'Belief' is not the same as evidence.
Anyone making policy on the basis of belief rather than the available evidence is unsafe.
I might believe that money is inherently evil. If I applied that to policy I would make really useless policy.
I might believe that Satan is a real force, when it is clear there is no material evidence whatsoever for the existence of Satan. If I made policy on the basis of my belief in and fear of Satan, I would make really unhealthy policy.
One ought to make policy on the basis of whatever causes avoidable harm must always be avoided. Basic Health and Safety.
I might believe in God, but I cannot bring that belief to policy formulation - it is a belief, and without material evidence, it has no relevance to public policy, other than that it is a matter of freedom of belief - one can believe what ever one chooses.
I can believe in golden faeries in my garden.
But I cannot bring that to policy deliberations.
I understand that Climate Disruption is driven by excess CO2 poured into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels, by deforestation, by agricultural practice that degrades the soil and by militarism's warfare.
The evidence for all these is well documented.
Taking all these into consideration, with a view to avoiding avoidable harm, I might make healthier policy.
Some people believe that misogyny is the natural order, that women are inferior to men, the 'weaker sex', etc and some believe that women should serve men, sexually and as submissive partners.
Those people make really adverse policy that causes harm when it comes to human rights of women, education, wage equality, power equity, gender violence.
Acknowledging that belief as a false belief, and talking the evidence that men and women are persons, with brains and minds, fully capable of the kinds of thinking required to solve problems, we might make healthier policy.
"a problem incorrectly understood is insoluble, and problem correctly understood is half way towards a solution".
That is a fundamental axiom that anyone involved in public, elected civil governance really ought to be focussed on.
Equality and Equity are not the same thing.
Often 'being equal' is offered as a way of joining in the hierarchy - Women in Combat Teams for example, or Women as CEOs or line managers of environmentally destructive commercial operations.
It means being equal to the men who are causing harm.
It is a slight of hand, a mask.
Equitable inclusion has to lead to cessation of harm causation, reparations, accountability and forwards policy that eliminates the harm causation.... otherwise it is a set-up to maintain the harm causation.
Corneilius
Thank you for reading this blog.
"Do what you love, it is your gift to universe."
This blog, like all my other content creation work is not monetised via advertising. If you like what I present, consider sharing my content. If you can afford the price of a cup of coffee or a pint of beer/ale/cider for a few months, please donate via my Patreon account.
https://patreon.com/corneilius - donations gratefully received
https://www.reverbnation.com/corneilius - .mp3 songs
https://www.soundcloud.com/coreluminous - .wav Songs
https://www.corneilius.net - Archive
#folkmusic
#singersongwriter
#blogger
#music








