John Pilger laments Murdoch fuelled racism in Australia
Australia, like Canada and the United States, has a sordid history of violent racism that to this day reinforces conditions whereby Indigenous Australians “have the shortest life expectancy of any of the world’s 90 indigenous peoples.”
Yet another symptom of the intricate web of power that lurks in the shadows of our darkest histories and our vociferous consumption of the Earth’s waters, minerals, atmosphere and biosphere.
The illegal eavesdropping on famous people by the News of the World is said to be Rupert Murdoch’s Watergate. But is it the crime by which Murdoch ought to be known? In his native land, Australia, Murdoch controls 70 per cent of the capital city press. Australia is the world’s first murdochracy, in which smear by media is power.
The most enduring and insidious Murdoch campaign has been against the Aboriginal people, who were dispossessed by the arrival of the British in the late 18th century and have never been allowed to recover. “Nigger hunts” continued into the 1960s and beyond. The officially-inspired theft of children from Aboriginal families, justified by the racist theories of the eugenics movement, produced those known as the Stolen Generation and in 1997 was identified as genocide. Today, the first Australians have the shortest life expectancy of any of the world’s 90 indigenous peoples. Australia imprisons Aborigines at five times the rate South Africa during the apartheid years. In the state of Western Australia, the figure is eight times the apartheid rate. Read entire article…
Background briefing on Palestine and Israel
Recently, the 63rd anniversary of the Palestinian Nakba was marred by all-too-common IDF violence – 21 killed and more than 200 injured.
Earlier, Israeli PM Netanyahu condemned Palestinian unity between Fatah and Hamas as ‘a tremendous blow to peace and a great victory for terrorism’. Recently released ‘Palestinian Papers‘ show that the Oslo peace process was specifically designed to harm relations between the groups.
Previous to that, Marrickville Council in NSW, sister city to Bethlehem in the West Bank, made headlines by endorsing the Global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israeli apartheid. The Greens Mayor who led the motion to adopt the BDS was viciously smeared by politicians and media, receiving death threats and arguably costing her re-election.
Israel receives more US Aid than all other recipients combined, most of which comes as military aid in contracts for US arms manufacturers. Israel also happens to be the only other nuclear state in the region beside Pakistan. The US regularly vetoes UN resolutions condemning Israel’s violent, illegal occupation of Palestine lands.
And yet, if we are to listen to our leaders and our media, we should not worry too much about the 1400 Palestinians killed in 2008 or those killed in the IDF raid on the aid ship.
Much to discuss @ Cinema Politica Frankston @ B’artiste! Join us on the 25th of May for two films.
Questions a journalist might have asked Julia Gillard had one attended her Osama bin Laden press conference.
Listening to Prime Minister Gillard’s repetitive warmongering after delivering the news of Usamah bin Muhammad bin Awad bin Ladin’s alleged killing, I was hopeful that the questions that followed may have delved into some of the larger issues that surround Australia’s involvement in the war on terror. Sadly, as the state’s stenographers submitted their superficial questions, Gillard would only re-issue her previous sound-bites.
What follows is a series of questions that one might reasonably expect those engaged in ‘journalism’ to have asked. Unfortunately, either the definition of ‘journalist’ has changed, or there were simply none available when Mrs Gillard called her press conference. These questions rely on background information and references within the reasonable field of knowledge of an Australian Prime Minister with troops engaged in two theatres of the war on terror.
—————————————————
First of all Mrs Prime Minister, let us reflect that it is a sad day indeed when the leaders of the West are welcoming the death of any man. Bin Laden’s death has been detached from its historical context and treated as merely an occasion for jingoistic self-congratulation.
I quote here Peter Gabel; ‘pleasure in response to the killing of another [human being] disrespect[s] the sacredness of every human life; it also inherently undermines the moral character and worthiness of those responsible for the death itself.
‘If the United States [and Australia by association] seeks to place itself on a higher moral ground than those who commit immoral acts against our people, we must all conduct ourselves in a way that manifests our empathy and compassion for all of humanity, for every human person, and also manifest our awareness of the tragic distortions in human relations across the globe that still hurl human beings into the horrors of ongoing violence and war.’
Allow me to paraphrase the opening sentences of your statement, with subtle alterations that I’m sure won’t go unnoticed.
George W. Bush ‘declared war on innocent people and’ as yet he has not ‘paid the price for that declaration.’ John Howard, Tony Blair and George W. Bush, among others, ‘were directly responsible for despicable acts of violence against innocent people and they inspired’, encouraged and legalised ‘acts of violence by others.’
The Nuremberg Tribunal found that ‘a war of aggression…is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole’.
How do you respond to allegations that Australia has acted illegally, and in concert with the USA and other allies, committed and continues to commit war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan? Is it simply a realpolitik calculation that we must at all costs maintain our inglorious alliance with the USA? Australians would like to know: do you intend to extend this alliance into any future US confrontation with China?
Mrs Prime Minister, you remember today the loss of 105 Australians killed in attacks by terrorist organisations in the last decade. You suggest that their families would welcome this execution and ‘reflect on the fact that justice has been done’. On Anzac Day we are yearly reminded that the Turkish remember all who were lost in the misguided campaign at Gallipoli. Should we not also be remembering the million Iraqi’s lost to the state terror campaign led by the USA and so eagerly supported by Australia?
