set of about 35 distinct proteins. Without this molecular machine, there is no regulation for what goes in and out of the cell's nucleus, which would lead to catastrophic death for the cell. It must exist for cells to exist. Once the RNA Molecule passes through the NPC, it travels to the Ribosome, a 2-part chemical factory which reads the information on RNA and uses it to construct functional proteins using a specifically sequenced chain of amino acids. Once complete, this protein will then be sent to the section of the cell it belongs to integrate into another molecular machine and do its job. The Ribosome is another highly complex molecular machine - consisting of between 56-80 proteins. Without this molecular machines, proteins cannot be built. Proteins are the building blocks of every cell in every organism on Earth. Without Ribosomes, Life doesn't exist. If you're paying attention, you'll start to realize that Life relies on a highly sophisticated interdependent network of complex machines, which all rely on each other for the function of the system. DNA requires the cell for stability, but the cell requires the proteins for its structure and function, but those proteins require DNA and RNA to be built - it's a circle of necessary interdependence. Systems like this cannot be built by evolutionary processes, which requires that each piece of the process is built by gradual incremental means over lots of time. Without all the pieces there, from the beginning, none of it works. There is only one known source of complex & interdependent informational systems like those we find in life: and that is from Intelligence. Molecular Biology is the best and most obvious evidence of the Intelligent Design in Life.
0:55

This is how DNA turns coded information into functional proteins - the building blocks of the nanomachines that keep the cells in your body alive. This complex process highlights the sophisticated interconnected systems of Life which must all exist together from the beginning, or Life doesn't happen. First, an RNA molecule is copied from a short segment of DNA. Without the specifically ordered DNA information, RNA cannot form, proteins cannot be built, cells stop working, and life ceases to exist. Life is information first. Once the RNA Molecule is created, it gets ejected from the Polymerase where it was built, and it travels through a complex molecular machine called a Nuclear Pore Complex (NPC), which is an information recognition device that controls the flow of information in and out of a cell's nucleus. The NPC is highly complex - composed of about 500-1,000 protein subunits, derived from a set of about 35 distinct proteins. Without this molecular machine, there is no regulation for what goes in and out of the cell's nucleus, which would lead to catastrophic death for the cell. It must exist for cells to exist. Once the RNA Molecule passes through the NPC, it travels to the Ribosome, a 2-part chemical factory which reads the information on RNA and uses it to construct functional proteins using a specifically sequenced chain of amino acids. Once complete, this protein will then be sent to the section of the cell it belongs to integrate into another molecular machine and do its job. The Ribosome is another highly complex molecular machine - consisting of between 56-80 proteins. Without this molecular machines, proteins cannot be built. Proteins are the building blocks of every cell in every organism on Earth. Without Ribosomes, Life doesn't exist. If you're paying attention, you'll start to realize that Life relies on a highly sophisticated interdependent network of complex machines, which all rely on each other for the function of the system. DNA requires the cell for stability, but the cell requires the proteins for its structure and function, but those proteins require DNA and RNA to be built - it's a circle of necessary interdependence. Systems like this cannot be built by evolutionary processes, which requires that each piece of the process is built by gradual incremental means over lots of time. Without all the pieces there, from the beginning, none of it works. There is only one known source of complex & interdependent informational systems like those we find in life: and that is from Intelligence. Molecular Biology is the best and most obvious evidence of the Intelligent Design in Life.

Divinely Designed

62,517 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

This Chinese developer linked two $2,999 NVIDIA DGX Sparks into one box and runs the full Qwen3-235B at home, after dropping his $1,999-a-month cloud bill to zero. He wired 2 small boxes into a single computer, split a giant 235-billion-parameter model in half between them, and serves it across his own network at about 10 tokens a second, with no internet, no cloud, right there on the desk. No data center, no thousand-dollar graphics cards, no monthly cloud bill. Just him, 2 gold boxes the size of a sandwich, one cable between them, and 1 power strip. And here is the whole payoff. He used to pay the cloud $1,999 a month for the same model, and the meter ticked on every request. Now he paid $5,998 once for 2 boxes, they covered their cost in 3 months, and after that he sends as many requests as he wants for free, only electricity. The two Sparks talk over one fast cable, each holds 128GB of memory, and together they carry the whole model, about 73GB loaded per box, with the chip inside pinned near the limit at 96%. Both boxes work as one and keep trading data over the cable, with no cloud in the loop and no single word leaking out. The ready model sits on one local address, and any app on his network calls it as easily as ChatGPT. And here is how he described, in plain words, what this pair of boxes does: "this is a pair of boxes that holds the huge Qwen3-235B model and serves it to one network. the model is split in half, and each box owns its half. parts: // Box 1 (holds the first half of the model and starts the answer fast, the first word appears in under a second) // Box 2 (holds the second half and writes out the rest, about 10 tokens a second) // Cable (connects the 2 boxes and moves data between them on every step, with no lag) // Address (one local address where any app sends its request, like to a cloud model) // Test (a script that runs big prompts through and measures speed and delays) // Monitor (checks temperature, power draw, and load on both boxes every 2 seconds). the model never goes to the cloud. he only steps in when a box runs hotter than 80 degrees or the cable between them starts dropping data." So the system knows exactly what it is, what it is for, and where its limits are. It knows it has to hold the whole huge model across 2 boxes on its own. It knows it has to answer every request locally, with no meter, no limits, and no internet. It knows the human is only needed when a box overheats or the link between them stalls. → The setup runs around the clock on 2 boxes, each pulling under 60 watts → However many requests he sends, the monthly bill is $0, only electricity → The first box starts the answer in under a second → The second writes text at about 10 tokens a second → One request at a time: 838 tokens in 85 seconds, first word in 0.8s → Two requests at once: 697 tokens in 108 seconds, first word in 0.7s → Both boxes sit at 96% load and warm up to 76-78 degrees And only when a chip in a box runs hotter than 80 degrees or the cable between the 2 Sparks drops data does the system call the owner. And when he himself is out on a run or in a coffee shop, he still reaches his own model at home from his phone: sends a big prompt to the local Qwen3-235B, gets the full answer back in under a minute and a half, with no token meter ticking and no limit to hit. Here is what the test shows on his screen during one of the night runs: "one request at a time: 838 tokens in 84.9 seconds, first word in 0.8s, then 0.1s per token." "two requests at once: 697 tokens in 107.6 seconds, first word in 0.7s, then 0.15s per token." "Box 1: chip at 96% load, 76 degrees, 56 watts, 73GB used in memory." "Box 2: chip at 96% load, 78 degrees, 56 watts, the Qwen3-235B model fully loaded." And while everyone around is paying for AI by the month and bumping into limits, his top-tier model just sits on the desk and works as much as he wants: his own little power plant instead of a forever meter. He has no server rack of his own and no cloud account behind it. Just 2 DGX Spark boxes on a desk, one model split in half between them, one local address, and a folder of prompts next to it. Out of everything I have seen this year, this is the cleanest way to stop paying for AI: $5,998 of hardware on the desk once, $0 a month to the cloud, unlimited forever, and between them 2 gold boxes, 1 cable, and the full Qwen3-235B answering at home with no internet.
1:16

This Chinese developer linked two $2,999 NVIDIA DGX Sparks into one box and runs the full Qwen3-235B at home, after dropping his $1,999-a-month cloud bill to zero. He wired 2 small boxes into a single computer, split a giant 235-billion-parameter model in half between them, and serves it across his own network at about 10 tokens a second, with no internet, no cloud, right there on the desk. No data center, no thousand-dollar graphics cards, no monthly cloud bill. Just him, 2 gold boxes the size of a sandwich, one cable between them, and 1 power strip. And here is the whole payoff. He used to pay the cloud $1,999 a month for the same model, and the meter ticked on every request. Now he paid $5,998 once for 2 boxes, they covered their cost in 3 months, and after that he sends as many requests as he wants for free, only electricity. The two Sparks talk over one fast cable, each holds 128GB of memory, and together they carry the whole model, about 73GB loaded per box, with the chip inside pinned near the limit at 96%. Both boxes work as one and keep trading data over the cable, with no cloud in the loop and no single word leaking out. The ready model sits on one local address, and any app on his network calls it as easily as ChatGPT. And here is how he described, in plain words, what this pair of boxes does: "this is a pair of boxes that holds the huge Qwen3-235B model and serves it to one network. the model is split in half, and each box owns its half. parts: // Box 1 (holds the first half of the model and starts the answer fast, the first word appears in under a second) // Box 2 (holds the second half and writes out the rest, about 10 tokens a second) // Cable (connects the 2 boxes and moves data between them on every step, with no lag) // Address (one local address where any app sends its request, like to a cloud model) // Test (a script that runs big prompts through and measures speed and delays) // Monitor (checks temperature, power draw, and load on both boxes every 2 seconds). the model never goes to the cloud. he only steps in when a box runs hotter than 80 degrees or the cable between them starts dropping data." So the system knows exactly what it is, what it is for, and where its limits are. It knows it has to hold the whole huge model across 2 boxes on its own. It knows it has to answer every request locally, with no meter, no limits, and no internet. It knows the human is only needed when a box overheats or the link between them stalls. → The setup runs around the clock on 2 boxes, each pulling under 60 watts → However many requests he sends, the monthly bill is $0, only electricity → The first box starts the answer in under a second → The second writes text at about 10 tokens a second → One request at a time: 838 tokens in 85 seconds, first word in 0.8s → Two requests at once: 697 tokens in 108 seconds, first word in 0.7s → Both boxes sit at 96% load and warm up to 76-78 degrees And only when a chip in a box runs hotter than 80 degrees or the cable between the 2 Sparks drops data does the system call the owner. And when he himself is out on a run or in a coffee shop, he still reaches his own model at home from his phone: sends a big prompt to the local Qwen3-235B, gets the full answer back in under a minute and a half, with no token meter ticking and no limit to hit. Here is what the test shows on his screen during one of the night runs: "one request at a time: 838 tokens in 84.9 seconds, first word in 0.8s, then 0.1s per token." "two requests at once: 697 tokens in 107.6 seconds, first word in 0.7s, then 0.15s per token." "Box 1: chip at 96% load, 76 degrees, 56 watts, 73GB used in memory." "Box 2: chip at 96% load, 78 degrees, 56 watts, the Qwen3-235B model fully loaded." And while everyone around is paying for AI by the month and bumping into limits, his top-tier model just sits on the desk and works as much as he wants: his own little power plant instead of a forever meter. He has no server rack of his own and no cloud account behind it. Just 2 DGX Spark boxes on a desk, one model split in half between them, one local address, and a folder of prompts next to it. Out of everything I have seen this year, this is the cleanest way to stop paying for AI: $5,998 of hardware on the desk once, $0 a month to the cloud, unlimited forever, and between them 2 gold boxes, 1 cable, and the full Qwen3-235B answering at home with no internet.

