• About
  • THE BEADY EYE SAY’S : THE EUROPEAN UNION SHOULD THANK ENGLAND FOR ITS IN OR OUT REFERENDUM.

bobdillon33blog

~ Free Thinker.

bobdillon33blog

Tag Archives: Politicians

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WHY IS TRUST IN POLITICIANS AT AN ALL TIME LOW?

30 Saturday Nov 2019

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Political Trust, Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WHY IS TRUST IN POLITICIANS AT AN ALL TIME LOW?

Tags

Career politicians, Depoliticization., Fair Political System., Far Right political parties, Political ignorance, Political leaders, Political power., Political spectrum, Political Trust, Politicians, Politics of the Future, Populism., The Lethargy of our Political leaders

 

(Twenty-minute read)

The problem with the above question is where to start.

Around the world, democracies are distrusted by a majority of their citizens.

As a result, it is creating space for the rise of authoritarian-populist forces or other forms of independent representation.

Without trust we are diminishing our capacity to meet complex, long-term challenges, reducing support for evidence-based public policies and promotes risk aversion in government.

This lack of trust is and will translate into a lack of action.

I suppose that there is no one simple explanation for what drives or undermines political trust but there can be no doubt that social media with the growing worldwide inequality is contributing to spreading distrust. and forming barriers of political engagement.

This is set to get worse with profit-seeking algorithms.

So what is it about citizens, such as their educational background, class, location, country or cohort of birth, that makes them trusting or not?

In general, the strongest predictors of distrust continue to be attitudinal and are connected to negativity about politics which is being influenced more and more by technological algorithms of prediction and recommendation.

What would it be that makes citizens feel that their vote could deliver value?

Most interventions tend to focus on dealing with issues of social disadvantage through education, labour market activation, public participation, improved representation, place-based service delivery and other forms of empowerment.

By offering more participation or consultation we are turning politics into a tokenistic exercise, generating more cynicism and negativity among citizens, who are turning to Populism.

The term populism can designate either democratic or authoritarian movements. Populism is typically critical of political representation and anything that mediates the relation between the people and their leader or government.

Populism usually combines elements of the left and the right, opposing large business and financial interests but also frequently being hostile to established socialist and labour parties.

In its contemporary understanding, however, populism is most often associated with an authoritarian form of politics.

Populist politics, following this definition.

It revolves around a charismatic leader who appeals to and claims to embody the will of the people in order to consolidate his own power. In this personalized form of politics, political parties lose their importance, and elections serve to confirm the leader’s authority rather than to reflect the different allegiances of the people.

Depending on one’s view of populism, a populist economic program can, therefore, signify either a platform that promotes the interest of common citizens and the country as a whole or a platform that seeks to redistribute wealth to gain popularity, without regard to the consequences for the country.

In Europe, we are seeing the rise of the Swiss People’s Party, the Austrian Freedom Party, the Swedish Democrats, the Danish People’s Party, the Northern League in Italy, Marine Le Pen in France, Victor Orban in Hungary, and Greece’s Golden Dawn and of course the Brexit party in the UK.

Elsewhere in the world one has to only look at Donald Trump, Dufeele in the Philippines.

The question of what’s fueling this populist?

It’s nothing new.

Most of us are now live in two increasingly separate worlds one wants to eliminate health care, shred the social safety net, and cut taxes on the rich—benefit the winners from globalization and work against the economic interests of the working class.

They others want revenge and this revenge is —not of the economically insecure, but of the cultural left-behinds.

So are groups like the those mentioned above, just groups of nativist, putting their nation first?

The answer is obvious. No. They’re looking backwards.

However, that is not the case, because if populism was truly driven by economic fears, populist candidates should be drawing votes from those who are suffering the most: unskilled workers, the unemployed, those with lower levels of education, and less advantaged groups in cities and urban centres.

Because economic issues have declined in importance to voters, like cultural issues—around women’s rights, abortion, same-sex marriage, and gay rights—climate change – have risen to the fore, along with the anti-immigrant sentiment, authoritarianism, mistrust of global national governance, and right-wing ideological self-placement.

The rise of populist parties reflects, above all, a reaction against a wide range of rapid cultural changes that seem to be eroding the basic values and customs of Western societies.

So a populist leader is forced to be in a permanent campaign to convince his people that he is not established and will never be. Magnify the political divide. Ultimately he ignores complicated democratic systems and is therefore viewed with suspicion…

What if anything can be done?

The importance of beliefs can only be tackled through discussion of the role of mass media in influencing public trust.

The power of mass media is not easy to reconcile with the empirical evidence of experimental social psychology research which demonstrates that people with strong beliefs and values often remain unpersuaded even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Positive economic growth does not necessarily increase political trust, but negative economic growth and prolonged economic crises.

Rather, economic development and social modernisation in advanced industrial democracies have encouraged new types of engaged, questioning and assertive publics, for whom strong economic performance no longer automatically leads to increased trust.

There is only one answer to this question.

It is greater political accountability of MPs and political parties to their electorates and members.

Providing performance data will not work because it leads to government officials trying to manipulate the way citizens judge their performance. Positive data is given prominence, less helpful data sometimes hidden.

There is one thing for sure because trust cut across racial and ethnic lines any solution to the puzzle of political trust can not be achieved without our engagement.

Anti-establishment, might having faith in “plain talkers” and “ordinary people” as opposed to the “corrupt establishment” of business, government, academia, and media but without formal rules there can be no good democratic practice.

Here I may be forgiven for indulging in some wishful thinking and believing that, despite the current shortage of inspirational leadership in the West, trust in democratic principles and values that transcend national boundaries will remain strong and shared by a large number of ordinary people across the world.

The good news for political parties that take up the cause of democratic reform is that the citizenry is ready to take up the challenge.

Finding what is the equilibrium point between political trust and distrust requires reducing inequality because political attitudes are shaped by more than people’s pocketbooks.

In effect, political parties are each a product of the world view of their membership or of their directing minds. Their attitudes, carriage or expression are often indicative of the groups’ underlying body of beliefs, catechism or affirmation of faith.

The chattering class will continue to wallow in their own cynical self-assurance, and the best and most principled among us will remain reticent to enter to the moral minefield of public life.

At the heart of this faulty ontology remains the myth of the autonomous self, the pipe dream that our identity is a “blank slate” that WE choose regardless of the desires and influences of others.

