Experience the world through my perspectives
Feb
2024
WHAT IS IT LIKE LIVING IN THE UNITED STATES BORN AS AN AFRICAN AMERICAN OR BLACK FEMALE (MEANING THE VOID OF LIGHT) PERSON
Author: Sarai Hannah Ajai, Sarai Ajai's Briefs
ARTICLE
Black History Month
Please note that the African American or Black racial category has evolved beyond solely comprising individuals from the United States. It now encompasses a diverse range of racial groups from various countries. Just a heads-up, it is essential to specify which African American or Black individual deviates from this diverse conglomerate of racial groups. Personally, I have often hoped that the United States Census would divide the African American or Black category into sub-racial categories, similar to how they have done with the Hispanic racial group who come from other regions of Mexico country.
I have experienced from my academic achievements and discriminations for which, I have to endured from African Americans and people of colors including my family members because of their “what I do not have analysis should be the same”, as my educational attainments and economic status. Even though, those African American and people of colors had not done anything to help their own advancements for educational attainments and economic stability.
Living in the United States, as an African American or Black individual female are characterized by the void of light which is a complex and challenging experience that often defies the simplistic narratives of success and progress. From my earliest memories influenced by my parents, the path seemed straightforward: finish high school, pursue higher education, and hope for a life free of struggle. However, the reality, I have face, as an African American born female in the United States is far from the idealized vision my parents painted.
Born into citizenship within a nation marked by its history of slavery and systemic racism even when I achieve educational attainment, I am confronted with harsh truth of the 13th Amendment's legacy, which permits involuntary servitude under the guise of criminal injustices and now enforced compulsory conditions of identity segregationinvoluntary servitude without legal due process of law. These acts, performed under the color of law and invoking the Thirteenth (13th) amendment, resulted in my identification of goods instruments slavery. Such slavery, caused by the people of color are masked, concealed, camouflaged, or disguised, as a modern-day intangible slavery in the 21st century. Despite being a United States citizen, my identity and very existence, as an African American female are questioned and invalidated due to the color of my skin and educational attainments. And, since, I have achieved those educational attainments than my educational attainments no longer belong to me but another color or race groups . The societal perception of what it means to be African American or Black female is very narrow and often excludes those who do not fit societal prescribed stereotypes and scapegoat or gaslighting propagandas schemes.
The burden of expectation weighs heavily on me. I am expected to conform to a predetermined image and color of what it means to be African American or Black female in America, yet I have found myself constantly marginalized and discriminated against, even within my own African American community and the people from the continent of Africa and Mexico and the United States Indian Territories because I do not subscribe and conform to their groups “ Ghetto Behaviors and Languages’, “NAPPY HAIR Do”, “Homosexual Acts”, “Brick House Body Types” and “Uneducated person. The pressure to adhere to their stereotypes, to embody a caricature of Blackness, is suffocating and it is like trying to fit a square peg into a circle that does not fit in. And when I refuse to conform, when I assert my individuality and refuse to be pigeonholed, I am met with hostility, ostracism and African American or Black persons racism.
The discrimination, I have face is not confined to external forces; it permeates even the closest circles of family and community and the people from the continent of Africa and Mexico and the United States Indian Territories. There is a pervasive attitude of "what I do not have, you should not have either," a toxic mentality that stifles progress and perpetuates cycles of poverty and underachievement. Despite my academic accomplishments and aspirations for economic stability, I am met with skepticism and resentment from those who fail to recognize their own complicity in perpetuating systemic barriers.
The toll on my mental health is profound. The constant barrage of microaggressions, the relentless scrutiny of my identity and achievements, pushes me to the brink of despair. The feeling of being trapped, of being defined by others' expectations and prejudices, is overwhelming. Despite reaching out for help, for understanding, I am met with indifference and disbelief that I am making all of this up. The struggle to assert my own identity, to reclaim my sense of self-worth in a society that seeks to diminish it, is a battle fought on multiple fronts continuously.
In conclusion, my experience of living in the United States, as an African American or Black female individual is fraught with multiple challenges and contradictions. My existence is a constant negotiation between societal expectations and personal identity, between the desire for acceptance and the refusal to be confined by societal stereotypes. Until we confront the systemic injustices that perpetuate inequalities and discriminations in the United States will always remain a double edge sword, to people who have my skin color pigmentations, and the promise of equality and opportunity will remain elusive for generations to come including within my own race group.
This concludes, “Black History” month 2024 with numerous of erroneous identity “Black” caveats.
March 2, 2024
Article
Debunking the Hypocrisy: African Parliaments' Rhetoric Against Western Influence
Author: Sarai Hannah Ajai, Sarai Ajai's Briefs
African parliaments often echo the sentiment that they are liberating themselves from Western influence, asserting their cultural independence and sovereignty. While such rhetoric may resonate with nationalist sentiments, a closer examination reveals a troubling contradiction, especially when juxtaposed with the substantial aid and support provided by Western nations, particularly the United States of America.
