THE BEADY EYE LOOKS AT USA PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

23 Saturday Jul 2016

Posted by in USA Presidential Election

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE LOOKS AT USA PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

Tags

,

( A thought)

It may not seem like it should cost so much to stand on a stage and tell people why they should vote for you.Afficher l'image d'origine

Just how much?

The answer comes with an elephant-size asterisk in the USA.

In 2012 the presidential election cost $2 billion, and this year’s election is expected to reach $5 billion!

Trump himself says his net worth varies from day-to-day according to what mood he’s in.

To outsiders, the US presidential election contest must look rude, vulgar, overcrowded, angry, stupid, and dangerous. The race for the White House can appear a ridiculous spectacle to the casual observer.

In an age when knowledge is a mark of elitism, ignorance is power personified by Trump.

He’s under the illusion that he’s 10 times richer than he is, believes President Obama was born in Brobdingnag to the Queen of Sheba and thinks childhood vaccination caused the movie Rain Man. Russia, China, Iran, Isis, the Taliban and Hamas will be paralysed with fear.

Who knows what this lunatic will do?

Thus, so far, Trump is the best America can do against his rival Hillary Clinton, who claimed she and her quarter-of-a-million-dollars-a-speech husband were “dead broke” when they left the White House.

Hillary carries more baggage than the Boeing.

After a seemingly endless parade of campaign announcements and abandonments, debates and stump speeches – not to forget weekly controversies born from the mouth of Donald Trump – the 2016 presidential election is finally upon us.

On the 8th November.  Finally, on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, well over a hundred million Americans will go to the polls to elect the next president of the United States.

One of the world’s biggest un-popularity contests.

To be sure, voters’ opinions could change over the next several months but the world is watching one of the biggest farce ever. But what does it all signify?

So why is capitalism and its proponents not taking a victory lap? And why in the European Union are nativist, xenophobic and racist forces on the rise, as most visibly manifested with the Brexit vote? And why is the far right and far left in ascendancy in so many countries?

Trump was formally crowned as the presidential candidate for the Republican Party, a position he won by deriding the political and economic establishments for caring not a whit about average Americans, and by mocking and showing no fealty to his own party’s nomenklatura.

it’s because of the paralysis of the corporate state, ie. the inability of the corporate state to respond rationally to the problems facing the citizenry that you vomit up a figure like Trump. But Trump is not the phenomena; Trump responds to the phenomena

Now there is growing concern America is turning into an oligarchy – and democracy is disappearing as a consequence. “There is no democracy, it’s bought and sold,”

American like Europe Union has generated an enormous divide between the haves and have-nots. For the 1 per cent, corporate sector, banks, hedge funds and brokerage houses, the empire is working just fine.

“Like in Rome it’s going to be ungovernable for the next 75 years.” And that’s because the domestic population is growing restless and angry with their increasingly desperate economic lot.

This anger and frustration at the grassroots propelled Trump to his current candidacy for president, who has focused the rage at minorities, women and Muslims.

Hillary Clinton will almost assuredly take over as president.

So you put Clinton in power and you know you may get rid of Trump as a particular figure but you’re not going to get rid of that phenomena. You will certainly see another Trump-like demagogue rise up as this legitimate anger ripples through society. I don’t think either Trump or Clinton have any interest or any capacity to fundamentally alter the system.”

“Democracy,” in America is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.

No matter as the All-Seeing Eye on the back of the one dollar bill will still be the winner.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

THE BEADY EYE LOOKS AT THE ‘THE DARK SIDE’ OF FACEBOOK.

22 Friday Jul 2016

Posted by in Big Data., Facebook, Humanity., Life., Social Media., The Future, The Internet., Twitter, Unanswered Questions.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE LOOKS AT THE ‘THE DARK SIDE’ OF FACEBOOK.

Tags

,

By now, we are all aware that social media has had a tremendous impact on our culture, in business, on the world-at-large. Media reflects and creates the culture and mass media is a significant force in modern culture.

Communities and individuals are bombarded constantly with messages from a multitude of sources including TV, billboards, and magazines, to name a few.

The media reflects and projects the view of a minority elite, which controls it, but personal perspective plays a more powerful role in how the audience members interpret those messages.

There is no doubt that the media influences us.

These messages promote not only products, but moods, attitudes, and a sense of what is and is not important.

It was not to long ago only political and business leaders, as well as the few notorious outlaws, were famous. It is only in recent times have actors, singers, and other social elites become celebrities or “stars.”

So it is important to dwell on the negative influences of media because these can change the dynamics of the society for the worse.

The current level of media saturation has not always existed,  technological advancements and the availability of gadgets to young people, are now creating  social networks, which act as a stupidity X-ray:

Facebook and Twitter being two of the more prominent.

The negative influences of both are vast.

Facebook can become a source of relational confusion and distress.

It disrupts a person’s sense of autonomy and privacy as well as the stability of the relationship. Affecting the physical self, the emotions, the psychological aspect, and even the spiritual stand of many people.

