What's on your mind?

[Dead1]

Just dawned to me that there is one thing we all share in common when it comes to what's on our mind - the meninges, which is tissue between our brain and our skull.

 

See we are all much more alike than what we realise.

[AlSymerz]

Context is always an added bonus.

[RelentlessOblivion]

1 hour ago, AlSymerz said:

Context is always an added bonus.

Love when my links don’t appear. Let’s pretend I didn’t make a poorl timed remark about a certain submarine?

[AlSymerz]

Went down like an imploding submersible?

 

[GoatmasterGeneral]

4 hours ago, AlSymerz said:

Went down like an imploding submersible?

 

[AlSymerz]

Geez at that kind of speed the last thing that went through their minds would have been their arseholes!

 

[AlSymerz]

Farkdarnit. My email server has been down the best part of two days due to an autochanging setting which shouldn't be autochanging. I finally get around to finding time to fix it and the only emails that come in are advertising shit from shops that I haven't been to for a decade.

[Dead1]

Why there is no corruption in Australia:

Ex-premier of NSW and her boyfriend get accused of corruption by an anti-corruption body.

Will criminal charges be raised?  Of course not.  She walks scott free.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jun/29/icac-finds-former-nsw-premier-gladys-berejiklian-engaged-in-serious-corrupt-conduct?fbclid=IwAR2A5MK9A_T-zdtJ8BlZcZqCynWjWmC6Ewoe94ALaANHy0cR8G84fbs_8cI

 

Like any crime it's only a crime if it's prosecuted and a conviction is made.

 

Not first time and it's widespread.  Eg I remember two senior hospital managers being accused of corruption.  They were stood down and quietly resigned and were never heard of again.

 

Charges raised: No

 

Or recent paedophilia case where senior managers were hiding/ignoring reports of podophile on children's ward.

Senior managers quietly retire/resign.

 

Charges raised for covering up sexual abuse: No

 

If you don't even raise charges, then of course statistics don't show anything happening! 

They do it with murder all the time - just because you've stabbed someone repeatedly or shot them doesn't equate to attempted murder. Instead it gets lesser charges ala aggravated assault or wounding.

 

One of my wife's client was attacked with an axe when trying to stop a family violence event.  He had serious neck and shoulder wounds.  Was the perp charged with attempted murder?  Of course not - it was wounding (which covers life threatening injuries).

A guy who shot at police was also not charged with attempted murder.

So murder and attempted murder charges are really low which reduces stats for those.  Thus murder rates are on decline.  

 

We need to bring back a more Stalinist approach.  You're corrupt, you get charged (Stalinist bit) and get a proper fair trial (the non-Stalinist bit) and if you are found guilty, you are instantly taken out the back and hung or shot (the other Stalinist bit).

Also you're a rapist or pedo or murderer - same thing.

Also simplify the law, complexity is deliberately baked in to reduce accountability and transparency.  If you hack away at someone's neck with an axe then it's obviously attempted murder.

 

I'd even eagerly work as a public executioner.

 

 

[RelentlessOblivion]

It gets worse, there’s several politicians trying to scale back there, already very limited capacity for the anticorruption watchdog to investigate, let alone sanction those they find evidence on. I will say though capital punishment has never been an effective deterrent for any crimes whether carried out publicly or not. Much like crimes of desperation I think address the circumstances surrounding corruption, what is it that leads so many politicians and people in positions of authority to develop those habits/traits?

[Dead1]

2 hours ago, RelentlessOblivion said:

It gets worse, there’s several politicians trying to scale back there, already very limited capacity for the anticorruption watchdog to investigate, let alone sanction those they find evidence on. I will say though capital punishment has never been an effective deterrent for any crimes whether carried out publicly or not. Much like crimes of desperation

I suspect if capital punishment was expedited quickly (literally hours after conviction) it would be a deterrent.  Televising it and having it a mandatory viewing in prisons would probably also help.

