As we spend trillions of dollars on overseas wars and 'homeland' security (doesn't that remind you of fatherland and motherland, and the ideologies which accompanied those terms?), 50 million people are now thought to be 'food insecure' in the US. Food insecure is a clinical term for not having enough to eat. The figure was 36 million only three years ago. Now over 15% of the whole country struggles to feed themselves. The latest report was released earlier this month, at a time when many countries are celebrating harvest festivals or Thanksgiving, and yet mainstream news coverage of these shocking figures has been brief (to say the least).
It can be hard for many of us to imagine how poor someone would have to be to suffer from food insecurity. After all, bananas, rice , beans etc are pretty cheap yet nutritious foods. Still, millions choose between eating and paying bills each week or each month.
The average family is probably going to waste more food than many people can hope to buy during the thanksgiving holiday. Mainstream politics seems to have shifted to the right over the last few years, and I'm sure some people will be quick to blame the unfortunate millions for their own predicament. I doubt they are going hungry through choice. Hunger is a powerful motivator; try it some time.
There are organizations out there who make a difference. Feeding America is one of the larger ones. Many smaller ones prepare free Thanksgiving meals for those who need them. There are those who care enough to help, but this is a problem which should also be addressed by our society as a whole. 1 in 6 of the population of the US is in deep trouble. Maybe they can't find a job (or a job which pays enough to live on), or they are suffering from illness and crippling medical bills (insured or not).
What is the point of fighting wars, ostensibly to protect our freedoms, when so many of us are struggling to live. What happened to our priorities?
At over $100,000 each, how much food would the funds for dozens of backscatter X-ray scanners in our airports buy? Even now, the super-rich have the gall to argue against the ending of temporary tax cuts for the highest earners, while billions flow to defence contractors to enable us fight questionable wars and provide 'military assistance' to oppressive regimes.
If we still have viable communities, maybe we could expand the development and use of community gardens across the country as part of a solution. It isn't too late for people to help fellow humans. I can't say the same for politicians.
Friday, November 19, 2010
Thursday, November 11, 2010
At the Going Down of the Sun
At the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month, in 1918, an armistice was signed which ended the "war to end all wars". Around (estimates vary) 20 million people died during World War One. A further 60 million would go on to die in World War Two.
Today is a day for remembrance, not celebration or glorification (or sales - only in America).
"War does not determine who is right - only who is left." Bertrand Russell
Today is a day for remembrance, not celebration or glorification (or sales - only in America).
"War does not determine who is right - only who is left." Bertrand Russell
Friday, October 15, 2010
The Cult
In a Berlin museum, a controversial exhibition entitled “Hitler and the German People” is on display. Well over seven decades later, Germany is still struggling to deal with the events which followed Adolf hitler’s rise to power. His popularity was due to a mix of the economic climate in Germany, his personality, and his propaganda machine. As we can see from recent world history, if people are poor or see themselves as victims of some kind, a leader can take full advantage of their vulnerability and coerce them into believing or doing whatever they are instructed to do.
In general, people are surprisingly malleable. I’ve previously mentioned some of the famous psychology experiments which demonstrated this fact. This episode of a psychology series presented by Philip Lombardo (one of the organizers of the Stanford prison experiment) discusses cult behaviour, and how it can be induced:
Early on in the video, a technique known as thought stopping is introduced. Subjects are taught to exclude independent thoughts in order to conform and submit to a leader. This and other more subtle techniques are used against ordinary people everyday. After watching the video, consider how politicians, media organizations, religious leaders and corporations use the same methods to try to steer our thoughts and opinions. How easily do we turn against other groups of people? How easily are we convinced that we need to buy a new product?
This topic is huge; it concerns the torture of enemy combatants, police brutality, racism, consumerism – the list goes on. Those in control who stand to benefit are well aware of the effects of their actions. If we are to become more than pawns on a giant chessboard, we have to recognize these attempts to control our behaviour. We need to learn to review information objectively. We need to find ways to work together instead of dividing into exclusive groups and looking for a convenient scapegoat. Until we are capable of this, we constantly risk another repeat of the darker chapters of human history.
In general, people are surprisingly malleable. I’ve previously mentioned some of the famous psychology experiments which demonstrated this fact. This episode of a psychology series presented by Philip Lombardo (one of the organizers of the Stanford prison experiment) discusses cult behaviour, and how it can be induced:
Early on in the video, a technique known as thought stopping is introduced. Subjects are taught to exclude independent thoughts in order to conform and submit to a leader. This and other more subtle techniques are used against ordinary people everyday. After watching the video, consider how politicians, media organizations, religious leaders and corporations use the same methods to try to steer our thoughts and opinions. How easily do we turn against other groups of people? How easily are we convinced that we need to buy a new product?
This topic is huge; it concerns the torture of enemy combatants, police brutality, racism, consumerism – the list goes on. Those in control who stand to benefit are well aware of the effects of their actions. If we are to become more than pawns on a giant chessboard, we have to recognize these attempts to control our behaviour. We need to learn to review information objectively. We need to find ways to work together instead of dividing into exclusive groups and looking for a convenient scapegoat. Until we are capable of this, we constantly risk another repeat of the darker chapters of human history.
Friday, October 8, 2010
The Entertainers
There have been several discussions regarding the upcoming Stewart / Colbert rallies in Washington, D.C.. Many of the high profile comments suggest that both Stewart and Colbert are comedians who have no place in politics, or even that they are making a mockery of ‘real’ politicians. Of course, most of those comments come from the US far-right. After all, these rallies are largely in response to Glenn Beck’s Tea Party rally, and he is on the extreme fringe of the far-right.
All three have their own shows on major cable TV networks. Beck works for the GOP-funding Fox News, while Stewart and Colbert have their shows on Comedy Central. Beck uses his own brand of confused logic, hysterics and hate mongering (while selling gold to his paranoid viewers), while Stewart and Colbert use satire to entertain an entirely different yet politically aware audience.
That’s enough about Beck. Let’s look at whether Stewart and Colbert should be holding rallies. Obviously, they are entitled to do so (as is anyone else with the funds and the audience – and the permits).
Should the words of a ‘comedian’ or celebrity be taken seriously? I would raise two points in response to that. Firstly, we often tend to generalize. It is a common method of simplifying decision making but it is inaccurate. The ability to make people laugh does not prohibit the ability to understand politics. In fact, it could be argued that comedians often have a better than average understanding of people. Secondly, many modern-day politicians are in positions of power simply because they have the ambition, influence and/or funding required. They tell people what they want to hear. The famous Kennedy / Nixon debate demonstrated the power of the performance. Kennedy worked his magic and it helped him to win the election. Kennedy had better policies and was a better human being than Nixon, but on that night it was showmanship which really counted.
We seem to be quite fickle when it comes to politics. The personality seems to trump the policies all to often. Should an actor get involved in politics? Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger are two prominent examples (although Reagan may be a poor example of a good politician). There have been several celebrity mayors across the country (Clint Eastwood was an extremely good and well-liked mayor of Carmel).
It’s clear that leaders and potential leaders should be evaluated on their beliefs and personality – on an individual basis. Their profession has little bearing on their suitability.
Why are some many people supporting and planning to attend these two rallies (which were organized at the request of Reddit’s users)? People are tired of the political games. They are tired of the influence of big business in politics and the politicians who support corporations over individuals, and complain about freedom while trying to take it away from other people, or complain about big government while enjoying the benefits of big government. They are looking for honesty and truth, if only for a few hours.
All three have their own shows on major cable TV networks. Beck works for the GOP-funding Fox News, while Stewart and Colbert have their shows on Comedy Central. Beck uses his own brand of confused logic, hysterics and hate mongering (while selling gold to his paranoid viewers), while Stewart and Colbert use satire to entertain an entirely different yet politically aware audience.
That’s enough about Beck. Let’s look at whether Stewart and Colbert should be holding rallies. Obviously, they are entitled to do so (as is anyone else with the funds and the audience – and the permits).
Should the words of a ‘comedian’ or celebrity be taken seriously? I would raise two points in response to that. Firstly, we often tend to generalize. It is a common method of simplifying decision making but it is inaccurate. The ability to make people laugh does not prohibit the ability to understand politics. In fact, it could be argued that comedians often have a better than average understanding of people. Secondly, many modern-day politicians are in positions of power simply because they have the ambition, influence and/or funding required. They tell people what they want to hear. The famous Kennedy / Nixon debate demonstrated the power of the performance. Kennedy worked his magic and it helped him to win the election. Kennedy had better policies and was a better human being than Nixon, but on that night it was showmanship which really counted.
We seem to be quite fickle when it comes to politics. The personality seems to trump the policies all to often. Should an actor get involved in politics? Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger are two prominent examples (although Reagan may be a poor example of a good politician). There have been several celebrity mayors across the country (Clint Eastwood was an extremely good and well-liked mayor of Carmel).
