Once a lightweight, always a lightweight

Not too long ago (before the 2008 elections) one of my heart doctors asked for my opinion about Barack Obama. I pretty much said he was a lightweight we would never elect. Boy, was I wrong. I pointed out the obvious, that eventually humans will quit loaning us money as a country, and then the proverbial poo poo will hit the fan. Now it is closer than I thought. Back in 2009 I predicted, using a Moody’s forecast, it would be around 2016. Now I think it is much closer, like 2012.

Now in fairness, most of Americans wanted change, and voted that way in most elections, to include the President and our Congress members. The past record of performance and results by both reigning national parties is pretty dismal in 2010, I think. Conventional wisdom says we voted out the Republicans in 2006 and later in the expectation of change. Now the Democratic party has had its chance; and many are disappointed. Most still think change is a big deal, like an objective. Loyalty to any of the status-quo parties is secondary to loyalty to our Country, and our families.

Now again the proverbial conflict between idealism and practicality comes to the for-front. I’ve heard it said another way. Some humans want to “expand their mind and ideas”; and some aspire to doing the basic day to day ruling of a country as large as the USA. As always, and mostly because we are humans, there are always new problems to solve. And sometimes it takes a federal government; though it usually takes a more local governments, like a state, county, city, or school board.

So now I am worried about my future life and my descendents futures? Why? Because here in the USA we have elected so many lightweights who will do their bit.

And they may not be up to the challenges. Now whether it is ignorance, do goodism, or other more egotistical things; I don’t really care too much of what they try do.

In the end, humans will predominate, one way or the other. I just hope my descendents get a chance. Now that is a reasonable objective.

A real simplistic review

Service chiefs, like the Commandant of the Marine Corps, are mostly to man, train, and equip their service so to “chop” effective forces out to combatant commanders who do the fighting, defending, etc. Service chiefs also are on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and thus are principle advisers to the civilian leadership on military matters.

Combatant commanders, like the fellow in Afghanistan, are the gunfighters. They have a different chain of command that ultimately goes to the Secretary of Defense and then the President. They have to ask for and receive effective forces from the service chiefs in the end. They usually do this through the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at least these days. Some of this is proforma/traditional, and some is on the fly. Anyway, deployments are normally planned out well in advance for all the obvious reasons.

Now the service chiefs have a full time job. It includes things like doctrine. For example, all four services have an air arm, but just who they work for in a combatant command area is still a matter of friction. It also includes things like budgets, and they are the normal way to work with the people in Congress who control the purse strings.

Now combatant commanders often act and think like pro-consuls of the Roman past, and that causes friction with the State Department, too. And combatant commanders do not work for service chiefs, nor the State Department.

One complicating factor is those who work in the President’s own National Security office. They form another conduit to the President, and hopefully help him coordinate the various Secretaries like Defense and State. Now I think President Eisenhower invented this office, but what it does varies over the decades by whoever happens to serve there. Oliver North is one example.

One other factor to keep in mind is the law. For example, a law going back to the late 1940’s dictates that the Marine Corps shall consist of three divisions and three wings. My opinion is that is part of the response to President Truman and General Omar Bradley trying to reduce the Marine Corps to be the Navy’s policemen. And talk about laws, for example for good pay budgeting reasons the Navy is limited to so many petty officers 1st Class in a fiscal year. So if one petty officer 1st class skill level goes “over” in numbers for any reason, other petty officer 1st class skill levels will necessarily suffer, and on purpose. While this may sound silly, that is in the end because of the law and associated funding. All this is part of what a service chief does, as in typically trying to manage this the best he can.

Now for a voter’s opinion.

First the bad news. Trying to get humans to work together in a joint effort is hard work, still, and probably always. It usually takes some head knocking to make it work OK, which doesn't always happen. Now the good news. The USA is far ahead of the rest of the world in this area. Just look at the poor Iranians who have “two” military type forces, the regular military, and the IRGC (Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps). Not only do they compete for their funding, but they most likely have different chains of command, which is both silly, if true, and typically human normal. And the Iranians are just normal. Historically, look at the vaunted Germans in WWII when they had a military and also an SS that got its own funding. If the well is always full, so be it. But if it can go dry, or just down, then that is another thing.

By the way, there will not be a test on all this aforementioned.

Things are going to change

Let me get this right. A USA federal judge gave certain citizens six votes each in a local election in Port Chester, N.Y.

And he gave this six vote idea to a group of Americans called “Hispanics”, which is a census term I think.

Now I cannot find his “ruling” on the internet, so the “devil is in the details” still applies, as always.

But who in their right mind would “rule” some American people get six votes, and some American people still get their one vote?

Now whether he is constrained by the laws as he sees them, or is just imposing his ideas, I do not know.

But for sure, things are going to change.

The value of using human history

The main value is with the emphasis on “human”.

After all, all times and circumstances are different. But, how we humans act and react in our own times has a consistency that can be an attention gainer. Yes, the circumstances are always different, but how we in our own times think and act and react is probably pretty consistent. In other words, if one wants to add to their bag of tricks, considering history has advantages; and respecting human tendencies is smart. It is pretty much taking advantage of all who have gone before us, and what we might learn from them, our ancestors. And why not?

Some examples are obvious to me. Whoever heard of the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854? Well many did in their time, and they made decisions that affected all of them, back in their time. Fast backward to the Magna Carta, and read about all that. Fast forward to the recent and long civil war in Sri Lanka, and read about these fellow humans, on both sides. Even read about the history of the USA Constitution.

Now what do we humans do if our present leaders think and act and govern another way, as in their way. That is a normal human question. After all, some leaders do better than others, or so I think. And mostly I think we voted them in, at least in the USA. Now in mainland China, I think, these leaders presently got themselves ingratiated with the present dictatorship, and now have a hard row to hoe, in the old fashioned human history term. And in other parts of the world, like the continent of Africa, the old time western diplomatic idea of nation states will evolve back to whatever happened before. There is friction everywhere in some of Africa, one might say from a tribal and history point of view.

Last one historical human tendency is to generalize, especially about humans. Yet we are so different everywhere, to try impose one idea on all is historically silly.

The point of this article is to think about what we humans presently want to do in our own country. And using some history is probably smart in adding to one’s bag of tricks. And most certainly our human future will be different from our past, everywhere.

That is just what is going to happen

Now if you even buy the idea of this title, then think foreign and domestic. And think that decisions and actions have consequences. And even think that we humans also will think about what to do outside of our governments, and mostly in self interest.

I suggest doing your best to seek out key bits of information. Like a lot of businesses are rat holing cash to be ready for worse things to come. This idea is both foreign and domestic, and most humans in the world should worry, as they probably will. Mostly they worry because they have to anticipate, and mostly they think about their families. And this idea is both business and personal.

What really bothers me is that the proverbial cork is out of the bottle, and the genies have been unleashed. Mostly I think of foreign regional powers going at it, and it getting back to us. What bothers me the most is that this present government in the USA is in over its head, mostly lightweights, and they may end up dragging us down, too. Now in fairness, things like nuclear downwind patterns will come up, and that may rile us up, too.

In the end, a lot of young people alive today are now going to die before their time. What a shame. There are other alternatives, both foreign and domestic. These people did not have to die too early, but they are going to because of poor USA leadership. Anarchy, which is always around the corner, is one thing, but uncontrolled behavior all around the world is another. We humans need responsible governments, I think.

I guess you also have to buy an idea of governance at all levels. Mostly do our leaders dictate what they think is good for us, or do they dictate laws and rules that promote our futures? This is a more profound idea than many may think. And do we get to vote for these leaders? Just who is in charge?

On the domestic USA front, who knows what is going to happen? The good news is that all USA people have to eat, though many will go hungry when they did not have to. After that it is all free play I would guess. I personally expect my wealth to decline by 50%, and all because of present government policies. I am already making plans to bail out, as in move away to another country with whatever is left. As always, I do have alternatives.

What a shame since I love the USA. And I too have ties to land. Like over 700 acres in Tennessee, USA. As always, I can be happy in a lot of places, not all in the USA. Anyway, I will make my own decision. And so will our present government. Let the chips fall where they may.

Just what is going to happen in the future? I don’t think anyone really knows, as least confidently. But I sure trust the idea that we humans will promote and take care of our families as best we can.

How to think

We humans all think, and mostly use our intelligence we got from our mothers and fathers, our educations, our experiences, and our assumptions we seem to have gotten from some combination of all preceding.

