Question 1:
If you were a narcissistic psychopathic sociopathic and unscrupulous billionaire, with a vested interest in an industry causing massive catastrophic ecological consequences, that industry could not be reformed (because the flaw was fundamental to everything about it), you had no control over the alternative technologies, and there was enormous amount of social pressure to ban your industry … what might you do?
- Lobby (bribe) politicians to prevent legislative and regulatory reform;
- Outsource to the cheapest most desperate labour market and thus disempower unions (especially those with green ties and alliances);
- Bribe scientists to falsify data &/or fraudulently / misleadingly / deceptively present its interpretation;
- Spread other misinformation campaigns;
- Covertly sabotage alternative technology start ups;
- Support any media / marketing / sociopolitical engineering efforts to distract and dumb down the population;
- Accelerate extraction of resources whether you have a market for them or not, while everyone is distracted fighting all the other crap you’re doing, and stockpile those resources in case people actually get legislative change in their favour … and so on … feel free to add your own.
Question 2:
Notice any similarities with the world we see around us?
Question 3:
Can you think of any billionaires who fit this description?
(hint: a couple of brothers who’s surname sounds a lot like a popular cause of voluntary diabetes, another who’s company sounds like halitosis and who’s presence in the Bush administration was about as welcome as a long conversation with someone afflicted by the condition).
Question 4:
If there was an NEO (Near Earth Object) of sufficient size and velocity, such that the kinetic energy ((1/2).mv^2) of its impact would be greater than every single nuclear device ever built combined:
- Would the increase in people accessing a high quality education, without the stress of associated student debt (so they can actually focus), increase or decrease the probability that someone would figure out a solution to preventing the impact, even though we might have little or no warning?
- Would the proper independent funding of science for sciences sake, and arts for arts sake, without needing to show a commercial cause for such research, increase or decrease the probability that someone would figure out a solution to preventing the impact, even though we might have little or no warning?
- Would the increase in associated (sometimes random) interconnections (which no one can predict) between a greater abundance of highly trained generalists and specialists in seemingly unrelated fields across both arts and sciences (but which ultimately inspire people for various reasons to come up with the ideas they do), increase or decrease the probability that someone would figure out a solution to preventing the impact, even though we might have little or no warning?
- Would the reduction of distractions caused to the above generalists and specialists, by the reduction of suffering of others (family, associates, friends, and friends of such – plus associated difficulties often caused by trying to help them), if everyone was paid a fair living wage (whether they are fortunate to have a job or not), increase or decrease the probability that someone would figure out a solution to preventing the impact, even though we might have little or no warning?
- Would the increased or decrease in the rate of both technological and creative advancements (also resulting from the above and similar / related conditions), increase or decrease the probability that someone would figure out a solution to preventing the impact, even though we might have little or no warning?
Question 5:
Given that (unless you’re an idiot) your answers to all the above should be pretty easy to predict (as they’re all pretty self evident) … I ask you all:
WHY THE FUCK DO WE ALLOW SO MANY PEOPLE OF WEALTH AND POWER TO DO SO MANY FUCKING STUPID THINGS?!?!
Seriously … is there some reason for this?
Is there some point at which they will actually wake up to their own bullshit?
Time is running out folks, because we need species diversity in vast robust ecosystems in order to maintain the stability of the biosphere that sustains us … and we’re going in entirely the wrong direction.