why do i need to voice this?
it is because i know it is. you cannot change reality you do not witness.
whence this is not about things i like, and not an easy thing to write.
---------------------
there need not be no excuses, the filtration of political expression is to longstanding for that.
state's interesses through political file, it all exists from the days of your nations first parlementarian and long before.
who knows the freemasons are really the ones to inherit the greek scala of secret registration of possible enemy's of the elite.
don't even know if this is btw part of the array of usual or unusual transpirations on the topic, never heard it before myself.
anyway's, to call an example, the "french revolution"'s revolutionarys got thoroughly registered, followed, bribed, etc.
to give it a context.
-------------------------
what get's me suspicious.
you could say there have been two moments in dutch politics that have influenced my thought on it most.
in weighing the moral consequence of international politics that would be the former yugoslavia debacle, and in the personal life-style kind of way, having to do with activism indeed,
it was perhaps, 'encapsulation'.
"encapsulation" is a great word in dutch translation, sufficiently descriptive to be explained, i hope it is for english.
otherways it is more confusing to make a difference with 'institutionalisation', wich is only one way filtrage expresses.
encapsulation is closer to the infamous phenomenon of infiltration, the infiltrated organisation will become shielded from the outside world, and may end up completely institutionalised.
weird as it is, with it's 'market' (a wide assortiment of discontent and solidarity),
profitable in many cases. obviously not necessarilly because things "are what they seem".
how very profitable get's clear when you realise the investment in for example the line of well indoctrinated 'educated' 'workers', is actually made to get a grip on movements that might change the status quo.
----------------------------------------
since that is how smart people be, i recognise the all to often institutional infiltrate usually through that. a hesistance to like change of status quo,
but there are rather a few more indications.
selfishly i like to be creative in activism, it's quite a pretence ofcourse, but you often see the attitude not to be open for alternative (and that is where peacefull comes into the action comparison) action, more direct action, that has consumer impact eg., sometimes even the rather visible publicitary aspect, in longstanding organisations.
some of them may function in their parts, but basically they are 'institutionalised',
for example the dutch 'socialists' had a complete agreeal with the capitalist elite about organisation.
normally you would not be made known, that such was already explicitly standing out in the 1920s.
anarchists do know. for no other reason then the fear of the power of the idea, whole police and army divisions were mobilised against a meeting on that political expression.
a lot of the people institutionalised would not even consciously know they are actually preserving the status quo,
for some odd reason undercover police often are not psychologically capable of denying their uniformist admiration of authority.
it will allways stay odd, the whole group of uniformed employed has thorough psychological sensitivities with authoritive inception.
the usual freudian expression with such a symptom is 'a inferiority complex'.
that besides they feel proud at it.
otoh. they possibly also give some of these open reactions because 'they know me' (and that there is not much i can do about it). also i figure they feel still safe.
not much of a madman, perhaps i just make an acutely sane impression, but i often hint notice,
wich they do not typically psychologically receive, allthough almost allways register.
---------------------------------
so what is the situation? i think in usia .. like here, every 'organisation', every staged event,
would be as 'depoliticised' as here.
the other way around it also works, the most politicised groups, like marxists, are indeed the ones to tell a serious thing, because they will be the more ideologically correct to take it serious.
i suppose it is like being branch oriented, oftentimes organisations in a field perform admirably but all to often only for what their limited context allows them.
the illusion of power is also a great tool, in keeping people 'occupied',
so the receipe is the same, occupy yourself and stay self-occupied.
it's never been comfortable that clichees don't matter.
--------------------------------------------
on the side of gossip.. i had the first thought at the first moment it perspired 'the occupy protests' and so far they have ofcourse been, were there 'to stay', it was a damn pitty we were so close to winter.
it is also a comforting sign of obama's engagement with civil action, notwithstanding flatter would still seem baseless.
it is a wonderfull thing so many people will be thinking such great things over such important things. would it be realist and netsavvy to work at that the southern hemisphere that is unfortunately less important, for now offers the best prospects for manifestations of direct action?
or are people going to set the record straight for housing rights? it's quite possible that with the usual speculation and foreclosures and ecological tipping points (the crisis), there is plenty room,
if you have great places warm cloths help a lot for activism in winter.
------------------
conclusion, i do not think it is possible to organise a bigger movement unobserved.
tolerance for one anothers activism, hopes aspirations and dreaming is what does the trick best.
really be a bit principled about things also helps a lot.
if something 'should actually be okay'. (for damage it is proportional), it should just be okay.
hampering political expressions, and delegation of tasks are the primary instruments of institutionalised infiltration.
it has been really painfull, many people hardly know what they do, but in how they communicate, and the attitude towards people they need to make their compromise with a more resolute integrity against (for), you immediatly notice the 'attitude'.
it is not exaactly, exactly police infiltration, but institutionalisation, typically 'educating' (brainwashing) people for the job, is surprisingly related.
one respect in what police actually does not try to limit the impact of events, is the scale of the escalation. having the arms , the tools, and the repressive instrument to win all those battles, the more typical infiltrant attitude is to push for violence against persons, and actual misplaced excess against goods i would think. instigating violence is more their point.
but that would be a bit hard to judge, for a beginner and even after a while, people do have particular trauma's and experiences of their own, and by far nar not all are allways ready to
express anything very thoughtfully,
it's often the difference between 'i hate the pigs' (with not uncommonly some of all the good reason), and: let's bloodthirstily escalate.
as allways with psychology it is as much of their projection as it is the desire.
all that said. cops can 'turn'. it's a much feared thing in the establishment. it is rare, and not many are that good at it, but it is nice to respect that all humans do try for a human aspect.
forgive me the lightheartedness, but it is also funny that for example when i see these students, student cop's really quite often i think, but.. etc. etc. , conformism rewards already for students,
and i notice how relatively violent they think, it is also possible to take it serious, perhaps really violence is how a cop think would be the best way if a 'turned' person (they forget we are not like them) wanted to do something about injustice.
typical, it's really quite lighthearted, makes me think that the fbi didn't like that ambassador:)
well, thought of that immediatly:)
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Monday, October 17, 2011
occupy
a friend of mine is strongly interrested in the occupy protests worldwide. taken worldwide, apparent worldwide, talking on the matter with him is very enjoyable.
he liked it back so i was for my doing moderately flattered.
whence that comes first, i like it like mad.
