Saviors of the Planet
October 13, 2015
TimeWatch Editorial
In the very recent past, the idea of a global community has again come to the forefront. This description has always been applied to the inhabitants of this planet, oftimes more generally than specific. The universal application of this term “Global Community” has never really been challenged because of the obvious similarities of humanity. Our communal need for life sustaining elements, air, water and food etc, and our similar dependencies, like education, income and housing, are truly held in common. Yet, within these so-called general confines, our rate of consumption and preferences differ. This is true even within the boundaries of the closest knit families.
Left to themselves, a family settles into a balance of differing consumption patterns and preferences that are not visible to outsiders, but are very clear to each member of the home. Any attempt to control or restrict the rate of consumption or preference of the members of that home, creating an environment in which each must conform to the preferences of the other, immediately causes an emotional challenge. There may be external conformity to the new laws in that home, but the individual retreats within, finding solace in the inner room of the conscience. Whatever the means used to satisfy compliance, you can be sure that the original preferences are changed only by persuasion, coercion or punishment.
As it is in the family, so must it be with society at large. The present description of a world of conformity, as put forward in the concept of “saving the planet,” fails to reveal the accompanying restrictions necessary to be put in place in order to “accomplish” this obviously unachievable goal. Nations, like families are a patchwork of varied patterns and rates of consumption and preferences, driven by inherited or environmental experiences. To achieve the goal of uniformity, there must first be a reallocation of resources, based upon the choices and decisions, not of those who will be affected, but of the masters, the decision makers, those who have applied their formula for “the salvation of earth.” As I have said before, there are just three ways to accomplish obedience; persuasion, coercion or punishment.
Persuasion is the act of presenting argument or attraction or reward that causes the modification of your belief system, so that an adjustment is made regarding your world view to include that which you have been influenced to accept. In almost every case, the newly accepted item now impacts some if not all of the views previously held, even though you may be totally unaware of that fact. The genius of persuasive protocol is that like a box of items, once a new item is added, the composition of the entire container is changed.
Once persuasion has failed, coercion is the next step. This is defined as the use of force or intimidation to obtain compliance. Coercion begins with the stating of the legal authority assigned the compliance officer. If this is not sufficiently motivating, threats, and initial actions follow to convince of the serious nature of non-compliance. Other words that would properly describe the progression of coercion would be pressure, arm-twisting, threats, harassment, compulsion, oppression and enforcement.
The final action will be punishment. Seizure of possessions, freezing of assets, and in the case of nation-states, prevented from financial interaction globally. Ultimately, those who will feel the heavy hand will be the people, the workers, the children, the retirees, the renters, the homeowners, the citizens, the nationals, the families. But then, who cares? The masters would have “saved the planet.”
Cameron Bowen.
