Αγορά Πολιτών

Τρόπος Συμμετοχής

Χορηγίες

Πολίτες στην Αγορά

Έχουμε 640 επισκέπτες συνδεδεμένους

Επικοινωνία

Γερμανία 004917667046073

The Absolute Evil

 

Gang-stalking Greeks

 

Byzantine Atrocities

 

European Dissidents ALARM

 

Human Rights' Court

 

The used up men

 

Dissidents - USG RICO crimes

 

Open Letter to Theresa May

 

Open Letter to António Guterres UN's SG

 

Triangulation - Zersetzen

 

Open Letter to Andrew Parker, MI5

  

Πράξεις ποταπές - Despicable choices

 

 

My father's death

 

Cavitation damage

 

Burglary and vandalism

 

Dry mini submarine

 

Message to Bundeswehr 2

 

Message to Bundeswehr 1

 

“Tough” guys and TOUGH guys

 

Μοναδική λύση, το Χόλιγουντ

 

Charlatans

 

Zeppelin: Beyond Gravity

 

Foreign intervention in Greece?

 

Η ανελεύθερη Ελλάδα

 

Η Ελλάδα καταγώγιο;

 

Αν.Επ. Π. Παυλόπουλο

  

Intangible prisons

 

Plausible deniability

 

Images of German w & s

 

Crimes against Humanity

 

"Chimera" - "Bellerophon"

 

pr. Donald Trump

 

  

Legal Notice 87

 

Βδέλλες, αποικιοκρατικές

 

Being a German

 

Legal Notice 84

 

Dirty colonial methods

 

Georgi Markov, BG - KGB

 

Samples of Barbarity

 

Ελλάδα - αποκόλληση

 

Έλληνες, στο έλεος...

 

Harvester's log 16/3/17

 

 

Legal Notice 66

 

Execrable

 

Legal Notice 62

 

  

My story

 

  

Aggression?

 

  

Η Εστία μου

 

  

Why so untidy?

 

  

Αποικιοκρατία

 

  

Εξόντωση Ελλήνων αντιφρονούντων;

 

  

Ζήτημα εμπιστοσύνης

 

  

Μεθοδικότητα

 

  

Ανοικτή Επιστολή πρέσβη ΗΠΑ

Αφορμή, U2RIT vs Ελλάδα;

Βιοηθική

A request to U2RIT

Colonial aggression - 2

Open Letter to UN S.G.

Open Letter to p.C. & p. O.

Δήλωση πρόθεσης επαναπατρισμού

 

Ο "εφιάλτης" της Νυρεμβέργης

Συλλογή Φωτογραφιών

Αίτημα προστασίας, προς Ιταλία

Chroma key, background removal

Science and Ethics

Να συμβάλει και η U2RIT

Θα ξαναφτιάξουν πολλές φορές Άουσβιτς και Zyclon B

 

Split-Screen effect

Η Ζωή είναι Ωραία.

Βόρεια Κορέα

Λευτεριά στους Έλληνες, εξανα- γκαστικά "Εξαφανισμένους"

 

Μυστικές δίκες;

Trustworthiness

Πολιτισμό, ή, απληστία;

Ακραία Στυγνότητα

Η Τέχνη της Επιβίωσης

Political Asylum 3

Επιστροφή στις ρίζες

The Human Cost of Torture

An urgent appeal for solidarity

More obvious than the Sun

Western "culture"

Political Asylum

Έννομη Προστασία

Μια μήνυση που εγείρει ερωτηματικά

 

 

 

Honor your father...

Noise

Creative Greeks

A pair of Dictatorships

We are Human Beings and Not Guinea Pigs PDF Εκτύπωση E-mail
Αξιολόγηση Χρήστη: / 0
ΧείριστοΆριστο 
Συνεννόηση για Δράση - Απόψεις
Συντάχθηκε απο τον/την Χρήστος Μπούμπουλης (Christos Boumpoulis)   
Παρασκευή, 02 Νοέμβριος 2018 18:51
   christosboumpoulis_090.JPG

 

   Guinea Pigs

    

Azk IV - "Mind Control" - Dr Rauni Kilde

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nvs5UixShgM

 

 

We are Human Beings and Not Guinea Pigs

From the early ‘70s and then, the colonizing Nations (U2RIT) have turned, involuntarily, innocent and healthy, and mostly unsuspected, members of colonized Nations, to human “guinea pigs”, meaning, they, involuntarily on the victim’s behalf, abused them in order to conduct inhumane and illegitimate human experiments.

Some of these experiments, I know that from my personal experience, involve the development of the Remote Neural Monitoring R.N.M. technology and the related electronic brain implants; and others involve testing of experimental medicine and/or medical protocols, related to the cure or to the treatment of various, even leathal, illnesses.

Quite many victims, worldwide, of this monstrocity, we have realized our own victimization, they rise their voices, through the Internet and elsewhere, in order for our suffering to become terminated; in order all the necessary, for our complete recovery, means to be given to us; and in order for our vindication and compensation to become accomplished.

Up till now, the outcome, of our call for freedom and for our Human Rights to become fully respected, is that the colonizers, seemingly, employ all the means they possess in order to cover up their criminal offences and in order to exterminate, by various means, each and every eye witness these crimes; and also, a “deafening” silence and a disappointing absense of solidarity, on behalf of the ordinary citizens, everywhere.

 

These days, having been, involuntarily, brain implanted, unavoidably, means:

- Your Human Rights being constantly and totally violated.

- If you realize your having become a human “guinea pig” and, legitimately, try to free yourself, it is certain that, the colonizeders are, definitely, going to, arbitrarily and extra-judicially, punish you by subjecting you to a life-time gang-stalking, which is a death-program.

 

Constant and totall violating of one’s Human Rights, means arbitrary violations of each and every one of the issues which, the Human Rights, exist to safeguard: not becoming murdered; not loosing, arbitrarily, your freedom; not being tortured; not loosing your privacy; your thoughts not becoming arbitrarily manipulated by others, etc.

Gang-stalking, in short, means becoming assassinated, after having been tortured, for a long period and the worst means for torturing having been used for your torturing to be realized.

 

The indiference by which the ordinary citizens are ignoring our unjust suffering is wrong because by this way they, passively, become complicit to the, commited against us, crimes and because, they burden themselves with moral debts that can never be repayed.

