BBC Blog Network

User Profile

Morgaine_VLB

Listed below are comments made by Morgaine_VLB between Wednesday, 15th October 2008 and Wednesday, 18th March 2009.

«Newer
Older»

Is Obama drifting? 06:44am on 18 Mar 2009 Sorry, but I think you've got the wrong issue. The real question is whether the AMERICAN PEOPLE have gone back to "business as usual" (i.e. seeing politicians as surrogate parents whose job is to "take care of us" so that we can remain totally self-absorbed). Why isn't anyone interested in covering that? Oh right... People get angry when you suggest they take responsibility for themselves and their democracy. Not good for business. Sorry. Forgot about that...
Blues for Bush 08:07am on 21 Jan 2009 The former President's environment legacy is written in his corporate policies: if it makes money, do it. One of the first things Bush said after taking office was that he is for big business, and that's all he really believes in. He said it with a smirk, and in a tone of voice that implied the correspondent must be daft to think there might be anything else to consider. I believe we should take Bush at his word: what concerns big business, concerned him and what didn't was a non-issue. So the real question is what is big business's track record on issues of environment, ecology, and safe, honest business practices... Oh wait!!!... Aren't we seeing their legacy right now on Wall Street? Clearly honesty, ethics, and deep contemplation of the consequences of their actions have always been high on their list of priorities. Silly of me!
"Predict and survive" - or not 08:00am on 21 Jan 2009 There is a simple method used in wildcrafting: never take more than 10% of the healthy growth of anything harvested in any given area. If you do, you are likely to endanger its ability to survive. The assumption here, is that conditions will change in unexpected (and sometimes unfortunate) ways, and enough of a species must be left to repopulate in the event of blight/illness, natural disaster, etc. That these things will happen is inevitable, it's a matter of when. Modern society plays roulette, betting the disaster won't happen this time. Ancient societies realized that the price of a miscalculation was simply too high. Loss of a whole species could have a powerful impact on human quality of life or even on survival.

Modern people don't like this concept because it is easier to simply strip the land of its resources, stockpile them, and control supply and demand (thus profit), while hoping that stocks will replenish by the time it's time to strip them again. This system appeared to work since its inception in the 1940s because we were oblivious to the signs of its true effect. Now we are addicted to the method and reluctant to change it because it will change profit flow. Apparently, we'd rather be dead than have our profits come on a different schedule or not be able to monopolize supplies...

I believe extinction is what results when a species can no longer adapt to rapid changes in environment, isn't it?
Freethinkers welcome! 02:30am on 21 Jan 2009 About time! Nonbelievers pay taxes and perform the same civic duties as "believers"; why shouldn't they be welcome?
Will the world respond to America's Moment? 02:25am on 21 Jan 2009 There is a difference between a "leader" and a "saviour". Some people are looking for a saviour -- someone to save them from the consequences of their own follies. Those people will always be disappointed and feel betrayed when what they've one comes back to them.

Other people are looking for a leader; someone who is intelligent and savvy enough to understand the causes of pressing problems and who is strong enough to withstand pressures from those responsible (or who benefited) who are still living in denial. Those people will never be one hundred per cent satisfied because no one is perfect. Barack Obama is human; he will make mistakes. Overall, if he remains true to his image most people looking for a leader will be satisfied.

Of course, a few people are looking for a surrogate parent; someone who will take care of them while they play all day. Those people need to grow up.

Happy freedom day!
Do green targets miss the point? 2:12pm on 21 Dec 2008 I think the bottom line is that no one wants to be the one to make the sacrifice. We're all hoping someone else will, or that the impending disaster will happen to our kids or grandkids, instead of to us. (Yes, I know it sounds terrible, but that's what it boils down to, isn't it?)

The public is waiting for governments to solve it; government is waiting for the private sector, which is waiting for science to produce a miracle so that there won't be any need... Ultimately, people resist change. We don't like it and we won't do it until the crisis is at our back doorstep... Take for example recent food shortages. Scary reading, yes, but if you're not experiencing a shortage yourself it's easy to just gossip about it and keep living your current lifestyle. Loss of biodiversity? For the person who doesn't see it, it isn't happening. Just another conspiracy of naturalists.

Employers aren't going to let us do things differently, and they dictate the nature of for most of our waking lives. But while they may give lip service to the need for change, they still can't trust we're working unless they can see us doing it with their own eyes, even if working from home would keep thousands of cars off the road for most of the week. We have to drive 3 hours daily just for work, and that's likely to increase with the coming financial crisis.