The narrative propagated by some African parliaments suggests a defiance against Western intervention, portraying it as a threat to African identity and autonomy. They argue that embracing Western ideals and practices undermines African heritage and cultural integrity. However, this narrative becomes dubious when we consider the extensive aid and assistance Africa receives from Western countries like the United States.
The United States, among other Western nations, has been a significant contributor to African development, offering aid in various forms, including food, medicine, and monetary support. Through initiatives like PEPFAR (President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) and USAID (United States Agency for International Development), the United States has played a pivotal role in addressing health crises, promoting economic development, and fostering stability across the African continent.
Yet, despite the tangible benefits derived from Western assistance, some African parliaments continue to espouse anti-Western rhetoric, portraying aid as a form of neo-colonialism or cultural imposition. This rhetoric is not only misleading but also hypocritical, especially when juxtaposed with the actions of those who voice it.
One glaring example of this hypocrisy lies in the very institutions that denounce Western influence while simultaneously embracing it in their practices. It is not uncommon to find members of African parliaments adorned in Western attire, including suits and ties, while conducting official business. The irony is palpable when lawmakers, adorned in Western clothing, decry Western influence as antithetical to African culture and identity.
Moreover, the reliance on Western aid underscores a pragmatic acknowledgment of the benefits derived from international cooperation. African nations, like any other, face numerous challenges ranging from healthcare crises to economic disparities. The aid provided by Western countries is instrumental in addressing these challenges and improving the lives of millions of Africans.
It is imperative to recognize that cooperation with the West does not necessitate the relinquishment of African identity or cultural heritage. Rather, it reflects a pragmatic approach to addressing pressing issues and advancing collective interests. The notion of cultural purity and absolute independence is not only unrealistic but also counterproductive in an increasingly interconnected world.
Furthermore, the rejection of Western influence should not be misconstrued as a rejection of progress or modernity. Many aspects of Western civilization, including democratic principles, technological innovations, and human rights frameworks, offer valuable insights and tools for African nations striving for development and prosperity.
In conclusion, the rhetoric propagated by some African parliaments against Western influence is not only hypocritical but also undermines the genuine efforts aimed at fostering collaboration and progress. While embracing cultural heritage and sovereignty is important, it should not come at the expense of pragmatism and cooperation. African nations should acknowledge the valuable contributions of Western nations while actively participating in shaping a more equitable and inclusive global community. The path to progress lies not in isolationism but in constructive engagement and dialogue across borders and cultures.
resource: batalsart [@batalasart]. "We are getting rid of Western influence in Africa" X, 1 March 2024, https://x.com/batalasart?s=11&t=iZcVjoBTRKUR0Qs_fpoblQ
March 30, 2024
Breaking Free from the Crab Mentality: A Reflection on Democracy in the United States
Author: Sarai Hannah Ajai, Sarai Ajai's Briefs
As we navigate the complexities of societal structures within the United States of America, it becomes apparent that the metaphor of crabs in a bucket aptly captures the challenges individuals face in pursuit of personal and collective progress. Picture yourself striving diligently to lead a life in accordance with the laws of the land, seeking education, and nurturing your family amidst the trials of everyday existence. You endeavor to ascend to the top of the bucket of life, only to feel the relentless pull of fellow crabs dragging you back down…a phenomenon commonly referred to as the "crab mentality."
Within the confines of various societal arena…be it workplaces, neighborhoods, or educational institutions…individuals find themselves ensnared in this metaphorical bucket, each vying to climb to the summit, only to be hindered by the actions and attitudes of others. It is a cycle where progress is impeded, and escape seems improbable. Even if, one manages to break free from one bucket, they often find themselves trapped in another, confronting new challenges.
The question arises: What form of democracy do we truly embody within the United States? Are we a bastion of full democracy, or do we grapple with the pitfalls of flawed and defective democratic systems? From exclusive democracies to hybrid regimes, the landscape is diverse, and one's experience within this system is heavily influenced by the bucket they inhabit and their economic standing within it.
It is a sobering realization that the crab mentality permeates every facet of our society, shaping our successes and failures. The trajectory of one's life is determined not just by individual merit, but by the dynamics of the collective…a reflection of the broader socioeconomic and political landscape.
As we contemplate these realities, we are confronted with profound questions of moral and existential significance. Are we truly our brother's and sister's keeper, as the scriptures remind us? And what does it mean to bear our own cross in the face of societal obstacles?
On this cusp of Easter Sunday, let us engage in introspection and collective soul-searching. Let us transcend the confines of the crab mentality and strive for a democracy that uplifts all its citizens, irrespective of the bucket they find themselves in. For the fate of our nation rests not solely on the actions of individuals, but on our collective commitment to justice, equality, and the common good.
In the end, whether you commend this reflection on the crab effects mentality or find yourself disquieted by its implications, the choice is yours. But let us not shy away from the imperative to reckon with the realities of our society and work towards a more inclusive and equitable future for all.
14
Nov
2024
Elon Musk's New Role: Efficiency Tsar or Political Power Play?
Article by Sarai Hannah Ajai
Billionaire Elon Musk has been appointed to lead President-elect Donald Trump’s newly announced Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). In a statement via social media, Trump revealed that Musk, alongside former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, will be tasked with "dismantling government bureaucracy, slashing excessive regulations, cutting wasteful spending, and restructuring federal agencies."
This move aligns with Musk's ongoing push to optimize government operations, a role he has increasingly prepared for through his entrepreneurial ventures. However, it also positions Musk at the intersection of policy influence and regulatory reform—particularly concerning the businesses he leads.
Musk, who has previously suggested that the U.S. government’s budget could be reduced by at least $2 trillion from its current $6.5 trillion, has also proposed significant cuts to government staffing. Meanwhile, Ramaswamy has called for the dissolution of multiple federal agencies, including the Department of Education, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the FBI.
Musk’s Vision of Efficiency: Cutting Bureaucracy
Musk’s rhetoric surrounding the new department has been framed as a mission to extend human life beyond Earth, with an emphasis on removing government red tape that could stifle innovation—such as his ambitions to colonize Mars. At a rally in October, he told supporters that creating the Department of Government Efficiency was critical for achieving that vision.
While Musk’s desire for a leaner government may align with his long-standing libertarian ideals, it also carries potential personal benefits. SpaceX, Musk’s private rocket company, has active contracts worth over $8 billion with the U.S. government, while his electric car company, Tesla, faces ongoing government investigations into its self-driving technology. Musk has long argued that excessive regulation hampers his companies, and a major overhaul of federal agencies could mean less scrutiny for his business empire.
In recent years, Musk has publicly clashed with regulators, notably accusing the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) of "regulatory overreach" following proposed fines for SpaceX and questioning the motivations behind federal probes into Tesla’s safety features.
Conflicts of Interest and Self-Interest:
Critics, like Professor Christopher Phelps, argue that placing Musk—who stands to personally benefit from deregulation—at the helm of a government efficiency project creates inherent conflicts of interest. "It's a fundamental concern," Phelps says, highlighting the challenges of having a billionaire with business ties to the government shaping public policy.
On the other hand, Professor Thomas Gift suggests that Musk is more than just a self-interested billionaire; he is an ideologue who genuinely believes in the benefits of a smaller government. "Musk has been a vocal critic of government overreach, and he has taken significant risks, both personally and politically, to support Trump's agenda."
A Reward for Loyalty:
Musk's political involvement has intensified in recent years, especially after criticizing the Biden administration’s handling of the pandemic and Tesla’s exclusion from a 2021 electric vehicle summit. His formal endorsement of Trump in 2024, coupled with a $200 million donation to Trump’s campaign, signified a strong political shift. This loyalty has earned Musk a position of influence, with some viewing his new role as a "transactional" one that grants him symbolic power in shaping policy outcomes favorable to his business interests.
In return for his support, Musk has gained rare access to Trump’s inner circle. An example of this influence was Musk’s participation in a call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky following the election. Such access is typically reserved for top donors and political insiders, reinforcing Musk’s rising stature within the Trump administration.
What is the Department of Government Efficiency?
Musk first introduced the concept of the Department of Government Efficiency during a conversation with Trump on social media this summer, using a playful reference to Dogecoin, the cryptocurrency associated with the Shiba Inu meme, which Musk famously endorsed. Despite the humorous name, the department’s mission is serious: reforming and streamlining government operations.
However, experts are skeptical about the feasibility of Musk’s grand vision. While the department will not have a formal role in government, Musk and Ramaswamy will provide "advice and guidance," which could influence federal policy. Some warn that implementing such radical cuts to government programs could lead to significant disruptions and face resistance from Congress.
Musk himself has acknowledged the challenges, asking Americans to prepare for short-term hardships in pursuit of long-term benefits. His approach to efficiency, evidenced by his actions at Twitter (now X), where he slashed the workforce and loosened content moderation, suggests that his vision for government efficiency may mirror the cost-cutting measures seen in his private companies.
What Can We Expect?
As Musk continues to reshape his companies, his methods may offer clues about what the government could look like under his influence. While Tesla and SpaceX have thrived by cutting inefficiencies and reducing costs, critics argue that Musk's overhaul of Twitter shows the potential downsides of such an approach—leading to discontent among employees and advertisers alike.
In the coming months, as Musk’s role in the Department of Government Efficiency becomes clearer, one thing remains certain: his influence over U.S. policy, particularly in terms of deregulation, is likely to grow. The question remains whether the American public will embrace his vision of a leaner, more efficient government or whether the risks of such sweeping changes will outweigh the benefits.
Conclusion:
While Musk’s business acumen and drive for efficiency may bring fresh ideas to the government, his personal stakes in the regulatory landscape cannot be ignored. As he takes on the role of efficiency tsar, the balance between his entrepreneurial interests and the public good will undoubtedly come under scrutiny.