 

Christos Boumpoulis

economist

 

Exhibits

Remote Neural Monitoring
How many times did you have thoughts that you never wanted to share with anyone and have been constantly worried at the thought of someone ever finding out about these thoughts? All of us have been through this process, and the new and improved technologies being developed around the world, supposedly to deal with crime and terrorism, and inadvertently intrude on one's privacy, should probably bring us all to the brink of paranoia. These technologies are funded by governments at the highest level and some of the countries involved include USA, UK, Spain, Germany and France.
Recently, the infamous National Security Agency (NSA) of the U.S.A. has developed a very efficient method of controlling the human brain. This technology is called Remote Neural Monitoring (R.N.M.) and is expected to revolutionize crime detection and investigation.
R.N.M. works remotely (ever wondered why have we all been driven relentlessly towards wireless systems?) to control the brain under the objective to detect any criminal thought taking place inside the mind of a possible culprit. Inevitable question: How can you isolate a criminal thought if you do not have a comparative measure of non-criminal thoughts?
This undertaking is based on two principles:
The research studies have shown that the humanoid intellect thinks at a speed of about 5 kilobits per second and, therefore, does not have the capability to contest with supercomputers acting via satellites, implants and biotelemetry.
The human brain has a characteristic set of bioelectric resonance structure. By using supercomputers, the R.N.M. system can home in on it, and send messages through an embedded individual's nervous system in order to affect their performance in a preferred way.
The entire system has been developed after about 50 years (!) of neuro-electromagnetic human experimentations, claimed to be involuntary, but there is no evidence to support this claim. According to many scientists involved in this program (their names are not revealed for obvious reasons), within a few years it is expected that DNA microchips, under the guise of medical breakthroughs that will be presented to launch the disease cure processes on speed and efficiency, will be implanted in the humanoid cereberum, which would make it inherently controllable. R.N.M. will then have the ability to read and govern a person's emotional mental procedures along with the involuntary and visions.
At present, around the world, supercomputers are watching millions of people at the same time, with the speed of 20 terabits per second, particularly in countries like USA, Japan, Israel and a number of European countries. A similar program is supposedly under way in Russia.
How does R.N.M. work? It employs a set of programs functioning at different levels, like:
The signals intelligence system which applies electromagnetic frequencies (EMF), to excite the brain for the system and the electronic brain link (EBL).
The Brain Stimulation system that has been planned as particle emission intelligence, which means receiving information from unintentionally created electromagnetic waves in the environment. However, it is not related to radioactivity or nuclear detonation.
The recording machines that have electronic equipment to examine electrical action in human beings from afar. This computer-generated brain charting can always record all electrical events in the cerebrum.
The recording aid system deciphers individual brain maps for security purposes.
The underlining technology of this system takes under consideration that the electrical activity in the speech center of the brain, can be translated into the subject's verbal thoughts. R.N.M. can send encrypted signals to the audio cortex of the brain directly circumventing the ear. This encoding assists in detecting audio communication. It can also perform electrical mapping of the cerebrum's activity from the visual center, which is achieved by avoiding the eyes and optic nerves, consequently projecting imageries from the subject's mind onto a video display. With this visual and audio memory, both can be visualized and analyzed.
The machinery involved can, remotely and non-invasively, detect information by digitally decoding the evoked potentials in 30-50Hz, 5 mW electromagnetic emissions from the cerebrum. Evoked potentials are called the spikes and patterns created by the nerves, as they produce a shifting electrical pattern with an ever-changing magnetic instability, which then puts on a constant amount of electromagnetic waves. The interesting part about this is that the entire exercise is carried out without any physical contact with the subject.
The EMF emissions can be decoded into current thoughts and audiovisual perception, in the subject's gumption. It sends complicated cyphers and electromagnetic pulse signals to activate evoked potentials inside the mind, consequently generating sound and visual input in the neural circuits. With its speech, auditory and visual communication arrays, R.N.M. allows for a comprehensive audio-visual mind-to-mind connection or a mind-to-computer association.
The mechanism needs to decrypt the resonance frequency of each specific site to modulate the input of information in that specific location of the cerebrum.
Furthermore, R.N.M. can detect audio via microwaves, and features the broadcast of precise directives into the subconscious, producing visual disorders, illusions and instillation of words and numbers into the brain through radiation waves.
With all the given paybacks for tracing the unlawful and traitorous activities, there are many alarms and dangers being pointed out by human rights advocates and scientists. The agencies of human rights, worldwide, have criticized the system as an affront to the basic human rights because it violates privacy and the dignity of considerations and events of life.
Several countries have opposed it and refer to it as an offence on their human and civil rights. Along with other biological concerns voiced by scientists, R.N.M. remains a controversial technology, which is being used in many countries for security maintenance and surveillance.
References:
Robert C. Gunn, PhD, Arbor, Michigan, NSA clinical psychologist currently indicted for human and Constitutional rights violations of Mind Control. Extracts from the passage of the affidavit of the indictment.
Declassified documents by NSA of the MKULTRA project
R.G. Malech Patent #3951134 "Apparatus and method for remotely monitoring and altering brain waves" USPTO granted 4/20/76

Source: https://www.learning-mind.com/remote-neural-monitoring-how-they-spy-on-your-thoughts/

  

'Matador' With a Radio Stops Wired Bull

1965-05-17, New York Times

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20817F9395812738DDDAE0994DD4...

The brave bull bore down on the unarmed "matador" — a scientist who had never faced a fighting bull. But the charging animal's horns never reached the man behind the heavy red cape. Moments before that could happen, Dr. Jose M. R. Delgado, the scientist, pressed a button on a small radio transmitter in his hand, and the bull braked to a halt. Then, he pressed another button on the transmitter and the bull obediently turned to the right and trotted away. The bull was obeying commands from his brain that had been called forth by electrical stimulation—by the radio signals—of certain regions in which fine wire electrodes had been painlessly implanted the day before. [Experiments] have shown, he explained, that "functions traditionally related to the psyche, such as friendliness, pleasure or verbal expression, can be induced, modified and inhibited by direct electrical stimulation of the brain." For example, he has been able to "play" monkeys and cats 'like little electronic toys" that yawn, hide, fight, play, mate and go to sleep on command. With humans under treatment for epilepsy, he has increased word output sixfold in one person, has produced severe anxiety in another, and in several others has induced feelings of profound friendliness—all by electrical stimulation of various specific regions of their brains. "I do not know why more work of this sort isn't done," he remarked recently, "because it is so economical and easy." Monkeys will learn to press a button that sends a stimulus to the brain of an enraged member of the colony and calms it down, indicating that animals can be taught to control one another's behavior.

