Reflections on society, politics and nature XXXVIII

This is one in a series of posts with brief notes on society, politics, and nature. I sometimes include short personal notes as well. Click “read more” to see all the entries.


Most humans have shared values, at least when we drill down to find the most basic expression of our values. The conflicts are often more rooted in how inclusive or exclusive our sense of “we” is and differences in strategies.

So in politics, as in the rest of life, it’s often helpful to differentiate values and strategies. We can identify our respective values. See how similar or different they are, and they tend to be more similar the more we drill down to find their essence. And then explore collective strategies that fit those values.

It’s of course not quite that simple. Sometimes, we may be too invested in a particular strategy to be open to this type of exploration. And it may be difficult to get people on board with this exploration on a larger scale. But it’s a good starting point and general guideline for ourselves and we can bring it into whatever groups we are part of.

If we find ourselves invested in a particular strategy, it helps to take a step back and identify our values and the essence of these values. This, in turn, may help us be more flexible and explore a range of possible strategies that all fit the deeper values.

As mentioned above, there is also the question of how wide our circle of “us” is. Does it include all of life, future generations, and non-human species? Or is it more exclusive? Whether it’s wide or narrow, the deeper values may be the same, for instance, to support life. A more narrow circle of “us” may reflect cognitive limitations, seeing a wider circle as unfeasible, or investment in a view of life as a zero-sum game. Differentiating values and strategies may also here help us open our minds to find win-win strategies, at least sometimes.

This topic came to mind since it seems that some who get into conspiracy theories – like QAnon – seem to share values with people outside of the conspiracy world. They just have (very) different strategies, based on a very different set of information and ideas about how the world works. Although the values may be shared, it doesn’t mean the info and ideas about how the world works are equal. One is based on verifiable information and the other on flimsy disinformation. But identifying and emphasizing the shared values may be a starting point for dialogue.

Thanks to Marshall Rosenberg and Non-Violent Communication for pointing out the difference in needs and strategies, or – as I wrote about it here – values and strategies.

Click READ MORE to see more posts on this topic.


As predicted, wealthy countries want to hoard vaccines for themselves. There is an international program to buy up vaccines for less wealthy countries, but it’s – as of now – small and slow-moving.

There are many problems with this.

Wealthy countries also want to allow private companies to keep patent rights on the vaccines, preventing price drop and less wealthy countries to produce their own vaccines. In a global crisis, the only thing that makes sense is to set aside any patents and allow for a wider production of the vaccines. Especially since public funds have been used to develop many of these vaccines.

We are all in this together. Unless everyone is safe, no-one is safe.

The wealth of wealthy countries is built upon the poverty of the less wealthy countries. Their poverty didn’t happen by accident. It happened through centuries of exploitation, and this is an ongoing exploitation.

We never know when we will need help. It’s better to help others so they will be there to help us when we need help.

It does something with us if we don’t act from solidarity and the recognition that we are all one. It’s painful. It goes against what we are, no matter how much we have covered it up with beliefs, identifications, and wounds.


In New Age circles, some talk about starseeds. Somehow, we are special beings that lived on another planet and now came here with a special mission.

To me, this seems like a way to build up a story of being special. Different. Not like the other folks.

To the extent it’s taken seriously, it’s inherently a painful story. It reinforces an experience of being different. And it’s a story we’ll need to defend and prop up without really being able to.

Why not instead deepen in our shared and individual humanity? That’s what’s here. That’s what we are living. That’s clearly what life “wants” us to be and live here and now. And there is an immense richness and beauty in it.

Why not deepen in recognizing that all life in the universe is an expression of the universe. We are all the local senses and consciousness of the universe, and we are the universe bringing itself into consciousness.

Why not deepen in the recognition of what we are – that which all our experiences happen within and as? That which the mind may label consciousness, or oneness, or even the divine?

To me, that makes a lot more sense than trying to prop up a second-hand idea that has no real data to support it.


Trump desperately wants to be seen as the best. So it seems fitting – in a sad and poetic justice kind of way – that he is best at being the worst. Already, most historians see him as the worst president in US history, and that’s not likely to change anytime soon.

We often create what we fear the most.

Of course, there is a whole sad backstory here with his childhood and his relationship with his father and grandfather.

FEBRUARY 1, 2020


I keep coming back to this since I see examples of how people misunderstand this in my personal life and in the news.