Note crime increased in a lot of Eastern Europe after collapse of totalitarianism and crime increased in west once more brutal criminal systems were in place - indeed in America it was draconian "3 strikes and you're out" legislation (drafted by one Joe Biden) that reduced crime after it had skyrocketed out of control.

(Where the US fucked up is not fixing inequality.  IMO it's always got to be a carrot and stick approach.  Simply slamming crims without fixing inequality just means more crims to lock away).

 

There does need to be the right cultural aspects - eg nothing in the world actually works in Latin America or Africa due to cultural factors (and note Philippines which is in Asia but has a Latin style culture has also failed dismally relative to its neighbours).  Liberal democracy or totalitarianism - it doesn't matter.    And that's not just crime but economic development, education, anything approaching equality etc.  

 

Quote

I think address the circumstances surrounding corruption, what is it that leads so many politicians and people in positions of authority to develop those habits/traits?

 

I think you're trying to find goodness where there is none.  A large chunk of humans are self serving pieces of shit who will doing anything to gain power and enrich themselves.

We call them "ambitious," but most are just what we also call "cunts".

Politicians have always been like this but the rules used to be a lot more stricter.  Opportunities for corruption were lower too as government services were run by government and neoliberalism was not the driving ideology.

I work with high level managers and most of them try to engage in subtle corruption, empire building and nepotism.  They care for little except their own personal goals.

It has got worse though as more draconian bureaucratic rules from essentially the strict Victorian era (these lasted to 1990s) have been loosened or removed and as cultural norms now favour a more loose and flexible approach to values and as entitlement has been established as an important if unspoken value.

It doesn't help everything is so complex now.  Accountability and transparency are now confused and difficult to determine where accountability lies.  

There is also fewer KPIs and fewer repercussions for meeting them.

Basically this modern deregulated system empowers ambitious cunts to act naturally and removes barriers that prevents or curtails their dodgy behaviour.

The system is now basically designed around graft.  Those who get caught have usually pissed off some other power broker.  

[GoatmasterGeneral]

4 hours ago, RelentlessOblivion said:

what is it that leads so many politicians and people in positions of authority to develop those habits/traits?

 

2 hours ago, Dead1 said:

I think you're trying to find goodness where there is none.  A large chunk of humans are self serving pieces of shit who will doing anything to gain power and enrich themselves.

We call them "ambitious," but most are just what we also call "cunts".

Politicians have always been like this but the rules used to be a lot more stricter.  Opportunities for corruption were lower too as government services were run by government and neoliberalism was not the driving ideology.

I work with high level managers and most of them try to engage in subtle corruption, empire building and nepotism.  They care for little except their own personal goals.

Basically this modern deregulated system empowers ambitious cunts to act naturally and removes barriers that prevents or curtails their dodgy behaviour.

The system is now basically designed around graft.  Those who get caught have usually pissed off some other power broker.  

It's just naked fucking greed is what it is, combined with opportunity.

I think that there's a certain personality type who's more inclined to seek and more equipped to attain and then thrive in these positions of power. Just like there are certain personality types who're attracted to become law enforcement officers. I can't speak for Australian politics, but it's clear to me that a large portion of American politicians are motivated to seek office primarily to gain access to wealth and power. And even many of the ones who might've initially began their careers with the best of intentions to be ethical and honest public servants have allowed themselves to become corrupt over time because that's just the way things work in the halls and back rooms of government. You have to know how to play the game and become adept at it to become successful and rise through the ranks. When presented with an opportunity to enrich themselves, providing they think they can get away with it (because they see everyone else getting away with it) many are unable to resist the temptation.

And I believe that most of those in established positions of power need the new hires to get onboard the corruption train so they'll be as guilty as they are and be less likely to expose them. You won't be trusted or able to do your job properly if you won't go along to get along. Also it must be said that any organization that's responsible for overseeing and policing itself is doomed to be a cesspool of corruption due to the members having few obstacles they can't work out how to subvert or bypass altogether. I think many people in civilian positions of power and authority (CEO's and oligarchs and such) are also disgustingly greedy, corrupt and unethical, but they probably get away with it at a much higher rate and no one will ever be the wiser simply because they are not under nearly as much public scrutiny as our politicians.