In regard to those 105 Australian victims of terror, why are you linking the London bombings with Al Qaeda when there is no evidence for this claim? Why do you mention Mumbai when there is no evidence of Al Qaeda involvement? Nor has there has ever been conclusive evidence of an Al Qaeda link to the Jemaah Islamiyah group who took responsibility for the Bali bombings. Why do you persist in repeating these inflammatory insinuations and deceptions?
Mrs Prime Minister, if the summary execution of one man means that ‘justice has been done’ for the thousands killed in New York, how might Iraqis and Afghanis seek justice for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of their countrymen caused directly by the war crimes of the above mentioned men and the complicity of their respective populations?
Chris Hedges, a former Middle East Bureau Chief for the New York Times has said:
‘I’m also intimately familiar with the collective humiliation that we have imposed on the Muslim world. The expansion of military occupation that took place throughout, in particular the Arab world, following 9/11 – and that this presence of American imperial bases, dotted, not just in Iraq and Afghanistan, but in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Doha – is one that has done more to engender hatred and acts of terror than anything ever orchestrated by Osama bin Laden.’
For the West, the war on terror has led to a bizarre perversion of justice, to ‘the systematic use of assassination, torture, indefinite detention and extraordinary rendition against terror suspects…accompanied by the erection of the scaffolding of a police state in the US itself’, writes Larbi Sadiki on Al Jazeera. Across the globe citizens have sacrificed freedom for security as civil liberties were reduced.
Mrs Prime Minister, if the loss of 3000 innocent lives in New York is to be called ‘terror’, shouldn’t hundreds of thousands of innocent lives lost in the resultant wars in Iraq and Afghanistan also be called ‘terror’? Obama and Osama both ‘shamelessly deploy violence‘. How has it come to pass that terrorism and torture is acceptable when we carry it out, but unacceptable when someone else does?
During your speech and subsequent question time, you mentioned eighteen times either that the threat of terror continues, that Al Qaeda will continue, that the war on terror continues, or that our mission in Afghanistan must continue. Terrorism as a tactic will always be with us, utilised by non-state actors and hegemons alike. It appears that Orwell’s slogan ‘War is Peace’ is the new Western doctrine for the 21st century. What eventuality would precipitate an end to the war on terror? How will we know when the war on terror is over?
There are more than 100,000 troops in the Afghanistan, compared to less than 100 Al Qaeda operatives. In your opinion, Prime Minister, what exactly is the mission in Afghanistan?
The war in Afghanistan and Pakistan is already the longest in US history, a war that 60% of Americans and the same proportion of Australians do not believe to be worth fighting. How much longer will this illegal occupation persist?
There has been much scholarly investigation into the root causes of terrorism. Associate Professor Robert Pape of the University of Chicago suggests the motivation is ‘to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from the territory that the terrorists view as their homeland’.
Bin Laden himself said in 1997, ‘the U.S. wants to occupy our countries, steal our resources, impose agents on us to rule us and then wants us to agree to all this. If we refuse to do so, it says we are terrorists… Wherever we look, we find the U.S. as the leader of terrorism and crime in the world. When Palestinian children throw stones against the Israeli occupation, the U.S. says they are terrorists. Whereas when Israel bombed the United Nations building in Lebanon while it was full of children and women, the U.S. stopped any plan to condemn Israel.’
How do you reconcile this with ongoing Australian support for the continued occupation of Arab lands in Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan and now Libya? Does not the ongoing support for these military adventures expose Australians to an increased risk of ‘terrorist’ attack?
Mrs Prime Minister, you mentioned three times that we should employ ‘enhanced vigilance regarding personal security.’ Are we not creating more ‘bin Ladens’ by continuing to invade and occupy other countries? What actions would you suggest the Australian population undertake to increase their security while your government continues to engage in illegal wars that are known to increase the risk of terrorist attacks?
Would you please explain to the Australian public how exactly the slaughter of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of innocent Iraqis in an illegal occupation of their country, will enhance our nation’s security?
Mrs Prime Minister, thank you for your time.
Climate Change and the impotence of Australia’s leadership
Climate change, an existential threat beyond reasonable doubt, is the foremost concern for humanity in the 21st century. Yet the climate issue is met with inaction, unpardonable time-wasting, utter capitulation to lobbyists and a desperate distortion of the scientific consensus. Our inability to confront climate change reflects the enormity of the task before us and also the dangerous rigidity of our society. Change on the scale needed to even partially avoid the catastrophic consequences of a warming Earth is simply not up for discussion in the media or political arena. This must change.
On the centrality of human influence on the climate
The conservative conclusions of the 2007 Intergovernmental Committee on Climate Change (IPCC) report stated that it was more than 90% likely the observed changes in climate were anthropogenic in origin. Since then, climate scientists have been reporting that almost all previous predictions are understated; observations of changes in sea level, ocean acidity, average temperature and polar defrosting are revealing increases at or beyond the highest rates predicted by the IPCC report. (Australian Collaboration)
We are on track to double the atmospheric concentration of CO2 from pre-industrial levels. Indeed at a current level of around 390ppm we have little chance of stopping the rise and returning to the 350ppm that a majority of scientific opinion believes is near the upper limit for continued human survival. We have observed an increase in global temperature of 1° Celsius and are already committed to much more due to the temperature lagging CO2e concentration.
Recent extreme weather events such as Australia’s floods and the US tornadoes are occurring more frequently and with more devastating results. According to a statement by the Bureau of Meteorology on 28 February 2011, “[w]hilst any one such event cannot be attributed to global climate change, a recent study of extreme weather events across the globe suggests that there has been an increase in the frequency of such events over recent decades, and this trend is consistent with what we expect under global climate change”.
