Greenpeace

Greenpeace Africa Greenpeace Global
Greenpeace

Nasa

Navigate To NASA LIVE Nasa's Official Website
JPL-NASA
Are Institutions (Like the UN) Still Relevant?

20/04/2021

In today's world, many of the institutions we grew up with and which formed a large number of the conceptions and views we hold about all matters in life, have become moribund and seemingly purposeless as we perceive them to be ineffectual at best.

This is due to a number of often conflicting reasons, most of which then result in excessive manipulation of the media and what is deemed suitable for public consumption. The Great Institutions were put into place for varied reasons but all had one thing in common: they were there to improve the quality of life for the people of this planet, whether by avoiding war and violent uprisings, ensuring the provision of basic necessities at an acceptable level of quality, or foreseeing and putting into place qualitative plans of action for unforeseen or unavoidable setbacks (from natural disasters to manmade ones).We all slept easier at night. They were looking out for us, or so we believed.

“... a life that requires constant income streams. This does not mean that they are unaware that there are major discrepancies between what they are told and shown (via MSM & images) and the end results of those words and statements.”

The rot set in around the late 60's when counter-culture started not only to question the status quo but challenged it directly by refusing to accept platitudes as answers. Further, they demanded as their right the option of changing the system to benefit more people directly and in the 70's, transparency became a major issue. Show us the actions, the results, and let us directly assure ourselves that they are the truth, not a sanitized version to be fed to the electorate to keep them from asking awkward questions. We would not take their disingenuous replies as the unvarnished truth but insisted on ever more details and hard facts, all of which were then independently verified before being accepted to be suitable fodder for the public.

For the most part, the public were semi-unaware of the intricacies of these issues as participants at the level of observers and then only seeing what was fed to them by the mainstream media. It made little difference which country you were in—a version of the game was played out with the usual local and regional variations. Since most of the public were educated in a system that was designed to turn out office and service industry (McJob's) fodder rather than teach each individual to think for themselves, they were for the large part incapable beyond the elementary stage of ascertaining the truth of any matter by the normal methods of research.

The information is out there but you had better be able to see beyond the veil because it’s not only well hidden but also surrounded by copious amounts of misinformation. To find the true facts, you need to be both skilled and incredibly patient. For most people, time is luxury they do not have with their constant need to survive just standing still in today's consumer driven life, a life that requires constant income streams. This does not mean that they are unaware that there are major discrepancies between what they are told and shown (via MSM & images) and the end results of those words and statements.

But for the institutions, that problem is one for their media centers and spokespeople to deal with because that is virtually their only contact with the public they are supposed to serve. They leave the real issue up to the government (or whichever head is in charge depending on the system in place) to deal with as it involves the electorate and they will hide behind 'I'm only an employee, appointee, etc., and I am not responsible for...' thereby shirking any responsibility, be it moral or legal. This is part of why such a large proportion of the population tend towards the deny, deny method of not taking responsibility for their actions and words, thus leaving society today in the position of having members who refuse to follow the simple rules that make it work. These rules are as simple as the biblical 'Do as you would be done by' and have seldom needed to be strictly adhered to but instead followed, not blindly, but in the main so we can all live in a semblance of harmony. Most of us may cheat a touch on our taxes (if we can get away with it ), smoke consumables, indulge in excesses, whether it be food or something else and other minor infractions, none of which will shake the foundations of our societies.

And what about the institutions? Do they really represent us and consider any of our interests? Or are they now so compromised that it is no longer possible for them to do any real work which is not filtered through so many layers of bureaucratic and everyday corruption that they are incapable of delivering as promised. The basis of their inception was when the rot set in. Let’s be fair, the concepts behind most institutions were superb at the time and definitely for the right reasons but were hijacked from the start by legal finagling, which gave interest groups the leeway to indulge in very profitable but contrary actions. Subversion then grew as the amounts of money increased over time (due as usual to inflation and padding) until we reached the state we are at today when the original concept is far from what we see before our eyes and looks like a pipe dream.

