Letter to Barack

[chuck kottke]

I would like to post this for all to see - give me some feedback please! I have sent this letter over a week ago, no response yet - so perhaps this is the best way to get the message out(?). Anyhow, just my hope for a way out for those feeling the hardships in the desert regions of the Indian subcontinent, & the African continent:

 

Dear Barack,

Water water everywhere, and not a drop to spare; so goes the old mariner's tale, and about the same could be said of the coastal desert regions of the globe. I awoke this morning to the beautiful fall foliage, all covered in sparkling white snow, glistening intensely under the sun's radiance; the sun sitting high in the pure blue sky that follows a wintry storm. It got me thinking of Cashmere, and all the mountain snows that fall in Northern India & Pakistan, feeding the tributaries of the Indus river, which ultimately feeds the multitudes. The mountains are getting drier, & I couldn't help but wonder if we may be better served by focusing our attention on getting desalinated water to places desperately in need, instead of viewing defense strictly as a matter of military weapon systems, planning, and personnel, we viewed it more wholistically, putting as much if not more emphasis on remedying the underlying causes of conflict and extremism, would we not be more safe?

I understand the limitations you face in attempting to change the government (as once set in place, and agency, much like a boulder, is hard to move). So, like the Taoist philosophy of water flowing around a boulder in a river, if one cannot change what is set in place, perhaps the answer is to be one with the flow of the stream instead, and take a modified course? To keep the defense contractors satisfied, would it be possible to get them to shift production away from the excesses of military armaments, and towards things such as desalination plants? If contracts are mainly what they are after, and the best defense is promoting well-being and equity around the globe, it seems like a win-win idea - perhaps even a win-win-win idea, considering the positive effect on the environment it could have, if done properly. Employment would remain high in the sector, and global poverty reduced. Places such as Kenya which are dry and stable, and newly formed Somaliland which is fairly stable but impoverished would be greatly benefited, and the ability of growing high-value crops would go a long ways towards permanent economic & employment gains. Cacao, for instance, could be grown in climate-controlled orchards, and the trees' isolation from diseased areas of cacao production elsewhere would guarantee income stability & global availability of cacao nibs. Or, adding regionally produced sugar & milk to make chocolates could boost the local economies again, through value-added market incentives.

Considering the environmental effects, current desalination systems suffer from their dumping of briny water back into the oceans form where they draw water. One Australian proposal is to dry the brine in large salt flats in the desert, and then sell the remaining salt as a gourmet product. Perhaps a good start, but what to do when production exceeds consumption? Then the salt could be used as a glaze component for firing ceramics in solar thermal kilns. Equatorial desert regions could again benefit greatly from solar furnaces to provide the heat for such operations, and the contracts awarded for components would increase jobs here as well. More jobs would be available to those living in near-equatorial desert areas creating useful products such as clay roofing tiles, drain tiles, bricks, and the like. Solar furnaces could also be used to fire minerals used to make cements, and solar generated power used to electrify some of the darkest parts of Africa. Job opportunities both here and abroad would stimulate the global economy, and simultaneously stabilize the world.

In addition to water scarcity, the basics need attending, and why not put military dollars to work making the mosquito nets, finding disease cures, installing sanitation and water distribution systems? Plenty of needs to be met, and real efforts can make all the difference in states on the brink. With so much money going from Federal Coffers into the Defense Department, it seems a wise choice for solving several problems at once, and truly a defensive strategy that will offer peace dividends for generations to come.

I believe the best defense is spreading prosperity and equity around the globe. We live in a world not of limited resources, but of limiting conditions on human potential - if we set the gears in motion with the right timing, one might hear the bell of liberty echoing off far-flung shores.

With all the best of hopes, dreams, and prayers to you Barack,

 

-Chuck Kottke.

[Matter-Eater Lad]

In addition to water scarcity, the basics need attending, and why not put military dollars to work making the mosquito nets,

 

Or bring back DDT which would have saved TENS OF MILLIONS of lives and would save tens of millions in the future much better than nets. Governments banned something that was not nearly as bad as people believe. Fear mongering and government have helped tens of millions die in Africa.

 

Since 1969, 87 million people mostly children have died from malaria. But worse the book has since been debunked by the National Cancer Institute and 13 studies, and 9,000 pages of other evidence found no correlation between DDT and risk to humans or wildlife (“egg shell thinning” etc.)

 

http://www.goderichsignalstar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1754028

[chuck kottke]

DDT is already back in Africa - I watched a presenter on UCTV describing it's use there Nick;) There might be more effective means however - to spray is to select, and that's only effective for a little while, until a super-strain of mosquitoes arises.

I think DDT did have some serious health implications, and if it wasn't the reason for the egg shells getting thin, then what was?

Perhaps an insecticide specific for mosquitoes, with a low retention time and more benign towards human health would be better. DDT is and old product and should be updated or replaced - I wonder if it is truly safe, or industry wants us to believe that it is.

Anyhow, a friend of mine says that when she was a kid living in Panama, her brother and the neighborhood kids would run after the DDT spray truck because they were trying to get a high off of the spray!:laugh3: Kinda puts a new twist on that old film footage.. So, perhaps for other reasons DDT might not be a good choice. Best first choice is natural ways, like encouraging more of the mosquito's natural enemies to thrive, to keep the numbers low..

Anyhow, I'm referring to Sub-Saharan Africa, which hasn't a mosquito problem - maybe some of those nasty sand-fleas possibly though...?

[MrMagpie]

I'm sure nature has some effective suggestions for prevention of mosquitos that doesn't involve potentially dangerous chemicals. I say potentially because there is debate as to whether or not DDT is dangerous for humans/wildlife. With cases like this I'm all for the precautionary principle.

And like Chuck mentioned, superbugs could definitely be problematic...its similar to the problems being caused by loading our monocrops with pesticides and herbicides.

[Matter-Eater Lad]

I'm sure nature has some effective suggestions for prevention of mosquitos that doesn't involve potentially dangerous chemicals. I say potentially because there is debate as to whether or not DDT is dangerous for humans/wildlife. With cases like this I'm all for the precautionary principle.

And like Chuck mentioned, superbugs could definitely be problematic...its similar to the problems being caused by loading our monocrops with pesticides and herbicides.

 

Survival of the fittest.

[chuck kottke]

Well, malaria is a spirochete, and has the uncanny ability to change antigens quite rapidly on its surface - tough to control from the vector perspective, but the netting is amazingly effective! I do recall now that the netting is treated with DDT, although it seems some other treatment could be just as effective. Mainly, it's the mesh size, not the pesticide that is the main preventive device.

Someday perhaps we will have a vector that can insert protective genes into the human body, in order to help in identifying the malarial pathogens.. would this violate some basic principles?

Certainly we humans constantly defy Darwin's basic 'survival of the fittest' idea, since we can modify so much in our environment, and put this basic idea to the test. What would Darwin have to say about genetic engineering, or gene insertion? We're no longer limited by Darwin's 'law', it would seem (whether we like it or not!).

Anyhow, the basic idea I was trying to convey was that promoting prosperity is 1000X more effective than fighting the results from ignoring poverty...

[MrMagpie]

I think if desalination is going to be used, it would be a good idea to ensure it is all powered by solar power.

[chuck kottke]

Yes!! I agree wholeheartedly Briggins - and in super-sunny equatorial Africa, it's the best place for solar.. (well, outside of spacecraft in orbit on the sunny side)..:sunny:

I wonder if the mail isn't getting through because I sent it to the White House (and they need to sniff the mail for weeks before anyone opens it..?) It shouldn't take that long to determine the letters are safe, I would think? Maybe the old address still works..

[MrMagpie]

I don't know what its like in the US, but I know in Canada letters to our Prime Minister are usually read, but you just get a generic letter back basically saying "thanks for your input" type of thing.

[chuck kottke]

True - same here, normally. But I did get one letter back from Barack (maybe from his staff?) which was written with thought, replying to my query. Either artificial intelligence has gotten more sophisticated:laugh3:, or it was an actual reply. Either way, it's a hobby of mine to try and guess at possible solutions to problems, even if it might not get "out there". But on occasion something comes of it. I send copies to my representatives, and often they read the letters and reply on occasion (other then the form mailings) - so perhaps something is resonating somewhere with somebody. Hmm:thinking:.. maybe if I write Michelle Obama instead...:sneaky:

But more importantly, the idea is presented to other citizens - and then it has a chance of being considered in the public sphere. Good ideas sometimes resurface, and can impact the future - so it's not always for naught. Maybe in Canada the success rate for communication with the Prime Minister is better??

[Matter-Eater Lad]

I don't know what its like in the US, but I know in Canada letters to our Prime Minister are usually read, but you just get a generic letter back basically saying "thanks for your input" type of thing.

 

In America our leaders can't actually read so they just pretend.

[SimpleBlur]

In America our leaders can't actually read so they just pretend.

 

:lol:

...

Wait, that's true...:uhoh:

[Jay Niguez]

*listens to Joell Ortiz' "Letter To Obama" and leaves the thread* :escaping:

[Dfit00]

Government agencies are very inefficient.

[Hogy]

"Water water everywhere, and not a drop to spare; so goes the old mariner's tale"

It's called The Ancient Mariner, not the old one.

[MrMagpie]

Ancient is pretty old....:rolleyes:

[Hogy]

True.

[Ceckers]

When writing to a president of a country it might not be a good idea to start off with a rhyme :rolleyes:

[chuck kottke]

"Water water everywhere, and not a drop to spare; so goes the old mariner's tale"

It's called The Ancient Mariner, not the old one.

Yes, yes, the Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner to be exact - but I was trying to be artful in my approach. Ancient is of antiquity, but old is relative - I was trying to bring the thoughts closer to the present..

[chuck kottke]

Here's another letter to bore you with.:P (this one to my beloved congressman Steve Kagen):

Dear Steve,

Just another note on water - since the current price for a gallon of desalinated water is running around 2 tenths of one cent per gallon, and the current cost of an AH-64 Apache helicopter weighs in around 43 million dollars, it seems more logical to put defense dollars into these solar-powered desalination systems, and in doing so cut our needs for such machines quite dramatically. Or, we could send them 21.5 billion gallons of desalinated water (the equivalent of 1 medium sized ice berg's worth of fresh water). That's enough fresh water for 5 million people for over a one-year period of time. (but the desalination plant would run for decades)..

If some of the major arms manufacturers could be persuaded to build the necessary infrastructure and provide properly trained personnel, it seems likely we could end the water crisis in sub-Saharan Africa, and collect a peace-dividend worth more than any investment could measure. The flow of government contracts could still be the same, just the end products would be different. Or, am I making too much sense? Just out of curiosity, what is the true cost to the taxpayers for all the wars, defense budget, and defense-related indebtedness we've incurred in the past year? It seems like money poured out for naught, save for the necessity of defense, which could more cheaply be done through assistance in economic development of failed and near-failed states, provided the level of stability is great enough for assistance to be implemented.

What's your opinion on these matters?

Sincerely,

-Chuck.

[chuck kottke]

gives it a good *BUMP*:P

[Matter-Eater Lad]

The only letter I wrote to a president was to Bush....the language wouldn't be appropriate for the kids on this forum.

[Matter-Eater Lad]

I'm probably on a terror watch list now.

[chuck kottke]

The only letter I wrote to a president was to Bush....the language wouldn't be appropriate for the kids on this forum.

:laugh3::laugh3::laugh3:

And was he even elected, or selected?;) DieBold changed their name to Premier Elections Solutions; I like that - sounds much more like what they really do - election solutions - sort of like dissolving the vote in some sort of inky solvent!:P

I took a look again at one of the election rigging films on Free Speech TV Nick, and I still think it's hilarious that the machines from DieBold used Epson memory cards designed and used originally in Tandy's laptop computers 20 years ago! Easily hacked with a boot hack. But can they still deliver the election?