Blaze

93,871 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

It’s embarrassing to watch the TGA tie itself up in knots and contradict itself over the safety of the vaccine. The mRNA vaccine is designed to attack your own cells because the antigen sits on the cell membrane. The T-cell which responds to the vaccine antigen can’t separate your cell from the spike protein. It kills both and the TGA has already admitted as much in the past conceding myocarditis is an autoimmune response. The spike proteins are not rapidly degraded as numerous studies have shown they last in the body for up to 60 days. But more importantly the mRNA is designed to last much longer and produce more proteins. This means the body produces a much larger concentration of the toxic spike protein than what the virus would have delivered. And I quote from one study: “Later studies documented similar effects for 5-methylcytidine and 2-thiouridine and observed that modified mRNAs produced 10- to 100-fold more protein compared with unmodified mRNAs. Recently, N1-methylpseudouridine (m1Ψ), the modification used in the current mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, was found to possess superior characteristics to Ψ; m1Ψ elicited less immunogenicity and increased protein production by more than an order of magnitude relative to Ψ.” And another on the Poly-A tail increases the duration. “Whether for the mRNA vaccine from Pfizer/BioNtech® laboratories or that of Moderna®, the two mRNA sequences end in a Poly(A) tail. The purpose of this addition is to increase the stability of the mRNA in biological medium and also to allow the recruitment of the ribosome, in order to initiate an efficient translation. After translation, the mRNA can be reused several times, but when this happens, it also loses part of the Adenines of its Poly(A) tail, as enzymatic degradation begins there, which only ensures a transient protection against this degradation. When this tail is too degraded, the mRNA is no longer functional and is destroyed. The poly(A) tail stabilizes mRNA and boosts protein translation, and the length of the poly(A) tail is proportional to translation efficiency. It is a critical factor in determining the longevity of mRNA molecules.” Long story short - the TGA continues to lie. Quotes from: #auspol
2:19

It’s embarrassing to watch the TGA tie itself up in knots and contradict itself over the safety of the vaccine. The mRNA vaccine is designed to attack your own cells because the antigen sits on the cell membrane. The T-cell which responds to the vaccine antigen can’t separate your cell from the spike protein. It kills both and the TGA has already admitted as much in the past conceding myocarditis is an autoimmune response. The spike proteins are not rapidly degraded as numerous studies have shown they last in the body for up to 60 days. But more importantly the mRNA is designed to last much longer and produce more proteins. This means the body produces a much larger concentration of the toxic spike protein than what the virus would have delivered. And I quote from one study: “Later studies documented similar effects for 5-methylcytidine and 2-thiouridine and observed that modified mRNAs produced 10- to 100-fold more protein compared with unmodified mRNAs. Recently, N1-methylpseudouridine (m1Ψ), the modification used in the current mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, was found to possess superior characteristics to Ψ; m1Ψ elicited less immunogenicity and increased protein production by more than an order of magnitude relative to Ψ.” And another on the Poly-A tail increases the duration. “Whether for the mRNA vaccine from Pfizer/BioNtech® laboratories or that of Moderna®, the two mRNA sequences end in a Poly(A) tail. The purpose of this addition is to increase the stability of the mRNA in biological medium and also to allow the recruitment of the ribosome, in order to initiate an efficient translation. After translation, the mRNA can be reused several times, but when this happens, it also loses part of the Adenines of its Poly(A) tail, as enzymatic degradation begins there, which only ensures a transient protection against this degradation. When this tail is too degraded, the mRNA is no longer functional and is destroyed. The poly(A) tail stabilizes mRNA and boosts protein translation, and the length of the poly(A) tail is proportional to translation efficiency. It is a critical factor in determining the longevity of mRNA molecules.” Long story short - the TGA continues to lie. Quotes from: #auspol

Gerard Rennick

62,548 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Look at this crucifixion. There are no nails. There is no blood, no wound, no crown of thorns. And you are not looking up at Christ, the way every crucifixion in history has asked you to. You are looking down at him, from above, as if you were God... The painting is Christ of Saint John of the Cross, made by Salvador Dalí in 1951, and it hangs in the Kelvingrove Art Gallery in Glasgow. It began, as so much of Dalí's work did, with a dream. He had been struck by a small, almost crude drawing made in the sixteenth century by the Spanish mystic Saint John of the Cross. While imprisoned in Toledo, the friar had a vision of the crucifixion seen from an impossible angle, from above, looking down on the bowed head and outstretched arms, and he sketched it quickly. Nothing like it existed in the entire tradition of Christian art. Centuries later, Dalí saw a reproduction, and it stayed with him. Then, in 1950, he had what he called a "cosmic dream." In his own words, written beneath his studies for the painting: "I saw this image in color and which in my dream represented the nucleus of the atom. This nucleus later took on a metaphysical sense; I considered it the very unity of the universe, the Christ." In the dream he saw Christ hovering above the bay of Port Lligat, the little Spanish fishing village where he lived, and a voice said to him: "Dalí, you must paint this Christ." He began the next morning. At first he intended to include the wounds, but near the end, he dreamed again, and this time he saw Christ with none of it. No nails. No blood. No thorns. He erased suffering from the cross entirely. To get the body right, he hired a Hollywood stuntman and had him suspended from an overhead gantry in the studio, so he could study exactly how a real human body hangs in the air, how gravity pulls at it. The result is a figure of impossible calm, floating in a dark sky above an ordinary harbor where two fishermen go about their day, unaware of what is happening above them. Dalí painted the moment as it might be seen from outside of time, from above the world, where the horror has been lifted away and what remains is the shape of the thing itself: a man, suspended between the sky and the sea, at the center of everything. Saint John of the Cross, whose small drawing began all this, once wrote a line that could serve as the caption to this painting: "In the evening of life, we will be judged on love alone." I started my newsletter because the past is full of masterpieces like this one, and so few people ever stop to show us why they matter. Every week I try to. If that is something you'd like to be part of, you can join through the link in my bio, and if you'd like to support my work, a paid subscription is what makes it possible. Thanks for reading.
0:57

Look at this crucifixion. There are no nails. There is no blood, no wound, no crown of thorns. And you are not looking up at Christ, the way every crucifixion in history has asked you to. You are looking down at him, from above, as if you were God... The painting is Christ of Saint John of the Cross, made by Salvador Dalí in 1951, and it hangs in the Kelvingrove Art Gallery in Glasgow. It began, as so much of Dalí's work did, with a dream. He had been struck by a small, almost crude drawing made in the sixteenth century by the Spanish mystic Saint John of the Cross. While imprisoned in Toledo, the friar had a vision of the crucifixion seen from an impossible angle, from above, looking down on the bowed head and outstretched arms, and he sketched it quickly. Nothing like it existed in the entire tradition of Christian art. Centuries later, Dalí saw a reproduction, and it stayed with him. Then, in 1950, he had what he called a "cosmic dream." In his own words, written beneath his studies for the painting: "I saw this image in color and which in my dream represented the nucleus of the atom. This nucleus later took on a metaphysical sense; I considered it the very unity of the universe, the Christ." In the dream he saw Christ hovering above the bay of Port Lligat, the little Spanish fishing village where he lived, and a voice said to him: "Dalí, you must paint this Christ." He began the next morning. At first he intended to include the wounds, but near the end, he dreamed again, and this time he saw Christ with none of it. No nails. No blood. No thorns. He erased suffering from the cross entirely. To get the body right, he hired a Hollywood stuntman and had him suspended from an overhead gantry in the studio, so he could study exactly how a real human body hangs in the air, how gravity pulls at it. The result is a figure of impossible calm, floating in a dark sky above an ordinary harbor where two fishermen go about their day, unaware of what is happening above them. Dalí painted the moment as it might be seen from outside of time, from above the world, where the horror has been lifted away and what remains is the shape of the thing itself: a man, suspended between the sky and the sea, at the center of everything. Saint John of the Cross, whose small drawing began all this, once wrote a line that could serve as the caption to this painting: "In the evening of life, we will be judged on love alone." I started my newsletter because the past is full of masterpieces like this one, and so few people ever stop to show us why they matter. Every week I try to. If that is something you'd like to be part of, you can join through the link in my bio, and if you'd like to support my work, a paid subscription is what makes it possible. Thanks for reading.

