18) Americans are the first of the worlds people who need saving from the USA

Whilst on the surface it may appear that this is an Ant-United States Blog, it is just the opposite.  While “patriots” are killed in foreign wars benefiting corporations, mothers think their sons are dying for their country.  They don’t realise they are, in effect, mercenaries for hire.

http://money.msn.com/investing/10-companies-profiting-most-from-war

Meanwhile, the Lobby system makes bribery the official policy determination system in Washington; we haven’t seen hypocrisy like this since the Prohibition.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/12/lobbying-10-ways-corprations-influence-government

The money itself is created not by the US Mint, but instead by the world’s most crooked private company, the Federal Reserve. The money is created essentially by generating debt courtesy of the fractional reserve system of money creation. A very good case could be made for this being the archetypical “root of all evil”

It’s very much a 1% vs the 99% situation, and elements of  the 1% honestly do have control over the media and news/entertainment sources which wield such powerful influence over the manipulated masses of Sheeple.

I can’t tell you how many conversations I’ve had with educated academics and successful business people who buy into even the least sophisticated forms of Orwellian crowd control.  I’m talking issues that can easily be repudiated with verifiable sources or facts.  Spin becomes a powerful tool when merged with one’s identity.

Fast food, vapid consumer culture and a wall street culture of excess remain the flavour of the decade while reality tv and award show pop culture form the richness of young lives rather than literature, art and real world history and issues.

I honestly feel most of this will improve over time and occur by a process of natural self-correction once the parasites are removed.

Socially responsible movements and documentaries like "Who Killed the Electric Car?" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F and a film I'll cover more thoroughly in my next post 19) Economic Meltdown, called "Inside Job".http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inside_Job_(2010_film)

Human nature is not as fucked up as we think it is IF WE UNDERSTAND HOW TO MANAGE IT.

Until the American People are rescued from this Matrix Like reality, they will always vote in Democrats or Republicans, instead of Independents in the past like Ron Paul, who have in the past contested US elections on issues that really can fundamentally alter US and therefore world society.

Only once this battle is won can the world be saved from America, by America.

For More check out: www.dwahts.weebly.com

10) SYRIA updated.

http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2014/may/16/why-wont-kerry-leave-syria-alone.aspx

Just a link to an interesting article on the Ron Paul site regarding aspects of the updated situation in Syria.  

9) CAUSES

The name of this blog is “Do we already have the solutions” for a reason.  My earlier posts on Identity and their link to values have shown that the solutions often lie in being able to removing barriers to reveal what we already know. Culture, identity and personal ego and indoctrination issues often lead do being emotionally aligned and  motivated to draw a line in the sand and choosing sides.  Nowhere is this more apparent than with getting behind a cause.

The vast majority of causes are non-issues.  The way society deals with the issues is the real problem, often creating two opposing sides defending their particular positions and my personal experience has shown me that many of us are indiscriminately being PRO or ANTI a particular issue.

This makes little sense of course, because the elements at play are never simple and broad decision of personal PRO or ANTI policy should ever be applied without due consideration of the context.  As obvious as this sounds, is very uncommon to encounter either side investigating the merits of the opposing camp, or taking the time to understand the application of their cause in each scenario.  This has the fascinating effect of producing loyalties and hostilities along with all sorts of ridiculous barriers to solutions that are so often right in front of us.

For example:

Recently the issue of trophy hunting has exposed how much emotion your average armchair activist is prepared to invest to stop a particular trophy hunter, Melissa Bachman, from plying her nasty trade.  Public opinion has likely achieved part of its goal, leaving conservationists frustrated that another hollow victory based on sentiment has achieved nothing for Lion Conservation.  The conservationist approach was for a long time perceived as PRO trophy hunting in their efforts to highlight the real issues, the issues that would achieve real success, were regarded with suspicion and prejudice. See here: http://www.toomuchtoomany.co.za/blog/2013/11/15/lions-in-the-cross-hairs

The issue of fracking has become so sentimentally polarizing, that in some cases where fracking is potentially the least environmentally impacting way to meet energy demands, there is serious talk of shelving the idea, or not even getting data on it, in favor of more harmful ways of producing power IN THOSE PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES.  It also fails to address the issue that ever growing needs for power come from our failure to manage or population, lifestyle or impact on the environment. See here: http://www.toomuchtoomany.co.za/blog/2013/12/5/we-cant-treasure-only-the-karoo and here: http://www.toomuchtoomany.co.za/blog/2013/5/6/when-should-we-start-fracking-in-the-karoo IT’s not clear what the facts on this issue are yet, but it quite clear that there is a public desire to move forward without due consideration of the facts due to sentimental attachment to a cause.

