The Purest Definition of Love, the Qualities of a Lasting Relationship, and the Salve for the Betrayals of Time by Maria Popova

 

Source: The Marginalian

Few things in life cause us more suffering than the confusions of love, all the wrong destinations at which we arrive by following a broken compass, having mistaken myriad things for love: admiration, desire, intellectual affinity, common ground.

This is why knowing whether you actually love somebody can be so difficult, why it requires the rigor of a theorem, the definitional precision of a dictionary, and the courage to weather the depredations of time.

In On the Calculation of Volume (public library) — her startlingly original reckoning with the bewilderments of time and love, partway between Einstein’s Dreams and Ulysses — Danish author Solvej Balle offers the best definition of love I’ve encountered since Iris Murdoch’s half a century ago:

The sudden feeling of sharing something inexplicable, a sense of wonder at the existence of the other — the one person who makes everything simple — a feeling of being calmed down and thrown into turmoil at one and the same time.

Describing a couple united by this kind of love, Balle captures the essential qualities of a lasting relationship:

They had a closeness which I could not help but notice. Not the sort of unspoken awareness that shuts other people out, the self-absorption of a couple in the first throes of love who need constantly to make contact by look or touch, nor the fragile intimacy which makes an outsider feel like a disruptive element and gives you the urge to simply leave the lovers alone with their delicate alliance. They had an air of peace about them… [They] had clearly decided to spend the rest of their lives together, it was as simple as that, so what could they do but see what the future would bring.

The future, however, can bring what the present can’t foresee, can’t bear to consider. People die. Lovers stop loving. Sudden and mysterious phase transitions of feeling take place without warning or explanation, they way the lava of one person’s passion can turn to stone overnight, leaving the other entombed in painful and lonely confusion. Because of this, to live with the fundamental fear of loss and love anyway may be the purest measure of our aliveness. What makes it possible — the only thing that makes it possible — is to refuse the glass-half-empty view of life, to see that death is a token of the luck of having lived and every loss a token of the luck of having had, that these are miracles that weren’t owed us but nonetheless prevailed over the laws of probability so we may live and love.

There are moments we remember this, moments that stagger us into this primal perspective — moments Balle describes as ones when “the ground under one’s feet falls away and all at once it feels as though all predictability can be suspended, as though an existential red alert has suddenly been triggered.” She writes:

It is as if this emergency response mechanism is there on standby at the back of the mind, like an undertone, not normally audible, but kicking in the moment one is confronted with the unpredictability of life, the knowledge that everything can change in an instant, that something which cannot happen and which we absolutely do not expect, is nonetheless a possibility… That the logic of the world and the laws of nature break down. That we are forced to acknowledge that our expectations about the constancy of the world are on shaky ground. There are no guarantees and behind all that we ordinarily regard as certain lie improbable exceptions, sudden cracks and inconceivable breaches of the usual laws.

It seems so odd to me now, how one can be so unsettled by the improbable. When we know that our entire existence is founded on freak occurrences and improbable coincidences. That we wouldn’t be here at all if it weren’t for these curious twists of fate. That there are human beings on what we call our planet, that we can move around on a rotating sphere in a vast universe full of inconceivably large bodies comprised of elements so small that the mind simply cannot comprehend how small and how many there are. That in this unfathomable vastness, these infinitesimal elements are still able to hold themselves together. That we manage to stay afloat. That we exist at all. That each of us has come into being as only one of untold possibilities. The unthinkable is something we carry with us always. It has already happened: we are improbable, we have emerged from a cloud of unbelievable coincidences… We have grown accustomed to living with that knowledge without feeling dizzy every morning, and instead of moving around warily and tentatively, in constant amazement, we behave as if nothing has happened, take the strangeness of it all for granted and get dizzy if life shows itself as it truly is: improbable, unpredictable, remarkable.

This, of course, is why to live is a probable impossibility and to love is to live against probability; it is why our moral obligation to the universe is to love one another while we are and because we are alive.