Dogmatism and doctrinaire ideology may seem no longer attractive or realistic political attributes. But democracy will continue to mean a change of government from time to time as if oscillating between two sides with opposing philosophies rigidly applied.

The democratic tradition of alternating governments, evolving policies, pragmatic choices, etc theoretically presents us with some choice with regard to the management of our economic and other affairs.

Being so vulnerable to purely political decisions surely honesty is required.

Perhaps it is time to remove politics from decisions that require long term solutions and set them in law, like reducing Carbon emmission, before we see civil unrest, and migration on a massive scale.

Why should this be done:

Because elections are for political parties to be in office for the short term – five years if not re-elected.

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisement

Share this:

  • Tumblr
  • Email
  • Pocket
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Telegram
  • Skype
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS IT TIME TO REPLACE POLITICAL PARTIES. PART THREE.

29 Friday Jul 2016

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Modern Day Democracy., Politics., Social Media., Technology, The Future, The world to day., Unanswered Questions.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS IT TIME TO REPLACE POLITICAL PARTIES. PART THREE.

Tags

Fair Political System., Inequalities of opportunity, Political leaders, Politicians, politics, Politics of the Future

I can’t help but to return to the fascinating question.Afficher l'image d'origine

WHY?

Because DIVERSITY is absolutely necessary to justice.

Because Biometric E-Voting is on the horizon with a new paradigm in political communications. Look at your desktop, and you’ll see the ways the new media are changing the political scene from the bottom up.

Because of the outmoded ways we allow politicians to make decisions on our behalf.

Because candidates who would have had no chance before the Internet can now overcome huge odds.

Because we are becoming aware of what today’s Capitalism is doing to culture.  A top-down, big-money view of politics while the unresolved tensions between morals and markets are getting worse.

Because of corporate funds in political which are devastating to the public interest.

Because more and more of the new Generation want to balance individual autonomy with civic virtue. New social media are already changing the way organizations attract supporters.

Because we need a balanced society without turning persons into clients, cogs or worse. Facebook addicts. The potential mobile universe of grassroots text messagers is now over 136 million.

Because most social mayhem now arising around us is driven by seduction and stresses of public decay under a capitalism that’s no longer tempered.

Because with today’s casino like, predatory, intensively degrading capitalism is ruining social equality.

Because if we don’t want the curtain to drop on Sapiens history we have to answer the question. What do we want to become?

Do we want a digital existence. With hundreds of cable TV channels and satellite radio stations, millions of bloggers, and literally billions of Web pages all pouring out trillions of unadulterated verbal and written diarrhea that nobody gives a shit about.

The media today are more diffuse and chaotic than ever.

Because there are thousands of other reasons but it is naive to think or imagine that we might hit the brakes and stop scientific project that are upgrading Homo sapiens into a different kind of being, or a computer with a mind inside. ( Nobody is willing to argue such a proposition as the answer is we are doing it to cure diseases and save human lives.)

So I suppose we are left with the real question that is not what we want to become, but what do we want to want?

It is obvious that we all want to live, but up to now we have not given the question of living enough thought.

In my mind no political power should have the power to declare war without asking its people first, never mind getting a United Resolution it is the Young of a country that dies.

If you don’t agree with me here have a look at what happens.

The 20th century is described as the “bloodiest”, with an estimated 187 million deaths due to the various wars combined.

The death tolls for various conflicts throughout history, the best estimates put the total death toll due to all wars at 341.7 million people.

The United States most likely has been responsible since WWII for the deaths of between 20 and 30 million people in wars and conflicts scattered over the world.

The wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan have taken a tremendous human toll on those countries. As of March 2015, approximately 210,000 civilians have died violent deaths as a result of the wars. The number of displaced people exceeded 50 million in 2013.

Our subjective well-being is not determined by external parameters such as wars, salary, social relations or political rights. Biologists hold that our mental and emotional world is governed by biochemical mechanisms shaped by million of years of evolution.

Any decision that has a direct effects should be put to the nation as a whole not delegated to those that happen to be in power at any given time.

So here is my suggestion.

In this age of instant communication there should be a Free Government App (for argument sake called Vote Now.)

Afficher l'image d'origineThis App delegates an unique password to all.

When any political party in power want to commit a country to any project that will cost the nation let’s say over 6 billion.

We the people of the country are asked to approve or disapprove the project within a given number of days, weeks or whatever.

The app provides all relevant information connected to the project.

The E-voting system using biometric enables a voter to cast his vote using internet without additionally registering himself for voting in advance and going to a polling place. Why not an App.

This App will stop governments from sell of the country’s natural resources to Sovereign Wealth Funds and cut out lobbyist and any form of corruption.

Here are a few recent UK decisions that should have been put to the people.

For examples 300 odd sitting Conservative MP under the leadership of a Prime Minister Theresa May (a Prime Minister that has no mandate) recently voted in favour of spending over £31bn over the lifetime of the programme, including adjustment for inflation over that period, and an additional £10bn as a “contingency” to renew four worthless submarines carrying Trident nuclear missiles.

It’s no wonder they got cold feet on the total lifetime cost of the planned Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant which could be as high as £37bn. Which is was to be funded by the EDF and a Chines Sovereign Fund against 35 years of guarantee returns at twice the present cost of power.

The two new carriers that has attracted criticism over its £6.2bn cost.

Maybe I am nive but I would not let elected or non elected people sell my future.

All views and suggestions welcome.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Tumblr
  • Email
  • Pocket
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Telegram
  • Skype
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS IT TIME TO REPLACE POLITICAL PARTIES: PART TWO.

28 Thursday Jul 2016

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Humanity., Politics., Sustaniability, The Future, The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, World Aid., World Organisations.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS IT TIME TO REPLACE POLITICAL PARTIES: PART TWO.

Tags

Fair Political System., Political ignorance, Politicians, Politics of the Future, The Future of Mankind, The Lethargy of our Political leaders, United Nations, Visions of the future., World Politics

IN THE FIRST PART ON THIS BLOG I ATTEMPTED TO SHOW THAT TECHNOLOGY IS CHANGING THE WAY WE VIEW DEMOCRACY AND AS A CONSEQUENCE POLITICAL PARTIES WILL OR ARE BECOMING OBSOLETE.

For those of us who still think that because we support a particular party AND that it will deliver on its pre-election promises I can only say we are living in cloud cuckoo land.