James Lucas

109,244 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Our democracy is dying and we are rapidly descending into one party rule. We are left without a credible opposition and a Teal cross-bench with its mouth firmly shut on the slow removal of our right to question the government. The changes that Labor are planning to make in its Freedom of Information (FOI) amendments will further destroy what was already an imperfect system. Secrecy is the key to corruption. Intrinsic to the slow and deliberate removal of our rights, privileges and freedoms. So much happens under the cover of cabinet secrecy, of the quiet respect both sides of politics show each other in not exposing their worst deeds. Like the political class is more afraid of exposure than doing a poor job. It feels that way in Australia because it absolutely IS that way. Gone are the statesmen of old. Those that acted in the national interest. The current crop – Albanese and Ley – don’t deserve our trust. There has been more than enough evidence of corruption and cover-up from both sides, as they just have their turn, or wait for their turn, and nothing really changes. It’s baked in. By design. Ley did a little puff piece on the proposed imposition of a cost to access an FOI, which is a problem, but far from the biggest issue. The two major crimes being committed on the people by the passage of this bill will be the loss of the ability to request information anonymously, and provisions to deeply protect ministers from scrutiny through FOI. A bad convention formalised in law. Secrecy of any kind is abhorrent in a democracy. Without proper information, the public can’t make good electoral decisions. Without the ability to expose information by way of right, it is impossible to hold the government to account. As there is no opposition and scantly any capable media scrutiny. Those responsibilities now fall to members of the public, and in particular, whistleblowers from within the system. Whistleblowers, or anyone who does not toe the line in this country are absolutely pilloried. That rings true in all aspects of our government, and within the political parties that hold the system up. Losing anonymity in requesting documents from government, when paired with the pending loss of anonymity on social media is a one-two-punch that knocks out the last frontier of scrutiny. Our last hope to right the system through the system. Absolutely terrifying. Moreover, the biggest and most important decisions are made in cabinet, and by ministers. Without the ability to ask the big questions of the big players we are left up the proverbial creek, without a paddle. I am sure Sussan will be requesting some minor amendments to cost, but happy to waive the rest through, because she wants to have her turn at it later. We are poorly served by our parliament, we are right to question them, their integrity and intent. When we hear about our involvement in the bombing of Iran from the Americans, and negotiations with India to build 1 million homes here, from India… questions over the ISIS brides and everything else we learn by accident… we must shout our displeasure at this secrecy from the rooftops – while we still can. There must be a public outcry over this breach of faith. Our nation is slipping away from us, like sand through the hourglass. One grain of truth at a time. I just want Australia back.
0:58

Our democracy is dying and we are rapidly descending into one party rule. We are left without a credible opposition and a Teal cross-bench with its mouth firmly shut on the slow removal of our right to question the government. The changes that Labor are planning to make in its Freedom of Information (FOI) amendments will further destroy what was already an imperfect system. Secrecy is the key to corruption. Intrinsic to the slow and deliberate removal of our rights, privileges and freedoms. So much happens under the cover of cabinet secrecy, of the quiet respect both sides of politics show each other in not exposing their worst deeds. Like the political class is more afraid of exposure than doing a poor job. It feels that way in Australia because it absolutely IS that way. Gone are the statesmen of old. Those that acted in the national interest. The current crop – Albanese and Ley – don’t deserve our trust. There has been more than enough evidence of corruption and cover-up from both sides, as they just have their turn, or wait for their turn, and nothing really changes. It’s baked in. By design. Ley did a little puff piece on the proposed imposition of a cost to access an FOI, which is a problem, but far from the biggest issue. The two major crimes being committed on the people by the passage of this bill will be the loss of the ability to request information anonymously, and provisions to deeply protect ministers from scrutiny through FOI. A bad convention formalised in law. Secrecy of any kind is abhorrent in a democracy. Without proper information, the public can’t make good electoral decisions. Without the ability to expose information by way of right, it is impossible to hold the government to account. As there is no opposition and scantly any capable media scrutiny. Those responsibilities now fall to members of the public, and in particular, whistleblowers from within the system. Whistleblowers, or anyone who does not toe the line in this country are absolutely pilloried. That rings true in all aspects of our government, and within the political parties that hold the system up. Losing anonymity in requesting documents from government, when paired with the pending loss of anonymity on social media is a one-two-punch that knocks out the last frontier of scrutiny. Our last hope to right the system through the system. Absolutely terrifying. Moreover, the biggest and most important decisions are made in cabinet, and by ministers. Without the ability to ask the big questions of the big players we are left up the proverbial creek, without a paddle. I am sure Sussan will be requesting some minor amendments to cost, but happy to waive the rest through, because she wants to have her turn at it later. We are poorly served by our parliament, we are right to question them, their integrity and intent. When we hear about our involvement in the bombing of Iran from the Americans, and negotiations with India to build 1 million homes here, from India… questions over the ISIS brides and everything else we learn by accident… we must shout our displeasure at this secrecy from the rooftops – while we still can. There must be a public outcry over this breach of faith. Our nation is slipping away from us, like sand through the hourglass. One grain of truth at a time. I just want Australia back.

Matthew Camenzuli

13,891 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Your observations are almost correct, but your conclusions are not. What you see flying out, as what others thought was his ear piece, is not his ear piece. It is his chain he had around his neck, with, what I am pretty certain, a cross on it, which all Christians would wear, if they have a chain on their necks. So, what apparently happened, which seems so astronomically unlikely, is the bullet did not hit him in the neck first, but hit him in the chest, and to be more specific in that cross. So, after a hit into that cross, his chain snaps, and it is that which you see flying out backwards. When the chain snaps, and starts flying up and backwards, it also pulls up the front edge of is shirt, in less than 0.1 sec. So, that is how that anomaly is explained at the same time. What happens next, is his mic had a wire under his shirt. It kind of just laid in the back of his neck, going around his shoulder, and disappearing under his shirt on the front. That wire must have had some contact with this chain, or even being wrapped around it like may be just one turn. So, when that chain snaps and starts flying backwards, it starts pulling on his mic at the same time. Just the mic had a wire that was most certainly lose a little bit. So, that is why that responds with a few tens of a second delay. But still, the mic also, after jerking around for a few tens of a second disappears completely of his shirt. So, basically, the bullet hits his cross first, which is on his chain, would explain all of these anomalies at the same time, including the wire on the back of his neck being pulled around from the front, and thus bulging his shirt in the back a little bit. If you pay all of this is slow motion, you will see that it all gets seqeuenced correctly. And the last thing to note, is after hitting his cross, and getting deflected, the bullet now would start going up, instead of forward, and would go up into his neck from the bottom up, and disappear into his head. That would also explain at the same time why there is no exit wound. Because his skull would stop the bullet from exiting. One side note, not related to all of these anomalies, but still a necessary thing to keep in mind - that alleged high velocity bullet Mauser 30_06, could not have possibly be the weapon used, as that bullet would have taken one third of his neck out. For everything to be explained correctly, no Mauser, or any other kind of shotgun could have been used. Another, much smaller caliber weapon had to be used, like some kind of a hand gun, and from a much closer distance too, as a hand gun without the scope, from a far way roof would just not work. And so, that is how all of this happened. I know this was long. But this is one bizarre, super difficult to crack episode. So, I could not make it any shorter.
0:30

Your observations are almost correct, but your conclusions are not. What you see flying out, as what others thought was his ear piece, is not his ear piece. It is his chain he had around his neck, with, what I am pretty certain, a cross on it, which all Christians would wear, if they have a chain on their necks. So, what apparently happened, which seems so astronomically unlikely, is the bullet did not hit him in the neck first, but hit him in the chest, and to be more specific in that cross. So, after a hit into that cross, his chain snaps, and it is that which you see flying out backwards. When the chain snaps, and starts flying up and backwards, it also pulls up the front edge of is shirt, in less than 0.1 sec. So, that is how that anomaly is explained at the same time. What happens next, is his mic had a wire under his shirt. It kind of just laid in the back of his neck, going around his shoulder, and disappearing under his shirt on the front. That wire must have had some contact with this chain, or even being wrapped around it like may be just one turn. So, when that chain snaps and starts flying backwards, it starts pulling on his mic at the same time. Just the mic had a wire that was most certainly lose a little bit. So, that is why that responds with a few tens of a second delay. But still, the mic also, after jerking around for a few tens of a second disappears completely of his shirt. So, basically, the bullet hits his cross first, which is on his chain, would explain all of these anomalies at the same time, including the wire on the back of his neck being pulled around from the front, and thus bulging his shirt in the back a little bit. If you pay all of this is slow motion, you will see that it all gets seqeuenced correctly. And the last thing to note, is after hitting his cross, and getting deflected, the bullet now would start going up, instead of forward, and would go up into his neck from the bottom up, and disappear into his head. That would also explain at the same time why there is no exit wound. Because his skull would stop the bullet from exiting. One side note, not related to all of these anomalies, but still a necessary thing to keep in mind - that alleged high velocity bullet Mauser 30_06, could not have possibly be the weapon used, as that bullet would have taken one third of his neck out. For everything to be explained correctly, no Mauser, or any other kind of shotgun could have been used. Another, much smaller caliber weapon had to be used, like some kind of a hand gun, and from a much closer distance too, as a hand gun without the scope, from a far way roof would just not work. And so, that is how all of this happened. I know this was long. But this is one bizarre, super difficult to crack episode. So, I could not make it any shorter.

