Darwin continued

La plaga de la publicidad

2011-12-18T18:33:00.000+01:00

Los problemas fundamentales del mundo actual (guerra, hambruna, agotamiento de recursos naturales, calentamiento global y todos sus derivados) son causados principalmente por las grandes industrias y las multinacionales, apoyados por los bancos y los gobiernos en un sistema global que se basa en una siempre creciente y voraz producción en masa, sustentado por un consumismo desorbitado.

Este consumismo desorbitado a su vez es creado, provocado, estimulado y fomentado mediante el incesante bombardeo propagandístico, inventado por parte de las propias industrias para poder mantener o incrementar lo que para ellos es lo más sagrado: “la cuota de mercado”.

Dicho bombardeo propagandístico se encuentra ya profundamente araigada e incrustada en todos los aspectos de la vida, incluso más que la propaganda comunista en la antigua Unión Sovietica o la fascista en la Alemania de Hitler e, incluso, en la novela 1984 donde todo lo dominaba el Gran Hermano. Esta propaganda consumista invade la televisión, la radio, los periódicos, las revistas, las plazas, las parades de autobuses, los buzones de las casas y, desde hace algo más de una decada, internet y los móviles. En el mundo “moderno” no hay escapatoria de esta plaga que ya afecta al casi 100% de la humanidad, un porcentaje considerablemente más alto que la epidemia más devastadora de la historia, la peste, y que se conoce como: publicidad.

Para contrarestar, en cierta medida, los efectos devastadores que causa la gran industria (las empresas que cotizan en bolsa - “ellos”) y ese consumo desorbitado asociado a ella que se nutre de la publicidad, se deberían introducir unas reglas (leyes) que revierten parte del dinero ganso que se ganan (los dirigentes de) las industrias para apalear los destrozos que provocan al planeta tierra y a la humanidad.

Si tan imprescindible es la publicidad para “ellos” a fin de mantener y ampliar ese sagrado cuota del mercado; que paguen por ello una cuota a las autoridades públicas como compensación, equivalente a lo que están dispuestos a pagar para alimentar ese espíritu consumista. En otras palabras: un impuesto del 100% sobre toda la actividad relacionada con la publicidad (siempre para empresas que cotizan en bolsa y cuotas más humanas para empresas más humanas, las PYMEs). Además, ¿No sería esta, casualmente, precisamente una de las fuentes más apropiadas de donde sacar los fondos para cubrir déficits o para financiar los servicios sociales y otros bienes comunes en vez de privados?
Aún así, poner límites a la exposición a ese bombardeo de mensajes tan nocivos para la mente humana (come, bebe, consume, posee, ¡compra!). ¿Acaso no le ponen limitaciones de exposición a algo tan natural, sano y necesario como el sexo?
Por ejemplo que no ocupe más del 10% del espacio informativo donde aparece: tiempo en televisión y radio (tal vez volumen también), superficie en prensa e internet. Y que de ese 10% no más de la mitad sea de empresas que cotizan en bolsa.
Transparencia, veracidad y funcionalidad de los mensajes publicitario como:
- Precio real en el mismo tamaño de letra que el precio de oferta.
- También en el mismo tamaño eventuales condiciones (permanencia)
- En casos de user modelos para productos de estética personal (cosmética, dietética, salud, ropa): poner nombre, edad e incluso operaciones estéticas de los modelos.
algunos de estas reglas ya se aplican en algunos países.
- Limitar mensajes publicitarios a la funcionalidad real del producto y no a valores sentimentales supuestamente asociados como que uno liga más o es más popular o feliz por pedir las patatas que van con la hamburguesa o comprar cierto modelo de coche.
- No apropiarse de movimientos sociales como si lo hubieran inventado o formaran parte de ello cuando no es así.
- Dar referencias verificables, medibles y directamente accesibles para todo el mundo en caso de proclamar ser “número uno” (de qué, dónde, cuándo) o prometer un 20% (se puede medir?) de mejora en tres semanas.

La indignada inspiración para escribir por fin lo anteriormente expuesto surgió por la reciente (navidad 2011) hipócrita y publicidad de Telefónica (nunca tragaré su patético intento de lavado de cara/imagen cambiándose el nombre) y el todavía más despreciable y triste anuncio de la 'ever' soberbia Coca Cola. Ambos, descaradamente, autoadjudicándose un supuesto apoyo a los recientes movimientos y sentimientos sociales. A saber:

- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEKdjm-nvCg (como si Telefónica funcionara por la ética del 15M)

- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEhd2S5GbUg (como si Coca Cola aportara algo en los sueños)

The last terrorists in Europe

2009-03-01T03:17:00.003+01:00

I tried to post the news article on Emilio Gutierrez in El Pais on Digg but it got rejected because it was "widely reported".