It’s clear that leaders and potential leaders should be evaluated on their beliefs and personality – on an individual basis. Their profession has little bearing on their suitability.
Why are some many people supporting and planning to attend these two rallies (which were organized at the request of Reddit’s users)? People are tired of the political games. They are tired of the influence of big business in politics and the politicians who support corporations over individuals, and complain about freedom while trying to take it away from other people, or complain about big government while enjoying the benefits of big government. They are looking for honesty and truth, if only for a few hours.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Disconnected
For decades, the rise of TV and our viewing habits have been the subject of many studies. Some were of course conducted by advertisers and broadcasters, but there has been a great deal of interest from psychologists who have been concerned at the impact of TV on our lives. Technological advances gave us more and more leisure time, but as TV gained popularity, we spent more time in front of it. Of course in moderation, TV retains the potential to enlighten us and enrich our lives, but we often watch bland programming for hours at a time, which erodes the time we have to spend on fulfilling hobbies and interests or with friends and family. We are so accepting of TV that in many cases our capacity for critical thought is diminished. TV as a distracting ‘easy option’ is probably also a factor.
We’ve lived through the supposed threat of 5th columnists in the form of communists and now, we are told, muslims / liberals / socialists (take your pick). What if the real 5th columnist is hiding in plain sight – in your living room?
Watch a few minutes of a movie classic to illustrate my point.
This summer, I spent two weeks without TV. Most of that time was spent without a phone of any kind or an internet connection. This probably sounds like a nightmare to some of you. To be honest, it did take a few days to get used to it, but I felt like I was really living. I took walks, met new people, and spent a lot more time outside. It is hard to deny that TV and our more modern gadgets isolate and distract us. They give us more excuses not to exercise. We risk becoming more divided, more easily manipulated and less physically involved with the world around us. By now, a whole generation has grown up with the internet.
Like TV, there are advantages. These new and evolving tools can make information more accessible, make communication easier or more affordable, and create new jobs and opportunities. However, we have to resist the glow of the screen and the allure of another 100 ‘friends’ you’ll never meet if we are to hold on to our humanity. Without strong communities, respect for our fellow Man and our health, we remain at the mercy of those who want our vote or our money.
Maybe next time you feel like checking your email, take a walk around the block instead (and leave the cell phone at home).
We’ve lived through the supposed threat of 5th columnists in the form of communists and now, we are told, muslims / liberals / socialists (take your pick). What if the real 5th columnist is hiding in plain sight – in your living room?
Watch a few minutes of a movie classic to illustrate my point.
This summer, I spent two weeks without TV. Most of that time was spent without a phone of any kind or an internet connection. This probably sounds like a nightmare to some of you. To be honest, it did take a few days to get used to it, but I felt like I was really living. I took walks, met new people, and spent a lot more time outside. It is hard to deny that TV and our more modern gadgets isolate and distract us. They give us more excuses not to exercise. We risk becoming more divided, more easily manipulated and less physically involved with the world around us. By now, a whole generation has grown up with the internet.
Like TV, there are advantages. These new and evolving tools can make information more accessible, make communication easier or more affordable, and create new jobs and opportunities. However, we have to resist the glow of the screen and the allure of another 100 ‘friends’ you’ll never meet if we are to hold on to our humanity. Without strong communities, respect for our fellow Man and our health, we remain at the mercy of those who want our vote or our money.
Maybe next time you feel like checking your email, take a walk around the block instead (and leave the cell phone at home).
Friday, September 10, 2010
A Matter of Faith
Religion has dominated the headlines recently, and I’m going to try to avoid the story, which I’m sure we are all tired of hearing about (I thought we left book burning in the 1930’s). I’m going to try to discuss religion as objectively as possible.
The belief in a god requires faith. To be a person of faith, by definition, requires a suspension of critical thinking. People don’t question the details of their chosen god. Faith requires acceptance of the basic premise. Religious faith brings several perceived benefits. As far as I can tell, the greatest benefit is a source of comfort. The higher power is deemed to love believers and offer some level of protection, and of course belief in an afterlife is a great source of comfort when dealing with loss or facing one’s mortality. On the flipside, the existence of a demonic force is used to explain the ‘evil’ actions of people. In essence, religion provides explanations for the unanswered questions of life, and alternatives to the harsh realities.
I am more familiar with Christianity than other religions, and so I have a basic understanding of the Bible. I can’t help but notice that many people have differing interpretations of the messages conveyed in the Bible. I’m sure that some of the more dedicated scholars could quote a passage to lend weight to almost any opinion. Some branches of Christianity seem to be divided into Old Testament and New Testament schools of thought. The former is often described as “fire and brimstone”, and is regarded as the harsher of the two. However, even with my minimal schooling on the subject, I do recall that one clearly demands that one should not kill, steal or worship false idols, while the other describes how the main character “turns the other cheek” in the face of hostility and has a particular dislike for money lenders. It seems to me that followers can be quite selective in their reading and indeed their definition of what it means to be a Christian.
To paraphrase a favorite character of mine, we want to believe. We want to have a convenient explanation for life’s hardest questions. Is it possible that the thirst for comfort and simplistic answers is open to abuse? If we want to believe, for example that our leaders do no wrong, and someone in authority makes a fitting statement, are we more likely to accept that without questioning? If a person has believed in a particular religion for his whole life, and someone questions the existence of a god by statements based on critical thinking, that person faces an attack on his or her whole belief system. It doesn’t matter if it makes sense, because everything he or she has believed in and used to makes sense of the world (and don’t forget that convenient comfort) would mean nothing if it was accepted as truth. Denial is a powerful force, and we see it all the time in politics. If the truth is too awful, we can simply tell ourselves that it isn’t true.
Where would we be without religion? What would a world of godless heathens do with themselves? I’m not sure of the answer to that. Clearly religion has been the basis for a great deal of slaughter over the centuries, but humans always seem to find a difference to divide them and give rise to hatred. I believe that a truly civilized society would evolve past such irrational hatred. Currently, we are predisposed to it, and politicians love how easily we are manipulated. The Stanford Prison Experiment and Stanley Milgram’s work demonstrates our capacity to carry out orders and cause suffering. We like to be controlled, especially when the controller allows us to indulge our dark side.
What if we could accept our presence here is fleeting. How many suicides would be prevented if we all knew that (to quote another character) “there ain’t no coming back”. There would be good and bad people, regardless of religion. I think that we don’t give ourselves much credit if we need a religion to form a moral code and know right from wrong. Without easy answers we would be forced to ponder those large, difficult questions, and maybe we wouldn’t be so (okay, I’ll say it) gullible when our leaders talk to us. Maybe we’d have one less excuse to fight, too.
The belief in a god requires faith. To be a person of faith, by definition, requires a suspension of critical thinking. People don’t question the details of their chosen god. Faith requires acceptance of the basic premise. Religious faith brings several perceived benefits. As far as I can tell, the greatest benefit is a source of comfort. The higher power is deemed to love believers and offer some level of protection, and of course belief in an afterlife is a great source of comfort when dealing with loss or facing one’s mortality. On the flipside, the existence of a demonic force is used to explain the ‘evil’ actions of people. In essence, religion provides explanations for the unanswered questions of life, and alternatives to the harsh realities.
I am more familiar with Christianity than other religions, and so I have a basic understanding of the Bible. I can’t help but notice that many people have differing interpretations of the messages conveyed in the Bible. I’m sure that some of the more dedicated scholars could quote a passage to lend weight to almost any opinion. Some branches of Christianity seem to be divided into Old Testament and New Testament schools of thought. The former is often described as “fire and brimstone”, and is regarded as the harsher of the two. However, even with my minimal schooling on the subject, I do recall that one clearly demands that one should not kill, steal or worship false idols, while the other describes how the main character “turns the other cheek” in the face of hostility and has a particular dislike for money lenders. It seems to me that followers can be quite selective in their reading and indeed their definition of what it means to be a Christian.
To paraphrase a favorite character of mine, we want to believe. We want to have a convenient explanation for life’s hardest questions. Is it possible that the thirst for comfort and simplistic answers is open to abuse? If we want to believe, for example that our leaders do no wrong, and someone in authority makes a fitting statement, are we more likely to accept that without questioning? If a person has believed in a particular religion for his whole life, and someone questions the existence of a god by statements based on critical thinking, that person faces an attack on his or her whole belief system. It doesn’t matter if it makes sense, because everything he or she has believed in and used to makes sense of the world (and don’t forget that convenient comfort) would mean nothing if it was accepted as truth. Denial is a powerful force, and we see it all the time in politics. If the truth is too awful, we can simply tell ourselves that it isn’t true.
Where would we be without religion? What would a world of godless heathens do with themselves? I’m not sure of the answer to that. Clearly religion has been the basis for a great deal of slaughter over the centuries, but humans always seem to find a difference to divide them and give rise to hatred. I believe that a truly civilized society would evolve past such irrational hatred. Currently, we are predisposed to it, and politicians love how easily we are manipulated. The Stanford Prison Experiment and Stanley Milgram’s work demonstrates our capacity to carry out orders and cause suffering. We like to be controlled, especially when the controller allows us to indulge our dark side.
What if we could accept our presence here is fleeting. How many suicides would be prevented if we all knew that (to quote another character) “there ain’t no coming back”. There would be good and bad people, regardless of religion. I think that we don’t give ourselves much credit if we need a religion to form a moral code and know right from wrong. Without easy answers we would be forced to ponder those large, difficult questions, and maybe we wouldn’t be so (okay, I’ll say it) gullible when our leaders talk to us. Maybe we’d have one less excuse to fight, too.
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Labor Day
This year, labor Day is going to be a strange one for a lot of people. The official unemployment rate stands at 9.6%, although some estimates put the real figure at more than 16.7%. That would be a minimum of 14 million people out of work - maybe over 20 million. Many of the jobs they've lost are not going to be replaced anytime soon. A jobless recovery is no recovery for those left behind.
For many at the top, especially bankers, business is returning to normal and the bonuses are flowing again. For those at the bottom, final demands and foreclosure letters are all they can expect. Back in 1911, a US anti-capitalist poster was produced, which clearly shows a Communist view of the system. Yet, at times like this, similar viewpoints are difficult to avoid.
More and more, it seems that we are on our own, just as people found themselves on their own after the Katrina disaster. Has globalization and outsourcing resulted in the obsolescence of many of the currently unemployed? If so, this reveals the ugly side of our system.
Happy Labor Day. Spare a thought for those who are struggling.
For many at the top, especially bankers, business is returning to normal and the bonuses are flowing again. For those at the bottom, final demands and foreclosure letters are all they can expect. Back in 1911, a US anti-capitalist poster was produced, which clearly shows a Communist view of the system. Yet, at times like this, similar viewpoints are difficult to avoid.
More and more, it seems that we are on our own, just as people found themselves on their own after the Katrina disaster. Has globalization and outsourcing resulted in the obsolescence of many of the currently unemployed? If so, this reveals the ugly side of our system.
Happy Labor Day. Spare a thought for those who are struggling.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
The American Dream
Since I didn't grow up in the US, I've often wondered exactly what the American Dream is. I have several ideas, based on my experiences here:
Owning a car
Owning a house
Freedom (along the lines of the Bill of Rights)
Owning a business
Having a family with 2.4 children
Or a combination of the above
It seems to be a difficult thing to define. It depends on who might be trying to sell you a product, and whatever it might be, it is probably being revised to suit our current financial situation. Maybe these days, the American Dream should be having a place to live and a job to support you. George Carlin once famously said that it was called the American Dream because "you have to be asleep to believe it".
So many of our products are sold to us on the basis of what they will tell others about us, or that we will achieve a certain milestone in life, and yet if we think about it, we can see that much of it means nothing. Sure, we can own a car and a house, but if they are not the biggest and best available (or at least better than our friends' or coworkers'), does it really mean that we have failed somehow? Doesn't it just mean that we paid more? We talk about a work/life balance (notice how the two are separate), but do we really think about how much of our earnings, or how many hours of our lives, goes to pay for the latest phone, the more expensive car, the 500sf of our house that we never use, or the credit card and mortgage interest?
Owning a car
Owning a house
Freedom (along the lines of the Bill of Rights)
Owning a business
Having a family with 2.4 children
Or a combination of the above
It seems to be a difficult thing to define. It depends on who might be trying to sell you a product, and whatever it might be, it is probably being revised to suit our current financial situation. Maybe these days, the American Dream should be having a place to live and a job to support you. George Carlin once famously said that it was called the American Dream because "you have to be asleep to believe it".
So many of our products are sold to us on the basis of what they will tell others about us, or that we will achieve a certain milestone in life, and yet if we think about it, we can see that much of it means nothing. Sure, we can own a car and a house, but if they are not the biggest and best available (or at least better than our friends' or coworkers'), does it really mean that we have failed somehow? Doesn't it just mean that we paid more? We talk about a work/life balance (notice how the two are separate), but do we really think about how much of our earnings, or how many hours of our lives, goes to pay for the latest phone, the more expensive car, the 500sf of our house that we never use, or the credit card and mortgage interest?
Friday, August 20, 2010
Class War
The term "classless society" is often found in communist or Utopian theories. Obviously, the idea is that everyone is truly equal where classes do not exist. In the UK, the classes can be traced back at least as far as feudalism. In the US republic, great efforts were made to erase the class system (at least in terms of the monarchy and hereditary peers). However, classes are almost unavoidable with our current capitalist system, with wealth determining one's status. Once again, an individual's class can be hereditary. Once again, the serfs or working poor are at the mercy of the so-called upper classes.
Over the last few years, we have seen a more sustained, unambiguous assault on the middle class (in the UK, this would be the working class people and the lower-middle class). Those people who could live in reasonable comfort, maybe own their own homes, drive a reliable car are the latest group to be targeted. We hear of a jobless recovery. Ask yourself who is doing the recovering, if 10% or the population is going to remain unemployed. Why are benefits and services for the poor and middle class always such a bone of contention, while tax cuts for the rich are a sacred cow? Taxes for the rich are at their lowest levels for around 60 years. What do the Taxed Enough Already party expect? Why, for that matter, is the biggest military budget in the world (bigger than the rest combined!) untouchable? Remember Ike's farewell address?
Should we, the working/lower/middle classes take some of the blame for our situation? In the US, we've spent money like its going out of fashion for decades, and now many of us are reaping the whirlwind. A few years ago, one man decided to try to lift the blinkers on our culture of consumption:
Reverend Billy and the Church of Stop Shopping tried their best to make people think before they buy. We are under constant assault by advertisers to keep up with our neighbors, to desire new gadgets, to be afraid or inadequate. It is the job of corporations to make a profit above all else. If it leads to destruction of lives or environmental damage, but still makes a profit after any lawsuits, then everything is okay. Their mission is to separate you from your money. That is the system we have built. Only corporations are bailed out. Only corporations can buy politicians.
Over the last few years, we have seen a more sustained, unambiguous assault on the middle class (in the UK, this would be the working class people and the lower-middle class). Those people who could live in reasonable comfort, maybe own their own homes, drive a reliable car are the latest group to be targeted. We hear of a jobless recovery. Ask yourself who is doing the recovering, if 10% or the population is going to remain unemployed. Why are benefits and services for the poor and middle class always such a bone of contention, while tax cuts for the rich are a sacred cow? Taxes for the rich are at their lowest levels for around 60 years. What do the Taxed Enough Already party expect? Why, for that matter, is the biggest military budget in the world (bigger than the rest combined!) untouchable? Remember Ike's farewell address?
Should we, the working/lower/middle classes take some of the blame for our situation? In the US, we've spent money like its going out of fashion for decades, and now many of us are reaping the whirlwind. A few years ago, one man decided to try to lift the blinkers on our culture of consumption:
Reverend Billy and the Church of Stop Shopping tried their best to make people think before they buy. We are under constant assault by advertisers to keep up with our neighbors, to desire new gadgets, to be afraid or inadequate. It is the job of corporations to make a profit above all else. If it leads to destruction of lives or environmental damage, but still makes a profit after any lawsuits, then everything is okay. Their mission is to separate you from your money. That is the system we have built. Only corporations are bailed out. Only corporations can buy politicians.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
The Other War
The finaincial crisis has caused several states to consider steps towards the legalization of marijuana, if only as a source of new tax income. The parallels with alcohol prohibition are obvious. What would this country be like if marijuana was legalized?
Thursday, July 22, 2010
The Great Game
For the last few days, the release of the Libyan convicted of the bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie has made the headlines again. This time, BP (the company we love to hate) is implicated in the early release. Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi was released, we were told, due to his terminal illness. Reports have since been made that he will live for much longer that previously expected. We hear questions surrounding his release and his health, but not his guilt.
