Welcome to Don Malcolm's Web Pages Web site design and maintenance, spam reduction, over 300 search engines, programmer resources, dictionaries, reference material, career resources, volunteer guide, and other material.

Search this site:

CLIMATE CHANGE AND ITS FUNDAMENTAL CAUSES

By Don Malcolm

With the release of the recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), there is much talk on the impact of global warming on climate change and what we can do about it.

GOVERNMENTS

Governments appear to be doing too little too slowly. Why? Their existence is based on an idea. An idea that finds its existence through the actions of politicians and leaders. To gain entry into government and to maintain a position in government, a politician must appeal to their source of power whether autocratic or democratic. This makes it difficult for governments to make decisions that are in the best interests of our children's children and future generations. Rather, it is the idea of government run by individuals that are motivated by appealing to their source of power, that leads to openly stated commitments such as “I am not going to do anything that will damage the economic welfare of the country”, and “The jobs and lives of the people in our country must not be jeopardised in the pursuit of combating the effects of global warming”.

These statements hit at the heart of what is wrong with government. The reality is that if we continue to pamper ourselves, there may not be a future for the country to enjoy. It could be wiped out by storm, or draught, or some other shift of the environment. A classic case is logging of native forests. Well I'm sorry, the loggers will just have to realise that their industry segment is unsustainable, and that they will just have to go and get work elsewhere. Yes it is disruptive, and it is a disruption that is necessary for the long term survival of the planet. We need to wake up from our self-delusion of government for the people, or government of the people for the benefit of the elite.

Whatever the actual structure of government, we need to realise that there are hard decisions to be made, that will be disruptive to our present lifestyle. I understand the need for a balanced approach. It is not very prudent to put millions people out of work resulting in starvation and crime. Having said that, let us get to work, and come up with creative ideas to solve the problems. Let us make the hard decisions that result in closing down of entire industry segments. Let us take the unpopular choice for the sake of future generations on planet earth. Let us not destroy the planet just because we wanted to keep some citizens in jobs.

CORPORATIONS

Corporations from the perspective of world history are a recent innovation. There exist three major flaws, one is what they call “internal referencing”. This is the idea of considering how does it benefit me. (I use the word 'me' instead of 'us' as the concept is personal, and because a corporation is an individual entity.) Then there is the “corporate horizon”. A corporation can only see into the future and plan for just a few years, perhaps for as little as three to five years. In contrast, a personal horizon (that of a living breathing human being) is generally up to around ten years. Another idea is the “focus on growth”. One can rightly ask, when is enough enough? Some time into the future, people will look back on this period with amusement at how distorted our perception had become, and with horror at the immensity of the destructive global impact these ideas had.

It has happened in wars past. At the time, we do it for the sake of an idea. We do it for the motherland. Then sometime later, reality sets in. We awaken from our self-delusion, and realise the emptiness and destructiveness of such ideas. The idea of a corporation is fatally flawed at its core. Yes there are many good people in the world doing many good things with corporations. However even these corporations are fundamentally flawed. What concern of a corporation is it, to spend shareholder money in things that do not benefit the corporation? We need a radically new way of thinking, that places the welfare of future generations as a top priority. Do we really want to leave the future of this planet in hands of self focused, short sighted, and greedy corporations? I think not. It is time for a radically new idea. An idea that puts the welfare of the planet where it belongs. In the heats and minds of every person on planet earth.

Why is a corporation internally referenced? Well, it doesn't make sense from a corporation perspective to spend ones own money assisting another entity where there is no tangible benefit for oneself. A corporation by nature, uses its resources to benefit directly or indirectly itself. Why is a corporation short sighted? The directors, and executives are assessed on present performance, not on promises. The corporation is expected to profit stake holders in the present, promises don't count. Results (present tangibles) are what matters to stakeholders. Some honourable well intentioned leaders have shifted the focus to some extent. Though by the very nature of a corporation, this shift is contrary to the fundamental purpose and goals of a corporation, and thus not universally sustainable or achievable across corporations globally. A noble attempt, and a more radical solution is required.

Why is a corporation greedy? There is the notion that if one is not moving forward then one is loosing ground or going backwards. Even an attempt to stay the same, is considered by many to be equivalent to going backwards because if you stay the same, as the world around you is progressing, then you are being left behind, and indeed your very survival becomes an issue. In order for a corporation to simply keep alive in this world, it must actively engage in and be continually improving, developing, and growing. By very nature of a corporation existing in this present world, it must focus on growth in order to survive in a competitive world. Is this unbridled headlong rush to growth in the best interests of the survival of the planet? When is enough enough?

