Category Archives: World Leaders

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WILL POPULISM BE THE ULTIMATE STRESS TEST OF REPRESENTATIVE POLITICS.

19 Sunday May 2019

Posted by in 2019., Democracy, European Elections 2019, European Union., Humanity., Inequality, Modern Day Democracy., Politics., Populism., Post - truth politics., Reality., Social Media, The common good., The far-right., The new year 2109, The Obvious., Unanswered Questions., WHAT IS TRUTH, What needs to change in European Union., World Leaders, World Organisations., World Politics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

 

(Twenty-minute read)

Is democracy unravelled in the face of nationalism, racism, violence and populism? It seems even with the publicly supported compromise between countries and political parties are unable to cooperate to deliver anything.

If one takes a look at the world today 9/11 and the “war on terror” helped bring the idea of a “clash of civilisations” between Islam and the west to the forefront of political debate leaving all the rest in the dustbin of democracy.

As a result in the last few years, a new kind of far-right activism has emerged.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of far right"

This new activism, comprised largely of online anger and offline protest, crosses borders, yet is heavily nationalist and growing.

In Britain, its icons tend to be entrepreneurial social media personalities, celebrities of a sort, who use their following to exert pressure on mainstream politics.

Nobody in England embodies the dynamics of this new movement more than Mr Fraieg with his tutor in the USA Mr Dump who both gave support to Yaxley-Lennon better known as Tommy Robinson. ( The founder of the founder and former leader of the English Defence League (EDL) now the voice of UKIP which was founded by Nigel Farage, has today more than 950,000 followers.)

We all know that Data-driven algorithms exert great influence on the political world by analyzing our voting potential.  By logging what we do, where we do it, how we do it, with whom we do it, – Facebook- Twitter – Social Media, TV, U Tube, Google.

The marketplace of ideas, with the best arguments, no longer win out.

Even more worrying is the extent to which it is “normalising” extreme right-wing ideas and ideologies helping to form governments rooted in racism and fear of others – with anti-establishment crusader, online propagandists attracting large amounts of the wrong type of money and attention.

Throwing its opponents into a fierce disagreement about how to respond with the potential to have quite dangerous and dire consequences.

Indeed, one of the goals of right-wing extremists has always been to appear “normal”.

But all of this is not inevitable, and it can be stopped if we recognise that keeping the far right out of power is only one part of the problem.

We need a better understanding of what “free speech” is and is not.

There is still no public control or oversight of what we should regard as our platforms.

The logical consequence of free speech at any cost is that someone will soon be successful in rallying together enough impressionable voters to form an electable far-right party.

It has happened before and it will happen again.

The accusation of betrayal by the elites is central to the way that far-right movements operate with single-issue campaigns mostly conducted via social media without any commitment to wider political action.

For many years, far-right views were outside the acceptable bounds of debate and should be denied a platform.

But the breaking down of these boundaries presents a dilemma: what does the anti-fascist principle of “no platform” mean when a far-right activist has their own independent platform anyway?

The majority of their supporters, have no formal political affiliation and answered to no party hierarchy.

The ideas of extreme right-wing movements are dangerous, as they are not institutional actors.

While only a few years ago such groups would have been widely reviled, in today’s more populist atmosphere, such views are now more mainstream, sideling voters from the political movements that were originally created for their benefit.

For me Far Right is a slippery term and one that people should rarely if ever, apply to their own politics. In everyday use, it describes a range of extreme nationalist activity.

For instance: Stephen Bannon, a white nationalist who has said the west is at the start of a civilisational war with Islam.

Luckily different currents within the far right do not always get on and may also see one another as enemies.

So far it is not a cohesive movement. Their various aims are profoundly undemocratic: A majoritarianism defined by race, ethnicity or religion, and the violent exclusion of internal and external enemies.

The best defence is a political movement that has anti-racism at its core and seeks to give people greater democratic control over the way their society is organised and run.

However in recent years, pushed by the election of Donald Trump in the US, and political changes in Europe, we have seen the breaking down of the taboo that kept far-right political ideas largely outside mainstream culture.

This can be rectified. It is mostly the result of technological change, which can be fixed by regulating social media companies.

In order to win political power, for any group, it should first be necessary to push for wider cultural acceptance of the ideas that underpinned their movements.

This is not to say that the claims being made by activists and the views of people who might support the far right should be ignored – either in political debate or in everyday life.

But the question is how these issues are presented, and how they are challenged: who is speaking, and why, matters as much as whether or not an issue is in the news.

Big media organisations must be aware that legitimisation of the far right is not acceptable. They cannot normalise nor be seen to give permission to what are, in truth, hateful ideas and ideologies.

They are most effective when unaffiliated and unaccountable, disavowed by politicians and commentators who echo his views but wish to look respectable.

But the greater danger is in the cumulative effect of the various types of far-right activism – political parties, websites, social media personalities, funding and coordination from wealthy US thinktanks and entrepreneurs – on the political mainstream.

The problem is that ordinary joe soap is becoming more and more detached from the political area paying more and more taxes in order to live a decent life while feeling shut out of the system.

With the views of the far right how taking advantage of wider political failures all fueled by food banks, benefits cuts, homeless, job insecurity, pension erosion shifting the mainstream debate in its favour. Its public messages are focusing on popular fears about identity and economic security.

IE: Europe is overrun by Muslim immigrants; liberal elites have allowed all this to happen.

So far no alternative vision has won out.

Simply pointing out their factual mistakes is insufficient they must be challenged, locally and internationally, before it starts to do serious damage.

Why?

Because we are mechanistically sleepwalking towards an inability to effectively confront problems such as Brexit, Inequality and Climate Change.

There is only one way to get the voters to engage with the modern world and that is not by voting every five years as an expression of free will. 

It is offering the citizens of a country to own some of its prosperity by:

ISSUING CITIZENS GUARANTEED (NON-TRANSFERABLE BONDS.)

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "picture of bonds certificate"

These bonds could be bought for as little as a Dollar to as much as?

They could mature in as little as a year or?

They could be inherited but not sold.

They could be for every environmental, health, or whatever project that is not for profit for profit sake.

They will engage people in the direction of a country countermanding

negativity, allowing all citizens no matter what their political views,

creed, or colour to take pride in their nation.

They will countermand inequality and stop the rise of the far right.

THEY WOULD IF ADOPTED BY DIEM 25 FORFILL MOST IF NOT ALL OF ITS POLITICAL ASPERATION FOR EUROPE.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked and abuse chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: WITH CLIMATE CHANGE WE NEED TO THINK IN VERY DIFFERENT TERMS ABOUT THE COORDINATION OF A GLOBAL RESPONSE.

16 Thursday May 2019

Posted by in Algorithms., Big Data., Climate Change., Democracy, Environment, European Elections., Fourth Industrial Revolution., Google Knowledge., Humanity., Modern Day Democracy., Modern day life., Natural World Disasters, Our Common Values., Post - truth politics., Reality., Sustaniability, Technology, The Future, The Obvious., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., WHAT IS TRUTH, What needs to change in European Union., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Leaders, World Organisations., World Politics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

 

(Eighteen-minute read)

We are rapidly approaching the era of ubiquitous surveillance, a time when virtually every aspect of our lives will be monitored. Leaving us vulnerable to all manner of manipulation and persuasion.

The goal is to automate us’: welcome to the age of surveillance

capitalism.

Google, Facebook Amazon, U Tube, Supermarket Loyalty Card,

Credit card spending, you name it and it is creating the

surveillance data and we continue to ignore the most vital data

that we are alive and can do something about climate change.

It’s impossible to take a long view of what’s happening.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of surveillance"

SHOULD WE BE WORRIED?

While most of us think that we are dealing merely with algorithmic inscrutability, in fact what confronts us is the latest phase in capitalism’s long evolution – from the making of products, to mass production, to managerial capitalism, to services, to financial capitalism, and now to the exploitation of behavioural predictions covertly derived from the surveillance of users.

During all this surveillance some elements of our world will change beyond recognition while others will stay reassuringly (or disappointingly) familiar.

Some innovations we might not notice, while others will knock us sideways, changing our lives forever.

For example The use of biometric recognition devices to ensure the identity of a person.

Three things, however, are certain: technology will get smaller, smarter and cheaper while Climate change will cost TRILLIONS  by the end of the century.

Perhaps there’s a technological barrier that can’t be surmounted, such as artificial superintelligence or weaponized nanotechnology but Global warming will no doubt disproportionately hurt the poor, broadly undermine human health, damage infrastructure, limit the availability of water, alter coastlines, and boost costs in industries from farming, to fisheries and energy production.

How different might life be 20 years from now?

I would bet you that it probably will be much like it is today.

Unfortunately, GDP is still viewed as a prerequisite to achieving global goals, even though it can’t stand for everything.

Food, clean water, good education and infrastructure, all these things need money to support so it’s inevitable and sad that climate change will become a product for profit.  

However, the effects of Surveillance and Climate Change are going to be felt for hundreds, and possibly thousands, of years to come.

“A large fraction of climate change is largely irreversible on human time scales.”

Climate change and variability (e.g. increasing water scarcity), mounting / unresolved conflicts and refugee crises, increasing global inequalities which seem irreversible, and the questionable performance of the global economy (which is still very linked to increasing resource use) will still rule the roost.

Many people do not know what it really amounts to, either due to unreliable sources or deliberate misinformation, which has led to a series of myths about climate change.

First, it is important to be clear that climate change cannot now be avoided.

Climate change presents perhaps the most profound challenge ever to have confronted human social, political, and economic systems.

One of the central social, political, and economic questions of the century is: how then do we act?

It will present one of the most profound challenges to the way we understand human responses.

National governments are embedded in market economies that constrain what they can do.

We first have to get past controversies over cost estimates and distributions. (See previous posts: World Aid Commission Of 0.050% )

Activists think that the key here is simply getting the public to understand the facts by providing information.

The public should not, however, be understood as simply mass publics, which are problematic when it comes to mastering complex issues simply by virtue of their mass nature.

Increasingly, justice frameworks are being used in the development of climate policy strategies and as such, national governments can deploy this discourse when it suits their interests to do so. So developing countries can point to the history of fossil fuel use on which developed countries built their economies, such that fairness demands that it is the developing countries that should shoulder the burden of mitigation.

The response on the part of the wealthy countries is that for most of this history, their governments had no awareness that what they were doing could change the climate, and so ought not to be held uniquely responsible for future mitigation.

Dealing with major climate change issues has however never been a part of the core priorities of any government.

Governments acted swiftly and with the expenditure of vast sums of money in response to the global financial crisis in 2008–9. They have never shown anything like this urgency or willingness to spend on any environmental issue.

To date, very few national governments look at all like decarbonizing their economy or redesigning energy systems to reverse the growth in energy consumption.

This is why it is necessary to reframe the effects of climate change to where the government might involve recognition of the security dimension of climate change. Climate change can threaten the security of populations and vital systems, even in some cases threaten the sovereign integrity of states.

BUT: Neither coordinated collective action nor discursive reframings can stop at the national level.Image associée

Even if this was achieved Climate change involves a complex global set of both causal practices and felt impacts, and as such requires coherent global action—or, at a minimum, coordination across some critical mass of global players.

Like the heading to this post state:

Perhaps we need to think in very different terms about the coordination of a global response. 

The Western Antarctic Ice Sheet has already gone into an unstoppable decline.

Currents that transport heat within the oceans will be disrupted.

Ocean acidification will continue to rise, with unknown effects on marine life.

Thawing permafrost and sea beds will release methane, a greenhouse gas.

Droughts predicted to be the worst in 1,000 years will trigger vegetation changes and wildfires, releasing carbon.

Species unable to adapt quickly to a changing climate will go extinct.

Coastal communities will be submerged, creating a humanitarian crisis.

Thankfully, we’re not completely out of options yet.

There is little point if we as the data is implying that the world is warming planting trees or hoping that some future technology is going to solve the effects of climate change.

We are all riding on the one big blue ball together, and no matter what happens we will be finally all be confronted (Thanks to climate change with our societal problems.)

Millions of voters will no longer cast their ballots based on emotional cues, defying their own clear self-interest or reason that has created a society that is consumed with looking out for yourself first.

So here are a few things that you can do now.

Reduce the emissions that are warming the world the fastest.

Vote Diem 25 in the forthcoming European Elections.

Lobby your Television Stations to include a least once a week a weather report on Climate change.

Use your buying power to stop purchasing products with Palm Oil or products wrapped in plastic or are transported from on side of the world to the other.

Support local products.

Demand from your government free education.

Protect our privacy at all costs (It won’t be easy to fix because it requires us to tackle the essence of the problem – the logic of accumulation implicit in surveillance capitalism. That means that self-regulation is a nonstarter.

Digital technology is separating the citizens in all societies into two groups: the watchers and the watched and it will become increasingly disruptive throughout this century and beyond with profound consequences for democracy because the asymmetry of knowledge translates into asymmetries of power.

Governments know this.

Whereas most democratic societies have at least some degree of oversight of state surveillance, we currently have almost no regulatory oversight of its privatised counterpart. This is intolerable now while climate change will be intolerable in the near future. 

The fourth Industrial revolution will be the last. In effect, we are forcing future generations to retroactively subsidize our decision not to increase energy efficiency and move to cleaner fuels.

The warmer it gets, the less productive a country’s economy will likely be. Perhaps more concerning, however, is what could happen in a world where climate change is allowed to continue unmitigated.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of economic climate change"

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK’ S: WHICH GLOBAL ISSUE SHOULD WE BE WORKING ON TO HAVE THE GREATEST IMPACT?

