Why humans die? Why should they die? This is a question  of the ordinary man, the philosopher and also the scientist.

There are reasons for man death, for example, attack by other living things such as beasts, or poisonous animals, and also very small or even microscopic and ultra microscopic creatures such as viruses.

Man also might be perished by the forces of nature, such as drowning or thunder, or exposure to extreme coldness or heat or earthquakes and so on.

If man survives all these he gradually becomes old and feeble and his body will not regenerate anymore and becomes degenerated and succumbs to death. The big question is here. Science knows why one stops growing in adolescence. There is a piece of information in genes that stops all creature to eat and grow larger in terms of their height. You can modify it and make a bigger hedgehog – as big as a sheep.

But there is no similar gene to tell, in particular, to humans to stop regeneration and thus to become old. There are theories that explains degeneracy of living things. I am interested to begin my discourse from that point.

First agent of aging is believed to be the cosmic rays. These are particles accelerated with high energies inside the furnace of stars in such enormous amounts that they pass the width of our galaxy in few seconds (in their own time frame). These particles have ionising effect; that is, they destroy chemical bounds and prevent creation of more complex molecules from bounding of simpler molecules. In other words they can destroy life, as the life is creation of drastically complex molecules.

Our earth has a shield against accelerating particles, otherwise, the solar winds never would allow any life to be created on the earth. In spite of this shielding, the cosmic rays can penetrate even deep inside the  mines on the earth. So they are one source of ionising and degenerating the living stuffs.

There is another important source of ionisation. All in the crust of our planet we have natural radioactive minerals scattered everywhere. They were second most important agent of aging until twenty century, perhaps even more effective than cosmic rays.

Pre-industrial societies had a role in destruction of earth by burning vast areas of natural forests and erosion of fertile lands which had an indirect effect on longevity of living things on the earth. Also confining men in cities and travel and trade helped proliferation of many disease among the humans.

Despite this and some limited but notable bad effects of industrialisation, up to the second world war we can deduce that these man made destructions always could be nullified with the healing forces imposed by nature as a counter-balance against the human mischiefs. Until second world war man could not overpower nature towards complete annihilation.

In the last month of the second world war, men exploded three nuclear bombs. This is different with all wars that human has done. A country in recent history could go and bomb another country. Devastation is limited to the point that bomb hits the target. That is all in terms of material and life.

When you bomb another country with nuclear explosives, you and your own citizen also get a portion of that devastation. US, first, tested that weapon on her own soil. Immediately all around the place became poisoned forever.

In an attempt to keep the deterrence of nuclear devices, some places in the US are more radioactive than the places in Japan they targeted with those atomic bombs. As if the US has bombed its own country many times with a nuke device.

The first five nations that developed this weapon ahead of other countries, for almost two decades tested them in open atmosphere or under the ocean water. They also built facilities to process the necessary radioactive material for the weapon or for the power stations running on a controlled nuclear reaction, with the same concept. In all of these operation large amounts of water is used for washing and cooling; also sooner or later everything becomes exposed to the fresh air from the atmosphere and pollutes the atmosphere.

As much I tried, I could not find certain estimates for the amount of pollution caused during the last sixty – seventy years after emergence of this weapon and invention of nuclear reactors.

They say everything is under control. This means prevention of falling these materials in the hands of undesirable people or in the hands of their enemies. Otherwise, nothing is under control. Pollution of the earth relentlessly is continuing.

If you shut down a coal power station, after three years vegetation grows everywhere and rust and mould  and other elements return the place back to the nature that we had twelve thousand years ago. Shutting it down reverses our actions in matter of years. In contrast, nature needs hundreds thousand years to clean the radioactive pollution and man cannot reverse it.

This is the first irreversible destruction we have done to ourselves and to our nature.

One friend who left the comment earlier in one of our blogs described the social media as the opium of the masses hinting to what is quoted from Marx or Engels. I found the description somehow correct. However I have some humble ideas to add.

Supposedly, the original quote says that the religion is the opium of the masses. Therefore one strong objective of a Marxist activist is to vehemently fight with the religious beliefs of the masses as one of the main endeavours of his activism.

Marxist position has an additional reason or perhaps the reason behind its proposition regarding the religion. They believe that they are scientific thinkers and their ideas are based on science and in science there is no place for the religion. One can find cause of any phenomenon in nature without need to attribute it to an unseen omnipotent nonphysical entity. For that, they also called themselves scientific socialists.

The historical dialectic of Marxism interpretes religion as a hindrance to the uprising of the masses. They believe that the poverty in religions is described as the result of the destiny of the individual, disobedience to god, a way of testing the faith of the believer. Also, according to the understanding of them of the religions, wealth is something that god has given to the owner of wealth (i.e., capital).

We have to leave these things now. However, it still remains some juice in this catch phrase. Surprisingly, I can generalise the same preposition to other things. For instance (and this is already has been said by some), the Marxism is the opium of masses. Religion and Marxism, and as my friend says, the very brand new Social Media, at the end of the day would fall in the hands of power and the authority and will be used against the ordinary people in a way to opiate them.

Mao believed that he had found a way to prevent such a phenomenon to happen by constant revolution and he created some excitement in the population of his followers, as one might interprete, to opiate them in the religious belief in his red book.

Robert Michels’s Iron Law of Oligarchy and Vilfredo Pareto – Gaetano Mosca’s Theory of Ruling Elites hinting to other rules governing aggregate of humans. According to Pareto and Mosca any conceiveable way of government  will end up to the rule of lions by force, that is, the direct and ruthless governance or the rule of foxes by stealth and cunning and manipulative democracies both resulting frustration and inability of man to create a just and fair system

I differentiate just versus fair as I say. Just means that you stay on your agreement. For example, if you agree to pay ten pounds for a hand woven ‘broderie anglaise’ to a young weaver on the assumption to sell it in your shop for £12 then paying him the promised fee has fulfilled the criteria of you bing just towards him. When you pay justice has been done, full stop. Now assume someone comes to you and falls for the item and pays £20. It is “fair” that you give that extra £8 to the creator. All right, you had a role here, then give extra £6 by all fairness to the creator.

It is difficult. Isn’t it? Religion asks you to be fair and get reward in some other unseen world. Non-religious ideas, such as Marxism, say that you will be rewarded by a medal or by remembrance from the future generations. In both cases you will be deprived of 400% increase in benefit.

As usual I fell far from my goal title of the post. Social Media created from the beginning of the 21^st century, became the most used mass media in the history of man and could break all the boundaries that already existed among humans. When we come from our daily toils back home and while we are having dinner with our families then at the same time we can talk and gossip about everything with any intention as if we are gathered in the village pub or coffee shop. We do not read evening newspaper (if they still publish) or watch TV. Everything is available on the Internet. Above all things on the we like the social media.

We like the chatting and banter and warmth of the environment that we have created for ourselves. We become addicted to it. We are addicted but not opiated. If you exercise every day you become addicted but by no means you are opiated.

When Marxism investigates history, it does not say that early Christians, before Emperor Constantine, were opiated; in contrast, it believes they have been revolutionary and in favour of the movement of history to higher tiers of civilisation.

What happened then? And happens to any future strives of man to establish a just, lawful, and fair and balanced society.  The authority and power come and find their way into it and at the top of it. Then they will use it against you and to opiate you.

(to be continued)

A month ago I had a conservation with a Facebook friend regarding what people send on the social media without getting a very effective result of their intellectual efforts. I used a simile as “putting so many bricks on top of each other without building a monument” that can remain and resist the constant attack of time through the gales of oblivion. Waves come and hit them to the cliffs of “being in a remote past” and crush ideas into the realm of nihilia.

This friend liked my proposition to try to create a place and starting to put bricks, stones and mortars into a toil that synergises somehow into some effect, though modicum.