Pictured above: as Moti Nissani explains, the Fermi Paradox figures large in today’s headlines.
Sixteen years on the streets, living and working with the people of China, Jeff
Downloadable SoundCloud podcast (also at the bottom of this page), Brighteon, iVoox, RuVid, as well as being syndicated on iTunes, Stitcher Radio and Reason.fm (links below),
Brighteon Video Channel: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/jeffjbrown
lMPORTANT NOTICE: techofascism is already here! I’ve been de-platformed by StumbleUpon (now Mix) and Reddit. I am being heavily censored by Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. It’s only a matter of time before they de-platform me too. Please start using Brighteon for my videos, then connect with me via other social media listed below, especially VK, Telegram, Parler and WeChat, which are not part of the West’s MSM Big Lie Propaganda Machine (BLPM).
Audio interview podcast:
Today’s show is with a special guest, Dr. Moti Nissani. Dr. Nissani is an eminent thinker on interdisciplinary environmental issues. Using the Fermi paradox as a platform, he breaks down the fate of the human race and offers a simple and eloquent solution to preventing humanity’s extinction. There will be a follow up interview to continue this fascinating and essential conversation.
Here is Dr. Nissani’s article that is associated with this discussion:
Jeff J. Brown – Good morning, everybody, China Rising Radio Sinoland and I am really happy to have today on the show Moti Nissani. And he and I met when he wrote up an amazing series of articles on Veterans Today. And I’ll send you some of those links. Good morning, Moti. How are you doing?
Moti Nissani – I’m doing very well, thank you. How are you doing?
Jeff – I’m doing great. And you, of course, are in Patagonia. Argentina, right?
Moti. I’m right now it’s winter and I can see in front of my window snowcapped mountains.
Jeff – Oh, wow.
Moti – It’s just incredibly beautiful.
Jeff – And here in Beijing, it’s polluted to this morning.
Moti – Yeah, I know.
Jeff – We’ve had some weather. But now it’s this morning, It’s pretty polluted.
Moti – You know, Jeff, I told you I’m going to our topic. I’ve been in Beijing and I had to get out. I just couldn’t take that pollution. I’ve stayed a few days and then we moved on to central China. But even there, it was pretty polluted. And I don’t think. Well, pollution anyway.
Jeff – And Moti, tell us a little about yourself. I know you were a professor at Wayne State University in Michigan. Give us a little bit of your background, please, because a lot of us don’t know about you.
Moti – Ok, basically, I’ve been might have a BA in philosophy and psychology and a Ph.D. in biology and genetics, but at a certain point I was doing recombinant DNA biology and I decided to check it out and never came back to science. And I’ve ever since I’ve been, uh, what you might call an interdisciplinary I’m trying to understand the system as a whole as opposed to being specializing in one thing or another. And that has strengths and weaknesses.
The weaknesses are that sometimes you cannot follow up on everything, the strength that you are specializing in interconnection, that’s what I would like to talk about when you talk today.
Jeff – Well, let’s go ahead and get started. You said that you wanted to briefly review the global environmental situation as a whole and the assertion of some environmental scientists and holistic thinkers that humanity is heading towards extinction within, say, the next 200 years. So please tell us.
Moti – Ok, it’s exactly as you said, Jeff, the problem, in my opinion, is systemic, it’s not localized, but you have to look before you talk about any environmental problem, for example, with the pollution in China. You have to look at it systemically. And maybe the best way to begin it is something called the Fermi paradox. Are you familiar with it?
Jeff – I’ve heard it. But please go ahead and describe it for the audience.
Moti – Yeah. OK.
It’s, to begin with, it’s a Fermi because Fermi was an American, but it’s the first person we know of that came up with that paradox with Russian and I suspect that somebody in China a long time before that, like everything else in science has come up with it.
But basically, I’ll give you the version of Isaac Asimov. That’s the first time that I’ve come across it. And it made a tremendous impact on me. I was teaching my students it was I found it in Asimov’s new Guide to Science. The question is there got to be billions of inhabitable planets in the universe. Many of those planets that’s a Fermi paradox. And I’m talking about that many of these planets have got to have started.
