Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiA Million Road Deaths Every Year? It's Just the Price of Doing Business
Corporate social responsibility often resembles the adventures of The Good Soldier Svejk. In 1914, about to be conscripted into the Austro-Hungarian army, Svejk puts on his old uniform and a volunteer's buttonhole and, waving his borrowed crutches and shouting "To Belgrade, to Belgrade!", has his landlady push him to the recruiting office in a bath chair. Jaroslav Hasek's marvellous creation is lauded by the newspapers for his extraordinary patriotism.
By this means Svejk attempts to persuade the authorities that he is doing everything he can to get to the front, even if, to his enormous regret, his rheumatism prevents him from having his brains blown out. By noisily volunteering to subject themselves to stricter standards, the corporations try to pre-empt the rules which might otherwise have been imposed on them. This, they hope, will allow them to participate only when and how they see fit.
In Svejk's case it didn't work. His patriotism was rewarded with enemas and emetics until his rheumatism was miraculously cured. The corporations, on the other hand, always seem to persuade the authorities of their undying commitment to the causes they espouse, which ensures that they can enter the war on their own terms. This seems to be the way that the global campaign for road safety is going.
Death and injury on the roads is the world's most neglected public health issue. Almost as many people die in road accidents - 1.2 million a year - as are killed by malaria or tuberculosis. Around 50 million are injured. Some 85% of these accidents take place in developing countries. The poor get hurt much more often than the rich, as they walk or cycle or travel in overloaded buses. The highest death rate is among children walking on the roads.
The annual economic cost to developing countries, in lost productivity alone, is $65-$100bn, roughly the same as the amount they receive in foreign aid. I caught a glimpse of the human cost when I was hospitalised in northern Kenya. Some of the men on the ward had bullet or axe wounds inflicted in tribal wars, others were dying of HIV/Aids, but over half had been smashed up in road accidents. They could not afford good painkillers, and sobbed and screamed through the night. It looked like a scene from the first world war.
The problem is likely to become much worse. By 2020, according to the World Bank, deaths from road accidents are expected to fall by 28% in rich nations but to rise by 83% in poorer ones. By 2030, they will overtake the deaths caused by malaria. But while $1.9bn of foreign aid will be spent on tackling malaria over the next five years, the annual global aid budget for road safety is less than $10m. This issue has been neglected partly because it is something the rich inflict on the poor, and partly because it is widely perceived as an unavoidable price of doing business - as the global transportation industry expands, so must its human costs. Governments are just beginning to wake up to the problem. But the corporations got there first.
In 1999, at the invitation of the World Bank, the motor and oil companies joined something called the Global Road Safety Partnership. It was supposed to bring together "governments and governmental agencies, the private sector and civil society organisations". But its executive committee contains no one from a civil society organisation and only two representatives of government. BP, Total, DaimlerChrysler, General Motors, Michelin and Volvo, however, are all represented.
Professor Ian Roberts at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine compared the prevalence of certain words in the partnership's annual reports to their prevalence in a similar report written by the World Health Organisation. In the partnership's reports, he found a pattern of systematic neglect of pedestrians and cyclists. In the WHO's report, "speed limit" occurred 17 times in every 10,000 words; in the partnership's reports, just once. "Pedestrian" was used 69 times by the WHO, and 15 times by the partnership; "buses" and "cyclists" were mentioned 13 and 32 times respectively by the WHO, and not once by the partnership. "Reclaiming the streets for walking and cycling," he notes, "will not serve the interests of the car makers."
Instead, the Global Road Safety Partnership emphasised better training for drivers and better safety education for children. These measures do not interfere with the commercial interests of the transport industry. Neither, according to peer-reviewed papers Prof Roberts cites, do they work.
The motor industry also appears to dominate the most prominent international body on road safety. Three weeks ago, the racing driver Michael Schumacher wrote a column - quite a good one - for these pages to mark Global Road Safety Week. He described himself as a member of the "independent Commission for Global Road Safety". The commission launched the Make Roads Safe campaign, which is modelled on Make Poverty History. But how "independent" is it?
It was established by the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile Foundation, which is run by motoring and motorsports associations. Of the eight commissioners, one is an executive of General Motors, one runs the Bridgestone Tyre Corporation, one is a trustee of the FIA Foundation, one is chairman of the FIA Foundation and a president of the Automobile Club of Italy and one is Michael Schumacher. The commission's secretary is the director general of the FIA Foundation.
Its report is better than the material published by the Global Road Safety Partnership. There is more emphasis on speed limits, road design and traffic management. But there are some odd gaps and contradictions. It complains that "participation by middle- and low-income countries in the existing international road safety organisations ... is low" and that there is a "lack of ownership" of road safety programmes by the governments and people of developing countries. So why do all its own members come from the G8 nations? The commission prescribes an "action plan" for global road safety, to be run by something called the Global Road Safety Facility. This - surprise, surprise - also turns out to have been launched and partly funded by the FIA Foundation.
