Before Matoko Chan Completely Loses It

Yesterday I linked to Douthat, and apparently I should have actually linked to this essay, which describes Assange’s philosophy in much more detail. My apologies.

That link is a fascinating read, btw.






73 replies
  1. 1

    Before Matoko Chan Completely Loses It

    Boy, did you ever miss that train.

  2. 2
    Felanius Kootea (formerly Salt and freshly ground black people) says:

    The cudlip comments get to you?

  3. 3
    Fuck! A Duck says:

    How would one be able to tell?

  4. 4
    Annelid Gustator says:

    Can she please tell the folks at Wookieleeks to start in on FIFA?

  5. 5

    @TooManyJens:
    or the barn door after the horses were out.
    @Felanius Kootea (formerly Salt and freshly ground black people):
    It might have been the 3^25 cudlip comment, but cudlip predates this explosion by at least a few days.

  6. 6
    Joe Beese says:

    Speaking of Wikileaks, Mr. Cole, do you plan to post about its revelation that Obama’s representatives bullied Spain out of its planned prosecution of Bush-era torturers?

    Or are you just going to remind us about the Lily Ledbetter Act again?

  7. 7
    Calouste says:

    @Joe Beese:

    You mean Obama’s representatives who bullied Spain from 2005 to 2008? Those ones?

    Read the fuck up on the case before you start spouting bullshit. El Pais (in English) is a good start.

  8. 8
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @Joe Beese:

    Speaking of Wikileaks, Mr. Cole, do you plan to post about its revelation that Obama’s representatives bullied Spain out of its planned prosecution of Bush-era torturers?
    __
    Or are you just going to remind us about the Lily Ledbetter Act again?

    What I enjoy about clowns like you is that, somehow, all the constructive elements of the Lily Ledbetter Act are mitigated by the fact that another terrible thing happened. As though the universe is incapable of handling such a dichotomy.

    People can be angry at the revelation you are referencing while simultaneously championing the Lily Ledbetter Act.

    We are not all simple-minded buffoons like you.

  9. 9
    freelancer says:

    John, you know you shouldn’t encourage the mentally afflicted like this…

  10. 10
    Svensker says:

    @Joe Beese:

    Instead of Mclaren hanging out with Matoko, why don’t you go for it? The two of you can see how many times you can write the same thing on the blackboard before your hands fall off. The rest of us will miss you!

  11. 11
    Calouste says:

    In other wikileaks news, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi is holding an unscheduled meeting with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. Embassy cables released yesterday alleged that Putin and Berlusconi have a “close business relationship”. Berlusconi is in Russia at the moment, but was only scheduled to meet with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev.

  12. 12
    eemom says:

    hmmm…….do I sense a new FPer in the works?

    bwaaaahaaaahaaa. I couldn’t even type that without lmao at the hilarity that would ensue.

    Go on Cole, old Cudlip — do it. I dare ya. I double-dog dare ya.

  13. 13
    Joe Beese says:

    @Calouste:

    You mean Obama’s representatives who bullied Spain from 2005 to 2008? Those ones?

    No, I mean this one:

    On April 15 [2009], Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.), who’d recently been chairman of the Republican Party, and the US embassy’s charge d’affaires met with the acting Spanish foreign minister, Angel Lossada. The Americans, according to this cable, “underscored that the prosecutions would not be understood or accepted in the US and would have an enormous impact on the bilateral relationship” between Spain and the United States. Here was a former head of the GOP and a representative of a new Democratic administration (headed by a president who had decried the Bush-Cheney administration’s use of torture) jointly applying pressure on Spain to kill the investigation of the former Bush officials.

    http://motherjones.com/politic.....estigation

    Thanks for playing.

  14. 14
    licensed to kill time says:

    Boy, matoko_chan is gonna be thrilled.

    Cudlip-in-Chief noticed her!

  15. 15
    freelancer says:

    @Svensker:

    You should probably at WP to that list, what with his having worn out the Crtl+C/Ctrl+P on his keyboard, incessantly shouting “You Obots would still love blackity black Nobama if he skull&&&&ed a kitten on live TV! BTW nothing I said is racist because I declare the things I say not be racially motivated.”

  16. 16
    cleek says:

    meh.

    i don’t buy Assange’s rationalizations.

    to me, he looks like a guy who enjoys waving his ass at authority but wants to look like a high-minded revolutionary while he does it.

