The People Who Elect The Vultures

Posted on by
Buyer's Remorse? Likely Not.

Buyer’s Remorse? Likely Not.

 

I read this over at Owen Gray’s thoughtful site, a place where a great commentary seems to be forthcoming pretty much every day:

http://nor-re.blogspot.ca/2013/07/the-rise-of-spectacularly-incompetent.html

 

In this instance, our Prime Minister is appointing a man who has no diplomatic background to a diplomatic post. It would make sense to me that those entrusted with being the face of Canada in overseas missions would have undergone serious training and would have developed a deep fount of knowledge on world affairs, and particularly those aspects of diplomacy relating to the region in which they will be posted. That clearly seems not to be the case here and, unfortunately, the appointment seems to be just another incident where  Harper is keen to insert into appointed positions those who will be pliant tools of his own views rather than someone who represents something of a broader Canadian consensus view.

I’ve had discussions with various acquaintances and colleagues (when I was still working for a living) about political issues, particularly in the run-up to several and sundry Federal and Provincial elections over the last couple of decades. I have to stress that, while I agree with almost nothing of the politics of some of these folks, I respect them as good citizens, as good people, as people with a heart and a concern for others. In light of a whole series of incidents where the Prime Minister has proven himself to be a sly, devious, petty and controlling politician who works in the service of big money and the energy industry, I just have to wonder whether those who voted for Harper’s faux-Conservatives have any sense that they’ve been sold a bill of goods, that they didn’t get the moral and competent manager they thought they were getting, and that we are all poorer, less protected, more restricted and more misrepresented than at any time in the past. Mostly, I don’t think that the great mass of voters (a dwindling mass at that) really sees the sleaze that hides behind the flag-waging, support-the-troops, energy-superpower, it’s-all-about-the-economy rhetoric of the CPC machine. Incidents like this appointment are an incitement to get some of those good-folks voters together and to give every one of them a shake before asking them if this is what they really envisioned, and to they really care.

 

Against Forgetting: A Perspective from Derrick Jensen

Posted on by
What Life Was Like--For Some

What Life Was Like–For Some

 

The latest issue of Orion landed in my mailbox last week, the first paper issue I’ve seen in a couple of years, having switched to a digital subscription, and I was reminded of the pleasure of sitting down with a physical magazine, especially something as sumptuous as Orion, a visual feast as well as a wealth of content.  First up for me was a piece by Derrick Jensen called Against Forgetting: It’s hard to fight for what you don’t know you’ve lost.

His premise is that there has been a steady erosion of nature and the commons over the last several decades, to the point where there those of us who have become accustomed to the new reality and where there is at one generation and possibly two or three, who have known a whole different picture of society and its relation to the biosphere that what was extant in the middle of the last century.

Jensen writes of…

“,,,declining baselines. The phrase describes the process of becom­ing accustomed to, and accepting as nor­mal, worsening conditions. Along with normalization can come a forgetting that things were not always this way.”

As well, he cites Milan Kundera: “The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting.”

Much of Jensen’s discussion speaks to the disappearance of flora and fauna, to the loss of habitat and to the different nature of our interaction with the living world, though it could apply equally to the changed nature of relations within society. I would cite the state of health care as a prime example, on both sides of the Canada-U.S. border, with health care having become a profit center in the United States, subject to management by large healthcare corporations who insert a huge burden of bureaucracy and profit, as well as largesse to the management class, and stifling premiums for citizens, often with major exclusions from coverage and what seem to be denials of procedure on a whim. A look at an afternoon’s programming on an American television station will say much about the for-profit system: what advertising isn’t for cars, beer or casinos is likely to be for some health care organization. The same is true for the pharmaceutical arm of the health care equation, with a portion of the advertising being aimed at justifying the often outrageous cost of many medications because, we are told, these are R&D pharmaceutical companies. It seems, though, that advertising budgets are substantially larger than the budgets for actual research and development. North of the 49th parallel, we fare only somewhat better with the vestiges of what was once a reasonably competent nationwide health care system that delivered a wide variety of procedures in a timely fashion with relatively low overhead. Once Paul Martin took on the deficit pretty much on the backs of working Canadians by cutting services and transfer payments, the provinces were forced to cut back on what was on offer for patients, and, in many cases, did so with relish and glee, as governments turned a blind eye to the establishment of private, for-profit clinics and dismantled structures like the Theraputics Initiative, aimed at independent evaluation of pharmaceutical products and costs. When our current Prime Minister promised us that we wouldn’t recognize Canada when he got through, he wasn’t exaggerating or engaging in an idle boast, and our destination looks very much like the unregulated quagmire of our American friends and neighbours.