Governance use to be understood as ‘a system of values, policies and institutions by which a society manages its economic, political and social affairs through interaction within and among the State, civil society and the private sector.

This for now holds true for the most part but it is changing as we enter the Technology Revolution.

Why?

BECAUSE MOST SOCIETIES ARE NOW A MIX OF SEVERAL CULTURES DRIVEN BY A WORLD MEDIA THAT HAS TURNED EVERY FORM OF GREED AND VIOLENCE INTO AN ENTERTAINMENT.

POLITICIANS ARE NO LONGER CAPABLE OF REPRESENTING THE PEOPLE WHO VOTE FOR THEM.

THERE IS NO LONGER ANY LONG TERM PLANNING ONLY KNEE JERK REACTIONS.

INDEED WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO THE BEAR TRUTH- THEY ARE ALL DRIVEN BY DATA ON THE ECONOMY, AND MANIPULATED BY BIG MONEY OR THE LACK THEREOF.

Where does this leave us.

Just look at the current USA presidential election. Two candidate that are viewed as a threat to world peace.

There is an urgent need not just in the United States to invest in cultural diversity and dialogue.

Culture is increasingly recognized as a cross-cutting dimension of the three economic, social and environmental pillars of sustainability.

We must strengthen social cohesion and provide sources of inspiration for renewing forms of democratic governance if we are to put a break on governance for the sake of money rather than for the values we all cherish. 

We must places more emphasis on ‘unity in diversity.’

Indigenous knowledge can direct us towards more sustainable modes of living.

Similarly, ignoring the increasingly multicultural makeup of societies would amount to negating the existence of large sections of the population, which compartmentalizes society and damages the social fabric by creating competition between the different communities over access to resources (for education, health, social services) rather than promoting a sense of solidarity.

The expansion of digital networks, for example, has sometimes helped to revitalize endangered or even extinct languages; and the development of new technologies has greatly increased the possibilities of communicating and exchanging cultural content in time and space. Moreover, in certain cultural contexts, global cities in particular, the varied cultural flows and sometimes unexpected encounters produced by globalization are reflected in a growing range of consumer habits and trends.

You might ask why more emphasis on ‘unity in diversity.

Because Cultural diversity, characterized as it is by space-time compression linked to the speed of new communication and transportation technologies, and by the growing complexity of social interactions and the increasing overlap of individual and collective identities — cultural diversity has become a key concern, amid accelerating globalization processes, as a resource to be preserved and as a lever for sustainable development.

Intercultural dialogue must be seen as a complex and ongoing process that is never completed.

Unfortunately Globalization is NOT ACHIEVING THIS but is leading inevitably to cultural homogenization. Facebook, Twitter, Linked In etc.

While it is true that globalization induces forms of homogenization and standardization, it cannot be regarded as inimical to human creativity, which continues to engender new forms of diversity, constituting a perennial challenge to featureless uniformity.

Digital technology has drastically changed the modes of producing and disseminating cultural products, and cultural industries that previously were kept separate by analogue systems of production (film, television, photography and printing) have now converged.

We can’t hold a computer program like Google hostage to our demands.

We must move away from elite level deal making by allowing diverse interests to influence and design our own debating and decision-making rules.

Take for instance the eradication of world poverty, which is an intolerable violation of human rights in terms of both the hardships and the loss of dignity it causes – must be approached in terms of each specific social and cultural setting.

No amount of money is going to make any long-term worthwhile difference.

This can only be done with massive investment in Education.

Without education we are blowing in the wind, because rights and freedoms are exercised in very varied cultural environments and all have a cultural dimension that needs to be acknowledged so as to ensure their effective integration in different cultural contexts.

Education is a fundamental human right to which all children and adults should have access, contributing as it does to individual freedom and empowerment, and to human development.

We must escape National dialogues and engage in collective world mandates, that have legal status, and are independence from the government.

We must re- invent the United Nations changing it from a gossip shop on world problems to an Organisation that is fully funded with total transparency.

Irrivalent of the changes in technology quit hoc resolutions diplomacy is not enough.

Human beings relate to one another through society, and express that relationship through culture.

New technologies have not yet rendered the older technologies obsolete.

If we are to respond to the challenges inherent in a culturally diverse world, we must develop new approaches to intercultural dialogue, approaches that go beyond the limitations of the ‘dialogue among civilizations’ paradigm. Too often, dialogue events have stressed collective identities (national, ethnic, religious) rather than identities of individuals or social groups.

We must ensure a level playing field for cultural encounters and guaranteeing equality of status and dignity between all participants in initiatives to promote intercultural dialogue involve recognizing the ethnocentric ways in which certain cultures have hitherto proceeded.

The founding Vetoes in the United Nations must be scraped by give all nations an equal voice.

While virtually all human activities are shaped by and in turn help to shape cultural diversity, the prospects for the continued vitality of diversity are crucially bound up with the future of languages, education, the communication of cultural content, and the complex interface between creativity and the marketplace.

Recent decades have witnessed an unprecedented enmeshment of national economies and cultural expressions, giving rise to new challenges and opportunities.

The emergence of genuine ‘knowledge societies’ implies a diversity of forms of knowledge and of its sources of production, We are creating Internet technological Sahara Deserts that are and will drive millions to seek a better life or wars.

Communication networks have shrunk or abolished distance, to the benefit of some and the exclusion of others.

To address the problems that derive from the grotesque inequalities and structural poverty of our world which is at the foundations of 90% of the mess we now find ourselves in. We must recognise that successful intercultural dialogue lies in the acknowledgement of the equal dignity of the participants… based on the premise that all cultures are in continual evolution and are the result of multiple influences throughout history.

All rights and freedoms have a cultural dimension that contributes to their effective exercise. It is precisely this dimension that forms the link between the individual, the community and the group, which grounds universal values within a particular society.

All communities do not experience and respond to phenomena such as globalization in the same way.

As migration flows have intensified with globalization, they have significantly modified the ethno-linguistic makeup of a number of countries and have created new linguistic and translation needs, especially in administrative, legal and medical circuits worldwide.

Characterized as it is by space-time compression linked to the speed of new communication and transportation technologies, and by the growing complexity of social interactions and the increasing overlap of individual and collective identities — cultural diversity has become a key concern, amid accelerating globalization processes, as a resource to be preserved and as a lever for sustainable development.

Finally, forms of democratic governance can be renewed by deriving lessons from the different models adopted by diverse cultures.

