Showing posts with label Power Inquiry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Power Inquiry. Show all posts

Magna Carta, fables and misrepresentations.

There appears to be some variance in the interpretation of Magna Carta.




As I understand it, Magna Carta was a contract, drawn up by the Barons and the Catholic Bishops, setting out the relationship between the three ruling hierarchies - The Church, The Monarchy and The Barons. It had a number of versions, and all were abrogated or broken by the signing parties sooner or later.

Ordinary folk were not included. 

That same relationship persists today, with unelected Bishops in the House of Lords, unelected Lords in the House of Lords, Corporate Barons in the House of Lords as well as Corporate influence over the MPs in the House of Commons and those who form the Government of the day.

The Monarchy stands as a symbol of National Unity and National internalised Identity. 

The only articles from Magna Carta that are currently on the statute books, and thus active in Law, are the two which relate to the position of the Church and the City of London, both of which imply an acceptance of the status of the Monarchy as Head of State.

The reason why proportional representation or any other genuinely democratic voting system does not exist is to preserve that triumvirate of Power. You can vote, yet you have no real say in how laws are made, and what laws are made. You and I, dear reader, are excluded from the exercise of political and economic power. That is deliberate. Your vote is engineered to be impotent.

Cameron words must be read with that understanding...

"It falls to us in this generation to restore the reputation of those rights... It is our duty to safeguard the legacy, the idea, the momentous achievement of those barons."

This coming from a leader who is overseeing the privatisation of the NHS, who bombed Libya needlessly, whose Government is placing psychologists in Job Centers to mask the bureaucratic bullying of vulnerable people in pursuit of an ideological stance that is fundamentally institutionalised cruelty and utterly inhumane. Austerity is a lie. Austerity is Tory bullying of the vulnerable writ large.

What is the legacy of the Barons?

It certainly is not genuine participative democracy for all the people, where the people are treated as equals in the discussions and processes of decision making at the level of Governance.

Is the privatisation of the NHS into the hands of people associated with David Cameron's Cabinet and social class mandated by the people of the UK?

Or is it closer to the kind of trade controls the Barons would have seen as appropriate to their standing?

Was the bombing of Libya mandated by the UK electorate? Likewise the invasion of Iraq in 2003?

They were not. Indeed there is very little of Government legislation in recent history that has been fully supported by the majority of the electorate in the UK.

I could be wrong.

I also know that Government has been undermining those constituencies that were behind the Power Inquiry of 2006 through the Big Society campaign.

This is because they - the Community Voluntary Sector (CVS) - presented the most cogent, well articulated and well reasoned appraisal of the flaws in the current systems of governance, flaws which render it un-democratic. 

Take for example the Office of The Party Whip, and anti-democratic institution which has no place in a genuine peoples Democracy.

The Power Inquiry proposed a series of proven, tested and tried reforms that would safely devolve decision making powers to the grass roots of Society through deliberative processes that would build bridges rather than create divisions.

The CVS had decades of self governance experience to draw from - dealing with provision of services, listening and responding to clients, managing funding and treasury transparency, dealing with Government and European bodies and legislation, handling crises, developing evidence based policies and implementing those... a vast body of experiential knowledge and wisdom, with a more defined and exact database than currently exists for climate change as a direct result of only fossil fuel use.

I also understand that Government and the Establishment ruling class do place activists to distract, dissuade, and otherwise obscure the realities of history in order to confuse the activities of genuine activism, as a standard practice that has a long, long history.

There is much talk of Freemen, of Maritime Law, of Natural Law and of supposed rights of ordinary people inferred in Magna Carta that generates much attention, yet delivers nothing useful in terms of Democratic progress towards a more humane system of Governance.

The lack of delivery of anything useful is the proof of the pudding.

Here is a song that explores the idea that before the emergence of Kings (the original knife crime syndicates) human culture was Egalitarian, for the vast majority, because it is a highly evolved state of being, one that assured human communities would flourish and thrive over hundreds of thousands of years.

Industrial Hierarchy of Violence Culture is less than 300 years old, and is already threatening all living systems on this gorgeous planet with enhanced toxicity, multiple extinctions and vast harms to people and place. We would do well to remember who we really are.

I write songs like this because part of folk music is the honest recording of the lived experience in history as it really occurred, as a source of wisdom and strength. That is a core duty of the folk musician.