Note: If the above link fails, click here. This article shows mind control was being developed over 50 years ago. Though this technology can be used for good purposes, it also can and secretly has been used to manipulate and control for many years. For lots of information based on released CIA documents on how mind control has been secretly used for decades to affect both individual behavior and global politics, click here and here.

https://www.nytimes.com/1965/05/17/archives/matador-with-a-radio-stops-wired-bull-modified-behavior-in-animals.html

 

Mind-Reading

FMRI can be used to determine if someone is reading or writing. Neuroscientists can determine when a person is reading by monitoring their brainwaves. They can almost determine exactly what they're reading. And because these patterns are similar from one person to the next, a universal device for determining what people are reading is possible.

In March of 2008 both Technology Review and ABC News revealed that an fMRI in Kyoto Japan announced that they developed a technology that would eventually allow them to record and replay a person's dreams.

Emotions from love to hate can be recognized by neuralimaging, deception, and even self deception, can be measured.

Patterns associated with decision can also be read. Scientists from CMU, Stanford University, and the MIT Sloan School of Management were able to accurately predict the purchasing decisions of test subjects in a vitual shopping center. They monitored the subject's level of interest in a product as well as their decision to purchase it.

Neuroimaging can also detect decisions about how someone will later do a high-level mental activity. Neuroimaging can be used to determine if someone is speaking or reading. It can be used to detect areas of the brain that are active when somene is hearing a sound, or touching an object.

Brain patterns associated with specific physical movement can be detected before the actual movement is made.

Source: New World War Revolutionary Methods for Political Control, by Mark. M. Rich, page 95.

 

Consciousness on-off switch discovered deep in brain

By Helen Thomson

ONE moment you’re conscious, the next you’re not. For the first time, researchers have switched off consciousness by electrically stimulating a single brain area.

Scientists have been probing individual regions of the brain for over a century, exploring their function by zapping them with electricity and temporarily putting them out of action. Despite this, they have never been able to turn off consciousness – until now.

Although only tested in one person, the discovery suggests that a single area – the claustrum – might be integral to combining disparate brain activity into a seamless package of thoughts, sensations and emotions. It takes us a step closer to answering a problem that has confounded scientists and philosophers for millennia – namely how our conscious awareness arises.

Many theories abound but most agree that consciousness has to involve the integration of activity from several brain networks, allowing us to perceive our surroundings as one single unifying experience rather than isolated sensory perceptions.

One proponent of this idea was Francis Crick, a pioneering neuroscientist who earlier in his career had identified the structure of DNA. Just days before he died in July 2004, Crick was working on a paper that suggested our consciousness needs something akin to an orchestra conductor to bind all of our different external and internal perceptions together.

With his colleague Christof Koch, at the Allen Institute for Brain Science in Seattle, he hypothesised that this conductor would need to rapidly integrate information across distinct regions of the brain and bind together information arriving at different times. For example, information about the smell and colour of a rose, its name, and a memory of its relevance, can be bound into one conscious experience of being handed a rose on Valentine’s day.

The pair suggested that the claustrum – a thin, sheet-like structure that lies hidden deep inside the brain – is perfectly suited to this job (Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society B, doi.org/djjw5m).

It now looks as if Crick and Koch were on to something. In a study published last week, Mohamad Koubeissiat the George Washington University in Washington DC and his colleagues describe how they managed to switch a woman’s consciousness off and on by stimulating her claustrum. The woman has epilepsy so the team were using deep brain electrodes to record signals from different brain regions to work out where her seizures originate. One electrode was positioned next to the claustrum, an area that had never been stimulated before.

When the team zapped the area with high frequency electrical impulses, the woman lost consciousness. She stopped reading and stared blankly into space, she didn’t respond to auditory or visual commands and her breathing slowed. As soon as the stimulation stopped, she immediately regained consciousness with no memory of the event. The same thing happened every time the area was stimulated during two days of experiments (Epilepsy and Behavior, doi.org/tgn).

To confirm that they were affecting the woman’s consciousness rather than just her ability to speak or move, the team asked her to repeat the word “house” or snap her fingers before the stimulation began. If the stimulation was disrupting a brain region responsible for movement or language she would have stopped moving or talking almost immediately. Instead, she gradually spoke more quietly or moved less and less until she drifted into unconsciousness. Since there was no sign of epileptic brain activity during or after the stimulation, the team is sure that it wasn’t a side effect of a seizure.

Koubeissi thinks that the results do indeed suggest that the claustrum plays a vital role in triggering conscious experience. “I would liken it to a car,” he says. “A car on the road has many parts that facilitate its movement – the gas, the transmission, the engine – but there’s only one spot where you turn the key and it all switches on and works together. So while consciousness is a complicated process created via many structures and networks – we may have found the key.”

“Consciousness is created via many structures and networks but we may have found the ignition key”

Awake but unconscious

Counter-intuitively, Koubeissi’s team found that the woman’s loss of consciousness was associated with increased synchrony of electrical activity, or brainwaves, in the frontal and parietal regions of the brain that participate in conscious awareness. Although different areas of the brain are thought to synchronise activity to bind different aspects of an experience together, too much synchronisation seems to be bad. The brain can’t distinguish one aspect from another, stopping a cohesive experience emerging.

Since similar brainwaves occur during an epileptic seizure, Koubeissi’s team now plans to investigate whether lower frequency stimulation of the claustrum could jolt them back to normal. It may even be worth trying for people in a minimally conscious state, he says. “Perhaps we could try to stimulate this region in an attempt to push them out of this state.”

“We could try to stimulate the region in a minimally conscious person to try to jolt them out of this state”

Anil Seth, who studies consciousness at the University of Sussex, UK, warns that we have to be cautious when interpreting behaviour from a single case study. The woman was missing part of her hippocampus, which was removed to treat her epilepsy, so she doesn’t represent a “normal” brain, he says.

