¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 Nor does the USA, China or any “nation” or “state” – in the same “sense of existence” as tables, trees, houses, persons, and even villages.

¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 When is the action of a part not considered an action of the whole? The answer depends on our definitions for “action”, “part”, whole”, and “considered”. Is my writing this an action of the USA? Is EVERY action of a legal official of the USA government an action of the government. When The Donald shits, it that an act by POTUS? Are The Donald’s tweets the acts of POTUS? Naive realism  applied to large, complex populations of humans can cause us great difficulty. This is an issue beyond that of naive realism for all experience.

¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 If a rouge group (conspiratorial gang – CG) of members of a formal organization acts (contrary to the policies and bylaws of the org), are these to be considered acts by the org?  Conspiracy defined.

¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0 Trump and Putin have known connections with Organized Crime. The organized crime cabal in Russia, (CGs in Russia) may have hacked the 2016 elections in the USA. It can be  “rightly” claimed that Russia (the official nation state) did not formally participate in the hacking of the election. Trump and Putin are radically different players.

¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 What prompted me to revisit this theme was the recent announcement of the rolling back of regulations on the payday loan scams. This is clearly in line with the corruption of Legal-Organized-Crime (LOC).

¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0 The slow coup underway in the USA may be the work of an international cabal of CGs. The org structures/processes of CGs and CABALS of CGs is different from that of most institutions. Details of differences need to be worked out. The historical roles of CGs in so-called formal societal systems must also be explored.

¶ 7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0 The ontology/epistemology of societal systems needs revisiting. We project too much from our naive reality of the immediately perceived onto the non-observable too small or too big. We may discover a Societal Weirdness as strange as Quantum Weirdness.

¶ 8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0 Because we use nouns as labels for things, doesn’t necessarily imply “how these ‘things’ exist”.

¶ 9 Leave a comment on paragraph 9 0 What does the above contribute to our actions in our contemporary real wrlds?