a virtual world on Klondike

Over those long stay-at-home days, I have taken to trying out yet another farming game and this is called Klondike. It is surprisingly complicated as you have to produce things, both farming and material, using raw material that you either find or produce in factories, you have to build from materials you have made.

You will quickly find out that you have to deplete natural resources to make money and produce goods needed for materials.

Additionally, you may travel to other destimations using sleds or planes or trains.

You may export and import goods and produce from other levels and you can transport your goods and must manufacture certain items on other levels.

This is quite realistic when it comes to real world import and export and production of items on the local level that then gets exported and imported.

If this game had a realistic algorythm, which is bound to the actual seasonal production of agricultural products, one could feed the world on a game like this.

A virtual world created by computer programmers, who could then be staffed by ‘gamers’ who have to ensure that local products are distributed evenly all over the world, so that all have enough to eat at all times. The term game-maker could be appropriate for this too and not just Olympics.

Of course its more complicated with weather and conflict put together but it would make a realistic modelling structure to try and achieve real equality all over the world.

Nationals with large rain forests for example could be planned in for needing extra other resources and the people’s in such nations could be trained in jobs, which enable them to earn a living other than chopping down their forests to make money.

Or scientific advances could be programmed in to enable new technology to be employed like capturing extra carbon from the atmosphere to produce air plane fuel from as a product.

I think we need such a world game to program in what is actually available and that such knowledge and resources need to be shared out all over so that we get no left-behind regions of the world.

Poor areas, left to themselves, always develop undesirable political systems, ending in tyranny and disaster for the rest of us.

Far away dreams

Why do people explore space, want to go to Mars or explore for Exo Planets? Most likely because they look for happiness.

People’s relationships rely largely on chemistry whether that is triggered by money or some other currency of exchange value.

Just watched the Bruderhof and it reminded me a lot about my child-hood. I could however never now, express myself over a love for Jesus. I would use other values instead. Values like honesty, humility and responsibility. HHR, I might have found a new letter combination that means something to me at least.

It’s extremely rewarding to emphasise important values and it is humiliating to learn that a lot of people do not understand the basic values that life consists of.

I suppose in places like the Bruderhof you learn to concentrate on those basic values alone before anything else and it’s harder to get confused and divert into destructive or unhealthy habits.

I suppose people who enjoy the Bruderhof will be strong characters who have a huge will to live and contribute to their community.

In a ‘normal’ society people who are depressed are most probably the ones who are most frivolous in their behaviour. People who are depressed also tend not to clean so often.

I have just come across basic values in my own community. Learned that people have big plans, starting large, expensive schemes to teach people about environmental values but they are unable to remove the weeds in front of their own porch to stop weeds from destroying the concrete tarmac.

This is how our Residents Association keeps their porch in front of the community centre. Yet they have great plans to start a Climate Task Force. Perhaps what they need is a weed removal task force first. Even if the social landlord doesn’t do their job, would it not make sense to get a task force of volunteers to deal with that?

It’s pretty easy to explain that away with environmental concerns, to say that a living weed has a big environmental impact and that the damage to remove it would be immense.

Still those weeds destroy the civilised building structures, overgrow a footpath and where would that weed-growing stop? Would we end up being re-forested for the sake of the environment and have our houses swallowed up by trees or can we manage a basic form of discipline and agree to keep our cultured living spaces clean and free from plants whose roots can destroy our driveways?

Those are the people who have been given a substantive amount from the BIG LOTTERY to teach us about the environment. They probably going to teach us to leave weeds be; if we let them.

 

They’re attacking our food supplies again

With the argument that food supplies make up 20% of global emmissions, the Big Lottery has now funded – on a big scale – a project here in Tower Hamlets that wants to tell people: “Don’t rely on food banks, grow your own food”. See my previous post.

Photo by Taryn Elliott on Pexels.com

This, in effect, makes the situation of poor working class people worst. They are trying to teach you, eat what you can grow locally.

Many residents of Tower Hamlets and indeed throughout Britain rely on large-scale food imports. From rice to spice, it all has to come from far away places.

Unfortunately this new trend is masked up as working on our well-being. Whilst our residents face eviction notices, they are told to grow their own food to save the planet.

Whilst in our area people oppose the building of new housing, they support the growing of own food. Put the two together, you achieve less housing more farming in a place that is called the City of London. Overall the aim of those radical groups is to reduce the population number, reduce the size of cities and ruralisation of our country.

Even if you are a regular coffee house customer and eat out, your restaurant relies on food imports to supply your tasty morsels every day.