A UN observer at the trial is not convinced, and in the years since the bombing, several alternative theories have emerged, a number of which involved the CIA, DEA and drug smuggling. One of the best documentaries on the bombing is The Maltese Double Cross, from 1994:
A UN observer at the trial is not convinced, and in the years since the bombing, several alternative theories have emerged, a number of which involved the CIA, DEA and drug smuggling. One of the best documentaries on the bombing is The Maltese Double Cross, from 1994:
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Death In The Gulf
As it temporarily fades from the news, the Deepwater Horizon well continues to allow crude oil to gush into the ocean. People living on the coast are already starting to experience health problems due to exposure to the toxic chemicals released from the oil, or byproducts of burning the oil, or of course the dispersant, Corexit. However, the real devastation is occuring out at sea, where BP is attempting to restrict access. This footage was recorded a few days ago:
We hear people talk about the cost of this disaster, but have you noticed that we always use dollar amounts. No mention is made of the lives lost in the fire, or the lives destroyed along the coast, or the devastation to marine life. What will it take to force us to consider the true cost of environmental disaster - and avoid the next one?
We hear people talk about the cost of this disaster, but have you noticed that we always use dollar amounts. No mention is made of the lives lost in the fire, or the lives destroyed along the coast, or the devastation to marine life. What will it take to force us to consider the true cost of environmental disaster - and avoid the next one?
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
After Oil
We are living through tough times. We have heard about Peak Oil, and we are witnesses to the environmental devastation which results from fossil fuel use and extraction. As you can see here, oil is currently used in a wide range of products on which we depend.
There are people who are already thinking of the future - a future with less oil. The following short documentary follows one woman's investigation into alternative farming methods. She approaches a subject that I am particularly passionate about - permaculture.
The Wikipedia entry describes the term quite well: "Permaculture is an approach to designing human settlements and agricultural systems that mimic the relationships found in natural ecologies."
We like to believe that we accomodate Nature in some way, and that we enjoy it from time to time, but the truth is that we are part of Nature (whether we like it or not) and when we pollute or destroy, we are doing much more than making unpleasant views. Sustainable, efficient living can only come from working with Nature. Working against it doesn't seem to have taken us very far. As William Wordsworth once wrote, "Come forth into the light of things, let Nature be your teacher."
There are people who are already thinking of the future - a future with less oil. The following short documentary follows one woman's investigation into alternative farming methods. She approaches a subject that I am particularly passionate about - permaculture.
The Wikipedia entry describes the term quite well: "Permaculture is an approach to designing human settlements and agricultural systems that mimic the relationships found in natural ecologies."
We like to believe that we accomodate Nature in some way, and that we enjoy it from time to time, but the truth is that we are part of Nature (whether we like it or not) and when we pollute or destroy, we are doing much more than making unpleasant views. Sustainable, efficient living can only come from working with Nature. Working against it doesn't seem to have taken us very far. As William Wordsworth once wrote, "Come forth into the light of things, let Nature be your teacher."
Thursday, June 10, 2010
The Long War
The war in Afghanistan has now raged for longer than the war in Vietnam (after the Gulf of Tonkin resolution). Vietnam is widely acknowledged as the first "television war", in that TV cameras allowed combat footage to be shown on the evening news. Indeed, TV news played a large part in the changing of public opinion against the war. 58000 US personnel died in that war, and by some estimates, over 3 million civilians died. The NVA rolled into Saigon and communist expansion did not occur as projected by the US government.
Around four decades later, the war in Afghanistan continues, and shows no sign of stopping anytime soon. Later this year, politicians will vote to increase funding for the war. Over 1700 coalition deaths have occurred since the war began. Civilian casualties are unknown at this point, but it is clear that the rate is accelerating with the increase in bombings and drone strikes. Is the lower death toll one reason why the resistance to the war in the US is less widespread? Or are modern wars more professionally manged, in terms of censorship and propaganda?
Here is a documentary in which John Pilger explores those themes in 1983:
Great efforts have been made to avoid direct comparisons to the Vietnam war, and yet the similarities are becoming more and more apparent. Will we continue this long war? Can we afford to? Will public opinion turn against the war, or are we bored or immune to the stories of deaths now?
Around four decades later, the war in Afghanistan continues, and shows no sign of stopping anytime soon. Later this year, politicians will vote to increase funding for the war. Over 1700 coalition deaths have occurred since the war began. Civilian casualties are unknown at this point, but it is clear that the rate is accelerating with the increase in bombings and drone strikes. Is the lower death toll one reason why the resistance to the war in the US is less widespread? Or are modern wars more professionally manged, in terms of censorship and propaganda?
Here is a documentary in which John Pilger explores those themes in 1983:
Great efforts have been made to avoid direct comparisons to the Vietnam war, and yet the similarities are becoming more and more apparent. Will we continue this long war? Can we afford to? Will public opinion turn against the war, or are we bored or immune to the stories of deaths now?
Friday, May 28, 2010
Yes
Our possessions define who we are. That is what the advertisers want you to think and to a certain extent it is true. I've seen two car commercials which ridicule people who use excuses to buy luxury items and then they proceed to sell their new luxury item! Are we so asleep that we fall for that?! How did we get to this point? Back in the 1950's, the US had emerged from World War Two as the only major power to be virtually unscathed. It had spent the war years using it's huge manufacturing capacity to outproduce the axis powers, and now it was time to embrace consumption. In the 1950's, marketing was relatively simple. There was a prevailing attitude of conformity, and people were hungry for consumer goods in this time of prosperity. As the 1960's arrived, young people in particular wanted to express their individuality, and for a while, marketing became a much tougher challenge. Eventually, though, it became clear that the consumer could simply buy their individuality! Pretty soon, everything was for sale.
The cigarettes you smoked and the car you drove supposedly told everyone what kind of a person you were, based on the image portrayed in advertising. Since then, advertisers have become masters of "creating the need", and we have become consumers, first and formost. In our search for individuality, we have skipped introspection and bought our images off the shelf. Our pile of products usually fails to fill the void, and some people even end up in a cycle of depression and spending.
When we think of consumerism, we probably think of gadgets and cars, but we also spend millions of dollars each year trying to keep up with the neighbours. Hopefully these tough times will give us an opportunity to reflect on what really matters to us, and maybe we won't be so easily persuaded by the advertisers. For example, every year we fertilize our lawns, irrigate with sprinklers, spray the weeds and bugs, and of course cut the grass every week - all so that we can have the perfect lawn. The commercials help to give us something to aspire to. Let's break that down. Our fertilizer makes the grass grow faster, so we have to trim more often (with a shiny new ride-on mower, no doubt). The pesticides often kill more than the aphids, and runoff from pesticides and fertilizers poison rivers and probably our own drinking water. All that can be expensive, too. Is there an alternative? There sure is!
If we can break the advertising spell while money is scarce, maybe we can begin to really think for ourselves again.
The cigarettes you smoked and the car you drove supposedly told everyone what kind of a person you were, based on the image portrayed in advertising. Since then, advertisers have become masters of "creating the need", and we have become consumers, first and formost. In our search for individuality, we have skipped introspection and bought our images off the shelf. Our pile of products usually fails to fill the void, and some people even end up in a cycle of depression and spending.
When we think of consumerism, we probably think of gadgets and cars, but we also spend millions of dollars each year trying to keep up with the neighbours. Hopefully these tough times will give us an opportunity to reflect on what really matters to us, and maybe we won't be so easily persuaded by the advertisers. For example, every year we fertilize our lawns, irrigate with sprinklers, spray the weeds and bugs, and of course cut the grass every week - all so that we can have the perfect lawn. The commercials help to give us something to aspire to. Let's break that down. Our fertilizer makes the grass grow faster, so we have to trim more often (with a shiny new ride-on mower, no doubt). The pesticides often kill more than the aphids, and runoff from pesticides and fertilizers poison rivers and probably our own drinking water. All that can be expensive, too. Is there an alternative? There sure is!
If we can break the advertising spell while money is scarce, maybe we can begin to really think for ourselves again.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
The Big One
I thought I would run out of things to write about the latest oil disaster, but one recent report suggested that the volume of oil released is now equal to an Exxon Valdez spill every 3.5 days. Many think that the original leak has expanded as the damaged infrastructure has worn away. This problem is far from under control. A calamity is unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico. Some recent images of the oil reaching the Louisiana costline can be found here.
A disaster of this size is unparalleled. The environmental damage will last for decades, and will be catastrophic for marine life (and the fishing and tourism industries).
The Gulf of Mexico was already polluted. A similar oil well blowout occured in 1979, and pollution from sewage and fertilizer run-off created a dead zone in the region of 8000 square miles. This source states that annual pollution loadings can be:
* over 800,000 tons of nitrogen
* over 200,000 tons of phosphorus
* 100 million tons of dredged sediments
* over 2,000 tons of toxic substances from coastal industrial and municipal sites (four of the top five states in the U.S. in total surface discharge of toxic chemicals are Gulf States - Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas)
* approximately 1,000 tons of pesticides from coastal agriculture
* over 6,000 tons of produced waters from near-shore oil and gas platforms
source
We are killing the oceans, or at least big business is doing it on our behalf. They will continue to do so until we react strongly enough to this kind of news. Sure, you can stay away from BP gas stations, but where will you go? The Chevron next door?