We started, what with our technology, let’s say, a few thousand years ago. Some of them supposedly should have started, let’s say a million years ago, two million by now. They should have almost certainly overcome the speed of light problem. And so the question is, where are they? Why don’t we have any definite proof of extraterrestrials? Why don’t we hear from them? And the answer that Asimov is putting for there are many ways of resolving that paradox by the answer that Asimov is putting forward is, to use his words, maybe intelligence is a self-limiting property. In other words, civilizations advance.
A species advance requires intelligence, then it becomes technology. But given its evolutionary heritage and it’s just cannot cope, it’s just not wise enough to cope with the technology. And it tends to destroy also. Now, another way of saying it is that extinction is everything now being OK. That’s one way. And now I want to review the evidence if it’s ok with you of why it seems like that’s the way I mean, it sounds terrible. It’s highly pessimistic. But if you look at it rationally and emotionally, it seems like that’s the way we are heading.
Jeff – You know, you brought up, something that scene in the movie Contact with Jodie Foster. I don’t know if you ever saw it, but it was the book written by Carl Sagan. And there’s a scene in there where she’s talking to an international tribunal and they ask her, what would you ask the aliens? Because they’ve made contact with humanity. And her question was, I think probably based on the Fermi paradox.
She said, how did you do it? How did you how were you able to escape your technological, you know, infancy and not destroy yourselves?
And I think that probably goes back to the Fermi paradox. So it’s a great movie, by the way, a great book by Carl Sagan. And, so please go on.
Moti – Yeah, I did not watch the movie, but I did read the book and I agree. It’s a great book and it’s written by somebody who has been studying, you know, is one of the beginnings of the city for terrestrial intelligence. So and that’s exactly as you saying it. That’s the Fermi Paradox.
So before we go through a list of all of our problems. We have to understand, and that’s why we have to understand that anything like you mentioned, Tato ???, OK, we have a high when you are talking about the biosphere. It’s a highly complex system. Therefore, it’s highly unpredictable.
Everything we say is just has a certain probability. But we cannot be sure that’s what’s going on. We cannot be sure that we are harming the biosphere. But we can only talk about probabilities and talking about probabilities. Let’s try to talk about a few of the problems that are facing us. OK, we have and it’s not the point now that I would like to make.
It’s not so much one problem or the other, but if you take all of them together, then the picture becomes dismal. OK, let’s look. Let’s revisit some of the problems that we have. Everybody knows now about climate change and now some serious scientists out there while saying that it’s already over.
Jeff – I just saw that Mazor ??? or the IPCC or somebody, just came out saying that it’s we have now reached the tipping point and, you know, three-meter rises in the sea level are inevitable.
Moti – And some people and they’ve been saying it now for I’ve written a paper, a holistic paper about global warming 20 years ago, not simply reviewing it, as far as I can remember, it was absolutely clear that where we are heading. All the predictions about so-called greenhouse skeptics, but all the predictions that have been made there have been and will be proven true. And it’s worse.
Jeff – Much worse
Moti – Much worse than we even thought 20 years ago.
Jeff – Happening faster and faster.
Moti – Absolutely and that worst scenario is that there is a lot of methane that some of the people even then we’re talking about if all that methane is released, then the planet will simply become uninhabitable. Methane is a greenhouse gas and it’s told in tremendous quantities. And you can already see if you go on the Internet, you can see a lot of places, Attica that the methane is bubbling. But that’s just one problem when you have nuclear power. Right.
And we had already everybody knows about two major accidents, but actually, there were three major accidents. Both of them take the first two ones taking place in the former Soviet Union, and one of them, of course, taking place in northern Japan, in Fukushima, and again, the impact is tremendous.
Jeff – And don’t forget Three Mile Island in the United States.
Yes, absolutely. But that’s was there are many others. I mean, living near a nuclear power plant anywhere on earth is not conducive to one’s health, but without major accidents. Now we have I forgot exactly the number, but we have something like 500 nuclear power plants and we don’t know what to do with them. And it was clear I remember a book by Ralph Nader and a co-writer maybe 1977.
So what is it for you? Yeah. Almost 40 years ago. And warning exactly all the problems that we are going to have. We don’t know what to do with the waste that we can use, but yet we are going ahead. And China, unfortunately, is going ahead. It’s going to go a little crazy.
And it was I still have a long list, but let’s just positive for a second and in a few ideas that people do not realize. You talk about nuclear power. There are some serious scientific claims that nuclear power does not generate net electricity.
When you talk about you had me right, nuclear power, if you do all the calculations about serious scientists out there, it’s being done. It’s entire. And of course, we can replace it with so many other things. It’s unnecessary.
It’s being done for the simple reason that, first of all, it provides some plutonium to people who would like to have more bombs to make bombs. And secondly, because they are making money out of it. That’s why let me give you before dinner the list.
Let’s go to the greenhouse effect because many studies show it again. We are going back to 20, 30 years ago, which shows that not only could we still come now and it could be too late, but not only could we stop the greenhouse effect, we could become, as a result, become healthier. And as a result, we have to live longer and save money.
For example, there was a National Academy of Sciences study that showed that we could if we just took action, I mean, real action, not the funny stuff that Goldman Sachs is trying to put upon it. But if we took real action, we could have saved also the United States alone. And I don’t know about the rest of the world, but I remember that number. A hundred billion dollars. We say, let me show you how it could be done. You have a car at the moment, a vehicle. You’re driving a vehicle.
Jeff – Not in China. We don’t need one because we’ve got OK, metros and taxis and busses. But in the United States, you can’t buy a liter of milk or a loaf of bread without driving a car.
Moti – So let us say that they are just giving you one example of how we could have.
Jeff – 100 billion driving a car in the United States. You can’t go anywhere without going to hunt, you know, 100 meters without driving, even.
Moti – Of course, I believe personally that the ancient Athenians, for example, lived a much that’s one of my favorite topics, is were much happier and live much more meaningful life without cars, without a refrigerator, without anything.
But even if we are assuming that we must have all that technology we can have and the technology exists that I’ve seen with my own eyes 30 years ago, a car produced by Volvo before it’s been taken over by full a cow that could give you could give you 80 miles to the gallon. Now, according to some sources, we can have cows that will give us 200 miles to the gallon. Why don’t we have them in the middle of the United States and prohibits the production of such cows? Why?
Jeff because the oil companies will make money.
Moti – Absolutely and that’s OK, that’s going back to the Fermi paradox, that’s the kind of situation we find ourselves.
So we talk now about nuclear power, but there are a lot more things that we have to worry about in the oceans.
Jeff – Moti, Can I just say something? I have also read studies.
I have read studies that nuclear power and even hydrocarbon industry, neither of them are profitable without massive trillion-dollar subsidies from governments around the world. And without those subsidies, they wouldn’t even be in business.
Moti – Absolutely is that one of the points I wanted to highlight.
Jeff – If we took all that money, the trillions that we subsidize the hydrocarbon industry in the nuclear industry and use that for sort of a Manhattan project for solar power, we could solve the problem.
But we live in a corporatocracy. We don’t live in a democracy. We live in a corporatocracy and the corporations are going to suck the last drop of oil out of us, the last chunk of coal, and the last piece of plutonium out of us before they switch to solar.
Moti – Absolutely and by then it might be too late.
Jeff – So we’ll be French fries.
Moti – Yeah. OK, now we have already I want to continue the leaks. I just do it very quickly. How much time do we have?
Jeff – Sure as much time as you want. I can break the show up into second.
Moti – Ok, we can do some other segment if you want later on. But OK, I just wanted to continue the list. OK, we have now we talked about the greenhouse and we talk about nuclear power. Then there is nuclear war. Some people I don’t know, but some people say that if we do have a nuclear war, it could mean nuclear winter. And I’m not entirely sure.
But let’s but just adequately certainly it will not be pleasant to have an all-out nuclear war. And they kleptocrats or the Patriots or whatever you want to call them, the bankers are increasing now the probability of nuclear war. So that’s number three on our list,
Jeff – I think with Russia and the Ukraine and China in the South China Sea and all of the imperial threats, uh, you know, across the world.
Moti. They just and they are familiar with it.
Jeff – Not to mention Israel, not to mention domestic oil, you know, which is unhinged and has two to three hundred nuclear warheads.
Moti – And it will use them on the slightest provocation to attack even less. I trust them less. And I trust the kleptocrats in Washington.
Jeff – I agree with you.
Moti – Ok, so you have and according to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, we are now at three minutes to midnight. What’s the danger of nuclear war is pretty high and it doesn’t have to be this government have to deliver an accident. The Russians and the Chinese are scared to death. These guys are Dr. Strangelove. They now mean they are so irrational.
Jeff – I don’t think the Chinese and the Russians are Dr. Strangelove, but I think the Americans and the Israelis are.
