Australia rolls out the welcome mat — bigoted fascist style — and terrifies potential tourists and immigrants.
It has always bothered me that senators and others get titles like “the honourable” when they are no such fucking thing, and quite frankly they’re the opposite. What bothers me even more is the proportion of them whom are utter imbeciles, completely corrupt, cowardly, incompetent, disingenuous, and even bat shit crazy. Not to mention all the others in the bureaucracy, judiciary, police, ‘intelligence services’, and defence forces, whom are at least complicit if not corrupt themselves.
My question is:
How the fuck do any of these twats qualify to even run for public office in the first place, much less actually get themselves elected and then maintain their position, instead of getting themselves arrested?
— and I think Australia really needs to ask itself why it is so willing to have the very worst and least our society produces, as its so-called “leaders” … when arguably these people are making nothing but bad decisions, and I challenge you to prove me wrong ( ie: name and argue why any significant set of policies by any government in the last 4 decades has been brilliant and visionary ).
Many of these people are without question corrupt as fuck, as they openly take bribes, which is the very definition of corruption, and the mere act of rebranding these bribes as ‘donations’ and ‘lobbying’ is all it takes to ignore the fact that it is bribery, and therefore corruption. Our parliament is full of criminals.
This article originally came to me as an idea about how to simply distinguish the differences between property/trade/currency vs. non-property/trade/currency based economic systems – being that the former manufactures scarcity, while the latter removes it ( where possible ). Which in turn was inspired by a debate on social media about whether or not the world is over populated, what we mean by that, and how/why we justify such a statement.
It then occurred to me that for people to understand these issues, they must first understand what scarcity is, and how it occurs – ironically, the people who understand this the least are often the ones who should understand it the best ( economists ), and yet it’s quite apparent that many of them haven’t a clue. The reason for that being, scarcity is an ecological issue, but not an economic one within the confines of the capitalist economic paradigm ( though it should be ).
So let’s start at the beginning and look at what scarcity actually is.
If you design a system based on the correct interpretation of valid data, there’s a thing you should experience at some stage, and which validates the development track you’re on, and I have experienced this thing at least a few dozen times … it goes something like this ( to provide the most recent example ): Continue reading “Unexpected evidence”
What exactly is it we are referring to when we use the word “sky”?
If we think about it carefully:
the sky is an emergent object which only strictly speaking “exists” when you have an unobstructed view upwards towards a purely natural atmospheric and/or astronomical background.
So if i can see clouds, blue sky ( daylight ), or stars, I am seeing some aspect of the day-time or night-time sky. Continue reading “Blame shifting, brinkmanship, cowardice, ignorance, illiteracy, and laziness … versus “the sky is falling” – how do you find truth in a post truth world?”
I found an old screen-capture image I’d taken from Facebook a few years ago, and it inspired me to write this post, which discusses how an alternate economic framework, based on consequences rather than property, would deal with such things as censorship, societal values, and moderation of behaviour.
Another major flaw of capitalism, is its natural innate support for any and every hypothetically possible manifestation of anything even remotely similar to the underlying principles of fascism.
This probably should have occurred to me to do a long time ago, but for some reason it didn’t, and this may have caused some confusion … but some of you may have noticed that on the one hand I describe Open Empire as “non-hierarchical (aka anarchic)” but on the other hand I also describe it as being about new systems of “law economics and politics”. So … wherever you see the word “law” please do an edit in your head and replace this with the term “justice”.
I’ve seen a few comments over the last few months about what people think Linked In should be for, and what people think about how people use it (often in the latter case, accompanied by comparisons to people’s Facebook) … here’s my take:
I thought perhaps another approach to defining Open Empire would be to talk about what it isn’t …
So Open Empire ISN’T the following things: