We really are a remarkable species.
Man, (whether Created or Evolved) has developed some truly remarkable traits, and has put them to varied and often strange uses.
A few examples to illustrate my point, and then on to the crux of the conversation.
Man ( and I use the term as a species-identifier, not as a sexist stereotype) has become self-aware. You know, the old "I think, therefore I am", which, when you think about it (pun unavoidable), is an amazing thing in itself, but we weren't satisfied with that. We took that self-awareness and decided that we had to know where we came from. This led to Myths, religion, gods, beliefs,and eventually wars over whose god was the right one.
Man has curiosity. I don't mean the kind of curiosity that leads the cat to fall into the rubbish bin because it wants to see how the swing-lid works, but the all-encompassing curiosity that makes us want to find the smallest particle in existence, and also the very edges of a Universe so massive we can never hope to see more than a fraction of it...but we want to try anyway. It was this curiosity that made us discover every continent on our planet, find out about the inhabitants of them, and have wars with them.
Man has a need to control. Call it power,or organisation,or plain old neatness, but we like to have things in a recognizable order, with definitions and labels so everyone knows what is going on at any particular time. It is this need that caused Man to draw arbitrary lines on maps, add numbers, and call them Latitude and Longitude, so that we all knew exactly where we were at any given moment. (The kiddies reading this may not know those words, but trust me, children, your GPS don't gonna work without 'em). I know many of you thought I was going to say Borders when I mentioned lines on maps, but borders were a necessity, simply because without them there was no way to stop the killing.
Man controls the Environment, the only creature to ever do such a thing on a grand scale. I didn't say we were doing it well....
And Man has invented Time. Well, technically time has always existed, but it was Man who quantified Time, put a measure on it, and gave different measures names. Seconds, minutes, hours, weeks, lifetimes, millenia, eons. And years.
We measure the years. We mark their passing against our own lifetime, against events in the world, and we plan for the coming years, despite having no guarantee of those plans having any chance of success.
Which brings me to my reason for writing this tonight.
As I sit writing this, a year is finishing, and people are preparing to celebrate the coming of a new one. Good for them, I say, but are they celebrating in hope, in expectation, or in desperation?
I look back across 2016, and I see several landscapes.
My personal landscape looks like a battlefield, with blackened tree-trunks showing the places where forests of dreams were burned in events that roared through our lives like Chaos in a Zen garden. We were un-prepared, and I can see those of us touched by these events staggering through the wreckage. Each of us wounded, scarred, and dazed. Were it not for the steadfast friends and relatives who held us strongly, and gave us the support we needed, I do not know if we could have survived intact.
The landscape of Western Society is a teetering mess. So much has been subject to upheaval in our society, so much has been subject to powerful questions about what is Right, and what is Fair, that many basic under-pinnings of our beliefs are falling apart. Think about it. Are you as sure about some things now, compared to this time last year? We are watching our societies being put to the most severe tests since the Industrial Revolution created great wealth and great poverty, invented new jobs, yet wiped out Crafts and Skills that were centuries old.
Politically, I see questions from every level of Government, not only in Australia, but also the United States of America, and Europe. When Local Government Elections are so shambolic that the State Government institutes an Inquiry as it has in Queensland, then the fundamental structure of our voting system can be seen to be flawed.
State Government is now so volatile that massive shifts in voting have produced two successive administrations with massive majorities, and as a result, the sitting Government is so afraid of the voter that it effectively does nothing, for fear of being voted out.
Federal Government in Australia and the United States are both in a state of shock. Let's face it, with Independent Members holding the balance of power in Australia, and the Trump Administration about to assume power in the U.S.A., the public of both nations has suddenly realised that they have just given the keys to the bus to the whining thirteen year-old because they kept saying they could drive better. "Fine!! Here, you drive if you think you can do such a good job!!"
And now the public are holding their breath and hoping we don't crash.
Morally, I see a landscape under pressure, as we question who we are as Nations, as Peoples, as Societies. Our Moral Codes are in danger of being hijacked by popular "isms" and our sense of Common Decency is in danger of being Politically manipulated into backing one Party or Another.
So.
Rather than "Welcoming the New Year" as if we were standing at a door waiting for the arrival of a guest, I see us stumbling and falling, like a man who has been tripped-up in the middle of a race; desperately trying to maintain balance, unable to stop or slow down, because the impetus is now out of his control, and the best he can hope for is to make it to the finish line before crashing head-long into the ground, but hoping that, by some miracle, the New Year will be just beyond the finish, to catch us and save us from a bloody and ignominious end.
On that note, may I suggest that our New Year Resolutions be something like this;
Take responsibility for yourself and those who rely on you.
Don't shirk your duty to family, society or your fellow man.
Remember that many others do good things for you that you never know about...do good for others in the same way.
The ones that love you best also know the worst of you, remember to overlook their flaws as well.
You need fun in your life to balance the serious stuff. You can't ride a bike only leaning one way.
The only thing that you can do to make a difference is your best. If you do that, you can always sleep soundly.
I tucked my Grandson into bed tonight, and remembered that all we do is ultimately for the benefit or detriment of those who come after us.
Let's try and make it a better future.
Happy New Year, Folks.
Saturday, 31 December 2016
Saturday, 26 November 2016
The U.S. President is Invisible... and Nobody has Noticed
There is a vacuum in the White House. There is no President running the country, and nobody seems to have noticed. Oh, sure, Barack Obama is still living there, albeit packing up boxes (figuratively) of souvenirs and framed photographs of famous people, but he isn't actually DOING anything. There are a few Presidential Decrees that have been issued; a last minute chance to leave his mark on the nation while there is no real Congress to stymie the final Public Relations gestures, but these have been on ice for the better part of his second term and are now being rolled out like a pre-recorded Last Will and Testament that everyone has to listen to even though they know the speaker is dead, and all the money is being left to the cat.
You see, once Donald Trump was pronounced victor at the November election, Obama became a care-taker living in a big house. He cannot make material changes to policy, or influence the direction of the nation any more, because the machinery of Government is gearing up for the new Administration.
Donald Trump is now receiving the same daily Security briefings as Obama. Trump is being educated on the United States' position in relation to other World Powers, and possible future scenarios involving those nations. In effect, Obama is powerless unless a major crisis occurs involving National Security, Fiscal meltdown, or something similar.
On the other hand, Donald Trump is being schooled in Presidential Etiquette, names of Heads of State, how the Secret Service, FBI, and other arms of Government operate, as well as the aforementioned Security updates. But Trump has no real power. Until he takes the Oath of Office, and signs on the dotted line, (what is that thing they sign? I think it's a three year lease on the White House...) he cannot wield power in any real form apart from using the potential influence that his impending appointment gives him. He is, in effect, a private citizen who has accepted a massive promotion in the biggest company on the planet, but has to wait until the previous job-holder hits 65 and retires.
So, we have an existing President who has the power but can't use it, waiting to hand over to an incoming President who wants the power, but can't have it yet. So who is making the decisions? Well the same machine that runs the country on every other day of a Presidential Term; The Bureaucracy.
These are the ones that make the little decisions that keep the United States of America heading down the Road to the Future... whatever that Future may be.
That brings me to my real point in this diatribe...It doesn't matter who gets elected, nothing changes. The interim between Presidents is the clearest example of how little influence really resides in the Oval Office. If a country of 320 million people can exist for three months with two titular Presidents, neither of whom can make or influence policy, then why not for the rest of the year?
Of course it's not that simple. The President has the power of veto over Congress, and he can introduce Bills and formulate Policy, but a veto makes headlines in the news, and how many Bills and Policies are buried, diluted or defeated by the Congress, or poorly enacted by the Civil Service?
Finally, in the few weeks since his election, we have watched President-Elect Trump back down over the Mexico Border wall, Deportation of illegal immigrants, and a softening of his hard line with the Republican Party that isolated and disowned his Campaign. Already Trump is being transformed into ever other U.S. President, his edges are blurring, his stance is softening and he is becoming equivocal in his political alliances. Soon Donald Trump will be like every other President in modern times; generic and interchangeable....and the Machine of Government will continue on its way... only the hair colour will change...
You see, once Donald Trump was pronounced victor at the November election, Obama became a care-taker living in a big house. He cannot make material changes to policy, or influence the direction of the nation any more, because the machinery of Government is gearing up for the new Administration.
Donald Trump is now receiving the same daily Security briefings as Obama. Trump is being educated on the United States' position in relation to other World Powers, and possible future scenarios involving those nations. In effect, Obama is powerless unless a major crisis occurs involving National Security, Fiscal meltdown, or something similar.
On the other hand, Donald Trump is being schooled in Presidential Etiquette, names of Heads of State, how the Secret Service, FBI, and other arms of Government operate, as well as the aforementioned Security updates. But Trump has no real power. Until he takes the Oath of Office, and signs on the dotted line, (what is that thing they sign? I think it's a three year lease on the White House...) he cannot wield power in any real form apart from using the potential influence that his impending appointment gives him. He is, in effect, a private citizen who has accepted a massive promotion in the biggest company on the planet, but has to wait until the previous job-holder hits 65 and retires.
So, we have an existing President who has the power but can't use it, waiting to hand over to an incoming President who wants the power, but can't have it yet. So who is making the decisions? Well the same machine that runs the country on every other day of a Presidential Term; The Bureaucracy.
These are the ones that make the little decisions that keep the United States of America heading down the Road to the Future... whatever that Future may be.
That brings me to my real point in this diatribe...It doesn't matter who gets elected, nothing changes. The interim between Presidents is the clearest example of how little influence really resides in the Oval Office. If a country of 320 million people can exist for three months with two titular Presidents, neither of whom can make or influence policy, then why not for the rest of the year?
Of course it's not that simple. The President has the power of veto over Congress, and he can introduce Bills and formulate Policy, but a veto makes headlines in the news, and how many Bills and Policies are buried, diluted or defeated by the Congress, or poorly enacted by the Civil Service?
Finally, in the few weeks since his election, we have watched President-Elect Trump back down over the Mexico Border wall, Deportation of illegal immigrants, and a softening of his hard line with the Republican Party that isolated and disowned his Campaign. Already Trump is being transformed into ever other U.S. President, his edges are blurring, his stance is softening and he is becoming equivocal in his political alliances. Soon Donald Trump will be like every other President in modern times; generic and interchangeable....and the Machine of Government will continue on its way... only the hair colour will change...
Wednesday, 9 November 2016
The U.S. President Doesn't Surprise Me.
I am writing this after the most tumultuous day in living U.S. Electoral history. I do not say ALL of U.S. electoral history, because there have been some pretty extraordinary U.S. Elections. (No, I won't tell you, do your homework!)
I am doing something that I rarely do; I am posting before have given the subject time to sink in and to consider my response. As a result, my post may be a little screwed up, but please, read to the end and hopefully my thoughts will become clear. Here goes.
Living in Australia, we have a rather unique view of world politics. Our nation was born of slaves (read convicts), but achieved Independence (to a degree) without Revolution. Our Government is based on the British system of Parliament, but our States hold an autonomy reminiscent of the system of the United States of America. (hang in there guys, I'm getting to it...)
We have also never been invaded, never had a Civil War, and never had a political figure assassinated.
Our Economy is reasonably strong, and we are a popular nation for immigration.
We are, Indeed, The Lucky Country. Well, that's how we like to see ourselves.
My point is, when Elections occur in other countries, we like to remind ourselves of these facts, and give ourselves a little pat on the back. Indeed, we feel a little superior... That's why we think we have the Right To Criticise...
But we don't. Nobody has that Right. But we do have the right to observe and comment, because, well, we got most of the Democratic Process pretty right. On that note, here are my observations:
After the Election of Donald Trump as U.S. President today (Ninth of November Australian time), there was such an outpouring of hysteria, doom-saying and breast-beating, that I thought World War may have been imminent, but then I realised I was looking at Social Media, a place where hysteria or profound wisdom are the only ways to get noticed, and so I relaxed. But I must comment on the general reaction, not only on Facebook, Twitter, et al, but also on mainstream radio and television.
First of all, I understand that this is just a gut reaction, a knee-jerk response to a result that was largely discounted by the experts (once again I have to ask how good these "experts" are...they keep getting it wrong). It is also a result that was feared by the hugely vocal, largely well-educated, mostly Middle-Class, and generally ill-informed Centre-to-Left leaning voters of THE WHOLE WORLD.
You see, most people listen to the general media, and that media is excellent for pushing the shallow, exciting news that harried, pushed members of the public can take in easily. As a result, it was easy for World Media to push Donald Trump's "Build a wall" speech, his misogyny, his tax avoidance, and his simplistic, basic solutions to complex geo -political problems.
It was also excellent for showing up Hilary Clinton's E-mail controversy, her open political ambition and her desire to win at all costs.
World Media also did something else;
It allowed emotions to take over the facts.
We last saw this on the World Stage when Obama was elected for the first time. The World was so overwhelmed by the image of a Black United States President, that it forgot to take note of the clever campaign strategy he ran, his aspirational and ultimately impossible-to-achieve policies, and his lack of experience.
Obama was an inspiration, and the Press loved it. After eight years, many of his promises remain unfulfilled, and he will be remembered as the first Black President, not as a Great President. I do not mean to slight him, he tried very hard to fulfill his promises, but they were greater than was achievable. My point is that the Press got lost in the flashing lights and pretty costumes, just as they have in this campaign.
The Press have had a difficult time with Donald Trump. He didn't play the game. When he was caught being a sexist pig, he admitted it. When they found he didn't pay taxes, he said "Well if you could find a legal way to avoid tax, wouldn't you do it, too?" He attacked and attacked, he didn't stop punching, even when it was supposed to be Clinton's turn, he kept going. He put the Press off-balance.
Hilary Clinton, on the other hand, was a consummate politician. She parried, avoided, ducked, weaved, and didn't get caught on a single thing. And that was her problem.
So many people that I respect greatly have expressed concern and even down-right fear at the election of Trump as President. I can understand why, and I respect their opinion. I do however, want to remind the worried people of the world about a few things, some you may know, some you may have forgotten;
Hilary Clinton is the wife of a serial misogynist who avoided Impeachment by the skin of his teeth, and yet she stood by him, essentially for the sake of her political ambition. (Edit: I stand corrected; Bill Clinton WAS Impeached, but was acquitted at trial through insufficient evidence. He was found guilty of perjury over another sexual misconduct claim, however, and was fined and had to pay costs).
As Secretary of State, she allowed the deaths of United States diplomatic Staff and Marines at Benghazi, through inaction and indifference.
The F.B.I. have admitted that she has broken multiple Federal Laws by using her private email server to discuss Top Secret information, and also inappropriate attitudes toward Foreign Diplomats. Inexplicably, she has not been charged. No-one, not even her supporters can explain why.
The Clinton Foundation has received many millions of dollars in donations, much of which has been used in a manner which is highly inappropriate.
Now Donald Trump is not a saint. He is as tainted and has as many questions to answer as Ms Clinton. So why is everyone so upset? Well, because Trump is a bully, has no conscience, and no political experience. And that is all true. But Trump has some things that Clinton doesn't have.
Trump had no reason to think he would win. He came in, he fought, he played dirty, and he did what he had to do to get nominated. Then he started campaigning against Clinton.
Hilary Clinton was angry when Obama was nominated and was elected President. That was to be her turn. She was so angry that she spent the next two terms setting up her victory for this time around. She was so determined that when she had defeated all the other Democratic nominees, but Bernie Sanders wouldn't go away, the Democratic hierarchy changed some voting numbers to make sure Sanders was defeated and Clinton got the nomination. Please check mainstream news records to confirm this if you are in doubt.
Clinton exhibited an assurance, almost smugness, throughout the campaign, she knew this was her time. In another election, she would have been right.
Trump should never have made it past the second round of Primaries for the Republican Nomination, but there were too many Candidates. The votes were diluted in each vote due to the sheer number of candidates. The spread allowed Trump to survive long enough to get his simple, hard-hitting messages through to the working-class, non-voting public, and those new voters got him over the line to run for President.
So Trump came up against Clinton. Had Clinton been facing a politician, she would have won, and probably on easily. She had experience in debate, background in law and years as a top-level politician. She could take on any politician the opposition could throw at her.
Instead, she faced an opponent who didn't duck and weave like a politician would have, but stood, took it on the chin, and then counter-punched instead of defending. It didn't matter that the response was spurious, even ridiculous, it nullified her attack.
Clinton spoke of Social Reform and Women's Rights, but hadn't Obama done that for the last eight years? The Heartland States had been hurting for a long time and had heard this all before. They didn't like Trump, and would not admit they supported him, but they didn't support Clinton either.
Trump offered simple solutions, ones that sounded wholesome and traditional; jobs, family, Make America Great Again. Clinton assumed she would be elected because she was running against a clown who talked big. But big talk is what the working -class of the United States wants to hear.
Finally, there is a fundamental difference between Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton, and it concerns their aspirations.
Trump is a businessman, he regards everything as a battle. Daily life, for him, has always been a scramble to get to the top.
Hilary Clinton is a lawyer and a Politician. Her whole career has been about tactics and negotiation to achieve a result.
Trump stood up for election because he saw an opportunity. Clinton has hungered for this job since at least University, if not before. She and Bill were involved in politics at University and her trajectory has always been toward the White House.
Please don't tell me that either of these people do this job because of a desire to serve the people, because that's Bullshit. The people who have genuine desire to serve the community, well they become Scout Leaders, Community Volunteers, and anonymous donors to charities.
Anyone who wants to be elected to the White House has a strong desire for Power, and if they make at least 50 years of their life about it, then that desire is all-consuming, in my opinion.
Hilary Clinton is the first Presidential Candidate to lose an election and not address the supporters and the Press. Such was the disappointment she experienced.
Donald Trump has a desire for power also, but his is an academic desire. He wants to win it for the battle that comes before the prize.
I believe Trump will be a remarkably mild President. He will have his moments, no doubt, when the World will shake its' head and wonder, but I believe he will be "managed" by the State Department, The Senate, Congress, The CIA and The FBI.