I felt I had to inform them:

Hello! This case is the other way around!

I tried to submit
http://www.elpais.com/articulo/espana/maza/silencio/elpepuesp/20090228elpepunac_3/Tes
But I am told by your system that the article has been banned because: "This URL has been widely reported by users....."

This article is from the main Spanish newspaper "El Pais" and reports about a Emilio Gutiérrez who suffered a terrorist attack on his house in the Basque Country (as you may know the last and only place where there is still terrorism going on in Europe).
This obviously is not spam or off-topic (unless you consider european news as such).

The only "users" that would be interested in banning such an article are the terrorists themselves and their followers. They are extremists and fanatics and an absolute minority, but most probably ALL of them have been instructed to scam the web for any publication on Emilio Gutiérrez. That is the only reason why this article is "widely reported".
If in any way you want to help reduce terrorism, you should not ban the article, you should ban those users instead.
For further reference you can check the amount of supporting groups in favor of Emilio Gutiérrez at facebook, doing a search for his name. The biggest one has reached close to 20.000 supporters in just a few days:
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=53107989311
Even voluntary fundraising has started up for Emilio in several places in Spain.

I am an expat from Holland, living in Spain (fortunately not the Basque Country), I am just an occasional user of Digg and have nothing to do either with Emilio or the Basque country, but as most ordinary world citizens I want justice to prevail and feel that the least I can do is to inform you that most surely your system has been misused by terrorists and their followers.

Thank you and warm regards from Seville, Spain.

Unfortunately is seems hard to find info on the whole story in english, just one for the moment
http://lippincott.wordpress.com/tag/emilio-gutierrez/

Stuff to read (now it's late)

2008-12-29T02:04:00.003+01:00

http://wpunderwood.blogspot.com/

Religion

2008-12-25T03:05:00.005+01:00

In my opinion religion has been one of the mayor setbacks in human progress along history.

Religion kept Europe in the middle ages. Religion is most surely the most frequently used excuse for war in human history. And for torture. And for child abuse. And for corruption. And retracted morals...

I do not believe in god, in a god whatever name is used for him/her/it (what if it turns out to be a dolphin?).
I do not have a problem with people believing in some superior being, as long as they keep it to themselves. As long as they do not use it as an excuse like mentioned above. As long as they do not want to impose this belief on me or anyone else.
How come most religions seem to want to impose themselves upon others?
How come people can do harm in name of religion?

I believe in observation and measurable causes and effects.
I believe in science.
I don't know of any war that has ever been fought in the name of science...
Scientist do normally want to convince others, but not impose.

... it's late, but I'm not done!
Goodnight.

link to remember: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=darwin-on-the-right

Human priorities

2008-12-25T02:40:00.003+01:00

Another sketch...

Priorities to solve to maintain and stimulate human progress:

Stop war and hunger (= end large scale, collective suffering)
Human rights
Freedom of speech (internet!) and freedom to act (respecting others of course)
Sustainable development politics
Fair trade
Educate for harmony, not only to earn money or be productive
De-comercialize and improve Health care (= end small scale, individual suffering)
Living standard
Crime (the 3 former ones are a help in this)

Up to here and further

2008-12-25T01:06:00.005+01:00

This is just a sketch get to it out of my head. I might do something with it later

Main processes in the history of human evolution

Big Bang
Forming of galaxies and planetary systems (our solar system is just one of x00.000.000)
Life appears on earth
Evolution leads to homo sapiens
Homo sapiens progresses from small unorganized tribes to organized societies and politics
Society and politics develop, between drawbacks and small steps forward, to democracy
Arts & science advance and knowledge spreads thanks to the invention of print
Increased democracy and science lead to the industrial revolution
WO II definitely initiates large scale awareness of errors of the past - war - and the conscience of one human race - the declaration of human rights
Industry leads to the free market mechanism
Free market mechanism stimulates technological development and pushes consumerism in ever faster cycles
Technology delivers internet
Internet grows to the global storeroom and exchange of human knowledge, thoughts and visions.
The cash-crash, the credit-crunch and the threat of global warming definitely start to grow large scale awareness of errors in the free market mechanism and politics in a collective sense - unlimited speculating/capitalism - and in an individual sense - greed/selfishness
---present time -------------------------------------------------------
Exchange of knowledge and visions lead to accelerated progress in science (technological and social)
Progress in science leads to better understanding of oneself, each other and the world and universe that surround us
Better understanding lessens conflicts on an individual and collective scale and leads to higher living standards for more people

Good causes

2008-12-18T17:54:00.002+01:00

Google is now allowing its users to create themes that showcase the change they are helping to create with an application called iGoogle for Causes.

