Greetings,
There have been many complaints by many different people about how the world is being destroyed by the "big" companies destroying the atmosphere and also the ecology of the planet. It is true that this does happen, but I would argue that we need to look behind them to examine who allows them to do this. To be sure it is the politicians who have their hands greased by the money to make sure that laws do not affect them too much, but there are people who need to read these laws and financial policies to make sure that the companies can use them to their advantage, lawyers and accountants.
The companies, big and small, are defended by these two groups of individuals, lawyers defend them from law suits in and out of court, accountants defend them in regards to ensuring that they pay the minimum amount of tax possible. No company went alone to face the taxman, they always went defended by lawyers and accountants, first the accountants, then the lawyers. This is how they get away with paying so little, with assistance from their friendly politician of course who has bent things so that his public bears the brunt of the cost instead.
There has been much talk about renewable energy sources, and "green" energy not to mention "greener" modes of transport. These have been available for decades, but have been bought off and buried by the "big" companies who are addicted to oil. How did this happen? With the assistance of their accountants to buy the small company out of the market first, and then the lawyers to make sure that they would not come back of course.
Several famous cases have proven that if you have the money then there is a lawyer who will find a loophole for you to avoid responsibility for your actions. The same can be said for accountants, if you have the right accountant and pay them enough, there is always a loophole through which that extra lot of earnings can be slipped so that you do not have to pay tax on it. Lawyers always bear the brunt of accusation of low character in their approach.
Lawyers have been called "ambulance chasers" looking for clients from amongst those who are at their most vulnerable and needy, in an injured stated. Their signs claim, "No win, no fee," but only take the case if they know that they will win. Our world has become more and more litigious, 'Weird Al' Yankovic mocks this fact in one of his songs "I'll Sue Ya" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeXQBHLIPcw). Obviously it points out some extreme cases but clearly it makes the point of the litigious nature of the world in general.
We need to sit back and have a look at our world and how much it is controlled by paperwork. It seems that every little decision we make these days needs to be documented or it will come back at us. A small outing becomes a major event because everything needs to be organised and everyone's needs taken into account, "just in case". We need to take control and understand that a mistake is just that, a mistake, no legal ramifications are required. Likewise we need to make the "big" companies pay as much as everyone else does, and also pay for the damage that they have done to the environment. To do this is going to take some ideological and political change.
Cheers,
Henry.
Wednesday, 19 June 2019
Sunday, 2 June 2019
The "Public" Face
Greetings,
The discussion that follows is one which I have briefly touched on previously. In that post it was about how the Internet made us anonymous, or at least had the potential for doing this for us (https://historicalsocialpolitical.blogspot.com/2018/08/internet-connection-cloak-of-anonymity.html). This article is, in a way, an examination of the opposite, the "public" face which is presented, and how this can affect our interactions with other people.
There are two faces which we have, a "public" face which we present to the world, and a "private" face which we keep for our close friends and family. There are similarities between these two faces, but there are often differences as well. We get to choose what parts of ourselves we present to the public sphere, for the most part, and we get to choose what parts we hide, though erosions in privacy are making this more and more difficult. There are clearly places where our "public" face and our "private" face will blur, and how much these blur is most often our choice.
There are people who will automatically have a "public" face that is known by people, these people are what are known today as celebrities. However, anyone who interacts with the public also has a "public" face which will become known and attached to certain things. This may not be on the same scale as these "celebrities" but they will still become known. Hopefully they will become known for the right things.
A person who makes statements and stands with regard to certain things, will become known for these things. The more that they make statements about these things the more that people will have an expectation for them to be of a certain character. A person who makes statements about human rights, gender equality, and other political matters is going to be expected to also be acting according to those same statements, even in their personal life. As soon as they are seen to be "soft" on one area, which relates to another where they have made some grand statement in any way, their credibility will be damaged. Care needs to be taken with what we are seen to be standing for as it can come back to us, the Internet has a long memory.
Some will claim that they have a different personality or face for different interactions due to the nature of those interactions. A person thus may act brashly, arrogantly, with interactions on-line, but then may be friendly and considerate in-person. The problem is that if all people have seen is the former interaction, because they have never met the person in-person this is all that they are going to be known as. You may claim that, "But that was on-line." It was you, it was your interactions. You cannot separate your "face" on-line from your "face" in-person. Things to distance you from your on-line "face" will only work for so long, people will eventually find out, it is better that you treat people on-line how you would in-person.
The "public" face which you present should be one that you would want to meet and interact with. Have consideration for what you are going to put out there, because it is almost guaranteed that if you write something that you are going to regret, it will haunt you for ages afterward. This "public" face should be even a deeper consideration for those who would want to spread information, or attempt to sell their wares of any kind. Good-will can be upset quite severely through the ill-considered interactions of your "public" face with people.
How often have we seen the popularity of politicians and celebrities damaged by ill-considered statements on their parts? The same can happen to us if we are not careful. Consider carefully whether you really want to post that statement before you press the "post" or "send" button. Once it is out there you can't have it back.
Cheers,
Henry.
The discussion that follows is one which I have briefly touched on previously. In that post it was about how the Internet made us anonymous, or at least had the potential for doing this for us (https://historicalsocialpolitical.blogspot.com/2018/08/internet-connection-cloak-of-anonymity.html). This article is, in a way, an examination of the opposite, the "public" face which is presented, and how this can affect our interactions with other people.
There are two faces which we have, a "public" face which we present to the world, and a "private" face which we keep for our close friends and family. There are similarities between these two faces, but there are often differences as well. We get to choose what parts of ourselves we present to the public sphere, for the most part, and we get to choose what parts we hide, though erosions in privacy are making this more and more difficult. There are clearly places where our "public" face and our "private" face will blur, and how much these blur is most often our choice.
There are people who will automatically have a "public" face that is known by people, these people are what are known today as celebrities. However, anyone who interacts with the public also has a "public" face which will become known and attached to certain things. This may not be on the same scale as these "celebrities" but they will still become known. Hopefully they will become known for the right things.
A person who makes statements and stands with regard to certain things, will become known for these things. The more that they make statements about these things the more that people will have an expectation for them to be of a certain character. A person who makes statements about human rights, gender equality, and other political matters is going to be expected to also be acting according to those same statements, even in their personal life. As soon as they are seen to be "soft" on one area, which relates to another where they have made some grand statement in any way, their credibility will be damaged. Care needs to be taken with what we are seen to be standing for as it can come back to us, the Internet has a long memory.
Some will claim that they have a different personality or face for different interactions due to the nature of those interactions. A person thus may act brashly, arrogantly, with interactions on-line, but then may be friendly and considerate in-person. The problem is that if all people have seen is the former interaction, because they have never met the person in-person this is all that they are going to be known as. You may claim that, "But that was on-line." It was you, it was your interactions. You cannot separate your "face" on-line from your "face" in-person. Things to distance you from your on-line "face" will only work for so long, people will eventually find out, it is better that you treat people on-line how you would in-person.
The "public" face which you present should be one that you would want to meet and interact with. Have consideration for what you are going to put out there, because it is almost guaranteed that if you write something that you are going to regret, it will haunt you for ages afterward. This "public" face should be even a deeper consideration for those who would want to spread information, or attempt to sell their wares of any kind. Good-will can be upset quite severely through the ill-considered interactions of your "public" face with people.
How often have we seen the popularity of politicians and celebrities damaged by ill-considered statements on their parts? The same can happen to us if we are not careful. Consider carefully whether you really want to post that statement before you press the "post" or "send" button. Once it is out there you can't have it back.
Cheers,
Henry.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)