Economist Dean Baker shares his thoughts on the bailout panic during a public panel held at the Institute for Policy Studies on September 30, 2008. Dr. Baker is the co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, DC, and a columnist for The Washington Post and Atlantic Monthly. ( by Steven Greenstreet)
I consider this a must-see, as Baker's perspective is morally aligned with the people, and not with the state, or the elites who stand to prosper on the backs of the people. - John A.
Friday, October 3, 2008
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Groupthink
To understand what is going on in the so-called civilized world today; think of hordes of lemmings unthinkingly following each other off a cliff. Or consider mob mentality; blatantly conditioned consumerism; groupthink; or unfortunately even doublethink from many media pundits who up until very recently were so enthusiastic about asset and commodity growth during the artificially-based rise in home values right up to the last hours before the crash.
Is individual education combined with a large moral compass the key? The kind of education we have today is very much based on Taylorism.
As a result, and as a society we have devised an artificially-based educational system at both the bottom, and at elite levels. Among many, it's seen as politically incorrect to attack the sacred cow of business practices. Business practices are seen to create jobs, jobs, jobs after all.
For example, the average MBA student goes into the world armed with knowledge that has the potential to do either good or bad. Often however as already overwhelmingly proven by what's happening in the US, it's manipulated for selfish and damaging uses.
The allowable legality of amassing obscene amounts of wealth for a single individual is very much part of the problem. This causes great pain in society overall, whether its in our western hemisphere, or in third world nations. Someone has to work hard for that money. It simply doesn't come out of thin air. In actuality, many citizens end up toiling their lives away as factory workers to pay this one individual's overwhelmingly large share of the pie.
And this is the problem - the unwillingness to address this very basic, and even psychotic behavior, and the continuing stance of business pundits to refuse to cap CEO salaries, or bonuses/share allotments, or acknowledge anything is wrong at all....
Is individual education combined with a large moral compass the key? The kind of education we have today is very much based on Taylorism.
As a result, and as a society we have devised an artificially-based educational system at both the bottom, and at elite levels. Among many, it's seen as politically incorrect to attack the sacred cow of business practices. Business practices are seen to create jobs, jobs, jobs after all.
For example, the average MBA student goes into the world armed with knowledge that has the potential to do either good or bad. Often however as already overwhelmingly proven by what's happening in the US, it's manipulated for selfish and damaging uses.
The allowable legality of amassing obscene amounts of wealth for a single individual is very much part of the problem. This causes great pain in society overall, whether its in our western hemisphere, or in third world nations. Someone has to work hard for that money. It simply doesn't come out of thin air. In actuality, many citizens end up toiling their lives away as factory workers to pay this one individual's overwhelmingly large share of the pie.
And this is the problem - the unwillingness to address this very basic, and even psychotic behavior, and the continuing stance of business pundits to refuse to cap CEO salaries, or bonuses/share allotments, or acknowledge anything is wrong at all....
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Max Keiser, the Worthless Dollar is Backed by Bananas. Also, Insane People Run the Show
Found this video at http://qslspolitics.blogspot.com/.
Keiser's performance could be seen as satiric comedy, if it wasn't for the reality the situation in the US is shamefully all too real.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Margaret Atwood Blasts Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper at this Link
Stephen Harper recently made yet another move to cut arts funding in Canada. Looks like this will definitely cost him votes in the upcoming federal Canadian election in October, especially in Quebec where his party, the Conservatives - more accurately, the' Conservative Reform Alliance Party' (you put the acronyms together) was hoping to steal some seats from the weaker Bloc, and Liberal parties.
This is his third attack on arts funding in this year alone, or at least in allowing a tax shelter to exist to aid in film productions!
Atwood's letter is a little lengthy, but reads easily, and hits Harper hard!
Oh BTW, Harper is seen by many as Canadian's vest-sweater wearing, baby holding, version of George Bush. (Don't trust what you see!)
This is his third attack on arts funding in this year alone, or at least in allowing a tax shelter to exist to aid in film productions!
Atwood's letter is a little lengthy, but reads easily, and hits Harper hard!
Oh BTW, Harper is seen by many as Canadian's vest-sweater wearing, baby holding, version of George Bush. (Don't trust what you see!)
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
National Conference on Media Reform with Bill Moyers
The National Conference on Media Reform is a grassroots movement which asks everyone including 'you' as an individual to get involved, and spread the word.
It not only asks for a truly democratic, and moral approach to integrity in mainstream journalistic practices, but also raises the question of Internet Neutrality, and is in a current fight in wrestling away continual attempts by big business to control the information highway, which currently is the last bastion of free speech we have!
So, get involved before true freedom is gone!
Monday, September 22, 2008
Saturday, September 20, 2008
A Quick Fable or ( A Politician's Hippocratic/Hypocritical Oath to do No/Much Harm) or (A Default Failure of the Human Condition)
Once upon a time, a wealthy landowner who had a stable of slaves invited his friends to a party. He had the slaves trim out his grand mansion with many types of decorations. People came dressed in their most splendid for the occasion.
The tables were stuffed with delectable foods, and bottle after bottle of wine from the vineyards flowed freely. The day eventually gave way to evening, and drunkenly, one of the guests brazenly asked if the slaves busying themselves with tasks were well taken care off.
“Of course they’re well taken care off!” scoffed the host darkly, adopting an indignant air. He was about to further admonish this guest for daring to question the way he ran his household, but being the ever diplomatic politician that he was known to be, quickly decided upon a more tactful approach.
“How would they”, he began by pointing his finger at one of the nearby slaves, and continuing, “be able to appreciate the finer things in life the way we do?! By their very nature they are not created to be our equals!”
The drunken guest fell silent, and a small crowd dispensed with their conversations to listen.
The host with many eyes upon him, now inspired, swelled up his chest, and continued. “Sir, you forget there is an order to things in our world! But, just as nothing is fair in the natural world, then it also naturally follows that nothing has to be fair in the world of humans! But all the same, we do not operate on the same level animals do. Our particular species is far and ahead above the animal kingdom. We operate on a higher level, one that has its sight on higher principles. We must see ourselves as good stewards instead, and reach out a helping hand to our fellow man. We must aid in taking care of the less fortunate for they cannot aid themselves.”
