12345...10...


Rocket Propulsion Market 2020: Overview and Share Forecasted to 2027 – Market Research Posts

Rocket Propulsion market is projected to exceed USD 6 billion by 2027. The market growth can be attributed to the rising demand for enhanced defense and commercial space network. Increasing activities of space exploration, earth imagery, and atmosphere observation mission are providing a positive impact on the rocket propulsion market. Increasing technological advancements, such as all re-usable rockets, electric propulsion systems, electromagnetic drive, and introduction of green propellants are improving market competitiveness.

Request for a sample of this research report: https://www.decresearch.com/request-sample/detail/3047

Some major findings of the rocket propulsion market report include:

Major companies in the market are focused on providing new age technologies, which will help in minimizing failures and increase reliability at reduced costs. For instance, SpaceX and Blue Origin have recently demonstrated their capabilities of reusable rockets, significantly reducing the operational cost. The companies are still investing significantly to further reduce manufacturing cost by embracing additive manufacturing processes.

High initial investments and political insurgencies between nations eliminate trade networks, thereby restraining the rocket propulsion market. Rocket propulsion is a complex system and requires significant technological expertise. Many countries rely on other countries for carrying out space exploration projects. For instance, the U.S. was completely dependent on RD-160 engines developed by Energomash for its space exploration project until the political insurgencies with Russia took place in 2014. Currently, the market share of Energomash, a major Russian rocket engine manufacturer, has reduced significantly as it has lost the U.S. from its client base. Such factors are significantly hampering the global rocket propulsion market.

The demand for new technology and upgrades of existing system are contributing to the rocket propulsion market growth. The introduction of electric propulsion system and reusable rocket is supporting the growth of commercial space launch programs by significantly reducing the cost per launch. For instance, Falcon 9, a reusable rocket developed by SpaceX, has manufacturing cost of USD 54 million but during its second course, it occupied USD 200,000 as fuel cost and a few refurbishments.

Table of contents for this research [emailprotected] https://www.decresearch.com/toc/detail/rocket-propulsion-market

Companies are actively focusing on undergoing collaborations and long-term agreements to secure their market share. Commercial space travel is also one of the major markets that is expected to experience exponential growth, improving the rocket propulsion market opportunity. A few companies which include SpaceX and Blue Origin have initiated efforts to explore their opportunities in the commercial space travel segment. Other companies and government organizations are focusing on reliability and cost reduction for space exploration projects through collaborations. For instance, in April 2019, ISRO successfully conducted the PSLV-C54 lift-off from Satish Dhawan Space Centre SHAR, Sriharikota. After 17 minutes and 12 seconds of the lift-off, EMISAT successfully entered the suns synchronous polar orbit and released 28 international customer satellites into their assigned orbit. Such international collaboration reduces the cost of space travel to a larger extent.

Go here to read the rest:

Rocket Propulsion Market 2020: Overview and Share Forecasted to 2027 - Market Research Posts

What you need to know for Thursday, August 6 – Lompoc Record

LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. Chris Paul had 21 points, seven rebounds and six assists in the Oklahoma City Thunder's 105-86 victory over the poor-shooting Los Angeles Lakers on Wednesday night.

Danilo Gallinari scored 19 points and Steven Adams had 18 for the Thunder (42-25), who never trailed in their first win over the Lakers in four meetings this season. Oklahoma City pulled even with Houston for the fifth seed in the Western Conference playoff picture with five games left.

The 86 points were the fewest by the Lakers and by a Thunder opponent this season.

We just tried to stick to the game plan, Paul said. We tried to keep those guys off the (free throw) line as much as possible. We tried to build a wall up on LeBron when hes pushing it. Just trying to make it hard for them.

LeBron James had 19 points and 11 rebounds for the Lakers (51-16), who had another possibly concerning offensive performance while dropping to 2-2 in the bubble. Los Angeles, which has already clinched the top seed in the West and the Pacific Division title, never held a lead for the first time all season.

I think we had some great possessions, James said. I think sometimes we have some bad shot selection throughout the course of these games, but I think we got some great looks. Our defense is pretty good. We only allowed the Thunder to shoot 43% from the field. Well get our rhythm and start making some.

The Lakers went a season-worst 5 for 37 on 3-pointers and made only 35% of their shots overall. Los Angeles dropped two games behind Milwaukee for the NBA's best overall record, which won't provide a real home-court advantage in the NBA Finals this year.

Were building habits, and every time were out there we have a chance to build and find rhythms, Lakers coach Frank Vogel said. These games are still really important for us to do that.

Dion Waiters scored 14 points for the Lakers, whose poor perimeter shooting in the bubble still hasn't been fixed as they dropped to 25% on 3-pointers in their last four games. They went 1 for 12 behind the arc in the first quarter against Oklahoma City, and they missed 19 of their first 22 attempts until late in the third quarter.

The Thunder were only 5 for 24 on 3-pointers, but their steady defense and 32-for-36 effort at the free throw line led to a comfortable win.

I felt we had a good team effort in terms of getting back and letting (James) see a crowd, Thunder coach Billy Donovan said. Neither team shot it too well from behind the line today.

Thunder: They played without Mike Muscala (concussion protocol), Terrance Ferguson (bruised right leg) and Dennis Schroder, who is away from the team for the birth of his second child. ... Adams got his leg caught underneath his body when he fell in a heap with Davis during the third quarter. He left the court briefly, but returned to the game.

Lakers: Dwight Howard sat out with a sore right knee. ... Los Angeles got a scare in the third quarter when Paul elbowed Kentavious Caldwell-Pope in the ribs, forcing Caldwell-Pope to leave the game. The Lakers are already without Avery Bradley and Rajon Rondo. Caldwell-Pope returned later.

9 AD

Anthony Davis scored just nine points on 3-for-11 shooting in 29 minutes. That matches his second-lowest point total in a Lakers uniform and his lowest-scoring performance while playing at least 29 minutes since January 2018.

I think were fine, Davis said. I dont think anything is eye-opening, something that we need to be afraid of. The offense is going to come around.

76ers 107, Wizards 98

LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. Joel Embiid had 30 points and 11 rebounds, and the Philadelphia 76ers held on to beat the Washington Wizards despite losing two-time All-Star Ben Simmons to a knee injury in the third quarter.

There was no immediate word from the 76ers on the extent of Simmons injury, which occurred as he landed awkwardly after grabbing an offensive rebound. At the next break in the action he walked gingerly to the locker room and did not return.

He was shown leaving the locker room in street clothes late in the fourth quarter.

Tobias Harris added 17 points for the 76ers, who pulled within a game of the Pacers for fifth place in the Eastern Conference standings.

Thomas Bryant had 19 points and 10 rebounds for the fast-fading Wizards, who have gone 0-4 since the restart and would be eliminated from playoff contention if Orlando and Brooklyn win their games later Wednesday.

Nuggets 132, Spurs 126

Michael Porter Jr. had 30 points and 15 rebounds, and Denver rallied in the fourth quarter to beat San Antonio.

Nikola Jokic added 25 points and 11 assists. Jerami Grant finished with 22 points.

Two days after posting a career-high 37 points in Denvers win over Oklahoma City, Porter stayed hot, scoring 10 of the Nuggets first 16 points against San Antonio.

San Antonio, which started the day two games behind Memphis for the final playoff spot in the West, dropped to 2-2 since the restart.

Rudy Gay scored 24 points and Derrick White added 23 points and seven assists for the Spurs (29-38).

Jazz 124, Grizzlies 115

Joe Ingles scored 12 of his 25 points in the fourth quarter, and Utah kept Memphis winless in the NBA bubble.

Mike Conley had 23 points and seven assists against his former team for the Jazz (43-25), who improved to 2-2 in the seeding round and nudged ahead of Houston (42-25) for the fourth spot in the Western Conference standings.

Dillon Brooks scored 23 points, while Grayson Allen had a career-high 20 points and six 3-pointers as the Grizzlies dropped to 0-4 in the seeding round, further endangering their chances of hanging on to the No. 8 seed in the West playoffs.

Jonas Valanciunas had 21 points and 14 rebounds, and Ja Morant added 20 points and nine assists for Memphis (32-37). But the Grizzlies have lost five straight overall since March, and Portland (31-38) leads a pack of four teams now within three games of the eighth seed.

Raptors 109, Magic 99

Fred VanVleet had 21 points and 10 assists, and Toronto held on to beat Orlando.

Pascal Siakam added 15 points and Kyle Lowry finished with eight points, nine rebounds and 10 assists.

Toronto (49-18) has won its last seven dating back to before the hiatus and three straight games since the restart.

The Magic (32-37) missed an opportunity to clinch a playoff spot following Washingtons loss to Philadelphia earlier Wednesday. But they maintained their 7 1/2-game lead over the Wizards for the eighth seed with four seeding games to play.

They also may be without forward Aaron Gordon for an undetermined amount of time after he left the game in the third quarter with a left hamstring injury after taking a hard foul from Lowry.

Here is the original post:

What you need to know for Thursday, August 6 - Lompoc Record

Led Zeppelins Jimmy Page revealed the song that changed his life – Far Out Magazine

Its fair to say that with the Yardbirds, in-studio sessions and, of course, Led Zeppelin, Jimmy Page influenced thousands and thousands of musicians. The iconic guitarists image was up on bedroom walls around the globe and his music is still powered through speakers across the entire planet.