A good friend of mine commented that "
Half the pieces on the chess board carry the same title as those who sit in the Lords..."

To which I replied...

"
The key skill in Chess is predicting your opponents moves into the future, and then laying a trap for them to fall into through your own moves."

Government policy appears to be short term in the manner it is announced, yet behind the scenes that is not the case. We know that those who rule present an acceptable persona, a façade for public attention and consumption.


Our activism has to understand this, read past the headlines, and perceive what is coming and plan for it whilst being ready to adapt and change.


Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

Power, decision making, ethics and humane living: a choice

Interesting ideas are a starting point for this necessary discourse.

There ought to be a place in Parliament for some pensioners, disabled folk, some children and teenagers, and other vulnerable people, providing a commentary on the proceedings, a bit like the two old geezers at the end of the muppet show, humorous but with more bite.

PR, NOTA, and many other progressive and humane practices regarding a humane democracy are all possible.

Ask the disabled what they need, let them decide on policy on the disabled.

Ask the 'disruptive children' in schools what they need, let them inform how they are helped.

Ask the renters what they need, and let them inform how renting is regulated.

Ask mothers what they need, and then let those needs inform policy on family and community.

Ask elders what they need, and let those needs inform policy on family and community.

Ask Survivors of trauma and criminal abuse what they need, and let that inform policy.

Tell the banks what we need of their services, and ensure they comply to the 'market' : those who need their services (apart from criminal organisations, speculative betters etc etc )

Tell the police how they ought to relate to troubled youth, as carers as well as protectors, and let the troubled youth inform how they are to be treated.

Ask the Military how they can best help Society, and let that inform how they are deployed (Chavez did this in his 'exile' in the remote parts of Venuzeula, and directed the military under his command to build infrastructure, schools, wells, etc etc... which built his base from which he re-emerged to engage in Democratic Governance.)

There are a myriad of genuine examples of all of this kind of democratic behaviour that demonstrate it is both practical and effective.

We, the people, are the majority tax payers, and we need to take up the responsibility of how we organise our part of Society and not devolve that to others. We ought to employ some to do what we decide, not vote for others to decide for us. That's infantile.

The current political paradigm represents peoples fears more often than their needs or 'interests' as a means to manipulate the electorate, to gain Power over the people.


A truly representative figure head is a spokesperson carrying the message of those who have decided. Not a leader.

We need to become leaders who can select spokespersons, who can employ civil servants and politicians and direct them.

There was a time when those skills lived within the community. Amongst people known who could be trusted because if they bodged the job, you would come around to their house. This is oversight.

The time for grass roots oversight has come. Be part of it. Participate in decision making, in deliberation, in the exploration of the issues, the problems, the solutions and be a learner, a grower, a fully matured human being.

I want to live fully humanely. I do already, to a large degree, and recognise that I need to take up my shared responsibility, to all other living humans, my family to mature fully and become fully participative. I need to do this to honour my connections to you all, to honour my sense of self and to exercise the loving care I feel for all humanity.

What do you want?


Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

The central question of power - your choice.

A more humane approach threatens the old paradigm of political power, which operates on the private assumption of exercising Power over the people they claim publicly to serve.

A person centred approach would have made the Invasion of Iraq impossible to conceive, let alone actuate. A person centred approach would preclude western support and tolerance of the Saudi Wahabist head chopping Regime, or western
 support for Saddam that put him in Power in the first instance.

A person centred approach would have inhibited any cover up of the activities of Savile, Smith or Janner, and indeed would have dealt with those as the first signs, or allegations of abuse, emerged.

Voting for others to make a decision is not a genuine exercise of democracy, at least not in the classical Greek sense, nor in the manner the 5 Nations, both of whom are quoted as sources of Western Democracy and Federalism.

The modern Democracy is a sham – an illusion designed to give power over the people to a self selecting elite, and it demands the infantilisation of the electorate: in as much as a mother or father will make all the decisions affecting an infants life, and the infant has no power.

A toddler might play one parent off the other, to effectively give that power to his or her preference, yet still the toddler has no real power.

Is this what you want?

Is this what you are willing to accept, and all that goes with it : Iraq, Libya, corruption,  institutional cover-ups of horrific child abuse by powerful people?

To remain infantalised, in real political terms?

