Gosh, after the last post I can't stop. There is a volcano inside me ready to spew about the United Chavdom of Britain.
- a Chav is somebody whom gave up on religion one or more generations ago, yet has not replaced it with anything other than going shopping, seeing gigs and sports games, watching TV etc.
- a Chav is somebody whom doesn't understand atheism or religion in the evolution of Mankind, yet abides by the first and spurns the second.
- a Chav is somebody whom eats his or her way through the glut of food that is delivered to the Western Economies.
- a Chav is somebody whom starts doing things because of peer pressure, and will not stop doing these things until peer pressure stops them.
- a Chav is somebody whom cannot eat food that has not been wrapped in plastic and put on a supermarket shelf.
- a Chav is somebody whom will buy a can or plastic bottle of Coke or Someother Shit instead of drinking tap water or eating a cucumber or watermelon.
- a Chav is somebody whom thinks they are classy because they get their hair dressed, yet their brain is gungy and grimy with mud and rags.
- a Chav will happily pay £3.00 for a pint of crap tasteless lager, but refuse to pay £0.80 for a pint of fresh organic milk.
- a Chav will cover his front garden with concrete just so that he can park his or her car as close to his testicles or her vagina.
- a Chav will go to a fitness centre and work out to have big muscles and firm tits, but refuse to be seen using a spade for anything other than weaponry.
- a Chav will buy a newspaper and look at the pictures and read the words slowly, and then think that there is nothing else that he or she has to learn.
-
The Greatest Wealth is that of All the Species of Life on This Earth. Save it for Ever and Always.
Saturday, April 16, 2011
The Soup of British Chav
Look at them. Driving their cars in their bathrobes. Yes, those towelling robes that are also called dressing gowns. They wear them all day long, then venture out in the garden and then into their cars to run down to the shops to buy milk or fags.
Unbelievable? No, this is Britain today. I wonder what people in what used to be the British empire would think of this.
You see, the British Chav only really became widely described from 2003. Now in 2011, Chav culture is endemic and mainstream. What is a Chav? It was and still is, a person who has perverse notions of what is social aspiration. A Chav is somebody who would say "fuck" a lot, but seldom has good sex, let alone aspires to divine love-making. A Chav can come from any class, whereas the socialists think it is only used to label people of working-class descent.
A Chav believes that you are nobody unless you own lots of cars, and drive them as much as you can. A Chav does not know where his bread comes from - he or she drives to the Tesco, Asda, Sainsburys, Morrisons, Iceland or Co-Op supermarket and buys bread, but does not understand or care how the bread got there. A Chav admires sports celebrities, and dreams of being just like one. Chavs watch games and get excited and distraught about their successes and failures, but have not actually played any of those games for years. Indeed, the Chav has not walked more than 200 yards at any time in the last ten years, simply because the Chav has a CAR.
You see the Chavs driving in 4x4s, parking in the disabled bays at supermarkets, talking on their mobile phones while driving with one hand (this is ILLEGAL in Britain). Chavs throw away good, still-useable things as if they believe that more new things will arrive on a container ship from China, Japan, Taiwan, Korea, and India. Chavs moan about the price of petrol for their cars, and claim that they NEED their cars to go to work, but they NEVER think about (let alone try) moving closer to their job. Chavs throw their rubbish (sometimes toxic) on the roads, out of their cars, into their gardens, into the public parks and wilderness areas.
Why do I go on? I can't. They dominate in a democracy, and that is that. Chavdom has had its momentary attraction (which is sexual, because it pretends to be exclusive of love or care) to all walks of life, but its persistence in British culture is a pervasive vulgarity that cannot be disguised by a royal family's pomp and splendour, currently being hyped to North America and everywhere else because of the queen's grandson's dreary wedding.
Unbelievable? No, this is Britain today. I wonder what people in what used to be the British empire would think of this.
You see, the British Chav only really became widely described from 2003. Now in 2011, Chav culture is endemic and mainstream. What is a Chav? It was and still is, a person who has perverse notions of what is social aspiration. A Chav is somebody who would say "fuck" a lot, but seldom has good sex, let alone aspires to divine love-making. A Chav can come from any class, whereas the socialists think it is only used to label people of working-class descent.
A Chav believes that you are nobody unless you own lots of cars, and drive them as much as you can. A Chav does not know where his bread comes from - he or she drives to the Tesco, Asda, Sainsburys, Morrisons, Iceland or Co-Op supermarket and buys bread, but does not understand or care how the bread got there. A Chav admires sports celebrities, and dreams of being just like one. Chavs watch games and get excited and distraught about their successes and failures, but have not actually played any of those games for years. Indeed, the Chav has not walked more than 200 yards at any time in the last ten years, simply because the Chav has a CAR.
You see the Chavs driving in 4x4s, parking in the disabled bays at supermarkets, talking on their mobile phones while driving with one hand (this is ILLEGAL in Britain). Chavs throw away good, still-useable things as if they believe that more new things will arrive on a container ship from China, Japan, Taiwan, Korea, and India. Chavs moan about the price of petrol for their cars, and claim that they NEED their cars to go to work, but they NEVER think about (let alone try) moving closer to their job. Chavs throw their rubbish (sometimes toxic) on the roads, out of their cars, into their gardens, into the public parks and wilderness areas.
Why do I go on? I can't. They dominate in a democracy, and that is that. Chavdom has had its momentary attraction (which is sexual, because it pretends to be exclusive of love or care) to all walks of life, but its persistence in British culture is a pervasive vulgarity that cannot be disguised by a royal family's pomp and splendour, currently being hyped to North America and everywhere else because of the queen's grandson's dreary wedding.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Watching the Disillusionment of Loved Ones
There is something profoundly sad about watching the disillusionment of one that we love. The sadness is perhaps proof that we still love them. Disillusionment is nowadays called "Reality check", thanks to the Seventies hippie generation.
That we may have been partly responsible for sustaining their deluded state;
that we may have loved them because we wished to share their deluded state;
that we were unable to find for them a gentler let-down when the disillusionment finally came;
that we have to SHARE the let-down itself.
These are facts known to any intelligent mother, whom has had to grapple with the "Is there really a Santa Claus, Mum?" So Child would never have enjoyed the illusion that Santa Claus existed, but for Mum. Mum would never have loved the Child so much if they never believed what did not exist. Mum later tries to tell Child that Santa Claus does not exist, but cannot find an easy way. Mum feels pain when Child eventually discovers that Santa Claus does not exist, and both their whole frames of being are knocked down.