It is hard for us to maintain perspective and to measure change without a firm grasp of what used to be, particularly when, as individuals, we have access only to our personal and anecdotal information, and perceptions of how well the system functioned can vary considerably from place to place and with the influence of different circumstances, both personal and systemic. Sadly, it is hard for us to rely on statistics, given that there has been a campaign by several levels of government to ensure that the information that gets out reflect well on the issuing government, and on any interested parties with whom the government has chosen to work. Statistics Canada used to have a worldwide reputation as a quality provider of data and analysis based on thorough and meaningful methodology. My sense is that this is no longer the case, so we have to rely on our intuitive and personal understanding of whatever changes we perceive.

Changes of the same nature have been wrought in many other domains, from education to the world of work, from protection of water resources to urban sprawl, from foreign policy to basic research. The world I now inhabit is a very different world than that in which I grew up, and there is much that has been done that, for the sake of broader humanity and all the life that shares space with us, it would be better were it undone.

Jensen’s conclusion is an exhortation to gather baseline data now, a baseline against which to measure further erosion, or perhaps, rebuilding of the natural and societal realms, and he cites what might be some indicators to include in the baseline:

“But here is what I want you to do: I want you to go outside. I want you to lis­ ten to the (disappearing) frogs, to watch the (disappearing) fireflies. Even if you’re in a city—especially if you’re in a city—I want you to picture the land as it was be­ fore the land was built over. I want you to research who lived there. I want you to feel how it was then, feel how it wants to be. I want you to begin keeping a calendar of who you see and when: the first day each year you see buttercups, the first day frogs start singing, the last day you see robins in the fall, the first day for grasshoppers. In short, I want you to pay attention.

If you do this, your baseline will stop declining, because you’ll have a record of what’s being lost.

Do not go numb in the face of this data. Do not turn away. I want you to feel the pain. Keep it like a coal inside your coat, a coal that burns and burns. I want all of us to do this, because we should all want the pain of injustice to stop. We should want this pain to stop not because we get used to it and it just doesn’t bother us anymore, but because we stop the in­justices and destruction that are causing the pain in the first place. I want us to feel how awful the destruction is, and then act from this feeling.

And I promise you two things. One: feeling this pain won’t kill you. And two: not feeling this pain, continuing to go numb and avoid it, will. ”

All of this is too true, but not so self-evident that it has spurred legions of concerned citizens to action: the struggle of memory against forgetting can only be won when the dynamic tension between what is and what should gives rise to action.

However, there is another side to this.

No More
No More

Back in the early Sixties, we had one of these, though it was a convertible and a kind of a muddy gold colour. It was tricked out with an automatic transmission and power just about everything and was, in some circles, pretty typical of what was on the road at the time. The same with the house we haunted at the time, as seen in the header photo. It was easy to believe at the time that all was reasonably well with the World, and that whatever wasn’t right was going to be made right by our prodigious intelligence and will to make it right. It took decades to recover from the attitudinal fog that allowed us to continue unbridled consumption of goods and services as a way of life, but bits of it started to trickle through in the middle of the Sixties, and by the time Reagan was installed in the White House to begin his program of radical restructuring, there were glimmerings of awareness that we weren’t going to be able to carry on with “Fun, fun, fun ’til her daddy took the T-Bird away.” Somewhere it was written that living like there’s no tomorrow has turned from a lighthearted metaphor into a chilling impending reality, so the V-8 Ford is gone, in the sense that there are groups of people who have chosen to get off the bandwagon of He Who Dies With The Most Toys Wins, and to look for process to rebuild community, a rational economy and resilience, and to try to spread that message as a counterweight to the tsunami of consumerist messaging that permeates all levels of society. I would posit that we should also keep track of the seemingly meagre progress that we’ve made in eliminating the superfluous and harmful so that there is something to celebrate, but also as a way to measure what actions have been effective in preventing the further erosion of nature and society and contributing to reconstruction of a more just and sustainable model.