Or are you willing to mature, as The Power Inquiry suggested many millions of UK citizens are?

The choice IS yours!




Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

Politics, Arguments, Debates and Institutionalised Emotional Blindness

Politics, arguments, debates and the abdication of responsibility.


The Power Inquiry Report 2006.

If you have not heard of it, then I suggest that you need to know more about it. We all need to read the report and understand it's full implications, not least because it emerged from the grass roots, rather than a think-tank. And it challenges a number of assumptions about the ability of grass roots folk to engage with shared responsibility, robust governance and detailed policy deliberation.

The Power inquiry, an independent investigation into the condition of democracy in Britain, was set up in 2004. The members of its commission (chaired by Helena Kennedy) hosted meetings around Britain and heard submissions from a wide variety of interest groups, professionals, and concerned citizens. The commission published its report on 27 February 2006.

"After eighteen months of investigation, the final report of Power is a devastating critique of the state of formal democracy in Britain. Many of us actively support campaigns such as Greenpeace or the Countryside Alliance. And millions more take part in charity or community work. But political parties and elections have been a growing turn-off for years.

The cause is not apathy. The problem is that we don't feel we have real influence over the decisions made in our name. The need for a solution is urgent. And that solution is radical. Nothing less than a major programme of reform to give power back to the people of Britain..."

Examine it.

D. Cameron, E. Milliband and Menzies Campbell paid lip service to the report and initiative at the time. Cameron said, in public, and it's on video, that The Power Inquiry was the 'most important initiative in Democracy in the UK' in a long, long time.

I was there. I heard them speak and mouth hearty support for the report, as they stood and spoke before the assembled crowd of more than 500 people. 

Less than a week after attending the launch of the report, at a conference in Queen Elizabeth Hall, Parliament Square, after praising it during that weekend conference, after saying how important it was, after speaking about it in glowing terms to the attendees, they dismissed it as 'impractical.'

'Impractical'? Well, yes. Ceding power to people is always 'impractical' to the Ruling Class.

Here's an outline of the recommendations:

http://www.lgcplus.com/give-citizens-power-to-make-laws-urges-inquiry/513437.article

Here's the full document, PDF download, very much worth a reading.

http://www.jrrt.org.uk/publications/power-people-independent-inquiry-britains-democracy-full-report

Power without accountability or shared responsibility is always going to be a serious problem, and open to abuse.

Quite a lot of the comments flying around about Russel Brand, UKIP, and politics in general are antagonistic 'debating' style, rather than mature deliberation or critical analysis. Trying to win or batter the other side down as opposed to learning enough to develop a win-win solution.

What's that phrase they use about the Court system?

Adversarial.

I find that appalling. An abdication of responsibility. Politically immature. Psychologically immature. An adversarial Parliament is immature, and unworthy, easily corrupted - a collegiate parliament would be mature and worthy and would repel corruption.

Because the issue of power and legislation is really about us, we, the people who form the community and how we work together (or not) to create a society that nurtures, that cares for the vulnerable.

The issue is about relationships based on kindness, rather than power.

Healthy discourse is about sharing, exploring and growing together.

Debate is about power, it's about who wins.

The Power Inquiry emerged out of the Community Voluntary Sector, which has decades of providing services at the local community level, dealing with amongst other things : finances, governance, research, best practices, transparency, service provis
ion, understanding their 'clients' needs, overcoming institutional obstacles, overcoming Institutionalised Emotional Blindness, campaigning, fund raising, discourse on policy formulation and much else besides. These are real life skills.

It was these people that David Cameron's BIG SOCIETY was aimed at, as a direct institutional assault. And it was their clients, the vulnerable who suffer doubly as a result.

And it's working.

Speak to any disabled people currently being denied benefits on the false basis of 'austerity'?

Use your voice to nurture the active grass roots, as well as to chastise the powerful.

In another comment, elsewhere, I pointed out how appalled I was at the sniping that is so common.

Instituionalised Emotional Blindness. There's something here for everyone to consider.

The immaturity of the debating style of the discourse, as opposed to an effort to share, learn and grow in order to create a more nurturant society.

An abdication of responsibility. It's really quite ugly.




Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it is your gift to universe."

