Tag Archives: facts

Counter Intel

Posted on by
Reply

Image

“I have the gun. I make the ‘pew pew’ noises!”

Gotta love a little Hollywood embellishment once in awhile. But sometimes, the truth might be a little scarier than we’re seriously willing to accept. I’ve been on, off, and on either side of the fence when it comes to various activist issues, truth movements and conspiracy theories so many times that I’m guilty of being a blatantly self-denying, genuinely/falsely-enlightened, band-wagoning truther/sheople poster child if ever there was one, depending on your perspective, more times than I care to admit.

What I feel I have is an open mind. What I’m not sure I have is a proper gauge for what is actually factual information, and what is well-designed propaganda. What I want to briefly discuss, while I still have the drive to do so, is the matter of Fukushima. More specifically, the media’s handling of information coming out of Fukushima.

There are dozens upon dozens of self-proclaimed independent news outlets one can readily stumble upon all over the interwebs which claim to have information which is being spun and twisted — at best — or even withheld and straight up omitted — at worst — from public reports presented by just about every major mass media network out there. The mantra is the same everywhere you look: mass media is all controlled by interest groups pursuing agendas with zero obligation to actually provide the public with credible, factual information of genuine concern to them. They exist purely for the perpetuation of… whatever it is that they’re supposedly perpetuating.

I’m not explicitly stating my thoughts on “who’s right” one way or another here. Not that I don’t have my opinions, it’s just that, as far as I’m concerned, the issue is far bigger than a simple black and white breakdown analysis could ever accurately describe. What I will say is that there is definitely something going on. One way to see it for yourself is to simply do a google search for the term “Fukushima News”, and specify search hits from only within the past 30 days. Scroll down and peruse the first 3 or 4 pages. Take note of the number of well-recognized, traditional news networks sites you see providing any relevant reports. Scan a few of them. Note the general tone of the topics covered.

Now, contrast that with almost any reports pertaining to Fukushima in the last 30 days presented by sources you might consider to be less-traditional. Maybe they claim to be independent. Maybe they claim to be truth-seeking. Maybe you just haven’t heard of the given sites in question. Whatever the case, scan over just about any Fukushima-related report from the past 30 days they have provided an abundance of, and again notice general tone of the topics covered.

Specifically, notice the COMPLETE LACK of any comparison whatsoever.

I have nothing further to say. I’m still trying to get a sense of what I, personally, make of this severe discrepancy. I would, however, like to open the topic up for discussion. I’m not interested in opinionated rants, but if anyone else has been noticing this trend and has some well thought out, well, thoughts on the matter that they’d be willing to share, I’d like to hear them.

Vested Interest

Posted on by
Reply

Systems can be fragile, only working under ideal conditions. Other times, they can be robust, designed to work even under inhospitable conditions. A particularly robust system can have the quality of being biased towards self-preservation. Not a bad thing in and of itself.

Problems arise when a system that includes the input of intelligent designers (as might be the case with computer systems and technical engineers) has a morally-irresponsible bottom line.

Many systems, however, are completely incapable of being personal. And good thing, too! Can you imagine if a hurricane was fully aware of the impact it was having on human life and local ecosystems? If they were aware and could do something about it yet elect not to, then they’re more than just destructive forces, they would be evil entities. If they’re aware of their impacts but can’t change anything, assuming they would if they could, then they come away from the experience carrying extreme guilt. Considering how unpreventable they are, extending said extreme weather system’s sensitivity to such a degree would only torture the poor cyclone with guilt and self-loathing (if it were biased to favour the well-being of living beings. There’s nothing saying that that must be the case). All for what? It’s not like it can do anything but follow the course of events as they unfold. A system like that isn’t designed to make it’s own decisions and direct it’s own actions (as far as I am aware. Correct me if I’m wrong). It would appear that such systems follow the teachings of Chaos to the exclusion of all others.

For other systems, it’s too bad they could not be more sensitive to their impacts. Perhaps there’s plenty of potential for intelligent decision-making, but such capability is poorly exercised. A lot of things that we take for granted come from this second kind of system.

Some systems are so complex, however, that intelligent, decision-making stages are too far removed from other stages, ones where, say, consequences are experienced, and where feedback is imprecise at the best of times.

So, too many times, intelligent decision-makers are not even aware that systems they’ve put in place may be causing more harm than good. The focus is in the wrong place (profit, 9 times out of 10). In the pursuit of misguided goals, we make barbaric choices. We’re quick to dismiss ethical concerns we’re confronted with, justifying our actions, minimizing our faults, shifting the focus on ‘greater evils’, twisting the facts, and basically doing anything and everything we can to cocoon ourselves from the negative realities of events we’re directly or indirectly responsible for setting into motion.

If there’s money to be had, we’ll engage and indulge in all manner or inexcusable behaviour, with no more regard for human, animal, plant, or any other natural creation’s inherent dignity than we can get away with neglecting (and even abusing) in the court of law.

And even then, with enough money on our side, it’s perhaps easier to pay the wrong people in the right places off than actually grow a sense of real responsibility and start making some genuinely good decisions. It’s more profitable to keep existing systems in place, and improve them only towards widening said profit margins than to do just about anything and everything else within our power to influence and control.

When we have these kinds of deeply vested interests, we will go so far as to destroy the pioneering spirits of entrepreneuring individuals, people with dreams of changing the status quo for the better, and keen vision for how to do so. [edit: while there’s an incredible number of awesome humans with commendable values, unless or until the kind of humans I have talking about (the kind who exploit anything and everything out of greed) are dealt with, I don’t see good odds of being allowed outside this universe (and go any other place, like Drendast where universes intersect)]

It doesn’t matter who we are. We all need to take a good hard look inside every once in a while and, with as little bias in our own favour as we humanly can (never a perfect check and balance, but it’s better than nothing), admit to ourselves what patterns of behaviour we have in our lives which contribute towards the perpetuating of systems that, in all seriousness, insult the very core of our beings, ultimately bringing harm to the well being and dignity of ourselves and others here on the only planet we’ve presently got.

Oh, and it never hurts to gain the perspective of others, especially others who can be trusted to be honest. How do we know who those others might be? We can never be sure (another imperfect check and balance), but if the feedback we get from others is ever uncomfortable, odds are it isn’t being candy coated, and that, at least, is never a bad sign.