  17. 17
    aaron bady says:

    Following Matoko Chan’s trail of carnage through that thread was one of the more amusing experiences of the past few days.

    Thanks for the link!

  18. 18
    Comrade Colette Collaboratrice says:

    Is this now officially the thread where we attack the other commenters? Wait, let me get my list. Also popcorn.

  19. 19
    soonergrunt says:

    @cleek: Tip of the hat to the guy who said it better and more concisely than I ever could.

    @John Cole–The boat sailed on that one about six months ago. Lord, but she does love her pie.
    Another tip of the hat to cleek.

  20. 20
    polyorchnid octopunch says:

    Jesus, Americans… dumb as posts about this. Seriously, this thing is the best thing since sliced bread… and it’s really fun watching all of you pulling a three monkeys act just as hard as you can. Is it because a Dem’s in the WH and it’s your side that’s taking the beating this time?

    As for the whole thing with the Spanish… you need to think about how soon it’s going to be (esp. given the fact that your economy is circling the bowl) before countries like Spain go “well, sayonara. Let us know when you’re ready to be reasonable.” What are you going to do then?

  21. 21
    Calouste says:

    @Joe Beese:

    So a Republican Senator and a Bush-era leftover diplomat are now Obama’s representatives? Sounds more to me like some people were trying to complete some “unfinished business” under the radar. It’s not like the bullying hadn’t been going on for 4 years by that point in time.

  22. 22
    matoko_chan says:

    @Cole.
    i love you. picture me staring up at you with adoration in my gooey brown JRT puppy dog eyes while thumping my tail stub madly on the floor.
    @aaron bady:
    AMG Aaron Bady!
    it just doesnt get moar desu than that.
    but the best comment was alien-radio!!!!
    give him props please, not me.

    To massively simplify. Success is built on having a nice open functioning OODA (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) loop. When A paranoid system adds layer after layer of security, bluffs, FUD, etc. at increasing strength as the core of the system is approached, Information flow across the entire system is compromised, and the OODA loops of the component parts start getting more and more out of whack,they respond to information more and more slowly, make decisions slower, or worse always make the SAME decision etc. This is how non linear information systems collapse.
    If you can complete your OODA loop faster than your opponent you will win.
    Quite aside from what else Wikileaks accomplishes it’s an elegent hack.

  23. 23
    matoko_chan says:

    all you juicers, that should help.
    Assange’s paranoia frag bomb is an OODA loop killer.
    i know there are some systems punks in here.

  24. 24
    burnspbesq says:

    @eemom:

    That would send me back to FDL.

  25. 25
    suzanne says:

    Damn, matoko_chan went even more batshit than usual and I missed it?!

    I have a feeling that would have made my holiday season.

  26. 26
    wsn says:

    Just read yesterday’s thread.

    +1 for matoko_chan’s bewildered outrage. No one is covering the leaks in any interesting way – i.e., if what Assange is trying to do will or could succeed.

  27. 27
    burnspbesq says:

    @Joe Beese:

    Remind me again what position Mel Martinez held in the Obama Administration at the time of that meeting.

    Oh, right.

    If you knew how the world works, you would know that the embassy person at that meeting was there to babysit and take notes, and that the Spanish government would have understood that anything Martinez said was not the position of the United States.

  28. 28
    celticdragonchick says:

    Before Matoko Chan Completely Loses It

    As already noted above…that ship has sailed.

  29. 29
    burnspbesq says:

    That’s why I said yesterday that wikileaks is a means to an end, and that Assange is a political actor who wants to break the existing order and then rearrange the pieces in accordance with a design known only to himself.

  30. 30
    burnspbesq says:

    @suzanne:

    “Damn, matoko_chan went even more batshit than usual and I missed it?!”

    Count your blessings.

  31. 31
    wsn says:

    @burnspbesq:

    But it’s not a design known only to himself. He’s published how he thinks it will end!

    That is, high level corporate and governmental interactions will be public (perhaps after some relatively short time delay). Any organization that isn’t too concerned about having their business public will be fine and will be able to devote all their resources to their objectives. Any organization that wants to keep secrets won’t be able to keep up with the “good” organizations because they will have to devote too many of their resources to secret-keeping.