The official pandemic guidelines are to prevent the healthcare system from being overloaded. They are not meant to be sufficient to prevent individuals from being infected.

As individuals, we need to follow stricter guidelines if we want to avoid being infected. And we need to stay up-to-date about the research and what is happening in other countries.

For me, it seemed clear early on in the pandemic that the virus mainly transmits through the air. That means that masks are essential and that they need to be close-fitting and medical grade. It also means that it’s important to not spend much time in enclosed spaces with people outside of your own household. (The few times I have needed to go to a store, I chose a time with few customers and went in and out as quickly as possible. Mainly, I buy whatever I need online.)

The one meter distance rule of the Norwegian government is clearly insufficient when we know how easily the virus spreads through the air. I keep much longer distance, and if I have to pass someone, I do it quickly.

We also know that viral load plays a big role in how sick we get, so it’s important to reduce viral load. Again, mask and avoiding enclosed spaces with people outside of our own household are two of the most important things we can do here.

Contracting this virus is like Russian roulette. We don’t know how it will impact us. Some young and healthy people get seriously sick. And it seems that anyone can get lasting and sometimes severe symptoms (long covid).


If you want to help someone in your life, help them feel safe.

– Matt Licata

That’s also a good aim for us collectively.

As I see it, a central aim for governments – for us collectively – is to help everyone feel safe. Or, at least, provide the circumstances where they can feel safe.

This helps all of us. A society where people can feel safe is a safer society for all of us. It’s a gentler, kinder, and more sane society.

How do we do this? Through good social safety nets, tax-funded higher education, good universal healthcare, deeper democracy, and so on.


For a few months now, I have followed a few people who have invited their animal companions to talk – using buttons and human words. I believe Hunger for Words was the first, and they have a good list of resources as well.

I love this approach. It’s an updated approach to the timeless question of interspecies communication, and it adds an important dimension to it. At the same time, it reminds us that non-human animals have cognition and feelings as we do, and that we essentially are not so different from each other. We all want the same – we want happiness, contentment, and freedom from suffering.

If this takes off and becomes more popular, it can also be another small step towards humans treating other species with more respect, assign rights to them as we have to ourselves, and see them more as equals – in the sense of having equal worth and similar emotions, basic cognition, and wants.

FEBRUARY 3, 2020


Someone wrote “we have nine years” in the context of our climate crisis.

I have never really understood the impulse to put a number of how much time we have. It doesn’t make sense.

Through our human activity, we have already created irreversible change. We have exterminated species, habitats, and ecosystems. We are in the middle of a human-created climate crisis of gigantic proportions.

What we can do is slow down the crisis. We may be able to reverse some destructive trends. We may be able to create a more regenerative approach to our life and Earth.

But there is no set amount of years that we have to change or reverse anything. If there was a deadline, it was yesterday or decades or centuries ago.

FEBRUARY 6, 2021


There is nothing original here, just my own attempt at understanding – or guessing.

One element in the conservative backlash in the US these days is Christian fragility. Christians realize that the days of absolute Christian supremacy is over. They have to share a country – and the world – with atheists, Buddhists, Hindus, and more.

For some, it’s not a problem at all. It’s healthy to have a variety of views and approaches on these things. We can learn from each other. We can find common ground and shared values. We can live and thrive together.

For others, it’s some kind of disaster. I am not exactly sure why. It does seem connected with white fragility and male fragility. People create an identity around these things – whiteness, patriarchy, Christianity – and needs it to be validated by people around them supporting and sharing that identity. When the supremacy of these identities is perceived as threatened, the fragility becomes visible – sometimes in the form of reactivity and backlash. (For instance, the election of Trump can be seen as a reaction and backlash in response to the Obama presidency.)

Perhaps they also see the world as a zero-sum game. If others share in the basic respect and rights we already have, it means we somehow lose something.

Another element here is elements in politics and media intentionally feeding people misinformation and feeding their fears for their own gain. And less informed people allow themselves to be misled.

FEBRUARY 7, 20201


I have read that some far-right communities have adopted Vikings for their cause. It just shows that we can take anything and make it fit our values and worldview. We pick and chose what fits and leave out the rest, and we may also make up things to fit our worldview.

