Reflexiones sobre reflexiones

Posted on by
Reply

«Ve’betarayin yehon qadmayin ve’qadmayin betarayin» («הָרִאשׁוֹנִים יִהְיוּ אַחֲרוֹנִים וְהָאַחֲרוֹנִים – רִאשׁוֹנִים» en hebreo); la primera frase estaba en arameo.  «Los primeros serán los últimos y los últimos serán los primeros», según se dice, eso proclamó Jesús —o más exactamente, Yešu—. Pero ¿qué hay de los que están entre esos dos polos? ¿Existirá una relación inversa en toda la escala? ¿Y qué decir de los que ocupan el centro: los insípidos, los tibios o casi fríos, aquellos que, buscando mantener abiertas todas las opciones, se niegan a tomar partido? ¿Dónde se situarán y cuándo?

Por supuesto, están los hipócritas, los mentirosos, los manipuladores; aquellos que adoptan una postura sin intención alguna de actuar en consecuencia y que, de hecho, a menudo actúan de manera totalmente opuesta a lo que dicen defender. Suelen congregarse en la política, el derecho, el periodismo y entre el clero.

Hay quienes consideran que los que están en el medio son los peores de todos: los cobardes, los cómplices. Claro que en ese punto intermedio hay diversas variantes, y tal vez distintos olores. La ambivalencia. ¿En qué se diferencia de la indecisión? ¿O de la apatía? ¿Y cuál podría ser la relación entre la apatía y lo patético?

Hay quienes afirman que «es mejor haber amado y perdido que no nunca haber amado». ¿Cómo se traduce esto conceptualmente en el caso de quienes expresan su opinión y resultan estar equivocados, frente a aquellos que, por miedo a equivocarse, nunca opinan?

¿Dónde te situarías tú?

Es solo una pregunta.

Se atribuye a Albert Einstein la siguiente frase: «El mundo es un lugar peligroso para vivir, no por causa de los malvados, sino por aquellos que no hacen nada al respecto».

Me pregunto qué diría Yešu.
_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; todos derechos reservados.  Permiso para compartir con atribución.

Guillermo Calvo Mahé es escritor, comentarista, analista político y académico residente en la República de Colombia. Aspira ser poeta y filósofo empírico y a veces se lo cree.  Hasta el 2017 coordinaba los programas de Ciencia Política, Gobierno y Relaciones Internacionales de la Universidad Autónoma de Manizales. En la actualidad, participa en entrevistas radiales y televisadas, foros, seminarios y congresos cívicos tabto en Colombia como en el exterior y edita y publica la revista virtual, The Inannite Review disponible en Substack.com/.  Tiene títulos académicos en ciencias políticas (del Citadel, la universidad militar de la Carolina del Sur), derecho (de la St. John’s University en la ciudad de Nueva York), estudios jurídicos internacionales (de la facultad posgrado de derecho de la New York University) y estudios posgrado de lingüística y traducción (del Centro de Estudios Latinoamericanos de la Universidad de la Florida).  Sin embargo, también es fascinado por la mitología, la religión, la física, la astronomía y las matemáticas, especialmente en lo relacionado con lo cuántico y la cosmogonía.  Puede ser contactado en guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com y gran parte de su escritura está disponible a través de su blog en https://guillermocalvo.com/.

Reflections on Reflecting

Posted on by
Reply

“Ve’betarayin yehon qadmayin ve’qadmayin betarayin” (“הָרִאשׁוֹנִים יִהְיוּ אַחֲרוֹנִים וְהָאַחֲרוֹנִים – רִאשׁוֹנִים” in Hebrew), the first was in Aramaic. 

“The first shall be last and the last shall be first” Jesus, more accurately Yešu, is reported to have declaimed.  But, what about those in between?  Will there be an inverse relationship all the way through?  And what of those in the middle, the bland, the lukewarm or almost cool, those who, seeking to keep all options open, refuse to take a stand.  Where will they stand and when?

Of course, there are the hypocrites, the liars, the manipulators, those who take a stand with no intention of acting on it, indeed, who frequently act in a manner totally opposed to that they claim to espouse.  They tend to congregate in politics, and law, and journalism, and among the clergy.

There are those who feel that those in the middle are the worst of all, the cowardly, the enablers.  Of course, there are a number of flavors in the middle, and perhaps odors.  Ambivalence. How different is it than indecision?  Or apathy?  And what might the relationship between apathy and pathetic be?

