Showing posts with label vulnerable. Show all posts
Showing posts with label vulnerable. Show all posts

Freedom from democratic regulation of externalising costs - the driver of anti-masking ideology.

Observing what has been happening, I have made an assessment that the use of the language of 'restrictions,' if it is deliberate, is most probably designed to trigger the 'my personal freedom from tyranny' emotional hook. Nobody likes to feel restricted. It's a way to nudge an opinion set that dismisses evidence.

In this blog piece I want to explore how that trigger works, why I think it is being exploited for political reasons, what the effects are of such intentional triggering and why I think it is lethal to all our futures. I want to show how it relates to a constellation of problems as a key, as a critically important distraction, deflection, obscurant strategic weapon.

The ability and willingness of certain agencies to exploit this trigger more or less guarantees that this pandemic will run on and on and on causing incrementally more harm, with no end in sight.

I say incrementally causing more harm because the assumptions about the nature of the virus and it's impacts are incorrectly assessed and thus measures to limit those harms - measures to uphold the populations right to health - are conflated with undermining personal liberty, even as this government outlines very real legislation that undermines civil liberties and diminishes Government accountability.

"who will we not save?" as they sought to 'protect the Hoard'..

The effect of saying "We are imposing restrictions" is quite different the effect of "We are implementing preventative public health measures to protect the populations Right to Health."

If the strategy is to allow spread to achieve herd immunity, then it would be useful for the Government to create a scapegoat and exploit that vector to insulate the Government from the costs such a strategy will incur. The Government must not pay the price, and so others will be made to carry the cost. This is an externalised cost exercise.

Non-Essential Travel is Tinder for the Virus.

In the most simplistic terms, if SARSCOV2 cannot meet a new host, it will die out.
Suppression of  transmission of the virus in the community is the most effective strategy in dealing with an epidemic of an infectious pathogen.

Stopping the spread is spreading the love.

However, in global terms this strategy is only as strong as the weakest or least effective implementation of it. Any country that allows spread of the virus will generate variants, and successful variants will select for more efficient replication, transmission. Where we have huge unknowns is the virulence of new variants - we cannot predict future virulence and this means allowing spread is taking a terrible gamble. England has been a significant weak link in terms of global transmission suppression, as has the US and EU.

This takes on another dimension when it is a question of travel between countries or within countries, in the midst of a pandemic of  new highly infectious air borne virus, when we cannot predict long term outcomes, even as we observe short and medium term harms. International Travel, because it always involves enclosed spaces and a mix of people who are exposed to each other for significant periods, operates as a dating app for this virus. This kind of travel is inherently risky for spread of SARSCOV2.

Right to Health.

When powerful lobbies with immense economic interests advocate for their interests at the expense of the whole population, at the expense of the populations Right to Health, we see a conflict of interest, and an externalising of costs occurs. The people pay the price. 

What is one years economic activity in the great scheme of things, compared to many, many years of life lost to death and long term disease?  This kind of question arises in other areas. What is the value of high processed foods industrial economic activity and profit taking that leads directly to dietary disease, compared to the costs of dietary disease?

If we had regulation that limited high processed foods, that removed them from our food shelves, would that be a 'restriction' or a 'public health measure'? New Zealand is going to ban sale of tobacco. 

Is that a restriction? Is it a rational public health measure? Do the 'rights' of Tobacco Company shareholders trump the rights of people vulnerable to addiction who are being exploited?

Here we see the choice of the word 'restrictions' clearly has a political and economic meaning.

Economic liability, externalised costs.

In the case of a loss of business imposed by a Government 'restriction' - an order to cease flights - the Government is liable to some degree for compensation to those adversely affected. 

The affected Business lobby will have a reasonable claim that since the Government is restricting it's ability to function it deserves adequate support for the duration of that limitation.  That was not the case with the travel lobby - they lobbied for continuation of their business, they lobbied for spreading the virus as one outcome of that stance. It was not their intention, yet that is precisely what happened.

I know of someone who flew to Thailand this week, for a holiday. Upon arrival he was tested, and found to be infected, and infectious. It is likely that he picked up the virus just before he flew out, in public transit or at the airport, and was incubating during the flight, totally unaware of his condition.

That person had to quarantine for 12 days and do regular tests. He was without symptoms. He was bored. He tried to bend the rules. He was more concerned with his personal freedom, the irritation he felt because he had to quarantine than he was with protecting the Thai population. His reaction is quite typical among wealthy westerners who think international travel is their right. The sovereign individual. Me, me, me.

It's not his fault, it is the culture that has acculturated him so that he behaves as he did. He could easily have taken a holiday anywhere in the UK. He felt an entitlement to undertake international travel, travel that is spreading the virus, in the middle of a global pandemic. He is one of millions.

Throughout this pandemic there has been no travel lobby seeking to protect the population's Right to Health. The travel lobby is happy to externalise the costs of spreading the virus - the travel lobby was unwilling to share those costs.

Tourist travel spreads the virus

Since February 2020, I have had a sense that something was off about the insistence  upon maintaining tourist and holiday travel - non-essential travel -  because I could not help but notice  how much of a vector of spread of the virus such non-essential travel was, precisely because effective quarantine arrangements were resisted and were not put in place. 

The first two waves of SARSCOV2 spread within the UK are entirely down to the Government's deliberate choice to reject quarantine, to reject precise tracking of where the virus was, to reject mass testing to chase down the virus, to reject support for isolation and to allow open, unchecked borders.

It was that choice more than any other that seeded SARSCOV2 into the UK. The media were full of the narrative 'the China Virus' when by February 2020 it was the Spanish, Italian and Austrian Ski Holiday Virus, even as the East Asian countries were proving that suppression of community transmission is the most effective way to avoid the avoidable harms which the USUK Governments did not avoid - by choice.

Where there were proven suppression of community transmission strategies put in place, community transmission was much more reduced. That's the basic scientific truth here.

Measures designed to reduce harm in an epidemic of infectious disease are more correctly described as preventative public health measures. They are not necessarily restrictions. When viewed in this context they are not sensed as restrictions - even as they do require temporary limitations on behaviour - it is understood that the measures are protective and that they are temporary, and that once the threat has subsided, the measures can be withdrawn, and the limitations thus evaporate as they are no longer necessary.

That protection that could have been organised, and funded if Governments and travel lobbies had put populations right to health at the top of their priorities. The protection evaporated. 

Freedom to trade trumped the Right to Health. 


How selfish, and to be honest, how cruelly reckless.

The Oligarchy are waging a war against democratic legislative regulation of Wealth Extraction grounded in toxic industrial practices which incur costs when they are not cleaned up or prevented. Those costs are kept at a distance. Those costs are externalised from the economic activity of the operations from raw material sourcing through processing, manufacture, distribution, sale, consumption and end of life of product.

