The value of truth depends on the wages of falsehood. As Twain remarked, “Truthfulness in a dishonest man rests on witnesses.”
I can rely on the truth of those companies and groups extolling what good, useful and noble work they do for the betterment of all (whether they wish it or not) because spokesbeings represent purist altruism with nothing to gain from what might otherwise be seen as costly self-promotion.
Furthermore, the best of these merciful messages are done loudly and rhythmically to assure my fullest appreciation of their beneficial content.
I embrace diverse images as convincing and true until my call to a service center is answered by a polite artificial intelligence, a spokesbeing of the finest sort requiring no costly health insurance or child care.
A century past (for much longer, really) the popular (might I suggest fashionable) boogey being was the bearded (perhaps male, then) Hebrew with global tentacles stretching to every byway and nook of society, meaning authority whether decent and legitimate or not. If only, sincere voices warned, the innocent public could be freed of Zionist strangling an era of universal peace and prosperity could then arise. A similar theme of collective guilt is used currently to identify today’s set of useful boogey beings.

A bigger threat (by magnitudes more numerous) to peaceful prosperity must be opposed; eradicated really. This requires fresh dedication to a more vibrant type of social cleansing; an ironic form of antiracist racism where gender free idealism aims its’ good at eliminating color-coded biologic males.

As in the past, a certain group who understands this will come forward to do the enforcing for the good of all.
I hope you’ll be among those who question or even balk at my repeated returns to issues and things in Central Europe. It is, I know, a limited window, but honestly the EU view (in essence a carbon copy of the vision of Europe crafted by National Socialist (NAZI) planners.
I look to the EU for inspiration as I’d look to skim milk for substance. Not there.
As I look and poke my nose here-there the Central Europe nations reveal an interesting schism between those smaller states and the big important nations we hear of. What’s that mean? What am I saying?
I’ll wager most readers have not heard much of the Three Seas Initiative. Why? Because it involves those lesser states bordering Baltic, Black and Adriatic Seas. (Explains that, eh?)
If your nation was repeatedly overrun by big neighbors you might over centuries develop a certain wariness when those neighbors smilingly offer help. (If you were the Ukraine, for example.)
So, what did the Three Seas Initiative propose? It sought a degree of independence from domination by the same-old powers that put boots on the ground to enforce cooperation, ban use of native languages, impose monetary and labor conditions, etc.
One way (O Frabjous Day, Callou Callay) was seeking less energy dependence on those big neighbors who generally sought to involve the lesser nations to help pay for the bigger neighbor’s dumb-ass (you won’t have to look that up) bungling.
To get from under the boot the Three Seas nations began buying Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) from guess who? US.
We had a lot of gas (oh the jokes that could come squeaking out) that once liquefied could be bulk shipped to Baltic and Adriatic ports where the locals in the Three Seas did the rest. This interesting and successful trade relation between the U.S.and Three Seas nations did well, somewhat freeing Central Europe from French, German, Russian domination until.

Well, see it now? How accurate am I saying that when some energy decisions were announced no (as in zero) mention of the impact on the Three Seas was mentioned? This may well be your first time getting a whiff of this particular natural gas.
But, taking a deep inhale don’t you feel proudly uplifted to know how easily U.S. policy fell in line with centuries of repressing Central Europe by the big important nations with the better PR and smoke screens?
But, then, noble causes always come with ignoble consequences.
As a high school student I hated history. Shove Civil War or WWI my way and death by boredom was nearby.
For many, maybe you, things were the same. It can be “accident” when something hits and a learning connection is begun. For me, connection started with two names – Scharnhorst and Gneisenau.
Why those in particular, who knows? But through their stories I began to see historical backgrounds.
Dabbling fascination led in time to slow immersion in context for type of ship, innovations in boilers, gunnery optics, and so on because a warship (in particular) is a magnificent form of time capsule.
Learning tends to be slow and (if you’re at all fortunate) continuous. And I have to add surprising because what other term explains how on a cold wet day one May years ago Harry (not at all an expert) collected a small following as he went through U995 in Kiel, where a minimal explanation of Trofenmesser from an essentially ignorant source (me) was more than the vessel provided. (An explanation of why U boat clocks had no ship’s bells also went over well.)

Big stories (including the human ones) are built of small details. One of life’s enduring adventures happens when any of us follows the trail of personal interests to an unexpected place.
My admiration of President Biden (an amazing replica of my own dear father) goes back decades to his position on “natural law” when he deftly confronted Supreme Court nominee Thomas with the concept.
Without ever saying what it was, then Senator Biden was firm in the conviction that both he knew and Thomas knew what natural law was. Indeed. There it was, firmly established in official testimony.
Neither of the two gentlemen ever defined natural law, which seemed a fairly important thing when considering a Supreme Court judge. Wouldn’t you think?
But I’d bet neither of them knew, or if they did never said. Masterful use of conviction is good, but is it enough?