Periodically, the preverbal light bulb goes on for one reason or another. For me, it was my time at GaTech when I learned Newton’s equations were just Einstein’s equations at a slower speed. And things like E=MC squared was really simple calculus. And even quantum mechanics was a way to satisfactorily build things, but it was not necessarily a way to explain what was happening.

One other profound thing happened to me. I used to think I was really smart, especially when I was invited into advanced mathematics courses at GaTech. There I met some really smart people, and I realized I was more normal, albeit a hard worker. I bailed out after two academic quarters.

It was during that time that I made my peace. I agreed with the Einstein quote about God does not roll dice. I also rejected the idea that quantum mechanics explained why things worked. Even my fraternity experience had a religious element, and I actually took the time to study all the major human religions in the world. It always bothered me that sons and daughters of Christians were Christians, Moslems made Moslems, etc. I also read recalcitrant works like Worlds in Collision by Emmanuel Velikovsky. I guess you could say I could think out of the box. Later I even took an engineering course that promoted this idea, said another way. It suggested any engineering study consider three solutions, two obvious alternatives, and a third crazy option to think about.

I even made my peace with God. I decided to think that there was an order in the universe that was still unexplained. I decided religions were a good way to express this for most humans, but it was still not good enough for me. Later when my brother, 18 months younger than me, died, I did this process again and ended up the same way.

I also thought about all this when deciding which way to go in life. I’m kinda a natural geek at heart. But also being an engineer at heart, one has to be practical. It always bothered me that even smart guys like Leonardo Da Vinci had to spend a lot of time seeking funding for his lifestyle and work. I think about this a lot when I review the global warming stuff, a subject I have been studying since the 1960’s.

I thought to go the practical route, and joined the Marines, which also appealed to me. Back then I was also draft motivated. And I later learned there is a lot in common there to the uninitiated. Even the USMC led me to reading a lot of old National Geographic magazines about human explorations in the third world, and even then there was a second world, too. Also reading H.G. Wells Outline of History first published in 1928 was an eye opener. His premise was that there is more human history than just what is published in the West, and mostly about the West's histories.

So how do we think, today? Thinking out of the box, or not following conventional wisdom, is a hard row to hoe. After all, messing with anyone’s rice bowl is serious business to them.

On the geek side, I still wonder about the red shift idea which reports the universe is expanding. I still wonder if our observation ideas are skewed by our human experience and methods. The Heisenberg Principle comes to mind. Basically, if the red shift idea is flawed by our human observations and logic, then what we are seeing is something else. For example, could it be some kind of differential process going on vice some cosmic Doppler effect?

On the political human side, I still wonder how to explain what might be going on in 2010. Maybe it is just easier to think about what to do, though my engineering education suggests knowing what is going on is the first step to solving any problems. Of course knowing what is going on is just a guess. But that is why we think.

Now the real change begins

Have you noticed how much the word “crisis” is now used? Not too many decades ago, one seldom heard this word, especially in it’s morphed political connotation. Do we really have that many crises now that simply did not exist before? Or is the idea just a way for politicians doing their elected jobs, which is mostly to rule, and which to me is mostly to assign and fight for budget priorities. And at least at the federal level ideas like a crisis are a way to borrow more money without staying within budget.

Or does crisis mean our past leaders have done a poor job, from both national parties, I would add. Now all plan ahead, and some better than others.

Along the way, poor ethics and even the rule of law seem to come up more. Is saying one thing and doing another a smart political practice, or a personality defect? And do laws passed by legislatures and signed by executives and the oaths they take to enforce these laws still matter? As one of the “common masses” and the “governed” I still need to have faith in our present governments (school board, city, county, state, and federal). In turn, they still need to provide the reason for my simple faith and future vote.

One complicating problem is our hired bureacrats, which can mean many things. These mostly hard working Americans have to write rules which implement laws, or even and too often have to write the laws. And there are variations of "them". Some are at the executive level, some at the legislative level, all have their own tax payer funded gyms, and all have a great degree of influence which we do not vote on. But even they are subject to change.

Now one idea is to change the size of our USA Congress. The size of the Senate is in the Constitution, but the size of our House of Representatives is presently set by some vote and Presidential signing in the 19 teens. Another idea is to change the location of our federal capital city. Another is to term limit our legislators. After all we in the USA already made an amendement to term limit our executive.

