We Are Not Saved

Grand Strategy In Life [Essay] (w: review of 33 Strategies of War)

There's a concept within statecraft known as grand strategy. The "grand" strategy means paying attention to every avenue of conflict, not just the military sphere, but also the diplomatic, the logistical, and the domestic, and everywhere else advantage might be gained or lost. It encompasses soft power, irregular actions, public opinion, etc. But at the same time, it also encompasses prioritization and focus, because, while it's important to consider every avenue, resources are always limited and need to be spent wisely.  A great example of grand strategy done right is the US in WWII. We supported the Soviets, we developed nukes, we invaded Europe, we came together as a nation, and most of all, we buried the Axis with our industrial capacity.  For an example of grand strategy done poorly consider Vietnam. Our battlefield tactics were great. But at the strategic level we comprehensively failed in almost every domain. There was vast domestic opposition, political goals were unclear, we failed to contain the conflict geographically, and never really understood the resolve of the Vietnamese people. You might think that the point of grand strategy, if well executed, would be winning. I disagree, I think the point of grand strategy is not losing. (There's probably an essay to be written about how this applies to Iran, but I think we have enough hot takes on that subject at the moment.) Grand strategy asks you to pay attention to all potential avenues by which disaster may arrive. Disaster in Vietnam did not arrive through the front door, it came from many unexpected directions, but an unexpected disaster is still a disaster, and generally worse than disasters which have been foreseen. As one considers the various aspects of grand strategy, what would it mean to have a personal grand strategy? And how would that be different from just living a "good life"? As a bridge between these two ideas, consider the life of Napoleon. Something Robert Greene does at great length in his book: The 33 Strategies of War By: Robert Greene Published: 2006 496 Pages

Meta-Competition and the Downfall of Civilization [Essay]

Or how America went from the platonic ideal of goal-scoring to the messy theatricality of flopping. And whether we can stop it before someone get's stoned in the forum.

Eugenics and Other Evils - Chesterton Was Right Everyone Else Was Wrong

Eugenics and Other Evils By: G. K. Chesterton Published: 1922 188 Pages Briefly, what is this book about? Once this book entered the public domain, someone (most likely Inkling Books) added a subtitle to their edition: "An Argument Against the Scientifically Organized State". This is a pretty good description of the book's thrust, though the book's major focus is still definitely eugenics. When the book was written eugenics was a powerful political force, supported by numerous well known individuals. Buck v. Bell, the famous case which approved involuntary sterilization, didn't arrive until 1927. This is where we get the infamous line from Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. writing for the majority, "Three generations of imbeciles are enough." Though it was only when researching this piece that I discovered that the ruling explicitly invoked the precedent already set around compulsory vaccination. The full context is: We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U. S. 11. Three generations of imbeciles are enough. What authorial biases should I be aware of? You're probably already aware of Chesterton's biases, though in addition to being very Catholic, and very traditional, he was also a big supporter of the "little guy". This comes out a lot in this book since eugenics seems primarily aimed at the "unwashed masses", not the inbred nobility. Who should read this book? I have previously mentioned that I am gradually working through an ebook I picked up many years ago collecting Chesterton's best-known works. This happened to be next on the list. I wouldn't recommend it as the first Chesterton you read, or even the fifth, but it gives a great insight into a particular time and place, and puts you in the middle of an argument we consider long settled but which was raging at the time. What does the book have to say about the future? I think there's a lot that could be taken from this book and applied to the current debate over MAID (medical aid in dying). It will be interesting to see if that practice ends up following a similar arc. Specific thoughts: Chesterton's surprisingly prescient archetypes

Three Books With Some Variation of the Word "Fly" in the Title

1- Operation Overflight By: Francis Gary Powers and Curt Gentry Published: 1970 384 Pages Briefly, what is this book about? An autobiographical account of Powers' experiences before, during, after and around his U-2 spy plane being shot down over the Soviet Union, including his 21 months of imprisonment in a Soviet prison and his long campaign to rehabilitate his reputation upon his return to the US.  2- Flybot By: Dennis E. Taylor Published: 2025 430 Pages Briefly, what is this book about? Another Taylor book where a few scrappy nerds get thrust into the middle of world altering events. In this case it's the emergence of an ASI (artificial superintelligence).  3- Gun Runner By: Larry Correia and John D. Brown Published: 2025 430 Pages Briefly, what is this book about? Set in a science fiction future, this is a classic tale of scoundrels with a heart of gold, who may seem like bad guys but once you peel away their gruff exterior. Though actually the story is somewhat reversed. You see the heart of gold right from the beginning, but because they are still scoundrels, some of the scoundrelly things they do end up being bad, and they have to undo the damage they've caused. The story mostly revolves around Jackson Rook, a mech pilot whose piloting implants were once subverted forcing him to cause tremendous harm. This has left him haunted and in search of redemption.

HeartMath Solution - A Sugary Pseudoscience Soufflé

Come for the unreplicatable science, stay for the promise of a planetary heart beating out peace for a thousand years. The HeartMath Solution: The Institute of HeartMath's Revolutionary Program for Engaging the Power of the Heart's Intelligence By: Doc Childre, Howard Martin, and Donna Beech Published: 1999 304 Pages (But somehow this translates to only 2 hours 45 minutes on audio…) Briefly, what is this book about? The idea that the heart contains a separate brain, and true emotional health comes from aligning the heart's brain and its "intelligence", with the actual brain. Basically it's mindfulness, meditation, and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) wrapped in pseudoscience. What authorial biases should I be aware of? These guys are definitely trying to sell you on the HeartMath program. Also many of the studies they cite were conducted by their institute. Who should read this book? No one, unless perhaps for its (completely unintentional) value as a work of humor. Specific thoughts: You had me at "quantum nutrients"