No-body wants a hair-trigger in power...least of all those with the biggest guns...
I am doing something that I rarely do; I am posting before have given the subject time to sink in and to consider my response. As a result, my post may be a little screwed up, but please, read to the end and hopefully my thoughts will become clear. Here goes.
Living in Australia, we have a rather unique view of world politics. Our nation was born of slaves (read convicts), but achieved Independence (to a degree) without Revolution. Our Government is based on the British system of Parliament, but our States hold an autonomy reminiscent of the system of the United States of America. (hang in there guys, I'm getting to it...)
We have also never been invaded, never had a Civil War, and never had a political figure assassinated.
Our Economy is reasonably strong, and we are a popular nation for immigration.
We are, Indeed, The Lucky Country. Well, that's how we like to see ourselves.
My point is, when Elections occur in other countries, we like to remind ourselves of these facts, and give ourselves a little pat on the back. Indeed, we feel a little superior... That's why we think we have the Right To Criticise...
But we don't. Nobody has that Right. But we do have the right to observe and comment, because, well, we got most of the Democratic Process pretty right. On that note, here are my observations:
After the Election of Donald Trump as U.S. President today (Ninth of November Australian time), there was such an outpouring of hysteria, doom-saying and breast-beating, that I thought World War may have been imminent, but then I realised I was looking at Social Media, a place where hysteria or profound wisdom are the only ways to get noticed, and so I relaxed. But I must comment on the general reaction, not only on Facebook, Twitter, et al, but also on mainstream radio and television.
First of all, I understand that this is just a gut reaction, a knee-jerk response to a result that was largely discounted by the experts (once again I have to ask how good these "experts" are...they keep getting it wrong). It is also a result that was feared by the hugely vocal, largely well-educated, mostly Middle-Class, and generally ill-informed Centre-to-Left leaning voters of THE WHOLE WORLD.
You see, most people listen to the general media, and that media is excellent for pushing the shallow, exciting news that harried, pushed members of the public can take in easily. As a result, it was easy for World Media to push Donald Trump's "Build a wall" speech, his misogyny, his tax avoidance, and his simplistic, basic solutions to complex geo -political problems.
It was also excellent for showing up Hilary Clinton's E-mail controversy, her open political ambition and her desire to win at all costs.
World Media also did something else;
It allowed emotions to take over the facts.
We last saw this on the World Stage when Obama was elected for the first time. The World was so overwhelmed by the image of a Black United States President, that it forgot to take note of the clever campaign strategy he ran, his aspirational and ultimately impossible-to-achieve policies, and his lack of experience.
Obama was an inspiration, and the Press loved it. After eight years, many of his promises remain unfulfilled, and he will be remembered as the first Black President, not as a Great President. I do not mean to slight him, he tried very hard to fulfill his promises, but they were greater than was achievable. My point is that the Press got lost in the flashing lights and pretty costumes, just as they have in this campaign.
The Press have had a difficult time with Donald Trump. He didn't play the game. When he was caught being a sexist pig, he admitted it. When they found he didn't pay taxes, he said "Well if you could find a legal way to avoid tax, wouldn't you do it, too?" He attacked and attacked, he didn't stop punching, even when it was supposed to be Clinton's turn, he kept going. He put the Press off-balance.
Hilary Clinton, on the other hand, was a consummate politician. She parried, avoided, ducked, weaved, and didn't get caught on a single thing. And that was her problem.
So many people that I respect greatly have expressed concern and even down-right fear at the election of Trump as President. I can understand why, and I respect their opinion. I do however, want to remind the worried people of the world about a few things, some you may know, some you may have forgotten;
Hilary Clinton is the wife of a serial misogynist who avoided Impeachment by the skin of his teeth, and yet she stood by him, essentially for the sake of her political ambition. (Edit: I stand corrected; Bill Clinton WAS Impeached, but was acquitted at trial through insufficient evidence. He was found guilty of perjury over another sexual misconduct claim, however, and was fined and had to pay costs).
As Secretary of State, she allowed the deaths of United States diplomatic Staff and Marines at Benghazi, through inaction and indifference.
The F.B.I. have admitted that she has broken multiple Federal Laws by using her private email server to discuss Top Secret information, and also inappropriate attitudes toward Foreign Diplomats. Inexplicably, she has not been charged. No-one, not even her supporters can explain why.
The Clinton Foundation has received many millions of dollars in donations, much of which has been used in a manner which is highly inappropriate.
Now Donald Trump is not a saint. He is as tainted and has as many questions to answer as Ms Clinton. So why is everyone so upset? Well, because Trump is a bully, has no conscience, and no political experience. And that is all true. But Trump has some things that Clinton doesn't have.
Trump had no reason to think he would win. He came in, he fought, he played dirty, and he did what he had to do to get nominated. Then he started campaigning against Clinton.
Hilary Clinton was angry when Obama was nominated and was elected President. That was to be her turn. She was so angry that she spent the next two terms setting up her victory for this time around. She was so determined that when she had defeated all the other Democratic nominees, but Bernie Sanders wouldn't go away, the Democratic hierarchy changed some voting numbers to make sure Sanders was defeated and Clinton got the nomination. Please check mainstream news records to confirm this if you are in doubt.
Clinton exhibited an assurance, almost smugness, throughout the campaign, she knew this was her time. In another election, she would have been right.
Trump should never have made it past the second round of Primaries for the Republican Nomination, but there were too many Candidates. The votes were diluted in each vote due to the sheer number of candidates. The spread allowed Trump to survive long enough to get his simple, hard-hitting messages through to the working-class, non-voting public, and those new voters got him over the line to run for President.
So Trump came up against Clinton. Had Clinton been facing a politician, she would have won, and probably on easily. She had experience in debate, background in law and years as a top-level politician. She could take on any politician the opposition could throw at her.
Instead, she faced an opponent who didn't duck and weave like a politician would have, but stood, took it on the chin, and then counter-punched instead of defending. It didn't matter that the response was spurious, even ridiculous, it nullified her attack.
Clinton spoke of Social Reform and Women's Rights, but hadn't Obama done that for the last eight years? The Heartland States had been hurting for a long time and had heard this all before. They didn't like Trump, and would not admit they supported him, but they didn't support Clinton either.
Trump offered simple solutions, ones that sounded wholesome and traditional; jobs, family, Make America Great Again. Clinton assumed she would be elected because she was running against a clown who talked big. But big talk is what the working -class of the United States wants to hear.
Finally, there is a fundamental difference between Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton, and it concerns their aspirations.
Trump is a businessman, he regards everything as a battle. Daily life, for him, has always been a scramble to get to the top.
Hilary Clinton is a lawyer and a Politician. Her whole career has been about tactics and negotiation to achieve a result.
Trump stood up for election because he saw an opportunity. Clinton has hungered for this job since at least University, if not before. She and Bill were involved in politics at University and her trajectory has always been toward the White House.
Please don't tell me that either of these people do this job because of a desire to serve the people, because that's Bullshit. The people who have genuine desire to serve the community, well they become Scout Leaders, Community Volunteers, and anonymous donors to charities.
Anyone who wants to be elected to the White House has a strong desire for Power, and if they make at least 50 years of their life about it, then that desire is all-consuming, in my opinion.
Hilary Clinton is the first Presidential Candidate to lose an election and not address the supporters and the Press. Such was the disappointment she experienced.
Donald Trump has a desire for power also, but his is an academic desire. He wants to win it for the battle that comes before the prize.
I believe Trump will be a remarkably mild President. He will have his moments, no doubt, when the World will shake its' head and wonder, but I believe he will be "managed" by the State Department, The Senate, Congress, The CIA and The FBI.
No-body wants a hair-trigger in power...least of all those with the biggest guns...
Thursday, 27 October 2016
Doctor, I have an Election, and it won't go away....
I have been watching the United States Presidential Election with the same open-mouthed fascination as many others, I suspect. This Train-Wreck-In-Slow-Motion has been crashing and staggering across the screen that is World Media, for what seems like years. Remember all those Republican Candidates that engaged in trying to out-scare the public more than their rivals? Remember the Democratic no-names that had surprising success with policies that people actually liked?
Ted Cruze and Bernie Sanders seem like such a long time ago...
The amazing thing for me is that after all the Primaries were fought and won, (a shock result for the Republicans, a foregone, and set-up result for the Democrats), we are left with two candidates who, no matter how you cut the cake, are flawed, have suspect political agendas, are not representative of their respective Partys' values, and have people all over the world asking; "Is this REALLY the best that the United States has to offer?"
Now my opinion counts for less than nothing, but I own this Blog, so I'm going to let you have it...because I can...
The two people that the citizens of the United States of America will have to choose between in a few days time, are in my opinion, the very best that the system of selection in the United States can produce at this time. Now I didn't say they were the best people for the job, because I don't believe they are, but they are the best that the system can produce when selecting from those that nominated.
Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump are the result of an electoral system that has a number of features which are open to exploitation, and these two have exploited them very well. Before I upset too many of you, let me explain that as an Australian, I have no stake in this game. I am an observer and I have an opinion. Of course, as a person in the world today, I am affected by the outcome of this election. The U.S.A is a major Super Power... we live in their shadow militarily, politically, and economically, but I want to make it clear that I feel free to criticise both sides equally, because, well, I don't have to vote for them.
Anyway, back to the story. Here are a few of the things that have given us the candidates we have today;
The Pre-Selection process of the Presidential Election was set up many years ago. It has not been updated for decades. States that were once of little influence now have massive power in this process. It is essential for Party nominees, and later Presidential nominees to win the right places at the right time. This leads to the second point;
Media has changed, and how! Social Media, online advertising, direct marketing, and the obvious bias of certain media outlets has given us an advertising landscape not seen since the heady days of William Randolph Hearst (look him up if you don't know him... makes Rupert look like a little girl..), and then of course there is the money...
Funding for Parties and Candidates has changed and legal loopholes have been made into hard and fast laws that have altered the playing field forever. The Supreme Court has ruled (for those that don't know, I am aware many of you DO know), that a Corporation can donate to a political candidate, because that corporation can be recognised as an "individual" with Rights and Interests under the law!! Billions of dollars are now at the disposal of those who want to be elected and are willing to make the right promises.
Speaking of promises, I don't recall any political campaign being so full of promises that no-one even pretends to believe will be carried out.
Do you really think that wall will be built, and that Mexico will pay for it? Really?
Do you really think that the massive social reforms will happen? Really?
What we are seeing is a turning point that started with Obama and has reached fruition this year. Obama (or his team) saw that Social Media, Public Opinion, and a sense of history were all coming together at the right time. So he exploited Social Media with a grass-roots fund-raising campaign, playing on the Public Opinion and sense of history that said that the Time Was Right for a Black President. Of course, he also made use of the points made in the previous paragraph, but he got it right. He was elected over a standard Republican nominee. It was a New Dawn.
Now the new nominees are seeing the opportunity to make history for themselves.
We will either have the first non-career politician since George Washington was elected President, (and he was the first President, so it was hard to have a career...), or
We will have the first woman elected President. Either way, history will be made straight after Obama was the first Black President. (funny how I'm allowed to say "black" as long as it involves "President". Maybe the more important the position, the less "African-American" you can be...no offence meant, just something I noticed).
So we have two potential Presidents, each with serious questions over past behaviour, future actions, and current legal developments. But this is a result of a system that rewards those with the deepest pockets, the best connections,the smartest strategists, the highest profile, the simplest message and the least scruples. Gone are the days of the Best Man for the Job. Those days went away when I was a child.
I have no idea who will win this election, but I do know that it will be a Presidency unlike any we have ever seen before, and looking back over past Presidencies, that's a pretty big call.
Good-night and good luck!
Ted Cruze and Bernie Sanders seem like such a long time ago...
The amazing thing for me is that after all the Primaries were fought and won, (a shock result for the Republicans, a foregone, and set-up result for the Democrats), we are left with two candidates who, no matter how you cut the cake, are flawed, have suspect political agendas, are not representative of their respective Partys' values, and have people all over the world asking; "Is this REALLY the best that the United States has to offer?"
Now my opinion counts for less than nothing, but I own this Blog, so I'm going to let you have it...because I can...
The two people that the citizens of the United States of America will have to choose between in a few days time, are in my opinion, the very best that the system of selection in the United States can produce at this time. Now I didn't say they were the best people for the job, because I don't believe they are, but they are the best that the system can produce when selecting from those that nominated.
Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump are the result of an electoral system that has a number of features which are open to exploitation, and these two have exploited them very well. Before I upset too many of you, let me explain that as an Australian, I have no stake in this game. I am an observer and I have an opinion. Of course, as a person in the world today, I am affected by the outcome of this election. The U.S.A is a major Super Power... we live in their shadow militarily, politically, and economically, but I want to make it clear that I feel free to criticise both sides equally, because, well, I don't have to vote for them.
Anyway, back to the story. Here are a few of the things that have given us the candidates we have today;
The Pre-Selection process of the Presidential Election was set up many years ago. It has not been updated for decades. States that were once of little influence now have massive power in this process. It is essential for Party nominees, and later Presidential nominees to win the right places at the right time. This leads to the second point;
Media has changed, and how! Social Media, online advertising, direct marketing, and the obvious bias of certain media outlets has given us an advertising landscape not seen since the heady days of William Randolph Hearst (look him up if you don't know him... makes Rupert look like a little girl..), and then of course there is the money...
Funding for Parties and Candidates has changed and legal loopholes have been made into hard and fast laws that have altered the playing field forever. The Supreme Court has ruled (for those that don't know, I am aware many of you DO know), that a Corporation can donate to a political candidate, because that corporation can be recognised as an "individual" with Rights and Interests under the law!! Billions of dollars are now at the disposal of those who want to be elected and are willing to make the right promises.
Speaking of promises, I don't recall any political campaign being so full of promises that no-one even pretends to believe will be carried out.
Do you really think that wall will be built, and that Mexico will pay for it? Really?
Do you really think that the massive social reforms will happen? Really?
What we are seeing is a turning point that started with Obama and has reached fruition this year. Obama (or his team) saw that Social Media, Public Opinion, and a sense of history were all coming together at the right time. So he exploited Social Media with a grass-roots fund-raising campaign, playing on the Public Opinion and sense of history that said that the Time Was Right for a Black President. Of course, he also made use of the points made in the previous paragraph, but he got it right. He was elected over a standard Republican nominee. It was a New Dawn.
Now the new nominees are seeing the opportunity to make history for themselves.
We will either have the first non-career politician since George Washington was elected President, (and he was the first President, so it was hard to have a career...), or
We will have the first woman elected President. Either way, history will be made straight after Obama was the first Black President. (funny how I'm allowed to say "black" as long as it involves "President". Maybe the more important the position, the less "African-American" you can be...no offence meant, just something I noticed).
So we have two potential Presidents, each with serious questions over past behaviour, future actions, and current legal developments. But this is a result of a system that rewards those with the deepest pockets, the best connections,the smartest strategists, the highest profile, the simplest message and the least scruples. Gone are the days of the Best Man for the Job. Those days went away when I was a child.
I have no idea who will win this election, but I do know that it will be a Presidency unlike any we have ever seen before, and looking back over past Presidencies, that's a pretty big call.
Good-night and good luck!
Sunday, 17 July 2016
Why Rio Is A Bad Idea For An Olympics
I want to be honest here; Rio De Janeiro is not the first bad idea the International Olympic Committee have had when choosing venues to hold the Summer Games, but it ranks up there with the top three.
Rio will not be a disaster as an Olympic event, (there is too much money involved for that to happen), but it will not be the glamorous, screaming success that the IOC (see above) are hoping for. In fact, I believe it will take numerous Spin-Doctors to hide the failures that it will produce.
And like all armchair observers, I am happy to tell you why... but I will have to go back to the beginning...
When Baron de Coubertin first instituted the Modern Olympics in 1896, he was working on a certain set of standards, and those standards have been adhered to pretty much all the way to the present day, with a few notable disasters...but he was also working in a different world, that had different standards, and different structures governing society.
The good Baron was a product of, and lived during, the Great Age of Empire. All nations that were worth anything of consequence, had Colonial property. Britain, France, Germany, Spain, Belgium, Russia, Italy, even the United States of America, all had colonies and were all making large sums of money from those colonies, as well. This situation persisted well into the Twentieth Century, with Britain, France, and Belgium holding on to colonies into the 1960's, (Technically Britain had a colony in Hong Kong until 1999, in all but name). As a consequence, the Great Powers had immense resources and could easily afford to host an event that, while initially small, rapidly grew into a large and expensive undertaking.
The Baron's world was also one of regimented hierarchy, where every individual knew their place in society, and also knew the consequences of stepping outside the Rules. Remember, this was over a century after the Unifications of both Italy and Germany, but before the First World War, and the Russian Revolution. Many people regarded this time as a kind of Golden Age, akin to the time of Classical Greece. It is no coincidence that The Olympic Games was revived at this time.
So for almost one hundred years, the modern Olympics were held in wealthy European capitals, or if not wealthy, at least retaining the glory of that wealth, and when the Games did shift away from Europe, it was to wealthy non-European capitals like Melbourne, Tokyo, and Mexico City.(Mexico was a very wealthy nation at this time). It seemed like it could go on forever, but then Montreal announced after it hosted the Games in 1976, that the Olympics had cost Montreal a fortune, and it was no exaggeration. The debt was not paid off until 2006, thirty years after the Olympics. Ouch....
Suddenly the prestige of hosting a Summer Olympics was seriously counter-balanced by the immense financial burden it placed on the host city/nation. Suddenly city officials had to consider whether hosting the Games was worth the financial and political fallout. Now the Rules of Society had changed and the populace didn't abide by the old Hierarchy. Now the population could vote out those who cost the city a fortune for the sake of a year or so of Glory.
Which brings us to Rio.
If ever a city didn't need the financial millstone of an Olympic Games, it's Rio de Janeiro. A beautiful city, with magnificent beaches, the Statue of Christ, Carnivale, Food, Glamour.... and slums, mud-slides, crime, poverty to rival any Third-world nation on earth, and civil unrest...lots of civil unrest.
