[Sussex] Putting the World to Rights [Was: Definetly No Linux Thread here]

The ol' tealeg tealeg at member.fsf.org
Sun Jan 12 14:49:00 UTC 2003


Afternoon Steve ;)

On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 12:36:29 +0000
Steve Dobson <steve.dobson at krasnegar.demon.co.uk> wrote:

Lot's of snippage here -  I agree with everything Steve says about
parental responsibility, but I also think it is naive to think that
companies will do what is "right" or "good" without being legally
restrained.  The highest objective of any company (note the word
"company" rather than "business") is to protect and increase the value
of shares in that company and to try to pay dividends upon them - this
is the law of the land, only where a company feels that doing what is
"good" or "right" will result in higher value to the shareholder are
they _allowed_ to give it priority - we as consumers have to convince
companies that fairtrade and fairplay are the best routes to
profitability and growth - as Dar Williams says, "We can play the greed
right into our hands".  Good examples of this:

1. The entire organic/free range food market (whether this is "good" or
not depends on your point of view).

2. Co-op bank - ethics is now a selling point (and a succesful one at
that).

Towards these ends I always buy fairtrade bananas, coffee etc, I
realise this is a luxury of living in wealthy society (to have the
choice) but in some small way it is giving validation to these programs
and helping reduce the explotation of the third world by the first
(which, BTW is _the_ major reason why so many people want to come and
live in England - and if you think that's a purely British problem then
you are listening to much to the British press and ignoring the Europe
wide statistics).

> I don't like your statement on the role of government to protect us.
> To me this implies that you believe that the Government, once elected,
> can impose on us the Laws that it sees fit.  I don't want to give them
> that much power.
>
> I also don't like your ideas about MP's giving up their links to 
> companies.  Stopping MPs from being on boards, consulting, being
> part of trade unions isolate them from the people they represent.
> A government should not lose touch with the people.` This has happened
> to many times.  Thatcher lost it, and went way, way of the deep end
> with the Poll Tax.  I fear that Blair is loosing touch too.

Er, the government is the only elected body we have for creating law -
everything then passes through the house of lords (an unelected body),
all other laws are made in court by trial and precedence - again by
unelected bodies (ultimately the house of lords or one of the European
courts - all unelected) if we rely on anyone to act for us, and
represent _us_ then it is our elected government - right now that
government is more willing to listen to wealthy foreigners like Bill
Gates and Kenneth Thomson than to anyone of us.  When you talk about
being out of touch - I agree - but right now MP's have a conflict of
interests - their own income from association with wealthy people and
companies is often in direct opposition to what is good for the rest of
the people in the country.  Big companies can afford to lobby for their
needs, they do not need privaleged access - we, the people, have that
same right.  Right now Bill Gates has more influence other government IT
policy than the british IT industry does, or than your or I as
individuals - if you don't see something wrong there then I must say I
don't agree.


> Like you I want proportional representation.  I would like to see 
> the parties have an ordered list of members.  The more votes a party
> gets the more people from the list it is allowed to put into
> Parliament.
> 
> Would this give one party and overall majority?  Not from what I 
> remember from watching "Election Night".  We would get a coalition
> government and that, I believe would help keep them honest.

Absolutely agreed!

> I would also like to see more power at the local level.  I don't like
> centralisation, Eastbourne does not have the same problems as 
> Brixton. 

Yes, local matters should be handled locally.  

But I also think that management of the NHS for instance_should_ be
centralised - the amount of money wasted on trust managers etc, is huuge
and a net result of successive governments sold on the lie that all
MBA's put forth, that every organisation is the same and is best run
according to accounting principles and that managers are the answer to
everything.  In the old days on the spot management was given by the
Matrons - that worked, it dealt with the realities of
healthcare(remember that Doctors and especially consultants exist
outside the management structure of the NHS) - now we have accounting
staff in every trust making supply deals and managing staff with no
understanding or qualifcation in Nursing. Surely the NHS can strike a
better deal for the supply of healthcare consumables on a countrywide
scale than they can on a trust by trust basis.

> Likewise some politics make more sense at the super-state level
> (defence for one).  Westminster has to be stripped of much of its
> current power. Some needs to be given to Brussels, a lot has to be
> returned to the councils.  Now that does sound like a better democracy
> to me.

See above - I agree totally.
 
> Okay, we're different; we're educated, we're interested in a wide
> number of issues and we're outspoken on issues we care about.  But the
> general downbeat flavour of your post can lead those less educated
> into thinking that there is nothing they can do.

Not at all.  They have to be actively aware that every time they take
out their wallets they weild just as much power as when they going into
a voting booth.  Things the masses need to learn:

1. If you have an opinion express it - if you keep it to yourself you'll
never change anything.

2. You _must_ vote.  If you don't like any candidates then spoil your
paper - the right to vote is _EVERYTHING_ our society stands for: right
now our government is less representative of the view point of the
masses than Gareth Gates!

3. Debate may seem pointless but debate is the only way to form a
knowledge of the world as it _really_ is - like sound and vision - if
you look with one eye or hear with one ear then you cannot percieve
depth of direction - a point of view is the same.

> I agree with you that a large part of society swallow hock, line and
> sinker the view they read in The Mail or The Sun.  But the writers are
> educated. We can help those writers see things from a different point
> of view.  If we're downbeat, if it looks to those outside that our
> cause it lost.  Why should they take an interest?  

Yes but the editorial of those papers is not controlled by the writers,
they are instruments for their owners excercised by their mad-dog
editors.  I've twice been to dinner with one P. Morgan (editor of the
M/rr0r) as he is a member of Newick cricket club (as our my parents in
law).  If you think he is an intellegent, reasonable man then you are
speaking from a position of naivity - his politics are in line with
those of Henry VIII, his treatement of women is about the same and
frankly their is strong evidence that he uses the paper as an instrument
for his own personal gain (just ask the FSA).

> I believe that having a positive attitude helps; that one person can
> make a difference.  By not just finding fault, but trying to find ways
> to correct the situation this helps others to get on board too.  It
> may not be as active a way of changing the world as entering politics,
> but after much though on the subject, over years, I'd rather be part
> of a pressure group than get caught up with a political party.

Again I agree... in the last month I have:

1/ Resigned my position with the W3C concerning their change in stance
towards software patents.

2/ Become a full member of the Free Software Foundation.

3/ Donated to the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

These are (from my point of view) all positive actions I can take to
change the world in ways that I believe will make it a better place.

I hope that if debate of this kind makes people think about these things
then it is also a positive move.

-- 
geoff.teale at claybrook.co.uk 
tealeg at member.fsf.org
      _________________________________ 
     / _______________  ______  ______/\ 
    / /\_____________/ /\____/ /\_____\/ 
   / / / __   __    / / /   / / / 
  / / / / /\ / /\  / / /   / / / 
 / /_/_/ / // /_/_/ / /   / / / 
/_______/ //_______/ /   /_/ / 
\_______\/ \_______\/    \_\/ 

-- 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/sussex/attachments/20030112/17bad452/attachment.pgp 


More information about the Sussex mailing list