Ruling Power

By Roger Colins

The House of Commons in session

It's always a point of controversy to discuss war, religion, sex or politics. Controversial because these are all very much a personal point of view and disagreeing with a persons belief displays a rather callous disposition and assumes that one person, put simply, claims to know better than the other.

Of course, we don't know any better. The lot of us are crawling around blind just trying to do the best we can, the best way we know how.

A person can't really be judged a lesser being by anyone else because when it comes down to it, any one of us could be right. Dogs have their good and bad points the same as cats but which is overall 'a better pet'? We just can't be sure.

Democracy comes from the ancient Greek word demos 'of the people'. Curiously, communism has a remarkably similar definition being 'owned by the people'.

This being so, one can't help but wonder how the two found themselves in such opposition.

Communism without it's historical application is quite the excellent idea. So is democracy. National socialism works very well and monarchy, should it be genuinely benevolent, would be highly popular. It seems governance has just gotten stuck in history.


Power Play

Perhaps it has something to do with power. The adage goes that absolute power corrupts, absolute. Does it apply?

It would if you include dictatorship but not when these particular instances are designed to spread the attributes of power over a wide area.

Vladimir Putin. President of Russia

Lust for power, then. A person that finds himself in power may only want more.

The limits to their success may only depend on the limits to their morals and should this person discover that he has none, he or she could very well develop a messiah complex.

The concept of democracy differs somewhat from the rest in only one particular and that is corruption.

Any other system has a lot more holes that beg for exploitation. The lustful immoral are drawn in like moths to the flame.

Leaving consensus aside, democracy is still the most corrupt-proof government we have to work with and yet these holes keep cropping up.

Back handers, bribes, quid pro quo and back scratching constitute the epicentre for corruption, especially in a democracy. Politicians are looking for votes and will sell their mothers to appease as much of the electorate as humanly possibly.


By Design

Barack Obama. President of the United States of America

There is also the issue of funding and this is predominant across all government types.

A candidate has to publicise his entry, gain support from his party, present his policies and spread the word.

In order to do this the media is enlisted to help out and the only way to create more publicity than your opponent is to shovel the most amount of money at the media.

Does that mean the candidate willing to impart the most money will win? Certainly seems that way.

Votes are there to give the most practicable forum for opinion. Buying votes if rife in many democratic states globally but it is still down to the individual should the electorate give up his free will for a few pennies more because the practise has become established, part and parcel with how the country decides who gets to take over next.

The very existence of any government's infrastructure including anarchy, shows that there is a vested interest in how things should or should not be done. How things should be done has to lie in the hands of the people, even if it is anarchy.

Hierarchy of representatives from local council all the way up to the cabinet allows a conduit of communication from the people to the person. Representative, is a choice word.


A Civilian Servant

Politician or advocate, leader or reformist, lunatic or genius; when they stand at the front and commence parley that person represents those that gave over the responsibility. There is another name for this station.

David Cameron. Prime Minister of the United Kingdom

A servant.

Should that person digress from such position to express and relay the thoughts, feelings and desires of his or her constituency, they are no longer representative of the people they claim to speak for.

Suggesting that a representative has no personal interest what-so-ever is quite at odds to the allure of power.

Finding a person that has no interest in power to serve as one's representative may seem daunting but there is a final point to be made.

If said person has a proven track record of service to his or her country then they would not refuse the honour, they could not or it would go against all that they have previously sought out and accomplished.