The Free Market Fundamentalists and Industry leaders choose to see such regulation as might be required to prevent those costs from being incurred in the first instance, let alone dealt with when they are incurred, as a form of tyranny. "We will not let you restrict our Wealth Extraction by reducing our profitability by demanding we pay all those costs." 

They understand that the demand by a growing and significant cohort of reliable scientists, concerned citizenry, NGOs and some government officials for corrective and adaptive action on climate change, on environmental degradation, pollution of air, land and sea, on species loss and other related matters, including mass poverty, low wages and corrupt influence of legislators represents a threat to their 'liberty' to carry on extracting wealth even as it causes harm and to externalise the costs of that harm. 

Democratic legislative  regulation is deemed to be an enemy of their ability to extract wealth and their capability to and willingness influence legislatures to protect that wealth extraction. Democratic regulation is a threat to their political power, power which stems from their Wealth Extraction.

However they cannot stand in the town hall and make that plain. They must find other ways to protect their interests and this puts them into conflict with our collective interests.

Political Grooming Gangsters.

By deploying emotional hooks that conflate emotive notions of individual freedom within existing democratic systems with a vaguely defined Libertarianism, the Oligarchy have been able to enroll the 'Mask is a Muzzle Freedomeers' in a process that is undermining democratic regulation to protect the populations right to health, and this is inextricably linked to the protection of their Wealth Extraction Systems and their toxic industrial practice of Externalised Costs. 

Trump, Brexit and anti-masking, anti-vax, anti border quarantine, open up the economy, let the vulnerable take it on the chin - these are all views that are underpinned with funding and logistical support from the Oligarchy of the Wealth Extracting Industrial giants. They are not emergent concepts, that have popped up from the grass roots of society, as an organic awareness and movement. These ideas have been developed and promoted by the Oligarchy, and seeded into vulnerable parts of the population through a process of political and ideological grooming.

Percentages or persons?

There is a pattern where people opposed to public health measures cite that only a small percentage of people die from Covid - they ignore the reality that a small percentage of a massive population is a lot of people dying avoidable deaths.  The Covid Freedomeers dismissal of the lives of so many vulnerable people is a good example of externalising costs

The vulnerable must pay the price incurred in the strategy of allowing spread of the virus beyond control in order to keep the economy open. The cost is externalised. 

The people who will gain from keeping the economy open in ways that place the vulnerable at greater risk that they ever needed to be placed at, will not pay the price. 

The vulnerable pay the price.

The Covid Freedomeers do not draw attention to how many of any given population have pre-existing conditions, which elevates their risk of death and disease and harm, exponentially. That is why they cite percentages. To evade the human realities.

The vulnerable will pay the price of the Freedomeers ill-advised reckless endangerment.

Then there's the matter of post infection chronic disease, which is rarely discussed in honest detail - as I write close to 2% of the total population of adults across the UK are suffering with varying degrees of Long Covid. 1.3 million people, who did not have this chronic disease burden prior to January 2020. 1.3 million people whose condition could have been avoided.

Not avoiding avoidable harms - externalising costs.

The Freedomeers claim that protecting the vulnerable undermines their Freedom, even though the evidence is that where States and populations have adopted best practice public health measures, and have pursued strategies to suppress transmission of the virus within the territories of the State whilst protecting borders with effective quarantine and screening, both economy and civil liberties fare much, much better - not to mention the right to health of the population is upheld and preserved.

Here's some of the evidence for my observation.

a) www.99-percent.org/what-is-the-market-fundamentalist-agenda/ - a detailed blog examining the ideological stance of the Free Market Fundamentalists, drawing on their own published writings and legislative action.

b) https://bylinetimes.com/2021/02/02/cambridge-analytica-psychologist-advising-global-covid-19-disinformation-network-linked-to-nigel-farage-and-conservative-party/ - the same people who orchestrated the vast manipulative targeting operations that 'won' Brexit and Trump's Election are also heavily involved in COVID misinformation and disinformation, and keep the economy open lobby groups with privileged access to senior ministers in the Government.

c) https://bylinetimes.com/2021/10/01/inside-the-radicalised-anti-vaxxer-network-influencing-government-vaccine-advisory-panel/ an exploration of one of these groups and their direct links to Government, allowing them to influence Government policy without adequate oversight, and with a decidedly malign intent.

d)  https://graphika.com/reports/ants-in-a-web/ - just one example of many, where wealthy billionaires and states operate psychological manipulation campaigns that undermine healthy democracy, and attempt to drive behaviour that can be exploited.

"Exiled Chinese businessman Guo Wengui, who fled China to evade trial for Corruption, is at the center of a vast network of interrelated media entities which have disseminated online disinformation and promoted real-world harassment campaigns. The network acts as a prolific producer and amplifier of mis- and disinformation, including claims of voter fraud in the U.S., false information about Covid-19, and QAnon narratives."

e) https://blog.f-secure.com/the-psychology-of-election-hacking/ - a concise blog that looks at psychological targeting operations.

"Election hacking is perhaps the most topical example of what the combination of hostile information-technological and information-psychological activities can mean in the modern information environment. It has government officials asking whether malicious information activities targeting elections could be the new normal."

f) https://bylinetimes.com/2021/02/15/gb-news-funder-legatum-linked-to-koch-climate-denial-network-us-race-baiting/ - US Free Market Fundamentalists linked to UK News Press Media operations spreading Covid misinfo and climate denialism and other fallacies, designed to divide electorates and thus weaken or impede democratic solidarity to evolve regulation of toxic industries.

g) https://bylinetimes.com/2020/12/02/ministry-of-defence-funds-man-behind-great-barrington-declaration/ - Weaponised mass communications in a Covid setting. Government, Military and extreme right wing free marketeers working together.

h) https://dwylcorneilius.blogspot.com/2021/06/grooming-how-it-operates-why-it-works.html my own blog examining how grooming works, why it works, using Brexut as  a case study (not exhaustive) and suggesting ways to prevent profoundly psychologically abusive such campaigns

Cognitive Disssonance Weaponised.

There are a number of internalised conflicts inherent in the Anti-mask Freedom lobby, not least that they are being exploited by the very people they most often claim are engaged in a conspiracy of tyranny - the Oligarchy.

By triggering emotional hooks related to vague notions of personal freedom, they blind the Covid Freedomeers to the Freedom the Oligarchy desires - freedom from rational democratic regulation of Wealth Extraction and Toxic Industrial practices - and enrol the Covid Freedomeers in demolishing rational democratic governance.

Now, to be honest, as much as I find the position of the Covid Freedomeer an irritant, I was myself fully hooked into Conspiracy Theory, New Age Woo and other belief systems that ignored evidence, and that exploited my vulnerability.

I do have deep reservations about the nature of State power as it operates within the current  historical context, understanding as I do, as many of us do, that the origins of The State System are steeped in blood letting, that the evolution of the Rulers localised institutionalised 'right' to  exercise violence, to 'defend' their realms from external and internal enemies and to engage in war fare runs counter to egalitarian principles and usually causes great harm to workers, and rarely do the Ruling Class bear such harms.

Of course, I and many, many people see the potential for healthy democratic development of a truly equitable social power system as it has played out in the past, and  is playing out in the present. 

We are all aware of the potential trajectories of a more democratic system of Governance focused on Justice, Equity and Humanity,  into the future (Power Inquiry 2006, UBI, Blockchain Policy Fora, People's Assemblies, Egalitarian Democracy).

We live within an historical context that is the struggle to end oppression.

Trade unions were an expression of that struggle, as were The Suffragettes, Martin Luther King, the struggle against Apartheid and the struggle of workers to attain decent working conditions, education for their children, health care systems for their communities and much else besides.

In the 21st Century, the Unions of the grass roots will need to expand well beyond the work place and working conditions...

Schools, Hospitals, Care Homes, even our own homes are the new political battle fields, fora for dissent and laying the ground work for collective change, countering oppressive corruption, building healthier democratic systems that serve all our futures, that nurture our world instead of exploiting and damaging our world.

The Grooming Operations are a very important element of the way oppressor class maintains it's hegemonic stance, a very potent weapon and we must understand why so many are vulnerable to that kind of persuasion, because we need to help them and us to break free of that persuasion, in order to build social grass roots solidarity that we need to confront the problems of Power.

https://dwylcorneilius.blogspot.com/2021/11/the-industrial-system-is-inherently.html

"The Industrial System is inherently adversarial: it treats those who are harmed by the Industrial System, those who bring attention to the harm, in order to stop the harm, as adversaries. 

Insulate Britain

The custodial sentences imposed on Insulate Britain activists for contempt of court are clearly a contempt of our collective welfare. In the same way that Shell's move from Holland to England is. In both cases, those who drew attention to harm and suggested ways to prevent the harm are being treated as adversaries.

Another way to put it is like this: political power struggles undermine healthy governance - adversarial dynamics inhibit co-operative dynamics. Any relationship that has a power struggle within it is likely going to be toxic.

Industrial political Power is inherently adversarial in that it is profitable only because its foundation for wealth extraction is created by externalising costs.

Those who bear the pain of the costs and bring attention to that pain, and those costs, are considered as adversaries.

When those who are harmed find a voice and become advocates to confront the harm causation, with an eye to stopping the harms, the industrial cult treats them as enemies to be crushed. 

This is a reactionary stance - the cult wishes to preserve the extraction of wealth above all else, and will attack anyone who questions the morality or wisdom of extracting wealth at such a cost. 

It will take every measure available co-opt anyone who proposes solutions in order to control any proposed change.

Kindest regards

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

Landing a lander on Mars whilst bombing Yemeni villagers is not 'Progress'.

Landing a lander on Mars whilst bombing Yemeni villagers is not progress, just as landing a man on the Moon whilst bombing Vietnamese villagers was not 'progress'' - there is an argument that it represents a technical progress, but that is all it represents, at best, and to hold it up as human progress or cultural progress is nonsense, irrational and an avoidance of the realities we all must face.


Man on the Moon 1969


Vietnam 1969



Yemen 2020


Mars Lander 2021

A poem, by Gil Scot Heron, might find resonance today in Yemen or Libya or Syria, and indeed within the United States even still, where Racist violence by Police is as common as pie.


A rat done bit my sister Nell.
(with Whitey on the moon)
Her face and arms began to swell.
(and Whitey's on the moon)
I can't pay no doctor bill.
(but Whitey's on the moon)
Ten years from now I'll be payin' still.
(while Whitey's on the moon)
The man jus' upped my rent las' night.
('cause Whitey's on the moon)
No hot water, no toilets, no lights.
(but Whitey's on the moon)
I wonder why he's uppi' me?
('cause Whitey's on the moon?)
I was already payin' 'im fifty a week.
(with Whitey on the moon)
Taxes takin' my whole damn check,
Junkies makin' me a nervous wreck,
The price of food is goin' up,
An' as if all that shit wasn't enough
A rat done bit my sister Nell.
(with Whitey on the moon)
Her face an' arm began to swell.
(but Whitey's on the moon)
Was all that money I made las' year
(for Whitey on the moon?)
How come there ain't no money here?
(Hm! Whitey's on the moon)
Y'know I jus' 'bout had my fill
(of Whitey on the moon)
I think I'll sen' these doctor bills,
Airmail special
(to Whitey on the moon)

Whitey's on the Moon by Gill Scott Heron 1970

I was 14 years old, 1973, when I realised the tech spin-offs of war were not worth the harms that war causes. To claim the benefits is to ignore the meaning of the harms.

Infamously Madelaine Albright dismissed the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children over the course on a decade of warfare against Iraqi Ruler, Saddam Hussein, who was elevated to power by American influence on Iraqi politics "We think, we think It was worth it!" was her thoughtless commentary, when questioned about those deaths, the cost to Iraqi civil society and it was indicative of the cult she was a member of.



Madelaine Albright - "I think this is a very hard choice"
- a choice made for the Iraqi children and their parents, not by them.

The culture of Violent Hierarchy, the culture of competing industrialised militarised powers as the dominant culture among modern human societies, is a cult. Generalised acceptance of any cult is typically based on false beliefs, misinformation, gaslighting and disinformation. I know this from personal experience, having been hooked into a number of cults in my life time. 

Cultish Beliefs.

The Malthusiams of Boris Johnson are likewise cultish beliefs which are directing the disastrous management of the Corona Virus epidemic sweeping across Britain in successive waves - he obviously believes the costs of the 130,000 (and rising) fatalities, the 250,000 long covid cases, the disproportionate burden borne by disabled people are a price worth paying 'to protect the Economy' (which it clearly is not doing).

Those who in the UK compare the costs of the 'successful' Mars lander operation against the budget of the deliberately 'failed' UK Test and Contact Trace mission are missing the point.

Comparing one success of the abuse system against another failure of the abuse system, without calling to mind that it is an abuse system, without acknowledging in full the harms caused by the abuse system and without putting the harms front and foremost for attention, accountability and prevention is irrational, it is a non sense.

Crowing over the success of one element of the abuse system to highlight the failure of the other is  illogical, dismissive and deeply, profoundly disrespectful and callous..

It's very similar in behavioural dynamic to what happens within an abuse family dynamic.

An abuse family system, institutionalised.

The same 'family' system that landed the lander on Mars is waging illegal, amoral wars that are killing families, destroying communities, crushing entire civilian infrastructures of whole countries.

The same 'family' system that landed the lander on mars and photographed the landing from above the lander, in live real time, from the drop modules angle, an 'amazing feat' which 'has never been seen/done before' is engaged in wars that cause wholesale slaughter, and is deliberately mismanaging epidemics that are killing hundreds of thousands of people.

The UN called for a total ceasefire of wars in April 2020. Their call for common sense was ignored by the primary war mongers.

"Freedom!" people cry. "We have such great Freedoms!" 

Others claim: "Our Freedoms are being imperilled! Don't wear a Muzzle!"

Both of these are lies.  Cultish lies.

In the UK and USA there is no public domain discussion of zero community transmission strategy.  We know that News Media in co-ordination with the political hegemony of the ruling faction are censoring any discussion of zero-covid strategies. There is no freedom.  The temporary need to stay indoors is not a loss of freedom, as some idiots claim. It is common sense. Stopping the spread is spreading the love. 

There are lobbyists who are deploying the harms caused by bad management to argue for opening up, which is worse management, rather than argue for better management as in a zero community transmission strategy. They too talk non sense, they adopt an irrational and holly unjustifiable position.

Vulnerable Peoples Lives Matter.  

Vulnerable people such as the disabled, people with 'learning disabilities', people with chronic disease are subject to 'rationing' of healthcare resources and doctors are ordered by Government to adopt 'do not resuscitate' orders as a rationing policy for these vulnerable people, who cannot dissent let alone consent to such a decision, simply because the Government of the day refuses to adopt a zero community transmission strategy. 

Between 24 January and 20 November 2020 in England, the risk of death involving the coronavirus (COVID-19) was 3.1 times greater for more-disabled men and 1.9 times greater for less-disabled men, compared with non-disabled men; among women, the risk of death was 3.5 times greater for more-disabled women and 2.0 times greater for less-disabled women, compared with non-disabled women.

source: Office for National Statistics 11 February 2021

We do not, as ordinary people in England, have the freedom to prevent the State, the Government and the News Media from ignoring the science. We do not have the freedom to prevent the State, The Government and the News Media from deliberately ignoring the proven established public health mandates for handling an epidemic, just as we have no freedom to prevent the State from engaging in war and pursuing deliberate harm causation policy. 

Boris Johnson lied in Parliament about the efficacy of zero community transmission, which we know is protecting the lives and economies of 1.8 billion people across East Asia and Oceania. It's not rocket science, it is best public health epidemiological science. He claims his policy is led by data, not dates and yet he coerces 10 million school children to attend unsafe schools on an arbitrary date even as community transmission is well above levels recorded prior to the first lock down two weeks short of one year previous.


Johnson lies in Parliament.

Tony Blair is still a free man.

Tony Blair also lied in Parliament.


When Prime Ministers lie in Parliament why must millions of innocent people pay the price?.


Progress? What Progress?

Landing a lander on Mars whilst killing hundreds of thousands of citizens with bad management of an epidemic is not progress. Removing Saddam Hussein at the cost of 600,000 Iraqi lives was not bringing democracy to Iraq, it does not represent progress.

We need to have one - progress - without the other - avoidable harms to vulnerable citizens -to be able to say that we are a safe and functional Democracy. That would indeed represent human progress.

We need to be able to land a lander on Mars and not be waging war, not be deliberately mismanaging an epidemic to be a safe and healthy Democracy.

This system is a cult. It is not a culture, it is barely a society, it is a nasty, violent hierarchical  cult.  we the ordinary citizens are caught in it's grip, stuck between a wall and a hard place, doomed by the cult's desire to retain, maintain, enhance and project it's power above all other considerations. I do not blame ordinary people - we are all victimised and dehumanised by this situation.

When a person has internalised the cult, that person cannot see it for what it is.

When a person has de-colonised from the cult, that person can see it for what it is.

This is the 21st Century.

Welcome to the truth.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

 "Do what you love, it is your gift to universe."

Gavin Williamson's emotional manipulation, his grooming tactics in public view.

"The grooming (gaslighting) of human vulnerability is one of most vile things any human being can do to another."



Freedom of Speech, abused.

 Gavin Williamson's speech on Saturday 16 May, his Corona Virus Education briefing from 10 Downing Street, was an abuse of the rights of Freedom of Speech. It was a deeply manipulative speech. I want to put it into context in this blog piece.

Let me first lay out a necessary qualification about Freedom of Speech in the Public Domain.

Free Speech

Free Speech is a Responsibility - it is neither an absolute Right or a Privilege.

The Responsibility is to speak honestly, to be evidence based, to be as good a listener as a speaker and to acknowledge what is verified, reliable and true as such, and to also acknowledge beliefs as made up, as guess-work at the very best.

Freedom of Speech is not a right to promote beliefs over evidence in matters concerning the shared commons.

Freedom of Speech is not a right to groom, manipulate or exploit others through use of language and various logical fallacies...

Freedom of Speech abused.

The Freedom Movement protesters in Hyde Park and elsewhere were a 'welcome' media distraction from Gavin Williamson's 'briefing' against teachers, parents, children and health and safety common sense. Their case was a mistaken interpretation of the meaning of Freedom of Speech and both they and the Secretary for Education denied the social responsibility inherent in the right to free speech. The distraction was welcome from the point of view of the Government. A minor incident elevated to a mass media 'news' story.

A few 5G obsessed anti-vaxxers, freedom campaigners and assorted conTheory spreaders gathered in Hyde Park, near speakers corner, an historical location for Free Speech in Public, to spout nonsense in  public, and to bully , manipulate and groom others to their beleif system and at the same time they chose to deliberately breach social distancing guidelines and regulations whichare necessary to stop the spread of the virus.

The Freedom Movement UK protesters were speaking futile nonsense to power. And asking to be arrested, as a piece of political street theatre. They were in fact fufilling Johnsons policy objective - more spread towards mythical Herd Immunity.

A few of the 200 or so 'activists' were arrested for potentially spreading an infectious disease, after receiving two verbal warnings to disperse under the Corona Virus regulations. The police action was rough, because the protesters resisted and that made for great video evidence of 'state suppression'.

The protesters will claim that their rights to Free Speech were being trampled upon. They were not arrested for anything they said. No surpirse there - reality is hardly their logical foundation.

They are as narcissistic as those they claim to oppose. Fodder for the narrative that the lock down is an injustice.

Lock down injustice.

Which it is, yet not in the way these protesters claim. Reality is much more detailed than their futile and ill-informed caricature allows.

The injustice inherent in lock down as it is being played out in the UK is that it is not being deployed to stop the spread of infection, to lead towards eradicating the viral spread within the UK population in order to protect the significant population of vulnerable people. It is being deployed to guarantee a slow spread of the infection, which does not protect the vulnerable.

That is utterly repugnant, and it is a political and economic choice of policy that undermines the health and safety of at the 11.5 million UK citizens with chronic disease conditions, and in particular the elderly in care homes and those with multiple conditions.

Education and Work.

Teachers Unions have been speaking truth to power since March, and continuing through April, on into May  and  continuing this week, by asking direct and pertinent questions about health and safety of returning to school in the midst of an uncontrolled epidemic.

Whilst the lock down has slowed the community transmission rate in London, elsewhere it is rising.

The infection spread is still out of control.

 Under control means we know where the virus has been, we know where it is and we have suppressed transmission to the degree that there have been no new cases of infection for at least two days or more. None of these are in place as I write. The spread of infection is uncontrolled.

The teachers unions are asking the Government to present their scientific and public health evidence that proves that it is safe to return children to school by asking clearly worded questions, presenting the scientific evidence their questions are based on. The Government is failing to respond in kind.

The teachers concerns are laid out in the 5 tests they set for safe re-opening of schools.

They have also issued a substantial document laying out the detail of their questions, a document which is also a useful learning guide for anyone interested in the matter, as it poses the questions, outlines the back ground of their concerns, presents the scientific evidence and study papers that their concerns are based on.

The Government has not responded in kind.

The British Medical Association has come out in full support of the teachers unions. Their concerns are justified, they are medically rational, a phrase Boris Johnson might be familiar with in the negation of that same term, from his speech on February 3rd in Greenwich.

Instead the Government and their advisors are spinning the numbers, they are painting a false picture of the risk of infection emerging within schools. The details are laid out on this blog, Corona Maths.

"Dr Jenny Harries went even further in order to justify the opening of schools on 1st June by saying “There’s a lot of anxiety I think around this but people need to think through – in an average infant school with 100 children the likelihood of anybody having this disease is very small and diminishing with time.”
Let’s be clear about this.
That statement is absolutely 100% untrue statistically.  
The likelihood is not small and there is no evidence that that likelihood will diminish with time.  So let’s explore what the implications for schools really are.

The Implications for Schools


She is an epidemiologist who should have a grasp of statistics so I can only assume that she is toeing a political line and that what she has said is deliberate rather than accidental."





The risk in returning children to school is still very, very high.  The spread of infection, the  incidence of community transmission is not under control,not by any standard measurement, and  teachers are being bullied, workers are being bullied whilst many businesses are being stressed by lack of adequate economic support, bad policy decisions an d we are all subjected to misleading public narratives.

Emotional Blackmail and Gaslighting.

The Teachers Unions and the BMA were publicly gas-lighted by Education Secretary Gavin Williamson, in his briefing from 10 Downing Street, Saturday 16th May.

Williamson attempted to groom the general public, the students and the parents into enrolling in an attack on the teachers.

Here is the video of Gavin Williamson's odious speech.


He carried out a classic grooming exercise in full public view.

He intruded into circle of trust, he primed his audience, he then used emotional blackmail to bind them in to his agenda, and then launched a series of snide attacks where he deployed emotional triggers,  laid guilt trips aimed at teachers unions and the BMA, to undermine in the public view their evidence based concerns about health and safety of the teachers, the children, their parents and elder relatives. Machiavellian to the core.

Like he really cares about vulnerable children, or vulnerable adults, having voted for policies that are proven to have caused harm to vulnerable during the past few years, even when evidence was presented of those harms.

"School is the safest place for children from unhappy homes."  Emotional black mail.

"School re-opening is based on best scientific advice." Twaddle. They are unwilling to present that evidence. It does not exist.

Evil is as evil does.

Here is the transcript of that speech.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/education-secretarys-statement-on-coronavirus-covid-19-16-may

On getting children into school as soon as possible.

Here I will examine some of his statements, and indicate the tactics.

"This is particularly important for vulnerable and disadvantaged young people. There are some who would like to delay the wider opening of schools."

*( speaking to the wider electorate, entering into the circle of trust, blatantly lying to do so - schools are already open for vulnerable children - here, and here . and *here *even though many are not turning up where provision has been made for them, presumably because their parents are concerned with the risks of transmission of infection which might be brought back into family homes where vulnerable unwell or elderly adults share homes, a reasonable concern..)

"But there is a consequence to this."

*(Guilt tripping the teachers, frightening the parents, gaslighting the wider public to think teachers are putting selfish concerns ahead of children's well being)

"The longer that schools are closed, the more children miss out. Teachers know this. Teachers know that there are children out there who have not spoken to or played with another child of their own age for the last two months."

 *(guilt tripping the teachers in front of workers, talking about the teachers in the third person to the workers)

"They know there are children from difficult or very unhappy homes for whom school is their happiest place in their week. It’s also the safest place for them to be and it’s thanks to their teachers and the support that their teachers give to them that they are safe and happy."

*(those who are keeping these children out of school by blocking a return are harming these children, - emotional black mail)

The poorest children, the most disadvantaged children, the children who do not always have support they need at home, will be the ones who will fall furthest behind if we keep school gates closed.

*(guilt tripping the teachers in front of the public)

"They are the ones who will miss out on the opportunities and chances in life that we want all children to benefit from what teachers and schools deliver for them."

* (the claim is false, and he implies it is the fault of teachers if these children are failed )

So we’re asking some children to come back from the 1 June. And we are asking schools to adopt a number of strict protective measures.

*( he is asking for children of workers to return  - and he knows the Government have not answered the Teachers Unions evidence based questions on Health and Safety, and that those questions will not be answered in his briefing).

Context.

So to place this into the fullest context,  we must take on board the meaning of the UK Policy of slow spread of the infection, and what it really means, and what motives might lie behind it.

The speech by Johnson last week (May 10th) was about getting workers back to work. 

Protect the economy! Be alert! Get back to work!

He used deliberate, tactically vague instructions to set workers up for a fall, either way - if they are too cautious, they will be blamed for hurting the economy, and their employers will have a leverage to dismiss them, or refuse to support them.  If they take too much risk, they will be blamed for the adverse outcomes.

In order to really push that back to work agenda, more school children must be 'encouraged' to return to school so that parents are free to go to work. If they did not push for this, then at least half of parents would stay home because we know that many families both parents go to work.

There are 4.526,000 families with both parents at work.

That is a substantial number of workers, just over 9 million.

At present furlough is covering  6.3 million workers.

Even if the Government can get half of the parents back to work, they are looking at saving billions every month,  and at the same time they are increasing the potential for more slow spread of the infection, all at the same time.

Why is slow spread so important to this British Government?

What does slow spread really mean and what benefits does it accrue, and to whom?

Why does the UK Government reject the stop the spread, eradicate the virus within the population approach?

It would be utterly foolish to ignore these questions.

Especially when the Education Secretary is prepared to publicly behave in such a profoundly manipulative manner.

I am not personally frightened, as much as I am concerned. I have been very ill, for three weeks in March with lingering sense of infection into mid April. I feel much better now. Nowhere as well as I did before March.

I have gone beyond fear now, I am mostly furious and I also understand anyone who is vulnerable being fearful, not so much of the bug as of the Government and it's reckless behaviour.
,
The media are portraying our concern as fear, as timidity, as way to gaslight us, to bully us into submission.

It's really ugly to look at and see.

What is going on here?


Kindest regards

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

https://www.reverbnation.com/corneilius

https://www.corneilius.net

https://www.soundcloud.com/coreluminous

The Fit, The Chronically ill, Poverty and the Economy - between a rock and a hard place. Stop the Spread.

The thing that strike me most about this virus SARSCOV2 is that it is a highly infectious viral infection, in that it transmits from human to human with relative ease.

There is a period where the infected person shows no symptoms,  the person feeling no symptoms is wholly unaware of it and is therefore spreading the virus to other human beings without knowing that he or she is a vector of the viral spread.

Therefore  the virus can run through any culture where there are many large group phenomena such as international travel on planes, boats, trains, shared public transport, pubs, clubs, football matches, prisons, care homes, parliaments, apartment blocks, temples of all kinds and large family homes and much else besides.

There is a blind spot among some fit healthy people that I have been feeling into and I will explore what this is in this article. "It can't be all that bad."



The dynamics of close urban living organisation and a silent virus.



In effect an invisible spread before any signs of it happening ever emerge.

Many people will become infected and they will show no symptoms at all. Their immune systems get on top of the virus before it causes any problems. Nobody is any the wiser. Nobody is at fault. We do not know why this is the case. All we have to go on is the experience. What happens.

Fit, healthy people can pretty much shake it off.  There are exceptions, of course, and whilst media tend to hype those or minimise them, we are still learning about the disease state as we go and fear is not really useful, whereas caution is.

Stay calm, act responsibly for the whole community.

For the people with strong immune systems the viral infection appears to them to be a not so serious problem. For some it's not. There is no way to predict in advance if one is one of the unlucky few. It is a gamble, a risk.

For people whose immune system is compromised, the issue becomes the disease, COVID19.

The disease is what happens when the virus begins to replicate faster than the body's immune system can cope with, and starts to impact on the body. When the body's immune system response is not robust enough to stall the viral replication which destroys body tissue.

That is what the disease is - the destruction of tissues within the body as the virus takes over cells and then destroys the cell once it has replicated many more copies within the cell, releasing the replicates which seek out new cells and these repeat the cycle, thus destroying enough cells to cause a variety of breakdowns depending upon which tissue is affected, that can then lead towards death : liver, kidney, gut, lungs and heart can all be impacted.

The disease COVID19 is really, really dangerous to a significant percentage of those who have chronic immune compromising health issues, or co-morbidity's.

That is why the Government and NHS has issued instructions to people at risk to shield themselves.

If you can imagine what it is like to live in what is called shielded status, where you cannot be touched by anyone in your immediate family, for months on end, for a year, for a year and a half. A situation where everything that comes to you has to be washed and cleaned, a situation where all your facilities such bath, toilet, clothes washing and handling and all your cooking, if they are shared,  must be policed with constant attention to detail every time anyone in your household uses those shared facilities. Imagine being confined to one room.  Imagine have to think about every move you might make outside that one room.

Add to that the conflicting narratives that percolate across news media and social media, spreading confusion and uncertainty, and then we can see that there is an extra avoidable element of situational  stress loaded onto people who are already dealing with significant stresses not of their own making.

Can you imagine living as an elder in care home that is shielded? The complexity and pressures that are added to those that already exist? What must it be like to be a carer at home?

What must it be like for carers working in large care homes?

In the UK population of people with multiple conditions is about 15 million people.  Not all are shielded of course. There are degrees of vulnerability.

In the USA it is about 83 million people.

The existing data from around the world suggests that about 20% of that cohort will, if exposed to the virus, experience severe and critical symptoms of the disease, and about half of those will potentially become fatal. Breakdown of the bodies systems and organs. This is a horrific way to die. 

How do we protect those people?

To protect the 10%  most at risk we must protect all of those people who could be vulnerable.

Co-morbidity, Disability and Vulnerability within a stressed culture.

The impact of multiple stressors on the human body and psyche that arise from living within a culture where chronic stress and inter-generational trauma patterns remain largely unresolved is well understood in the medical world and not widely understood across the grass roots.

Observe  how even media will publish articles that castigate people suffering from obesity: fat shaming is one aspect. Blaming smokers, suggesting they are doing it to themselves and should pay for their treatment, whilst protecting the Tobacco makers, even though we know that smoking involves addiction, The NHS offers treatment for that and other addictions.

There is the all too common negative attitude towards disabled people.

This makes gathering the intention of the population to focus on the needs of the vulnerable more difficult than in ought to be. Nonetheless the majority of people are decent, and will take into consideration the vulnerabilities of their fellow citizens.

To protect the vulnerable, those people with multiple combined health issues, the only proven strategy is to stop them from getting the infection in the first place.

They must not meet the virus.

We do not have a vaccine. There are no medicines that can reliably prevent escalation of the disease or can be used as treatments of the disease. There is evidence that vitamin D and C have offer some degree of immune system boost. There is evidence reducing stress reduces immune system effectiveness, so it stands to reason that reducing stress improves immune response.

SARS was a corona virus pandemic that happened in 2003.  It was less infectious than SARSCOV2  but more more lethal, with a case fatality rate of 60%, and because it generated symptoms rapidly it was much easier to trace and close down.

We still have no vaccine for that particular virus. The Governments in countries affected by SARS working with the WHO,  informed populations of the threat and what needed to be done, contact tracing, quarantine, treatment in isolation, limiting movement for a period, and they stopped the spread, and in time eradicated the virus from the population. The same procedure was applied in 197-18 epidemic. The process has been learned over a 100 year term, with new learnings since SARS in 2003. In clearest terms we know that suppression of transmission can lead to elimination of transmission, and that cause eradication of a virus that cannot live outside a human body.

We hear talk of a vaccine.

However vaccines are very difficult to make, and even more difficult to test to the degree that they can safely be used across entire populations. Such is the risk that Governments indemnify vaccine makers from litigation and financial compensation that arise when a few cases of vaccination cause severe and lethal reactions.

There are only two strategies that can protect vulnerable people in this situation.

One strategy is to isolate all vulnerable people from the general population, to isolate them from any possible community infection vector.  To enclose them behind a virus proof barrier.

That is really, really really difficult, and made much more difficult if you allow the rest of the population to slowly become infected while you wait for a vaccine. Waiting for a vaccine is not a health and safety protocol. Slow spread is not a health and safety protocol.

Those who service the vulnerable must  also be isolated from the general population.

If they become exposed,  then they must be set away from the vulnerable until they become provably immune, and can then re-introduced to continue their caring work - but they will still have to adopt clean site protocols upon entry into each caring facility as they could still carry the virus in by fomite transmission. Or they must live and work within the isolate environment of the point of care situation.

You have to somehow generate a population of immune people to service the vulnerable to maintain that separation from the virus, and you have to maintain that population in constant state of vigilant surveillance for viral particle presence.

The other way to protect the vulnerable is to stop the spread across the entire population.

That is to say to eliminate the transmission of the virus from within a given population, which leads to eradication of the virus. Stop the spread, spread the love.

This is also difficult, but it is proven. We know it works.

It was proven in SARS and MERS, and in other outbreaks of infectious disease where human to human transmission was the vector of spread. Suppression of the spread of infection, leading to elimination of community transmission and eventual eradication when the virus can find no new human hosts, and it dies out.

The process is complex, yes. It requires a lot of human resources, and a lot of co-ordinated action willingly undertaken by citizens, businesses and state officials. What makes it complicated are political and economic agendas intruding on the Health and Safety requirements.

New Zealand, Vietnam and others are showing that stopping the spread is a viable policy choice, across very different populations and economies.

Economics and Health and Safety.

Governments that have chosen the slow spread approach have all done so for economic and political reasons, not for health and safety or public health reasons.

And there is another dynamic that clouds the judgement of many people in this matter, going back to the start of this article.

Fit, healthy people are to a large degree thinking of and quite rightly concerned with how any of the protocols to stop the spread, social distancing, contact tracing and quarantine of workers, and a general shut down impacts them, their jobs and livelihoods. Because of the media narrative that the disease does not affect fit, healthy people, that many if not most will have no symptoms or will experience very mild symptoms,they are not so much worried about getting the infection and suffering severe symptoms.

Many believe that getting the infection will grant them immunity, and that as such getting the infection is desirable, to get it out of the way. This is understandable.  They have not been given the full accurate picture. 

Support - in economic terms - to take on the task of stopping the spread in the UK is minimal, and conditional and not well organised, as it was offered in an off the cuff move. This makes it less likely that working folk in the UK will readily consider what it might take to stop the spread - if your livelihood is under threat that is a reasonable feeling to have. They solution is to provide adequate and timely support. That is the job of the State in this kind of situation.

Austerity.

In the UK there is a further complication, that being cuts to public services  and the decades long policy of restricting support to disabled and chronically ill people who require state benefit support, as pursued under the policy banner of Austerity.

That the general population has been unwilling  or disinterested in confronting this over the past ten or twenty years or so in any meaningful manner is largely a matter of how media refuses to cover the dynamic honestly, how ineffective Parliament has been as a body with oversight that reins in harmful policies, and how the media and right wing politicians have been pursuing narratives that undermine empathy for people who need and deserve support - the attack on the welfare state as a thing that undermines the economy.

The UN report into the mistreatment of low income, unemployed, chronically ill and disabled people in the UK, by Government policy, was barely noticed by the population, and almost totally ignored by the largely right wing media, and robustly denied by Government, without any firm rebuttal - because there was and is no defence of those policies given the harm they have caused.

With regards to SARSCOV2 and COVID19 the Government attitude and it's stance is clearly focused on the economy, rather than on the welfare of the whole population, fit and vulnerable alike. The poverty of 14 million people in the UK is real. The feeling of deprivation amidst a growing population of billionaires whose wealth gains are in inverse proportion to the wealth losses from the low income groups is real.

Ironically, many of the fit and healthy feel as if they are being oppressed by the situation of the shut down. That said most people are adhering to the social distancing measures, and are diligent in their compliance and that is a really wonderful phenomenon - I know that most people are decent people, caring people. That decency is not reflected in the corridors of power, as the PPE scandal and others reveals.

And there is a large degree of confusion and resentment across the divided UK electorate  which is largely a consequence of Brexit and the deliberate bipolar adversarial dynamic deployed by it's proponents. So we can see that there's a lot going on here.

Protect the Economy, allow slow spread of the infection.

The confusion of political and economic and ideological perspectives in News media and across social media that filter perceptions of the nature of the threat and we have a perfect storm that creates confusion when what is need is clarity so that the population as a whole understands what is happening and what needs to be done.

Stop The Spread is the only viable policy facing this infectious disease.

Slow the Spread renders the whole population vulnerable. Loss of income is a serious leverage in deflecting attention from the realities of the Governments chosen stance. But we must transcend that and integrate it to resolve this situation.

What we are looking at is a factor that will determine the lethality of this viral infection will be socio-economic - low income population are much more at risk in any situation where an epidemic occurs.

This is born out by the most recent statistics produced by the Office of National Statistics.

Socio-Economic Status

Low income is a factor, as much as health and fitness, or lack of it in outcomes during an epidemic.

Universal Basic Income for the duration of a stop the spread policy duration could resolve that issue, and it would put cash flow into the local economies. 

Global international general trade must take second place for the duration. Internationally, resources movement must take precedence over personal travel so that areas that are less developed are more effectively supported in stop the spread policy implementation. We need every state to follow the stop the spread protocols. We have to help each other through this.

Tourism and Air travel are luxuries that must wait. Both were major vectors of the global spread of the infection. Nobody is talking of blaming either of these, and nobody should. That said, caution must be the stance, a until we are in control of the pandemic.

The dynamics of power as a factor in the exploitation of the situation.

Bullies will always, always seek to exploit any emerging vulnerability in a family, village, town, organisation, institute or population where they hold degrees of power over others. This is a behavioural dynamic, almost an un-thought about reaction other than they will think about how to maximise the opportunity - they will not have to think about choosing to exploit the vulnerability, that will feel natural, second nature to the bully.

Trump, Johnson et al are clearly part of a bullying dynamic, as are their hard core supporters. Their behaviour reveals this. The hatred poured out at those who are their political opponents, the bile and the misleading narratives with which they project and scapegoat others is well documented.

I think that British Government and their sponsors have made a  huge strategic error in allowing and endorsing a slow spread in order to protect the economy. That choice means that the hit to the economy will be much, much worse than if they had chosen the stop the spread policy, because it will mean extended periods of economic disruption as successive waves of opening up and closing down inevitably flow from the slow spread policy towards the fiction of 'herd immunity'.

The hubris and the arrogance of that decision stops them from admitting it, and now they are just bluffing through, which is why the media denial is so intense.

There is still time to stop the spread, but it means we must remove those in Government who refuse to take on that policy, because they have ideological and economic attachments to the slow spread policy and they cannot be trusted to carry through a stop the spread policy. Because they have already caused so much avoidable harm, they must be prevented from causing any more. They must be held accountable, and they must prevented from causing any more harm. The prevention of more harm has to be the primary concern right now.

We must address the issue of acknowledging that the often unspoken origin of distress, disease and ill health across entire populations lies in how power is mediated,  and where that observation is avoided, ignored, muted and suppressed - we must confront the deliberate gaslighting focus on what is 'wrong' within the individual, that avoids addressing what is harmful about the culture itself.

That is a serious problem - the resolution of which must come from a widespread, accurate and wholly evidenced understanding of the situation and fuller engagement across the population based on that understanding. Honesty and transparency matter profoundly. Spin causes harm. Lies are wholly unacceptable.






Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe"

Thank you for reading this blog. All we need to do is be really honest, responsive to the evidence we find,and ready to reassess when new evidence emerges. The rest is easy.

What Nelson Mandela's media death-fest means to me.


Nelson Mandela is being used as mortar to point the cracks between the bricks of Empire. As toilet paper to wash the stained, putrid behinds of Power players. As a soporific to drown out the cries of the oppressed. He cannot speak in his own defence, for he has passed away. He is being abused again.

Nelson Mandela


image source : By Francisco Anzola from United States - Rivonia treason trial, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=83684810

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_Prepared_to_Die


The Marikana Massacre in 2012 stands as a testament to the reality of Power in South Africa. Striking African miners brutally shot to death by Police operating under the direction of the ANC. 

In much the same manner that the BBC fawned over Pope Benedict on 16-19 September 2010, during his 'State Visit' to the UK, the mainstream media fawns over the English Establishment, over the very people who have in the past expressed hatred for Mandela, yet who are now riding the bandwagon whilst pursuing policies Mandela himself described :

"If there is a State that has committed unspeakable atrocities in the world, it is the United States of America. They don't care for human beings."

What State does? Show me it. Prove it with outcomes, not with reference to slick slogans or empty aphorisms

Bush, Obama, Clinton and Bono, Cameron and Geldof and so many others, let alone the local lads, Jacob Zuma, Cyril Ramaphosa: these are all people whose political lies have led to the violent death of others with less power, people unable to defend themselves; these are all people who have enriched themselves at others expense and who defend their positions and proclaim their own innocence.

I find the lack of critical analysis in the mainstream media to be a horror.

All the more horrific given that Nelson Mandela went down the road of reconciliation with those who had abused him, because he understood that the urge for revenge amongst people who have been dreadfully, lethally abused is natural enough and yet, for peace to have a chance, that urge must be transformed, by personal and determined daily effort, into practical pathways towards understanding, honesty and material changes.

He also knew well that those who hold Power are capable of utter horrors, such as the US infiltration of South America with trained mercenaries, special ops and armed militia sent in to undermine democratically elected governments who failed to toe the line, who dared to claim the resources on their lands as their own 'strategic resources'. Such is the nature of the powerful abuser.

That those who were the abusers - the owners of the 'strategic resources', gold, coal, oil, silver, diamonds, platinum etc - manipulated that insight, that gift of Nelson Mandela to his country and to ALL the people of South Africa, that example of empathy and kindness, to preserve their economic power knowing it would mean that many, many millions of innocent people's lives would be adversely impacted, reveals a lot about those people and the institutions they utilise to preserve their grandiose and narcissistic 'civilisation'.

I find the mainstream media to be implicated in the abject failure of representative democracy as a tool to mitigate the effects of free-market economic ideologies (wealth hoarding at the expense of the vulnerable) and religious fundamentalisms (indoctrination of defenceless children and aboriginal peoples) and it's stealthy lack of genuine, meaningful support for those whose vulnerability is being abused by these two Institutional threads of greed - the greed for power and money and the greed for power and souls.

Not least because few journalists are capable or willing to look at the psychology of the Society they are a part of. They dare not go there. They dare not even look into their own internalisations, and so they project onto the world their own opinion and describe that as reality and attack with 'ad hominem' those who would try to reveal it for what it is. 

Snowden, Dr. Kelly, Manning, King, Nigella Lawson - that odious video is an attempt to distract from nature of the throat holder she co-habited with, and what that whole scenario really means.

None appear able to engage with history as a psychological study of intergenerational behaviour patterns that emerge out of trauma. So the past becomes irrelevant other than as a foot note, an aside, a curiosity or a justification for more abuse, based on the idea that that the historical abuse was so much worse and what is happening now is mild in comparison, and represents an improvement.

History as it is taught in schools is being utilised as toilet paper... to wipe clean that which has stuck, stinks and is deemed unpalatable for inspection.

None are willing to do more than repeat official lines or adhere to their editors instructions (the media version of the party whip) and offer their opinion (most opinions are useless when facts are the issue, because they reflect personal prejudices and are not journalism in the sense that democratic journalism is functional when it investigates power, and reveals what has been found, in such manner that the reader can grasp the basics of any given subject and then make informed decisions on how to act).

The entire thing is disgusting.

For me, the new age movement is dead, it is all deadly and incredibly boring. Dull as. False Hope has been beautifully packaged, wrapped in finery and sold as a way forwards, when it is backwards, insular and ineffective in bringing forward healthy activism.

It is as dull and unimaginative as is the concept of civilisation progressing, in some linear fashion towards an ideal, which is so often the claim of Power and those who are comfortable because they occupy a position of relative ease within the Power dynamic.

Taking up an aboriginal culture's philosophy as something to facilitate healing, or drive change with, is meaningless. Pacha Mama is not my word. The Vedas are not of my time. Ubuntu is drivel, when it is spoken by Europeans who refuse to acknowledge the truth of their own culture.

The dysfunctional myths of other cultures are irrelevant to my life.

Aliens are pointless distractions. Ceremonies are futile. Conspiracies are real and the theorists are un-realistic and unwilling to do the work that needs doing, not least on or within themselves, let alone in following the path that Nelson Mandela took. He had to dig deep to go where he went.

Eco-tourism is extravagance wading through the oppressed. High Culture is propaganda.

Unless it is with all the children, all the innocents, all the wounded, every single last one of them, not least the child within each adult, that personal place of vulnerable innocence, taking sides leads to sterile debates and furious that are a debasement of discourse and learning. Someone wins, someone loses: that is not a balanced situation.

If you think Facebook or your favourite bulletin board and the trolls are bad, try your media, your papers, your pubs, your pop music, your scriptures. It's all an abhorrent falsified performance of avoidance. Real addictions are painfully meaningful.

For me the dominant culture of power is boring and deadly, it is incredibly dull, severely and intentionally limiting, it is putrid, utterly rank, it stinks and is probably beyond being compostable. Useless.

That's what I get from the media reporting on the death of Nelson Mandela.

Of course we all have no choice but to live in this sewer that calls itself a high culture : we were born into it, we had no choice. I am so fortunate that my place in the sewer is relatively comfortable. I am so lucky I was not born in Iraq, Gaza, Palestine or Soweto or a council sink estate in the UK or a run down area in Detroit, where the neglect of power and wealth is real and the people who are suffering are blamed and pilloried for their suffering as though it was entirely their fault.

And so I praise the life in myself, the beauty in you, and in all people, the generosity of spirit I see all around, which thrives in spite of, not because of, that culture of Power.


Here are two songs that celebrate you and I.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCfHe5PfVxo

Occupy Common Sense

and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXAHHT3w-DM


Expectations of Every Child....





Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe