Working Together to Improve the World

People on the left of the political spectrum often make the mistake of believing the world would be better if everything was guided by governments.

People on the right of the political spectrum often make the mistake of believing the world would be better if everything was guided by businesses.

Both sides are wrong.

They mistake power for control.

Power is the ability to make decisions.

Control is the ability to prevent decisions from being made.

What is the basis of your power? 

Who and what are you able to control, and why?

What do you have the power to do, and how?

Who and what influences your ability to make decisions?

Real democracy is about working together pleasantly to address the causes and consequences of unpleasantness. 

Bullying is always unpleasant for its victims and must be stopped appropriately.   

And all harassment should be regarded as bullying, as should all other unreasonable social pressures.

But how should reasonable social pressures be regarded?

How do you tell whether a social pressure is reasonable or not?

Perhaps you are unsure what it means to serve democracy, whether through pleasant politics, pleasant journalism or any other activity.

How do you know whether your life is guided by proper policies?

Such policies always reflect political pleasantness.

What have you studied about localities and their inhabitants, and why?

What do you know about meeting needs within localities?

If you are already one of the servants of democracy at a local level, how do you ensure that experiences is not a game and never treated as one?

Political pleasantness requires such questions to be answered properly.  You may find that quite surprising, especially if you are unfamiliar with proper answers to important questions.

Local appropriateness requires pleasant journalism at the local level, and in the wider context.  It certainly also requires proper policies.

Things would certainly improve with and through pleasant journalism.

But what is pleasant journalism in practice?  

Who pays for it? 

Who provides it? 

Who consumes it?

And who is unwilling to pay for it, provide it or consume it, and why?  

These are obviously very important questions to answer if the reasons for problems in the world are to be understood properly.

Well-informed citizens are deeply distressed by the continuing abuses of power, in public sector and private sector organisations, and particularly in politics, all over the world.

They want real leadership and they are providing it themselves to the best of their ability.

But why should leadership be left to traumatised and retraumatised citizens to provide?

Why should the emotionally exhausted feel obliged to do the work required in the absence of real political leadership?

Government, in many parts of the world, has long been nothing more than theft from the public for the benefit of the greedy, regardless of which political party or family groups or crime syndicate holds most power. 

What is your acquaintance with pleasantly well-informed news ensembles and journalistic consorts, in any part of the world?

Who would find your answers to such questions quite surprising, and why?

Who would find your answers no surprise whatsoever, and why?

Much rudeness takes the form of presumptuousness.

How, then, should rudeness be addressed?

Presumptuousness is a form of aggression.  It is also quite often an expression of ignorance.  It is rudely intrusive.  It causes psychological stress in those feeling unjustly obliged to comply with it. 

You may have a propensity towards drinking too much alcohol or using other consciousness-distorting or addictive substances during and/or after sitting and/or working and/or socialising in male-dominated situations, such as in an Australian parliamentary setting/sitting.  

Perhaps you prefer to trust people you regard as having much in common with yourself and/or people you admire.

The elegantly egalitarian Revolutionary Climatological Needlepoint Committee has long been reporting its exasperation regarding domineering politicians and other political puppets.

The committee has reported seriously, to no avail, in much the same way as climate scientists

The committee has also reported satirically, to no avail.

Perhaps the committee's sophistication is the problem.

Yet ordinary, mortal celebrities of little sophistication have failed to have much influence over the decision-making, and absence of necessary decisions, by domineering politicians.  That is especially the case regarding revolution-inducing anthropogenic practices.

There is much evidence, too, that responsible business managers, responsible business owners, and responsible investors have had little influence with domineering politicians and other practitioners of corruption.

How have you responded to the committee's reports?


 

In many conflict-related situations, the people paid to help resolve problems actually make situations worse.  They have not received the necessary training.  They do not receive the necessary supervision.

The people in positions of most responsibility within organisations, and paid accordingly, are insufficiently accountable for the distress caused by incompetent, and cruel, personnel.

What do you believe your rights to be, especially if they are rights you believe everyone has a right to experience?

What do you believe your political responsibilities to be?

When political pleasantness is the goal to be achieved, working together can be quite surprising.

How do you usually support the work of librarians, archivists, scientists, historians, trustees and moderators?

What experience have you had in relation to libraries, archives, science, history, trustworthiness and moderation?

What do you know about political leadership?

What do you know about climate leadership?

What is your acquaintance with political neutrality, and how do you define it?

What is your acquaintance with climate neutrality, and how do you define it?