Yet, all icons have their heroes, and during a conversation for Bob Boilens book, Your Song Changed My Life, where the veteran journalist speaks to some of musics heroes about their own favourite songs. When he asked Page the answer became rather obvious.

Like most rock and rollers his age, when Jimmy Page was a young boy rock n roll was so far from Britain it wasnt even played on the radio. As an eight-year-old Page moved houses and, upon arriving at his new bedroom, found himself a leftover guitar from the previous residents. Though the young Page had no interest in the instrument he kept it around.

Rock n roll would of course eventually land on British shores and Page himself would do a good job in bringing his own flavour to the new sound. In fact, Page immersed himself in every piece of the delta blues he could find, giving himself a vital education as he did. But as Boilen revealed to Rolling Stone, So many Brits of that age talk about skiffle music [and] Lonnie Donegan was king.

However, there was something different about Pages relation to the Scottish singer who brought rock n roll to Britain. But it wasnt till I began to think of how Donegan changed the blues and skiffled it up that I made the connection to how Jimmy Page took Donegan and electrified it to shocking and long-lasting effects.

Page was never intent on making himself into a British version of an American product though, I wanted to have my own approach to what I did. I didnt want to do a carbon copy of B.B. King, but I really love the blues. The blues had so much effect on me and I just wanted to make my own contribution in my own way.

Lonnie Donnegans cover of the blues standard Rock Island Line, a song about two Chicagoan institutions, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad line and made famous by Lead Belly, found its way on to the radio. Page certainly hear dit many times. But it wasnt until a friend of Pages, Rod Wyatt, played the song live that something in Page was ignited.

Page told Wyatt of the guitar he had at home with Wyatt promising him that he could both tune and help Page to play the instrument. It was a campfire guitar but it did have all the strings on it which is pretty useful because I wouldnt have known where to get guitar strings from, remembers Page. And then [Rod] showed me how to tune it up and then I started strumming away like not quite like not quite like Lonnie Donegan, but I was having a go.

He really understood all that stuff, Lonnie Donegan, Page tells Boilen. But this is the way that he sort of, should we say, jazzed it up or skiffled it up. By the time you get to the end of this hes really spitting it out he keeps singing Rock Island line, Rock Island [and] you really get this whole staccato aspect of it. Its fantastic stuff! So many guitarists from the Sixties will all say Lonnie Donegan was [their] influence.

Listen to Lonnie Donegans Rock Island Line and see if you can be inspired to be the next Jimmy Page.

(Via Rolling Stone)

Read more:

Led Zeppelins Jimmy Page revealed the song that changed his life - Far Out Magazine

voluntaryist.com – Fundamentals of Voluntaryism

Introduction

Voluntaryism is the doctrine that relations among people should be by mutual consent, or not at all. It represents a means, an end, and an insight. Voluntaryism does not argue for the specific form that voluntary arrangements will take; only that force be abandoned so that individuals in society may flourish. As it is the means which determine the end, the goal of an all voluntary society must be sought voluntarily. People cannot be coerced into freedom. Hence, the use of the free market, education, persuasion, and non-violent resistance as the primary ways to change people's ideas about the State. The voluntaryist insight, that all tyranny and government are grounded upon popular acceptance, explains why voluntary means are sufficient to attain that end.

Violence is never a means to knowledge. As Isabel Paterson, explained in her book, The God of the Machine, "No edict of law can impart to an individual a faculty denied him by nature. A government order cannot mend a broken leg, but it can command the mutilation of a sound body. It cannot bestow intelligence, but it can forbid the use of intelligence." Or, as Baldy Harper used to put it, "You cannot shoot a truth!" The advocate of any form of invasive violence is in a logically precarious situation. Coercion does not convince, nor is it any kind of argument. William Godwin pointed out that force "is contrary to the nature of the intellect, which cannot but be improved by conviction and persuasion," and "if he who employs coercion against me could mold me to his purposes by argument, no doubt, he would.. He pretends to punish me because his argument is strong; but he really punishes me because he is weak." Violence contains none of the energies that enhance a civilized human society. At best, it is only capable of expanding the material existence of a few individuals, while narrowing the opportunities of most others.

People engage in voluntary exchanges because they anticipate improving their lot; the only individuals capable of judging the merits of an exchange are the parties to it. Voluntaryism follows naturally if no one does anything to stop it. The interplay of natural property and exchanges results in a free market price system, which conveys the necessary information needed to make intelligent economic decisions. Interventionism and collectivism make economic calculation impossible because they disrupt the free market price system. Even the smallest government intervention leads to problems which justify the call for more and more intervention. Also, "controlled" economies leave no room for new inventions, new ways of doing things, or for the "unforeseeable and unpredictable." Free market competition is a learning process which brings about results which no one can know in advance. There is no way to tell how much harm has been done and will continue to be done by political restrictions.

The voluntary principle assures us that while we may have the possibility of choosing the worst, we also have the possibility of choosing the best. It provides us the opportunity to make things better, though it doesn't guarantee results. While it dictates that we do not force our idea of "better" on someone else, it protects us from having someone else's idea of "better" imposed on us by force. The use of coercion to compel virtue eliminates its possibility, for to be moral, an act must be uncoerced. If a person is compelled to act in a certain way (or threatened with government sanctions), there is nothing virtuous about his or her behavior. Freedom of choice is a necessary ingredient for the achievement of virtue. Whenever there is a chance for the good life, the risk of a bad one must also be accepted.

Common sense and reason tell us that nothing can be right by legislative enactment if it is not already right by nature. Epictetus, the Stoic, urged men to defy tyrants in such a way as to cast doubt on the necessity of government itself. "If the government directed them to do something that their reason opposed, they were to defy the government. If it told them to do what their reason would have told them to do anyway, they did not need a government." Just as we do not require a State to dictate what is right or wrong in growing food, manufacturing textiles, or in steel-making, we do not need a government to dictate standards and procedures in any field of endeavor. "In spite of the legislature, the snow will fall when the sun is in Capricorn, and the flowers will bloom when it is in Cancer."

Although certain services and goods are necessary to our survival, it is not essential that they be provided by the government. Voluntaryists oppose the State because it uses coercive means. The means are the seeds which bud into flower and come into fruition. It is impossible to plant the seed of coercion and then reap the flower of voluntaryism. The coercionist always proposes to compel people to do some-thing, usually by passing laws or electing politicians to office. These laws and officials depend upon physical violence to enforce their wills. Voluntary means, such as non-violent resistance, for example, violate no one's rights. They only serve to nullify laws and politicians by ignoring them. Voluntaryism does not require of people that they violently overthrow their government, or use the electoral process to change it; merely that they shall cease to support their government, whereupon it will fall of its own dead weight. If one takes care of the means, the end will take care of itself.

It is a commonplace observation that the means one uses must be consistent with the goal one seeks. It is impossible to "wage a war for peace" or "fight politics by becoming political." Freedom and private property are total, indivisible concepts that are compromised wherever and whenever the State exists. Since all things are related to one another in our complicated social world, if one man's freedom or private property may be violated (regardless of the justification), then every man's freedom and property are insecure. The superior man can only be sure of his freedom if the inferior man is secure in his rights. We often forget that we can secure our liberty only by preserving it for the most despicable and obnoxious among us, lest we set precedents that can reach us.

It is a fact of human nature that the only person who can think with your brain is you. Neither can a person be compelled to do anything against his or her will, for each person is ultimately responsible for his or her own actions. Governments try to terrorize individuals into submitting to tyranny by grabbing their bodies as hostages and trying to destroy their spirits. This strategy is not successful against the person who harbors the Stoic attitude toward life, and who refuses to allow pain to disturb the equanimity of his or her mind, and the exercise of reason. A government might destroy one's body or property, but it cannot injure one's philosophy of life. - Furthermore, the voluntaryist rejects the use of political power because it can only be exercised by implicitly endorsing or using violence to accomplish one's ends. The power to do good to others is also the power to do them harm. Power to compel people, to control other people's lives, is what political power is all about. It violates all the basic principles of voluntaryism: might does not make right; the end never justifies the means; nor may one person coercively interfere in the life of another. Even the smallest amount of political power is dangerous. First, it reduces the capacity of at least some people to lead their own lives in their own way. Second, and more important from the voluntaryist point of view, is what it does to the person wielding the power: it corrupts that person's character.

Go here to see the original:

voluntaryist.com - Fundamentals of Voluntaryism

Voluntaryism – Wikipedia

This article is about the political position. For other uses, see Voluntarism.

Philosophy supporting all forms of human association being voluntary

Voluntaryism (,[1] ;[1] sometimes voluntarism[2] )[3] is used to describe the philosophy of Auberon Herbert, and later that of the authors and supporters of The Voluntaryist magazine, which, similarly to anarcho-capitalism, rejects the state but supports private property.[4]

As a term, voluntaryism was coined in this usage by Auberon Herbert in the 19th century and gained renewed use since the late 20th century, especially within libertarianism in the United States.

Voluntaryist principal beliefs stem from the principles of self-ownership and non-aggression.

Precursors to the voluntaryist movement had a long tradition in the English-speaking world, at least as far back as the Leveller movement of mid-seventeenth century England. The Leveller spokesmen John Lilburne and Richard Overton who "clashed with the Presbyterian puritans, who wanted to preserve a state-church with coercive powers and to deny liberty of worship to the puritan sects".[5]

The Levellers were nonconformist in religion and advocated for the separation of church and state. The church to their way of thinking was a voluntary associating of equals, and furnished a theoretical and practical model for the civil state. If it was proper for their church congregations to be based on consent, then it was proper to apply the same principle of consent to its secular counterpart. For example, the Leveller 'large' Petition of 1647 contained a proposal "that tythes and all other inforced maintenances, may be for ever abolished, and nothing in place thereof imposed, but that all Ministers may be payd only by those who voluntarily choose them, and contract with them for their labours."[5] The Levellers also held to the idea of self-proprietorship.[5]

In 1843, Parliament considered legislation that would require part-time compulsory attendance at school of those children working in factories. The effective control over these schools was to be placed in the hands of the established Church of England, and the schools were to be supported largely from funds raised out of local taxation. Nonconformists, mostly Baptists and Congregationalists, became alarmed. They had been under the ban of the law for more than a century. At one time or another they could not be married in their own churches, were compelled to pay church rates against their will, and had to teach their children underground for fear of arrest. They became known as voluntaryists because they consistently rejected all state aid and interference in education, just as they rejected the state in the religious sphere of their lives. Some of the most notable voluntaryists included the young Herbert Spencer, who published his first series of articles "The Proper Sphere of Government," beginning in 1842; his supporter Auberon Herbert, who coined the modern usage of voluntaryist and established its current definition; Edward Baines, editor and proprietor of the Leeds Mercury; and Edward Miall, Congregationalist minister and founder-editor of The Nonconformist, who wrote Views of the Voluntary Principle.

The educational voluntaryists wanted free trade in education, just as they supported free trade in corn or cotton. Their concern for "liberty can scarcely be exaggerated". They believed that "government would employ education for its own ends" (teaching habits of obedience and indoctrination), and that government-controlled schools would ultimately teach children to rely on the State for all things. Baines, for example, noted that "[w]e cannot violate the principles of liberty in regard to education without furnishing at once a precedent and inducement to violate them in regard to other matters". Baines conceded that the then current system of education (both private and charitable) had deficiencies, but he argued that freedom should not be abridged on that account. In asking whether freedom of the press should be compromised because we have bad newspapers, Baines replied that "I maintain that Liberty is the chief cause of excellence; but it would cease to be Liberty if you proscribed everything inferior".[6] The Congregational Board of Education and the Baptist Voluntary Education Society are usually given pride of place among the Voluntaryists.[7]

In southern Africa, voluntaryism in religious matters was an important part of the liberal "Responsible Government" movement of the mid-19th century, along with support for multi-racial democracy and an opposition to British imperial control. The movement was driven by powerful local leaders such as Saul Solomon and John Molteno. When it briefly gained power, it disestablished the state-supported churches in 1875.[8][9]

Although there was never an explicitly voluntaryist movement in the United States until the late 20th century, earlier Americans did agitate for the disestablishment of government-supported churches in several of the original thirteen states. These conscientious objectors believed mere birth in a given geographic area did not mean that one consented to membership or automatically wished to support a state church. Their objection to taxation in support of the church was two-fold: taxation not only gave the state some right of control over the church; it also represented a way of coercing the non-member or the unbeliever into supporting the church. In New England, where both Massachusetts and Connecticut started out with state churches, many people believed that they needed to pay a tax for the general support of religion. For the same reasons, they paid taxes to maintain the roads and the courts.

There were at least two well-known Americans who espoused voluntaryist causes during the mid-19th century. Henry David Thoreau's first brush with the law in his home state of Massachusetts came in 1838, when he turned twenty-one. The state demanded that he pay the one dollar ministerial tax in support of a clergyman, "whose preaching my father attended but never I myself".[10] When Thoreau refused to pay the tax, it was probably paid by one of his aunts. In order to avoid the ministerial tax in the future, Thoreau had to sign an affidavit attesting he was not a member of the church.

Thoreau's overnight imprisonment for his failure to pay another municipal tax, the poll tax, to the town of Concord was recorded in his essay "Resistance to Civil Government", first published in 1849. It is often referred to as "On the Duty of Civil Disobedience" because in he concluded that government was dependent on the cooperation of its citizens. While he was not a thoroughly consistent voluntaryist, he did write that he wished never to "rely on the protection of the state" and that he refused to tender it his allegiance so long as it supported slavery. He distinguished himself from "those who call[ed] themselves no-government men", writing that "I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government". This has been interpreted as a gradualist, rather than minarchist, stance,[11] given that he also opened his essay by stating his belief that "government is best which governs not at all", a point that all voluntaryists heartily embrace.[10]

One of those "no-government men" was William Lloyd Garrison, famous abolitionist and publisher of The Liberator. Nearly all abolitionists identified with the self-ownership principle, namely that each person, as an individual, owned and should control his or her own mind and body free of outside coercive interference. The abolitionist called for the immediate and unconditional cessation of slavery because they saw slavery as man-stealing in its most direct and worst form. Slavery reflected the theft of a person's self-ownership rights. The slave was a chattel with no rights of its own. The abolitionists realized that each human being, without exception, was naturally invested with sovereignty over him or her self and that no one could exercise forcible control over another without breaching the self-ownership principle. Garrison was not a pure voluntaryist, for he supported the federal government's war against the Southern states from 1861 to 1865.

Another one was Charles Lane. He was friendly with Amos Bronson Alcott, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Thoreau. Between January and June 1843, a series of nine letters he penned were published in such abolitionist's papers as The Liberator and The Herald of Freedom. The title under which they were published was "A Voluntary Political Government" in which Lane described the state in terms of institutionalized violence and referred to its "club law, its mere brigand right of a strong arm, [supported] by guns and bayonets". He saw the coercive state on par with "forced" Christianity, arguing: "Everyone can see that the church is wrong when it comes to men with the [B]ible in one hand, and the sword in the other. Is it not equally diabolical for the state to do so?" Lane believed that governmental rule was only tolerated by public opinion because the fact was not yet recognized that all the true purposes of the state could be carried out on the voluntary principle, just as churches could be sustained voluntarily. Reliance on the voluntary principle could only come about through "kind, orderly, and moral means" that were consistent with the totally voluntary society he was advocating, adding: "Let us have a voluntary State as well as a voluntary Church, and we may possibly then have some claim to the appeallation of free men".[12]

From the French world, there was Frdric Bastiat, whose book The Law argued that for a free society, a government must only concern itself with maintaining the individual's right to defend his life, liberty and property; and that if a government pursues anything more than that such as is common with philanthropy, then it will inevitably encroach those rights, rescinding freedom.

Although use of the label voluntaryist waned after the death of Auberon Herbert in 1906, its use was renewed in 1982, when George H. Smith, Wendy McElroy and Carl Watner began publishing The Voluntaryist magazine.[13] Smith suggested use of the term to identify those libertarians who believed that political action and political parties (especially the Libertarian Party) were antithetical to their ideas. In their "Statement of Purpose" in Neither Bullets nor Ballots: Essays on Voluntaryism (1983), Watner, Smith and McElroy explained that voluntaryists were advocates of non-political strategies to achieve a free society. They rejected electoral politics "in theory and practice as incompatible with libertarian goals" and argued that political methods invariably strengthen the legitimacy of coercive governments. In concluding their "Statement of Purpose", they wrote: "Voluntaryists seek instead to delegitimize the State through education, and we advocate the withdrawal of the cooperation and tacit consent on which state power ultimately depends".

In following years, Murray Rothbard advocated voluntaryism in his book For a New Liberty, and voluntaryist philosopher John Zube began writing a series of articles advocating left-wing voluntaryism in the 1980s.

The most prolific contributors to the philosophy of voluntaryism in the 21st century include Larken Rose and Carl Watner. Adam Kokesh ran for president of the United States in 2020 on a voluntaryist platform.

The rest is here:

Voluntaryism - Wikipedia

Black Friday Is Capitalism at Its Most Beautiful | Cole Webb Harter – Foundation for Economic Education

I went to a Daily Mass on Black Friday last year. The priest didnt waste too much time with the homily, but he made a few comments about Thanksgiving and a statement about Black Friday which I found hopefully refreshing.He said, This is a day for the poor. Of course, hes right, but how often do we think of Black Friday in those terms? As Thanksgiving and Black Friday approach once again, let us reflect on this concise but incredibly profound statement.

Black Friday is a day when the fruits of our labor are more abundant and more available for more people. Black Friday is truly one of the most beautiful examples of capitalism we have around these days.Its a day when everyone gets richer. The producers get richer because more people are buying their wonderful products, and the consumers get richer because they both come into possession of something they greatly value and because they save a little of their hard earned money in the process. This is what capitalism is all about: mutual enrichment through mutual gift-giving.

Judging by his accent and the color of his skin, this priest is almost certainly an immigrant from a very poor country.He definitely understands poverty, and the fact that he sees something charitable and Christian in a day so often sneered at by Catholics and upper-middle-class Americans in general for its apparent celebration of consumerism and materialism is extremely enlightening. The truth is Black Friday benefits the poor and the working class most of all. The rich dont need a discount. They buy what they want regardless of the price.

But Black Friday is a day when the fruits of our labor are more abundant and more available for more people. Think about this next time you mock some single mother on food stamps for taking part in a "doorbuster" crowd while trying to get a discount Christmas present for her children.It can be tumultuous, but its also a glorious celebration of the humanitarian implications of the free market.