US_did_ 911

31,104 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

🧵1/ I’m back from a short trip on a social network with photographs and videos from Gaza, with some brief personal conclusions. First, it is quite clear that there are those in Gaza who know how to make extensive use of the networks and social media for the purposes of emotional extortion and also false propaganda, exactly like they live streamed the October 7 massacre and somehow turned it into “justified resistance”, they use quite a few Western buzzwords such as “genocide”, “occupation”, “oppression” and “Zionism”- and this is the simplest way to distinguish between Hamas propaganda posts and authentic people in Gaza, whom I’ve known all my life, who use much simpler words and not this indoctrinated manipulation bullshit. I was looking for THESE authentic people - the real voices. And I think I found a few. So first of all, what do I think there is NOT happening in Gaza? There is no genocide and no famine. Yes, there is quite a lot of suffering, shortages in some places and lack of decent shelter etc. And there’s a lot of cynical exploitation of it for propaganda purposes. I’m saying it because you can see children are getting payed for it, you can see the absolute control of distribution and you can see how basic needs and the way out is blocked with money- Israel is not taking money for any of it, the West is sending free aid, so the money is demanded by those who want to control the suffering and use it. You should know, that before the war - there was already quite a lot of very poor population in Gaza, but now the economic difficulty has greatly increased for two main reasons: one, the war damaged many sources of livelihood and the second - a major source of livelihood was working in Israel and this option was closed for a long time now, since October 7, and is now much less operational. So in fact the main source of income is donations and funding from Hamas for control purposes of course. This is how, among other things, Hamas uses the population to "work for them", and also to smile or cry for the cameras on demand. Now on the issue of claimed famine- famine is when there’s NO food and water, enough for the population. As I said, my personal conclusion is that there is no shortage of food and water in Gaza at all. The problem is that the food is not distributed equally, it is controlled by those who are powerful (usually Hamas operatives) and then sold at high costs to the population without them having sources of livelihood. Food that should be distributed for #free is actually sold at a high price, the shelter tents are also paid for and the exit from Gaza is particularly expensive (5000$ that are paid to the transporters). There are quite a few who refer to Gaza as a "prison" but Gaza is not a prison, Hamas has simply created a situation where it is very expensive to leave it - and thus the poor and the new poor are completely dependent on Hamas and other clans (Hamulas) in everything to do with food, shelter and exit, and they play with them as pawns. If Gaza is a prison - then it’s because Hamas are imprisoning it. All the suffering in Gaza started because of #Hamas it continues and increases because of #Hamas, but the main point is that #Hamas is also the one factor that can stop it. If Hamas surrendered unconditionally and released the Israeli hostages, as done in any war in which you are forced to admit defeat - they would truly liberate Palestine. Remember- this is a war that #Hamas started, a war that on Oct. 7 was celebrated in the streets of Gaza. But #Hamas prefers to keep the Palestinians captive so that it can showcase suffering (which they create) and use it as a tool for financial donations, manipulation of the West and a messianic jihadist war that will never end for them. If the West doesn’t wake up to this ongoing manipulation- they will never help the Palestinians in Gaza or in general, and they will bring this jihadist chaos to their doorstep From Gaza >
0:40

🧵1/ I’m back from a short trip on a social network with photographs and videos from Gaza, with some brief personal conclusions. First, it is quite clear that there are those in Gaza who know how to make extensive use of the networks and social media for the purposes of emotional extortion and also false propaganda, exactly like they live streamed the October 7 massacre and somehow turned it into “justified resistance”, they use quite a few Western buzzwords such as “genocide”, “occupation”, “oppression” and “Zionism”- and this is the simplest way to distinguish between Hamas propaganda posts and authentic people in Gaza, whom I’ve known all my life, who use much simpler words and not this indoctrinated manipulation bullshit. I was looking for THESE authentic people - the real voices. And I think I found a few. So first of all, what do I think there is NOT happening in Gaza? There is no genocide and no famine. Yes, there is quite a lot of suffering, shortages in some places and lack of decent shelter etc. And there’s a lot of cynical exploitation of it for propaganda purposes. I’m saying it because you can see children are getting payed for it, you can see the absolute control of distribution and you can see how basic needs and the way out is blocked with money- Israel is not taking money for any of it, the West is sending free aid, so the money is demanded by those who want to control the suffering and use it. You should know, that before the war - there was already quite a lot of very poor population in Gaza, but now the economic difficulty has greatly increased for two main reasons: one, the war damaged many sources of livelihood and the second - a major source of livelihood was working in Israel and this option was closed for a long time now, since October 7, and is now much less operational. So in fact the main source of income is donations and funding from Hamas for control purposes of course. This is how, among other things, Hamas uses the population to "work for them", and also to smile or cry for the cameras on demand. Now on the issue of claimed famine- famine is when there’s NO food and water, enough for the population. As I said, my personal conclusion is that there is no shortage of food and water in Gaza at all. The problem is that the food is not distributed equally, it is controlled by those who are powerful (usually Hamas operatives) and then sold at high costs to the population without them having sources of livelihood. Food that should be distributed for #free is actually sold at a high price, the shelter tents are also paid for and the exit from Gaza is particularly expensive (5000$ that are paid to the transporters). There are quite a few who refer to Gaza as a "prison" but Gaza is not a prison, Hamas has simply created a situation where it is very expensive to leave it - and thus the poor and the new poor are completely dependent on Hamas and other clans (Hamulas) in everything to do with food, shelter and exit, and they play with them as pawns. If Gaza is a prison - then it’s because Hamas are imprisoning it. All the suffering in Gaza started because of #Hamas it continues and increases because of #Hamas, but the main point is that #Hamas is also the one factor that can stop it. If Hamas surrendered unconditionally and released the Israeli hostages, as done in any war in which you are forced to admit defeat - they would truly liberate Palestine. Remember- this is a war that #Hamas started, a war that on Oct. 7 was celebrated in the streets of Gaza. But #Hamas prefers to keep the Palestinians captive so that it can showcase suffering (which they create) and use it as a tool for financial donations, manipulation of the West and a messianic jihadist war that will never end for them. If the West doesn’t wake up to this ongoing manipulation- they will never help the Palestinians in Gaza or in general, and they will bring this jihadist chaos to their doorstep From Gaza >

Gal G., Adv 🇮🇱

2,695,728 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Abandoned and Reduced to Skin and Bones, This Dog Still Looked at a Stranger with Trust ✨ The little dog lay curled up, its ribs clearly visible beneath its skin, its fur dirty and giving off a foul smell. It had been abandoned with almost nothing left. Yet when the rescuer approached and spoke to it, its first reaction was not fear or retreat. It moved closer, looking up with clear, innocent eyes and responding with an almost unconditional friendliness. It was a moment that made many viewers stop and take notice. The story began as a straightforward rescue case. The puppy was found severely malnourished, filthy, and alone. Despite being neglected to such an extent, it still approached a stranger gently, showing no signs of defensiveness. The rescuer offered it food and spoke to it in a soft voice, and the dog responded with trust almost immediately. The question is a simple but profound one: Why does a creature treated so cruelly still have the ability to love and open its heart to someone it has never met? The answer lies partly in the nature of dogs. Unlike humans, dogs do not tend to hold grudges in the same way or dwell on them over long periods. They live largely through their instincts for attachment and their search for safety. When a new person reaches out to them, many dogs can still respond with acceptance. This is not foolishness or a lack of memory. Rather, it is a trait shaped over thousands of years of living alongside humans. They often place trust ahead of suspicion. The contrast in this story makes that even more striking. The dog's body tells the story of neglect: exposed ribs, a foul smell, and hunger written across its fragile frame. But its eyes and the way it approached the rescuer tell a different story. It was still willing to offer affection. The distance between the former owner's actions and the dog's response creates the emotional weight of the story. From a human perspective, the story also offers a thought-provoking comparison. After being hurt, people often become guarded, defensive, and reluctant to open up again. Yet a dog abandoned to the point of near death can still look at a stranger with hope in its eyes. That innocence does not mean that dogs are incapable of feeling pain. It shows that they have not learned to close their hearts in quite the same way humans sometimes do. The story also reminds us of responsibility. When a vulnerable creature is abandoned, rescuing it is not simply an act of kindness. It is also an opportunity to reflect on how we treat those who are weak and easily overlooked. Have we become too willing to turn away from lives that are no longer “convenient”? And have we retained the ability to trust and love with fewer conditions? The rescuers in the video did more than provide food. They sent a simple message: there are still people willing to stay. The dog responded with perhaps the most precious thing it still had, its gentle, innocent friendliness. The moment was quiet, but deeply moving. It showed that love does not always need to be nurtured by perfect circumstances. Sometimes, all it needs is a small opportunity to be expressed. In a world where people increasingly encounter hurt and mistrust, the image of a skeletal dog still approaching a stranger becomes a simple reminder. Perhaps there is something we can learn from animals: trust does not always need to be justified by a good past. Sometimes, when a hand reaches out in the present, the heart can still choose to open. That dog was left with almost nothing. Yet it still chose to show love. And that choice makes the story more than just a rescue. It becomes a reminder that even amid suffering, innocence can still remain 💖
1:01