However, he points out that the interesting thing about this study is that the person was still awake. “Normally when we look at conscious states we are looking at awake versus sleep, or coma versus vegetative state, or anaesthesia.” Most of these involve changes of wakefulness as well as consciousness but not this time, says Seth. “So even though it’s a single case study, it’s potentially quite informative about what’s happening when you selectively modulate consciousness alone.”

“Francis would have been pleased as punch,” says Koch, who was told by Crick’s wife that on his deathbed, Crick was hallucinating an argument with Koch about the claustrum and its connection to consciousness.

“Ultimately, if we know how consciousness is created and which parts of the brain are involved then we can understand who has it and who doesn’t,” says Koch. “Do robots have it? Do fetuses? Does a cat or dog or worm? This study is incredibly intriguing but it is one brick in a large edifice of consciousness that we’re trying to build.”

Source: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329762-700-consciousness-on-off-switch-discovered-deep-in-brain/

 

New World War Revolutionary Methods for Political Control

Wall Street’s targeting of the entire population with destructive medication to treat fake mental illnesses is probably on of the biggest deceptions in our lifetime. It is a major medical fraud and probably a crime against humanity. Millions, including physicians, consumers, and the general public, are being deceived.

In addition to profit and neutralizing individuals, the targeting of the population appears to serve another purpose. As observed in Volume I, it becomes a biological necessity for the psychopaths who rule a society to psychologically and biologically kill as many normal people as possible.

While this has typically taken the form of concentration camps, wars, and persecution in the past, the targeting of perfectly healthy people with medication that literally destroys their bodies, appears to be a massive and cleverly disguised attack against the population in general.

Conclusion

Rather than thinking of psychopaths as mentally ill, it may be more accurate to consider them a separate subspecies of the human race. They know they are protected by the naivety of the common worldview. Their pursuit of power is hyperactive. It is no exaggeration to say that, while the normal people are busy pursuing their activities, these characters literally sit around thinking of ways to deceive the populace into giving them control

Because they are primarily focused on placing themselves in position of influence, they have a tendency to occupy these positions more so than normal people. Their vigorous pursuit of power, combined with their natural abilities to conceal themselves and lie with no inhibitions, allow them to achieve such positions. These characters have been continually responsible for a pattern of historical atrocities.

They spend a considerable amount of time constructing a mask on a personal level. On a macro level, a group of them will construct a similar face dy using an ideology. If such people have the financing, they can overthrow constituted governments, typically without a majority of the people being aware of it. They place people similar to themselves in position of influence. And as part of their mask, they install semi-normal people in positions which have high public exposure.

They eventually establish control over the entire governing structure of a country, including its military and police, as well as the psychological sciences, and institutions which can be used to influence society, such as NGOs, academia, and the media.

They conceal their true objective using an ideology which includes a plan for a better world. Some elements of their plan may seem reasonable or even desirable. In addition, however, an enemy is created which is portrays as an obstacle to the better world.

The utopia is only possible when the enemy is removed. A portion of the population is recruited to assist in accomplishing this. Also, a privileged class of people is created within the government to serve the pathocracy and is rewarded for its obedience.

Organizations run by psychopaths usually profess only humanitarian intents. A pathocracy will have the appearance of nornalcy. Evidence suggests that the US government has been entirely overthrown by a network of groups exhibiting psychopathic traits that have disguised themselves using humanitarian fronts.

They are facilitating a revolution which will result in them having control of the entire planet. Using the multinational force, they are waging a worldwide war against civilians to accomplish this.

We’re informed that a group of people is standing in the way of this global utopia. Various labels have been assigned to them. They are resisters, clinging to old ideologies which have no place in the new world. They are obstacles to our evolution, we’re told. Many of them are using information as a weapon to change people’s worldviews. Some of them are promoting conspiracy theories.

The new enemy will be denied anctuary, tracked everywhere with intrusive surveillance, and attacked with PsyOp and NLW relentlessly. Most of these weapons and tactics, which are used in combination, leave little or no trace of their use.

Directed-energy weapons, including microwaves, lasers, and acoustic frequencies, will be used on the enemy. Depending on the frequency and power level, these weapons can cause a wide variety of effects spanning the mental, emotional, and physical realms. CNO are used to attack the enemy’s computers. This includes efforts to disrupt and degrade hardware and software, as well as spoofing attacks.

People can be traumatized with microwave hearing technology. Powerful silent subliminals can setup mental conflicts and can be used to influence people’s emotions, thoughts, and behavior. Holograms can be transmitted to specific points in space to scare people.

PsyOp attacks are transmitted through every possible channel of communication that the TA uses. The TA’s environment is psychologically prepared with products which have triggers that they’ve been sensitized to.

Calmatives that are to be covertly administered to the enemy can cause anxiety and dizziness, headaches, sedation, and also depression. Biological weapons, including viruses that create injuries or medical conditions, are also to be used. It has been suggested that biological weapons can be tailored to affect a specific race or bloodline.

In order to maintain a dictatorship it is absolutely critical that control is established on the neighborhood level.

Methods of executing large numbers of normal people are instituted when psychopaths rule a society. Although this has usually meant death camps and wars, evidence suggests that an additional method, which appears to be linked to a global eugenics program, includes targeting the entire population with toxic medication.

It is no exaggeration to say that the Anglo-American Establishment is using the military to reach down into your neighborhoods, single people out, and silently torture them, while using the mental health system, congress, media, and NGOs to conceal their attacks.

As we’ve learned, individual psychopaths believe it is necessary for their personal survival to degrade people. On a larger scale, we also understand at this point, that when they run a society they consider it a necessity to annihilate large portions of normal people.

Source: New World War Revolutionary Methods for Political Control, by Mark. M. Rich, page 261.

 

 

U.S. Settler-Colonialism and Genocide Policies against Native Americans

 

By Dr. Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz

Historian

 

US policies and actions related to Indigenous peoples, though often termed “racist” or “discriminatory,” are rarely depicted as what they are: classic cases of imperialism and a particular form of colonialism—settler colonialism. As anthropologist Patrick Wolfe writes, “The question of genocide is never far from discussions of settler colonialism. Land is life—or, at least, land is necessary for life.”i The history of the United States is a history of settler colonialism.