Godfathers-of-AI-Warn-Superintelligence-Could-Trigger-Human-Extinction by Wiktoria Gucia

 

Source: Daily Beast

The “godfathers” of AI have joined an unlikely mix of royals, politicians, business leaders, and TV personalities in signing a statement urging a ban on developing “superintelligence” over fears it could lead to “potential human extinction.”

The Wednesday statement, signed by more than 2,000 people—including AI pioneers Yoshua Bengio and Geoff Hinton, Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, and former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon—calls for limits on creating technology that could eventually outthink humans.

The signatories are calling for a prohibition on superintelligence until there is a “broad scientific consensus that it can be developed safely and controllably,” and “strong public buy-in.”

The debate over the risks and benefits of AI has been ongoing among key figures involved in its funding and development. The statement includes remarks from CEOs of some of the largest AI companies, including Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, and Elon Musk, owner of xAI, both of whom have warned about the dangers of Artificial Superintelligence (ASI).

Altman wrote that ASI is “the greatest threat to the continued existence of humanity,” while Musk stated that it is “potentially more dangerous than nukes.”

Current AI systems are known as Artificial Narrow Intelligence (ANI) and rely on human guidance to operate. Tools like ChatGPT and other generative AI rely on large language models (LLMs), which train AI to produce human-like language and form an important step toward developing ASI.

In June, Meta opened a research facility called the “Superintelligence Lab” to compete with leading firms like OpenAI and Google in creating AI capable of matching human cognitive abilities—a milestone that Demis Hassabis, CEO of Google’s DeepMind, predicts could arrive within the next five to ten years.

“Frontier AI systems could surpass most individuals across most cognitive tasks within just a few years,” wrote Yoshua Bengio, considered one of the leaders behind the rise of deep learning in AI, in a comment on the Wednesday statement.

British computer scientist Stuart J. Russell wrote: “This is not a ban or even a moratorium in the usual sense. It’s simply a proposal to require adequate safety measures for a technology that, according to its developers, has a significant chance to cause human extinction. Is that too much to ask?”

“This is not a ban or even a moratorium in the usual sense. It’s simply a proposal to require adequate safety measures for a technology that, according to its developers, has a significant chance to cause human extinction. Is that too much to ask?”

Other signatories—including the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle; author of Sapiens, Yuval Noah Harari; and actor Sir Stephen Fry—also commented on their decision to sign the statement.

“The future of AI should serve humanity, not replace it,” wrote Prince Harry in his statement of support, adding, “The true test of progress will be not how fast we move, but how wisely we steer.”

The statement also cites data from a survey conducted by the Future of Life Institute, which found that only 5 percent of Americans support the unregulated development of AI, while 64 percent believe superhuman AI shouldn’t be made until it’s proven safe.

Musings

 The greatest trick white supremacy ever pulled was positioning racism as only a belief system and not a power structure. This racist system is designed to make you believe that if you just act right, you’ll reach the safety of rarefied air; then they remind you not to breathe. Now is not the time to be more tolerant about race; rather, it’s time to be more intolerant about racism.

How Trump Intends to Hijack the Midterms by Chaucey DeVega

 

Source: CP

Donald Trump’s authoritarian chaos machine is running amok. Pro-democracy Americans — and those simply hoping for a return to normalcy — are pinning their hopes on a Democratic victory in November’s midterm elections. But that salvation will not be easy or cheap. Their hopes will face a coordinated effort by Trump and the anti-democracy right-wing to secure victory before a single ballot has even been counted.

As the Washington Post reported on Monday, the events of Jan. 6, 2021, were a trial run. Then, he “pressured Republican county election officials, state lawmakers, and members of Congress to find him votes after he lost his reelection bid. Now, he’s seeking to change the rules before ballots are cast.”

These strategies include “challenging long-established democratic norms” and making “unprecedented demands that Republican state lawmakers redraw congressional districts before the constitutionally required 10-year schedule, the prosecution of political opponents, a push to toughen voter registration rules and attempts to end the use of voting machines and mail ballots.”