So it is sad. That's life. An endless string of illusions clutched, each followed by grasping at the harsh brutal truth. As I believe I have always tried to seek the truth, I feel particularly qualified to say that the truth is like the multiverse of universes. When you have uncovered one, so you find you are buried deep within another one that you yet do not understand. So too do I feel qualified to say that there is no pride to be gained, from understanding more universes than the next man.
Yet I want to be sad.
For spring here, faltering,
does not smell the same
As where I left.
I am homesick for a place that I lived in and loved for so long, but whose ruin I could no longer bear to watch.
Funny that, as if I hadn't seen most of it ruined, that I should have been so bothered. Perhaps disillusionment sometimes is the wrong diagnosis.
Perhaps realities change, and we are belittled by our powerlessness to halt the change.
So here in Britain, we wait for spring. There are daffodils out now, and crocuses, but none of the trees are springing into leaf. Nights are still cold, and nothing much is growing fast, even when we have a sunny warmish day.
Today is Budget Day. As if I care. All the farting economists in the world could be piled into a gas oven and it set alight, and I would not be any happier.
I call the world the Planet.
The Planet is too big for me to hold.
Its billions of people are too many for me to scold.
Its development is too much a horror for me to behold.
Thank God we die when we grow old.
That we may have been partly responsible for sustaining their deluded state;
that we may have loved them because we wished to share their deluded state;
that we were unable to find for them a gentler let-down when the disillusionment finally came;
that we have to SHARE the let-down itself.
These are facts known to any intelligent mother, whom has had to grapple with the "Is there really a Santa Claus, Mum?" So Child would never have enjoyed the illusion that Santa Claus existed, but for Mum. Mum would never have loved the Child so much if they never believed what did not exist. Mum later tries to tell Child that Santa Claus does not exist, but cannot find an easy way. Mum feels pain when Child eventually discovers that Santa Claus does not exist, and both their whole frames of being are knocked down.
So it is sad. That's life. An endless string of illusions clutched, each followed by grasping at the harsh brutal truth. As I believe I have always tried to seek the truth, I feel particularly qualified to say that the truth is like the multiverse of universes. When you have uncovered one, so you find you are buried deep within another one that you yet do not understand. So too do I feel qualified to say that there is no pride to be gained, from understanding more universes than the next man.
Yet I want to be sad.
For spring here, faltering,
does not smell the same
As where I left.
I am homesick for a place that I lived in and loved for so long, but whose ruin I could no longer bear to watch.
Funny that, as if I hadn't seen most of it ruined, that I should have been so bothered. Perhaps disillusionment sometimes is the wrong diagnosis.
Perhaps realities change, and we are belittled by our powerlessness to halt the change.
So here in Britain, we wait for spring. There are daffodils out now, and crocuses, but none of the trees are springing into leaf. Nights are still cold, and nothing much is growing fast, even when we have a sunny warmish day.
Today is Budget Day. As if I care. All the farting economists in the world could be piled into a gas oven and it set alight, and I would not be any happier.
I call the world the Planet.
The Planet is too big for me to hold.
Its billions of people are too many for me to scold.
Its development is too much a horror for me to behold.
Thank God we die when we grow old.
Wednesday, March 09, 2011
Questioning the Philosophy of Self-Doubt
A few days ago I questioned the Philosophy of Self-Belief. With the following conclusion ..
Well, to be fair, and to be rational, I must treat its opposite : the Philosophy of Self-Doubt.
{Why do we need to doubt ourselves?}
or {Why do we need to be doubted by others?}
=> Why do we Need to be Doubted?
(The symbol => is the mathematical one for "implies")
Why indeed. We all know people who only rise up to a task when everybody doubts that they can. It's the challenge of proving people wrong that gives them extra impetus.
For ourselves, when we doubt ourselves, and then we master our doubts and rise up to the challenge, we feel even better for ourselves, don't we?
But is this just playing games? If you have a task, why should it be necessary to play the following game...
I doubt myself.
I refuse to accept that I can't do it.
I shall prove myself right that I can do it, while proving myself wrong that I can't do it.
What a waste of energy all this game playing is. Like playing football instead of farming.
And there, in the last line, there is a big hint of more...
"I shall prove myself."
Self-Belief, Self-Doubt, Self-Proof.
Are these good games to play as motivations to do a task? There should be enough motivation from the need or desire to do a task, without having to throw in motivational games of Self-Belief, Self-Doubt, and Self-Proof. I am probably mistaken, but this is what I think the Methodists did. Get rid of the game-playing, and get on with the work, either because you need to do it, or because you WANT to do it.
I therefore suggest that it is a lie that we must believe in ourselves, or that we are helped by others whom believe in us. This lie is purely to sustain lies upon which our lives are built
Well, to be fair, and to be rational, I must treat its opposite : the Philosophy of Self-Doubt.
{Why do we need to doubt ourselves?}
or {Why do we need to be doubted by others?}
=> Why do we Need to be Doubted?
(The symbol => is the mathematical one for "implies")
Why indeed. We all know people who only rise up to a task when everybody doubts that they can. It's the challenge of proving people wrong that gives them extra impetus.
For ourselves, when we doubt ourselves, and then we master our doubts and rise up to the challenge, we feel even better for ourselves, don't we?
But is this just playing games? If you have a task, why should it be necessary to play the following game...
I doubt myself.
I refuse to accept that I can't do it.
I shall prove myself right that I can do it, while proving myself wrong that I can't do it.
What a waste of energy all this game playing is. Like playing football instead of farming.
And there, in the last line, there is a big hint of more...
"I shall prove myself."
Self-Belief, Self-Doubt, Self-Proof.
Are these good games to play as motivations to do a task? There should be enough motivation from the need or desire to do a task, without having to throw in motivational games of Self-Belief, Self-Doubt, and Self-Proof. I am probably mistaken, but this is what I think the Methodists did. Get rid of the game-playing, and get on with the work, either because you need to do it, or because you WANT to do it.
Tuesday, March 08, 2011
Pushing Away the Zeitgeist
There are Sheep and there are Wolves. There is Black and White but also every shade of gray.
So human beings can be found whom belong on every spot of the Sheep to Wolf spectrum.
I know I shift between the polarities of sheep and wolf depending on the world, my life, and me.
But what is this Zeitgeist? I have always been very sensitive to it and even gone out looking for it, but if you think about IT, what is IT?
Is the Zeitgeist a single miasma? I think not. Different levels of Zeitgeist exist for Sheep and Wolves and all in between.