I also have a (slight) fascination with Vikings, but for other reasons. For me, it’s more about their pre-Christian worldviews and a slightly more nature-oriented religion, their craft, and especially their international travels, trade, and connections. They show that people at the time traveled far distances and there was a mix of cultures and ethnicities. (For the most part, Vikings were farmers and fishermen who occasionally went trading and sometimes also settled in other countries.)

When I imagine the Vikings, I make them fit my own values – craft, international connections, adventure, exploration, mixing of cultures and ethnicities. And when far-right folks imagine the Vikings, they emphasize whatever fits their values and views. (Perhaps Nordic ethnicity, supremacy, violence, etc.)


A few weeks ago, I saw someone on social media say “it’s a difference in opinion” in reference to whether or not Biden actually had won the election. This is an example of post-modernism taken way too far since the election result was certified by innumerable officials in all fifty states as well as at a federal level, including by several appointed by Trump himself.

Opinion has to do with values and how we want society to be, along with what music, food, and other things we personally like. Of course, in some countries, election results are highly questionable and likely manipulated. But in the US in 2020, under the scrutiny of large numbers of officials and international observers, the results are very likely largely accurate.

We have a consensus reality that relies on shared daily life experiences, science, and what serious investigators – historians, investigative journalists, and others – reports. We need this consensus reality to function as individuals and as a society. Without it, we lose our footing.

At the same time, it is true that consensus reality isn’t always what it seems to be, our worldviews and history changes over time, and we all experience our own version of the world.

One does not preclude the other. Consensus reality and informed relativism can co-exist and form a larger whole that gives us a more nuanced and – hopefully – accurate picture of reality.

If consensus reality is taken as all there is, we ignore shifting worldviews and valid differences in experiences. If relativism is all we are left with, we descend into a form of madness and fragmentation of society. (Which we can get a taste of from QAnon and other conspiracy theory folks.)

In daily life and as a human being in a society, I mostly rely on consensus reality. It works for most things. At the same time, I know it’s limited and flawed and I investigate my own cognitive biases, intellectual fallacies, and my beliefs and assumptions to see if I can find what’s more true for me.

Often, when we get a new tool, it takes some time for us to figure out how to best use it. In this case, some folks took a half-baked understanding of post-modernism and relativism and made it into a parody of itself. It’s not a fault in post-modernism, it’s a fault in how some of the insights from post-modernism were used by some people.

And, in reality, I doubt it has very much to do with post-modernism and relativism. What we see in people who question the election result, and go into nutcase conspiracy theories, is what we have seen throughout history, long before there was something called post-modernism.



A New York Times-produced documentary, Framing Britney Spears, came out a few days ago. I haven’t seen it yet.

For several years, there has been a controversy over her father having legal control over her life, money, and career. I don’t know the details of the case, although it does seem fishy.

There is a useful question here, and in all cases where we suspect patriarchy and sexism: How would this look if a man was treated this way?

If she was a man, would the same have happened? How would it look if a 39-year-old man was treated this way? Do we, or many, accept it because she is a woman? Would it seem more unacceptable if she was a man?

I just watched a few minutes of an international track & field championship and saw several female cheer-leaders along the track during a men’s race. Why don’t they have men in similar outfits dancing along the track during the women’s competition? If we imagine it, how does it look?

This is a very simple test or thought experiment to reveal our biases. It’s almost embarrassingly simple and obvious. And yet, much of what we see in the world today wouldn’t happen if more did this type of thought experiment.

We can use it to test for patriarchy and sexism. We can use it to test for racism and a colonial attitude. (Would a white person be treated this way?) And we can use it to test for anthropocentrism in the way we treat non-human species and ecosystems. (Would we treat a human this way? How would it look if we treated a human this way?)

FEBRUARY 15, 2021


I am not really concerned about patriotism in a conventional sense, but I see some are.

So what is real patriotism for me?

Patriotism can be roughly defined as “devotion to and vigorous support for one’s homeland”. So the question is, what is my homeland? And what does it mean to be devoted to it and support it?

Here are some things that come to mind:

My homeland is, in a narrow and literal sense, whatever country I live in and feel connected to. To me, this means promoting the well being of all people here, and especially those in difficult situations. It means to preserve and support the regeneration of ecosystems. It means to include all beings here in the circle of “us”, including non-human species. It means taking care of traditions while also supporting the new to emerge. (The new and old co-exists and enriches us.) And it means to support the well-being of future generations, to set the stage for them to have a good or better life.

