Science and Technology -- Prospects and Problems: A Sufi Perspective

Releasing the Genie

In a variety of movies, the discovery of how to release a given genie from captivity in order to do one's bidding or grant one a certain number of wishes is often accompanied by an ensuing realization that the process is not without potential risks and dangers. Siimilarly, on the surface, everything might seem straightforward with respect to various instances of scientific and technological creativity that, supposedly, will do our bidding, and, as a result, people speak about the wonders of progress and the promise of the future which scientific and technological breakthroughs generate.

However, the shadow of the 'Black Swan' event (or events), along with other possible unpleasantries, tend to lurk in the background awaiting the opportunity to suddenly manifest themselves and turn what seemed to be paradisical into a living nightmare. For example, when people began to unlock the secrets of the atom toward the beginning of the twentieth century, no one anticipated the advent of: nuclear weapons, depleted uranium, Chernobyl, Fukushima, or the problems associated with disposing of nuclear waste materials, but now we know the tragedies which might, and often do, ensue from the nuclear wombs of such scientific and technological fecundity.

Most of us are mesmerized by the amazing capabilities of the increasingly savy smart phone inventions that are rolling off the assembly line with each new generation. Yet, there is an ugly underbelly to this technology which is rooted in the 'coltan wars' which, for more than a decade, have been taking place in the Democratic Republic of Congo in Africa and during which thousands have died fighting over the possession, mining, sale, and distribution of the metalic ore: Coltan (which is an amalgamation of the words: "Columbite" and "tantalite"). Coltan happens to have rather unique abilities when it comes to the storing and retaining of electical charges ... a capacity which is utilized in many smart phone capacitors.

Moreover, the lives of people all over the world have been transformed through the presence of computer technology. Yet, the appearance of computers in the world also introduced a huge problem -- which still remains largely unsolved -- involving the disposal of the toxic wastes (e.g., involving heavy metals such as: cadmiun, beryllium, and lead) that are entailed by the process of manufacturing computers.

Once the genie has been released, it is not always so easy to try to control what has been set free and, thereby, been enabled to haunt, if not terrorize, the world. People who are good at creating new science and technology are often blind, if not indifferent, to the ramifications and implications of that which has been manifested through them.

The creators -- and associated vested interests -- often label anyone who resists what the former individuals are trying to do as "Luddites" (textile craftspeople in England who resisted the introduction of labor-saving machine technology in the early 1800s). Nevertheless, history is replete with incidents in which, like Pandora's Box, technology and science became like conduits for the flow of problems (social, political, environmental, moral, and legal) into the world.

The Cautionary Principle

Prudence, patience, and wisdom tend to indicate that the activities of science and technology ought to be engaged with a certain degree of circumspection. One application of this sort of perspective is to exercise caution when it comes to such activities For instance, wouldn't it be nice to come up with solutions to problems inherent in technological and scientific innovation before the fact rather than after the fact ... only after tremendous damage already has taken place?

There is a teaching principle among Native Americans which says that unless one understands what impact a given action will have on the seventh generation to follow, one should refrain from such an action. Another related teaching is: we do not bequeath the present world to our children but, rather, we borrow that future from them since what we do today will affect the quality of their lives tomorrow. In both cases, the underlying moral principle is that we need to exercise -- not abandon -- caution when it comes to decisions concerning the release of new scientific and technological innovation into the world.

----------

3D-Printing Technology

The following video is about the emerging technology of 3D printing. One is introduced to some of the potential -- and a few of the possible problems -- associated with 3D printing.

However, although there is a short section near the end of the video concerning one conceivable environmental application of 3D-printing technology, absolutely nothing is mentioned, or even alluded to, in the video with respect to the question: What sort of impact might the heavily plastics-based technology (at least as it is currently operated) have on the world's ecologies? Unless we can find an ecologically safe way to handle the plastics which will be released into the environment, then it is hard not to perceive something like 3D-printing technology as being as big a problem -- if not bigger -- as it is a potential boon. After all, to date, humanity does not have a great track record when it comes to the successful and safe disposal of plastics ... or, for that matter, many other environmentally unfriendly manufactured substances.

