Why Greta Thunberg Should Be Time’s Person of the Year

[justsit]

Hehe love the part where they say he has tried to present it as 'nothing out of the ordinary'. There is basically entire continent on fire, but nothing out of the ordinary mate. It takes balls I must admit and quite admire that.

Balls + enlightened activity? Great, but IMO, nothing very admirable about balls when combined with ignorance and stupidity.

[mikenz66]

Hehe love the part where they say he has tried to present it as 'nothing out of the ordinary'. There is basically entire continent on fire, but nothing out of the ordinary mate. It takes balls I must admit and quite admire that.

Not that I want to be an apologist for Mr Morrison, but yesterday I showed my Mum this picture of ash from Australia on one of our New Zealand Glaciers (2000 km south east!):

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/118563 ... -bushfires


She's often talked about seeing this sort of thing in the late 40's and early 50's, when she was a keen climber. Her comment was that this was the sort of thing she'd seen back then, but she recalled it as redder than the photo.


Mike

[Könchok Thrinley]

Hehe love the part where they say he has tried to present it as 'nothing out of the ordinary'. There is basically entire continent on fire, but nothing out of the ordinary mate. It takes balls I must admit and quite admire that.

Balls + enlightened activity? Great, but IMO, nothing very admirable about balls when combined with ignorance and stupidity.

Yes, definetly that is why I admire just the balls as I can sometimes barely find the balls to do a single good deed and here he is ...

[Kim O'Hara]

Hehe love the part where they say he has tried to present it as 'nothing out of the ordinary'. There is basically entire continent on fire, but nothing out of the ordinary mate. It takes balls I must admit and quite admire that.

Not that I want to be an apologist for Mr Morrison, but yesterday I showed my Mum this picture of ash from Australia on one of our New Zealand Glaciers (2000 km south east!):
...

She's often talked about seeing this sort of thing in the late 40's and early 50's, when she was a keen climber. Her comment was that this was the sort of thing she'd seen back then, but she recalled it as redder than the photo.


Mike

If that's the case, she may well have been seeing windblown dust from Central Australian deserts rather than windblown ash from our East coast.

I vaguely recall learning that dust from the Sahara makes it all the way across the Atlantic to South America, so the distance from Oz to NZ is no barrier.


Kim

[mikenz66]

If that's the case, she may well have been seeing windblown dust from Central Australian deserts rather than windblown ash from our East coast.

That's possible. Dust from the Gobi desert reaches Japan, apparently.

However, she recalls this being during fires. In the 50s she was in Canberra for a few years, so was quite aware of the fire issues.


Mike

[tkp67]

PROVE the bolded and there is no argument from me. Please establish that all corporations are oligarchies. I would settle with a accurate accounting of the 20 million plus American corporations. If there was but one person per corporation that still isn't a "small" demographic. How many of them are really Oligarchies? How many of them are quantifiablly sociopathic?

All corporations must have at least three officers (even if they are one person): a president, a treasurer, and a secretary. They may or may not have boards of directors. By definition, then, corporations are oligarchic structures. The specifics of how a given corporation may be governed is determined in its bylaws, but in no way are these entities democratic. Unless written into its bylaws, the average employee of a given corporation has no say at all in how that corporation is governed, what kinds of decisions the corporate body makes.

Your promulgation is that I am stating corporations are neutral. I never made such a statement. My accurate description of our reality is that corporations are mental framework created by our own sentient minds. Corporations do not create sentience nor to they command. We do. As individuals and as a collective.

"Corporation" is a name for a specific type of collective. If you admit that collectives can command, then you admit corporations can command.

Of course, we are discussing nothing more than a convention. But this is why we have the term "conventional truth." Unfortunately for your argument, conventions do not bring entities in being. Entities appear, and are then given conventional designations. We also do not create sentience. From the point of view of Buddhadharma, a given stream of consciousness has no start point, no creator. I also stated that corporations were merely legal persons; but as legal persons they are given rights, have agency, and so on. So-called "individuals" are no more immune to deconstructive analysis than any other composite entity— hence the five aggregates, twelve sense bases, and eighteen sense elements.

Here is the simple difficulty for me Malcom. Oligarchic structures an oligarchy does not make, nor do they change the fabric of samsara or our ability to transcend it.

I do not disagree with the observations regarding corporations and the similarities to oligarchies. Importantly they can often be used to reap unfair benefit at the expense of others the environment being the relevant factor here. Yes these are critical points you make.