Yet without a doubt the Zeitgeist I pick up through my antennae is the Official Cultural Zeitgeist of Britain, as sanctioned by the artists, the newspapers, the businesses, and the citizens. (Hmmm, interesting what I haven't included in that list...)
Is the Zeitgeist a set of activities, or feelings? Is it a set of attitudes? Is it a mood? Yes, I definitely think it is a mood.
The Zeitgeist of Britain is more oppressive than usual. The mood is not recessive, but a kind of prozacked depressive. As mentioned before, the nation is hot happy with what it has become or achieved. You can have the shiniest cars, the shiniest jewels, and the shiniest furs, but what good are they when you have just learned that you have to sell them because you can't pay for them? At the same time you have also been diagnosed with a malignant, slow-acting cancer and you are looking through all the quack remedies that promise you a cure.
I can't stand it any more. The Zeitgeist mood weighs me down so much that there is only one thing to do.
Push away the Zeitgeist. What use is the Zeitgeist when it does more harm than good?
I shouldn't even bother trying to re-shape the Zeitgeist - I haven't the strength at this stage.
Push it away. Sometimes, a man has got to be an island.
So human beings can be found whom belong on every spot of the Sheep to Wolf spectrum.
I know I shift between the polarities of sheep and wolf depending on the world, my life, and me.
But what is this Zeitgeist? I have always been very sensitive to it and even gone out looking for it, but if you think about IT, what is IT?
Is the Zeitgeist a single miasma? I think not. Different levels of Zeitgeist exist for Sheep and Wolves and all in between.
Yet without a doubt the Zeitgeist I pick up through my antennae is the Official Cultural Zeitgeist of Britain, as sanctioned by the artists, the newspapers, the businesses, and the citizens. (Hmmm, interesting what I haven't included in that list...)
Is the Zeitgeist a set of activities, or feelings? Is it a set of attitudes? Is it a mood? Yes, I definitely think it is a mood.
The Zeitgeist of Britain is more oppressive than usual. The mood is not recessive, but a kind of prozacked depressive. As mentioned before, the nation is hot happy with what it has become or achieved. You can have the shiniest cars, the shiniest jewels, and the shiniest furs, but what good are they when you have just learned that you have to sell them because you can't pay for them? At the same time you have also been diagnosed with a malignant, slow-acting cancer and you are looking through all the quack remedies that promise you a cure.
I can't stand it any more. The Zeitgeist mood weighs me down so much that there is only one thing to do.
Push away the Zeitgeist. What use is the Zeitgeist when it does more harm than good?
I shouldn't even bother trying to re-shape the Zeitgeist - I haven't the strength at this stage.
Push it away. Sometimes, a man has got to be an island.
Saturday, March 05, 2011
Yeo Valley Rap
When I saw this, I just thought Wow!
Aren't they all beautiful?
If you live in a city or a town, you've probably noticed that none of the young men and women look this good - and even if they did, they wouldn't last long before they were sucked into lives of cocaine, heroin, alcohol or just plain sex addiction.
Well Done Yeo Valley and BBH. It's marketing, but hey, when it's like this, sock it to 'em
Aren't they all beautiful?
If you live in a city or a town, you've probably noticed that none of the young men and women look this good - and even if they did, they wouldn't last long before they were sucked into lives of cocaine, heroin, alcohol or just plain sex addiction.
Well Done Yeo Valley and BBH. It's marketing, but hey, when it's like this, sock it to 'em
Friday, March 04, 2011
Question the Philosophy of Belief in Your Self
Google "Believe in Yourself" and you will be told that you have to, and why you need to. Look at the reasons from a philosophical standpoint.
(Why do we need to believe in ourselves?) OR (Why do we need others to believe in us?) =
Why do we need to be believed?
Isn't it strange that we are told that we need to be believed?
Are our lives built on such tenuous lies that without that belief we would DIE?
Isn't it appallingly feeble if this is true?
A) Assume that our lives are built on real foundations. Would we need to be believed? What purpose would it serve ourselves to be believed? I can see that it would be useful to others if THEY believed US, so that they may choose to copy how we build our lives on real foundations.
B) Assume that our lives are built on a fragile pyramid of lies. Can we sustain ourselves without being believed? Are we held up only by belief, whether that is coming from others or ourselves?
I therefore suggest that it is a lie that we must believe in ourselves, or that we are helped by others whom believe in us. This lie is purely to sustain lies upon which our lives are built.
I feel much happier knowing this truth! Is this philosophy?
(Why do we need to believe in ourselves?) OR (Why do we need others to believe in us?) =
Why do we need to be believed?
Isn't it strange that we are told that we need to be believed?
Are our lives built on such tenuous lies that without that belief we would DIE?
Isn't it appallingly feeble if this is true?
A) Assume that our lives are built on real foundations. Would we need to be believed? What purpose would it serve ourselves to be believed? I can see that it would be useful to others if THEY believed US, so that they may choose to copy how we build our lives on real foundations.
B) Assume that our lives are built on a fragile pyramid of lies. Can we sustain ourselves without being believed? Are we held up only by belief, whether that is coming from others or ourselves?
I therefore suggest that it is a lie that we must believe in ourselves, or that we are helped by others whom believe in us. This lie is purely to sustain lies upon which our lives are built.
I feel much happier knowing this truth! Is this philosophy?
2011 in Britain
It is 2011. Look at that frightening number.
Welcome back to Britain. I never left it, but I left you, dear Reader, this long.
My God, I thought Britain was bad in the Noughties. Now three years after we've had the 2007/8 Global Financial Crisis, things seem to be sufficiently worse that I really wish I weren't here.
This country has been floundering in a cultural depression for 3 years now. People are coping, but not happy, and not hopeful, and not even interesting. They drive to the supermarket, they shop, they eat, they watch TV. They live through life's struggles, and they go to work if they still have a job, but they all know that the country hasn't done well, and can't afford to go on living beyond its means. Yet imports still keep rising, and exports barely are holding.
It feels as if one cannot dare to dream any more in Britain, yet in theory, that is all the British can now afford to do. I say in theory, because in practice, they still drive around in cars that are too big, and they still use them constantly while they themselves get fat and useless. Cars are empty, trains are running empty, planes still fly everywhere. The cutbacks on waste have yet to become ubiquitous, yet cutbacks in the public sector are all you hear about on the news, or when chatting.
THIS COUNTRY HAS BECOME BORING AND USELESS? Yes, it really feels that way.
It was of course the fault of the three Labour Governments, that presided over the shift to Banking and the wholesale submission to Global Economics, which finally created a credit and property and finance boom that collapsed in 2008. Yet only in 2010 did that government finally get thrown out.
Since then, the new Government has barely made a mark, yet every move they make is loudly protested and entirely opposed.
How can things improve, and how can things get better, when we have a people who have been spoilt by wasteful Labour Governments, and a new government who can no longer afford to spoil them?
I despair, and it's no fun being here. And we've had another cold winter (so much for global warming) so I wish I were on a beach far away from here.
I want to dream. Love is like a shrunken dried up apple in my soul, because there never was much love in Britain, and now there is nowhere to dream.
What can I do?
Welcome back to Britain. I never left it, but I left you, dear Reader, this long.
My God, I thought Britain was bad in the Noughties. Now three years after we've had the 2007/8 Global Financial Crisis, things seem to be sufficiently worse that I really wish I weren't here.
This country has been floundering in a cultural depression for 3 years now. People are coping, but not happy, and not hopeful, and not even interesting. They drive to the supermarket, they shop, they eat, they watch TV. They live through life's struggles, and they go to work if they still have a job, but they all know that the country hasn't done well, and can't afford to go on living beyond its means. Yet imports still keep rising, and exports barely are holding.
It feels as if one cannot dare to dream any more in Britain, yet in theory, that is all the British can now afford to do. I say in theory, because in practice, they still drive around in cars that are too big, and they still use them constantly while they themselves get fat and useless. Cars are empty, trains are running empty, planes still fly everywhere. The cutbacks on waste have yet to become ubiquitous, yet cutbacks in the public sector are all you hear about on the news, or when chatting.
THIS COUNTRY HAS BECOME BORING AND USELESS? Yes, it really feels that way.
It was of course the fault of the three Labour Governments, that presided over the shift to Banking and the wholesale submission to Global Economics, which finally created a credit and property and finance boom that collapsed in 2008. Yet only in 2010 did that government finally get thrown out.
Since then, the new Government has barely made a mark, yet every move they make is loudly protested and entirely opposed.
How can things improve, and how can things get better, when we have a people who have been spoilt by wasteful Labour Governments, and a new government who can no longer afford to spoil them?
I despair, and it's no fun being here. And we've had another cold winter (so much for global warming) so I wish I were on a beach far away from here.
I want to dream. Love is like a shrunken dried up apple in my soul, because there never was much love in Britain, and now there is nowhere to dream.
What can I do?
Friday, February 25, 2011
Emerging from Radio Shadow
As though a satellite gone behind a planet
all these months with days unseen
while atomic clocks kept time.
Now emergent from the radio shadow
I attempt contact.
all these months with days unseen
while atomic clocks kept time.
Now emergent from the radio shadow
I attempt contact.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
UK Government Programme for Energy and Climate Change
The Government believes that climate change is one of the gravest threats we face, and that urgent action at home and abroad is required. We need to use a wide range of levers to cut carbon emissions, decarbonise the economy and support the creation of new green jobs and technologies. We will implement a full programme of measures to fulfil our joint ambitions for a low carbon and eco-friendly economy.
* We will push for the EU to demonstrate leadership in tackling international climate change, including by supporting an increase in the EU emission reduction target to 30% by 2020.
* We will seek to increase the target for energy from renewable sources, subject to the advice of the Climate Change Committee.
* We will continue public sector investment in carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology for four coal-fired power stations.
* We will establish a smart grid and roll out smart meters.
* We will establish a full system of feed-in tariffs in electricity – as well as the maintenance of banded Renewables Obligation Certificates.
* We will introduce measures to promote a huge increase in energy from waste through anaerobic digestion.
* We will create a green investment bank.
* We will retain energy performance certificates while scrapping HIPs.
* We will introduce measures to encourage marine energy.
* We will establish an emissions performance standard that will prevent coal-fired power stations being built unless they are equipped with sufficient carbon capture and storage to meet the emissions performance standard.
* We will cancel the third runway at Heathrow.
* We will refuse permission for additional runways at Gatwick and Stansted.
* We will replace Air Passenger Duty with a per-flight duty.
* We will introduce a floor price for carbon, and make efforts to persuade the EU to move towards full auctioning of ETS permits.
* Through our ‘Green Deal’, we will encourage home energy efficiency improvements paid for by savings from energy bills. We will also take measures to improve energy efficiency in businesses and public sector buildings. We will reduce central government carbon emissions by 10% within 12 months.
* We will reform energy markets to deliver security of supply and investment in low carbon energy, and ensure fair competition including a review of the role of Ofgem.
* We will instruct Ofgem to establish a security guarantee of energy supplies.
* We will give an Annual Energy Statement to Parliament to set strategic energy policy and guide investment.
* We will deliver an offshore electricity grid in order to support the development of a new generation of offshore wind power.
* We will encourage community-owned renewable energy schemes where local people benefit from the power produced. We will also allow communities that host renewable energy projects to keep the additional business rates they generate.
* As part of the creation of a green investment bank, we will create green financial products to provide individuals with opportunities to invest in the infrastructure needed to support the new green economy.
* We will work towards an ambitious global climate deal that will limit emissions and explore the creation of new international sources of funding for the purpose of climate change adaptation and mitigation.
* Liberal Democrats have long opposed any new nuclear construction. Conservatives, by contrast, are committed to allowing the replacement of existing nuclear power stations provided that they are subject to the normal planning process for major projects (under a new National Planning Statement), and also provided that they receive no public subsidy.
* We will implement a process allowing the Liberal Democrats to maintain their opposition to nuclear power while permitting the Government to bring forward the National Planning Statement for ratification by Parliament so that new nuclear construction becomes possible. This process will involve: – the Government completing the drafting of a national planning statement and putting it before Parliament; – specific agreement that a Liberal Democrat spokesperson will speak against the Planning Statement, but that Liberal Democrat MPs will abstain; and – clarity that this will not be regarded as an issue of confidence.
Not a lot there on Cutting Energy Waste and Encouraging Reduced Energy Consumption. It does say Through our ‘Green Deal’, we will encourage home energy efficiency improvements paid for by savings from energy bills. We will also take measures to improve energy efficiency in businesses and public sector buildings. Home Energy Efficiency Improvements? You mean Mercury-containing Fluorescent light bulbs and rock fibre loft insulation and double-glazing for people who have houses that are too big for them? Energy Efficiency, Efficiency, Efficiency?