One negative influence can trigger another negative effect and this can cause a chain of reaction leading to destruction of relationships in society.

Interacting with a monitor and keyboard means people feel less empathy.

A child hits the age of 18, he must have seen about 200,000 acts of violence on television alone.

What most of the programs they see and hear send the false notion that in every conflict there has to be a winner and a loser, thus making them believe that violence is a successful means of resolving conflicts.

 

Facebook Narcissism is excessive self-love, inflated self-importance and unjustified feelings of entitlement. Posting large amounts of information on your profile page in my view can be perceived as narcissistic. You’re an asshole for expecting strangers to care about your forty favorite movies.

Are either of them doing any good?

What are some of the real impacts, both positive and negative, that social media has had on our society?

Every politician worth his salt needs to jump on the social media bandwagon. This is because social websites have played an important role in many elections around the world,

They have also served to rally people for a cause, and have inspired mass movements and political unrests in many countries, AND IT IS NOT BEYOND THE PALE TO SAY THEY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE RECENT TERRIBLE EVENTS WE ARE WITNESSING. Many introverts and socially reclusive users place too much emphasis on virtual interaction, and ignore the real world outside.

Facebook and other social media offer platform for obsessions with self-image and shallow friendships. Young people are becoming increasingly narcissistic, and obsessed with self-image and shallow friendships.

IF Facebook is to be a place where people go to repair their damaged ego and seek social support, it is vitally important to discover the potentially negative communication one might find on Facebook and the kinds of people likely to engage in them. Ideally, people will engage in pro-social Facebooking rather than anti-social me-booking.

The way that children are being educated is focussing more and more on the importance of self-esteem – on how you are seen in the eyes of others. THIS HAS TO CHANGE.

Many companies perform a background check on the Internet before hiring an employee. If a prospective employee has posted something embarrassing on social media, it can drastically affect their chances of getting the job.

Here are three facts about Facebook that will blow your mind

1. Half of the world’s online population now log into Facebook at least once a month – that’s 1.49 billion people.

2. One in every five minutes on a mobile phone is spent on Facebook.

3. Over 1.5 billion searches are made on the site every day.

Revenue has hit $4.04bn in the three months ended June 30, from $2.91bn in the same period last year.

Here is one of their promotions.

Money eyes emoticon

Maybe you got a new job or are ready to break open your piggy bank. You can let your pals know that your mind is on money. If you’re seeing dollar signs, this is the ideal emoticon to post in a chat message or on a timeline. You’ll be able to express everything you feel when you share our emoticons with your FB friends.

You may well ask: Do I use Facebook. Yes I do, but I don’t want Facebook writing my epitaph its my god-given opportunity to show off.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

“toxic” elements of narcissistic personality disorder.

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WHY IS THE WORLD IN SUCH A MESS.

21 Thursday Jul 2016

Posted by in Humanity., Modern Day Democracy., Sustaniability, The Future, The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Organisations., World Politics

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WHY IS THE WORLD IN SUCH A MESS.

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

I AM SURE LIKE ME YOU CAN RATTLE OFF HUNDREDS OF REASONS.Afficher l'image d'origine

But the world is that what humans have made out of it.

Five centuries of European colonialism and global culture-trashing, and the remaking of the world in the economic interests of competing empires, cannot be undone by a single institution and a cluster of lofty ideals.

The world, as it now exists, was largely shaped by the colonial powers, which divided the world among themselves, carving out states without any consideration for existing ethnic, religious or cultural realities.

And after the colonial era collapsed, these carved-out political entities, defining swatches of territory without any history of national identity, suddenly became the Third World and floundered in disarray.

It was inevitable that to keep these artificial countries alive, and avoid their disintegration, strongmen would be needed to cover the void left by the colonial powers. The rules of democracy were used only to reach power, with very few exceptions.

Values and ideas which were considered universal, such as cooperation, mutual aid, international social justice and peace as an encompassing paradigm are also becoming irrelevant.

Whatever noble attempts at eliminating war the powers that be made in the wake of World War II — Europe’s near self-annihilation — didn’t cut nearly deep enough.

These attempts didn’t set about undoing five centuries of colonial conquest and genocide. They didn’t cut deeper than national interest. If something grows too big, then it destroys itself from the inside.

The existing problem with the EU as shown by the recent English Referendum. Attempts to create regional or international alliances to bring stability have always been stymied by national interests.

But why is it like this? Why are humans using their capacity of higher intelligence so negatively?

Perhaps it is because the human race in its state of development and as a whole, is still nearer to the animal behavior than to advanced capabilities.

Just look at the choice of the next President of the USA governed by Money.

The problem with the United Nations is that it’s a unity of entities defined by their hatred of one another and committed to the perpetuation of “the scourge of war.

Is it because Capitalism has not taken care of our fellow human beings?

We have become consumer and have lost the instinct to take care of our fellow human beings?

There is one part of the population who have overweight and are sick because of too much food and an other part who are starving to death, often living one beside the other.

Just look at the current refugee crises.