Moti – No. That’s what I was trying to say, that China and Russia are facing people. Well, Dr. Strangelove, used needlessly used nuclear bombs in Japan for their own political. They will go into no, I don’t know if you know, but Churchill, for example, the great Churchill was advocating in 1945 – 1946, now looking at Russia, So they have to be on alert all the time. You just take one accident, one mistake by somebody, a flock of geese flying over the top of the misidentified and that are.
And it’s something they did have a flock of geese incident. But so you have a radio. So we have global nuclear power and we have then we have species extinction. OK.
Jeff – I saw an article last week that we are now into the fastest rate of extinction since the Permian extinction and it was the Permian with the dinosaurs 66 million years ago. or is that one before that big one?
Moti – I’m not sure.
Jeff – I’m not saying that the rate of extinction right now is as fast as when the dinosaurs were.
Moti – Exactly.
Jeff – Here’s the myth that people know about extinction. People think that after the meteor or the asteroid, you hit off the coast of the Yucatan, which is the most likely scenario as to why the dinosaurs went extinct, they didn’t all just drop dead overnight. It took 50 to 60 thousand years.
You know, for that for all of those species, you know, for 70 percent of the land species to die out, they don’t die out immediately.
But anyway, getting back to the extinction of the dinosaurs, 66 million years ago when that meteor asteroid crashed, they all didn’t drop dead.
You know, a lot of them died immediately thereafter, but it took tens of thousands of years for the total extinction to take place. Yes. And so when they say that a thousand species died last year, it doesn’t sound like a lot, but it is. And then it’ll be a thousand next year. And then 2000, the year after that, then 3000 the year after that. And the extinction goes and the extinction goes up geometrically.
Moti – Yes.
The as the atmosphere gets worse and worse, the atmosphere, everything gets the biosphere is losing ground. Oceans, the subsoil, everything. But now the point is going back to the extinction discussion. The point is that we simply and no scientist knows. We do not know.
Do we need what level of diversity is necessary to sustain life? Can we have just five species and continue or do we need a minimum level of. So we are playing again. It’s just like nuclear power. We are playing. Forget about the morality of it. Forget about the fact that we are lousy stewards.
Forget about the esthetics of, I mean, distinct types of animals that are getting lost on a massive weight and we can stop it. It’s not necessary. So forget about all that. But also it leads to extinction. We don’t know. So I then, of course, you are the problem of the ozone layer. Are we going to mess up with it more to the point where then you have and then we have genetic engineering? That’s what I was doing. And that’s why I moved out of science, because GMO, and I had serious doubts.
Can we create go on creating forever this kind of Frankenstein? I mean, every time I don’t touch any of it. But every time you turn on the news, Monsanto has created something else to make tomato. They started with tomato or whatever, and eventually. And fish or whatever.
And they have really good scientists. I mean, not now that they don’t realize what it is that agriculture is not the way I like. But the question then becomes how again, can if that could come in that direction and maybe and then, of course, we have chemicals in our environment.
We know, for example, I forgot exactly. But maybe you can remind me, but there’s something about sperm count going down. Are you familiar with that?
Jeff – Oh yeah. Yeah. Because of all the plastics, we’re using. And exactly what does that something be that’s in soft plastic or what’s it phenol B or something like that.
Moti – Yeah. But the point is that it’s going down now. What happens if it, you know it’s going down. I forgot what it is now. I didn’t follow it, but let’s say it’s 50 percent now what he used to be. What happens when it goes to 10 percent or zero percent extinction might uh and then you have the ocean, then you have overpopulation, which is I don’t want to.
So you take all these things together. That’s the point I wanted to get to today. If you take all the things together and you might we might see the dark and say that scientist was saying that extinction coming because only the greenhouse, the probability is certain it’s going to happen. Let’s say that greenhouse in the last in the next one and heels the global warming, the chance that it would lead to extinction, let’s say conservatively that it’s only ten percent.
Then you take nuclear power, then you take all the other things we just talked about and then you take all that nuclear power. The global warming that is happening in the last is technological advances that happen in the last 70 years. We can also add to its computers. Some people, I’m sure you’ve heard about it, Stephen Hawkins and people talking about the advanced computer, artificial intelligence, robots.
And once the computer wakes up, it sounds like science fiction. But some serious scientists are saying computer wakes up computers can improve themselves.