Abandoned and Reduced to Skin and Bones, This Dog Still Looked at a Stranger with Trust ✨ The little dog lay curled up, its ribs clearly visible beneath its skin, its fur dirty and giving off a foul smell. It had been abandoned with almost nothing left. Yet when the rescuer approached and spoke to it, its first reaction was not fear or retreat. It moved closer, looking up with clear, innocent eyes and responding with an almost unconditional friendliness. It was a moment that made many viewers stop and take notice. The story began as a straightforward rescue case. The puppy was found severely malnourished, filthy, and alone. Despite being neglected to such an extent, it still approached a stranger gently, showing no signs of defensiveness. The rescuer offered it food and spoke to it in a soft voice, and the dog responded with trust almost immediately. The question is a simple but profound one: Why does a creature treated so cruelly still have the ability to love and open its heart to someone it has never met? The answer lies partly in the nature of dogs. Unlike humans, dogs do not tend to hold grudges in the same way or dwell on them over long periods. They live largely through their instincts for attachment and their search for safety. When a new person reaches out to them, many dogs can still respond with acceptance. This is not foolishness or a lack of memory. Rather, it is a trait shaped over thousands of years of living alongside humans. They often place trust ahead of suspicion. The contrast in this story makes that even more striking. The dog's body tells the story of neglect: exposed ribs, a foul smell, and hunger written across its fragile frame. But its eyes and the way it approached the rescuer tell a different story. It was still willing to offer affection. The distance between the former owner's actions and the dog's response creates the emotional weight of the story. From a human perspective, the story also offers a thought-provoking comparison. After being hurt, people often become guarded, defensive, and reluctant to open up again. Yet a dog abandoned to the point of near death can still look at a stranger with hope in its eyes. That innocence does not mean that dogs are incapable of feeling pain. It shows that they have not learned to close their hearts in quite the same way humans sometimes do. The story also reminds us of responsibility. When a vulnerable creature is abandoned, rescuing it is not simply an act of kindness. It is also an opportunity to reflect on how we treat those who are weak and easily overlooked. Have we become too willing to turn away from lives that are no longer “convenient”? And have we retained the ability to trust and love with fewer conditions? The rescuers in the video did more than provide food. They sent a simple message: there are still people willing to stay. The dog responded with perhaps the most precious thing it still had, its gentle, innocent friendliness. The moment was quiet, but deeply moving. It showed that love does not always need to be nurtured by perfect circumstances. Sometimes, all it needs is a small opportunity to be expressed. In a world where people increasingly encounter hurt and mistrust, the image of a skeletal dog still approaching a stranger becomes a simple reminder. Perhaps there is something we can learn from animals: trust does not always need to be justified by a good past. Sometimes, when a hand reaches out in the present, the heart can still choose to open. That dog was left with almost nothing. Yet it still chose to show love. And that choice makes the story more than just a rescue. It becomes a reminder that even amid suffering, innocence can still remain 💖

Beauty of music and nature 🌺🌺

24,431 Aufrufe • vor 16 Tagen

I've become a missionary with one message. Every time I meet a young person, the same words: have children, get married, build a family. I did not decide on this calling. It overtook me. And it overtook me for a single reason. I had no idea. I genuinely did not understand how much joy, how much meaning, how much sheer beauty pours out of a child until I was holding one of my own and felt the floor of my life drop into something deeper than I knew was there. I grew up white, affluent, secular, comfortable, and insulated. That world does not put babies in front of you. None of my friends were starting families. Out of my whole circle, almost no one has a big one. We were not formed by the presence of children. We were formed by their absence, by the strange quiet of homes built for two careers and no cradle. And a person believes what his world shows him. So we believed. What we believed was a lie. It is a lie with an author, and that the author is the enemy of joy himself. It is the gospel of the world, and its commandment is wait. Wait until you are older. Wait until the career is built and the savings are stacked and the twenties are properly spent. Enjoy your freedom. You are not ready. It does not arrive sounding like temptation. It arrives sounding like wisdom, like prudence, like the responsible thing, and that is exactly why it works. The most effective lies are the ones that wear the face of virtue. And the maddening thing is that it collapses from every angle at once. It is not rooted in biology, because the body is made for this work precisely in the years we are told to postpone it. The flesh keeps a calendar the culture pretends not to see. And it is not rooted in theology either. You will not find this deferral anywhere in the Christian imagination, in any of the fathers, in any of the scriptures. So choose whatever lens you like. Take the cold secular measure or the ancient sacred one. By either light the counsel is rotten. It is bad for the body and bad for the soul and bad for the society downstream of both. This is why I have come to see it as one of the central tragedies of my generation. Every age carries its own wound. The Great Depression was a depression of bread, a scarcity in the world of matter, hunger you could measure. Ours is a depression of a different order. It is a famine of the spirit in the middle of abundance. We have more than any people who ever lived and we are starving in a way our ancestors would not recognize, because the thing we are refusing cannot be bought and cannot be banked. The ones most made to give and receive this love are quietly declining it. They are walking away from the one inheritance that actually compounds, and the cruelest part is that they do not feel the loss as loss. You cannot grieve what you were taught not to want. That is the deepest cut of it. The lie does not only steal the thing. It steals the capacity to know the thing was stolen. A man can spend his whole life on the far side of a door he never knew was a door, mistaking the wall for the edge of the world. Because this beauty is not ordinary beauty. It is not the pleasure of a good meal or a clear morning. It is participation in something that comes down from above, the same generative love that spoke everything out of nothing and called it good. To make a person, to be undone and remade by loving that person more than your own life, is to be drawn for a moment inside the very act that holds the cosmos together. A child does not merely add to your life. A child reorders the soul. It teaches you what you are by asking everything of you, and you discover, kneeling there exhausted at three in the morning, that you had a capacity for self gift you never suspected, a depth in yourself you had no other way to reach. In the Gospel of John, on the last night, Jesus prays, these things I have spoken to you that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be complete. And I have come to understand why family is the road into that fullness, why it is not one path among many but the one most fitted to the shape of the promise. Consider who is praying. Christ does not come to us as a lone figure dropped out of the sky. He comes out of a family older than the world, the eternal communion of Father and Son, the love between them so total and so alive that theologians dared to call it a third person. Before there was anything, there was a family. The deepest fact about reality is not a force or a law or a void. It is a household. It is begetting and being begotten, giving and receiving, a Father who is only a Father because there is a Son. So when Jesus speaks of joy made complete, he is not pointing away from family toward something higher. He is pointing toward the very thing he came from, the life he has known from eternity and came to share. His joy is the joy of belonging utterly to a Father and pouring himself out for those he loves. When you marry, when you bring a child into the world, when you wear yourself down in the small unseen labors of a home, you are not stepping outside that divine life. You are stepping into a small image of it. Your family is a created echo of an uncreated one. The love you give your child rhymes with the love the Father has for the Son. The exhaustion, the tenderness, the way a parent would tear the sky open to protect a sleeping infant, all of it is the heavens pressed faintly into flesh, the eternal household leaving its fingerprint on yours. That is why the joy is not merely added to family but completed in it. We were made in the image of a God who is, at his very root, relation and gift and generation. To found a family is to do the most Godlike thing a creature can do, to participate from below in the begetting that God does from all eternity. Your home becomes a window. Through it, dimly and imperfectly, you glimpse the country you came from and are going to. And now a word for the young people reading this, the ones who do not yet have children. I want to tell you what it is like from where I stand. When I am out somewhere, a restaurant, anywhere, and a large family comes through the door, the noise and the chaos and the small bodies of them, something happens in me on two levels at once. The first is joy. A pure gladness at the sight, the way you feel watching something good and alive. But underneath it, almost in the same instant, a sadness reaches up and takes hold of my heart. Because I know now, at my age, after my own years of waiting, that I will never have that. I will never know the particular fruit of a family that large, the fullness of that table, the weight of all those lives gathered under one roof. The door to it has quietly closed, and I felt it close. And I am telling you plainly, because I love you and have no reason to lie to you: you will feel this too. You will. The day will come when you see what you passed up, and you will recognize the ache for what it is, and it will be too late to answer it. So please, learn from a man who got it wrong. Let my regret be worth something by becoming your wisdom. Do not wait yourself into a grief you cannot undo. Choose now, while the door is open, so that you may step into a joy that does not end.
8:26

