Welcome to Disturbing Trends
The UK faces a question of staying in the EU. Meantime the USA and EU are negotiating a free trade agreement, the largest trade deal in human history.
Scotland is facing a referendum on whether it stays with the UK or rules itself, as an independent member of the EU.
The possible future relationships include Scotland having a Free Trade with the USA but not proud independent England that becomes instead a massive tax shelter free wheeling gambling and banking hub for investment shills.
It is now scientifically and medically recognised that antibiotic use must be extremely limited if they are to remain effective in life threatening situations.
David Willetts, the science minister, will propose far-reaching measures that would clamp down on the overuse of antibiotics by GPs and hospital doctors. He will also try to restrict usage on farms and fisheries, where the drugs are blended with feed to boost yields. – Guardian
As a survivor of near fatal infection following surgery the value of antibiotics is beyond question. But for real health it is imperative to avoid antibiotics unless the killing of bacteria is critically indicated. Recovery with traditional medicine (which is really helpful in relaxing the mind while avoiding antibiotics) is necessary for minor ailments. If widespread use of antibiotics is not stomped out we are in danger of evolving bacteria we can not fight eventually evolving an extinction event. It is very intelligent of the UK Government to take this to the G8, the G20 and the UN.
What is freedom if you only think you are free?
Politics is hard. If you veer too far from the peoples’ hopes that voted you in, especially if you are exploring fascist tendencies, you got a lot of explaining to do.
Of course this “war” against “terror” needs to be concluded and maybe the most exhaustive war would not resolve it. The tendency is to try and resolve the conflict during your history making turn in office. But maybe the problem is deeper and actually solving it does in the opinion of the intelligence community require a war. And if the eyes of the CIA are turned inward, they are not turned outward, doing their job. And the same kind of shift of focus into what are in essence “criminal acts” that are called “terror” as the person became a Muslim. Is that the test of whether it was an act of terror versus the act of a deranged person with automatic weapons at the opening of a Batman film? Does the definition of “terror” turn on motivation or how, we the supposedly terrified public, feel?
We will remember Boston, but the location of the Batman mass murderer has fallen from my lexicon of “terror”. “Terror” is in fact a language idea, if you call it that, then anything is justified. Just like the governments if 1984, behind steel walls, the Governments of today are now afraid of and watching their own people. The US Constitution is revealed as a set of ideals and we witness America at war with itself. Not a civil war in any conventional sense. But a war all the same. Not so much a war do to the actions of the “terrorists” (one can just imagine they finally get to meet each other on the other side as so far they are only brothers because they do the same thing due to the same sort of language indoctrination.
The war is defined by the actions of the Government. And just like medical actions that have a high risk of failure, special powers must be kept back until there is no option, i.e. a state of war.
If a government finds an existential crisis has beset it from within, if it is fighting an infection then it has to act in a way that has survival in its future. Due to the electoral cycle it wants a result within 5 years.
Yes. The NSA data gathering is extremely Orwellian and changes the perceived nature of Government now that we all know that fascist measures are in play to allow American control of “it’s interests” (interests that are, incidentally, shared with and competed for by every country in the world) may have taken a step too far.
Why do we comment in political columns? It may be necessary. Democracy depends on well framed usually moderate arguments that sway people rather than extreme arguments that insult intellect and isolate ideas.
A fine tipped right wing refutation of an unconvincing left wing assumption makes this interesting. It is worth wading through all the trolling and insults for those gems. Similarly, a left wing contrast on the effects of greed temper the right wing stomp to success so encourages social behaviour.
Comments in newspapers and on websites like this allow arguments to be refuted and no blood spilt.
Example of democratic discovery.
Noam Chomsky talks about how the West attempts to destroy the world – from the other guy’s point of view wars waged by America and its brinkmanship are dramatic.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/04/us-disaster-race-noam-chomsky
UN Weapons Inspector Hans Blix on why Britain should not spent 100 billion pounds updating its Trident nuclear deterrent.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/26/hans-blix-trident-abandon-britain-nuclear
Sally Bercow has been found at fault in a libel action in the high court – after a tweet where she asked why Lord McAlpine was trending, adding “innocent face” – suggesting although she may have known about why, she was not going to say. She was reflecting less obscure media references to defamatory and false accusations about Lord McAlpine that have already been subject to successful defamation suits.
Freedom of speech has an evolutionary function on society. Overly reactionary forces may work against the natural drift of progress causing decay and distortions like slavery or apartheid.
The insults freely flung about daily on social networks and chat boards seem to reflect the maturity of their audiences. It is refreshing to see a public candidness without the need to follow celebrity having a voice. Sally Bercoe’s voice is no more meaningful than any other in the Twitterverse. So to single out Twitter as the most robust, sober and authentic forum certainly surprised me.
It is obvious that using social networks for libel is actually more stupid than any other form as the evidence is pretty hard to deny and can spread like wildfire.
Just hope I have not implied anything here. Innocent face.
Started as a comment: http://discussion.guardian.co.uk/comment-permalink/23841388
Disclaimer: this blog is published offshore in America.
the dystopian consequences of declines in education
The decline of The Western Empire in the mid 21st century can be traced to the commercialisation of education – a philosophical direction established in the Thatcher years in the UK and developed by her successors Blair and Cameron. The real damage was achieved by the bizarrely successful Michael Gove who rose in cabinet ranking from the academisation of primary schools and the commercial running of secondary schools and the effective enslavement of a generation by massive student fee increases backed by interest bearing loans. It appears that anti-progressive policies were Gove’s agenda. The economic collapses of the last 21st century were based on the choices of the children educated by Gove’s ideological schemes resulting in ultra conformity.
References: http://academies.sayingno.org
Denial of the responsibility of mass genocide by caring more about profits than pollution is one of the worst, slowest and most horrible crimes committed a little bit by each of us, remorselessly and daily.
The only path away from the destruction of nature are mired by political crossfire: any bobbing head is likely to be severed. And so the two headed demon reasons with itself and instead of finding the good answer they focus on the other, firing poisoned darts, hoping to damage the alternative and thus seem the most deserving of power. We live in an age of political arrogance. The terrifying thing is if Tony Blair took over the Labour p#Party here in the UK, it is most likely they would once again win.
The USA is as addicted to its weapon deaths as it is to the other grand killer of humans, the automobile. The cattle ranches and meat industry in general is another big contributor, the other problematic “too large to control” source of greenhouse gas. The methane release from melting permafrost is the icing on an explosive cake of contributing factors. It does not really matter unless we can change the direction of the pollution equation.
Regulating human nature assumes some people are capable of evil, others are not. In fact it is a choice and our internal values are where the real risk lies. Face it, we all have weapons built into our bodies (teeth, claws) and our minds can be used to elaborately plan actions with unforeseen consequences.
Our real protection lies in the social contract, not regulating the spread of blueprints. Every citizen has access to sharp knives but that does not mean that we use them. Box cutters became weapons not because we failed to detect them, but because of a philosophy that does not enshrine value to others. It is the spread of radicalism and the rule of totalitarianism we have failed to defeat.
When we are taught values by an authority that uses its power in a corrupt way, whether it be religious or political, therein lies the source of insanity.
Guns in the hands of citizens do not protect them from guns. Money in the bank does not protect one from madness.