We the people of the world must make our collective voices heard which is becoming almost impossible due to all of the above.

If we don’t want to rule byAfficher l'image d'origine

AI has officially made its way into Google’s search algorithm.

(The artificial intelligence of RankBrain comes in the form of mathematical entities called vectors that can be understood by computers. When presented with an unfamiliar word, RankBrain will help formulate a guess at what the query was about and filter accordingly.)

There are many possibilities as to how Rank Brain could work into being a signal to direct your choice to making any decision.

Central to the many problems arising in this context is the Western ideology of knowledge transparency, which cannot do justice to systems of thought recognizing both ‘exoteric’ and ‘esoteric’ knowledge and embodying initiatory processes for crossing the boundaries between them.

Diversity of traditions and cultures has for centuries been one of Europe’s riches and that the principle of tolerance is the guarantee of the maintenance in Europe of an open society.

Take England’s recent referendum on the EU.

So far the English referendum has resulted in transitional period now represented by an unelected interim governments whose authority to press the out button and start negotiations to leave may lack legitimacy in the eyes of the public.

Political transitions are tumultuous processes that celebrate advances and suffer setbacks several times before they can conclude with a new, widely accepted constitutional order.

There is a whole new class of millionaires as the new generation takes control of banks, government, and other institutions. The stage is set for another depression and the collapse of the welfare state.

How this can be achieved I leave to you to suggest.

But I am convinced that with the smart phone we should create a new political platform where the voice of people would hold weight in decision taken by our political masters.

If every eligible voting age citizen had a phone, any project that cost over x billions could be electronically sent for approval or disapproval.

As how to finance the United Nations ( see previous post : A World Aid Commission)

Can any of what I am writing about be achieved.  Yes it Can.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Tumblr
  • Email
  • Pocket
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Telegram
  • Skype
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: ARE WE CONDEMNED TO REACTION POLITICS FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE

08 Friday Jan 2016

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Politics., Technology, The Future, The world to day., What Needs to change in the World

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS: ARE WE CONDEMNED TO REACTION POLITICS FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE

Tags

Politicians, politics, Politics of the Future, SMART PHONE WORLD, The Future of Mankind

When you look at the state of the Planet is it time for world Governments to have   a third level of Governance.

Our political discourse is shrinking to fit our smart phone screens.

( If we don’t open our eyes we will be governed by natural-born troll, such as MR TRUMP who is adept at issuing inflammatory bulletins at opportune moments, he’s the first candidate optimized for the Google News algorithm.)

A pro active house of power with non political representatives immune from lobbing that know what they are talking about.

Such a house would address the long-term views about family welfare, social conditions, the environment, crime and virtually every aspect of our lives that our national government policy effects.

“When you’re up to your ass in alligators, it’s difficult to remind
yourself that your initial objective was to drain the swamp.”

Our political actors can only focus on a few core issues simultaneously, the construction and selection of the problems on the agenda constitute a key phase of the policymaking process.

It is far more effective and cheaper to prevent problems from occurring than to let problems grow and then try to solve them.

A proactive approach to change is needed to avoid a potential future threat or to capitalize on a potential future opportunity.

It would not be effected by the political strategies surrounding the construction of insecurity or the currently political needs of focusing on the acquisition and retention of power.

Unfortunately, as human organizations or societies get bigger, older and more complex, “Destructive Achievers” tend to become dominant. They are promoted or elected to power because they are willing to satisfy the short-term desires of the most powerful members of the group, even at the expense of the group’s long-term health.

Every political power has to go through the media.

These days it is impossible to deny the significant role of the media in the life of societies it influence the opinions and beliefs prevailing in society through content management – which is more difficult now with social media , however, to categorically determine the nature of this impact.

While this maybe true political actors wanting to create and maintain their place in the media must comply with the policies of the mass media, based primarily on the desire to garner the greatest possible interest in the message.

Hence, politicians in their activity must adapt not only to the needs of potential voters, but also to the needs of the media, among which the most prominent ones are the sensational nature of the content and availability of the politician.

As a Result the politics presented is superficially world that is reduced to news, schemas and scandals.

A pro active Chamber may cause in the electorate the expectation of integrity, reliability, conscientiousness from their potential political leaders.

Is such a suggestion feasible or foolish?

Both the development of transmission technology and dissemination of information, increased strength and importance of the media in society. As a result political discourse is contaminated.

Reactive Vs Proactive Change 119

It would be feasible if all decisions from this house were electronically vote on by the electorate before submission too Parliament for approval.

The Internet revolution has transformed the way knowledge is disseminated and how people unite over causes.

It is now more than ever necessary to understanding some of the most influential social and political processes of our time. Social networks are playing a key.  It is and has transformed elections.

In the 1920s, radio disembodied candidates, reducing them to voices. It also made national campaigns far more intimate. In the 1960s, television gave candidates their bodies back, at least in two dimensions. Today, with the public looking to smartphones for news and entertainment, we seem to be at the start of the third big technological makeover of modern electioneering.

This shift is changing the way politicians communicate with voters, altering the tone and content of political speech. But it’s doing more than that. It’s changing what the country wants and expects from its would-be leaders.

What’s important now is not so much image as personality.

Social media favors the bitty over the meaty, the cutting over the considered.

It also prizes emotionalism over reason.

The more visceral the message, the more quickly it circulates and the longer it holds the darting public eye.

In something of a return to the pre-radio days, the fiery populist now seems more desirable, more worthy of attention, than the cool wonk.
SOCIAL MEDIA ARAB SPRING

In my eyes, social media is one of the most important global leaps forward in recent human history. It provides for self-expression and promotes a mutual understanding. It enables a rapid formation of networks and demonstrates our common humanity across cultural differences. It connects people, their ideas and values, like never before.

It is in its infancy.

Once we truly learn how to harness this new technology and these new ways of communicating, we will feel the full impacts of social media.

It is responsible for the roots of the Arab Spring in the Middle East, Twitter, YouTube, Facebook and others have played not just an important role, but also an instrumental one.

The truth is the fear that some governments have about truly empowering their citizens through these new technologies. They are afraid of power of human connections online forming communities of interest because they are self-monitoring, with their own norms and expectations.

In China, the government of President Xi Jinping has expressed concern about the real power that social media has to spread information

From the printing press to the telephone to the Internet, each of these tools has been a way to organize and activate — to give people the voice they want and deserve.