So I guess that was a lot of words to say essentially absolute power corrupts absolutely. Even if you're not a corrupt self-serving piece of shit going in, the system will very likely turn you into one in short order. Just like US prisons take borderline individuals and turn them into hardened criminals. Our penal system is set up in a way that you have no choice but to become a murdering thieving conniving piece of shit just to survive. But for now I'll spare you all the US prison reform rant.

[Dead1]

 

49 minutes ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

 

And I believe that most of those in established positions of power need the new hires to get onboard the corruption train so they'll be as guilty as they are and be less likely to expose them.

In my experience the new hires are corrupt from the start.   They are hired specifically because they fit the corrupted culture. 

You see them speeding past you career wise - very ambitious and often with little or no actual competence.  Their only competence is kissing the correct arses.  They tend to leave messes behind them but they are generally untouchable unless something goes pear shaped in the media and they get scapegoated or the people in charge (minister or departmental secretary) in which cases there are purges.

As I always say, it's basically Game of Thrones without the sex.

Most competent people actually refuse promotions upwards because they know what it's like (myself self included).

 

 

Some companies are notorious for this kind of hiring of arseholes - eg KPMG which has recently been embroiled in a massive corruption case was known for employing people who fit certain psychological profiles (basically ambitious alpha male jocks are preferred).  I know several people who resigned from them when their companies were either taken over or who couldn't hack the culture. They all hated the KPMG culture - total loyalty to the company, cut throat ambition and having the company control aspects of your life outside of work (literally you are expected to associate within KPMG circles).

 

49 minutes ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

I think many people in civilian positions of power and authority (CEO's and oligarchs and such) are also disgustingly greedy, corrupt and unethical, but they probably get away with it at a much higher rate and no one will ever be the wiser simply because they are not under nearly as much public scrutiny as our politicians.

The laws are written in such a way as to protect these people by fragmenting accountability and obfuscating transparency.  

Eg a lot of what is internationally regarded as money laundering is legal in Australia and chunks of Canada such as Vancouver.

Things like auditing is often done by affiliated companies or are rubber stamps.  Same with approval processes.

A lot of supposed consumer protections are actually toothless tigers whose boards are populated by members of corporations they are meant to be acting against.  Or even worse self regulated industries!

It creates an illusion of consumer/worker protection.

 

Note it never used to be like this.  Up to 1980s government regulation was far more vigorous and far more effective.   Of course this didn't fit the neoliberal dogma being adopted and companies were basically given blank cheques to do as they please.

Basically the bad guys are winning.

49 minutes ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

I think that there's a certain personality type who's more inclined to seek and more equipped to attain and then thrive in these positions of power. Just like there are certain personality types who're attracted to become law enforcement officers. I can't speak for Australian politics, but it's clear to me that a large portion of American politicians are motivated to seek office primarily to gain access to wealth and power.

It's the same in Australia.

These days your average politician is a party hack who joined the party whilst at university, worked with politicians to weasel their way up through party ranks and then weaselled their way in through increasingly undemocratic preselection processes.

We even have parachuting of candidates - eg taking someone who is powerful in their party but does not have much public appeal  and then giving them a safe seat to run in even though they don't live in the area and probably couldn't find it on a map. 

In some cases some of the most powerful members in Aussie parties aren't even elected members of parliament.  They call them faceless men and they basically run the parties and as such the agenda.  They are powerful enough that they've toppled prime ministers.  

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faceless_men

TL:DR They're now basically professional politicians from a young age and they spend their time manipulating, back stabbing and arse kissing to get into positions where they are put up for election.