Instead of setting up properly manned entry points we allow people smugglers to pray on the vulnerable, close borders, and watch people drowning.  A sure recipe for terrorism.

How can we find a way out of the mess?

Obviously religious and spiritual rules made up by humans doesn’t protect humanity from being distinguished.

Our ” way of life” our behavior, our goals and values are making is blind, are confusing us and driving us more and more into disease and depression.

There are people calling for a solution.

They are expecting help from their authorities, they expect to be healed by doctors or they ask for help and solutions from their government. What an illusion!

As long as they are dependent and not capable to look through the game of this world, they will not be able to make decisions for themselves. They will stay in dependency, manipulated from the more clever…

There’s always money to wage war and build weapons.

The recent Vote by 300 odd English MP to renew Trident.

The contractors are adept at playing the game. Jobs link arms with fear and patriotism and the next war is always inevitable. And it’s always necessary, because we’ve created a world of perpetual — and well-armed — instability.

While on the other hand we have out of date world organisations that beg for funds.

We won’t begin creating global peace until we learn how to bypass nationalism and the single, unacknowledged agreement binding nation-states to each other: the inevitability of war.

We are left with the two greatest  international enemies – the environment and the global economy – unfortunately we are so selfish – so naive – we do not want to face the reality of what we have done to the planet and each other in the name of progress. We are in denial. We are addicted to antisocial behavior – propelled by fear.

All our problems are as a result of our moral and ethical collapse and only finding and using a simple international moral and social code of love and cooperation will enable us to survive and save us from ourselves. We are not talking about religion here. Morality and ethics existed before religion and it is that version of them that we want and need.

We can accept that one can be proud of one’s country and support its activities and ideals without feeling the need to bomb or subvert the country next door. The only people who would seriously disagree are psychotics and psychopaths or their minions. For example, governments.

To allude to globalisation is idiotic without capping Greed and reversing Inequality.

We now live in a world of  technologically based society.  Information is power and money. This is why we are all being Googlefied, Twittered to feed the Internet of Everything.

We only can expect that help will show up, when we start to help ourselves!

As the human race keeps on making steps in technology & science, the Smart Phone is the Pandora box of the future. Re shaping the World.

Science has made huge steps, society has not.

Society is crucial to the well-being of all of us.We need to open the doors to new exciting boundaries.

Here are my top six.

Improve Education World wide. Eliminate Racism. Resource Efficiency.Eliminate Hunger.Environmental awareness.Overcome Religion.

To achieve any of the above needs funding by placing a world aid commission of 0.05% on all activities that are for profit sake only.

On all High frequency trading, on all Foreign Exchange transactions over 20,000 dollars, on all Sovereign wealth funds acquisitions. on all Lotto wins over a 1 million.

This would create a perpetual fund from Capitalism greed to address the world’s inequality.Afficher l'image d'origine

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WHY DOES ENGLAND NEED A NUCLEAR DETERRENT.

19 Tuesday Jul 2016

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WHY DOES ENGLAND NEED A NUCLEAR DETERRENT.

 

( One minute read)

The logic is to deter a nuclear attack on the UK because, even if the nation’s conventional defence capabilities were destroyed, the silent submarine would still be able to launch a catastrophic retaliatory strike on the aggressor, a concept known as mutually assured destruction.Afficher l'image d'origineAfficher l'image d'origine

Supporters of replacement argue that threats from rogue states and terrorist groups could emerge at any time and a minimum nuclear deterrent is needed to help counter them.

The nuclear defence industry is also a major employer.

Some estimates suggest that up to 15,000 jobs may be lost – as well as considerable expertise – if a new batch of submarines was not commissioned.

Object on ethical grounds say the UK should never be a country that is willing to threaten or use nuclear weapons against an adversary, even in the most extreme circumstances and that the humanitarian consequences of doing that would be so grotesque as to be unfathomable.

The UK should not be spending possibly £40bn on a programme that is designed for uncertainty and indeed that an “uncertain future threat environment” may mean no threats arise and so £40bn would have been spent unnecessarily.The Royal Navy nuclear submarine HMS Vanguard, arrives at Devonport naval base in Plymouth for refit

Renewing Trident would show Britain was “committed” to working with Nato allies after voting for Brexit.  Replacing Trident was a Tory manifesto pledge in the general election.

£31bn over the lifetime of the programme, including adjustment for inflation over that period, and an additional £10bn as a “contingency”.

The UK is the only nuclear weapons state that deploys submarines as its sole nuclear weapons delivery platform.

However, critics argue Britain is technically so dependent on the US that in effect Trident is not an independent system. For example, the British Trident missiles are serviced at a port in the Georgia, US, and some warhead components are also made in America.

As part of the renewal, common missile compartment systems that could be fitted into both UK and US submarines are set to be developed as a means of saving money.

HERE IS WHAT THE BEADY EYE THINKS.