----------------------
over the years i have allways been thinking the way change would one day allways come to be is when people unite over a goal that is not limited but diverse and that they have to carry it "themselves" a lot more then you would somehow expect or understand even in a few years.
burn out is a word, that does not fit the load. not only because it is worse, and ideological problems can be a superhuman burden, also because it is different, what change needs is the engagement of plenty, and not a great few can get/keep it organised through dedication.
action, and grassroots 'power-building', needs an informed and interested critical lot. ' a critical mass' in some theory, but is more about the numbers than about a limited weight.
they need to engage for something that is within their understanding and strangely, probably within their reach. a limited target like "peace", or a definite and often specific environmental, human rights or animal rights complaint seem not enough to have the people unite.
in the case of war and peace, this is psychological, but it is also that people appear to regard many things as out of reach. so indeed, the old (and classically anarchist) idea of fighting poverty, and the fighting the structure for poverty in society , wich perhaps too is general of the movements against the further distribution of wealth to the few, is the kind of handhold that might do.
it is hard to be definite, i get insecure of great events with a positive approach and intention. people are powerfull, but also powerless often.
ideally the people come up with all the ideas they need, but in describing events i reason from my own experiences, i am not really such a common person it feels like there can be 'the critical mass' of people similar to me.
somehow it all seems so relevant. it is so desperately relevant to be positive, whilst there is actually so and so very much to be rather edgy.
so i take an excursion into occupation.
scr.w neoconomics, and neocology will have to wait a bit more.
activism and strangely also anarchism wich is the way i politically analyse events and weigh relations (in the sense of in actuality foremostly but sometimes in the personal), have a charming dynamics of their own.
that is more intuitively for me in anarchism. but that is only subjective, activism itself generates similar associative strength.
however anarchism is to what i test the human value and quality of judgement (a very 'ethical' quality) so for you it can be activism (or in a more symbolic way of speaking 'activity', a psychality), but i would like to refer to everything within terms with anarchism.
the dynamic in activism is often absolute. it is not anyone's special thing, it works for all and everything. for example the word occupy.
keep bussy.., don't be vacant.. weird associations with a tool imperialised,
the occupied nations , and used to be people.
but within activism (and considering housing and non-housing basic rights is about the most feasible thing in anarchism), occupation is something still entirely different.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
terms with a vast impact tend to get obfuscated, confused through the application of different meanings..
there is a reason you can say : are you not occupied? are you occupied with that you are not preoccupied? or are you in fact the opposite?
because 'occupation' is an ancient, age old and powerfull tool of emancipation, that naturally and anarchistically follow to be basic freedoms of people, ancient dispositions.
it has been 'obfuscated' purposedly obscured from clear insights.
that does not mean it is no good as a tool. no, even the worst of the machiavellian (occupy every other) thinking ofcourse respects how occupation is a superefficient direct action.
we actually seen it this year, each and every side has their bias and preoccupations with the events, but that 'occupying' squares did have enough of a impact and visible aspect to change destinys is typical.
(thinks ok.. so that is where at least the definite association is from, had been wondering)
but really it is historical, the olympus is about the first sinai to been occupied, and so have symbols of power been all through the century's , from the fora to the bath houses to the roofs, and even the whole homes of the rich with the romans.
probably more burocratical institutions have been occupied then one nation singly features (said the optimist, well, reasoning there should be less institutions than people for me at least it is true).
in any case the pavements before more then any of these institutions have been occupied for plenty of the day. a usual 'capital' features usually tenfolds of protests and demonstrations, routinely ignored on windy corners of motorways, just as often on the pavement and with nearly allways some police seemingly keeping possible public at a distance.
it is a nice idea to a place like washington or brussels, (and both probably have the policys in place to prohibit) to join in a wide range and variety of protests in an organised fashion whilst you are at it in occupying the metropoles.
anyhow it is getting cold and i will get back on that, because the southern hemisphere is actually warming up.
to judge whether you can publicly as a movement or symbol of your own can join in the oftentimes specialist and remote requests of the various protests i would merely look at principle.
it is predictable that any organisation, even perhaps the small political foreign platforms, with the dear naivety to consider protest an option on a once per year or whatever base, is charmingly naive and often limited but somehow the ground cause is within a bigger concept..
for justice, against corporative power, for political freedom..
unless there is complete disagreeal with a case perhaps you do not need to be as informed or concerned as the protest , to just join in because protests actually lack power.
activism is or at least has been for me, to explore protest and action, to find new things to 'occupy' for example, to find new ways to give voice.
so that is all very absorbed, how i lived it. but somehow it is what turns in the anarchist idea, so perhaps it is just as true for activism.
i look forward to some more philosophy on the subject, more then explaining what meritocratical let alone corporate securitys would perhaps not doom the people of this planet to utter insignificance or slavery, risking being misinterpreted or face straight forward abuse.
-----------
tomorrow it will be about the negative side of todays activism, the police infiltration, the punishment or lifelong file to unfollowedly still to fool you fully, personalness and whatever.
today it suffices to remark:
anarchism is without borders, and activism is not to stick to many limits.
you can occupy a house but you can occupy a huge place to keep warm and protest.
you can occupy the police and not keep them occupied, but you can also occupy yourself and stay occupied.
he liked it back so i was for my doing moderately flattered.
whence that comes first, i like it like mad.
----------------------
over the years i have allways been thinking the way change would one day allways come to be is when people unite over a goal that is not limited but diverse and that they have to carry it "themselves" a lot more then you would somehow expect or understand even in a few years.
burn out is a word, that does not fit the load. not only because it is worse, and ideological problems can be a superhuman burden, also because it is different, what change needs is the engagement of plenty, and not a great few can get/keep it organised through dedication.
action, and grassroots 'power-building', needs an informed and interested critical lot. ' a critical mass' in some theory, but is more about the numbers than about a limited weight.
they need to engage for something that is within their understanding and strangely, probably within their reach. a limited target like "peace", or a definite and often specific environmental, human rights or animal rights complaint seem not enough to have the people unite.
in the case of war and peace, this is psychological, but it is also that people appear to regard many things as out of reach. so indeed, the old (and classically anarchist) idea of fighting poverty, and the fighting the structure for poverty in society , wich perhaps too is general of the movements against the further distribution of wealth to the few, is the kind of handhold that might do.
it is hard to be definite, i get insecure of great events with a positive approach and intention. people are powerfull, but also powerless often.
ideally the people come up with all the ideas they need, but in describing events i reason from my own experiences, i am not really such a common person it feels like there can be 'the critical mass' of people similar to me.
somehow it all seems so relevant. it is so desperately relevant to be positive, whilst there is actually so and so very much to be rather edgy.
so i take an excursion into occupation.
scr.w neoconomics, and neocology will have to wait a bit more.
activism and strangely also anarchism wich is the way i politically analyse events and weigh relations (in the sense of in actuality foremostly but sometimes in the personal), have a charming dynamics of their own.
that is more intuitively for me in anarchism. but that is only subjective, activism itself generates similar associative strength.
however anarchism is to what i test the human value and quality of judgement (a very 'ethical' quality) so for you it can be activism (or in a more symbolic way of speaking 'activity', a psychality), but i would like to refer to everything within terms with anarchism.
the dynamic in activism is often absolute. it is not anyone's special thing, it works for all and everything. for example the word occupy.
keep bussy.., don't be vacant.. weird associations with a tool imperialised,
the occupied nations , and used to be people.
but within activism (and considering housing and non-housing basic rights is about the most feasible thing in anarchism), occupation is something still entirely different.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
terms with a vast impact tend to get obfuscated, confused through the application of different meanings..
there is a reason you can say : are you not occupied? are you occupied with that you are not preoccupied? or are you in fact the opposite?
because 'occupation' is an ancient, age old and powerfull tool of emancipation, that naturally and anarchistically follow to be basic freedoms of people, ancient dispositions.
it has been 'obfuscated' purposedly obscured from clear insights.
that does not mean it is no good as a tool. no, even the worst of the machiavellian (occupy every other) thinking ofcourse respects how occupation is a superefficient direct action.
we actually seen it this year, each and every side has their bias and preoccupations with the events, but that 'occupying' squares did have enough of a impact and visible aspect to change destinys is typical.