Trump expressed regret in a recent interview with the New York Times that he did not send in the National Guard to seize voting machines in the 2020 election, which he has falsely claimed was stolen by Democrats. He has also suggested he could deploy federal law enforcement or the National Guard to Democratic-led cities to monitor elections for so-called fraud, which would be a form of voter intimidation, and is taking steps to systematically dismantle programs designed to protect the integrity of the country’s elections from foreign and other malign actors. His administration has installed election deniers and other conspiracists — believers in the Big Lie that the 2020 election was stolen — in key positions throughout the FBI, the Justice Department, the Department of Homeland Security and other parts of the government.

In short, the wolves are watching the chicken coop.

The Post’s analysis did not fully account for the administration’s voter suppression and nullification campaigns targeting Black and brown people, young people, students and other likely Democratic voters. Voter suppression efforts in Georgia and other battleground states are estimated to have cost the Democrats millions of votes — and potentially the 2024 election. The right-wing justices on the Supreme Court are also poised to gut the landmark 1965 Voting Rights Act, which protects the voting rights of racial minorities by ensuring that voting districts are representative and not diluted by gerrymandering. Republicans and other members of the antidemocracy right-wing have repeatedly used language about the “quality” of voters and “voter integrity,” and they have made false allegations of widespread fraud in “urban areas” to signal their belief that the votes of Black and brown people are not legitimate. The ultimate goal is to create a 21st-century version of Jim and Jane Crow, where Black and brown people are made into second-class citizens. 

Trump and his allies have placed election deniers in key local positions on election boards and in election offices.

Compared to Democrats, centrists and mainstream liberals, the Trumpists and the broader anti-democracy right are revolutionaries who think in decades and centuries — and build the networks, relationships, institutions and resources required to win. Democrats’ lack of vision and adherence to obsolete normal politics is one of the main reasons why they have been so ineffective in resisting the rise of authoritarianism and neofascism underTrump.

Even if Republicans somehow lose the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential election, they will still seek to boobytrap the country’s governing institutions.

“This is the big one,” political scientist Barbara F. Walter explained in an essay exploring the dangers of institutional sabotage. “Watch for changes that would constrain a Democratic House even if Democrats win. Last-minute regulations that take years to undo. Executive orders are designed to be irreversible. Budget maneuvers that limit congressional power. Court appointments that lock in a conservative judiciary for decades.”

If Trump and his MAGA forces and the broader right-wing can execute even some of their plans, the integrity and legitimacy of the country’s elections will be further undermined. The result will be what political scientists describe as “competitive authoritarianism.” In such a pseudo-democracy, the United States would be like Putin’s Russia, where there are elections but a victory by the ruling party is all but assured.

As Walter warned, we can’t “assume the midterms will save us. If we’re not actively defending the democratic process right now, we may find there’s nothing left to save come November.”

Trump is a fighter. He does not retreat. Like other autocrats and authoritarians, the weaker his position, the more aggressive he becomes. In an interview with Reuters earlier this week, the president once again suggested canceling the upcoming midterm elections, saying, “It’s some deep psychological thing, but when you win the presidency, you don’t win the midterms… When you think of it, we shouldn’t even have an election.”

This was the third time this month Trump suggested that elections are unnecessary now that he holds power. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt defended Trump’s remarks as a “joke,” insisting that “he was speaking facetiously.” 

Dictators, autocrats and other malign actors strategically use humor as a type of diminutive to minimize their real intent and to distract the public and media. Trump’s public behavior, such as the plot to nullify the 2020 election and his stated desire to be a dictator, are two of many examples showing how serious his threats to end the midterms really are. 

On Thursday, he threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act and deploy the military to quell ongoing protests and civil disturbances in Minnesota, a week after an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent shot and killed Renee Good, an unarmed United States citizen who was acting as an observer.

The protests and unrest in Minneapolis and other cities were sparked by Good’s killing and a broader pattern of increasingly aggressive and reckless behavior by ICE and other federal law enforcement who are waging Trump’s mass deportation campaign.

If Trump were to invoke the Insurrection Act, voting and elections could be suspended or outright canceled in the blue states and other parts of the country that support the Democratic Party. Under such a scenario, he would take an action — such as ordering ICE to target Democratic-led cities in a very aggressive and provocative manner — that would create widespread protests and unrest. He could then claim that the situation is an emergency and invoke the Insurrection Act, declaring that elections cannot take place in such an environment.  

We have a very long year ahead, and the American people and our democracy are going to be greatly tested.

Do we have the stamina and patience? The world will soon find out.

“Empire in Decline”: Historian Alfred McCoy on U.S. Aggression in Venezuela, Iran & Beyond

 

Musings

 

  

#REALITY

The Suicide Pact: What Happens the Moment We Touch Greenland by Brent Molnar

 

Source: The Flensburg Files

If the United States follows through on the threat to invade Greenland, we need to be crystal clear about what happens the next morning. This is not a real estate transaction or a routine military exercise. It is the geopolitical equivalent of pulling the pin on a grenade in a crowded elevator. The moment American boots hit the ground in Nuuk to seize territory from a fellow NATO member, the world as we know it ends. The consequences will not be temporary sanctions or angry letters. They will be total, permanent, and devastating.

The first domino to fall is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization itself. NATO is built on the sacred promise of Article 5, that an attack on one is an attack on all. If the U.S. attacks Denmark, we are not just breaking the treaty; we are triggering it against ourselves. NATO dissolves instantly. The alliance that kept the peace in Europe for 75 years evaporates, leaving the continent to rearm and realign against the new aggressor across the Atlantic. We don't just lose an ally; we create a unified enemy.

The military repercussions will be swift and humiliating. Europe will immediately demand the closure of every U.S. military base on the continent. Ramstein in Germany, Aviano in Italy, Lakenheath in the UK, all gone. Our ability to project power into the Middle East and Africa vanishes overnight. We will be evicted from the very soil we helped liberate and defended for decades, forced to retreat to our own shores as a fortress nation, isolated and friendless.

Then comes the economic nuclear option. The European Union is the largest single market in the world, and they will weaponize it. Europe will likely move to call in U.S. debt and dump their dollar reserves, sending the value of our currency into a death spiral. The U.S. economy, which relies on the dollar being the global reserve currency, will collapse. Inflation will make the post-COVID spikes look like a rounding error. Your savings will be worthless before the ink dries on the invasion orders.

Corporate America will face an extinction event. U.S. companies will be expelled from the European market. Apple, Google, McDonald's, and Tesla will see their assets seized or their operations banned. Trillions of dollars in market capitalization will be incinerated in minutes. The stock market will not just crash; it will close. We are talking about the complete de-globalization of American industry, cutting us off from the wealthiest consumers on the planet.

The skies will go silent. European aviation authorities will almost certainly ground all Boeing jets and ban U.S. airlines from their airspace. Transatlantic travel will cease. If you are in Paris or Berlin, you are stuck there. The logistical arteries that feed our supply chains will be severed. We will be cut off from European medicine, machinery, and technology. We will be an island nation in the worst possible sense.

The cultural isolation will be just as stinging. The International Olympic Committee and FIFA will have no choice but to bar the United States from competition, just as they did with Russia. There will be no World Cup matches in New Jersey. There will be no Team USA in the Olympics. We will be treated as a pariah state, unwelcome on the global stage, forced to watch the world celebrate without us.

For individual Americans, the consequences will be personal and painful. Visa-free travel to Europe will end immediately. Americans currently living or working in Europe will lose their legal protections and residency status. They will become persona non grata, potentially facing deportation or internment. The "blue passport" that used to open every door will suddenly be a red flag at every border crossing.

This is the end of trust, and it does not reset. You cannot invade a democratic ally and then say "my bad" four years later. The psychological break will be permanent. Europe will realize that the United States is no longer a partner but a predator. They will build their own defense architecture, their own financial systems, and their own alliances that specifically exclude us. The West will continue, but the United States will no longer be part of it.

Invading Greenland is not a show of strength; it is an act of national suicide. We are trading our reputation, our economy, and our security for a frozen island and a handful of minerals we can't even process. The price of this real estate deal is everything we built over the last century. If we cross this line, there is no going back. We will be the lonely superpower, ruling over nothing but our own decline.