There are those who assert that “it is better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all”.  How does that translate in the context of those who opine and turn out to have been wrong versus those, who, fearing to be wrong, never opine at all?

Where would you place yourself? 

Just asking.

Albert Einstein is credited with saying: “The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it.”

I wonder what Yešu would say?
_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen). Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales. Previously, he chaired the social studies and foreign language departments at the Eastern Military Academy in Huntington, New York. He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review available at Substack.com; an intermittent commentator on radio and television in both Colombia and abroad; and, an occasional contributor to diverse periodicals and publications. He has academic degrees in political science (BA, The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina), law (JD, St. John’s University, School of Law), international legal studies (LL.M, the Graduate Division of the New York University School of Law) and translation and linguistic studies (GCTS, the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies). However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta, cosmology and cosmogony. He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

Very Brief Reflections on the 2026 BRICS Summit Held in Bharat Mandapam in Pragati Maidan, New Delhi, India on the 12th and 13th of September

Posted on by
Reply

During September 12th and 13th of this year I had the privilege of participating in a brief forum conducted by India’s NewsX World on the 2026 BRICS Summit, as it was taking place, and of interacting with senior military, judicial and diplomatic personnel from various countries, including the Peoples’ Republic of China, The Union of South Africa and, of course the Republic of India.  It was a very rewarding experience.  The following are some of my observations on the summit, and its results.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi did a masterful job of balancing diverse interests and perspectives including those of three countries in active military confrontations, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Iran, as well as beautifully dealing with endemic border friction between the host country, India, which currently holds the presidency of the BRICS, and the Peoples’ Republic of China which will assume the presidency during 2027.  It seemed that Mr. Modi and Chinese President Xi were carefully laying the groundwork for strategic continuity among the BRICS community, a very welcome attitude. 

The Unanimous Joint Resolution addressed numerous critical issues, including many down to earth pragmatic projects that touch the everyday lives of their citizens in areas involving health, livelihood, culture and human rights.  There had been concerns that the increased membership of the BRICS, now comprising eleven full members: Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Indonesia, and the UAE; alongside ten partner nations, Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, Uganda, Uzbekistan and Vietnam, would render consensus unlikely and consensus is required because, unlike the European Union or the United Nations, unanimity is the rule, sovereignty and equality being a pillar of the group.  Of course, there was another possibility, that a forum more democratic and inclusive than that provided by the United Nations Security Council could, even if with divergent interests and goals, through compromise, consensus and real diplomacy among equals, attain social, political and economic objectives that have alluded older and more structured institutions, institutions where oligarchical constraints limit productive long term solutions.  Seemingly, at least for now, the latter succeeded thanks to the collaborative efforts of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Presidents Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping.

On the issue of dedolarization, the Indian perspective prevailed, perhaps because the European Union’s experience with the Euro has made BRICS members unwilling to follow suit, sovereignty in the European Union having become passé at best, but also because of two other important factors: first, India’s unwillingness to antagonize the United States, something with which a number of other members and partner nations concur, especially Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and now Bolivia; and secondly, because the BRICS countries have developed and are in the process of expanding fiscal solutions to the abuse of the United States dollar as the principal international means of exchange.  Chief among such emerging modalities are BRICS Pay, central bank digital currency proposals and, bilateral agreements such as those in place between the Russian Federation and the Peoples’ Republic of China as well as Iran and, the New Development Bank.

  • BRICS Pay is a collaborative cross-border payment system developed by the BRICS economic bloc to facilitate transactions using local national currencies while bypassing the U.S. dollar and Western-dominated networks like SWIFT.  BRICS Pay functions as a cloud-based connector linking national payment systems (such as Brazil’s Pix or China’s CIPS) enabling retail (QR code-based) and business to business transactions directly in member currencies, removing the need for a U.S. dollar intermediary.
  • Central bank digital currency proposals, under the leadership of India, seek to connect central bank digital currencies for smoother, dollar-independent cross-border tourism and trade settlements using blockchain technologies.  The plan focuses on connecting existing national fast payment systems and sovereign digital currencies rather than creating a new single currency union. The initiative builds on the 2025 Rio de Janeiro declaration which encouraged efficient and interoperable cross-border payment mechanisms within the bloc in order to lower transaction fees and bypass multiple intermediary banks for businesses, exporters, and travelers.
  • The BRICS New Development Bank already provides an alternative (albeit limited by capital constraints) for emerging and developing economies to the abusive controls imposed on loans through the United States controlled World Bank and International Monetary Fund.  It aims to fund infrastructure and sustainable development across emerging economies, positioning its future around local currency financing, digital asset integration and expanded cooperation among diverse economic states of development.  To date, the New Development Bank has provided alternative financing options for development projects across the Global South, having funded close to 100 projects totaling over $32 billion.  It is currently primarily funded by the Peoples’ Republic of China but new members Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates could, should they chose to do so, vastly increase its current capitalization.  An interesting indirect aspect of the existence and potential evolution of the New Development Bank may be the leverage it provides the BRICS with respect to making control over the World Bank and International Monetary Fund more democratic and their operations less intrusive, one of the goals set forth in the Joint Resolution.