Much friction is coming in the next decade. These present rulers, whom we have elected, are more and more having to make hard choices about budgets, a traditional reason we have politicians. Now how they decide, like to promote one group over another, honor legal contracts, etc. will affect we the “governed”. And we will respond with our votes. All this period will be full of friction, and different throughout our vast land and Country. And it will take a long time, like maybe a decade to sort out.

There are many things to worry about. Like what if our federal government can no longer borrow funds because nobody in their right mind will loan us the money. It has happened before, and many times. Then rough times will come, which will contribute to the real change that is also coming. As one way of life ends, another is coming, and to be in the New World and the USA is not a bad place to be when this change comes about. It is going to happen elsewhere, too.

Two themes course through this article. One is that change will come, no matter what any political leader tries to do to shape it their way and vision. I think of it as a human and masses imperative. The second theme is about voting, which is a way for change to happen. If voting is denied outright, or by subterfuge, or other like a dictatorship, then the change will still happen, though the process and friction will be much rougher and probably longer. But by golly, some less controlled change will happen in the end. As the old saying goes, be careful what you ask for...you might get it.

And I suspect family and children will bubble to the top. My guess is the human imperative is mostly about our kids' futures, and what we have to start to make it happen. And my guess is that we humans will keep our USA America as one nation, mostly for self interest, but also because we now have our own American culture that is worth preserving, in our self interest, of course.

Suppose Americans don’t vote for your idea?

There could be, and probably are, a myriad of reasons. The usual one I hear is the generalization of how we Americans think as a nation. That is so silly, since this is still a country of states, albeit, a United States.

I hear we “Americans are always in a hurry” for example. Yet I know, and I suppose many know, that there are many individuals who are not in a hurry, wherever they live.

Another I hear is the idea that “I know better”. Now that scares me because it suggests ignoring the American vote in favor of some other way. This suggests dictatorship and royalty type of things to me, all un-American.

What does still impress me is the idea of societal and peer pressure. It actually still exists in the USA. The usual example I think of is our treatment of our animals. Most will accept bad treatment of humans, but never the poor animals.

Now whether it is a urban vs. rural thing, or more likely some more esoteric idea like the environment, that is up to the voter in the end. I think most of us still have ties to the land, and enjoy it.

So fellow Americans know how well things are going here, environmentally speaking; just research child birth problems from environmental problems in China, for example. Things can be worse, elsewhere, as it is in China these days.

Back to the title of this post.

Most Americans will vote with their pocket book and their self-interests, to include, environmental. And of course that varies depending on where they live. This idea appeals to many because it just lets the voters be in charge. After all, it is their vote.

The difference between facts and optimism

My vote is that I would pay for people who report the facts, mostly as a short cut (so I don’t have to take the time) to learning the news. Now I think this is pretty human and traditional, for long evolved reasons.
Now some of us think our ethics are so poor these days in the west, that even lying is becoming acceptable to many on the way out.
Any way, I get my vote too, both political, and pocket book.
And I will pay for the facts. After all I want to think I know the news, which is mostly human, after all.
And human is not just “the west”.
Read or listen to what other humans in “the east” think about their situations.
Anyway, just the “facts, mam”.

What happens next?

Nobody knows for sure, but all can guess since that is just human nature, and parental nature probably. Most have heard of similar ideas like self-preservation and maternal-preservation. And governments can dictate behavior, but they can’t dictate what humans think, as much as they may try.

The scary part is the leadership in USA America. It seems we have presently some bad combination of lightweights and ideologues in both our executive branch, and our two legislative branches. And we elected them, and also the world does not stop. And USA America is still a big player in our human world.

Now in fairness, maybe the lightweight and ideologue collars are unfair, but that is still what probably most Americans, and maybe world people, think today. After all, the perception is just as important as the reality, and this idea goes back way before modern media like TV and modern methods like propaganda. Even Roman rulers and dictators had to listen and use this knowledge, and perception, to try rule.

And to predict, soothsay if you will, is analogous to psycho-babble in my opinion. To predict what and how and why people think is usually a waste of time. It is more practical to predict other people’s capabilities. The obvious example is men and women. We still can’t predict each other’s intents reliably. Now the capabilities, well that is another matter.

So what is going to happen in the near future, both foreign and domestic.