09 Tuesday Apr 2019

Posted by in Artificial Intelligence., Climate Change., Education, Environment, Evolution, Fresh Water., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Inequality., Life., Our Common Values., Poverty, Reality., Sustaniability, Technology, The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Obvious., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., United Nations, WHAT IS TRUTH, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Leaders

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

(Ten-minute read)

By not be able to coordinate any universal action we now pose the greatest threat to our own survival.

Future civilisation might well create a world without need or want, and make mindblowing intellectual and artistic achievements but in this new age, what should be our biggest priority as a civilisation be?

We could build a far more just and virtuous society but if we let civilisation end, then none of this can ever happen.

An overwhelming amount of political attention goes on concrete issues that help the present generation in the short-term since that’s what gets votes but at the cost of future generations that have no way to stand up for their interests, whether economically or politically.

You might be surprised if you ask the above question using AI.

Climate change comes some way down the list.

Natural risks are still quite small in absolute terms.

The risks from nuclear weapons are greater than all the natural risks put together. So, it seems like the chance of a massive climate disaster created by CO2 is perhaps similar to the chance of a nuclear war.

Since these risks are caused by humanity, they can be prevented by humanity, but what stops us is the difficulty of coordinate action.Image associée

Take Artificial Intelligence.

(There is a 50% chance we will develop high-level machine intelligence in 45 years, and 75% by the end of the century.)

It is difficult to predict what something smarter than us would do.  A sufficiently powerful system might be difficult to control, and so be hard to reverse once implemented.

What’s less appreciated is that new technologies will present further catastrophic risks.

Like genetically engineer a virus that’s as contagious as the Spanish Flu, but also deadlier, and which could spread for years undetected. That would be a weapon with the destructive power of nuclear weapons, but far harder to prevent from being used.

So, let’s ask the question again.

What should be our biggest priority as a civilisation be?

(The flippant answer is we first have continued to exist so that we’ll have the chance to solve all our other problems.)

Improving technology? Helping the poor? Changing the political system? Free Education? Geo-engineering?- to mention a few.

Most of the best ways to tackle these risks are not easily taken by for-profit entities because the beneficiaries live in the future and can’t pay you.

For instance, a better-educated population would probably elect more enlightened leaders (cough). Improve the decision-making ability of people and institutions, this would help to make society, in general, more resilient, and solve many other problems.

However, in order for education to achieve anything, it would have to be on a very large scale to have any noticeable effect.

Improving technology holds the possibility of enormous gains, but also enormous risks.

Avoid accidents from AI systems are the most neglected of all risks.

More to the point, no matter what you think has happened in the past, if we look forward, improving technology, political organisation and freedom gives our descendants the potential to solve our current problems, and have vastly better lives.

Then, among the catastrophic risks, climate change gets the most attention, while issues like pandemics and AI are the most neglected.

An issue can be big but comparatively well-known and crowded, like climate change, or it can be small but neglected, like land use zoning reform.

In most countries, there is no government agency that naturally has mitigation of these risks in its remit.

So, even if we only focus on the impact on the present generation, these

catastrophic risks are one of the most serious issues facing humanity.

Probably part of the reason most people aren’t immediately ready to jump into action is that there appear to be so many problems and no simple solution presents itself for any of them.

One approach is to address each risk directly. Or rather than try to reduce each risk individually, we can try to make civilisation generally better at managing them – if we could all coordinate — if every nation agreed to contribute its fair share to reducing climate change, then all nations would benefit by avoiding its worst effects.

Unfortunately, such an approach in our capitalist consuming world is pie in the sky.

The truth is we only do so out of self-interest.

As we are witnessing with the Paris Climate Agreement made on 12 December 2015 when it comes down to the nitty gritty no one wants to pay either in the short term or long term.

It would be great if we could make the government have more concern for future generations.

To enable a universal action it has to be unseen and paid for by all without knowing. 

You only have to look at the reaction of the yellow jackets movement spontaneous calls to protest against the increase of the internal consumption tax on energy products. A rebellion of the provincial under-classes that typifies the 21st century (web-populism, fake news and a visceral, exaggerated hatred of both media and political elites).

Like the 5Star Movement in Italy, they started as an internet rebellion against representative democracy.

We all live in an apocalyptic bubble of social media- SO IF WE ARE TO GENUINELY TACKLE ANY OF THE WORLD PROBLEMS IT REQUIRES A PERPETUAL FUND THAT GENERATES ITS FUNDS FROM PROFIT FOR PROFIT SAKE NOT INCREASED TAXES.

(SEE PREVIOUS POSTS)

Such a fund would turn the United Nations from a begging organisation into a world organisation with clout.

AI CALCULATES 19% chance of extinction before 2100.

It’s possible to grow the capacity of a community faster than you can grow your individual wealth or career capital. WE NEED TO USE OUR BUYING POWER TO EFFECTS CHANGE.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "images of global issues"

Why?

Because we will need to change our way of thinking and the extent of how we consume resources.

To achieve food and water security. To stop HABITAT AND BIODIVERSITY LOSS AND OCEAN DESTRUCTION – TO CREATE A MORE MODERN AND EFFECTIVE UN. 

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

,

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: ITS TIME FOR THE SOCIAL SECTOR TO MOVE BEYOND THE US-VERSUS THEM.

28 Thursday Mar 2019

Posted by in #whatif.com, Capitalism, Climate Change., Environment, Humanity., Inequality, Life., Modern Day Democracy., Our Common Values., Politics., Populism., Purchasing Power., Reality., Sustaniability, Technology, The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Obvious., The world to day., Trade Agreements., Unanswered Questions., WHAT IS TRUTH, What needs to change in European Union., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Leaders, World Organisations., World Politics, World Trade Organisation

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

 

(Twelve-minute read)

There is no point at shaking our fists at corporations whose drive is to maximize profits at the expense of communities.

The world is changing faster than ever before with levels of social inequality spiralling out of control, with most of the world’s problems resulting from this, in one way or another.

The story we have been telling ourselves about our origins is wrong and perpetuates the idea of inevitable social inequality.

There is a fundamental problem with this narrative.

It isn’t true.

Civilization meant many bad things (wars, taxes, bureaucracy, patriarchy, slavery…) but also made possible written literature, science, philosophy, and most other great human achievements.

Civilization’ does not come as a package.

Unfortunately most see civilization from their smartphones and TV sets hence inequality, as a tragic necessity.

Once we learn to throw off our conceptual shackles and perceive what’s really there one can imagine overthrowing capitalism or breaking the power of the state, but it’s very difficult to imagine eliminating ‘inequality’.

In fact, it’s not obvious that doing so would even mean since people are not all the same and nobody would particularly want them to be.

Against a background of limited resources GDP growth is still seen as the ultimate political ambition.

‘Inequality’ is a way of framing social problems appropriate to technocratic reformers, the kind of people who assume from the outset that any real vision of social transformation has long since been taken off the political table.

With billions of people hyper-connected to each other in an unprecedented global network, it allows for an almost instantaneous and frictionless spread of new ideas and innovations. Combine this connectedness with rapidly changing demographics, shifting values and attitudes, growing political uncertainty, and exponential advances in technology, and it’s clear the next decade is setting up to be one of historic transformation.