And so it goes...
The tables were stuffed with delectable foods, and bottle after bottle of wine from the vineyards flowed freely. The day eventually gave way to evening, and drunkenly, one of the guests brazenly asked if the slaves busying themselves with tasks were well taken care off.
“Of course they’re well taken care off!” scoffed the host darkly, adopting an indignant air. He was about to further admonish this guest for daring to question the way he ran his household, but being the ever diplomatic politician that he was known to be, quickly decided upon a more tactful approach.
“How would they”, he began by pointing his finger at one of the nearby slaves, and continuing, “be able to appreciate the finer things in life the way we do?! By their very nature they are not created to be our equals!”
The drunken guest fell silent, and a small crowd dispensed with their conversations to listen.
The host with many eyes upon him, now inspired, swelled up his chest, and continued. “Sir, you forget there is an order to things in our world! But, just as nothing is fair in the natural world, then it also naturally follows that nothing has to be fair in the world of humans! But all the same, we do not operate on the same level animals do. Our particular species is far and ahead above the animal kingdom. We operate on a higher level, one that has its sight on higher principles. We must see ourselves as good stewards instead, and reach out a helping hand to our fellow man. We must aid in taking care of the less fortunate for they cannot aid themselves.”
And so it goes...
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Have MIT Researchers Achieved the Incredible?!
Maybe some good news for a change!
It would appear researchers at MIT have been using as their model of inspiration what plants do naturally in the way of photosynthesis to create energy.
By using photo voltaic solar panels homeowners could power their homes by day, while also drawing energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen for storage. At night, the stored hydrogen and oxygen could be recombined creating a 'fuel cell' chamber to generate power while the solar panels are inactive.
So the question now is, can we expect a practical scaling up for mass distribution anytime soon?
See and read more here!
It would appear researchers at MIT have been using as their model of inspiration what plants do naturally in the way of photosynthesis to create energy.
By using photo voltaic solar panels homeowners could power their homes by day, while also drawing energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen for storage. At night, the stored hydrogen and oxygen could be recombined creating a 'fuel cell' chamber to generate power while the solar panels are inactive.
So the question now is, can we expect a practical scaling up for mass distribution anytime soon?
See and read more here!
Friday, August 8, 2008
Sunday, August 3, 2008
Wishful thinking or I'm Almost Willing to try Anything Else
It's very obvious for anyone who wishes to see we have many, many problems to overcome in this world.
Of course, it takes an unbiased individual without an ax to grind, no hidden agenda, or financial motivation to see the problems correctly. It also takes such an individual to see what solutions need to be taken.
Where is such a person?
How would we recognize such a person?
Is it even intelligent to leave it up to a single person? What if something happened to that person? Would chaos follow?
I'm thinking of all the hoop-la, and media fervor over Obama of course.
Why does the media think its appropriate to build up a single person to a demigod status? Remember how the traditional Japanese culture used to build up their Emperor to godlike status too?
It's a romantic idealism at best - a Hollywood notion. The idea of a lone gunman with a good heart but few words riding into to town to save the day. It's the same idea of beating your breast patriotically in praise of a genuine anti-hero to act like Robin Hood and save the masses (us) from the cruelty of others.
I could tell you who I think the Sheriff of Nottingham is, but I'm sure you already know.
Solution:
Instead, why not develop a presidential system that relies on having a dozen members as we have in public courtroom juries?
Abolish the idea of having a single American president to lead the country in favor of twelve intelligent, charitable individuals?
I can almost hear you gasp as you struggle for breath at the thought!
What? Get rid of our president? Change the American system of government from allowing all the power to be held by one individual?
Think about it.
The opposite is true. The way our system stands now is based on archaic ideas of a single tribal chief to lead his people. It's a crap shoot whether he's a good leader or a poor one. If he's a poor one, then everyone else pays the price for his mistakes, or moral corruption. What we have now has proven how undemocratic our system can be favoring instead dictatorship-like tendencies as we have now.
But get rid of our president? Whoa! How could we do that? You ask.
Would the constitution need to be amended for this to take place?
Yes, by all means, amend the Constitution! It obviously needs it as it already seems to be so amendable by others ( as already done by the same dictator I mentioned above).
After all, the legal arena sees fit to charge a twelve person jury with imminent life and death decisions of accused murder suspects, and many important landmark decisions that affect our everyday lives.
How do we know this would actually change anything? You ask
That's a good question.
I want to say: Anything has gotta be better than what we have now. But, a more reasonable answer is: Having twelve members immediately provides asking for a consensus to important issues. A 'Chamber of Sober Thought,' if you will.
This actually makes more sense. Include a dozen individuals as an internal set of checks and balances who all share equal presidential duties.
Yes - this may appear on the outset to be a 'whacky', or radical idea to some people, but all one has to do is open your eyes to see what we are doing in this world under the guise of 'democracy.'
Power divided in the hands of twelve, might be better than power in the hands of one. What are the chances we'd end up with 12 crazy people instead of just one?
Of course, it takes an unbiased individual without an ax to grind, no hidden agenda, or financial motivation to see the problems correctly. It also takes such an individual to see what solutions need to be taken.
Where is such a person?
How would we recognize such a person?
Is it even intelligent to leave it up to a single person? What if something happened to that person? Would chaos follow?
I'm thinking of all the hoop-la, and media fervor over Obama of course.
Why does the media think its appropriate to build up a single person to a demigod status? Remember how the traditional Japanese culture used to build up their Emperor to godlike status too?
It's a romantic idealism at best - a Hollywood notion. The idea of a lone gunman with a good heart but few words riding into to town to save the day. It's the same idea of beating your breast patriotically in praise of a genuine anti-hero to act like Robin Hood and save the masses (us) from the cruelty of others.
I could tell you who I think the Sheriff of Nottingham is, but I'm sure you already know.
Solution:
Instead, why not develop a presidential system that relies on having a dozen members as we have in public courtroom juries?
Abolish the idea of having a single American president to lead the country in favor of twelve intelligent, charitable individuals?
I can almost hear you gasp as you struggle for breath at the thought!
What? Get rid of our president? Change the American system of government from allowing all the power to be held by one individual?