For instance, currently one can find 'The Great Pacific Plastic Garbage Flotilla' off the the coast of California which has been estimated to be anywhere from 600,000 square miles to nearly 4 million square miles in size. Furthermore, there is ever-increasing evidence to indicate that all sorts of micro-sized plastic molecules are entering into the food chain and doing irreparable harm to many species of animals ... the micro-sized plastic components give direct expression to the fact that plastics are highly resistant to being completely broken-down into harmless substances via some process of bio-degradation. 

All we need now are millions of people purchasing 3D-printing technology (as it becomes cheaper, faster, and more ingenious) that will exacerbate an already extremely difficult problem. There is something deeply troubling about all of this, and, yet, the underlying issue does not seem to be even on the distant horizonal radar of the following presentation.

One can only hope that someone will come along -- sooner rather than later (if not before the fact) -- and develop a feasible, efficient, cheap way of recycling the plastic products that are generated through the 3D-printing process so that when they break or have lost their uses/attraction, they can be dumped back into the printing process instead of being dumped back into the environment.

And then, of course, there is always the possibility of creating genetically modified organisms (such as bacteria) to consume the plastic refuse and, maybe, secrete, say, gold as an end-product, so to speak. Unfortunately, this might be a 'solution' which transitions us from the frying pan to the proverbial fire.

----------

Whistleblower Realities

The Issue

Some people claim that whistleblowers are individuals who are concerned about: fairness, integrity, justice, honesty, transparency, society, rights, democracy, truth, and sovereignty for the people. Government authorities, however, argue that whistleblowers are criminal, selfish, treasonous, ego-driven, publicity seeking troublemakers who are jeopardizing national security as well as violating the principle that democracy is best served when secrets are preserved and the people are kept ignorant about what is being done through the process of governing. Where does the truth lie?

---

The Grand Deception

The American form of government is supposed to be rooted in republican principles. Such principles were derived from, and shaped by, a moral philosophy that was promoted during the Enlightenment. At the heart of this Enlightenment philosophy is a belief which requires the process of government to be run as a moral enterprise. In other words, rather than governement officials acting in ways that are arbitrary and intended to serve the interests of the government rather than the interests of citizens, republicanism indicated that government officials must abide by certain moral principles such as: honesty, objectivity, fairness, truth, nobility, keeping promises, charitability, transparency, tolerance, service to the public, and not being a judge in one's own affair.

The foregoing outline of republicanism is integral to the United States Constitution. Indeed, the principle of republican moral philsophy was enshrined in the American form of government through Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitutiion. That portion of the document stipulates that the federal government guarantees the states, and, therefore, the people, a republican form of government ... a form of government which does not violate the moral principles of republicanism. 

To operate in accordance with Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution, a government cannot be a judge in its own affair. Among other things this means that governments (whether federal or state) do not get to be the final arbiters of what is in the best interests of democracy or promoting the sovereignty of the people, and this includes the Supreme Court (both federal and state) since the judiciary constitutes one of the three branches of centralized government.

For several hundred years (in fact from practically the beginning of the founding of the American Republic), both federal and state governments have sought to render Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution relatively invisible and irrelevant to the process of governance. And, yet -- and this is precisely why Article IV, Section 4 has been rendered obscure by the federal and state governments -- this portion of the Constituion is, probably, the most fundamental principle set forth in that document becuase it was intended to allay the fears of the people that government would become tyrannical, but through a guaranteed, Constitutionally enshrined promise, the people would find assurance that the process of government would not be oppressive or tyrannical and, instead, would operate in accordance with the moral requirements of republicanism.

---

Bait and Switch

Centralized government in the United States has been conducting a sleight-of-hand routine before the American public from almost the very beginning of the founding of our experiment in democracy. However, this form of governmental prestidigitaton has been picking up steam over the last one hundred years as the sorcerers of governance seek to induce the public to believe that protecting 'national interests' or 'national security' is the same thing as protecting the sovereignty of the citizens, and this illusion is assisted by misdirecting people's attention away from the moral requirements of republicanism -- which, in the present case, means that the government does not have the right to determine what is, and is not, in the best interests of citizen sovereignty. Invoking the terms: "national interests" and "state security" is about protecting governments, not the people, although governments have done their best to try to deceive people and induce people to believe that there is no difference between "national interests" and citizen sovereignty.

Governments don't like whistleblowers because, in essence, such individuals remind us all that sovereignty is the right of the people and is not derived from, or a gift, of the government. Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution indicates that whistleblowers have the right to be heard by the people beyond the horizons of a legal process which may serve the interests of central government but does not necessarily serve the sovereign interests of citizens.

Whistleblowers perform a public service to the cause of citizen sovereignty, often at great personal risk. Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution not only encourages such selfless acts, but guarantees that the government must let such acts take place quite indepedently of what the government believes to be the case and quite free of criminal prosecution. Indeed, every prosecution of a whistleblower constitutes a violation of Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution and, as such, represents an unconstitutional act on the part of the government. 

Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution is the 'supreme law of the land'. It takes precedence over every other aspect of the Constitution because it is the only guarantee which appears in that document. To seek to deny the requirements of Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution not only renders the rest of the Constitution meaningless, but it seeks to suppress the principles of republican moral philosophy in which the American form of democracy is supposedly rooted.

Israel and Orwellian NewSpeak

An Israeli Myth

I.F Stone, publisher and primary investigative reporter for the highly regarded Stone's Weekly (which probably reached its height of influence in the mid-1960s when, among other things, Stone was the only American journalist to challenge Lyndon Johnson concerning the alleged Gulf of Tonkin incident), was a supporter of Zionist aspirations early in his life even as he also was a proponent of a two-state solution with respect to the Palestinian-Israeli issue. Later in his life he became more sympathetic to the cause of Palestinians.

For example, a favorite slogan of the Zionist movement suggested that Palestine was 'a land without a people', while Jews were 'a people without a land', and, therefore, the match between Palestine and the Jewish people seemed to be a match made in Heaven. At one point, I.F. Stone had the temerity to state that the slogan was not accurate because Palestine had never been a land without a people, but much like the American-French deal concerning the Louisiana Purchase and the American-Russia deal involving Alaska, no one seemed to want to reflect on the fact that the lands beings sold and confiscated were inhabited by people who might object to the nature of such transactions.

Hypocrisy

While the Jewish people are entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, they are not entitled to deny these same rights to the Palestinian people. The Jewish people are entitled to water, but they are not entitled to deny Palestinians access to that same resource. The Jewish people are entitled to shelter, but they are not entitled to build illegal settlements on Palestinian land. The Jewish people are entitled to freedom of movement, but they are not entitled to prevent this same sort of freedom to the Palestinians. The Jewish people are entitled to food and to pursue agricultural self-sufficiency, but they are not entitled to destroy the crops and means of livelihood of the Palestinians. The Jewish people are entitled to fish and enjoy the waters off their coast, but they are not entitled to stop Palestians from the same right to fish and enjoy the waters off their own coast. The Jewish people are entitled to sovereignty, but they are not entitled to prevent the same sort of sovereignty to the Palestinian people. The Jewish people are entitled to make laws to govern themselves, but they are not entitled to establish a completely different and unfair set of laws to govern the Palestinian people. The Jewish people are entitled to security, but they are not entitled to torture Palestinians or impose Nazi-like collective punishment on the Palestinian people for the acts of individuals, nor are they entitled to build massive illegal walls which disrupt and undermine Palestinian life. The Jewish people are entitled to protect themselves, but they are not entitled to carpet-bomb Palestinians or arbitrarily invade and occupy the territories of the Palestinians. If Jewish people are entitled to a right of return to ancestral lands, then, so too, are Palestian people entitled to the same kind of right of return, but in neither case does such a right (if it exists at all) entail being able to take and occupy whatever land and property one likes if and when one does return. The Jewish people are entitled to the protection of the international community, but they are not entitled to thumb their noses at international law when it suits their purposes ... such as in the case of U.N. Resolution 242 which indicates that no country -- including Israel -- has the right to acquire territory through war, as the Israelis did during the 1967 Six-Day War. The Jewish people have a right to be concerned about the intentions of Iran with respect to its nuclear program, and the rest of the world has the right to demand that Israel open up its own nuclear program to international inspection. In many ways, Israel is an amazing society, culture, and experiment in democracy, but Israel also has a very dark underbelly which, for more than half a century, has sought to place many obstacles and hardships in the way of Palestinians becoming a similarly amazing society, culture, and experiment in democracy.

The first plane hijacking was perpetrated by Israelis. The first terrorist attacks in the Middle East were committed by Jewish groups such as the Irgun and the Stern Gang (Lehi). The first bombings of innocent people were committed by members of the Jewish community in relation to the King David Hotel, Alhambra Cinema, Damascus Gate, Jaffa Gate, and the Haifa market.

None of the foregoing justifies 'suicide bombings' by the Palestians, but there is considerable innocent blood on Israeli hands, and, consequently, it is time for the duplicitous, self-serving, hypocritical Israeli dance of death, destruction, and tyranny to come to an end.

The United States gives approximately two-three billion dollars a year to Israel and has been doing this for over fifty years. Much of this aid is in the form of military weapons and assitance which means that the United States government is both directly and indirectly responsible for the oppression of the Palestinian people.

Such aid is granted despite the fact that in additon to the scandals that have been uncovered involving the state of Israel spying on, and stealing (or attempting to) classified information from, America (for example, Jonathan Pollard, Ben-Ami Kadish), Israel also made an unprovoked attack on the U.S.S. Liberty in 1967 and killed 34 crew members, while wounding an additional 171 other crew members despite the fact that the Liberty was in international waters at the time of the attack. Both the Israeli and American government conducted inquries into the matter and concluded that the matter was a tragic mistake, but the people who were on the Liberty and who actually experienced what took place have no doubt that the Israelis attackers knew the identity of the ship which they bombed and strafed ... and did so for hours. Then, of course, there was the incident in which Mossad agents were discovered cheering and dancing on the roof of their van as they watched the Twin Towers burning on September 1st, 2001. Moreover, after being released by American authorities, the agents went home to brag and joke about the whole affair on Israeli television.

The United States is quite willing to impose onerous economic and financial sanctions upon Iran for a nuclear program whose actual status is quite unclear, and, yet, the Americans looked the other way when the Israelis produced some 400-600 nuclear weapons, thereby enabling the situation to evolve into a much more dangerous and destabilizing set of circumstances which threatens everyone because there is no such thing as a precision nuclear weapon -- toxic radioactivity travels everywhere and adversely affects everyone. As such, the state of Israel has joined an 'elite' group of nations (which includes: America, Russia, China, France, Britain, India, and Pakistan) that constitute nuclear menances in the world -- countries that act out of paranoia, fear, myths, and a desire to control the world through tactics of intimidation and force because they don't have the competency or the inclination to solve problems in a non-violent way.

I'm not in favor of Iran acquiring nuclear weapon capability. Nonetheless, I also am not in favor of Israel actually having such weapons. But the beat of hypocrisy continues on in so many, many different ways when it comes to the state of Israel.

Recognizing the human rights of Jewish people does not require one to approve of, or agree with, Israeli policies concerning its continued oppression of the Palestianian people. In fact, one cannot possibly recognize the human rights of Jewish individuals -- while simultaneously failing to extend equal recognition with respect to the rights of Palestian people -- without becoming entangled in indefensible nonsense. Engaging in such double-talk is a clinic in Orwellian Newspeak that is uncivilized, distasteful, shameful, and constitutes, as well, an egregious violation of international law.

The Principle of 'No'!!

The following paragraphs were just posted to my websites and constitutes a mission or official policy statement, if you will, that governs the intent and content of the postings which appear on my websites, blogs, and the material within all of my publications. 

------

The Anab-Whitehouse.com website operates in accordance with the Principle of 'No'. Another way of giving expression to the spiritual orientation that is rooted in the 'Principle of No' is to bear witness (via my writings, actions, commitments, values, and beliefs) that: 'There is no reality but the truth'.

The foregoing principle or form of bearing witness requires me to declare the following: I am against violence -- that is, I say "No!!" to such acts -- irrespective of whether those activities are given expression through: religious fundamentalists (of whatever denomination) who seek to forcibly impose their beliefs on others; national security agencies; the killing of innocents (through whatever means); domestic abuse; compulsory educational systems; sexual exploitation; slavery; ethnic cleansing; tyrannical governmental agencies (whether in the United States or elsewhere); corporate pathology; techniques of undue influence; financial/banking injustices; censorship; military adventurism (via armies, militias, jihadists, mercenaries, and so-called 'freedom fighters'); unfair and unsafe labor practices; ecological destruction; police brutality; suicide bombings; processes of ideological control (e.g., propaganda and indoctrination); spiritual abuse; market manipulations; arbitrary legal and constitutiional systems; intelligence agencies; political parties; torture (or 'enhanced interrogation'); unwarranted surveilance; extreme rendition; spying; assassination; drones; martial law; preemptive wars; congressional malfeasance; executive imperalism/dictatorship; inhumane prison conditions and treatment; as well as oppressive social/economic/religious/political majorities or minorities which results in the violation of basic human rights involving: truth, worship, speech, creed, assembly, health care, learning, shelter, food, privacy, movement, and sovereignty.

In my opinion, all of the foreging forms of violence constitute expressions of terrorist-oriented practices, and this is true whether, or not, such expressions of violence are perpetrated by: nations, states, governmental agencies, organizations, banks, the judiciary, institutions, social groups, economic entities, international bodies, the media, military personnel, or individuals. Some years ago, Issac Asimov -- a writer and teacher -- indicated in one of his fictional works that: "Violence is the last refuge of incompetence." In other words, only people who are incompetent when it comes to issues of: truth, character, justice, sovereignty, integrity, and decency find a sense of refuge or solace in using violence to control and destroy the lives of other human beings.

Approximately a thousand years ago, the Sufi saint Hazrat al-Hujwiri (also known as Hazrat Dada Ganj Baksh) stated in his Kashf al-Mahjub -- and he, actually, was quoting someone from a still earlier time -- "Once Sufism was a reality without a name, and now it is a name without a reality." The problem has gotten worse since that time.

One of the primary purposes of this Web Site is to serve as a virtual library (including written, audio, and video selections) that is intended to provide authentic information on, and insight into, numerous dimensions of the Sufi (tasawwuf) Path, in particular, and Islam, in general. There is nothing in any of the writings or audio and video presentations which appear on this website which run contrary to the 'Principle of No' that was outlined in the opening paragraphs of this web page. This is also true of the more than thirty publications (covering over 12,000 pages of material) that are available through Bilquees Press. I invite you to test the truth of the foregoing claim for yourself either in relation to the material contained in this web site or in any of my real world or virtual world publications. The 'Principle of No' is at the very heart of Islam and the Sufi Path. Until an individual says no to all the myriad delusional modes of perpetrating violence against others and oneself, one will not be in a position to recognize, understand, and acquiesce to the truth of reality's nature ... including one's own potential for serving as a locus of manifestation in relation to reflecting, according to one's capacity and Divine Grace, certain dimensions of the truth concerning the nature of reality.

American Indigenous Peoples and the Palestinians

There is much which has been written about the 6 million Jewish people who were killed by the Nazis. There is much less that is written about the 3-4 million non-Jewish people who were exterminated by Hitler and his fellow 'true believers' during the Second World War. Moreover, there has been even less written about the 19 million indigenous peoples in America (and the foregoing figure is actually a very conservative estimate) who were slaughtered by allegedly enlightened, democratic, and liberty loving people over the course of some 500 years within the areas now occupied by the United States ... a program of abuse and oppression which continues to this day.

According to Hitler, himself, the Nazis based their model for the holocaust on the programs which were implemented by the United States that has been directed toward exterminating, imprisoning (within reservations), and/or forcefully assimilating the indigenous peoples of America. The apartheid government of South Africa also used what might be termed 'the American model' to deal with the indigenous peoples of South Africa.

When indigenous people in America were not being killed, placed on and restricted to reservations, or forced-assimilated into American culture, every treaty that was ever made between one supposedly democratic government or another within the United States was broken by representatives of the latter agencies. Today, the most impoverished, oppressed, unemployed, and abused people in the United States are the indigenous population -- unless, of course,  one's tribe owns a casino ... but even this is an economic and social model that has been borrowed from the white man and which tends to repudiate many dimensions of the moral and spiritual heritage of indigenous cultures, and, thus, constitutes a pyrrhic victory at best.

However badly black people have been treated prior to, during, and after the birth of the United States -- and their treatment has been horrific, oppressive, and uncivilized in very shameful, violent, and demeaning ways -- that abuse has been far less than what has been imposed upon indigenous peoples in America. To cite a minor issue in this respect, an abolitionist movement in relation to blacks has been in existence for hundreds of years in America, but there has never been a comparable abolitionist-like movement among white people to end the incredibly abusive and tyrannical manner in which indigenous peoples have been, and are continuing to be, treated. Indeed, in light of how indigenous people are, and have been, treated in this country, slavery might be considered a step forward for them -- although I certainly am not advocating that this be done but, rather, I am just pointing out an interesting feature of comparison.

Furthermore, there has never been something comparable to an 'Underground Railroad' to carry indigenous peoples to safety as was the case in relation to Black slaves. And, perhaps, one of the reasons for this is that, historically, indigenous people in Canada have tended to be treated every bit as horrendously as their counterparts in the United States have been treated ... although in some ways, Canada has done much more to rectify things vis-a-vis indigenous peoples than America has done.

The Civil Rights movement led to a great leap forward for many people of African-American heritage. Unfortunately, that same movement led to little, or no, improvements for indigenous peoples ... indeed, many facets of the lives of the latter groups of peoples are still being controlled by a very pathological entity known as the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Like people of African-American  heritage, indigenous peoples have been slaughtered, tortured, raped, abused, ripped from their lands, deprived of their culture and languages, had their communities and families destroyed, as well as have been stripped of their spiritual beliefs. However, whereas tremendous progress has been made (although much still remains to be done) in recognizing and attempting to rectify the many forms of racism which are directed toward people of African-American heritage, almost no progress has been made to acknowledge and ameliorate the varied forms of racism that continue to be directed toward indigenous peoples in America.

Little by little -- and oftentimes painfully slowly -- people of African-American heritage have been ceded some degree of power within the United States. Part of this is the result of the growing political realities associated with a demographic which is rooted in 27 million people of African-American heritage who currently reside in the United States.

How extraordinary that, on the one hand, a group of peoples who were abducted from Africa now totals some 27 million, while, on the other hand, a group of peoples who lived in America long before the forced migration of those who would become African-Americans, now number a little under 3 million -- less than one-ninth the size of the former group of peoples. Perhaps, if some 19 million indigenous peoples had not been subject to a Western holocaust, political realities might have accorded them some of the same rights and privileges as their African-American brothers and sisters ... but, instead, they are largely ignored and continue to be subject to the arbitrary, unjust, and oppressive decisions of the United States government.

One of the reasons why many people in the United States -- including so-called Executive, Judicial and Congressional leaders -- not only tolerate, but provide financial support for (to the tune of $2 billion dollars a year) the continued oppression of the Palestinian peoples by the Israeli government, is because the Israeli government engages Palestinian indigenous peoples over there in the same way that the American government engages indigenous peoples here. Both groups are considered to be 'savage', 'uncivilized,' demonic, and unworthy of being treated with the dignity and rights to which all human beings are entitled.

Both Israel and the United States are considered to be among the leaders in the fight for democracy. However, as long as those two countries continue, each in its own way, to oppress and abuse Palestinians as well as American indigenous peoples, they are merely hypocrites who speak with forked tongue.