A COUNTRY THAT HAS JUST VOTED TO LEAVE AN ORGANISATION (WHICH WAS SET UP TO STOP WARS), HAS NOW WITHOUT A REFERENDUM ADOPTED ON THE VOTE OF 300 ODD MP AND A NON ELECTED PRIME MINISTER TO SPEND £31bn ON A NUCLEAR DETERRENT NEEDS TO HAVE ITS HEAD EXAMINED.Afficher l'image d'origine

CONSIDERING:

THAT IT CANNOT SUPPORT ITS OWN HEALTH SYSTEM.

That benefits and pensions payouts is around £217 billion 2015/2016, 29% of public spending.

THAT THERE IS IN DESPERATE NEED OF INFRASTRUCTURE, ALTERNATIVE ENERGY, HIGH SPEED TRANSPORT AND HOME BUILDING, NEVER MIND THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE FREE EDUCATION.

THAT IT HAS JUST SEEN ITS MAJOR HIGH TECH COMPANY BOUGHT BY AN JAPANESE.

THAT IT HAS RAMPANT INEQUALITY.

What we clearly see is a country moving at full speed toward a disaster.

As I have said there is no point to a Nuclear Deterrent other than mutually assured destruction.

Here are a few pictures to remind you how has and who could and had their finger on the button.

 

Afficher l'image d'origine Afficher l'image d'origine

Afficher l'image d'origineAfficher l'image d'origineAfficher l'image d'origineAfficher l'image d'origine Afficher l'image d'origineAfficher l'image d'origineAfficher l'image d'origineAfficher l'image d'origineAfficher l'image d'origine Afficher l'image d'origine

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

THE BEADY EYE PUT THE CASE FOR A RE RUN OF THE UK IN OR OUT REFERENDUM VOTE.

18 Monday Jul 2016

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE PUT THE CASE FOR A RE RUN OF THE UK IN OR OUT REFERENDUM VOTE.

( A thought )

A new research has found that up to 7 per cent of the people who voted for a Brexit in the EU referendum now regret their choice. Afficher l'image d'origine

The referendum was an advisory, non-binding referendum.

It is in fact not legally binding. Parliament doesn’t actually have to bring Britain out of the EU if the public votes for it.

By law, the UK’s legislatures in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland must be consulted before EU laws can be annulled.

The final result was 17,410,742 votes for Leave (51.9 per cent) compared to 16,141,241 for Remain (48.1 per cent), on a turnout of 72 per cent.

Half of those surveyed also felt both the UK’s economy and position in the world had worsened, but almost one in 10 said they did not believe the Brexit would be implemented.

More than 4 million people have signed a petition calling for a second EU referendum but the Government has ruled out another vote on the issue, dubbed a “neverendum” by David Cameron.

The majority of those questioned also wanted a general election to be held before official negotiations on the Brexit begins.

The debate will take place on 5 September at 4.30pm in Westminster Hall.’

The result of the referendum should be challenged.

However the debate in Westminster Hall ‘does not have the power to change the law and won’t end with the House of Commons deciding whether or not to have a second referendum’. Which begs the question, what’s the point?

Remain voters want the government to prioritize staying part of the EU’s single market while Leave voters are keen to end free movement between the UK and the EU and both priorities are likely to be mutually exclusive.

The point is that it is the Youth of England and the Youth of the European Union that have to live with the consequences.

We have reached a stalemate.

It is therefore up to the EU to demand a second referendum.

EU leaders would have to come up with a better deal to keep the UK in the club.

This referendum would then be stepping stone not a leap into the unknown.

There is real concern in Brussels that any more special treatment for the UK could be contagious, a green light to other member states to try the same.

So what!  Every country in the Union has to abide by the rules.

After the Maastricht Treaty was rejected by voters in Denmark a batch of concessions were made, a second vote was held and the Treaty passed.

Let us ask.

Democracy is government “of the people, by the people and for the people” – but the definition of “people” has changed throughout time.Afficher l'image d'origine

Is it better to spend 7 billion on renewing an obsolete Nuclear deterrent or spend one billion to see if Peace which is at the core of the European Union is worth having.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS. CAN THE WORLD’S WOES BE PUT DOWN TO MONEY.

16 Saturday Jul 2016

Posted by in Capitalism, Humanity., Modern Day Democracy., Sustaniability, The Future, The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Aid., World Organisations., World Politics

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS. CAN THE WORLD’S WOES BE PUT DOWN TO MONEY.

Tags

, , ,

 

Money talks a powerful language. It is a factor in many things that happen and don’t happen. Wealth greases the gears of power and influence.Afficher l'image d'origine

The standard most worshipped by Western society today is financial success, and many people spend their lives pursuing it. Our idiotic species–immediately respects and gives greater credence to anyone who looks rich.

Money can bring power, and power can bring money.

Which one comes first?

Modern day technology is exposing the Capitalist system for what it is worth and as a result we are beginning to see if you focus on the world that you are presented with directly the only collective wisdom we’ve come up with is money can’t buy you love.

 

1% of the population earns 96% of the wealth in the world, and thus explains why we have such a troubled world.

It’s a struggle between the haves vs the have-nots.