Think about it.
The opposite is true. The way our system stands now is based on archaic ideas of a single tribal chief to lead his people. It's a crap shoot whether he's a good leader or a poor one. If he's a poor one, then everyone else pays the price for his mistakes, or moral corruption. What we have now has proven how undemocratic our system can be favoring instead dictatorship-like tendencies as we have now.
But get rid of our president? Whoa! How could we do that? You ask.
Would the constitution need to be amended for this to take place?
Yes, by all means, amend the Constitution! It obviously needs it as it already seems to be so amendable by others ( as already done by the same dictator I mentioned above).
After all, the legal arena sees fit to charge a twelve person jury with imminent life and death decisions of accused murder suspects, and many important landmark decisions that affect our everyday lives.
How do we know this would actually change anything? You ask
That's a good question.
I want to say: Anything has gotta be better than what we have now. But, a more reasonable answer is: Having twelve members immediately provides asking for a consensus to important issues. A 'Chamber of Sober Thought,' if you will.
This actually makes more sense. Include a dozen individuals as an internal set of checks and balances who all share equal presidential duties.
Yes - this may appear on the outset to be a 'whacky', or radical idea to some people, but all one has to do is open your eyes to see what we are doing in this world under the guise of 'democracy.'
Power divided in the hands of twelve, might be better than power in the hands of one. What are the chances we'd end up with 12 crazy people instead of just one?
Sunday, July 13, 2008
On Re-educating Our Educational System and Understanding the Cultural Phenomenon of What We Have Today Instead
"A funny thing happened on the way to school one day. At an early age, I decided I couldn't stand the slowness of learning that attending school offered, so I quit, and that's when my real education began." - from my personal history.
.
His term for this collection of strategies was scientific management, although it is sometimes simply referred to as Taylorism. In order to implement his ideas, Taylor contracted with companies to rearrange their production processes to simplify the tasks each employee performed. Instead of doing many different things, workers in Taylorized factories would execute the same simple tasks over and over.
This not only increased production, but reduced an employer’s need for skilled labor. For this reason, employers could cut their overall wage costs
.1
Taylor and his disciples cited the search for efficiency, “the one best way” to do a job, as justification for such changes. Because scientific management consultants claimed they understood the “natural laws” of human behavior and endurance, they argued that the implementation of scientific management would benefit both workers and society at-large.
Nevertheless, skilled workers and their unions often vociferously protested these changes because Taylorism made their work monotonous and also trespassed upon what they perceived as their traditional prerogative to manage their own time on the job. Workers and their unions objected not only to the efforts of scientific managers to determine what workers did all day, but also to efforts to tell workers exactly how they should do it.2
Approaching the end of the Industrial Revolution, Taylor’s ideas provided a catalyst for increasing the output of American factories beyond the promise of technological advances alone. After Taylor’s death in 1914, scientific management spread throughout the world, and it has influenced everything from advice to housewives on how to do their chores to how Japanese (and later American) cars have been made. Taylorism has also shaped the structure of American education. - This quote and more info here.
Below are a few important notes to consider:
Advent of the Industrial Revolution between 1760 - 1780 (give or take).
People began leaving their rural lives behind, to go to the cities where they could be employed in a factory. They in effect were leaving cleaner, less stressful, and more self-sufficient existences for one fraught with dangers to their health, both physical, and mental along with the risks of potential poverty, and boredom as they worked to receive what they initially thought would be better pay, and a better life. Ironically, at the same time, society was also leaving its familiarity with nature behind.
Before the Industrial Revolution many tradespeople made wide use of 'hands-on skills' in their livelihoods, and in their lives in general. 'Self-sufficiency' wasn't an invented term in this era, but was instead universally accepted simply as a way of life - more individuals had more real-life applicable skills.
Today we would say such a person was multi-talented, or multi-skilled which goes against what Taylorism has done for much of our educational system.
I was commenting on David Campbell's Economy blog regarding all things New Brunswick and its economy, and came across his discussion with someone referring to Taylorism.
Taylorism
Frederick W. Taylor was an efficiency expert: the first modern efficiency expert in world history. Around the turn of the Twentieth Century, he developed a set of ideas designed to get employees in manufacturing industries to produce more output.
His term for this collection of strategies was scientific management, although it is sometimes simply referred to as Taylorism. In order to implement his ideas, Taylor contracted with companies to rearrange their production processes to simplify the tasks each employee performed. Instead of doing many different things, workers in Taylorized factories would execute the same simple tasks over and over.
This not only increased production, but reduced an employer’s need for skilled labor. For this reason, employers could cut their overall wage costs
.1
Taylor and his disciples cited the search for efficiency, “the one best way” to do a job, as justification for such changes. Because scientific management consultants claimed they understood the “natural laws” of human behavior and endurance, they argued that the implementation of scientific management would benefit both workers and society at-large.
Nevertheless, skilled workers and their unions often vociferously protested these changes because Taylorism made their work monotonous and also trespassed upon what they perceived as their traditional prerogative to manage their own time on the job. Workers and their unions objected not only to the efforts of scientific managers to determine what workers did all day, but also to efforts to tell workers exactly how they should do it.2
Approaching the end of the Industrial Revolution, Taylor’s ideas provided a catalyst for increasing the output of American factories beyond the promise of technological advances alone. After Taylor’s death in 1914, scientific management spread throughout the world, and it has influenced everything from advice to housewives on how to do their chores to how Japanese (and later American) cars have been made. Taylorism has also shaped the structure of American education. - This quote and more info here.
Below are a few important notes to consider:
Advent of the Industrial Revolution between 1760 - 1780 (give or take).
People began leaving their rural lives behind, to go to the cities where they could be employed in a factory. They in effect were leaving cleaner, less stressful, and more self-sufficient existences for one fraught with dangers to their health, both physical, and mental along with the risks of potential poverty, and boredom as they worked to receive what they initially thought would be better pay, and a better life. Ironically, at the same time, society was also leaving its familiarity with nature behind.
Before the Industrial Revolution many tradespeople made wide use of 'hands-on skills' in their livelihoods, and in their lives in general. 'Self-sufficiency' wasn't an invented term in this era, but was instead universally accepted simply as a way of life - more individuals had more real-life applicable skills.
