a 'fair' manifesto - survival of the just

Subtitle:

the Enlightenment; Gandhi & Marx vs. Rand; greed, plunder & rapine

Theme:

"Into every life a little socialism must fall."

Cooperation trumps confrontation.

Morality [1]:

"Do unto others ..."

"Do no harm."

Legality:

The 'basic' crimes are lying, cheating, theft and murder.

Lying is an assault against integrity; lie2 -n. 1 intentionally false statement (tell a lie). 2 something that deceives.[POD]

All cheating = rip-offs are theft; super/'windfall'-profits, crooked deals, depressed wages/conditions, etc..

War is murdering theft; violence is a resort of the IQ/morality/legality-challenged.

Status summary:

Starting possibly with Thatcher (Fraser was criticised for wasting time, so the theory must have been available '75+/-) we have been forced to endure a so-called 'free-market revolution,' comprised of neoliberalism + globalisation + resource-wars all foist upon us, often totally independent of the sheople's wishes. Proof: What the IMF *forced* upon so-called 'developing' economies was done to us apparently *voluntarily* by both political 'sides' i.e. in Aus by both Lib & Lab, more generally by so-called conservatives & progressives. More proof: Bipartisan *anything* = un- and anti-democratic; the voters even if fully & honestly informed (we're not) have/are offered *no* choice. Final proof: Thatcher's screech: "TINA!" = Totally, cruelly, maliciously wrong; of course there are alternatives.

Argument; what's needed:

'Correct' income distribution by a properly progressive income tax for individuals and an income/super-profit tax on corporations, an appropriate capital gains tax on all but the family home/farm & a gift/inheritance tax above a certain (not overly-generous) minimum. Where appropriate, reverse iniquitous privatisation(s).

Grounds: Thatcher's wily "There is no community, only individuals" means no dynasties either, let alone any 'free lunches'.

By all means, let the profit-motive rip (within reason, like not forcing anyone into deprivation), let the fat-cats keep their rather pointless scoring - but then recover all drastic excesses. Use the so-generated surplus to save our once jewel-like planet's ecosphere (it's only 101% critical for our collective survival). Gated communities just won't/can't save anyone, once the climate well & truly crashes (see melting Arctic ice, already happening).

Thatcher's "TINA!" is wrong; money creation to be by the commune, all interest flows to the commune, commune creates the bulk + interest & 'gives' that interest-portion to the government. The government's spending on *required* services & *shared* infrastructure provides the mechanism for paying the private-sector interest-component, thus avoiding the 'compound interest' paradox. Inflation target is to be 0% and population across the world should be encouraged to steadily fall towards (or below) the sustainable level. 'Sustainable' must imply *no* mining (sooner or later), that will anyway be *forced* latest when exhaustion is reached.

Possible theory sources:

1. Michael Hudson (tax property)

2. Ellen Brown (community banks)

-=*=-

So-called 'free-market' systems are failing; the *non-duplicable* 'required/normal' utilities (water, sewage, elec./energy, comms = road, rail & airports + phone, new = internet) + health. *For profit* privatisations are leading - you might have guessed - to more profit and less (egalitarian) service.

Another name for these vicious 'free-market' processes is financialization (note: "makes economic rents (= rip-offs) possible"); all possible income-streams are being purchased with borrowed money up to their full carrying capacity - less the grossly excessive management overheads (obscene CEO & lessers' 'remuneration' packages.)

Another term for this is 'misallocation of resources,' and in a world of *guaranteed* limited resources any 'wastage' amounts to a crime, not to mention higher prices = super-profits being ripped off the 'lower levels' to add ever more to the fat-cats' already obscenely over-full cash-coffers.

The 'free-marketeers' (Randians?) may have some point pushing their profit motive, but IMHO they've gone totally overboard. The priority *must* be directed to egalitarian delivery of required services at the fairest price. Obviously, extracting profits from health-care means higher prices and/or lower service = inhumane nonsense (inhuman adj. brutal; unfeeling; barbarous. [POD])

What is so outrageous is that one could see the resulting mess coming - for example, they trumpeted that we had/were getting a 'consumer-led' economy, whilst simultaneously *reducing* the sheople's incomes by off-shoring etc, and depressing conditions on remaining jobs - a guaranteed contradiction. Similarly, by a) flogging off the sheoples' utilities, govt. income-streams were ditched, b) by cutting taxes (mostly off the rich), govt. income was further reduced, forcing govts. into deficit = borrowing, all the while viciously cutting services = reducing lifestyles. Now we have govts. in debt almost everywhere; a spiral to the bankrupt-bottom. How clever was/is that? TINA, indeed!

Following the expression "Fair go, ya mug!" the profits of our collective efforts (workers + bosses, 'investors') must be equitably shared.

Following the expression "A fair exchange is no robbery," prices must be fair, not hide externalities, and profits must be reasonable - or taxed away if not.

Following the expression "There's nothing new under the Sun," there's probably adequate theory already available to solve our problems, restore humanity's track towards the Enlightenment and a well-earned relax for the currently fat-cat-oppressed. Brown & Hudson have given us some tips, where's the rest?

-=*=-

Musing; why does any of this matter?

Some accuse critics of financialization (-> rip-off profits & the rich getting ever-more obscenely richer), of the 'politics of envy.' IMHO incorrectly, but much more: the current system is deliberately, maliciously ignoring the biggest problem we face, namely the excess-CO2 climate-change catastrophe which, so far lacking effective countervailing action, is getting *less* avoidable thus *more* inevitable; something *must* be changed. Otherwise, the (irrevocable) end coming up?

How ignominious, to be shoved over a cliff and down the gurgler, all for ever-more profits to the ghastly mega-greedy.

Fazit: Freedom is fine and required;

  "... be free,
be whatever you are,
do whatever you want to do,
just so long as you don't hurt anyone." 
[Haîr/my conviction]

-=*end*=-

Ref(s):

[1] From my side-bar, musing; morals:

"Do unto others ... " is both necessary and sufficient; 'enlightened altruism' works in any size group, providing the members unite to 'enforce' it. Just as eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, the whole is greater than the sum of the parts - when those (human) parts cooperate. "Me, me me!" is a recipe for eventual disaster; any and all rippers-off must be rejected. Truth is more beautiful than brutal; lies are deployed only to deceive - all liars must be identified, and immediately thereafter any communication with such liars terminated. Note Lakoff-framing and avoid the negatives; merely conversing with a propagandist will extend his/her/its platform - simply point 'em out, then turn 'em off. Our future depends on eliminating most/all error and becoming strictly sustainable.

in order to avoid unintentional offence - a few Qs:

(mini-Miranda: all responses will be recorded - but not passed on);

Do you wish to remain anonymous? (y/n)

If 'n,' real name? (in header to any comment.)

1(+). Are you awed by the approaching perfection of 'the Enlightenment,' as typified by "Liberté, égalité, fraternité, etc." (nowhere that I know of actually on current 'democratic' offer) OR

1(-). Are you blinded by a weird, irrational belief in some phantasmal, conjured 'deity(ies)?'

[phantasmal -> phantom -n. 1 ghost, apparition, spectre. 2 mental illusion. -attrib. adj. illusory. [Greek phantasma][POD]]

2(h-). Are you a tyrannical capitalist, ripping sheople off at every turn, an administrative/managerial lackey of such, oppressing any/all associates/employee/serfs, OR

2(h+). Are you a 'salt of the Earth' worker, without whom we'd have no flush-torlets, sealed roads or airports for the fat-cats to land their obscenely profligate executive-jets upon?

[profligate -adj. 1 recklessly extravagant. 2 licentious, dissolute. -n. profligate person. profligacy n. profligately adv. [Latin profligo ruin] [POD]] - also applicable to ever-more fossil-carbon burning causing an ever-less avoidable climate-change catastrophe.

3. Do you support a) 'red in tooth&claw' economic Darwinism, ruthlessly exploiting all resources viciously to exhaustion, OR b) considered sustainability with progressive taxes supporting universal-human-rights utilities (water, sewage etc.) & critical services, i.e. Medicare (aka socialised medicine), elec., roads & other communications? Note that this is not a 'political' question, since (3a) has almost universal 'bipartisan' support; kindly note that bipartisan = un- and anti-democratic, since it offers the electorate *zero* choice.

4. Pro- OR anti-peace, i.e. what of the current Anglo/Judaic (US+Z) illegal, invasive murder-for-spoil attacks morphing to brutal occupations in the ME?

5. Pro- OR anti-justice vis-à-vis hapless mainly Arab/Muslim ELO/Os (Palestinians, Iraqis, Afghans, Pakistanis...), say?

6. Pro- OR anti-truth? (*Nothing* worthwhile needs the attempted 'camouflage' of deceit.)

IF I survive the above asking, THEN we can probably chat...

(And as for me (if any doubt remains), I'm looking/agitating for 'the Enlightened' fair & just solution.)

-=*=-

2nd round: Most significant -ves since '65 = US&Z (continuing) depredations, democracy failure, corrupt & venal MSM/TV (propaganda/lies).

Intermediate: Fall-of-the-wall was not an unrelieved good; a) nice for so-called 'freedom' but sad that b) the commies failed, sadder still that c) 'the East' gave themselves up to capitalism (carpet-baggers plus neoliberalism), which then oh, so cynically stripped them bare. But Q: Did they learn? A: By their voting (still more for 'Westernisation'); so far not - more MSM info-failure.

What (if anything) has improved (significantly)? IMHO: 1) Medibank -> Medicare (but under continuous attack), 2) PCs/Internet and 3) (marginally) mobiles. Disclosure: I blog for truth and justice and I iPod (mostly skiing), but I do not smart-phone (only as far as qwerty), nor do I tweet or facebook(?) and I barely ever 'do' TV (video etc.) except for some 'news' (+ F1.)

-=*=-

Musing: I find it uncanny, that a) the electorate breaks about 50:50 on most Qs, even stranger that b) the 50:50 break can be quite different, depending on the actual Q. Implication: At the best after the above questionnaire, I could get along comfortably with perhaps *half* the target audience, at v.worst as low as a 1/64th!

Not so BTW: The *differing* 50:50 splits constitute *ultimate proof* that no two-party system can 'satisfy' an electorate; *only* (fair, fully-informed & de-dumbed-down) referendums ever could.

-=*=-

Fazit: I counsel enlightened altruism; see side-panel 'musing; morals.'

blacker than the filthiest black [Ahmadinejad & 9/11; US&Z murder-for-spoil]

.. *all* who do not ...

  .. resist, make themselves ...

    .. accessories, and therefore as guilty as *sin*

Subtitle: *Total* leadership failure - both perpetrators and 'bystanders'

The big Q: Are they *sooo* stupid, or *deliberately* (murderingly!) malevolent?

-=*=-

Trigger article:

US fury over Ahmadinejad's 9/11 tirade
Updated September 24, 2010 08:06:00
  «Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has told the United Nations that most people believe the US government was responsible for the attacks of September 11, 2001.» 
[AusBC/justin]

Comment 1: Note AusBC's language; the Oh, so negative and prejudicial 'tirade.' Another report: "Ahmadinejad's latest provocation." Q: Is this fair and unbiased reporting?

Comment 2: IMHO, the *only* explanation that fits the 9/11-facts is that all three - not 'just' the two hit by aeroplanes, but *three* towers were pre-loaded with explosives and pre-wired for controlled demolition.

*Proof*: One only needs to look carefully at a few videos. Worth putting in a bit time & effort to 'refresh' your recall, you can get some here, note especially 'NTowerExploding'.

Comment 3: Now, we can see what we can see, and that fully nine years down the track. What then, of the so-called 'intelligence' agencies? Surely *they* are smarter than I am; IF I can be convinced, THEN what of them? IF the intel agencies can see what we can, AND they 'fearlessly advise' their political masters, THEN what do our so-called 'leaders' know, and since when?

Review my above 'big Q.'

Comment 4: The same goes for the (corrupt & venal) MSM, including publicly-financed broadcasters like 'our' AusBC, whose actual *job* it is to unvestigate then report: What do they know, and when did they know it? Yet the fantasy lie-cloud continues to be pushed, misinforming any/all who wistfully 'trust' our news *gate-keepers*.

Comment 5; Q: Why the UN walk-out? A: Cowards, liars and *reality-deniers*, Aus 'representatives' amongst them - to our enduring great shame.

Comment 6: Recall that it was *after* 9/11 provided the 'excuse' that the US (& Zs) went *totally* berserk with their murder-to-steal attacks on hapless, innocent ELO/Os, some of those ELO/Os (Palestinians) possessing coveted land, some (Iraqis) oil and some (Afghanis) 'merely' pipeline routes and opium-producing potential.

For here a last Q: Just how 'convenient' was 9/11? A: IMHO, it was absolutely *no* coincidence.

-=*=-

At the time of writing this:

(google:) News for Ahmadinejad sept 23 2010 un
  «Ahmadinejad tells UN most blame US gov't for 9/11 - 6 hours ago
Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addresses the 65th United Nations General Assembly at UN headquarters in New York, September 23, 2010. ...
Reuters - 3451 related articles» 

Refining the search to: Ahmadinejad sept 23 2010 UN Zionism "anti-Semitic" abhorrent delusional vile conspiracy

gives:

  About 8,050 results (0.10 secs) 

Comment: There was a time-lag between the searches (me composing); see the story-count exploding from 3451 through 8,050 as refined, and who knows what number by now...

-=*=-

Considering 'conspiracy theories':

1. The 'official' one: that a few cave-based Muslim / Arab / Al-Qaeda militant / extremist / insurgents planned and executed what must be judged as *the* most complex terrorist attack targeted at the world's greatest nukular power - and not only got away with the plan's execution essentially un-detected (the US did *nothing* effective to even hinder the operation), but the subsequent jet-fuel fires (diesel at WTC7) caused the into-the-footprint collapse of not two but three modern steel & concrete tower-buildings, one of which, WTC7, was not even struck, all in 'perfect' imitation of controlled-demolition, vs.

2. Ahmadinejad's report of theories he mentioned in the UN:

  «... One theory of what happened on that day, he said, was "the US government orchestrated the attack in order to save the Zionist regime in the Middle East".
... the president said there was evidence that the US government had at least supported the attacks, including passports in the rubble of the Twin Towers ...» 
[guardian/UK]

Summary (my paraphrasing):

1. The 'official' *all-and-only* terrorist success, however improbable & *Muslim/Arab* as a gratuitous bonus.

2. The US *regime* (CIA, possibly/probably with Mossad) 'orchestrated the attack.'

3. The US *regime* 'had at least supported the attacks.'

As at any crime scene, one has to ask who had the means, motive, and opportunity, and of course: Cui bono? Hijacking the airplanes may have been a relatively simple task - and the fantastic flying demonstrated could have been done by the planes' navi-system / auto-pilots - a snap, *if correctly programmed*. Some of the hijackers were alleged to have 'trained' in US flight-schools, where they were derided for their poor to non-existent piloting skills - of single-prop Cessna types.

I've said it before; IF the towers were pre-prepared (IMHO the only viable collapse-theory) THEN the hijackers were merely (paid/unpaid) assistants on a schedule, aka globalised, neo-liberally out-sourced sub-contractors.

Recall the astounding speed with which the 19 were identified - could it be that they were on someone's *pre-existing* list? And of the 19 dear-departed, some 7 or so are reported to be still around somewhere, living what must be assumed to be 'lives after death?' There you go, X-ian hopefuls: Proof at last!

Comment: Sooner or later, we'll get some applicable facts. Some *actual* conspiracist will spill the beans, even if (undoubtedly) under the threat of death for doing so. Imagine the fame!

Simply human nature to eventually blab. Why are we (still) waiting?

elementary, my [no so expensive] Watson! [the troubles foist upon us]

.. exposing ...

  .. the big lie ...

    .. for what it is = propaganda

-=*=-

Intent: To save our once jewel-like planet; mostly one-liners:

Preamble: Truth can only be brutal to those who cannot handle it[1].

"As a practitioner of ahimsa [= total non-violence], Gandhi swore to speak the truth and advocated that others do the same." Also see Swadeshi = local.

Feynman wrote: “For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled.”

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be very careful about that. After you’ve not fooled yourself, it’s easy not to fool other(s) ...”

For absolutes like 'no' or 'all' assume qualifier *almost*; always some 'technical' exception(s).

Argument:

0. Cut CO2 *back* below 300ppm - or exeunt our life-as-we-like-it supporting ecosphere - possibly terminally.

1. We live in a forced lie-cloud = pushed-propaganda paradigm via corrupt/venal MSM + AusBC conduit; proof = Z- & US-regime's (false!) 'narratives' uncritically passed-on (often augmented!) to us ad nauseam, following Bernays' morphing of (lying!) propaganda into PR. Prime example: Barker's (brainless! Endless!) regurgitation of "the West suspects Iran ..."

1a. (For intending parents, unqualified) *never* lie to your children (loss of trust = irreparable trauma).

1b. Most religions are mostly lies (worst of all, ever = the Oh, so super-cynical life-after-death lie); to so corrupt utterly defenceless minds is the gravest possible child abuse. Possibly the 2nd-most egregious abuse of religion per se (after the referred-to child abuse) is priests 'blessing' about-to-murder troops (aka pig-higorant US&/Z 'grunts').

1c. TV is *bad* for *all*; propaganda (unfiltered) & *no*, it's *not* just a movie! The 'news' is slanted; whatever 'the West' does is OK (see casualties caused by the illegal invasion of Iraq, say) - but if some 'militant' should fire a home-made penny-rocket at Israel - Well! Then there's the 'entertainment;' all possible perversions (mature-age audience only - Ha!), typically lies, hate, infidelity and 'ticking-bomb' type scenarios. As incontrovertible proof, ask yourself: "How do the sheople get dumbed-down anyway?" A: All across the nation, most TVs run day & night. Altogether: "Der - they didn't think!" How else does Israel get away with illegal invasion, brutal occupation, genocide, ethnic cleansing and illegal settlements all stealing Palestinian ELO/Os' homeland[2], except that the slanted news gives the criminal Israelis a 'soft run?'

2. US & Z wars from/incl. '45 dual A-bomb war crimes & '47+ illegal invasions / subsequent brutal occupations, right down to today are mass-murdering-for-spoil (proof of premeditation = Jabotinsky, Kennan et al.). *No* project that attempts to 'hide' behind even a single lie can ever be worthwhile - the US/Z wars are *replete* with (filthy!) lies - worst possible example, hasbara. The Zs *deliberately, continuously* lie, futilely trying to obscure their attempted criminal theft of land-never-to-be-theirs.

2a. 9/11 was a pre-prepared false-flag black-op demolition; any Muslim/Al-Q component was a) instigated / incited / fomented / subverted / co-opted / coerced / corrupted (probably all of these & more) by CIA/Mossad & b) the faux-muslim 'hijackers' were on a pre-arranged schedule. Someone knew it was coming; proof = 5 filming, *dancing* Zs in Liberty State Park - not to mention collapse videos, note especially 'NTowerExploding'. It *must* be CIA, for no foreign power could operate inside the US without them knowing, and it *must* be Mossad, following cui bono. *Only* the combination of those two had the means, motive, and opportunity - and both, an utter lack of any human decency. A "New Pearl Harbor" indeed, *precisely* to the Z-neoCon-cabal's PNAC prescription.

3. Washington consensus / neo-liberal (voodoo!) economics / globalisation = deceiving / thieving rip-offs (and see "Hit Man" and IMF *forced* SAPs).

3a. 'Life-critical' aka required services *must* be delivered at intended minimum-cost, and *most* importantly in an egalitarian fashion - basic human rights so demand. *Anything* 'for profit' *obviously* contains an 'extra = surplus' component - namely profit, most dangerously so with medicine - as the US experience explicitly demonstrates; possibly the most expensive, yet one of the worst performers. I mean, how bleedingly obvious is it, yet how blatantly, immorally denied? Excepting (still) 'free air,' there's water, sewage, roads & rail, elec. & 'phone, most of which were, under "Enlightenment" principles, delivered by the state at (close to) basic cost, all now more or less 'privatised' - to our, we the sheople's enduring cost. 'They,' the exploiters, don't even realise that we the sheople are now nearing if not already at the extreme profit-extraction limit (see US mass-unemployment & housing-boom collapse).

3b. As part of 'neo-liberalism,' the rich have been 'untaxed,' compared to a just and progressive taxation policy (adding injury to insult, taxes have been *increased* on lower income groups, i.e. Howard's *regressive* GST - but essentially 'bipartisan,' see below). At the same time, as govt. revenues have been *deliberately* reduced ('low/no deficit' mantra) - something 'had to give,' namely benefits & services. No one should ever expect a 'free lunch,' but IF (when) benefits/services are cut THEN someone's life-style is being reduced at the same time. Ever since at least Fraser's "razor gang" of Lynch, Howard, et al. attempt to cut public services, so-called govt. 'waste' has been rigorously pursued. Are such razor-gangs having measurable effect? 35 years long? Think about it...

3c. Resource-exploitation should be approaching 100% super-profit taxed, as should *all* economic rents (Keynes suggested euthanasia of the rent-seekers, one assumes figuratively - but you never can tell...)

4. Our so-called democracy is "of, by, for"-inoperative - any lie destroys it (misinformed may *not* properly decide), little/no real choice of candidate (each of Lib/Lab worse than the other), few/no honest reps (they preferentially rep. the 'big end of town'), ++.

4a. The Lib/Lab pug-ugly twins should be gaoled for misleading & mal-representation (i.e. bipartisan neo-liberalism = *not* in we, the people's interests.)

4b. Bipartisan is un- & anti-democratic; it offers the electorate *no* choice. Absolutely critical when it come to (resource!) wars and mass-slaughter-for-profit, and forcing upon us an economics system which has *demonstratively* further enriched the already obscenely rich fat-cats. And now, having 'pumped' vast sums into - primarily - the banks which *caused* the GFC, they embark on 'austerity' - aimed squarely at cutting benefits & services. Q: Cui bono here? A: Obscenely rich fat-cats don't need govt. services - it's why they exhort "starve & strangle" government.

-=*=-

Fazit: Our so-called 'leaders,' be they political, economic or 'spiritual' [sic] are (almost!) without exception leading us astray, we're being 'aimed' at - to be flushed - down the gurgler.

Q: Just how clever is that?

-=*end*=-

Reprise; let me say that, another way:

title: the big (ugly!) picture

theme: lies, rip-offs; murdering, thieving wars-for-spoil

1) militarisation

2) neoliberalism/privatisation

3) globalisation (= exploit the weakest)

4) ecosphere-destruction (resource-rapine; excess-CO2)

These are the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse; not so much a race-to-the-bottom as a lemming-like lurch down the gurgler.

Proof 1: The 63yr & continuing vicious, genocidal attacks on and ethnic cleansing of the hapless ELO/Os of Palestine.

Proof 2: The deliberate, criminal sacking-ruin of Iraq - It's the oil, stupid! (Perhaps 1.3mio+ dead, 2mio internally displaced plus 2mio more fully-fled.)

Proof 3: Hell-fire in Afghanistan & Pakistan; see 'carpet of gold/bombs' - now murdering violence wall to wall; mercilessly slaughtering the near-stone-age native peasants = more hapless ELO/Os.

Proof 4: The dire sheople-conditions in the US; possibly *worst* medical system - neoliberalism being 'aped' across the world (why??!) - 43.6mio US citizens in 'official' poverty, just under 51mio without health insurance, practically the whole country bankrupt (excepting the extreme fat-cat 'top' low-digit%; they're merely *morally* bankrupt).

Proof 5: Dire circumstances elsewhere; Africa say. Certainly anywhere the US covets resources.

-=*=-

Q: Which blighted 'geniuses' are bringing us the above disasters?

A: You know who they are; the ones with the most guns. Violence is the resort of the IQ-challenged!

Biggest Q of all: I can see all this coming, perhaps you too - so why can't 'they,' the smartest-of-the-smart so-called 'leaders?'

A: Beats me. But no one, not even 'they,' will avoid the inevitable consequences of failure to go totally sustainable.

Of course, it doesn't have to be like this; we could/should return to the Enlightenment-track (Liberté, égalité, fraternité, etc.); object: peace, sharing and sustainability - save the planet! Euthanase the rentiers! First, share survival and then any left-over prosperity fairly with us, we the sheople - before it's too late.

It's never too late to effectively combat injustices; confront and properly deal with the criminal perpetrators - think Nuremberg.

-=*=-

Ref(s):

[1] "In The Face Of This Truth"
By Robert Jensen
20 September, 2010
  «This talk, in polite company, leads to being labeled hysterical, Chicken Little, apocalyptic. No matter that you are calm, aren’t predicting the sky falling, and have made no reference to rapture. Pointing out that we live in unsustainable systems, that unsustainable systems can’t be sustained [repetition for the slower ones], and that no person or institution with power in the dominant culture is talking about this - well, that’s obviously crazy.
But to many of us, these insights simply seem honest. To be fully alive today is to live with anguish, not for one’s own condition in the world but for the condition of the world, for a world that is in collapse. What to do when such honesty is unwelcome?» 
[countercurrents/jensen]

-=*=-

[2] ELO/Os = erstwhile legal owner/occupiers. All innocent civilians are to be protected and their property is to be inalienable; i.e. no (trumped-up!) war may be used as an 'excuse' to plunder. US- & Z-regimes stand so indicted.

prima facie count-rigging and blatant pro-Lib AusBC bias

.. gobsmacking! ...

  .. right in the middle ...

    .. of the tightest election ever:

The AEC coolly says: "eight seats have now been temporarily removed from the count."

-=*=-

Trigger article:

Coalition snatches vote lead from Labor
By Sarah Collerton
Updated August 30, 2010 23:25:00
  «Julia Gillard had been using Labor's two-party preferred lead as a reason why the independents should back her party to form a minority government.
...
But that argument may have disintegrated, with the latest election figures showing the Coalition now holds a lead of more than 1900 votes on a two-party preferred basis.
...
A recalculation means eight seats have now been temporarily removed from the count.» 
[AusBC/news(1)]

Comment 1: Impossible! The AEC needs reminding: One wo/man, one vote, and *all* go into the count. Nothing else makes sense, what the bloody hell are they playing at?

Comment 2: An outright lie! It is only possible to write ".. the Coalition now holds a lead" since the published figures have been fiddled; if the true figures were to be used, the statement is simply *untrue*. As such, this amounts to a lie from the AusBC. Not so BTW, the 'rolling count' at the bottom of each election-coverage article has never included the Greens seat in the ALP count, although that Green has indicated he is 'on board' with Labor. On the other hand, the new 'independent' National from WA is always included by the AusBC in the coalition tally, although that National has formally declared he does *not* wish to be included in the coalition. This is *more* evidence (adding to the veritable landslide) towards AusBC pro-Lib bias. Alleging pro-Lab bias simply doesn't pass the 'giggle test' - for reasonably intelligent observers; it's a filthy pro-Lib misleading propaganda ploy.

2nd article:

Vote count strips Labor's legitimacy: Bishop
By Sarah Collerton
Updated August 31, 2010 01:28:00
  «"It's hard to see what moral authority or legitimacy Julia Gillard can now claim."
Ms Bishop says the Coalition is now significantly ahead on Labor on "all counts".
"The primary vote, the two-party preferred, ...» 
[AusBC/news(2)]

Comment 3: No. The "the two-party preferred" count - as now 'fiddled' - has absolutely *no* legitimacy.

Comment 4: Any fool can see that following (3), Ms Bishop is utterly incautious at best and possibly an outright liar for using 'fiddled' figures. She must know of the fiddle. She would rule us; do we really want such rulers?

Comment 5: Note the headline-language deployed by the AusBC: "snatches vote lead" & "strips Labor's legitimacy". Depraved and more; factually wrong. It's the AEC who's doing the counting, all the rest of us are witnesses and *no one* can *snatch* anything. As for 'legitimacy,' Howard ruled for a session based on a minority of the count - did he acknowledge that as illegitimate? The AusBC are supposed to be unbiased reporters, paid for by our (we the sheople's) taxes.

Latest article:

Labor back in front as election lead see-saws
Updated August 31, 2010 12:17:00
  «But this morning Greens leader Bob Brown says the figure is meaningless because eight seats have been taken out of the equation.
"If you look at the whole of Australia and you treat every seat equally, when you do that Labor's ahead and is likely to keep that lead right the way through to the finishing pole," he said.
...
Writing in his ABC blog this morning, Mr Green said the AEC's current count was incomplete without all 150 seats included.» 
[AusBC/news(3)]

Comment 6: Some sanity; better be effective.

-=*=-

Fazit: What is this, Repug-style vote manipulation? Heads must roll - at both the AEC & the AusBC.

  Where is my vote??! 

tiresomely, repetitively - wrong [so-called 'leaders' & apologists]

There is a 'lie-cloud;' what I've termed the pushed-propaganda paradigm, swamping us in our natural search for 'news and understanding.' News because we feel we have to stay up-to-date, to know what's going on in the world (generically but also practically, to know how to vote - say). Understanding (speaking on my own behalf, but generalising 'from the part to the whole') - because 'what' on its own is not enough, some of us want to know 'why.'

One problem is that the news we get is not the 'unvarnished truth,' rather sometime-facts too often enveloped in misleading spin (= lies).

Example; fact: "Russia is fuelling Iran's nukular-reactor." Spin: "The West fears Iran is seeking an A-bomb." (A particular Anne Barker speciality.)

Once, there was only the MSM (main-stream media) and (optionally for some) publicly financed broadcasters. Since the MSM is privately owned & run, their 'profit motive' allows them to push their own opinions - so they say, but it should never extend to undermining politics by lying. Publicly financed broadcasters should tell us *exclusively* the truth; why else do we pay for them? (8¢ per day, or whatever: OUR, WE THE PEOPLE'S TAXES.)

Now we have the opportunity (thanks, internet) to liberate ourselves from the tyranny of the (lying) MSM info-gatekeepers, so those of us who care to look and take the time to do so may clearly see the (apparently planned! - or at least not planned against) catastrophe confronting us.

Our once jewel-like planet, upon which we 101% depend, is going down the gurgler (aka ecosphere tor-let) on at least these *five* levels:

1. Far too many people.

2. Dangerously excess CO2.

3. Increasing resource depletion.

4. A really stupid economics 'system.'

5. Last but by no means least, wars for spoil.

Only a small part of a pico-sec's reflection should be required for the reasonably-intelligent to realise that eternal expansion within finite limits is an absolute impossibility. Yet that's what's been allowed to happen (by trend) with population; *why* didn't anyone act while acting was still possible, i.e. at least as late as following 'The Limits to Growth' à la the Club of Rome, 1st brought to public attention in or around 1972? Not only has population growth *not* been contained and neutralised, but most 'opinion leaders' still speak of 'economic growth,' not just as possible but desirable to the point of 'must.' Eternal growths in population and production are both an utter nonsense, and are clearly *impossible*. Of course, warnings came much earlier, see wiki/Malthusian_catastrophe - Malthus (1766–1834). One effect of current economic practice[1] seems to be testing the Malthus-associated wiki/Iron_Law_of_Wages on the 'down' side, depressing wages *everywhere* (trending to *below* sustenance) - a true 'road to serfdom.'

[1] Current economic practice; keywords: Washington Consensus (hardly a 'consensus' when so obviously forced); World Bank, IMF, neoliberalism, globalisation, privatisation, downsizing, lean&mean, out-sourcing, off-shoring, sub-contracting, de-unionisation; any more dastardlies?

Once more to the reasonably-intelligent; what can we expect when they hand us medicine/health services, water, electricity, 'phone, post, sewage, garbage, all for-profit, except to have our lives squeezed - to death if so deemed - all for ever-more profit & reduced quality (lowest common denominator) services?

But, of course, it gets worse. The profit motive drives capitalism, so they like to crow, and all other -isms are gone (1st communism, now socialism - except for the socialisation of losses, see GFC & obscene bank bail-outs.) Buy low, sell high, they blithely exhort. Except again, it's not a *fair* profit they're after (cost plus a reasonable, motivating margin), but 'economic rent' in all its ugly infamy.

A special word on wars: *All* wars require at least one aggressor (cf. Nuremberg); and so all wars are wrong from inception. (Proof: Someone (aggressor) has to start shooting/invading; stopping/eliminating that aggression would eliminate all war.) With the establishment of the UN, one might have thought that wars were in fact banned, and with political will would be have been prevented/eliminated. Wrong. Went wrong almost literally within minutes; see Palestine, aggressor Zionist invasion thereof, subsequent brutal occupation - 62+ bloody years ago, continued down to today with no just end anywhere in sight. Another round of Nuremberg-style courts needed. Latest Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan by stealth & possibly next Iran. *All* wars of aggression, *all* wars for spoil - for land, water, oil/gas, pipeline routes, hegemony. Recall that force is the resort of the IQ-challenged, and murdering-theft about the worst crime imaginable.

A note on terrorism; yes, it exists. Car bombs were deployed (if not invented) by the Zionists invading Palestine, '47/8. Al-Qaeda was initially a CIA-construct. How to we know how much Islamo-strife is deliberately incited by external interference (read CIA, again?) One way of reducing the impetus to terrorism may well be to stop aggressively invading and theft-intentioned occupying (oil-bearing) Islamo-homelands.

We can easily see by the most casual inspection exactly who the villains are, namely the you-ass-eh regime and its illegitimate Z-sprog colonials-by-murdering-force (say 'Hello' to the collective 4th Reich.) I mentioned the 'why' - both for the wars and the idiotic neoliberal economic system, and the answer is for these tyrannical regimes (and their shadowy backers) to enrich themselves. Note that it's not meant to enrich the US sheople - proof: 40mio on food-stamps, same number with no medical insurance & no realistic hope of being treated in a medical emergency (Obama's new 'health program' notwithstanding, another 'gift' to the already obscenely 'profitable' FIRE sector).

Finally, a word on excess-CO2: It's a known green-house gas, a certain amount in the air is *required* to keep our once jewel-like planet's ecosphere in our comfort-zone. Too much - and we've crossed the too-much line of around 300ppm already - and our climate may, most probably will, change to make our lives far more difficult, if not outright impossible. The warnings are all there, going back at least as far as Malthus. So to the final two questions, (1) why don't we have systems being put in place to save our world, and (associated), (2) where are the truly smart people? Unless stopped and soonest, we're all going down the gurgler together, when we go.

turning voters into villains - and victims [lies = corruption, turpitude]

.. over-harsh or 'merely' unkind ...

  .. here one calls spades ...

    .. bloody shovels

Thesis: Without enlightened action (soonest!), things will not only never get better, they'll get ever uglier, faster.

-=*=-

Not too many things are truly simple, in fact very often the exact opposite. Take a modern digital photo; 4k*3k pixels, each pixel with say 32 bits = 402653104 bits. It's a lot - but the photo is essentially processed bit-by-bit - and bits are *very* simple things, each being only 0 or 1. This little allegory shows that even the most complex things can be broken down into simpler parts, single bits being the least complex of all. That's exactly what digital computers do - and if they can & do, why not sheople?

In other words, nothing one normal person can conceive of cannot be explained to others (esoterics like quantum-mechanics possibly excepted); that being so, why do some - all(?) politicians and most MSM - tell us lies? BIG problem.

One can get into trouble with absolutes; all, every, none etc.. It's why I put (?) after the 'all' above. Thanks, but "No, thanks!" to JWHoward, we were told: "All politicians lie!" Vis-à-vis the pro-wars (on *both* 'sides;' bipartisanship = un- and antidemocratic) - and vis-à-vis the Iraq war '03+ (illegal invasion morphed into brutal occupation, same for Afghanistan '01+ & Israel '48+) - we were lied to, and that's a *provable* fact. (Proof omitted here, but can be confirmed by a non-superficial inspection. As Huxley's "Island" begins - attention!)

-=*=-

Q: Why does anyone lie?[1]

A: To deceive.

Q: Who wants to be deceived?

A: Only a tiny (bizarre!) few.

Q: So why do they[2] tell us lies?

A: Beats me.

Q: Why do the sheople accept lies?

A: Beats me even worse, and there's the rub: If only the sheople would stop accepting lies ... a mighty big IF! (First & most effective step: Turn off the TVs!)

-=*=-

Q: Would it be possible, to eliminate *all* lies?

A: IMHO yes, but before that come the quibblers. (What's in it for them?)

For example, some quibbler might say "What of some kid with terminal cancer - you gunna say Yore gunna die!!?"

Naturally, the quibbler has chosen a 'hard one.' No one 'enjoys' being confronted with his or her own imminent demise, one may suppose least of all a young child.

On the other hand, some *deliberately* confront children with their own imminent demise - then offer them the cynical religious hook: "Everyone dies; IF you believe in this g*d THEN get 'life after death.'"

Aside about 'belief:' All who 'believe' do so more or less in the absence of evidence. By the conservation laws, *no* information/message of *any* type may enter our universe, and so no (putative) g*d can signal its (alleged) existence, same for the 'life after death' swindle; proof *utterly* impossible. The reason why small children accept such indoctrination is that they are so constructed to have unquestioned trust in their 'primary carers' aka parents. Telling children lies is nothing other than permanent, doubly damaging *child abuse*. (Q: Why doubly damaging? A: By being deceived, it damages children directly, then a second time when they realise that they've been lied to = betrayal of trust.)

I wrote above: "First step, turn off the TVs!" Going one step further, for the little kiddies: Don't even turn the TV on! That's actually the 2nd step; the 1st is: Do not lie to your children, ever! After all, IF the aim is to eliminate lies (mine is), THEN that's one essential place to start stopping the lies; don't tell any yourself, and *never* to your kids.

Of course, we'll never get rid of TVs, but it *must* be noted, that that's the portal for most of the lies thrown at us, and not 'just' via the 'news.' It's never "just a movie!" - lots of so-called 'entertainment' and obviously many ads contain subversive content. Proof: How else have the sheople become so desensitised that they tolerate the mass-murder-for-spoil now commonplace - Israel (62+ bloody years, still no justice in sight), Afghanistan, Iraq, likewise?

Also of course, it's not 'just' wars (themselves unjust); some critical problems were recognised starting long ago, with the *anticipated* excess-population explosion (ignored, nothing done), and latest excess-CO2 induced climate-change (= climate crash, one way or another, possibly permanently crippling our once jewel-like planet's *life-support* systems), the excess-CO2 problem being ignored (if at all acknowledged) - and nothing done. The 'vehicle' for most of our troubles, foisted upon us partly if not entirely via lies and bipartisanship, is neoliberalism, its hand-maiden so-called 'free' markets and its running-dog companion globalisation.

That's not to say that neoliberalism et al. doesn't work (mostly negatively) or doesn't have *some* redeeming features (however few), but on the whole, as implemented, it is doing us (we the sheople), our economies and our (only!) world grave damage.

The proof of this damage is as obvious as ubiquitous; perhaps no more so than in the vicious, bipartisan = un- and anti-democratic privatisations of public utilities (phones, airports, roads, elec., water etc. in rising importance) - we can plainly see it is wrong, and ever was wrong. Yet the Qld & NSW *Labor* governments persist. Why? Idiots!

-=*=-

Fazit: We in Aus have just been through a Federal election, result not yet known but could end with a *totally* 'useless' result, whereby both major parties have the same number of lower-house seats: a 'perfect' stand-off.

In a way, it's a laugh; one could say that the sheople could not decide between one set of liars and the other.

As a result, some are calling for change.

My suggestion, as priority number one: Get rid of *all* lies - and liars.

-=*end*=-

PS From my headline, what's about: "Turning voters into villains?" Well, in the demos leading up to the illegal, Nuremberg-class attack on Iraq by B, B & H, some of us anti-wars cried "Not in our name!" Some quibblers (what's in it for them?) tried to argue that yes, it is in our (we the sheople's) names, because 'that's the system.'

News for the quibblers: No. Recall here "of, by, for."

Unless the sheople are fully and correctly informed, they are simply not able to make rational choices, assuming that there were enough honest candidates on offer, with a sufficiently wide palette of policy choice - including no war and no neoliberalism - available. Then, assuming that choice (of both candidates & policies currently, as then, *not* on offer), those elected *must* then properly represent the sheople - all else - and what we actually have - is tyranny.

IF the sheople are misinformed (we are!) THEN the sheople are *incapable* of reasoned voting, aka consenting even to being represented. The so-called 'leaders' are thus operating without informed consent, aka outside of democracy, let alone outside all decency and outside all 'acceptable' morality. As such, they do *nothing* 'in our name' and should be dragged before the courts as Nuremberg-class defendants. With penalties to be carried out as appropriate.

-=*=-

Ref(s):

[1] lie2 -n. 1 intentionally false statement (tell a lie). 2 something that deceives. -v. (lies, lied, lying) 1 tell a lie or lies. 2 (of a thing) be deceptive.  give the lie to show the falsity of (a supposition etc.). [Old English] [POD]

[2] Foremost politicians, and ever more in the (corrupt & venal) MSM, including publicly financed broadcasters like 'our' AusBC. It is theoretically possible - even likely, that these liars are not even lying on their own behalf, but rather on behalf of the 'hidden, true rulers.' (Yes, the dreaded & much maligned C-theory. Unfortunately, lots of observable facts support exactly and only such a C-thesis.)