That is the beauty of voluntaryism and capitalism: it is a descriptive, and not a prescriptive, worldview. Its very easy for people to sit back on Black Friday and exempt themselves from the rat race, to hold themselves above all those plebs scrambling for a television at half-price.The neo-Marxist left, and regrettably some libertarians, like to tsk-tsk at these people for being so foolish as to think useless junk like TVs and childrens toys and gaming consoles are worth such revelries.

This is the great tragedy of the political philosopher, who thinks he knows whats best for everyone. You dont reallyneedthat TV, you dont reallyneedthat new pair of shoes.To these people I say, get off your morally superior high horse. Who are you to say what people need and dont need? That is the beauty of voluntaryism and capitalism: it is a descriptive, and not a prescriptive, worldview. Nobody is required, let alone qualified, to decide whats best for everyone else. In a truly free market, free from government coercion and cronyism, everyone is able to allocate for themselves what resources, goods, and services they deem most valuable and essential.

Mostly we think of Black Friday as a day of crass consumerism, of greed, and irrational attachment to material goods. But just look how good life is. The free market has yielded a surplus unthinkable to even the richest members of society as recent as two hundred years ago. So stop judging and celebrate abundance.

View original post here:

Black Friday Is Capitalism at Its Most Beautiful | Cole Webb Harter - Foundation for Economic Education

Satyaniti and Swaraj: The True Twin Pillars Of Society – Youth Ki Awaaz

The society which we know as India in modern times was once a society firmly placed on the twin-pillars of self-governance and voluntaryism [1-5]. Voluntaryism is a philosophy that posits that all forms of human association should be voluntary [6 and 7]. A voluntaryist society is one where people live, socialise, transact and trade without any structures of power and hierarchy, without any coercion or regressive power dynamics. The decentralisation of power, which ends with a community or family in modern times, ended only with the individual politically, socially and spiritually in ancient India.

Spontaneous order in the political and economic realms was respected and harmonized. While in the past I have written on Dharmocracy, comprehensive (political, economic and spiritual) democracy; in this piece, I go one step further in decentralisation and renegotiation of the normative to the individual. In ancient India, at least in spirit, it was Swarajya (self-rule of people within picayune kingdoms/republics so much so, that even in 1947, India had 565 princely states) not Samrajya (imperial rule), catallaxy (a synchronisation of individual economics and interests) not a modern economy (transactions with assumed common goals and interest) [8, 9]. This was the perspective that prevailed, and in such a liberal society, people lived with responsibility, peace and rationality: traits of a rarely found, open, free and transparent society [10-12].

The Vedas are the fountainhead, the spring of profound and beautiful philosophical, soteriological and spiritual principles and ideas [13-18].

Composed in Vedic Sanskrit, the Vedas constitute the oldest layer of scriptural literature within the Sanatana Dharma, with Hindus considering the Vedas to be apaurueya, not authored by a man. While monarchies prevailed in the Vedic society [19, 20]; not only was there a movement away from pre-eminence given to political power towards a more spiritual one [21, 22], but also the existence of ancient Indian republics Ganatantra, which contributed towards the decentralisation of power [23]. Whether this directly took the form of anarchism is debatable, but there was a move towards reducing the importance of the construct of a primary, overarching state and constructs of powers [24].

The Dharmic path has always been about a fearless trek into the unknown, about seeking the truth of reality [25-27]. It throws out any and every imposed normative ideal of political philosophies, and in doing so, calls for the sacrifice of attachment of the human mind with dogma and rigid political alignments. While this perspective highlights societys ills and even prescribes possible solutions, it lays a greater emphasis on mutual respect, cooperation and harmony in society rather than rigid loyalties to political constructs of the state or ideologies. This is part of the greater Dharmic realisation of the futility and fleeting nature of all constructs be it political, social or economic, in the pursuit of the Absolute Truth.

Satya, the Absolute Truth, is beyond constructs of politics and society, particularly those of state and (political) ideologies

And in doing so, it had anarchist undertones, when one considers politics: it highlighted the fallibility of human power and reasoning that can be applicable to one and all. The importance of spontaneous self-organisation and unconscious design in political entities, the significance of innovation and influence of factors and forces beyond the control of a central authority.

Satyaniti, this Dharmic anarchism, is the result of the Indic civilisation embracing the dynamism of life, and the spontaneity and capacity to the self-organization of human beings.

The principle of self-governance naturally arises from this realisation. Instead of imposed structures, the emphasis is on peaceful emergent orders without any rigid conservatism regarding hierarchy, power dynamics, and coercion. A truly Dharmic society has at its foundations a pre-eminent place for honest introspection, self-improvement and evolution of thought, and individuality thereby. This is a dynamic way of determining ones purpose of life, of ones role within society, and the key to ones happiness.

There is a distinct difference between western anarchism and Dharmic anarchism. While western anarchism is about negation and oft-violent insurrection against political structures, the Dharmic version preoccupies itself with the realisation of why the obsession with these political elements is naturally at odds with ones existence and well-being. The Rishis (seers) since times immemorial led by example in highlighting how self-governance and self-rule are significant, coupled with anarchist tendencies of not placing much importance with control of the state.

They dwelled in forests outside the control of any government be it of a monarchy or republic of ancient India. They brought forth a spiritual mooring for education and existence, a values-based living and a realisation of Rta (cosmic order) and Dharma (the path that facilitates this order, the universal cosmic principle as well equilibration in nature).

While western anarchism emphasised anti-state policies, Dharmic anarchism emphasised self-consciousness. While western anarchism went against specific rulers, Dharmic anarchism went for decentralised and non-hierarchical polities. The latter prioritises community living, sensitivity to holistic living and ecologically sustainable lifestyles. This was done with a combination of grassroot democracy (that was centralised around the unit of the Gram, village), Dharma, Varnasrama (not Jaativad) and socio-spiritual realisation of Satya, Truth.

Grassroot democracy can be seen even today with the Panchayati model. Over millennia, this turned India into not only a village-based society but also a strongly community-based, resilient society. The movement towards making these fundamental units of politics and society self-governing and self-sufficient has been seen over the ages. This was in a cooperative model, which was sustainable and nature-bound, and most importantly, independent from the state and its associated politics. Orientalists such as Metcalfe, Munroe and Wilks have described the importance of these communities in India. Kings came and went, dynasties came and went, power exchanged powers, wars took place, but what never changed beyond a point was the underlying social fabric of India, which is based on the village- and community-based model.

C. F. W. Hegel highlighted how this system made India impervious to the vagaries of despotism and subjugation by rulers and invaders, even during the colonial era. The achievement of this high level of decentralisation was that there never was a political monolith that a coloniser or invader could demolish for the Indians to fall as a people. It is this rich political heritage that naturally translates to the principle of self-governance, self-rule and Swaraj. And it is this rich political heritage that I would like to stand by.

Satyaniti and Swaraj constitute the historical backbone of the socio-political order of India, through the ages.

References:

[1] Talwar, Balvir. Sustainable growththe Vedic way.International Conference on Quality (ICQ05), Tokyo, September. 2005.

[2] Rammohan, Sethuraman. Improving Governance In The Light Of Ancient Indian Heritage Texts. (2018).

[3] Jha, Pradip Kumar. Decentralization in India: Reflections from Bihar.Journal of Politics and Governance3.4 (2014): 149-155.

[4] Singh, Gurdeep. Swami Dayananda Saraswatis Instruments in the Reformation of Indian Society.

[5] Mohapatra, Amulya Ranjan.Swaraj: A Multi-Dimensional Concept. Readworthy, 2009.

[6] Herbert, Auberon Edward William Molyneux.The principles of voluntaryism and free life. Free Press Association, 1897.

[7] Watner, Carl. Stateless, not lawless: voluntaryism and arbitration.The voluntaryist84 (1997): 1-8.

[8] Tilak, Deepak, and Geetali Tilak. Swarajya and Tilak. (2019).

[9] Nikam, N. A. Indian Thought and the Philosophic Bases of Responsibility of Man.Revue Internationale de Philosophie(1957): 75-87.

[10] Kuppuswamy, Bangalore.Dharma and society: A study in social values. Macmillan, 1977.

[11] Londhe, Manali. Vedic Concept of Rta: The Cosmic Order.Proceedings of the XXIII World Congress of Philosophy. Vol. 16. 2018.

[12] Saravanamuthu, Kala. Gandhian-Vedic.Envisioning a New Accountability (Advances in Public Interest Accounting, Volume 13). Emerald Group Publishing Limited(2007): 177-235.

[13] Halbfass, Wilhelm. The Idea of the Veda and the Identity of Hinduism.Defining Hinduism. Routledge, 2017. 16-29.

[14] Goodall, Dominic, ed.Hindu scriptures. University of California, 1996.

[15] Macnicol, Nicol.Hindu scriptures. Univ of California Press, 1996.Remove featured image

[16] Zaehner, Robert Charles.Hindu scriptures. Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 2001.

[17] Frawley, David.Wisdom of the ancient seers: Mantras of the Rig Veda. Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 1994.

[18] Wilson, H. H. Rig-Veda Sanhita: A Collection of Ancient Hindu Hymns, Vol. (1888).

[19] Bedekar, V. M. VEDIC FOUNDATIONS OF INDIAN CULTURE. (1976): 223-226.

[20] Singh, Sarva Daman. Monarchy in the Vedic Age.Australian Journal of Politics & History35.3 (1989): 338-352.