(thinks ok.. so that is where at least the definite association is from, had been wondering)
but really it is historical, the olympus is about the first sinai to been occupied, and so have symbols of power been all through the century's , from the fora to the bath houses to the roofs, and even the whole homes of the rich with the romans.
probably more burocratical institutions have been occupied then one nation singly features (said the optimist, well, reasoning there should be less institutions than people for me at least it is true).
in any case the pavements before more then any of these institutions have been occupied for plenty of the day. a usual 'capital' features usually tenfolds of protests and demonstrations, routinely ignored on windy corners of motorways, just as often on the pavement and with nearly allways some police seemingly keeping possible public at a distance.
it is a nice idea to a place like washington or brussels, (and both probably have the policys in place to prohibit) to join in a wide range and variety of protests in an organised fashion whilst you are at it in occupying the metropoles.
anyhow it is getting cold and i will get back on that, because the southern hemisphere is actually warming up.
to judge whether you can publicly as a movement or symbol of your own can join in the oftentimes specialist and remote requests of the various protests i would merely look at principle.
it is predictable that any organisation, even perhaps the small political foreign platforms, with the dear naivety to consider protest an option on a once per year or whatever base, is charmingly naive and often limited but somehow the ground cause is within a bigger concept..
for justice, against corporative power, for political freedom..
unless there is complete disagreeal with a case perhaps you do not need to be as informed or concerned as the protest , to just join in because protests actually lack power.
activism is or at least has been for me, to explore protest and action, to find new things to 'occupy' for example, to find new ways to give voice.
so that is all very absorbed, how i lived it. but somehow it is what turns in the anarchist idea, so perhaps it is just as true for activism.
i look forward to some more philosophy on the subject, more then explaining what meritocratical let alone corporate securitys would perhaps not doom the people of this planet to utter insignificance or slavery, risking being misinterpreted or face straight forward abuse.
-----------
tomorrow it will be about the negative side of todays activism, the police infiltration, the punishment or lifelong file to unfollowedly still to fool you fully, personalness and whatever.
today it suffices to remark:
anarchism is without borders, and activism is not to stick to many limits.
you can occupy a house but you can occupy a huge place to keep warm and protest.
you can occupy the police and not keep them occupied, but you can also occupy yourself and stay occupied.
Sunday, October 9, 2011
don quichotte (2)
in scared anticipation of the contination of the releases on neocology and necronomy, the capitalist marketing in our realms of perception begs for deeper crisis and more injections while we wait.
it would suit for intermezzo.
possibly it is a play into the game. after all the perspective of necronomical crises lives a life of it's own, and.. actually.. the climate is pretty f.u.
more probably it is the usual blackmail, perform so we can make a profit or we doom the poor fellows you do it for..
since concepts can be misused, and intentions hyacked, what if we'd derive an eternal motive, and who we do that for? perhaps best is to just make the straight proposals.
well-being is a distribution of wealth. it is slightly more, a distribution of what you might call pleasure or happyness, but it has been researched, if needlessly, that even in the groups with the most minimal incomes money is necessary to undertake those things that fill in the needs to be happy.
the matter is one of distribution. distribution of powers as in small scale democratical involvement and in moral obligation as dedicated through a herstory of conceptualisation of what we must call 'human rights' , or fundamental principles of justice.
not differently to be accountable.
so in a political as much as financial sense we are talking transparance.
=============
to apply what human resource extra offers, and even within constraints natural to a financial system domesticating privilige, wealth needs to be distributed.
the weirdest of all problems, 'overpopulation', is a matter of financial privilige, birth control is a financial privilige. it is fascinating to wonder how much active birthcontrol did to facilitate the necronomical spurts in china and india, and how with no means tools of the wealthy were handed to the have-nots.
in fact that active family planning is one of the advantages of the ones 'well off', before a few decades was still largely taboo.(1) researched but 'climate scepticked', so to say.
_____________________________________
the opposite is also true, there is so far no limit to contempt.
-----------------------------------------------------
k the google interface is deleting for clipboarding once more.
need to break, or the interrupted flow get's to easily corruptable.
ltr.
(1) one didn't tell poor and or uneducated people they were stupid for allowing their lives to be stressed through plenty kids, nor defend how chanceless children like that would stay.
it would suit for intermezzo.
possibly it is a play into the game. after all the perspective of necronomical crises lives a life of it's own, and.. actually.. the climate is pretty f.u.
more probably it is the usual blackmail, perform so we can make a profit or we doom the poor fellows you do it for..
since concepts can be misused, and intentions hyacked, what if we'd derive an eternal motive, and who we do that for? perhaps best is to just make the straight proposals.
well-being is a distribution of wealth. it is slightly more, a distribution of what you might call pleasure or happyness, but it has been researched, if needlessly, that even in the groups with the most minimal incomes money is necessary to undertake those things that fill in the needs to be happy.
the matter is one of distribution. distribution of powers as in small scale democratical involvement and in moral obligation as dedicated through a herstory of conceptualisation of what we must call 'human rights' , or fundamental principles of justice.
not differently to be accountable.
so in a political as much as financial sense we are talking transparance.
=============
to apply what human resource extra offers, and even within constraints natural to a financial system domesticating privilige, wealth needs to be distributed.
the weirdest of all problems, 'overpopulation', is a matter of financial privilige, birth control is a financial privilige. it is fascinating to wonder how much active birthcontrol did to facilitate the necronomical spurts in china and india, and how with no means tools of the wealthy were handed to the have-nots.
in fact that active family planning is one of the advantages of the ones 'well off', before a few decades was still largely taboo.(1) researched but 'climate scepticked', so to say.
_____________________________________
the opposite is also true, there is so far no limit to contempt.
-----------------------------------------------------
k the google interface is deleting for clipboarding once more.
need to break, or the interrupted flow get's to easily corruptable.
ltr.
(1) one didn't tell poor and or uneducated people they were stupid for allowing their lives to be stressed through plenty kids, nor defend how chanceless children like that would stay.
Monday, September 26, 2011
the narratives of ecology necronomy, neoconomy and neocology (1)
the very global ideas, currently reinterpreted as 'mondial',
for a lack of integrity in the use of the term, just like one of those neoconomic ideas i had about the need for manual task to be diverse and the people variedly engaged in production.
don't blame me, i used to call the concept 'flexibility'.
so that is against exploring the real fronteers of the social context, it get's abused long before that.
anyway nature is mercifull and benevolent, ecology is so that even in terms of jobs and "economical" , or perhaps better to think of it as just 'human' engagement, the sky is the limit and only pigs can fly.
so as to say, the idea of profit and consumption tells you you can fly, but it is easy to tell who is really the bird to fly under the umbrella of fake-"justice". it would not to be to bad to return to the double speak undo thing of the 60s. and talk about 'wrong_is'
all in all not that it would put people with their (bare) feet in the (exemplary natural) soil.
all the blessings after all come from above, as the mindless repetition requires the cultures that failed to aprehend zen. (the religious ones).
for fun value the pope, obviously german, begged the germans for obedience, yesterly,
contempt for the real light of day (today's so to say) as if anyone there would get that message, obviously a publicity stunt for the still 'to be' meeker (esp. africa and south america).
__________________
the problem in explaining basic concepts for a sustainable human society is not as much in the principle, everyone understands in principle 'most of us' would agree to ' positive developments, be they natural notwithstanding it is the absolute primary, even in the human psychology but definitily so in new ecology and thus new (in the sense of sustainable) economy.
basically there is an empiric base for "good faith" (better put : "solid sceptics").
it's very shallow in the personal respect, the individual psychology and hardly worth mentioning in institutional operative, but the basic is there unmistakebly.
in the case there is no pious reference i don't mind to explore the cultural context, and for it we would only have to look at the strong tendency of people to engage with a concept of supposed
"good against evil" like religion , or the somewhat amazing ease with that people can be couched to quitte unkowingly to the real effect or effort contribute to sponsor actions or donating.
it is not especially effective or informed and structurally more often all but generous, nevertheless consider it a symbol of the will and expression of solidarity, it is there in people and it is pretty plain to see.
so in so far i recognise ' solid sceptics' that it is there in a somewhat embryonal state.
with that i would have liked to have said enough about motivation, it's not the realist situation we run into, or become somehow placed or displaced in.
maybe it is important to note it is not 'part of', it does not add much to deny this world is full of places, or to overlook that for each of us the own individual is the one thing essential in whatever functionality or positive arrangement.
change the world, and know you have to do it with yourself.
matters of priority's ... motivation.
-------------------------
so now we are motivated i want to touch on the "history" of it. (better : "herstory")
just like motivation is uselessly debated, "herstory" is unusually unpronounced.
there is "allways two sides to a story"
not that there really allways is, but such is to keep you think that. ok, on the personal and individual psychological side there is allways two story's, except that it is not mostly fresh story's, it doesn't tell anything about facts.
take for example einsteins theory of relativity, it may be not only "relative but also more true then we yet realise. both at the same time, because simply, "the universe is bigger then that.
so for the sake of omission (you name him the guy with the two passports and a double name),
i would love to leave the debate on the herstory of profit and exploitation , overconsumption and pollution, power and victim, a debate and point of it's own, and something for another occasion.
in as far as herstory directly applies to society, "the glocal community", it is usually in the ecological context. that what people, continents and nations have available to operate within.
so if you like this to be concepts restrained through herstory (that's" half of the story that's never been told" bob m.) it is not what i will write on for neoconomy, and it is part of a different debate, one in wich it is more the diversity of human impressions and opinions then the set letter that describes the most, b.t.w.
-------------------------
d dc. the debilitating debts crises.
curently media are featuring the european community's 'financial' prospects. i figure they took some inspiration from al jazeera and then what i wrote to get in the mood.
be warned, like i mentioned for starters, neoconomical concepts are easy to abuse, based as they are on the human psychology and natural context, and for my part the juxtaposed human context and natural psychology, they apply. and with what can be applied can be worked,
so with the rather glamorous advent of the angels of the market in incarnated multicolor,
the tales about our necronomy (the dead one), the tv and multimedia era, and professional politicians and by far not only them hitching on the wave of the promises of capital forever,
whatever you will understand from me, is not what i regard as "what they have in 'mind' ".
general experience and critical reading neither have ever let up to the conclusion that: " in this world, i *must* say, this capitalist world, truthfull neoconomic future is *not* the objective of the establishment".
i.o.w: the people with the interests, near the stake, can not be trusted to be honest let alone impartial or unbiased. not when it is about the future of 'all', societys, the global community.
sorry.
anyhow the idea about 'stimulating european economy' is actually the idea to 'stimulate global wellfare/wellbeing' (motivation remember?)
this is the same as development. wellbeing. as simple as it is obvious. the earth and it's climates offer a varied amount of options to different areas. did you just get robbed of your woodcover and natural resources (the live ones), like say haiti, and it is warm, chances are you best build light, making things earthquake safe would be much more effective then making them earthquake 'proof'.
not that you need no such buildings, but for common people you must wonder if that line , not only in haiti, bodes ill. huge apartments do tend to be huge tragedys when they collapse.
when it is somewhat colder, you have no choice, and in quite a few nations the temperatures are thus people hardly have a choice but to be laborous, because you just can't sleep a whole winter even if it is dark.
so the reeling and dealings of societys differ vastly, and are bound to be strongly characterised by the context of nature and climate, it is a fascinating subject and leads just to one major conclusion and rightly so;):
people are not made for work, nature is not.
the stoopit necronomical denial is , "work is made for people", they will pretend as if not, as long you can't view inside of the financial portfolios. but the next moment it is a favorouble boast..
'we made the work', said the ones that limited development for their own 'good'. (their 'bad' actually).
---------------------
the financial detail is revolting, none of the developments the past 30 years in macronecronomical sense, have been conceived, debated or 'effectuated' with the idea it would really benefit the lot. it will be abused as an excuse still, and has allways, but it is the embryo.
the head knows most people do have a heart so the argument is to well received. the tongue arguably speaks to submit, in the institutional realms, wich is distracting, purposedly, and hardly fascinating.
'privatisation' resulted in greed and assault on even the most basic 'riots'. trickle down necronomy is such an old farce it didn't deserve mention in the whole 20 or 21st century.
'free trade' , everyone restricted but usia and it's compliants.
imf, not only grey booking the 'debt' to a taste, delving in the potential for cheap labour by deranging conditions. the eu, the carreer for the priviliged. a priviliged project with intentions of centralising absolutist, 'decission' power. 'privacy'.. the rite to fraude, be perpetually observed,
forever deridden, and distribute privilige arbitrarilly.
just a few things those past decades that did not make the mark. that indeed were also not of 'good intention'. 'good faith' only fools you blindly there.
you know what, i think a day or so more about these 'my concepts'.
i can just start next, this was most of what i felt it needed for an introduction.