The Revolutionary Climatological Needlepoint Committee has been leading the way politically, scientifically and beautifully for longer than anyone can remember:


 

Perhaps you enjoy sewing to prevent yourself from fidgeting. 

It is easy to feel agitated when well aware of the facts about politics and the global climate.

Although much workplace incompetence arises when workers pretending to be competent, through an anxious desire to please lazy, greedy and vulgar 'team leaders', poor health at work has many detrimental societal consequences.  

The effects of various personal problems, and interpersonal problems, cause much confusion and abuse, and so do inappropriate policies.

One of the main problems is that civility and incivility are not clearly defined, if they are defined at all, in most groups, organisations and interpersonal relationships.

How do you compare countries?

How do you compare districts within countries?

How do you compare governments?

How do you compare economies?

How do you compare climates?

How do you define a pleasant way of life, and is that way of life sustainable or even possible for most people?

The global Mozarty Party has had many years of experience in the practice of political pleasantness:

 

 

The Australian Political Reform Club has likewise gained much valuable experience in that regard:


 

You may be aware that pleasant journalism keeps everyone safe.  It does so by suitably drawing attention to problems in order to encourage improvements, as reasonably as possible.

Perhaps you are already a pleasant supplier of public interest journalism:

 

 

What have you been learning about proper policies, and from whom? 

Providing appropriate assistance is a proper policy in itself, particularly when being paid to do so.

Yet there are often individuals and groups wishing to prevent appropriate assistance from been supplied to individuals and groups with particular needs, including the need for appropriateness.

What, for example, is your acquaintance with News Crap?

It is not possible to work appropriately with untrustworthy persons. 

Enlightened patrons of political pleasantness, in any organisational, institutional, local, global, group or individual activity, devote their attention mainly to the practice of suitable pleasantness, not disreputable antics.  They are never patrons of corrupt practices.

All true servants of democracy attempt to gain adequate familiarity with the areas of the world in which the live, and the areas of the world they intend to visit or inhabit.  They also attempt to understand the global context of life quite well.

Perhaps you regard yourself as such a servant.

Politics, particularly in its most pleasant form, is not a game.  Nor is it a business. 

It is meant to serve the public interest with or without assistance from public interest journalism.

How does your enlightened patronage serve democracy and life on Earth?

Why is enlightened patronage in the service of democracy an absolute necessity to the survival of future generations, and current ones?

What has your training helped you to improve, and how do you know?

What have your talents helped you to improve, with or without training?

Perhaps you provide access to a beautifully civilised news resource on a daily basis. 

What have you discovered about local appropriateness and global appropriateness, and how?

How and were have you been working with people to improve a constitution?

How and where have you been working with people to improve a culture?

How do you usually think about patronage in relation to compatibility?

How do you usually think about politics in relation to compatibility?

How do you usually think about work in relation to compatibility?

How are you preventing corruption?

The questions here are intended to prepare you to be interviewed about your past and present patronages, your past and present politics and your past and present work.

How do you assess voting preferences, research preferences and working preferences? 

How do you prefer to assess your own language preferences in various situations?

If you are appropriately registered as one of the enlightened patrons of political pleasantness in this part of the Internet, you will already have privileged access to many surprisingly suitable resources.

Those resources will help you to understand the meaning and purpose of political pleasantness, whether you are an Australian citizen or you possess another type of legal status.

What do you already know about the politics of nationality, citizenship and legal status?

If you are familiar with Australian politics and society, perhaps you regard rudeness as a matter of convention in the Australian context.

To anyone adequately familiar with the real Australia, the truth does not surprise though it often shocks.

Perhaps you are unaware of the extent of rudeness in any part of the world, or even in the global context.

How do you distinguish between reasonable obligations and unreasonable ones?

What, for example, do you know about obligations in relation to housing, and from whose point of view?

Where have you been seeking guidance on how to contribute towards the improvement of the world? 

The world only improves in the absence of violence, including violence against nature itself.

You may know something about zero-carbon housing and zero-energy buildings and energy conservation and energy economics and environmental design and zero-carbon food production and zero-carbon transport and necessary transformations of education systems and health systems and political systems and financial systems.

While the efficient use of energy is important, even more important is the efficient use of time.

Much needs to be done to improve the world, very quickly indeed.

What do you know about good design?

What do you know about good definitions?

Perhaps you know something about Australia's aggressive legal profession, military traditions, policing practices, administrative incompetence, pushy sales techniques, cacophonous eateries, academic hubris, religion-based harassment, mass media madness, corporate greed, badly-designed buildings, speculative acquisitiveness, gambling habits, drinking habits, driving habits, drug-taking habits, excessive enthusiasms of the sporting variety, creepy machismo, normalised bullying, elitist education system, elitist health system, elitist citizen-repatriation system, elitist approach to human rights, exported manufacturing and polluting, exported humanitarian obligations, the gaslighting approach to environmental obligations, the blatant disregard for pleasant conventions, and the cringe-worthy, highly offensive bragging associated with all of the above.  

What, then, can be done?

How do you compare conduct?

How do you compare human settlements, including suburbia?

What do you regard as experiencing access to a pleasant way of life, and why?

In terms of climate action, there has been much political talk about net zero carbon emissions.  But what does that actually mean in practice?

But what is a comfortable climate, and who deserves to have access to it?

Perhaps you currently live comfortably in a climate-controlled dwelling. 

Whether you do or not, how does your patronage support the improvement of the world?

How do you assess local changes and global change?

What have you been learning about frugality?

What have you discovered about privilege and disadvantage?

Perhaps you regard frugality as relative.

Working together to improve the world urgently requires your contributions, regardless of your past experiences of pleasantness and unpleasantness.

Perhaps you are seeking a few enlightening references to assist you.

Who and what do you currently support and why, and how, and where?

Perhaps you support the truth.

What do you believe to be the truth about climate neutrality?

How do you define a crisis? 

How do you define an emergency?

Perhaps you regard poverty as a crisis. 

Perhaps you regard net zero carbon emissions to be unachievable, especially in relation to your own way of life.

How, if at all, have you been attempting to reduce and prevent waste and pollution of various types, and where?

What do you know about the Global Carbon Project?

What do you know about Australian political efforts to reduce carbon emissions?

What do you know about Australian non-political efforts to reduce carbon emissions?

Governments in Australia have long been ignoring the carbon footprint of farming.

What is your understanding of the subject?

A good starting point would be a commitment towards healthy soil.

What is your commitment in that regard?

And what is your commitment to political pleasantness through political philanthropy?



Creative reporting of the utmost quality is necessarily accurate and suitably timely.  It is elegant as well as relevant.  It impeccably upholds civility whilst addressing wrongdoing satirically.  It often does so with appropriate insights from history.

Who is showing leadership in the land of no worries?

Political credibility in Australia is apparently authorised by whoever gets the most media coverage.

How do you tell whether a matter is controversial or not?

What have you discovered about natural jobs?

How do you tell when an employed person is absolutely useless as an employee, especially from the point of view of providing a satisfactory service?

You may have noticed that there are more than a few enlightening questions to consider when seeking to work with other people to improve the world.

Politics is always about conflict.  There are pleasant ways to address conflict and unpleasant ways to address conflict.  Yet pleasantness and unpleasantness are often subject to subjectivity.  They are therefore matters of perception.

Perhaps you have sometimes been bullied for being a high achiever.

But what does it actually mean to be a high achiever?

Although there is often a necessity to prevent expressions of grandiosity, the crab mentality mainly entrenches mediocrity if not bullying.

And recruitment practices often entrench prejudice and aggression.

What do you know about the metrics of recruitment? 

What do you know about the metrics associated with termination of employment?

Perhaps you have experienced the ruthlessness of an up or out process.

If your conscientious efforts have ever been regarded by an assessor as mediocre, how did you feel, and how did you respond?

What do you know about elegantly egalitarian approaches to political pleasantness through political philanthropy?

Perhaps you are often involved in reporting on a particular industry, or working in a particular industry, or critiquing a particular industry.

Perhaps you regard politics as an industry.

But where is integrity located?

Where is your integrity located if not in your conscience?

How egalitarian is your use of words and phrases, and your expression of ideas, and how do you know?

How do you usually decide who to trust?

The tall poppy syndrome is meant to bring the corrupt to justice and to prevent scandals from occurring.  It is not meant to prevent quality ideas and practices from being put into practice.

Perhaps you have been regarded as a class traitor and/or race traitor for acting in harmony with your talents and conscience.

Perhaps your efforts to break free of oppression through the practice of moderation have been met with derision.

Perhaps you regard yourself as a political moderate with an anti-consumerist or non-consumerist approach to meeting your needs and expressing creativity.

Where is real political leadership to be found?

How do you define that leadership?

The Civility Party of Australia may help you with your definitions:

 


Comments

Post a Comment