Profit is everything to a corporation. While there is profit in pollution, it will continue.
A disaster of this size is unparalleled. The environmental damage will last for decades, and will be catastrophic for marine life (and the fishing and tourism industries).
The Gulf of Mexico was already polluted. A similar oil well blowout occured in 1979, and pollution from sewage and fertilizer run-off created a dead zone in the region of 8000 square miles. This source states that annual pollution loadings can be:
* over 800,000 tons of nitrogen
* over 200,000 tons of phosphorus
* 100 million tons of dredged sediments
* over 2,000 tons of toxic substances from coastal industrial and municipal sites (four of the top five states in the U.S. in total surface discharge of toxic chemicals are Gulf States - Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas)
* approximately 1,000 tons of pesticides from coastal agriculture
* over 6,000 tons of produced waters from near-shore oil and gas platforms
source
We are killing the oceans, or at least big business is doing it on our behalf. They will continue to do so until we react strongly enough to this kind of news. Sure, you can stay away from BP gas stations, but where will you go? The Chevron next door?
Profit is everything to a corporation. While there is profit in pollution, it will continue.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
The Cost Of Progress - Part 2
By now you've probably heard that the surface area of the "spill" has grown rapidly over the last few days. This disaster will be a headline grabber for the days and probably weeks to come, as it should be. A year from now, most of us will have forgotten about it, or at least consider it a past event.
In 1989, 11 million gallons of crude oil spilled when the Exxon Valdez ran aground. Despite clean-up efforts, the contamination has continued to prolong the disaster over the following years. Similarly, the legal battle continues to this day.
Of course, Exxon and BP are not the only oil companies tied to pollution disasters. Chevron partnered with an Ecuadorian oil company to tap the oil reserves of Ecuador. The scale of pollution left behind is thought to be anywhere between 10 and 30 times worse than the Exxon Valdez spill, and it appears to have been deliberate.
Watch CBS News Videos Online
Toxic oil wastes were dumped in 900 open, unlined pits which contaminated land and groundwater, and have been linked with many deaths and illnesses. The lawsuit was first filed 17 years ago and, as with the Exxon Valdez case, continues to this day.
With an underfunded Superfund program, the EPA struggles to clean up dangerous pollution events in the US. Superfund sites are located in dozens of major cities and many other locations. Almost all of us have "acceptable levels" of dangerous chemical pollutants in our tapwater. We desperately need to have a better set of tools to deal with polluters in this country, and for US companies operating overseas.
Take a look at my latest designs - Cost Of Crude and Growth For The Sake Of Growth
In 1989, 11 million gallons of crude oil spilled when the Exxon Valdez ran aground. Despite clean-up efforts, the contamination has continued to prolong the disaster over the following years. Similarly, the legal battle continues to this day.
Of course, Exxon and BP are not the only oil companies tied to pollution disasters. Chevron partnered with an Ecuadorian oil company to tap the oil reserves of Ecuador. The scale of pollution left behind is thought to be anywhere between 10 and 30 times worse than the Exxon Valdez spill, and it appears to have been deliberate.
Watch CBS News Videos Online
Toxic oil wastes were dumped in 900 open, unlined pits which contaminated land and groundwater, and have been linked with many deaths and illnesses. The lawsuit was first filed 17 years ago and, as with the Exxon Valdez case, continues to this day.
With an underfunded Superfund program, the EPA struggles to clean up dangerous pollution events in the US. Superfund sites are located in dozens of major cities and many other locations. Almost all of us have "acceptable levels" of dangerous chemical pollutants in our tapwater. We desperately need to have a better set of tools to deal with polluters in this country, and for US companies operating overseas.
Take a look at my latest designs - Cost Of Crude and Growth For The Sake Of Growth
Monday, May 3, 2010
The Cost of Progress
As I type, up to 25000 barrels of oil per day are gushing into the Gulf Of Mexico. The explosion which destroyed the Deepwater Horizon oil platform also claimed 11 lives. Already we are looking for someone to blame as it becomes clear that the flood of oil from the sea floor is proving difficult to stop, and that contingency plans for a spill were inadequate or non-existent. At this point, it will probably turn out to be the worst oil disaster in US history since the volume of oil is not limited to the contents of an oil tanker.
Last week, the main proposal was to burn off the oil. Not surprisingly, this has had little effect. Even if it had, the fire would have produced an airborne cloud of toxins while the most dense chemicals would have dropped to the sea floor. You can read about in-situ burning here. The best clean up technique appears to be rapid containment and removal, but this has not happened.
What could have caused this catastrophe? This is central to the topic of blame. Obama sent SWAT teams to inspect similar rigs, suggesting to the public that terrorism could have been suspected. However, industry insiders and educated observers suspect a more logical cause.
"The problem is that when you drill into these formations, and then try to inject cement into the hole/gaps to prevent leakage, the curing process for that creates heat. That heat can, if not controlled, cause the gas to escape the frozen crystals. If a lot of gas is released all at once, as could happen during the cement/curing process, it can cause a blowout where the cementing is occurring, or force gas and/or oil up the pipeline to the drilling rig on the surface."
Our friends at Halliburton were involved in the construction of the well. There is an article here which covers their role. Halliburton is a "world leader" in cementing well heads.
"Halliburton performed a variety of services on the rig, including cementing, and had four employees stationed on the rig at the time of the accident. Halliburton's employees returned to shore safely, due, in part, to the brave rescue efforts by the U.S. Coast Guard and other organizations.
Halliburton had completed the cementing of the final production casing string in accordance with the well design approximately 20 hours prior to the incident. The cement slurry design was consistent with that utilized in other similar applications."
In 2007, the U.S. Minerals Management Service noted that over 14 years, around half (39) of the well blowouts in the area were due to cementing problems. Halliburton's cementing was blamed for an Australian blowout last year (the well leaked oil for 10 weeks).
Interestingly, Halliburton announced that it would acquire an oil and gas well fire control company less that a month ago. At the very least, this is disaster capitalism at it's finest.
So, who is to blame? It certainly looks like Halliburton had a part to play. The BBC asked a similar question here, where a point was made which most of us like to ignore. Many corporations operate with little concern for anything other than profit. We see that all the time. Would they continue to take such risks if the potential profits declined? In other words, if we consumed less, we would see fewer disasters. We have to accept at least a small portion of the blame.
You may remember the documentary, Who Killed The Electric Car. The answer to the question posed in the film explores similar issues. Real change has to come from the top and the bottom.
Last week, the main proposal was to burn off the oil. Not surprisingly, this has had little effect. Even if it had, the fire would have produced an airborne cloud of toxins while the most dense chemicals would have dropped to the sea floor. You can read about in-situ burning here. The best clean up technique appears to be rapid containment and removal, but this has not happened.
What could have caused this catastrophe? This is central to the topic of blame. Obama sent SWAT teams to inspect similar rigs, suggesting to the public that terrorism could have been suspected. However, industry insiders and educated observers suspect a more logical cause.
"The problem is that when you drill into these formations, and then try to inject cement into the hole/gaps to prevent leakage, the curing process for that creates heat. That heat can, if not controlled, cause the gas to escape the frozen crystals. If a lot of gas is released all at once, as could happen during the cement/curing process, it can cause a blowout where the cementing is occurring, or force gas and/or oil up the pipeline to the drilling rig on the surface."
Our friends at Halliburton were involved in the construction of the well. There is an article here which covers their role. Halliburton is a "world leader" in cementing well heads.
"Halliburton performed a variety of services on the rig, including cementing, and had four employees stationed on the rig at the time of the accident. Halliburton's employees returned to shore safely, due, in part, to the brave rescue efforts by the U.S. Coast Guard and other organizations.
Halliburton had completed the cementing of the final production casing string in accordance with the well design approximately 20 hours prior to the incident. The cement slurry design was consistent with that utilized in other similar applications."
In 2007, the U.S. Minerals Management Service noted that over 14 years, around half (39) of the well blowouts in the area were due to cementing problems. Halliburton's cementing was blamed for an Australian blowout last year (the well leaked oil for 10 weeks).
Interestingly, Halliburton announced that it would acquire an oil and gas well fire control company less that a month ago. At the very least, this is disaster capitalism at it's finest.
So, who is to blame? It certainly looks like Halliburton had a part to play. The BBC asked a similar question here, where a point was made which most of us like to ignore. Many corporations operate with little concern for anything other than profit. We see that all the time. Would they continue to take such risks if the potential profits declined? In other words, if we consumed less, we would see fewer disasters. We have to accept at least a small portion of the blame.