The project, which just received major Big Lottery funding has built-in “the Parkview and Cranbrook climate task force”

Previously Extinction Rebellion declared the Glasshouse Community Centre on Parkview Estate as one of their favourite haunts and they use it to prepare props for those large-scale demonstrations that put a stop to life in London as we know it, by blocking traffic and trying to stop commuters boarding trains.

Unfortunately major community organisations in Tower Hamlets have agreed to take part in this project. Of course they do try it first with the poorest as they are the most vulnerable and easiest to draw in.

All those attempts to shut our supermarkets down and replace them with plastic free, self-selection shops failed because the products are not as cheap as the conventional ones.

Whichever way you look at it, the working people, who earn little money need to be able to buy food in the time they have available to do it.

What these projects are doing is telling the poor working class: “Don’t rely on the ‘bad supermarket food’, dont’ rely on food banks, Grow your own food.

If you see how little space there is in an inner-city housing estate or garden to grow food, you would know that any crop would not achieve more than one dinner per harvest. If you have a plot you may achieve a aquivalent of 10 dinners with one large tub of earth.

Just imagine the working person has to do a full shift or work overtime to earn enough and then they cannot even pop into a shop to buy food but they have to make do with what they grow at home.

 

BIG Lottery lost the plot

Virtually that is what they funding, plodding on plots. They have now funded a scheme that is giving the poor of Tower Hamlets the illusion that they can grow their own food, so that they no longer need to be reliant on food banks.

For that illusion they pay several project leaders good salaries to carry out that deception.

Remember how dreamer George Galloway tried it years ago, he tried to convince Tower Hamlets residents that they no longer need supermarkets but just have to buy local or directly from farmers.

The poor haven’t become any richer, they have become poorer and making them feel that they are responsible partly for 20% of the global greenhouse gas emmission because they don’t grow their own food is foolish to say the least.

Tower Hamlets council even splashes out on a community kitchen, which is (un)suitably located directly next to a private school. So any fires from that kitchen will lead to an evacuation of the school of course.

I thought avoiding accidents whilst cooking in my own kitchen was difficult at times but imagine sharing a kitchen with many who are led to cook there together. The person with the nut allergy next to the nut lover.

It is more than cruel to give people the illusion that they can grow their own food in densely crowded urban area.

I grow my own raspberries and currants and still end up getting them from Sainsbury’s because I do not get more than a handful. Any plots people have in Tower Hamlets are small plots, balconies, window boxes. Surely not enough to feed anybody.

And aren’t the poor to work for their money? Now they are not only expected to work but also to grow their own food, so they no longer need food banks.

Apparently the Big Lottery has not yet realised that you can’t grow rice in London and that fish grows in rivers and the sea and not the local canals. So food will always have to be transported into urban areas and all those food-growing schemes can be no more than a hobby to get people out of the house, if they got a tub somewhere.

I am more than disappointed that the Big Lottery supports that scheme, which is also connected to workshops about Climate Action.

As Extinction Rebellion already use our local community centre for making props for their demos, they now gotten even more money to educate local poor people on climate action.

Obviously the last thing a poor person wants to do is spend their last pennies on a bag of compost so that they can harvest 10 potaotes in a few months time. 

The Lorelei effect

bee beehive bloom blossom

Photo by Anton Atanasov on Pexels.com

Heinrich Heine, a German author published his version of the Lorelei, as the beautiful blonde lady, who sat on the rock, above the river Rhine and lured men to their deaths.

I am very sceptical about blaming women only but today, the luring with charm applies to all genders.

There are just some people who are very convincing and irresistable to the point of distraction.

I would call the decision to allow the planting of lots of fruit trees all over the estate and the installation of a bee hive on a busy London council estate such a decision-making process.

I can predict that the combination of lots of sweet fruits, which will be rotting on the ground, will drive those bees wild and also invite wild wasps to our housing estate and cause a lot of problems.

Yet nobody seems to care or want to look ahead into the future and predict this is going to happen. Grown adults are blind to the reality of the situation.

Of course from a naturalists point of view, that is sheer heaven but if you look what happened to the countryside where the Mayan temples once stood, they are over-grown now with jungle, perhaps that is what will happen to our estate in the future, if those environmental extremists have their way.

People in cities often get romantic ideas of what nature is like and that we need to be more in tune with nature, yet we need to be sensible and have policies, which are suitable for our environment.

We are very densely built up, with a school and surrounded by busy roads, those bees have nowhere to go to let off steam. Talking to someone at Tower Hamlets Homes, they say, THH would never purchase a bee hive for the estate, yet, that is what they did.

Seems charming somebody in some department worked.

TUC – neutrality

  • Thought poverty
  • Unilateralism
  • Compartmentalisation

The three ingredients to conflict and distraction.

I don’t just look at what I want to see and don’t just read what I want to hear. I get myself a selection of books from major influencers and compare their thoughts.

Presently it’s

  • Greta Thunberg
  • Donald Trump
  • Mike Berners-Lee

I must confess I only bought the Berners-Lee book because the name reminds me of Tim Berners-Lee, the founder of the Internet and I thought, that everybody with the name of Berners-Lee must know what they are talking about.

Greta, a girl with Aspergers, she is a definite proof of thought poverty and unilateralism and so is Donald Trump. Though because Donald Trump is on the powerful side of life, what he says is good and what Greta says is dangerous.

The clash of ideologies here is not much different from all other clashes in the history of man. For example when Britain invaded the colonies and all those invading repressed the natives. Though now we know that the natives had and still have important knowledge and methology. Probably more knowledge in some stuff than our newly taught engieners and scientists have.

That brings me to compartmentalisation. Nowadays everybody has to specialise fairly early on in life. So a guy like Boris Johnson wouldn’t understand what climate change is all about. He is just a happy go lucky chap who wants to make things happening and with a good sense of humour in a smiling way.

Donald Trump – I am still not through the first book of his – has only profit margins at heart. Very dangerously though, he wants to separate the Social Security budget from the rest of the financial world. He hardly ever talks about standard of living and security of housing, he talks about saving and interest rates.

It’s clear that if you are in power, whatever you say is good. From your point of view, you are the money maker, the law maker and the standard bearer of all things great and small.

Of course radicalisaton of strategy only works for those in power. Those against become criminals in any event.

Now comes Mike Berners-Lee as the go-between Great Thunberg and Donald Trump, the man who also pleases Boris Johnson’s desire to widen the British Empire and international trade relations of Britain with the rest of the world. Mike simply declares that the amount of carbon produced by transport is nothing compared with natural carbons produced by animals and rice production or fermentation for example.

There are now so many statistics available on earth warming and what percentage of what produces most dangerous carbons, that the mind literally boggles.

But if energy production produces 70% of damaging carbons then it doesn’t really matter if that is through transport or animal farming or fermentation. It is just including everything that uses energy.

Unfortunately those at the top are unable to just analyse and change tac, the politicians have to please the sponsors of parties and those sponsors are the ones who run business and those are the makers of our world today.

Perhaps we need to look at another way of shifting power to those who are not dependant on any financial support from business leaders. We need neutral observers and decision makers.

Setting international standards

What humanity needs is an international set of professional standards, that enables all communities of the world to set rules of human interaction.

Even the smallest indigenous communities have standards that are set to enable the community to thrive.

Depending on location and environment, the more primitive societies made the most of what they had but set moral standards to prevent sexual exploitation or unhealthy live styles.

Most major religions are centred around the unquestionable servititude towards a divine being – a God –  and the rulers in charge identified themselves as being a direct descendant of that God. Of course that developed through from ancient times via the Greeks, Romans, then Christians in the west and Muslims in the East.

Through international communications it becomes clear that a lot of such communities exist world-wide, communities who teach their children, that their God is the only true one.

Conflicts are created when one community teaches their followers that they can exploit anybody who is not part of their religion as for example Daesh or Isis did. They said it was OK to exploit anybody sexually who was not a strict Muslim.

This principle leads to tribal conflicts on smaller area disputes as they can happen in African tribes for example, who roam wild areas and conflict with each other over territorial disputes.

Modern gangs, even in western societies use the rape of another gang’s members as a tool of control and stamping on authority. The rape of the women in other tribes is also an ancient method of destroying other cultures.

Religion started off as a moral code to regulate personal and family life to restrict behaviour to acceptable standards to avoid disease transmitted by sexual activity for  the members of any particular community.  Where later on science came in was when ‘doctors’ found  cures for common illness through scientific research, developing medications that could be administered and also by finding hygiene rules to avoid water contamination for example.

Setting a commonly accepted code of standards is important to avoid local and wider conflicts and to enable humanity to develop.

Whilst primitive cultures enslave their followers by simple dicatatorial rule, e.g. everybody must follow the laws of the leader, modern society exploits the poor by having rules, which create dependency. Universal Credit is a nodern example of that because it drove recipients into prostitution or they could not afford to live.

Other countries developed away from religious Gods and became Communist, again using strict dictatorial rules to regulate society.

A lot of states now have nuclear power and use that as a threat to keep foreign influence away.

I really do not think it matters what type of rule a society has, it just matters that each member of any society can live with a freedom of choice and without having to loose dignity.

Yes, the ability to choose aslo depends on intellect and brain function. This can vary from individual to individual. Yet professional standards should regulate good standards of living and enable everybody to contribute to the best of their ability.