The real reason people want to be rich isn’t so they can buy stuff. It’s so they can have power over others. People want influence and respect and they see that people with money have influence and respect, so they seek money.

There’s only one problem: money does not result in influence and respect – instead, influence and respect often lead to money.

Human greed seems to have no bound.

It is said that money is a good servant an a bad master too…

In today life for people money is everything. When in fact it is only an IOU.

Money can buy material happiness for limited time.

Can it buy true happiness? No.

They don’t know that there are many things bigger than money…Our morals values these are bigger than money..

The paradox of money is that although earning more of it tends to enhance our well-being, we become happier by giving it away than by spending it on ourselves.

What matters a lot more than a big income is how people spend it.

What moves the needle in terms of happiness is not so much the amount you give, but the perceived impact of your donation. If you can see your money-making a difference in other people’s lives, it will make you happy even if the amount you gave was quite small.

Life experiences give us more lasting pleasure than material things, and yet people still often deny themselves experiences and prioritize buying material goods.

People think material purchases offer better value for the money because experiences are fleeting, and material goods last longer. They think that experiences are only going to provide temporary happiness, but they actually provide both more happiness and more lasting value.

And yet we still keep on buying material things, because they’re tangible and we think we can keep on using them.

Experiences, on the other hand, tend to meet more of our underlying psychological needs. They’re often shared with other people, giving us a greater sense of connection, and they form a bigger part of our sense of identity.

We also get more pleasure out of anticipating experiences than anticipating the acquisition of material things.

Feelings of gratitude and appreciation can be very difficult to sustain.

The first measure of happiness is “evaluative.” A sense that your life is good—you’re satisfied with your life, you’re progressing towards your life goals.”

Power is money and money is power.

There are many more examples of this now than anytime in the past.

If a man who earned a standard salary wanted to run for president, he would have almost no chance at all unless he was backed by people with money.

The more money a candidate has, the farther he can get. Although the richest competitor doesn’t always win, the president is usually a very wealthy man.

I want money because to me it represents security and independence.

Real power and influence are when you can make a substantial and lasting mark on the world.

To come to the point of this post.

Capitalism has created Inequality along with the very technologies that have led us down the road to Climate Change, not to mention the present wars and the reemergence of  the Barbaric nature of humanity.

However we have power to change systems?

At present we have money starved World Organisations in need of reform.

A world media that turns, nature, wars and violence into entertainment.

There is so much information that we can only Google, Twitter, and take selfless selfies.

Long term planning is impossible or political suicide.

THE WORLD MANTRA SEEMS TO BE:  i’M ALRIGHT JACK.

We are all on hedonic treadmill WHILE OUR WORLD IS FRAGMENTING.

THERE IS ONLY ONE SOLUTION.

THAT IS TO PLACE A WORLD AID COMMISSION ON ALL ACTIVITIES THAT ARE ONLY IN EXISTENCE FOR PROFIT SAKE. ( SEE PREVIOUS POSTS) Afficher l'image d'origine

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS. ARE THE ENGLISH PEOPLE BEING HOODWINKED .

12 Tuesday Jul 2016

Posted by in England EU Referendum IN or Out., European Union., Modern Day Democracy., Unanswered Questions.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS. ARE THE ENGLISH PEOPLE BEING HOODWINKED .

Tags

,

( A quick thought)

THE FIRST QUESTION IS.Afficher l'image d'origine

HOW CAN A NON ELECTED PRIME MINISTER RATIFY A DEAL TO LEAVE THE EUROPEAN UNION.

She can negotiate the deal which has to be accepted by the House of commons and the 27 remaining EU member states.theresa-may.jpg

When the government of the UK invokes Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. This is the significant “red button”. Once the Article 50 process is commenced then Brexit does become a matter of law, and quite an urgent one.

It would appear this process is (and is intended to be) irreversible and irrevocable once it starts.

But invoking Article 50 is a legally distinct step from the referendum result — it is not an obligation.

If she does not have a mandate from the people of the Uk by way of a General Election she is incapable of signing any agreement.

There is only one solution.

Before the 2011 Fixed Term Parliament Act (FTPA) the Prime Minister could simply “call an election”.

This was effectively the PM exercising the royal prerogative: no parliamentary vote was needed, it was the PM’s decision.

This power was transferred to the House of Commons under the FTPA, which was introduced by the 2010 Coalition government.

On paper it is no longer the Prime Minister’s decision. This is not true.

There are two ways under the FTPA that an election can be called ahead of schedule.

The first is if two-thirds of MPs vote to hold an election. This is a very high bar and would in practice require both Labour and Conservative support.

The second is if there is a no confidence vote in the government of the day. After such a vote other parties are given 14 days to form another government. If none can be formed, a new election is held.

A majority government could, by a simple vote, declare “no confidence” in itself.

Since no other party has a majority, after 14 days an election would be set.

One of the reasons England put forward to leave the EU was that it was run by unelected officials.