The extension of the United States from sea to shining sea was the intention and design of the country’s founders. “Free” land was the magnet that attracted European settlers. After the war for independence but preceding the writing of the US Constitution, the Continental Congress produced the Northwest Ordinance. This was the first law of the incipient republic, revealing the motive for those desiring independence. It was the blueprint for gobbling up the British-protected Indian Territory (“Ohio Country”) on the other side of the Appalachians and Alleghenies. Britain had made settlement there illegal with the Proclamation of 1763.

In 1801, President Jefferson aptly described the new settler state’s intentions for horizontal and vertical continental expansion, stating: “However our present interests may restrain us within our own limits, it is impossible not to look forward to distant times, when our rapid multiplication will expand itself beyond those limits and cover the whole northern, if not the southern continent, with a people speaking the same language, governed in similar form by similar laws.” This vision of manifest destiny found form a few years later in the Monroe Doctrine, signaling the intention of annexing or dominating former Spanish colonial territories in the Americas and the Pacific, which would be put into practice during the rest of the century.

The form of colonialism that the Indigenous peoples of North America have experienced was modern from the beginning: the expansion of European corporations, backed by government armies, into foreign areas, with subsequent expropriation of lands and resources. Settler colonialism requires a genocidal policy. Native nations and communities, while struggling to maintain fundamental values and collectivity, have from the beginning resisted modern colonialism using both defensive and offensive techniques, including the modern forms of armed resistance of national liberation movements and what now is called terrorism. In every instance they have fought and continue to fight for survival as peoples. The objective of US authorities was to terminate their existence as peoples—not as random individuals. This is the very definition of modern genocide.

The objective of US colonialist authorities was to terminate their existence as peoples—not as random individuals. This is the very definition of modern genocide as contrasted with premodern instances of extreme violence that did not have the goal of extinction. The United States as a socioeconomic and political entity is a result of this centuries-long and ongoing colonial process. Modern Indigenous nations and communities are societies formed by their resistance to colonialism, through which they have carried their practices and histories. It is breathtaking, but no miracle, that they have survived as peoples.

Settler-colonialism requires violence or the threat of violence to attain its goals, which then forms the foundation of the United States’ system. People do not hand over their land, resources, children, and futures without a fight, and that fight is met with violence. In employing the force necessary to accomplish its expansionist goals, a colonizing regime institutionalizes violence. The notion that settler-indigenous conflict is an inevitable product of cultural differences and misunderstandings, or that violence was committed equally by the colonized and the colonizer, blurs the nature of the historical processes. Euro-American colonialism, an aspect of the capitalist economic globalization, had from its beginnings a genocidal tendency.

So, what constitutes genocide? My colleague on the panel, Gary Clayton Anderson, in his recent book, “Ethnic Cleansing and the Indian,” argues: “Genocide will never become a widely accepted characterization for what happened in North America, because large numbers of Indians survived and because policies of mass murder on a scale similar to events in central Europe, Cambodia, or Rwanda were never implemented.”ii There are fatal errors in this assessment.

The term “genocide” was coined following the Shoah, or Holocaust, and its prohibition was enshrined in the United Nations convention presented in 1948 and adopted in 1951: the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. The convention is not retroactive but is applicable to US-Indigenous relations since 1988, when the US Senate ratified it. The genocide convention is an essential tool for historical analysis of the effects of colonialism in any era, and particularly in US history.

In the convention, any one of five acts is considered genocide if “committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group”:

 

(a) killing members of the group;

(b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.iii

 

The followings acts are punishable:

 

(a) Genocide;

(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;

(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;

(d) Attempt to commit genocide;

(e) Complicity in genocide.

 

The term “genocide” is often incorrectly used, such as in Dr. Anderson’s assessment, to describe extreme examples of mass murder, the death of vast numbers of people, as, for instance in Cambodia. What took place in Cambodia was horrific, but it does not fall under the terms of the Genocide Convention, as the Convention specifically refers to a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, with individuals within that group targeted by a government or its agents because they are members of the group or by attacking the underpinnings of the group’s existence as a group being met with the intent to destroy that group in whole or in part. The Cambodian government committed crimes against humanity, but not genocide. Genocide is not an act simply worse than anything else, rather a specific kind of act. The term, “ethnic cleansing,” is a descriptive term created by humanitarian interventionists to describe what was said to be happening in the 1990s wars among the republics of Yugoslavia. It is a descriptive term, not a term of international humanitarian law.

Although clearly the Holocaust was the most extreme of all genocides, the bar set by the Nazis is not the bar required to be considered genocide. The title of the Genocide convention is the “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide,” so the law is about preventing genocide by identifying the elements of government policy, rather than only punishment after the fact. Most importantly, genocide does not have to be complete to be considered genocide.

US history, as well as inherited Indigenous trauma, cannot be understood without dealing with the genocide that the United States committed against Indigenous peoples. From the colonial period through the founding of the United States and continuing in the twentieth century, this has entailed torture, terror, sexual abuse, massacres, systematic military occupations, removals of Indigenous peoples from their ancestral territories, forced removal of Native American children to military-like boarding schools, allotment, and a policy of termination.

Within the logic of settler-colonialism, genocide was the inherent overall policy of the United States from its founding, but there are also specific documented policies of genocide on the part of US administrations that can be identified in at least four distinct periods: the Jacksonian era of forced removal; the California gold rush in Northern California; during the Civil War and in the post Civil War era of the so-called Indian Wars in the Southwest and the Great Plains; and the 1950s termination period; additionally, there is the overlapping period of compulsory boarding schools, 1870s to 1960s. The Carlisle boarding school, founded by US Army officer Richard Henry Pratt in 1879, became a model for others established by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Pratt said in a speech in 1892, “A great general has said that the only good Indian is a dead one. In a sense, I agree with the sentiment, but only in this: that all the Indian there is in the race should be dead. Kill the Indian in him and save the man.”

Cases of genocide carried out as policy may be found in historical documents as well as in the oral histories of Indigenous communities. An example from 1873 is typical, with General William T. Sherman writing, “We must act with vindictive earnestness against the Sioux, even to their extermination, men, women and children . . . during an assault, the soldiers can not pause to distinguish between male and female, or even discriminate as to age.”iv

The so-called “Indian Wars” technically ended around 1880, although the Wounded Knee massacre occurred a decade later. Clearly an act with genocidal intent, it is still officially considered a “battle” in the annals of US military genealogy. Congressional Medals of Honor were bestowed on twenty of the soldiers involved. A monument was built at Fort Riley, Kansas, to honor the soldiers killed by friendly fire. A battle streamer was created to honor the event and added to other streamers that are displayed at the Pentagon, West Point, and army bases throughout the world. L. Frank Baum, a Dakota Territory settler later famous for writing The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, edited the Aberdeen Saturday Pioneer at the time. Five days after the sickening event at Wounded Knee, on January 3, 1891, he wrote, “The Pioneer has before declared that our only safety depends upon the total extermination of the Indians. Having wronged them for centuries we had better, in order to protect our civilization, follow it up by one or more wrong and wipe these untamed and untamable creatures from the face of the earth.”