I've become a missionary with one message. Every time I meet a young person, the same words: have children, get married, build a family. I did not decide on this calling. It overtook me. And it overtook me for a single reason. I had no idea. I genuinely did not understand how much joy, how much meaning, how much sheer beauty pours out of a child until I was holding one of my own and felt the floor of my life drop into something deeper than I knew was there. I grew up white, affluent, secular, comfortable, and insulated. That world does not put babies in front of you. None of my friends were starting families. Out of my whole circle, almost no one has a big one. We were not formed by the presence of children. We were formed by their absence, by the strange quiet of homes built for two careers and no cradle. And a person believes what his world shows him. So we believed. What we believed was a lie. It is a lie with an author, and that the author is the enemy of joy himself. It is the gospel of the world, and its commandment is wait. Wait until you are older. Wait until the career is built and the savings are stacked and the twenties are properly spent. Enjoy your freedom. You are not ready. It does not arrive sounding like temptation. It arrives sounding like wisdom, like prudence, like the responsible thing, and that is exactly why it works. The most effective lies are the ones that wear the face of virtue. And the maddening thing is that it collapses from every angle at once. It is not rooted in biology, because the body is made for this work precisely in the years we are told to postpone it. The flesh keeps a calendar the culture pretends not to see. And it is not rooted in theology either. You will not find this deferral anywhere in the Christian imagination, in any of the fathers, in any of the scriptures. So choose whatever lens you like. Take the cold secular measure or the ancient sacred one. By either light the counsel is rotten. It is bad for the body and bad for the soul and bad for the society downstream of both. This is why I have come to see it as one of the central tragedies of my generation. Every age carries its own wound. The Great Depression was a depression of bread, a scarcity in the world of matter, hunger you could measure. Ours is a depression of a different order. It is a famine of the spirit in the middle of abundance. We have more than any people who ever lived and we are starving in a way our ancestors would not recognize, because the thing we are refusing cannot be bought and cannot be banked. The ones most made to give and receive this love are quietly declining it. They are walking away from the one inheritance that actually compounds, and the cruelest part is that they do not feel the loss as loss. You cannot grieve what you were taught not to want. That is the deepest cut of it. The lie does not only steal the thing. It steals the capacity to know the thing was stolen. A man can spend his whole life on the far side of a door he never knew was a door, mistaking the wall for the edge of the world. Because this beauty is not ordinary beauty. It is not the pleasure of a good meal or a clear morning. It is participation in something that comes down from above, the same generative love that spoke everything out of nothing and called it good. To make a person, to be undone and remade by loving that person more than your own life, is to be drawn for a moment inside the very act that holds the cosmos together. A child does not merely add to your life. A child reorders the soul. It teaches you what you are by asking everything of you, and you discover, kneeling there exhausted at three in the morning, that you had a capacity for self gift you never suspected, a depth in yourself you had no other way to reach. In the Gospel of John, on the last night, Jesus prays, these things I have spoken to you that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be complete. And I have come to understand why family is the road into that fullness, why it is not one path among many but the one most fitted to the shape of the promise. Consider who is praying. Christ does not come to us as a lone figure dropped out of the sky. He comes out of a family older than the world, the eternal communion of Father and Son, the love between them so total and so alive that theologians dared to call it a third person. Before there was anything, there was a family. The deepest fact about reality is not a force or a law or a void. It is a household. It is begetting and being begotten, giving and receiving, a Father who is only a Father because there is a Son. So when Jesus speaks of joy made complete, he is not pointing away from family toward something higher. He is pointing toward the very thing he came from, the life he has known from eternity and came to share. His joy is the joy of belonging utterly to a Father and pouring himself out for those he loves. When you marry, when you bring a child into the world, when you wear yourself down in the small unseen labors of a home, you are not stepping outside that divine life. You are stepping into a small image of it. Your family is a created echo of an uncreated one. The love you give your child rhymes with the love the Father has for the Son. The exhaustion, the tenderness, the way a parent would tear the sky open to protect a sleeping infant, all of it is the heavens pressed faintly into flesh, the eternal household leaving its fingerprint on yours. That is why the joy is not merely added to family but completed in it. We were made in the image of a God who is, at his very root, relation and gift and generation. To found a family is to do the most Godlike thing a creature can do, to participate from below in the begetting that God does from all eternity. Your home becomes a window. Through it, dimly and imperfectly, you glimpse the country you came from and are going to. And now a word for the young people reading this, the ones who do not yet have children. I want to tell you what it is like from where I stand. When I am out somewhere, a restaurant, anywhere, and a large family comes through the door, the noise and the chaos and the small bodies of them, something happens in me on two levels at once. The first is joy. A pure gladness at the sight, the way you feel watching something good and alive. But underneath it, almost in the same instant, a sadness reaches up and takes hold of my heart. Because I know now, at my age, after my own years of waiting, that I will never have that. I will never know the particular fruit of a family that large, the fullness of that table, the weight of all those lives gathered under one roof. The door to it has quietly closed, and I felt it close. And I am telling you plainly, because I love you and have no reason to lie to you: you will feel this too. You will. The day will come when you see what you passed up, and you will recognize the ache for what it is, and it will be too late to answer it. So please, learn from a man who got it wrong. Let my regret be worth something by becoming your wisdom. Do not wait yourself into a grief you cannot undo. Choose now, while the door is open, so that you may step into a joy that does not end.

Kirk Rollins

78,104 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

The first movement of Violin Concerto in E minor, Op. 64 is one of Felix Mendelssohn-Bartholdy's most celebrated works. It is admired for the lyrical, vocal quality of its melodies and the coherence of its structure. Yet the enduring vitality of the movement arises not from these qualities alone, but from the way Mendelssohn shapes the entire work as a continuous process of development, in which each musical idea grows from material already established while simultaneously preparing the way for what follows. It is this organic continuity that gives the movement its distinctive persuasive power. To understand why, one must begin with its most concrete musical details. The first striking feature is Mendelssohn's decision to introduce the solo violin almost immediately, rather than reserving an extended orchestral introduction in the manner of the Classical concerto tradition. The violin enters at once with the principal theme, unfolding a melody that is long, supple and unmistakably song-like. From the opening bars, the listener does not feel as though the narrative is waiting to begin; rather, one is drawn into a musical process that already seems to be in motion. This manner of opening establishes a sense of continuity from the very outset and defines the character of the movement as a whole. The violin's melodic writing is built chiefly from stepwise motion interspersed with moderate leaps. Instead of presenting isolated musical gestures, Mendelssohn shapes his phrases into long, flowing arcs, each seeming to arise naturally from the one before it. As one motif reaches its conclusion, its closing notes frequently become the point of departure for the next. The ear therefore seldom perceives the music as a sequence of detached units, but rather as a single line of development unfolding from within itself. Equally significant is Mendelssohn's treatment of his musical motifs. He rarely introduces an entirely new idea only to abandon the old. Instead, previously stated motifs are continually transformed through changes of pitch, rhythm, expression or harmonic setting. When a familiar motif returns in a new guise, the listener immediately recognises its relationship to what has already been heard while simultaneously perceiving its transformation. It is this union of familiarity and renewal that allows the music to develop without ever seeming fragmented. Rhythm likewise plays an essential part in sustaining this continuous movement. Between the violin's expansive lyrical phrases appear short, flexible rhythmic figures that provide constant forward impetus. These patterns, however, never unfold at random. They are frequently repeated with subtle adjustments of accent or metrical emphasis, sufficient to maintain momentum while preserving a sense of unity. The listener therefore experiences an unbroken impulse of progression without any impression that the musical thread has been interrupted. At a deeper level, it is the harmony that gives the entire process a clear sense of direction. Mendelssohn creates moments of tension through passing harmonies, non-chord tones and carefully judged modulations into closely related keys. Yet each expansion is meticulously prepared and ultimately resolved back to stable tonal centres. The ear continually rediscovers its tonal point of reference and thus never loses sight of the broader trajectory of the movement. The orchestra is organised according to the same principle. It serves not merely as accompaniment to the solo violin but frequently receives, echoes and develops the motifs first introduced by the soloist. As musical ideas pass from violin to orchestra and back again, the listener perceives not two independent voices but a single musical thought unfolding through contrasting colours. The dialogue between soloist and orchestra therefore creates not opposition but an ever richer expansion of the musical structure while preserving its essential unity. As the movement unfolds, the listener is drawn not only to the beauty of its melodies but also to the relationships between them. Each idea leads naturally to the next, so that the entire movement appears as an organic whole in continual expansion rather than a succession of isolated episodes. Its persuasive power lies not in any single memorable passage, but in the coherence of the process as a whole. At a deeper level, the first movement embodies not merely a principle of musical composition but a broader principle of living systems. The work is constructed as a process in which no element exists in isolation. Each motif inherits material from its predecessor, is transformed into a new form, and in turn becomes the foundation for subsequent development. It is precisely this uninterrupted sequence of inheritance and transformation that gives the music its vitality. The same principle may be observed in the workings of the natural world. Life is sustained not by isolated parts but by continuous cycles of exchange and mutual support. The human body functions in this manner. Oxygen passes from the lungs into the bloodstream; the blood carries it to every cell where energy is produced, before returning the products of metabolism to continue the cycle. Each stage depends upon the one before it while simultaneously preparing the conditions for the next. No single link exists solely for itself; each both receives from and contributes to the others. Should one essential link in this cycle be broken, the entire system gradually loses its capacity to sustain itself. Life endures not because its individual parts exist independently, but because an unbroken cycle binds them together into a unified whole. The first movement of the concerto is organised according to a comparable principle. Melodies do not simply appear and disappear; they become the material from which subsequent motifs are fashioned. These motifs are reshaped through new rhythmic and harmonic contexts before being taken up, expanded and returned by the orchestra to the solo violin. No idea is detached from the larger process. Every element receives material from what precedes it while preparing the conditions for what follows. Through this continual exchange, inheritance and transformation, Mendelssohn creates a musical cycle in which each idea both nourishes and is nourished by the others. It is perhaps because the movement reflects such a principle that it possesses so natural and compelling a character. Its beauty resides not merely in individual melodies or episodes of development, but in the way every musical element remains connected within a continuous cycle of motion, where each part both receives from and supports the rest, preserving the unity of the whole. This is the deepest source of the first movement's enduring power. Mendelssohn does not assemble a succession of disconnected ideas; he creates a living organism in which every musical element continually inherits, transforms and sustains the others. It is this unbroken cycle that has endowed the concerto with its lasting vitality and enabled it to continue moving listeners across generations.
13:17