The tech invasion has already taken over retail and advertising – and now invading forces have their eyes set on healthcare, finance, manufacturing, and education, banking.

It is time we turn the page on an approach to “the economy” under which communities are passive recipients, relegated to react to its ups and downs.

If we really want to understand how it first became acceptable for some to turn wealth into power, and for others to end up being told their needs and lives don’t count, it is here that we should look.

For instance, almost everyone nowadays insists that participatory democracy, or social equality, can work in a small community or activist group, but cannot possibly ‘scale up’ to anything like a city, a region, or a nation-state.

But the evidence before our eyes, if we choose to look at it, suggests the opposite.

Popolourism or people power can take many forms depending on what kind of change you’re looking to achieve and who has the power to make that change happen — whether it’s a government, company, community or individual.

There are many ways to influence governments and politicians, all of which can shift laws, policies and regulations.

Governmental and political structures are complex and vary widely across the globe and local laws can restrict the ability of organisations to engage in politics but there is one universal power that we have not yet tapped into.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "purchasing power pictures"

That is the power of Purchase Power.

The social sector has focused for years on government as its mechanism for change, but it’s business that has the biggest potential impacts on the social and environmental crises of our time.

Some of the deepest challenges facing our democracy have to do with the interaction between money and politics.

Yet civically minded citizens have limited options: call your MP, join a one-off protest action, donate to our advocacy organization. Too often, the options posed don’t translate into tangible benefits for one’s own community.

By making every purchase a civic opportunity, we can put communities back behind the wheel of their own economic destiny.

If we really want to see change when we open up our wallets to purchase the necessities and extra goodies in our lives, we should be more conscious of what or who we are supporting.

Purchasing power is social impact power.

With purchasing power, we can help business leaders to deliver social benefits while also meeting their bottom line, creating local markets that reward those who do.

People, given a path that does not set them back economically, will make choices as consumers that do good for their world. And, just as important, business leaders will as well.

By pooling our purchasing power, people and communities can do more than gain access to services they want at lower cost; they can unlock the ability of business–and I believe, whole market sectors–to be drivers of social good.

I believe people and communities have a more powerful tool in where what, and when they use their purchasing power.  For creating social benefits they care about, one that requires no sacrifice but instead aligns with their own economic interest as consumers:

Collective purchasing power.

Just imagine if the money we routinely spend on food, clothes, gifts, and even indulgences were turned into an untapped superpower to force change.

We’re at a moment of crisis in Communities–especially low-income neighbourhoods–are no longer being meaningfully engaged by the global economy, income inequality has never been higher, and our expulsion of finite fossil fuels into the atmosphere has us all on a crash course for disaster.

Although no generation behaves the same as the last.

How can we jumpstart a new, clean economy that truly lifts up those who need it most?

As new technologies are created at a faster and faster pace – and as they are adopted at record speeds by markets – it’s fair to say that the future is coming at a breakneck speed.

The definition of wealth itself is taking on a new meaning, with millennials leading a charge towards sustainable investing rather than being entirely focused on monetary return.

Global warming is here.

Humanity has dallied so long that avoiding the worst impacts will now require extremely sharp emissions cuts and the hotter it gets, the harder it gets to adapt.

THE TECH TO PULL CARBON OUT OF THE ATMOSPHERE IS STILL UNPROVEN.

The world has now amassed $247 trillion in debt, including $63 trillion borrowed by central governments: How we view money – and how that perception evolves over time – is an underlying factor that influences our future.

The population tidal wave in the coming decades will completely reshape the global economy. Rapid urbanization will translate into the growth of megacities, holding upwards of 50 million people.

While Amazon and Apple are worth over $1 trillion, Jeff Bezos has a $100+ billion fortune, and the current bull market is the longest in modern history at 10 years.

WITH MORE AND MORE PROFIT SEEKING ALGORITHMS THE FORCES BEHIND CHANGE ARE NOT ALWAYS EVIDENT TO THE NAKED EYE.

We now seem to be trapped in a trade paradox in which politicians give lip service to free trade, but often take action in the opposite direction.

Underrepresented populations have enormous influence as consumers.

Here are a few suggestions for conscious consumerisms.

Why not follow Bogota the Capital of a poor country and ban cars from our city centre on Sundays.

With the speed at which technology now moves, expect our energy infrastructure and delivery systems to evolve at an even more blistering pace than we’ve experienced before.

Why not allow and assist communities to set up there own solar farms.

Why not lobby Apple with there RECENTLY ANNOUNCED new credit card to allocate the cash back to charities.

Why not designate one day of the year as a world day of no online purchases.

Why not promote public asset ownership.

Why not apply a 0.05% world aid commission on all High-Frequency trading, on all Sovergen wealth fund accusations, on all foreign exchange transactions over 50,000 $, on all Lotto wins to create a perpetual World Aid fund.

Why not ask people outside Super Markets not to buy products that are housed in non-recyclable plastic.

There are many facets of change that will impact our shared future.

For community-driven economic transformation, someone has to pay for all of this change, and it is still going to be us in the form of targeted advertising.

So let advertising in all its forms Pay.

The wealth landscape is not all just about billionaires and massive companies – it is changing in other interesting ways as well.

The full impact of Millennials purchasing power and brand preferences will come into full effect in 2020 when their purchasing power is projected to reach $1.4 trillion.

Eventually, our descendants will be unrecognizable.

In our consumer culture what will have an immediate beneficial effect is a bottom-up approach through purchasing power which hurts the bottom line.

Finally. I am not the first or will I be the last to recognise the above.

Portable Purchasing Power

Today’s mobile advertising industry is growing exponentially. More devices

mean more sales, more opportunities to force change with what, where, and

how you buy.

Image associée

The world we want is in our hands. Buy the changes you want to see. 

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE LOOKS AT THE FAR RIGHT AS A VOTING PROPOSITION.

07 Thursday Mar 2019

Posted by in 2019., Democracy, European Elections 2019, European Union., Freedom, Modern day life., Our Common Values., Politics., Post - truth politics., Reality., The common good., The far-right., The Obvious., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., WHAT IS TRUTH, What needs to change in European Union., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Leaders, World Politics, World Racism

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

 

(Fourteen-minute read)

BEFORE YOU VOTE IN THE FORTHCOMING EUROPEAN ELECTION YOU SHOULD BE WELL ADVISED TO KNOW WHAT EXACTLY DO THE FAR RIGHT PARTIES STAND FOR.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "PICTURES OF THE FAR RIGHT"

The European far right represents a confluence of many ideologies: nationalism, socialism, anti-Semitism, authoritarianism.

Given the significant variations that exist between these parties and groups, any term that groups them together and compares them will have limitations.

But the term “far right” is the least problematic precisely because it can be used, on the one hand, to identify the overarching similarities that make them comparable, and on the other to distinguish between different variants.

Though Europe’s far-right parties differ in important respects, they are motivated by a common sense of mission: to save their homelands from what they view as the corrosive effects of multiculturalism and globalization by creating a closed-off, ethnically homogeneous society.

Under the “far right” umbrella, we must distinguish between two sub-categories: extreme and radical right.

The extreme right includes both vigilante groups and political parties that are often openly racist, have clear ties to fascism and also employ violence and aggressive tactics. These groups may operate either outside or within the realm of electoral politics or both.

The term “right-wing populism”, however, is less appropriate.

Populism is an even broader umbrella that often includes disparate parties and groups.

To narrow down this category, we often tend to conflate populism and nationalism, identifying a party as populist, not on the basis of its populist attributes – what party doesn’t claim to speak on behalf of the people in a democracy? – but on the basis of its nationalist attributes.

But despite the similarities between “populism” and “nationalism” – both emphasise conflict lines, focus on the collective, and put forward a vision of an ideal society – the two are conceptually different. While the former pits the people against the elites, the latter pits the in-group against the out-group.

In part, both can be seen as a backlash against the political establishment in the wake of the financial and migrant crises, but the wave of discontent also taps into long-standing fears about globalisation and a dilution of national identity.

This civic nationalist rhetoric presents culture as a value issue, justifying exclusion on purported threats posed by those who do not share “our” liberal democratic values.

The justification is that certain cultures and religions are intolerant and inherently antithetical to democracy.

They tend to oppose procedural democracy with some common themes, such as hostility to immigration, anti-Islamic rhetoric and Euroscepticism.

The forthcoming elections are going to expose just who are they, where they are, what are their political programmes and why they have risen from the political fringes.

So where does this leave Europe’s political landscape?

Will the far right triumph in Europe in 2019?

Will the far right redraw the political map of Europe?

Is the European Union being pulled inexorably towards the agenda of the far

right? 

There is little point here in listing party after party, it is sufficient to say that they all to some degrees or other blame and want to get rid of migrants. While conveniently ignoring that their countries are for the most part made up of refugees in one form or another.

If the far right wins 100 seats in the new European parliament this year, and the EPP group’s drift to nationalism and xenophobia continues, it is safe to say the projects of integration and social liberalism will be on hold.

They believed in what Trump promised in the USA.

The reality is that the EU in the forthcoming elections needs to look at the next distribution of structural funds. It needs to redefine the allocation criteria to reflect the preparedness of regions and authorities to receive and integrate migrants.

What is the solution?

It is surely this:

For the centre-left and the radical left to seek tactical unity with as many green and liberal parties as possible to defend democracy, suppress fascism and end austerity.

At the moment it’s hard to get the leaders of the European radical left to occupy the same room, let alone persuade social democratic politicians to collaborate with them.

However, the migration issue is the starting point of a continental power struggle pitching two very different versions of the principles that should bind Europe together.

One is liberal democratic, and attuned to the notion of an open society; the other is fortress-minded, illiberal and intolerant.

These far-right leaders are now uniting to attempt a national-populist takeover of the EU as we’ve known it.

There is, however, one wild-card option with a non-negligible chance of happening:

Theresa May falls, a second referendum cancels Brexit, Article 50 is revoked, Britain elects new MEPs and a new, left-led British government appoints a commissioner to match its politics. A unilateral cancellation of Brexit would merely leave Britain with all its rights under the status quo: but it would alter the dynamics of Europe.

Because even at 40 per cent of the vote, a new raft of left-affiliated MEPs would shift the balance in the parliament, while a feisty, communicative left commissioner from the fifth-largest economy in the world would tilt the balance in the EU.

For the democratic-minded across Europe, Europe needs to get its priorities right before it’s too late.

We all need to ask ourselves why should we relive the pain and terror today of far-right policies?

Surely if we Europeans have learnt anything it is that we all must distance ourselves from fascism in order to appeal to broader electorates.

And so herein lies the problem.

If nationalism is always a feature of the far right, as most researchers agree, what is the added value of the term “populism”? To put it another way, what is the difference between a radical right-wing party and a populist radical right-wing party? While populism may or may not be an attribute of some far-right parties, it is not their defining feature. Rather, nationalism is.

But while these parties differ in many ways, their progressive entrenchment in their national political systems raises similar questions about out-group exclusion, anti-immigration narratives and mainstream responses.

Former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, a leading advocate of the alt-right in the United States, is hoping the movement can lead Europe’s nationalist and populist parties to a strong showing next May.

For me “Bannon is American and has no place in a European political party.

It is disrespectful and unnecessary!

Many of the themes of Bannonism/Trumpism do not translate well in Europe.

For far-right groups, the migrant issue is something of a zero-sum game:

One country’s “gain” (by refusing refugees) is necessarily another’s nation’s “loss”.

Ultimately, as national right-wing groups chart their paths forward, few will find their domestic legitimacy bolstered by linking up with other groups on the far right.

Allusions to transnational links complicate matters for most of them.

The history of far-right activism is replete with examples of efforts to develop international links, and their failure.

The reason why far-right populists in Europe do not coordinate more systematically is that most of them are profoundly different, both in policy and style.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "PICTURES OF THE FAR RIGHT"

The sad truth is that it does not take Steve Bannon to build a strong far right in Europe. The voters are doing his job perfectly well – by not voting, and by supporting nationalist, anti-EU forces in their home countries.

History repeats itself, sadly, so don’t vote with false news spread by social media.

There are more than 40 million Muslims and 1.6 million Jews in Europe.

Do they need our votes?

I don’t think they need our votes. They need our kosher stamp.

No country can be forced to take in refugees. Every country has the right to say, ‘We don’t want others coming here.’ But the moment we’re talking about [engaging with parties that talk of] restriction on freedom of religion and racism.

The old world order is going through a lot of turbulence and is in danger of collapsing.

Those who believe in social democratic, green or liberal agendas have become accustomed to viewing far-right populists as automatically anti-EU.

Faced with this ideological flexibility, pro-EU politicians will need to think long and hard about how to protect the EU from those who would misuse it to promote a darker vision of Europe. These right-wing parties should be ostracized.

Make an informed choice rather than a mere expression of frustration with the EU in May.

There’s no steady political weathervane pointing in only one direction.

FOR ME:

OVER THE NEXT TWELVE YEARS WITH ALL OF US TREATED BY CLIMATE CHANGE  THAT IS GOING TO MAKE EVERYTHING IRREVELENT WHY WASTE A VOTE ON A FAR RIGHT OR INDEED FOR THAT MATTER ON A FAR LEFT PARTY WHEN WHAT IS NEEDED IS A VOTE THAT BRINGS US ALL TOGETHER TO ACT.

The far right has never had the slightest interest in the unknown.

It wants to be told the news it wants to hear, and the atmosphere of mystery it cultivates—like the pseudo-science to which it often gives rise—only exists to provide obvious lies with a vague cover of authority, a comfortably blurred prestige.

The tinder is dry, waiting for a lighted match.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: ITS TIME FOR SOME DEEP AUTHENTICITY ABOUT WHAT WE ARE ALL FACING.