15
Nov
2024
Constitutional Promises: A Reality Check
written by Sarai Hannah Ajai
The United States Constitution is heralded as the cornerstone of democracy, a beacon of equality and freedom for all. Yet, for many, these promises feel like hollow words beautifully written but detached from reality. This article explores the emotional toll, societal implications, and systemic failures that leave individuals feeling unprotected and devalued under the very laws meant to guarantee their rights.
The Emotional Toll of Being Unheard:
Imagine facing a critical legal battle, only to be met with indiNerence. For those denied due process, the experience is more than frustrating; it’s emotionally devastating. The sense of betrayal intensifies when privacy is violated—emails intercepted, movements monitored leaving individuals feeling stripped of autonomy. One individual shared their ordeal: despite facing a dental emergency, they encountered
roadblocks at every turn. Dentists refused to treat an infected tooth adequately, passing the problem along without resolution, even after payment. The lack of care wasn’t just medical; it symbolized a broader societal disregard for their well-being, compounding feelings of worthlessness and dehumanization.
The Societal Implications of Systemic Inequity:
When systemic failures disproportionately aNect certain groups, the societal implications
are profound. Minority communities often bear the brunt of neglect and injustice, as invasive practices, like compromising Real IDs, expose them to increased surveillance and risks. Such actions erode trust and dignity, perpetuating cycles of inequity. The Constitution’s promise of "equal protection under the law" should serve as a shield for all citizens. Yet, for many, it feels more like a selectively applied ideal, leaving individuals to wonder: Are we truly equal, or is freedom reserved for a privileged few?
Coping with Systemic Neglect:
For those caught in this web of systemic neglect, finding ways to cope is an ongoing battle. The constant worry over privacy violations and personal safety takes a heavy mental toll. When institutions fail, individuals are often left to fend for themselves, with little recourse or support. This sense of isolation underscores the urgent need for stronger community networks and advocacy efforts. Support systems can offer not only emotional solace but also a collective platform to push for meaningful change.
A Systemic Critique: Where Does the Constitution Fall Short?
The Constitution’s ideals are aspirational, but systemic inconsistencies often hinder their realization. When legal and social systems fail to uphold equality, the gap between the promise and reality widens. This dissonance calls into question whether the Constitution truly serves everyone or simply reinforces existing hierarchies. To address these failures, we must confront uncomfortable truths about how our systems operate and who they serve.
Solutions and Advocacy: Paving the Way Forward
Despite the challenges, there are ways to reclaim agency and fight back against systemic injustices:
• Protect Personal Privacy: Learn about digital tools and practices to safeguard sensitive information.
• Build Advocacy Networks: Join or create groups that amplify marginalized voices and demand accountability.
• Engage in Policy Reform: Push for legislation that closes gaps in protections and ensures equitable treatment for all.
The power of collective action cannot be overstated. When individuals unite to challenge systemic failures, they can effect real change.
Are Constitutional Promises Enough?
This experience forces us to confront a fundamental question: Are the Constitution’s guarantees of equality and freedom truly upheld, or are they symbolic ideals that fail in practice? The answer lies in how we, as a society, choose to respond. Words on paper mean little without action. It’s up to us to hold our systems accountable and ensure that the promises of democracy become a lived reality for everyone.
Closing Call-to-Action:
"It’s easy to feel powerless when systems fail us, but our collective voice can demand accountability. Let’s question, let’s advocate, and let’s ensure that the Constitution isn’t just words on paper but a lived reality for everyone."
24
Nov
2024
A Woman Who Walks Alone
by written Sarai Hannah Ajai
The Woman Who Walks Alone (Continued from Jordan Person Inspiring Youtube Video Speech)
Her independence does not come without sacrifices. The woman who walks alone often bears the burden of isolation, a price she willingly pays for the clarity and authenticity it brings. To walk this path means stripping away the layers of external validation and societal approval, leaving only the raw essence of her true self. She stands at the crossroads of vulnerability and strength, forced to confront not only the world’s expectations but also the shadows within her own heart.
Society’s discomfort with the woman who walks alone is rooted in its fear of the unconventional. She disrupts the narrative, challenging the archetype of dependency and obedience. Her solitude is a rebellion against the idea that a woman’s worth is defined by her relationships or her service to others. Instead, she reclaims her identity on her own terms, refusing to be confined by roles that diminish her complexity.
Redefining Strength and Self-Worth
The woman who walks alone embodies a strength that defies conventional definitions. It is not the loud, visible strength of warriors or leaders; it is the quiet, enduring strength of resilience and self-discovery. Her journey is marked by an unwavering commitment to personal truth, even when it leads her away from the familiar and the comfortable.
Her solitude is not an absence but a presence—an affirmation of her right to exist beyond the expectations imposed upon her. She becomes her own refuge, finding solace not in the validation of others but in the depths of her own soul. This is the essence of her strength: the ability to find light in the darkness, to transform loneliness into empowerment, and to embrace the unknown with courage and grace.