Whether 1880 or 1890, most of the collective land base that Native Nations secured through hard fought for treaties made with the United States was lost after that date.

After the end of the Indian Wars, came allotment, another policy of genocide of Native nations as nations, as peoples, the dissolution of the group. Taking the Sioux Nation as an example, even before the Dawes Allotment Act of 1884 was implemented, and with the Black Hills already illegally confiscated by the federal government, a government commission arrived in Sioux territory from Washington, DC, in 1888 with a proposal to reduce the Sioux Nation to six small reservations, a scheme that would leave nine million acres open for Euro-American settlement. The commission found it impossible to obtain signatures of the required three-fourths of the nation as required under the 1868 treaty, and so returned to Washington with a recommendation that the government ignore the treaty and take the land without Sioux consent. The only means to accomplish that goal was legislation, Congress having relieved the government of the obligation to negotiate a treaty. Congress commissioned General George Crook to head a delegation to try again, this time with an offer of $1.50 per acre. In a series of manipulations and dealings with leaders whose people were now starving, the commission garnered the needed signatures. The great Sioux Nation was broken into small islands soon surrounded on all sides by European immigrants, with much of the reservation land a checkerboard with settlers on allotments or leased land.v Creating these isolated reservations broke the historical relationships between clans and communities of the Sioux Nation and opened areas where Europeans settled. It also allowed the Bureau of Indian Affairs to exercise tighter control, buttressed by the bureau’s boarding school system. The Sun Dance, the annual ceremony that had brought Sioux together and reinforced national unity, was outlawed, along with other religious ceremonies. Despite the Sioux people’s weak position under late-nineteenth-century colonial domination, they managed to begin building a modest cattle-ranching business to replace their former bison-hunting economy. In 1903, the US Supreme Court ruled, in Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, that a March 3, 1871, appropriations rider was constitutional and that Congress had “plenary” power to manage Indian property. The Office of Indian Affairs could thus dispose of Indian lands and resources regardless of the terms of previous treaty provisions. Legislation followed that opened the reservations to settlement through leasing and even sale of allotments taken out of trust. Nearly all prime grazing lands came to be occupied by non-Indian ranchers by the 1920s.

By the time of the New Deal–Collier era and nullification of Indian land allotment under the Indian Reorganization Act, non-Indians outnumbered Indians on the Sioux reservations three to one. However, “tribal governments” imposed in the wake of the Indian Reorganization Act proved particularly harmful and divisive for the Sioux.”vi Concerning this measure, the late Mathew King, elder traditional historian of the Oglala Sioux (Pine Ridge), observed: “The Bureau of Indian Affairs drew up the constitution and by-laws of this organization with the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934. This was the introduction of home rule. . . . The traditional people still hang on to their Treaty, for we are a sovereign nation. We have our own government.”vii “Home rule,” or neocolonialism, proved a short-lived policy, however, for in the early 1950s the United States developed its termination policy, with legislation ordering gradual eradication of every reservation and even the tribal governments.viii At the time of termination and relocation, per capita annual income on the Sioux reservations stood at $355, while that in nearby South Dakota towns was $2,500. Despite these circumstances, in pursuing its termination policy, the Bureau of Indian Affairs advocated the reduction of services and introduced its program to relocate Indians to urban industrial centers, with a high percentage of Sioux moving to San Francisco and Denver in search of jobs.ix

The situations of other Indigenous Nations were similar.

Pawnee Attorney Walter R. Echo-Hawk writes:

 

In 1881, Indian landholdings in the United States had plummeted to 156 million acres. By 1934, only about 50 million acres remained (an area the size of Idaho and Washington) as a result of the General Allotment Act of 1887. During World War II, the government took 500,000 more acres for military use. Over one hundred tribes, bands, and Rancherias relinquished their lands under various acts of Congress during the termination era of the 1950s. By 1955, the indigenous land base had shrunk to just 2.3 percent of its [size at the end of the Indian wars].x

 

According to the current consensus among historians, the wholesale transfer of land from Indigenous to Euro-American hands that occurred in the Americas after 1492 is due less to British and US American invasion, warfare, refugee conditions, and genocidal policies in North America than to the bacteria that the invaders unwittingly brought with them. Historian Colin Calloway is among the proponents of this theory writing, “Epidemic diseases would have caused massive depopulation in the Americas whether brought by European invaders or brought home by Native American traders.”xi Such an absolutist assertion renders any other fate for the Indigenous peoples improbable. This is what anthropologist Michael Wilcox has dubbed “the terminal narrative.” Professor Calloway is a careful and widely respected historian of Indigenous North America, but his conclusion articulates a default assumption. The thinking behind the assumption is both ahistorical and illogical in that Europe itself lost a third to one-half of its population to infectious disease during medieval pandemics. The principle reason the consensus view is wrong and ahistorical is that it erases the effects of settler colonialism with its antecedents in the Spanish “Reconquest” and the English conquest of Scotland, Ireland, and Wales. By the time Spain, Portugal, and Britain arrived to colonize the Americas, their methods of eradicating peoples or forcing them into dependency and servitude were ingrained, streamlined, and effective.

Whatever disagreement may exist about the size of precolonial Indigenous populations, no one doubts that a rapid demographic decline occurred in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, its timing from region to region depending on when conquest and colonization began. Nearly all the population areas of the Americas were reduced by 90 percent following the onset of colonizing projects, decreasing the targeted Indigenous populations of the Americas from a one hundred million to ten million. Commonly referred to as the most extreme demographic disaster—framed as natural—in human history, it was rarely called genocide until the rise of Indigenous movements in the mid-twentieth century forged new questions.

US scholar Benjamin Keen acknowledges that historians “accept uncritically a fatalistic ‘epidemic plus lack of acquired immunity’ explanation for the shrinkage of Indian populations, without sufficient attention to the socioeconomic factors . . . which predisposed the natives to succumb to even slight infections.”xii Other scholars agree. Geographer William M. Denevan, while not ignoring the existence of widespread epidemic diseases, has emphasized the role of warfare, which reinforced the lethal impact of disease. There were military engagements directly between European and Indigenous nations, but many more saw European powers pitting one Indigenous nation against another or factions within nations, with European allies aiding one or both sides, as was the case in the colonization of the peoples of Ireland, Africa and Asia, and was also a factor in the Holocaust. Other killers cited by Denevan are overwork in mines, frequent outright butchery, malnutrition and starvation resulting from the breakdown of Indigenous trade networks, subsistence food production and loss of land, loss of will to live or reproduce (and thus suicide, abortion, and infanticide), and deportation and enslavement.xiii Anthropologist Henry Dobyns has pointed to the interruption of Indigenous peoples’ trade networks. When colonizing powers seized Indigenous trade routes, the ensuing acute shortages, including food products, weakened populations and forced them into dependency on the colonizers, with European manufactured goods replacing Indigenous ones. Dobyns has estimated that all Indigenous groups suffered serious food shortages one year in four. In these circumstances, the introduction and promotion of alcohol proved addictive and deadly, adding to the breakdown of social order and responsibility.xiv These realities render the myth of “lack of immunity,” including to alcohol, pernicious.

Historian Woodrow Wilson Borah focused on the broader arena of European colonization, which also brought severely reduced populations in the Pacific Islands, Australia, Western Central America, and West Africa.xv Sherburne Cook—associated with Borah in the revisionist Berkeley School, as it was called—studied the attempted destruction of the California Indians. Cook estimated 2,245 deaths among peoples in Northern California—the Wintu, Maidu, Miwak, Omo, Wappo, and Yokuts nations—in late eighteenth-century armed conflicts with the Spanish while some 5,000 died from disease and another 4,000 were relocated to missions. Among the same people in the second half of the nineteenth century, US armed forces killed 4,000, and disease killed another 6,000. Between 1852 and 1867, US citizens kidnapped 4,000 Indian children from these groups in California. Disruption of Indigenous social structures under these conditions and dire economic necessity forced many of the women into prostitution in goldfield camps, further wrecking what vestiges of family life remained in these matriarchal societies.

Historians and others who deny genocide emphasize population attrition by disease, weakening Indigenous peoples ability to resist. In doing so they refuse to accept that the colonization of America was genocidal by plan, not simply the tragic fate of populations lacking immunity to disease. If disease could have done the job, it is not clear why the United States found it necessary to carry out unrelenting wars against Indigenous communities in order to gain every inch of land they took from them—along with the prior period of British colonization, nearly three hundred years of eliminationist warfare.

In the case of the Jewish Holocaust, no one denies that more Jews died of starvation, overwork, and disease under Nazi incarceration than died in gas ovens or murdered by other means, yet the acts of creating and maintaining the conditions that led to those deaths clearly constitute genocide. And no one recites the terminal narrative associated with Native Americans, or Armenians, or Bosnian.

Not all of the acts iterated in the genocide convention are required to exist to constitute genocide; any one of them suffices. In cases of United States genocidal policies and actions, each of the five requirements can be seen.

First, Killing members of the group: The genocide convention does not specify that large numbers of people must be killed in order to constitute genocide, rather that members of the group are killed because they are members of the group. Assessing a situation in terms of preventing genocide, this kind of killing is a marker for intervention.

Second, Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group: such as starvation, the control of food supply and withholding food as punishment or as reward for compliance, for instance, in signing confiscatory treaties. As military historian John Grenier points out in his First Way of War:

 

For the first 200 years of our military heritage, then, Americans depended on arts of war that contemporary professional soldiers supposedly abhorred: razing and destroying enemy villages and fields; killing enemy women and children; raiding settlements for captives; intimidating and brutalizing enemy noncombatants; and assassinating enemy leaders. . . . In the frontier wars between 1607 and 1814, Americans forged two elements—unlimited war and irregular war—into their first way of war.xvii

Grenier argues that not only did this way of war continue throughout the 19th century in wars against the Indigenous nations, but continued in the 20th century and currently in counterinsurgent wars against peoples in Latin America, the Caribbean and Pacific, Southeast Asia, Middle and Western Asia and Africa.

Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part: Forced removal of all the Indigenous nations east of the Mississippi to Indian Territory during the Jackson administration was a calculated policy intent on destroying those peoples ties to their original lands, as well as declaring Native people who did not remove to no longer be Muskogee, Sauk, Kickapoo, Choctaw, destroying the existence of up to half of each nation removed. Mandatory boarding schools, Allotment and Termination—all official government policies–also fall under this category of the crime of genocide. The forced removal and four year incarceration of the Navajo people resulted in the death of half their population.

Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group: Famously, during the Termination Era, the US government administrated Indian Health Service made the top medical priority the sterilization of Indigenous women. In 1974, an independent study by one the few Native American physicians, Dr. Connie Pinkerton-Uri, Choctaw/Cherokee, found that one in four Native women had been sterilized without her consent. Pnkerton-Uri’s research indicated that the Indian Health Service had “singled out full-blooded Indian women for sterilization procedures.” At first denied by the Indian Health Service, two years later, a study by the U.S. General Accounting Office found that 4 of the 12 Indian Health Service regions sterilized 3,406 Native women without their permission between 1973 and 1976. The GAO found that 36 women under age 21 had been forcibly sterilized during this period despite a court-ordered moratorium on sterilizations of women younger than 21.

Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group: Various governmental entities, mostly municipalities, counties, and states, routinely removed Native children from their families and put them up for adoption. In the Native resistance movements of the 1960s and 1970s, the demand to put a stop to the practice was codified in the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978. However, the burden of enforcing the legislation lay with Tribal Government, but the legislation provided no financial resources for Native governments to establish infrastructure to retrieve children from the adoption industry, in which Indian babies were high in demand. Despite these barriers to enforcement, the worst abuses had been curbed over the following three decades. But, on June 25, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling drafted by Justice Samuel Alito, used provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) to say that a child, widely known as Baby Veronica, did not have to live with her biological Cherokee father. The high court’s decision paved the way for Matt and Melanie Capobianco, the adoptive parents, to ask the South Carolina Courts to have the child returned to them. The court gutted the purpose and intent of the Indian Child Welfare Act, missing the concept behind the ICWA, the protection of cultural resource and treasure that are Native children; it’s not about protecting so-called traditional or nuclear families. It’s about recognizing the prevalence of extended families and culture.xviii

So, why does the Genocide Convention matter? Native nations are still here and still vulnerable to genocidal policy. This isn’t just history that predates the 1948 Genocide Convention. But, the history is important and needs to be widely aired, included in public school texts and public service announcements. The Doctrine of Discovery is still law of the land. From the mid-fifteenth century to the mid-twentieth century, most of the non-European world was colonized under the Doctrine of Discovery, one of the first principles of international law Christian European monarchies promulgated to legitimize investigating, mapping, and claiming lands belonging to peoples outside Europe. It originated in a papal bull issued in 1455 that permitted the Portuguese monarchy to seize West Africa. Following Columbus’s infamous exploratory voyage in 1492, sponsored by the king and queen of the infant Spanish state, another papal bull extended similar permission to Spain. Disputes between the Portuguese and Spanish monarchies led to the papal-initiated Treaty of Tordesillas (1494), which, besides dividing the globe equally between the two Iberian empires, clarified that only non-Christian lands fell under the discovery doctrine.xix This doctrine on which all European states relied thus originated with the arbitrary and unilateral establishment of the Iberian monarchies’ exclusive rights under Christian canon law to colonize foreign peoples, and this right was later seized by other European monarchical colonizing projects. The French Republic used this legalistic instrument for its nineteenth- and twentieth-century settler colonialist projects, as did the newly independent United States when it continued the colonization of North America begun by the British.

In 1792, not long after the US founding, Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson claimed that the Doctrine of Discovery developed by European states was international law applicable to the new US government as well. In 1823 the US Supreme Court issued its decision in Johnson v. McIntosh. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Marshall held that the Doctrine of Discovery had been an established principle of European law and of English law in effect in Britain’s North American colonies and was also the law of the United States. The Court defined the exclusive property rights that a European country acquired by dint of discovery: “Discovery gave title to the government, by whose subjects, or by whose authority, it was made, against all other European governments, which title might be consummated by possession.” Therefore, European and Euro-American “discoverers” had gained real-property rights in the lands of Indigenous peoples by merely planting a flag. Indigenous rights were, in the Court’s words, “in no instance, entirely disregarded; but were necessarily, to a considerable extent, impaired.” The court further held that Indigenous “rights to complete sovereignty, as independent nations, were necessarily diminished.” Indigenous people could continue to live on the land, but title resided with the discovering power, the United States. The decision concluded that Native nations were “domestic, dependent nations.”

The Doctrine of Discovery is so taken for granted that it is rarely mentioned in historical or legal texts published in the Americas. The UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Peoples, which meets annually for two weeks, devoted its entire 2012 session to the doctrine.xx But few US citizens are aware of the precarity of the situation of Indigenous Peoples in the United States.

 

Source: http://brewminate.com/u-s-settler-colonialism-and-genocide-policies-against-native-americans/

 

The Gurkhas were discussed in explicitly racial terms. For nineteenth-century British colonialists, the inhabitants of south Asia were, for the most part, a disgusting and unthinking mass, lacking the intelligence or humanitarian instincts of the white race. In the 1860s, one British officer said 'Asiatic soldiers' do not have 'the same pluck or moral courage as the European... unless drugged and maddened by opiates beforehand' (4). One British observer said Indians and other south Asians 'live in a different stage of civilisation and intellectual development... their only courage is apathy and their valour consists in animal ferocity. A native soldier, of whatever rank, has no heroism, and he is ignorant of honour in every acceptation of the word.' (5) Gurkhas, by contrast, were considered not to be 'fully Asiatic', since they were brave and more loyal than other, non-heroic, dishonourable Asiatic peoples (6).

 

Source: http://spiked-online.com/newsite/article/6648#.W3nVm6vQDs0

 

Artificial intelligence, or the end of the world as we know it

How dangerous is AI's exponential growth? Is any job immune to automation?

 

DW spoke to technologists and historians to better understand some of the technological and societal upheavals humanity is facing.

Does technology favor tyranny? That's one of the surprising — and unsettling — questions Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari asks in his much-quoted new book, 21 Lessons for the 21st Century.

 

TECHNOLOGY | 22.10.2018

Whereas 20th-century technology favored democracies as they were able to distribute power to make decisions among many people and institutions, according to Harari, artificial intelligence (AI) might make centralized systems that concentrate all information and power far more efficient as machine learning works better with more information to analyze.

"If you disregard all privacy concerns and concentrate all the information relating to a billion people in one database," Harari writes, "you'll wind up with much better algorithms than if you respect individual privacy and have in your database only partial information on a million people."

The rise of AI swinging the pendulum from democracies toward authoritarian regimes is just one of the feared adverse impacts of technologies: Others include job displacement, concentration of power, diminishing privacy, rising income inequality and losing our "free will." Yet most people have little or no knowledge about how AI, blockchain, the Internet of Things or genetic engineering could affect their lives.

"The conflict between democracy and dictatorship is actually a conflict between two different data-processing systems," not ethical ones, says Yuval Noah Harari. The historian also wrote the international bestsellers 'Sapiens' and 'Homo Deus'

As there's reason to believe that these technological trends and transformations will pose existential challenges for humankind over the next decades, it makes sense to put them into a wider perspective, thereby hopefully creating some clarity.

After all, "if the future is decided in our absence," as Harari puts it, "we won't be exempt from the consequences."

Industrial revolutions vs "information revolutions"

At the Oslo Innovation Week in September, an annual conference in the Norwegian capital, Oxford University researcher and author Chris Kutarna offered some historical context. His key message: The prevailing "micro view" of history, which focuses on economic forces like capital and technology as well as industrial revolutions as the main drivers of progress, is too narrow to understand and navigate the forces currently changing our world as we know it.

 

Source: https://m.dw.com/en/artificial-intelligence-ai-automation-technology-harari-machine-learning-ethics-obama-future-oslo/a-45932260

 

Note: The photo was found here,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guinea_pig

 

Τελευταία Ενημέρωση στις Παρασκευή, 02 Νοέμβριος 2018 19:10