This blog, like all my other content creation work is not monetised via advertising. If you like what I present, consider sharing my content. If you can afford the price of a cup of coffee or a pint of beer/ale/cider for a few months, please donate via my Patreon account.

Thank you for reading this blog.

https://patreon.com/corneilius - donations gratefully received




Scotland Votes, political maturity

Local political activism based on empathy for the concrete reality of the lived experience rather than ideological positions - as suggested in The Power Inquiry - wherein Democratic participation in the discourse and decision making process on all matters that affect our lives....

Effective Participation requires that centralised power positions are devolved away from central to the local, away from hierarchical party structures which mirror the Power play of Authority, and as it happens the power play of monotheistic religions.

It also requires a maturation of one's understanding of shared responsibility of power and of democracy way beyond mere voting for choices 'offered' by those touting for power.

A difficulty I have with Trades Unions, one form of centralised hierarchical power structure,  is articulated by the NUT - the national Union of Teachers, who have NEVER gone on strike to protect the best interests of the children, who side with the Authoritarianism of State Education and act only to preserve their wages and power.

I see that as incredibly selfish and narrow minded and it makes them much easier to be co-opted by Power - Power can impose curricula and other policies (ADHD and drugging children who are basically bored in School settings) that cause harm to children as long as the teachers get enough money!

That's just one example. When has a Nursing Union gone on strike to ensure Hospital patients are served organic locally grown foods? Never...

I suggest, to everyone who is exercised on this issue that you download the Power Inquiry booklet and examine the detail within it - I think you will be inspired by it.

Your passion and concern is obvious. Do not waste it on voting for who rules you - get invovled and share the responsibility of power.

http://www.jrrt.org.uk/publications/power-people-independent-inquiry-britains-democracy-full-report

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

The Power Inquiry recommendations : a brief review.

Russell Brand talks about two areas of interest to us all in the Paxman interview.

These are

a) the cruelty of the way Political, economic and religious power as we know it behaves - war, poverty, misogyny, concentration of wealth.

and

b) the desire of ordinary folk who have empathy, intelligence and the energy to render Governance incapable of such cruelty, yet who feel totally excluded from so doing due to the current political systemic and institutionalised set-up.

We are excluded from policy decision making, we are excluded from adequate oversight, and our concerns raised, when harms are caused, are brushed aside.


a well known war criminal, free and at large, unindicted, 
simply because the people are excluded from policy decision making.

The Power Inquiry of 2006 looked at how political and legislative power could be devolved to the grass roots, to those people who are largely imbued with common sense, decency, empathy, intelligence and the energy and a natural desire to render Power incapable of such cruelty such as The Iraq War or the mistreatment of 'failed' asylum seekers, or the mistreatment of the elderly in privatised 'care' and so on, if they had the opportunity.

In essence this is about Power Relationships of old being superseded by shared power with empathy based relationships at it's core as a future and necessary social and cultural trajectory.

Here is a brief list of Power Inquiry Recommendations:

You can download the full POWER INQUIRY REPORT in .pdf format  from this web page.
- it's a very inspiring document!

Rebalancing Power

There needs to be a re-balancing of power between the constituent elements of the political system: a shift of power away from the executive to Parliament, away from central government to local government. 

Much greater clarity, transparency and accountability should be introduced into the relationship between the Executive and supra-national bodies, quangos, business, and interest groups. 

Too much power goes unchecked. The aim here, in The Power Inquiry, is to allow the freedom for our elected representatives to be the mind, heart, eyes, ears and mouth of British citizens speaking at the vert heart of governance.

1. A concordat should be drawn up between executive and Parliament indicating where key powers lie and providing significant powers of scrutiny and initiation for Parliament.

2. Select committees should be given independence and enhanced powers including the power to scrutinise and veto key government appointments and to subpoena witnesses to appear and testify before them.

This should include proper resourcing so that committees can fulfil their remit effectively. The specialist committees in the Upper House should have the power to co-opt people from outside the legislature who have singular expertise, such as specialist scientists, or those who work directly in frontline services when considering complex areas of legislation or policy.

3. Limits should be placed on the power of the whips. Indeed the Party Whip is anti-democratic in nature and should be abolished.

4. Parliament should have greater powers to initiate legislation, to launch public inquiries and to act on public petitions.

5. 70% of the members of the House of Lords should be elected by a 'responsive electoral system' (see 12 below) - and not on a closed party list system - for a maximum of three parliamentary terms. To ensure that this part of the legislature is not comprised of career politicians with no experience outside politics, candidates should be at least 40 years of age.

6. There should be an unambiguous process of decentralisation of powers from central to local government.

7. A concordat should be drawn up between central and local government setting out their respective powers.

8. Local government should have enhanced powers to raise taxes and administer its own finances with oversight and consent by it's local population. Participatory budget decision deliberations by the people from whom that revenue is received.

9. The government should commission an independent mapping of quangos and other public bodies to clarify and renew lines of accountability between elected and unelected authority.

10. Ministerial meetings with representatives of business including lobbyists to be logged, transcripted and listed on a monthly basis.

11. A new overarching select committee should be established to scrutinise the executive's activities in supranational bodies and multilateral negotiations, particularly in relation to the European Union, and to ensure these activities are held to account and conducted in the best interests of the British people.

Real Parties and True Elections

The current way of doing politics is killing politics. Russell Brand is not lying. Russell Brand  is being accurate, Paxman agrees but differs in that he claims that if you don't vote the you have no right to complain, which is an opinion position rather than the reality of Power Politics as we know them because it's a way of avoiding the central issue of powerlessness by being excluded from the key parts of decision making processes.

The fact that the voting system does not provide the ability to reject all the candidates -  None of The Above - is problematic, as is the First Past the Post system.

An electoral and party system which is responsive to the changing values and demands of today's population must be created.

This will allow the development of new political alliances and value systems which will both regenerate existing parties and also stimulate the creation of others.

12. A responsive electoral system - which offers voters a greater choice and diversity of parties and candidates - should be introduced for elections to the House of Commons, House of Lords and local councils in England and Wales to replace the first-past-the-post system.

13. The closed party list system to have no place in modern elections.

14. The system whereby candidates have to pay a deposit which is lost if their votes fall below a certain threshold should be replaced with a system where the candidate has to collect the signatures of a set number of supporters in order to appear on the ballot paper.

15. The Electoral Commission should take a more active role in promoting candidacy so that more women, people from black and minority ethnic communities, people on lower incomes, young people, representatives from vulnerable groups and independents are encouraged to stand.

16. The voting and candidacy age should be reduced to sixteen (with the exception of candidacy for the House of Lords which ought to be come an Upper Chamber).

17. Automatic, individual voter registration at age sixteen should be introduced. This can be done in tandem with the allocation of National Insurance numbers.

18. The citizenship curriculum should be shorter, more practical and result in a qualification.

19. Donations from individuals to parties should be capped at £10,000, and organisational donations capped at £100 per member, subject to full democratic scrutiny within the organisation.

20. State funding to support local activity by political parties should be introduced based on the allocation of individual voter vouchers. 

This would mean that at a general election a voter will be able to tick a box allocating a £3 donation per year from public funds to a party of his or her choice to be used by that party for local activity. It would be open to the voter to make the donation to a party other than the one they have just voted for.

21. Text voting or email voting should only be considered following other reform of our democratic arrangements.

22. The realignment of constituency boundaries should be accelerated.

Downloading Power

The people want to nurture a culture of political engagement in which it becomes the norm for policy and decision-making to occur with direct input from citizens. This is the central plank of The Power Inquiry. This means reform which provides citizens with clear entitlements and procedures by which to exercise that input - from conception through to implementation of any policy or decision.

I repeat it's about the move from older Power Relationships to sharing power at the grass roots, where empathy and connection can inform the decision making processes. Empathy and connection are actually common sense qualities to nurture for there can be no meaningful community without these..

23. All public bodies should be required to meet a duty of public involvement in their decision and policy-making processes.

24. Citizens should be given the right to initiate legislative processes, public inquiries and hearings into public bodies and their senior management.

25. The rules on the plurality of media ownership should be reformed. This is always a controversial issue but there should be special consideration given to this issue in light of the developments in digital broadcast and the internet. Further legislation needs to be drafted to prevent exploitative and manipulative media content that misleads, misinforms or deliberately targets know biases and vulnerabilities of any person or group.

26. A requirement should be introduced that public service broadcasters develop strategies to involve viewers in deliberation on matters of public importance - this would be aided by the use of digital technology.