May’s policies will improve the lives of UKers until it doesn’t, because every policy contains the seeds of its own sunset;

If she wants to lead a country she would be well advised to hold;

A general election, combined with a re run of the in or out of the European Union with all sixteen years eligible to vote, with the introduce of true Democracy by adopting Proportional Representation.    

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS. IS THERE NOW ANY POINT TO THE COMMONWEALTH.

07 Thursday Jul 2016

Posted by in England EU Referendum IN or Out., European Union., Politics., The Future, The world to day.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS. IS THERE NOW ANY POINT TO THE COMMONWEALTH.

Tags

,

 

(TWO MINUTE READ)

The commonwealth has all but being dead for the last ten years.Afficher l'image d'origine

Now that England has vote to leave the European Union perhaps it might come to life or should the Commonwealth, a transnational institution, which pre-dates the United Nations, call it a day and withdraw from the international scene?

It is now the time and it is politically correct to debate Britain’s role in the Commonwealth.Afficher l'image d'origine

No longer can the United Kingdom claim the sole paternity for success stories in the Commonwealth.

The European Union is on a much higher level of importance than the Commonwealth or even the United Nations.

Membership of the Commonwealth is a historic fact. Like your parents, you do not get to choose them. Most countries did not actively choose to become members of the Commonwealth. Instead, membership was seen as almost a diplomatic obligation.

On the other hand, joining the European Union equates to marriage. It is a choice about your future and not a statement about your past.

Central to the enhanced value of the European Union are its shared values, common rules and their direct economic benefits. Countries do not become Members because of their history, but because they show commitment and resilience in achieving the convergence which would see them qualify for the benefits of freedom of movement of goods, services, capital and people.

Adjustment and restructuring are painful and come at a cost which is not only economic but also social and political. It takes years and is not completed upon membership. Instead, the process is ongoing.

There are countries that are geographically and historically European, but until now do not qualify to become members because they do not have the democratic and political commitment to deliver the necessary reforms. Part of these reforms have to do with sharing or even ceding responsibilities to supra-national institutions. That takes a lot of courage, and sometimes something more than that.

This is supplemented by the fact that the various institutions have the power to decide. Decisions are not on statements of intent, but rather actions that affect the everyday life of people from Copenhagen to Valletta, from Lisbon to Warsaw.

Back to the Commonwealth.

Very few know much about it.

Most Jamaicans think that Barack Obama is the head of the Commonwealth rather than Queen Elizabeth.

Those it have any purpose other than a club as commonwealth values have never being precisely defined.

It was formed partly by India to stay friends with their British colonial rulers on Independence in 1949.

Every two-year the heads of Governments of the 53 countries that make up the Commonwealth meet for a pow-wow.

It now could be mortally wounded if India and some of its larger countries walk out because of the recent Brixit Vote.

It might be a network of disparate people, bound by an imperial history that seems, even among former subjects people’s, to inspire nostalgia as well as resentment.

The only thing holding it together is Queen Elizabeth, who is approaching her nineties.

It would not surprise me over the coming years to see Australia and Canada replace the Queen as their head of state.

I  personally cannot contemplate the idea of being a colony or of having a foreigner as a Head of State.

If the Commonwealth is to survive it should be about commitment rather than history.

It should be about the future rather than the past.

Perhaps now is the time for England to commence disbanding the Commonwealth as it is today and regrouping, setting out updated guidelines and Charter of Values to which participants must strictly abide.

Whether or not one opts for such a model, the idea of further opening up Commonwealth membership to other countries near and far, and also allowing for consensual withdrawals from the organisation without acrimony, should be duly examined.

Staring at a decaying organisation and hoping that its fortunes might suddenly turn around is delusional.

It can opt to remain as it is and sink in total irrelevance within the next decade or so, or have the courage to make changes, by starting to tackle them at least in piecemeal fashion.

Having history as our sole bond is clearly not enough in today’s world.

In order to be relevant, the Commonwealth should be about people rather than diplomats. It should be about economic growth rather than bureaucracy. It should be about the future rather than the past.

All comments appreciated.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS SHOULD THE EUROPEAN UNION ACCEPT THE RESULT OF THE ENGLISH REFERENDUM.

03 Sunday Jul 2016

Posted by in England EU Referendum IN or Out., European Union., Modern Day Democracy., Unanswered Questions.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS SHOULD THE EUROPEAN UNION ACCEPT THE RESULT OF THE ENGLISH REFERENDUM.

Tags

,

 

( Important three minute read)

The Pandora Box is open.Afficher l'image d'origine

It is damaging politically for the status of the EU – and its liberal values – and, thus, for the future prosperity and security of Europe as a whole.

It is harmful for the economy of the rest of the EU.

The UK voted to leave the EU by a four per cent margin. 

In short the UK choose to leave the EU, has left it between a rock and a hard place.

SHOULD THE EU ACCEPT THE OUT VOTE OR DEMAND A RE RUN.

Amid rumbling aftershocks from last Thursday’s political earthquake, there is still no sign of the UK actually leaving the EU.

Could it be that Brexit will never happen?

Although the vote is not legally binding and parliament would be within its rights to ignore it, to do so would be political suicide or political reincarnation.

At this moment there is no way of knowing whether there is going to be Civil unrest or a general election fought on the basis of one party campaigning to take the UK back into Europe. 

The reality is that on the Uk side it is now impossible to negotiate and none of the options available to the UK outside the EU, are attractive. 

Why?

Because None of the available options could satisfy at the same time the UK’s political wishes and its economic interests.  

There is no clear picture on who might step forward to lead the Conservatives – and the country.

The Labour Party is tearing itself apart, with more than a dozen shadow cabinet members resigning in an attempt to force leader Jeremy Corbyn to resign.

Leading Leave campaigners suggested single market access is on the table, which could require compromise on free movement laws.

Investment banks are reportedly already putting in train plans to move thousands of City jobs overseas.

The Institute of Directors has warned around a quarter of its members may begin a hiring freeze until the economic effects of Brexit become clear.

It is quite obvious to any outsider from the resulting fall out that the people of England did not vote on the Referendum core question.

They voted against inequality, fear of immigrants eroding their ability to access jobs, wages, housing, and the health services and now have a duty to the rest of Europe to go back and vote again.

As fears of a post-Brexit recession in the UK and beyond wiped $2trn (£1.5trn) from global stock values in the worst trading day since the credit crunch in 2007. The pound touched a 30-year low against the dollar and the FTSE 100 slumped 3.2 per cent.

Can the EU wait?  Yes. But not for Long.

We all know that the World we live in is facing complex problems that require a combined effort to resolve.

Given the “extraordinary complexity” of the tasks there is no need to immediately trigger the UK’s formal exit process from the EU.

On the plus side it allows the EU to look at itself and learn the lessons that it’s the people who count not the single market.

The bloc has lurched from one crisis to the next, promising time and again to heed the growing mistrust of its 500 million citizens, only to return to the business of internal squabbling as another emergency emerges on the continent.

Business as usual’ is no longer an option.

Its Reform or die! But exactly what that reform would look like is an open question.

Euroskeptic parties are gaining influence across the bloc, taking advantage of the E.U.’s perceived failures in dealing with the euro zone crisis and the arrival of more than a million people seeking sanctuary from war and poverty last year.

The Eurosceptics are the ones most on the ball in terms of putting forward their vision of Europe, and the E.U. institutions have to come up with something convincing to rebut that.

The E.U.’s management structures are complicated, and there is not one single person who can lead the push to define a narrative.

E.U. countries will pursue much more British-like policies in which they look for concrete benefits from European integration and not for a quasi-religious or quasi-ideological movement towards the construction of Europe.

The 27 remaining member states have very different histories and cultures, and range from the socially liberal Scandinavian nations to the more religious and conservative South and East. Denmark, for example, legalised same-sex unions in 1989, but Malta only allowed its citizens to divorce in 2011.

These gulfs became apparent during the refugee crisis, when Hungary and Slovakia claimed the influx of Muslim refugees would threaten their culture. The divide between the former Soviet nations and the rest of Europe, meanwhile, often overshadows negotiations of the E.U.’s response to Russian aggression.

Without a shared vision there is the risk of narrowing the E.U’s focus to regional challenges, which needs to be resisted.

If the Union is not to follow in the footsteps of England its combined wealth must be spread evenly. This can not be achieved with an Euro that does not reflect the GDP of the whole of European Union.

If the Euro is to remain it must have a financial vehicle to allow investment in it.

Euro Bonds.

If the Union is to reform it must balance it books, scrap moving its Parliament from one city to another, open proper channels to migrants,

Can the divided, sprawling economic bloc come up with a vision to unite its fractious member states?

Only time can tell if Britain’s vote ends up being a wake-up call, or a death knell.

If England wants to win like Wales ( In the European Cup) they have to be on the pitch.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS. ENGLAND. WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE ?

28 Tuesday Jun 2016

Posted by in England EU Referendum IN or Out., European Union., Politics., Unanswered Questions., World Politics

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS. ENGLAND. WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE ?

Tags

(Six minute Read)

Up to now the continued sharing of genetic materials has maintained all of humankind as a single species.

As if you could not noticed this is changing with results that are going to be both good and bad.

The result of UK Referendum poses some deep question other than those connected to the Single Market.

The question of Identity?

What a great shame that England with all its smartphones has not recognize this.

The technology changes taking place in the World is eroding individuality identity which can only be protected by acting in the common good of all.Afficher l'image d'origine

How we are seen and how we see others affects various domains of our lives and the lives of others; from the types of jobs we have, the amount of money we make, the kind of friends we make, the places we live, the foods we eat, the schools we go to, etc…

The entire social structure we inhabit is affected by at least one social construction, race.

Gone are the days of Imperialism, or Isolation.  

Unfortunately from  the very beginning we get ideas of who will succeed and who won’t by the racial categories we belong to.

Race is used as an indicator of difference, there is no denying that.