In another and more real sense, my home is Earth. My circle of “us” includes all humans, all beings, all ecosystems, and future generations. That’s the reality. Whether I like it or not, I am part of the Earth community. I belong to humanity and Earth.

My homeland is also my inner country. Patriotism means taking care of to the different parts of myself and how I relate to these parts and my experience. How do I relate to these? Can I find a kinder way?

And my homeland is what I am. It’s what my experiences happen within and as. It’s what I am as capacity for the world – including this human self – as it appears to me, and it is this always-changing world. Patriotism here means to notice what I am, and notice that this is what I am noticing itself. It also means to invite the different parts of me to reorient within this “new” context and find healing and join in with this noticing.

Of course, I am here just taking an idea I typically don’t resonate with and redefining it so it does resonate. And why not? In this way, I can find how I want to be a patriot. I can find where it makes sense to me. And it’s always good to question and examine ideas out there in the culture and, inevitably, in me.

Also, I find it useful to examine ideas closely enough so they don’t anymore make sense or have much meaning to me. It’s freeing. It allows me to relate to them more consciously.


I find it fascinating to explore dimensions for our views on the world and politics.

One of these dimensions is zero-sum vs win-win views. Do we have a generally zero-sum view on life and society, or a win-win view? Are the situations when we go into one or the other? Where do these views come from? How do they correlate with which policies and political parties we support?

It seems that much of the support of Trump and his policies and ways of doing politics came from a zero-sum view. If they win, I lose, so I need to make sure to win (at their expense).

Perhaps we see something similar behind the rich-country approach to vaccines. They want to get as many vaccines for themselves as possible as soon as possible (which is understandable), and yet we also need to make sure everybody in the world has access to a vaccine. Both are equally important – we are all in the same boat, none of us is safe until everyone is. From a standard epidemiological view, it’s clear that it’s in all our interest to provide vaccines to everyone in the world. How do we most effectively and fairly do it? By removing patents on the vaccines so they can be made cheaply in countries around the world, and made accessible to everyone. And yet, there seems to be very little political interest in doing this in the wealthy countries. They are more concerned with the profits of the pharmaceutical companies and this is unwise even from a narrow self-interest view. It’s a win-lose game that ends up making everyone lose.


As predicted, small British businesses that relied on trade with the rest of Europe are now in post-Brexit troubles. It seems that a good deal of these people actually voted for Brexit, even when it seemed obvious that Brexit couldn’t possibly be good for them. Within the EU, they have access to the whole market without restrictions. Outside, they will obviously face barriers and challenges.

I guess that shows the power of identity politics and misinformation. In this case, identity politics is the fantasy of a stronger Britain outside of the EU, and the misinformation came from politicians and the media that either supported it or didn’t take them sufficiently to task for it.


I enjoy watching Lars Monsen and his wilderness series on Norwegian TV. He genuinely seems to have a good heart. He clearly deeply loves nature. And he seems to have a generally very good attitude and orientation to challenges and life in general.

There is also one question I have about his approach: why not pair down the equipment? Why bring a lot that’s not necessary? Why so much packaging that increases the weight? Why “camp shoes”? Why so heavy boots?

It seems that he is using an old-fashioned mindset. Why not embrace light backpacking or even ultra-light? It would add to the adventure. It’s far more enjoyable and equally comfortable if done right. It’s far easier on the body. And it’s educational and makes for even more interesting TV.

I haven’t been able to do much hiking or backpacking recently for health reasons, but I love nature and hiking. I also know the drudgery of bringing far too much stuff with me, so I am highly motivated to lighten the load as much as possible. And it is very much possible. With some dedication, knowledge, and experience, people get their packs down to 10kg (light backpacking) or even 5kg (ultra-light), with the addition of food and water.

I personally find light shoes, or even good hiking sandals, far better than the heavy boots I see Lars Monsen and some others use.

His most recent series highlighted this topic since he and his friends seemed to struggle with the weight. They did leave some things half-way, but it seems they didn’t put much effort into exploring how to systematically reduce the weight from the beginning.

I assume this comes down to mindset. Some are happy doing things the way they were taught and how they have always done it. Others are more curious and interested in finding better – and often more enjoyable – options.