You may remember the documentary, Who Killed The Electric Car. The answer to the question posed in the film explores similar issues. Real change has to come from the top and the bottom.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
The End
Albert Einstein once said "The pioneers of a warless world are the youth who refuse military service."
During World War One, there were many incidences of troops of opposing sides who had no urge to fight eachother. Neither side wanted to kill or risk being killed and so they settled into a sort of truce. This often lasted until senior officers learned of the situation and forced the troops to conduct raids and larger assaults. The famous "Christmas Truce" was an extreme example, where the opposing sides played football (soccer) - again, until senior officers decided it was wrong.
Compare those events with the footage we see of modern war. The latest images and comments of US combatants suggest the enemy has been dehumanised. How does this happen?
Modern society must have a part to play. By design, so must military training.
I can't help thinking that we can do better that this. Our ability to wage war has rapidly evolved, and yet our ability to prevent war seems to have been left behind. What is democracy?
During World War One, there were many incidences of troops of opposing sides who had no urge to fight eachother. Neither side wanted to kill or risk being killed and so they settled into a sort of truce. This often lasted until senior officers learned of the situation and forced the troops to conduct raids and larger assaults. The famous "Christmas Truce" was an extreme example, where the opposing sides played football (soccer) - again, until senior officers decided it was wrong.
Compare those events with the footage we see of modern war. The latest images and comments of US combatants suggest the enemy has been dehumanised. How does this happen?
Modern society must have a part to play. By design, so must military training.
I can't help thinking that we can do better that this. Our ability to wage war has rapidly evolved, and yet our ability to prevent war seems to have been left behind. What is democracy?
Not In My Backyard
Have you ever heard of the Cuyahoga River? As recently as 40 years ago, it was not unheard of to see it on fire. The depth of pollution on the surface of the water was often several inches thick. You can read more about that here. Since then, the EPA has worked to clean up disasters such as that one, from mines to chemical dumps to DoD sites, but in recent years, the EPA has suffered from funding cuts (thank Bush for that one), and it struggles to fight major polluters. That problem can only get worse as more executives from those corporations find their way into the government. This is not the point I am trying to make today.
I read an article about the EPA which was written on Earth Day (I was attempting a digital detox last week) which stated that today's problems are invisible (greenhouse gases etc) becuase the EPA has cleaned up the visible pollution. While the burning rivers and toxic sludge of the 70's have been dealt with, pollution has not gone away. Ask the people of Libby, Picher or Anniston.
Earlier this year, news broke of a new floating garbage patch - this time in the Atlantic Ocean. Read the National Geographic article here. There are between 500,000 and 1,900,000 pieces of plastic trash in each square mile of the garbage patch. Can you imagine what we've done? You don't have to. This BBC video shows the scale of the problem on a Hawaiian beach. A new harvest of plastic debris washes up each day. Not only that, but the beach itself is becoming plastic!
I'm not sure what kind of a warning sign we need to see before we do something. If the average suburb looked like that beach, would we change the way we live? Should we use disposable products at all?
I read an article about the EPA which was written on Earth Day (I was attempting a digital detox last week) which stated that today's problems are invisible (greenhouse gases etc) becuase the EPA has cleaned up the visible pollution. While the burning rivers and toxic sludge of the 70's have been dealt with, pollution has not gone away. Ask the people of Libby, Picher or Anniston.
Earlier this year, news broke of a new floating garbage patch - this time in the Atlantic Ocean. Read the National Geographic article here. There are between 500,000 and 1,900,000 pieces of plastic trash in each square mile of the garbage patch. Can you imagine what we've done? You don't have to. This BBC video shows the scale of the problem on a Hawaiian beach. A new harvest of plastic debris washes up each day. Not only that, but the beach itself is becoming plastic!
I'm not sure what kind of a warning sign we need to see before we do something. If the average suburb looked like that beach, would we change the way we live? Should we use disposable products at all?
Monday, April 12, 2010
Unamerican
I've heard some pretty shocking things in my time. How about “you’re a traitor for questioning consumption”? This didn't happen to me, but it did happen to Annie Leonard (remember the Story of Stuff?). It was all because she spoke out against what she thought was an outdated, fundamentally flawed system. I wonder if the kind of person who would make a comment like that actually understands the concept and the problems we are facing as a result (and more importantly, what it means to be free). Have you ever read the Bill of Rights? I have - every word.
I know that we are living in a time where nothing can be taken for granted. Many people choose not to believe what they hear on the news. I can understand that. I know I do the same, but I notice that many people are very selective in their beliefs. It is almost as if they select their truths to fit into their existing belief system.
Over the last few years, we've seen some good examples, such as:
Climate change (or global warming) is a big fraud
Creationism is more valid than natural selection (or Darwinism)
We can go back a few decades, and look at Lee Harvey Oswald, the Watergate incident or any number of events through our recent history and see that there are always people who will deny facts, twist them, or claim that it was in our best interests if the facts cannot be denied.
Back to our current environmental crisis for a moment, I know there are many who see climate change as another excuse to separate us from our hard earned money. I agree, in that there are many who intend to use the crisis to maximise profits. As usual, it is those corporations and politicians at the top of the food chain who are the perpetrators. Before I explain that, I want to make it very clear that it does not automatically mean that the whole crisis is a fraud. It means that it is being hijacked for profit.
Annie describes the cap and trade system in her latest film:
When we suggest that we have damaged our planet, or that a war or a policy is wrong (ethically or legally), that suggestion shakes the belief systems of some people. Shocking truths are often unpleasant, but we have to accept them if logic dictates that it is most likely true. We cannot hope to continue to prosper and evolve if we cling to outdated beliefs. Similarly, we canoot resort immediately to threats and violence against those with differing opinions or lifestles. That is a great way to start a war. Have you noticed any correlations between our culture and our foreign policy recently?
I know that we are living in a time where nothing can be taken for granted. Many people choose not to believe what they hear on the news. I can understand that. I know I do the same, but I notice that many people are very selective in their beliefs. It is almost as if they select their truths to fit into their existing belief system.
Over the last few years, we've seen some good examples, such as:
Climate change (or global warming) is a big fraud
Creationism is more valid than natural selection (or Darwinism)
We can go back a few decades, and look at Lee Harvey Oswald, the Watergate incident or any number of events through our recent history and see that there are always people who will deny facts, twist them, or claim that it was in our best interests if the facts cannot be denied.
Back to our current environmental crisis for a moment, I know there are many who see climate change as another excuse to separate us from our hard earned money. I agree, in that there are many who intend to use the crisis to maximise profits. As usual, it is those corporations and politicians at the top of the food chain who are the perpetrators. Before I explain that, I want to make it very clear that it does not automatically mean that the whole crisis is a fraud. It means that it is being hijacked for profit.
Annie describes the cap and trade system in her latest film:
When we suggest that we have damaged our planet, or that a war or a policy is wrong (ethically or legally), that suggestion shakes the belief systems of some people. Shocking truths are often unpleasant, but we have to accept them if logic dictates that it is most likely true. We cannot hope to continue to prosper and evolve if we cling to outdated beliefs. Similarly, we canoot resort immediately to threats and violence against those with differing opinions or lifestles. That is a great way to start a war. Have you noticed any correlations between our culture and our foreign policy recently?
Thursday, April 1, 2010
The Other War
The War on Drugs has raged in the US for decades. A real war, with gun battles and atrocities is spiralling out of control in Mexico. Just one city, Cuidad, has seen 5000 murders in three years. In an interview with NPR, Charles Bowden gave his account of the problem:
"The drug industry is the future," he says. "The problem is you won't live long, but you can't live very long ... if you work in those factories because the wages are essentially slave wages."
The poverty which contributed to the catastrophe cannot be ignored. Bowden blames the North American Free Trade Agreement, other U.S. policies and the election in 2006 of Mexican President Felipe Calderon, who decided to meet the drug industry head-on.
The current state of the War on Drugs in the US is examined in this recent film (American Drug War, 2007):
The film attempts to cover a waide range of issues, including individual freedoms, private prisons, CIA drug operations, whistleblowers and the huge, increasing budgets of agencies involved in the fight.
Has the War on Drugs become part of the problem? And the War on Terror?
"The drug industry is the future," he says. "The problem is you won't live long, but you can't live very long ... if you work in those factories because the wages are essentially slave wages."
The poverty which contributed to the catastrophe cannot be ignored. Bowden blames the North American Free Trade Agreement, other U.S. policies and the election in 2006 of Mexican President Felipe Calderon, who decided to meet the drug industry head-on.
The current state of the War on Drugs in the US is examined in this recent film (American Drug War, 2007):
The film attempts to cover a waide range of issues, including individual freedoms, private prisons, CIA drug operations, whistleblowers and the huge, increasing budgets of agencies involved in the fight.
Has the War on Drugs become part of the problem? And the War on Terror?