By their very nature, corporations are not fit entities to be making decisions relating to the best interests of the long term survival of the planet. They are fundamentally incapable of arriving at a rational decision that is in the best interests of the planet. By way of logical conclusion, therefore corporations are not fit entities to make decisions regarding their own activities. Corporations have a fundamental blindness to what is in the best interests of the planet.

Since corporations are not fit entities to make decisions regarding their own activities and are in a state of self delusion (due to being fundamentally incapable of rational choice), the only truly rational choice for corporations is to choose to cease to exist, at least in their present form.

STREET TERRORISM

Governments are expending great amounts of energy in creating mistrust between neighbours, getting people to consider other peoples behaviour with suspicion in the fight to combat political terrorism. All the while, there is nothing more than pacifying rhetoric coming from the government, regarding street violence or what I like to call street terrorism. I call it street terrorism because how many times have there been media reports of elderly and others who are afraid to venture for fear of being bashed without cause. These people are being terrorised. There is talk here in NSW of strengthening the police force, however that misses the point which I will talk more about later. Violence is something that society and the government have tolerated. With the arrival of ice combined with the desensitisation through violent computer games, there is a new breed of violence on our streets.

I hear persons being interviewed who say that typically youths only engage in one time assault, and then grow up to be productive members of society. I have two things to say to such people. First I bet, that they themselves where involved in a one off assault when they were youths. Secondly, I would like to see them get hospitalised for no reason other than being there. See if they still think it is fine for youths to engage in unprovoked violence.

The kind of violence we are seeing is different than ten or twenty years ago. Today it is just “Hey you”, “Hey you” (in a tone that would suggest that I just want to talk), and then without any talk, no further words are exchanged, it is just bash bash bash. I am outraged, I am angry, I want justice. Those youths demonstrated a total lack of respect, and what they did is totally unacceptable.

Do you want to go lenient on such outrageous unacceptable behaviour? What about the victims? There are those whose lives are irrevocably damaged. I say, they do the drugs, they do the violence, they do the time. Lock them away for at least ten years. Anything less is not justice. This should not be about a young life lost in prison. The legal system is not primarily concerned with reform. The purpose of the legal system is to provide justice for the victims. It is to provide justice for the victims, so the victims don't turn into perpetrators in obtaining their own justice. When the legal system fails in its duty to lock away the perpetrators, it fails in its duty to society. Anyone who has a different opinion to this, I highly recommend getting beaten savagely and severely without cause and hospitalised, then an awakening of consciousness may take place, that victims need proper recourse, that is, victims need justice. When youths do drugs, and then do violence, they forfeit their rights. We need to respect the rights of the victims. We need to lock away anyone of fifteen or older who commit such violent crimes. We need to respect our police who endanger themselves by apprehending these violent young criminals, with sentences that are commensurate with the crime for anyone who has passed their fifteenth birthday. Anything less is not justice, it is terrorism. When the Government allows its citizens to be terrorised without proper justice, it is failing in its duty.

The present focus of the NSW government is on policing to combat the violence. This misses the point. While you have youths who play violent video and computer games, followed with drug taking such as ice. You have a potent cocktail that any amount of policing is going to be ineffective against. To be effective, the cause of the violence has to be addressed. I don't hear public outrage regarding desensitisation due to violent games, so I will leave that one alone for now. That leaves the drugs.

I applaud what certain Asian countries are doing in the fight against drugs. Yes! I applaud the death sentence. I know it is an option that many find repulsive. However I highly recommend being the victim of a brutal unprovoked attack resulting in hospitalisation, to bring a little sanity and balance into this debate. I applaud what certain Asian countries are doing.

Perhaps there is some middle ground. First I want to say that while we go soft on drugs, we go soft on violence. This is unacceptable. We need to get serious about this problem. Being in possession of drugs is worth at least a mandatory 5 years. Testing positive to it being in your body at least 3 years. Dealing is worth at least 10 years. We need to get serious about dealing with this problem.

If the government fails to provide justice for the victims we will see another uprising such as was seen at Cronula, and if a group uprising is unachievable, then victims will express themselves as vigilantes. The bottom line, is that the Government needs to perform its duty and provide justice for victims through the legal system.

February 2007

MAJOR DISCOVERY
The way life is viewed and all of existance is challenged with quotes from leading scientists and thinkers in:
The Most Simple Science Theory of Physical Reality Philosophy Physics Metaphysics of Space & the Wave Structure of Matter (WSM)

The Interactive Bible