    Whether that will work is another story, but it’s not like Assange is hiding the ball.

  32. 32
    Maude says:

    @burnspbesq:
    Government by jigsaw puzzle and Assange has the cover picture.

  33. 33
    fordpowers says:

    Word. I actually dropped this same link in the comments a couple times yesterday so I’m happy to claim partial credit, thx.

    That article really is soooooo worth the read – even if it kinda hurts the brain.. Its this underlying philosophy that really has sucked me in and made me obsessed with this whole scandal. I mean, I’m certainly not surprised by any of the revelations – because clearly we’re surrounded by a bunch of sick, corrupt fcks worldwide. But just seeing the hierarchy of information and dissemination changing right before our eyes and watching the technology turn this powerful political game on its ear is just fascinating for me. admittedly, I’m a little geeky, but still.

  34. 34
    Poopyman says:

    @cleek: Bingo. Of course, the US obliged him by creating a security state, so there is that to consider.

  35. 35
    burnspbesq says:

    @wsn:

    Color me skeptical. We could doubtlessly spend days speculating about how this will play out, but start with this one.

    It seems to me that it more or less logically flows from what Assange has written about information that he is opposed to the entire notion of non-public information. If that’s correct, then there are no patents, trademarks, or copyrights in his world. Yet, our historical experience in a wide variety of industries has been that unless you give inventors the opportunity to earn economic rents for some period of time, you get a less-than-optimal level of R&D investment. And in order for those economic rents to flow, you need a legal mechanism to prevent persons other than the inventor or his/her designers from competing them away. So how do you fund research in Assange-world? Who decides what gets funded?

  36. 36
    burnspbesq says:

    Damn auto-correct. That should be “designees,” not “designers.”

  37. 37
    Bill Arnold says:

    @wsn:

    Whether that will work is another story, but it’s not like Assange is hiding the ball.

    I want an example of it ever having worked. i.e. has there ever been a large completely (or even mostly) transparent human organization?

  38. 38
    Softail says:

    @burnspbesq:

    Patents are a perfect example in fact. Patented inventions aren’t protected because they’re secret. They are public knowledge. Due to the advantages you mentioned everyone agrees to pretty much play by the rules most of the time. there are no secrets involved at all after the patent issues only while it is in review for a fixed period. Nothing WikiLeaks does would interfere with that unless there were something shady in the review process.

    BTW if you sent much time with intellectual property lawyers you would probably have a much darker opinion.

  39. 39
    wsn says:

    @ burnsbesq

    I am also skeptical. But people were making art before copyright. And the gov’t can fund research. Not to mention a lot of the profit from patents/inventions is arguably from being the first mover & getting network effects, not so much the patent. What’s the % of patents that aren’t renewed?

    @ Bill Arnold

    I think the distribution channels (the internet) could (possibly!) make an orders-of-magnitude difference than what’s been going on in the past. Consider facebook & notions of privacy.

    And I don’t think “completely transparent” is precisely right. Most stuff will probably not be looked at. But anything plausibly could be, and at very little cost to the leakers/publishers. Meanwhile keeping things from them (basically keeping them out of digital format) is increasing.

    Basically, the cost of keeping things open in this model grows by a small-order polynomial, whereas the cost of keeping things secret grows geometrically or exponentially. (all guesses/examples.) So any organization of any scale does a cost/benefit analysis and says “fuck it”.

    Again, I’m skeptical. But I don’t think it can be dismissed so easily.

  40. 40
    burnspbesq says:

    @Softail:

    I’m an international tax lawyer. At least half of what I do is IP-related.

  41. 41
    burnspbesq says:

    @wsn:

    “And the gov’t can fund research”

    If that notion doesn’t have you breaking into a cold sweat, you haven’t thought it all the way through.

  42. 42

    @burnspbesq:

    It seems to me that it more or less logically flows from what Assange has written about information that he is opposed to the entire notion of non-public information. If that’s correct, then there are no patents, trademarks, or copyrights in his world.

    Is a trademark or copyright “non-public”? Or a patent, for that matter?

    You may be using that term differently than I understand it (likely). I can’t recall where it was, but I read somewhere that one company’s “secret recipe” was not patented because it would have to reveal the ingredients outside their company itself. But that may be urban legend.

  43. 43
    wsn says:

    @burnspbesq:

    Actually, I have. The patent system is not what separates us from, say, Iran.