 

[GoatmasterGeneral]

5 minutes ago, Dead1 said:

In my experience the new hires are corrupt from the start.   They are hired specifically because they fit the corrupted culture. You see them speeding past you career wise - very ambitious and often with little or no actual competence.  Their only competence is kissing the correct arses.  They tend to leave messes behind them but they are generally untouchable unless something goes pear shaped in the media and they get scapegoated or the people in charge (minister or departmental secretary) in which cases there are purges.

As I always say, it's basically Game of Thrones without the sex.

Most competent people actually refuse promotions upwards because they know what it's like (myself included).

Yes, the hierarchy of these organizations are structured in such a way that the most driven and most unethical and cutthroat types will be able to rise to the top easily while normal decent people who don't have the stomach for the bullshit will get tired of all this nonsense very quickly and just try to keep their heads down do their time in peace and then fuck off back home. Or else they'll just finally get fed up and quit to go find another line of work. But it's not easy to pack up and start over again in a new career when you're on the wrong side of 40 or 45. So I imagine there are many like you who are miserable and stuck in positions they hate because it's easier just to get up and keep going into the office every day until they've put in enough years to qualify for retirement.

[Dead1]

6 minutes ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

Yes, the hierarchy of these organizations are structured in such a way that the most driven and most unethical and cutthroat types will be able to rise to the top easily while normal decent people who don't have the stomach for the bullshit will get tired of all this nonsense very quickly and just try to keep their heads down do their time in peace and then fuck off back home. Or else they'll just finally get fed up and quit to go find another line of work. But it's not easy to pack up and start over again in a new career when you're on the wrong side of 40 or 45. So I imagine there are many like you who are miserable and stuck in positions they hate because it's easier just to get up and keep going into the office every day until they've put in enough years to qualify for retirement.

Very true on all accounts.

 

I've known a couple of good high level managers that left due to the bullshit. They were all highly qualified so new jobs weren't really a problem.

 

But their loss was felt across the department as their less scrupulous arse kissing replacements weren't either competent enough or were too corrupt (eg lots of travelling so collect travel allowances)  or simply too busy arse kissing to even maintain things that worked, let alone fix new problems.

[RelentlessOblivion]

I often ponder why many Scandinavian countries seem not to have the same issues with corruption that we do, also tend to have higher social mobility, better education, better healthcare, lower rates of criminality in general etc. Perhaps I’m naive, but I think it is more western culture, breeding corruption, and a hunger for power that it is necessarily human nature.

[GoatmasterGeneral]

19 minutes ago, RelentlessOblivion said:

I often ponder why many Scandinavian countries seem not to have the same issues with corruption that we do, also tend to have higher social mobility, better education, better healthcare, lower rates of criminality in general etc. Perhaps I’m naive, but I think it is more western culture, breeding corruption, and a hunger for power that it is necessarily human nature.

I've never been up that way, but I'm sure native Scandinavians would tell you their countries aren't as idyllic as some might want to think and they have their own problems too. I know I've read that the right-wing has gained a foothold in Swedish politics of late so how long do you think it will be until they have many of the same kinds of corruption and issues as all the other larger western countries just maybe on a smaller scale. I haven't done any research on this but I wouldn't think that Scandinavians should be any more or less inherently prone to corruption than people from any other western industrialized nation. We surely know many European countries have had long histories of rampant endemic corruption.

[Dead1]

51 minutes ago, RelentlessOblivion said:

I often ponder why many Scandinavian countries seem not to have the same issues with corruption that we do, also tend to have higher social mobility, better education, better healthcare, lower rates of criminality in general etc. Perhaps I’m naive, but I think it is more western culture, breeding corruption, and a hunger for power that it is necessarily human nature.

I'd say a large chunk of it is cultural.  The Nordic model is more than economics, it's a value set deeply rooted in Nordic culture.

From what I've read it has to do with how societies developed there in terms of harsh climate and the particular type of Protestantism practiced there.

Western cultures (Nordics, Germans, Anglo-Saxons) has less corruption than other ones, hence it managed to evolve higher resilience and better standards of living.  A lot of it is tied in to ancient Protestant values.

