Understanding current events through the precision of language
The first step to solving any problem, is understanding it.
Understanding current events through the precision of language
The first step to solving any problem, is understanding it.
The first step to solving any problem, is understanding it.
The first step to solving any problem, is understanding it.
"[...] Now, it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes: it is not due simply to the bad influence of this or that individual writer. But an effect can become a cause, reinforcing the original cause and producing the same effect in an intensified form, and so on indefinitely. [...] It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts. The point is that the process is reversible."
— George Orwell, "Politics and the English Language"
The quotation displayed here is sourced from George Orwell's essay, Politics and the English Language. I aim to implement Orwell's wisdom, using his values to dispense with the "double-speak" that plagues modern understandings of the world.
To be continued.
Last updated: April 3, 2025
The USA got the world to agree to what seems like an impossible bargain; 180 nations out of 195 nations agreed to NOT build their own "nuclear deterrent". These nations agreed to forgo building their own (technically achievable) super-weapons: why did 180 nations agree to such a limitation?
The purpose of this essay is to explain the importance of preventing the proliferation of thermonuclear weapons, and why the "non-nuclear nations" agreed to such a such a limitation, and what the USA gave to secure that deal. One must remember that no rationale actor would give up the ability to develop nuclear weapons without receiving something in return.
What did the "non-nuclear" nation-states receive in return from the nuclear armed nations? Under what circumstances did 180 nations swear off nuclear arms development? What can astute observers learn from the the formation of the Non-Proliferation Treaties, and what are the responsibilities of the "nuclear powers" of the NPT in order to hold the line against the proliferation of nuclear weapons development?
Most importantly, what would be the cost of the mass proliferation of nuclear weapons development? Why was so so much sacrificed, in order to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons development, across 195 sovereign nations?
These are not easy questions to ask. They drive any sane individual to the brink of insanity. I have forced myself to stare at these dilemma, and I have found myself breaking. I cannot do this alone. I need help and support from concerned citizens, to confront the reality of a world where world leaders possess the capacity to trigger the end of the world, with the single order of any one antagonistic world leader. We must confront the realities of a nuclear-age, or wait for this cancer to destroy us.
Understand that only one head-of-state of any nation that possesses a nuclear-arsenal may choose to launch their thermonuclear weapons, and trigger a cascade of events that ends the world as we know it. It may well be the decision of an individual outside the bound of our democratically elected government.
This is a state of affairs that troubles me deeply. Do I believe that upon any given day, that we are on the verge of nuclear war? No, I do not. On any given day, the possibility of the decision to launch thermonuclear weapons is Infinitesimally low. But there is an Infinitesimally low chance on any given day, for years or end, for decades on end, for centuries on end... eventually the "anti-lottery" is lost. And the cost to humanity is unacceptable.
I have searched the very depths of my soul and have found that I can not stand idlely by as humanity stands waiting with a gun pointed at our head. Generations have grown old with this situation, accepting it as the status quo. This cannot be abided by. Too much is at stake.
For the sake of future generations, I implore you, to confront the reality that faces us. To force oneself, to not look away; to face the discomfort, and accept the brutal reality which faces us.
We will have to to search through our very human nature, search through the history of great power conflicts throughout history, to find a resolution to this issue that is paramount to the very continuation of this great experiment of humankind.
I do not claim to know the answers. I do not have solutions. I merely ask for you, the reader, for help in this great question for the preservation of human civilization.
...
What follows is a "living document" of sorts". If you are reading this, please be aware that I am not finished. I wish to learn, to improve upon my state of mind. I want to learn from from others. "We stand on the shoulders of giants," learning from our ancestors. And if we are to improve ourselves, we must learn from each other.
Humanity stands upon a precipice. There are a great number of challenges that threaten the very foundations of our modern world. The proliferation of thermonuclear weapons is but one of them. In these writings, I aim to achieve to confront these issues, and utilize humanity's collective knowledge to find a better way forward. Conflict and brinksmanship with thermonuclear weapons, I can assure all readers, that over the long road, that over the longer term, can only lead to disaster.
I am sorry that I am an imperfect person, ill-equipped to confront problems of this magnitude. I implore you, all concerned citizens of the English-language, to stand together, to confront me. You do not need me. You have the tools within yourselves. I claim no special privileges or authority or ability.
...
I need assistance in furthering this line of thought. All further help will be properly attributed to those contact me. If you read this, please email me your thoughts, at sduval2@me.com with your inputs. All credit will be given on this website with anything furthering our goal of preventing the proliferation of thermonuclear weapons. (Add in the subject line "Politics and the English Language".)
...
To be continued.
The first thought that comes to mind, and the main reason so many people avoid reading our history is simple: Most of the world's history is quite bleak. Are we just masochistic fools?
We study history for the same reason that cardiologists study heart disease or oncologist studies cancer: to learn how to avoid tragedies. By studying the events that have plagued humanity, both the events that destroyed so much and the challenges we overcame, we learn how to avoid making the same mistakes.
But as the saying goes, "history rarely repeats itself, but it nearly always rhymes." There's more to studying history, than learning to avoid repeating the same mistakes. There is power in learning from success; by studying our victories in detail we can replicate the virtues that made our ancestors deeds memorable.
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.