Bastille Day: A Long Story

Posted on by

Tricolore

 

My parents used to do something that might, in other circumstances, be considered rude, but might have been a necessary evil under the circumstances. My mother was one of the uppity women who actually had a college degree, and Dad, who bailed out of much of his formal schooling at fourteen or fifteen, had spent considerable time in France, so when they wanted to discuss something of weight in privacy, but were saddled with their considerable brood, they would just speak French and carry on the conversation with us trying to make some sense of what was going on. Dad, in particular, was a pretty serious francophile, particularly in terms of certain lifestyle issues, and this rubbed off on me to the point where, when offered the opportunity to learn some French in the latter stages of Grade 7, I leaped at the chance, even though it meant that I had to show up for school an hour early every day, and that there was no credit attached to the course. I carried this enthusiasm right through high school and eventually graduated from university with a degree in French Literature. After some kicking around trying out job options, I returned to university for a teaching certificate, and launched a career, now entirely in the rear-view of time, teaching mostly French at the secondary level. I generally found this rewarding and frustrating at the same time, and it certainly gave me an excuse to hone my language skills and cultural background by travelling in both France and Québec, by indulging in French television, radio and music, and continuing to read all manner of material from comic books to Jean d’Ormesson. I actually managed to incorporate a whiff of a lot of this stuff into the classroom routines to give students a sense that this wasn’t a hollow exercise in conjugating verbs and that an appreciation of one’s own culture required an outside reference point to be really effective (that was my line, and I still sense that it has some validity).

I guess the point of this is that there is a reason why I still pay attention to what happens in that far-off land, even though I don’t see myself going back. My sense was that there was a major current of progressive thought in much of the literature I studied, so of course I had the expectation that this would be something of an influence on how society functioned in France, even though I knew about the upheavals of decolonization and vicious undercurrents of fascism and reaction that have always acted as a counterbalance to any progressive leanings that might stir some portion of the population: ever the optimist in something of the Voltairian sense. Heck, they even have a Socialist Party and a Communist Party, and the Socialists have now elected a president for three mandates in recent memory, along with a stint with a Socialist Prime Minister from 1997-2002. Ah, but politics being what it is, we have what is known as a Socialist In Name Only, wherein Mitterand continued  pretty much the same policies as various conservative political formations have put forward over the decades, where Lionel Jospin admitted to lack of power to do anything when layoffs became standard operating procedure among profitable corporations, and where François Hollande, the current president and SINO, follows the EU austerity line, beggaring more citizens and further enabling the Medef and the hierarchy it represents. It’s a microcosm of what discourages people from voting. I listened to Mitterand, to Jospin, to Segolène Royal (PS candidate who lost to Sarkozy, the French Bush) and to Hollande. So much of what they said as candidates rang true, made sense, gave hope. They all crapped out, Mitterand blowing up Greenpeace vessels and dealing in all sorts of shady transactions in Africa, Jospin bowing to business as usual, Royal turning out to be a great friend to Tony Blair, and Holland betraying the mandate given to him by voters who had for too long been victims of the Sarkoziste pay to play system (so it would seem to an outsider). It seems rather like voting for Hope and Change, and getting Guantanamo six years on, the NSA in every box of cereal, drones all over, repeated corporate bailouts, cabinet posts dominated by Goldman Sachs, and a litany of failed policies leading to the point where there are almost as many people on Food Stamps as there are with legitimate jobs.

So I take this day to slurp some French Grape, eat the French national bird (raised in beautiful Beaver Creek, procured at the local Farmers’ Market from Bob) and ruminate somewhat on what could have been and what might still be, though the possibilities seem to narrow with each passing day.

So Rare, The Truth, The Whole Truth, Nothing But The Truth

Posted on by
What We Don't See (Ane Need To Look For!)

What We Don’t See (Ane Need To Look For!)