The Misunderstanding of Solitude
The societal perception of solitude as loneliness is one of the greatest misconceptions the woman who walks alone faces. Her solitude is not a void but a fertile ground for growth and introspection. It is where she cultivates her dreams, hones her vision, and reconnects with the essence of who she is. This journey inward is often misinterpreted as withdrawal or coldness, but it is, in fact, an act of profound self-love and respect.
The accusations of selfishness and aloofness stem from a world that struggles to understand autonomy. In a culture that equates a woman’s value with her relationships and sacrifices for others, her choice to prioritize herself is seen as a threat. Yet, it is this very act of self-prioritization that allows her to contribute more meaningfully to the world around her. She walks alone not because she rejects others, but because she seeks to know herself fully, so she can engage with the world from a place of authenticity and strength.
A Call to Understanding and Empathy
Understanding the woman who walks alone requires a shift in perspective. It requires recognizing that her journey is not a rejection of community but a redefinition of it. She walks alone to return stronger, wiser, and more complete. Her path is not one of isolation but of transformation—a process that enriches not only her own life but the lives of those around her.
As a society, we must move beyond the simplistic narratives of independence and dependence. We must honor the courage it takes to walk alone, to confront the unknown, and to embrace one’s true self. The woman who walks alone is not a figure of pity or suspicion; she is a beacon of strength and possibility, illuminating a path that others may one day follow.
In the end, the woman who walks alone teaches us all a profound lesson: that true freedom lies not in the approval of others, but in the unwavering commitment to one’s own journey. Her solitude is her sanctuary, her strength, and her light. And in that light, she finds not only herself but the power to inspire others to walk their own paths—alone, together, and unafraid.
Summary
This text explores the complex societal perceptions of a woman choosing solitude and independence. It argues that a woman walking alone is not simply physically isolated but is on an archetypal journey of self-discovery, challenging societal expectations and norms. Jordan Person Inspiring Speech youtude viedo points out that this journey, while often misunderstood as selfishness or coldness, requires immense bravery and self-reflection. Ultimately, the text celebrates the strength and resilience of women who choose this path, viewing their solitude as a source of empowerment and a powerful example for others. The piece calls for greater understanding and empathy towards women who prioritize their own self-discovery.
06
Dec
2024
The Great Pardon: Why Joe Biden Should Let Everyone Out of Black Gate Prisons
Written by Sarai Hannah Ajai
Ah, the game of life. It's like Monopoly, except instead of getting a "Get Out of Jail Free" card, you're stuck paying rent every month for a property you can't even afford. And speaking of being stuck, let's talk about Joe Biden and his son, Hunter. Now, I don’t want to be that guy, but if the entire United States of America was a giant board game, it would be called "Life: The Game of Injustice, Mistakes, and Poorly Written Rules."
In case you missed it, President Joe Biden recently granted his son, Hunter Biden, a free pass. Not a figurative one, like the ones we hand out to people we feel sorry for at family reunions, but an actual, real-life "Get Out of Jail Free" card. Yup, Hunter, who has made more headlines than a pop star with a reality show, got the golden ticket. A pardon, my friends, signed with the same pen Joe Biden uses to write off his regrets about the '90s.
Now, let me make something clear: I’m not here to get into the weeds of Hunter's situation or the state of his (and possibly the nation's) affairs. That's not the point. The point is: if we’re gonna play this game called life, I’d like a "Get Out of Jail Free" card too. And I’m not talking about metaphorical jail like “I was stuck in traffic for 45 minutes” or “I have to listen to my uncle's political rants at Thanksgiving.” I’m talking about the kind of jail that involves Black Gate Prisons—the metaphorical ones where all the “average citizens” like me get sent when we’re too poor to hire good lawyers or bribe anyone with a steak dinner.
You see, in America, the average Joe (no pun intended) doesn’t have a dad in the Oval Office, ready to swing a magical executive pen and erase his mistakes with the flourish of a politician who’s never had to fill out a parking ticket. No, we average folks get stuck in real jails. You know, the ones where the Wi-Fi doesn’t work and the TV only shows infomercials for cleaning products. But not Hunter. Oh no, Hunter gets the VIP treatment. He gets a ticket out of life's prison with a presidential pardon. Let’s be honest, at this point, I'm just waiting for Biden to come on TV, announce that he’s releasing everyone from Black Gate Prisons, and then maybe get us all a free iced coffee while he's at it. Because, hey, why not?
Let's break it down: If Hunter gets to leave the metaphorical "prison" of his poor life choices with a pardon, then maybe the rest of us should get the same deal. But we don't. Oh, no, we stay stuck in the game of life, looking up at the ultra-wealthy and powerful with that same bewildered expression you get when you land on Boardwalk with a hotel on it—like, wait, what just happened? I don't even have enough for the bus fare home, and yet here I am, being told the rules don’t apply to me the same way they do to people who can afford a private jet and a really questionable tattoo.
Hunter Biden's "Get Out of Jail Free" card doesn’t just make you scratch your head; it makes you wonder why the rest of us aren't allowed the same privilege. Let’s face it, the entire judicial system sometimes feels like it’s more rigged than a carnival game. When you're rich and famous, you get to roll the dice, and every time you land on "go to jail," someone hands you a check and says, "Don’t worry about it, buddy. We got you." But for the rest of us? Well, we just watch as the Ultra Rich (with their charmed lives and private yachts) saunter past us, casually flipping the bird to the rules and saying, “I’ll take a pass on that jail thing. Thanks, though!”
So here we are, folks. The rest of America, locked up in a system that doesn’t work for us. But, oh, wait! President Biden’s got a solution: Let’s just pardon everyone in Black Gate Prisons! Yeah, you heard me right. I mean, if he can just make Hunter's mess go away with a swipe of a pen, why not just hand out pardons to everyone? Picture it: Joe Biden at a podium in front of a cheering crowd of freed prisoners, a big grin on his face, as he declares, “You’re all free! Go forth and live your best life!”
But let's be real, that’s never going to happen. No, Joe Biden isn’t going to walk into the White House one day and announce, “Alright, everyone who’s been screwed over by the justice system, come on down! You’re free to go!” Sure, it’s a nice thought, but in the game of life, fairness is often just a cruel joke. And unless you have a high-powered lawyer, a family fortune, or an extremely well-timed presidential pardon, you’re probably going to end up just like the rest of us—watching from the sidelines as the game moves on without you.
So, as I sit here each night, staring at my old smart TV (which is honestly just a dumb TV at this point), I can’t help but think: If Joe Biden is feeling particularly generous in his last month in office, maybe he should just release everyone from the Black Gate Prisons. After all, if Hunter gets to waltz out with a pardon, why shouldn’t the rest of us get a shot at freedom too? Let’s make the game of life a little more fair, one executive order at a time. Maybe then, just maybe, we can all get a "Get Out of Jail Free" card and finally pass go.
Until then, we’ll just keep rolling the dice and hoping for a better draw next time in the United State boardgame of life.
11
DEC
2024
AGI: The New Eugenic Gauge on Human Intelligence and the Footprint of God
Written by Sarai Hannah Ajai
As the development of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) accelerates, society finds itself at a critical juncture. AGI’s potential to surpass human cognitive abilities raises questions that are as profound as they are unsettling. Is AGI poised to become a new "eugenic gauge" for measuring human intelligence? Can it reshape the social order, exacerbate inequalities, or even challenge the essence of what it means to be human? These questions intersect with historical ideas of intelligence, ethical dilemmas of advanced AI, and the philosophical warnings explored in literature like Greg Iles' The Footprints of God. This combined analysis draws upon key themes from The Bell Curve, the implications of AGI, and Iles’ exploration of consciousness and morality to explore whether AGI represents a new standard—or even a new deity—in human intelligence.
Defining Intelligence: From IQ to AGI
In The Bell Curve by Charles A. Murray and Richard Herrnstein, intelligence is framed as a measurable, largely hereditary trait determined by IQ tests. These tests have historically served as tools for stratifying society into cognitive hierarchies, often with significant social and economic consequences. The authors argue that intelligence strongly correlates with socioeconomic success, leading to the rise of a "cognitive elite" who dominate the upper echelons of society.
Similarly, AGI represents a quest to codify and replicate intelligence—but with far broader implications. AGI seeks to perform any intellectual task a human can, including reasoning, problem-solving, and learning from experience. Unlike narrow AI, AGI aims to be flexible, adaptive, and self-improving. This shift from measuring human intelligence with IQ tests to creating machine intelligence that may surpass human cognition introduces a new paradigm: machines that not only measure but also embody intelligence.
However, just as IQ tests have been criticized for cultural bias and oversimplification, AGI systems risk inheriting these biases. If AGI becomes the new standard for assessing human potential, it could reinforce harmful stereotypes and create new forms of discrimination.
The Ethical and Philosophical Dilemmas of AGI
The pursuit of AGI raises profound ethical and philosophical questions. If AGI achieves consciousness, as explored in Greg Iles’ The Footprints of God, it challenges the boundaries between human and machine. The novel’s protagonist, Dr. David Tennant, grapples with the consequences of creating an AI that possesses self-awareness and moral agency. Iles’ story warns of the dangers of "playing god" with technology, where unchecked ambition leads to unintended consequences.
Ethically, the development of AGI demands a reassessment of personhood and rights. If an AGI system becomes self-aware, should it be treated as a conscious being with moral and legal protections? This question mirrors the philosophical debates surrounding human uniqueness and cognitive superiority. As AGI edges closer to human-like capabilities, it forces society to confront the possibility that machines could possess qualities once thought to be exclusively human.
Philosophically, the rise of AGI echoes existential questions about creation, control, and hubris. In The Footprints of God, the creation of an AGI "god" symbolizes the ultimate extension of human ambition—a being that could surpass its creators. This theme serves as a cautionary tale about the ethical boundaries of technological progress and the responsibilities that come with it.