Forward-thinking governments will listen to those voices and empower them. Others will be fearful of the voice of the people and remain on the losing side of history.

Today’s society, in a similar manner to liquid, adopts various unstable forms under small amounts of pressure. They are incapable of stabilizing in a consistent form, which results in consequences to social relationships and politics.

Meanwhile, political parties, bureaucracy and institutions seem to remain firmly in the 17th Century.

Democracy has to reinvent itself in accordance with this new “liquid society” where collaboration happens between many millions of people directly.

Leadership is not vertical, as in the past, but horizontal.

There is no time and space limitation for public accountability on the Internet.

Creative commonality is standard and does not resemble the authoritarian style of the dead communist experience.

It seems that it is no longer society’s obligation to understand legislation, it is a duty for governments to be understood by their people.

More than ever, the citizen is now part of the solution. Decision-makers must take advantage of technological tools to listen to the people and raise public awareness of controversial debates. If society has logged out of the virtual world it is time for government to realistically log on in an effective way to chat with citizens.

Ultimately, the discussion is all about what government is doing to the people, as in France in 1779, Russia in 1917 and 1991, in addition to many other uprisings in past. After all, it is much easier to listen to people now.

Open government is what politics will be in the Future.

While the possibilities are promising, there is also risk and danger.

It is now evident that there is no such thing as privacy. Google is omniscient of what people search for and do. Facebook has over a billion subscribers meaning Mark Zuckerberg has personal information about one in every seven people on earth. USA, Brazil, Mexico, India and Indonesia are at the top of that list.

Companies collect and negotiate information about customers and often without permission. There have been notorious cases of non-authorized government investigations on people, from autocratic regimes to alleged democracies.

Evgeny Morozov calls for a cyber utopia of ingenuity with the perspective for digital technologies. The dark side seems closer to scenarios depicted in fiction such as 1984, A Brave New World or, more recently, the Guy Fawkes face mask borrowed by the Anonymous movement from the V for Vendetta movie that has become omnipresent throughout the latest uprisings in Turkey, Egypt, Brazil and the United States.

President Obama is the best-known politician to be exploring the possibilities of new technologies to converse with the people.

Others must follow his lead and innovate. It is inevitable.

Facebook´s average user is 22 years old and the digital world continues to evolve bringing greater potential. Soon, every protester will have a smart phone with an HD 3D camera. The ascension of mobile caused Steve Wozniak to announce the end of the personal computer, which he himself invented with Steve Jobs three decades ago.

Politics needs to adapt. Like it or unlike it.

The technology is just scratching the surface of its promise.

Smartphones are cheaper than computers and will become ubiquitous; Everyone will be connected through phones.

Afficher l'image d'origine

A major effort needs to be made to educate voters about proactive vs. reactive approaches to issues.

It’s not just about economics. Afficher l'image d'origine

We are dealing with the mechanism of the spiral of silence, which pulls individuals into a paradox of sorts: to ensure social acceptance, he or she resigns from forming own thoughts and views on certain topics, withdrawing from discussion

The culture of diversity removes any moral (good/bad) and evaluative (positive/negative) dimension that justifies the political, social and ethical associations linked to the dynamics of diversity.

Of course, I’m open to suggestion!

http://go.ted.com/Cuah

http://go.ted.com/Cuaq

http://go.ted.com/CuaH

Share this:

  • Tumblr
  • Email
  • Pocket
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Telegram
  • Skype
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...

Our Politicians need to wake up to the fact that- Globalization and technology stop at no border.

06 Friday Feb 2015

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on Our Politicians need to wake up to the fact that- Globalization and technology stop at no border.

Tags

Capitalism, Democracy, English General Election., Greed, Politicians

After seven or eight post on Nuclear Weapons its back to what’s wrong with Capitalism/ Democracy.

Those of you that have been reading my blog will have already seen that I have advocated that Greed is the root problem when it comes to both the above.

I have suggested that we need to come together through Social media to stop Sovereign Wealth Funds privatizing the resources that we all rely on. To stop Computer Algorithms from plundering the Foreign Exchange, Stock Exchange, not to mention E Bay Auctions.

I have also stated that this is impossible, but that it is not impossible to place a 0.05% WORLD AID COMMISSION TO CREATE A PERPETUAL SOURCE OF FUNDS TO REMOVE INEQUALITIES IN THE WORLD.

Unfortunately to date most of my readers are to busy living their lives to engage in developing such an idea other than pressing the like button.

Not to despair. Today, we are living in the age of globalization and technological revolution.

Both have delivered much benefit to society, but have reshaped the political economy of western industrialized countries in ways that challenge the middle class and those striving to get into it.

THE TROUBLE FOR CAPITALISM IS THAT IT HAS SOMEHOW OR OTHER STOPPED SERVE THE VAST MAJORITY OF SOCIETY AND IT IS THEREFORE TURNING – DEMOCRACY INTO WORTHLESS VOTES –  that are now turning to Internet Petitions and reality TV. 

This sea change has been facilitated by technology that has loosened the connections between top management and ordinary workers. Corporations have become less committed to their work forces and their communities.

Institutions on all levels are deeply mistrusted by the public. However, part of that mistrust has developed precisely because both government and business have failed to offer broadly shared prosperity. Today, the ability of free-market democracies to deliver widely shared increases in prosperity is in question as never before.

So how do we create a stronger, fairer, and more sustainable economic model in which the many and not just the few benefit from rising prosperity now and into the future?

This is not just a question for governments but for companies and citizens as well.

My first contention HAS NOT CHANGED it is impossible to remove Greed but where we see profit for profit sake we should cap it.

We all know what is wrong, but just in case you are a Politician:  It is the GROWING GAP BETWEEN THE HAVE AND HAVE NOT’S ( NOT MONEY BUT INEQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY)

Confidence in government is at an all-time low, and consequently, the public resists intervention by a government it viewed as incapable of solving its problems. This forces families that could benefit from public support to face the challenges of the evolving economy on their own. It is a vicious cycle — and a cycle we can and must break by renewing confidence through a government that works effectively and efficiently for its citizens.

SO WHAT CAN BE DONE?

While some on the left seek to turn away from globalization and technology, that is not a realistic option. No country can prosper in isolation.

Those on the right who argue for a return to laissez-faire, trickle-down economics — cutting taxes at the top, stripping out regulation, and making deep cuts to public services — do not provide a viable alternative.

Developed countries cannot succeed through a race to the bottom in which companies simply compete on cost as workers see their job security erode and their living standards decline. When democratic governments and market systems cannot deliver prosperity to their citizens, the result is political alienation, a loss of social trust, and increasing conflict across the lines of race, class, and ethnicity.

HERE IS WHAT I SEE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED.

1) There are still too many people who are unemployed.

2) Minimum wages have lost their real value.

3) Workers must benefit from increased productivity rather than seeing returns accrue primarily to shareholders.

4) Remove barriers to women’s labor-force participation, such as inflexible work environments and high-cost child care.

5) Focusing on early childhood education, increasing the quality of our schools, eliminating financial barriers to higher education, and providing support for apprenticeship programs are all critical to driving higher skill levels across economies in both tradable and non-tradable sectors.

6) Cities and regions must be given the tools to make their own local decisions to help drive growth.

7) Increasing numbers of workers find themselves in contractual relationships that do not guarantee hours worked or provide benefits such as paid vacation, sick days, or pension benefits. No hours contracts are slavery.

8) Large corporate attention has shifted to financial engineering, particularly with the goal of minimizing tax payments. Restoring the integrity of corporate taxation will require more than a simple reversal of the policies of the past 30 years. It will require governments to develop a taxation system that can withstand the pressures of a globalized economy, promote long-term investment, and provide a stable, fair, and predictable policy framework for businesses.

9) Create Profit-sharing and share-ownership schemes provide a direct way to ensure that employees have an incentive to help their company to succeed.

10) Raising skills levels.

 These challenges are formidable, but they must be met, and any politician worth his privileged position would do well to take note.

These are essential for democracy itself. Advocates and apologists for anti-democratic regimes argue that the democracies are no longer capable of managing their problems or creating a sense of social dynamism. For democracies to thrive, rising prosperity must be within reach of all citizens.

The profound technological changes that brought down the cost of many goods and services are also replacing traditional middle-income jobs. It is changing balance of economic power away from domestic workers and toward mobile, international corporations.

Internet and computer technology has made cross-border business organization less costly and more efficient, it has become easier for businesses to outsource or relocate all or part of their operations to countries where wages, labor, and environmental standards are low.

In addition to unskilled labor — which has, in some cases, been squeezed by globalization and off shoring –advances in robotics and artificial intelligence have put intermediate-skill jobs at risk in what economists call a hollowing out of the labor market.

This trend is set to continue with 3-D printers, Google’s driver less cars, and Amazon’s drones. This is creating an even greater premium on higher levels of skills and qualifications, making the returns from ideas, capital, and top-class qualifications greater and greater.

Employment is less likely to be stable or long term.

Powerful forces of globalization and technological change must be navigated or inequalities will continue to widen, and for many, precarious low-skill work will increasingly become the norm. The consequence is that growth will stall.

Finally, it is essential that markets work in the public interest and for the long term rather than focusing only on short-term. Infrastructure investments deteriorating facilities, unpredictable service disruptions, congestion, and higher costs to businessesj and households is the result.

In summary, declining growth, the effects of the financial crisis, and increasing inequality have combined to put substantial economic stress on middle-and low-income families across the developed world.

Poor policy choices have only made matters worse. Concerns about financial instability, immigration, and tax avoidance are not the causes of our problems they are fruits ripening on the tree.

To ensure that all of society’s citizens have a stake in prosperity, and therefore all of  citizens have a stake in the future we need new social and political institutions to make 21st century capitalism work for the many and not the few.

( If you are English reading this blog feel free to forward this post to your candidate in the forthcoming General Election.)

2015 will see the creation of new political parties organised in radically different ways, – See more at: http://www.nesta.org.uk/news/2015-predictions/democracy-makes-itself-home-online#sthash.vxQJ1BiK.dpuf

Five Star in Italy prides itself on its internet-based decision making structure, as do the Pirate Parties in Iceland, Germany and Sweden. Democracy OS in Argentina has designed a sophisticated way for all its members to propose ideas and shape them online. – See more at: http://www.nesta.org.uk/news/2015-predictions/democracy-makes-itself-home-online#sthash.vxQJ1BiK.dpuf

Democracy could be reenergised. There are other possible futures, of course. A sullen anti-political mood could fuel populist demagogues. But there is at least a good chance that those with their eyes on the future rather than the past will have the edge. – See more at: http://www.nesta.org.uk/news/2015-predictions/democracy-makes-itself-home-online#sthash.vxQJ1BiK.dpuf

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The global economy has fundamentally changed over the past 40 years.

As communism collapsed and countries gradually liberalized their economies, rapid reductions in poverty and increases in living standards have taken place in Asia and especially China, in South America, and in Eastern Europe, with growth increasingly taking off in Africa. Some of those countries that have produced economic growth have done so in a manner that has left most of their citizens no better off.

This is an economic problem that threatens to become a problem for the political systems of these nations — and for the idea of democracy itself.

Governments in developed countries must stay open to the world, seek new trade deals and regional partnerships, and continue their commitment to a dynamic market economy. While the economic mission of progressives is unchanging, the means of its achievement change from generation to generation as the economy evolves.

We need a smarter, and fairer society that returns to long-termism which will not only meet our fulfillment of environmental commitments, but will created a world worth living in.

Inclusive prosperity nurtures tolerance, harmony, social generosity, optimism, and international cooperation. Left to their own devices, unfettered markets and trickle-down economics will lead to increasing levels of inequality, stagnating wages, and a hollowing out of decent, middle-income jobs. This outcome is morally wrong, economically myopic, and at fundamental odds with a democracy in which everyone quite reason- ably asks for an equal chance to succeed.

understand and can respond to voters political systems restore their vitality and reclaim their ability to deliver on the promise of prosperity for all.

Share this:

  • Tumblr
  • Email
  • Pocket
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Telegram
  • Skype
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...

Here’s a Question. Is it time to redefine what it means to be a nation?

10 Wednesday Dec 2014

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on Here’s a Question. Is it time to redefine what it means to be a nation?

Tags

Citizenship., Communities, Community relations, Europeans, global climate change, Globalization, Identity, Immigration, Interculturalism, Multiculturalism, National borders, National identity, Nationhood, Politicians, Population mobility, Sovereignty, transnational relationships, Tribalism, Western economies

This is a vast subject governed by innumerable historical beliefs some of which are set in concrete and blood so I am going to discuss this subject in two parts.