  44. 44
    wsn says:

    @arguingwithsignposts:

    That is IP known as a “trade secret.” John Rogers discussed it a bit when talking about his show a while back.

    Trademarks are the ™ or (r). Like the phrase “Coca-cola”. They have to be used to be kept. It’s why you see a bunch of bs tiny lawsuits from the big guys against even the tiniest violation by small guys – even one missed c&d letter could mean giving it up.

    Trade secrets are things you do a certain way. You keep them by keeping them secret. If they get out, you lose your rights. But you have some protections if they are unlawfully revealed.

    Patents are for (basically) inventions – the gov’t grants you a few years monopoly to make, use, sell, offer for sale, or import the device/process in exchange for making it public. That way, the public has access to it eventually, but you have an incentive to make it via the monopoly.

    Copyright is for writings, art, designs, etc. It prohibits someone from copying what you made without your consent. They last for as long as disney wants to keep mickey mouse copyrighted.

  45. 45
    Bill Arnold says:

    @Softail:

    Due to the advantages you mentioned everyone agrees to pretty much play by the rules most of the time. there are no secrets involved at all after the patent issues only while it is in review for a fixed period.

    A patent is often not written until the ideas gel and there is some reason to protect the IP because disclosure (e.g. product, or publication) is imminent. Transparency threatens that.

  46. 46
    matoko_chan says:

    nononononono, again, you guys miss Assanges point.
    The US system is the field lab experiment for Assanges design of a paranoia frag bomb on classified data systems, not on our security system.
    The beauty of Assanges system killer (if it works) is that the more unjust a regime is, the more vulnerable it is to this attack.
    The defense is simply, dont be evil.
    I am unsure if Douthat is stupid or lying in his opinion piece.
    perhaps both.
    if this works on the US……it could work on all closed regimes– China, Russia…..and Iran.
    it is a quite brilliant mashup of Information theory, systems theory, and SNT (social network theory).
    Assange’s paranoia frag bomb is just an OODA loop killer.
    Instead of trying to hunt Assange down or smear him with fake rape charges, we should be offering him a fucking job.
    Of course, that would mean we actually believed our own bullshytt about the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.
    We are fucking terrified of information transparency.
    Because we are evil.

  47. 47
    THE says:

    No matoko, China is already a very closed webspace, with written language barrier and “the Great Firewall of China”.

    They only need to introduce digital signatures and the web is official and secure with no anonymity.
    CPC will never allow a Wikileaks to live inside China
    and they will block any access to an outside one, through the GFOC.

    Once nations start to spoof Wikileaks with disinformation,
    no one will be sure what is true on WL.
    And then everything becomes officially deniable again.

  48. 48
    Bill Arnold says:

    @THE:

    Once nations start to spoof Wikileaks with disinformation,
    no one will be sure what is true on WL.

    Disinformation warfare is the stuff of nightmares. I’m recalling a story by Ken MacLeod (“The Execution Channel”) where disinformation had a big role, with entire government agencies (or at least one) devoted to actively polluting public information.

  49. 49
    THE says:

    Yes, Bill, but it’s the obvious solution to WL – just bury the truth in noise.

  50. 50
    matoko_chan says:

    @THE: disinformation might be an evolutionary stage, but right naow china is just as reliant on OODA loop structure as any other country.
    you digitized sigs will ossify the system just like any other security protocol.
    this is our old humans vs machines battle spock, like the autonomous selfreplicating drones against hostile trusted networks.
    it cant be proven…..unlike satan and the black box.
    :)

  51. 51
    matoko_chan says:

    @Bill Arnold: there is no example.
    this is a BRAND NEW FUCKING PARADIGM.
    no one knows if it will work,
    we are in the middle of field test #1.
    are you a conservative?

  52. 52
    Peter J says:

    @John Cole:

    Assange’s lawyer writes about the charges in Sweden against Assange.

    Considering that the reporting about it has been rather one-sided, it’s very interesting read.

  53. 53
    THE says:

    @matoko
    I don’t agree. China is already talking about compulsory real name registration of all websites.

    Digital signatures is a very small step. When you sign up with an internet provider you are mailed a flash drive with all the software to install on your computer and includes your personal certificate.

    The network will bar all unsigned communications. Anything coming from outside China can be given a random signature by the Information Ministry at point of entry, if it is on the whitelist of approved foreign websites.

    You have no idea the scale of China’s web management and cyberwarfare, censorship, and monitoring already. It’s a freakin’ army.

  54. 54
    THE says:

    @matoko_chan:

    it cant be proven…..unlike satan and the black box

    Hmm. Very cool. I had never heard of that before. The very fact that you know about it, tells me a lot about you.

  55. 55
    burnspbesq says:

    @Peter J:

    You’ve kinda missed the point, I’m afraid. The public statements by Assange’s lawyers have very little to do with law, and much more to do with crisis management and PR. Notice that the lawyers who are doing most of the talking on Assange’s behalf about about his legal problems in Sweden aren’t, you know, Swedish.

  56. 56
    Bill Arnold says:

    @matoko_chan:

    this is a BRAND NEW FUCKING PARADIGM.
    no one knows if it will work,
    we are in the middle of field test #1.
    are you a conservative?

    OK, then we’re basically agreed.
    Yes, a little conservative, about big experiments of this sort, where we’re all the subjects. Mainly because we live in a world that is pretty dangerous, what with all the nuclear weapons still in play and with new nuclear players, bio warfare getting cheaper, AGW a big messy set of unknowns, information technology growth an even messier set of unknowns, etc. It would be nice to have a solid reason to believe that transparency would reduce risks.

    it cant be proven…..unlike satan and the black box.

    That was amusing, had not seen it, another new set of web sites to procrastinate with… :-)

  57. 57
    matoko_chan says:

    @Bill Arnold:

    It would be nice to have a solid reason to believe that transparency would reduce risks.

    It would be nice to believe that humans can be treated like informed adults and allowed to make their own decisions.
    That is my objection to conservatism in general. Conservatives treat their base like retarded children that have to be bribed and bullied and exploited. Conservatives try to find rational for injustice and tribalism and stupidity, rather than educating and informing their base.
    Conservatives are dishonest actors that demogogue the people because they believe humans need caretaking and are too stupid to learn. That is why they validate stupid beliefs like creationism, Fetal Personhood, and climatology denial.
    That is why Assange’s New Paradigm (if it works) threatens the basis of conservatism, the cloistering of information deemed too dangerous for the ‘slines to have access to.
    Now Assange and i are basically both quellists. We believe that all humans have an embedded substrate of demodynamic nanotech that just needs to be switched on. That is what Maximize Exposure is about. Let a thousand Mannings (leaks) bloom in the information desert. In theory this will lead to a redistribution of power accumulation points. But who can say?

    Note the tacky old biddies dishing on me on the cudlips thread.
    I am trying to switch on their embedded nanotech, make them think about what Assange is attempting, rather than cowlike acceptance of the disinformation poison Douthat is pouring in their ears.
    Douthat is simply a toxic person. He is profoundly intellectually dishonest and should be shunned by people of reason and good faith everywhere.

  58. 58
    THE says:

    But matoko, that is not true when you reveal the contents of diplomatic communications.

    That is kept secret, mainly to protect other governments who want to keep potentially secret and embarrassing information from messing up their relationships with their own citizens or with third governments, whilst they explore negotiation options with the US government.

    Even if you want US actions to be open – other governments just won’t play by your rules. The wider world is neither as democratic nor as individualistic as the USA.

    You play by their rules or they won’t play at all – or not with the USA.
    Your’s is a recipe for isolationism.

    (Last sentence added in edit).

  59. 59
    matoko_chan says:

    @THE:

    that is not true when you reveal the contents of diplomatic communications.

    Bullshytt!
    The “international community” is just another closed power subroutine feeding off the people. Like the Arab states desire to take down the ISLAMIC republic of Iran, which would cause uprisings against the oligarchs in their own countries if it were publically known.
    like quell says, smashing them is a neccessary first step.

    The oligarchs aren’t an outside factor; they are like a closed subroutine that has gotten out of hand. A cancer if you want to switch analogies. They are programmed to feed off the rest of the body no matter what the cost to the system in general, and to kill off anything that competes. That is why you have to take them down first.

  60. 60
    THE says:

    Fine matoko, so you want to remake the world in your image.

    If you won’t respect our legitimate security concerns, then in the end we will be forced to ignore you.

