I Know Where I'm Going

Time for a short post.

The basic question always is what do we know?

No, I know the Donald Rumsfeld theory, so I know best to skip it. Then there is what we think. This can be a different matter.

One interesting question is why do so many very clever people foul up big time?

Especially when they go into politics.

So if you have some quality time to waste try this one.

You may or may not like it, depending on what you know or perhaps what you think you know.

I’m going for a cup of tea; that I do know.

http://www.naturalnews.com/gullibility.html

OK, your score isn’t the end of the world. I think.

The Age Of The Looter

One of my world weary attempts to explain things to people is that the “ism’s” they either like to believe in or fiercely oppose are not what they think they are and the reality is entirely different. “Free markets” and “capitalism” in their theoretical forms are just common examples of the many bundles of ideas or ideologies which have little or nothing to do with the way it all works in the modern world.

This is brought to mind by posts in The Burning Platform dot com, click on search, and then click on page 21. Jim Quinn asserts that oil prices are governed not by free market trading, or indeed by decisions of the OPEC cartel, but essentially by a huge racket run by a group of major firms. Gathered together in the Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) which includes Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, BP, and others there has been large scale manipulation of pricing with complex movements of money that have effectively controlled the price levels. By managing them up and down, the companies involved between them have creamed off trillions of dollars. In effect this is looting the vulnerable economies, developed and undeveloped, on a large scale.

Similar techniques have been applied to other commodity markets. In short the prices of many key goods have little or nothing to do with real demand or supply for normal economic purposes, but everything to do with achieving the best margins available in the financial, trading, and speculative mechanisms. This is not pure speculation which has a function in true free markets, but controlled speculation that is not designed simply to win, but to extract as much as the market will stand. Nor is there free and full information in the sense that is regarded as essential to free market. There is secrecy both in ways and means.

Our legislators and governors are supposed to protect us from looting of this kind, and malpractices that have the same effect. But through the lobbies, cartel and protection organisations and the rest many of them have been bought. It is common in the USA for the Congressional Record to be filled with speeches essentially ghost written for the Senators and Representatives by the lobbyists. It is much the same in the UK, one way or another. Allied to this is the way such organisations have the major media largely in their control by the weight and influence of their public relations machinery, and again their buying of the system. Wherever you may go, markets in the globalised age are now governed, despite what appears to be a wealth of information.

The trouble is that these governors do not know what is going in their organisations. They are too big, impossible to control or manage other than by setting financial targets, and so complex that their very function creates risks at such a level that they court chaos and danger every day. It is a bout of chaos we have experienced recently in the credit crunch, and there is more to come. But institutionalised looting is not new in human history. The Feudal System was one form of looting by inter related magnate dynasties in Europe. The Roman Empire was another, for all the gloss of “civilisation”. It might have been “diverse” but it was dependent on slaves and rapacious political control. The trouble is we do not see so much of the past as politically and economically a variety of means of looting others. We tend to limit our ideas to the Vikings, another collection of gangs on the make. I quote from Hurstwic, a New England Viking re-enactment group.

Quote:

The aspect of Norse society that most captures the modern popular imagination is the Viking raids. The historical records of Europe (written for the most part by the educated clergy who often were the victims of these raids) called the raiders "a most vile people". But the raiders themselves certainly didn't hold that opinion. To them, the raids were a normal and desirable consequence of the pressures on a growing society and of the religious beliefs of the time.

In the mind of the Norse people, raiding was very distinct from theft. Theft was abhorrent. According to the Norse mythology, theft was one of the few acts that would condemn a man to a place of torment after his death. On the other hand, raiding was an honorable challenge to a fight, with the victor retaining all of the spoils. A story from chapter 46 of Egils saga Skalla-Grímssonar illustrates this distinction. While raiding a coastal farm, Egill and his men were captured by the farmer and his family, who bound all of the raiders. In the night that followed, Egill was able to slip his bonds. He and his men grabbed their captors' treasure and headed back to the ship. But along the way, Egill realized he was acting like a thief, which was shameful. So, he returned to his captors' house, set it ablaze, and killed the occupants as they tried to escape the fire. He then returned to the ship with the treasure, this time as a hero. Because he had fought and won the battle, he could justly claim the booty.