Have you not noticed that the problem left untackled here is that the Enviromental Movement has been trapped into a cul-de-sac for years by having to request Efficiency improvements, instead of Energy Consumption Reductions, because nobody has yet challenged the prerogative of Economic Consumerism (if the public gets what the public wants, that isn't usually what the planet wants, so you have to change what the public wants)?
How do you measure Efficiency? The efficient use of Energy is where it is used to create the most vital forms of wealth. What are the most vital forms of wealth? FOOD, not diamonds/gold, or throw away consumer purchases, or huge office towers that run on airconditioning in the summer, or empty houses and buildings entirely heated to 22 degrees centigrade just because their occupants think it is THEIR RIGHT TO KEEP WARM BY BURNING FOSSIL FUELS OR BY WASTING GREEN TECHNOLOGY RARE EARTH METALS ON OVERSIZED HOMES.
Consumption of Energy, if it is outright wasteful, cannot be made efficient unless the waste is ruthlessly eliminated.
The UK Coalition Government's Programme for the Environment - Human Population
Nick Clegg's and David Cameron's detailed programme has been released today. Below is the page from their Environment, Food and Rural Affairs page. Other areas of their programme will be discussed in other posts.
It all sounds good, but what is missing?
Man. The number of people. The one thing that is most obvious on this planet Earth, is being completely ignored by this government. The government has not indicated any policy towards population levels in its own country, so why would it be able to lead politically on this issue on a global level? It won't.
For the Green Party and Caroline Lucas, here's your key. It is no longer adequate to be green and mean and mind your own reproductive practices, because even with equitable politics (complete fairness) it is the total human population in the world that will cause stress on the environment.
China and its Communist Party are far more thinking and honest about this issue.
The Government believes that we need to protect the environment for future generations, make our economy more environmentally sustainable, and improve our quality of life and well-being. We also believe that much more needs to be done to support the farming industry, protect biodiversity and encourage sustainable food production.
* We will introduce measures to make the import or possession of illegal timber a criminal offence.
* We will introduce measures to protect wildlife and promote green spaces and wildlife corridors in order to halt the loss of habitats and restore biodiversity.
* We will launch a national tree planting campaign.
* We will review the governance arrangements of National Parks in order to increase local accountability.
* We will work towards full compliance with European Air Quality standards.
* We will take forward the findings of the Pitt Review to improve our flood defences, and prevent unnecessary building in areas of high flood risk.
* We will examine the conclusions of the Cave and Walker Reviews, and reform the water industry to ensure more efficient use of water and the protection of poorer households.
* We will work towards a ‘zero waste’ economy, encourage councils to pay people to recycle, and work to reduce littering.
* We will reduce the regulatory burden on farmers by moving to a risk-based system of regulation, and will develop a system of extra support for hill farmers.
* We will investigate ways to share with livestock keepers the responsibility for preparing for and dealing with outbreaks of disease.
* We will take forward the Marine and Coastal Access Act and ensure that its conservation measures are implemented effectively.
* As part of a package of measures, we will introduce a carefully managed and science-led policy of badger control in areas with high and persistent levels of bovine tuberculosis.
* We will promote high standards of farm animal welfare. We will end the testing of household products on animals and work to reduce the use of animals in scientific research. We will promote responsible pet ownership by introducing effective codes of practice under the Animal Welfare Act, and will ensure that enforcement agencies target irresponsible owners of dangerous dogs.
* We will ensure that food procured by government departments, and eventually the whole public sector, meets British standards of production wherever this can be achieved without increasing overall cost.
* We will investigate measures to help with fuel costs in remote rural areas, starting with pilot schemes.
* We will create a presumption in favour of sustainable development in the planning system.
* We oppose the resumption of commercial whaling, will press for a ban on ivory sales, and will tackle the smuggling and illegal trade on wildlife through our new Border Police Force.
* We will bring forward a motion on a free vote enabling the House of Commons to express its view on the repeal of the Hunting Act.
It all sounds good, but what is missing?
Man. The number of people. The one thing that is most obvious on this planet Earth, is being completely ignored by this government. The government has not indicated any policy towards population levels in its own country, so why would it be able to lead politically on this issue on a global level? It won't.
For the Green Party and Caroline Lucas, here's your key. It is no longer adequate to be green and mean and mind your own reproductive practices, because even with equitable politics (complete fairness) it is the total human population in the world that will cause stress on the environment.
China and its Communist Party are far more thinking and honest about this issue.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Fear and Arrogance
Arrogance is nothing but a method of overcoming fear. Arrogance works to some degree, but is generally not very successful. Fear is fear, and masking fear with devices such as Ignorance, Arrogance and Anger (amongst others), is never going to be the best solution.
The trouble is, that Fear is an animal instinct that has evolved because it is so successful. Yet in the modern world, it has to be used in situations very different from how it evolved. For example, fear is useful when you're driving a car and you see a patch of slippery oil or ice way ahead. But it isn't useful if you see it and don't do the right things (slow down and engage anti-lock brakes if necessary). The modern world, you understand, is not what we evolved in.
Doing the right things when experiencing fear is without a doubt the most difficult part of life itself. Ignoring, being arrogant, and getting angry are seldom the best things, even though they sometimes get lucky. What is the best thing?
Feel the fear and challenge it? How?
- I am afraid.
- What are you afraid of? So what are you going to do about it? Are you going to just sit there and be afraid? Not very clever. Are you going to get angry? Not very clever. Are you going to believe that you will conquer your fear just by the force of your will? Not very clever.
- No, Mr Spock, you're absolutely right. What do I need you to tell me that for.
- Because you're a stupid animal.
- You're not as good as a Vulcan, you know, but you're amusing...
The trouble is, that Fear is an animal instinct that has evolved because it is so successful. Yet in the modern world, it has to be used in situations very different from how it evolved. For example, fear is useful when you're driving a car and you see a patch of slippery oil or ice way ahead. But it isn't useful if you see it and don't do the right things (slow down and engage anti-lock brakes if necessary). The modern world, you understand, is not what we evolved in.
Doing the right things when experiencing fear is without a doubt the most difficult part of life itself. Ignoring, being arrogant, and getting angry are seldom the best things, even though they sometimes get lucky. What is the best thing?
Feel the fear and challenge it? How?
- I am afraid.
- What are you afraid of? So what are you going to do about it? Are you going to just sit there and be afraid? Not very clever. Are you going to get angry? Not very clever. Are you going to believe that you will conquer your fear just by the force of your will? Not very clever.
- No, Mr Spock, you're absolutely right. What do I need you to tell me that for.
- Because you're a stupid animal.
- You're not as good as a Vulcan, you know, but you're amusing...
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Building Roads Evan Davies Today RAC Productive Driving.
Why not build more roads?, Evan said. Terrifying, and it probably will happen. Because it was a lobbying cry from the RAC. The RAC will do anything to give itself more business, but that can be said about any business from heroin dealing to flogging Mars bars.
BBC Radio 4.
Yet it is still terrifying. Once we were afraid of wars, nuclear holocausts, enviromental catastrophe, but now we are most afraid of shit economists. Evan Davies is unfortunately a shit economist, because of his generation. He mentioned on the Today programme something like we drive 100% more, yet have only built 20% more roads in the past X years. You would think that an economist would ask the question, why are we driving 100% more, and is all this driving productive? Would that the next time he drowns his sorrows in some gay club, that somebody should slap some intelligence into him, but that isn't going to happen, is it? The blind will sooner lead the blind.
What is non-productive driving?
People who are driving miles and miles who don't increase theirs or anybody else's happiness. There are loads of these people. Driving is like doing heroin, crack cocaine, and stuffing yourself with junk food.
This article on Today, on the same day that Open Country had Helen Marks doing a truthful episode in West Dorset chronicling a musician and a farmer who were expressing the death of rural life in Britain! Killed because homes and houses in rural areas are hardly ever occupied, because they are second homes, or owned by wealthy people who are away on holiday, and even when they are at home, they DRIVE FAR AWAY to TESCO to do their shopping, so that there is no local shopping or local rural economy. Gone are the smallholdings, and local businesses.
This is the economics of Today. The people in the BBC live in London, or the hipper parts of Britain, and are full of denialists who can't even travel from their own Radio Programme to their neighbours. Yet they completely expect to jump on a plane, or a train, or into a car, and be as far away from where they work within 12 hours. In so doing, they have turned the whole world into a boring but dangerous place, full of McDonalds, and Pizza Hut and Starbucks and Tesco and Asda. Why dangerous? Because what happens when you take heroin away from a junkie?
BBC Radio 4.
Yet it is still terrifying. Once we were afraid of wars, nuclear holocausts, enviromental catastrophe, but now we are most afraid of shit economists. Evan Davies is unfortunately a shit economist, because of his generation. He mentioned on the Today programme something like we drive 100% more, yet have only built 20% more roads in the past X years. You would think that an economist would ask the question, why are we driving 100% more, and is all this driving productive? Would that the next time he drowns his sorrows in some gay club, that somebody should slap some intelligence into him, but that isn't going to happen, is it? The blind will sooner lead the blind.
What is non-productive driving?
People who are driving miles and miles who don't increase theirs or anybody else's happiness. There are loads of these people. Driving is like doing heroin, crack cocaine, and stuffing yourself with junk food.
This article on Today, on the same day that Open Country had Helen Marks doing a truthful episode in West Dorset chronicling a musician and a farmer who were expressing the death of rural life in Britain! Killed because homes and houses in rural areas are hardly ever occupied, because they are second homes, or owned by wealthy people who are away on holiday, and even when they are at home, they DRIVE FAR AWAY to TESCO to do their shopping, so that there is no local shopping or local rural economy. Gone are the smallholdings, and local businesses.
This is the economics of Today. The people in the BBC live in London, or the hipper parts of Britain, and are full of denialists who can't even travel from their own Radio Programme to their neighbours. Yet they completely expect to jump on a plane, or a train, or into a car, and be as far away from where they work within 12 hours. In so doing, they have turned the whole world into a boring but dangerous place, full of McDonalds, and Pizza Hut and Starbucks and Tesco and Asda. Why dangerous? Because what happens when you take heroin away from a junkie?
Friday, April 23, 2010
Frustration
Tried that, and couldn't get through, tried something else, and still couldn't. Tried everything, and still unsuccessful, so what do you get? Frustration.
Frustration, the transitory state of mind that occurs when reason fails, and anger takes over. Frustration itself becomes an extension of that failure, so usually produces failure.
At the sign of frustration, it is better to rest, withdraw, or retreat, and then to tactically invite recreation, advice, or new thinking.
Frustration, the transitory state of mind that occurs when reason fails, and anger takes over. Frustration itself becomes an extension of that failure, so usually produces failure.
At the sign of frustration, it is better to rest, withdraw, or retreat, and then to tactically invite recreation, advice, or new thinking.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
No Airplanes in the Sky since 5 Days Ago
Because of the volcano in Iceland spouting a cloud of ash, all jet plane traffic was shut down over Britain and much of Europe since Thursday 15 April.
For the first time in my life, like so many people, I have been able to live under a sky withouth any airplanes in it. It is a source of wonder. I have never seen such blue and clear skies in London or in England, and while we have had marvellous weather at that. And it has been also wondrously peaceful, especially for the people who are damned by living near Heathrow, Stansted, Gatwick, etc.
The endless moans of people who have been stranded abroad or whose travel plans have been wrecked! What happens when these types of people end up sick in a hospital bed? They are the ones who never know what hit them, and are stunned and scared. In other words, should these people not be grateful just to be alive, and to have food to eat, and water to drink? Yes they should be just grateful, but they complain because these are the modern people created by Global Economics. The common muck who have been created, and pandered to, by Global Economics.
For the first time in my life, like so many people, I have been able to live under a sky withouth any airplanes in it. It is a source of wonder. I have never seen such blue and clear skies in London or in England, and while we have had marvellous weather at that. And it has been also wondrously peaceful, especially for the people who are damned by living near Heathrow, Stansted, Gatwick, etc.
The endless moans of people who have been stranded abroad or whose travel plans have been wrecked! What happens when these types of people end up sick in a hospital bed? They are the ones who never know what hit them, and are stunned and scared. In other words, should these people not be grateful just to be alive, and to have food to eat, and water to drink? Yes they should be just grateful, but they complain because these are the modern people created by Global Economics. The common muck who have been created, and pandered to, by Global Economics.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Matthew Greenburgh Adviser to RBS Takeover of AMRO
Gosh, why is Matthew Greenburgh allowed to live free? Why is he not imprisoned and all his financial assets confiscated, for helping to put this country into hundreds of billions of pounds into debt?
There are probably a hundred people, including Gordon Brown, Mervyn King, Fred Goodwin, James Crosby and John Tiner (of the FSA) who are responsible for the economic disasters of the Noughties that made a national debt that will take ten years to repay.