Other very pragmatic proposals I found intriguing include the BRICS Global Value Chains Action Plan 2026–2030, an invoice discounting mechanism for trade finance; a dedicated micro, small, and medium enterprise digital platform launched by India during 2026 to connect users with access to knowledge, finance, and international markets; and, a micro, small, and medium enterprise cooperation portal and a startup innovation fund.  However. to me, the most important aspect was the call to resurrect international law, virtually assassinated by Israel and the United States, and to reform major international institutions such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund which have never met the needs of the vast majority of the world’s population (almost half of which resides in BRICS member nations), but have instead, represented oligarchic interests interested in looting the less developed world and maintaining traditional privileges. 

The article by Pepe Escobar accessible through the following link shared below provides other interesting (although perhaps less optimistic) perspectives on what was a very important and well attended summit: https://geopoliticsprime.substack.com/p/history-on-a-roll-brics-yemen-hormuz?r=lwzkv&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web. It is worth reading.
_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution. Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen). Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales. Previously, he chaired the social studies and foreign language departments at the Eastern Military Academy in Huntington, New York. He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review available at Substack.com; an intermittent commentator on radio and television in both Colombia and abroad; and, an occasional contributor to diverse periodicals and publications. He has academic degrees in political science (BA, The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina), law (JD, St. John’s University, School of Law), international legal studies (LL.M, the Graduate Division of the New York University School of Law) and translation and linguistic studies (GCTS, the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies). However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta, cosmology and cosmogony. He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

Nihilistic Pessimism

Posted on by
Reply

Lugubriously lethargic lassitude is the art form the legacy media has perfected on behalf of its masters to keep us from realizing what has happened to the world we hoped to leave as a legacy for our descendants, the world we thought we’d be able to glimpse and, at times enjoy, the world we were promised if we would just work hard and behave.

It is the hopeless state that assails us when we seek to exercise our political duties and go to the polls with no real choice at all, all the available candidates having already been bought and paid for with our money but certainly not for our benefit.

It is the residue we’re left with when those who own and control us abuse us, and we’re left without recourse in the face of their immune impunity.

It is our reaction when we are forced to realize that Jeffrey Epsteins rule our world through their bought and paid for proxies and that we can, at best, sit and watch as children are abused and Palestinians are slaughtered for fun and profit, hoping that the vision of German Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller’s “First They Came” will not apply to us, at least not in the near future.

It is what being inside a societal black hole’s event horizon feels like for those not among the Chosen.  It is what being aware feels like in the Dystopia we live in, one where we sometimes envy those blissfully unaware among us, those who make it possible.  It is what we feel when we’ve come to realize that the metaphorical sign atop the gates of mythic Hell joyfully proclaiming the death of hope already apply to us.
_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen). Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales. Previously, he chaired the social studies and foreign language departments at the Eastern Military Academy in Huntington, New York. He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review available at Substack.com; an intermittent commentator on radio and television; and, an occasional contributor to diverse periodicals and publications. He has academic degrees in political science (BA, The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina), law (JD, St. John’s University, School of Law), international legal studies (LL.M, the Graduate Division of the New York University School of Law) and translation and linguistic studies (GCTS, the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies). However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta, cosmology and cosmogony. He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

Reflections on Dodger and the Late, Great, Sir Terry Pratchett

Posted on by
Reply

I’m reading Dodger, a sort of historical novel by Terry Pratchett, well, “Sir” Terry Pratchett, “the late” Sir Terry Pratchett.  I’m very fond of the author and his many novels and Dodger has many of the elements I most like in a novel: real historical characters, albeit in fictional settings, at least in part, although perhaps the most important parts; and, a protagonist that I find beguiling, whether or not I identify with him.  But so far Dodger has not dazzled me as it has the reviewers, may Sir Terry’s soul forgive me.

In part that’s because, as I do with all of Sir Terry’s novels, especially now that he is unlikely to write any more, I am stretching it out as long as I can and it may be that, because of that, it has not caught fire for me, and, at any rate, there are still over seventy pages to go, but, it feels contrived to me.  It involves a genre different than the one I associate with Pratchett novels and lacks the savage wit and comedy that usually generates a bit of uncontainable laughter, laughter of the out-loud variant, which makes it seem strange (although had it been written by another author, perhaps that reflection would not stand out as much).  But then again, I love historical novels of all kinds and by many different authors and most are not usually funny. 

I enjoy philosophical interventions in novels, interventions that lead me to reflect on the human condition and on my personal condition, and that aspect is seemingly present but for some reason it doesn’t resonate, at least not for me.  I don’t quite know why.  I thought, for an instant, that perhaps I was just angry at Sir Terry for having proven to be mortal and having left us (after all, he was born two years after I was) but that was just an excuse I made up.  I’m concurrently reading and enjoying a number of his other novels (Going Postal comes to mind). Actually, in some cases I’m rereading novels I first read decades ago.  Actually, some, half a century ago, when Terry Pratchett was both alive and a commoner, before he became first Sir Terry and then, the late Sir Terry. 

Of course, I’ve changed during those decades.  During that more than half century.  And not just once or twice and not slightly, but seemingly totally at times (several times).  And the current version of me does not enjoy things other versions loved (such as Robert Heinlein’s writing style).  I still love Terry Pratchett’s and I really enjoyed his collaborations with Neil Gaiman but Dodger has, so far, inexplicably fallen flat, at least for me, if not for the critics.  Then again, critics frequently panned Terry Pratchett’s novels, at least before he became Sir Terry, as they pan many works of literature, cinema and what was once the silver screen that I thoroughly enjoy (the older Star Trek series are examples (ntil Voyager and the change in focus that followed, which the critics loved).  

Well, I still have a bit over seventy pages to go and, who knows, perhaps suddenly in those seventy pages it will all come together for me.  An epiphany of sorts.  At any rate, for now, my apologies to Terry Pratchett and to Sir Terry, and to his ghost (who is most assuredly reading my writing and laughing, although perhaps not for the reasons I would most appreciate).

Interesting though that I decided to write this “reflection” before I finished Dodger leaving both me and the late, great, Sir Terry Pratchett somewhat of an “out”.  I think he would at least have chuckled at that.
_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen). Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales. Previously, he chaired the social studies and foreign language departments at the Eastern Military Academy in Huntington, New York. He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review available at Substack.com; an intermittent commentator on radio and television; and, an occasional contributor to diverse periodicals and publications. He has academic degrees in political science (BA, The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina), law (JD, St. John’s University, School of Law), international legal studies (LL.M, the Graduate Division of the New York University School of Law) and translation and linguistic studies (GCTS, the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies). However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta, cosmology and cosmogony. He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

Reflections on the Wisdom Attributed to Socrates and on the Wisdom of Chauncey Gardiner

Posted on by
Reply

“I neither know nor think that I know”[1]

The last part of my education, long after I’d attained degrees in political science, law and international legal studies, involved, in part, linguistics and, to my surprise, it vastly enhanced my grasp of the other disciplines I’d studied, as well as of communication in general, as though I’d previously been intellectually two dimensional but after grasping essential aspects of linguistics, I’d attained the ability to perceive and to express myself in three or four. That led me to understand how Noam Chomsky had managed to attain such profound wisdom concerning both society and human nature although, perhaps, not with respect to all of his associates.

Something similar had occurred to me many decades earlier when, towards the end of my initial degree in law, I’d taken an elective course in jurisprudence, a course which should really have been a mandatory first semester course.  Especially meaningful in that course was the section on Hohfeldian Terminology, a system of eight fundamental legal concepts created by American jurist Wesley Newcomb Hohfeld in 1913 to clarify ambiguous legal language, obviously an aspect of linguistics applied to law[2].  It is probably not very familiar to practicing attorneys today, although it should be.

Earlier in life I’d regretted not having studied higher mathematics as the little exposure I’d had in college to the field had led me to believe that most of us were largely blind, deaf and dumb with respect to the reality surrounding us.  For some reason, however, philosophy did not impacted me in the same manner, probably because it is so premise driven; i.e., given a premise accepted as accurate, logic leads to conclusions that seem brilliant but which usually have little to do with reality.  Indeed, the most important thing I learned of practical value while studying philosophy was that when predicted conclusions did not reflect reality, the premises were usually at fault.

I am now the sum of diverse currents having made many, many mistakes and learned from some of them, perhaps having gained at least a trace of wisdom in the process, especially, a willingness to accept that there is a great deal I don’t know and the ability to sometimes discern what it is that I don’t know.  Perhaps the most important thing I’ve learned is that an open mind is a wonderful thing but ought never to be confused with an absence of opinions and beliefs, all of which should be continuously put to the test; perhaps the test I learned from philosophy: if the expected results prove inaccurate, the drawing board needs to be revisited rather than ignored through a plethora of excuses.

Interestingly, the latter concept seems anathema in politics were an open mind is considered an indicia of the absence of principles, a trait popularly referred to as “waffling”.  Hence, a politician willing to reconsider his or her positions in light of experience is looked down upon as untrustworthy, something which does a lot to explain where we find ourselves: easily manipulated and unwilling to accept reality, even when it smacks us in the face. 

As opposed to politicians, great mathematicians and physicists are constantly testing their premises, something that seems a corollary to David Hume’s belief that absolute truth may be impossible to prove but that what he referred to as “conventions”, tools we use in lieu of truth for practical purposes, i.e., because they seem to work (until they cease to be reliable, at which point they are discarded), were good enough in the short term[3].

Socrates taught by feigning ignorance and pretending to seek knowledge from those he taught, among them Aristocles, who we know by his nickname, Plato.  Or perhaps, Socrates really did have an open mind and was misinterpreted, kind of like the character Chauncey Gardiner so well played by the late, great, Peter Sellers in the film, Being There.

_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen). Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales. Previously, he chaired the social studies and foreign language departments at the Eastern Military Academy in Huntington, New York. He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review available at Substack.com; an intermittent commentator on radio and television; and, an occasional contributor to diverse periodicals and publications. He has academic degrees in political science (BA, The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina), law (JD, St. John’s University, School of Law), international legal studies (LL.M, the Graduate Division of the New York University School of Law) and translation and linguistic studies (GCTS, the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies). However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta, cosmology and cosmogony. He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

[1] Plato. (1997): Apology (H. Tarrant, Trans.) in J. M. Cooper (Ed.), Plato: Complete Works (Stephanus p. 21d). Hackett Publishing.

[2] Cullison, Alan D.: (1967): “A Review of Hohfeld’s Fundamental Legal Concepts”, 16 Clev.-Marshall L. Rev. 559; Cleveland, available at https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2997&context=clevstlrev.

[3] Hume, David (1739–40; 2009 publication): A Treatise of Human Nature; Edited by P. H. Nidditch. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

On An Ethics for Non-State Popular Responsive Violence

Posted on by
Reply

I apparently wrote the following in 2012, revisited it on June 1, 2017 for some reason, and am again revisiting it.  Today is the 27th day of August, 2026.  The time spanned is interesting but, perhaps even more, so is the relevance.  The protagonists are, I assume, Citadel classmates, some of whose names have been changed to protect the guilty:

We were supposed to play softball against a group of local VMI alumni but the day which had started out under a bright golden sun set in a field of robin’s egg blue had made a drastic turn about ten minutes before game time and we’d retired to a local Irish pub where we’d had a dart tournament of sorts instead.  After we’d split a few pitchers, a few of us wound up, a bit tipsy in the basement bar at Mike’s house.

We’d shot the shit for quite a while, getting a bit more buzzed as we watched Sunday afternoon football, then finding ourselves in that twilight waiting for the Sunday night game, buzzed enough to take on the world’s problems, … again.  We’d all been political science or history majors but most of us had gravitated towards the business world after a sojourn exploring rice paddies of Southeast Asia.

I hadn’t been paying all that much attention, truth be told, I might have been snoozing, until a bit of acrimony crept into our discussions.

Bill had once explained his theory of legitimized violence to me in the context of what he referred to as our reverse Robin Hood socioeconomic system.  “Since impunity is rampant”, he’d said, “new mechanisms need to evolve to create and police social justice and that, at least in a state of transition, must involve successful challenges to the state monopoly on legitimate use of violence.  The bad guys now own all major states and most if not all minor states so the conditions that led to the implicit decision to surrender personalized use of violence no longer exist.  But unlimited violence won’t work either.”

He was off on a similar vein again, this time, trying to put terrorism into some kind of ethical context.  I think most of us acknowledged the problem but few saw terrorism as the answer.  So Woody, I think, asked Bill if he had any kind of workable solution.