Raiding was a desirable occupation for a young man, although a more mature man was expected to settle down and raise a family. This view of raiding is described by Ketill to his son, Þorsteinn, in chapter 2 of Vatnsdæla saga. Ketill was not pleased that his son had taken no initiative in rooting out a highwayman working nearby who had killed dozens of travelers. Ketill said to his son, "The behavior of young men today is not what it was when I was young."

He said that it was once the custom of powerful men to go off raiding, in order to win riches and renown for themselves. Even if sons inherited their family lands, they were unable to sustain their high status unless they put themselves and their men at risk and went into battle, winning wealth and renown for themselves. Raiding increased a man's stature in Viking society. A successful raider returned home with wealth and fame, the two most important qualities needed to climb the social ladder.

Unquote

There is nothing new under the sun. Let us see these mega corporations and their political affiliates, allegedly our elected governments and international organizations, for what they really are and the tradition they truly serve. They are the looters of our time and this is the Age of The Looter. When it will end is an interesting question. If we have reached and perhaps passed Peak Oil, and peaks of other key commodities, the debate rages, and population continues to rise at its present rate then there will be another breakdown of societies, irrespective of whether Earth is warming up or about to cool down.

So a shopping list, one double headed axe, one six strand sword, double leather jerkin, shield, a Sutton Hoo type helmet, a long well found vessel ready for use, and a few other things. Anyone for the “Skylark”?

Any Old Isms? Any Old Isms? Any Any Any Old Ism's?

In the last few centuries, how many is debateable, humanity has collected a number of ‘Isms to direct the mind, explain our behaviour, and give us comfort in times of trial. To these might be added “Ics”, or “Ians”, a number of “Ologies” of one sort or another. Then there are “Mania’s”. These are not exclusive and are subject to interpretation. My Ism is your Ology, your Ology is their Mania, and their Mania is my Ism. I hope this is quite clear. For this comment I will stick to Isms, because I have had a lot of them in my time, some enforced, others as fashion, and now and again because one had a passing attraction, like a steam hauled train going through when you are waiting for the dreary modern rattletrap for which you have a ticket.

Some of the most fervent and anxious opinions out there in the media and on the net are all to do with Isms. All I need to do is mention one in particular and express a slight reservation, and then there will be a thunder of hooves in the distance, or worse a lot of abusive and threatening mails in the inbox getting in the way of my Fantasy Football operations.

The essential trouble with an Ism that has been around a long time is that when it is further from its roots, the human condition changes, and as other radical changes occur not only does it morph into something quite different, but these stresses in turn spawn Schisms, so an Ism has many sub-Isms. This is getting complicated, if you do not believe me study ecclesiastical history. It is said that at one time in Yorkshire the proliferation of dissenting chapels was such that in some places almost every family ran their own chapel. It exists elsewhere, but probably I have already upset too many people.

That is just religion. In economics and commerce it becomes a lot more serious and emotional. Even the flagellants of old cannot match for fervour the proponents of this Ism or that Ism relating to the ordinary business of life and money. Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, Corporatism, Fascism (nowadays sometimes disguised as Nationalism) all these and more are on offer for those who seek some kind of explanation for what the hell is going on.

At present we have a government that has come to believe on the basis of whatever Ism they employ; this is a matter of confusion and disagreement; that moving digital money about rapidly by computer is the key to the future and wealth and happiness. At least for the few who are party to it, and can draw down the benefits. Some call this Capitalism, and if so, it has certainly morphed, it is very different from the pre Limited Liability form, and the early 20th Century industrial age types. One school suggests that the word now relates to systems that try to maximise the rents on what they own, and this entails the exploitation of whatever and whoever they can get their hands on. It might explain the relapse into different forms of bondage that much of present humanity endures.

If so then not only do self styled Capitalists have very different ideas of what their Ism actually is and does, but the notion becomes incomprehensible to everyone else. So as an Ism it is now redundant, and we need to dream up a whole new set of words or phrases to try to explain matters. Socialism and Communism have had that problem. In our modern world this is not easy.

Once upon a time if someone had done enough swotting, written big books that got circulated, and attracted enough interest and agreement, you could have a new Ism established in a generation or two. These days, you knock out something from a quick search of a few Wikipedia entries and the odd bit or two from Google Scholar in the morning, post it in the afternoon, then after adverse reactions and threats amend it in the evening, but by the next morning it is dead in the water and you have to start all over again.

This is not good news for philosophers or theologians, still less for economists or social scientists. It does not affect politics, but those practitioners have always had a flexible way of dealing with things. At the dawn of the 21st Century; that is by the calculations of some Isms; there are those with different dating patterns; perhaps it is time for humanity to clear out the intellectual lofts, sheds, and cupboards of what passes for all the whole world of theory.

If none of the old Isms are any use they represent obstacles to any assessment of the human condition now and in the foreseeable future, whether rational, emotional, spiritual, or even cynical. We have only what we know, and that isn’t much, what we can judge relating to the degree of perception as to what is going on around us, what our instincts may tell us, and what any notions of morality may guide us.

So why not dump the lot? Perhaps a sonic boom from a passing near earth object, or a blast of cosmic rays from some distant galactic catastrophe, or perhaps simply the total crash of our electrical supply systems from a bigger than usual solar flare might do the job for us.

Oh dear, I have just contracted a new Ism. It is called Fatalism. Does anyone share my ideas? Imagine the T Shirts, “Fatalism Is The Future” or “Fatalism Rules OK”. If you can’t beat them, join them.

Life Is A Terminal Condition

The Royal College of Nursing on the basis of an internet response of 0.3% of their 390,000 strong membership have decided that their position on Assisted Suicide will be neutral in the future and not in opposition. I wonder how many nurses with particular religious principles may be struck off or have careers ruined for refusing to assist in cases where a patient, or the patients family or associates, want to end it all? More interesting is just who was involved in promoting this decision, why, and what representations were made to them? We shall never know, but we do know that in circles that exert influence there have been moves in the recent past to encourage euthanasia, if only to allow a marginal increase in GDP per head, and therefore claim economic growth. Inevitably, it is all alleged to be really quite simple in principle, and only a small number of cases will be involved. Where have we heard that one before? Then we are amazed at how many more occur.

As if our Parliamentarians haven’t found themselves in enough messes, including being invited by the Government to surrender their constitutional rights to the judiciary, the risks are that they might now make of muck of the more basic business of life and death. Many of us older persons probably can recount the errors of judgement and moments of insanity that might have resulted in The End, without the rolling credits. There are some who have narrowly survived the same made by medical staff, but now we have to face those about to be made by lawyers and human rights activists.

John Mortimer, the wonderful writer, humanist, and perceptive commentator on our world was reckoned to be well towards the Left in his philosophy, but was violently against any suggestion of euthanasia or “assisted suicide”. He was a lawyer by trade, but he had served in many Probate cases, and had realised that when money, wills, legacies, and families or others, often members of the clergy, were involved, those concerned were liable whatever their background, education, or other qualities, to relapse into a primeval state of predation and determination to take all they could get imaginable. Civilisation and conscience would be lost at the moment the possibility of a valid death certificate arose. John was certain that if euthanasia etc. became possible and legal, the same would occur whether death was possible or even improbable.

An uncle who became aware that a local clergyman who was ever willing to turn up in the last days of a parishioner often arrived with a will form from the local stationers and witnesses in need of indulgences. Because of his zeal in hounding the local diocese for justice, we came to know my uncle as “The Willfinder General”, but he did save carers from destitution and others from serious loss, at the cost to the clergy of their regular trips to the Cheltenham Gold Cup.

The issues have become more complicated in recent decades as reliable food supplies, better housing overall, and advances in medicine and science have kept most of us alive for longer. The price of this has been many people surviving to a great and infirm age, despite serious conditions, or in some cases major handicaps. By the use of high technology a human being can be kept in a state of half life, or at the margin of death for long periods, albeit at high cost. Theoretically, it is these cases that the idea of euthanasia and the connected assisted suicide has come to be regarded as a palliative by some, and a good vote winning wheeze by others.

The trouble is how do you make the decisions at the margins? How many cases will be at the margins? Who will effectively be making the decision? Who will advise those about to die of the full implications? If any money at all is involved then how far will Mortimer’s Law apply, “Where there’s a will there’s a way”? The figures mooted at present are suggested to be small and only really the very difficult cases. But only it would take only a slight shift of the margins of decisions to send the actual figures much higher up the curve.

If your nearest and dearest start going on about how they need a special holiday or a wonderful Christmas to remember, or a new car, or how they are troubled by heavy debts incurred in their lifestyle, and then offer to help with the medication, go out and spend every penny you can and make a new will leaving what is left to the donkey sanctuary. That will teach them!