What is the point of morality, if for every six hundred thousand people, the care and consideration of 599,999 people can be undone by one?
It could be worse, of course, but moralists cannot claim the high ground, when the morality they preach sustains the Global Human Economic Machine on such a scale that it takes ever fewer individuals to jeopardize the entire System.
There are probably a hundred people, including Gordon Brown, Mervyn King, Fred Goodwin, James Crosby and John Tiner (of the FSA) who are responsible for the economic disasters of the Noughties that made a national debt that will take ten years to repay.
What is the point of morality, if for every six hundred thousand people, the care and consideration of 599,999 people can be undone by one?
It could be worse, of course, but moralists cannot claim the high ground, when the morality they preach sustains the Global Human Economic Machine on such a scale that it takes ever fewer individuals to jeopardize the entire System.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
The importance of Self-intelligence as opposed to General Intelligence
It has been cloudy and wet for two days now, and it has been no longer cold since Tuesday. Indeed, Wednesday was sunny and nearly too warm, and the first daffodil in my garden came into flower the day after.
I have been very tired. Tired of everything, and most of all very tired of London, as I have been for nearly a decade. I listen to BBC Radio 4, and listen for intelligence, but I hear very little that has anything to do with the world I am in here in this part of London. You can thus assume that nobody who works in the BBC or the media lives here. Why? Because they live in their ghetto world, and their jobs have become to maintain the ghettoes of the British Empire, an empire which fell over 70 years ago but which many people fantasize to be still existing through the BBC.
When I am out I see few British people, hear few British people, and even though it has been like this for the last decade, I still find it taxing, more so because it is never discussed. Even when people here speak English, they seem to lack the power of speech, expression and erudition. The whole difficulty is never discussed, because in the light of the dangers of inflammatory political racism, it has never been allowed to be publicly discussed, yet those of us who have to carry on have to carry on.
In these circumstances, self-intelligence, namely your intelligence about yourself and your dependence on your own (not other people's) intelligence, are essential survival traits. As I turned to my blog I read back on my posting from two weeks ago, and not surprisingly, it is the only intelligence that invigorates me.
Now that I have been reminded of the importance of a self-limiting sense of failure, I suspect that it is more important than the intelligence that I can glean from those people out there.
What are those people doing out there in London? They are eating, sleeping, and shitting, in the liberal democratic section of the Global Human Economic Machine, and they are busy playing at religion and having families. You would think the human race were in danger of de-population, the way these people are busying themselves with bringing their children into this overcrowded world that doesn't even have many fish left in the sea.
I have been very tired. Tired of everything, and most of all very tired of London, as I have been for nearly a decade. I listen to BBC Radio 4, and listen for intelligence, but I hear very little that has anything to do with the world I am in here in this part of London. You can thus assume that nobody who works in the BBC or the media lives here. Why? Because they live in their ghetto world, and their jobs have become to maintain the ghettoes of the British Empire, an empire which fell over 70 years ago but which many people fantasize to be still existing through the BBC.
When I am out I see few British people, hear few British people, and even though it has been like this for the last decade, I still find it taxing, more so because it is never discussed. Even when people here speak English, they seem to lack the power of speech, expression and erudition. The whole difficulty is never discussed, because in the light of the dangers of inflammatory political racism, it has never been allowed to be publicly discussed, yet those of us who have to carry on have to carry on.
In these circumstances, self-intelligence, namely your intelligence about yourself and your dependence on your own (not other people's) intelligence, are essential survival traits. As I turned to my blog I read back on my posting from two weeks ago, and not surprisingly, it is the only intelligence that invigorates me.
Now that I have been reminded of the importance of a self-limiting sense of failure, I suspect that it is more important than the intelligence that I can glean from those people out there.
What are those people doing out there in London? They are eating, sleeping, and shitting, in the liberal democratic section of the Global Human Economic Machine, and they are busy playing at religion and having families. You would think the human race were in danger of de-population, the way these people are busying themselves with bringing their children into this overcrowded world that doesn't even have many fish left in the sea.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Luddites Arise - Robots and Computers replace People in the Global Human Economic Machine
Avtar Rahl, 58, is the human face of those statistics.
He had been working in electronics for 32 years when he was made redundant over a year ago. He was referred to the job club by Jobcentre Plus.
"Over the last few years I watched the staff numbers on the shop floor dwindle from over 100 to a handful as the firm became fully automated," he says.
Automation and Computers have been replacing people progressively in all areas of the economy.
Yet the thick-as-shit liberals and day-dreaming socialists have carried on regardless, without any thought about where it will all end up. Probably because theirs are the only jobs that have not been replaced by computers and automation.
It is time to replace the social workers, the menopausal salarywomen, the tenured humanitarian workers, the judges etc, with computers and automation. Let them see how much they like it, and when they've experienced the pain, they will understand that to be Luddite is essential and intelligent, whereas to be Progressive is ignorant and blundering. If the Global Human Economic Machine were a car, then the Luddite knows he must control the car or dump it and walk. Whereas the Progressive races onward, carelessly believing that there is no cliff or crash ahead.
Saturday, March 06, 2010
Failure, Success, the Esteem of Self and Others
Reference : Self-Destructiveness as an Intended Feature of Liberalism
I am no good
They are all better
I am the best
They are all rubbish
Am, is, are
A Failure
A Success
A Winner,
A Loser.
They are winners,
So then must I be.
They are losers
So then must I be.
What is Failure or Success and how is it estimated in the Self and Others?
It is obvious that an individual prefers the self-esteem of success to the feeling of being a failure. Yet the design of a liberal civilization, as mentioned back in August 2008, depends on individuals self-estimating as failures and engaging in self-destruction or withdrawal from the Global Human Economic Machine. This is necessarily true by definition of liberalism, since individuals are free to continue without removal by their peers.
True liberalism does not, has never, and can never exist in any civilization, but its aspirations, such as Benign liberalism, do exist, and have transpired to produce some people, myself included, who are prone to self-estimate as failures. How? Because self-estimation as failure allows the machine of civilization to replace the failing individual's function, hence ensuring that the machine of civilization keeps running, while benign liberalism protects the failing individual (rather than discarding it), so allowing the failing individual to fulfil its reproductive cycle or be re-used in some other part of the machine.
This is all very well from the point of view from the machine, but what of the individual? Benign liberalism is a vague intention, with no guidebook, no cookbook, and barely anybody bothering to discuss it in this detail.
The failing individual, in order to be most useful, has of course to have opportunities for re-use in other parts of the Economic Machine. Just as importantly, the failing individual has to have limits of self-estimation of failure.
What is the use of a self-esteem of failure once you have been replaced and your failure does not jeopardize the rest of civilization's machine? For example, there is no use to "retired" people feeling like failures. By feeling neutral, they might even embark eventually on useful endeavours.
The self-esteem of Failure, after it is no longer needed, must be dampened by limits, which in a liberal civilization must be self-limiting.
Self-limiting self-estimations of Failure are corresponded with self-limiting self-estimations of Success.
I am a Success.
Use Me.
I am used
I am no longer either a Success or a Failure.
I continue to be used while knowing that I am free to fail.
I am a Failure
Replace Me
I am replaced.
I am no longer used
I am no longer either a Success or a Failure.
I am Free to Move On.
Success or failure in self-estimation relative to others is made in two ways -
the Transference of Success or Failure between the Self and the Others, and the Opposition of Success or Failure between the Self and the Others. For example, suppose there are two teams, Team A and Team B. I am on Team A, then Team A's Success or Failure transfers to me. Team B's Success or Failure does not transfer to Team A , but is opposed to Team A and its members.
These fundamental perceptions by our evolution in tribes (A We versus They Success/Failure estimation) does not meld well in a single Globalized civilization.
Why can't the Globalists understand this, or do they deliberately ignore and dupe us into accepting silly tribal substitutes like Global Football (Soccer) Teams to entertain our evolutionary nature?
I think some Globalists might not know what they do not understand, for they are missing this evolutionary inherent nature of tribalism that exists in most of us.
I am no good
They are all better
I am the best
They are all rubbish
Am, is, are
A Failure
A Success
A Winner,
A Loser.
They are winners,
So then must I be.
They are losers
So then must I be.
What is Failure or Success and how is it estimated in the Self and Others?
It is obvious that an individual prefers the self-esteem of success to the feeling of being a failure. Yet the design of a liberal civilization, as mentioned back in August 2008, depends on individuals self-estimating as failures and engaging in self-destruction or withdrawal from the Global Human Economic Machine. This is necessarily true by definition of liberalism, since individuals are free to continue without removal by their peers.
True liberalism does not, has never, and can never exist in any civilization, but its aspirations, such as Benign liberalism, do exist, and have transpired to produce some people, myself included, who are prone to self-estimate as failures. How? Because self-estimation as failure allows the machine of civilization to replace the failing individual's function, hence ensuring that the machine of civilization keeps running, while benign liberalism protects the failing individual (rather than discarding it), so allowing the failing individual to fulfil its reproductive cycle or be re-used in some other part of the machine.
This is all very well from the point of view from the machine, but what of the individual? Benign liberalism is a vague intention, with no guidebook, no cookbook, and barely anybody bothering to discuss it in this detail.
The failing individual, in order to be most useful, has of course to have opportunities for re-use in other parts of the Economic Machine. Just as importantly, the failing individual has to have limits of self-estimation of failure.
What is the use of a self-esteem of failure once you have been replaced and your failure does not jeopardize the rest of civilization's machine? For example, there is no use to "retired" people feeling like failures. By feeling neutral, they might even embark eventually on useful endeavours.
The self-esteem of Failure, after it is no longer needed, must be dampened by limits, which in a liberal civilization must be self-limiting.
Self-limiting self-estimations of Failure are corresponded with self-limiting self-estimations of Success.
I am a Success.
Use Me.
I am used
I am no longer either a Success or a Failure.
I continue to be used while knowing that I am free to fail.
I am a Failure
Replace Me
I am replaced.
I am no longer used
I am no longer either a Success or a Failure.
I am Free to Move On.
Success or failure in self-estimation relative to others is made in two ways -
the Transference of Success or Failure between the Self and the Others, and the Opposition of Success or Failure between the Self and the Others. For example, suppose there are two teams, Team A and Team B. I am on Team A, then Team A's Success or Failure transfers to me. Team B's Success or Failure does not transfer to Team A , but is opposed to Team A and its members.
These fundamental perceptions by our evolution in tribes (A We versus They Success/Failure estimation) does not meld well in a single Globalized civilization.
Why can't the Globalists understand this, or do they deliberately ignore and dupe us into accepting silly tribal substitutes like Global Football (Soccer) Teams to entertain our evolutionary nature?
I think some Globalists might not know what they do not understand, for they are missing this evolutionary inherent nature of tribalism that exists in most of us.
Monday, March 01, 2010
Global Indians
OH my goodness, have you ever heard so much patting on the back, and "Aren't We Wonderful?". The terrifying reality that India has been taken over by people who want to be like US Americans comes home. You can see that Bollywood hasn't just imitated Hollywood, but soon there will be imitations of the Oscars, and everything else.
What I discern is that the people who have been successful, and have money, no longer are content with the status that money will buy, but want the status that comes intrinsically with class divides. And having gotten to the levels of Global Control that they have, they are going to want a Global Caste System. After all, India, with its traditional caste system was a very stratified class society before the British got there, and it had no history of social equality.
Around London you will see very many Indian people, who like so many other people from around the world in London, are struggling, and despite being talented, might never gain in their lifetimes the type of success paraded and flaunted around in this self-indulgent broadcast.
The desperate demands for social status and social recognition from various ex-colonies and Emerging Economic Powers in the world is going to be a feature for decades to come. We have had "Japan!", we have been getting "China!" and we are getting developing flourishes of "India!".
What a terrifying world we live in. Once upon a time all you had to worry about was a Cold War between the West and the East. Now it's so much more complicated.
That's it, I'm not going to worry any more. Just dumped this worry on my blog.
What I discern is that the people who have been successful, and have money, no longer are content with the status that money will buy, but want the status that comes intrinsically with class divides. And having gotten to the levels of Global Control that they have, they are going to want a Global Caste System. After all, India, with its traditional caste system was a very stratified class society before the British got there, and it had no history of social equality.
Around London you will see very many Indian people, who like so many other people from around the world in London, are struggling, and despite being talented, might never gain in their lifetimes the type of success paraded and flaunted around in this self-indulgent broadcast.
The desperate demands for social status and social recognition from various ex-colonies and Emerging Economic Powers in the world is going to be a feature for decades to come. We have had "Japan!", we have been getting "China!" and we are getting developing flourishes of "India!".
What a terrifying world we live in. Once upon a time all you had to worry about was a Cold War between the West and the East. Now it's so much more complicated.
That's it, I'm not going to worry any more. Just dumped this worry on my blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)