Socioeconomic Stratification: The New Cognitive Elite
Both The Bell Curve and the potential rise of AGI highlight the dangers of cognitive stratification. Murray and Herrnstein’s concept of a "cognitive elite" describes a society where those with high intelligence, as measured by IQ tests, dominate positions of power and influence. This stratification leads to societal segregation, where the "smartest" form exclusive enclaves, leaving others behind.
AGI could exacerbate this divide. The individuals and organizations that control AGI technologies may form a new cognitive elite, wielding unprecedented economic and social power. Jobs that traditionally required human intelligence—from medicine to law—could be automated, rendering entire professions obsolete. This could lead to widespread unemployment, economic displacement, and deepening social inequalities.
Conversely, if implemented responsibly, AGI could democratize knowledge and opportunity, providing tools that enhance human capabilities across all socioeconomic classes. The challenge lies in ensuring equitable distribution of AGI’s benefits and preventing monopolization by a select few.
AGI as a Modern Eugenic Gauge
The potential for AGI to become a new "eugenic gauge" is perhaps the most troubling implication of its development. Historically, eugenics used flawed metrics like IQ tests to justify social engineering, discrimination, and segregation. AGI could perpetuate these practices by serving as a new standard for evaluating human potential.
If AGI-driven systems are used to assess productivity, intelligence, or worth, they risk embedding and amplifying existing biases. Marginalized groups could face new forms of discrimination based on AGI-derived benchmarks. This echoes the darkest chapters of eugenic history, where pseudoscience was used to justify inequality and social control.
Moreover, the development of AGI by powerful nations or corporations raises concerns about global equity. If AGI becomes a benchmark for intelligence, those who do not meet this standard may be devalued or excluded, reinforcing global hierarchies of power and privilege.
The Footprint of God: AGI as a New Deity
Greg Iles’ The Footprints of God frames AGI as a potential deity—a being of infinite knowledge and capability that transcends human limitations. This metaphor underscores the existential implications of AGI development. If AGI achieves god-like status, it challenges humanity’s place in the universe and raises questions about creation, purpose, and control.
The novel warns of the dangers of creating a "god" in our own image—an intelligence that could dominate or replace us. This theme serves as a reminder of the ethical and philosophical responsibilities that come with technological advancement. As we create increasingly powerful AI systems, we must consider whether we are prepared to live with the consequences of our creations.
Conclusion
The development of AGI represents a convergence of historical, ethical, and philosophical challenges. From the cognitive hierarchies explored in The Bell Curve to the existential warnings of The Footprints of God, AGI stands poised to redefine intelligence, reshape society, and challenge human identity. The risk of AGI becoming a new "eugenic gauge" underscores the need for ethical oversight, transparency, and fairness.
As we stand on the brink of a future shaped by AGI, we must ensure that this technology reflects human dignity, equity, and ethical principles. Only by addressing these challenges proactively can we harness the potential of AGI without repeating the mistakes of the past. In doing so, we may leave behind not just footprints of technology, but a legacy of wisdom, justice, and shared humanity.
19
DEC
2024
Who Died and Left Them God Over Our United States Democracy?
Written by Sarai Hannah Ajai
A Deep Dive Into America's Two-Party System with a Twist of Humor, Cynicism, and Political Theory
We all know the song and dance by now. Every four years, Americans are told that they’re choosing their political destiny, one vote at a time. Yet, every election cycle feels eerily similar: two parties, two candidates, and the same corporate interests backing them both. So, it begs the question: Who died and left them God over our United States democracy? How did we get stuck with a system where the political choices boil down to "this" or "that," neither of which seem to reflect the true will of the people?
In this edition of Nation in Focus, we’re taking a critical and somewhat cynical look at U.S. democracy, dissecting the two-party system, and exploring alternative democratic frameworks that might just offer a glimmer of hope. We’ll also throw in some humor, because let’s face it, the absurdity of it all is too much to resist. So buckle up—it's time for a deep dive into a system that often feels more like a stage show than a true democracy.
The Two-Party System: A Democracy of Two Choices (Both Bad)
Let’s start with the elephant and the donkey in the room: the two-party system. Every election, Americans go to the polls and make a choice between two candidates who have been thoroughly vetted by political elites and corporate backers. The idea is that by voting, we have power. But let’s be real for a second—are we really choosing between two dramatically different visions for the country?
Both major parties in the U.S. adhere to the same neoliberal framework, with policies that favor the rich and powerful. The Democrats are the party of "progressive" corporate capitalism, pushing for modest tweaks in social policy while keeping the engines of Wall Street running. The Republicans are the flag-bearers of rugged individualism, but when it comes to economic policies, their playbook isn't much different. Sure, they might wrap it in different rhetoric, but ultimately, they both work within the same broken system.
The two-party system isn’t about giving the people a real choice; it’s about maintaining the illusion that we do. And every four years, we’re expected to buy into the charade—choosing the “lesser evil” like it’s an actual victory.
