I am on an email list that sends out updates on “net neutrality.” Today I got one saying that various forces in congress are trying to undo the FCC’s classification of the Internet as a public utility, which it obviously is. As such, it comes under regulation not just by FCC but by every state in the union. They asked me to send $5 to help them in their battle. That’s a bit like putting in fluorescent bulbs to fight global warming, a feel-good but otherwise pointless exercise.

The whole of the neutrality battle leaves me confused, so I hope others can clarify it for me. There was a time when we all used dial-up for Internet, and people were buying second phone numbers. The nation’s phone infrastructure was stressed, but the problem soon righted itself as we all strung cables out of the wall for high-speed dedicated Internet service. And now it’s a wi-fi/4G world and will continually improve.

The assumption with the neutrality battle is that we are dealing with a limited commodity, band width, but I don’t think we are. It will expand, and what we use today will seem dial-up by comparison ten years from now.

Something else is going on. The band width cartel that has naturally formed is openly threatening to slow down web sites that do not pony up extra dough. That would effectively shut down web sites like this one and tens of millions of others. I doubt the driving force is naked greed. The Internet giants have already cordoned off the market and can print money as they please.

So I am thinking a little more in line with my general sense that we live in a totalitarian society, an iron fist barely concealed beneath a velvet glove. The objective of elimination of net neutrality would have nothing to do with available band width or constraints on corporate greed. Rather, its effect would be its objective – to silence all of those voices that have so changed the landscape, tiny to mid-sized Internet sites that nag nag nag at the heels of power. Mine is nothing, and I suffer no illusions.

I can access information from all over the globe that would have been relegated to the “alternative media” just twenty years ago. Alex Jones, for instance, is a potent force with millions of patrons (I am not one). Assuming he is the genuine article, a real voice of dissent (I do not suffer that illusion either), his traffic would slow to a crawl, and he’d effectively be silenced. There are thousands of other sites of far more value that would also be quashed by this corporate attack on band width freedom.

The object, then, of elimination of net neutrality would be to return us to the good old days when the bulk of the population was relegated to a few heavily censored sources for news, like NBC and New York Times, for instance. For that reason, I expect the pressure on FCC to return Internet to its unnatural designation as a non-utility to grow to hysterical screaming. It is indeed a monumental struggle, and $5 from a few concerned citizens ain’t gonna get it done. Is DemandProgress.org, the source of that $5 request, a blind alley used to distract real concern, make sure it all goes nowhere? That’s all I can make of such a pointless gesture.

This is just the beginning. The object, as I see it, is to quash real first amendment freedom before it gets out of hand.

The long journey home was made even longer by a storm in Denver that saddled us at LAX, forcing us to return to the terminal even as the plane was set to take off. We were only delayed a couple of hours, but at DIA we passed a line of people forced to reschedule that went on for blocks. We were tired but felt the pain of all those people who are delayed by a full day in getting to their destinations by a storm that shut down DIA for a mere one hour. Our national transportation system is a complex interdependent web, and I marvel at its efficiency.

At home we were under a foot of snow, so digging out was hard work. We had a guy come in and plow while we were gone, but he left a pile of snow blocking access to our back yard. I’ve carried back a traveler’s’ bug that has been nagging for over a week, and fatigue is one of its symptoms, so running the snow thrower and hacking away at a pile of ice chunks blocking access was a mighty chore.

New Zealand is a beautiful place. My brief exposure to its news media left me with the impression it is heavily censored, like ours. What coverage of world events I saw in newspapers was the London viewpoint, and their TV news was heavily focused on sports and local crimes and accidents, which are few. So passive observers in that place will know very little of the world, just like here.

People are nice everywhere, very nice. Food is bland (but my point of view is tainted by my gastrointestinal baggage – nothing had any appeal). At LAX I had chicken quesadilla and a glass of Chardonnay and my taste buds were awakened … spices! Hispanic flavors! I’m home! Fleeting are the joys of life, however, as the bug allows only brief periods to savor such pleasure.

My overall impression … New Zealand is like the Swiss Alps, beautiful, and like Switzerland, a land mostly unaffected by passage of violence in world events. This leaves a soft people not used to troubles. There are 4.5 million people there, and 28 million sheep (not double-counting). The World Cricket Tournament is going on there now, and that, like our Super Bowl, dominates the public mind. It’s a silly place.

But so beautiful. Two days before leaving I was going through photos on my camera, getting rid of duds. One photo was taking a long time to be erased, and I suddenly shrieked a Homer Simpson shriek – I was erasing the entire trip! I quickly removed the battery, but too late. Every photo gone. I don’t take great photos, just point and shoot, so no great loss. On Milford Track it was too wet, so I left the camera in the pack. We bought ninety photos of that Shangri-La and others have emailed us some of theirs. And we have a few stored on the iPad and iPhones. And as my wife says, it only means we have to go back.

Fine, but I am going to smuggle in some spices. Those people do not know food.

Tha above images are, according to Geoffrey Pyatt, U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, satellite photos proving there are Russian artillery systems stationed near the town of Lomuvatka, about 20 kilometers northeast of Debaltsevo. (See link.)

Take a close look and see if you see what I see … splotches. See now how our propaganda system functions. The image becomes what authority figures say it is. According to Pyatt, “we are confident these are Russian military, not separatist, systems.” Take special note of his word, “confident,” as in “confidence game.”

On the right-hand side of the photo, next to the “N” indicator, if you look closely, you will also see the Brooklyn Bridge, currently for sale.