The first movement of Violin Concerto in E minor, Op. 64 is one of Felix Mendelssohn-Bartholdy's most celebrated works. It is admired for the lyrical, vocal quality of its melodies and the coherence of its structure. Yet the enduring vitality of the movement arises not from these qualities alone, but from the way Mendelssohn shapes the entire work as a continuous process of development, in which each musical idea grows from material already established while simultaneously preparing the way for what follows. It is this organic continuity that gives the movement its distinctive persuasive power. To understand why, one must begin with its most concrete musical details. The first striking feature is Mendelssohn's decision to introduce the solo violin almost immediately, rather than reserving an extended orchestral introduction in the manner of the Classical concerto tradition. The violin enters at once with the principal theme, unfolding a melody that is long, supple and unmistakably song-like. From the opening bars, the listener does not feel as though the narrative is waiting to begin; rather, one is drawn into a musical process that already seems to be in motion. This manner of opening establishes a sense of continuity from the very outset and defines the character of the movement as a whole. The violin's melodic writing is built chiefly from stepwise motion interspersed with moderate leaps. Instead of presenting isolated musical gestures, Mendelssohn shapes his phrases into long, flowing arcs, each seeming to arise naturally from the one before it. As one motif reaches its conclusion, its closing notes frequently become the point of departure for the next. The ear therefore seldom perceives the music as a sequence of detached units, but rather as a single line of development unfolding from within itself. Equally significant is Mendelssohn's treatment of his musical motifs. He rarely introduces an entirely new idea only to abandon the old. Instead, previously stated motifs are continually transformed through changes of pitch, rhythm, expression or harmonic setting. When a familiar motif returns in a new guise, the listener immediately recognises its relationship to what has already been heard while simultaneously perceiving its transformation. It is this union of familiarity and renewal that allows the music to develop without ever seeming fragmented. Rhythm likewise plays an essential part in sustaining this continuous movement. Between the violin's expansive lyrical phrases appear short, flexible rhythmic figures that provide constant forward impetus. These patterns, however, never unfold at random. They are frequently repeated with subtle adjustments of accent or metrical emphasis, sufficient to maintain momentum while preserving a sense of unity. The listener therefore experiences an unbroken impulse of progression without any impression that the musical thread has been interrupted. At a deeper level, it is the harmony that gives the entire process a clear sense of direction. Mendelssohn creates moments of tension through passing harmonies, non-chord tones and carefully judged modulations into closely related keys. Yet each expansion is meticulously prepared and ultimately resolved back to stable tonal centres. The ear continually rediscovers its tonal point of reference and thus never loses sight of the broader trajectory of the movement. The orchestra is organised according to the same principle. It serves not merely as accompaniment to the solo violin but frequently receives, echoes and develops the motifs first introduced by the soloist. As musical ideas pass from violin to orchestra and back again, the listener perceives not two independent voices but a single musical thought unfolding through contrasting colours. The dialogue between soloist and orchestra therefore creates not opposition but an ever richer expansion of the musical structure while preserving its essential unity. As the movement unfolds, the listener is drawn not only to the beauty of its melodies but also to the relationships between them. Each idea leads naturally to the next, so that the entire movement appears as an organic whole in continual expansion rather than a succession of isolated episodes. Its persuasive power lies not in any single memorable passage, but in the coherence of the process as a whole. At a deeper level, the first movement embodies not merely a principle of musical composition but a broader principle of living systems. The work is constructed as a process in which no element exists in isolation. Each motif inherits material from its predecessor, is transformed into a new form, and in turn becomes the foundation for subsequent development. It is precisely this uninterrupted sequence of inheritance and transformation that gives the music its vitality. The same principle may be observed in the workings of the natural world. Life is sustained not by isolated parts but by continuous cycles of exchange and mutual support. The human body functions in this manner. Oxygen passes from the lungs into the bloodstream; the blood carries it to every cell where energy is produced, before returning the products of metabolism to continue the cycle. Each stage depends upon the one before it while simultaneously preparing the conditions for the next. No single link exists solely for itself; each both receives from and contributes to the others. Should one essential link in this cycle be broken, the entire system gradually loses its capacity to sustain itself. Life endures not because its individual parts exist independently, but because an unbroken cycle binds them together into a unified whole. The first movement of the concerto is organised according to a comparable principle. Melodies do not simply appear and disappear; they become the material from which subsequent motifs are fashioned. These motifs are reshaped through new rhythmic and harmonic contexts before being taken up, expanded and returned by the orchestra to the solo violin. No idea is detached from the larger process. Every element receives material from what precedes it while preparing the conditions for what follows. Through this continual exchange, inheritance and transformation, Mendelssohn creates a musical cycle in which each idea both nourishes and is nourished by the others. It is perhaps because the movement reflects such a principle that it possesses so natural and compelling a character. Its beauty resides not merely in individual melodies or episodes of development, but in the way every musical element remains connected within a continuous cycle of motion, where each part both receives from and supports the rest, preserving the unity of the whole. This is the deepest source of the first movement's enduring power. Mendelssohn does not assemble a succession of disconnected ideas; he creates a living organism in which every musical element continually inherits, transforms and sustains the others. It is this unbroken cycle that has endowed the concerto with its lasting vitality and enabled it to continue moving listeners across generations.

𝗖𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗠𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗱𝗶𝗲𝘀

12,733 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Alex Krainer (Alex (Sasha) Krainer) draws the sharpest possible line: the real conflict is not between nations, but between two opposing systems of economic governance. One is the British free-trade system of extraction, concentration of wealth, and forever wars. The other is the national system of political economy — the American System of Hamilton, Clay, Lincoln and Henry C. Carey. “The conflict in fact is between the western colonialist system and everyone who rejects colonial subjugation. The war in Ukraine, war against Iran, genocide of the Palestinian people, the buildup to the war on China, the uncontrolled migrations, and many other social, political, and economic crises are all merely different battlefields of the same great conflict. What are these two opposed systems of economic governance? One is the British system of free trade. The other is the national system of political economy. It is often referred to as the American system because it was pioneered by American leaders like Alexander Hamilton, Henry Clay, Abraham Lincoln, and Lincoln’s chief economic adviser, Henry C. Carey. In a nutshell, the national system seeks to create protective barriers to foreign trade in order to give domestic manufacturing a fighting chance against foreign competition. It also accumulates capital at home, investing it into manufacturing, infrastructure, education, research and development, innovation, culture, and other uses that raise society’s standards of living. By contrast, the British system of free trade extracts wealth and concentrates it. It seeks to remove all barriers to the worldwide free flow of capital, always in pursuit of the highest possible return. With free trade, nations are obliged to compete for investment capital by systematically depressing wages, job security, pensions, healthcare services, and education. Other costs which cut into returns on capital are infrastructure development, social spending programs, and protection of the environment. Therefore, competing for investment capital entails progressive slashing of all these cost items down to the bare bones. In that sense, the British free trade system amounts to a competitive race to the bottom. In his 1851 book The Harmony of Interests, Abraham Lincoln’s economic adviser Henry Carey contrasted the two systems, opening with the words: ‘Two systems are before the world.’ Carey’s prose is rather long, but it could be summarized along seven key dimensions: 1. Trade versus production. One system directs capital and draws labor towards trade and speculation. This tends to depress wages and erode prosperity. The other system fosters production of goods, services, and infrastructure. It leads to higher wages and rising standards of living. 2. Raw materials versus finished goods. One system favors mass production of raw materials and cash crops for trade. It systematically impoverishes farmers and reduces their employment. The other system favors production of more refined, high-quality products, enriching their producers. 3. Exporting produce versus enjoying it at home. One system sends mass-produced bulk abroad, sometimes even causing famines in the producing economy. The other system organizes labor to satisfy domestic demand and produce an abundance of diverse high-quality products at home. 4. Concentration versus dispersion of wealth. One system concentrates wealth and power in a few hands in great commercial cities while depleting and impoverishing the rest of the nation. The other system enriches those engaged in production and disperses wealth more evenly across society. 5. War versus moral and educational growth. One system compels the productive sector to fund fleets and armies. The other directs the same means for moral and intellectual growth of the people in their nations. 6. Stable communities versus population replacement. One system requires a large low-skilled labor force that accepts work with low wages. It predictably resorts to a mass influx of immigrants. The other system raises the standards of living, prosperity, and security of the native labor force. 7. Universal war versus universal peace. One system gives rise to universal forever wars. The other strives to preserve peace. Let’s condense these seven points even further. One system favors production of raw commodities in bulk. It lowers living standards, concentrates wealth in few hands, impoverishes the workforce, and favors population replacement, militarization and forever wars. This is the British system of free trade. The other system favors production of diverse quality products at home, enriches their producers, raises the standards of living, disperses wealth, fosters stable communities and favors stability and peace. This is the national system of political economy — or the American system. Its aspiration is sovereignty and independence. Free trade’s aspiration is globalization and unipolar hegemony. The contrast between the two systems could not be any starker, and the record entirely validates the way Henry Carey characterizes them. And we’ll see from actual historical examples where one system or the other was implemented and from the ways that they changed the societies in question.” Two systems are before the world. One produces prosperity and peace. The other produces poverty, migration and perpetual war. The choice remains.
4:35

Alex Krainer (Alex (Sasha) Krainer) draws the sharpest possible line: the real conflict is not between nations, but between two opposing systems of economic governance. One is the British free-trade system of extraction, concentration of wealth, and forever wars. The other is the national system of political economy — the American System of Hamilton, Clay, Lincoln and Henry C. Carey. “The conflict in fact is between the western colonialist system and everyone who rejects colonial subjugation. The war in Ukraine, war against Iran, genocide of the Palestinian people, the buildup to the war on China, the uncontrolled migrations, and many other social, political, and economic crises are all merely different battlefields of the same great conflict. What are these two opposed systems of economic governance? One is the British system of free trade. The other is the national system of political economy. It is often referred to as the American system because it was pioneered by American leaders like Alexander Hamilton, Henry Clay, Abraham Lincoln, and Lincoln’s chief economic adviser, Henry C. Carey. In a nutshell, the national system seeks to create protective barriers to foreign trade in order to give domestic manufacturing a fighting chance against foreign competition. It also accumulates capital at home, investing it into manufacturing, infrastructure, education, research and development, innovation, culture, and other uses that raise society’s standards of living. By contrast, the British system of free trade extracts wealth and concentrates it. It seeks to remove all barriers to the worldwide free flow of capital, always in pursuit of the highest possible return. With free trade, nations are obliged to compete for investment capital by systematically depressing wages, job security, pensions, healthcare services, and education. Other costs which cut into returns on capital are infrastructure development, social spending programs, and protection of the environment. Therefore, competing for investment capital entails progressive slashing of all these cost items down to the bare bones. In that sense, the British free trade system amounts to a competitive race to the bottom. In his 1851 book The Harmony of Interests, Abraham Lincoln’s economic adviser Henry Carey contrasted the two systems, opening with the words: ‘Two systems are before the world.’ Carey’s prose is rather long, but it could be summarized along seven key dimensions: 1. Trade versus production. One system directs capital and draws labor towards trade and speculation. This tends to depress wages and erode prosperity. The other system fosters production of goods, services, and infrastructure. It leads to higher wages and rising standards of living. 2. Raw materials versus finished goods. One system favors mass production of raw materials and cash crops for trade. It systematically impoverishes farmers and reduces their employment. The other system favors production of more refined, high-quality products, enriching their producers. 3. Exporting produce versus enjoying it at home. One system sends mass-produced bulk abroad, sometimes even causing famines in the producing economy. The other system organizes labor to satisfy domestic demand and produce an abundance of diverse high-quality products at home. 4. Concentration versus dispersion of wealth. One system concentrates wealth and power in a few hands in great commercial cities while depleting and impoverishing the rest of the nation. The other system enriches those engaged in production and disperses wealth more evenly across society. 5. War versus moral and educational growth. One system compels the productive sector to fund fleets and armies. The other directs the same means for moral and intellectual growth of the people in their nations. 6. Stable communities versus population replacement. One system requires a large low-skilled labor force that accepts work with low wages. It predictably resorts to a mass influx of immigrants. The other system raises the standards of living, prosperity, and security of the native labor force. 7. Universal war versus universal peace. One system gives rise to universal forever wars. The other strives to preserve peace. Let’s condense these seven points even further. One system favors production of raw commodities in bulk. It lowers living standards, concentrates wealth in few hands, impoverishes the workforce, and favors population replacement, militarization and forever wars. This is the British system of free trade. The other system favors production of diverse quality products at home, enriches their producers, raises the standards of living, disperses wealth, fosters stable communities and favors stability and peace. This is the national system of political economy — or the American system. Its aspiration is sovereignty and independence. Free trade’s aspiration is globalization and unipolar hegemony. The contrast between the two systems could not be any starker, and the record entirely validates the way Henry Carey characterizes them. And we’ll see from actual historical examples where one system or the other was implemented and from the ways that they changed the societies in question.” Two systems are before the world. One produces prosperity and peace. The other produces poverty, migration and perpetual war. The choice remains.

🅰pocalypsis 🅰pocalypseos 🇷🇺 🇨🇳 🅉

45,904 Aufrufe • vor 14 Tagen

In the 1930s, Dresden was considered one of the most beautiful cities in the world. For more than two hundred years the capital of Saxony had been called the Florence on the Elbe. Its kings had imported artists from across Europe and filled the city with Baroque palaces, churches, opera houses, and wide riverfront promenades. The skyline was a crowd of domes and spires above the river. Painters had travelled there in the 18th century just to capture it, and the canvases they left behind show a city that looked less built than composed, like a single enormous work of art. By the early 1940s, Dresden had been spared the bombing that had flattened other German cities. Many of its residents believed it would stay that way. Some told themselves the city was simply too beautiful to destroy and that no one could look at it and give the order. On the night of 13 February 1945, the order came. Wave after wave of Allied bombers dropped thousands of tons of explosives and incendiaries onto the old centre. The fires merged into a firestorm, a column of heat so violent it generated its own wind and pulled people and buildings into its core. By morning, the Florence on the Elbe was gone and tens of thousands of people were dead. Eight square miles of the historic centre had been reduced to rubble and ash. What had taken three centuries to build had taken roughly fourteen hours to undo... Beauty is not permanent. It is built slowly, by many hands, across generations, and it can be taken in a single night. And yet human beings keep building it, keep rebuilding it, keep believing it is worth the risk. After the war, the people of Dresden gathered the blackened stones of their ruined cathedral and, decades later, raised it again from its own ashes. Because beauty does not stop wars, but it refuses to concede that the worst of what humans do is the whole of what humans are. Dostoevsky said beauty would save the world. He did not mean it would happen quickly. He meant it could not, ultimately, be stopped. If you'd like to sit with this a little longer, today's article is a deeper meditation on how time changes everything: And if you'd like to support my work, a paid subscription is what makes it possible:
0:26

In the 1930s, Dresden was considered one of the most beautiful cities in the world. For more than two hundred years the capital of Saxony had been called the Florence on the Elbe. Its kings had imported artists from across Europe and filled the city with Baroque palaces, churches, opera houses, and wide riverfront promenades. The skyline was a crowd of domes and spires above the river. Painters had travelled there in the 18th century just to capture it, and the canvases they left behind show a city that looked less built than composed, like a single enormous work of art. By the early 1940s, Dresden had been spared the bombing that had flattened other German cities. Many of its residents believed it would stay that way. Some told themselves the city was simply too beautiful to destroy and that no one could look at it and give the order. On the night of 13 February 1945, the order came. Wave after wave of Allied bombers dropped thousands of tons of explosives and incendiaries onto the old centre. The fires merged into a firestorm, a column of heat so violent it generated its own wind and pulled people and buildings into its core. By morning, the Florence on the Elbe was gone and tens of thousands of people were dead. Eight square miles of the historic centre had been reduced to rubble and ash. What had taken three centuries to build had taken roughly fourteen hours to undo... Beauty is not permanent. It is built slowly, by many hands, across generations, and it can be taken in a single night. And yet human beings keep building it, keep rebuilding it, keep believing it is worth the risk. After the war, the people of Dresden gathered the blackened stones of their ruined cathedral and, decades later, raised it again from its own ashes. Because beauty does not stop wars, but it refuses to concede that the worst of what humans do is the whole of what humans are. Dostoevsky said beauty would save the world. He did not mean it would happen quickly. He meant it could not, ultimately, be stopped. If you'd like to sit with this a little longer, today's article is a deeper meditation on how time changes everything: And if you'd like to support my work, a paid subscription is what makes it possible:

James Lucas

34,335 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten