Propaganda: The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause. Material disseminated by the advocates or opponents of a doctrine or cause. (wordnik.com)
Over on the silent wave, Liana makes a plea not to demonise autism. Get to know us. What makes us different is nothing to fear. Look, I am surrounded by non-autistic people, and while I might never understand their way of seeing the world, I see no reason to be afraid of them, or their […]
Demonizing autism brings in money from parents and loved ones who want to “cure” this terrible “disease”. Fear is a commodity in this world. People and institutions push that fear until rational behavior disappears and witch-hunts begin. The US has been at a tipping point for a long time. Autists are not the only “different” people who become sales pitches for callous institutions and individuals. There is a reason someone invented the “bleach-cure” for autism. Concern about parents or autistic children had nothing to do with it.
It’s OK to think of us as people. It’s more likely that you will destroy me than that I will destroy you.
Killing yourself seems to be one of the great taboos in life. It is perfectly alright to send off young people to kill someone they know nothing about. As long as they do it in another country. Yet they are forbidden to take their own lives if they cannot handle the consequences of those murders. Allowing medical laboratories to test medication on people is fine, but for that lab-“rat” to take their own life is a no-no. We get to take part in sports that may well end up killing the us, yet if that we were to jump off a building to die we would be decried. And the list goes on. Somehow it is worse to be for self-death than it is to accept going to war. Or beating up people for their beliefs and lives. Or abusing family members.
Me. I’m all for people killing themselves. I’m not particularly against people killing other people either. At least not any more than I am against people killing other types of life. Death holds no particular meaning for me. It just is. How life dies is irrelevant once it is gone. I care much more about why people kill themselves or something else.
Looking at the way some people’s lives are, I don’t understand that so few people commit suicide. I realize all sorts of people talk about “it not being worth it”. That type of statement does not make sense. When you are dead you are dead and have no clue what you will or will not miss. Plus some lives are truly shitty. The argument that killing yourself is so much worse for the people around you than other kinds of death is also completely bizarre. That all depends on how their societies have trained them to view death.
Statements that try to tell suicidal people about how they would be missed and how this too shall pass, simply do not understand what how life can be. I have seen some of those lives close up. The last thing I would want to burden a person contemplating suicide with is how they would make me feel. Sure. I would grieve some of those people. But it’s not my choice. It is theirs. Or it should be. If you do choose to kill yourself, at least stay away from bleach. There are better ways to go.
I have no idea if this is an Aspie way of thinking or if I just have more empathy than others. Cause isn’t that what empathy is? Trying to understand and not adding to burdens.
When it comes to maps of the world, I find them to be all about the distribution of power. Power to define who and what goes where on pieces of paper is something people regularly kill other people for. Vivid Maps just posted a picture of the map below. European thinking on who lives where is behind this map that supposedly shows The Distribution of the Human Race.
Sometimes being Aspergers sucks royally. My brain has been in melt-down for months now. Thinking and writing feels like wresting my feet from mud. Coherency is optional.
I know why this situation has come about. It is one that cannot be changed but must be lived with until it resolves itself. That’s the thing with life. Sometimes we are in control and sometimes circumstances control us. As anyone knows who knows anything about Aspergers, predictability is incredibly good. When I have to go through longer periods of unpredictability, melt-down is inevitable.
This is one such period. Blogging has become impossible. I can tell my reviews and articles are impacted, and writing drags me further into the mud. I’m not giving up, but I am giving myself space to come back to some sense of control.
I’m Nigerian, but I’m weirdly qualified to answer this because in 1979 the leaders of my country copied the American system in its entirety, after 8 years of the British system ended in utter chaos!
The American system here already seems on its last legs, what with the North-East burning, the South-East in pseudo revolt and the South-South controlled by pirates. From my viewpoint, its not the system that matters, its the leaders! We’ve tried democracies and dictatorships and all have been generally terrible leaders, with that said, the dictators have been by far effective and its not even close. Lets go back to the Nigerian past.
In the beginning of the 19th century, there were no African countries save Egypt(which was much larger) and Ethiopia, the area presently known as Nigeria could be roughly divided into three power spheres. Most of present day Northern Nigeria+Parts of Chad+Parts of Niger and Parts of Cameroon was the Sokoto Caliphate, the South West of the country+ Togo were dominated by the Yoruba States of Ibadan and Abeokuta, the South-East+ the South South were trading states who understood the problems war brought to trade, however the Aro state were the trading hegemon in the area(think of them as the Nigerian version of Goldie’s Royal Niger Company or the Dutch VOC). This was Nigeria at its most powerful, the closest thing to a democracy in my list, the Aro would be called a “flawed democracy” these days.
The British who eventually controlled the entirety of Nigeria by 1914 were obviously not a democracy and yet most of the systems they introduced; e.g the laws(in parts of Nigeria, things like the Sales of Goods Act and the Criminal Code are still those the British pronounced), the policing system, the lingua-franca, the rail network and old roads are still in use today.
Finally in 1960, we got our taste of democracy and it was a disaster, elections were widely rigged, riots were the order of the day, there wasn’t an agreeable census(still isn’t, we’re probably the only country in the world that estimates our population), corruption became institutionalised and it all culminated in 30 month civil war.
We returned back to the dictatorships and they despite being massively corrupt managed to; centralise power at the Federal centre which on one hand reduced the ability of the constituent units to start another civil war but is also the excuse some use for our underdevelopment, one bloody coup+ civil war later, General Gowon settled down to rule and introduced the driving system we currently use, the currency we currently use, introduced the NYSC. General Obasanjo, hosted the FESTAC, started Operation feed the nation and handed power over to the civilians.
This was the point where we adopted the American system, which gave us the government widely agreed to be either the most or the second most corrupt government in my nation’s history, which considering they have all been corrupt is no mean feat. Fun-Fact, the democracies are all ranked as the top four. I’ll get to why later.
We returned back to the dictatorships, and they managed to change the colour of our currency to the one currently in use, introduce the queuing culture into the country(this was the famous queue or be whipped stance of our current President in his dictator days), completed our Federal Capital, electrified the majority of the country, built the third-mainland bridge in Lagos, built the majority of our airports and express-ways. Also in my country under the dictators, I’m told electricity was better and the government provided water.
We’ve been a democracy now for 16 years and you’re forced to deal with stuff like this:
Those are obviously extremes, but in 16 years of democracy, American style democracy to be specific; our leaders can not point to one single infrastructural or societal achievement. They either take credit for things like “introducing mobile phone-networks into the country” or “renovating existing roads” as great achievements.
In my view, American style democracy has its flaws, and my country’s leaders have exposed it:
American style democracy is highly divisive, frankly America itself is a wonder to watch, divided across many issues and yet all loyal to the country. However here, its different, you see in Nigeria there is no such thing as a government safety net, in your times of trouble it is inevitably your family who rally around you and what is the tribe but an extension of family. It is why campaigns here are simply not voting for the “other”, it gets worse the further North you head with the horrific literacy levels. This of-course works when “your Brother” has the development of the country at heart and not wanting to loot state funds for a house at Hyde park, but so far all leaders have all preferred to loot the country blind.
American style democracy simply cannot work in a country with the illiteracy levels mine has, the illiteracy turns voting into “client-talism”, where you have people voting not for the ideals espoused by the candidate, but for things ranging from Bags of Rice, N10,000 in cash to Smart-phones. I always find it hilarious when Americans complain about money in their politics; first-world problems. In between the cash for vote and the tribal politics, its simply impossible to vote in the right leader.
American style democracy is expensive!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! so expensive in fact that my country currently spends 70% of its budget on recurrent expenditures i.e allowing our useless politicians to leave in style and paying our frankly useless civil service, with debts still having to be paid, this leaves very little for capital expenditures, which is why here we’re grateful for 10 hours of power, lecturers skip classes to handle private businesses, public hospitals are literally hell!!!, basically everything is messed up.
Finally, full democracy itself has so far had a poor record in transforming a country, the countries having the fastest rises from poverty have so far been either dictatorships or “flawed” democracies; flawed democracies are a term which I’ve never understood.
To conclude, many of the respondents to your question don’t know what its like to live in a poor country, the last time the world was poor(the great depression), democracy was nearly wiped out, to them democracy being the obvious best seems a no-brainer. Personally, I’m concerned that we’ve all seemed to settle on this one system and condemned the rest, throughout humanity’s history, it has been a constant experimentation with what forms of leadership is best for that particular area, Athens didn’t impose democracy on Sparta, the European monarchies didn’t impose monarchy on America; somewhere along the line that changed and the world has suffered for it. In my opinion to each their system.