However the benefits and detriments of both oligarchies and corporations are reflections of human nature as both are true creations of the mind. I say true because they exist only as a construct of human civilization and require humans to function.

There is a fair amount of evidence that even business understands the need for mindfulness, buddhism and greater consideration for humanity. IMHO we are in this process, warts and all. The shape of which our beliefs help shape. In this regard I believe humanity's capacity to engage buddhism to a greater potential in light of these turbulent times.

If corporations and tech companies can use social engineering to steer public behavior it can be challenged through understanding and observation. In this way I think these conversations already have a problem solution potential that lies in our perspective. Can we bring ourselves to task to keep our minds open to such things? I feel to do otherwise is submitting to samsara.

[Malcolm]

Here is the simple difficulty for me Malcom. Oligarchic structures an oligarchy does not make, nor do they change the fabric of samsara or our ability to transcend it.

But that is not what we were talking about. I merely pointed out that the behavior of corporate oligarchies is sociopathic by definition. You decided to debate definitions.

In this way I think these conversations already have a problem solution potential that lies in our perspective.

Simply put, we need to change the laws in order to force corporations to behave for the benefit of sentient beings, and not for the exclusive benefit of their shareholders. This is how corporations used to be structured in the early USA: a given body that wished to form a corporation had to present their business plan to their local community, and then that body was either given a time-limited corporate charter (generally seven years), or denied. At the end of that charter, it came up for review, and either continued or denied, depending on the social benefit or ill that corporation rendered to that community.

[Nemo]

Tk this documentary is excellent about how corporations transcended regulation and began devouring the natural world like a cancer. Limited liability is criminal.

[tkp67]

Here is the simple difficulty for me Malcom. Oligarchic structures an oligarchy does not make, nor do they change the fabric of samsara or our ability to transcend it.

But that is not what we were talking about. I merely pointed out that the behavior of corporate oligarchies is sociopathic by definition. You decided to debate definitions.

In this way I think these conversations already have a problem solution potential that lies in our perspective.

Simply put, we need to change the laws in order to force corporations to behave for the benefit of sentient beings, and not for the exclusive benefit of their shareholders. This is how corporations used to be structured in the early USA: a given body that wished to form a corporation had to present their business plan to their local community, and then that body was either given a time-limited corporate charter (generally seven years), or denied. At the end of that charter, it came up for review, and either continued or denied, depending on the social benefit or ill that corporation rendered to that community.

Here is the conundrum, corporations are legal entities that allow humans to deploy such framework for the benefit or detriment of mankind. Corporations themselves have shaped law in America since the 50's through lobbies to gain such leverage. The law, entities made of it, are simply human constructs that are as impermanent and reflective of human nature and thus the realms are all present. I can list many corporations which are leveraged for good and for the purpose of furthering dharma. This is all reflective of the human conscious. Therein lies the surest solution. Surety that human nature be forced seems a limited approach.

food for thought

https://tricycle.org/trikedaily/opinion ... ti-dharma/

Opinion: Are Corporations Anti-Dharma?

A corporate lawyer and an economist explain why certainty about the greed of corporations should make a Buddhist nervous.

https://tricycle.org/magazine/corporate-takeover/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeslead ... 92d59c710a

Why You Should Be Practicing Buddhism Business

Corporate Takeover

A conversation on Buddhism, corporate power, confrontational tactics, and the future of the world with Rainforest Action Network chairman Jim Gollin

[Vasana]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/03/opin ... hcJYg5wtYo

It appears that this tragedy will not be the desperately needed gamechanger...

Give it a few years. Needs to be multiple converging events and impacts I reckon.

[treehuggingoctopus]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/03/opin ... hcJYg5wtYo

It appears that this tragedy will not be the desperately needed gamechanger...

Give it a few years. Needs to be multiple converging events and impacts I reckon.

I hope you are right.

[Vasana]

The law, entities made of it, are simply human constructs that are as impermanent and reflective of human nature and thus the realms are all present. I can list many corporations which are leveraged for good and for the purpose of furthering dharma. This is all reflective of the human conscious. Therein lies the surest solution. Surety that human nature be forced seems a limited approach.

What you're saying isn't incorrect but to me it comes off slightly naive or overly optimistic. The system and it's constructs are not neutral - they're rigged in favour of wealth, extraction, exploitation and degeneration.. When corporations have so much money and power that they can actively budget and anticipate any fines or penalties for malpractice into their business plans, then you know it's not an even playing feild. When efforts at multi lateral diplomacy ( UN ) cannot even enact legally binding international laws beyond 'soft law' then what good is it hoping in abstract terms that all of this will all change naturally in due course, due to the implicit nature of change. Time constraints and barriers of change need considering.