The vaccination issue is a prime example where issues are again being confused.  There is so much evidence for vaccinations saving lives and doing much good for society, but because there have been instances in the past where some bad vaccines were discovered, or where unscrupulous pharmaceutical companies and their political lobbyists have been found pushing legislation in cases where untested or unnecessary vaccines where to be made compulsory, some have turned against ALL VACCINATIONS.  For the same reason many in the PRO camp have taken to defending all instances of vaccination indiscriminately.  It’s completely unnecessary and avoidable, but until we learn to weed out the separate issues we will never focus on the real problems. Here is a potted and superficial look at the issue: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_controversies

The danger of all of this sentimentality is that it affects political will to make real change, politicians run for office based on these emotive issues often more than the real issues of the day, and often their policy is shaped by taking stands on these issues designed to resound with one group or the other in order to win over a voting section of the population tied into the issue.

Politics is not so much sick because of politicians, it is sick because politicians have to get elected, and we demand they take a stand on these matters to get our allegiance and  satisfy our agendas over finding solutions for the ails of society.

I call indiscriminate activism “slactivism”, because of the poor fact checking as well as the lack of interest shown in researching and understanding an issue one claims to feels so passionately about. Sometimes it is harmless; other times when there are consequences it is irresponsible and hypocritical.

www.snopes.com regularly cites cases where sudden public reaction and hostility spreads misinformation and lies, often harming innocent people, by outraged armchair activists who couldn’t be bothered to check their facts, spreading vitriolic hate parading as an internet meme.

It’s often been cited to me that slactivism can achieve results because of the attention drawn to the issue, but attention drawn to incorrect issues can often harm a cause or provide only a sense of self satisfaction those seeking to exploit the issue in order to demonstrate their righteous moral indignation to those listening.  I cannot reconcile it with the work done by those responsible activists spending their own time and resources campaigning for real change, it just does not ring true.

I will concede that if slactivism bring the issues out, and those who better understand the issues challenge the material with intention to show better understanding, then some progress can be made, but it cannot work unless the facts are corrected sensibly and politely which places personal responsibility on all of use to question and understand with open minds, and not to argue to defend our position at all costs.  The internet and social media has given everyone a platform, I think it’s time to stop going around high-fiving and siding with each other and instead learn the art of the polite disagreement and healthy debate.  We learn more about each other in respectful disagreement that we do in awkward comprise.

6) Conspiracy Theories

As I write this the United States is in the process of drumming up support for a Strike on Syria.  The reasoning offered is that the strike is necessary as a result of chemical weapons having been used by the Syrian government against it’s own people.  The difference between the few thousand dying by chemical warfare and the previous 90 000 dying by conventional weaponry isn't immediately apparent; perhaps the distinction will be clarified later. Before getting into this issue specifically or making comparison in the rhetoric used by George W. Bush previously in getting the support required for the invasion of Iraq (using non-existent WMD’s as his main selling point) I would prefer to take step back and look at the bigger picture.

The truth is that almost none of us understand what goes on behind closed doors in affairs governing world politics.  The issues themselves are certainly more complex and inter-related than the reasoning provided in the casual conversations I've been privy to. One thing does strike my as very relevant to the themes being introduced by this blog, that aspect is that many people appear very certain in their world view and align their pride and ego with a particular position.  Once the line is drawn in the sand the views and strong opinions invariably need to be defended and eyes are no longer open and free to process information clearly.  We become politically or ideologically aligned and begin to confuse our issues once we commit to a “side”.

I’m incredibly disappointed by this because I feel that the issues are not dealt with in a satisfying manner and the reporting via the already heavily politically aligned news networks reflects this polarizing stance.  Western political lobbying systems and corporate/political interchangeability have inherently built this element into the system even though no particularly sinister puppet master is required to pull the strings.

On the opposite side of the spectrum we have a collection of thematically interesting maverick perspectives that are either fervently supported or vehemently written off as crack-pot conspiracy theorists.  Many of the people or groups to get it wrong in the sense that they often claim to have all the answers or draw conclusions from incompletely formed or half true essential facts.  What has sent a chill down my spine is the fact that for every idea that turns out to be false, there is one that turns out to be true.  I have been following many of these theories for some years now, and while I am not a follower or supporter of many of these perspectives in the true sense, I have been struck by how much of it is verifiable or predicted in advance.  I lost a frustrating long argument in this vein recently with a well informed friend who predicted the “US Empire builders shopping list” as Afghanistan – Iraq – Syria – Iran – (in that order) in the early 2000’s.  He even went as far to mention political destabilizing movements in Libya, Egypt and Turkey.  It’s hard to completely dismiss the fact that something that resembles an agenda is a possibility.  It’s even more difficult to accept that the news “As Reported” is unfolding for the reasons we led to believe.

I’ll be getting stuck into some of these issues in my next post, but I’ll be following public attitudes closely to see if there is any maturing of public assimilation and processing of these ideas, and whether any balance or even perspective is appreciated over the taking of contrary positions without having all the information available to us.

As far as dismissing people wholesale as “crack-pots” or “conspiracy-nuts”, I do not, because for me some of these people do not have to be 100% on the money, just a kernel of truth is worrying enough.  There are those that have elements of such truths and the evidence is overwhelming yet pitted more often against spin and propaganda that evidence to the contrary.

In the meantime here are some links; each has something to offer, even in those cases where some have been exposed to varying degrees (often by unscrupulous attempts to discredit the sources due to the inherent agendas).  Add the awareness's to your mental arsenal without committing to them.  Use them as consideration points if you must, disagree if need. I do not advocate subscribing wholesale to any of them, but believe me, there is an important message in most of them if you are free to read and process without emotional reaction.  I must confess, have included one or two more extreme perspectives, just for fun:

• http://wikileaks.org/
• http://ronpaulinstitute.org/home.aspx 
• http://occupywallst.org/
• http://thezeitgeistmovement.com/
• http://www.ora.tv/offthegrid 
• http://www.thevenusproject.com/
• http://www.johnperkins.org/
• 
  

4) Behind the STATISTICS

The previous post focused on data and trends relating group identities and values, but what about the real human face and consequence behind these statistics?

“Too Much Too Many” follows David Johnson's South African road trip looking at human population and consumption growth impacts.

David's love of South Africa meant he relocated from London to Cape Town in February 2007.  He's a qualified environmental / town planning lawyer and a qualified field guide (what most people call a game ranger). 

He's written on population and consumption matters for international organizations such as Africa Geographic and the Cape Times. David has also spoken about Too Much Too Many on SABC3's Expresso Show, John Maytham's 567 Cape Talk radio show and the Otherwise show on SA FM

Unlike the PEW research center and other such research organizations, he's not looking for statistics but rather meeting real people whose personal stories highlight why taboos need to be broken and why a new approach is needed with many of the topics he’s looking at. 

Population and consumption growth are impacting people, wildlife and landscapes but the links are often not seen. At the end of the road trip the project will be turned into a book. If you're concerned about human rights, or even just passionate about South Africa’s wildlife / in awe at the country’s staggering landscapes, it is a road trip for you to follow.

Be sure to get stuck in at: http://www.toomuchtoomany.co.za/

How to get involved

We need to get people talking about human impact, so please forward articles to friends who might be interested, share links on Facebook and Twitter, let's get people to join a debate.
 

If you're in South Africa can you suggest interesting issues local to you which might not be well-known? I'd love to hear from you especially.

If you work for an organization outside South Africa involved in the field perhaps we can collaborate. 

http://www.toomuchtoomany.co.za/how-you-can-help/

3) Making the link between IDENTITY and VALUES

I quite enjoy the Pew Research Center because they are a non-partisan, non-advocacy data and research organization.  They are principally concerned with the data and statistics rather than taking or advising a particular position.

Have a look at http://www.pewresearch.org/ and play around.  We quickly get feel that our attitudes and values on issues of the day are linked to our identities in terms of racial, cultural and religious groupings.  These identifiers link certain value systems to the group and produce trends that make value systems almost predictable by such groupings.

You will find trends in attitudes to gay marriage in the very religious, or among Muslims being different to the non-religious or even the politically liberal for instance.  Sometimes these trends are common knowledge and sometimes they are surprising, but usually they are interesting in some way or another.

Taking a position on this issue:

Attitudes on abortion, contraception, women’s rights, children’s rights, misogyny etc etc all seem to have links to cultural values.

Botched circumcisions take a number of lives each year in the coming of age ceremonies, but no matter, they continue each year due to some cultural values held by those communities that must be more important than the risk.  Infant circumcisions are more important than an individual’s right to decide on his own body in some societies.  Other groups use the same word “Circumcision” for females, to describe removal of her genitals basically, and feel that to them it’s pretty much the same thing….

These values are usually more or less prevalent in groups and certain identities reflect certain tendencies.

If a democratic secular society is to be valued, I hope certain things remain non-negotiable.  We have fought very hard for racial equality in South Africa, and we still are not totally there.  Women’s rights and the rights of gays and lesbian have also taken a long time just to get the recognition they have today, and I think we should make these and other things we've fought for NON-NEGOTIABLE in a society that values civil liberty and individual freedom of expression.

Europe and Scandinavia are faced with this clash of value systems due to the large scale Islamic community emigration bringing Islamic values with those communities which are in many ways at odds with Western values. Their children are born into identity crises, which is really not always fair.  How do we reconcile these values?

What are the important issues of today? Overpopulation, the environment, global economy, the energy crises, war, disease, poverty, human rights? Any other ideas to add to this?  I’m sure there are.

Let’s take these issues head on, and make a case for defining our shared culture of common consequence around them by contrasting current cultural values and see which provides the most likely way to find SOLUTIONS.

2) IDENTITY

Here is a table showing the different religious grouping in South Africa according to the 2001 national Census.

 

SA Census 2001 

Denomination	Adherents
Dutch Reformed churches	3,005,697
Zion Christian churches	4,971,931
Catholic churches	3,181,332
Methodist churches	3,035,719
Pentecostal/Charismatic churches	3,695,211
Anglican churches	1,722,076
Apostolic Faith Mission	246,193
Lutheran churches	1,130,983
Presbyterian churches	832,497
Bandla Lama Nazaretha	248,825
Baptist churches	691,235
Congregational churches	508,826
Orthodox churches	42,253
Other Apostolic churches	5,627,320
Other Zionist churches	1,887,147
Ethiopian type churches	1,150,102
Other Reformed churches	226,499
Other African independent churches	656,644
Other Christian churches	2,890,151
African traditional belief	125,898
Judaism	75,549
Hinduism	551,668
Islam	654,064
Other beliefs	283,815
No religion	6,767,165
Undetermined	610,974

I think when this is considered, and knowing a little about South Africa’s history of oppression and our stated goal of a “Rainbow Nation” we can see the value of living in a secular society.  Secularism in essence advocates that government Institutions, political decisions, legal principles etc should be neutral on the influence of any religious group as far as possible, especially one groups interests over another’s.  It will naturally be extremely difficult to be completely secular, but from I can ascertain we do a fairly good job of that element over here along with the racial element, possibly as a result of our past and carefully considered constitution.

Some parts of the world don’t work this way, like Pakistan for example, but I’ve learned from interaction on social media sites that idea’s on free thinking are spreading, and indoctrination by one group over another seems to be on the way out.  The events in the last few years regarding Egypt, Libya, Syria etc seem to re-enforce the notion that we are moving in a general direction where dictatorships and overt oppression are no longer tolerated by populations.  The more subtle forms of oppression will possibly re addressed next.  I’m fairly sure there will be fireworks along the way, but I’m sure we will get there or thereabouts.

Most of history has been defined by the spread and clash of civilizations and ideologies, crusades have happened and wars have been fought, the dust is still settling.  The future in a shrinking world, in my opinion, belongs to tolerance and co-operation rather than to division and war.

In order to get there each group has to look at its values and be willing and open to change if needed, and this cannot always be guaranteed if some or other absolute morality is perceived to exist unchallenged from an all knowing god. That would equate openness to new ideas with going against god’s word.

The very religious also cite lack of ability to disprove the existence of god as very good reason to require no evidence whatsoever.  Here “Faith” is seen as a quality of strength rather than as a weakness and the scientific method of requiring evidence and repeatable results is regarded with suspicion.  I am typing this on a computer, so I know that works and even though religion has never offered anything provable beyond some sort of intangible emotional solace, it will persist for some time to come, possibly as long as we are around.

There are two ways around this roadblock; one is by undermining the current understanding of our translation / interpretation of the holy texts.  This will introduce an element of doubt into our version of god’s word, rather than god’s ACTUAL word.  This might provide scope for compromise where there was previously none and I will devote a section of this blog to doing precisely that in an upcoming chapter.

But what if there is another way?  What if the power to bring us together and remove unwarranted prejudice lies at the level of the individual instead of the group?

This leads me to the central theme of this blog.  How free are WE to process information, make decisions and to know ourselves?  We may be legally free, but are we really free from other influences that may use coercion or duress or enforce a sense of community identity that may have values that are at odds with our individual identity? What about exploring aspects of another group that we are curious about because it inspires some sort of passion and belonging in us?

What I am proposing is that we are finally at a stage when we have constitutional backing to be more than just our inherited identities. It will serve us well to ditch unquestioned absolute morality to get in touch with values that resound with us on a personal level, even if it is at odds with defining values that we inherited through our cultural background.