[21] LINDBLAD, J. THOMAS. The Ultimate Implications of the Ancient Hindu Concept of Sovereignty: The Principle of.Journal of Indian History: Golden Jubilee Volume(1973): 193.

[22] Sinha, Braj M. SVADHARMA AND SVABHVA IN THE BHAGAVADGT.Journal of South Asian Literature23.2 (1988): 144-149.

[23] Pandey, R. B. Vedic origin of Indian republics. Proceedings of Indian History Congress; 15th. session, Gwalior. 1952.

[24] Weir, Kay. A brief history of anarchism.Pacific Ecologist19 (2010): 48-50.

[25] Agarwal, Manjul K.The Vedic Core of Human History: And Truth Will Be the Savior. iUniverse, 2013.

[26] Edgerton, Franklin. The Upanisads: what do they seek, and why?.Journal of the American Oriental Society(1929): 97-121.

[27] Nigal, Sahebrao Genu.Vedic philosophy of values. Northern Book Centre, 2009.

Here is the original post:

Satyaniti and Swaraj: The True Twin Pillars Of Society - Youth Ki Awaaz

Satyaniti and Swaraj constitute the historical backbone of the socio-political order of India, through the ages – OpIndia

Society in the lands we know in modern times as India once was a society firmly placed on the twin-pillars of self-governance and voluntaryism [1-5]. Voluntaryism is a philosophy that posits that all forms of human association should be voluntary [6, 7]. A voluntaryst society is one where people live, socialise, transact and trade without any structures of power and hierarchy, without any coercion or regressive power dynamics. The decentralisation of power, which ends with a community or family in modern times, ended only with the individual, politically, socially and spiritually, in ancient India. Spontaneous order in political and economic realms were respected and harmonized. While in the past I have written on Dharmocracy comprehensive (political, economic and spiritual) democracy, in this piece, I go one step further in decentralisation and renegotiation of the normative to the individual. In ancient India, atleast in spirit, it was Swarajya (self-rule of people within picayune kingdoms/republics so much so, that even in 1947, India had 565 princely states) not Samrajya (imperial rule), catallaxy (a synchronisation of individual economics and interests) not a modern economy (transactions with assumed common goals and interest) [8, 9]. This was the perspective that prevailed, and in such a liberal society, people lived with responsibility, peace and rationality, in what was a rarely found open, free and transparent society [10-12].

The Veda are the fountainhead, the spring of profound and beautiful philosophical, soteriological and spiritual principles and ideas [13-18].

Composed in Vedic Sanskrit, the Veda constitute the oldest layer of scriptural literature within Santana Dharma, with Hindus considering the Vedas to be apaurueya, not authored by man. While monarchies prevailed in Vedic society [19, 20], not only was there a movement away from preeminence given to political power towards a more spiritual one [21, 22] but also the existence of ancient Indian republics Ganatantra, which contributed towards decentralisation of power [23]. Whether this directly took the form of anarchism is debatable, but there was a move towards reducing the importance of the construct of a primary, overarching state and constructs of powers [24]. The Dharmic path has always been about a fearless trek into the unknown, about seeking the truth of reality [25-27]. It throws out any and every imposed normative ideal of political philosophies, and in doing so, calls for the sacrifice of attachment of the human mind with dogma and rigid political alignments. While this perspective highlights societys ills and even prescribes possible solutions, it lays a greater emphasis on mutual respect, cooperation and harmony in society rather than rigid loyalties to political constructs of the state or ideologies. This is part of the greater Dharmic realisation of the futility and fleeting nature of all constructs, be it political, social or economic, in the pursuit of the Absolute Truth:

Satya, the Absolute Truth, is beyond constructs of politics and society, particularly those of state and (political) ideologies

- article continues after ad -- article resumes -

And in doing so, it had anarchist undertones, when one considers politics: it highlighted the fallibility of human power and reasoning that can be applicable to one and all, the importance of spontaneous self-organisation and unconscious design in political entities, significance of innovation and influence of factors and forces beyond the control of a central authority.

Satyaniti, this Dharmic anarchism, is the result of the Indic civilisation embracing the dynamism of life, and the spontaneity and capacity to self-organize of human beings.

The principle of self-governance naturally arises from this realisation. Instead of imposed structures, emphasis is on peaceful emergent orders without any rigid conservatism regarding hierarchy, power dynamics and coercion. A truly Dharmic society has at its foundations a preeminent place for honest introspection, self-improvement and evolution of thought and individuality thereby. This is a dynamic way of determining ones purpose of life, of ones role within society and the key to ones happiness.

There is a distinct difference between western anarchism and Dharmic anarchism. While western anarchism is about negation and oft-violent insurrection against political structures, the Dharmic version preoccupies itself with the realisation of why obsession with these political elements is naturally at odds with ones existence and well-being. The Rishis (seers) since times immemorial led by example, in highlighting how self-governance and self-rule is significant, coupled with anarchist tendencies of not placing much importance with control of the state. They dwelled in forests outside the control of any government, be it of a monarchy or republic of ancient India. They brought forth a spiritual mooring for education and existence, a values-based living and a realisation of Rta (cosmic order) and Dharma (the path that facilitates this order, the universal cosmic principle as well equilibriation in nature).

Read- Satyatva or the Absolute Truth: Resonances across Religions and Rejection of Exclusivism

While western anarchism emphasised anti-state policies, Dharmic anarchism emphasised self-consciousness. While western anarchism went against specific rulers, Dharmic anarchism went for decentralised and non-hierarchical polities. The latter prioritises community living, sensitivity to holistic living and ecologically sustainable lifestyles. This was done with a combination of grassroot democracy (that was centralised around the unit of the Gram village), Dharma, Varnasrama (not Jaativad)and socio-spiritual realisation of Satya Truth.

The grassroot democracy can be seen even today with the Panchayati model. Over millenia, this turned India into not only a village-based society but also a strongly community-based and resilient society. The movement towards making these fundamental units of politics and society self-governing and self-sufficient has been seen over the ages. This was in a cooperative model, which was sustainable and nature-bound, and most importantly, independent from the state and its associated politics. Orientalists such as Metcalfe, Munroe and Wilks have described the importance of these communities in India. Kings came and went, dynasties came and went, power exchanged powers, wars took place. What never changed beyond a point was the underlying social fabric of India, based on the village- and community-based model. C. F. W. Hegel highlighted how this system made India impervious to the vagaries of despotism and subjugation by rulers and invaders, even during the colonial era. The achievement of this high level of decentralisation was that there never was a political monolith that a coloniser or invader could demolish for the Indians to fall as a people. It is this rich political heritage that naturally translates to the principle of self-governance, self-rule and Swaraj, and it is this rich political heritage that I would like to stand by.

Satyaniti and Swaraj constitute the historical backbone of the socio-political order of India, through the ages.

References:

Read more:

Satyaniti and Swaraj constitute the historical backbone of the socio-political order of India, through the ages - OpIndia

Satyaniti and Swaraj constitute the historical backbone of India – Global News Hut

Society within the lands we all know in fashionable occasions as India as soon as was a society firmly positioned on the twin-pillars of self-governance and voluntaryism [1-5]. Voluntaryism is a philosophy that posits that every one types of human affiliation needs to be voluntary [6, 7]. A voluntaryst society is one the place individuals stay, socialise, transact and commerce with none constructions of energy and hierarchy, with none coercion or regressive energy dynamics. The decentralisation of energy, which ends with a group or household in fashionable occasions, ended solely with the person, politically, socially and spiritually, in historical India. Spontaneous order in political and financial realms had been revered and harmonized. Whereas previously Ive written on Dharmocracy complete (political, financial and religious) democracy, on this piece, I am going one step additional in decentralisation and renegotiation of the normative to the person. In historical India, atleast in spirit, it was Swarajya (self-rule of individuals inside picayune kingdoms/republics a lot so, that even in 1947, India had 565 princely states) not Samrajya (imperial rule), catallaxy (a synchronisation of particular person economics and pursuits) not a contemporary economic system (transactions with assumed frequent targets and curiosity) [8, 9]. This was the attitude that prevailed, and in such a liberal society, individuals lived with duty, peace and rationality, in what was a not often discovered open, free and clear society [10-12].

The Veda are the fountainhead, the spring of profound and exquisite philosophical, soteriological and religious rules and concepts [13-18].

Composed in Vedic Sanskrit, the Veda represent the oldest layer of scriptural literature inside Santana Dharma, with Hindus contemplating the Vedas to be apaurueya, not authored by man. Whereas monarchies prevailed in Vedic society [19, 20], not solely was there a motion away from preeminence given to political energy in direction of a extra religious one [21, 22] but in addition the existence of historical Indian republics Ganatantra, which contributed in direction of decentralisation of energy [23]. Whether or not this straight took the type of anarchism is debatable, however there was a transfer in direction of lowering the significance of the assemble of a main, overarching state and constructs of powers [24]. The Dharmic path has all the time been a couple of fearless trek into the unknown, about searching for the reality of actuality [25-27]. It throws out any and each imposed normative best of political philosophies, and in doing so, requires the sacrifice of attachment of the human thoughts with dogma and inflexible political alignments. Whereas this angle highlights societys ills and even prescribes doable options, it lays a better emphasis on mutual respect, cooperation and concord in society fairly than inflexible loyalties to political constructs of the state or ideologies. That is a part of the better Dharmic realisation of the futility and fleeting nature of all constructs, be it political, social or financial, within the pursuit of the Absolute Fact:

Satya, the Absolute Fact, is past constructs of politics and society, notably these of state and (political) ideologies

article continues after advert article resumes

And in doing so, it had anarchist undertones, when one considers politics: it highlighted the fallibility of human energy and reasoning that may be relevant to every body, the significance of spontaneous self-organisation and unconscious design in political entities, significance of innovation and affect of things and forces past the management of a government.

