Get Mind Smart
see the bigger picture
Overstand the Corporate Plan
Under construction – mountains of information a-cometh!!!
SAY NO TO ‘BEYOND GDP’ = VALUING NATURE AND PEOPLE
170 NATIONS SIGNED ARTICLE 40 OF AGENDA 21 IN 1992 COMMITTING TO ‘GO BEYOND GDP’ – AND THIS TRANSITION IS NOW BEING SUPPORTED BY:
World Economic Forum
Club of Rome
World Social Forum
Biomass links to natural accounting and the new economics – it is about holistic systems – endlessly renewable capitalism – products can be made with renewables, people and nature are renewable – giving each component a financial value allows tight control of accountancy and risk, by using complexity agent-based modelling, and it turns us into commodities.
JUST LIKE THE ELITE, OCCUPY IS BOTH CALLING FOR A DIFFERENT KIND OF CAPITALISM (‘DEMOLISH’) AND FOR CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND, IN LINE WITH THE ZEITGEIST MOVEMENT, THE WORLD SOCIAL FORUM (set up after Seattle protests,see Lew Rockwell on RT – WSF AND WEF ARE INTERCHANGEABLE), AND THE ELITE, FOR A RESOURCE-BASED ECONOMY – PUTTING PRICES ON NATURE, PEOPLE, AND CONCEPTS RELATED TO THEM.
WHY WERE OCCUPY INVITED TO ATTEND THE OECD FORUM ALONG WITH SEVERAL OTHER FOR-THE-MAINSTREAM ‘ACTIVISTS’?
WHY WAS AN OCCUPY ACTIVIST CALLING FOR US ALL TO WORK TOGETHER AT DAVOS (THIS YEAR NAMED ‘THE GREAT TRANSFORMATION’)?
THOSE MOST INVOLVED IN CALLING FOR MEASURING NATURAL CAPITAL are also calling for a new economic system. The most notable proponent here is George Soros with his Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET), which is now teamed up with the Oxford Martin College in the UK.
INET is also involved with the futurICT project, which includes work on the Planetary Nervous System (aggregates info from smart dust, guardian angels, mobile phones, computers etc etc); the Living Earth Simulator(behaviour prediction, thus including finance/economics as well as social systems ie complexity modelling) the Global Participatory Platform (this is the communitarian participatory democracy ‘platform’ which will be councils making decisions (/acting upon) based on info received from artificial intelligence and complexity models and algorythims).
Measuring natural capital requires deep surveillance and record keeping. The ‘Guardian Angels’ could do this very well. Implantable!!!
And spoke at the conference
“Hunter Lovins, founder of Natural Capitalism: We must move rapidly from words to action if the 99% are to find a path to a future that is both just and sustainable. One important step will be to convene an international forum capable of forging agreement on the key principles and institutions for a new, sustainable economic paradigm – a Bretton Woods agreement for the 21st century.”
Not at all ironic to refer to Bretton Woods here because the recent Bretton Woods 2 was a Soros initiative, calling for a new economic paradigm (the conference itself was called ‘Paradigm Lost’!!!). check out the sections on this website about economics for more info, but note that Amory Lovins (former husband of Hunter Lovins, both still working for the same cause) stands to gain substantially from measuring natural capital and most certainly from biomass which is intended to fuel his hydrogen fuel-cell powered vehicles!!!!
Speakers at this year’s 4th OECD World Forum on Statistics, Knowledge and Policy, Measuring Well-Being for Development and Policy Making (16-19 October 2012, New Delhi, India) include Richard Layard (LSE) and Charles Seaford (nef) and figures from the World Bank http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/4/46/50108811.pdf
As mentioned above, other reasons to refute natural accounting include the possibility of people and nature becoming commodified and financialised, as well as the trend towards biomass – this all links in to the Third Industrial Revolution spearheaded by Rifkin. This is to be our transition.
The collapse of the economy is being stage managed. It may be that several key figures are the fall guys. J P Morgan (came up with the widely used Value-at Risk model;’ VaR’) has lost billions, and it’s blamed on the different kind of risk model they used, all the talk in banking circles is on the measurement and prediction capabilities for risk, which of course links to insurance, and the need for tighter control, and the need for a global financial language with global identification numbers. (This ‘language’ is code for software – and that code bears the ideology of its creator – remember that someone writes the code and for subjective representations such as law it is an ontology.)
So note these two connections between J P Morgan and accounting for natural capital:
John Fullerton, Founder and President, leads all activities of the Capital Institute. Since the formal launch of Capital Institute in 2010, John has established himself as a thought leader in the “new economy” space, on financial reform, and as a leading practitioner of “impact investing.” He writes a weekly blog, “The Future of Finance,” at Capital Institute, and speaks regularly on the intersection of sustainability, social justice, and finance. John is also the principal of Level 3 Capital Advisors, LLC, an investment firm focused on high impact sustainable private investments.
During his 18-year career at JP Morgan ending in 2001, John managed multiple capital markets and derivatives businesses around the globe, and subsequently ran the venture investment activity of LabMorgan as Chief Investment Officer. He was JPMorgan’s representative on the Long Term Capital Oversight Committee in 1997-98. John is currently a director of Grasslands, LLC, New Day Farms, Inc., the New Economics Institute, and an Advisor to Natural Systems Utilities. He was a participant of the UNEP Green Economy Report. John’s impact investment activity with Level 3 Capital Advisors brings a unique “theory and practice” experience that helps informs his work at Capital Institute.
John Fullerton is also executive director of Soros’ INET.
Another former J P Morgan executive is Rob Johnson; he is founder and director os the Capital Institute AND IS NOW BACK AT J P MORGAN AS HEAD OF GLOBAL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT FOR CHINA REAL ESTATE (DEC 2011). Rob Johnson is also closely tied to Soros – he is director of INET – see http://ineteconomics.org/video/documentary/george-soros-talks-rob-johnson-about-inet
Andrew Haldane spoke at Soros’ Bretton Woods 2 – he endorses complexity theory – see speech on ‘fat tails’ and the one on global financial syntax. Haldane has also suggested that banks will become irrelevant with peer-to-peer (P2P) payments and microtransactions etc.
Complexity modelling involves agent-based social simulation – economics is a ‘social system’. It has found that control of just a few key nodes results in control of the whole system.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR PEER-TO-PEER GOVERNANCE PROMISED BY THE CHAMPIONS OF BOTH THE NEW ECONOMICS AND COMMUNITARIANS???
WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM BITCOIN BEFORE IT GOES UNDER OR BECOMES CONTROLLED BY GLOBAL FINANCIAL SYNTAX AND/OR OTHER CURRENCIES SUCH AS THAT CREATED BY NATURAL ACCOUNTING?
WE ARE BIOMASS – WE ARE DATA – SAY NO TO NATURAL ACCOUNTING - SAY NO TO GATHERING OF DATA
QUESTION THE INVOLVEMENT OF ALL THOSE NAMED ABOVE. WHY ARE THEY INVOLVED WITH THE OCCUPY MOVEMENT? WHY IS THE ZEITGEIST MOVEMENT CALLING FOR THE SAME THING? JAQUES FRESCO IS PROMOTING SMART MESH CITIES AND A VIRTUAL ECONOMY – THESE REQUIRE SURVEILLANCE AND ARE UNDER CONSTRUCTION NOW. BIOMASS COULD RESULT IN LARGE SCALE LAND USE WHICH IS WHY WE ARE TO BE HERDED IN TO SMART CITIES AS PER AGENDA 21 – BUT THE BIOMASS FARMS AND INCINERATORS WILL REQUIRE A LABOUR FORCE – THEY ARE BAD FOR HUMAN HEALTH AND INVOVLE THE USE OF GM CROPS – THOSE WITHOUT ‘KNOWLEDGE CAPITAL’ THE NON-BOURGOISIE WILL WORK THERE – SEE PLANNEDOPOLIS – ALSO LIVING IN THE HINTERLANDS WILL BE THOSE WHO DO NOT SCORE WELL ON QUESTIONS RELATING TO GOVERNANCE, OR EVEN OVERALL HEALTH, IN THE ‘GLOBAL WELL BEING’ SURVEYS.
We are living in a knowledge economy soon to incorporate a new capitalism, where peer-to-peer, under the communitarian philosophy of ‘the common good prevails’, will require extensive connectivity (smartdust etc) and surveillance. How much you eat matters – carbon footprint. How many friends you have – reputation = currency. It goes on and on like this, but it needn’t do – it hasn’t actually happened yet. We are indeed on the cusp, but can change it now using the instruments which have been created. Occupy stand up and move forward on this! It’s not their world!
Here are more links in this web:
Amory Lovins – massive amount of connections to top corporations and government around the world, well worth looking at – see him at Rocky Mountain Institute – cleantech investor – designer of hydrogen fuel-cells (hydrogen can be made from biomass). Lovins advocates valuing natural capital (wrote book + see this video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9E7dWfItDE where Dennis Meadows, author of Limits to Growth was also speaking).
He reported to the Club of Rome on the ‘next industrial revolution’ – this is aligned with Jeremy Rifkin’s work on the Third Industrial Revolution.
Dennis Meadows also adds his support to the Occupy movement http://www.occupyworldstreet.org/ows-the-book/praise-by-author/14-dennis-meadows
other supporters of Occupy:
(Vandana Shiva is endorsing cradle to cradle and OECD measures towards natural accounting)
Occupy is calling for natural capital accounting, including human beings, and is also calling for ‘the third way’ along with the World Social Forum, and communitarians the world over. Occupy itself can be said to be a communitarian movement, as can the United Nations.
THE NEW ECONOMICS IS AGENDA 21 IN ITS FINAL PHASE – NATURAL CAPITAL ACCOUNTING CALLS FOR GLOBAL SURVEILLANCE AND DATA-COLLECTION. SAY NO TO BOTH! TELL OCCUPY!
NOTE! J Craig Ventner – human genomics – “Instead of writing software for computers, we can now write software for life” (said this in a BBC program called ‘Progress’) bioethics is ‘socially responsible’!! more on this to come!
Complexity modelling will be advantaged by natural capital accounting – it will enable almost total control of the world when the data-gathering instruments are in place and legislation regarding natural capital, together with financial collapse of the current system causing natural capital metrics to become a virtual currency alongside other virtual currencies together with the global financial language – complexity modelling only applies to natural systems – but so many problems here - more writing to follow – for instance, does it factor in manipulation by the elite? By those who write the code? Those who govern the data? What happens to reflexivity then? What about controlling the key nodes? Can we be purely peer-to-peer without central governance? Or does the code represent ‘governance’?
Perhaps a virtual currency which is always abstract, and extrinsic, such as Bitcoin? We cannot allow financial values to be attached to ‘products of nature’ or to ‘human attributes’ because in the current climate especially this could lead to physical representations of money – and even concepts would have a financial value. That would be one hell of a messed-up world, so we can’t allow it to happen.
Financialisation of nature is already happening eg Speciesbank
more on this to come shortly
The International lntegrated Reporting Council (IIRC) believe there “is a clear interdependence between the six forms of capital used by companies to create and preserve value. These capitals are natural, financial, human, intellectual, manufactured and social. In the policies we are taking to Rio, we focus specifically on the contribution natural and social capital make to creating and preserving value.”
The IIRC “aims to create a globally accepted framework for accounting for sustainability” www.iasplus.com/en/.../international-integrated-reporting-council-iirc (sponsored by Siemens) - they talk about ‘creating value’ – this is also spoken of by advocates of social currency creation such as Arthur Brock( eg Metacurrency), who spoke to Occupy with Eric Harris-Braun (24/10/11) as part of ‘Revisioning Money Day’; said “.. we can create value but not money”. He champions currency ‘evolution’ to reflect our own ‘evolution’ to a system based on relational dynamics, market neotribes, social networks built on co-operation, purpose, solidarity, resilience, sustainability.