Today we would say such a person was multi-talented, or multi-skilled which goes against what Taylorism has done for much of our educational system.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Here in St.Martins
Here in St.Martins we have a lot of the things many people are looking for in a place in which to live. There are perhaps a few obvious exceptions to this rule here, but these seem somewhat minor in the face of what many urban populations are having to deal with elsewhere.
Yes, its true the village is located about 35 to 40 minutes from Saint John, and many living here make the daily commute to work in the city. And there is no high school here which makes it tough for families to think about moving here. After grade 8 the kids her are bussed to a high school in Saint John for grade 9 and upwards.
But, if you're an individual looking to slow down, well then life doesn't get much slower than it does here. There are no inner city gangs, or anything else that's much organized for that matter. And most of the village has high speed internet which also makes it an option to work from home if you're so inclined.
Here also, you will find nature galore, from uncrowded beaches, to walking trails that will lead to a perch at the edge of rugged cliffs overlooking the ocean. In the summer, tourists from around the world somehow manage to find their way here, and yet the main road through the village is not crowded, and the tourists are generally of the baby-boomer persuasion so they're driving slower anyway.
But, one thing I've noticed quite distinctly from living here for the last 8-9 years is the age demographics in the areas' population which may spell trouble in the future. I'm not sure if anyone's kept close scrutiny of new people coming to live here. Obviously, I'm speaking of the contrasting out-migration of the younger generation versus in-migration of older ages.
Its my impression of watching the comings and goings, that more individuals fitting the description of retired persons seeking to downsize from Ontario, or countries such as England are coming to live here, than do younger families with school age children in tow, although a few families do come from these places as well. Of course, if you've been paying attention to this issue in the Atlantic region as a whole, or for that matter many rural areas as a whole, then you already know this is a continuing theme as we watch helplessly as our youth leave our locales for greener pastures.
But, here's the problem we need to address. Alongside the out migration of younger people, we are collectively facing an unprecedented health challenge as the large baby boomer generation will start requiring medical care, at the same time that we already have an existing demographically older population here due to many years of out migration of our younger people.
So, we have a large potential problem looming on the horizon if we can't figure out a real way to keep healthy demographic numbers alive here, which we still haven't been able to do.
So, this raises the all- important question of: how do we do it? How do we make it attractive for young families to remain here, and also at the same time, attract new families here? How do we go about balancing a sustainable age demographic here in New Brunswick?
This is a question our local governments have been trying to figure out for years. They've paid out big chunks of taxpayers change to consultants to help understand how to tackle this on-going issue.
Creating jobs in the 'Energy Hub' of Saint John for instance will only go so far. Other regions (the west) with possibly more to offer in other ways, can effectively compete for those would be workers in their already existing rich job environments.
Creating temporary construction jobs to build the 'Energy Hub' can only play a temporary role in the overall solution.
Currently, our province is having a large, and fractured debate over what age children should begin learning to speak and write French in our schools. This language debate seems to have galvanized many people into voicing their opinions on this issue.
But, I think the debate should include more than the question of French immersion. I think we have a great opportunity to have an open dialog about something much more far reaching, and fundamental.
I think areas like ours actually need to rethink what we are teaching our children in our schools. As a thinking, open, and mature society, we should be ready to begin questioning if the kids are really getting a very good education overall?
Then, New Brunswick could potentially be very attractive for families to both stay here, and come to live here as well!
Saturday, May 31, 2008
True Democracy - Wishful Thinking
As I was commenting on someone's website regarding election coverages, it became apparent how universal the problem of delivering news coverage from a totally unbiased perspective can be.
And unfortunately, our large neighbor to the south of us continues to set the bar for the rest of the world in allowing unfettered, biased news coverages to flourish in mainstream media.
But, it is not my intention to paint everyone with same brush, and as an example, some of what's on Fox news can hardly be viewed as being unbiased or 'fair and balanced' . The news arm of Rupert Murdoch's media empire often allows for preferential treatment of viewing many topics for 'serious' discussion from a very right wing perspective - meaning the traditional status quo rationale is fine, and doesn't need rethinking, or retooling. This is why I don't bother watching Fox news - and the few times I've attempted, I have to report, I felt lobotomized as that style of salacious news reporting requires its viewers to have a lobotomy to take it seriously.
But, for the matter of a large media organization owned and paid for by big business, and for the inherent purpose of enhancing its own economic protection, reporting on the news can allow for the 'truth' in journalism under the helm of this ear mongering guise to be jeopardized to say the least. To use an old expression: This is akin to allowing the fox watch over the hen house. It might not happen all the time, but the fox is sure to get hungry once in a while.
But, all the same, within many news organizations, this traditional practice is very self serving, and often leads to fervently blocking attempts to examine an important issue in enough detail, so as to result in a well researched information before true tragedy happens, i.e. the Vietnam war, or the war in Iraq today (see independent photo journalist sites if you have the stomach for it - for how very destructive this course of action has been to real humans - women and children, - 'collateral damage').
Its easy to understand how many individuals either through, a combination of coercion, the continual act of self preservation to keep their jobs, fear, or general induced conditioning from early on will actively aid in undermining the above attempts at uncovering the 'real' truth. Then of course, I have to acknowledge the competing interests of working in the real world. The economy and the question of jobs is to be given real consideration.
But it is by this method of pushing ( exaggerating) the truth a little further over time, for instance - the fashion conditioning of product placement that promises you a new experience over the old that eventually leads to something like the 'war on terror' of today. It becomes more difficult for the bulk of the populace busily engaging in their day to day activities of making a living, and driving the kids to after school programs to have the time or energy to discern the truth from reality. Or, if they can, they feel too busy and out of breath to have the energy to do much about it, and instead escape into a movie. (I have nothing against movies if they're well written, inspiring, or have something to say, and yes, from time to time, being only human, I admit I occasionally feel the need to escape into a trash fix myself).
To take a page from history, Hitler introduced a powerful propaganda stratagem to great effect; persuade the public through a constant campaign using fear as a motivator, and self preservation as a focus. He spent the national treasury on building a great military, and a powerful national voice to cheer lead for it. He caused the human suffering of millions. While his star was rising in the early years, people were afraid to speak out lest they become the object of aggression, or ridicule from their fellow countrymen, and also became the targets of domestic police attention or searches. Does any of this sound familiar?
Not much has changed in seventy years. Today, honest journalism is threatened everywhere by the same, old pitfalls; the ability of our wonderful, charismatic human spirit, and nature to become corrupted - by the need for self-preservation, coercion, fear, conditioning, self- interests, and ultimately - ego- I'm right - you're wrong.
It may be considered cynical, at least pessimistic in this next remark, but I think it's safe to assume there are many journalists working for privately owned news organizations under these same conditions. They are not able to work as 'honest' journalists in the same way I would consider as being honest. There is a constant need to self-censor, and be politically correct to their employer. Perhaps if they wish to keep their jobs, the best they can do, is to leave helpful clues, and subtle hints for the public to follow.
One has only to look at the myriad of puzzles we face on a daily basis to begin to understand something smells of deceit. Take Newton's Third Law; 'For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction'. In other words, before the 'war on terror' began in earnest - on TV and radio, we were not bothered by not knowing about it. It was not in our vocabulary, not on our radar screen. Since 9/11 however, the 'war on terror' is all around us. It is all we can think about. It is all consuming in our preoccupations.
It is the reason gas prices are so high. It follows then through the production of ethanol (because gas prices are high), why food prices are going up. It is the reason we are in Iraq, and Afghanistan. It is the reason why thousands of contractors are making premium salaries off of a manufactured war. (see Iran's stolen Presidential democratic election in 1953 by Britain and the U.S. for Standard Oil now BP )
But, (and this will be for a future post) are we yet expected to receive an honest answer to the real reasons for all this? Take the big question to begin with; Why did 9/11 happened in the first place? Fox news doesn't want to talk about it, or they simply say that Osama Bin Ladin is crazy, and has it in for America. As a matter of fact, has CNN highlighted how Saddam Hussein was aided in his own dictatorship to maintain his loyalty? Or, what about Iraq's historical relationship with its neighbor, Iran? There are specific historical events there that have been deemed of 'no value' in discussing, passed off as 'ancient history', or of no 'relevance importance' in relation to today's situation. Yet, it is these actions of the past aided by western powers that creates much of the chaos we find ourselves in today.
We are making the same mistakes today, for the very reason that mainstream media refuses to openly discuss the true root causes.
Some would say this is why we in Canada have the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) - to protect our airwaves from being inundated with only one point of view.
I would have to agree; CBC Radio being a Corporation to the Crown is probably the closest mainstream newscaster we will have to enable truth in media broadcasting, but I do see that even it has been coerced somewhat in its overture to silly celebrity gossip, and remains biased in its own perspective to look at itself in how quickly irrelevant it is becoming. The insistence of repeating the same news every half-hour, and Hollywood gossip is a good example of this!
Over the years, previous to the current direction CBC is taking, I have watched, and listened to countless topics discussed and debated on CBC's airwaves. Many have been chock full of intelligence, and compassion for the plight of our fellow man in other parts of the world, along with insightful real world decisions we could make right now to correct them. Currently, there are a few programs on CBC radio that rub my more serious side the wrong way, but I guess that's a personal preference, and that too will probably be for a future posting. However I still have hopes the CBC I once knew will someday return...
And unfortunately, our large neighbor to the south of us continues to set the bar for the rest of the world in allowing unfettered, biased news coverages to flourish in mainstream media.
But, it is not my intention to paint everyone with same brush, and as an example, some of what's on Fox news can hardly be viewed as being unbiased or 'fair and balanced' . The news arm of Rupert Murdoch's media empire often allows for preferential treatment of viewing many topics for 'serious' discussion from a very right wing perspective - meaning the traditional status quo rationale is fine, and doesn't need rethinking, or retooling. This is why I don't bother watching Fox news - and the few times I've attempted, I have to report, I felt lobotomized as that style of salacious news reporting requires its viewers to have a lobotomy to take it seriously.
But, for the matter of a large media organization owned and paid for by big business, and for the inherent purpose of enhancing its own economic protection, reporting on the news can allow for the 'truth' in journalism under the helm of this ear mongering guise to be jeopardized to say the least. To use an old expression: This is akin to allowing the fox watch over the hen house. It might not happen all the time, but the fox is sure to get hungry once in a while.
But, all the same, within many news organizations, this traditional practice is very self serving, and often leads to fervently blocking attempts to examine an important issue in enough detail, so as to result in a well researched information before true tragedy happens, i.e. the Vietnam war, or the war in Iraq today (see independent photo journalist sites if you have the stomach for it - for how very destructive this course of action has been to real humans - women and children, - 'collateral damage').
Its easy to understand how many individuals either through, a combination of coercion, the continual act of self preservation to keep their jobs, fear, or general induced conditioning from early on will actively aid in undermining the above attempts at uncovering the 'real' truth. Then of course, I have to acknowledge the competing interests of working in the real world. The economy and the question of jobs is to be given real consideration.
But it is by this method of pushing ( exaggerating) the truth a little further over time, for instance - the fashion conditioning of product placement that promises you a new experience over the old that eventually leads to something like the 'war on terror' of today. It becomes more difficult for the bulk of the populace busily engaging in their day to day activities of making a living, and driving the kids to after school programs to have the time or energy to discern the truth from reality. Or, if they can, they feel too busy and out of breath to have the energy to do much about it, and instead escape into a movie. (I have nothing against movies if they're well written, inspiring, or have something to say, and yes, from time to time, being only human, I admit I occasionally feel the need to escape into a trash fix myself).
To take a page from history, Hitler introduced a powerful propaganda stratagem to great effect; persuade the public through a constant campaign using fear as a motivator, and self preservation as a focus. He spent the national treasury on building a great military, and a powerful national voice to cheer lead for it. He caused the human suffering of millions. While his star was rising in the early years, people were afraid to speak out lest they become the object of aggression, or ridicule from their fellow countrymen, and also became the targets of domestic police attention or searches. Does any of this sound familiar?