 

Recent discussions of the road vs. rail in the face of the possible construction of a gateway facility on the Alberni Canal are all valid, but they miss a couple of points, or fail to give them the focus needed. What has come to light is that there has been a lot of discussion of public business without the public being invited to the discussion, and it’s particularly disturbing that it took months for the information to come out via a Freedom of Information request, stalled on several occasions, delayed from August, 2012 until June, 2013. If we subscribe to the idea that justice delayed is justice denied, we are surely, as members of the public, being shortchanged on the flow of information on which to base decisions. Disturbing is, indeed, a term we might apply to much of what is being done in our names. In a business-to-business negotiation, it may be appropriate to withhold information from the seat opposite, but as soon as the public good is engaged in the discussion, there is a need for those little words that get bandied about so frequently without really meaning anything: open, transparent and accountable. It isn’t only a question of who pays (taxpayers), but also of who benefits and whether taxpayers get good value for money spent, of whether projects are worthy to begin with, and of the general direction of policy.  The obfuscation, delay and misdirection seems to happen at all levels of government, and the links between local, regional, provincial and federal governments seem to become increasingly tangled and the smokescreen increasingly universal. Taxes are good when they serve the community, but toxic when misdirected, and the only way to know the difference is through access to quality information, all of it, and in a timely fashion.

Negotiation?

Posted on by

0cfedade-61e1-4a22-a62f-17d17cf6f074

So the new education minister has said that he will scrap the BCPSEA, which bargained on behalf of government in contract talks with teachers. His aim is to settle a ten-year long contract with the BCTF and to, in the words quoted in the Vancouver Sun, ditch the toxic relationship between the province and the teachers. The BCPSEA was always a shell, an organization set up so that it could legitimately plead poverty in negotiations even when its parent seemed flush with cash for megaprojects, spectacle  and ruinous IPP contracts. Good riddance to what was, essentially, a living lie. However, the idea that the BCTF would willingly sign an agreement with the province of the length proposed by Minister Fassbender (mouthpiece for Christy Clark, engineer herself of a large part of the legacy of bitterness between the province and teachers) without there being ironclad guarantees of stability in purchasing power and serious teeth in the implementation and enforcement of reasonable provisions for class size and composition, an end to meddling in professional development, and a more collegial decision-making process in which teachers, through their bargaining unit, would have a real say in how the school system functioned, is pure fantasy, and really points to more of the same vitriol. It would be, in effect, the imposition of a contract whose terms would be dictated largely by the Liberal Party bureaucrats through the Ministry of Education and would virtually guarantee that there would be no peace in the school system until a more balanced approach were found. It could be seen as an initiative to finally break the school system beyond repair as an excuse to turn the whole enterprise over to private interests, wherein the Province could take the costs off the books, they could cut teachers and their nuisance union loose and let them take their chances with aggressive capital. This would also, of course, further the Liberal dream of a province and world without unions, where capital and privilege reign supreme, where wealthy families can educate their young in the lap of luxury while the rest are forced to attend fact factories on their way to low-skill, low pay work, or pass directly into the penal system, where the work is the same and the pay even lower.

We have another four years of this kind of underhanded chicanery that does nothing to build a relationship of trust and everything to frustrate all other stakeholders. Parents are being held hostage, but it isn’t the BCTF that’s doing it.

 

3689

 

Many thanks to Adrian Raeside for generously allowing the use of his work.

The Latest Shot: The War Of/On Words

Posted on by

A poster supporting Snowden is displayed in Hong Kong

 

The following head appeared in the Toronto Star’s home page:

Ex-U.S. spy arrives in Moscow, seeks Ecuador asylum

A click through to the article does add the word whistleblower, but that aspect of Snowden’s actions seems easy to lose in the flurry of accusations about spying. It’s just the latest attempt to criminalize everything that doesn’t lie down and accept that the powers in Washington, London, Paris, Moscow, Beijing and, of course, Ottawa, get to do whatever they want in their quest to suppress their current bugaboo, terrorism, no matter how many times, how far and how fast they move the goalposts, and no matter that their actions might be creating the terrorists they seek to eliminate. It’s a great gig, like advertising the latest innovation in toothpaste to sell a ton more of the stuff, or creating a new restless leg syndrome to open up a new marketing niche. The adman parallel is appropriate because our politicians have, in effect, become shills for the same mercantile caste that has helped us build a society of overconsumption, waste, pollution, penury, austerity, faux democracy and illusion. So we have the Patriot Act and the Clear Skies Act, Families First, The Government of Canada Action Plan and a long and dreary trail of other misnomers for actions aimed at gutting the real economy and ensuring that power continues to reside with the puppet masters pulling with Wall Street, Bay Street and City strings. Snowden hasn’t referred to himself as a spy, and neither has he been convicted of such an offense, so perhaps it would be prudent to stick an “alleged” in there somewhere. Prudence in the press? only when it comes to turning over the real rocks to see what lies beneath.

Expectations

Posted on by

Powell

 

This young lady caused quite a stir last weekend when she made a bit of a hash of an answer to a question about the gap in remuneration between men and women. Sorry to say, why would we expect cogent and reflective answers to questions asked on the fly of a person whose intellect is clearly of secondary concern? Would we expect that she deliver a scholarly treatise on the development of the gender gap and a set of tangible and feasible steps to resolve a disparity that flies in the face of everything that we claim to support in our egalitarian and democratic society? Likely not, and perhaps we might have a quiet snicker into our popcorn bowl as we watch our beauty pageant, and perhaps we ought to muse on the way a life gets directed into public spectacle based on some idea of the perfection of the human body (and along the way, a thought about why we would be watching this stuff in the first place: no one watches, no sponsors, no pageants!). If the young lady in question mashes up a poor selection of pre-selected platitudes in a form that makes little sense, there’s likely a lack of general preparation in play, starting when she was a foetus and continuing through early childhood and school years, where it seems likely that athletics, cheerleading, modelling and film would have become increasingly important as it became apparent that she was not an ordinary physical specimen of a developing child/woman. Since we all are bathed in the same soup of sales and sex that produced this intellectual prodigy, we ought perhaps not be overly smug. After all, she could yet go into….

 

Clark

 

…politics.

 

Papal Misbehaviour

Posted on by

Francis Misbehavin'

 

One of our spiritual leaders has spoken again, a couple of instances over the last few days and must have been invoking  the Catch-22 clause. On the one hand, he blessed a horde of Harley-Davidson riders in honour of the 110th anniversary of the founding of the Milwaukee motorcycle manufacturer. Then there was the meeting of the delegation of good Catholics from France, and urged to overturn recent legislation in that country that legalized marriage between same sex couples. So it’s all right for a spiritual leader to do commercial endorsements? It’s all right for the Pope to interfere in the affairs of a sovereign  state? What happened to the idea of rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s?

The definition of a zealot fanatic is that he knows what’s best for him and will go to great lengths to ensure that you do it.

Our Mutual Obessession

Posted on by

WebLoon

 

There was considerable splash in the regional media about the Congress being held at the University of Victoria with large numbers of delegates flooding the campus and the city as they attended sessions and debated questions in the Humanities and Social Sciences, those forgotten areas of study that have taken such a back seat to the core sciences, both theoretical and, ultimately, practical, engineering, math and business. First, we seem to have forgotten that all knowledge is connected, and that social, spiritual and ethical considerations are attached to all the results of all the research that fills institutions of higher learning, as well as government and commercial labs: we seems generally to have forgotten the lessons of the fable of Pandora’s Box, be it in relation to nuclear energy, the general use of fossil fuels, the implementation of genetic modifications, nanotechnology, as well as all the panoply of new communication devices. In all the reporting, there was little or nothing about the content of the Congress, about questions debated or about what resolutions might have united groups of delegates in the quest to further our understanding  of human and social phenomena. Instead, we have been told repeatedly how good this gathering is for the local economy, wherein the delegates bring money and spend it on lodging and meals, double-decker bus tours, kitschy souvenirs or weighty tomes from Munro’s, whale watching excursions, copious quantities of single malt whiskey, or newspapers that lack any substantive content. Pride of place amongst those interviewed is given to the chamber of commerce types, the hôteliers and restaurateurs, the boutiquiers and tour operators who will funnel this manna back into the pockets of Victorians in general. Hardly a word that there might be some benefit beyond the simple pecuniary, sad to say, and the question of our infatuation with monetary considerations needs to be one of the questions put front and centre.

Of course the same reporting applies to almost any community event worthy of mention, from social justice film festivals to minor hockey tournaments. Granted, some of these events are only spectacle and entertainment whose legacy will be a note in the statistical compilation of sports and entertainment superlatives as well as the money left behind by those who managed to be on the screen rather than camped in front of it. Does it not, however, seem that the benefits of community interaction might be worthy of a mention? What about the opportunity for our local Pee Wees to measure their mettle against that of their counterparts from over the hill and far away? The reports seem to be generally lacking any of these considerations as though no one among the reader-/listener-/viewership had any interest beyond personal gain. Sadly, that may be the case, given that we’ve been so thoroughly trained to focus on the material economy.

A piece on Northern Reflections by host Owen Gary lays out the ugly truth of the results of humanity serving the economy rather than the economy serving humanity (perhaps the rest of the biosphere is just collateral damage):

http://nor-re.blogspot.ca/2013/06/democracy-and-efficiency.html

Not only is Gray’s piece a telling slice of prose, some of the comments are revealing, as are Gray’s  replies. It’s a tonic for the tripe that passes for information in the press in our time.

Sidestepping Through Questions

Posted on by
Reply

confusion_3

 

Here’s a question for all us’ns:

What good is it to save the planet if humanity suffers?

I saw this gem as a minor headline on the Globe and Mail site yesterday, from whence it then disappeared, though a quick search turned up the article. It burned me up some, as these idiocies will, but I had other things to attend to and Geoff Dembicki over at the Tyee beat me to the acid comment fest (as probably did legions of others).

http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/2013/05/30/exxon-mobil-resolution-climate-tillerson/

So what remains to be said is that we are getting as bad at paying attention to questions as we are at seeking answers and solutions, often the latter being something of a result of the former.

You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers.

You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions.

—Naguib Mahfouz

We ask questions all the time that are perhaps not the optimal questions to deal with situations that confront us. How, for instance, did pacifists deal with the prospect of World War II., supposedly a war to eliminate fascism and the threat of Nazi domination of the planet. Tough to do, largely because folks had already painted themselves into a corner with regard to the aggressive acts of the Axis powers, and, really, part of the problem is that the essential questions were no longer applicable because no one knew what to ask back around the Congress of Vienna in 1814-1815 (and better results might have stemmed from an even earlier questioning of direction and process). So here is Rex Tillerman asking us if we want to stall development in the poorer sections of the world so that we can reduce carbon and forestall the damaging effects of climate change: what he’s really saying is that those poor little brown people are really in the stew anyway, so why can’t we just party on. Climate refugees are already a reality, and even the operators of ski hills are beginning to see that they are seriously impaired in their ability to do business if the snow and ice is all gone on the mountains that they presently occupy.

Dr. Henry Morganthaler died yesterday. He probably thought he had the abortion question whipped several decades ago, but there are still many who don’t think it’s really a good move to be removing nascent life from a woman’s womb before it has a chance to defend itself, and others who will vigorously defend a woman’s right to choose what she does with her body. Heck, in my feeble mind, they’re both right, but, again, the timing of the question is wrong: ideally, the question of the survival of the child needs to be answered before conception, and to facilitate this decision, there needs to be easy availability of family planning, contraception (other than the Bush-era counselling to crossed knees) and counselling. I have no answer for the poor fetus resulting from forced sexual intercourse and better minds will see that there is an answer stemming from a better question, something on the order of looking at how we prevent rape in the first place, something on the order of a fundamental shift in attitudes toward relations of sex and power.

The same quandary applies to the debate about gun control. I’ve never owned a firearm and don’t intend to start any time soon, but I know lots of people who do own firearms, and most of them treat them with a sense of respectful caution and would never think of leaving them lying about in a way that might promote an accidental shooting, let alone have a thought of using a firearm to enforce their will or take revenge. However, we keep hearing of accidents where youngsters harm each other, either with their own firearms, or with carelessly stored firearms belonging to a responsible adult, and every once in awhile, someone loses it and goes on a rampage, shooting mostly random victims. Likely we need to be asking ourselves questions about people’s expectations, people’s perceptions of society, how we define success and how we participate in a live lived in a community, and particularly how we resolve conflicts.

The sad part of the topic is that Tillerman gets away with framing an argument in these terms, when really, it isn’t just the developing world that will suffer, but all of us. There was a line from a song by Luc de la Rochellière a couple of decades back called “Six Pieds Sur Terre” in which he expresses his fervent desire that Hell exist (Mon Dieu, promets-moi que l’enfer existe!) as a remedy for people who perpetrate the unspeakable crimes of warmongering and economic plunder, something that would certainly seem to apply to Tillerman and people of his ilk who are quite keen to add insult to the injury they have  done by sequestering the wealth of the world for their own benefit all out of proportion to any sane standard.