--------------------------------------
for a lack of integrity in the use of the term, just like one of those neoconomic ideas i had about the need for manual task to be diverse and the people variedly engaged in production.
don't blame me, i used to call the concept 'flexibility'.
so that is against exploring the real fronteers of the social context, it get's abused long before that.
anyway nature is mercifull and benevolent, ecology is so that even in terms of jobs and "economical" , or perhaps better to think of it as just 'human' engagement, the sky is the limit and only pigs can fly.
so as to say, the idea of profit and consumption tells you you can fly, but it is easy to tell who is really the bird to fly under the umbrella of fake-"justice". it would not to be to bad to return to the double speak undo thing of the 60s. and talk about 'wrong_is'
all in all not that it would put people with their (bare) feet in the (exemplary natural) soil.
all the blessings after all come from above, as the mindless repetition requires the cultures that failed to aprehend zen. (the religious ones).
for fun value the pope, obviously german, begged the germans for obedience, yesterly,
contempt for the real light of day (today's so to say) as if anyone there would get that message, obviously a publicity stunt for the still 'to be' meeker (esp. africa and south america).
__________________
the problem in explaining basic concepts for a sustainable human society is not as much in the principle, everyone understands in principle 'most of us' would agree to ' positive developments, be they natural notwithstanding it is the absolute primary, even in the human psychology but definitily so in new ecology and thus new (in the sense of sustainable) economy.
basically there is an empiric base for "good faith" (better put : "solid sceptics").
it's very shallow in the personal respect, the individual psychology and hardly worth mentioning in institutional operative, but the basic is there unmistakebly.
in the case there is no pious reference i don't mind to explore the cultural context, and for it we would only have to look at the strong tendency of people to engage with a concept of supposed
"good against evil" like religion , or the somewhat amazing ease with that people can be couched to quitte unkowingly to the real effect or effort contribute to sponsor actions or donating.
it is not especially effective or informed and structurally more often all but generous, nevertheless consider it a symbol of the will and expression of solidarity, it is there in people and it is pretty plain to see.
so in so far i recognise ' solid sceptics' that it is there in a somewhat embryonal state.
with that i would have liked to have said enough about motivation, it's not the realist situation we run into, or become somehow placed or displaced in.
maybe it is important to note it is not 'part of', it does not add much to deny this world is full of places, or to overlook that for each of us the own individual is the one thing essential in whatever functionality or positive arrangement.
change the world, and know you have to do it with yourself.
matters of priority's ... motivation.
-------------------------
so now we are motivated i want to touch on the "history" of it. (better : "herstory")
just like motivation is uselessly debated, "herstory" is unusually unpronounced.
there is "allways two sides to a story"
not that there really allways is, but such is to keep you think that. ok, on the personal and individual psychological side there is allways two story's, except that it is not mostly fresh story's, it doesn't tell anything about facts.
take for example einsteins theory of relativity, it may be not only "relative but also more true then we yet realise. both at the same time, because simply, "the universe is bigger then that.
so for the sake of omission (you name him the guy with the two passports and a double name),
i would love to leave the debate on the herstory of profit and exploitation , overconsumption and pollution, power and victim, a debate and point of it's own, and something for another occasion.
in as far as herstory directly applies to society, "the glocal community", it is usually in the ecological context. that what people, continents and nations have available to operate within.
so if you like this to be concepts restrained through herstory (that's" half of the story that's never been told" bob m.) it is not what i will write on for neoconomy, and it is part of a different debate, one in wich it is more the diversity of human impressions and opinions then the set letter that describes the most, b.t.w.
-------------------------
d dc. the debilitating debts crises.
curently media are featuring the european community's 'financial' prospects. i figure they took some inspiration from al jazeera and then what i wrote to get in the mood.
be warned, like i mentioned for starters, neoconomical concepts are easy to abuse, based as they are on the human psychology and natural context, and for my part the juxtaposed human context and natural psychology, they apply. and with what can be applied can be worked,
so with the rather glamorous advent of the angels of the market in incarnated multicolor,
the tales about our necronomy (the dead one), the tv and multimedia era, and professional politicians and by far not only them hitching on the wave of the promises of capital forever,
whatever you will understand from me, is not what i regard as "what they have in 'mind' ".
general experience and critical reading neither have ever let up to the conclusion that: " in this world, i *must* say, this capitalist world, truthfull neoconomic future is *not* the objective of the establishment".
i.o.w: the people with the interests, near the stake, can not be trusted to be honest let alone impartial or unbiased. not when it is about the future of 'all', societys, the global community.
sorry.
anyhow the idea about 'stimulating european economy' is actually the idea to 'stimulate global wellfare/wellbeing' (motivation remember?)
this is the same as development. wellbeing. as simple as it is obvious. the earth and it's climates offer a varied amount of options to different areas. did you just get robbed of your woodcover and natural resources (the live ones), like say haiti, and it is warm, chances are you best build light, making things earthquake safe would be much more effective then making them earthquake 'proof'.
not that you need no such buildings, but for common people you must wonder if that line , not only in haiti, bodes ill. huge apartments do tend to be huge tragedys when they collapse.
when it is somewhat colder, you have no choice, and in quite a few nations the temperatures are thus people hardly have a choice but to be laborous, because you just can't sleep a whole winter even if it is dark.
so the reeling and dealings of societys differ vastly, and are bound to be strongly characterised by the context of nature and climate, it is a fascinating subject and leads just to one major conclusion and rightly so;):
people are not made for work, nature is not.
the stoopit necronomical denial is , "work is made for people", they will pretend as if not, as long you can't view inside of the financial portfolios. but the next moment it is a favorouble boast..
'we made the work', said the ones that limited development for their own 'good'. (their 'bad' actually).
---------------------
the financial detail is revolting, none of the developments the past 30 years in macronecronomical sense, have been conceived, debated or 'effectuated' with the idea it would really benefit the lot. it will be abused as an excuse still, and has allways, but it is the embryo.
the head knows most people do have a heart so the argument is to well received. the tongue arguably speaks to submit, in the institutional realms, wich is distracting, purposedly, and hardly fascinating.
'privatisation' resulted in greed and assault on even the most basic 'riots'. trickle down necronomy is such an old farce it didn't deserve mention in the whole 20 or 21st century.
'free trade' , everyone restricted but usia and it's compliants.
imf, not only grey booking the 'debt' to a taste, delving in the potential for cheap labour by deranging conditions. the eu, the carreer for the priviliged. a priviliged project with intentions of centralising absolutist, 'decission' power. 'privacy'.. the rite to fraude, be perpetually observed,
forever deridden, and distribute privilige arbitrarilly.
just a few things those past decades that did not make the mark. that indeed were also not of 'good intention'. 'good faith' only fools you blindly there.
you know what, i think a day or so more about these 'my concepts'.
i can just start next, this was most of what i felt it needed for an introduction.
--------------------------------------
Friday, September 16, 2011
because
there is so much going on.
yet it is not anything very special, i have a few remarks on the arab spring only. libya admirably tries, but report from the african side of the continent are still in the pessimist.
israel is once over fighting all "arabs" ideas, saying it is basically an attitude against racism they have. it doesn't compute but the argument is still valid. no matter if nato or islam (and i damnedly even know about asia) racism is all to commonplace. without it, no millions would be killed in irak, kurds would not be one of the more suffering ethnics in the world, palestineans would be quite fine in israel, and probably even in the westbank and gaza, without it it wouldn't be feasible to judge whole populaces for the islamic leads they get at. etc.
racism is the big evildoer even when you don't directly notice.
remember london? completely conceived through racism, no i liked libya lauded sarkozy over cameron. remember paris?
now that actually didn't cause that much of a policestate extravaganza. (allthough i overheard i had sarkozy watching me when i visited:)
i liked the french statements in libya, it's so nice to see a nation honour the revolutionairy principle, if even in lipservice. erdogan is doing generally admirably. he is one of those, and go figure how much israel disagrees, that seems to overstep old grudges. sometimes i dislike his policy's (esp. with bombing kurds and calling them attrocious,
/from here google deleted my rather rounded posting.. asking to sign in when i was and suddenly not having saved the draft it "saved" (like every second, it stood out), and destroying the layout by inserting loads of spaces in the text./
edit: that nato, the security counsel (usia) ea. so much need this asset of racism, to manage profit in the face of climatecatastrophe
and with his willingness to attack syria (with or for nato))
ah.. well i went on about how the un veto security counsel wouldn't but that the sacrifices do require us to learn a lesson..
that nato and usia, and that counsel consider repression and racism the best guarantee to manage profit of theirselves and other rich in the face of climate catastrophe, and that is why they will most probably continue a line of downgrading and detroying 'rights'.
so much people are sacrificed we should make it worth, instead "rivers of blood flowing into an ocean of repression continued". that we should actually stand up for those rights, (not only the ones left)
that it actually boils down to racism.
note:
sorry for my public it works so well to interrupt my flow, hope to serve you better next time, but you can hardly guess how often i have to correct for example the first line of a thing i write, because it got altered.
should i be surprised when i agitate against racism this basic capitalist asset is so defended?
i hate to admit i am not. maybe i better the post still later, i am to annoyed to expect much of an effort here and now.
yet it is not anything very special, i have a few remarks on the arab spring only. libya admirably tries, but report from the african side of the continent are still in the pessimist.
israel is once over fighting all "arabs" ideas, saying it is basically an attitude against racism they have. it doesn't compute but the argument is still valid. no matter if nato or islam (and i damnedly even know about asia) racism is all to commonplace. without it, no millions would be killed in irak, kurds would not be one of the more suffering ethnics in the world, palestineans would be quite fine in israel, and probably even in the westbank and gaza, without it it wouldn't be feasible to judge whole populaces for the islamic leads they get at. etc.
racism is the big evildoer even when you don't directly notice.
remember london? completely conceived through racism, no i liked libya lauded sarkozy over cameron. remember paris?
now that actually didn't cause that much of a policestate extravaganza. (allthough i overheard i had sarkozy watching me when i visited:)
i liked the french statements in libya, it's so nice to see a nation honour the revolutionairy principle, if even in lipservice. erdogan is doing generally admirably. he is one of those, and go figure how much israel disagrees, that seems to overstep old grudges. sometimes i dislike his policy's (esp. with bombing kurds and calling them attrocious,
/from here google deleted my rather rounded posting.. asking to sign in when i was and suddenly not having saved the draft it "saved" (like every second, it stood out), and destroying the layout by inserting loads of spaces in the text./
edit: that nato, the security counsel (usia) ea. so much need this asset of racism, to manage profit in the face of climatecatastrophe
and with his willingness to attack syria (with or for nato))
ah.. well i went on about how the un veto security counsel wouldn't but that the sacrifices do require us to learn a lesson..
that nato and usia, and that counsel consider repression and racism the best guarantee to manage profit of theirselves and other rich in the face of climate catastrophe, and that is why they will most probably continue a line of downgrading and detroying 'rights'.
so much people are sacrificed we should make it worth, instead "rivers of blood flowing into an ocean of repression continued". that we should actually stand up for those rights, (not only the ones left)
that it actually boils down to racism.
note:
sorry for my public it works so well to interrupt my flow, hope to serve you better next time, but you can hardly guess how often i have to correct for example the first line of a thing i write, because it got altered.
should i be surprised when i agitate against racism this basic capitalist asset is so defended?
i hate to admit i am not. maybe i better the post still later, i am to annoyed to expect much of an effort here and now.
Friday, September 2, 2011
road to nowhere
there's plenty of political tomtom these days.
so i' ll announce to great drums and marching music :
libya... (2)
that should do for now.
khadaffi hides and cides, he does not believe for one moment libya will be better without his family in a racist position of divide et impera.
and indeed libyans all over the line, and unfortunately more it seems even with the rebels, engage in racist acts.
acts of violence, extortion, torture, massacre, and rape..
eu aiming it's arrows at syria , what will be there?
eu is as hypocrite as can be. they neglect their allied navy/oil base bahrein's foreign intervention totally, yet they antagonise over syria.
it's amazing to see how the sheople are obsessed with hate and prejudice to perform not the slightest of nuance.
i say down with the bahreini sunni dictatorship.
about syria? i really don't know, i have the faint suspicion the syrian rebels would be every bit as racist and divided the libyans are, and that it is not very probable outside actions will help to defuse that.
dictators , but also all the other elites (fake democracy's), thrive on sowing division.
as far as i can see for the white and potentially influential public on both sides of nato's ocean, it worked.
i feel like i am living between fools drenched with hate through a system that starts the indoctrination in the kindergarten.
worse then when i was a kid, every form of rebellion is now repressed with numbing medicins.
the public should save us from worse. but they have been denied the political or common knowledge and historical background to understand.
i am sorry to say, not 1 in 10 of the average readers anywhere seem to have some collection of their witz. i am deeply pessimist about the results of a continued political engagement once more guised as a humanitarian cause, towards the dictatorships the proprietary class does not like.
(assad, iran)
as long as the western publics can't put things into proportion, we can also forget about muslims doing so, when we in the supposed so free western world don't start out to make sense, they will look for their own opinionmakers. and those, are part of the lucky few, just like here.
will no doubt do everything to betray the people and sheople, just like here.
the cataclysmic environmental destruction sees the priviliged monetary elites glasping at any blunt or delegitimised form or instrument of repression available, cause they damn well know disaster is inevitable, and they want the poor to suffer only for theirselves to survive.(1)
in between all that israeli and other (amazingly related) outfringe is stoking tension where possible.
enjoying the sheople bow to their discord like they would in churches and other centre's of
despair.
(1) wich is just as unreasonable, only to be explained by them dimming their own views, firstly to keep a secret they know better, but secondly for being in permanent denial as a matter of survival (meaning they have no apreciable estimation of the real state of earth's affairs themselves).
(2) actually the result is inconclusive, ghadaffi is out to opt for a prolonged duration of the war and terror, for his or his rich family's part untill there is no libyan left, besides them, so that is still inconclusive.
so i' ll announce to great drums and marching music :
libya... (2)
that should do for now.
khadaffi hides and cides, he does not believe for one moment libya will be better without his family in a racist position of divide et impera.
and indeed libyans all over the line, and unfortunately more it seems even with the rebels, engage in racist acts.
acts of violence, extortion, torture, massacre, and rape..
eu aiming it's arrows at syria , what will be there?
eu is as hypocrite as can be. they neglect their allied navy/oil base bahrein's foreign intervention totally, yet they antagonise over syria.
it's amazing to see how the sheople are obsessed with hate and prejudice to perform not the slightest of nuance.
i say down with the bahreini sunni dictatorship.
about syria? i really don't know, i have the faint suspicion the syrian rebels would be every bit as racist and divided the libyans are, and that it is not very probable outside actions will help to defuse that.
dictators , but also all the other elites (fake democracy's), thrive on sowing division.
as far as i can see for the white and potentially influential public on both sides of nato's ocean, it worked.
i feel like i am living between fools drenched with hate through a system that starts the indoctrination in the kindergarten.
worse then when i was a kid, every form of rebellion is now repressed with numbing medicins.
the public should save us from worse. but they have been denied the political or common knowledge and historical background to understand.
i am sorry to say, not 1 in 10 of the average readers anywhere seem to have some collection of their witz. i am deeply pessimist about the results of a continued political engagement once more guised as a humanitarian cause, towards the dictatorships the proprietary class does not like.
(assad, iran)
as long as the western publics can't put things into proportion, we can also forget about muslims doing so, when we in the supposed so free western world don't start out to make sense, they will look for their own opinionmakers. and those, are part of the lucky few, just like here.
will no doubt do everything to betray the people and sheople, just like here.
the cataclysmic environmental destruction sees the priviliged monetary elites glasping at any blunt or delegitimised form or instrument of repression available, cause they damn well know disaster is inevitable, and they want the poor to suffer only for theirselves to survive.(1)
in between all that israeli and other (amazingly related) outfringe is stoking tension where possible.
enjoying the sheople bow to their discord like they would in churches and other centre's of
despair.
(1) wich is just as unreasonable, only to be explained by them dimming their own views, firstly to keep a secret they know better, but secondly for being in permanent denial as a matter of survival (meaning they have no apreciable estimation of the real state of earth's affairs themselves).
(2) actually the result is inconclusive, ghadaffi is out to opt for a prolonged duration of the war and terror, for his or his rich family's part untill there is no libyan left, besides them, so that is still inconclusive.
Monday, August 22, 2011
succesfull slaughter of the arrogant air
after all the firing at and from the clouds finally it is done. libya is getting back to peace-bussiness as usual. eu and usia anounced they will 'help the rebels implement reforms over the coming months and years'.
wow, thats great news if you just lost a sun or father for lybias freedom.
in some years the nato will still promise freedom.. i would be.. well let me not tell you what i would be,
i hate people to go around with guns, be they the uniformed brutes that follow upon any order to incarcerate black people, like in usia, or camerons, or be they the libyans that perforate the skies for no obvious reason. wow its peace, let me fire a gun, makes sense? not to me.
that is only impressions, perhaps it doesnt matter, i heard story's about how (only) after ww2 the dutch got hold on plenty weapons, they emptied on, basically anything in sight that wasnt moving. nude women, shaved women or even just the other side of the river.
people are like that, in the absence of resistance they turn into great hero's.
reminds me of drones and gaza btw.
but i should be happy and thankfull, the bloodlet is over, one of these in denial of legitimate governance left the theatre, libyans will finally have the possibility to listen to vague promises of change for years to come, as predicted by eu, usia and nato statements.. wow...
will libya change for the better? i dont know, really don't, it should i think, but i am not very optimist, the nato axis is doing it very utmost to run far behind the facts " gadaffi should step down" once over according to plenty of the fatnecks, today still. and the promise of years of promises has been made.
gadaffi is still at large, personally i hope it stays like that, not that i think his last few speeches were so great, but i also don't think they have been correctly translated or quoted. only the endless repition of that last speech in itself, even when the scene totally changed and all the libyans answered khadaffi's call to go forward, forward, forward. over 24 hours it is the topic of the news on alJ. and with my experience with media so far, that wont be unique.
saif el islam is a bitch. sorry to say, but yesterday he was still inciting killing, telling they were not about to surrender and now he is caught enjoying the ever illfetched richess in a luxury resort. that it left supporters and common people bleeding and dead.. did it ever matter to him?
not yesterday.
i disliked his recent act, allthough i guess only it's excesses were made known to us.
as usual the poor have been made to suffer, and the rich to get away with it. who else but nato to blame?
moreno o campo. heh a 'judge' someone that thinks its legal to deal with racist cops, racist verdicts, inequality of justice, a fraud, someone like saif el islam.
a clown, a puppet of the wallstreet frauds that steal more in a year then the whole poor part of london can lay it's hands on.
so let's set aside the international perspective that is rubbish anyhow.
gladder now. this is great for libya. why? because as autocrats tumble the future might just become more democratic. it might not, but that risk has allways been. it may otoh. because once you threw over an autocrat that usurped power for decades, next time possibly people will prevail such a development. stop them dead in their tracks after 4 or 8 years.
i dont think it will be better for the libyans now. gadaffi wasnt half bad in distributing housing, education healthcare and other basics. he was bad in being tolerant, maybe as bad as cameron even. he was also bad in applying justice equally, much like cameron eg.
the capitalist system however has a doctrine, a religion even, that to become rich, you have to keep the poor under, punish them where and when you can, rob from them, and nato and the other archenemy's of the poor promised assistance, so will it get better? no i think.
that besides people might still starve feeling liberated, why not, the proverb is: it is better to die a free person then to live as a slave.
i figure already today the gasoline prices will fall, for example my dutch people that supposedly voted to be able to cause way worse accidents on the highways, will once again pollute like mad, spread dust and toxins through the poor people's air like there is no other day.
because no matter elections in the west are a fraude, realising you can kill even if you are middleclass gives people a good feeling. the sheer power to threaten who or what you don't like with 3 tons of metal at high speed is a good thing in the compassionate mind of the believers.
take out your revenges on those pathetical non-polluters they will think, is justice, make m die from lungcancer, only to notice tobacco is not to blame when it is to late.
whats wrong with tobacco you might ask, well people work less hard, they take breaks, their lungs function less before all of the backs are broken in the pursuit, the crusade for distinguishing wealth for the 'bosses'.
i will see in a year or two. what's libya then. no more housing, less healthcare, more poverty and starving, lots of nato trained security to lock people up for longer.
thats what i think would happen. a new clique of priviliged, taken from colonial stock will reitterate the hollow phrases of the capitalists, politics to be lost forever before it was even born into the continent, oh well should i care?
it's not as if politics is the territory of reason either way. it's possible one less sheik is enough of a result, nato get's it's guns and drones free for assad, then again the syrians this time, will bleed. assad will sit in his palaces untill the criminal court takes him in to cut into stone their version of the tale, poisoning the mind of the future generations..
so great..
the next about to fall is israel, after the unknown assailants in eilat bravely challenged it's supremacy and universal right to lock up the palestineans, suddenly in the shade of a bombing campaign, netanyahu will be referred to the criminal court, ofcourse with his hatemonging associates and admirers overhere in europe.
saif el islam will need to be sedated not to risk a lifelong sentence over singlehandedly attacking the breivicks and their admirers and instigators in the one hour of caged open air a day left for his lifetime. (he should thank me now, just to proof i am wrong they will not punish him as hard as they would like to, solidarity between the rich will rule his day, and the courts proceedings, just like so far he, gadaffi and assad are left in peace.)
brothers in bankaccounts, fellow criminals, you don't hurt these do you? people might notice it works. thumbs up libya.
V for vulnerable. make it better then it was, don't allow the rich to make it worse.
(you know this is almost as inciting civil war: don't allow the rich to make it worse?)
good for me the powerfull and their servant judges(also priviliged) won't admit.
make it better libya, can you? please try, your chances are better then egypts.
wow, thats great news if you just lost a sun or father for lybias freedom.
in some years the nato will still promise freedom.. i would be.. well let me not tell you what i would be,
i hate people to go around with guns, be they the uniformed brutes that follow upon any order to incarcerate black people, like in usia, or camerons, or be they the libyans that perforate the skies for no obvious reason. wow its peace, let me fire a gun, makes sense? not to me.
that is only impressions, perhaps it doesnt matter, i heard story's about how (only) after ww2 the dutch got hold on plenty weapons, they emptied on, basically anything in sight that wasnt moving. nude women, shaved women or even just the other side of the river.
people are like that, in the absence of resistance they turn into great hero's.
reminds me of drones and gaza btw.
but i should be happy and thankfull, the bloodlet is over, one of these in denial of legitimate governance left the theatre, libyans will finally have the possibility to listen to vague promises of change for years to come, as predicted by eu, usia and nato statements.. wow...
will libya change for the better? i dont know, really don't, it should i think, but i am not very optimist, the nato axis is doing it very utmost to run far behind the facts " gadaffi should step down" once over according to plenty of the fatnecks, today still. and the promise of years of promises has been made.
gadaffi is still at large, personally i hope it stays like that, not that i think his last few speeches were so great, but i also don't think they have been correctly translated or quoted. only the endless repition of that last speech in itself, even when the scene totally changed and all the libyans answered khadaffi's call to go forward, forward, forward. over 24 hours it is the topic of the news on alJ. and with my experience with media so far, that wont be unique.
saif el islam is a bitch. sorry to say, but yesterday he was still inciting killing, telling they were not about to surrender and now he is caught enjoying the ever illfetched richess in a luxury resort. that it left supporters and common people bleeding and dead.. did it ever matter to him?
not yesterday.
i disliked his recent act, allthough i guess only it's excesses were made known to us.
as usual the poor have been made to suffer, and the rich to get away with it. who else but nato to blame?
moreno o campo. heh a 'judge' someone that thinks its legal to deal with racist cops, racist verdicts, inequality of justice, a fraud, someone like saif el islam.
a clown, a puppet of the wallstreet frauds that steal more in a year then the whole poor part of london can lay it's hands on.
so let's set aside the international perspective that is rubbish anyhow.
gladder now. this is great for libya. why? because as autocrats tumble the future might just become more democratic. it might not, but that risk has allways been. it may otoh. because once you threw over an autocrat that usurped power for decades, next time possibly people will prevail such a development. stop them dead in their tracks after 4 or 8 years.
i dont think it will be better for the libyans now. gadaffi wasnt half bad in distributing housing, education healthcare and other basics. he was bad in being tolerant, maybe as bad as cameron even. he was also bad in applying justice equally, much like cameron eg.
the capitalist system however has a doctrine, a religion even, that to become rich, you have to keep the poor under, punish them where and when you can, rob from them, and nato and the other archenemy's of the poor promised assistance, so will it get better? no i think.
that besides people might still starve feeling liberated, why not, the proverb is: it is better to die a free person then to live as a slave.
i figure already today the gasoline prices will fall, for example my dutch people that supposedly voted to be able to cause way worse accidents on the highways, will once again pollute like mad, spread dust and toxins through the poor people's air like there is no other day.
because no matter elections in the west are a fraude, realising you can kill even if you are middleclass gives people a good feeling. the sheer power to threaten who or what you don't like with 3 tons of metal at high speed is a good thing in the compassionate mind of the believers.
take out your revenges on those pathetical non-polluters they will think, is justice, make m die from lungcancer, only to notice tobacco is not to blame when it is to late.
whats wrong with tobacco you might ask, well people work less hard, they take breaks, their lungs function less before all of the backs are broken in the pursuit, the crusade for distinguishing wealth for the 'bosses'.
i will see in a year or two. what's libya then. no more housing, less healthcare, more poverty and starving, lots of nato trained security to lock people up for longer.
thats what i think would happen. a new clique of priviliged, taken from colonial stock will reitterate the hollow phrases of the capitalists, politics to be lost forever before it was even born into the continent, oh well should i care?
it's not as if politics is the territory of reason either way. it's possible one less sheik is enough of a result, nato get's it's guns and drones free for assad, then again the syrians this time, will bleed. assad will sit in his palaces untill the criminal court takes him in to cut into stone their version of the tale, poisoning the mind of the future generations..
so great..
the next about to fall is israel, after the unknown assailants in eilat bravely challenged it's supremacy and universal right to lock up the palestineans, suddenly in the shade of a bombing campaign, netanyahu will be referred to the criminal court, ofcourse with his hatemonging associates and admirers overhere in europe.
saif el islam will need to be sedated not to risk a lifelong sentence over singlehandedly attacking the breivicks and their admirers and instigators in the one hour of caged open air a day left for his lifetime. (he should thank me now, just to proof i am wrong they will not punish him as hard as they would like to, solidarity between the rich will rule his day, and the courts proceedings, just like so far he, gadaffi and assad are left in peace.)
brothers in bankaccounts, fellow criminals, you don't hurt these do you? people might notice it works. thumbs up libya.
V for vulnerable. make it better then it was, don't allow the rich to make it worse.
(you know this is almost as inciting civil war: don't allow the rich to make it worse?)
good for me the powerfull and their servant judges(also priviliged) won't admit.
make it better libya, can you? please try, your chances are better then egypts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
wanted terrorist: name silencer aka stealotron
Through lies and fraud this one is managed to rob 1000000s of the fruits of their work and their voice