[tkp67]

The law, entities made of it, are simply human constructs that are as impermanent and reflective of human nature and thus the realms are all present. I can list many corporations which are leveraged for good and for the purpose of furthering dharma. This is all reflective of the human conscious. Therein lies the surest solution. Surety that human nature be forced seems a limited approach.

What you're saying isn't incorrect but to me it comes off slightly naive or overly optimistic. The system and it's constructs are not neutral - they're rigged in favour of wealth, extraction, exploitation and degeneration.. When corporations have so much money and power that they can actively budget and anticipate any fines or penalties for malpractice into their business plans, then you know it's not an even playing feild. When efforts at multi lateral diplomacy ( UN ) cannot even enact legally binding international laws beyond 'soft law' then what good is it hoping in abstract terms that all of this will all change naturally in due course, due to the implicit nature of change. Time constraints and barriers of change need considering.

I certainly understand how you feel in regards to the bold. It would be a lengthy and complex dialog but let me remove the hyperbole and condense it in a small digestible manner.

Climate change threads here have brought little interest regardless of context until little Greta came along and questioned the consciousness of the worlds leaders, both political and business.

Corporations have more influence on law because they have been allowed to run rampant which is why Trumps swamp drain simply is a way to manipulate law for business interests.

This most powerful force now is the stirring of conscious which can actually challenge the human condition itself. The articles I posted share like perspectives from others with reasonable credentials who understand this and see it work in motion.

I am sure it is nice to think saying new laws would fix everything here on dharmawheel but I don't see it causing any change in that regard it just sounds good on paper and puts ownership on the rest of the world. What the world needs (and those articles argue) is awareness.

Buddhism is our wheelhouse so it seems the most relevant vehicle and it does not exist outside of the rest of our lives unless of course we make this a choice.

[ShantiPeace]

Absolutely tkp. Well said.

[Malcolm]

Climate change threads here have brought little interest regardless of context...

That is not true. Half the great vegetarian debate is devoted to the climate impacts of diet and agriculture.

Buddhism is our wheelhouse so it seems the most relevant vehicle and it does not exist outside of the rest of our lives unless of course we make this a choice.

Buddhadharma has never pretended to be a system of political governance. It is a system of personal values. We can operate from those values, but we cannot impose them on others.

[DharmaJunior]

... and if the horse never drinks, we have to resort to beating it with a stick (of truth)

[Nemo]

When it comes to illness treating symptoms will not cure the disease. Lets look at 5 of the world's worst problems and find the root cause.

1. Weapons manufacturers deliberately starting conflict to sell wares.

2. Polluters destroying the climate to continue to make obscene profits while paying for disinformation campaigns and buying politicians.

3. Food treated with poisons that is not nutritious but that produces more calories per acre and hence more profit.

4. Essential medicines out of patent but still increasing in cost by 1000%.

5. People working multiple jobs and being exhausted to the point of depression and barely able to buy basic necessities.

They are all infected by the same thing. Capitalism. If you don't name it you can't cure it. We need something better or a few billion will die. We never really escape feudalism. The Lords and Ladies still owned all the property and never gave up power. Most money now is made by having a pile of money. It eclipses the entire economy of making stuff and providing services. Confronting this alone could pay for the democratic socialist system most of us want. But there is literally a global cabal of oligarchs trying to stop this at every turn and they are very willing to use deadly force to do so.

[Queequeg]

What a dense and interesting talk. Personally I think capitalism is a Gyalpo now. One of the demons of materialism that Padmasambhava warned would possess at least half of the population.

For decades some of my employers murdered anyone who spoke against the demon in dozens of countries. In 1599 it was simply namtok, but I think it is something more now. The ways it protects itself and infects others is disturbingly organic. Being poor is now illegal in many places. Literally walking around without sufficient symbols of the demon on bits of paper can get you beaten and jailed. Capitalism is the thing that fulfills our desires while destroying the environment and eventually us. Textbook Gyalpo behavior.

I agree completely.

What is interesting to me is the way it manifests, not as a romanticist conception of an evil entity which thinks and acts with malicious intent, but rather the opposite. It has all the hallmarks of mind but without the very thing which could make it volitional - in maintaining a consistent view of merely putative objects it gives rise to a viewpoint which can only be held by a metaphysical entity - and by contrast the grounded view is one where such consistency is lost, along with the putative 'reality' which accompanies it.

I don't know if I am completely convinced, but at least in the United States, there is an argument that the ruling WASPS who were once educated in the private schools and liberal arts colleges of the Northeast have basically abdicated both real and moral power in the last two to three generations. Its a shaky argument, but I'll lay out overview as best I can.

1. Basically, the culture of the WASPS with their sort of patrician reserve have been displaced in the leadership of large segments of of the business and finance communities by a more aggressive MBA, profit maximizing ethos. That's not to say it wasn't always there - Carnegie setting Pinkertons on unionizers is as much a part of America as FDR's aristocratic leadership of civic renewal. Bush Sr. was the last hurrah of that patrician class, replaced by the technocrats of the Clinton and Obama administrations. (Reagan and W represent a different base of power - a kind of putative nationalism, which Trump took (arguably in drag only) full populist.)

2. The education that WASPS gave their children at the elite boarding schools and liberal arts colleges was critical in instilling a sort of "Classic" Largesse Noblige, Liberal morality. Students were steeped in Greek and Roman philosophers and historians, and what is now characterized as the Pantheon of Dead White Men. They might still turn into grubby banksters on Wall Street, but at least they had a little shame and endeavored to hide their greed and feint toward higher ideals. It was an education of elites from the perspective of comfortable elites who had the security to be charitable from high. That education is now on one hand looked down on as a waste of time - students should study practical things like STEM and Business. History, Literature, Philosophy - that's for the "betas" who are just leeches on the body of commercial vigor and technological advancement. On another hand, in a good faith effort to address the critiques of its elitism and become more inclusive and representative of the diversity of voices, it has lost that confidence in its basic morality, replaced by critical studies which, in my perhaps biased view, offers little more than a reactionary posture to anything that even sniffs of power.

The world of those WASPS was an illusion - a narrative with all kinds of holes in it - but it was a widely accepted narrative that informed the decision making of several generations of American leadership. In the luxury of the pseudo aristocracy, there was a solid vantage from which to take a more generous, longer term view. I don't think we have any long term thinking prevailing at all in the US. We have a 24 hour news cycle and perpetual political campaigning where every event and issue is a battle for public opinion. It doesn't build out a logical intellectual world view, but at this point is just basically and anything goes popularity contest in which informed opinion is replaced by cultivating a more basic tribal affinity or aversion as the case may be.

Political campaigns are, at least in the freewheeling American style, traumatic experiences. Candidates are getting up their and prodding our insecurities because they've found that is the most effective way to get people to turn out and vote. When people are comfortable, they don't feel compelled to vote. When made to fear that their life is at risk in some manner, they will turn out and vote for the candidate they think will best protect them.

That was a bit of a mind dump.

Any attempt to undermine it is perceived as an attack on the integrity of reality itself - this is perhaps why the debate appears to be happening in backwards land, because in stepping over an invisible boundary we find ourselves literally through the looking glass. The response that, surely as Buddhists we do not advocate for suffering, has become the defence of the gyalpo itself insofar as the very consistency of this entity is dependent upon our energetic investment in this disembodied viewpoint. The very thing that is usually referred to by the term "being grounded" i.e. in reality - is precisely an entirely putative reality which has acquired a life of its own in opposition to any actual viewpoint we could take (unless of course we elected a world leader... now that is dangerous territory!).

This grounded view point you describe - this is basically the same view proposed in the scientific method, isn't it? In fact, we probably could trace it to the development of the scientific method.

[Queequeg]

Yes, but this is kind of the point. It is hard to find an American film or TV show which doesn't have some kind of 'prime mover', even if it is an evil mastermind, there is a fantasy point where it seems that everything must make sense. The basis for every good conspiracy theory, that someone somewhere is pulling the strings... precisely because the alternative, that no such point exists, is inconceivable to us.

Back when the Sopranos and the Wire were THE must watch TV shows, I think it was the creator of the Wire who compared the Wire to a Greek narrative in which no one is in charge but rather you have all sorts of characters moving around the stage, and the Sopranos, which basically took place in Tony Soprano's head, as a Roman narrative - or as you put it, Prime Mover narrative.

I enjoyed both shows, but for me, the Wire is one of the best TV series ever.

[Queequeg]

Sigollavada sutta

I've been looking for that for a while. Could not remember where I had read it.

That is excellent advice.

Thank you.