Corporate Control of America

A couple of things put me in a pessimistic mood about our future. This time I'm not talking about the Biosphere, but about our democracy. It started with Bill Maher's interview with Bill Moyers. Moyers reminded me about the corporate control of America, and went into some detail. This is an issue that I was somewhat fired up about, a decade ago. But since then I had gotten used to it. (not happy about it, but not thinking about it.)

Then later that same day I went to the movies to see District 9. It's
quite a good Sci-Fi film, and quite unusual. But it's depressing. It
involves human & alien interaction in quite an unusual way. The humans turn out mostly to be the bad guys, and the ending is not a happy one, although not totally so. The movie left me in an unhappy mood, and corporate control of the world was part of the theme.

I first got upset about the topic due to seeing the movie: Bulworth.
This is a very entertaining film by Warren Beatty. (He produced,
directed, and starred in it.) It's mostly a comedy, but it has a
serious underlying message about corporate control of America. That was over ten years ago, and for a year or three I was concerned about it, but then, as people do, I gradually got used to the idea.

The basic problem is this: Election campaigns are very expensive nowadays, due mainly to the importance of television, and the high cost of airtime. Most senators and congressmen get most of their funding from large corporations and wealthy individuals. Hence, they must pass only legislation that favors these donors, or they won't get the needed funds, and are likely to lose their job. (and it's a very cushy job, with excellent perqs, including health care.)

"Hey", you might ask: "The airwaves are public property. The TV broadcasters require government licenses. Why are they not required to support political campaigns without profit?". Good question. Could it be because half a dozen giant corporations own almost all of the media? Corporations that the elected officials don't want to offend?

I'm not an expert in this subject. I googled on the phrase "Corporate
control of America" and got many thousands of hits. Here are a few
quotes, without their sources. You can find them with google if you are interested. I just want to provide some sense of what's going on.

"Rapid consolidation of network and cable television ownership in the
hands of a few corporate conglomerates has significantly harmed free
expression, quality, and creativity in television, the Center for the
Creative Community (CCC) told the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) today in Comments filed with the FCC."

"Inverted totalitarianism, unlike classical totalitarianism, does not
revolve around a demagogue or charismatic leader. It finds its
expression in the anonymity of the corporate state. It purports to
cherish democracy, patriotism and the Constitution while cynically
manipulating internal levers to subvert and thwart democratic
institutions. Political candidates are elected in popular votes by
citizens, but they must raise staggering amounts of corporate funds to compete. They are beholden to armies of corporate lobbyists in Washington or state capitals who write the legislation. A corporate media controls nearly everything we read, watch or hear and imposes a bland uniformity of opinion or diverts us with trivia and celebrity gossip. In classical totalitarian regimes, such as Nazi fascism or Soviet communism, economics was subordinate to politics. “Under inverted totalitarianism the reverse is true,” Wolin writes. “Economics dominates politics—and with that domination comes different forms of ruthlessness."

"Perhaps big-corporate control of America has gotten so out of hand over the last 30 years ... that it's now irreversible."

"Jefferson was as motivated to prevent economic tyranny as he was to prevent political oppression. Even prior to the industrialization, he saw in embryo the monstrosity of the impending corporate control of America as early as 1816."

"The world’s food has been fundamentally transformed in a way that these agribusinesses want to keep you from seeing. And that was the most shocking thing for me in making Food, Inc. I knew there were big factory farms out there, but I didn’t know agribusiness was essentially keeping us from really talking about it."

"Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Ulysses S. Grant, and Abraham Lincoln were the four Presidents of the United States who fought hardest against the corporate control of America."

Can anything be done to change this, to put control of America back in the hands of the people? Well, yes, in theory. We could vote out most of the present senators and representatives, and replace them with new ones who are committed to reducing the role of giant corporations and the super-rich in our government. The new lawmakers might even return to the old American practice of curtailing the size of giant corporations, and preventing the growth of cartels, trusts & monopolies.

Could this happen? Well, it's possible, but that ain't the way to bet.

m

The Myth That Malthus was Wrong

There is a widely accepted idea that we are NOT subject to Malthus'
notion that populations, including human populations, always
increase until reaching some limit where the available resources
won't sustain them. When that time comes there will be famine, or
other disaster, and the population will be greatly reduced.