Unfortunately much of modern society is determined by venture capitalism, a form of control over people, by making those with the most money privileged. Whilst it doesn’t matter how people gotten rich, they do not loose their wealth, even after they have been found to supply humanity with dangerous products.

Using advertising and mass-media, any producer of any goods can use streaming to attract people to buy their products and get rich, may that be cigarettes or e-cigarettes, alcohol or petrol cars.

Modern societies life-styles have been driven by a desire to have comfort in the home and use less physical activity.

People are required to use their energy to work for an employer and then have little time for their personal lifes. Laws force any person to work for any employer who will give them a job, not allowing the individual to choose.

This produces a downward social spiral. Dismantles family life and the ability of the individual to choose a healthy profession over an unhealthy one.

Earth warming has now become the biggest threat to humanity but the mechanisms that drive international trade, which is mainly responsible for earth warming, are not being dismantled.

When I say international trade I also mean the goods that are being traded and the production of which causes a big carbon foot print.

Wars and conflicts have an enormous carbon foot print. The use of fossil fuels, which also produce petrol, diesel and plastics is a major source of carbon.

Unfortunately many societies cannot exist unless they engage in trade because all services and labour are distributed due to a GDP calculation that is established. GDP stands for General Domestic Product.

Societies, countries rely on tax collections to provide services for the inhabitants.

Unless governments make a stand and refuse to accept taxes from bad companies, we cannot progress.

We need to exercise control over venture capitalism and control goods and services for their beneficial impact on society before we produce, advertise and sell them.

heart of the economy

No point complaining about migrants who sent money earned abroad to bolster their home economies. We need to change the way our society works to make it successfull.

Looking at these maps, most money sent abroad from anywhere currently flows to India and India of course has a very successful network of functionaling families.

As our country has specialised in establishing the forefront of some ideologies at the expense of letting family life develop, we will continue to get our money sent abroad by guest workers.

Stopping immigrants is not the solution, the solution is to join them if you can’t beat them and change our family policies.

We are currently cleansing our cities of the poor, send them out to rural areas and populate our cities with rich investors and city workers who have little off-spring. Our harvests of fruit and veggies get wasted as we have no workers to harvest it.

Lets just take a deep breath and re-consider options to stay on top of the game.

The right to exist

I think all plant and animal life should get a right to exist to stop extinction and obliteration of natural occurances like forests.

Macaca nigra self-portrait large.jpg
By Self-portrait by the depicted Macaca nigra female. See article. – Wtop.com (archive; cropped and denoised by uploader), Public Domain, Link

The New Scientist suggest giving nature Human Rights but that is not likely to succeed. There were people who tried to give a monkey human rights to protect the monkey’s picture from being used for copyright purposes.

Giving plants, animals, minerals, etc. the right to exist would help a fixed preservation of earthly life as it is today.

What about the argument of evolution, if we would not change things, probably new life would not evolve?

Yet all evolution so far evolved with the healthy environment intact, without the healthy environment, we would not get much chance to evolve much further. I think we need to bring legislation into action that prevents further destruction of the environment. We do have the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in Britain but there is no world-wide legislation. Brazil doesn’t want to preserve the rainforest as it stifles their economy.

the rainforest

Is without question one of the most importent assets of our planet. It is concentrated on various geographical locations. Lets take Brazil here as an example.

green leafed trees under blue sky

The typical British countrydise, cleared of forest, ready for farming. Photo by Lisa Fotios on Pexels.com

Of course us developed nations we have already cleared a lot of our forests and developed our lands. We in Britain even talk about becoming self-sufficient farming-wise to justify us leaving the EU without a deal.

For that of course we need to farm the land and clear probably even more forest.

We really do love to rely on the rain forest. The untouched and virgin rain forest, that same rain forest that saves our planet.

But what about those nationas that are couched within the rainforest areas. Nations like Brazil. Do their citizens not have the right to farm, to develp the land, to get skills-based jobs that are based within their national borders.

scenic view of rainforest

Rainforst    Photo by Arnie Chou on Pexels.com

Whilst we here in Britain demand that we can become independent of others, we do expect nations within the rainforest regions to leave that forest and just not devleop, to depend on others, help others, so that we developed countries can stay developing ourselves.

What are the nationals within the rainforest countries supposed to be doing?

Nobody has thought about this and I think that just shows how stupid our privately educated politicians and business leaders are because all they can think of is themselves.

It is an international problem and it needs nations to work together. But of course our political leaders only think about Brexit and becoming indendent from Europe and use the resources of other nations to bolster our own wealth.

The rainforest? The rainforest is depended upon that it stays as it is. So what about putting that thinking cap on?

Previous Older Entries

Blog Stats

  • 54,609 hits