Not much has changed in seventy years. Today, honest journalism is threatened everywhere by the same, old pitfalls; the ability of our wonderful, charismatic human spirit, and nature to become corrupted - by the need for self-preservation, coercion, fear, conditioning, self- interests, and ultimately - ego- I'm right - you're wrong.
It may be considered cynical, at least pessimistic in this next remark, but I think it's safe to assume there are many journalists working for privately owned news organizations under these same conditions. They are not able to work as 'honest' journalists in the same way I would consider as being honest. There is a constant need to self-censor, and be politically correct to their employer. Perhaps if they wish to keep their jobs, the best they can do, is to leave helpful clues, and subtle hints for the public to follow.
One has only to look at the myriad of puzzles we face on a daily basis to begin to understand something smells of deceit. Take Newton's Third Law; 'For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction'. In other words, before the 'war on terror' began in earnest - on TV and radio, we were not bothered by not knowing about it. It was not in our vocabulary, not on our radar screen. Since 9/11 however, the 'war on terror' is all around us. It is all we can think about. It is all consuming in our preoccupations.
It is the reason gas prices are so high. It follows then through the production of ethanol (because gas prices are high), why food prices are going up. It is the reason we are in Iraq, and Afghanistan. It is the reason why thousands of contractors are making premium salaries off of a manufactured war. (see Iran's stolen Presidential democratic election in 1953 by Britain and the U.S. for Standard Oil now BP )
But, (and this will be for a future post) are we yet expected to receive an honest answer to the real reasons for all this? Take the big question to begin with; Why did 9/11 happened in the first place? Fox news doesn't want to talk about it, or they simply say that Osama Bin Ladin is crazy, and has it in for America. As a matter of fact, has CNN highlighted how Saddam Hussein was aided in his own dictatorship to maintain his loyalty? Or, what about Iraq's historical relationship with its neighbor, Iran? There are specific historical events there that have been deemed of 'no value' in discussing, passed off as 'ancient history', or of no 'relevance importance' in relation to today's situation. Yet, it is these actions of the past aided by western powers that creates much of the chaos we find ourselves in today.
We are making the same mistakes today, for the very reason that mainstream media refuses to openly discuss the true root causes.
Some would say this is why we in Canada have the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) - to protect our airwaves from being inundated with only one point of view.
I would have to agree; CBC Radio being a Corporation to the Crown is probably the closest mainstream newscaster we will have to enable truth in media broadcasting, but I do see that even it has been coerced somewhat in its overture to silly celebrity gossip, and remains biased in its own perspective to look at itself in how quickly irrelevant it is becoming. The insistence of repeating the same news every half-hour, and Hollywood gossip is a good example of this!
Over the years, previous to the current direction CBC is taking, I have watched, and listened to countless topics discussed and debated on CBC's airwaves. Many have been chock full of intelligence, and compassion for the plight of our fellow man in other parts of the world, along with insightful real world decisions we could make right now to correct them. Currently, there are a few programs on CBC radio that rub my more serious side the wrong way, but I guess that's a personal preference, and that too will probably be for a future posting. However I still have hopes the CBC I once knew will someday return...
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Ralph Nader's Surprising News
I understand from watching Nader over a period of many years, I think its safe to say he is probably one of the most recognizably credible individuals who's attempted to hold the powerful responsible to the less powerful.
Saturday, May 24, 2008
Wind Energy
I'm glad to see the announcement of clean wind energy initiatives by the province!
I wonder what the $ deal is though? Can we pay an existing wind energy firm to show the province how to actually build some of the larger, successful, and reliable turbine designs for ourselves, thereby creating much needed jobs here while eliminating much expense of simply purchasing them?
This way we can kill several birds with the same stone. We can employ both unskilled labor and out-of-work New Brunswick tradespeople to make these turbines. At the same time, we can create other initiatives such as a profit sharing for these same workers which will be offset by fabrication benchmarks to ensure strict quality control, and additionally, we will be able to offer smaller, residential turbines to New Brunswicker's at, or near cost for added self-sufficiency.
We could do the same for solar panel fabrication, and thermal heat pumps. All we need is enough voices, and of course, the political will...
I wonder what the $ deal is though? Can we pay an existing wind energy firm to show the province how to actually build some of the larger, successful, and reliable turbine designs for ourselves, thereby creating much needed jobs here while eliminating much expense of simply purchasing them?
This way we can kill several birds with the same stone. We can employ both unskilled labor and out-of-work New Brunswick tradespeople to make these turbines. At the same time, we can create other initiatives such as a profit sharing for these same workers which will be offset by fabrication benchmarks to ensure strict quality control, and additionally, we will be able to offer smaller, residential turbines to New Brunswicker's at, or near cost for added self-sufficiency.
We could do the same for solar panel fabrication, and thermal heat pumps. All we need is enough voices, and of course, the political will...
Thursday, May 22, 2008
John Pilger - The War on Democracy
John Pilger's film 'The War on Democracy'. Have you seen it? You should! It's in 10 parts on Youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=to6uNUTf8g4
(The youtube video quality will improve after the first episode)
or here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3739500579629840148
or: http://johnpilger.com/
This documentary examines an area of geopolitics that is usually kept below the radar of most Canadians, and Americans. In Central, and South American countries we're led to believe that much of social unrest, attempted coups, and attached episodes of violence is nothing more than the result of internal struggles (corrupt leaders, out-of-control drug cartels, the wealthy staying wealthy by keeping the poor in check, and the rebels doing what they naturally do best- which is to rebel).
But as this documentary unfolds the history of the latter half of the twentieth century, nothing could be further from the truth.
The gist of the film is based on the incredible historical evidence (facts), and outright murder of women and children sanctioned, and even carried out by U.S. administration involvement with Central, and South American countries for the profit of American corporations. ( Remember I'm only reporting this. Check out the his films if you're unsure)
These atrocities are carried out in the name of 'democracy'. Instead of allowing true democratic societies to develop, the White House over many administrations was instrumental in creating coup d'etats in which they deposed of rightfully, democratically elected leaders, and instead set up political puppets that would become dictators including the notorious, and psychopathic General Pinochet.
These leaders then became the loyal puppets of the White House (as did Saddam Hussein until he revolted), and large U.S. Corporations, especially those with insider U.S. government connections. Among today's generations of innocents living in these countries south of our borders, many that survive, get to enjoy living either in abject poverty, or are very psychologically disillusioned.
The overwhelming moral of this film is: "Anything and Everything, including human life can be, and will be sacrificed for the personal wealth and fortunes of others!" But more importantly, tell others of this film, and where we truly are as an 'enlightened society' if we are ever to have a peace in our world!
http://johnpilger.com/
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Jeffrey Sachs on Economics for a Crowded Planet
Progressive video by Sachs who gives a rundown on his newest book. Don't despair, there is hope.
1 to almost 2$Billion/day is spent on the Pentagon by the out of control US government in its profit -taking, and paranoid war against 'terror' money laundering to the military industrial complex campaign.
Only 3$Billion/year is spent on energy research.
Where are the Math geniuses?
Its not that we don't have the means to turn the direction the world is heading in...
We simply enjoy a very corrupt way of looking at things...
And this must change...
1 to almost 2$Billion/day is spent on the Pentagon by the out of control US government in its profit -taking, and paranoid war against 'terror' money laundering to the military industrial complex campaign.
Only 3$Billion/year is spent on energy research.
Where are the Math geniuses?
Its not that we don't have the means to turn the direction the world is heading in...
We simply enjoy a very corrupt way of looking at things...
And this must change...
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Letter to the Editor
This is another letter sent to and published by the Irving owned Telegraph Journal newspaper. I'm actually surprised they agreed to publish it since some of what is in the letter is currently applicable to Saint John.
First, some background
A possible, second refinery project is being talked about for Saint John. Depending on what side of the fence you're on, this is either good news for the economy here, or threatening news for the environment, including human health.
(Personally, I don't know why we collectively can't achieve the vision to have both).
The firm that wishes to do it, is also looking to partner with B.P. Corp. The proposed cost?... $7 billion + , and to be built over the next few years. If you take into account what Jeffery Sachs says in regards to the U.S. spending only $3 billion a year on energy research, then to my mind, $7 billion could also help us discover, and refine a new energy source to use, such as recapturing hydrogen, and then reusing it, etc.
The answer to this moral -crossroads dilemma seems simple to me:
If we want others to see our perspective on their wrongdoing, then we have to set the example here first .We condone violence in the form of pollution, and poverty and lost ideals against our own children, but think nothing of speaking out against the crimes that other nations commit. We must become more mature, more humbly intelligent in the way we conduct our own lives so that others may eventually see the wisdom that we are attempting to share, and then begin to follow us in this truly new, enlightened path we can both travel on together....
Here's the letter: (remember: these letters have a 250 word count limit)
Well, Janice Harvey sure said a mouthful in her latest article entitled"What will stop Global Warming?" In it, she hit the proverbial economic nail painfully on its head with a swift swing of weighty environmental truth.
What she is proposing is an incredibly heroic effort by all levels of society, but ironically, mostly by those who have the most to lose by having the applecart upset. Today unfortunately, there are many otherwise intelligent people who refuse to comprehend there is any moral problem with polluting our world further still.
Often, this inability to admit our own wrongdoing is compounded by the degrees of separation in our lives, and between industry giants and local workforces. There is a trickle down effect in how relationships are effected between neighbors, and family members whose incomes are solely dependent on working for these same industries. People are usually afraid to speak out for fear of ridicule from people they know. Local politicians too, have traditionally shown they don't have the vision, or the courage to question the environment versus jobs anthem, just as an elementary school full of innocent children downwind of an oil refinery is morally not responsible.
The oil giant BP might fund large wind farm initiatives, but unfortunately, once pollution from its oil refining enters our atmosphere,and gets into our water, and our food supply it can not be taken back, or the damage it causes lessened. We've polluted much in two hundred years. We should really think about stopping.
First, some background
A possible, second refinery project is being talked about for Saint John. Depending on what side of the fence you're on, this is either good news for the economy here, or threatening news for the environment, including human health.
(Personally, I don't know why we collectively can't achieve the vision to have both).
The firm that wishes to do it, is also looking to partner with B.P. Corp. The proposed cost?... $7 billion + , and to be built over the next few years. If you take into account what Jeffery Sachs says in regards to the U.S. spending only $3 billion a year on energy research, then to my mind, $7 billion could also help us discover, and refine a new energy source to use, such as recapturing hydrogen, and then reusing it, etc.
The answer to this moral -crossroads dilemma seems simple to me:
If we want others to see our perspective on their wrongdoing, then we have to set the example here first .We condone violence in the form of pollution, and poverty and lost ideals against our own children, but think nothing of speaking out against the crimes that other nations commit. We must become more mature, more humbly intelligent in the way we conduct our own lives so that others may eventually see the wisdom that we are attempting to share, and then begin to follow us in this truly new, enlightened path we can both travel on together....
Here's the letter: (remember: these letters have a 250 word count limit)
Well, Janice Harvey sure said a mouthful in her latest article entitled"What will stop Global Warming?" In it, she hit the proverbial economic nail painfully on its head with a swift swing of weighty environmental truth.
What she is proposing is an incredibly heroic effort by all levels of society, but ironically, mostly by those who have the most to lose by having the applecart upset. Today unfortunately, there are many otherwise intelligent people who refuse to comprehend there is any moral problem with polluting our world further still.
Often, this inability to admit our own wrongdoing is compounded by the degrees of separation in our lives, and between industry giants and local workforces. There is a trickle down effect in how relationships are effected between neighbors, and family members whose incomes are solely dependent on working for these same industries. People are usually afraid to speak out for fear of ridicule from people they know. Local politicians too, have traditionally shown they don't have the vision, or the courage to question the environment versus jobs anthem, just as an elementary school full of innocent children downwind of an oil refinery is morally not responsible.
The oil giant BP might fund large wind farm initiatives, but unfortunately, once pollution from its oil refining enters our atmosphere,and gets into our water, and our food supply it can not be taken back, or the damage it causes lessened. We've polluted much in two hundred years. We should really think about stopping.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Unanswered Questions about our Local Environment and jobs
If GM/Saturn's electric car, the EV1, was so bad that its owners who leased them wanted to buy them, then why did GM refuse to accept the many potential sales and instead take them back only to destroy them?