The Chinese dictatorship has been good for China, one only need compare the reception Xi Jinping got from your country to the one my President got where he sneaked into 10 Downing, was kept waiting and went to beg(it was humiliating, personally). American democracy has obviously been good for America, though one could argue it has crossed the line into “flawed” democracy and dictatorships many times in its history.
Igbo democracy was good for the Igbo republics; Constitutional/Absolute monarchy was good for the Oyo; Military republicanism was good for Ibadan, a Theocracy was good for the Sokoto Caliphate.
American and British democracy has however been bad for Nigeria.
I’ll be writing quite a few posts on “the illusion of equality” because it is the topic I think about most of the time. Part of those thought processes is the question of whether or not anything can be done to reduce inequality. Of course, there is. Some opportunities to reduce inequality require changes in regulations, while others can be done by individuals. These two girls have found their own way. Until Dec. 19, you can donate money to worldbuilders.org. But first, check out this enthusiastic video that I just discovered.
“the right of different groups of people to have a similar social position and receive the same treatment”
Photographer: Sally Crane
Photographer: Jerry Wong
Luxembourg City: Christmas & Winter by Europe Video Productions
Photographer: Chantelle D’mello
An aerial view of Doha, capital of the State of Qatar. Photo-credit: Royal Dutch Shell Media Library
Photographer: JeCCo on Wikimedia Commons
Photographer: Martin Garrido
13 Cove Grove designed Aamer Architects
Photographer: Shawn Baldwin for The New York Times
Except for the fact that people are born and die, there is no equality in this world. People highest on the human pyramid stand firmly on the bodies of those below, keeping them in their place. Any perceived threat to their position, is stomped out as soon as it is revealed. Organizations and countries join in the battle to get to the loftiest position. After all, no one wants to be at the bottom. Do we? The three wealthiest countries in the world, in December 2016, are Quatar, Luxembourg and Singapore.
Qatar is the richest country in the world. Their borders are shared with the Persian Peninsula and Saudi-Arabia. Languages in Qatar are Arabic and Farsi (spoken by Irani descendants). Its area is 11,586 km2, or 4,467.6 sq mi, with a population of about 2,383,705 people (86% who are foreign workers). Qatar’s wealth is mainly due to rich oil- and gas-resources, and that wealth goes to its citizens and toward foreign investments. Qataris do not seem to have poverty. The Qatari do not work at jobs they consider beneath them, something they can afford to do because their living- and education costs are paid for by the state. Yet, Qataris make up only 6% of the work-force. All of this wealth is built upon the backs of South-East Asian domestic and migrant workers who are treated like slaves and Western foreign workers who are treated better.
Luxembourg is a tiny country. Its population is 576,249 and has a mix of French, German and Luxembourgish as official languages. With an area totaling 2,586.4 km2, or 998 sq mi, it is in 172nd place in country-size. It is surrounded by Germany, France and Belgium and has been gobbled up by one party or the other until the end of WWII. So why so wealthy? With such a small area, it has low infrastructure costs. In addition, military spending is a minimum. The populace is well-educated and well-tended by the government, and unemployment is low. 85 percent of its wealth comes from being a tax haven and having attractive banking regulations draw corporations to set up head quarters there. Another important factor, that contributes to Luxembourg’s status as 2nd wealthiest country, is that 60% of its work-force does not live in Luxembourg. Therefore, that majority does not take money from Luxembourg’s privileged population yet pay taxes to it, adding economic pressure to surrounding countries. Poverty is not at large problem among the population, but there is be relative (compared with) poverty.
The Republic of Singapore comes in third. Singapore’s official languages are English, Malay, Mandarin and Tamil, although English has precedence as teaching and business language. Its area is 719.1 km2, or 278 sq mi, making it smaller than Luxembourg but with a much larger population (5,610,000 people). Singapore is surrounded by the Johore Strait, the Singapore Strait and the Strait of Malacca. One reason for its wealth is location. Singapore is a transportation hub between 123 countries and refines oil on a large scale. New businesses get large tax exemptions. Education is supported by the state up through high school and college and there is some housing assistance. Individuals pay a small tax. However, they must save 20% of their income, savings that go toward housing and retirement, savings that are managed wholly by the State. Wealth inequality is a large problem, a matter Singapore is trying to address by collecting data on income differences and types of poverty experienced by its populace.
