Subject line of this blog entry is at this link.
I like it! I don't do social media "liking" but this one I give a big thumbs up to!
I would rather see an individual motivated by the best interest of what is right and wrong about a matter come forward to do with personal courage what they are morally convinced is the "right thing". Judgment of what is a morally right thing to do in any situation is a tricky thing to. What is the domain frame of reference that proscribes the "right thing".
An excellent question!
There are domains of reference competing in decision making within higher order domains of reference. Maybe all the competing domains can be viewed as interacting on a level playing field. That field is difficult to define but whatever it may be is something to be defined and agreed upon by the competing actor entities. Entities that are people, in the singular and in the plural collective, that act individually or collectively through the personal or collective nature of beliefs. Beliefs that may be highly defined and established in formal rules and regulations, procedures and protocols or as ambiguous as anyone or collection of people all agreeing on the same commonly held standard without that standard being highly defined.
I suggest that even in domains dominated by rigid rules and regs there exist individual and collective entities within that domain, regardless of its size that have, individually (or in a closely held small group) shared standards alternative and competing with the standards of the parent domain.
Turds in punch bowls? Maybe. But by what standard is a turd or a punch bowl a punch bowl?
Elusive isn't it? As elusive as the framework right or wrong in any given domain. Domains of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. A collection of individual rights at the foundation of our social fabric. A collection of rights now applicable to collective entities beyond individuals when those entities are defined as corporate. Extend out that "corporate interest" right and non-profits also have them, extend that our and entities other than collections of humans also have the rights. A collective like Mother Earth nature. The natural world collective and all of its children. A view that does not put human beings as the center of all the natural world. One contrary to the biblical view that the earth was given to us to use solely for our own dominating interests.
This is a classical tough situation to grasp and make appropriate decisions.
This particular situation of TPP involves secrecy.
So much in the world today is increasingly related to secrecy. I think it is a product of the information age. The nature of secrets was once a matter of unwritten shared agreement, maybe backed by blood or something like that, among a small group. A group small enough that the shared secret be interpersonal and sanctions for violation personally applied. In the information age all that secret stuff has to be formalized in documentation.
That is what the $100,000 reward is for. That is what Edward Snowden revealed. All that secret documentation.
Cost vs Benefit is a neutral standard related to a level playing field. A standard so neutral that it can be applied to opposed entities such as doing things judged as good or doing things judged bad.
Secrets may be either good or bad. Hard to tell since they are secrets. It is good to keep them when the outcome of revelation would be bad, by some standard. Also good to keep them when the good outcome would be thwarted by their revelation before implementation of whatever is being held secret.
What is best for the common good?
The secret of the atom bomb and the implementation of its secret purpose is something to ponder.
In the world of secrets the defense of the secret is often: "We are doing it to protect you". Maybe: "You can't handle the truth". Or: "Don't ask how the sausage is made". Or: "Let history be the judge".
Perhaps one what to approach the matter is that nothing be secret? Is that possible? One of the best kept secrets was D-Day. What if it was not secret. It would defeat the purpose. There would be a severe downside risk. On D-Day, plus one, there was no longer a secret.
TPP is secret. Secret with sanctions and appropriate safeguards to keep it secret. It will have its D-Day, someday. on D-Day, plus one, it will be totally revealed. Why publicly expose the plan before then? Why, because D-Day will make it fait-accomlished? Without possibility of reversal?
The TPP once revealed will have public review before being passed by law in congress. Prior to then it is a multi party negotiating document. A multi party negotiating document before it becomes a two party negotiating document at the individual national level. Will each of the participating national entities in secret negotiations have to take it to its related national political level for public review and decision making? At the secret level it appears to be a matter of "all in" to reach final agreement. What is the risk that the representatives of national entities that agree in secret on it will have that agreement denied by national public review?
There is much at stake with TPP, much at risk if what is being invested in secret review is not endorsed by public review.
It is a risk/reward situation. TPP has to do with trade but the bulk of it is not about traditional trade by corporate interests in whatever corporations are interested in beyond pure trade matters. What might that be? Power to control. Not to compete but to dominate.
Not for corporations to compete with what entity?
Answer: Government on a global as well as national level. Corporate competition with government at our own US level is an open warfare struggle. At the global level where corporations operate there is no single competing governmental entity. None that has a legislative, executive and judicial system as entities agent of its governmental structure. The global "governing" entity has a monetary based system of governance with monetary Legislative, Executive and Judicial systems.
One of the prime features of TPP is that a global judicial system would dominate national legislative and executive as well as judicial system. In the US they operate in a check and balance system, generally. Judiciary rule is a way to subvert the system. What is the better corporate game plan for national domination? Capture all three branches but ultimately which one rules on the law of the land? In a chess game capturing the key figure ends the game. That much I think I know about chess.
TPP is secret because if it was not then recognition by the public that it was not in our best national interest in the USA or any other participating nation would nip it in the bud.
In conclusion: It is good that the secret be penetrated and made public before it is presented to our governmental representatives that are in the pocket of financial corporate interests.
Yes, I would donate to the reward. Like the cop that recently fired one of the hundreds of bullets into a fleeing automobile and killing the occupants: Could I be held responsible for aiding and abetting a technically illegal act if I donated a dollar? Perhaps my donation should be protected as a secret like the donation to a PAC? I doubt if I could get that legal standing. While I may have a dollar, I do not have that many dollars to buy my protection from the rule of law or by the rule of law.
Edward Snowden is a hero because the reward for his justified action was not monetary. Who got the reward money for Bin Laden, if anybody did. If a reward was given there was no public recognition because the recipient was no hero. Some claim that someone in the raid has bragging rights but recently the entire raid that killed him has a new look.
TPP is a Global vs National power play. Just exactly who is the Global entity playing here? The USA government owned by corporate/financial interest wearing its global mantel or Corporate Global Governance that will strengthen its hold on the US government by weakening its representation of the the common good but strengthening and using its allied military power as an enforcement agency?
It is an intricate web of power and influence domain in which to make a decision.
The standard of judgment however is as clear as ever: What is best for the common good? The world is not so complicated that we can't see what that is no matter how the media agents of national and corporate interest want to distort it to protect the secret that we the people no longer own our country.
Corporate interests own us as a resource. That is the secret they are good at keeping.
Is there a secret way for me to donate?
No, of course not. Secrets are for thee, not for me.
Example of judicial rule captured by corporate interest:
"Handing banks a victory, the Supreme Court
ruled that financially struggling homeowners who file for bankruptcy
may not expect to have their second mortgage loans canceled, even if
they owe more on their homes than the properties are worth."
Those same financial/corporate interests were, of course, not even brought into court for impartial justice much less subject to a Supreme Court decision.
This link also.
This today..good job Wikileaks!
Wikileaks Drops Another Damning Trove Of Secret Trade Deal Documents
So, what is the scam. TPP made public with 60 days for review. Then vote but TPA says Congress can make no amendments? Send to the President to sign. Which he will. Then everything depends on him being swayed by public opinion to approve or disapprove?
Do I get that right???????????????????????
No comments:
Post a Comment