Concerning, at present, probably the most important topic of your life

[Muel]

3 months on and I'm still yet to read a single post or article about this I can understand.

Can someone just tell me what to do and make it simple? Am I supposed to avoid flying on planes, or fly to work every day?

[dann2707]

Classic Sheffield hallamer

JOKINGGGGGG

[1a2bcio8]

I have to admit that I'm struggling to see how you're not understanding? I don't think these things can be understood perfectly perhaps. They're big situations and they're complex because they have multiple causes that are economic, social, technological, etc. None the less, they can be grasped in a basic sense even it not perfectly. For instance, the scientific consensus is that the increase of co2 in the atmosphere is man made, is heading for unprecedented levels and this will, in all likelihood, be very problematic or even catastrophic for life on earth. I'm pretty sure I've mentioned how governments are doing very little because they serve powerful, minority interests in the short-term such as the established energy industry that makes a lot of money for the continued use of 'dirty' energy. In other areas I've discussed how governments are involved in illegal wars, not based on humanitarian interests but for controlling resources and locations in the world. Over one millions Iraqi's are dead from the 2003 invasion and occupation which our governments have done in our name but which we had the power to stop. They also perform state terror. American, French, British, etc. governments fund terror organisations, death squads, they assassinate people (drone strikes now, for instance) and so on. Our government is currently in the process of spinning lies about the most vulnerable people in our country - most people completely misunderstand the statistical realities on benefits - so that they can dismantle the welfare state as they increase corporate subsidy and tax breaks for the most wealthy. The NHS is being drained of funding and being sold to private companies that MPs own or have relations with in some sense despite the warning by doctors that people's lives are being put at risk because the changes will lead to inadequate services. The system will become two-tier with people that can afford it being offered good services and others, who cannot, being offered insufficient services.

These are just a few examples of how we are being exploited that carries the implication that the exploitation is increasing. The constant need to increase profits, power, resources, etc. will mean that the exploitation will not stop and unless you are an elite within this system, it will come to effect you. Ideally the harm toward anyone by the system, foreign or domestic should be enough to bring us to action - not just personal threat. The video I linked above shows, in no uncertain terms, that power resides in the majority and that those who would ignore will of the majority are ultimately subject to it. Protest therefore works and with enough people involved we could force our governments and powerful interests to conform with what's best for us.

So I'm offering you ideas and facts that can springboard your understanding and I've said before that this is the initial basis - knowledge - which is something you need to do yourself. You need to check that I'm not just making stuff up. This requires a bit of effort, no doubt. Then we need to organize. There's groups such as the occupy movement, charities like greenpeace, etc. all of whom try to organize protests, boycotting, petitions, etc. that sometimes work but often lack the social involvement that we see in, say, the Brazilian movement that I posted up about.

I think if you don't understand what I'm saying, then you're doing so willfully because you don't really want to change how you relate to this sort of thing. I'm sure you do in a sense but the desire to stay comfortable is a strong one even if realistically, it's probably unstable in the sense that you can't hide from these sorts of things completely. It's not easy to understand perfectly and it's not easy to change but it is doable but then a lot of stuff that's worth doing is like that.

Edited July 2, 2013 by Ben Rowlands

[Muel]

Read through that carefully and it mostly makes sense. The bit where I get lost is when I read the links and stuff you post up, possibly because they're written for far more well read people than me or because they assume a knowledge of politics or the world in general which I don't have because I've never actively watched the news or anything.

The main reason I struggle to understand is that I don't really want to have to. I want someone like you to tell me what to do so that I have more time in the day to go climbing and watch telly. That said I have honestly tried to get my head round some of this stuff, and I still find it hard to grasp how the government could really benefit from doing chemtrail stuff. Everything I've read in detail so far just doesn't seem like proof IMO, i.e what I understand about it, I don't believe.

The bit that bothers me really is the stuff about the NHS getting even shitter. My Grandparents have had loads of work done over the last 5 years or so, and while being a pretty good standard of care considering it's free(ish), the standard has always been "not quite good enough" IMO.

Classic Sheffield hallamer

JOKINGGGGGG

Classic Sheffield Hallam Failer

[manuel]

or instance in the UK, we're allowing those things to ruin the planet, our governments to employ methods that worsen the economy for the majority but everyone in the end, damage the ethically developed welfare systems (NHS, benefits, etc.) and most of us do very little about it. The successes of capitalism can spell its end and probably in a rather messy way unless we work out a way to change the current system through the sorts of efforts we can see in Brazil or other areas of Latin America actually. You see a lot of politically engaged populations in those areas which have effected positive change and extracted themselves America's corporate domination.

Ok so - No - The government is not trying to "worsen the economy" And the government don't want to weaken the NHS/Welfare. Those are pretty much the only things people have as a measure of how well they are doing as a government ! if they suck at that they wont get voted for. But if the country cannot afford these things what would you have them do ? If you don't like the government you need to vote for someone else or maybe even start your own party if you have a better idea?

I agree that usually the things government come up with are always too short term a fix, as its all about getting in again.

The end of capitalism was messy - it was a banking crisis that cost us billions and billions, but was so big, we could not afford it to fail.

You state a lot of things in your post as fact Ben but most of them are up for debate - like government bad, protesting good, CO2 levels WILL kill the earth. there are points of view for all sides of these arguments.

(+ I hate greenpeace and agree with this...)

http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/blog/the-sad-sad-demise-greenpeace/

[1a2bcio8]

Ok so - No - The government is not trying to "worsen the economy" And the government don't want to weaken the NHS/Welfare. Those are pretty much the only things people have as a measure of how well they are doing as a government ! if they suck at that they wont get voted for. But if the country cannot afford these things what would you have them do ? If you don't like the government you need to vote for someone else or maybe even start your own party if you have a better idea?

I agree that usually the things government come up with are always too short term a fix, as its all about getting in again.

The end of capitalism was messy - it was a banking crisis that cost us billions and billions, but was so big, we could not afford it to fail.

You state a lot of things in your post as fact Ben but most of them are up for debate - like government bad, protesting good, CO2 levels WILL kill the earth. there are points of view for all sides of these arguments.

(+ I hate greenpeace and agree with this...)

http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/blog/the-sad-sad-demise-greenpeace/

Sorry chap but that's a cartoon view of politics you're suggesting. Parties are not voted in according to their merits but relative to their various campaigns of manipulation such as the complete misunderstanding most people have about benefits fraud - about 0.7% which is pretty small relative to the perceptions most people hold. The same holds true for the nature of immigration. When you have a corporate media that generally aligns with political power and dissents within such narrow margins as to mostly be useless, leading to a generally uninformed population, you can't maintain that cartoon view. People need to know how inept and ill-intended their governments are in order to decide how best to choose between them but we are not offered that. The only basis for democracy is informed choice. I can refer you to books if you want to properly consider my arguments but if you base your arguments purely on a mainstream view of these matters you're not placed to actually refute them. You need to actually address and respond to my specific points. My intention here has always been to offer an alternative view on matters from which people can actually explore those matters and decide from themselves but, clearly, nobody actually does that. Rather the trend is to rationalize away what's being said without a proper consideration of it.

You've glossed over a significant factor of 'austerity' in terms of our being able to afford or not afford welfare and that's corporate tax avoidance, banks, etc. all of which are not properly regulated. We wouldn't have the issues we did if those systems were regulated properly. The amount we lose in those areas dwarfs the costs of maintaining welfare, the NHS, etc. The changes in the NHS are also ascribable, not to the economy, but to vested interests (politicians for example) who gain from the privatization of NHS services.

Furthermore, austerity cannot work in a capitalistic system which is based upon consumerism. Yes, big business may save money by squeezing people in their jobs due to a more competitive job market - paying them less, getting more hours from them, etc. - but this will only bring benefits to those businesses in the short term. When you reduce consumption by creating a poorer populace, money moves around that economy less and it stagnates. The deficit has been growing and this form of neo-liberalism simply isn't working. At best, the government are stupidly blinded by ideology and at worst they know that it's causing more problems but the short term gains for big business trumps all else.

Why is it that you struggle to imagine that an institute (our government) that was borne elites promoting their interests against the monarchy rather than for the populace can be self-serving and constituted by intelligent idiots? Intelligent in the sense of rhetoric but completely idiotic in the sense of wisdom. The history of human civilization is dictated by elite interests dominating or attempting to dominate all else. Only if you buy into the current myth of well intended elites and perceive modern human society in a vacuum can you come to that sort of conclusion.

Obviously it depends on how you define bad but if illegal wars, state terror, etc. resulting in the deaths of millions around the world in the last decade, the scapegoating of vulnerable people for political expediency, channeling wealth from the poor to the rich, etc. is considered to be a bad thing then there's not much debate.

Actually I didn't say that co2 killing the earth is not debated but anthropogenic climate change is (not debated); it is established. Scientists do believe that the problems from climate change will not be pretty and will probably be catastrophic. The consensus is essentially that it will probably be very bad. This is up for debate but the debate exists within the range of how bad it will more so than will something bad happen at all.

Capitalism hasn't ended by the way... and the banks could easily have been nationalized rather than being given free bailouts, staying not regulated, not prosecuted, etc. Why hasn't that happened?

Muel, this stuff is difficult to get your head around because it sits in opposition to the world view we've been constantly offered through watching the television, reading the newspaper, going to school, etc. But it's difficult whenever we approach a new subject. It does get easier and I really struggled with everything myself to begin with. It just depends on the value you hold for it. Without really trying to create a guilt trip but just putting it in matter-of-fact terms, are these things worth caring about? In the sense that if we cared about them more collectively we could do something about them. To the extent that we generally ignore them we can do nothing about them and, in essence, we therefore side with the people who do so much harm. We are complicit if we are not involved in some sense of standing up against what's happening.

[Revolver]

The end of capitalism was messy - it was a banking crisis that cost us billions and billions, but was so big, we could not afford it to fail.

Capitalism is far from over. Long live the day when helping your community is more important than f**king it over.

[manuel]

Capitalism is far from over.

That was my point - it crashed in on itself, and we all bailed it out. It will never be over.

[Dave Anscombe]

That was my point - it crashed in on itself, and we all bailed it out. It will never be over.

I would place peanuts on it(id rather use peanuts as a method of payment-Rather than say some paper with cool squiggles on it.

[1a2bcio8]

http://www.skepticalscience.com/Newcomers-Start-Here.html

[The Mechanic]

Capitalism is bound to fail in the end, it is unsustainable because of the consumption of resources to maintain it. It will go the way of communism in the end.

With regards to the impact of mankind on the planet it is ludicrous to say we are not having one. Yes the environment has been worse and better than now, Global warming will happen don't doubt it as we are changing the planet to such an extent by asset stripping. The millennia that went before was able to lock in CO2 we are now releasing that CO2 at an astounding rate.

The pollution of our sea has never been greater, with fish stocks diminishing on a daily basis. The sea is our lifeblood for CO2 conversion to O2 and yet we continue to dump our waste in it at an amazing rate. If all algae in the sea were damaged by this pollution then the forests we have left would not be enough to sustain mankind.

Politicians are driven by consumerism an d as such cannot rectify the problems mankind faces, a step which may help is being discussed at present I believ that would mean that a politician cannot work for other companies whilst in office, something which changes there perspective on the worlds problems.

There is no easy cure, mankind will end one day it cannot continue as it is, Whether we self destruct or nature does it for is is open to debate but evolution will continue so will the planet long after we are gone as long as the sun exists in its present form. Nature restores the balance but it can't do that until we either cease to exist or work with it in a less invasive way.

That's my rant done.

[1a2bcio8]

[Matt Vandart]

More on this subject:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/sep/19/russia-un-climate-report-geoengineering

[Matt Vandart]

Also a few people here need to understand what 'money' is.

All this bullshit about 'how will they fund it?' is just that bullshit.

You never 'pay' for anything all you do is hand around debt and liability for that debt.

[Matt Vandart]

More:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/russ-blinch/five-ways-to-detect-climate_b_3961924.html

[Ash-Kennard]

Can we make a list of do's and don'ts?

e.g.

Do - Recycle

Don't - burn petrol for fun

something like this, concise. Not an essay (ben LOL), too much information is often worse than not enough.

[1a2bcio8]

Unfortunately the situation is often complex and therefore requires thinking about. If I tell you to do 'x' without you really understanding 'x' then we're promoting the kind of attitude that got us into the current social predicaments; the blind adoption of predigested facts. How can you tell the truth value of what I'm saying unless you've spent time considering varying points of view, looking at the different facts, understanding the parts that you won't understand straight away? After all, we don't expect to understand an academic discipline or a craft instantly. These are things we have to develop in order to master an understanding so that we can deal with them properly. Achievement comes from striving.

I don't want to tell you what to do even if I feel that it's our responsibility to understand human nature and act in accordance with it. I'll present you with how I understand things but we're not going to get anywhere unless people take the time to really grapple with what are sometimes complex social, economic and ecological problems. Life is complex and when we embrace the fact and try to develop a deeper understanding we live a richer life.

It's unsurprising when people want to operate from bite size facts and basic directions when our schooling system operates in that way. Take fact 'y', accept it as truth on our authority, reflexively regurgitate it in situation 'z'. This is what learning has generally been reduced to. We're all memory machines. Well, this is slightly unfair because we are all reasonable to a greater or lesser degree but education definitely pushes in a certain direction.

Nothing will ever change unless people take responsibility for the fact life is complex and therefore challenging. The most challenging things are always the most worthy though.

[monkeyseemonkeydo]

TL;DR ().

[1a2bcio8]

Jokes

[Ash-Kennard]

do we atleast agree that recycling is a good thing?

[TheCircus]

YOU ARE ALL VERY STUPID

[LukasMcNeal]

OH MY GOD TheCircus IS BACK?!

[Muel]

do we atleast agree that recycling is a good thing?

He wouldn't even tell me whether I should avoid flying or not and just told me to spend all my spare time reading articles and critiquing them. Yeh right, did enough of that at uni.

[Luke Rainbird]

He wouldn't even tell me whether I should avoid flying or not and just told me to spend all my spare time reading articles and critiquing them. Yeh right, did enough of that at uni.

I don't know which of these activities is the biggest waste of energy

[monkeyseemonkeydo]

do we atleast agree that recycling is a good thing?

Not necessarily. The theory is great- send all your waste for recycling and save energy and the planet. I'm sure in some instances it works nearly perfectly (things like metal, paper etc.) but it seems a lot of our 'recycling' just gets loaded on to container ships and sent half way round the world to be dumped elsewhere...

TheCircus...