And ultimately, I am not sure whether it's worse to cut down trees or to use all the power and resources that computers require to operate efficiently. If I knew that, I might be able to make an informed choice about which to do, but in the absence of any clear information I'll tend towards preserving life... which also preserves the machines, ironically.

We can all boohoo over this or we can take personal responsibility for effecting the change ourselves. In the end, I think that's the only way change is going to happen.
Republicans vs. unions 3:03pm on 15 Dec 2008 I think the simplest way to look at this is to use the metaphor of the TV show "Survivor", a program which pitted two teams of (usually) successful business people against each other in remote wilderness areas, and gave each team challenges that had to be won in order to stay on the island and win the "big money". Invariably, the skills that got people promoted in business got them thrown off the island at tribal council. Why? Because the basic attitudes fostered in modern business are unsustainable, and this fact is blatantly obvious when you strip things down to a survival level.

Once *unmasked* (i.e. no longer anonymous in their offices), most people do finally adapt to some degree, once it becomes obvious to them that they will not survive otherwise (though many resist until it is too late to save themselves). What's lacking right now in the auto and banking industries is the recognition that change is necessary to their survival. The recognition is lacking because society protects corporations, and corporate management, from the consequences of their own actions. As a result, they continue doing the same things, and we continue to pay.

The solution is simple: make them pay instead. Most people have an aversion to pain. Only when we make the pain of their mistakes theirs (instead of the public's) will corporations and share holders sit up and take notice. As long as we keep bailing them out we are all just postponing the inevitable extinction of life as we know it.
Confirming our prejudices 03:45am on 25 Nov 2008 Let's see... Eight years ago the US economy was doing pretty well under a Democratic president, after having had to tighten our belts following more Republican blunders. After 8 years of Bush the world is tottering on the brink of another Great Depression --which could actually cost the rich people money instead of just poor people --and the Republicans immediately look to bail out the very people whose greed caused the problems in the first place, justifying their actions with plenty more "fear" rhetoric about all the bad things that will happen to us little people if we don't. Then the vote to give these people rewards for what they did, as well as bailing out their companies. But don't worry. That famous Republican "trickle down" theory means that one day some of it will trickle down to us... whatever slips through their fingers, that is.

And the Republicans can't figure out what went wrong... It must be the media's fault that people found out what was happening! Well, if they hadn't put a gag order on the media and alienated them too, they might have found more support there, but apparently the media doesn't buy that argument either. Must be the fault of those history classes, the ones that point out that loss of a free press means loss of freedom, generally. Maybe someone should tell them, so they can campaign against an educated public. After all, it's easier to lie to ignoramuses.
Baby P - It will happen again 03:33am on 25 Nov 2008 It will happen again, not because people are inherently evil -- they are not. Even more than genetics, people are the products of their conditioning. The societies of the western world produce more monsters than anywhere else, not because we have inherently worse people, but because we value material goods and money far above a human life. We talk about people killed in wars as "collateral damage". We watch television programs that glorify baseness and brutality. We have yielded to the lowest common denominator instead of demanding that everyone aspire to, and strive for, the highest possible conduct. We are argue against making people responsible and accountable for their own actions and then wonder why they go on to commit atrocities. We bail out criminals and punish the honest person, and whatever lip service we might give it, the message we are all absorbing is, "We can't help being monsters. It's in our natures, so why rebel against it?" If this were true, the number of serial and spree killings, rapes, and mutilations would not be on the rise in the richest countries in the world. There would never have been a time when people could safely leave their front doors open, or call on a neighbour for help. Yet we know there was, so let's stop copping out and accept the truth: we know how to make monsters. It's what we do best. We have the power, but not the will to change it because it might mean temporary inconvenience in our own lives, or possibly admitting unflattering things about our "great modern cultures". We're only really sorry about things like Baby P's death when we get caught doing them; the rest of the time we're content to look the other way, say, "There's nothing I can do", and switch on some Reality TV. Happy viewing.
Tick, tick... boom? 01:07am on 15 Oct 2008 If banks and governments had to keep their budgets balanced they way I have to keep mine balanced, and have real, concrete, physical resources to pay the bills with, instead of moving pretend money around in accountant's ledger's, this would never have happened. I am accountable, and I am the one who is prosecuted if I don't pay my bills. No one steps in to save me from my own incompetence. The same should be true at every level of the financial sector. These people are living in a fantasy that we are paying for, and it's got to stop or depression will hit one way or another.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

Morgaine_VLB