landback chudette

A fish swimming in the Great Lakes today may have been alive before many colonial settlements existed in the region.

A new scientific study suggests lake sturgeon may live far longer than previously believed. Using 44 years of tagging and recapture data from five Great Lakes populations, researchers estimated that male lake sturgeon may live 90 to 279 years, while females could potentially reach 99 to 427 years.

For many years, scientists estimated sturgeon age by counting growth rings in fin spines, similar to tree rings. Researchers now say that method becomes less reliable as lake sturgeon age because their growth slows and the rings become increasingly difficult to distinguish. By tracking individual fish over decades, the study offers a new way to understand how long these ancient fish may live.

The findings also align with knowledge long shared by some Indigenous communities, whose oral traditions have described lake sturgeon as exceptionally long-lived beings. In many Great Lakes cultures, sturgeon hold deep importance as part of foodways, seasonal knowledge, and relationships with waterways.

Lake sturgeon were once heavily harvested and treated as nuisance fish in the late 1800s, contributing to major population declines. According to Michigan DNR reporting, less than 1% of historic Great Lakes lake sturgeon numbers remain. Because they mature slowly and reproduce over many decades, recovery takes time across generations.

The study highlights the value of long-term monitoring and collaboration among Tribal Nations, fisheries researchers, universities, and conservation agencies. Protecting healthy rivers, spawning habitat, and connected waterways remains important for the future of this species.

1. The United States creates dollars, which costs them essentially nothing.

2. Over time, US military power compelled the biggest oil producers (starting with Saudi Arabia in 1974) to trade exclusively in dollars.

3. When a company needs oil, it needs dollars to buy it. You can obtain dollars in a number of ways: you can take a loan or you can sell shoes to the US or teacups to Europe. Notice that the factory has to ship actual shoes to the US or to third markets in order to obtain, basically, a bookkeeping entry that took the US microseconds to create.

4. The oil company receives the shoe factory's dollars in exchange for oil. It invests these dollars into US treasury bonds or securities, which is really the only sensible thing they can do --cash deprecates in value over time, and there are virtually no other risk-free places to park your billions of dollars worth of oil earnings.

5. The US puts part of the investment it received into military use, so that it can keep anyone who would dare to detach from this dollar hegemony in check. The rest goes to enrich the US. Return to step 1.

Note that this mechanism is essentially an obfuscated tax on the rest of the world. An Iranian shoe factory has to obtain dollars if it wants to buy oil, and the oil company is incentivized to store its dollars in the US treasury. This means that part of the value that foreign capitalists would otherwise pocket actually ends up in the United States.

To obtain a million dollars, the US government pushes a button; to obtain the same million a Bangladeshi factory has to sew 500 000 T-shirts.

Because the oil bill comes in dollars and the only deep, liquid, politically safe asset is a US Treasury bond, value flows to Wall Street.

In other words: The US creates money, manufactures a need for everyone to hold some of that money, and then incentivizes them to return that money to the US.

The petrodollar was only ever the beginning. Many things are gated behind the dollar: Shipping, aviation, SWIFT transactions, etc. Everyone needs dollars; if you can't get any you're going to struggle in the global capitalist economy. This is why the US gets to create seemingly endless dollars and have them still hold value, it's why the US can bend anyone reliant on the dollar to their will via sanctions; the dollar itself acts as a weapon. Of course, the status quo is maintained at gunpoint, and the dollar's value is ultimately backed by US military might. The United States exports death.

Because of all of this, the US has an enormous material incentive to keep oil flowing, to keep its military spending high, and to topple any and all projects that would endanger this system. To stop the flow of unequal exchange, to stop the coercive taxation over the rest of the world, would be to destabilize the US empire. Anyone who would provide an alternative must necessarily be seen as an adversary.

Want to nationalize your oil? Want to deal in another currency? Are you another military superpower? No? Too bad, here's one million drone strikes and a new *democratic* government for you.

It's not about being tough on crime, because the absolute toughest most brutal measure you could take against "crime" as a social problem is to alleviate poverty, and increase access to education, healthcare and social mobility.

It's about performing "tough on crime" as an aesthetic by enacting violence against a prop, i.e. minorities and the impoverished, who are fetishized and objectified to represent "crime." They are brutalized as punishment for crime, but never with the purpose of alleviating the problem of crime.

Does anybody remember when back in January Trump kidnapped the Venezuelan president? Well the American government proceeded to place someone else in charge and is directing them via text message. They are telling him who to appoint into office and allowing US businesses into the country.

They are "not looking to instate democratic elections at this time."