Oh, and of course, a mosquito-borne virus that can cause congenital defects in unborn children.
If your Economy is so fragile that an increase in public bus fares of around 20 cents Australian provokes rioting in the Streets, my advice would be to not host an Olympics. Of course, 20 cents Australian is .50 Brazilian Real. In a nation where the average monthly income for the last four years has been just 2000 Real, a hike of half a Real per bus ride is substantial. I don't think many other stable economies would have riots in the streets, though....
Of course, there is a lot of money coming from outside Rio to fund this event, and the inevitable "will it be ready in time" questions will probably be silenced by spending a lot of this cash, but the bottom line will still be in the red, and the poor of Brazil will ask why some of that money could not be spent on improving their situation. Stir into this mix the corruption allegations and abuses of power cited by the media and social justice organisations, and Rio 2016 could very well lead to a very uncomfortable social upheaval in the near future.
I hope I am wrong about Rio 2016, and I hope it does the Economy of Rio the world of good, but I have my doubts. We can only wait and see, and if it is not a good outcome, perhaps the International Olympic Committee will be more circumspect in its' choices for future hosts.
By the way, my Top Three Olympic city disasters? In no particular order;
Moscow 1980...this was in the twilight of the USSR... like holding the Olympics in North Korea today...
Beijing 2008...so determined to prove they were better than Western nations at this sort of thing that they actually cheated on the fireworks display at the opening...using video footage to make it look more impressive. And the smog of a Third-world Economy being pushed into the 21st Century...choking the athletes.
Berlin 1936...generally acknowledged as the most cringe-inducing Olympic Games, with Hitler shamelessly turning them into a political exercise, and embarrassing his nation, the Games, and the athletes themselves.
I hope Rio doesn't displace any of these...Please...
Rio will not be a disaster as an Olympic event, (there is too much money involved for that to happen), but it will not be the glamorous, screaming success that the IOC (see above) are hoping for. In fact, I believe it will take numerous Spin-Doctors to hide the failures that it will produce.
And like all armchair observers, I am happy to tell you why... but I will have to go back to the beginning...
When Baron de Coubertin first instituted the Modern Olympics in 1896, he was working on a certain set of standards, and those standards have been adhered to pretty much all the way to the present day, with a few notable disasters...but he was also working in a different world, that had different standards, and different structures governing society.
The good Baron was a product of, and lived during, the Great Age of Empire. All nations that were worth anything of consequence, had Colonial property. Britain, France, Germany, Spain, Belgium, Russia, Italy, even the United States of America, all had colonies and were all making large sums of money from those colonies, as well. This situation persisted well into the Twentieth Century, with Britain, France, and Belgium holding on to colonies into the 1960's, (Technically Britain had a colony in Hong Kong until 1999, in all but name). As a consequence, the Great Powers had immense resources and could easily afford to host an event that, while initially small, rapidly grew into a large and expensive undertaking.
The Baron's world was also one of regimented hierarchy, where every individual knew their place in society, and also knew the consequences of stepping outside the Rules. Remember, this was over a century after the Unifications of both Italy and Germany, but before the First World War, and the Russian Revolution. Many people regarded this time as a kind of Golden Age, akin to the time of Classical Greece. It is no coincidence that The Olympic Games was revived at this time.
So for almost one hundred years, the modern Olympics were held in wealthy European capitals, or if not wealthy, at least retaining the glory of that wealth, and when the Games did shift away from Europe, it was to wealthy non-European capitals like Melbourne, Tokyo, and Mexico City.(Mexico was a very wealthy nation at this time). It seemed like it could go on forever, but then Montreal announced after it hosted the Games in 1976, that the Olympics had cost Montreal a fortune, and it was no exaggeration. The debt was not paid off until 2006, thirty years after the Olympics. Ouch....
Suddenly the prestige of hosting a Summer Olympics was seriously counter-balanced by the immense financial burden it placed on the host city/nation. Suddenly city officials had to consider whether hosting the Games was worth the financial and political fallout. Now the Rules of Society had changed and the populace didn't abide by the old Hierarchy. Now the population could vote out those who cost the city a fortune for the sake of a year or so of Glory.
Which brings us to Rio.
If ever a city didn't need the financial millstone of an Olympic Games, it's Rio de Janeiro. A beautiful city, with magnificent beaches, the Statue of Christ, Carnivale, Food, Glamour.... and slums, mud-slides, crime, poverty to rival any Third-world nation on earth, and civil unrest...lots of civil unrest.
Oh, and of course, a mosquito-borne virus that can cause congenital defects in unborn children.
If your Economy is so fragile that an increase in public bus fares of around 20 cents Australian provokes rioting in the Streets, my advice would be to not host an Olympics. Of course, 20 cents Australian is .50 Brazilian Real. In a nation where the average monthly income for the last four years has been just 2000 Real, a hike of half a Real per bus ride is substantial. I don't think many other stable economies would have riots in the streets, though....
Of course, there is a lot of money coming from outside Rio to fund this event, and the inevitable "will it be ready in time" questions will probably be silenced by spending a lot of this cash, but the bottom line will still be in the red, and the poor of Brazil will ask why some of that money could not be spent on improving their situation. Stir into this mix the corruption allegations and abuses of power cited by the media and social justice organisations, and Rio 2016 could very well lead to a very uncomfortable social upheaval in the near future.
I hope I am wrong about Rio 2016, and I hope it does the Economy of Rio the world of good, but I have my doubts. We can only wait and see, and if it is not a good outcome, perhaps the International Olympic Committee will be more circumspect in its' choices for future hosts.
By the way, my Top Three Olympic city disasters? In no particular order;
Moscow 1980...this was in the twilight of the USSR... like holding the Olympics in North Korea today...
Beijing 2008...so determined to prove they were better than Western nations at this sort of thing that they actually cheated on the fireworks display at the opening...using video footage to make it look more impressive. And the smog of a Third-world Economy being pushed into the 21st Century...choking the athletes.
Berlin 1936...generally acknowledged as the most cringe-inducing Olympic Games, with Hitler shamelessly turning them into a political exercise, and embarrassing his nation, the Games, and the athletes themselves.
I hope Rio doesn't displace any of these...Please...
Saturday, 7 May 2016
Mothers Day
I wrote this on Mothers Day 2014....
So today is Mothers Day. A day when we traditionally thank our Mothers for their sacrifice, toil, and undying love. I tend to see more, though.
Today is a day for ALL Mothers.
Some have given up their children for medical or personal reasons.
Some have had their children taken away, and some have lost their children through family turmoil.
Yet they are still Mothers.
I was lucky, I had a loving Mother, her Mother loved me too, and my Fathers mother loved me also.
My wife is a loving Mother to our children, and a loving Grandmother to Hunter.
My wife's Mother was a most wonderful Mother who welcomed me, and who I miss to this day.
Yes, I have been fortunate.
But I still think of all the Mothers who have been before and those less fortunate than so many of us.
So, if you are lucky enough to still have your Mother, tell her you love her.
If you are one of those whose Mother has gone, whether long ago, or recently, then wish upon a star and say "Thank-you".
Because good or bad, rich or poor, not one of us would be here without a Mother to give birth to us.
Somewhere, a Mother will thank-you, even if you can't hear it.
Happy Mothers Day, Mum.... I love you.
So today is Mothers Day. A day when we traditionally thank our Mothers for their sacrifice, toil, and undying love. I tend to see more, though.
Today is a day for ALL Mothers.
Some have given up their children for medical or personal reasons.
Some have had their children taken away, and some have lost their children through family turmoil.
Yet they are still Mothers.
I was lucky, I had a loving Mother, her Mother loved me too, and my Fathers mother loved me also.
My wife is a loving Mother to our children, and a loving Grandmother to Hunter.
My wife's Mother was a most wonderful Mother who welcomed me, and who I miss to this day.
Yes, I have been fortunate.
But I still think of all the Mothers who have been before and those less fortunate than so many of us.
So, if you are lucky enough to still have your Mother, tell her you love her.
If you are one of those whose Mother has gone, whether long ago, or recently, then wish upon a star and say "Thank-you".
Because good or bad, rich or poor, not one of us would be here without a Mother to give birth to us.
Somewhere, a Mother will thank-you, even if you can't hear it.
Happy Mothers Day, Mum.... I love you.
Sunday, 24 April 2016
Why Gallipoli Means So Much To Me...
He was an old man before I was born.
He had been born in another century, another era. When the idea of Empire, and loyalty, held different meanings to what we know today.
I only knew him when his step was already a shuffle, and his back was bent.
He was deaf, very deaf, a daunting thing to a child, like me, who was not used to shouting at adults, and knew little of his background to begin with.
He was my Uncle Peter, a man of few words, whether because of his hearing, or a natural reticence, I'm not sure (although he had his opinions, as I found when I grew older).
He was a man set in his ways, as so many elders of my time were, and I find myself becoming. There is a comfort in the routine, and as long as the routine does not become obsession, there is no harm in that.
My earliest memory of Peter McLeod, is coming into the lean-to at the back of the house to "wash-up" before lunch. A tin pan was part-filled (never fully filled) with water from the rain water tank, and a sliver of soap (I never saw a full bar, so I wonder if it was a left-over from the bathroom), was used to wash our hands, face, and back of the neck. Adults first, children last. Then it was time for lunch.
It was later that I learned that Uncle Peter had been at Gallipoli, but that was all I learned.
Uncle Peter didn't talk about Gallipoli to me. Ever. Except once.
A year before he died, I sat and watched the Anzac Parade on the television in his home, as it was broadcast from Brisbane. (I never saw Uncle Peter at an Anzac Service in our town, but perhaps he did attend before I can remember). Anyway, he was quietly watching the parade as the different units passed by, but when the Red Cross party came on screen, he suddenly cried out, with tears in his voice; "We would have been lost without the Red Cross at Gallipoli!", and he sobbed.
And that was it. Nothing else.
Peter MacLeod passed away a year or so later, and the local Returned Servicemens League turned out to honour his passing.
I was young, idealistic. The world was black or white for me then. I was angry that these people who had nothing to do with him in his lifetime, wanted to be there at his funeral.
I didn't understand that they understood him. Men from the First World War, the Second World War, the Malayan Conflict, the Korean War, and of course, Vietnam.
Many of them wanted nothing to do with other soldiers, they just wanted their lives back, as Uncle Peter did. So they didn't seek out the camaraderie of old soldiers, but got on with their lives.
Until one of them died.
Then they came together and honoured someone that they identified with. Someone that knew their pain, their fear, but moved on with life.
Of course there were many who found comfort in the comradeship. Who gained strength from the shared experience. They were there too... honouring a fellow fallen warrior, one who had lived through the horrors that only modern soldiers can know.
But I didn't understand. I was angry. I was angry that an old man who had given so much was now being honoured by people he had never known.
I knew so little. I have learned so much.
Thank you to all of you, the shuffling old men, who don't like to talk about it, and to the rest of you who need to talk, and should talk.
Because what you have done is more than anyone should ask.
Thank you all, the Uncle Peters, the George Moores, the Ken Petfields, the Peter Bennetts,Steve Newburns, Edward Dahleimers and all the other veterans I have met along the way. I have learned so much from you all, and I will be holding you in my heart on ANZAC Day.
Lest We Forget...
He had been born in another century, another era. When the idea of Empire, and loyalty, held different meanings to what we know today.
I only knew him when his step was already a shuffle, and his back was bent.
He was deaf, very deaf, a daunting thing to a child, like me, who was not used to shouting at adults, and knew little of his background to begin with.
He was my Uncle Peter, a man of few words, whether because of his hearing, or a natural reticence, I'm not sure (although he had his opinions, as I found when I grew older).
He was a man set in his ways, as so many elders of my time were, and I find myself becoming. There is a comfort in the routine, and as long as the routine does not become obsession, there is no harm in that.
My earliest memory of Peter McLeod, is coming into the lean-to at the back of the house to "wash-up" before lunch. A tin pan was part-filled (never fully filled) with water from the rain water tank, and a sliver of soap (I never saw a full bar, so I wonder if it was a left-over from the bathroom), was used to wash our hands, face, and back of the neck. Adults first, children last. Then it was time for lunch.
It was later that I learned that Uncle Peter had been at Gallipoli, but that was all I learned.
Uncle Peter didn't talk about Gallipoli to me. Ever. Except once.
A year before he died, I sat and watched the Anzac Parade on the television in his home, as it was broadcast from Brisbane. (I never saw Uncle Peter at an Anzac Service in our town, but perhaps he did attend before I can remember). Anyway, he was quietly watching the parade as the different units passed by, but when the Red Cross party came on screen, he suddenly cried out, with tears in his voice; "We would have been lost without the Red Cross at Gallipoli!", and he sobbed.
And that was it. Nothing else.
Peter MacLeod passed away a year or so later, and the local Returned Servicemens League turned out to honour his passing.
I was young, idealistic. The world was black or white for me then. I was angry that these people who had nothing to do with him in his lifetime, wanted to be there at his funeral.
I didn't understand that they understood him. Men from the First World War, the Second World War, the Malayan Conflict, the Korean War, and of course, Vietnam.
Many of them wanted nothing to do with other soldiers, they just wanted their lives back, as Uncle Peter did. So they didn't seek out the camaraderie of old soldiers, but got on with their lives.
Until one of them died.
Then they came together and honoured someone that they identified with. Someone that knew their pain, their fear, but moved on with life.
Of course there were many who found comfort in the comradeship. Who gained strength from the shared experience. They were there too... honouring a fellow fallen warrior, one who had lived through the horrors that only modern soldiers can know.
But I didn't understand. I was angry. I was angry that an old man who had given so much was now being honoured by people he had never known.
I knew so little. I have learned so much.
Thank you to all of you, the shuffling old men, who don't like to talk about it, and to the rest of you who need to talk, and should talk.
Because what you have done is more than anyone should ask.
Thank you all, the Uncle Peters, the George Moores, the Ken Petfields, the Peter Bennetts,Steve Newburns, Edward Dahleimers and all the other veterans I have met along the way. I have learned so much from you all, and I will be holding you in my heart on ANZAC Day.
Lest We Forget...
Sunday, 17 April 2016
How do you sleep?
I have been away from this site too long... a statement proved by the fact that I had forgotten my password!!
But I am back, for better or for worse, and I have something to say.
I ran for election... I lost.
I can live with that. I know I can, because I just wrote over one hundred words about what happened, and then deleted them, so you will never know what really happened...because that is not important.
What is important is what comes next... what comes after..
Local Government, (or Local Council) elections do not loom large on the political radar. They are, by definition, local affairs about local issues.
They are also incredibly important. To You.
It is your local authority that decides whether High-Rise buildings, Night-Clubs, Brothels, Live-music, Public concerts, Street-parties, Road-maintenance, Disabled access, Parking fines, or even Public Libraries, are supported or opposed. It is Local Government that controls your garbage pick-up... but 90% of the public don't care.
And that led me to a very important discovery...
I ran for local council in Noosa Shire, where I have lived for over twenty years.
I knew I was an outside chance of winning, but I also knew that much of what I was saying was supported by decent working folks like me. I wanted to get out there and say the things that many people were thinking, but no-one was saying.
That was the first sign of my naivete'. Because if so many people thought it, then why wasn't there a representative on Council espousing these beliefs already??
Here is why...the decent working folks (like me), don't follow local politics. They are too busy making a living, and when work is over, they aren't going to political meetings at night. They are taking their kids to soccer/tennis/football/ ballet, and then they are asleep in front of the television because they are tired. They are too tired from making a living to care!
The second sign of my ignorance was the background of my fellow Candidates...everyone had a backer... either financial or ideological.... and those of us that didn't...well we can always write Blogs.
The bottom line is this... if you are on Council already, you will stay, because everyone knows your name. If you are running for a vacant seat, (and ten of us were chasing three vacant seats), then the prize goes to the biggest cheque-books in the race. If you can afford the money, and can take the time off work to simply campaign, then the seat is yours to grab.
So the winners didn't need to make a difference. They simply needed to reassure the right people that they would not rock the boat, and have enough money to ensure their face was well known, and tiredness, apathy, and a desire for the status-quo would ensure that the result would take care of itself.
I am not bitter, or resentful about this, (okay, maybe a little resentful..). but that is how the game is played, and has been for thousands of years...
Except...
Except... if A Candidate, An honest, fair-minded Candidate, sees things that are wrong, sees unfairness, and decides to speak up, then maybe something can be changed.
I was raised to be fair, and that the rules were there to make it so everyone had a chance to win, with the best person for the job becoming victor on the day.
I didn't see that, I saw unfairness, and I decided I would not let it pass. I do not think that the perpetrator intended to disadvantage a Candidate for Councillor, I just think they were so intent on winning the vote for Mayor, that they did not consider the repercussions of their actions. But I saw an injustice in what they did.
I know I will not be on Council, but I feel someone else may have (or may not have) missed their chance. So I spoke up on their behalf... and I pushed, and pushed some more, and I am still pushing now... but at least the State Electoral Commission has agreed to investigate my claims.
Nothing may come of it, I don't know. But I do know that at least I have not remained silent when I saw an injustice to another human being.
I can sleep easy...and I do...
But I am back, for better or for worse, and I have something to say.
I ran for election... I lost.
I can live with that. I know I can, because I just wrote over one hundred words about what happened, and then deleted them, so you will never know what really happened...because that is not important.
What is important is what comes next... what comes after..
Local Government, (or Local Council) elections do not loom large on the political radar. They are, by definition, local affairs about local issues.
They are also incredibly important. To You.
It is your local authority that decides whether High-Rise buildings, Night-Clubs, Brothels, Live-music, Public concerts, Street-parties, Road-maintenance, Disabled access, Parking fines, or even Public Libraries, are supported or opposed. It is Local Government that controls your garbage pick-up... but 90% of the public don't care.
And that led me to a very important discovery...
I ran for local council in Noosa Shire, where I have lived for over twenty years.
I knew I was an outside chance of winning, but I also knew that much of what I was saying was supported by decent working folks like me. I wanted to get out there and say the things that many people were thinking, but no-one was saying.
That was the first sign of my naivete'. Because if so many people thought it, then why wasn't there a representative on Council espousing these beliefs already??
Here is why...the decent working folks (like me), don't follow local politics. They are too busy making a living, and when work is over, they aren't going to political meetings at night. They are taking their kids to soccer/tennis/football/ ballet, and then they are asleep in front of the television because they are tired. They are too tired from making a living to care!
The second sign of my ignorance was the background of my fellow Candidates...everyone had a backer... either financial or ideological.... and those of us that didn't...well we can always write Blogs.
The bottom line is this... if you are on Council already, you will stay, because everyone knows your name. If you are running for a vacant seat, (and ten of us were chasing three vacant seats), then the prize goes to the biggest cheque-books in the race. If you can afford the money, and can take the time off work to simply campaign, then the seat is yours to grab.
So the winners didn't need to make a difference. They simply needed to reassure the right people that they would not rock the boat, and have enough money to ensure their face was well known, and tiredness, apathy, and a desire for the status-quo would ensure that the result would take care of itself.
I am not bitter, or resentful about this, (okay, maybe a little resentful..). but that is how the game is played, and has been for thousands of years...
Except...
Except... if A Candidate, An honest, fair-minded Candidate, sees things that are wrong, sees unfairness, and decides to speak up, then maybe something can be changed.
I was raised to be fair, and that the rules were there to make it so everyone had a chance to win, with the best person for the job becoming victor on the day.
I didn't see that, I saw unfairness, and I decided I would not let it pass. I do not think that the perpetrator intended to disadvantage a Candidate for Councillor, I just think they were so intent on winning the vote for Mayor, that they did not consider the repercussions of their actions. But I saw an injustice in what they did.
I know I will not be on Council, but I feel someone else may have (or may not have) missed their chance. So I spoke up on their behalf... and I pushed, and pushed some more, and I am still pushing now... but at least the State Electoral Commission has agreed to investigate my claims.
Nothing may come of it, I don't know. But I do know that at least I have not remained silent when I saw an injustice to another human being.
I can sleep easy...and I do...
Monday, 22 February 2016
I'm Beginning To See A Pattern
I am running for local government in my town.. Local Council, we call it in the Land Of Oz...
Anyway, beyond the Bull and the Blandishments. After the Answer-Avoiding and A**-Licking, we get down to what it's all about. And I'm beginning to see a pattern....
The pattern is about Movie Stars...
Don't worry, the candidates don't see it, because they are in the picture...you have to be OUTSIDE the frame, to see it.. and it works like this...
When Robert De Niro cracked the big time, (and Jodie Foster, but more on her later...), he did it in "Raging Bull", and "Taxi Driver".
When Leonardo Di Caprio cracked it, it was for "What's Eating Gilbert Grape?"
Tom Cruise did it in "Risky Business"
Nicole Kidman in "Dead Calm", an Australian low-budget thriller.
And of course, Jodie Foster.." Taxi Driver" as well.
Now let's talk about where they went;
De Niro went on and up.. He has played a succession of roles as diverse as a gangster in "Dick Tracy", to a gangster in "The Untouchables", to a gangster in "Anger Management" (1 &2)
To an ex FBI (now THERE"S a change-up) in "Meet the Fokkers" et al, and most recently, an ex-Vice-President of a company in "The Intern"
De Caprio has gone from "Gilbert" to "Titanic", to "The Beach" to "Great Gatsby", admittedly with side-trips but still consistently upward.
Cruise is now a staple as the high-class detective,/futuristic/ know-it -all rich guy.
Kidman went from working class sailor to World-renowned author (The Hours), to Princess Grace of Monaco...
And Jodie Foster is well-known for making it from teenage hooker to working single- parent (Safe-Room, North), to Corporate anything (check her last few films...)
The point I am making here is that most actors start out making films about the poor people, the workers, because that's where they are.
As their success grows, so do the kind of parts they have in movies they make. They get richer, more luxurious, and more removed from you and me.
I don't begrudge them their success, they earned it, and if they can make big bucks, then good for them....
But why do they do it?
Well, I think that they make films about real life. THEIR real lives.
The more successful you are, the more you get paid. That means your reality changes too.
So, De Niro started out poor, his movies were about his recognition of real life. As he got older, and richer, Real Life changed for him. Now wealth is the Norm, and it is taken for granted. Which is why I have trouble identifying with many modern movies.
Apply the same rule to the rest.
Except Paul Newman. Newman played the part, not the setting. He played Losers and Drunks just as much as Businessmen and Family men, until his dying day.
I never thought of myself as an actor.
But I wouldn't mind trying to be Paul Newman,...
As a Candidate of course...
After all, the rest of them are trying to be Di Caprio...
Vote 1 Ken Coleman
Anyway, beyond the Bull and the Blandishments. After the Answer-Avoiding and A**-Licking, we get down to what it's all about. And I'm beginning to see a pattern....
The pattern is about Movie Stars...
Don't worry, the candidates don't see it, because they are in the picture...you have to be OUTSIDE the frame, to see it.. and it works like this...
When Robert De Niro cracked the big time, (and Jodie Foster, but more on her later...), he did it in "Raging Bull", and "Taxi Driver".
When Leonardo Di Caprio cracked it, it was for "What's Eating Gilbert Grape?"
Tom Cruise did it in "Risky Business"
Nicole Kidman in "Dead Calm", an Australian low-budget thriller.
And of course, Jodie Foster.." Taxi Driver" as well.
Now let's talk about where they went;
De Niro went on and up.. He has played a succession of roles as diverse as a gangster in "Dick Tracy", to a gangster in "The Untouchables", to a gangster in "Anger Management" (1 &2)
To an ex FBI (now THERE"S a change-up) in "Meet the Fokkers" et al, and most recently, an ex-Vice-President of a company in "The Intern"
De Caprio has gone from "Gilbert" to "Titanic", to "The Beach" to "Great Gatsby", admittedly with side-trips but still consistently upward.
Cruise is now a staple as the high-class detective,/futuristic/ know-it -all rich guy.
Kidman went from working class sailor to World-renowned author (The Hours), to Princess Grace of Monaco...
And Jodie Foster is well-known for making it from teenage hooker to working single- parent (Safe-Room, North), to Corporate anything (check her last few films...)
The point I am making here is that most actors start out making films about the poor people, the workers, because that's where they are.
As their success grows, so do the kind of parts they have in movies they make. They get richer, more luxurious, and more removed from you and me.
I don't begrudge them their success, they earned it, and if they can make big bucks, then good for them....
But why do they do it?
Well, I think that they make films about real life. THEIR real lives.
The more successful you are, the more you get paid. That means your reality changes too.
So, De Niro started out poor, his movies were about his recognition of real life. As he got older, and richer, Real Life changed for him. Now wealth is the Norm, and it is taken for granted. Which is why I have trouble identifying with many modern movies.
Apply the same rule to the rest.
Except Paul Newman. Newman played the part, not the setting. He played Losers and Drunks just as much as Businessmen and Family men, until his dying day.
I never thought of myself as an actor.
But I wouldn't mind trying to be Paul Newman,...
As a Candidate of course...
After all, the rest of them are trying to be Di Caprio...
Vote 1 Ken Coleman
Saturday, 9 January 2016
Smokin', Tokin' Chokin', and Quality of Life?
Once upon a time, Western Society was faced with a crisis. It was so concerning that the leading societies of the day considered taking legal action, and wanted to pass laws making it illegal for citizens of their nations to use a certain drug. Governments Of The Day said that the large number of people using this drug had caused a breakdown in the fabric of society, and threatened the productivity of their nations, not to mention the detrimental effect being placed on family life.
The laws were never passed, but the debate did happen, and the arguments were sincere. If it had not been for the pressure applied to the law-makers by a certain sector of society, perhaps the laws may have taken effect, and our society would have been vastly different.
The drug? Tea.
When tea first arrived in Europe, tea-houses sprang up everywhere, and were so popular, and so all-consuming, that the scenarios described above really did occur. It was only the pressure applied by the wealthy tea merchants that prevented the stimulant being outlawed.
Later, of course, came coffee, with similar effects.
Both of which have nothing to do with Marijuana, except in one respect. It has also changed the societies into which it has been introduced.
Tea, Coffee and dope are all recreational drugs which are derived from plants. They are not particularly powerful in their natural form, but Marijuana is becoming more potent as hydroponic and genetic mutations appear in the product being sold. Potency is terrific if you want a quicker high, or a longer high, but these effects are not really useful when it comes to paying the mortgage...
Unfortunately, many people regard dope as a great way of coping with Real World problems. Let's face it, as progressive as we want to be, smoking dope will not fix your relationship, pay your debts, or bring you closer to God.
It is also worlds away from being effective in controlling strong symptoms of serious diseases, and this is where the current medical confusion lies.
There are certain natural therapies that recommend the use of herbal infusions to alleviate symptoms; Chamomile tea, Mint tea, etc., and they can be very therapeutic....BUT...
You wouldn't treat cancer with a cup of tea.
OK, maybe some people would, but the success/failure rate never seems to be publicised as a percentage for some reason...
Which means that the use of the natural product in its natural state (steeped or smoked...), is probably not such a great idea when treating serious illness.
And this is where the Real World comes crashing into the realms of Bureaucracy...
You see, Bureaucrats and Lawmakers have a problem with the Real World, and the problem is simple;
The Real World doesn't follow the rules that Bureaucrats make... it's really irresponsible of the Real World, but they're working on fixing that, don't worry.
The Bureaucrats have decided that all drugs need regulation, and the Lawmakers have been employed to make sure this happens. Now the use of Marijuana has a long history, and it has always been associated with working class people. Rich people tended to use Opium, Laudanum, or Opera, (depending on their taste), mainly because they were more expensive, and because everybody else was doing it.
Marijuana came from the hemp growers who used it to make rope (remember hemp rope? I do, you probably don't..). In the days of sailing ships, hemp was the biggest market in the world, even bigger than canvas for sails. Really.
So, when the slaves of Mississippi, Alabama, Virginia, and the rest were planting/picking tobacco or cotton, the slaves of Kansas, Ohio, Oklahoma and the rest of the Mid-West were planting or harvesting hemp. And yes... I realise that most people forget that almost ALL states of the Union had slaves until just before the Civil War. (Let's save that for another blog post, ok?)
Anyway, after the harvest, it is well documented that, right up until the 1930's, when most farm labour was still Black (or Coloured, or Afro-American... I genuinely mean no offence), the workers would gather the leaves of hemp left over from the harvest and make fires in the fields, and sit around them till late at night, laughing and singing.
Rope hemp is not very strong as a drug, but its effect is an indication of where the drug could go... and so the Jazz era discovered Indian Hemp...and away we go!!
Where would Jazz, Blues, Folk, Rock and Roll, and the entire 1960's be without Dope?? Nowhere, Man!!
The thing that puzzles me most about this whole thing is: Why do Advocates find it so hard to understand the resistance that The Establishment has to Marijuana?
We have spent 3 (THREE... 1 PLUS 1 PLUS 1) Generations telling society that dope is the drug of Rebellion. This is our way of telling them that we are going to screw their values. We don't care. It's all about smoking shit and getting wasted, and you can't stop us... You Bastards!! We'll rebel by getting stoned and doing nothing!!
Until someone discovered that dope might be good for treating disease.
So now we are all wondering why Society isn't saying "WOW! HOW GREAT!! LET'S GIVE EVERYONE DOPE FOR FREE"
Hmmm...
Now let's face it; no-one is saying that Marijuana is a cure-all that will end Man-kinds suffering. It can be used as a pain relief for certain conditions, when inhaled as a smoke, in its dried, leaf state. It is no good as a long-term cure when used in this way.
The educated among you (if you have come this far), will realise that what the experts are talking about is...Medical dope oil.
Marijuana oil, when properly produced and applied as a tincture (NOT smoked.. and look up the word "tincture", I am not your Year 6 teacher), can actually relieve certain symptoms of certain diseases, Cancer being one of them. I have seen this for myself. Unfortunately Society as a whole, Bureaucracy and Lawmakers in particular, have made it their business to make sure this drug is illegal, and punishable in the courts.
The truth of the matter is; we, the public, have made it our business to reinforce that perception.
Marijuana has been the drug of rebellion and resistance for generations. We have continually thrown it in the face of the Establishment as a symbol of our refusal to do things by the book. Wild parties, alcohol and dope during Prohibition. Free love and dope in the 1960's. teenage rebellion and dope in the 70's.
Now we wonder why governments won't legalise medicinal marijuana, just because we have finally found a way to help mankind.
Like your morning cup of tea,(or coffee), Dope will need to overcome the stigma we have placed on it ourselves, before we can be relaxed about how we use it.
You can toke that any way you like....
The laws were never passed, but the debate did happen, and the arguments were sincere. If it had not been for the pressure applied to the law-makers by a certain sector of society, perhaps the laws may have taken effect, and our society would have been vastly different.
The drug? Tea.
When tea first arrived in Europe, tea-houses sprang up everywhere, and were so popular, and so all-consuming, that the scenarios described above really did occur. It was only the pressure applied by the wealthy tea merchants that prevented the stimulant being outlawed.
Later, of course, came coffee, with similar effects.
Both of which have nothing to do with Marijuana, except in one respect. It has also changed the societies into which it has been introduced.
Tea, Coffee and dope are all recreational drugs which are derived from plants. They are not particularly powerful in their natural form, but Marijuana is becoming more potent as hydroponic and genetic mutations appear in the product being sold. Potency is terrific if you want a quicker high, or a longer high, but these effects are not really useful when it comes to paying the mortgage...
Unfortunately, many people regard dope as a great way of coping with Real World problems. Let's face it, as progressive as we want to be, smoking dope will not fix your relationship, pay your debts, or bring you closer to God.
It is also worlds away from being effective in controlling strong symptoms of serious diseases, and this is where the current medical confusion lies.
There are certain natural therapies that recommend the use of herbal infusions to alleviate symptoms; Chamomile tea, Mint tea, etc., and they can be very therapeutic....BUT...
You wouldn't treat cancer with a cup of tea.
OK, maybe some people would, but the success/failure rate never seems to be publicised as a percentage for some reason...
Which means that the use of the natural product in its natural state (steeped or smoked...), is probably not such a great idea when treating serious illness.
And this is where the Real World comes crashing into the realms of Bureaucracy...
You see, Bureaucrats and Lawmakers have a problem with the Real World, and the problem is simple;
The Real World doesn't follow the rules that Bureaucrats make... it's really irresponsible of the Real World, but they're working on fixing that, don't worry.
The Bureaucrats have decided that all drugs need regulation, and the Lawmakers have been employed to make sure this happens. Now the use of Marijuana has a long history, and it has always been associated with working class people. Rich people tended to use Opium, Laudanum, or Opera, (depending on their taste), mainly because they were more expensive, and because everybody else was doing it.
Marijuana came from the hemp growers who used it to make rope (remember hemp rope? I do, you probably don't..). In the days of sailing ships, hemp was the biggest market in the world, even bigger than canvas for sails. Really.
So, when the slaves of Mississippi, Alabama, Virginia, and the rest were planting/picking tobacco or cotton, the slaves of Kansas, Ohio, Oklahoma and the rest of the Mid-West were planting or harvesting hemp. And yes... I realise that most people forget that almost ALL states of the Union had slaves until just before the Civil War. (Let's save that for another blog post, ok?)
Anyway, after the harvest, it is well documented that, right up until the 1930's, when most farm labour was still Black (or Coloured, or Afro-American... I genuinely mean no offence), the workers would gather the leaves of hemp left over from the harvest and make fires in the fields, and sit around them till late at night, laughing and singing.
Rope hemp is not very strong as a drug, but its effect is an indication of where the drug could go... and so the Jazz era discovered Indian Hemp...and away we go!!
Where would Jazz, Blues, Folk, Rock and Roll, and the entire 1960's be without Dope?? Nowhere, Man!!
The thing that puzzles me most about this whole thing is: Why do Advocates find it so hard to understand the resistance that The Establishment has to Marijuana?
We have spent 3 (THREE... 1 PLUS 1 PLUS 1) Generations telling society that dope is the drug of Rebellion. This is our way of telling them that we are going to screw their values. We don't care. It's all about smoking shit and getting wasted, and you can't stop us... You Bastards!! We'll rebel by getting stoned and doing nothing!!
Until someone discovered that dope might be good for treating disease.
So now we are all wondering why Society isn't saying "WOW! HOW GREAT!! LET'S GIVE EVERYONE DOPE FOR FREE"
Hmmm...
Now let's face it; no-one is saying that Marijuana is a cure-all that will end Man-kinds suffering. It can be used as a pain relief for certain conditions, when inhaled as a smoke, in its dried, leaf state. It is no good as a long-term cure when used in this way.
The educated among you (if you have come this far), will realise that what the experts are talking about is...Medical dope oil.
Marijuana oil, when properly produced and applied as a tincture (NOT smoked.. and look up the word "tincture", I am not your Year 6 teacher), can actually relieve certain symptoms of certain diseases, Cancer being one of them. I have seen this for myself. Unfortunately Society as a whole, Bureaucracy and Lawmakers in particular, have made it their business to make sure this drug is illegal, and punishable in the courts.
The truth of the matter is; we, the public, have made it our business to reinforce that perception.
Marijuana has been the drug of rebellion and resistance for generations. We have continually thrown it in the face of the Establishment as a symbol of our refusal to do things by the book. Wild parties, alcohol and dope during Prohibition. Free love and dope in the 1960's. teenage rebellion and dope in the 70's.
Now we wonder why governments won't legalise medicinal marijuana, just because we have finally found a way to help mankind.
Like your morning cup of tea,(or coffee), Dope will need to overcome the stigma we have placed on it ourselves, before we can be relaxed about how we use it.
You can toke that any way you like....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)