27. MPs should be required and resourced to produce annual reports, hold AGMs and make more use of innovative engagement techniques.

28. Ministerial meetings with campaign groups and their representatives should be logged, minuted and listed on a monthly basis.

29. A new independent National Statistical and Information Service needs to be created to provide the public with key information free of political spin.

30. 'Democracy hubs' should be established in each local authority area. These would be resource centres based in the community where people can access information and advice to navigate their way through the democratic system.

These ideas are a starting point in the solution to the problems, the frustration, the despondency most people feel when facing up to the problems of Politics and Power.

Russell Brand was merely being honest.

Russell Brand is not the 'answer' and he knows it.

Of course he knows it, he's not stupid and he's not a megalomaniac.

He's a man who has seen through difficult experience some of the consequences of poverty, addiction and he is someone has thought about it in some depth.

And now he is speaking out against the hypocrisy.

As most of us do in our living rooms.

WE are the answer. All of us adults.

This is a choice we must make as mature adults, of we are to give meaning to our affirmations of love to our children, on behalf of their children and grand children.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it is your gift to universe."

This blog, like all my other content creation work is not monetised via advertising. If you like what I present, consider sharing my content. If you can afford the price of a cup of coffee or a pint of beer/ale/cider for a few months, please donate via my Patreon account.

Thank you for reading this blog.

https://patreon.com/corneilius - donations gratefully received





Big Society? Think again.

It's an intentional scam - Cameron came across the www.powerinquiry.org back in 2006 which revealed a few key points - that voter apathy was a myth, that what actually was occurring was that more and more people saw the way the politicians sought a mandate then did the pretty much what they wanted , broke promises, had their noses in various troughs, launched wars no-one wanted, suppressed democractic dissent, bailed out bankers for their gambling debts, etc etc and thus tpublic rust in politicians had plummetted , along with live membership of policial parties, whilst involvment in social community works of all kinds increased as people started to do more for their communities at the grass roots by themselves , for themselves- which built in a growing sense of independence and strength.

It revealed in some detail that people were, in general, quite capable of making decisions on matters that affect their lives and were now desirous of a political democracy that conferred that power (the means to make the decisions on how to use taxes to support their communities on issues that directly affected their lives) onto them, away from the central, and finally, that the people had thought long and hard about how to do this (hence the 47 reccomendations of The Power Inquiry) and had come up with viable changes and methods to do this.

In other words Big Society was up and running.... and was therefore seeen as direct threat to centralised Power...

Cameron, Menzies Campbell and Ed Milliband attended the Power Inquiry Conference and made flowery overtures to the assembled people, nearly 600 strong, from all over the UK. I was there, I heard the speeches. I attended the break-out sessions. I read The Power Inquiry Report, cover to cover. I saw what could be.

Two days later, media reported the politicans as saying that the reccomendations of the Power Inquiry were 'impractical'. And that was that. End of.

Camerons Big Society is an attempt to privatise that constituency so as to undermine it. This includes ,of course, amongst other things, forcing smaller local grass roots charities to close, handing their 'services' over to larger charities whose purse strings are controlled by Corporate and Government funding, the privarisation of the NHS under the false guise of 'improving services' - using that wanton mantra of the market being the  natural driver of excellence.

He agrees with Thatcher. There is no such thing as Society - or rather, he and those he works with, dines with,  would  prefer there was no such thing as Society as a responsive, intelligent and empathic collective, but rather individuals, whose qualities, flawed or otherwise are entirely of their own making, scrambling over each other for a slice of the pie. He's trying to dismantle what has been built up at the grass roots.

Which is why this week, Cameron has gone to Egypt, with a defence sales team on tow.


"Yasmin Khan, senior campaigns officer at the charity War on Want, called for the Prime Minister's "shameful" and "ill-timed" trip to be cancelled. She said: "It is deplorable that David Cameron is seeking to exploit the crisis by promoting sales of weapons and torture equipment to the region." 

Sarah Waldron, campaigns co-ordinator at Campaign Against the Arms Trade, said: "The UK Government prioritises the interests of arms companies – it makes a mockery of claiming to have a rigorous approach to arms sales. People in the Middle East are dying in an attempt to get democracy and yet Cameron and other ministers are still selling weapons used to oppress them."

People power must be thwarted at every turn. Directly, or indirectly.

If you haven't already read the Power Inquiry, I suggest you do so at the soonest opportunity.


We need to know what is possible and what has been rejected by the politicians. 

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe











Bookmark and Share

Power Relationships, Fear, Truthers and Consumers.

In a Society that is predicated upon Power Relationships - where one party to the relationship exercises power over the other, to meet the preceived needs of the power holder, it is imperative to condition those upon whom Power is exercised... to accept those Power Relationships as 'natural'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niccol%C3%B2_Machiavelli#The_Prince

What is happening now is that due to the internet, both accurate and inaacurate information is made more easily available to those with access to the internet.

We KNOW more about the struggles of Tribal Societies now than we did 20 years ago. They have always KNOWN that our Governments are not to be trusted. Their blood has been spilled, their way sof life attacked. They KNOW.

www.hiddenfromhistory.org

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/first-australians/

We KNOW more about the psychology and neurobiology of natural parenting than we did 20 years ago. That is because those who have been researching this area have been able to share their learnings outside the academic world, and those learnings have been applied successfully by many hundreds of thousands of people world wide. The data has been tested.

www.birthpsychology.com

We KNOW more about the criminality of Governance than we did 20 years ago. That is because information, such as WIKI LEAKS, has been shared, has been peer reviewed, and has been used to some effect - though there is a way to go yet - as evidenced by the work of people such as Kevin Annett, Colm O'Gorman and many other whistle blowers.

http://colmogorman.com/?page_id=16

The Power has absolutely encouraged the FEAR mongering dissemination of information as a tool to slow down this process.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_sin - a form of psycho-terrorism

9/11 Truth is also part of that process, designed to slow down the pace of real awakening.

Here's how it works.

By diverting attention from the War Crimes, for which Prima Facie evidence is in abundance, to the questions concerning 9/11 which cannot be answered. Eyes off the ball.

Under 3000 people died in New York on 9/11. That was truly dreadful. A horror. And there are manu unanswered questions about 9/11.

More than 1.3 million died between 2003 and 2006 in Iraq. Hundreds of thousands of people died in Afghanistan between 2001 and 2006. All due to the violence brought upon those countries by US/UK 'Coalition of the willing'. The only unanswered question is WHY is it that the war criminals are not already on trial? We have the evidence.

Unless those in Power who have engaged in War Crimes are brought to trial, which will only happen when the people make the decisions on the issues that affect their lives, and enforce them not by voting for preselected options, but by generating those options themselves, using accurate information.

www.powerinquiry.org

Alex Jones, Tsarion, David Icke and others like them are also part of this process. They absoultely ignore the learnings regarding natural parenting. They absolutely ignore the work being done on Participative Democracy. They FEED THE FEAR.

The New Age 'movement' is part of this process. (especially in the way it has co-opted Indigenous Spirituality and turned it into a mega billion dollar world wide industry designed to inculcate individualism, rather than community cohesion and empathic relationships).

It is time for civilisation's peoples to refuse BEING RULED, and to take on the mature responsibility of self governance as the mechanism for administering the needs of Society, rather than the be driven for the perceived needs of the 'economy'.

The basis for self governance is empathy, not Power.

Consumerism is THE ELITE disease.... it's what Hierarchical Elites have always done... They consume the world for their own narccisstic desires.

My studies have shown that for examlpe, the practice of seperating mother from child is one fo the oldest elite practices there is. And it's aboslutely at the heart of generating the lack of empathy that emegres through any society where this practice is widespread; what's even more interesting is that where that practice of disruption is not present, AND there is disruption to the natural emergent sexuality of the puberty, the same lack of empathy will be found.

The two drives to bond are sensory or pleasure related, are biologically driven and require some form of external power to cause a disruption. They are both empathic drives at heart. The connection to another with full perception. These are the basis for making that same connection with ALL life, from which the sense of one-ness emerges as a sensory feeling, rather than an intellectual conceit.

-----------  in addition ---------

One of the things at the core of 'civilisation' as we know it is the lack of empathy ...

ALL civilisation that have hierarchies also disrupt the child-motherbonding processes and/or disrupt naturalpost pubrttal sexuality.

This requires Power over those whose natural processes are disrupted BECAUSE these are so fundamental and because they are to do with deveoping experiential empathy, a neccessary trait in a healthy human society.

http://www.violence.de/prescott/bulletin/article.html - 1975 Paper published in The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists.... detailing this

www.birthpsychology.com - details the natural brain development through empathic parenting, citing neuroscience, development, psychology and anthropology....

This is at the the core - the rest follows as symptoms of that core lack of empathy, the development of the sociopath....

What's interesting is the Hierarchical elites in EVERY culture of Hierarchy remove the chld from the mother in their own families.. it's as though they understand the effect.

Once the printing press came into being it was possible for them to 'share' this understanding (which was written in to JudaeoChristian texts, hindi texts and much else besides) amongst the up an coming merchant classes, and from them over time iut becomes codified in Institutional Care and Education.

This all leads directly to a culture of Power Relationships.

95% of all known tribal societies are egalitarian - there are 170 million people living as tribal land based societies, and further 120 million living arounf or nearly assimilated into western civilisation ( the colonised...) - and then there's the vast first contact data - which the jesuits and other missionaries have archived... together these show a pictue of mostly egalitarian empathic relationships.

IF civilisation was empathic, our technologies woould be greener and geared to natural nurturant processes; war would be unlikely...

Unfortunatly it's not, for the above reasons...

Part of the picture is in abuse dynmaics, how people deal with truama and whether or not they can resolve it or not, and adopt controlling behaviours as a consequence, which become codified over time...

The REAL problem is this lack of empathy and how Societal Powers mediate how parenting/education is functioning is part of finding ways to break ithe cycles...

Judith Herman writes about the relationships that energe in abuse dynmaics.... the abuser (power) the apologist (middle classes) the scapegoat (the poor, some criminals, addictc) the victims (the indigneous,. the habitat), the rebel (the angry poor, some criminals) the soother (charitible people) the deniers (those who are either next in line for abuse of they slip up, or those who are comfortable or identify with the abuser/system ...) etc etc....

All the best

Corneilius

Do what you love,it's your gift to universe

ps. I am writing a book, Natural Child, Natural Society...

I hope this makes sense to you, as it makes eminent sense to me.

The Myth of Democracy.

The facts are that power is exercised over living beings, human and non-human, in ways that diminish both, in ways that are degrading the abundance of the environment, in ways that are not subject to the will of the people of the land (voting changes the overall abuse not a whit, as much as switching lightbulbs will do anything other than salve a flaccid conscience).


Whether it’s the US Government or the Iranian Government, the Catholic Church or Islam, the IMF or the WTO, decisions that are properly those of the people of the land are made by distal powers whose experience is inadequate to the task of knowing what people need and truely want, and therefore relies upon theory and belief for it’s action. Such a basis for action is bound by it’s inadequacies to cause harm.


That harm, vast and yet somehow invisible to many, is rationalised as a ’sacrifice’, or ‘collateral damage’ or ‘the price of freedom’ or ‘enduring freedom’ or worse, it is rationalised as evolution, the survival of the fittest, as progress.


Until we recognise that a) we are fully of nature b) that the function of ALL living beings on Earth is to improve the habitat for ALL living beings c) that the processes of power and dominance start with the domination of our children, who become adapted to that dynamic of dominance, and so become troopers, cops, weapons scientists, corporate managers, bankers and mercenaries as much as those who become rapists, murderers, and abusers of all hue, we will be unable to shift our behaviour as a 'civilisation'.......


For example, lets take a quick analysis of democracy as practiced.



Voting without complete and transparent oversight of those selected is no choice at all, as it leaves room for corruption. Voting without active and ongoing participation (which is power true sharing) is also a fraud.


The remedy is as follows :


Undermine the power of parties, ban private funding of parties, ban ‘party line’/'party whip’ and make lobbying transparent, both of which are currently enforced because no-one at the grass roots level would abide by such behaviour amongst their own neighbours, and why would they chose otherwise?



Institute a recall process for all positions of public office, at all levels, from grass-roots to the executive.



Make it easier for independent local representatives to enter. Give more decision making powers and the resources to effectively make decisions at the grass roots local level.


In a word, give people real power and they will use it wisely. This is proven by the very fact that the system is rigged AGAINST people power.


The The Power Inquiry of 2006 is a document that proves this analysis to be correct.


And for all these reasons, Democracy as practiced is a fraud.




Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's your gift to universe





Bookmark and Share