Brave New World – 2011

In 1932, Aldus Huxley published his novel, Brave New World. It looks at a society where people are bred in bottles. They are treated physically and chemically so they belong to one of five classes and will be fulfilled by the role they have been bred for. They are “psychologically conditioned” by having ideas implanted into their brains while sleeping so that they will behave the way they are supposed to according to the mores of their society. Huxley, like many of his contemporaries, saw the industrialization of the world as a major step down a very wrong path.

After living through the second World War, Huxley went back and revisited his famous tome. In 1958, he published Brave New World Revisted. Here he sees that the seeds of our current problems have not only been sown, but are beginning to reap the rewards for those who are rich and powerful. He talks about how corporations and governments are using propaganda to sell the masses (read US!) the bill of goods they would have us buy. The following are some highly relevant quotes from this book so full of foresight.

“In their anti-rational propaganda the enemies of freedom systematically pervert the resources of language in order to wheedle or stampede their victims into thinking, feeling and acting as they, the mind-manipulators, want them to think, feel and act…And yet children are nowhere taught, in any systematic way, to distinguish true from false, or meaningful from meaningless, statements.”  (pgs 130-131)

“Certain educators, for example, disapproved of the teaching of propaganda analysis on the grounds that it would make adolescents unduly cynical. Nor was it welcomed by the military authorities, who were afraid that recruits might start to analyze the utterances of drill sergeants. And then there were the clergymen and the advertisers. The clergymen were against propaganda analysis as tending to undermine belief and diminish churchgoing; the advertisers objected on the grounds that it might undermine brand loyalty and reduce sales….In its present form, the social order depends for its continued existence on the acceptance, without too many embarrassing questions, of the propaganda put forth by those in authority and the propaganda hallowed by the local traditions.”  (pg 132)

“Under the relentless thrust of accelerating over-population and increasing over-organization, and by means of ever more effective methods of mind-manipulation, the democracies will change their nature; the quaint old forms – elections, parliaments, Supreme Courts and all the rest – will remain. The underlying substance will be a new kind of non-violent totalitarianism. All the traditional names, all the hallowed slogans will remain exactly what they were in the good old days. Democracy and freedom will be the theme of every broadcast and editorial – but democracy and freedom in a strictly Pickwickian sense. Meanwhile, the ruling oligarchy and its highly trained elite of soldiers, policemen, thought-manufacturers and mind-manipulators will quietly run the show as they see fit.” (pg 137)

“Or take the right to vote. In principle, it is a great privilege. In practice, as recent (prior to 1958 when this book was written) history has shown, the right to vote, by itself, is no guarantee of liberty. Therefore, if you wish to avoid dictatorship by referendum, break up modern society’s merely functional collectives into self-governing, voluntarily co-operating groups, capable of functioning outside the bureaucratic systems of Big Business and Big Government.”  (pg 141)

“At this point we find ourselves confronted by a very disquieting question: Do we really wish to act upon our knowledge? Does a majority of the population think it worthwhile to take a good deal of trouble, in order to halt and, if possible, reverse the current drift toward totalitarian control of everything?”  (pg 144)

This next quote appears to mark the root cause of why we ended up where we are today:

“In the United States – and America is the prophetic image of the rest of the urban-industrial world as it will be a few years from now – recent public opinion polls have revealed that an actual majority of young people in their teens, the voters of tomorrow, have no faith in democratic institutions, see no objection to the censorship of unpopular ideas, do not believe that government of the people by the people is possible and would be perfectly content, if they can continue to live in the style to which the boom has accustomed them, to be ruled, from above, by an oligarchy of assorted experts. That so many of the well-fed young television-watchers in the world’s most powerful democracy should be so completely indifferent to the idea of self-government, so blankly uninterested in freedom of thought and the right to dissent, is distressing, but not too surprising.” (pg 144)

The question is, should this be the final word on how we are ruled:

”In the end,” says the Grand Inquisitor in Dostoevsky’s parable, “in the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us ‘make us your slaves, but feed us.”

Or should this:

 “Under a scientific dictator (by this Huxley is referring to the science of psychology where it is understood how to influence people to make certain us see only what the overseers want us to see, and we believe it to be true), education will really work – with the result that most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution…Perhaps the forces that now menace freedom are too strong to be resisted for very long. It is still our duty to do whatever we can to resist them.” (pg 147)

Iceland’s On-Going Revolution

For those of us still angry about the financial institutions taxpayer funded bail-out and the on-going worldwide recession directly linked to the fiasco, please read Deena Stryker’s diary page entitled Iceland’s On-going Revolution (see link below).