“Terrorism has no boundaries so while in the short term, it provides a kind of superficially reactive sense of justice, it in fact adds to injustice” Bill explained.  “There is no accepted terrorist ethic, if there were, then it wouldn’t really be ‘terrorism’, it would be something else.

“Like what” Woody had asked?  He and Bill, for the time being, seemingly engaged in a somewhat too serious albeit hypothetical soliloquy.  Bill’s vocabulary was a bit too sophisticated for a lot of people but you get used to it after a few decades.

“We’d need to invent a new term I guess” Bill had replied, “but first we’d need to carefully consider what applicable parameters could maximize effectiveness while minimizing harm to the innocent, and in the context of the kind of class-based abuse that we have, determining who is innocent is a fundamental problem.” 

“Suppose”, he’d continued “a financier manipulates the law to cheat a million people of their retirement savings but because he then has so much money, he buys protection, not only from prosecution or even civil legal claims, but buys enough security to assure his personal welfare can’t be threatened.  Then suppose a victim, in order to exact some kind of compensation, kills the man’s brother; an innocent person who did not benefit directly from the financier’s wrongdoing.  Does that involve terrorism?  Does that involve justice?  Or suppose the victims hire someone to bomb a facility owned by the financier, one undoubtedly insured, and a number of employees and customers are injured there.  Does that involve terrorism?  Does that involve justice?  Probably not, in either case.  But what else can victims do?  How can they make the costs of wrongful conduct so high that despite the unwillingness of the state to see justice done, such conduct will be made too risky?”

“That’s the million dollar question” Chuck chimed in (so he wasn’t asleep after all).  Woody poked him, laughing. “Remember when questions were cheaper?  Groucho Marx and the $64,000 question?”

“You mean Karl Marx don’t you” grumbled Frank.  Frank was a completely honest guy but a dyed in the wool Republican for whom the state could do no wrong.

Bill glanced at his friends, worried that perhaps he was being a bit too open.  They’d all studied political science together decades before but the others had wandered into different fields.  He had too but after his divorce he’d returned to academia and a very different world view.  Still, while they frequently disagreed, there was a lot of respect shared so he opened up.  “Cute, guys, if only this wasn’t so serious.  Desperate people take desperate actions, and way too much of the world is full of desperate people.  A bit of ethical guidance could save a lot of lives.

“Ethics?  Terrorist ethics, you’ve got to be kidding” chided Frank.

“Well financiers’ ethics sure aren’t about to make a surprise appearance” responded Bill.  “The fact is, an analogy to ethical and legal norms involving the concept of self-defense might alleviate the collateral damage.  Maybe there is a basis for resort to violence that can at least be tied to standards so that suffering by the innocent can be minimized, but it’s a tough call.  One argument I’ve heard involves concentric zones of responsibility-benefit with the victimizers in the middle, kind of like bulls’ eyes, and the purely innocent on the outside.

Huh (from several of the people present)?

“Well” answered Bill, the innermost circle has those most directly responsible with each next circle including a proximate prioritization of blame or responsibility. It’s a nexus based chain.  Let me give you an example.  The person responsible is in the central circle, following circles might include that person’s accomplices, then that person’s guards, then people who benefit directly from that persons improper actions, then persons who benefit indirectly.  After a series of circles like that you arrive at the mass of people who have no links.  Only action involving the latter would be pure terrorism while only action against the person responsible would be fully justified.  As one gets further away from the center, justification decreases while the label of terrorism becomes more apt.  Of course, defining who merits occupying the center is the rub.

Woody thought for a bit and then asked, “Well; how does that affect tax payers?  Many of us support activities that might be considered culpable while others don’t, but we all have to pay them.

Bill seemed prepared for the question and replied fairly quickly “The problem there involves the ability to implement the ethical paradigm.  How to tell which taxpayers are more blameworthy and which are more innocent, and even harder, how to act separately in such a general context.  Obviously the supporters of the policies that are blameworthy are less innocent than the opponents, but the group is too homogenous to differentiate.”

“Tom, you’re the lawyer” said Chuck.  “I know law and ethics have all too little in common, but what do you think of Bill’s observations?”

Tom kind of grinned.  “That depends on whether he can pay the legal fees.  I’m pretty sure he’ll be needing a lawyer, soon.”

“Fuck all of you” shouted Frank, apparently a bit more buzzed than the rest.  “And God bless America.”

Realizing he may have talked a bit more openly than was healthy in the current climate, Bill glanced at his watch and exclaimed “Where the Hell has the time gone, we need to do this again sometime but as for me, I’m out ‘a here.”

Most of the others agreed, called for their tabs and got up, all except for Frank and Tom, who decided they needed to talk a bit more.

“Shit” Bill whispered to Woody as he left, “I forgot just what Frank has been doing during the past few years”.

“You can’t be serious Bill” Woody whispered back.

“Then why are we whispering” observed Bill?  “Why are we whispering?”
_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2012; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen). Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales. Previously, he chaired the social studies and foreign language departments at the Eastern Military Academy in Huntington, New York. He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review available at Substack.com; an intermittent commentator on radio and television; and, an occasional contributor to diverse periodicals and publications. He has academic degrees in political science (BA, The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina), law (JD, St. John’s University, School of Law), international legal studies (LL.M, the Graduate Division of the New York University School of Law) and translation and linguistic studies (GCTS, the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies). However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta, cosmology and cosmogony. He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

A Mission Statement for Seekers Seeking to Grasp Divinity

Posted on by
Reply

Is the following a heretical hypothesis, is it anathema and blasphemy or is it, well, … common sense?

First Postulate: That one single anthropomorphic, omnipotent, eternal, ubiquitous, omniscient and omnibenevolent divinity exists is extremely unlikely given, in mundane terms, the proof of the pudding, i.e., the history of humans on earth. 

Second Postulate:  That multiple non corporeal entities superior to us exist, limited as to when they came to be and that they are neither omnipotent, nor eternal, nor ubiquitous, nor omniscient nor omnibenevolent seems as likely as life existing or having existed outside of the earth, which is not to say that such entities or such life exists.

Third Postulate:  The foregoing is something on which it is worth speculating, on which it is worth reflecting and concepts concerning such “possibility” seem worth putting to the test, even if the principal postulate of the scientific method makes proof the existence of superior non-corporeal beings difficult, but not as impossible as proof of their non-existence.

Fourth Postulate: The Third Postulate almost applies to the much less likely proof of a single anthropomorphic, omnipotent, eternal, ubiquitous, omniscient and omnibenevolent divinity, the difference involving proof of its purported distinctiveness.

A mission statement for a society of seekers sending out an S-O-S to the multiverse?

I wonder how Richard Dawkins, the atheist prince and putative father of memes would react to the foregoing; memes, in a sense, being incorporeal beings possibly meeting quite a few of the requirements set forth above, as may be the case, in the future, with human created artificial intelligence.  As to the Dalia Llama; the Pope or the leaders of the thirty three million bickering variants of Abrahamic creeds (or are those Hindu gods, the one equals thirty three million avatars version), I’m pretty sure I know how they would react, although Pope Francis I might have found it interesting.
_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen). Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales. Previously, he chaired the social studies and foreign language departments at the Eastern Military Academy in Huntington, New York. He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review available at Substack.com; an intermittent commentator on radio and television; and, an occasional contributor to diverse periodicals and publications. He has academic degrees in political science (BA, The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina), law (JD, St. John’s University, School of Law), international legal studies (LL.M, the Graduate Division of the New York University School of Law) and translation and linguistic studies (GCTS, the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies). However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta, cosmology and cosmogony. He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

A Bit of Reciprocity: a sort of prayer

Posted on by
Reply

If he or she or it or even they exist, the divine, they and I are, I think, friends.  Mainly because I dare to interact with them as a sort of equal.  Not in terms of power of course, but in sensitivities and concerns and perceptions, seeing in divinity those same traits, albeit not easily admitted, especially to “believers” who insist that divinity is perfect: eternal, omniscient, ubiquitous, omnipotent and omnibenevolent, when the divine has or have, in all probability (assuming probability is relevant), doubts of his, her, its’ or their own, and perhaps quite a bit of guilt and remorse.

The divine, if the concept exists, desperately need someone with whom to communicate and not in prayer (which probably generates divine migraines) or devotion, but openly and honestly, without fear of being judged, but rather, hoping for empathy, in much the same way as humans should hope to relate with whatever concept of divinity they individually have.

Of course, the likelihood that divinity exists is rather slight but, all the same, even if imagined, it can be comforting. 

Or, terrifying. 

Terrifying if he, she, it or they are really, to any extent, omniscient, ubiquitous, and omnipotent but not omnibenevolent (eternal is irrelevant).  Given the world as it is and as it has seemingly always been, omnibenevolence obviously cannot coexist with the other attributes traditionally associated with divinity by purportedly modern humans.  The ancients, even the purported descendants of Abraham, knew that.  Their divinities were selfish, self-centered, prone to outbursts and as frequently wrong as they were right, regardless of what their sycophants wrote. Which explains why they were terrified of their divinities and sought to appease them, rather than to understand them.  Interestingly, similar fear seems to infest most Abrahamic religions, despite the love on which they are purportedly premised.

But I like my concept much more.  Ours is a hubris free relationship involving imperfect, perhaps insecure divinities that need us as much as we need them.  It is more comforting, more reflective of the best in us as humans (or is it we?).  Thus, I cater to the divine generously, open to whatever they need to get off of their metaphorical shoulders without expecting all that much in return, other than a bit of reciprocity.

Hmm, reciprocity. 

Isn’t that the essence of the so called “Golden Rule”?
_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen). Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales. Previously, he chaired the social studies and foreign language departments at the Eastern Military Academy in Huntington, New York. He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review available at Substack.com; an intermittent commentator on radio and television; and, an occasional contributor to diverse periodicals and publications. He has academic degrees in political science (BA, The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina), law (JD, St. John’s University, School of Law), international legal studies (LL.M, the Graduate Division of the New York University School of Law) and translation and linguistic studies (GCTS, the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies). However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta, cosmology and cosmogony. He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

Reflections on Good, Evil, Divinity and Efficiency

Posted on by
Reply

Nature and nature’s god, if there is one, and if there is a difference between the two concepts, cares nothing at all about the human concepts of good and evil, or good and evil at all, caring only for efficiency and its maximization but, lacking omniscience, seeks to find efficiency through trial and error, through experimentation which is frequently not only unsuccessful, but results in devastating failures, that is where infinity and eternity create the ideal laboratory. 

We humans refer to the foregoing as evolution, which may well not be a bio-centric concept but rather, applicable to every process in the cosmos, or better yet, the multiverse or best of all, the omniverse, at least for now.  That concept expands as the concept (or fiction) of time is filtered in.

Of course, evolution in a cosmic sense was probably most prominent during the early stages of cosmic evolution, during the first zeptoseconds after whatever first occurred, but continued experimenting with energy and with the smallest possible particulate units which we currently believe to involve quarks and leptons but probably involved a series of predecessors, most of them failed.

I wonder what it was like before the first zeptosecond.  A concept, at least in human terms, that needs light and hydrogen atoms but which obviously had precursors, smaller and shorter until they sought to merge with a time before infinity or eternity had been posited as divine hypotheses, assuming, of course, the improbable existence of divinity.

It must be incredibly comforting to be unconcerned with good or evil, merely enjoying the creative frustrations of the quest for efficiency, a road like, the road to Hell, littered with positive intentions but unconcerned with damnation.

We humans, of course, believe that we know better.  We have concepts of good and evil contradictory to nature’s quest for efficiency and contrary to the dictates of cruel evolution.  We believe ourselves more enlightened, which more than anything confuses us as we have, to date, been utterly unable to abide by the morality and ethics we invent to discredited nature’s cruel quest for efficiency.  But then, comforting hypocrisy is our hall mark. One with which we imbue the verisimilitudes of divinity we create in hopes that those illusions will provide us with answers to unfathomable and hence unanswerable queries, and the most foul among us use the myths we create, to maximize control and power and wealth and hubris.  And they find that efficient, at least in the short term, and hence divine.

We humans, and perhaps all forms of life, are apparently aberrations nature has yet to categorize as failed experiments, failures which, or perhaps who, like Mordred, aspire to supplement their parentage, or progenitor, nature itself, and force it into our own image, one where good and evil exist as relative concepts, useful tools as long as they’re ignored whenever inconvenient.

Observations which my deistic friends of Abrahamic persuasions will find heretical and anathema, at best, but which Elphaba apparently grasped as, exposed to water, she slowly started to melt and in her personal, last instant epiphany, exclaimed: “What a world, what a world!”
_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen). Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales. Previously, he chaired the social studies and foreign language departments at the Eastern Military Academy in Huntington, New York. He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review available at Substack.com; an intermittent commentator on radio and television; and, an occasional contributor to diverse periodicals and publications. He has academic degrees in political science (BA, The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina), law (JD, St. John’s University, School of Law), international legal studies (LL.M, the Graduate Division of the New York University School of Law) and translation and linguistic studies (GCTS, the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies). However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta, cosmology and cosmogony. He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.