Personally, I would rather put some effort in before the trip in finding the best light-weight solutions – light essential gear, selecting multi-use items, and leaving all that’s not essential – and enjoy the trip more.

FEBRUARY 17, 20201


When we know some about the history of cults, conspiracy theories, and millennium movements, it’s much easier to recognize them. And when we recognize them and know some of the history, it’s much easier to not be taken in by them.

That’s why it’s essential for schools and the media to educate people on this particular corner of history. Along with some basics about the history of science, scientific methodology, media literacy, and logical fallacies. It servers as a kind of inoculation against these things, and politicians using similar strategies.

The times I have seen conspiracy theorists comment on social media, what they say often fits the historical patterns very closely. They themselves don’t seem to be aware of it, but for an outsider with a bit of knowledge of history, it’s easily recognizable.


In this video, Bunny the dog pushes the “who” and “this” buttons and then looks at herself in a mirror. Later, after looking out the window for a bit, she looks at her human companion and pushes the “help” button.

It’s easy to imagine that what appears to happen is just what’s happening. She is confused about who she sees in the mirror and may begin to suspect it’s herself. She may also feel a bit confused and uneasy and asks for help.

Of course, we don’t know for certain. But after having been watching these talking-with-button videos for a while, and several different animals using them, it seems that what seems to be happening is what’s actually happening.

Of course, they will have their own understanding of what the buttons mean, which may be slightly different from way of understanding it. But the understanding of the meaning seems to roughly and in the essence be the same as ours.


There is something about the universe — an elegant order in the way everything fits and unfolds

– Tom Atlee in his recent newsletter

[made into regular article]


Since I was very little, I have felt uncomfortable eating animal flesh. It just didn’t feel right, so I started eating vegetarian in my teens. These days, I mostly eat fruits, vegetables, grains, seeds and nuts, and so on, and infrequently fish and some meat. For me, meat is rarely the center of a meal but an occasional addition.

I just read an article where an expert said that North Koreans have generally poor health and weak immune systems since they mostly eat fish and rarely eat red meat.

To me, that seems slightly absurd. Why would a diet of vegetables, grain, and fish lead to poor health? If North Koreans have poor health due to diet, it’s more likely because they don’t get enough food or their diet is not varied enough.

Eating a varied diet low on animal protein is natural and can be very healthy. After all, this is how most of our ancestors lived. This is what we are made for.

I have never really understood the modern world’s obsession with meat. Does it come from a reaction to previous times where meat was rare and a luxury, so now people want to indulge in this particular luxury? And then justify it by telling themselves that daily red meat is necessary for their health?

FEBRUARY 21, 2021


The Norwegian government allows a lot of US military activity on their soil and in their water and air. It’s been going on for decades, of course. And yet, there is very little discussion if this is OK and to what extent we want to allow it. After all, it does increase tension with Russia and puts Norway at risk.

What I have noticed, and most recently last week, is that any political discussion about this is immediately squashed by the government and the main political parties. They shame people who question this policy. They don’t want it to be a topic or for people to think about it. Why? Probably because they know their arguments are not as strong as they would like to think. They feel threatened by the idea of having an open discussion on this topic.

And that – squashing dissent and shaming those who raise the question is, of course, profoundly undemocratic.


Shakespeare would often base his plays on existing stories, and he would often take black-and-white elements in these stories and complexify them. In this way, he made space for a richness of interpretations and understandings of the plays and the elements in them.

Life is like that. Life is immensely rich, and that leaves room for innumerable interpretations and understandings. There is some validity and grains of truths in most or all of them, and together, they make for a far more rich and complex picture.

It doesn’t mean at all that the views and interpretations are equal or have validity in the same way. We often have to explore and wrestle with each one to find the validity in them, as it appears to us, and also find how they all fit together in a way that makes sense to us and seems honest and useful.

FEBRUARY 25, 2021

I keep being surprised by how the Norwegian government seems to be behind the current Covid-research. For instance, they are considering not vaccinating young people because they assume they are not at risk for a severe illness. It seems odd considering all the research on the serious long-term problems among some young people following even a mild covid infection.


This is not a new idea all, but it’s interesting to look at the current phase of humanity as the teenage years. Somewhere between childhood (pre-civilization) and adulthood (Gaia-centric civilization).

A lot of the behavior we see among humans, at individual and collective levels, is quite immature. The main example is probably how we relate to nature and Earth.