This is a good initiative, but even if the intention is fantastic, it worries me is that most causes, unfortunately, are not really a solution to the fundamental problem but a soothing of the symptoms.

I understand that the fundamental problems of war, hunger, underdevelopment, endangering nature and the planet are all direct or indirect results of western modern society's (individuals, multinationals and governments) greed and need for an ever growing production with cheap resources.

I wonder if there isn't any "cause" that addresses this directly?

As long as the fundamental problem does not disappear, a small bunch of good intentioned people will always need to reforest on one hand, while some industrial giant deforests at 10 times the speed on the other hand. That's a hard battle.

But of course, as long as we don't know how to tackle the fundamental problem, it's worth the effort to at least diminish the effects by sending money, food, medicines, doctors, teachers and scientists through all kinds of causes and networks, and hope that the global public opinion and awareness ends up overthrowing or restructuring the established system that caused the need for causes in the first place.

The "crisis", the greatest cut on oil production ever and climate change....

2008-12-18T00:43:00.007+01:00

Doesn't it feel like some circle is closed, or that a certain balance is being re-established in some way?

In the last years an ever stronger growing voice can be heard the world around that climate change is the mayor threat to our planet. I think so too. And even if it's not, I still think we should not make such a mess of our collective home, exploiting and (ab)using up all it's natural resources, chopping forests, leading to extinction of a great number of species and producing more waist per person each day than a Neanderthal in his whole life-time!

It's like we are consuming up all our resources, littering and shitting in our own house. A house we can't get out of you know! So, first we shit in our backyard where we don't come to often (Africa and the third world in general), but if we feel a great sudden need we don't mind doing it under the couch (the shit we keep in our own 'developed' countries) . If we continue like this we'll end up shitting where we don't want to anyway: the kitchen sink and our dinner table (Fifth Avenue?).

For hundreds of millions of years the earth has been working as a self regulating closed circuit that was able to balance itself. But then we showed up, broke the circuit it and got it out of balance (basically in the last hundred years..). The climate is just one of several elements in this circuit and, at present, the most threatened and threatening for our survival, due to Global Warming. This is caused by the CO2 emissions as a result of using fossil fuels - coal, fuel oil and natural gas - for industry and transportation.

However, after building up gradually, my feeling that somehow some balance is in the process of being restored climaxed today!

First there were some significant drops in the stock market. Then came the Credit Crunch. This caused a drop in the construction industry, followed by a drop in the automotive industry, airlines and industry in general. Maybe I don't have the order correctly, but that's not the point, all of this happened.
And today the OPEC announced the greatest cut in oil production ever!

Isn't that amazing???
Right when we're somewhere close to the point of no return regarding Climate Change, due to global warming caused by unlimited CO2 emission through burning fossil fuels for cars and industries, the whole system collapses and, all of a sudden, industries and oil production drop like never before. Precisely those mechanisms that the mayor causes of Global Warming. Most surely this has a higher impact than the public opinion or Kyoto ever could have achieved. And in a shorter time...
Most mayor industries have dropped their production in several dozens of percents.

Doesn't it look like this fits too well to be a coincidence? Doesn't it look like we reached some invisible limit and we have been pushed back hard? Like a warning that says we cannot continue this way?
It really makes me wonder if there isn't some cosmic force or law behind it. Others may think of it as something divine. And even if it's just a coincidence, in any case, we should take advantage of the situation to rebuild things in a more responsible way.

Of course it's sad for all the individual little people that suffer from the situation, but let's hope the few big individual people and collectives (industries, companies and governments) that manage us all have learned and draw wise conclusions from it. For example avoid overspeculation that needs overproduction that forces overconsumption which generates overpolution.

It seems that most governments actually think in that direction. Everybody should, we all can do with a little less.

Starting Beyond Darwin (Darwin continued)

2008-12-05T02:00:00.006+01:00

Finding the quote:

Mumbai Terrorists May Teach Us Nothing, But Can a Wal-Mart Stampede?
While Mumbai suffers heavy losses from a terrorist attack, American shoppers are busy trampling Wal-Mart employees to save a few dollars on Black Friday. When will we get our priorities straight?

finally triggered me to set up a blog as an outlet for my (sometimes vague and frequently chaotic) thoughts on mankind and my perception of his (her) existence, progress, evolution and all related stuff. Here I hope to eventually organize these thoughts and share views with others.

The Wal-Mart stampede (nov 28, 2008) struck me hard as an unmistakable example of the dark side of man's attitude, although it doesn't diminish my faith in mankind as a whole in the long run. I believe in a technological, social and mental progress in the near future. And, somewhat further on, I believe in an evolution (maybe partially stimulated by human progress itself) into some "higher" being we all hope and aim for (well, most of us..). I understand this near future to be several to many generations ahead.
Those who (commercially) think of short, middle and long term as being two, five and ten years, respectively, will find this interpretation of 'near' surprising. However, it's not intended in the everyday way of seeing 'time', but in a cosmic sense, where even a thousand years still means nothing. I believe that very little people, entities and governments ever think on this scale, but if you want to consider human progress and evolution it is mandatory. If you just look behind you, you see how much time there was needed to get where we are now and we only have just started as species, roughly some 2 million years ago while some reptiles are believed to have been around for over 200 million years!

Anyway, my faith in mankind's future, does not neglect the many problems the human race has at present and will have to overcome in the centuries ahead, as the Wal-Mart stampede clearly shows. In fact, my main worry in this context is precisely: whether or not mankind will survive the coming decades and actually will be able to continue it's evolutionairy voyage. Problems like war and deterioration of man's natural environment (I don't believe in the human race living somewhere else than on earth, our home! Sorry Trekkies...) are serious threats, threats that in my opinion find their roots in the shortsightedness, greed and selfishness of each individual human being: my home, my car, my family, my money and my bargain at Walmart, which collectively are reflected on a greater scale: my company, my generation, my nation and my religion.

The threats would diminish considerably, if only people and entities could see themselves from a wider perspective; more as a supporting element within an evolutionairy process than as the protagonist of their own self-centered short term movie.
Would the bargain at Walmart then still be so important? Or would Walmart still create "an atmosphere of competition and anxiety" that leads to "crowd craze"?

Some references to the Walmart stampede:

While Mumbai suffers heavy losses from a terrorist attack, American shoppers are busy trampling Wal-Mart employees to save a few dollars on Black Friday. When will we get our priorities straight?

Family of man crushed at Wal-Mart stampede sue store
The family of a Wal-Mart shop worker trampled to death when bargain hunters surged into his store is suing the retail giant, claiming its sales advertising "created an atmosphere of competition and anxiety" that led to "crowd craze".
And last but not least the comment on Digg that triggered me to finally start a blog:
Mumbai Terrorists May Teach Us Nothing, But Can a Wal-Mart Stampede?
While Mumbai suffers heavy losses from a terrorist attack, American shoppers are busy trampling Wal-Mart employees to save a few dollars on Black Friday. When will we get our priorities straight?
Definitly a good question which I just could not leave unanswered....

This is exactly what I thought as well. (Talked about it with my girlfriend just before)
As wrong as they may seem, the Mumbai terrorists at least had their reasons and consciously did something they were convinced of. The wal-Mart stampede, however, shows the darkest side of unconscious collective human behavior, triggered by the worst of their weaknesses: greed (which then, to a certain extend, is a form of egoism) - just to save a few dollars as you correctly mention.

Interestingly so, it's this same weakness that, in fact, led to the big crash just some months ago (still going on); the greed of many individual people betting high stakes on supposed big future profits, triggered by the even bigger collective greed of companies, banks, institutions and governments, betting even higher stakes on some imaginary profits (commonly known as speculating - which actually is no more than an evolved form of betting...).

I am absolutely not against the free market mechanism, but I have finaly understood the real meaning of capitalism (which is only good for the happy few up there, that are addicted to speculating). Free market is ok, but speculating without limits leads to the malicious need to manipulate people to consume, buy and spend beyond their real needs and resources. This extremely intelligent, subliminal, malicious manipulation (also referred to as publicity and marketing) is what distorts our priorities and has us stampeding a man to death.

A lot people in the wealthy countries should think a step back and ask themselves if, having already covered the basic needs of shelter and food, they really need that big 4x4 car to do shopping or run so hard only to save some bucks....