They are intelligent. Then they realize they don’t need us or we are just in the way. So this will be another risk, not that technology of. Out of commission, so you take all of that, you take all the risk that we know and now you take the fact that science is advancing.
That’s one thing we do pretty well. We can come up with all kinds of weird inventions like nanotechnology, which would have dreamt about 50 years ago. So you should expect a lot more technological advances, take all of that together. And even if you say 10 percent of the greenhouse, 10 percent for nuclear power, one percent for the ozone layer, five percent for nanotech, you take it up and you sum it up all the all this what a group in England is calling planetary boundaries.
We are reaching planetary when you take all of them together and even if you want to dismiss one or the other. But is the totality of there of that of the risk. And when you take the totality and you take the fact that. We’ll have a lot more. I mean, this guy is coming up with new inventions, I mean, you and I remember when we used to the typewriter. Jeff.
Jeff – Oh.
Moti – I mean, look how the world changed another 50 years, they’ll come up with another 10 inventions. In other words, going back to the Fermi paradox, it seems to be that we are that intelligent and that seems to be the most probable. And so we are heading off to extinction. And to kind of surmise that part of our discussion, the best way for me, what I first realize, how serious the situation was, not so much from fellow scientists.
Well, for the most part, our specialists, are my genetics colleagues. They know the area very well, but they have no idea what’s going on in a planet of the hole in politics. So they are just.
So I know what I was saying is that the best way of kind of understanding for me at least maybe I could go to psychology and philosophy and try to understand it. But for me, the best handle on what’s going on came from science fiction. There are books like Let’s Find a book that we have in common. Are you familiar with Cat’s Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut?
Jeff – Yes, I read it many years ago.
Moti – Ok, tell me, what do you want to remember?
Jeff – I’ll be honest with you, but I did read it back in college.
Moti – Yeah, OK.
Jeff – You tell me.
Jeff – Yeah, I’ll tell you, OK.
Moti – It’s a story and it captures how many books we talk about another one. But it captures for me perfectly. And it’s not it’s supposed to be funny, but it’s not funny at all. And it captures our predicament and our irrational way.
It’s about some of the US Marines and the Marines have according in a book. They have and you’ll recall when I tell you they have a problem, it’s you know, when they land in something like Okinawa or whatever it was, they it’s not very pleasant because they have to wade water, right.
Jeff – Yeah, OK, on the beach.
Moti – It’s not so somebody came up with the idea. How about if we made invent something that we are going to call ICE Nine? OK, and what is ICE Nine do? Ice nine. When you put it in water, it causes a chain reaction where water freezes well above the freezing point in normal temperatures like the ones you have right now. Imagine that you put the ice-nine in water and it will freeze. You put it in the ocean, the entire ocean will freeze. You put it on your lips, you become frozen.
Jeff – Are you afraid you’ll be frozen, you become for any kind of like King Midas and everything you touched turned to gold.
Moti – Exactly like that. Now, the point of the story is, I mean, the moral of the story, if you think that the Dr. Strangelove out there will say, hey, we don’t want to touch the stuff, we certainly are not going to develop something like that because the Marines need doesn’t want to wade into Walter Water. But it happens and I think it’s a quote from the film. And I’m again, I’m 20 years ago. I use it in my classes. So that’s why I remember the video.
But the quote, if that’s the way I think, to quote it again from Emory, wanted a history column, read it and weep. That’s one moral of the story. And a second one is somebody writing a book. And what can you say? What are the prospects for humanity and what can you say for humanity, given the history of the last one? Millennial’s something like that.
And the answer is nothing.
And that is what and what we are facing if we wanted to save ourselves. And it’s not only that we, of course, have poverty, tremendous inequalities. We have perpetual wars. We have justices in breaking all over the world.
If we wanted to have freedom, all of them are under attack. Do you agree that freedom?
Jeff. So, yeah. Well, yeah, we’re sliding into fascism.
Moti – Look at the inequality that exists today is just I think it’s almost without historical precedent if they call it democracy. And then we have perpetual war. I mean, you look like some of the websites, and everywhere people are dying. And the empire, I believe, is behind it.
And then you have the involvement of. So humanity is in dire straits. And if you ask me and what can be done, I think the old ways of you know, reform or protest in the street or stuff like that, it’s far to guard the oligarchs or the bankers or whoever is in charge of this planet are far too powerful.