The Icelanders just said no to paying for the mistakes of the financial institutions; they threw out their government and their constitution, told the international community that they would not allow their citizens to be personally responsible for paying off that debt. Damn the International Monetary Fund and the European Union! Their government, unlike those throughout the rest of the world including our own, got behind its citizens and launched investigations into those responsible for the crisis.

At last, a country with a backbone! Maybe it’s time the US took a leaf out of Iceland’s book on democracy.

To read the entire article, go to http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/01/1001662/-Icelands-On-going-Revolution

ALSO: Don’t Forget: SHALE GAS OUTRAGE, WEDNESDAY SEPT. 7TH NOON. It’s time to make our voices heard. Come out and protest the polluting of our water supply from unconventional gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale. http://shalegasoutrage.org

Sit Up and Take Notice

With all the talk about gas fracking here in the Marcellus Shale, it might be interesting to note that an investment advisory group in the UK has been looking into the carbon emissions problems of fossil fuels and how controlling carbon emissions will impact market investors. The Carbon Tracker Initiative notes that fossil fuel companies continue to list coal, gas and oil reserves as a way to fund further exploration and development. (http://www.carbontracker.org/carbonbubble)

There are two problems with this: First, as noted by Ian Urbina in his excellent New York Times series, gas drilling companies are not above inflating their estimates to help fuel a rise in their stock prices. (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/us/26gas.html?_r=1&ref=ianurbina) No one is sure exactly how much gas is to be found at any particular drilling site but companies are not above painting a rosy picture, paying a small amount for the privilege of destroying the land and then abandoning wells that prove not to be productive.

The second problem is much more curious. According to the Carbon Bubble, a report by the Carbon Tracker Initiative, if governments are to hold global warming to the 2°C that has become the designated upper limit for temperature increases, then 80% of the current total fossil fuel reserves must go unburned. But that’s not why anyone buys stock, to abandon the riches untapped. This leaves investors “exposed to the risk of unburnable carbon” and “investors would be subject to impairment as these assets become stranded”. In other words, if the fossil fuels are not dug up and burned investors lose their money.

So the Carbon Tracker Initiative is suggesting that perhaps it’s time for investors and regulators to respond to this risk. They suggest that investors diversify their portfolios so that they are not so heavily invested in fossil fuel-reliant stocks. And they recommend that regulators require companies to list their fossil fuel reserves and their potential CO₂ emissions based upon those reserves. They would also like to see regulators assess the risk to the markets and do something to prevent the bursting of the carbon bubble from wrecking havoc with the markets.

What exactly regulators can do is not clear and what, if anything, will those who regulate the regulators do. (in the case of the US markets that would be the US Securities and Exchange Commission, in the UK it’s the Financial Services Authority) But remember, it was these same regulators who allowed the markets to crash in 2009 and although the markets might have rebounded, most of the world’s economies have not.

Cheltenham Township Sustainability Committee – Installment 1

This past Wednesday was the first meeting of the combined Cheltenham Township Sustainability Committee. As many of you are aware, I was not expecting much to come out of this committee due to the way Art Haywood, the chairman of the committee, and the rest of the township commissioners set up the two-tiered structure. Also, as many of you know, I had a long talk (or, as my husband who was present says, I talked ‘at’) Hannah Mazzaccaro and Drew Shaw from MCPC who have been hired to facilitate the process. I expressed my concerns regarding the process, how it should begin and how to create a plan with some real meat in it rather than just a piece of fluff the commissioners can wave around and state that they’ve created a sustainability plan with no true substance.

From this first meeting, it would seem that MCPC personnel have been listening, not just to me, but to other members of the community and/or committee who have made their voices heard.

Although the two-tiered committee set-up is still in place, the structure now appears to be such that most of the real work will be done by the general committee which encompasses not only those handpicked by the commissioners, but also, we the great, unwashed masses. And, it turns out that we, the great unwashed, have an amazing amount of expertise in the areas of sustainability to be covered by this committee.

At a guess, I would say there were almost 40 people attending the first meeting. As we went around the table introducing ourselves, an overwhelming number of people announced their expertise in areas such as environmental education, landscape architecture, planning, energy systems, building energy systems and transportation, to name just a few of the occupations given. I couldn’t help but feel just a little bit smug about how educated our township is and how freely we give of our expertise, if only the township, including the school district, would accept our aid.

And although part of the stated mission, according to the Chair and co-chair, is to create a plan with aggressive, achievable goals, I cautioned the committee that we must also look into the future before we take any steps forward. If we don’t know where we want to end up, some steps we take that seem appropriate at first glance, may be highly costly and counterproductive in the long run.

After general introductions, MCPC personnel gave a powerpoint presentation. It covered, in a very general, purposefully vague way, what sustainable is according to others and how some other communities have written their own plans. Obviously, there are models out there, however, no one has yet achieved true sustainability so there is plenty of room for us to create our own vision and build a plan accordingly.