#power #government #ethics

Subliminal Messaging

By Roger Colins

Spot anything other than Ned? Subliminal messaging seeds thoughts and ideas in the back of our heads without our conscious awareness.  Negatives are a prime example of this effect. The brain doesn't hear negatives. If told not to think of a green house, you'll immediately think of one. Most commonly, the trick is used in advertising, marketing and sales. Subliminal messaging is essentially a form of hypnosis as the victim's will is being toyed with. Here's a short example. __________________________________________________________ 'If it were the right price, you'd buy it, wouldn't you?' tag question. No one can answer no, so 'Yes' 'You have the paint range selected personally by you.' customer nods in understanding, not agreement. 'After we send it to the factory you can have it in about three weeks.' nods again 'So, when can we make the appointment?' Close. The salesman has already made you say yes, then, makes you think of something unrelated. This is in order to distract for a moment while you try to connect his first line to the next. You know you said yes but to what, you can't remember any more. There is no connection and he has managed to confuse, just for a second. Lastly, while you're listening and thinking, the salesman jumps you with an assumption, once again cutting off your thought process. You're on the spot, don't want to disappoint the lovely man and just settle for agreeing to the sale. The 'Yes' was the subliminal message and how it works are the connections to it. As far as the top name brands are concerned they just want to remind you that they are still the best. Coca Cola, Nike, Apple all bombard the general public with slogans and labels. Although we will look, we not think about it. The image is just there to reinforce their grip on the market. Subliminal messaging is more subtle. In addition to the logo flashing across a screen, they throw in a clip of your favourite pop music to make it more appealing. This tells you that they have the same taste as you in music even if you don't have the same taste in drinks, trainers or computers. Subliminal messaging can more subtle than even that. I like to think of it as liminal messaging. This trick here is to encourage actively conscious thought on the subject matter. Take 'The Wolf of Wall Street'. Scorsese is well known for cinematic violence and his movies have an attractive quality because of it. He has however done movies without violence but even though they are just as good if not better, they have not done as well at the box office than those with the trademark blood and swearing. More than that, after having walked out of a movie jam packed with more swear words than any other in living memory, can you honestly say you will swear less after having watched it? Monkey see, monkey do and if we are not careful about looking out for the tell tale signs of subliminal messaging then we have no defence against it and soak up every last bit of it. Positives, negatives, blunt and subtle. The news and media are no different. They learnt this trick by sheer accident and now it's used as the gold standard. Instead of trying to cover up a scandal or ignore a humanitarian catastrophe it is simply easier and more effective to report on it and every other to saturate our expectations. If a nuclear bomb were dropped on China, seven nuclear bombs say, there would be world war. Imagine there were no scandalous reports in the current day media and had not been for a number of years. Along comes a nuclear bomb of presidential assassination or phone hacking or sexual assault, there world be the media equivalent to world war. No one would put up with it. As the media is now a soapbox for everyone's worst sins, we put up with it because it appears to be the norm, accept that because it is being reported someone else is going to do something about it and are resolved that it is not our problem. If China were hit with actual, nuclear bombs, I do not believe people would let it slide unless everyone were being hit with them too. Subliminal messaging is clever but not as clever as an on-the-nose-double-blind. It's fun, entertaining and just like a Martin Scorsese movie.

subliminal_messaging hypnotism media

A Trustworthy Government

By Roger Colins

Protestation. Sounds like such a powerful and effective tool for the masses to display disapproval of government policy, at home or abroad. Do they work, protestations? Well, let's a have a look. First of all we have to differentiate regimes. Interesting, how the word regime and government appear to be contiguous. One communist can call the other a regime and that one can call the other a government. Communist, Fascist, Monarchy, Dictatorship, Fundamentalist, Democratic... For argument's sake, let us suppose that it doesn't actually matter. What we are looking for is influence over our own country, influence over another. So, should the general public appear to have a quarry to bring to light over, war or, healthcare or whatever the disputed problem then the most commonly understood action to draw attention seems to be to rally, take to the streets and protest. The government in power, among democratic states at the very least, have to consider re-election. For almost every other government type re-election constitutes avoiding civil war. Civil war. These days, unless the revolutionaries have the full support and backing of a more powerful group of allies than the government they are trying to overthrow (e.g Libya) then they are essentially doomed to failure as the government in power are not stupid and have prepared accordingly with armies, weapons and propaganda. For a democracy nearing a general election there is however a different position to consider. To be re-elected they will estimate the viability of the discontent of the particular protesters in question, if they represent a large enough demographic base of the population, which decisions regarding their discontent will or will not change their voting decision in the election and lastly, quite literally last, if the protesters actually have a legitimate point and whether or not modification of the policy benefits the government, re-election chances and the country as a whole. What if, there were a way to present this argument to government without having to take all of these steps. Say, an established government department dedicated to proposals by discontented citizens? Maybe your government has one already. Well, what you would have is a line of communication. People could actively take part in the decisions of their country without the uncertainty, the distrust, the anxiety attached to protests from all quarters. It would certainly sound a lot more civilized. It would even work in non democratic states. People could contact their government representive with suggestions, ideas, changes and even praise and support about policies that the people agree with. This would be mutually beneficial for the government as well. The ministers or kings would be able to see at a glance how well they are doing and make the necessary changes to their legislation or laws to appease, stimulate or perhaps even reward. Protests carry with them a certain amount of stigma suggesting that the people of the country are unhappy with their choice of representative, unhappy with their nation, unhappy to be, who they are or who they have become. Shouting and screaming and painting huge banners with slogans in red ink and blocking public highways for certain, draws attention but does it really have the desired effect? If the desired effect is for the government representitives to order police to disperse the protesters so the majority can get back to work, then the aim has been reached. If the goal is to effectively implement progress, have the government representive bring the problem to government forums and spark proactive discussion among those in power then perhaps, protestation is not the best way forward. When your local convenience shop is out of milk, say you jump up and down, shout and scream at them. What do you think they are going to do? They are humans too, what would you do if in their position? Well, of course they might need to order more milk if all their customers start going to another shop but if it is only one or two customers, it probably isn't a worry and a simply call to the police will solve the problem. ________________________________________________________ Perhaps a polite, well thought out suggestion will do the trick. Or even, think up an idea that would help the shop owner improve his business while at the same time, ordering in some more milk for you. He might not like you very much, in which case whatever you say will probably fall on deaf ears in which case, maybe just, put it in writing and send him a letter?

government protesting complaining