In the case of immigration it is used to index a group of people who have ties to some geographic location and specific phenotypic features.

However there is nothing absolute or real about social constructions in the same way as there is something absolute and real about rocks, rivers, mountains, and in general the objects examined by physics.

If race is defined by the dominant group in society “politically, economically, sociocultural, and historically”, and this definition holds up due to collective agreement, racism is very much alive and well within the structure of our society.

A mountain will exist regardless of people thinking, agreeing or accepting that it does exist. Unlike a mountain, the existence of race requires that people collectively agree and accept that it does exist.

Also there is nothing biologically real about race. It is conceptually unstable but exists in real life.

Furthermore there is nothing that we have identified as race that exists apart from our collective agreement, acceptance, and imposition of its existence.

Additionally, race does not identify differences in culture and is always loosely connected to biology.

Race is a marker of status that includes or excludes one from broader social constructs and enables or disables certain powers.

White people are often blind to racism and do not see the privileges they have due to their skin color. Many individuals may claim they are not racist while tacitly accept the dominant racist ideology by way of reaping the benefits offered to them.

The dominant group in society imposed the boundaries of group membership by defining race in terms of biology.

A large portion of the English vote to leave the European Union can be attributed to the fear of losing hegemonic control which was spread through the white population due to control of Immigration.

Race is an indicator but an indicator of what kind of difference.

There are no biological differences between different “races”.

Let us summarize what we have said about what race is so far. First, race is a social construct contingent on collective acceptance, agreement, and imposition. Second, race has always been defined by the dominant group in society. Third, race indicates differences in status. The status indicated by which race you are, either includes or excludes one from broader social constructs, and disables or enables certain powers.

People are learning to deal with race and other races simply because they have to. And in all honesty, races are redefining what their race can do achieve, or not achieve.

The question we have to ask is whether those differences are so great that it explains every disparity we see in society.

It would then not be that easy to eradicate by removing the “racial lens” because this lens is not just over our eyes, but is a part of the very foundations of society.

So, abandoning the notion of race altogether may not be possible, but perhaps becoming aware of race and understanding it will get us a little closer to seeing how it does not apply, thus abandoning the current negative view associated with race differences.

We have no clue on how to embrace our “differences”

Why would a majority group may feel the necessity to accept minority group’s culture ? Do they need to ? Not really. Why?

We cannot simply get rid of the notion of race. Rather, a different understanding of race should be developed. This is the biggest challenge to the European Union. How to accommodate the indelible identity of its members.

Is a “Jewish race.”

Not only is that patently ridiculous (just as a notion of a Catholic race or a Muslim or Buddhist “race” would be) — they are also supporting and promoting a tool of their oppression.

One can only hope that we can learn to handle group differences in humans as intelligently and humanely.

The human race has no unified goal or plan.

Our shortsighted dependence on fossil fuels has brought great wealth to the countries that exploit them, but the overall effect is damaging to humanity as a whole.

One-Third Of The Human Race Has To Die For Civilization To Be Sustainable.

The goals of individual states and nations are such that conflicts inevitably arise with other states and nations and as a result we have wars.

This world is in the throes of a cock measuring contest bloody and rapey till a clear winner suffocates on unbreathable air.

Should the European Union accept the recent UK Remain or Leave Referendum Results?

Not on your nanny.Afficher l'image d'origine

There is too much at stake.

An Organisation that has peace at its heart. Its founding aspiration, (even if it is in need massive reform) to allow a vote that was misinformed to adversely affect (even it is driven by single Market) such a noble and worthwhile CAUSE.

The European Union must reform and work to build vibrant and tolerant democracies whose governments are accountable and open to the participation of all people.

The European Union must make its own workings more transparent to its citizens and more connected with their national politics.

The European Parliament election must be taken that seriously, it is too easy for people use their vote as a protest, voting against their national government and sometimes for anti-establishment parties.

Member states need to stop blaming Brussels for everything. They go to Brussels knowing that they have to make decisions on hard issues, but they don’t want to take the political costs themselves.

There is not adequate democracy in the EU.

Correcting this perception and encouraging citizens to engage with the EU is one of the big challenges facing the Union in the future.

It should pass a law to abolish most of the regulations that exist—a huge simplification of the approach.

By the end of this year there will be a Capital Markets Union and the Digital Single Market. These are two elements that can make European companies more competitive and bring more financial resources to startups.

It should issue euro bonds to finance the migrant crisis.

It should issue euro bonds for growth—euro bonds targeted for human capital, infrastructure, and research and development. These euro bonds can be a European issuance of debt up to five percent of European GDP, which means 700 billion euros that you can inject into the European economy and show that European institutions are doing something concrete to create jobs.

European leaders should decide to increase the European budget from the current one percent of GDP to three percent of GDP.

It should scrap the physical movement of Parliament establish a permanent home.

The EU has to recognize that it has many issues that it needs to face.

There is much dissatisfaction in many countries with policies coming out of Brussels and with the level of transparency with which Brussels operates.

One way or the other, the EU has to gain the confidence of the populace.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