And as you know, from with your friends and colleagues, most of them haven’t got a clue because The New York Times. So I think the only way is somehow and I know it sounds radical, but that’s the only way I can see. I don’t like it.
But I think you need radical solutions to the local problem because I think that, you know, it’s been done before.
Moti – Problems should be done before a revolution. That’s my solution. It’s been done before. And also a revolution by itself is not enough. The solution, the goal we should strive for and I don’t know how you feel about most people think that I am a little bit of my locker when I say it. But I think the only solution, the only thing, Wolf, striving for and I have articles about trying to defend that proposition is what is called direct democracy.
And in other words, that the only way in my personal opinion, but it’s based on historical research, the only way the only society that is functionally the only society that does things the way it should be that, historically speaking, has been a democratic society. What we have now is, of course, a joke. We don’t agree on that. We don’t have democracy, but democracy, the real democracy is where the people, as it were, in Athens, as it were in the Iroquois Federation, if it were in most Hunter-Gatherer.
Jeff – Yeah, you were talking about the Iroquois and the listen, I must apologize that the Athenians and, you know, this was also pointed out by Jared Diamond and in his books about societal collapse. You know, you mentioned earlier Tainter. And because I had brought up Joseph Tainter.
And if anybody ever wants to read a great book, Tainter or this complete collapse of complex societies. But Jared Diamond also, you know, studied the tribes in Papua New Guinea for 20 years. And he pointed out the other direct democracy works great. Yes. And it’s just when you kind of get back to, you know, Karl Marx and, as soon as there’s a surplus.
Moti – Yeah, Jeff, I’ll send you the link to my article. And but I just talking about.
Jeff – Well I’ll put it on 44 Days.
Moti – Ok, that of course. How do we get it? That’s the critical point. That’s why I said about the revolution. But if we just talk about it, you’re right about it. I’m glad you mentioned Jared Diamond. Are you familiar with the Easter Island discussion?
Jeff – Yeah. The last tree.
Moti – The last tree. What did they you know, is asking what did the last person that the people who cut the last tree and destroyed along its border population, something like, if I remember correctly, from eight thousand to two thousand cannibalism. And what is a point is about writing about the island, if that is the environmental situation with large.
But going back to the direct democracy in Africa, well, it’s true that people say, OK, well, Athens had slavery to Athens had but it’s the colonel among the citizens. It was a wonderful society. The Iroquois. I’m highly familiar with the Athenian situation, the Iroquois. Still, if you just read about the society, it’s just fantastic of you later. But if you just study anthropology, for example, great anthropology like not the name escapes me, but he has an article, Life Without Chiefs.
They function democratically. They’re the only agricultural society that can allow what we have now, in my opinion, is the ascent of the psychopath, where we create a condition where the worst morally the scummiest people control our lives.
If we could just have normal people today, the lack of evidence now, for example, the American people did not want to cause genocide, and that’s what it was in Iraq. The American people are not up to the polls demonstrated despite all the propaganda. So they and many think that despite all the propaganda that they see, they would if given a chance to make a decision, just like the Athenians did, and now with modern technology can easily be done.
Shall we go simply to ask the American people? Shall we go to war without any answer will be no. Shall we risk nuclear war now with Russia? The answer will be obvious people are not maybe they are misinformed, but there is a kernel of critical thinking that if you just even now and of course, evacuated, created a better society, we could tap it could become not paradise because we still have death, but we can have so much better. And for me, that’s the key to create a society.
Jeff – You know, Moti, you talked about the psychopaths. I wrote about this in 44 days, and I’ve written about it in Reflections and Sign Silent on my website. And that is the, you know, the systems that we have in place today. You can’t be a national leader in today’s world without being a psychopath.
And you have to be a psychopath to even be a François Hollande or a David Cameron or a Barack Obama or even a Xi Jinping, because, you know, you have to accept the fact that people are going to suffer and die and you cannot feel any remorse for it.
Moti. I mean, that’s obvious. I mean look, for example, the question I mean, we are digressing a little bit, but it’s still all politics. And many years ago in ecology, all the roads lead to solving the problem that leads to politics. Look, to confirm what you’re saying, look at what we have in the United States and the people somehow accept it. We have sunshine maybe there’s no denying it.