    No one needs USA that much any more anyway.
    It is a bankrupt declining power.
    Our number one trading partner is China.
    USA is number seven.

    I bet China will understand our security concerns.
    We supply them with uranium, iron ore, coal.
    They will come to the party.

    Don’t you see? Every country will be forced to make the same choice.

  61. 61
    matoko_chan says:

    @THE: u forget my dual citizenship.
    i am also a citizen in the Hacker Nation.

    Wikileaks is moved to french and swedish servers after criminal US DDOS attack and Amazon cowardice.
    the ABC headline is Wikileaks DOWN! but it is not.
    Assange reportedly close to arrest.

    what do i say?
    Release the Kracken Garani Massacre Video!

  62. 62
    matoko_chan says:

    Pakistan shows us the way.

    High court of Pakistan dismisses attempt to ban WikiLeaks http://is.gd/i8g4x
    about 1 hour ago via web

    LHC’s Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed dismissed the petition, calling it non-maintainable.
    We must bear the truth, no matter how harmful it is

    bi lah kayfah

  63. 63
    THE says:

    Secrecy is vital to our national security.
    It is vital for Pakistan’s security.
    Wait till their secrecy viz a viz India is compromised.

    Every government knows what has to be done.
    The Net can be locked down.
    I already told you how.

    You might be a hacker.
    I am a Darwinian.
    Survival is the only game.

  64. 64
    THE says:

    Actually now that i think about it.

    If the Pakistanis don’t care about the US security leaks any more,
    that possibly means the pro-Chinese faction has won.

    USA may soon be kicked out of Karachi.

  65. 65
    matoko_chan says:

    @matoko_chan: ABC was double wrong– french and SWISS servers.

    uh oh. everyDNS also hosts Netflix.
    bad juju for Cole.
    First they came for Wikileaks, then they came for Netflix.

  66. 66
    matoko_chan says:

    @THE: why cant Justice Azmat simply be a moral person that believes in the Law?
    the Prophet(PBUH) famously said, a nation can survive without god, but a nation cannot exist without justice.

    and hacking is darwinian.
    <3

  67. 67
    matoko_chan says:

    Right naow in Murrikkka, we have samesame jeebus democracy, but no justice.
    does that mean Murrikkka is doomed?

  68. 68
    THE says:

    @matoko_chan:

    Your prophet was born before mankind had heard of Darwin’s theory of Evolution.

    Darwinian theory teaches us that survival is the highest law of life, not justice.
    Nature selects us for inclusive fitness.
    Justice is only one part of that.

    If it is a choice between survival and justice, we will choose survival.
    That is our moral weakness perhaps, but there it is.

    Darwinism teaches us that were not designed to a moral law, but rather, by natural law.

  69. 69
    Peter J says:

    @burnspbesq:

    Notice that the lawyers who are doing most of the talking on Assange’s behalf about about his legal problems in Sweden aren’t, you know, Swedish.

    Considering that the lawyer in question did represent Assange in London in October in regard to his legal problems in Sweden, don’t you think that the lawyer would make himself familiar with appropriate Swedish laws and that he would also have been in contact with Assange’s Swedish lawyer?

  70. 70
    matoko_chan says:

    @THE: but the Generous Qur’an is darwinian.
    :)

  71. 71
    THE says:

    Everything humans do is Darwinian matoko.
    Everything they create.

  72. 72
    THE says:

    I mean of course, that it is “Darwinian” at some meta-level.
    Because we are Darwinian agents.

    We are acting out a Darwinian agenda even when we don’t know we are.

    Sometimes the Darwinian agenda is that of the beings or ideologues that parasitize us.

    My DNA is not always the DNA in effective control of me.
    Societies, even religions, can be vehicles of exploitation, of me, by other Darwinian agents.

  73. 73
    THE says:

    Right naow in Murrikkka, we have samesame jeebus democracy, but no justice.
    does that mean Murrikkka is doomed?

    I don’t think nature gives any such guarantees.

    Lions have been exploiting wildebeest for millions of years.
    Wildebeest have never gained justice for the ruthless exploitations of the Lions against them.

    Parasitic relationships can be permanent and co-evolving.
    Nature is not just. It is logical.

    The plants have never risen up in revolt against the predation by the animals.
    Not in a billion years.
    Neither has any god saved them.

Comments are closed.