Stiglitz (see ‘A New Economy’) was one of the key members on a ministerial advisory panel for South Africa – he said of the global economic crisis and addressing climate change – “the two are complementary” – perhaps explained by “climate change is an opportunity. It isn’t necessarily a burden …. This way of thinking of focusing on the costs and not their opportunities has contributed to getting us bogged down.” http://mg.co.za/article/2011-01-17-how-sa-can-change-the-worlds-climate-outlook/
Cradle to cradle – davos – (self-assessed) - criteria for certification involve use of biomass and renewable energy trading credits. Links to reflexivity and circular economy. More on this to come!
The founders of WAAS were motivated by a deep emotional commitment and sense of responsibility to work for the betterment of all humankind. Their overriding conviction was on the need for a united global effort to control the forces of science and technology and govern the peaceful evolution of human society. Inhibiting conditions limited their ability to translate these powerful motives into action, but they still retain their original power for realization. Today circumstances are more conducive, the international environment is more developed. No single organization can by itself harness the motive force needed to change the world, but a group of like-minded organizations founded with such powerful intentions can become a magnet and focal point to project creative ideas that possess the inherent dynamism for self-fulfillment.
.....Governance is essential. At the same time, it is necessary to recognize that major improvements are necessary and that, possibly, we are also facing a governance paradigm change
It is the purpose of the B.I.O. World Referendum, first proposed in 1991, to transcend national boundaries and bring the world together in a common cause.12 In today’s complex society, nations seldom share priorities. Climate change and other environmental concerns are possibly the only issues that are relevant to all the nations of the world. Furthermore, environmental degradation and resource depletion are often the impact of extreme poverty on the planet. A simultaneous electronic ballot on saving bios is a brilliant opportunity to demonstrate that, as citizens of the world, we can all agree on safeguarding the Earth for the generations to come.
world referendum (education):
Bio-Economics: Environmental management, natural resource economics, international policy, EU environmental policy, corporate policy.
– Bio-Energy: Renewable energy sources, clean energy, models for energy savings, wind, solar, biomass, energy efficient buildings.
– Bio-Ethics: Environmental protection as an ethical responsibility, codes of environmental ethics for every profession, the environment in bioethics. http://www.globalecointegrity.net/docs/conferences/samos/presentations/Arvanitis.pdf
WASHINGTON, D.C. (Feb. 16, 2012) – Company executives, scientists and government officials will bring a global perspective as featured presenters at BIO’s 9th annual World Congress on Biotechnology and Bioprocessing. The world’s largest industrial biotechnology conference for business leaders, investors, academics and policymakers in biofuels, biobased products, renewable chemicals, synthetic biology, food ingredients and biomass comes to Orlando, April 29 - May 2 at the Gaylord Palms Resort & Convention Center.
The plenary program will include six panel sessions:
• Fostering a Biobased Economy
• A Global Vision for Biomass Utilization: How Biotech Can Get Us There
• The Future of Biocatalysis in Global Manufacturing
• Promoting Biotech Innovation
• Financing Innovation in the Industrial Biotech Space: Creative Models and Future Trends
• What’s Driving Demand for Biotech Products?: A Customer’s Perspective
Featured plenary speakers include:
• Harry Baumes, Director, Office of Energy Policy and New Uses, United States Department of Agriculture
• David A. Benko, Director, Materials Research & Development, Goodyear Tire
• Paul Bryan, Consultant
• James C. Collins, President, DuPont Industrial Biosciences
• Andrew Hagan, Associate Director, Head of Chemicals Industry, Global Leadership Fellow, World Economic Forum
• Jennifer Holmgren, Chief Executive Officer, LanzaTech
• James Levine, President and Chief Executive Officer, Verenium Corporation
• Philip New, Chief Executive Officer, BP Biofuels
• Mark Niederschulte, Chief Operating Officer, INEOS Bio
• Valerie Sarisky-Reed, Acting Program Manager, Biomass Program, United States Department of Energy
• Vincent Schachter, Vice President, Research & Development, Total Oil and Gas
• Scott Vitters, Sustainable Packaging Director, The Coca Cola Company
• Roger Wyse, Managing Director, Burrill & Company
Brent Erickson, executive vice president of BIO’s Industrial & Environmental Section, said, “Speakers at the World Congress will highlight the growing biobased economy, in which homegrown biomass resources are transformed into consumer products. Some of the most widely used consumer products are joining the biobased economy. We are excited to offer this information-packed plenary program covering high profile topics and providing company executives an unparalleled opportunity to network with their colleagues and learn about the latest developments in the field of industrial biotechnology and bioprocessing.”
BIO’s World Congress will also feature six breakout session tracks over three days, with industry presentations on Advanced Biofuel Technologies; Algae and Feedstock Crops; Renewable Chemical Platforms and Biobased Materials; Specialty Chemicals; Synthetic Biology and Metabolic Engineering; and Technical Presentations. The full program of breakout panel sessions and speakers is available online.
– are we one day to be traded on the Global Social Stock Exchange? Round and round, react and re-react, virtual and real – the matrix.
Time for matrix tactics.
Our Position: oppose
Bill Number: SB1507
Legislative Session: 2012 Legislative Session
Say “NO” to More Head-in-the-Sand Policies and “YES” to Sustainable Development
SB1507 NOW: Rio declaration; prohibition (Burges) says that no government entity in Arizona can adopt or implement any of the tenets or principles relating to the U.N. Rio Declaration on Environment and Development and the Statement of Principles for Sustainable Development. It states,
"Since the United Nations has enlisted the support of numerous independent, shadow organizations to surreptitiously implement this agenda around the world, the state of Arizona and all political subdivisions are prohibited from implementing programs of, spending any sum of money for, being a member of, receiving funding from, contracting service from or giving financial or other forms of aid to the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives or any of its related or affiliate organizations . . . ."
This is really out there and way out of touch with both what the Statement of Principles for Sustainable Development does and is intended to do. The Rio Declaration contains 27 principles of sustainable development, including intergeneration and intragenerational equity; the precautionary principle; the polluter-pays principle; common but differentiated responsibilities; participation and access to information and judicial and administrative proceedings; environmental impact assessment and prior notification. What is wrong with that?
Thank you to the 20 Democrats and at least 10 Republicans who opposed this bill in the House. That is why it never made it to a Third Read.
According to the website for the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives,
ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability is an association of over 1220 local government Members who are committed to sustainable development. Our Members come from 70 different countries and represent more than 569,885,000 people.
ICLEI is an international association of local governments as well as national and regional local government organizations who have made a commitment to sustainable development.
ICLEI provides technical consulting, training, and information services to build capacity, share knowledge, and support local government in the implementation of sustainable development at the local level. Our basic premise is that locally designed initiatives can provide an effective and cost-efficient way to achieve local, national, and global sustainability objectives.
This is hardly some kind of shadowy organization with a hidden agenda. It is clear that it is working to help communities to promote sustainability and reduce their contributions to global climate change. None of this is contrary to U.S. or Arizona constitutions.
This bill should be rejected as it is not founded on accurate information and promotes a high level of paranoia about something we should all be working to do, living more lightly on the only planet we have.
Whilst theoretical communitarians differ in the nuances of their belief systems, the translation of the theory into ACTION rarely achieves such subtlety – that’s the danger of communitarianism: when it’s put into action, it manifests as both the glorification of consumerism and ‘growth’ (individual interests and the shared interest of the economy), and the continual fallback position of ‘the good of the collective is paramount’. This means, for instance, that the international ‘community’ must intervene in the affairs of ‘misguided’ nations (R2P). It means you must take the vaccine. It means the Occupy LSX protestors had to be evicted, because the public outnumbered them (and of course ‘health and safety’ considerations) – their ‘benefit’ mattered more. The concept can be whipped out whenever suits: for the common good. The argument goes – what benefits the community benefits the individual, as per ‘the prisoner’s dilemma’ and Robert Putnam’s research.
So note the CONNECTION TO AGENDA 21:
GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF COMMUNITARIANISM
Note how many of these communitarian principles are enshrined in Agenda 21.
Statement before the Subcommittee on Oceanography, Great Lakes, and the Outer Continental Shelf of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Washington, DC, July 21, 1992
Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to discuss the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), which concluded on June 14, 1992, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
The Administration valued the extensive involvement of Congress in preparing for the Rio conference, including passage of separate resolutions. In Rio we had the benefit on our delegation of observer groups from both the House and the Senate. Congressional interest and support enhanced US influence while we were completing our work at UNCED.
