Constants and Variables 134, practical edition
Repeating and broadening a very old point, just because I feel like it.

We know the problems in politics, science and academia. The problems have been thoroughly exposed. We don't need to spend ANY MORE TIME on exposing the problems. And we can't afford to waste time on 'innovative disruptive' solutions, because ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL 'innovative disruptive' solutions are GUARANTEED to make the problem infinitely worse. Instead, we should be thinking of PRACTICAL ways to solve the problems.

PRACTICAL: Was this problem solved before? If so, how? And how can we re-apply the OLD solution to re-solve the problem?

Most of our political and economic problems were solved hundreds of times. Some of them were solved by Natural Law setups like Sharia, some by the Soviet system, MANY of them by FDR.

= = = = =

One exception to the FDR pattern is the first breakup of Deepstate. Deepstate was formalized in the 1890s by Sherburne Hopkins and brought into government by Wilson. After 1920, Wilson's bureaucracy went away quickly except for Lady Edgar's Bureau of Inquisition. I've been trying to figure this out, and came up with one pretty good answer. Harding tried to break up Deepstate, tried to turn away from imperialism. He was discredited by "scandal", an everyday bit of corruption involving some of his friends. Then he died of "natural causes". We remember him ONLY for Teapot Dome.

The facts are right out in the open. I don't have the history skills or access to connect the facts in a more rigorous way. I wish somebody who has skills and access would pick up the ball and run with it, to find out HOW Harding broke up Wilson's Deepstate.

= = = = =

The problems of Academia, theorigenic blindness and rigid orthodoxy, have been extremely well documented. As with Harding, we already have an example of the solution, and it's not even outside the structures of Academia. Some disciplines have succeeded in breaking the Kuhn deadlock, and still manage to get grants for research. Microbiology and invertebrate biology have taken off the theory goggles and started to LOOK ABOUT THEM AND TAKE HOLD OF THE THINGS THAT ARE HERE.

What's the difference? How did those researchers open their minds without leaving the system?

Labels: Carver, Constants and Variables, se-lu

  ¶ 7:12 AM