Both Qatar and Luxembourg are parasitic countries. Both siphon work-force from other countries, keeping benefits to themselves while leaving their workers without access to state funds. Unless they are over a certain wage-bracket, Singapore’s workers are poor in practical terms, yet that poverty is not necessarily revealed on statistics, the same kind of statistics that sugar-coat actual conditions of workers in Qatar and Luxembourg. Imagine what the poorest countries must be like.
Language is power. Controlling definitions equals being one of the powerful. We use language to normalize oppression. Activists are told they must “go slow” or “be patient” because “change takes time”. Yet, change happens once enough people want it, especially if social media falls in love with a story.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), article 1:
“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”
Equality, to me, means that every intelligent being on this planet should have the same rights as every other intelligent being. For some of us, that means society has to adjust to us; and for others, it means that we have to adjust to society.
The two most basic rights, as I see it, are the rights to have enough food to eat and clean water to drink. “My article IsWater a Human Right addresses how states and corporations work on keeping clean drinking water a luxury product and not a basic human right. Willful pollution of drinking sources happens often and lying about such pollution and paying off politicians to get to keep on polluting is fairly common.
“The Global Hunger Index considers the minimum intake for an adult to be at least 1650 kilocalories consisting of a blend of essential “energy, protein, or essential vitamins and minerals”. (GHI) It doesn’t take a genius to understand that the world is incredibly skewed when it comes to having enough healthy food to be able to contribute to our societies.
“Actual hunger is when you feel weak because of a chronic lack of food, when you’re in pain because your stomach is empty, when you can’t concentrate because your brain doesn’t have enough calories to properly function and what 795m people suffer around the world, every, single, day.” (One)
“The WFP said that families are so short of food that children receiving school meals under the WFP’s emergency programme put part of their serving in a plastic bag to take home.” (AlJazeera)
No state is as hungry as the Central African Republic (CAR). A cycle of killing has become part of life since the Central African Republic Bush War began in 2004. Civilians, particularly women and girls, are violated in every way possible. Villages are destroyed and hundreds of thousands of muslim citizens have fled to neighboring countries (UNHRC). This has brought about lack of farmers and food. To make matters worse, it is suspected that outside funding to the rebels has been and is occurring. UN reports state that these last years of violence have brought about a 70% decrease in food production compared to pre-crisis averages. According to the World Food Programme, more than one million people in CAR face a hunger crisis. Then, there is the other side of the hunger coin. Obesity.
“In 2016, around forty percent of the adults in the world can be classified as overweight. In over a hundred countries across the world, more than half of the adult population is overweight.” (Gazette Review)
So. More than 10% of the population of the world goes hungry all of the time, while around 40% of the world’s adults are overweight or obese. Food waste (ca 25% of world’s food calories) is immense and land is taken from food production and used towards energy production. Outside states fund destabilization of countries for their own gains. The US has been particularly bad in this area ever since the Cold War started between the USSR and the USA/NATO. Corporations who want access to a country’s goods or to stop production of certain items have, as in the civil war in CAR, also been guilty of sponsoring destabilization of nations. Added to all of this comes environmental changes that exasperate already challenging situations.
The answer to ensuring the equal right to enough food and to clean water is simple, but ever so difficult to implement. The only element we cannot control is the environment. Even there we have some tools that lessen damages.
Stop fighting over resources.
Stop food waste.
Grow products that the ground can support.
Prioritize food production over excavating luxury items.
Share and share alike.
It really is that simple. Really. And also that difficult. Sadly, I am too cynical to believe we, as a race, will fight our greed and share privileges. Over and over again, history has proven that we don’t. History continues to do so. You and I need to change our thinking and behavior to model a society where food and water resources are shared equally among the planet’s intelligent beings. We can use the tools (social media, voting, campaigns, lobbying, networking, etc.) available to us to influence politicians and corporations to “get with the game”.