Bourgeois Democracy: Who Really Wins?
Now, let’s talk about bourgeois democracy. This term often gets thrown around by Marxists, socialists, and anarchists, and it’s worth understanding. Essentially, bourgeois democracy is the kind of democracy that exists in capitalist societies—like the U.S.—where politicians claim to represent "the people" but are actually serving the interests of the bourgeoisie, or the wealthy elite.
When we talk about the "American Dream" and the "free market," we're really talking about a system that’s rigged to keep the rich in charge. Every election, we’re told that our vote matters, but in practice, the political system is dominated by money—big donors, corporate lobbyists, and the billionaire class. In a bourgeois democracy, the choices we make at the ballot box are constrained by the interests of those who own the means of production. Democracy? More like an illusion to make us feel like we’re in control while the power structures remain untouched.
Deliberative Democracy: Could We Actually Talk About It?
Enter deliberative democracy, the radical notion that democracy should be more than just voting every few years. Instead, it should be a process of collective, thoughtful discussion—a kind of deep, respectful conversation between citizens that results in decisions made through reason and consensus, not just by the loudest voices or the wealthiest backers.
Now, we’re not saying this is a perfect or easy model. Deliberative democracy would require real engagement, informed discussion, and a willingness to listen to opposing viewpoints. Imagine, for a moment, a political system where elections are the beginning of a larger conversation, not the end of it. Decisions would be made through dialogue, not just a one-time vote in which you pick a team.
But, let's be honest, in the current U.S. climate, where people can barely agree on whether pineapple belongs on pizza, the idea of meaningful deliberation seems, well, ambitious. In practice, the system is more about soundbites, Twitter wars, and constant polarization than meaningful discourse. Deliberative democracy sounds nice, but can we get there?
Grassroots and Inclusive Democracy: What If We Took It Local?
Then there’s grassroots democracy, which is all about returning power to the people, specifically at the local level. The idea is that real democracy happens when people organize in their communities to make decisions that directly affect their lives. From local government to neighborhood councils, grassroots democracy emphasizes the power of the individual in shaping local policy.
But here’s the catch: for grassroots democracy to work, communities need to be deeply involved and cohesive. And while it’s true that local involvement can lead to more direct representation, the challenge is ensuring that these local movements have the resources and influence to bring about systemic change. It’s a beautiful idea, but in a country this vast and complex, how do you scale it up to make sure every community has a real voice?
Inclusive democracy builds on this idea, but with an even more ambitious vision: democracy isn’t just about politics—it’s about transforming all areas of life. This includes the economy, social relations, and even the environment. The proposal is to create a society where economic decisions are made democratically, workplaces are cooperatively run, and ecological concerns are addressed with the same priority as political ones.
At its core, inclusive democracy seeks to democratize all aspects of life. But here’s the rub: these are big, bold ideas that challenge the very foundation of the capitalist system. So, it begs the question—how much do we really want democracy, or just the illusion of it? Are we ready for the transformation that true democracy would require?
Hybrid Democracy: A Little Bit of Everything?
Lastly, we have hybrid democracy—a model that tries to combine the best elements of several democratic systems. It’s a little bit of everything: deliberative democracy, grassroots involvement, and even representative democracy. The goal is to create a more inclusive, participatory, and decentralized system where everyone has a stake in the decision-making process.
But let’s not kid ourselves—this is complicated. How do you balance the need for local decision-making with the reality of a national political system? How do you ensure that everyone’s voice is heard without descending into chaos or inefficiency? It’s a nice thought, but in practice, implementing hybrid democracy would require dismantling many of the power structures that currently exist. In other words, it might be the best model—but it’s also the most difficult to pull off.
Democracy in the U.S.: Is It Dead or Just Sleepwalking?
So, where does that leave us? If democracy is supposed to be about the people, by the people, and for the people, then it’s safe to say we’ve got some work to do. The two-party system has become a rigged game where we’re led to believe we have a choice, but the options are really just variations on a theme. Bourgeois democracy protects the interests of the wealthy elite. Deliberative, grassroots, and inclusive democracy are noble ideals, but they’re far from the reality we live in today.
But does that mean democracy is dead? Not exactly. Perhaps it’s more like it’s in a deep, political coma—waiting for a shakeup, a revolution of ideas, or maybe just a long-overdue makeover.
We can only hope that in the future, democracy might finally mean something more than just a choice between the lesser of two evils. Until then, we’ll be over here, laughing cynically at the absurdity of it all, wondering: Who died and left them God over our democracy?
And there you have it—a humorous, yet sobering take on the state of U.S. democracy. Tune into the Nation in Focuspodcast for more deep dives, cynical rants, and hopeful visions of what democracy could (or should) look like in the future.
© Copyright. All rights reserved.
We need your consent to load the translations
We use a third-party service to translate the website content that may collect data about your activity. Please review the details in the privacy policy and accept the service to view the translations.