02 Saturday Mar 2019

Posted by in Climate Change., Paris Climate Change Conference 2015, Reality., Sustaniability, The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Obvious., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., WHAT IS TRUTH, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Leaders, World Organisations., World Politics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

 

(THREE MINUTE READ)

YOU MIGHT BE FEELING ANGER, YOU MIGHT BE FEELING GRIEF, OR TERROR, FORGET ALL THAT NOW IT THE TIME FOR AUTHENTICITY FOR TELLING THE TRUTH.

YET THE EVIDENCE FOR HUMANITY’S ROLE IN CHANGING THE CLIMATE CONTINUES TO MOUNT, AND ITS CONSEQUENCES ARE INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT TO IGNORE.

THERE’S A VAST AND GROWING GAP BETWEEN THE URGENCY TO FIGHT CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE POLICIES NEEDED TO COMBAT IT.

WE CAN NO LONGER NOR CAN OUR WORLD LEADERS NO LONGER NOT BE TAKING STEPS TO AVERT CLIMATE CHANGE.

WE NEED DEEP ADAPTATION TO WHAT IS COMING.

WE MUST REBEL AGAINST UNSTANABILITY IN ALL ITS FORMS.

NOW, IT IS THE TIME FOR REALIZING HOW REAL ALL THIS IS.

NOW IT IS THE TIME FOR MASS NON- VIOLENT DIRECT ACTION.

NOW IT IS THE TIME FOR SOCIAL MEDIA AND OUR TV CHANNELS TO BE SPREADING THE WORD.

NOW IT IS THE TIME TO USE YOUR BUYING POWER TO DRIVE HOME THAT THIS IS NOT A FANATICISM THAT IS GOING TO BE SOLVE BY TECHNOLOGY

DON’T BE FOOLED THAT CHANGING YOUR LIGHT BULB OR JOINING THE GREEN PARTY IS GOING TO BE ENOUGH. WE NEED AN ABSOLUTE STEP CHANGE, AND WE HAVE BEEN IN NEED OF IT FOR A LONG TIME.

THE SOCIETIES AND GOVERNMENTS THAT ARE COMMITTING US TO OBLIVION CAN NO LONGER BE LEGITIMATE IF WHAT THEY ARE  ADVOCATING IS MASS EXTINCTION.

IT IS HIGHT TIME WE FREE OUR SELVES FROM THE ASSUMPTION OF POLITICAL BUSINESS AS USUAL.

THE PARIS CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCES, THE G8 MEETINGS, THE UNITED NATIONS, THE DONAL TRUMPS AND JAIR BOLAONARO OF THIS WORLD MUST BE PUT OUT TO GRAZING.

WE HAVE DESTROYED HALF OF NON-HUMAN LIFE ON EARTH IN MY LIFETIME.

WE ARE NOW PUTTING OUR SELVES ON THE ENDANGER LIST.

WE MUST DEMAND THAT CARBON ADMISSION BE REDUCES TO ZERO BY 2025.

THIS IS THE REAL TARGET.

HOW CAN THIS BE DONE?

BY USING OUR BUYING POWER. FORMING SMALL GROUPS THAT AGREE TO BOYCOTT PRODUCTS THAT CONTRIBUTE TO THE PROBLEM.

BY REALISING THAT WHEN YOU LOOK OUT YOUR WINDOW ALTHOUGH YOU MIGHT BE LOOKING AT A BLUE SKY THAT SOMEWHERE ELSE ON THE PLANTE IS ON FIRE, IS UNDERWATER, OR IS BEING FLATTENED BY HURRICANE WINDS.

BY REALISING THAT GROWTH AT ALL COST AND THE TECHNOLOGY IT IS PRODUCING WILL NOT STOP CLIMATE CHANGE.

BY REALISING THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT WARS OVER THE LAST DROP OF FRESHWATER OR THE LAST PIECE OF DRY LAND OR DEPARTURE FROM EARTH INTO OBLIVION.

BY REALISING THAT THIS IS HAPPENING IN YOUR LIFETIME AND THE RESPONSIBILITY TO AVOID IT BELONGS WITH US. 

BY ADOPTING A 0.05% WORLD AID TAX. ( See previous posts)

SUCH A TAX OR COMMISSION WOULD REVERSE THE FUNDAMENTAL INEQUALITY WHEN IT COMES REDUCING GLOBAL EMISSIONS.

BY NOT BUILDING ANY MORE NUCLEAR POWER STATIONS WHOS BYE PRODUCT WASTE CONTAMINATED THE EARTH. Image associée

LET ME ASK YOU THIS QUESTION:

WHAT IS THE POINT OF ANYTHING IF WE DON’T HAVE A LIVEABLE PLANET?

REGARDLESS OF WHAT PATH WE CHOOSE, THE KEY THING TO REMEMBER IS THAT WE ARE GOING TO PAY FOR CLIMATE CHANGE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

OUR CHOICES NOW DO MATTER, BUT WE’RE RUNNING OUT OF TIME TO MAKE THEM.

IS THERE ANYTHING YOU CAN DO?

YES.

JOIN THE DiEM25 AND MAKE A DIFFERENCE: 

In order to do so, sign up at www.our.europeanspring.net.

All human comments appreciated/ All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WHEN THIS BRIXIT MAYHEM IS ALL OVER. THERE WILL BE QUESTIONS GALORE AS TO HOW IT ALL HAPPENED IN THE FIRST PLACE. ANOTHER FACE BOOK VICTORY.

13 Thursday Dec 2018

Posted by in #whatif.com, 2018: The Year of Disconnection., Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Brexit., Democracy, Facebook, HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Life., Modern Day Communication., Modern Day Democracy., Modern day life., Our Common Values., Politics., Populism., Reality., Social Media, Sustaniability, Technology, The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Obvious., The world to day., Twitter, Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Leaders, World Organisations., World Politics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

 

(Seven-minute read)

Facebook is more powerful than a nation-state.

Facebook is in the business of exploiting your data.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the erosion of democracy"

Platforms like Facebook enable people’s data to be used in ways that take power away from voters and give it to data-analyzing campaigners.

Unfortunately, it seems that none of us sees this. We don’t hold media technology firms accountable for degrading our public conversations.

With only months to go before Britain exits the European Union, the English government is in meltdown oblivious to what is happening in the world beyond and how it connects to Britain

All eyes are transfixed on the EU exit sign.

Critically, both for the EU and England it’s what happened on Social media platforms like Twitter or Facebook that will remain the biggest question of all after Brexit.

Both Twitter and Facebook have become a giant funnel not just for dark ads, but for dark money that evades election finance laws and the control of money spent during elections is the very basis of our electoral laws.

If we are now failing to recognise the above we are failing to appreciate how social media is breaking our democracy.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the erosion of democracy"

While we all are all burying our heads in the sand of smartphone it is obvious that Social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter are the perfect cover for something far more chilling controlling the expression of public opinion in the political debate.

Although Twitter and Facebook are categorised as social networking services, in fact, they are as different as chalk and cheese. And, of the two, Twitter is more important in one respect: its impact on the arena in which societies discuss their political issues.

Twitter also has the capacity to turn “ordinary” people into broadcasters, a development whose implications we are only just beginning to digest. Yellow Jackets, Brixiters who form the conclusion are perhaps three hundred miles distant from those who hear the arguments?

Technologies such as Twitter, which offer real-time tracking of public opinion, are the visible foundations of the Arab Spring, Donald Trump’s election, Brexit and the Yellowjackets.

Democracy and the rule of law are been subverted in plain sight.

If you look at the USA Twitter is the de facto newswire for the planet, which means that a company that can regulate expressions of opinion might be very powerful indeed.

And that should make us nervous.

So is there anything that can be done?

No much unless we pass laws regulating these platforms and make them responsible for what is posted on their platforms.

One of the most striking aspects of the epoch-making Brexit is (as with the Syrian War the Iraq, and Yemen war) is the way many MPs cited the emailed opposition of their constituents to armed intervention as a reason for voting against the proposed action.

Thus, it is evident that we are all increasingly embracing the importance of social media and its value in modern human communication.

However, this trend can only be assumed as the beginning of an envisioned well connected and digital adept world.

So recent history has evidenced that Social Media is a potent tool with transformational abilities to shape and influence the way in which people communicate and share information.

One of the qualities that define Social Media is its ability to transcend beyond borders, without observing spatial distance that exists between and amongst the geographies.

In addition, social media connects individuals on a semi-personal level, while allowing instantaneous feedback and dialogue.

But, this does not rule out the possible abuse of such innocent yet powerful platforms of communications.

Different sectors ranging from government to business also embeds and encourages the embracement of social media platforms into their processes in order to enhance organisational efficiency.

We might be gradually realising the significance of social media for democratic benefits that it is seen as an agent of public discourse and a driver of public participation and freedom of speech amid political and democratic uncertainty.

It might be rising the political and democratic consciousness but the power of social media in the political and democratic dispensation cannot be underestimated.

Is social media damaging democracy? Yes, but we can also use social media to save democracy.

We have to stop governments from colluding with an omniscient surveillance superpower but use it as their eyes to see the inequalities we all live in.

THERE IS NOT THE TIME FOR COUNTRIES TO BE MOVING TO ID ISOLATION IF WE ARE TO HARNESS TECHNOLOGY TO SERVE THE WORLD.

Just as there is nothing inevitable about democratic survival, neither is the demise of democracy guaranteed.

These changes are especially likely to go unnoticed when popularly elected leaders twist laws to their advantage or frame attacks on checks and balances as populist reforms limiting the power of elites.

Civil society must reclaim its rightful place by demanding genuine participation in governance, including decisions on peace initiatives, environmental protection and trade and investment agreements.

A large part of humanity still doesn’t have it. Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the erosion of democracy"

All human comments appreciated. All abuse and like clicks chucked in the bin of the cloud.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: ” THE TIME WILL COME WHEN WE REALIZE THAT WE ARE NOT ABLE TO EAT MONEY.”

28 Wednesday Nov 2018

Posted by in Capitalism, Climate Change., Environment, Fourth Industrial Revolution., Humanity., Life., Modern day life., Natural World Disasters, Our Common Values., Paris Climate Change Conference 2015, Reality., Sustaniability, Technology, The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Obvious., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., Wealth., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Leaders, World Politics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

 

WE SHOULD BE ALL FAMILIAR WITH THE ABOVE QUOTATION.

It is a “Native American saying”.

“Canada, the most affluent of countries, operates on a depletion economy which leaves destruction in its wake. Your people are driven by a terrible sense of deficiency. When the last tree is cut, the last fish is caught, and the last river is polluted; when to breathe the air is sickening, you will realize, too late, that wealth is not in bank accounts and that you can’t eat money.”

When one stands back from one’s self the above sums up the present state of our world.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "THE TIME WILL COME WHEN WE REALIZE THAT WE CANNOT EAT MONEY"

Present needs and present gains was the rule of action—which seems to be a sort of transmitted quality which we in our now enlightened time have not wholly outgrown, for even now a few men can be found who seem willing to destroy the last tree, the last fish and the last game bird and animal, and leave nothing for posterity, if thereby some money can be made.

We are unable to change as we have turned everything into commodities to make material profit or power.

WHY?

Because most are suffocating in a sea of debt, unable to extricate themselves from the shackles of an abhorrent situation inherently created by the consumptionism and consumerism that grips much of the world’s population.

We are, in effect, products of our own society, now being exploited by AI for profit.

What is needed is a World Conference of every nation to enshrine in law the protection of Clean Air, Freshwater, the protection of the environment and ecosystems that we all rely on for life on the planet.

The richer we are and the more we consume, the more self-centered and careless of the lives of others we appear to become.

Our erroneous belief that we are more concerned about manmade climate change than the people of other nations informs the sentiment, often voiced by the press and politicians, that there’s no point in acting if the rest of the world won’t play its part.

Only when the crisis causes or exacerbates an acute disaster – such as the floods – is there a flicker of anxiety, but that quickly dies away.

Sustaining interest in this great but slow-burning crisis of climate change is a challenge no one seems to have mastered.

For years we’ve been told that people cannot afford to care about the natural world until they become rich; that only economic growth can save the biosphere, that civilisation marches towards enlightenment about our impacts on the living planet.

The results suggest the opposite.

The more we consume, the less we feel. And maybe that doesn’t just apply to guilt.

Perhaps that’s the point of our otherwise-pointless hyperconsumption: it smothers feeling. It might also be the effect of the constant bombardment of advertising and marketing. They seek to replace our attachments to people and place with attachments to objects: attachments which the next round of advertising then breaks in the hope of attaching us to a different set of objects.

Even if you somehow put aside the direct, physical impacts of rising consumption, it’s hard to understand how anyone could imagine that economic growth is a formula for protecting the planet.

So what we seem to see here is the turning of a vicious circle.

The more harm we do, the less concerned about it we become. And the more hyperconsumerism destroys relationships, communities and the physical fabric of the Earth, the more we try to fill the void in our lives by buying more stuff.

This is an almost inevitable result of a society that has become restructured around shopping, fashion, celebrity and an obsession with money.

How we break the circle and wake people out of this dream world is the question that all those who love the living planet should address.

There is only one easy answers.

We must make Greed in all its forms of profit for profit sake pay. ( See previous Posts – A world Aid commission )

Agreement’s like the Paris Climate Change promises are not worth the paper there are written on without the necessary finance to create a change of mind.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK,S: WHAT HAVE US HUMANS ACHIEVED TO DATE.

08 Thursday Nov 2018

Posted by in 2018: The Year of Disconnection., Climate Change., Environment, Evolution, HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Life., Natural World Disasters, Politics., Populism., Reality., Sustaniability, Technology, The common good., The current state of our oceans., The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Obvious., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., Where's the Global Outrage., World Leaders, World Organisations., World Politics

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, ,

 

(Three-minute read)

We have been on earth 300,000 years or maybe even longer.

WHAT HAS BEEN ACHIEVED IN THAT TIME-  OTHER THAN INVENTING NEW WAY OF KILLING EACH OTHER.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of human achievement"

I suppose the answer is we still exist.

Anyway, there is now compelling evidence THAT WE ARE ON THE THRESHOLD OF OUR GREATEST ACHIEVEMENT TO DATE.

Humanity’s impact on the Earth’s atmosphere, oceans and wildlife are pushing the world into a new geological epoch.

Humans have introduced entirely novel changes, geologically speaking, such as the roughly 300m metric tonnes of plastic produced annually.

Wildlife, meanwhile, is being pushed into an ever smaller area of the Earth, with just 25% of ice-free land considered wild now compared to 50% three centuries ago.

As a result, rates of extinction of species are far above long-term averages.

We [the public] are well aware of the climate discussions that are going on.

But there is more than one aspect of the changes happening to the entire planet.

The Earth is now on course for a sixth mass extinction which would see 75% of species extinct in the next few centuries if current trends continue.

  • Increased the concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere by about 120 parts per million since the industrial revolution because of fossil fuel-burning, leaving concentrations today at around 400ppm and rising
  • Nuclear weapon tests in the 1950s and 60s left traces of an isotope common in nature, 14C, and a naturally rare isotope, 293Pu, through the Earth’s mid-latitudes.
  •  We have put so much plastic in our waterways and oceans that microplastic particles are now virtually ubiquitous, and plastics will likely leave identifiable fossil records for future generations to discover.
  • We have doubled the nitrogen and phosphorous in our soils in the past century with our fertiliser use. According to some research, we’ve had the largest impact on the nitrogen cycle in 2.5bn years.
  • We have left a permanent marker in sediment and glacial ice with airborne particulates such as black carbon from fossil fuel-burning.

We will reach the hard reality whereby the planet we call home cannot keep us.

Even if like in the past we are able to get ourselves of this quite uncomfortable position with the developing technology we are going to see our civilization strained.

We are already using Earths resources that cannot and will not be replenished.

Granted we have come a long way from our biggins but with the human population set to continue to grow exponentially, there is no sense whether your black, white, rich, poor, Trump or Putin, Muslim or Christian, in the EU or out not cooperating together to share what we all need.

IF WE CANNOT ADDRESS THE OBVIOUS WITHOUT TURNING THEM INTO COMMODITIES TO BE SOLD ON THE STOCK EXCHANGE FOR PROFIT WE CAN REST ASSURED WHEN YOU ARE DEPARTED AND GONE THAT YOU WILL BE THE LUCKY ONE.

All the rhetoric without funds without the distribution of wealth and technology will achieve nothing.

THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO ACHIEVE ANYTHING – TAP INTO GREED.

(See: Previous posts re A World Aid commission)

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. #WHAT IF.COM THE EUROPEAN UNION ISSUED GREEN ENERGY TREASURY BONDS.

06 Tuesday Nov 2018

Posted by in #whatif.com, Climate Change., Environment, European Commission., European Union., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Modern Day Democracy., Natural World Disasters, Nuclear power., Our Common Values., Politics., Reality., Social Media, Sustaniability, Technology, The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Obvious., The world to day., Twitter, Unanswered Questions., What needs to change in European Union., What Needs to change in the World, World Leaders, World Organisations.

≈ Leave a comment

 

We are all realizing that climate change needs to be addressed.

Technology, governments, and world organisations will contribute but if we the citizens of the earth only pay lip attention like our politicians that are more concerned about the latest twitter we have a recipe for disaster.

Changing our habits one by one will take a lifetime.

So # What if.com has a suggestion that could be adopted by the Europen Union or for that matter any country.

We all know that energy is essential to us all and that we have the green technology to wean us off fossil fuels.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of energy conservation"

The problem is it the replacement.

Pounds of CO2 emitted per million British thermal units (Btu) of energy for various fuels:

Coal (anthracite) 228.6
Coal (bituminous) 205.7
Coal (lignite) 215.4
Coal (subbituminous) 214.3
Diesel fuel and heating oil 161.3
Gasoline (without ethanol) 157.2
Propane 139.0
Natural gas 117.0

THERE ARE THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF SMALL TOWNS AND VILLAGE ALL OVER EUROPE.

 #WHATIF.COM SUGGESTION.

WITH SOME CREATIVE INITIATIVES FROM OURSELVES, OUR GOVERNMENTS AND WITH HELP FROM THE EU THESE VILLAGES AND TOWNS COULD BECOME SELF-SUFFICIENT IN ENEGERY.

Nuclear energy, wind turbines, are not wanted for obvious reasons. Of all the long-term solution to reduce carbon emissions solar energy is the prefered option.

So until we crack fusion there is endless energy to be had from the sun.

There is no reason for half a dozen major energy companies that have come to dominate the market to offer repayable grants to every community to establish utility-scale energy co-ops to run small solar farms.

These co-ops can be funded in several ways.

By:  The issuing of EU environmental green bonds.

By:  A solar levy that could be progressively applied to bigger electricity bills.

BY: Customers who can either purchase a share of a solar garden and own that portion of the overall array or they can lease energy from the solar system and, in a sense, replace their monthly utility payments with monthly community solar payments that are typically at a lower price.

By: National grids paying for the excess energy generated with these payments guaranteed for 20 years.

WHEN ONE LOOKS AT SOLAR ENERGY WE SEE INDIVIDUAL HOUSES WITH SOLAR PANELS AND MORE THAN LIKELY ARE ASKING THE QUESTION WHY SHOULD WE BE PAYING FOR AFFLUENT RICH PEOPLE INDULGING IN GREEN CRAP?

OF COURSE, BIG ENERGY COMPANIES DONE WANT TO LOSE THEIR REVENUE BASE. However, increasing the amount of electricity storage has huge value to the National Grid because it helps balance variable supply and erratic demand.

Also, batteries will help the grid adjust to the big new challenge posed by the need to charge electric vehicles. ( Given these services, shouldn’t solar batteries be subsidised?)

Furthermore, it would make all of us and countries self-sufficient in green energy, weaning us off government support.

Solar farms at the utility scale would typically be at least 1 megawatt (MW), which is a power plant capable of supplying some 200 households. The needed kilowatt hours of energy can be established from the existing energy bills and work backwards to get a number of panels needed for the array.

A smaller solar farm only requires a few acres of land with a panel cleaned – and a powered robot.

Solar will get there and private money will eventually fill the gap, but it may not get there nearly as fast as needed without some creative thinking.

Just imagine what this would do not to just the reduction of carbon emissions, but to new employment opportunities, the cost of manufacturing, the sale of electric vehicles, the quality of the air we breathe to mention a few of the benefits.

There is not a village or town that would turn own such an opportunity.