Thursday, March 11, 2010
The Cradle to Cradle Concept - Waste=Food
I have attacked conspicuous consumerism several times in the recent past. Recently, I found a potential solution to a problem which threatens our future. Cradle to Cradle or C2C, is a concept based on life cycles found in nature (where there are no landfills). It focuses on using non-toxic and truely reusable materials (or truely biodegradable) to produce useful products while minimising pollution and maximising efficiency and renewable energy use. We would no longer work against nature. This film provides a very good explanation of the concept:
C2C will require some large changes, but it will address or problems of pollution, waste of natural resources, and waste storage. It is truely sustainable. One advantage will appeal to corporations and shareholders - it is possible to reduce overall costs.
For details of Cradle to Cradle certification, click here.
Many of my designs feature themes of consumerism and environmental concerns, but I'll leave you with this one today. I think it summarizes the thinking behind C2C - food for thought.
Don't forget, you can be notified of my posts (and a few others) on twitter.
C2C will require some large changes, but it will address or problems of pollution, waste of natural resources, and waste storage. It is truely sustainable. One advantage will appeal to corporations and shareholders - it is possible to reduce overall costs.
For details of Cradle to Cradle certification, click here.
Many of my designs feature themes of consumerism and environmental concerns, but I'll leave you with this one today. I think it summarizes the thinking behind C2C - food for thought.
Don't forget, you can be notified of my posts (and a few others) on twitter.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Nation Building?
We hear a lot about the term "nation building" when Iraq and Afghanistan are discussed. Many countries have fallen under the influence of the US at some point, and Latin America contains many examples. Latin American countries are currently working to achieve independence from the US by organizing and working together. Do those countries dislike the US simply because of ideological differences? We need only look at the interactions of the last few decades...
Cuba, Guatemala, Chile, El Salvador, Grenada, Nicaragua... the list goes on. Were we just fighting communism?
Cuba, Guatemala, Chile, El Salvador, Grenada, Nicaragua... the list goes on. Were we just fighting communism?
Friday, March 5, 2010
Are You On The Freedom Train?
What is the Freedom Train? I'll let Abe Osheroff describe it for you:
Abe was a lifelong social activist. Here is his last public appearance at the age of 92:
This isn't the post I'd planned to make today, but I think that sometimes inspiration is as important as the truth. I'll save my facts for another post. See you on the Freedom train.
Abe was a lifelong social activist. Here is his last public appearance at the age of 92:
This isn't the post I'd planned to make today, but I think that sometimes inspiration is as important as the truth. I'll save my facts for another post. See you on the Freedom train.
Monday, March 1, 2010
The Bitter Truth
There is a poison in most of our food. We don't think of it as a poison, but it is. That poison is fructose (and of course HFCS). It helps to make us obese, and damages our organs. It is in most US food because it is very sweet and very cheap. It actually metabolises as fat! This presentation explains the bitter truth:
In it, Robert H. Lustig, MD, UCSF Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology provides details of the problem facing us. If you don't have 90 minutes (and I recommend you find the time), at least watch the summary during the last 5 minutes.
The toxic effects of artificial sweeteners are another subject, and I have covered that topic in the past. I think it is much more beneficial to learn to avoid heavily processed foods - especially those with fructose. Stay away from soft drinks (see the coca cola conspiracy mentioned in the video). I know our portion sizes are too big, and we don't practice enough restraint or self control when it comes to food. I think there are many factors which lead to obesity.
A balanced, high fiber diet which is low in processed foods (and added salt, fat and fructose), and plenty of exercise, is your best option for a healthy life. Don't take my word for it - watch the presentation and decide for yourself!
In it, Robert H. Lustig, MD, UCSF Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology provides details of the problem facing us. If you don't have 90 minutes (and I recommend you find the time), at least watch the summary during the last 5 minutes.
The toxic effects of artificial sweeteners are another subject, and I have covered that topic in the past. I think it is much more beneficial to learn to avoid heavily processed foods - especially those with fructose. Stay away from soft drinks (see the coca cola conspiracy mentioned in the video). I know our portion sizes are too big, and we don't practice enough restraint or self control when it comes to food. I think there are many factors which lead to obesity.
A balanced, high fiber diet which is low in processed foods (and added salt, fat and fructose), and plenty of exercise, is your best option for a healthy life. Don't take my word for it - watch the presentation and decide for yourself!
Monday, February 22, 2010
Just Because You're Paranoid
You have almost certainly heard about the reaction to the latest Supreme Court decision relating to the infuence of corporations. In a recent poll, around 80% of Americans (from both sides of the two-part divide) opposed the decision. When you listen to what Bill Moyers has to say about the current state of affairs, remember that this is not some alarmist ratings-grabber.
The Italian dictator, Benito Mussolini, once said that "fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power".
Unlimited lobbying power for those with unlimited funds means that the interests of the private citizen will no longer be considered (if we assume that has not been the case until now). I suppose some would argue that this is an extension of the so-called free market, or laissez-faire capitalism. In reality, the new rulers are emerging from the shadows.
Credit card companies are busy changing their rules to sidestep new legislation. The big investment banks are laughing in our faces as they pay out huge bonus payments to their staff while the rest of the economy self-destructs.
We have been willing participants in the creation of these monsters. Consumerism makes the task of separating us from our money so much easier. This over consumption burns through the planet's natural resources and leaves us in debt, not content like TV and billboards tell us. Was it good for you?
I've just just completed a few new designs on similar topics, so take a minute or two to have a look at the latest arrivals here
The Italian dictator, Benito Mussolini, once said that "fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power".
Unlimited lobbying power for those with unlimited funds means that the interests of the private citizen will no longer be considered (if we assume that has not been the case until now). I suppose some would argue that this is an extension of the so-called free market, or laissez-faire capitalism. In reality, the new rulers are emerging from the shadows.
Credit card companies are busy changing their rules to sidestep new legislation. The big investment banks are laughing in our faces as they pay out huge bonus payments to their staff while the rest of the economy self-destructs.
We have been willing participants in the creation of these monsters. Consumerism makes the task of separating us from our money so much easier. This over consumption burns through the planet's natural resources and leaves us in debt, not content like TV and billboards tell us. Was it good for you?
I've just just completed a few new designs on similar topics, so take a minute or two to have a look at the latest arrivals here
Monday, February 15, 2010
The Living Dead
The topic of consumerism has been on my mind again recently, and I discovered an interesting (and short) film which i thought I'd share:
This topic of consumerism and indoctrination has been discussed on the big screen for decades. When we watch the classic, Network, it feels so relevant today because little has changed! Freedom of choice, when it is between 100 brands of fabric softener, is no choice at all. If our lives are centered on consumption, we enter into an endless cycle of work, shopping, and debt. We are complicit in the destruction and pollution of our natural resources. We are ignorant of what happens 'behind the scenes' while we are busy buying things we don't need.
I have been challenged to add something positive, and to give some resources for those who want to make a change. I'll start with a couple of great websites. The first is Adbusters , and the second is Mother Earth News .
A positive step which anyone can take is, after reading a blog or watching a film or just drawing your own conclusions, to pass the message on. After all, consumerism is about illusions. Free (and truthful) information is a sign of true freedom, not the disease of mindless consumerism.
I've posted this before, but it fits this topic perfectly - The Story Of Stuff:
This topic of consumerism and indoctrination has been discussed on the big screen for decades. When we watch the classic, Network, it feels so relevant today because little has changed! Freedom of choice, when it is between 100 brands of fabric softener, is no choice at all. If our lives are centered on consumption, we enter into an endless cycle of work, shopping, and debt. We are complicit in the destruction and pollution of our natural resources. We are ignorant of what happens 'behind the scenes' while we are busy buying things we don't need.
I have been challenged to add something positive, and to give some resources for those who want to make a change. I'll start with a couple of great websites. The first is Adbusters , and the second is Mother Earth News .
A positive step which anyone can take is, after reading a blog or watching a film or just drawing your own conclusions, to pass the message on. After all, consumerism is about illusions. Free (and truthful) information is a sign of true freedom, not the disease of mindless consumerism.
I've posted this before, but it fits this topic perfectly - The Story Of Stuff:
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Haiti, 1915
Haiti has a troubled past. The US has a long history of imperialism. Unsurprisingly, the US has been involved with Haiti's history for decades. In 1915, Haiti was invaded by US marines to "protect American and foreign" interests. For PR purposes, the occupation was labeled as a mission to “re-establish peace and order... and has nothing to do with any diplomatic negotiations of the past or the future”.
From wikipedia:
"Through American manipulation, 40% of the national income was used to alleviate the debt repayment to both American and French banks. Despite the large sums due to overseas banks, this economic decision ignored the interests of the majority of the Haitian population and froze the economic growth the country needed. For the next nineteen years, advisers of the United States governed the country, enforced by the United States Marine Corps."