Same applies to some successful North Asian countries eg Japan and South Korea.  China has a lot of corruption but it also has some other cultural factors that alleviate it compared to say Russia or Brazil.  This includes traditional Chinese community orientated values and Confucianism and Buddhism.

Essentially the corruption is limited enough to not cripple social development (though still a big problem).

Hence China is becoming an economic superpower despite corruption whilst India and Brazil and Russia wallow in their own corruption and inertia which is at all levels of society.

Hunger for power isn't necessarily bad if social values and structural protections are strong enough to limit it's abuse.

 

36 minutes ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

I've never been up that way, but I'm sure native Scandinavians would tell you their countries aren't as idyllic as some might want to think and they have their own problems too. I know I've read that the right-wing has gained a foothold in Swedish politics of late so how long do you think it will be until they have many of the same kinds of corruption and issues as all the other larger western countries just maybe on a smaller scale. I haven't done any research on this but I wouldn't think that Scandinavians should be any more or less inherently prone to corruption than people from any other western industrialized nation. We surely know many European countries have had long histories of rampant endemic corruption.

 

Compared to rest of the world (including Australia and US), the Nordic states are closest we get to human paradise in terms of living standards and accountability.

Yes they problems but they aren't as big as rest of world.

 

As for European corruption, you will find it is the strongest in societies that are:

a.) Non Protestant (ie Roman Catholic, Orthodox Christian and a couple of Muslim ones)

b.) Often industrialised late or never fully industrialised.

c.) Often had a strong Ottoman, Arab or Russian influence (ie Balkans and south Europe eg south Italy or Spain).

There are exceptions of course.

I don't include Russia here because Russia isn't really European in culture.  It's something else - a dysfunctional bastardisation of Eastern European, Ottoman, Byzantine, Mongol and Central Asian elements.  If you read about Russian culture, Putin, Prigozhin and the whole violent kleptocratic shit show are extremely normal by standards of Russian history. 

 

The technocratic if sluggish and economically rotting post-Stalin Communist USSR was actually the only period of relative enlightenment in Russian history (even Peter the Great ruled like a Mongol warlord which every single Russian tzar/premier/president has done before and after him).

 

[RelentlessOblivion]

If not for the fact I’d miss SA summer too much I really would move to either Denmark or Norway. It’s concerning the right wing swing in Sweden, but that does seem to be largely at odds with trends throughout the rest of the region. 

[GoatmasterGeneral]

11 hours ago, RelentlessOblivion said:

If not for the fact I’d miss SA summer too much I really would move to either Denmark or Norway. It’s concerning the right wing swing in Sweden, but that does seem to be largely at odds with trends throughout the rest of the region. 

Average maximum temperature of 23 °C (73 °F) in July for Stockholm; Copenhagen, Oslo and Helsinki have an average July maximum temperature of 22 °C (72 °F). Man that sounds perfect to me. That's a good 10° cooler than here on average. I would have no problem leaving hot sticky summers behind. It's 83°F today (28°C) and I'm dying.

By comparison...Adelaide experiences mild winters and a warm, dry summer. It has an average maximum temperature of 29°C (84.2°F) in summer and 15 - 16°C (59 - 60.8°F) in winter.

Yeah if I could have Copenhagen summers with Adelaide winters I'd be all set. Can't even really call 60°F "winter" imo. Problem of course is that these seasons run concurrently in the different hemispheres. Winter temps in Copenhagen are still a bit warmer than here in NJ though so Denmark wins. C'mon let's go Blivvington, I'll pack my shit and meet you in Copenhagen. 

