I don't advertisse in this blog but I'll make this an exception because this guy drove me to Fredericton to begin my protest two years ago. He's the son of Dorothy Dawson in Saint John.
Hi: i am a salesman, so it is necessary for me to portray myself in a
flattering and positive way. and in light of the destination of the
pictures i want the viewers of your blog to see that if they work hard and save
their money they too can come and sit on the beach in the cold weather.
It is not everyone who has the choice of providing an example of the
rewards of hard work and thrift.
With this picture i can demonstrate that the rewards of your labour are worth it: look at what you can enjoy on your vacation or when you are too old to work anymore. (of course, staying in my hotel, just off the beach, is implied!)
There are lots of other moral and social justifications for wanting to choose a
picture for general publication, including my personal favourite: wanting to
spite the people who were sure i would never account to anything!!
Let them see that attitude will give today what they will never be able to have,
except as a short term rental from someone like me!!!!
Just maybe i will pick up a few new customers for the hotel.
Does that make sense?
3 comments:
Hi: i really hate to ruin your day, but i am not a sufferer from any of
the attention problems. other than being unwilling to suffer fools gladly.
(which generally means civil servants, members of the clergy, and any person or organisation which pretends to be doing something "for my own good")
What i am is a person of many talents, with motivations different from the expectations of many persons in positions of authority and responsibility.
Most of what you are fighting against is a physical manifestation of the cultural requirement to conform.
Throughout history we have had many
cultures with multiple methods of convincing or coercing citizens to behave and appear in a specific fashion.
This has always been ounter-balanced by the ability of individuals to "vote with their feet" and leave. and in earlier times there was
the option of joining whatever army happened to be passing by.
In effect the forces of conformity had a method of releiving the social pressure of those who would or could not conform to the local standard.
At the turn of the century there were many writers who were prominent
in the discussion of the prevailing trends in society.
Some of those who managed to
get their ideas and concerns across to the general public had to do so
in a figurative manner, there was no other way to reach the general public.
Try re-reading aldous huxley, h.g.wells, jules verne, and other authors from the early 1900´s.
This centralisation of authority is not new, water monopolies are a
very common social structure.
The rise of bureaucracies signals the beginning of the social
ossification and those unwilling to participate must find a way of
accommodating themselves to the majority.
Today, at the beginning of the 21st century, we are nearer to the perfect method of social control than we as a species have ever been. it is no longer required to have large armies to enforce social behaviour.
Now it can be done with chemicals, and drugs. new technology is already being used to implant individuals with identification beacons, opportunities to be different
are being restricted under a whole range of good intentions.
At this point in time there is only the question of who will be the
issuer of the drugs and rules, and who will be the recipient.
A further thought: about 30 years ago dr. peters enunciated the peter
principle: a person will be promoted until they demonstrate incompetence. today we have the result of 40 or 50 years of corporate and government
bureaucracies following that practice, such that today we have no competent persons in any position in the heirarchy.
So we have many social problems to be investigated and/or fixed which are not social problems at all, but merely the result of small-minded bureaucrats reacting to perceived personal threats.
Of course i must finish this letter of exposition by inviting any and all who would like to debate these and other important questions to my
hotel on the beach in a warm, unrestricted environment.
Cheap beer to lubricate the thought
process, visual stimulation provided by god at sunset, and of course, a
friendly and cheerfull host to encourage you to enjoy yourself.
Thanks david
Very well written note. Your hotel sounds like nice place. Your analysis of controlling by drugs is good. Also politicians have developed a new culture of deception, which provides us with a mirage that lots of good things are being done. As Lord keeps saying his government spends more money on health care than any other government in the history of N.B. Oh yeah! Gas costs are higher today than ever before in the history of N.B. And a dollar was worth lot more in 1800 than it is today. He conveniently forgets to mention the inflation part & healthcare spending has not kept pace with inflation.
Talking about Peter principal Bernard Lord is the epitome of incompetence. We can also say that we never had such an incompetent premier in the history of New Brunswick.
on another note: today we should hand our heads and cry. cry for lost
opportunities, cry for the children of tomorrow who will never have the
feeling
of security of being attached to a place. cry for the small
entrepreneurs who
will never grow to any significant size. cry for our parents who
believed that
they were doing a good thing for the future when they made it
impossible to
fire civil servants.
and most of all, cry for this generation, our friends and neighbours,
our lost
dreams and unfullfilled goals.
for today is the official end to any possibility of becoming anything
at all!!.
it has been decreed in the highest court in the united states that any
politician or pipsqueak civil servant can take your land and property
at any
time, for any reason, with no recourse from the owners. and the reason:
so that
some other individual may "develop" the land.
today is the official day in which it is publicly ordained that the
only power
in this society is that of the ability to manipulate the civil
servants. or to
be the civil servant that can issue the order to seize or not seize
your land.
(see the news release from the u.s. supreme court issued this morning)
now what does this have to do with this blog? what does a decision made
in
another country have to do with drugging and otherwise abusing the
citizens of
new brunswick? is there anything that the taxpayers of new brunswick
can do
about this outright contravention of personal rights being inflicted on
the
citizens of another country?
unfortunately, the laws of canada and new brunswick tend to follow
those of the
u.s.. values applied to legal decisions regularly are supported by the
arguments used in the u.s. many of the concepts of what a citizen is
and the
rights and privileges of citizenship are similar in both countries. it
is
reasonable to assume that this decision will affect the lawgivers and
makers
here by providing a "moral" justification for over-riding the rights of
the
individuals in the province.
there is already a massive resistance to the LNG port and the
electricity plant
in saint john. the decision of the american supreme court provides the
elected
with moral support to continue the project in spite of the wishes of
the
electorate. in effect, there is now officially no counter-balance to
the
authority of the snivelling serpents. the citizens are no longer
allowed a
legal basis to argue any decision by the city council, or the
provincial
government or even the federal government. in short, you no longer have
the
right to own private property!! you may not defend yourself from
seizure by the
use of force, now you may not defend yourself in court. there are no
legal
grounds to disagree with the property takers.
so in future, only those who can manipulate the elected can have any
sort of
comfort. any person who hires or fires can now influence directly the
government and the civil service by threatening to remove jobs, or by
promising
to create jobs. this was true in the past by virtue of actual practice,
but was
not publicly held to be socially acceptable. now it is not only
allowable, it
is the only standard in legal existance.
and the final question: what can be done about it? the answer: spread
the word
about this in every way possible, to every person possible, as often as
possible.
the citizens who actually vote can make it clear to the lawmakers that
this is
un-acceptable in new brunswick. that the elected should immediately
take
visible and productive steps to safeguard the right of individuals to
property
ownership. that there must be un-assailable checks and balances on the
powers
and authorities of the civil servants, both elected and non-elected.
the voters
of this and all other levels of government must actively remind the
elected
that the citizens and the wishes of the citizens are the paramount and
only
reason for the existance of the civil service.
not that many years ago we in new brunswick had a leader who refused to
listen
to the voters of the province. it cost him and his party dearly. has
this
lesson been learned? i sincerely hope that it has, but i am equally
sure that
the the voters of new brunswick have forgotten the power they wield.
perhaps it
is time to initiate a recall on all the party leaders, which is
possible in the
conservative party. no power politically can withstand the grassroots
revolt by
the ordinary citizens of the land. some of us worked very hard and
succeefully
to make it possible to have a taxpayer revolt without violence and
without the
necessity of waiting until a provincial election is held to change the
views of
the elected. maybe it is the time to use this constitutional power to
keep new
brunswick for new brunswickers.
Post a Comment