The Russians play tit for tat.

“These materials were posted to Twitter not by accident, as their authenticity is impossible to prove – due to the absence of the attribution to the exact area, and an extremely low resolution. Let alone using them as ‘photographic evidence'” according to Major General Igor Konashenkov, spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry.

But it’s a confidence game, and those Americans who believe what they are told with complete lack of guile and utter simple trust in authority will believe that the gray splotches are exactly what Pyatt claims they are. His job is far too easy.

“It’s no secret to anyone that fakes like this are made by a group of US counselors staying in the Kiev building of the Security Council, led by General Randy Kee,” says Konashenkov, showing that two sides can play the same game.

After being savaged by New Zealand prices for over two weeks, I purchased a magazine (North and South, $9.00NZ, $6.75US) with a cover article, Why Prices are so Bloody High, by Chris Barton. It’s long and mostly anecdotal, but a key paragraph follows:

” It is estimated New Zealand’s economic growth rate would have been 15.5 percentage points higher between 1990 and 2010 if income inequality had not surged in the Rogernomics and Ruthanasia years after 1985,” said business commenter Bernard Hickey. “the report essentially argues the ‘trickle down’ theory used for much of the last half century by most developed countries does not work and the best method of improving economic growth is to reduce income inequality.”

I assume that Roger and Ruth were former government officials here. I don’t follow these things.

At another point Barton cites social historian Gordon McLauchlan, so says “You have to take power away from those people who make $4 million a year and think they are worth it.”

I see the simmering resentment in McLauchlan’s remark. I don’t see any way that one person is worth a hundred, much less a thousand times more than another. Luck has a lot to do with wealth, as does scaling, exploitation of other humans, subsidy and choice of birth canal. I also do not understand how anyone can think a human being unworthy of food, shelter and health care.

I take it one step further however. Every powerful person has the ability to buy pet economists, train and feed them and teach them to speak in a given manner. It should not be surprising that the Chicago School is more properly called the Rockefeller School of economics. These social pariah will parrot any idea that pays well, and plays it out in the future to be for the good of all.

But the paymasters know better. Neoliberalism was not meant to “succeed” in the sense that all would enjoy its benefits. Rather, it was a stalking horse for those who do benefit, the haves who want more. So in that sense, it has not failed, but rather succeeded, wildly.

The food here in New Zealand has not been to my liking, so I’ve taken to ordering ‘entrees.’ That word means something entirely different from in the U.S., where they would likely be known as “appetizers.” We are in a seaport, Akaroa, and just about everything they offer is fish of some variety. My palate does not harmonize with fish (which is only considered good if it tastes like what it isn’t).

I ordered beef carpaccio two nights ago, and was served five raw cold medallions with some sort of greenish dressing on them. I’ve checked the menu and that dish is no longer offered. I am also now given to understand that “carpaccio” describes various dishes served raw.

I’ve been paying the price ever since, and it is amazing how stomach and intestinal distress taxes joie de vivre – no desire to drink coffee (which is excellent here) or eat even modest quantities of food of any kind. Beer or wine – forget it. Nothing seems remotely interesting, no desire to write or read or hike or even just sit and people-watch. My quest right now is to find a bottle of sparking water to keep fluids moving through me so that this nasty business is soon over.

Yes, too much information. But I was thinking of John Cleese’s appearance on The Daily Show a while back when he was asked about politics and the world situation, and he said “I don’t give a fuck.” He’s in his late seventies now, and I think he’s assumed the proper attitude, which is mine right now as I make the best of this situation and the after effects of that awful meal.

In our travels around the south island of New Zealand, we’ve come across small local memorials to men who lost their lives in World War I, specifically at Gallipoli and at the Battle of Passchendaele. The number of casualties the country suffered, 16,300 dead and 40,400 wounded, far exceeds any stake that the country had in the outcome of that war by exactly this: 16,300 dead and 40,400 wounded.

It is said that New Zealand and Australia came of age, seized their identities as unique countries at that time. They apparently took hold of the fact that Old Europe was none of their concern.

I have looked through memorials to Winston Churchill now, and find there are none in New Zealand – no streets or squares or ball parks or schools named after the bloody bastard. But there are an oddball number of such things in Canada, I have found.

From this I conclude that New Zealanders are better at naming things than Canadians. I happen to like the name “Christchurch” for a city, for instance, and am none too fond of “Edmonton.” That is just one example. I have others.

This sculpture is the 2015 driftwood art winner in the annual contest here in Hokitika, New Zealand.

This is Savannah Guthrie. She is being considered as a replacement host for Brian Williams, on leave of absence for being caught in a lie, considered a “gaffe.” In news, a gaffe is getting caught lying about something inconsequential. Lying convincingly about important things is the job description. (In politics, a “gaffe” is accidentally saying something that is true.)

Guthrie appears to have all of Brian’s qualifications. She’s pretty, has a nice smile. She might be able to fill in slots on shows like 30 Rock and be really funny on Fallon. She could lie to me every night. I’d believe her.

Brian Williams is a community college dropout. As it is pretty well conceded that college degrees are mostly useless anymore, that was no blotch on his record, and I like that he forged ahead in the acting profession without training. He’s a natural.

But I did watch him in an interview one time where he claimed to write his own lines in real time for nightly news as the show went on. Nobody flinched. That was pretty good lying, probably why he thought the helicopter story would fly. People were eating his stuff up.

It’s not about truth. American news is lies. It’s about believability.