Part One:

If I happen to offend anyone that has lost or might suffer the loss of a love one in defense of their Nation with anything I write in these posts I apologize.

I am not advocating that we should abolish the sense of Nationhood rather that we must look at what it means as there is going to be in the next hundred years a massive remix of people whether we like it or not. 

Population mobility is accelerating and across the globe, people have become far more able and willing to re-locate in search of better employment prospects and a higher standard of living; or increasingly as a lifestyle choice where borders have remained open to them.

The theory of development that has been force-fed into dominant economic discourse all over the world is now contributing as to one of the main reasons we see immigration. With the predictions of climate change in the future this immigration can only increase.

In 2010 there were 214 million international migrants and if they continue to grow in number at the same pace there will be over 400 million by 2050 (IOM 2010).

Forced migration, where people have to move as a result of climate change, conflict and war, threaten to dwarf these numbers.

For the world as a whole at the moment 13% primarily considered themselves as “citizens of the world”, 38% put their Nation-State first, and the larger remainder put local or regional identities first.

There is no getting away from it that Identity is becoming more multi-faceted and whereas multiculturalism has been firmly rooted in racial constructs, ideas about difference has developed in other directions.

Sexual orientation, gender, faith and disability and other aspects of identity are now firmly in the public sphere and contributing to notions of personal identity alongside national identity.

Identity is increasingly complex. As well as the now routine hyphenating of nationality, faith and ethnicity, the consequence of people from different identity groups sharing the same society has also led to the growth of ‘mixed race’ or multiple identities.

This group is now the fastest growing minority in Britain and many other countries.

Inter-marrying, building new virtual networks, and creating real and tangible personal relationships at all levels is currently changing nations from the inside out.  ( What once was Christian will be Muslim. What once was American will be Spanish Mexican, What once was German will to Northern African and so on.)

States – and especially their political elites – have inevitably tried to cling to the idea of clear national boundaries and governance and any suggestions of the loss of sovereignty or the advent political plurality are quickly contested. (For example the recent Resignation of the Israel Government over changing its Constitution to place Jews in a privileged position of citizenship. )

There are now 20 cities with more than 1 million foreign-born people and another 59 cities worldwide with a presence of 100,000 or more foreign-born residents.

These include 11 cities with an immigrant presence of between 500,000 and 1 million people, for example in Argentina, Canada, USA, Russia and Israel (Clark, 2008,).  This is not simply about numerical growth however, migrant communities are also increasingly diverse and this inevitably leads to much greater complexity within nation states, particularly in the Western economies, which are often the target countries for migration.

The extent of population movement is such that all western economies are now characterized by ‘super’ or ‘hyper’ diversity with cities, like London, Stockholm, Toronto, New York and Amsterdam with over 300 language groups.

This is beginning to re-define our notion of multiculturalism which had previously been seen as the then essentially White countries coming to terms with migrants from a limited number of former colonies.  Relationships are now much more complex and community relations are multi-faceted, no longer simply revolving around majority/minority visible distinctions underpinned by distinct sociology-economic positions (Cantle 2012).

The reality is however that national and cosmopolitan identities now also need to sit alongside each other – they are not opposed – something that multiculturalism has never acknowledged.

Governmental responses to date have been ambivalent.

The changing nature of personal identities, with the separate components shaped by increasing diversity in terms of faith, present locality, and ethnicity – as well as an apparently declining sense of nationality is changing what it means to be Irish, English, French, American. Take your choice from Australia to Canada and you finds this taking place.

For the most part, Governments have attempted to reinforce their view of national identity through such measures as the teaching of national history and promoting national citizenship and identity. By steadfastly retaining the pretense of the integrity of national borders and governance, and by attempting to deny the interdependence brought by globalization, they reinforce a fear of ‘others’.

They appear not to want to grasp or lag behind the current reality of multi-faceted identities within their communities and may well find that the new phenomenon of social media will begin to create new transnational relationships which transcend traditional power structures.

Already there is clear evidence of a decline in traditional democratic traditions across Europe, with election turnouts and political party membership in decline. There is also some evidence of the growth of new political movements from the indignados in Spain to that led by the comedian Grillo in Italy and the current lack of trust and disconnection from mainstream parties suggests that these movements could grow still further.

In the UK, along with many other countries, there have been attempts to restrict immigration and to ensure that those immigrants that do come are able to speak the native language and past various tests based on attitudes and knowledge of customs and history (Cantle, 2008).

There has been little by way of any systematic attempt to engage with globalization through intercultural education and to enable people to become more at ease with diversity and globalization

Identity remains promoted on the basis that it is fixed and within boundaries.

Sen, Suggests that conflict and violence are sustained today, no less than the past, by the illusion of a unique identity (Sen, 2006).

He argues that, the world is increasingly divided between religions (or ‘cultures’ or ‘civilizations’), which ignore the relevance of other ways in which people see themselves through class, gender, profession, language, literature, science, music, morals or politics. He challenges ‘the appalling effects of the miniaturization of people’ and the denial of the real possibilities of reasoned choices.

Interculturalism should be part of this response and has been proposed on the basis of a progressive vision (Cantle, 2012) to support the necessary changes, replacing multiculturalism which became completely out of step with this new world order.

The era of transnational relationships, the growth of diasporas, new and pervasive international communications and travel, mean that such policies are no longer tenable. ‘Interculturalism’ can provide a new positive model to mediate change across regions and nations and recognize the multivariate relationships across all aspects of diversity.

When power resides with a global elite, and the economic crisis links our fate across borders, we are, it seems, all ‘citizens of the world. A ‘global village’ mediated through electronic communication.

Globalism, global civil society, global consciousness and cosmopolitanism were to sweep away tribalism of nations to clear the path for a new and better world in which humanity would finally achieve unity and share happiness.

Globalization frees and unites us. Increased freedom of movement, a revolution of communication, the hyper-acceleration of cultural production, have together created a fertile ground for innumerable imagined communities, unrestricted by the limits of geography.

What is now called globalization is only the backlash of an age-old process, constantly fostered by capitalist expansion, which started with the constitution of rival national units, at least in the core of the world economy.

It is very hard to find any trace of this optimistic view of globalization

For me the world economy is evidence of the pervasive ideas of Liberalization, Privatization and Globalization as panacea for all the problems our countries faces today.

World-wide solidarity among workers, disadvantaged and oppressed appears to remain an ideal than a reality and anti-immigrant sentiment is on the rise in the many parts of the world.

