Humanity Washed Ashore

“The full horror of the human tragedy unfolding on the shores of Europe was brought home on Wednesday as images of the lifeless body of a young boy – one of at least 12 Syrians who drowned attempting to reach the Greek island of Kos – encapsulated the extraordinary risks refugees are taking to reach the west.

The picture, taken on Wednesday morning, depicted the dark-haired toddler, wearing a bright-red T-shirt and shorts, washed up on a beach, lying face down in the surf not far from Turkey’s fashionable resort town of Bodrum.

A second image portrays a grim-faced policeman carrying the tiny body away. Within hours it had gone viral becoming the top trending picture on Twitter under the hashtag #KiyiyaVuranInsanlik (humanity washed ashore).”

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/02/shocking-image-of-drowned-syrian-boy-shows-tragic-plight-of-refugees

This was an excerpt of just one of the stories about the boy. Over the last few days, dozens have been written and published on various major news sites. What is more striking than the content of the posts, is the comments that are left on these articles. What is humanity’s response to such images, to such news? If you have a moment, I would suggest to read through the comments. It ranges from expressing shock, to sending love and prayers, to abdicating responsibility, to assigning blame to the parents, countries, presidents, religions and then it just goes into back-and-forth bickering over ‘what kind of person you are’.

That just makes you wonder...

When I read/hear such events and news stories – what I see is that: we’re more and more coming to a point where we can no longer ignore the painful truth that what happens on this planet is a problem for everyone – they are no longer ‘far away’ – what we’re accepting and allowing, even just through our ignorance and complacency – is literally washing up our shores. Does it help, then, to assign blame? Does it help, then, to debate over the exact historical figure and events that led up to the problems we’re facing today?

We can no longer afford to think in terms of ‘us vs. them’ and ‘my country vs. your country’ or ‘my religion vs. your religion’ – because it’s simply not constructive. It’s a similar point with climate change – does it really matter who started it? Can we really afford to debate over who should take the first step?

When recently traveling to Belgium with my sister and her little boy, we spent a lot of time on playgrounds. It was fascinating to see so many families of different origins, with different cultures and speaking different languages all in the same place. Belgians were actually in the minority. But more interesting was to see the difference in how the parents interacted (or rather, didn’t) and how the children interacted with each other. The parents stayed away from each other, individually watching their children from the sidelines and stepping in when needed, kind of avoiding each other. The children, on the other hand – would all play harmoniously together on the playground. It didn’t seem to make a difference to them what the other child looked like, what they were wearing or even what language they spoke. They would actually adapt and use more body language to get a point across.

My point being… how the world exists today is one version of what can be – and is a result of our collective history. At the same time, there exists a potential for a different way of living together. If we wait, stand aside and refuse to look for solutions that will actually work for everyone – we know our children will end up doing the same – and that potential for a different world is lost.

We still have a ‘choice’ in how we address these global problems, or at least – it seems like we do – because we haven’t yet seen the worst of it. Despite problems escalating, there seems to still be a belief in many that ‘things will work themselves out’ – call it ‘Disney-brainwashing’. But if we’re going to find sustainable solutions, we better do it now – and we better include everyone in the benefits. If you follow the trends of the ‘state of the world’ – what we’re doing to the planet, what we’re doing to each other – it’s very likely our children will no longer have that choice, that chance to say: okay, let’s turn this ship around.

So, from one human being to another – we’re all here, all living and breathing – and all capable of working together if we choose to, all capable of focusing on formulating solutions that work for everyone, all capable of standing up and no longer assuming someone else will solve our problems for us.

So, I invite you to – if you have an idea, if you are part of the solution – SPEAK OUT - let’s hear about ideas and solutions, start constructive discussions, connect and support each other.

Here is the solution I stand for: A Living Income Guaranteed for All – read about it and share what you think. Then share what you stand for! The Living Income Guaranteed crew hosts weekly hangouts, a platform where ideas and solutions are discussed and promoted. So, if you want your idea and solution to get some extra attention, you can also contact livingincome@equallife.org and be welcomed on a live hangout!

Let’s start a new trend:

#IAmPartOfTheSolution

Read More

119: The Yes Men

The Yes Men, a movie, follows a couple of anti-corporate activist-pranksters as they impersonate World Trade Organization spokesmen on TV and at business conferences around the world.

The story follows Andy and Mike from their beginnings with GWBush.com, and on to their tasteless parody of the WTO's website. Some visitors don’t notice the site is a fake, and send speaking invitations meant for the real WTO. Mike and Andy play along with the ruse and soon find themselves attending important functions as WTO representatives.
Delighted to speak for the organization they oppose, Andy and Mike don thrift-store suits and set out to shock their unwitting audiences with darkly comic satires on global free trade. Weirdly, the experts don’t notice the joke and seem to agree with every terrible idea the two can come up with.
Exhausted by their failed attempts to shock, Mike and Andy take a whole new approach for one final lecture.
The Yes Men is directed by Dan Olman, Sarah Price, and Chris Smith, whose previous credits include the 1999 Sundance Winner “American Movie.” It was released by United Artists. -  From http://theyesmen.org/movies/theyesmen

This is a documentary I watched today, which was quite interesting, funny and sad at the same time.

Within the documentary they show how these two guys go around to conferences and TV interviews, pretending to be representatives of the WTO. Within these interviews/conferences, they assume the opinion of the WTO, which is pro trade liberalization and so will always defend/protect the WTO as if they really are part of it. What they however do, is take these points to quite an extreme where they propose new policies which are quite ludicrous, but in a way do very closely resemble how the WTO works/operates -- it's just more emphasized.

So in the documentary for instance, they show how they go to a conference in Finland to talk about 'The Future of Textiles'. For this conference, they created this golden tight costume, which has got an inflatable penis attached to it, with a screen on the head of the penis. In this conference where lots of educated people are sitting, they showcased the suit on how managers can overcome the obstacle of work and monitoring their workers in Third World Countries while at the same time enjoying leisure time. So here, the suit is set up with monitoring devices and sensors, where the manager can keep an eye on the slave workers in Third World Countries and send them shocks to implants in their shoulders -- all from the suit.

At the conference, the guy who is doing the presentation is wearing the costume underneath his suit, and after his 'assistant' rips his suit off and the costume is revealed, he does a presentation of the suit along with showing an animation clip with all the benefits of this amazing suit. So this is one of the funny parts, because here's apparently a guy from the WTO, which is considered to be one of the representative points of capitalism and our current economic system -- walking around in this conference in a penis suit.

One of the sad parts however, is that they've been in this game for quite a while, and previously when they did this type of gigs, they were already going a bit 'over the top' but no-one seemed to notice that they were pulling a joke. They expected people to immediately find out what they were doing and get thrown out, but instead everyone received their message very well and encouraged what they are saying. So that's pretty scary -- where simply because the WTO represents that point of 'authority' -- people will simply accept whatever they say and support it, within believing that it's the right thing to do without being critical in anyway whatsoever.

So now with this penis suit, they thought it was going to be quite clear and they were pulling off a joke, and that they were going to be thrown out -- and as I was watching the moment in suspense, I was completely flabbergasted by the level of apathy in the audience and how they were not at all questioned or thrown out.

Some of the things you see in the documentary, where they do their speeches, are really quite disturbing and completely 'off of this world' and the complete zombie-ness of the audience/participators is just....scary.

I definitely recommend watching this documentary, as it clearly shows how our so called 'educational elite' is completely clueless as to what to do with this world, and are just brainwashed zombies who will accept anything 'society' throws at them from if they perceive them as an 'authority' -- even if what they throw at them goes beyond any form of reason and is completely ridiculous. It also shows the extent of the human problem and how much work there is to be done in terms of re-educating human beings and supporting them to for the first time become being with actual common sense and integrity. Because right now, humanity's really a joke -- and a bad one at that.

Related articles

• Day 98: The Unholy Trinity
• Day 102: Liberalism
• Day 119: True Activist Power
• Day 113: Inner Structure of an Equal Money System - Part 3
• Day 110: Evilution - Neocolonialism

Read More

Day 43: Homo Economicus & The Invisible Hand

It is strongly suggested to view the Documentary "The Trap" by Ian Curtis as complementary material to this blog.

Next we will be looking at the 'role' which has been assigned to the human within the economic system.
This is because all models within economics are based upon certain assumptions about human beings and how they operate -- and thus how humans will react to particular situations, based upon this assumption. It is thus important to understand this point as this is one of the re-occurring patterns within economics on which all graphs and models are based on in terms of the various interactions and dynamics at play within the field of economics.
This will become clearer within the blogs to follow.

Within current economics, the Human is viewed from the starting point of being a rational being. This rationality is defined in terms of survival and self-interest -- where it is deemed 'rational' for a human being to act and behave in a way which will always be directed towards achieving maximum benefit for self, within the context of continued survival and self-gratification (as we've already seen that 'wants' are prioritized over 'needs' -- and thus satisfaction/personal gratification plays a role all throughout economics -- see Day 40: What is Economics for context) . Rationality is thus not defined within the context of logic or common sense -- but the ability/tendency to behave and think in an egotistical, self-centered and selfish manner. In terms of economics, this gets translated into human beings always acting and behaving in a way which they believe will maximize profit/wealth accumulation or at least minimize costs / loss. Within this context, the human is often referred to as a 'Homo Economicus'.

[Now imagine, I had been reading many texts and readings on the subject where authors kept on referring to human beings making 'rational decisions' -- where to me the decisions described by the author weren't rational at all -- and where I only later found out that with 'rational' they meant 'self-interested'. So you see, economists don't just do magic tricks with numbers -- they also do magic with words!]

The best way to introduce this point within the context of economics may be to look at the famous quote by Adam Smith (18th Century Scottish economists -- often dubbed the "father of capitalism"), from his book The Wealth of Nations:

It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages

This quote clearly shows how humans are viewed as essentially self-interested beings -- but where this selfishiness indirectly leads to the 'greater good' of society. This 'movement' from a person being driven by self-interest only and then indirectly through only being considered with their own well-being, supporting society as a whole to be better off -- is often mentioned within the concept of the "Invisible Hand" where it is as though an 'invisible hand' moves everyone in a way that's "best for all".

By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was not part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good. It is an affectation, indeed, not very common among merchants, and very few words need be employed in dissuading them from it. - The Wealth of Nations

What's not being considered here, is that people following their own self-interest does not in fact lead to the 'betterment' of society as a whole -- as the current status within the world clearly demonstrates, where there are more people worse off than there are people well off. This is because no-one has ever been equal or been supported to be within an equal position -- and where those with particular advantages such as skill, access to resources, location, connections etc. -- are able to move more effectively within the system and will 'trample' everyone else within their pursuit of happiness, as a game of survival of the fittest.

What is also interesting to take note of, is that the particular observation of the human  as being essentially self-interested and not caring about anything or anyone else in this world (which is quite accurate, this is what we've accepted and allowed ourselves to become and live out through the current economic system as a reflection/extension of our own nature) -- has never been questioned. Instead of questioning this nature and asking ourselves whether this is something we really want to live by, we took this point for granted and went ahead and built our entire society/economic system upon this point. Where we don't go: "Hmm, us Humans, we are really self-centered egotistical beings who only care about ourselves -- maybe we should do something about this" -- but instead go "Hmm, us Humans, we are really self-centered egotistical beings who only care about ourselves, let's create a society/economic system which uses / harnesses this point to get people to move and create the system in such a way that they are rewarded for self-interested behaviour!"

And so we've created an economic system which is fueled by, and appeals to self-interest to get things done -- instead of human beings re-evaluating their very nature as self-interested beings and committing themselves to changing/transforming themselves as this nature so we may act and behave in a way which is considerate as what is Best for All and be responsible living beings on this planet!

Read More