MCPC is also asking us to reach out to other organizations within the community who are working towards sustainability or have a vested interest in the township and the direction it takes. Hopefully, in this way, they will not be marginalizing those groups already doing good work here in Cheltenham Township.

MCPC did appear to want to utilize not only the amazing talents sitting around the table that night, but also to open the process up to genuine community involvement. This, in my opinion, is an incredibly important step. The people at the table are only a small sampling of who abides in our community. By opening the process to suggestions from the entire community, we not only gain an even wider and more diverse selection of ideas, but also the support of the community itself. This is a necessary step in not only acceptance of the overall plan, but in the township’s ability to implement it.

Over the summer, MCPC has student volunteers doing the inventorying of greenhouse gas emissions and energy use in preparation for the committee to begin it’s true work in September of visioning and goal setting. After saying all the right things at this first meeting, I remain optimistic that the process will move forward in a manner we can all be proud up. I will keep you informed as to whether my optimism flags or remains high and the reasons why. Let us hope we will continue on in this positive manner.

Is Love All We Need?

I’ve been thinking a lot about love lately. About why we love and who we love and what the purpose of love is. Love brings two people together. Love makes them want to have children together. And love drives us to do extraordinary things (just look at Harry Potter). Ultimately, love is what tethers us here.

Love is also what drives me to help create a better world. Not so much a love of planet Earth or a love of freedom, but love for my family. Because what I leave behind, I leave for my children.

I know some of you will think of the love of money, how, if we amass enough wealth, we can pass it along to our children. But I don’t believe we can truly love money, or any object money can buy. It’s simple to get to the heart of the matter. Ask yourself, if someone gave you a choice, your money (say you had a tidy sum), or your children, which would you choose? I know what my choice would be.

So if love is truly the driving force for human beings, why have so many of us allowed the lust for money or the things that money can buy, overcome our senses? Shouldn’t we be asking ourselves, what each of us would do for love?

Maybe that’s the premise we should begin every discussion with. Personally, I would like to see how the world would look if every discussion began from a foundation of love. I think the world would be quite a different place than the one we find ourselves in today.

Affordable Healthcare for…

How Libby, Montana, Got Medicare for All

By Kay Tillow

http://my.firedoglake.com/kaytillow/2011/06/15/how-libby-montana-got-medicare-for-all/

In 2009 when the Washington beltway was tied up with the health care reform tussle, Montana Democratic Senator Max Baucus, chairman of the all powerful Senate Finance Committee, said everything was on the table–except for single payer. When doctors, nurses and others rose in his hearing to insist that single payer be included in the debate, Baucus had them arrested. As more stood up, Baucus could be heard on his open microphone saying, “We need more police.”

Yet when Senator Baucus needed a solution to a catastrophic health disaster in Libby, Montana, and surrounding Lincoln County, he turned to the nation’s single payer healthcare system, Medicare, to solve the problem.

Baucus’ problem was caused by a vermiculite mine that had spread deadly airborne asbestos killing hundreds and sickening thousands in Libby and northwest Montana. The W. R. Grace Company that owned the mine denied its connection to the massive levels of mesothelioma and asbestosis and dodged responsibility for this environmental and health disaster. When all law suits and legal avenues failed, Baucus turned to our country’s single payer plan, Medicare.

The single payer plan that Baucus kept off the table is now very much on the table in Libby. Unknown to most of the public, Baucus inserted a section into the health reform bill that covers the suffering people of Libby, Montana, not just the former miners but the whole community—all covered by Medicare.

They don’t have to be 65 years old or more.
They don’t have to wait until 2014 for the state exchanges.
No ten year roll out—it’s immediate.
They don’t have to purchase a plan—this is not a buy-in to Medicare—it’s free.
They don’t have to be disabled for two years before they apply.
They don’t have to go without care for three years until Medicaid expands.
They don’t have to meet income tests.
They don’t have to apply for a subsidy.
They don’t have to pay a fine for failure to buy insurance.
They don’t have to hope that the market will make a plan affordable.
They don’t have to hide their pre-existing conditions.
They don’t have to find a job that provides coverage.

Baucus inserted a clause in the Affordable Care Act to make special arrangements for them in Medicare, and he didn’t wait for any Congressional Budget Office scoring to do it.

Less than two months after the passage of the health reform bill on March 23, 2010, Nancy Berryhill of the Social Security Administration in Denver joined personally in setting up an office in Libby to sign up these newly eligible people. “This is a new thing,” Berryhill told the Missoulian. “No other group like this has ever been selected to receive Medicare.” Berryhill issued a nationwide alert to inform anyone who had lived or stayed in Lincoln County of their eligibility. She opened a storefront in Libby at the old downtown city hall where she signed up 60 people on the first day. She plastered the towns of Whitefish and Eureka with pamphlets explaining the program and added three new staffers to the office in Kalispell.

Berryhill said she did not know how much the care would cost. That kind of analysis was beyond her directive to sign the people up. There have been no reports of competition from the private for-profit Medicare Advantage plans. The sick are not profitable.

No one should begrudge the people of Lincoln County. The mine wastes were used as soil additives, home insulation, and even spread on the running tracks at local schools. Miners brought the carcinogens home on their clothes. The W. R. Grace Company dumped much of the clean up costs onto the federal government. A June 17, 2009, order by the Environmental Protection Agency, the first of its kind, declared Lincoln County a public health disaster. The Libby Medicare provision in the health reform law is based on the area covered by that EPA order.

Baucus gave his reasons to the New York Times for its only story on this unique benefit: “The People of Libby have been poisoned and have been dying for a decade. New residents continue to get sick all the time. Public health tragedies like this could happen in any town in America. We need this type of mechanism to help people when they need it most.”

Health tragedies are happening in every town. Over 51 million have no insurance. Over 45,000 uninsured people die needlessly each year. Employers are cutting coverage and dropping plans. States in economic crisis are slashing both Medicaid and their employees’ plans. Nothing in last year’s reform law will mitigate the skyrocketing costs. Most insurance is threadbare and doesn’t cover. More than 50% of us now go without necessary care. As Baucus said of Medicare, “We need this mechanism to help people when they need it most.” We all need it now.

Bill Clinton recently stated that the U. S. could give coverage to all for one trillion dollars a year less than we now pay if we adopted the system of any other advanced nation. (Unfortunately, he did not say this when it would have mattered most during the 1993 and 2009 health care reform debates.)

Other industrialized countries have found that to cover everyone for less they must remove the profit-making insurance companies. Congressman John Conyers has reintroduced HR 676, the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act, which does exactly that. There are 60 cosponsors. It would cover all medically necessary care for everyone including dental and drugs by cutting out the 30% waste and profits caused by the private insurers.

So as the Ryan Republicans try to destroy Medicare and far too many Democrats use the deficit excuse to suggest cuts in its benefits, let us counter with the Libby prescription to clean up the whole mess. Only a single payer, improved Medicare for All, can save and protect Medicare, rein in the costs, and give us universal coverage.

Medicare will celebrate its 46th birthday on July 30, 2011, and all are invited to join in the festivities. Medicare was passed in 1965 and implemented within less than a year. When we pass HR 676, this single payer bill, we can all be enrolled in the twinkling of an eye.

This fascinating and informative letter has been reposted here by permission of Nurses Professional Organization.

Action Step: Email this to your Congresspersons!

Power Corrupts

What’s occurring in Cheltenham township is symptomatic of what is happening at every level of government, all the way up to the federal level. The voting public’s voices are no longer being heard. Instead, we have a nation run by and for corporate and the wealthiest individuals interests. It seems we can talk and talk and protest and write letters and send emails and make phone calls and still, we barely rise above a whisper to the ears of those who govern us.

This country was founded because those early colonialists were tired of not having their voices heard and counted. They were tired of being ruled by a set of people to which they were not a part. Sadly, we are back in an equivalent situation, only on a far greater scale. Once again, we are being taxed and ruled by a set of people who no longer hear our voices. Corporate personhood was just the latest step in a long series leading us to where we are today, near total disenfranchisement of the majority of this country’s citizens. Is it that inconceivable that the next step will be to allow corporate “persons” the right to vote? And then, how many votes will each corporate person have?

I was reading an article in Vanity Fair written by Joseph Stiglitz. He wrote how there is so much less corruption in our government today and I burst out laughing. Of course there’s less corruption because the Supreme Court very kindly legalized it. How can you call it corruption when it’s legal!

The current problems with our government are self-perpetuating because, as Lord Acton put so succinctly, Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. And, he went on to say, Great men are almost always bad men., and we can add women to that statement today.

The problem is endemic everywhere and at every level. It seems we have reached the point where many of us cannot even sort out what is good and what is right and just from what is not. As an example of this, take a look at so many not-for-profit corporations. Their mission statement always sounds so lofty and good, but then take a look at how much of the money, in the form of donations and publicly funded grants, actually goes in to the work of the mission and how much goes into the pockets of the executives on the board and the administrative staff.

At every level, corruption is endemic. Until we all stand up against the myriad of blows to our personal freedom and democracy, we can only expect things to get worse. If Egypt can do it and Spain and even China, surely there is hope for us in the United States. I just wonder how far we will need to be pushed towards the cliff before we begin to push back.