The world is certainly globalized and is still globalizing but the old nations and nation-states have not withered away.

If you take Europe it does not exist except as a discursively constructed object of consciousness so it follows that Europeans also do not exist as a people with shared past, other than conflict. Europeaness consists as much in the way of values, interests,and beliefs, modes of justification, etc are mediated and negotiated as in a specific set of identifications. European identity or being European has not seriously undermined the centrality of nationalism in the modern world.

There is little point in contesting the  ‘emptiness’ of so many arguments for global citizenship. It is easier to be a global citizen if you are secure in your rights as a national citizen.

The logic that ‘only if the rich get richer will the poor live better! is a joke.

So why are Nation-states forfeiting their sovereignty in order to support global and regional markets, by selling their natural resources and future infrastructure to Sovereign Wealth Funds. The idea that the Welfare State has failed its citizens is sold through the mechanism of the Public Private Partnership, to pave the way for the take over of public assets by private interests.

The handing over common owned resources by interlinking of rivers, mining projects and disinvestment corroborated by the stock market fly in the face of Nationhood. (see previous Posts) For example in 2007, the total volume of trade by private corporations world over was over $1171 trillion. The sum of the earnings of all countries was a mere $66 trillion, almost twenty times less!

It needs to be understood that the financial power of the multi-nationals’ private business is huge.

The sovereignty of the state is no longer linked to a territory, nor are today’s communication technologies or military strategy, and this dislocation does in fact bring about a crisis in the old European concept of the political Nation.

The nation’ is frequently presented under the banner of Globalization as an outdated inconvenience, a domain of racism and intolerance.

New kinds of national identity are being forged.

A conversion from an ethnic to a multicultural and cosmopolitan community are evolving with alternative forms of belonging. That modernity is almost unthinkable without capitalism (despite any such attempt to render modernity as a democratizing force tied to a conception and experience of time).

Divisions in society are no longer based on citizenship, but rather on economic factors: access to employment, housing conditions and education opportunities.

So is it time for us to redefine the meaning of Nationhood. To rewrite and rethink our individual and collective destinies. Can we turn away from the future of the past and embody the logic of a future to come.

States now need to come to terms with the new circumstances that confront them.

The composition of western societies has become far more dynamic and complex. Ideas about personal and collective identity have inevitably begun to change as a consequence.

While states attempt to assert their relevance in a global age through both multiculturalism and top-down nationalism, new models of identity and strategies of participation need to be developed to deal with the co-existing phenomena of national experience and cosmopolitanism.

We all know that it is all but impossible for races and cultures that have differences going to the root of their immigration to be assimilated into a united whole.

It is my view that a Nation without a written Constitution that enshrines equality across the board can no longer offer Nationhood.

Because the concept of Citizenship and Sovereignty that emerged during the 17th/19th Century have become outdated and remains to this day significantly flawed.

The state remains a very powerful force in the lives of many people and is the most significant unit of democracy in the developed world. For many, being a citizen of a particular state, having absorbed the traditions and cultures, being subject to its laws and economic regulation and taking part in the polity, a sense of belonging is still very evident. This is a key point.

As an elite of politicians, businessmen and media executives literally fly over the great unwashed it is important to recognize that the nation, by now understood as both an antagonistic and unequal grouping as well as the potential for collective sovereignty, really is dead for many of those in positions of global power.

Nationalism will have to develop a new way of comprehending the world.

The answer to all of this will have to wait for the next post.

Why?

Because our Politicians are driven by the economy and not by what their people need to live fulfilled lives.

In the Corporate world Nations only exist in the contested space of conversation. In part two we will address this concept.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Tumblr
  • Email
  • Pocket
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Telegram
  • Skype
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...

All comments and contributions much appreciated

  • THE BEADY EYE ASK’S : ARE OUR LIVES GOING TO BE RULED BY ALGORITHMS. May 20, 2023
  • THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: IS THIS A NIVE QUESTION. IS IT IN NATO INTEREST TO ALLOW THE UK TO SUPPLY CRUISE MISSILES TO THE UKRAIN. May 12, 2023
  • THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WHAT IS A CORNATION? HAS IT ANY RELEVANCE IN TODAY’S WORLD WITHOUT HMS BRITIANNIA? May 9, 2023
  • THE BEADY EYE SAYS. WHEN IT COMES TO TECHNOLOGY THE JACK IS OUT OF THE BOX AND IT’S MAKING A PIGS MICKEY OUT OF THE WORLD WE LIVE IN. May 5, 2023
  • THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: IS OUR BIOLOGICAL REASONING BEING REPLACED BY DIGITAL REASONING. May 3, 2023

Archives

  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013

Talk to me.

bobdillon33@gmail.co… on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: WELCOME TO…
OG on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: WELCOME TO…
benmadigan on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. ONC…
Sidney Fritz on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: CAN…
Bill Blake on THE BEADY EYE SAYS. FOR GOD SA…

Blogroll

  • Discuss
  • Get Inspired
  • Get Polling
  • Get Support
  • Learn WordPress.com
  • Theme Showcase
  • WordPress Planet
  • WordPress.com News

7/7

Moulin de Labarde 46300
Gourdon Lot France
0565416842
Before 6pm.

My Blog; THE BEADY EYE.

My Blog; THE BEADY EYE.
bobdillon33@gmail.com

bobdillon33@gmail.com

Free Thinker.

View Full Profile →

Follow bobdillon33blog on WordPress.com

Blog Stats

  • 81,028 hits

Blogs I Follow

  • unnecessary news from earth
  • The Invictus Soul
  • WordPress.com News
  • WestDeltaGirl's Blog
  • The PPJ Gazette
Follow bobdillon33blog on WordPress.com
Follow bobdillon33blog on WordPress.com

The Beady Eye.

The Beady Eye.
Follow bobdillon33blog on WordPress.com

Blog at WordPress.com.

unnecessary news from earth

WITH MIGO

The Invictus Soul

The only thing worse than being 'blind' is having a Sight but no Vision

WordPress.com News

The latest news on WordPress.com and the WordPress community.

WestDeltaGirl's Blog

Sharing vegetarian and vegan recipes and food ideas

The PPJ Gazette

PPJ Gazette copyright ©

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • bobdillon33blog
    • Join 204 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • bobdillon33blog
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
%d bloggers like this: