Asinine World of Wars.

Asinine World of Wars.           

Heard any good jokes lately? One cannot say that some are not needed to compensate for the inanity that abounds in the saps global arena but as it is incredibly difficult to extract from the multitude of expansive events that impinge on the detritus of life’s procedures; any few things of unfolding actions that one can lay onto, at best, a modicum of gallows humour on the reality of extinctive indicators would be welcomed. On the assumption that there is some measure of overall compoundable directive guidance at play, which may bring about intelligent clarity into the mind of saps, this supposition does little to assuage a sense of foreboding by the collision of events that are showing bio-environ degradation forewarnings and increasing the survivability dangers for millions of souls. So what if there are combinations of life events building to tsunami over uncounted souls, does it matter?

Perhaps construal interpretation with observing ominous confrontations of life’s pressures is uncalled for, or is it just a short period of the faithless uncertainty in the ability of saps to survive for much longer: – such negativity! Even if one believes in the agility of evolution inventiveness, or the ‘so far so good’ doctrine, if one looks at the world with a sceptical view at the bizarre administrative structures of the direction many countries have taken, their lives and the perspectives peoples are engaged in and the resources they have access to, use, rely on and their interrelated understanding as a species, there are indisputable rising disparities. It does not matter how much one may wish to overlook such species inconsistency of existence by overlaying essentials of life with an optimistic verve for a comfortable gloss on inconvenient discrepancies, the statistics of equitable survival for all do not add up.

  

Do saps value their existence; are they really of any importance in the expansive universes experiments with creating life? One cannot be absolutely certain the experiment (if it is one) of saps life is unknown, or if it is running at all. On an individual basis saps value themselves, make selective valued appreciation onto or about others and have little compatibility concern for anyone else not of their accepted ilk nor do they have any compassionate regard for those that are a potential created threat to their own significance and sustainability. As a species it seems to display a functional outlook that it reigns supreme, yet it has been fashioned from a many divergent beginnings, has had developmental presence duration of some 2m years with an affected global impact of (only?) 50K years. By some measure this is a much shorter existence than other species that have existed, now mostly extinct, or some of genetic lineages still identifiable today. Well with ‘so far so good’; only GodAllahTetragrammaton may hold the answer to how enduring this human experiment is to be or if it is of any real importance to the universes continuance.

However in this turgid mind set one has just now, one might offer a prejudicial view; that saps are at base inherently genetically defective, insecurely uninhibited and psyche personalised with divisive emotive cognitive ability that has displayed at times collective insanity or singularly occasional flashes of inventive brilliance to endure so far and multiply. But it is culturally, socially, spiritually and conceptually immature in global consciousness and its successful infestation is unlikely to amount to anything of great universal importance; not to be ended in dismal fashion.

There has been and still is a predilection within a volume of the human species, a strange perverse attraction to singular and tribal insularity for conflicts, conflicts which arise that are, in some cases, deliberately provoked for gain or are due to a difference of entrenched views that are perhaps effectively made un-reconcilable by the tendentious dichotomy of winner vs. loser positions. This divergence is increasingly heighted by ramped up aggressive blustering language that does little to clarify intentions or analytically deconstruct the opposing views for any comparable points but also at play is the excitement that feeds the mindless adrenalin rush of threat, anxiety, fight-flight, and anticipation / satisfaction of a ‘win’ situation; ultimately to be right which so easily is conflated with might. Potentially there is on occasions the aim to resolve differences amicably, by reasonably minded individuals, but consequent to one party seemingly being disadvantaged by misjudgement of stated positions, one position resorts to wielding a stick. Although sometimes the stick is waved about prematurely for intimidated persuasion, once both positions are in urging mode with simmering frustration, trouble can escalate to (un?) intended conflict. And what If survivable resources are in contention as the source for conflict?

There is an assumed position before or after that the destruction wrought during violent conflicts is done on the basis of reluctant self defense, incidental or deliberate resource acquisition, unintended consequences of construed misunderstanding, anomic impositions, and unserviceable laws of compatible intent. Or simply someone or group make a complete fuck up of not understanding evidential pressures giving rise to tensions and who may also fall into the influential sphere of a forcible strength bearing down on the rationality of moderated views for preserving self interest.

With the advent of global media outlets, in some of expressed unrestrained unqualified news exposure, there is an extensive element of conflated coverage that is a perversion of actual detail. For some, accuracy of facts does not make buyable news; expressions of dramatisations provides vicarious involvement for the consumer and helps shape their attention span and vision of an event without having to understand the possible complexity or term maturity of news content leading up to a contemporary ‘newsworthy’ article. With such unrestrained expansive coverage, the volume of ‘news’ can only be engaged in limited isolation, good or bad and none have any designed relative link to each other to position a rational for the interpretation of supporting facts. However where some news can be orchestrated for devious influential reasons by an individual, the state or organisation, with hyperbole, fake news – propaganda; the tenor of some news although not interlinked with supported provable facts, may point to a unnatural direction of a (possible) cultural colluded mindset by a persuaded number, taken-in by the very nature of the way such ‘news’ of events is reported. In this, (one suggests) manipulative arena, there is and has been ample evidence to show the effectiveness of an unrecognised regressive directive direction which a social structure can be moved too; creating a problem of civil stability where the communication of trust in the truth becomes amorphous and fantasy overruns reality.

Not that the above should have any direct bearing on the extract of events that follows but these like so many other events are not just isolated global actions, the significant lies one thinks, is in the easy frequency of such events which have become familiar by the simplicity of their creation but is also in its range of progenies. Fractural occurrences to stability are increasingly uncontainable however the additional consequence is the instant ‘indisputable’ news and the attitudinal reaction to the events in parts of a collective system, responses to which one may see is shaped or influenced by those of affluence, class and racial positions. Some things matter more than others with; the shorter the time scale of event the greater the outpouring of anxiety for spurious conclusion, the longer the time scale of events the less angst for decisive action.?

In Norway on 22.7 2011 Anders Behring Breivik killed 77 people; motive far right views and extremism.

On the 15 March 2019, 50 people were killed in shootings at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand. The person responsible was an Australian Brenton Tarrant living in the country. He had advocated far-right politics, white supremacy, racist, anti-immigrant views and managed to live-stream the murders at the mosques onto Facebook. It took a while to delete the filming.

This was similar to the attack in Norway but without the immediate live stream.

In Sri Lanka on 21st April 2019 (Easter Sunday) 3 Christian churches across Sri Lanka and 3 luxury hotels in the commercial capital Colombo were targeted in a series of coordinated suicide bombings in which 250 people died. Motive: Islamist extremist.

People of the 1st world were unified in horror both by the actions and the easy ability to project the events onto a world stage using unrestrained media but were these events like so many others noted by the 1^st world, of any importance to peoples of the ‘developing’ and ‘undeveloped’ world who’s media coverage is not so avidly obsessed over to the exclusion of everyday survival?.  

Hold the above with the conflict in Yemen, seen as an extension of the Iran-Saudi Arabia proxy clash to combat Iranian power in the region. In 2018, the United Nations warned that 13 million Yemeni civilians face starvation and said could become "the worst famine in the world in 100 years." The country is poor by any standard divided into two principal Islamic religious groups: 55% Sunni and 45% Shia. Neither has overall administrative control and although the UN has called for financial assistance from member countries for Yemen, as in other desperate undevelopable areas, it has difficulty in gaining ‘promised’ help with many members reneging on financial support.

Reluctance to help from the 1st world did not seem to be in evidence when on the 15^th April 2019; a structure fire broke out beneath the roof of Notre-Dame Cathedral, Paris, causing extensive damage to the roof and its spire to be destroyed. It is seen as an 850 year old monument of important to France and others of connected or related acquaintance. even as the fire still burned, the French President Emmanuel Macron was vowing to reconstruct the historic building within years and companies and business ‘magnates’ pledged ($677m; £519m) to help with the reconstruction offers flowing in from around the globe. As the fire was extinguished after 15 hours, the European Council President Donald Tusk took to calling on EU member states to rally round with financial help for rebuilding ‘such an important, historic, edifice’. But the initial rush to help has not translated into hard cash equal to what was pledged, a deliberate short fall of undertaking as donors continue to chivvy to influence rebuilding and want celebrated personal recognition.

These are just events that stimulate media and public interest to enlist a short term public perceptive view with some involved supportive actions and like many other events around the world many are just of local importance, insignificant in deaths or destructions for those not personally or locality involved. Even in persistent conflict areas the consequence of extreme violence or devastations continues with sporadic awareness as there are too many enduring events camouflaged with covert verbal impotence, devoid of effective corrective actions. If they (events) do not alight on the 1^st world doorstep, who cares?

There are arising clear schisms in many countries noticeable in the way populations are acting in divisive ways against what may have been seen as in nations of assumed ‘stability’. Discordant actions erroneously cast as supportive moves for ‘popularism’, a description used as denigration for those actors whose actions upsets the comfort stability of administrative orders, which are, one suggest, driven by the maturing uncertainty tension of the multiplicity of fluid anxieties; condensed into, “All is not well”. The uncertainty that might be sensed by supporters of ‘popularism’ maybe in that a reasonable secure stable future of every nation is doubtful, made prominent in aspects unfolding economically, administratively, environmentally, demographically and how individually people are culturally resourced. Compounded issues arising from these aspects, are particularly testing for the 1^st world nations.

Although there are a range of conflicts that are broadcasted for popular media attention, obviously they are at present not all wars. However the scope of wars in the rampaging blood shedding destructive sense listed over time throughout the world, may offer a view that Earth is a world of wars with little to indicate that such actively, given the tension points above, is no longer permanently avoidable. It is just a matter of time and circumstances with any one of the above excessively stressed aspects. They have within them the initiator to generate the forcible build-up for some action to ‘solve’ the problems that are unfold from the conflicting perceived views and those whom support or castigate the dissimilarity in how the problems and causes of tensions are prejudicially understated on.

There is a relaxed view taken on the use of the term war, as in ‘war’ on this that or the other to signify the earnest intent being given to tackle a popular problem. The casual use of such a definitive term, (war) does in some way diminish the authentic implication of the word;  as in war on plastic, war on waste, trade war, war on terrorism, war on illegal drugs and homicides. These are the sort of word misuse connections that do not strike fear into a population as it would if there were a functioning opposing enemy. These fashioned wars are politically ‘manageable’ in local national conditions and are popular in so far as they are within means as ‘something is being’ done and appease public anxiety.

One makes the point here that there are three subject areas where the use of the word war could potentially be more correctly used but to do so will, and should be a cause for apprehension due to the massive effort required by all nations to address the implications of the continuing calculated neglect attached to the issues.

The first is the undeclared economics war. Global economics has a direct impact on the whole of the ability to; develop, improve and sustain every aspect of civilisation existence and drives the equality to inequality that is rapidly become more divisive, particularly affecting the 1^st world and not to the exclusion of anywhere else. A war on the abuses and the detrimental aspect of unrestrained rapid economy manipulations should be a prime contender for an uninhibited analysis to a war footing effort and begin national to global controls, (Why else trade war?). Economics has become extensively corrupted, not to serve the needs of population but to serve the extraction of wealth to the holders of directive power. The influence of renegade economics activity must be a secreted foundation that leads to exposure of the tension of the next subject area.

The second subject area is the developing unprofessed environment war. This is not a war on the environment (depends on ones perspective) but on the causes of long term insidious degradation inflicted on the whole biosphere. In popular terms this a problem which rationally has taken three decades to accumulate the pressure and proof of pollution and climate change. Proof of which has been mounting and although this has been driven mostly by the special environmental interest groups and scientific examination in many affluent nations, with protest from low laying in-danger countries, there has also been very strong deniability of the dangers from rich vested influences. Although there has been from a variety of climate groups (Green Parties and the current Extinction Rebellion) demonstrable actions and a slow shift by parts of the public to pay attention to green issue, currently excited with Co2 and carbon neutral moves; the power to engage in meaningful actions exercised by individual states has been economic cautious. This is not an unreasonable position to take given the opportunity cost losses against competitive nation and the general reluctance to be a prisoner of unpopular costly pre-emptive action as a prime mover to adjust to low or zero carbon waste and comprehensive waste recycling. However the environment is not going to wait while the economics of cost benefits are assessed no matter how misguided or short term the calculations are and the slow reluctance to adapt may only result in the third subject area.

Here one makes a slight deviation, as one, like others may has seen, there is resistance to acknowledge what now seems obvious, the climate is changing, the biosphere is being polluted, resources are becoming delightedly consumed, there will be eventually insufficient food production and restricted energy availability. And although there is a popularisation of environmental issues and disruptive actions currently articulated by media for attention such as that of ‘Extinction Rebellion’; a group of climate change activist that seems not to have a signal leader who for two weeks in April attempted to bring central London to a standstill by holding creative, joyous, disruptive protests that attracted a span of ages, not least the young, with a outlook to building a new future. It did not entirely succeed in a shutdown but it did irritatingly block up various points. Attached to this was a publically new ‘standard bearer’ given prominence. A 16-year-old Swedish girl with Asperger’s, Greta Thunberg, gave voice to the danger being foisted onto the generation to follow from the lack of action by the existing one and was critical of the steps being taken as doubtful and insufficient. In this was reference to the claim made for a successful reduction in Co2 by the UK, that she said were overly exaggerated and which ignored the massive pollution by shipping and air travel. (This was true but there are reasons for this) By some, she was courteously lampooned, (an affront by wiser adults in the room?) attitudes only constrained with regard to her disarmingly effective presentation on the problem future children will have, her sex, her age and her ‘disability’. Never-the-less, she was taken seriously. 

In regard to the problem of Co2, The calculations required to place accurate polluting rates being caused by whom and where is a global problem. Every nation is to blame but it is taken that the greatest and largest consumers with exhausted waste are the worst and should do the most. Due to economics, it is a distributive problem that is unlikely to be, anytime soon, satisfactorily resolvable. The best a nation can do is to attend to that which it can influence internally although this will inevitable place one at a disadvantage over those that ignore the problem. In this one can see the importance of the law in which the UK has set a legal limit to the emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases by the climate Change Act; this commits the UK government by law to reductions with legally-binding 'carbon budgets'(1). As a significant ineffective yet serious step it is the first of its legal type by any government.

Although it is absolutely right that raising all the issues surrounding environmental pollution and degradation issues should be engaged in, the problem with seeking a ‘solution’ to the climate issues generates short term dubious resolution such as in the current UK’s dash for electrification of motive vehicles and the pressure of making the use of all fossil fuels illegal by 2030/50. It is a preposterous idea and takes no account of the recharge energy requirements, battery material use, life span, mobility restrictions, eruptive economic cost and non-competitiveness; all to be balanced against the non environmental participants of other nations. The only way of justifying such action is to recognised that it is a short-term stop-gap designed to move a percentage of current fossil fuel users to electric while a greater effort should be made to develop microalgae bio-fuel (2) as direct replacement for fossil fuels (as used in internal combustion engines), more electric nuclear generation, hydrogen power motivation use, and the hope of fusion power. Wind and wave power are useful but of limited extension, discontinuous, inefficient, expensive and long-term inflexibly unreliable.  

This brings one back to the third subject issue: In all the above there is one element in the whole arena of sustainability in economic and environmental challenges which is practically always overlooked and is given nowhere near its true prominence as it conflicts with the absurd veracity postulated of achieving sustainability and how to accomplish the urgent demands of the two aforementioned issues.

In 1950 the population of the world was estimated at 2.5bn, by 2020 it estimated to rise to 7.8bn (3) and by 2050 it will hover in the region of 9.7bn. In just 70 years the population has grown by 5.3bn, (possible 7.2bn in100 years) this enlargement that has been assisted by a resource advantageous era. Is it reasonable to assume that another 7bn people could be effortlessly accommodated by 2150> to a 16.7bn population, being mindful of the resources and ecological precipice environmentalist say the world needs to avoid? One cannot see it being done without a form of inexhaustible clean stable energy.

It is already evident that there is drop out from an equitable standard of living for millions of people in undevelopable, developing and 1^st world countries. As no country is willing to enact population controls due to numerous questionable reasons, it is an unpalatable fact that all the effort that will go into mitigating the problems of corrupted economies and the environment, will only be delaying the inevitable unless populations are controlled! As it is the nature of saps, when under duress, is to look for something to allocate misfortune on, it is quiet probable that for the affluent to maintain their position, forceful power will flow to marginalise, reject, segregated and subjugate substantial more of the ‘undeserving’ population of the world.

So the third justifiable use of the term war is explicably war. The world has had its conflicts and wars just in the past 100 years politically and territorially driven. But potentially with a collision of the two other suggested war drivers (economics / environmental) and the easy ability saps have to concoct justification around reasons for war; leaves little doubt that to unravel the impediment issues to resolving these two drivers by ignoring neglected causative pressures (the prime one of impracticable growth) can intentional or accidentally exacerbate confrontations, perhaps continuing the asinine world of wars.

Now does all this sound just too depressing, is there no optimism one can see in that the immediate future can be better? Currently for some yes, but for the many, one very much doubts it unless there arise a global or national visionary leadership to challenge embedded cultural mores and idiosyncrasies at the root of resistance to change. As one has said before, what does one know about all this and why does one bother with it? It’s nothing to do with one, as one is just a visitor.            

(1) www.theccc.org.uk/tackling-climate-change

(2)  https://farm-energy.extension.org/algae-for-biofuel-production

(3) www.worldometers.info/world-population/world-population-by-year

See: Environmental sustainability trap, August 2017

© Renot

56191654