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?

The hinges of Brexit

There are several dimensions to this

  • Political independence
  • Commercial autonomy
  • Environmental concerns

Historically there were during

  • the 1600 – 95% of war between European nations
  • the 1700 – 75% of war …..
  • the 1800 – 45 % of war
  • 2000 – 0% conflict so far

Considering that the UK government pledged to cut Greenhouse gas emmission to zero by 2050, it seems illogical to leave the EU now.

Leaving the EU and having trade deals with further away countries, would mean considerably more transport of goods, more travel.

The UK is a water logged country and relies on either planes or boats for travel. There is only one land (under-water, tunnel) form of transport that doesn’t rely on flying or boats and that is via the Euro tunnel.

With increasing weather instability, transport by container ships will be endangered. There will also be a reduction of flights because it is very unlikely that the air travel industry will come up with a distinct change in airplane design that is more environmentally friendly.

Yet Britain relies for a large part on air travel. There are now calls to stop inland air travel but the train fares are too expensive to make that affordable.

Whilst I do not suggest that we should have to put up with any political system in Europe, just to get our trade, we need to seriously consider the implication of a break from Europe from the points of environmental change.

London_waterlevels

Flooding predictions for London for around 2080

What voters deserve is a clear planning procedure to include the worsening weather conditions, the increased demands on immigration because unstable political systems in Asian and African countries as well as increased flooding of large areas will decrease landmass available for people in those countries and they all will attempt to emigrate to saver regions.

Whilst our own coastlines suffer from erosion and raising sea levels will eventually encroach on our land.

A strong European council will be an assurance that political systems in European countries will not break down and revert to undemocratic methods.

Leaving Europe now without a deal makes us very vulnerable as we will be more dependant on trade deals with distant nations, when the transport of goods may be disturbed by worsening weather.

Being an influencer in Europe and remain as such will do us more favour than just leaving without a deal.

Whilst large swathes of English land owners want to break off from Europe because they have got the land to support themselves, the rest of us including London, Wales and Scotland feel very uneasy.

Of course theoretically the UK could manage on its own but the right-wing nationalists have a strong history of violent racism and that is what makes it an impossible thought to even embrace. The Jo Cox murder proved what right-wing terrorists are capable of.

I would say that the threat of war from an unstable future Europe together with worsening weather conditions would definitely threaten the future of our civilisation. Our armies would be severely hampered by the weather and our domestic situation would become severely unstable too. Further away allies may not be able to reach. Even D-Day had to be delayed because of bad weather and weather is going to be much worse. So we have to be very sensible and build alliances whilst it is possible to do so and prevent a shift to the right and into facism.

For these reasons I sincerly hope that a new Conservative Prime minister will be stopped from suspending parliament to push through a no deal Brexit.

 

The rainforest fund

top view photo of forest

Photo by Tom Fisk on Pexels.com

Woke up this morning thinking that all the nations who have a foreign aid budget should also have a rainforest fund. Our efforts to reduce deforestation must increase and it has to become a lawfully required activity to save nature.

I searched the Internet and such organisations do exist, predominantly trying to help save the rainforest. Yet whilst countries, around rainforests make illegal logging a criminal offence, it is impossible to police and enforce the laws.

Programs like ‘‘I bought a rainforest’‘, Planet Earth, highlighted the problems, which make poor inhabitants of the rainforest regions fell trees to sell, just to be able to survive. Large swathes of rainforest get chopped down for wood to make furniture, planting of Palmoil, farming fruits for sale etc.

Higher earnings and a world-wide decreasing of poverty doesn’t ensure that people earn that money with environmentally friendly activities.

There is no environmental value how GDP is achieved, it is just GDP. As our governments are proud to provide full employment, they also do not care 100 % what products those workers make, whether they help destroy natural and vitally important resources or not. Capitalism is not valued by earth friendliness, it is valued by profits achieved, whatever it is they sell.

photography of factory

Photo by Chris LeBoutillier on Pexels.com

When we reduce our carbon footprint inland, we still deal with other countries who have a huge one. OK, we no longer strive to produce polluting goods in Britain, but we have them imported from China. Pollution is a world-wide problem, not a local one.

We need to start giving each product and service a carbon footprint value just as we give foods a calorific value.

I don’t support Esther McVey’s call to reduce the Foreign Aid, that Britain gives, instead this Foreign Aid could be diverted to Rainforest preservation. Each time foreign aid gets reduced, we increase the chance of troubles brewing up abroad, which then will need to be solved by wars. Wars have a huge carbon footprint.

Neither do I support Boris Johnson’s promise of further tax cuts for the rich as people simply do not want to invest in Britain because of Brexit. Tax cuts do not prevent Brexit. It just proofs how poorly configured Conservative Brains are, all they can think of is ‘less tax will solve all problems’.

I’ll make another post about Brexit.

 

Against genetic modification of our food

I think it might be possible that some medications become ineffective not only because the viruses get used to it but also because genetic alteration of food will change the way our genes and bodies work. May be wrong but look what David Suzuki has to say about this:

Fact is that if genetically modified foods can cause cancers in mice then it might also be bad for us. We are all part of the same food chain.

I almost always read the label and found to my dismay that my favourite foods now have genetically modified grain and starch in them. I am changing my food habits and switch to other foods, which is hard as we always want to eat what we love.

Parasites resistant to drugs

This article I am referring to, has to do with Malaria but it could be about other illnesses that are now resisting antibiotics. We are using a lot of genetically modified crops, which will affect the ability of humans to resist antibiotics. Another new trend that endangers humanity.

A song and a dance deficit

Whilst barriers to export monies had been removed a long time ago and the UK concentrates on education and arts, it is absolutely no wonder that the widening trade deficit starts to hit us. We allow more and more housing per square meter available and close down manufacturing and business to allow that to happen.

Of course any UK based rich person can invest their money in an overseas country to produce cheap goods, which are then imported to the UK. Taxes are not paid to the UK but to the manufacturing country and the rich person themselves has changed residence to cheaper tax heavens.

Of course the international drive to exploit cheap labour markets to make more profits cannot be stopped as it is only the nature of business to make as much profit as possible. Business does not have an ethics built in, the ethics come with understanding and promotion of them, sometimes by individuals and sometimes by governments.

It’s only the biggest trade deficit since September 2011, when we already had a big deficit at that time but no remedial action was taken. Our imports from EU countries remain unchanged at £17.1 billion, which explains that we only import the absolutely necessary from relatively expensive labour markets, in European countries.

But there is hope because as soon as living standards rise in the currently cheap labour markets, we won’t be able to afford their goods and services any longer and have to seriously consider making goods ourselves once more. Just wonder where that would take place, when all space available gets increasingly occupied by housing.

Maybe we will also see a general reduction in manufacturing worldwide because increasing earth warming will remind us that it is exactly the manufacture and use of machines and goods, produced using natural resources that makes our temperatures soar.  Some Chinese residents recently dared to complain that their river is in danger of pollution if a factory is allowed to spew out waste into it, whilst previously those residents just died quietly from poisoned waters.

The other question is do we really want to be on the top of the manufacturing table? Just prior to World War I and World War II Germany was much superior in a low trade deficit and high manufacturing output, whilst Britain lagged behind.

During these Olympic games Britain has shown the world that this relatively small country cares a lot about health and fitness of its inhabitants, see the medal table to proof it.

Worrying levels of drug abuse in the UK

I think there might be a relationship with the increased drug abuse in the UK and the complacency of the courts towards bad and irresponsible language use. The increase of drug taking has virtually run parallel to an ever increasing abuse of the English language for all sorts of between the line insinuations and even worst direct swearing.

The statistics published in today’s Metro paper are more than worrying and show that this nation has lost the grip on reality and that shows in some High Court judgements. Not that I am saying the judges are on drugs but I am saying that the drug culture has won a worrying amount of public acceptance and bad behaviour has risen so that it is now acceptable to swear in public and judges don’t care about that any longer either.

The Columbian President complains that it is because of the drug taking habit, of the UK, amongst other nations that Columbia has a big problem. It is true that if is often just a matter of demand and supply and where there is no demand, there cannot be a supply.

The figures are greatly concerning if one puts them into the relationship of country size and population numbers. That 2.5% of English and Welsh use Cocaine, compared to only 2.1% of US citizens and only 0.8% of Colombians, shows that today’s show stopping society has lost a grip on what is right or wrong and what is good and bad.

The UK drug market is worth £21 billion compared to the USA £23 billion. And now David Cameron wonders why the economy does not lift off. In Columbia, Peru and Bolivia, an area the size of Greater London is used to cultivate the plants that make Cocaine and surprisingly the Colombians have more drug seizures than any other country, namely 61%. In Europe Spain makes the most confiscations.

Of course that makes sad reading in that it looks as it almost everybody in the UK has got their fingers somewhere in that drug honey pot and makes money on this. The corruption over drugs must be rife, or there would not be so much drugs be in circulations unchallenged.

It is this backdrop of widespread drug abuse and tolerance of drug dealing and drug use that puts the current situation in Britain in the context of gross negligence.

Previous Older Entries

Blog Stats

  • 53,254 hits