Satyaniti, this Dharmic anarchism, is the results of the Indic civilisation embracing the dynamism of life, and the spontaneity and capability to self-organize of human beings.

The precept of self-governance naturally arises from this realisation. As an alternative of imposed constructions, emphasis is on peaceable emergent orders with none inflexible conservatism relating to hierarchy, energy dynamics and coercion. A very Dharmic society has at its foundations a preeminent place for trustworthy introspection, self-improvement and evolution of thought and individuality thereby. This can be a dynamic means of figuring out ones function of life, of 1s position inside society and the important thing to at least ones happiness.

Theres a distinct distinction between western anarchism and Dharmic anarchism. Whereas western anarchism is about negation and oft-violent rebellion in opposition to political constructions, the Dharmic model preoccupies itself with the realisation of why obsession with these political components is of course at odds with ones existence and well-being. The Rishis (seers) since occasions immemorial led by instance, in highlighting how self-governance and self-rule is important, coupled with anarchist tendencies of not inserting a lot significance with management of the state. They dwelled in forests outdoors the management of any authorities, be it of a monarchy or republic of historical India. They introduced forth a religious mooring for training and existence, a values-based dwelling and a realisation of Rta (cosmic order) and Dharma (the trail that facilitates this order, the common cosmic precept as nicely equilibriation in nature).

Learn- Satyatva or the Absolute Fact: Resonances throughout Religions and Rejection of Exclusivism

Whereas western anarchism emphasised anti-state insurance policies, Dharmic anarchism emphasised self-consciousness. Whereas western anarchism went in opposition to particular rulers, Dharmic anarchism went for decentralised and non-hierarchical polities. The latter prioritises group dwelling, sensitivity to holistic dwelling and ecologically sustainable life. This was carried out with a mix of grassroot democracy (that was centralised across the unit of the Gram village), Dharma, Varnasrama (not Jaativad)and socio-spiritual realisation of Satya Fact.

The grassroot democracy might be seen even right this moment with the Panchayati mannequin. Over millenia, this turned India into not solely a village-based society but in addition a strongly community-based and resilient society. The motion in direction of making these elementary items of politics and society self-governing and self-sufficient has been seen over the ages. This was in a cooperative mannequin, which was sustainable and nature-bound, and most significantly, impartial from the state and its related politics. Orientalists resembling Metcalfe, Munroe and Wilks have described the significance of those communities in India. Kings got here and went, dynasties got here and went, energy exchanged powers, wars happened. What by no means modified past some extent was the underlying social cloth of India, primarily based on the village- and community-based mannequin. C. F. W. Hegel highlighted how this method made India impervious to the vagaries of despotism and subjugation by rulers and invaders, even in the course of the colonial period. The achievement of this excessive degree of decentralisation was that there by no means was a political monolith {that a} coloniser or invader may demolish for the Indians to fall as a individuals. Its this wealthy political heritage that naturally interprets to the precept of self-governance, self-rule and Swaraj, and its this wealthy political heritage that I wish to stand by.

Satyaniti and Swaraj represent the historic spine of the socio-political order of India, via the ages.

References:

More:

Satyaniti and Swaraj constitute the historical backbone of India - Global News Hut

Bear Lake Hill Climbs were a success | News-Examiner – The Herald Journal

The Bear Lake Hill Climbs returned after a two-year break. The Hill climbs were located at the Price Ranch in Geneva ID. There was plenty of snow, and at the last minute, the weather turned cold enough that mud was not the problem it had been in the past.

There were over 500 entries with several racers running in more that one class. This years race wasnt the largest race they have had, but it turned out great. The snow was good, they were able to make a course that gave some challenges to the racers, and all turned out well.

The case was an RMSHA race. The Bear Lake Rim Riders hosted the competition. The King of the Hill was Keith Curtis from Dillion, MT. The Semi pro was won by Cole Thomas and Jadian Phaff was the Womens Queen. There were local racers and ones from as far away as British Columbia. The Hill Climbs has been a long-standing tradition in Bear Lake, but due to changing weather conditions, it was canceled for three years. With a little change in schedule and the help of the Bear Lake County Road and Bridge crew, the race was on again. Of course, that could still have not happened if it wasnt for the generous use of Carson Prices land. He has been a great supporter of these hill climbs.

RMSHA would like to thank the community for the beautiful way they turn out and the voluntaryism that makes events like this happen.

A big shout out to the Price Ranch, Bear Lake Road, and Bridge Crew, Bear Lake Rim Riders, Bear Lake Ambulance Service, State of Idaho DOT for the quick clean up of the avalanches and all the volunteers that helped make this a great event. Thank you to all involved for a successful event. The hill help did a great job of helping keep the riders safe.

Our excellent motels, Super 8, Clover Creek, and Rest Assured Inns, have clean, comfortable places for the riders to stay, and all of these things make for a great race day.

The Community can be proud of the job it does for this event.

View post:

Bear Lake Hill Climbs were a success | News-Examiner - The Herald Journal

The Panarchist Solution to a World Divided – CounterPunch

In these days of epic collapse, with the established order rapidly disintegrating before our very eyes, mankind seems to be tearing apart at the seems and resorting to the bipolar extremes of the far-left and the far-right. And why the hell not? Poor people across the globe have grown weary of the false promises and bald-faced lies of the so-called moderates. The one thing the warring camps of extremes seem to agree on is that the mass democracy of neoliberal globalism is an epic wash. A rigged shell game that only pays out to the house, and now the house is on fire.

So we witness the spectacle of populism on both the left and the right. Record numbers of young people embracing the once tainted label of socialism while the kind of xenophobic nativism which was once only uttered in hushed tones at the far corners of church potlucks has now become mainstream fodder openly brandished like Hermann Goerings revolver. These are the times that we live in but weve seen them before. Whenever empires crumble and the fixed markets of state capitalism find themselves in peril. The people who stand to gain the most from the cataclysm find themselves divided on the opposite ends of the barracks. Stalinists and Brown Shirts. Antifa and the Alt-right. Its times like these when the call of Samuel L. Jacksons prophetic DJ in Spike Lees classic dissection of urban upheaval, Do the Right Thing, rings like tinnitus through my eardrums. Can we live together?! Together, can we live?!! Ive spent my life in search of an answer to that existential question. I believe Im getting closer.

Ive always found myself on the far-left end of the barracks, even while the proletariat was still drunk on the delusions of progress that came with the first black president and Apple Store commodity fetishism. I discovered Marx young and Chomsky shortly after. I spent the lion share of my teens flirting with a carousel of Libertarian Socialist ideologies, Chomskys Syndicalism, Red Rosas Council Communism, Subcomandante Marcos Zapatizmo. All set to a hard-driving soundtrack of Billy Bragg, Joe Strummer and Zack de la Rocha.

By my late adolescence, I found myself under the spell of more statist genres of leftism, brought on by the unexpected revival of Bolivarianism in Hugos Venezuela and Evos Bolivia. I eventually came to embrace Third World Communism as a bulwark against Northern attacks on these democratic social experiments. I came to see Fidel Castros harshly undemocratic measures to protect the Cuban Revolution in the wake of Kennedys terrorist campaign against it as the only solution to imperialism. But my appetite for history wouldnt allow me to hold on to that delusion for very long. Upon further studies, I came to the conclusion that the state itself was cancer and it mattered little how benevolent its managers were. It was always a wicked contraption designed to oppress before it self-destructs. I turned back to anarchism but contradictions continued to haunt me.

The biggest problem with nearly every school of leftism is its almost messianic assumption that mankind can be united in internationalist harmony beneath the banner of a single way. As much as I may believe that my own brand of Post-Marxist Syndicalism is the ideal model for a truly democratic society, I had trouble convincing myself that someday mankind would reach a singular collective consciousness and fall in love with the guild. Frankly, as an anti-imperialist, Ive always been uneasy with these sort of notions of internationalism.

Assuming that some 19th-century factory workers in industrial Western Europe had all the answers for my friendly neighborhood primitivists in the Amish community, let alone the tribes of Borneo or the Kalahari, just smacks bitchingly of colonialism. With a world so beautifully complex, how could there ever be just one way? This seemed like the same trap that lead our Founding Fathers to set the stage for the neoliberal hellhole of global capitalism, only ours was an egalitarian Manifest Destiny. I believed very strongly in the ideals of Murray Bookchin and Rudolph Rocker, but these contradictions kept me from seeing even my own anarchism as anything more than a distant pipe dream. That is, until I discovered the philosophy of Panarchy.

One of the biggest misconceptions about anarchism is that it is defined by the absence of government. Such notions are patently absurd. Governments have, do and always will exist. A government is any gathering of individuals brought together to make collective decisions. Technically speaking, three stoned roommates debating over pizza topping is a government. Anarchy is defined by the absence of the state, a permanent government micromanaged by a class of professional politicians, be they corporate board members, congressmen or monarchs. The very existence of this managerial class is what makes a simple government a state. Anarchy, in all its forms, seeks to abolish this hierarchy and replace it with an entirely civilian government. Panarchy is the recognition that in our world, in this diverse cultural landscape known as mankind, there is no singular answer to the scourge of the state. Anarchy can only exist outside of manifestos and punk rock venues when it is free to take on any form, regardless of adjectives, as long as it does so voluntarily and free from force.

Globalism has brought on nothing but colossal super-states. The tyranny of bigness, big government, big business, big race, big religion. This problem cannot be solved by hijacking these systems and rebranding them as internationalism. The only valid solution to this mass tyranny is localism and thats precisely what Panarchy embraces, the idea that government can only succeed on the same grounds as any other relationship, through reversible contracts between consenting parties committed to voluntaryism and non-aggression above all else. These could be mutual aid societies, autonomous communes, democratic syndicates, tribal orders, a quilt-work of endless Utopian experiments competing peacefully for their citizenrys patronage with individuals free to opt-out and collectives free to succeed at anytime. Ideally, these governments would exist like social clubs with benefits, completely untethered by geography. Making it entirely possible for six stateless nations to exist on a single square block.

Whats the catch, you ask? And there is always a catch. The catch is that freedom of society exists under the same parameters as freedom of speech. Panarchy doesnt just protect the societies you like, it protects the societies you hate. Under the grand contract of a confederal constitution, people would be free to build societies based around any ideology as long as they remained peaceful and voluntary. That means societies based on Mutualism, Syndicalism, Capitalism and Communism. But that also more than likely means peaceful nations governed by ideologies like Religious Fundamentalism, Geographic Integralism and even Racial Separatism. Allowing such societies to exist does not mean condoning them anymore than freedom of speech means condoning hate speech. Its a matter of excepting the reality that true liberty means respecting the decisions of others, however misguided, to live voluntarily however they damn well please, provided they do so peacefully, much like my clannish Amish neighbors who peacefully coexist with wicked English trannies like me.

This philosophy runs anathema to the current culture of both the far-left and the far-right, who both seem to define themselves by their guttural opposition to the others very existence. But I see this catch as the solution to a proletariat that will always remain divided across complex cultural lines. When they lack the nifty shield of persecuted victim-hood, the Fascist right tends to lose its appeal to the masses. Every time one of those goosestepping pricks gets hammered by Antifa, there book sales go through the fucking ceiling. I have to believe in the Kropotkinite theory that free mutual aid leads left towards true egalitarian evolution. When free to compete peacefully, the more malignant fear-based cultures will dwindle while the open communal ones will thrive. The beauty is that the far-right is free to believe the very same thing about my Queer Syndicalist Tribe. They get the opportunity to prove me wrong just as I do them, but the both of us will be too small to waste our energy on combat. Micro-nations make any form of sustained warfare an act of mutually assured destruction. Coexistence becomes the only sustainable way to exist.

And this is how I believe we can live together, Communists, Nationalists, melting pots and Isolationists, together we can live. Behind every apocalypse hides an opportunity for Utopia. The Panarchist says why not a thousand? Why not? Tis the season after all.

Continued here:

The Panarchist Solution to a World Divided - CounterPunch

Scientists Set New Temperature Record for Superconductivity

Scientists discover a superconductor that works at temperatures nearly 50 Celsius degrees (84.6 Fahrenheit degrees) hotter than the previous record high.

Hot Damn

An international team of scientists has built a superconductor that functions at 250 Kelvin, or -23 degrees Celsius — or just-9 degrees Fahrenheit.

That’s a few degrees colder than the chilliest winter day in Florida history, but it’s nearly 50 Celsius degrees (84.6 Fahrenheit degrees) hotter than the previous record high for superconductivity — and it puts the “holy grail” of energy transmission almost within our reach.

Wasted Energy

First discovered in 1911, superconductors are devices that can conduct electricity with zero resistance.

Because none of the energy is lost during the transmission process, superconductors could allow us to generate electricity in one place — a solar farm in a sunny region of the U.S., for example — and send it all over the place without wasting any.

The problem is that scientists have yet to create a practical superconductor — the devices all require extreme conditions, such as freezing cold temperatures and incredibly high pressures, which limits their usefulness.

Super Discovery

That’s why scientists across the globe are on the hunt for a superconductor that works at room temperature — and this new study, published on Wednesday in the journal Nature, represents a giant leap forward in that effort.

In it, the scientists describe how they created a type of material called a lanthanum superhydride. By placing enormous pressure on a bit of the material, they were able to coax it to act as a superconductor at the record-high temperature.

“Our next goal is to reduce the pressure needed to synthesize samples, to bring the critical temperature closer to ambient, and perhaps even create samples that could be synthesized at high pressures, but still superconduct at normal pressures,” researcher Vitali Prakapenka from the University of Chicago said in a news release.

READ MORE: Scientists break record for highest-temperature superconductor [University of Chicago]

More on superconductors: US Military Files Patent for Room-Temperature Superconductor

The post Scientists Set New Temperature Record for Superconductivity appeared first on Futurism.

Continued here:

Scientists Set New Temperature Record for Superconductivity

Can You Tell Which of These Models Is CGI?

Imma, a CGI fashion model, just scored a make-up modeling gig for a Japanese cosmetics brand.

Imma Real

Spoiler: it’s only the one in the middle.

The model in question is Instagram influencer Imma, who has racked up over 50,000 followers.

Imma may be rendered entirely by a computer, but that hasn’t stopped her from picking up her first gig: modeling Japanese makeup brand Kate Cosmetics for the Vice owned site i-D. In the photos, she’s posing alongside real human models, adding to the effect.

Virtual Models

Surprisingly, Imma isn’t the only virtual Instagram model around. For instance, Lil Miquela has garnered a lot of attention for her posts on Instagram with 1.5 million followers, but is arguably less photorealistic and easier to spot.

Imma even took part in an advertorial interview with i-D. She had some insightful comments to offer up when asked about how beauty needs to change in the future:

“The idea that the pursuit of an ideal and something that is like one can coexist,” she said, as interpreted by Google Translate. “There is no need to choose one or the other.”

READ MORE: One of these models doesn’t exist [Engadget]

More on virtual people: Watch a Real Pastor Baptize an Anime Girl in Virtual Reality

The post Can You Tell Which of These Models Is CGI? appeared first on Futurism.

Here is the original post:

Can You Tell Which of These Models Is CGI?

We Asked an AI to Finish Real Elon Musk Tweets

We thought it would be fun to run some Elon Musk tweets through a neural network designed by OpenAI, the company he founded and quit.

ElonBot

We’ve written previously about Talk to Transformer, a site by OpenAI that uses a sophisticated artificial intelligence to complete passages of text with surprisingly deft context.

Close news watchers will recall that Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, co-founded OpenAI, but decided to part ways with the company earlier this year, pointing to disagreements with its direction — which is why we thought it would be fun to run some of the eccentric billionaire’s most iconic tweets through Talk to Transformer.

Neural Musk

Musk announced some exciting news about the Boring Company today — but Neural Musk had different ideas for the tunnel-digging venture:

Remember when Musk suggested adding dragon wings to SpaceX’s Starship? The AI has another plan:

Musk’s riff on a dirty Tesla video was also no match for Neural Musk:

This was the tweet that led to the Boring Company — until Neural Musk put a Trumpian spin on it:

Musk recently joked about changing the Tesla horn sound. But his vision was no match for Neural Musk’s galaxy-brain concept:

Recall that beautiful render of Starship on the Moon? Neural Musk has bad news for its passengers:

More on Elon Musk: Elon Musk’s New Goal: “Reach the Moon as Fast as Possible”

The post We Asked an AI to Finish Real Elon Musk Tweets appeared first on Futurism.

Continued here:

We Asked an AI to Finish Real Elon Musk Tweets

Watch a Super-Strong Robot Dog Pull a Three-Ton Airplane

Researchers at Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia announced a new hydraulic, quadrupedal robot dog, and showed the bot pulling a three-ton airplane.

Go Fetch

Man’s best friend may be great at pulling a sled, but a manmade best friend can pull an entire airplane.

A little over a month has passed since we witnessed a pack of Boston Dynamics robot dogs pulling a truck. Now, researchers at Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia (IIT) have announced a new version of their hydraulic, quadrupedal robot, HyQReal — and what better way to show off the bot’s capabilities than by pulling a three-ton airplane.

Have a look! The new quadruped robot #HyQReal tested by pulling 3 tons airplane. Realized by Dynamic Legged Systems Lab @IITalk @Moog_Industrial @GenovAeroporto @PiaggioOfficial. #ICRA2019 #robot #robotics #technology #TechnologyNews #Engineering #futuretech #HighTech pic.twitter.com/QrF1JnlUWZ

— IIT (@IITalk) May 23, 2019

Big Boy

Though the same height as SpotMini, HyQReal is three times heavier than its nimble cousin. The former stands at 84cm and weighs 30kg (approx. 2.75ft and 66lbs) while HyQReal is 90 cm tall, and weighs 130kg (approx. 2.95ft and 286lbs.)

That’s because the beefy bot is being developed by IIT to aid in disaster scenarios like fires.

“We are not targeting the first response yet,” Claudio Semini, project leader at IIT’s Dynamic Legged Systems lab said in an email to CNET, “but support in the aftermath of a disaster. Bringing sensors into unsafe areas, manipulating and moving objects, opening doors, etc.”

Rolling Thunder

While pulling the immense weight of a three-ton plane is impressive, the capability depends more on the rolling resistance of the aircraft’s tires than its overall weight.

Still, it’s a testament to the capability of HyQReal to take on heavy-duty tasks. At the end of the day, if it takes a pack of robot dogs to pull a truck and one robot dog to pull an airplane, perhaps it’s time we started treating robots and AI more nicely before we end up regretting it.

READ MORE: The new quadruped robot HyQReal tested by pulling 3 tons airplane [EurekAlert]

More on Robot Dogs: Watch a Pack of Boston Dynamics’ Creepy Robot Dogs Pull a Truck

The post Watch a Super-Strong Robot Dog Pull a Three-Ton Airplane appeared first on Futurism.

More:

Watch a Super-Strong Robot Dog Pull a Three-Ton Airplane

SpaceX Just Unleashed 60 Starlink Satellites Into Orbit

Starlink Express

SpaceX just successfully let loose 60 of its tiny Starlink satellites, intended to bring internet broadband connectivity to people across the globe. While it’s a good start, the Elon Musk-led space company still has its work cut out to truly bring internet to all.

“In a year and a half, maybe two years, if things go well, SpaceX will probably have more satellites in orbit than all other satellites combined — a majority of the satellites in orbit will be SpaceX,” Musk said during a conference call last week, as quoted by Space.com.

Successful deployment of 60 Starlink satellites confirmed! pic.twitter.com/eYrLocCiws

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) May 24, 2019

The satellites launched on top of a Falcon 9 rocket from Cape Canaveral in Florida last night, but they aren’t the last SpaceX intends to launch. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approved SpaceX’s request in November to launch an additional 7,518, bringing up the total of approved satellites to almost 12,000.

In a May 11 tweet, Musk admitted that “much will likely go wrong on first mission,” adding that at least six more launches of 60 satellites (360 in total) are “needed for minor coverage, 12 for moderate.”

Starlink's flat-panel design allows for a dense launch stack to take full advantage of Falcon 9’s launch capabilities pic.twitter.com/ntnJInEfno

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) May 24, 2019

Satellite Clutter

The satellites aren’t orbiting at the altitude of most other satellites currently in orbit.

They are cruising at an operational altitude of just 340 miles (550 km) to avoid adding to the growing space debris problem. Worst case, according to Musk: they de-orbit themselves and burn up in Earth’s atmosphere.

READ MORE: SpaceX’s 60-Satellite Launch Is Just the Beginning for Ambitious Starlink Project [Space.com]

More on SpaceX: SpaceX Component Engineer Charged With Faking Inspection Reports

The post SpaceX Just Unleashed 60 Starlink Satellites Into Orbit appeared first on Futurism.

Continue reading here:

SpaceX Just Unleashed 60 Starlink Satellites Into Orbit

Asteroid Flying by Earth Is so Big It Has Its Own Moon

Saturday night, a mile-wide asteroid called 1999 KW4 will fly by the Earth, and when it does, it'll bring with it its very own moon.

Buddy System

Earth will be getting not one but two visitors from space this weekend.

Astronomers expect an asteroid known as 1999 KW4 to swing by the Earth at around 7:05 p.m. ET on Saturday — and when it does, it’ll bring along its very own moon.

“It’s one of the closest binary flybys probably in recent history,” planetary scientist Vishnu Reddy told NBC News. “That’s what makes it a very interesting target.”

Dynamic Duo

Asteroid 1999 KW4 is 1.5 kilometers (.93 miles) wide. That’s about three times the size of its moon, which clocks in at a width of about 0.5 kilometers (.3 miles).

Even at their closest, the space rocks will still be more than 3 million miles away, so don’t worry about them smashing into the Earth. In fact, they won’t even come close enough to see with the naked eye.

Still, the pair won’t be this close to Earth again until 2036, so if you want to catch a glimpse of the dynamic duo, be sure to have your telescope ready Saturday night.

READ MORE: Mile-wide asteroid and its tiny moon to zoom past Earth this weekend [NBC News]

More on asteroids: NASA Asks SpaceX to Help It Save Earth From Incoming Asteroids

The post Asteroid Flying by Earth Is so Big It Has Its Own Moon appeared first on Futurism.

Read the original:

Asteroid Flying by Earth Is so Big It Has Its Own Moon

United Nations: Siri and Alexa Are Encouraging Misogyny

Programmers are creating sexist AI voice assistants, which are then encouraging users to be sexist, according to a new UN report.

Two-Way Street

We already knew humans could make biased AIs — but the United Nations says the reverse is true as well.

Millions of people talk to AI voice assistants, such as Apple’s Siri and Amazon’s Alexa. When those assistants talk back, they do so in female-sounding voices, and a new UN report argues that those voices and the words they’re programmed to say amplify gender biases and encourage users to be sexist — but it’s not too late to change course.

Gender Abuse

The report is the work of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and its title — “I’d blush if I could” — is the response Siri was programmed in 2011 to give if a user called her a “bitch.”

According to UNESCO, that programming exemplifies the problems with today’s AI assistants.

“Siri’s submissiveness in the face of gender abuse — and the servility expressed by so many other digital assistants projected as young women — provides a powerful illustration of gender biases coded into technology products,” the report’s authors wrote.

It was only after UNESCO shared a draft of its report with Apple in April 2019 that the company changed Siri’s response to “I don’t know how to respond to that.”

“Me Too” Moment

The fact that Apple was willing to make the change is encouraging, but that’s just one phrase uttered by one assistant. According to UNESCO’s report, to truly make a difference, the tech industry will need to enact much more comprehensive changes.

A good starting place, according to the authors, would be for tech companies to hire more female programmers and stop making their assistants female by default, instead opting for gender-neutral voices.

“It is a ‘Me Too’ moment,” Saniye Gülser Corat, Director of UNESCO’s Division for Gender Equality, told CBS News. “We have to make sure that the AI we produce and that we use does pay attention to gender equality.”

READ MORE: Is it time for Alexa and Siri to have a “MeToo moment”? [CBS News]

More on biased AI: A New Algorithm Trains AI to Erase Its Biases

The post United Nations: Siri and Alexa Are Encouraging Misogyny appeared first on Futurism.

More here:

United Nations: Siri and Alexa Are Encouraging Misogyny

New Law Could End Robocalling Once and For All

The Senate just voted in favor of a bipartisan bill that could put an end to spam and unsolicited marketing calls once and for all.

Robocall Bill

In response to the almost 50 billion robocalls that were made last year in the U.S., the Senate just voted in favor of a bipartisan bill that could put an end to unsolicited marketing calls once and for all.

The Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence (TRACED) Act overwhelmingly passed with just one vote against and 97 in favor — clearly an issue that both sides can agree on.

Bullseye

The bill will increase fines and criminalize illegal unsolicited robocalls — and, more importantly, require providers to come up with a way to authenticate calls going forward.

“This bipartisan, common-sense bill puts a bullseye on the scam artists and criminals who are making it difficult for many Americans to answer the phone with any bit of confidence about who’s on the other end of the line,” said John Thune (R-SD), who co-introduced the bill.

Shaken, Stirred

The technology to authenticate calls already exists and has been lauded by the Federal Communications Commission chairman Ajit Pai as a “a significant step towards ending the scourge of spoofed robocalls.” In short, the STIR/SHAKEN framework ensures that both sides of a call would have their caller ID “signed” and validated by carriers.

“I commend the US Senate for passing the TRACED Act… [It] would help strengthen the FCC’s ability to combat illegal robocalls,” said Pai in a statement today. “And we would welcome these additional tools to fight this scourge.”

READ MORE: Senate passes bill to curb robocalls [CNET]

More on robocalls: Rise of the Robocallers: Here’s How We’ll Avoid a Future of Scammers

The post New Law Could End Robocalling Once and For All appeared first on Futurism.

See the article here:

New Law Could End Robocalling Once and For All

Watch a Tesla in an Underground Tunnel Race One on the Street

Two Tesla Model 3s race in a new Boring Company video, with one taking the surface streets and the other opting for the company's underground tunnel.

A Tale of Two Teslas

On Friday, the Boring Company tweeted a video of two Tesla Model 3s racing — and though they had the same destination, they took two very different routes.

While one of the cars used surface streets, the other opted for the Boring Company’s underground test tunnel. Taking the low road allowed it to absolutely destroy the time of its opponent, making the trek in just 1 minute and 36 seconds as opposed to the other car’s 4 minutes and 44 seconds — but it wasn’t exactly a fair fight.

Auto Advantage

The Tesla in the tunnel had so many advantages going into the race, it’s hard to even imagine what kind of odds a bookie would’ve given. The car didn’t have to deal with other vehicles, traffic lights, or speed limits — at one point, it was zipping along at 127 miles per hour.

Still, the cheeky video does hammer home a point Elon Musk has been trying to make ever since he first proposed starting the Boring Company way back in 2016: traffic sucks.

Once they’re filled with commuters, though, will tunnels suck any less?

READ MORE: Elon Musk’s Boring Company staged a race between a Tesla in a tunnel and on the road — and the winner was clear [Business Insider]

More on the Boring Company: Las Vegas Approves $48.6 Million Boring Company Tunnel

The post Watch a Tesla in an Underground Tunnel Race One on the Street appeared first on Futurism.

More here:

Watch a Tesla in an Underground Tunnel Race One on the Street


12345...10...