Most importantly, it calls for the developing nations to follow the path taken by richer countries in reducing deaths and injuries. But at no point does it mention that much of this reduction was the result of cyclists and pedestrians being driven off the roads. This is a much bigger issue for poor nations - where the great majority of people who use roads do not own cars - than for rich ones. Is this the vision:that the space now used by pedestrians and cyclists and ox carts and rickshaws is surrendered to car drivers? If so, it might reduce fatalities, but it would also represent a classic act of enclosure, through which the rich are able to secure the resources of the poor.
Michael Schumacher is in danger of finding himself in the same position as Bob Geldof - a celebrity who claims to speak for the poor and weak but who is informed and guided by the powerful. We need a global campaign on road safety, but it must belong to the people on whose behalf it acts.
monbiot.com
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
15 Comments so far
Show AllGraeme - please read:
http://www.freepublictransit.org/index.php?pr=Why_Free
Of course nothing is free.... wait a minute ... is anyone charging the oil/auto/coal industry the full price for dumping carbon dioxide into the air? no? hmmm... okay ...
well I guess some things ARE free. But subways are no good because they can't compete with this $10 a gallon subsidy?.... hmmmmm.....[think, think, think]...
I have an idea ... let's all go to
http://www.freepublictransit.org and do a little reading
and a little thinking.
Human priorities have been replaced in America by corporate priorities. The overwhelming influence of these powers, operating at the highest levels of state and national government, has been our national fate for a century or more. When it comes to corrective changes, good ideas will remain simply good ideas unless allowed by corporate interests to be put into practice. One famous example of this phenomenon is California's public transportation system which was, early last century, deliberately subverted and radically diminished by corporations desiring to sell cars and car tires and steel to make cars and oil companies wanting to sell gasoline to car drivers, etc. Now, commuting in L.A. and breathing it's air is, as everyone knows, a daily nightmare and health hazard, taking a staggering toll on lost time, frayed nerves, a wasted non-renewable resource, and a general lessening of the quality of life for many.
This is an example of a large "structural" decision which was made in our society, out of view and out of reach of the common man, of a kind which, once in place, is so difficult to erase or even to attempt to modify without sounding like some wild-eyed radical. And yet these hugely disruptive schemes were invented and visited upon us by a very small group of wild-eyed radicals, corporate radicals, with names like Huntington and Morgan and Rockefeller. And we are living with their radical plans to this day.
While corporatism rules, we are enslaved. Sounds extreme, but it's not. It is quite simply the truth. We are all drowning in the massive vortex of money inundating Washington politics. Not fixing this, is not fixing anything.
More Perfect Union
It seems there is of a part of our constitution that most of us have ignored or forgotten. That is its true purpose. I mean you hear all kinds of stuff about constitutionality. Its almost all unconstitutional unless you comprehend the true reason that it was written in the first place. It is all right there in the first paragraph. You know the "We the People" part. I think this is called the preamble but not being a constitutional scholar I'm not really sure. All I know is it's the first paragraph. It seems to be a
pretty wise piece of verbiage. I will repeat it for those of you who don't remember.
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect
union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America.
I believe this is supposed to be what Americans are all about. This is our purpose. If you really think about it, forming a more perfect union is the most perfect thing we could do.
Now the guys that wrote this thing must have been pretty clever because you notice they didn't say perfect union. They said, "more perfect" knowing that we are all human. We probably are going stay that way for a while, at least until the outer space aliens find us and start breeding Hulians.
You know, it seems that God or Allah or Darwin or however you believe you got here made us less than perfect for a reason. I personally believe this is it. So we could figure out how to form a More Perfect Union. Union, what is that? Isn't that what happens when you get married or is it the Brotherhood of Electrical Workers? Yes it just means people getting together to make things better and better and better. It just seems somehow we forgot that's why we formed a government and tried to give them the power to do that, make things better that is. Better for whom? The rich established well to do? No! What are the first three words?
WE THE PEOPLE!!!
You know, it took this country almost its whole existence and by that I mean its first two hundred years to admit that really everybody is people. That is just who we are supposed to be making things better for, everybody.
So will we ever have a perfect union? No. Can it be more perfect? I think it can be a whole lot more perfect. It seems too many people have given up on that. I believe we still have a long way to go. And I truly believe we will get there.
We must first establish the vision, purpose and desire to get there. That is the same stuff that made them write the constitution in the first place. You see, in spite of all its wisdom, there is a major flaw in our constitution. We must fix it! Or it will be the downfall of true freedom, and really the hope for peace and stability on earth. The fault is, our forefathers did not establish a truly failsafe barrier or "firewall" in today's terms, between the
influence of money or "special Interest" i.e.; corporations over our government, especially over the electoral process.
I do not believe it is possible for politicians to overcome their need for greed. Yes it is human nature. Money and power corrupts faster than the speed of light. We must do it for them. They will not do it for us. Strict verbiage needs to be written into our constitution now to correct and prevent "special interest" from further corrupting our government. We have a huge job ahead correcting the damage it has already done.
What in the world is a perfect union anyway? Well, in my book it's kind of like a perfect world. You know, everybody's happy. I think they call it Utopia. Obviously we aren't going to get there. So back to the magic word, "More" perfect. I think that's supposed to mean, almost everybody's happy. I think even a better way to put it is nobody has to be miserable unless you did something to deserve it. Here is my definition of a more perfect union. It really boils down to three basic elements of basic human need that we as a society owe each other.
1. Affordable quality health care available to everybody whether
they can afford it or not.
2. Affordable quality education for whomever wants to be educated.
3. Affordable quality public transportation to anywhere you need to
go.
The other needs in life should remain under the control of a free market "capitalism" that is closely monitored with some controls "socialism". You see I am all for good capitalism but we must separate the forces of capitalism from our government or it becomes bad capitalism. You can't have good capitalism unless you have good socialism. This is far more important than the separation of church and state. A government should be the servant of people's need and not the servant of corporate greed. Our constitution is supposed to be about serving peoples needs. That is the meaning of the next phrase in the preamble.
Promote the general welfare.
Be careful now. You know that old word "welfare" has gotten a bad rap because somehow our government thought they could create the great society by giving free money away. Duh! Of course it is a failure. It had a negative effect for the same reason that capitalism works. People have to be motivated to feed, clothe, and house themselves. If we just take care of the basic needs that we as a society owe each other. I believe everybody except for the truly disabled will be able to excel. Somehow we have let our societies moral and political obligation to insure the basic needs of society
become stigmatized as if it were a handicap on society. This is pure fallacy. Not taking care of the basic human needs is how the social elites enslave the general populace into subservience. We would all be so much more productive and prosperous if we just took care of the basics.
Many of you whose programmed, knee jerk, auto response system has you going into the socialism = communism = dictatorial society reaction are doing exactly what your heads of government want. Not opening your minds to what an incredibly beautiful life we could have if we wanted it strongly enough, because guess what? Yep you guessed it, they want to keep it all for themselves and their corporate cronies. I believe that a more perfect union will include a blend of political systems. Capitalism will work where it works best as a great motivator for people to want to do great things, and socialism will be used where it works best as the insuring infrastructure enabling all people to do great things.
Establish justice.
Now that's a tough one especially when you consider that it took us almost 200 years to admit that everybody is people. But let us get started. Lets start with make the punishment fit the crime. I'm sorry, I don't have much patience for criminals and I have even less for a justice system that let's them get away with crime.
Our country has just suffered some of the worst crimes in all of history. Millions of people's lively hoods and savings were stolen or swindled from them by corporate executives. Our government has basically given them the OK to do so because the perpetrators knew their risk were slim and certainly they would never risk what a robber would if he pulls off a heist of a Wells Fargo truck for lets say, eighty million dollars.
So what do they do about it? They try to hang it on Martha Stewart.
What a bunch of bull market chips. If she goes to jail than most of our elected officials belong there with her. Including George Bush, Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton and most of our Congress. They create and perpetuate the environment that caused Martha to think her behavior was well shall we say socially acceptable. These people and their corporate enclave stole billions of dollars from much of the populace through deception lies and fraud. If a robber that steals your wallet gets five to ten than these executive criminals should do the rest of their lives at hard labor with all the miseries and abuses that the common criminal gets in prison.
How do they get away with it? Corporate law, civil law and criminal law are so riddled with loopholes, shelters and ambiguities that it makes no sense to any one except corporate lawyers. I believe they just pretend to understand the mess they and our lawmakers have created.
How do you fix it?
1. Executive boards should be held criminally as well as civilly responsible for irresponsible conduct of their companies. The penalties should be equivalent to what other criminals of lesser social status would get.
2. The process by which laws are written should to be changed so that a board of constituent citizens agrees that the laws are in fact understandable and enforceable. Remember many lawyers are trained to and it is their job to bend the truth beyond a reasonable doubt.
Make law so simple that a tenth grade educated person can
understand them. Come on, how hard could it be to compose a law that states, "Any member of a board of directors must give three days notice in the public media before they can sell their own company stock"? If the
stock looses its value it is most likely the boards fault any way. Get rid of the legalese in laws. Do not allow words or concepts to be written into law that are not easily understood by an average person. If you have read many of the laws and statutes of this land you would have to agree they are way to complex and abstract. Legal concepts do not have to be this complicated. If you let lawyers make laws all you are doing is making sure that laws are so complicated that you have to have lawyers to settle your legal problems. And like it or not, we all have legal problems.
3. We could get rid of so much of this corporate deception and greed by converting our tax code to a graduated flat tax system, also a small 3% federal sales tax. Our tax codes are so corrupt and unbalanced they are shameful.
4. We could get rid of much more corruption by cleaning up the legislative process. It is as crooked as a snake. A law should be a law simply stated and not a bill laced with pork and encumbrances that may involve every legislator's interest.
5. Lobbying should consist of no more than a letter of public record. Political platforms should be freely circulated and readily available.
6. Political advertising should be banned. It is deceptive by design. All to often it is nothing but blind smear campaigns paid for with corporate dollars that promote ignorance instead of intelligence.
7. Political platforms, agendas and processes should be required to be carried in all media on a regular and consistent basis. I think a good number is 10% of the copy in newspapers and magazines, and one hour per day for television and radio. The media would not have to go without revenue for this. The advertising would be just as valuable if not more so. An advertiser just could not sponsor a candidate. If we don't have just-worthy lawmakers than we will never have a just society. If they refuse to vote to clean up campaigns and electoral process then vote them out. Let them know this is
mandatory.
8. Keeping the Electoral College system is unjust and stupid. We
now have a President in office who would not be there if we were truly Democratic. This just may be the biggest failure of our "democracy" in history. The truth is we don't live in a democracy we have a hodge-podge of electoral processes, which are archaic, at best and often corrupt. We live under the rule of the Electoral College, which was somebody's conception of a few people being smarter than the mere majority. We have just invaded A country under the guise of enforcing democracy yet we don't have it for ourselves we must fix it. Our government is we the people, by the people and for the people only if our government learns how to count. We all know they have a very hard time doing that.
The whole justice system is such an incredible waste of human resources and talent. It could be ten times more efficient if we wanted it to be. Think about it, most all of those judges lawyers and politicians are making a pretty good living aren't they? They have let our institution of government spin out of control don't get me wrong. There are good lawyers and politicians who are dedicated to a just society. They are just overwhelmed by a government that is corrupt by design. By that I mean our politicians are immediately exposed to corrupt influences as soon as they decide to become a politician because they have to finance the election from sources of influence. And as soon as they get to office they are immediately bombarded with the bribes of corruption from lobbyist and corporate junkets. We all know that these big corporations have yachts, jets and offshore and onshore resorts that constantly entertain our politicians for the specific purpose of influencing them. There is really only one way to stop this. We must have a constitutional amendment, which strictly prohibits and influence peddling by any organization, corporation or individual without complete disclosure. We must have one hundred percent publicly funded elections. Favors or bribes will result with 20 years to life in the same prisons with the mother
stabbers and father rapiers, oh yea and the dope dealers too. How are we going to get politicians to impose this upon themselves?
We must petition, petition, petition, if they do not take the medicine they are out of here. If we don't have just-worthy lawmakers than we will never have a just society. If they refuse to vote to clean up campaigns and
electoral process then vote them out. Let them know this is mandatory.
The next phrase in our words of wisdom is,
Insure domestic tranquility
Now from all the adds I see on TV you've got to figure that this means everyone gets an unlimited supply of Zanex, Oxicontin and Budweiser. And then we ride off into the wilderness in your new Cadillac Escalade listening to Led Zeppelin rocking out Stairway to Heaven. The sad truth is, this is way too many peoples idea of tranquility. This is fantasyland. Hello, wake up everybody. Reality is back down here on earth. The underlying problem here is how and why people become isolated to the point that they drop out of society and start to prey on those that are part of it. The key concept here is human family. Human family! What is that? We really are all brothers and sisters. We have to take care of each other. If you reject that as a concept
then you cannot conceive of a more perfect union, much less be a part of it. It means you don't belong here. Hey it's in the constitution. You can only "insure domestic tranquility" by taking care of each other. We have already tried putting everyone in prison.
The truth is our society rejects people on a wholesale basis. There is such a lack of placement and belonging for most people in our society that it is no wonder that so many fall from grace. This is where the human family comes into play. We can fix it but we must fix our government first.
If the success of a society is measured in SUV's yachts and mansions then we are defiantly on the road to success. However this road is paved on the backs of billions of people in misery. And this road is heading this planet towards the doom of depletion due to resource squandering and environmental destruction. There are those who try to label people who care about the future of our planet and people as radical. I believe the mental state of "he who dies with the most toys wins" is radical and so grossly irresponsible and destructive that it is no wonder the rest of the world is starting to hate America.
What do you suppose they meant, "Insure domestic tranquility"? I think it means having no fear of mistreatment or abuse by your fellow citizens or institutions, particularly government institutions. One of the most serious threats to domestic tranquility is violent crime. The problem is what is a serious crime in one person's eyes may not be in another. The obvious key here is violence or the threat of violence. Drug dealing crimes are not in
this category unless they involve violence. I am sorry, Rush Limbaugh fans; just putting the word prescription in front of your illegal Oxicontin purchase doesn't make his drug crime any different than purchasing heroin or crack. If an illegal drug dealer should be in prison for many years than so should Mr. Rush (to judgment). I believe if you do the numbers, heroin and crack dealers probably cause less misery and kill fewer people than the American
pharmaceutical companies with there conspiracy with the US government to extort billions from the American public. I am not saying drug dealers are good at all. I just believe it would be far easier to make the heroin and crack problem go away compared to what it would take to transform the pharmaceutical companies from an institution of greed to one of compassion. They are no better than the Columbian drug cartel.
The problem is that we as a society have let the purveyors of our society convince us that happiness and success is owning four huge vehicles and a ten thousand square foot mansion and a beach house carved into the dunes right on the beach and you don't have to associate with anyone out side of your little social circle and family. They call this "Family values". It is morally, politically, and socially irresponsible. And you know what? I really don't think
from my experience, these people are not any happier than those of a more normal existence. And if normal people didn't have to worry about health care, education and transportation really almost everybody would be very happy. And remember, that is what "We The People" are constitutionally mandated to do, be happy. Well maybe it's not a mandate but I'm sure that's what they had in mind when they were drafting the constitution.
Of course they have your next response under control. How could we afford it? "We would have nothing left after taxes"! My belief is we could have all three of the basic needs I have suggested for less then we are paying now. And still have enough money left over to defend us from our enemies and police our communities. How could that be?
Well let's break down what you are getting for all you are spending now. If you really think about it, I believe you will see.
Health Care
I believe 9 out of every 10 health care dollars does not exactly go to health care. Instead it goes to Insurance companies, lawyers, corporate executives and shareholders, pharmaceutical companies and of course government waste. Oh and if you have to refinance your house to pay for a medical procedure than you have to include the financial institutions. And then there are some of the doctors that think that their services are worth several hundred times what the average person makes. If you eliminate all of this and allow true competition amongst doctors instead of letting the American Medical Association dictate how many doctors there can be, make sure that
every doctor's medical performance history is in public record so people know to avoid the one who leaves a scalpel in your abdomen. If they stop charging three dollars for a Band Aid to make the hospital's profit-loss statement please the shareholders then I believe health care would be affordable for everyone. Our health care system like our government seems to be completely infected with abuse and corruption. The average doctor is not responsible for the mess. It is the influence of special interest
and corporations over our government.
When a Mindless thug invades your house and sticks a gun to your head and steals your valuables and then probably kills you. Outta here! If your judgment became so bad that this is OK then you are not a part of the human family. There should be no tolerance of violent criminals in our society. But to me our health care system is just as evil. Every day thousands of people in this country face a conspiracy of another of the worst crimes in United States history. It probably kills as many people every day as the World Trade Center tragedy. Every day thousands of people are told, "your money or your life" by the American health care industry. I just
have a hard time remaining tranquil when I think of how many millionaires I have to support if my son or daughter has a serious illness while I will certainly be doomed for financial collapse. It is a genuine fear for many of us far worse than terrorism.
I believe we could have better quality health care for one tenth of what we are paying now.
I have lived in a small third world country where we had two children. Our hospital bill for having a baby with a two nights stay in the hospital was $305 dollars in 1995. This included a nurse coming out to our house every two weeks for up to three months to make sure that everyone was doing OK, Mother and child. To me this was beautiful. Emergency room visits were $35. The doctors and nurses actually seemed to care instead of acting like they were part of a big money making machine. There was very little subsidy from the government. Our taxes and social security payments were far less
than here in the U.S.
Why can't we have such care here? Because our government allows them
to put the healthcare gun to your head and say "your money or your life". Because our doctors are afraid of being sued instead of caring about what is best for you. They can only do what the insurance company will pay for, and because they are to busy looking after their bottom line instead of your health. We have the worst health care system in the civilized world, unless you are rich. I believe the World Health Organization ranked us thirty-fifth in the world. It is shameful!
Wake up people! Vote them out!
Capitalistic health care is an oxymoron. It is a breeding ground for
greed and corruption. We have proven that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
How can we fix it?
1. Form a nonprofit health insurance program that everybody participates in and contributes to according to his or her wealth? In towns where there
is no public hospital, nationalize the health care services. You can't let health care be under total control of a corporate entity.
2. Establish true free market access to health care. Make public record the success rate and failure rate of the doctor's different procedures. Don't restrict access to medical schools. Make the doctors grades and performance public record. After all is that not what you are paying for?
3. Create a medical rating system for doctors and medical facilities that include actual patients feedback along with a professional review panel. Make this public information
Again, for the most part doctors and health care workers are not to blame here. I believe most of them make a fair wage and are dedicated to your health. But then there are those doctors who think they are worth over five thousand dollars an hour. And after all what is your life worth?
Education
This education thing is s no brainer. College tuitions are out of sight for the average person. Education should be based on ones ability to perform not on ones ability to pay.
You see, I believe the dumber they can keep the majority of people the less likely that we can break their grip on us. Yes this is their strategy. Please prove me wrong. I know that sounds extreme but that is exactly what is happening. Yes we can afford to educate everybody who wants an education. Probably for less than we are paying now if you add the cost of the extra police, prisons and crime together on top of the schools. Many poor countries have a higher literacy rate than we have.
Most of what we are paying for in our educational system is not education but indoctrination. That means being regimented into class structures that are not conducive to the way your brain wants to absorb information. Many students drop out because they don't want to be indoctrinated. I believe this is human nature. This is why kids start smoking pot. There is this obvious government pressure to get kids to believe that marijuana makes you an instant looser when many of them know their parents smoked pot and hey many of them are successful. The hypocrisy is so obvious and unhealthy. Kids are very much smarter than you give them credit for. Teach your children well.
If we start trying to educate kids to use their God given wisdom instead of trying to program them with fear they will be able to make the judgments in life necessary to survive any destructive temptation life has to offer. If students were allowed to pursue their interest from a much earlier age instead of forced into the rigid class structured system we have now. Students would flourish sooner and achieve more. The result would be fewer dropouts, less poverty, less need for police and prisons.
What is really hopeful for us is the Internet, for those who can afford it. We are rapidly progressing towards being able to educate ourselves. We need to make it available to everyone. All this talk about this free country we live in means almost nothing if you live in ignorance and poverty.
Transportation
The most important part of saving America and the world is providing free public transportation. I believe automobiles, as the means of public transportation was the biggest mistake in judgment humans have made in the history of the world.
Almost all of us have had a love affair with their car. I am not saying that is necessarily bad. I mean a nice ride in the country on a scenic highway can be a real good thing. It can help you realize what a beautiful place we live in. To depend on these behemoths to go to the store to go to work or to do anything with other than recreation or sport is foolish.
How else could we do it? For the price we pay for our cars, and insurance, fuel and taxes for the highways. We could have a very wonderful public transportation system consisting of a light rail system coming by your house every five minuets taking you, and your bicycle if you want, to a neighborhood depot where you could board a light rail system to get to work or the store or the movies or to the beach or to the heavy rail system where you could go anywhere. This would be so incredibly more healthy not only for our environment but for our mental and physical health. And guess what,
even our immune systems would be much healthier if we shared a public transport system.
I believe cars are making us crazy, paranoid, secluded, lazy and aggressive. Do you realize how much of your life is wasted behind the wheel of a vehicle? You really need to think about it. You likely spend eight hours sleeping and eight hours working; you only have eight hours a day left for yourself and your family. If you are entrapped in your car three to four hours per day in rush hour gridlock hating everybody around you for being in your way you are either already nuts or you are probably on Paxil. This vehicle has become a part of you. And this is how you learn to relate to your
fellow man/woman with hate and contempt because they are in your way. You are wasting thirty to forty percent of your usable life where you could be writing a book, working on your laptop, discussing how to fix the world with some really interesting new person you just met on the train or overhead high-speed monorail. Maybe you could be maintaining a very healthy life because you are riding your bicycle to work instead of sucking up exhaust fumes.
Automobiles are an incredible waste of energy, mental health, and resources.
It just totally amazes me that the automobile companies are still trying to sell you a vehicle that gets 10 miles to the gallon instead of one that gets 100 when we all know there is not enough fuel to power them unless we conquer the world and take the rest of the worlds oil supply. It sure seems that is what we are trying to do does it not?
Our Government must think we are all a bunch of fools. I mean there is no way we can sustain our present day energy consumption, yet they are still trying to get us to use more. Our government is foolish and that makes us all fools because we put them there. Do you remember the BTU tax that Bill Clinton proposed? It was a brilliant tax that if it had been approved we would not be facing this energy crisis we are facing now. No, we all would not be paying more in taxes. Most of us would be paying less because we would have learned to conserve. It will always be burnt into my memory the response from the Democratic Senator from Louisiana, "what is a BTU?
I don't even know what a BTU is." Why are we putting Morons like this in office?
We are wasting abusing and destroying our resources so fast that if
we don't stop it now our grandchildren are not going to have anything of value left. I am not saying corporations are all bad but what is very bad about corporations is how many of them have gained the upper hand in controlling your environment to the point that many of you can't even think for yourself. I believe most of us are brainwashed into a state of complete fantasy. The horror is way to many of you just don't care. The reality is not caring will destroy us. How many bumper stickers have you seen "I'm spending my grandchildren's inheritance"?
Automobile use will be catastrophic in the end if we don't start winding it down now. Continuing this behavior is madness. The real meaning of S.U.V is Stupid Urban Vehicle.
Here we are at the next phrase.
Provide for the common defense.
These times are treacherous. Our forefathers had the wisdom to accept that you cannot let government be influenced or controlled by religious influences. History has proven time after time after time again and again. Whenever religion has had control over government, people suffer; people are tortured, maimed and murdered. This has happened since the beginning of recorded history and it is happening right now. I don't care what religion you believe; if you try to control government or your fellow man with your religion you are committing an act against God and humanity. Government is not there to serve anybody's religious agenda it is only there to serve
peoples basic needs. I believe if you really study religious and military history, religion is just a shroud to hide the real reason that wars are fought, to satisfy the appetites of greedy and corrupt rulers and regimes in our case the American corporate-government complex. It is so obvious that our greed for oil got us into this mess in Iraq. Certainly we must be prepared to do battle. More certainly it must be stopped. If your religion or your government is telling you wars have to happen you really need to think hard about why are they telling you this? Certainly it is not for Gods sake.
God is good. Religion is evil.
Our military should only exist to defend us from invasion and no other reason. We have no business trying to control politics around the world. We are insuring our demise by tooting our horn about being the last remaining superpower. It is arrogant, aloof and really not true. It is making the rest of the world hate us. I mean how secure do all these trillions of dollars worth of high-tech military hardware make you feel when all it takes is a flour sack of anthrax to take us all out? We have shown how insensitive and uncaring we can be in Iraq. The whole world is going to turn on us if we don't wise up we must humble ourselves, wake up, and smell the rest of the world's roses. They smell very nice also.
We can convince all people that you don't need to let another person control your thinking; God wants to accept you just as you are. Just connect with him through prayer and meditation. Try to accept the wisdom he is trying to give you. That is why he put you here to exercise your own personal wisdom. Not that of any religious, moral or immoral organization. If there is any hate or rejection of another person, or group of persons in your religious belief or in your soul than there is something besides God influencing you. What is so amazing about the religious institutions that are in control our government now is how hypocritical their message is from the one that their prophets are trying to convey. What happened to love your enemies? What happened to turn the other cheek? What happened to pray for them that despite you? This nation is no longer one nation under God. I don't believe Christ or Muhammad would have any association with today's institutions of religion, which so
flagrantly violate their teachings.
Here is the last wise thought in our preamble.
Secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.
What are the "Blessings of Liberty"? Certainly they are not the confines of the ghetto; certainly they are not being crammed on a super highway in traffic crawling nowhere. I don't even think being glued to the tube watching mindless sitcoms is much of a blessing either.
The Blessings of Liberty are the blessings of nature that God and Mother Nature so wonderfully bestowed upon us. You know, the purple mountains majesty the amber waves of grain from sea to shining sea. The stuff that
makes this planet such a beautiful place to live. He gave us the talent to make it even more beautiful. But instead, because of that one flaw in our constitution, our corporate government complex has created a society of greed. We are squandering and chewing up those blessings like a starving wolf. For those of us who don't know what posterity is. (I had to look it up to be sure) It is your children and your children's children and their children's children and their children's children, how long do you want me to go on? I believe we are not going to make it that long if we don't wake up and wise up. We should be planning on the next thousand years and the thousand years beyond that. At the rate we are using up our resources especially our petroleum reserves, we are going to be a day late and a dollar short of making the train into the future. You can forget about the space ship into the heavens. We could easily be living a life of luxury on one tenth of
the non-renewable resources we are using now. But guess what, they
are making so much money on the cars, oil and electricity they are selling you they are not going to let you conserve. If you don't drive a Stupid Urban Vehicle by now than you are putting your life in greater danger on the highway. Who wants to let their kids get mashed up by a Lincoln Navigator? At least you want to even the odds. Don't you?
I believe the world's gas tank is already beyond half empty. We need
to save the rest of the remaining petroleum to make all the wonderful things you can make from it. Burning petroleum to scoot your butt in a three-ton vehicle to the grocery store or to work is unconstitutional. (Remember that magic word in the last phrase "posterity") It is also very stupid in the grand scheme of things. If you are already driving a Stupid Urban Vehicle you probably don't give a rat's gonad about your great grand children any way.
Notice the phrase that says secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. Not to the People of Iraq, not to the people of Cuba, not to the people of Nicaragua, not to the people of China, Not to any one but ourselves. No I am not advocating selfishness here, I am just saying if we ever get it together. The whole world will follow. Also, in my humble opinion, it makes our attempt to enforce liberty in Iraq Or Cuba or anywhere else
unconstitutional.
I know all of this thinking may sound a bit radical. Really it is not. This is where we would be if our forefathers had the additional wisdom to separate the influence of money ("Special Interest") from government. Our future would be secure. And I believe we would have led the world to real peace and prosperity by now.
Automobile, Oil, Insurance, Healthcare, Media, Pharmaceutical, financial and religious Industries run our government now. We must fix it. We need a constitutional amendment that results in extreme measures to separate the special interest lobbying cartel from influencing our government. I have explained a few ways we can start to turn things around. I also propose we start a political organization Called
S.A.F.E.
Or
Save America For Everyone.
Maybe we could form a political party. But I think it is more important that you let every politician know we are not going to accept this rampant ignorance parading itself as our government any more. They must endorse the S.A.F.E. doctrine or they are out of here.
I believe this vision of the future is the S.A.F.E and sure way to provide real happiness and continued prosperity for future generations, "our posterity". It is our moral, spiritual and constitutional obligation to fulfill this vision.
This planet is awesome and beautiful. It just maybe the most awesome
and beautiful place in the universe. I Think God planned it that way for us. If there is a Heaven and I believe there is. I am certain the real powers that be up there has no use for you if you can't take care of the place they gave you to practice in.
It's clear isn't it? There are too many people and they are literally running over each other. That is not so much a corporate or government problem as a human problem. What is the purpose of all these people? Don't answer right away. Think about it.
Public transit actually works very well, in Europe. It only doesn't work in North America because it is vastly underfunded here and because we have been culturally conditioned for decades to view public transportation as inferior, and to associate it with poor people. Cities over here also aren't designed with effective public transit in mind. This can and should change.
I'm not sure if completely free public transit is the solution, but cheap, effective and abundant public transit would certainly be a good idea. People already pay for private transit, whether they use it or not; they may as well pay into something the great many would benefit from, which like other public systems (health care, social security) would be far more efficient than private transit, which should be heavily taxed to pay for the public version.
Free Public Transportation. People serving people.
Private cars and trucks is transport where the vast majority pays the cost for the vast minority.
It costs the American taxpayer about $60.00 a barrel for every imported barrel of oil.
buffalo_ken,
You have been posting the link to free public transit in response to many articles. This is not the answer to anything. First of all it is not free. There are costs and those who consume the product or service should pay the cost. All of the costs. Those who use non-public transit should also pay *all* of the associated costs. Many of the ills of world are caused by the transference of costs from those who consume a product or service to society in general. The personal automobile and electric power plants are by far the two worst examples of this.
If the current systems of public transit worked, they would not need to be free, they would be able to compete with private transit and win. Private transit options are incredibly inefficient and their are much better options but current public transit systems don't work.
Do a search on personal rapid transit (PRT) or personal automated transit to find systems that have actually been designed to optimize the needs of transporting people and goods. These types of systems, if implemented, will unquestionably win against private transit options AND any current public transit option.
Reclaim the streets, and reclaim the world of human beings for humans. Rather than streets and world being first and foremost for commercial structures given artificial sentience and life. This means corporations, legally taking on 'rights' originally established for humans. Like the right to protection from unfairness, where the interpretation of 'unfairnesses' slowly has evolved to often be defined as criticism of business-practices. Now 'protection' often means not humans being protected from harm caused by machines in some sense, but the machines being protected from being restricted or stopped. And this being so whether it means physical machines like cars, or abstract machines like banks. Or other "money-machines".
With meaning and sentience thus having been conferred on material and abstract structures rather than organic structures – 'meaning' removed from inside humans to outside us – priorities of human societies are turned inside-out. All too literally. Where the activities of societies originally - when humans presumably voluntarily got together to cooperate - was for the benefit of the humans making them up, societies now first serve businesses, firms and corporations, with their moneymaking as the measure of 'meaning'. Only next, secondly are human needs and sense of meaning served. First society (seen as its businesses) must go on, then the individual humans making up this society. That's a view of meaning turned inside out, back to front, upside down, wrong way around.
"People first" is Monbiot's inherent message. Fine. Agreed. That'll happen only when and to the degree that the source of Meaning is seen to reside inside each individual, not coming from or stored anywhere in the consensual world of matter between us humans.
What that Meaning in life then is, and is to be described as between us, always remains for us to continously decide. But that collective deciding on what the meaning is or is to be, is essentially different from accepting a generalized decision that the meaning of our lives resides outside us, in the business-structures that perpetuates one specific form of society – the one where businesses (and a an elite of a few largely self-chosen people running them) decide what the meaning of society and thereby individual life is to be.
Ole Ullern
Reminds me of the good old feudal days when nobility in their massive carriages used to run down peons who got in the way of their matched set of horses.
Drive slowly and carefully.
Drunk drivers kill a lot more people than terrorists every year.
Isn't it ironic that both Bush and Cheney have multiple DUIs?
In his "Empire City", Paul Goodman proposed banning cars all together from city streets. A good idea, far ahead of its time.
It brings to mind whether streets and roads are for vehicles or for people. Maybe a false dichotomy but, in the face of the stats and info in Mr. Monbiot's revealing article, an issue we need to take even more seriously.
Not to mention secret "No Drive Lists" and checkpoints looking for "drivers of interest" and Northstar forming a partnership with the NSA - for our safety, natch.
Here's a solution that might help focus attention: STOP CALLING THEM ACCIDENTS. A tree falls on a car - accident. An incompetent driver who crashes due to said incompetence is not a victim of an "accident." Drunk behind the wheel? Not an accident. On the phone? Watching a DVD? Petting the dog? Not an accident.
Would you get on a plane piloted by someone who received as much training as the average driver?
How about this:
http://www.freepublictransit.org/
Not my idea, but it seems like an awesome idea indeed. Free transport. Yes, this is sensible.
IAH,
buffalo_ken
It would be nice to have rational governments that actually wanted to protect their citizens from death and injury based on a more scientific approach to risk management which would require resources to be prioritized to address the greatest and most probable threats first.
At present, about 50,000 Americans die on the road each year while an average of about 500 die from acts of terrorism on U.S. soil-- about the same number that die from being struck by lightning.
Supposedly, to prevent these 500 Americans from dying in the U.S. each year, our government is happy to send another 1,000 Americans (soldiers) to their deaths in Iraq, an illegal war started by the U.S. that claims the lives of about 200,000 Iraqis each year.
So, let's hope the U.S. government never realizes that traffic fatalities pose a problem a hundred-fold larger than terrorism. They'd probably find a way to address this problem proportionally, by sacrificing 100,000 troops and 20 million foreigners each year-- just to keep us safe.