From wikipedia:
"Through American manipulation, 40% of the national income was used to alleviate the debt repayment to both American and French banks. Despite the large sums due to overseas banks, this economic decision ignored the interests of the majority of the Haitian population and froze the economic growth the country needed. For the next nineteen years, advisers of the United States governed the country, enforced by the United States Marine Corps."
One famous participant in the occupation was General Smedley Butler. He was the author of War Is a Racket, a publication with condemned the use of US military might to defend the interests of a small number of very wealthy people. Here is one of many memorable quotes:
"I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for theNational City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents." Interestingly, a condensed version was printed in Reader's Digest in 1935, in which he was praised for his "moral as well as physical courage". How times change.
Take a look at some great War Is a Racket and US Intervention shirts if you're in the mood.
Friday, February 5, 2010
The Blue Closet
Our seas and oceans have been popular dumping grounds for many decades. People have dumped all manner of waste: raw sewage, household trash, medical waste, explosives, chemicals (including chemical weapons such as nerve agents) and varying levels of radioactive materials.
Household trash, and in particular plastic, is one of the more visible and widespread pollutants of the "blue closet".
It is becoming apparent that efforts to reduce the scale of the problem have failed, and it continues to get worse. For example, "20,000 tons of waste finds its way into the North Sea alone, primarily from ships and the fishing industry". Of course, the problem is a global one, and I'm sure we've all heard about the giant floating garbage patches in our oceans. On average, there are "18,000 visible bits of plastic floating on every square kilometer of sea", according to one study. Like our disappearing icebergs, there is more below the surface. In fact, "up to 67 percent of the trash sinks to the sea floor".
The volume of plastics and their ingestion by wildlife is not the only problem facing us. The plastics attract some of the many chemical pollutants in the water, concentrating them to levels up to "a million times higher than normal".
As those toxins enter the food chain, the concentrations only increase in the creatures at the top. That would be you.
You can read the full article here or just view the accompanying photos here.
You can find shirts on this issue here and here.
Household trash, and in particular plastic, is one of the more visible and widespread pollutants of the "blue closet".
It is becoming apparent that efforts to reduce the scale of the problem have failed, and it continues to get worse. For example, "20,000 tons of waste finds its way into the North Sea alone, primarily from ships and the fishing industry". Of course, the problem is a global one, and I'm sure we've all heard about the giant floating garbage patches in our oceans. On average, there are "18,000 visible bits of plastic floating on every square kilometer of sea", according to one study. Like our disappearing icebergs, there is more below the surface. In fact, "up to 67 percent of the trash sinks to the sea floor".
The volume of plastics and their ingestion by wildlife is not the only problem facing us. The plastics attract some of the many chemical pollutants in the water, concentrating them to levels up to "a million times higher than normal".
As those toxins enter the food chain, the concentrations only increase in the creatures at the top. That would be you.
You can read the full article here or just view the accompanying photos here.
You can find shirts on this issue here and here.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Soldiers Of God
In 1998, a twenty-four part documentary, entitled "Cold War", was first broadcast. Each episode dealt with a different aspect of the Cold War and covered the entire span from it's origins prior to 1945, to the fall of the Wall in 1989 and beyond. This series was available on VHS, but Bush II had some footage re-classified, and this is probably the main reason why it is no longer available for sale. Episode 20, Soldiers Of God, dealt with the US-supported resistence to the invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviet Union. I really should have posted this yesterday (since it was Groundhog Day).
From Wikipedia: "Episode 20, "Soldiers of God", shows Zbigniew Brzezinski in 1980, giving a speech to the mullahs and mujahideen fighters between the borders of Afghanistan and Pakistan encouraging the Muslim mujahideen fighters through his Pakistani translator saying "We know of their deep belief in God and we are confident that their struggle will succeed. That land over there is yours. You will go back to it one day, because your fight will prevail and you'll have your homes and your mosques back again, because your cause is right and God is on your side." — while assuring them of unconditional American government support; and interviewed State Department officials confirming that the United States uncritically supported the Pakistani government for the sake of American interests in Afghanistan."
From Wikipedia: "Episode 20, "Soldiers of God", shows Zbigniew Brzezinski in 1980, giving a speech to the mullahs and mujahideen fighters between the borders of Afghanistan and Pakistan encouraging the Muslim mujahideen fighters through his Pakistani translator saying "We know of their deep belief in God and we are confident that their struggle will succeed. That land over there is yours. You will go back to it one day, because your fight will prevail and you'll have your homes and your mosques back again, because your cause is right and God is on your side." — while assuring them of unconditional American government support; and interviewed State Department officials confirming that the United States uncritically supported the Pakistani government for the sake of American interests in Afghanistan."
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Zinn Remembered
Howard Zinn died yesterday. He was an author, historian and activist, who wrote the famous 'alternative' textbooks entitled A People's History of the United States, and A People's History of American Empire.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
The Intense Humming of Evil
Today is the 65th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz by soviet troops. Estimates place the number of victims at 1.1 million people of a range of nationalities. Alfred Hitchcock worked on this unfinished documentary which covers the Holocaust using real and graphic footage taken after the liberation of various camps:
Thursday, January 14, 2010
6 Minutes To Midnight
For the first time since 2007, the so-called Doomsday Clock has been moved. Today, it was moved backwards from 5 minutes to 6 minutes, signifying a brighter outlook on the future of humanity.
You can read the statement from the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists here, and take a look at the new Turn Back The Clock blog here.
You can read the statement from the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists here, and take a look at the new Turn Back The Clock blog here.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Junk Food?
Corn is something most people would consider to be part of a healthy diet. Most people aren't aware of Monsanto's GM varieties. Three of them were subjected to testing, and the results of the study are as follows:
"Effects were mostly concentrated in kidney and liver function, the two major diet detoxification organs, but in detail differed with each GM type. In addition, some effects on heart, adrenal, spleen and blood cells were also frequently noted. As there normally exists sex differences in liver and kidney metabolism, the highly statistically significant disturbances in the function of these organs, seen between male and female rats, cannot be dismissed as biologically insignificant as has been proposed by others. We therefore conclude that our data strongly suggests that these GM maize varieties induce a state of hepatorenal toxicity....These substances have never before been an integral part of the human or animal diet and therefore their health consequences for those who consume them, especially over long time periods are currently unknown."
You can read about the study, Monsanto's reaction, and the author's subsequent statements here
"Effects were mostly concentrated in kidney and liver function, the two major diet detoxification organs, but in detail differed with each GM type. In addition, some effects on heart, adrenal, spleen and blood cells were also frequently noted. As there normally exists sex differences in liver and kidney metabolism, the highly statistically significant disturbances in the function of these organs, seen between male and female rats, cannot be dismissed as biologically insignificant as has been proposed by others. We therefore conclude that our data strongly suggests that these GM maize varieties induce a state of hepatorenal toxicity....These substances have never before been an integral part of the human or animal diet and therefore their health consequences for those who consume them, especially over long time periods are currently unknown."
You can read about the study, Monsanto's reaction, and the author's subsequent statements here
Monday, January 11, 2010
Frozen Water
The recent cold weather spell across much of the US and Europe has resulted in several deaths, largely due to the actions of people who are not used to such conditions. There have, of course, been several cases where homeless people actually froze to death. I think that speaks volumes about our society and it's priorities. Up until the 1990's, Britain's Central Office of Information produced dozens of public information films (or PIFs, like the US PSAs). Here are some which deal with winter weather:
Some might think of these relics as the product of an authoritarian govt, or the "nanny state". Unfortunately, there are people who need this advice and I think we would be better off if films of this sort were shown today, and that it is a sign of a govt which is concerned with the welfare of the public (which is, after all, it's job).
Some might think of these relics as the product of an authoritarian govt, or the "nanny state". Unfortunately, there are people who need this advice and I think we would be better off if films of this sort were shown today, and that it is a sign of a govt which is concerned with the welfare of the public (which is, after all, it's job).
Friday, January 8, 2010
Who's Hungry?
How about a nice food safety story to start 2010?
Burgers - probably one of the most popular foods in the US, wouldn't you say? The contents of an average burger have been discussed many times over the years (from body parts you might not consider to be meat to the possibility of BSE contamination). It seems that in the quest to reduce E.Coli contamination, you can add ammonia to the list of delicious ingredients. You can read the full story here.
Burgers - probably one of the most popular foods in the US, wouldn't you say? The contents of an average burger have been discussed many times over the years (from body parts you might not consider to be meat to the possibility of BSE contamination). It seems that in the quest to reduce E.Coli contamination, you can add ammonia to the list of delicious ingredients. You can read the full story here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