First the foreign area. The preverbal cork is out of the bottle, and all the world’s regional problems will become more obvious to both the western media and the citizens affected. Most conflicts start by poor judgment of the local regional leaders, which is pretty much how much can they get away with. It is the surprises from misjudgments that start regional wars. Now some wars may be between regions, and some may be internal, like a civil war. If one reads the local media, more of this is traditional human stuff.

Second the domestic, like USA America area. Here we have the lightweight problem, presently. Traditional history suggests terrible times, such as these days, often make a leader much greater because of his response given the challenges and problems. Another historical idea is that great leaders are born, and do well in whatever situation they get elected or appointed to. It is the other idea, that some lightweight human and his or her hired minions are doing their best in terrible times, and their best is “shabby”. In other words, other courses of action might have helped we common citizens better.

Now what shabby means depends on what happens. Lord hope it not be some kind of dictatorship or other such attempt to usurp control and power. Lord hope even these lightweights are more reserved and smarter.

Third is the wildcard idea. It can be both mother nature driven, or human nature driven. In either case, the idea of a “one world government” may fade as humans do the more traditional things like retreat to home and more local governments. In this case even the idea of nation states will probably fade in favor of whatever government existed before.

Yes, the world will go on for a while. And hopefully, though naïve I think, human voting will become more used than wars, revolutions, and civil wars. Now that is the human factor mixed with western influence. Just what mother nature does with us is another matter.

Let us not screw our kids over

It is kind of embarrassing to even bring this subject up. After all in the USA America most people still expect their kids to have an even better quality of life than their parents had. And their parent’s quality of life is pretty good, and has been, I think for the last decades.

Yet it seems many of our elected representatives, and our elected executives, seem to be on this course as a way to fund things and get elected in their future. In other words, borrowing from the future to make things nice today seems to be an accepted routine that we support with our votes.

I seem to be educated to the historical idea that taxation without representation caused a revolution. Now a revolution is not some academic idea, it is a human endeavor.

Now education is one key to civilization, and a uniting behavior, I think. And mostly education, as it applied to me, is just the idea that most humans should be educated to the level of all that has gone before. Mostly it is so new humans don’t have to figure out things discovered thousands of years ago, and in the interim period, for example. And along the way, educating young humans to learn the basic skills to perform a service to their employer is a big deal, too. Making change at a fast food market is an example.

And education is a two-way street. Some want to be educated by whatever their local system is, and some don’t. What’s new? We do have drop outs, and always will.

What is disturbing is three things:

1) Is educating our children for their benefit, and probably our human future benefit, mostly a present day adult jobs program? This is an embarrassing question to even ask.
2) Can educating our children be about teaching them things to shortcut having to figure out thousands of years of fellow human learning? In other words, do they have to “do it again”? In my “advanced” classes, that is pretty much what we did. I considered it a waste of time (at age 16 by the way).
3) In the most classical human mode, have we humans in the USA America have dumbed down our own kids (without trying to I think) in order to now figure out we have a problem, and will try to solve it in the future.

What’s wrong with what worked in the past? Why did we change it?

And in the case of private school education these days, the most important, and recognized advantage is that the parents care, and participate. Plus they are paying on top of local property taxes, for example. While the kids are naturally the same as goes smartness, they are better educated in general, and offer a better prospect for marriage and work. In other words, they are better educated. An indirect idea, is that these kids have a father and mother at their home. Boys and girls are different, after all.

In the case of so many world humans coming to the USA to get educated, that is obviously a really good compliment. Two thoughts come to mind. One is that things must be worse back home than is reported in the USA. Second is that there is still value in a USA education that sells.

The obvious good idea is to look forward, and elect humans who will think this way at the school board, city, county, state, and even federal levels. Now every location will do it their own way, what’s new, but by golly it will be their way and about their kids.

At least that seems to be the way the new world USA America is evolving. And public education still seems to be the main idea for our future.

Last, just what is the intention of so many local school boards, and even higher levels of political and budget oversight, and even funding? Is the intention to educate their kids, or some other decision? If the deciders want to range out, consider what the State of Maine has done for almost a century. There I think they used vouchers because they thought it was smart. In the end, it was about the kids.

Now you decide where you live.

A sad state of affairs

Sometimes are better than others.

And this is an others time. Bummer for those affected, which are too many.

One common theme still bubbles to the top.

Ethics.

