There are no independent rating agencies...

Comment on the Wall Street Journal article:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303812104576437641734533746.html?mod=wsj_share_twitter

Manipulation of economic data by Argentina pales in comparison with the US debt issue, with manipulated rating attributed by the compromised big three rating agencies.

There are no independent rating agencies, rating agencies are compromised by their own business and their own political links, just like the Wall Street Journal seems seems (two seems may be sufficient to generalize as pattern with character of necessity).

The fact that the US still has a high rating is a proof that market agents are not able to properly evaluate risk, otherwise they would see the obvious in the big three rating agencies manipulation.

Both some European countries as well as the US should actually get a bad rating/downgrade. To ignore a risk is to open the possibility of collapse, in this case of a global financial collapse coming from the US and affecting several central banks and countries and then the global financial system.

...paraleipsis...

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/06/2011618134516152339.html

Either there is something more that should be in the above article that is absent, or we are lost in the middle of the sophistic rhetoric of the simulation and the simulacrum, because a “multipolar world economic order” would need human agents that had evolved as much as their technologies, which does not seem to be the case, at least not in an evident way. When we look around us, what is iteratively evident is the growing presence of people anxiously looking forward to alienate their autonomy in their artifacts, eagerly taking their transhumanist chips with their transhumanist pills.

A “multipolar world economic order”, managed by the humans that we know, would have a referent of enacted self-sustainability in permanent point of catastrophe, in which the homeostatic mechanisms for the system’s regeneration would always be under the threat of a clinamen of fragmentation. For this type of economy, it would be necessary that, at cognitive levels, it was processed a type of imperative such as: what happens to the others is not indifferent to me. In any network, the element of contamination is not “bullshit”, it is constitutively intrinsic to the networks’ dynamics.

The only way for such an economy to survive, in terms of self-regeneration and functioning homeostatic mechanisms, would be that it coexisted (simultaneity in the existence) with at least one Space Economy, including, perhaps, Alien Economies…, let then the Disclosure Project come forward, because there’s a lot to be explained here.

Or does the “New World Order” gang who (Biblically) begets these articles with apocalyptic “nuages” believe that the world is sufficiently alienated in the artifacts to be unable to question and understand the obvious?

It would be best to take into account that there are black swans out there, who do not follow the general law of non-thinking. Of course, these are the residual minority, all these black swans have is their thinking in permanent thinking, and the permanent “to think thinking” will certainly be worthless in the “New World Order”, quite the contrary, those will be the first to be pushed into some type of ghetto with a panoptic headlight: “Do Not Exit, under Penalty of Existential Euthanasia, We Fear Contamination”!

...the starry sky above us...

“The starry sky above me...” Kant, “Critique of Practical Reason”

To Kant, it was an "experience of sublime", but the "starry sky" is now closer to us, more accessible.

The "starry sky" perhaps no longer astounds and frightens us, but it may inspire peace, conformity, harmony - a "feeling of Beautiful".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZ94KIiUHak

...the starry sky above us, reflexively experienced, in us, as a “conformity to ends” which is expressed in the feeling of intercommunicable harmony, as ´”feeling of life”, by the compatibilization of different noumenic natures that are capable of making emerge a non-schematizable “perceptive pathos”, but reflected as an experience of Good, an experience which is enacted by the aesthetic “feeling of Beautiful”.

What is experienced as Good is not expressible by a form or figure, it is not also a (dis)form..., it is not demonstrative, it is not monstrative,..., but it can be interpreted-there and understood-there with the things-there and in the things-there...

The Good, such as Amazonia’s biodiversity, “escapes the understanding of the numbers” (borrowing a phrase taken from an episode of “Vida Animal” RTP).

,...to see in the verb the root of the verb...,

To see in the verb the root of the verb, to see in the things the root of the things is to "force" the veiled to unveil itself and the MemeticMimetic to appear and clarify so that the ignominy does not (pre)vail.

,...vides illam rem (?)...,

...the birth within a Catholic family, with the consequent growth and development, rooted in Christian practices, followed by later negation of the faith, and adhesion to the “schools”/“ideologies”: Marxist; Leninist; Maoist, in the theoretical/practical approaches, actively lived against a right-wing dictatorship, with all its fascist propaganda and repression…, followed by a, later, critical return to the Christian matrix, may give a human animal a good cognitive training in distinguishing the wolves from their disguises...,

"Leaderships" and "New World Orders"...,

A brief comment to:

http://www.amazon.com/Your-Handbook-Global-Leadership-2nd/dp/1450504558

Preparing a "Leader-based New World Order"? How antidemocratic!

Why global leadership? Who's the leader? Why a leader, and not cooperation? Why would a global democracy need a leader, or leadership?

Why not a cooperative participative global governance (co)structure, without a leader, or leaders?

At a national(ist) scale, extreme examples of discourses of "leaders of the people" we had the Nazism, Maoism and Stalinism...

Why open the venue to a "leader-centric globalist discourse" that top-downs the hierarchy down to the lower mindless bots, alienated desiring machines that obey the global leader?

Living systems are self-organizing, autopoietic, they do not need a global leadership, the system knows very well what it needs, and knows how to make emerge the best adaptive responses.

Top-down schemes lose perspective and are strange to the systemic bottom-up self-organization that is natural of every living system.

A top-down leadership scheme invites a zero-sum strategic reasoning in the game between the leader and the populace.

The "invisible hand" of life always rejected illuminated leader-based globalisms. What legitimacy does a leader-based global dictatorship have to think and decide for the rest of the world?

The world does not need a leader, leaders, or leaderships, the world needs adaptive, responsive, structures that regard the needs of everyone, that is, every living entity, not just humans. The world is not just the humans, the humans are just another example of an animal species, and not a very successful one at intelligent responses.

If one still thinks in the leader-based paradigm, one has clearly lost the evolutionary train. But who said that we need to remain here as long as the dinosaurs did?

...Mandelbrot...

http://www.publico.pt/Mundo/morreu-mandelbrot-o-pai-da-geometria-fractal_1461407

It’s a shame that Mandelbrot has died so soon, there remains a lot to be said about fractals...

...beyond the pragmatic operationality of the effects are the causes linked to the identity, projectivity and systemic integrity: zero/potentiality/rugosity: the systemic flux that folds onto itself: “AionFlux” to “Kairon”…,…

I don't know if the word fractal is a good term...; since a system's fractality is just an effect of a system's projectivity, related to its integrity and permanence...