And why does GM's new concept car, the 'Volt' have such little driving range (40 miles) between charge ups, compared to the EV-1 of several years ago?
And why are bio-fuels seriously being developed when it is obvious it creates two tragic effects? It ironically pollutes just as much to harvest the crop, and then to also process it, plus pesticides, and second, it is artificially creating higher food prices/shortages, as more land is given over to it. This is simply a no-brainer.
The decision to go ahead with bio-fuels is simply a political one. The 2002 Corn lobbyists in the American mid west promised to send more votes Bush's way if their states were bailed out.
And why is this province continuing to go down the same old road of trading jobs for the environment? Why are the province's elect official's voices remaining quiet on the question of the 2nd oil refinery in Saint John?
I, along with many other voices already believe Saint John creates more than enough pollution, and in doing so actually aids in limiting its population growth. Well, it limits those people and families that actually care about their health. We have to incorporate more ingenious ways of continuing to grow our economy with less pollution..
Instead, I'd like to see our province work to strike a brave, new path of true self sufficiency, one in which the health of our wonderful, natural world on the east coast is protected.
One has to wonder if N.B.'s Dept. of Environment will also include the cost of new medical expenses including lung cancer medications, and other mental stress, and psychological effects of NB residents in its EIF study if the proposed construction of the new refinery goes ahead? Or, how other residents will decide to move out of our province, or others will choose instead not to move here at all, instead choosing healthier places in which to live.
I think most intelligent people in this world are ready for a change. I would like to look out from the hill I live on, and not see that dirty brown stain stretching across the sky over the Bay of Fundy. The province's power generating station at Coleson Cove is as of this writing, actively spewing out clouds of burnt oil fumes every day and night. I think its highly ironic last year UNESCO awarded the Bay of Fundy with the acknowledgement of being an important, and unique natural biosphere.
You'll notice in my painting blog, that I tend to paint many seascapes, etc. The reason for this is simple; I'm surrounded by natural beauty here on the coast, and would very much like to keep its health intact so it continues to remain beautiful for me, my family, my friends, and you too.
And why does GM's new concept car, the 'Volt' have such little driving range (40 miles) between charge ups, compared to the EV-1 of several years ago?
And why are bio-fuels seriously being developed when it is obvious it creates two tragic effects? It ironically pollutes just as much to harvest the crop, and then to also process it, plus pesticides, and second, it is artificially creating higher food prices/shortages, as more land is given over to it. This is simply a no-brainer.
The decision to go ahead with bio-fuels is simply a political one. The 2002 Corn lobbyists in the American mid west promised to send more votes Bush's way if their states were bailed out.
And why is this province continuing to go down the same old road of trading jobs for the environment? Why are the province's elect official's voices remaining quiet on the question of the 2nd oil refinery in Saint John?
I, along with many other voices already believe Saint John creates more than enough pollution, and in doing so actually aids in limiting its population growth. Well, it limits those people and families that actually care about their health. We have to incorporate more ingenious ways of continuing to grow our economy with less pollution..
Instead, I'd like to see our province work to strike a brave, new path of true self sufficiency, one in which the health of our wonderful, natural world on the east coast is protected.
One has to wonder if N.B.'s Dept. of Environment will also include the cost of new medical expenses including lung cancer medications, and other mental stress, and psychological effects of NB residents in its EIF study if the proposed construction of the new refinery goes ahead? Or, how other residents will decide to move out of our province, or others will choose instead not to move here at all, instead choosing healthier places in which to live.
I think most intelligent people in this world are ready for a change. I would like to look out from the hill I live on, and not see that dirty brown stain stretching across the sky over the Bay of Fundy. The province's power generating station at Coleson Cove is as of this writing, actively spewing out clouds of burnt oil fumes every day and night. I think its highly ironic last year UNESCO awarded the Bay of Fundy with the acknowledgement of being an important, and unique natural biosphere.
You'll notice in my painting blog, that I tend to paint many seascapes, etc. The reason for this is simple; I'm surrounded by natural beauty here on the coast, and would very much like to keep its health intact so it continues to remain beautiful for me, my family, my friends, and you too.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
A Letter to the Editor
I sent the following letter to the editor at the Saint John Telegraph Journal.
I wrote it hoping members of the older generation who haven't yet surfed the Net, and traditionally read a newspaper instead, would find it at least a little inspiring to start thinking about doing so. As the rest of you already know, there is so much information available, sometimes its almost like being in a candy store!
Hopefully it will be published. Remember there is a 250 word limit for these letters, and the letter below just makes it.
____________________________________________________________________
I wrote it hoping members of the older generation who haven't yet surfed the Net, and traditionally read a newspaper instead, would find it at least a little inspiring to start thinking about doing so. As the rest of you already know, there is so much information available, sometimes its almost like being in a candy store!
Hopefully it will be published. Remember there is a 250 word limit for these letters, and the letter below just makes it.
____________________________________________________________________
Letter to the Editor
Last evening, I was again poking around the Internet, looking for sources of interesting, and enlightening information (which there are many). For those of you not very familiar with the Internet, your suspicion that there is a lot of mind-wasting crap on it is actually, only partially true. Just like watching TV, don’t bother with the sites you don’t want to. There are many better sites to choose from.
Lets say you have an interest in learning the real reasons behind the Vietnam war, or you desire to network with like-minded people, or listen to excellent, discussion programs in the form of podcasts, its all on the Net!
Some of you also might be surprised to learn, there is a growing community of New Brunswick bloggers who are exhibiting a dynamically thoughtful, and caring voice, making posts almost daily. Many of these bloggers have a willingness to share with fellow New Brunswickers their concerns regarding provincial politics, education, the environment, etc.
For instance, one such blog I visited recently had a link to a report regarding high-test scores of students in Finland. To my curious amazement, whatever they are doing in Finnish society, has allowed them to remain relatively free of many of the social ills, and negative government, and corporate practices plaguing the U.S for instance, which the same unfortunately, is also slowly beginning to undermine our real potential here in Canada.
Then there are really incredible sites like ted.com, podcastalley.com, and yes, even… youtube.com for its documentaries, etc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)