But the truth is that it has happened many times in human history,
in many parts of the world. I was reminded of this recently when
watching a History Channel show about Europe's "Little Ice Age".
This occurred in the 14th century. Prior to that there had been 300
years of generally good weather in Europe. This led to excellent
crop yields, and also to expanding agriculture northward. This
greater food production had allowed the population to expand to
numbers never seen before in Europe. In the 14th century, when the
weather turned colder, and with long periods of heavy rain, food
production declined. This led, as was inevitable, to malnutrition
among a large fraction of the population, and that in turn led to
epidemics of diseases, which killed large numbers of people.
Europe's population was significantly reduced.

There is an excellent book, "Collapse", by Jared Diamond, which
describes similar events in many different parts of the world, and
at different times in history. So it is something the human race is
quite familiar with, although those living today in the World's most
powerful countries are not.

There is every reason to think that this will happen again. There is
a difference, though, when compared with past Malthusian
catastrophes, and that is the scale of globalization and
international interdependence. All of these events in the past were
local in nature, although some of them affected large regions.
Today, the world is functioning as an entity, at least in economic
matters. Very few, if any, nations are self-sufficient. The U.S. for
example, needs oil from abroad in order to grow the food which
sustains us. We need the energy in oil both for production of
chemical fertilizer and for transporting the food throughout the
country.

Our technology has allowed us to expand yields by the use of
chemical fertilizer, and the development of new strains of plants
which can exploit that better than older varieties. But our
technology is useless against floods, droughts, storms, changes in
cloud cover, and temperature changes.

There will be disaster. The only way it can be avoided is to stop
the growth of the human population. But humans like making babies,
so we are not likely to do it on our own. It will take disaster to
do it for us.

I didn't say anything about WHEN there would be disaster. The good
news is that it won't be this year, or next, or any time very soon. The
bad news is that it will probably be in your lifetime, if you're under 50
years of age.

m

I'm Expanding My Subject Matter.

And the revised blog title is meant to show that. I don't have much more to say about the environment, and saving the biosphere. I still hope that it will be preserved, at least to some extent, but I'm not optimistic. As a blog writer, there are lots of topics that I'm likely to write about. I have opinions on the current political situation, on the nature of reality, on economics and investing, and various other topics. I can't predict when I'll be moved to actually write an article.

Poking around in my hard drive, I found this list of stuff I think I know something about:

health & fitness
computer science fundamentals
investments
evolution
The Natural World
meditation
alternate zeitgests (philosophy)
Science & technology
Go (the board game)
Age of Empires (PC game)
effective living (does your life function well?)
History of the world, including humans
Alternate lifestyles
Zen

That list is in no particular order. I might write about any of those topics, but there are plenty of others also. In my long life I've done a lot of things, been to a lot of places. Mostly, I paid attention, and learned stuff. I have also sought out people who seemed to know something I didn't, and tried to learn from them. And I've read quite a few books along the way. There's been formal education also; I have a Ph.D. in aerospace engineering from UCSD.

Clearly, I don't always feel bound by that old rule that says: a writer should not keep saying "I"! (But you won't find so much of that in the rest of the articles that I've written, or will write in the future.)

If you, dear reader, would like me to write about a particular topic, by all means please let me know! You can either post a comment to this article, below, or send me an email, to ze_zenguy@yahoo.com. I really prefer to write a message TO someone, rather than simply write for an unknown audience.

m

Earthchurch Needs a New Leader

Earthchurch is dormant, and has been for about a year. It still
exists, in the form of the website and the email list. There are still
27 people subscribed to the discussion list, but no discussions are
happening. There is also a small announcement list, but it's been a
long time since the last announcement. There are also archives of the
discussions that we had in the past. These are here:
http://lists.earthchurch.net/pipermail/discuss-earthchurch.net/

Of course I could simply abandon it, but everytime I read the
introduction on the website, about our fantastic planet, I always feel
this organization is needed. I think it's too potentially important to
abandon.

But I'm not the person for the job. Someone is needed who has more
energy than me, and who is more naturally sociable and charismatic.
Mainly, someone who will keep pushing and not give up. The truth is
that I'm old and tired and dispirited. I'm not optimistic about our
planet's future. (Of course I mean the biosphere; I'm not worried
about the rock and sand.)

So my plan is simply to be a caretaker until our new leader appears.

Nominations are welcome.

m

It's so hard to form new habits!

I don't know if any of you guys ever deliberately form new habits. I have done it many times. The latest one that I've been working on for over a year (!) is to take my canvas shopping bags from my car into the grocery store. A cupla years ago, before I realized that the natural world was doomed, I bought a couple of canvas grocery bags. My initial motivation was to help reduce the plastic bag count on our planet's surface. After using them a cupla times I found that they are much better bags than the plastic ones. They have better handles that are easier to find and don't hurt your hands. Plus, when loaded, you can set them down and they stay upright. That even works when you are also loaded!

But after you get home and put away the stuff, you have to get the bags back to the car for the next trip. That has not been a serious problem because I hang the empty bags on the doorknob. That way, I can't leave the house without seeing them, so I take them out to the car with me. But, they tend to stay in the car! :(

One must develop the habit of taking them from the car into the grocery store. I forget to do this about half the time. Sometimes I don't realize it until I'm in the checkout line; then it's too late to do anything. But often I will realize it when I'm in the middle of shopping. Many times I have quickly left the store, gone quickly to my car, and brought the bags into the store. I do this in an effort to train myself. I'm amazed at how long it has taken, and I'm still not completely trained! Perhaps this particular habit is difficult to form because I only shop about twice a week. Also, exiting the car is something one does frequently for various reasons, not just to go grocery shopping. Besides, I have been buying groceries for fifty years, using the store bags.

Hopefully, writing this may increase my awareness of this issue, and lead me to finally have this new habit!

m

Denial and Motivation and the Future of the Planet

As you probably know, denial is a common human phenomenon. People commonly avoid thinking about behavior that they repeat to their own disadvantage. Sometimes individuals grow enough to overcome the denial and change the behavior. A key to this is motivation. The source of the motivation is the hope that confronting the behavior will lead to some improvements in one's life. It is commonly accepted that without motivation there will be no change in the behavior, nor in the denial.

Now, zooming out to the big picture, we see that the behavior of most humans is causing the slow destruction of the biological earth. Furthermore, denial is in full bloom. Most humans avoid the awareness of this. Now, what's their motivation to become aware? Unfortunately, if an individual becomes aware of the phenomenon, it
does not make his life any better. If anything, it may make him/her
less happy, or more depressed, as the case may be. It does not help
the planet to any significant degree either; that would take
collective action by billions, or at least by their thousands of
leaders.

This is not a new phenomenon; it was given a name long ago: "The
Tragedy of the Commons". Originally, it applied to a local situation,
such as a common area used for grazing. But now it applies to the
biological earth.

m

Click for Earthchurch website.

Making Electric Cars Practical, by Jim Hasper, Guest Blogger

I feel that the only way to significantly reduce CO 2 emissions is to completely stop burning fossil fuels. The way to do this is to move to a total electric and hydrogen fuel economy. As a registered professional engineer who has worked extensively with industrial furnaces, I can tell you that there are very, very, few industrial processes that absolutely require the burning of fossil fuel. Most could be served by electric heating. Those that absolutely require combustion could use hydrogen as a fuel. The hydrogen, in turn, could be produced through the electrolysis of water. Facilities for doing this could be located in proximity to major users, so long distance transportation of the hydrogen would not be necessary. That leaves only the industries that use fossil fuels as a feed stock for producing materials such as plastics and lubricants. Even here, the actual processing could be done with electricity or hydrogen, so that the fossil fuels would not have to be burned.

Of course, generating this much electricity would be a problem. Even now, coal fired plants produce most of the electricity and also produce a large portion, if not most, of the CO 2. Converting to wind, water, or solar power are the ultimate answers, but these will require a long time to develop sufficient capacity to entirely replace coal. As an interim measure, I support using nuclear power. These plants could be built relatively rapidly and would greatly reduce the CO 2 emissions. Air pollution from these is far, far, less than from coal fired plants. As far as the hazardous waste, the physical amounts are relatively small and I'm sure that means could be developed, given the will, to safely handle them.

Automobiles are another major source of CO 2 emissions. Even hybrid vehicles still emit sizeable amounts of CO 2. Again the answer is the use of all-electric vehicles. Motor and battery designs have improved to the point that an all-electric vehicle is or soon will be feasible. One of the drawbacks, however, is the time needed to recharge the battery.

I have an idea that would eliminate this problem. My idea is very simple - design the vehicle with an easy-to-remove battery pack and encourage all manufacturers to use a common design for this component. Different sizes would be needed for the various types of vehicles, but all vehicles of the same type should use a common design. When the battery needs to be recharged, the user will drive into (or land at) a filling station, where his discharged battery will be removed and replaced with a freshly charged one. The design would permit this to be done in less than a minute - open the access door, release the clamping mechanism, and slide the discharged battery out. Repeat the procedure to install the freshly charged battery. The handling mechanism for the batteries would permit this to be done with a minimum of manual labor.

The user would pay only for the electricity stored in the freshly charged battery, not for the battery itself. He would also receive credit for any electricity remaining in a partially-discharged battery. The program would work similar to that used for the sale of propane for grills. - you initially buy just one tank, then just drop it off at the suppliers store when empty and pick up a filled one, paying only for the propane in the tank.

The vending company would stock a supply of the various sizes (probably only a few needed) of batteries. Batteries would eventually become un-rechargeable, but the replacement cost would be born by the vendor and would be recouped over time as a small portion of the cost for a freshly-charged battery, again similar to the cost of eventually replacing a propane tank. Batteries that were obviously damaged, as in a collision, would not be accepted for trade.

How would the needed network of such stations be developed? Either by some ambitious entrepreneur or in the same way that the network of gasoline stations was developed after the invention of the automobile. General stores first carried small quantities of gasoline for the few cars in existence. As the cars become more common, specialized filling stations developed. As entrepreneurs discovered that filling stations were profitable, more and more stations were developed. Eventually, the oil companies discovered that there was additional money to be made in retailing the fuel that they formerly only wholesaled, and began building their own stations and buying up the privately owned ones. The rest is history, as they say.

I began writing about this in April of this year. Just a week ago, I heard that Shai Agassi, the former head of the product and technology group at SAP, the business software developer, is planning to do exactly this. Not that I'm claiming any credit for his idea, but I am very pleased to see that someone is getting serious about this.

Click for Earthchurch website.

Diversity Within Earthchurch

I'm only talking about diversity of ecological footprints. Let's call them EF's for short. A person's EF is the total of all of his impacts on the biosphere. For example, when you sit in your warm home in the winter, there is some fuel being burned to generate the heat. The burning of the fuel puts some contaminants into the air. And so on. Our EF is a composite of many things. Automobile and aircraft use are important components, but so are many things that we don't even see, such as the diesel powered ships that transport the goods from China. When you buy a nice shirt that was made in China or Indonesia, some pollution was enabled, since a diesel ship and then a truck was used to bring it to you. Of course there was energy used to manufacture the shirt, and the cloth from which it was made. Laundry, especially the drying, also uses a lot of energy.

Within our Earthchurch group we have a wide diversity of ecological footprints. In my opinion we need to welcome them all. We have two people who have a very low EF. They have a lifestyle based on walking and bicycling, and a minimum of purchasing new things. Jay wrote about that when we were discussing saving money and helping the planet. At the other end we have some members who have a high EF lifestyle, living in large homes, putting lots of miles on large vehicles, taking a couple of plane trips each year, and buying lots of stuff. The rest of us are spread across the EF spectrum. My own EF is in the middle, perhaps a little less than the north American average. That's mostly because I'm retired and don't drive to work every day. I own a small car, but I also walk and bicycle quite a bit. I don't buy a lot of stuff. I haven't flown since April of 2001, but that's because it's become such a hassle. I hate waiting in lines. Also, I like it where I am.

We need members all across the EF spectrum. Our long term goal is to help change the mind set of many millions of people, worldwide. That's what it will take to rescue the biosphere. If we were to restrict our membership to those who are already living a low EF life, we would fail in that endeavor. The high EF people represent the mainstream, at least in north America. Furthermore, the high EF people typically are more influential than the low EF people. Our
community leaders, of all kinds, are almost always very high EF people. This is true worldwide. An extreme example is Al Gore. He has brought his ecological message to more people than perhaps anyone, and he also lives a very high EF lifestyle.

There is no possible way that we can convince millions of people to quickly shift from a high to a low EF lifestyle. They LIKE their high EF lifestyle. So we need to take a long term approach, and hope to change things over the next decade or two, or three. The low EF people serve as an example, perhaps a model, for the direction that human beings need to move. Our members who are currently high EF can also take a long term view, and look toward lowering their
EF gradually, over the coming decades. Perhaps they will buy a small car next time. Perhaps they will install a solar water heating system. Given a long term viewpoint, there are many things they can do.

m

Click for Earthchurch website.

Save Money & Help the Biosphere

Things you can do that save you money while also reducing pollution and other planet harming activities:

Indoors, in the winter when you are heating the house, wear a sweater and other warm clothing, and turn the thermostat a few degrees cooler. You will save money on your heating costs. You will still be comfortable. You just have to wear more clothes in your house. That's not much of a sacrifice, is it? And a dollar saved is a dollar earned*. Another advantage, not often thought about, is that when you go outside there is less of a sudden change, so you may be less likely to catch cold or other illness.

Use less gasoline. You can do that by putting on fewer miles each year. Don't make unecessary trips, combine errands, choose closer destinations when there is a choice, etc. When it comes time to get a different car, get a smaller one, or a more fuel efficient one. When it comes time to move, move closer to where you work. Or maybe you can get a job nearer to where you live.

I asked for suggestions on this topic on our Earthchurch discussion list, and I got dozens! There are too many to list here, but here's a selection:

Take the bus instead of driving. (also, walk or bike)

If you drive, set up a rideshare system so several people can leave their cars at home.

Have an automatic thermostat that lowers temperature at night and raises it during the time you are at home.

Get up earlier and go to bed earlier, to save using electricity for light;
also get fluorescent bulbs.

Use solar barbecue instead of coal, gas, or electric.

Take shorter showers to use less hot water hence less energy cost.

Wash your clothes with cold water, using a cold-water detergent.

have fewer or no children

live in an apartment

buy services instead of things

repair things instead of trashing them

Get some canvas grocery bags and take them with you to the grocery store.

tell others about the things on this list

m

*A dollar saved is worth quite a bit more than a dollar earned, because it's tax free!
Click for Earthchurch website.

What if it was another species?

What if it was another species?

Let's just take raccoons as an example. I know this is bizarre, but
suppose we were to discover that those cute raccoons were digging up coal and oil and burning it, and were also running various industrial processes that dumped mercury and lead and hundreds of chemicals into the air, soil and water. And in addition they were cutting down huge tracts of forest, using some of the wood, burning some of it, and letting some of it rot. Furthermore, they had increased their population to over 6 billion, and were inhabiting almost every region of the globe. And finally, both their population and these activities were predicted to steadily increase. Measurements showed that the composition of the atmosphere had changed markedly. Even the seas were slightly more acid, and poisonous chemicals could be detected in them. Raccoon trash could be found on the shores of the most distant pacific isle.

How would the human race react? How would YOU react to that news?

It seems pretty clear that the raccoons would be treated as worse than rats, and we would make war on them, trying to kill as many as possible.

But, as you know, the human race is doing all of those things. Because it's us, our attitude is different. Few people will advocate killing large numbers of humans in order to protect the biosphere. Although I love the earth and its plants and animals, I also love my children and friends and myself. I want the humans and the biosphere to both survive and be healthy.

That will not be easy to achieve. The present day habits and attitudes of the dominant human cultures are leading us slowly toward catastrophe. There are potential solutions, but they are complex, and require sustained effort by all major nations. The fundamental requirement is to change peoples attitudes and expectations, even aspirations. If most people in the world struggle to acquire a large vehicle and a large home we cannot avoid the catastrophe. Although science and technology played a major role in creating the problem, they are essential ingredients for solution.

I'm hoping that Earthchurch will help to change peoples attitudes, and to support the required technological innovations.

m

Visit Earthchurch.net!