UK General Election thread

[kentonio]

no you weren't. you were talking about warlords, corruption, and how any money that given will be immediately stolen by bad people. it's all written here on this page ken; i don't expect this sort of deflection from you.

Not deflection, just crossed wires, probably from me not concentrating properly. Apologies.

and i don't see why i should accept you as an arbiter of how people in britain think and vote. i've seen it for myself, i lived most of my life there; that's why i want to change it.

If you're still in tune with how Britain thinks, then you know how ridiculous an idea it is that the general population will ever vote to give up a significant chunk of the national wealth for ethical reasons.

again there are already NGOs working with directly local communities. they have no doubt experienced the problems you mentioned, and many others you didn't, and have developed diverse strategies and approaches to deal with the diverse situations that exist. it's remarkable that i have to point this out to someone who keeps talking about the 'real world' (while ignoring what is actually happening in it).

I'm not running down the achievements they make, my issue is with the difference in scale we're talking about. If they face those issues already, imagine those issues with the financial stake increased by a vast proportion.

[kentonio]

kentonio's caterwauling boils down to this:

"IT WILL BE DIFFICULT WAHHHHHH SO LETS NOT DO IT"
"WE CANT MAKE THE WORLD PERFECT WITHOUT SPENDING MONEY"
WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

He'd probably support foreign aid more if the money went straight into a monarch's pocket.

Actually you'd be amazed by quite how radical the changes are that I'd probably support. I won't support things I believe are just idealistic fluff though.

[kentonio]

I think the Prince Philip thread has demonstrated that your feelings about the whole voting issue in Britain, so this isn't so much moot as bleakly hilarious.

The reason I have little faith in democracy is exactly BECAUSE I know what motivates peoples votes.

[Hauldren Collider]

Kentonio, democracy has worked fairly well in britain for over 100 years. The places where I for instance am skeptical of democracy are only places where it a) has actually been tried and b) has actually never worked.

To the extent that britain is not democratic that is a flaw.

[C0ckney]

Actually you'd be amazed by quite how radical the changes are that I'd probably support. I won't support things I believe are just idealistic fluff though.

do you have any particular radical changes in mind?

[kentonio]

do you have any particular radical changes in mind?

Let's just say they rival yours on the radical scale, and share similar intended outcomes.

[C0ckney]

Not deflection, just crossed wires, probably from me not concentrating properly. Apologies.

fair enough. i'm sure it was an honest mistake; i was genuinely surprised.

If you're still in tune with how Britain thinks, then you know how ridiculous an idea it is that the general population will ever vote to give up a significant chunk of the national wealth for ethical reasons.

that's true, but my original point was that redistributing wealth to the third world would be effective, not that it would be popular.

I'm not running down the achievements they make, my issue is with the difference in scale we're talking about. If they face those issues already, imagine those issues with the financial stake increased by a vast proportion.

of course they will be problems with any large scale changes, but these can be addressed by building on existing knowledge and experience gained in particular contexts, by working with an empowering local communities to find sustainable solutions that improve people's lives. this certainly doesn't preclude large scale projects involving state actors, but different approaches will be needed for these.

[C0ckney]

Let's just say they rival yours on the radical scale, and share similar intended outcomes.

don't be so coy.

[Sava]

Actually you'd be amazed by quite how radical the changes are that I'd probably support. I won't support things I believe are just idealistic fluff though.

damn, I hoped you'd get more angry

[kentonio]

damn, I hoped you'd get more angry

I only get properly angry when people commit genuine offences, like pretending American Football is a real sport, or insulting my true love Drew Barrymore.

[Dr Strangelove]

Whoa! I remember when Drew Barrymore was just 5 years old. Seriously messed up dude.

[I AM MOBIUS]

Only if you loved her then - is that what you're alluding too...?

[N35t0r]

My father in law is a M.D., specializing in allergy and immunology. he lives in a city around 300 km away from here, on an entirely different province.

Among other things, he managed for a foreign NGO to donate a pollen sampler (he has an ongoing study on allergies from urban trees among other things), but legally they needed approval from the provincial government, which never gave it to them.

He also had a project for industrial water treatment (mostly from chicken processing plants, of which there are several in the city where he lives) using plants and whatnot. He had even managed to get the largest of the chicken companies to sponsor/host a trial project, but the municipal government forbade it from taking place.

[Sava]

Only if you loved her then - is that what you're alluding too...?

obligatory:

[C0ckney]

My father in law is a M.D., specializing in allergy and immunology. he lives in a city around 300 km away from here, on an entirely different province.

Among other things, he managed for a foreign NGO to donate a pollen sampler (he has an ongoing study on allergies from urban trees among other things), but legally they needed approval from the provincial government, which never gave it to them.

He also had a project for industrial water treatment (mostly from chicken processing plants, of which there are several in the city where he lives) using plants and whatnot. He had even managed to get the largest of the chicken companies to sponsor/host a trial project, but the municipal government forbade it from taking place.

that's a shame. did he ever find out why? was it corruption, or some other reason(s)?

i was involved in a project a couple of years ago, where we essentially kitted out a school before telling anyone from the government. we worked closely with the community residents' association, which is a useful backup to have, especially as at the time (pre-occupation) the local government were trying to avoid antagonising favela residents. luckily though, we didn't have any problems with officials.

in the same community the government had demolished some shacks on one of the hillsides (this was necessary, they were at risk of landslides - every years, tens to hundreds die in such events). our idea was to turn the area, which was really big, into a community garden/agroforest, which would also have the effect of securing the hillside against landslides. we approach the city government who were enthusiastic about the idea, promising funds and other support, none of which ever materialised. the residents' association were supportive at first, but grew frustrated the slow progress and later events. the police (this was post-occupation) carried out a heavy handed removal of some people who had tried to reoccupy the site (we didn't ask them to do this), and then following a lot of criticism, decided to leave things as they were. eventually, with no money, no support, and strained relations, we had to abandon the project.

the project i'm involved at the moment, building gardens in schools, we work with the schools directly, with no interference from anyone higher up; we don't ask anything from the authorities, and they leave us to get on with it.