[AlSymerz]

If Adelaide and South Australia would just stop sending us all this shitty rain I'd be happy. Honestly we get that you all want to be drips and have half your roads closed to flooding, but you don't have to share

[GoatmasterGeneral]

43 minutes ago, AlSymerz said:

If Adelaide and South Australia would just stop sending us all this shitty rain I'd be happy. Honestly we get that you all want to be drips and have half your roads closed to flooding, but you don't have to share

Aren't Ozzies always claiming they have a massive water shortage, and that's the reason you have an entire continent with only 25 million people? By rights a land mass that size should have ten times that many people. So then you get a little much needed rain for a change and you've gotta bitch about it? Is there no making you roo fucking Ockers happy? ⛈️ ☂️

[AlSymerz]

I have no idea about any specific claims of water shortages. There is always parts of the country in drought like conditions and there is a large portion of the country that would not sustain urban life due to how little water they get. The majority of the country has just come out of a 4 year La Nina which caused massive flooding to many areas as well as multiple flooding events to some areas, but flooding rains doesn't mean it fixes a water shortages.

After 4 years of La Nina anything more than light rain around here just hits the ground and runs away. Those of us on tank water are generally full and those who rely on mains water are generally getting it from dam storage with 80% or more capacity. But that will change dramatically with the oncoming El Nino expected this summer. According to experts we'll run the 2023/24 summer fine in the majority of the country but if we get a second El Nino in 2024/25 more than 65% of the country could be back under drought conditions.

It's a strange old country. Up in Northern Territory winter is the dry season, temps even drop under 30 degrees sometimes. But in the centre where that fucking great big rock is they had a one day rainfall this week that exceeded their entire winter total. Not only that it got cold enough that on Friday morning there was the slight chance that it was actually going to snow on the Rock, (it didn't though).

What would make some of us roo fucking ockers happy was if them weirdos from South Australia all farted at once in a North Eastern direction and blew all the rain clouds up into northern NSW and QLD, because we just don't need it right now.

 

[GoatmasterGeneral]

Thanks for the info sir but you do realize I was just joking, right? I know that flash floods or a rainy month won't change the basic Aussie water situation. That'd be as dumb as the people who deny climate change is real every time we get a cold day.

[AlSymerz]

Aahh yes but, I reserve the right to offer at least one waffle based opinion piece per week for the people not to read. In other words, you lot got your waffle pieces in yesterday which I didn't read so here's mine.

[Dead1]

So my first experience of Australian structural racism and it's a big one.

My wife and I want to get new passports.  My last one expired in 2017.

My wife filled the form in 2 minutes.

I clicked foreign born and all hell breaks lose and now it seems I am no longer entitled to an Australian passport despite being a citizen and having had Australian passports in past.

 

First bit of structural racism: I have to have an Australian citizen act as referee for me.  Doesn't matter I've been an Australian citizen since 1985.  As a low down dirty foreign undermensch I have to have a white person vouch for me.

 

Second bit of structural racism: I have to provide a certificate of citizenship.  I have never had to provide one of these before.

Now given I was 5 years old when I became a citizen, I was never issued my own certificate.  I was included on my father's certificate.

So I have to apply for this certificate at additional cost of $265-$540 (depending on which form I have to complete).

 

Except I can't fill the form as it asks questions I have no answers too:

Eg what exact date did I arrive in Australia - errr it was sometime in 1982 when I was2 years old.  My parents have no idea either.

When did I renounce my non-Australian citizenship?  No idea.  No idea if I even hold a second citizenship as I was a citizen of Yugoslavia which hasn't existed since 1991. 

I did seek consular advice - Croatian consultate never got back to me and Serb consulate told me I certainly wasn't a Serb citizen.

When did my parents renounce their non-Australian citizenship?  See above.

So for all woke blathering, since 2007 when I last applied for a passport, Australia has managed to actually introduce more racist rules in government.

So I am supposedly a citizen of Australia with no criminal record and I cannot get a passport which is apparently one of my rights!  

I now have to fuck around with Commonwealth ombudsman to see if I can get any joy though most likely as a second class citizen I can't.

 

I also have lost my last ounce of loyalty to Australia.  I hope at some stage the PRC rapes it good.