Gotta love it - Premier Elections Solutions, spun off of DieBold, got bought up by ES&S, another firm offering questionable voting machines.. but of course, the merger should produce better products, so says their spiel!:P Ah, nothing like progress to bring us more consistent results (if we pay the right piper, that is).. And with their aggressive sales methods, the European nations will have their to deal with them as well. Spread the love!:laugh3:

[chuck kottke]

Here's one I've just sent off - I would appreciate a dialog, to better understand the matter, and for the synthesis of more coherent communications with all three main branches of government (writing the Supreme Court, I would want to be more tactful, and less ambiguous - perhaps some of the letters may even get read!):laugh3:

Dear Barack,

Congratulations on delivering an excellent speech, and for setting down in unambiguous form your dissatisfaction with the Supreme Court's judicial activism, it's decision considering corporations virtual persons, and the parlaying of that into allowing campaign as spending by special interests, especially corporate soft money.

It is clear that corporations are not persons, and as Justice Stevens put it, "although they make significant contributions to our society, corporations are not actually members of it." and he goes on to say, "Because they may be managed and controlled by non-residents, their interests may conflict in fundamental respects with the interests of eligible voters." - "Our lawmakers have a compelling Constitutional basis, if not also a democratic duty, to take measures designed to guard against the potentially deleterious effects of corporate spending in local and national races."

What the 5 member majority has done is engage in judicial activism - the case was a narrow question centered around whether 'Citizen's United' had a right to use the funds in its treasury to pay for broadcasts during the 30-day period before an election. What they have done in expanding the scope of the question is clearly a political move, and an unconstitutional one at that.

In looking back at the origin of our Bill of Rights - through the Virgina Declaration of Rights - Section 7, which makes it clear in my mind that what this court's majority has done is in defiance of our natural rights as humans. As it is written, "That all power of suspending laws, or the execution of laws, by any authority, without the consent of the representatives of the people, is injurious to their rights, and ought not be exercised." "That no free government, or the blessings of Liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.

No matter what those 5 "conservative" justices say, corporations are not people with the right to speak in our public square any more than alligators are people.

In considering our rights as free men and women, we have inherently, in the collective sense, a right to fair elections and fair contests for office. As crucial as the right to vote, the right to a fair elections process is essential in obtaining, for all citizens, honest governance & honest courts. The product of fair elections ultimately is the protection of those rights we hold so dear, including the right to speak freely, to publish freely, and to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The ninth amendment clearly states, "The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Clearly, the right to fair contests for office is a right not enumerated in the Constitution, but it is a very basic and essential right underpinning the Republic, our democratic institutions, and those Liberties we all hold so dear.

And inherent in protecting that right to fair contests for office is a guarantee that all qualifying candidates have equal opportunity to be heard in the modern public squares of our time - whether that be on the radio, on TV, or over the Internet.

Since the persuasive power of money, both in purchasing broadcast time & content, and in financing candidate campaigns affects election outcomes, and since a wealthy minority of citizens have the ability to contribute, either directly or indirectly, well above what the average citizen can afford to contribute, clearly then that influence translates (on average) into election success for any candidate receiving more of these major contributions, assuming all other funding being equal.

It is all but a foregone conclusion that, in return for financing campaigns, preferential treatment is desired by & given to these contributors, many of whom are corporately backed.

This would be fine if it were just for galas and cocktail parties, but it is not. It has deeply affected our government and its ability to govern justly and properly. It is for this reason that greater and equal public access to the airwaves during an election year should be granted.

The broadcast spectrum is part of the commons - it belongs to all of us. Broadcasters have the privilege of using certain frequencies of the spectrum, and for that privilege they owe ample airtime back to the community and to this nation, especially for candidate messages, on an equal basis, and without charge, during an election year. In the end, even they benefit from this returned air time, as protecting natural rights via honest candidate races & the resulting improvement in honest legislators helps the broadcasters just as it helps all citizens in the United States.

 

Thanks for giving this letter some thoughtful reading on your part, and I am looking forward to your insightful reply!

With Many Thanks,

-Chuck.