The conservative, economically driven insurance industry understands the reality of data and observations: Munich Re (one of the world’s leading reinsurers) has said the ‘only plausible explanation for the rise in weather-related catastrophes is climate change. The view that weather extremes are more frequent and intense due to global warming coincides with the current state of scientific knowledge.’
Other motivations to change tack – peak oil
Even if you are in the minority that do not agree with the climate scientists, one thing that is harder to deny is the finite nature of Earth’s fossil resources. ABC’s Catalyst program (28/4/11) featured an interview with Dr Fatih Birol, the Chief Economist at the International Energy Agency. In the opinion of his agency, peak oil occurred in 2006. Previously nonsensical adventures like deep water drilling and tar sand extraction are now becoming commonplace – at unfathomable cost to the environment.
As was written in an opinion piece in the Age (‘A world without oil – it’s closer than you think’ 27/4/11), fossil fuels are on the decline. Australia is particularly exposed in this regard, with only around 50% oil self-sufficiency. Putting aside for a moment the timeline, the undeniable reality is that eventually, all energy must be sourced from renewable resources. Taking this line of argument to its conclusion shows that uranium too will eventually run out – leaving the nuclear option a bandaid at best.
Pascal’s Wager for the 21st century
It may help to think of Climate Change a modern day Pascal’s Wager. If we continue with business as usual, we are committing to biological destruction on an unprecedented scale. Regardless of climate change, immeasurable damage will result from our incessant liberation of resources. In the existential crisis that will unfold from burning every last drop of dirty oil, the quality of life on Earth can only decrease.
If we act drastically to bring to an end our infinitely destructive dependence on Earth’s finite resources, we would become a truly advanced human civilisation. Clean air, clean water, fewer wars and a healthier global ecosystem will result. Not to mention the added bonus of averting the potential extinction of homo sapiens.
On the carbon tax and the futility of waiting for government action
The evidence suggests that abrupt, extensive, systemic changes are now necessary to reduce the risk of catastrophic climate alteration. With this in mind, how appropriate is the current debate over a measure that aims at a feeble 5% reduction by 2020? The carbon tax is a dangerous distraction that will serve only to prevent us from acting more appropriately.
A recent Australia Institute paper revealed that industry representatives are making wildly exaggerated claims about the likely impacts of a carbon tax. The measly changes advocated by the Gillard government will barely impact profits, especially compared to the diminishing returns due to the strong Aussie dollar. Of course, it should not surprise us that those paid to maximise profit are simply clamouring for the biggest handout. This does raise the question however of how our government would ever instigate something resembling real action on climate change; indeed it appears fundamentally incapable of introducing the required reforms.
With the burgeoning propensity of industry groups to throw tens of millions at advertising campaigns aimed at changing public policy, we can be sure that no mainstream government will advocate for the abrupt change required. As written at Brave New Climate, ‘the potential for catastrophic impact from anthropogenic climate change is increasing rapidly. Strangely, the official Australian response largely ignores these warnings.’ It does not appear that our leaders are fit to lead us anywhere but where we’re already going.
So where do we want to go?
In a world of finite resources, it is a truism to state that eventually, all our energy must come from renewable sources. Acknowledgement of this reality is crucial to forming policy that has any hope of achieving energy security for Australia. Only by reflecting on this final destination can we hope to find the path. If you want to go to WA for a holiday you don’t start by aiming for Werribee and hoping for the best, you decide to go to Perth and you make the necessary arrangements to get there.
Beyond Zero Emissions, in collaboration with the University of Melbourne Energy Research Institute, recently released their Zero Carbon Australia (ZCA) 100% renewable energy roadmap. Along with similar publications, this important document details the existing, proven renewable technology that could supply Australia’s baseload electricity requirements within ten years. The details may be debated, but even critics agree that the ZCA plan is desirable.
At very least the ZCA proposition puts into discussion the ultimate goal of 100% renewables. It should be completely unacceptable to the Australian public that this idea has no resonance, let alone discussion, in the upper echelons of government.
A chance to Advance Australia
As a nation with a brief (white) history, Australian culture languishes. We struggle to decide if we’re a Monarchist lap-dog or an American Imperialist lap-dog, and continue to sacrifice lives for both.
What would a country that was independent of fossil fuels look like? Do we want this for Australia?
It’s time we found ourselves. Our land abounds in nature’s gifts; renewable energy for all.
Stepping forth onto the world stage with a clear goal, a common purpose, Australians should unite under a pledge to remove carbon from our society. A profound departure from the sycophantic pandering of years gone by, Australia would find its national identity in shrugging off thoughtless pursuit of economic growth, the crack pipe dream of infinite resources and profits. A newborn republic would emerge, a nation free from fossil fuels, an inspiration to the world.
Rooftop irrationality in Santa Cruz
For decades, travelers, surfers, and the houseless, have been trawling the Californian Coast for places to park overnight in their vans, cars, rvs and buses. It has obviously caused some consternation with the residents of the prime locations. One can appreciate and empathise with the concerns of property owners paying back massive mortages who have to wake to their waterfront streets filled with dirty hippies pissing in the bush or drinking cheap wine and feeding themselves as the sun sets. To alleviate these issues most counties pass bylaws and post signs making overnight parking illegal almost everywhere. Of course as a bus-borne vagrant, it would be easier if we could simply park anywhere, but I understand their perspective.
the offending location
In most areas a slow perusal of nearby streets and parks will eventually reveal small areas without signs that can host a van or two overnight. Residential areas are also good if you are arriving under the cover of darkness. We’ve found plenty of lovely spots along this coastline, some clearly legal and others somewhat not. In fact, since leaving BC almost three months ago we have paid for camping less than half a dozen times, and even then only by choosing not to continue the search. So it is still possible to stay for free, but you need some smarts and some awareness of the situation. Of course, some innocent words, an accent and no open containers, noise or funny smoke helps when it’s time to plead ignorance and humbly move on to another locale.
We’ve had one night-time move along order and one early morning knock at the door, but no threats, fines or even official warnings. Both times the officers have been happy to answer my questions as to where we can legally park overnight. The night-time cop even made sure that we weren’t intoxicated before sending us on our way. So I guess there are two obvious pathways to request permission to stay put: “Sorry officer but we’ve been here for a while and I am not confident that I am sober enough to drive.” Or perhaps “Sorry officer but I am just exhausted and I simply had to pull over before I fell asleep at the wheel.” In either case it would be risky for the officer to order you to move on in such a litigious society. The sobriety argument may lead to issues with open containers, or even DUI charges if the officer is in a bad mood – make sure the keys aren’t in the ignition. I digress.
Santa Cruz follows a familiar format; most prime downtown locations are clearly not approved for overnight stays, yet within a few miles there are parks, beaches, random pull-outs and other inconspicuous areas to pull over for a night. We got lucky in SC by finding a downtown open air two storey parking garage that had no ‘no camping’ signage. The meters were offline until morning so we settled in for an uninterrupted sleep nestled in the branches of a tall eucalypt that reached to the top floor. Perfect.
Tuesday, and we’re wandering main street doing some window shopping and poaching interweb and washrooms at starducks. As I wait outside the World Market with Cleo (Ash’s 12 year old yellow lab) a cycle-mounted security guard whom I’d noticed lapping the main drag approached to inform me that there were actually no dogs allowed on Pacific Ave (SC’s main shopping street). Some enquiry revealed that the law had been in place since the 70′s and was there because there were not enough responsible dog owners. Fair enough. I clarified further and moved five metres to the other side of the World Market doorway, which happened to be on a corner. The bylaw only applies to Pacific Ave, so by moving to the side street crisis was averted, the faux bike cop was placated and could continue his patrols. All in all it was a pleasant, if slightly ridiculous, encounter.
Fast forward ten minutes and Ash and I are back at the bus in the same place we’d parked overnight. We’d paid our daily fee and were under the impression we were playing by the rules and set up for our day’s wanderings. As we began preparing our meal, bike cop reappears and informs us that we are unable to remain in our vehicle for more than half an hour – no loitering, he explains, stops people camping in their cars. Ok, no worries, we can live with that, we’ll just finish our lunch and head back out to the street, this time without the dog. Bike cop departs, another amicable, if absurd, affair.
Within five minutes, a parking inspector, no bike this time, arrives to tell us she’s been sent by the owners of the carpark to move us on, as we are not allowed to remain with our vehicle while we make lunch. I explain to the nice lady that we have just had a conversation with bike cop, and he left after we’d agreed to leave – on foot – once our lunch was over. This isn’t good enough for walking lady, and to be fair maybe I was becoming less pleasant to deal with, so she then asserts that we should have paid for two parking spaces as our bus is infringing upon access to another space. In isolation this may have been a fair comment, but in the empty parking lot with a hundred spaces left to fill, she was obviously clutching at straws. In her logic, this means we must leave this instant, or risk a citation. So now we are being asked to forfeit our payment for the day’s parking and leave, bus and all. I ask for a refund in return for departing early, but unsurprisingly she’s not down with that. We inform her that we’ll be finishing our lunch and leaving the bus right where it is for the afternoon, and return inside to the frying bacon and eggs.
Presently, there’s a knock at the door and bike cop is back, asking for the man of the house (not because of some patriarchal prejudice, just because I had been involved predominantly in our earlier discussions). I step outside and bike cop is now on the lady inspector’s side and he’s asserting that we should depart at once. He tells me that we’ve been seen here and he knows that we’ve been at the vehicle for more than half an hour. His Orwellian knowledge notwithstanding, I remind him of our meeting about fifteen minutes ago in regard to the dog bylaw. “Well your girlfriend must have been up here then,” he quickly retorts. No buddy, that’s who I was waiting for out front of the store. “I’m not going to discuss this anymore” he says, “you can leave now or have a citation.” We attempt to explain that we have barely had enough time to fry an egg, but this logic bounces off the impenetrably indoctrinated ego as well.
By and by parking lady returns (after calling her backup – faux bike cop) and Cleo knocks an empty beer can out of the bus at her feet. Aha! They exchange smiles and now we’re getting an open container citation as well. I return inside to grab my bacon and egg roll – the reason this whole messed up situation exists – and concentrate on enjoying it to ease the rising rage. My hands are shaking, fight or flight instincts aroused, heart racing. Argh this is so ridiculous! Wiping egg yolk and barbeque sauce from my face I continued to attempt to reason with bike cop, while walking lady stood aside.
The smirking bastard, S. Stanger I believe, says he wants to discuss it, but the minute I start talking he reverts to his citation threat, making it appear that this consequence was getting closer and closer. His willingness to discuss the situation did not extend to listening to my agreement that we would leave (on foot) when lunch was done. Nor did he like my offer to leave if our parking fee was reimbursed. He continued to state the previously unambiguously disproven reasoning that we had overstayed our 30 minute loitering limit. I asserted that he was flat out lying and that having paid our parking fee we had the right to remain in the parking lot – so long as we played by the rules (which we believed we were).
At the mention of my ‘right’ to remain where I had paid to be, the faux bike cop launched into a legally laughable tirade about how naive I was to think I had rights on this private property. This single speech was the worst reflection of American delusions I have ever heard. “This is America,” he smugged, “you’ve got no civil rights here.” Goodness me. He even reverted to Australia’s prison colony heritage, suggesting it was no wonder I was such a pain in his ass having come from a nation of criminals!
When I enquired as to under whose authority he was harassing us, he said the we worked for the SCPD (SC police Department). A subcontracted security guard to cycle around and maintain the peace. When I continued along this path of enquiry he quickly declined to answer any more questions. It turned out eventually that he actually had no authority really whatesoever, and even had to wait for superiors to deliver a citation book to the scene of the ‘disturbance’ to issue our tickets.
As we continued to argue in circles the merits of their spurious allegations, Ash had noticed a man asleep at the wheel of his car a few spots away from our absurd scene. It should be noted that he had been there during the whole ordeal but bike cop had not seen it necessary to inform him of his loitering transgression. But I digress. Matt was very open to Ash’s request that he witness the exchange going on on the other side of the bus. He listened carefully to my exasperated frustrations, punctuated with bike cop’s irrational refutations. Matt’s amusement and clarity of mind as a non-partisan observer was timely and valuable. Weighing up my position and the determination of the power tripping locals, his wise advice was simply to leave.
Swallowing the last of my beer and a little pride, we packed up and deserted the scene – but not without a few abusive volleys between Ash and I and the faux cop. With my blood boiling, heart racing and all rational thoughts perplexed, we left down the nearest stairs and found a vantage from which to watch our antagonists decide what to do next. As i paced and began to calm down, the two had an apparently hilarious conversation by the bus and eventually left. We ducked back to make sure we had not received a ticket, and went back to our day. We saw that smug faux cycle cop a few more times throughout the day, and I managed to refrain from jamming a stick in his spokes as he rode past.
So in the end, we ate our tasty rolls, had a beer during the ordeal and eventually got on with our day. But as I walked away shaking, legs unsteady, I pondered the powerlessness and frustration that can arise when presented with an unchallengeable power, especially when things are intensified by irrationality and unreasonable figures of authority. Somehow I felt solidarity and empathy for all who face unreasonable power in their lives – civilians in war ravaged areas, Palestinians facing roadblocks, anyone unfortunate enough to have dealt with a brainwashed cop or security guard. If one considers that many of these encounters also involve unimaginable violence, bullying, or victimisation, and it’s very easy to begin to identify with those engaged in struggle.
Copper’s courtesy call
Leaving Santa Cruz on the two lane coastal highway number one, we were quickly gaining a tail as the thanksgiving traffic quickly caught the 45mph bus in the 55 zone. Of course most everyone wished to hurry along at 65 or more. After pulling out here and there to let the masses pass, we pulled out into a beach access rest area to make lunch, use the wc and again let our tail dissipate. As we rolled to a stop a blonde mum approached the bus and asked for a word.
offending slow coach
‘Think of this as a courtesy,’ she begins, ‘Do you live in California?’ (BC licence plates went un-noticed?) ‘I’m a police officer, off duty, and I thought i would let you know that on duty I would have pulled you over and given you a ticket for holding up traffic.’ She made it clear that there would have been no room for negotiation had she been uniformed. She continued to explain that in the state of California, a driver is required to pull over and let past trailing vehicles if they are unable to do the speed limit and there are five or more vehicles. I began to ask clarifying questions, explaining that the bus wasn’t capable of 55 miles an hour.
‘Well the speed limit is 55 and if you can’t do that then you gotta get outta the way.’ I mentioned that the signage read “maximum speed” or “speed limit” not mandatory speed, and she told me that it wasn’t actually a limit but rather had something to do with the average speed, and that I should really be going more than 55 to stay on the right side of the law.
Changing tack, I explained that I was a conscientious and courteous driver, having been a professional in the past, and that I was careful not to wait too long before using an appropriate turn out to allow others to pass. Again, my comments were dismissed without thought, her tone now getting stern, reinforcing her commitment to ticketing me had she been on duty. I was getting a bit riled up now so I asked how often I had to let them past – ‘must I pull out every time there are five cars?’ Of course, regardless of what is available – official turnouts not required – and even if I had just returned to the road after allowing people past, should five more cars arrive on my tail I would once again be obligated to pull out.
The off duty cop’s tone and reluctance to reason, combined with her ridiculous inability to consider the remotest fraction of circumstantial discretion really irritated me. As with the power tripping security guard in SC, I could feel my frustration begin to simmer, my heart racing, hands shaking and sweaty as I struggled to maintain composure in the face of this irrationality.
Now I appreciate that this lady took the time to pull of the busy highway on Thanksgiving to advise me on the laws of this beautiful state. What gets to me is the infuriating manner in which she carried herself throughout the entire exchange. We could have had a friendly conversation as equals, it would have taken less time and left both parties in a far better mood. Instead, sadly, she simply reinforced my experiences with Californian authority – condescending, patronising, so titillated by their power role in every encounter as to never indulge in rational discussion. Perhaps it is the institutional framework that forces these characters to toe the line fanatically in fear of hierarchical reprisal. Perhaps it is simply the corrupting nature of unquestioned authority.
10,000 serendipitous kilometres in Gus, the big blue bus
Gus, Crew, Tetons
Five Australians, one Canadian and a twelve-year-old yellow Labrador touring around in a ’79 short school bus certainly attracts attention from all sorts. Notably the hippies, the herbally elevated, and the homeless, yet also randoms from all walks of life, some on their way to work, some at work; peace signs out windows, pointing, smiling, laughing; we imagine they are stoked and living vicariously…
Boz and Bus
It begins with the hasty acquisition of an anonymous rafting bus. Five hundred kilometres home to Chilliwack and half that into the gas tank leaves much to ponder. Passengers are confirmed, interior decoration rushed, U-bolt roofracks installed, kayaks loaded, BC departed. It would be 9,000 kilometres before Gus got his name, and we still can’t decide if he’s a she or vice versa. Without original equipment, possibly some of both.
Yellowstone touristing
Adventure ensues… Santa Barbarian galactic shaman offers wisdom, befriending roadside salesmen, Albuquerque Republican Highlands contraband smuggling pilot shares the goodness, power tripping security guards dim the vibe, courtesy speeches from off-duty cops, Big Sur hitchhikers who’re panhandling for every meal, random encounters with paddlers from local heroes to international superstars, breakdowns and a thirsty Gus…
Bend, OR Local Hero Scotty Burns
Six dirty vagabonds in a hotel room, small town strippers, disorganised rendezvous, moustachioed unicyclists in mass bike rides, the fireworks superstore and subsequent idiocy, moonlit hot springs deep in the Rio Grande gorge, basejumpers at Evel Knievel’s Snake River jump site, shorted out alternators, mystery bus-born gunshots, demoralising engine audio…
Cooking/camping mode in the sunshine
Canadians, Americans, Spaniards, English, East coast, West coast, desert dwellers, wisdom filled acid tripping veterans and space cadets from the same academy. Autonomous living, anarchist thinking, a flow and fluid serendipity of events that defies planning…
Earthship construction in Taos, New Mexico
We learnt how to build our own houses from tires earth and bottles, we met the outermost layer of the anarchist onion skin, gathered in the Subrosa cafe, watched documentaries freeing our indoctrinated minds. WARNING: subversive literature…
Our best friend Cleo, with boots
We even managed to go paddling in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Colorado, resulting in backwards waterfalls and inadvertent 360s on slides above meaty holes. We met first hand the issues of private property as they affect waterways in Colorado, ducking under barbed wire fences as we paddled down a low river with signs on the banks forbidding scouting as trespass.
Sean Bozkewycz on Lower Mesa Falls
As we approach the Canadian border after 10,000 kilometres, we reflect and are excited by mystery filled divergent futures.
Gus will roll again.
Buddha Eyes on the road
the crew - goodbye bc
rafting the dechutes
Tom
Sean Bozkewycz on Dillon, downtown Bend, OR
minor mechanicals...
earthship interior grey water planter
Colorado Colours
Biased Carbox Tax Coverage – another symptom of an impotent mass media
The article printed in last week’s Frankston Leader came across as biased, unfounded fear-mongering. And the resultant comment stream shows just how deluded the general public is on the issue. In this piece I will confront the paper’s biased perspective and engage some reader’s arguments.
Hurley’s piece relies entirely upon testimony from one ‘concerned citizen’ and (surprise) an exposed industry spokesperson. After admitting that details about the proposed tax are vague, Hurley incites fear as he quotes MP Greg Hunt’s remarkably precise figures of a $300-a-year increase in electricity bills and a 6.5c a litre increase on fuel. Where do these figures come from when the details are so vague?
Concerned citizen Mr Davies tells us that the tax will have a ‘huge impact on the general cost of living.’ What does Mr Davies know about this tax that the government themselves does not? These baseless assumptions repeated unchallenged by Hurley smack of biased journalism. Where is the balance on this subject? Why are we presented with an article full of criticism for a federal Labor policy that is based on one citizen’s concerns, and not given one iota of opposition perspective?
For those complaining about your inexplicably rising electricity bills, this is the result of the Kennett government’s privatisation fetish and the resultant neglect of the transmission network. Electricity costs will only continue to rise as the private companies that run your utilities do what they do – grow profits. The only option is a move toward sustainable, renewable, decentralised energy sources. How do we do this? Tax brown coal power generation and use the proceeds to fund wind, solar and other proven technologies. Now this is not exactly what Gillard proposes to do, but that does not reduce the importance of at least beginning to ta the nation’s biggest emitters.
Jim Whaley writes that the “amount of carbon produced by Australia is quite neglicable [sic] in comparison to many other countries around the world…” This is exactly the defeatism and blame shifting that has left the entire globe in a state of inaction. Australia can and should become the world leader in sustainable civilisation. When rich countries like ours (which has one of the highest per-capita emissions in the world) excuse themselves from responsibility, what motivation is there for the Indias and Chinas of the world to clean up their act? We are already benefiting from a century of carbon-powered development – what right do we have to tell developing nations not to do the same while we do nothing?
Mr Hunt (an environment spokesperson lamenting action on climate change…) recalls a meeting he had with BlueScope Steel. Of course they are concerned about the affects of the carbon tax on their exposed industry. If we lose a few jobs in steel making, would it not suffice to replace them with future-proof employment opportunities in the renewable energy sector?
Mr Hunt says that he ‘would rather see incentives for companies to clean up power stations and coal mines, rather than have a tax on electricity’. The vagueness of this statement masks its inherent contradictions. The carbon tax is an incentive to clean up power stations. As with any industry, a company that takes on extra costs will pass those costs on to the end consumer. Thus, any incentive to clean up coal fired power stations will result in extra costs to the consumer. The only option then is to close the coal fired generators and find another option.
Australia, the sun-burnt country that we all love, does not have a solar panel industry! A carbon tax will signal to business investors that Australia is a mature and progressive country where their capital can take part in the upcoming green-tech boom. We can and should make the move toward 100% renewables in the shortest possible time frame. Here, from some of Australia’s most highly respected scientists, you can read about Australia’s potential to be 100% renewable by 2020. Doesn’t this merit some critical discussion in our nation’s media?
Kaz misrepresents the carbon issue as a pollution issue. Yes, there are many other pollutants that our society relies on the Earth to absorb and dispose of. No, this does not reduce the importance of dealing with carbon. (Carbon, rather than carbon dioxide, is colloquially used to refer to CO2e, the Carbon dioxide equivalent that allows all greenhouse gases to be meaningfully compared).
Kaz then goes on to explain that the human portion of carbon emission is but a small percentage of the natural earthly emissions. This is a common argument promoted by climate change skeptics, but it fails to recognise the important point that the earth’s natural carbon emissions are balanced by the earth’s natural carbon uptake – in the oceans and forests for example. The problem is that humans are creating more carbon emissions that the earth can handle, and at the same time destroying the earth’s capacity to absorb carbon – for example by clear felling vast swathes of forest. Then we get on to the positive feedback loops, whereby, for example, as the oceans warm they absorb less carbon, which warms the oceans, etc etc.
Don’t be taken in by the false perspectives of your profit-based media. Both sides of the story are not shown equally and will not be until you demand it yourself. To answer DJ’s perhaps rhetorical question, we have to put up with the government’s lies because we have a corporate media that simply takes what they say and relays it verbatim to the public.
Puntledge River Festival 2010
Boz on Stotan Falls
Flowing through the twin townships of Courtney and Comox on Vancouver island is a river atypical of my BC experience hitherto. Perhaps coincidentally this was also my first boating mission on Vancouver Island. Kayakers descended upon the Puntledge river for the annual festival of slides, falls and waves for which hydro BC releases increasing recreational flows from Friday until Sunday.
Upper hatchery to Stotan falls is the prime whitewater, with husky slides and a few fun waterfalls laced with man eating holes. The ledgey style of the Puntledge riverbed continues past Stotan with a slightly reduced gradient forming magnificent play waves in almost every rapid. Paddling down from the upper into the playrun I’d suggest parking a spare car with your kayak quiver – from here out you’re going to wish you had a playboat. Among dozens of quality on-the-fly treats, the friendly green glass of Tarp and Play wave is the cream of the crop and only improves as the eddy becomes increasingly uncooperative with the rising river.
Between 65 and 85 cumecs most lines on the upper go sight unseen, besides perhaps either nymph or Stotan falls. The slides are a bit scrapy at lower flows but there are fewer death holes to dodge. On Sundays increasing flow the ramps gather speed and you can move around a bit more, but the lines are tighter and the holes meaner. There are definitely some places on the upper Puntledge where you do not ever want to go at these flows.
The incessant Saturday night giveaway session was testament to the support of the paddling community, with the goods flying free until a sobering presentation from Jakub Nemec captivated the audience. Jakub spoke with passion about the theft of BC’s rivers by the corrupt and short sighted government that is speedily killing rivers and creeks to sell the power to the states (and that’s not mentioning the subsequent capability to capture the water and not return it to the streams…)
Sunday starts at 85 cms and peaks at 110 in the afternoon and these ramping flows give you a great chance to get a feel for the run, learning the rapids and the lines at lower water so that you can return with extra confidence for a peaking run; Having said that a couple of the lads escaped lightly after run-ins with mid-slide potholes. A fish ladder just upstream of Nymph falls handed out two especially viscous beatings to the Sams.
Stotan falls is a stunning few hundred feet of whitewater. It begins with a blind horizon under the bridge with the first smooth fifteen footer, a second similar fall in the fifteen foot range and then a double-stepped ledge slide to finish. Above is the classic shot from the bridge.
After the adrenalin-fueled Sunday arvo run we loaded the wheels once again and returned to the put in for one last run down the goods. The water had started to drop after the dam ceased releasing but there was easily enough water still, probably slightly more than saturday morning’s 65 cumecs. This is when our fun with fish ladders really took off. Ricketts and I went for a line down the right of a sliding rapid just above Nymph Falls but were both inadvertently pushed towards the fish ladder in the centre. I was lucky to scrape through but another metre left Ricky Dropped right into the corner of the heinous hole at the bottom of the ladder. Fighting valiantly, he was looped onto the rock shelf before eventually dragging himself out, having spent many seconds ragdolling. This is the same hole that beat Tregenza a wee bit on the Saturday (that backlooping re-entry caught on film – see the vid). Back at Stotan we were running out of h2o for the main attraction so after one last run we called it a day. Once changed we went back to the bridge for one last peek at the goodness only to discover a solid line had emerged down the first fish ladder. Now we are not entirely certain whether these channels are natural or man made but they’re a little bit out of place in the ledgey drops of the Puntledge. Since the dam was built the fisheries authority has had to do some fairly major fiddling with the riverbed to keep the salmon happy – gravel beds that no longer form naturally must be replaced, fish ladders built and stocks ‘enhanced’ by breeding programs.
Wet gear was retrieved and donned before rock paper scissors decided the order for the first run. The dropping river channeled up into the ladder and raced down the ramp with diagonals coming at you from all angles until the final reactionary pushed left and off into the hole below. The main part of the ramp was all good but you really wanted to get that last stroke to control your angle through the waiting hole. The three that fired is up all had solid lines and continued off downstream to discover another even larger ladder at the next drop.
This one had at least a hundred feet of cascading foamy diagonals and ledges before piling into a meaty hole. With Adrian armed with his throwbag I dropped in and got a solid final stroke in to pull me up and over the towback. A sick rapid to finish off a stellar weekend on the Puntledge.
If you look in the backroad mapbook nearby you will find massive areas of Vancouver island have been laced with forestry roads. There is barely a natural forest left. Paradoxically, we are lucky to have such great access to the rivers and creeks. In the same book there is a falls marked on Trent creek. Well we asked the locals and were told that it was a fifteen foot slide into a thirty footer and had been run recently. That was all we needed to make it a priority once the Puntledge flows ceased. Despite a night of rain the Trent was low and after scraping down a few hundred meters from the put in we found the drop. A slide alright, too low today, and an ugly looking lip on the falls which from our estimates looked barely over twenty, about 80% of which reconnected on the shelf below. With more water it goes but I’m not sure the mission would be worth it…
Little Qualicum’s been on a few of our hit lists for a while so we stopped in there on the return leg toward the departure bay ferry. A new tree has clogged the pool between the funky twenty and the clean twenty five making a tough IV+ line all the more consequential. After scouting for a long time we eventually decided that the timber cramped our style a little too much, and despite having the gear to descend to the log for safety, we would have to come back with a little less water. Or a lot less water and a chainsaw.
Cheers from BC,
boz
Distortion To Static: On The Transfer Of Information, Knowledge and Culture.
leave a comment »
Every wisdom path, religion or system of belief has been usurped or appropriated, reinterpreted and repackaged by men who see the potential power inherent in the teachings/understandings of such ancient time-tested psycho-spiritual truths.
Information is neutral, or we might say facts are neutral: they describe certain observable and usually knowable phenomena, and most higher levels of truth-transfer do not put a bias on how the information “should be” used.
It is at this juncture in the transfer of ideas and techniques that we find that the relative Free Will coupled with the mental conditioning of man comes into play and can very easily distort the information when it is subsequently passed down, often under the same name or in the same general school of thought.
This is the basic Service To Self vs. Service To Others situation: when a person or a group becomes privy to new information, they will then interpret and disseminate said information according to their level of consciousness and their own (often extrinsically conditioned) sense of morality and ethics.
So far we are dealing with somewhat obvious concepts: you learn, you judge, you conclude, you teach.
The real crux in this chain of transfer is in the last part: you teach.
In many cases, the reinterpreted information or system of philosophy is marketed as being equal to or the same as (or even better than) the original, and especially similar in name.
This is where the confusion takes hold, because often by the time the information has passed into new hands (and then restructured and possibly renamed), the original school or system or sourcebook/person is not available for a fair comparison.
In certain cases, the new system will take the name and certain concepts from the original, and then actively seek to alter, discredit and/or destroy the original in order to become the “New Original”.
If this process occurs even once or twice, in a few generations a complete system of thought, language, philosophy or culture/religion can be completely changed so much as to be almost unrecognizable.
This happens often in language, and almost always when it comes to philosophy and religion.
To conclude this section, let’s revisit the moral/ethical issue here:
If information is recognized as valuable (and correct), it can be seen as powerful and able to lend power to the holder of said information.
If the holder of this info is concerned mainly with STO (service to others), it seems logical that they would make the information available to others in the same shape and form, the same context in which they found it, so as not to distort or degrade the factual or qualitative content of it. This would allow the next recipient and holder to review the information as it is and make their own mind up about it, and to gain access to the aforementioned Power inherent (or believed inherent) in the information.
In a mixed STO/STS situation, the holder of said info might take the existing system and reinterpret parts, restructure or reword much of it because they may think their personal ideas/perceptions are superior or more concise and useful to the next recipients, thus nonetheless distorting it regardless of the polarity of intent.
Here the holder is usually true to their own new interpretation, and the next recipient will gain access to a mixed bag of information, sometimes drastically reducing the amount of Power they can access, sometimes making it easier to understand and assimilate the information.
If the holder of the information is concerned mainly with STS (service to self), it has often been observed that they will do much the same as the STO/STS example, namely retranslate, reinterpret and restructure much of the original material, but in this case with full intent to mislead and distort, in order to be the sole possessor of the original information and the Power that is believed to come with it.
Here the holder is often in total contradiction to their own “teachings” and publicly proclaimed views.
In both cases, most new systems will use the same or similar wording, jargon and concepts and will use the same or similar name as the original, thus usurping and eventually replacing the original grain of truth.
So we have explored some of the root causes of distortion in the transfer of information. If you can imagine this chain of events happening again and again over a long period of time, you will soon see exactly how much any information can be distorted and destroyed in the process of transfer, whether intentionally or not.
Written by Sean Bozkewycz
April 30, 2011 at 18:18
Posted in ideas, life commentary