President Bush said in the opening theme of his speech to heads of state:
Today, an unprecedented era of peace, freedom, and stability makes concerted action on the environment possible as never before.
Indeed, the earth summit was the largest effort at international cooperation since the end of the Cold War, and countries had the opportunity to engage each other in a discussion of common problems without the cloud of East-West confrontation.
….. the Administration believes that the Rio conference was successful because it made clear progress on virtually all issues, and because it set us on a path toward a better future from which there is no turning back.
UNCED has literally given the international community new terms of reference to guide us into the 21st century.
…….. Agenda 21 includes a chapter on financial resources that was a positive agreement from all countries. The chapter reflects a balance between the need for developing countries to mobilize most resources internally with the need for additional assistance from external sources. The United States stressed the importance of favorable domestic economies, the role of the private sector, and the need for innovative financing such as debt-for-nature swaps. The finance chapter endorsed a variety of sources and mechanisms for financial assistance for Agenda 21, including the Global Environment Facility, as restructured.
Agenda 21 is being passed down to us – the consumers.
The accountability of the corporation, demanded by activists for years, and more recently by the Occupy activists, is to be ours.
Not only that but we are to do the advertising for them, to become active consumers, supporting the brands.
We will have to support them, to earn enough to get by, trapped in the game of life.
In 2005, the US Supreme Court took on the most important property rights case in the history of our country. The case pitted homeowners in New London, Connecticut against city officials who wanted to use the power of eminent domain to redevelop the area in the hope of creating jobs and increasing tax revenues. The homeowners resisted, arguing that eminent domain power can only be used for public projects like roads and schools. Ultimately, however, the Court upheld the city’s right to transfer the homeowners’ property to private land developers. The controversial Kelo v. New London decision sparked a nationwide debate about the importance of property rights that continues today.
Unintended Consequences: Eminent Domain will introduce high school students to the history of eminent domain use in the United States. Students will hear Susette Kelo tell her story and travel to Florida and California to meet other Americans who are fighting to protect their property from city officials who want to put their land to “more productive” uses. After listening to the best arguments for and against the use of eminent domain for redevelopment, students will have an opportunity to discuss and debate the issue with their teachers and classmates.
Most people think of Agenda 21 as being about protecting the earth, which they have been taught to conceptualize as ‘sustainability’ and lowering carbon output. They are not always aware that the plan is to achieve a balance of the three Es of environment, the economy, and (social) equity.
Niki Raapana has amply demonstrated the effects of the sustainability agenda, and how it ties in with communitarianism. The resources here examine the ‘equity’ part of the Agenda 21 equation, and show how philanthrocapitalism has fostered the rise in social business, backed by government funding and changes in the law; the effects have been pervasive: it’s all social now. The boundaries between the public, private and charitable sectors have been blurred, and the pace is picking up.
Rio+20 gives voice to many environmentalist pleas for biodiversity but few of their concerns will be addressed. Instead, the basic themes of their concerns are being used as cannon fodder for the implementation of the green economy. Also known as cleantech, greentech, and the use of renewables, many green ecomony articles have pictures of windfarms and solar, but the biggest prospect for investment lies in the way of biotechnology. The problem here is biomass, the use of plant matter to make biofuels, and a host of other products, such as bio-plastics, paints, neutraceuticals, etc.
Biomass could easily be hailed as the answer to our food and energy ‘shortages’, which would make it the social responsibility of us all to endorse. It is said to be an equitable and sustainable resource, and to alleviate poverty by creating more jobs. However, it has been shown to counter biodiversity (the establishment of huge monocultures as opposed to permaculture), to increase carbon output (despite being defined as carbon neutral), and to have poor outcomes for health.
When all of the main business hubs for corporate leaders are dictating sustainability and social responsibility, and highlighting the problems caused by corporate disasters like Enron and BP, the obvious question is how they stand to gain – biomass will be not only part of the Global Brand (the socially responsible choice), it will also be a major factor in the commodification of nature.