Now the idea of ethics is in the mind of the beholder. And I don’t mean this in a moral equivalency sort of way. Nor do I mean it in some kind of hedonistic way. More I mean it as ideas as “that is just not right”. One in Christianity might suggest the Golden Rule, and there are variations of this “ethic” throughout the world and across most cultures and religions. This idea is what I think of and mean and suggest. Basically, treat other humans like you want to be treated.

Now most know of people, usually relatives, who say something simple that is profound to you, and you will never forget it, though they probably will. Such a thing happened to me maybe three years ago from my brother, who has done well in the financial world, and subsequently has lost more value he earned in the past than I have. Now what got my attention was that he “never” bad mouths people to make himself feel better, nor does he disparage others that might in the end help him. Yet he volunteered that the present financial situation was caused or influenced by those with poor ethics, and that they should go to jail. Now that got my attention.

As part of my lament the reader may laugh at me. Why is because I expect some degree of honesty and truth from our elected leaders. Now like most humans, I expect politicians running for office to promise about anything, and I discount that as best my experience helps me. But once ruling, I expect more honesty and truth about real problems which still exist. After all, I have to live and exist, as does my family.

Now in too much of the world, the “message” and the coordinated effort to manipulate the actual news seems to work, until people go cold and hungry.

Now those who think they can rule through the use of “message” stuff are suffering from low “ethics” in my mind. This is not the Golden Rule, and certainly not the standards used not too many decades ago. Ruling usually means listening to those ruled. And the message idea always fails in the end, for many reasons.

Last on the ethics “idea”, too many in the USA America think they can legislate our way out of our present dilemma.

I wish them luck. Even back before WWII, our federal legislatures and our president passed “Neutrality Laws”. And we all know what that got us. We can pass all the USA laws we want, I guess.

There is an alternative. One might call it “Fresh Blood”. The idea is to elect rulers at all levels; school board, city, county, state, and federal, that influence our lives and our family’s lives, and they bring their own ethics to the table.

After all, cynicism is one thing, but unethical behavior is another.

Here is an idea. History is human according to humans.

And let us give the Brits some credit for helping shape our world, and I think, our future world. Said another way, their empire at their time introduced ideas that seem to be selling these days. The world these days is not an eastern or western construct, exactly; or even a religious construct, more a human construct.

Anyway old ideas like communism and socialism and capitalism and religious imposition are fading, I think. Anyway, that is just an idea. Unfortunately, we these days will also have to go through the process of change, and the friction that will ensue. And mostly this means all humans are created equal, though some clearly are more hard working and self sacrificing than others. Now mostly that means we love our families and our kids, and go forward in our own ways.

Now I suspect the impact/transition/future will be worse in our human eastern societies, especially if you buy the Brit/western ideas. Use your own experience to think about this. For example, do we humans want to revert to governments like royalty, dictatorship, or false democracies? In other words, using the Brit/western idea, can we still vote about our future, where ever we live on the earth?

In the converse, present rulers wherever also know to listen to the local people however they rule and collect taxes. Most don't seek anarchy. That’s just a dumb way to go. And most potentates know this.

The collapse of one way of life

And the birth of another.

The collapse is inevitable to many. It is mostly economic, but also cultural. The world continues on, to include people all around the world being themselves. The old days of western type domination, be it European colonial, USA economic domination, or military victory in the last World War, has brought us to the point we in the world, the human world, are today. Now others count, too, more than maybe they used to be in western terms.

It is the “birth of another” question I think about. Do we humans descend into anarchy, where the “new” governments usually come from. I hope not, since anarchy is not a good thing for most of humans and our families and quality of life. I still like having the electric refrigerator and freezer working 24/7, for example.

And I still think the USA Constitution is a good way for humans to go in the future. It seems to balance all our human foibles with human reality. And only the willingness of citizens to support it will sustain it. It is just that simple.

So what is going to happen in the next ten years? Nobody knows for sure. There are lots of wild cards. For example consider a civil war in China and if it goes nuclear, then the probable downwind irradiation pattern over Japan and later Hawaii.

I just hope we can survive anarchy and make our future quality of life as good, or better, than it may be today.

Now does that take a political organization like the U.N., or an idea. My vote is for the “idea”.

Now “voting” is another new world “future human” idea. The alternatives are like revolution, civil war, and murder and “pitch forks” in the streets as the low lifes and criminals come out…maybe even a few partisans, too.