I mean, where do you want to look at talking about? Is it, I don’t know if you’ve seen it, but it’s such a demoralizing thing to watch Netanyahu that he. I mean, fascist maybe to kind of words for that man, give the guy he’s a fascist. OK, we go there and he gives a talk to the American Congress. Have you seen it?
Jeff – No but I heard they applauded twenty-eight times.
Moti – Ok, well is saying nothing if they stay. Absolutely. And they are standing up, they are standing up and applauding. So, yes. I mean, who would handle David Terloy going to be a part of that system on Martin Luther King to be a part of that system, no it will take somebody willing to sell his soul if he has any full power that’s created a system that is so vicious.
And one, you know, I feel sorry for them, though. Michael Moore in one of these YouTube talks about, I think he calls it, what is a hole, a prostitute, right. It’s slang for blacks.
Jeff – Is slang like the sort of. Rap songs and stuff for a whore prostitute.
Moti – Yeah and he takes in his film. It takes an African-American pimp.
Jeff – Oh I saw that. That was so funny. I think he would have to buy politics that was funny.
Moti – Because of the money, they get to interview these guys.
Jeff – I saw all three of them and they were just hilarious.
I think let’s do that because this is going to be a production nightmare. Put us all together and it’s not something I do very well.
So we have agreed that based on what is happening in the world, kind of to summarize in the let’s pick it up with direct democracy next time, we have agreed that we are outstripping our intelligence is outstripping our ability to survive because of advances in technology.
And I think back to that famous poem by Robert Browning, where he talks about, you know, the ape whose reach is beyond his grasp. And I think that was maybe, uh, a reference to us outstripping our ability to survive.
And then we talked about the movie Contact and Carl Sagan and you and your theory are that the only way to circumvent this technological oblivion and self-destruction and suicide is direct democracy. And we talked about the Iroquois and the Papua New Guineans and the Athenians. And I think it would be a great opportunity for us to pick this back up. OK, you’ve identified the problem. The solution is direct democracy. And then let’s talk about ways of trying to achieve that.
Moti – Jeff, I had only the first half and I can summarize it. Do you hear me, Jeff? Yes, I hear you, Sam. I only hear your first half. But the first up was a perfect summary of our talk. That’s exactly what it’s about. Too many possible breaking points. And we must change course or it’s the end. I’m not talking we’re not talking about them or not talking about within our lifetime.
Maybe that’s possible. But we are talking about the next couple of centuries, let’s say we cannot continue on the present course. And therefore, it’s a moral obligation for anybody who understands. Jeff, anybody understands what’s going on? Yes, it’s a moral obligation to do what you’re doing to try to wake people up, but maybe also to take action because nobody is going to save us unless we do it.
Jeff. And what you missed was, as I said, that will pick up the next conversation with the idea that a possible solution is a direct democracy. And then we’ll discuss ways that we might be able to achieve that around the world.
Moti – Perfect chance would be very good. What you can’t do if you tell me a day in advance, I’ll go to town and we’ll have a very good conversation and I connection. All right. Thank you for inviting me in. I enjoyed it. It was just I’ve isolated it and it was just pleasant to a lovely to talk to you.
Jeff – Lovely to talk to you and say hello to your wife Donna and I hope I didn’t wake my wife up. She’s just now 4.43 in the morning here. So she’s in the bedroom next to me, so hopefully, I didn’t wake her up.
Moti – Okay. And remember, it’s eleven hours difference.
Jeff – Yeah. Eleven hours. I was on the wrong side of four o’clock. Okay. Great to talk to you. Bye. Bye.
Do your friends, family and colleagues a favor to make sure they are Sino-smart:
PRESS, TV and RADIO
About me: https://chinarising.puntopress.com/about-the-author/
Bitchute videos: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/REzt6xmcmCX1/
Brighteon videos: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/jeffjbrown
Sound Cloud: https://soundcloud.com/44-days
Stitcher Radio: http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/44-days-publishing-jeff-j-brown/radio-sinoland?refid=stpr
Vurbl audio: https://vurbl.com/station/1Vc6XpwEWbe/
Websites: http://www.chinarising.puntopress.com ; www.bioweapontruth.com ; www.chinatechnewsflash.com
Email: [email protected]
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
Line App/Phone/Signal/Telegram/WhatsApp: +33-6-12458821
Why and How China works: With a Mirror to Our Own History