Teenagers often distance themselves from their parents in order to find some autonomy and discover who they are. And humanity are doing the same with Earth. We see ourselves as separate and, in the process, discover a type of autonomy and who we are and what our potentials are.

When teenagers get a bit older, they often find an easier and more healthy relationship with their parents. And that may happen with humanity too, if we are around for long enough. We may reconnect with Earth, recognize we are not separate from this larger living whole, and find a more mature way of relating with Earth. One that has the best of indigenous cultures (where they often recognize their intimate relationship with nature) and the current stepping-stone civilization, and has its own elements and is inevitably different from what we have seen before.

In some ways, Earth is like a patient parent. It waits for us to grow up. And it also, just by being what it is, gives us the consequences of our behavior which may help us mature.

MARCH 4, 2021


In a social media group I am part of, I see several people saying they prefer “natural immunity” (meaning getting infected with C19) over a vaccine.

We all make our own risk assessments, based on whatever information, biases, and personal experiences we have.

For me, who have lived with decades of post-viral illness (CFS), mostly rely on science, and have two friends with severe long-covid, it’s an easy choice. I’d take a vaccine any day over the actual illness.

We have known this for a while now: C19 is Russian roulette. Even people who are relatively young and healthy can get a severe and even life-threatening case (depends partly on viral load). Even people with mild to moderate cases can get long-covid. Even people who are asymptomatic sometimes show long-term effects.

In terms of risk, the choice is pretty clear.

And we are members of a society. By taking the vaccine, I am part of the solution. I help protect others and coming generations. I do my small part of getting society back on its feet. That’s good for all of us, and especially the more vulnerable – the children, sick, poor, and old.


I am baffled that large-scale geoengineering is even a topic, at least when it comes to dimming the sun and similar types of ideas. The Earth is an immensely complex living system. We cannot foresee the consequences of our actions. And it’s almost guaranteed that large-scale geoengineering projects will have dramatic, unforeseen, and unwelcome consequences.

Of course, we are already geoengineering at a large scale with our petroleum-based technology and industry, farming, pollution, and so on. And any change to a more life-centered civilization will involve its own inevitable geoengineering through new technologies, new ways of farming, new transportation, new industries, and everything else.

What I am talking about here is more the simplistic large-scale projects, for instance shading the Earth with particles or shields.

[in progress]


  • biathlon
  • stable attention
  • VH – energize, optimize, issues etc.

[in progress]



———– draft ———


If we want to understand conspiracy theories, it’s helpful to look at them from several angles.

One of these is mental health.

When people get invested in conspiracy theories, it tends to look delusional to others. These people clearly live in their own world with their own facts and ideas about how the world works. They show a lack of logical thinking. They don’t question their assumptions or the sources of their information. And they are often resistant to anything that could poke a hole in their views.

For instance, many Trump supporters seem to think that Trump actually won the election. Innumerable officials – including Trump appointed ones, and several judges, have clearly stated that the election was fair and Biden won. And there is no evidence whatsoever that the election was not fair. So why do they believe it? Is it just because a proven habitual lier like Trump keeps insisting on it? And do they really think all these officials and judges are in on some form of anti-Trump conspiracy?

Going a bit further, QAnon folks apparently thought Trump would become king before Biden could be inaugurated, and then go after a global network elite pedophiles. From the outside, it seems patently insane. Trump has shown no sign of being in it for anyone but himself. He has shown no signs of being concerned about the welfare of children (600 immigrant children are still separated from their parents). There is no way he would be able to stay in power. There is absolutely no evidence of a global network of elite pedophiles. And yet, now that Biden is president, I am sure that most QAnon folks will find an explanation. Perhaps Trump in his wisdom have chosen to wait, and so on. Instead of questioning their assumptions, they find an explanation that fits their existing worldview.

It’s a form of delusion. And yet, it’s a type of delusion that’s perhaps more common than we like to think.



  • religion -> conspiracy theories, small step




————- ooo ————-


conspiracy theories – some from privilege (e.g. anti-vaxxers etc)

complaining etc. – don’t see their privilege

time in history

future generations – ignore their needs from our own position of privilege (of being alive now, able to influence life for future generations)

humans vs other species

earth vs other planets (mostly without life)



One thought to “Reflections on society, politics and nature XXXVIII”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.