So can these same institutions be saved and fixed so as to provide the very worthwhile services they were set up to provide? Or do they have to be scrapped and reformed into a more pertinent and practical version so as to be able to deliver tangible results that can be quantified and are value for money? The existing institutions are so bloated that they are cash cows for those benefiting from them and an enormous drain of taxpayer's money for no good reason, let alone purpose. And the tax take is not getting bigger when applied to those fundamentals of life like infrastructure and utilities (presuming they are not already privatized and costing us all an excessive amount) but instead to the useless and ever hungry groups of businesses (from local to multinational) whose insatiable appetite for ever increasing profits (driven in part by the needs of the stock market to optimize further profits on the back of the existing ones) is one of the reasons behind every nations indebtedness.

Yes the Military/Industrial complex, as so often quoted, is the largest (bigger than pharmaceutical drugs) money spinner but the institutions are not far behind. And all of them rely on the tax take to provide most of the funding even when sales are accounted for. And when government's step in to pick up their respective tabs like they do for the UN (United Nations) or WHO (World Health Organization), it is still the taxpayer of the country concerned who pays the bill. What they receive in return is an altogether different story—we are not referring to that presented as the official version.

'Knowing your own darkness is the best method of dealing with the darkness's of other people' Carl Jung Swiss analytical psychologist. This has to be considered when reflecting on institutions since they are run and composed of people, not rules, and regulations or fixed assets like buildings and goods ranging from toilet rolls to IT to weaponry. And people are programmed to survive, though whether this is at all costs remains to be seen—history shows that cataclysms like wars and natural disasters bring out the worst in us (from a societal point of view) when we will survive no matter what we have to do. So, to solve the needless waste expended by ineffectual institutions, we have to deal with the human condition first. And then decide what we want these institutions to accomplish and how. And at what cost financially.

Unfortunately, due to time and financial constraints we will no doubt deal with both at the same time even though it would be better and more efficient to deal with each separately until we are ready to interconnect them. This of course will suit the 'businesses' who will attempt and succeed, if we let them, to include their agendas into the discussions and final plans and so subverting the whole idea of making them not only relevant but also cost effective. The removal of the iniquitous political deviants from the discussion will perhaps stop some of their nefarious plans but the legal teams will have to be scrutinized as will their input to prevent them sneaking in unwanted clauses and issues that are self-serving.

As is clearly exemplified by the case of the United Nations, a wonderful idea that was sidetracked by the major players from the start with the positioning of their headquarters in New York (the USA is not a neutral country) and the Security Council being positioned to override any vote in the General Assembly and thus negate any opinions/matters they did not want discussed, attended to, or brought to the public's attention. Added to this is the totally corrupt system of supply from the cleaning compounds, stationery and so on until it comes to choosing who forms what task force, or intervention monitors where the contracts are sewn up without options to achieve value for money. The usual tender system is applied but like so much else in most institutions, it is farcical in its blatant bias and irrelevant socially aware twaddle.

Many of the smaller nations depend on supplying troops to conflict zones as peacekeepers etc. and are therefore reliant on the contracts making them fully pliable if voting occurs or backing is required by those technically in charge. But in reality they are placed by the power brokers to ensure complicity so that profits can be taken. Still, let us not forget that the League of Nations placed Germany in such a financially parlous state after WW1 and Japan was treated as a third class nation so it is little wonder that WW2 happened. It’s another example of an institution completely removed from its remit by the Western powers (USA/UK/France/Canada etc.) so as to fulfil only their personal agendas and not its own, which was after all to ensure no further conflicts especially on the global level.

Institutions have become the bane of our lives in that we have no choice but to deal with them in order to facilitate important (why did we allow them to become this?) aspects of everyday existence like building permits, education, justice, and so on. They are notoriously inefficient in their hidebound pen pushing, box ticking methodologies, which they cling to come hell or high water, all this being necessary in order to justify their existence (wouldn't you protect your job?). But the idea of replacing them is always sidelined in favour of the prepared modifications, which are glossy and tick all the boxes but in fact nothing changes other than names of departments and methods so that it looks brand new but is more of the same. Oh, and the names of the companies supplying goods & services change but it's the same owners hidden behind Blind Trusts and other quasi legal financial hideaways (yes, they are legal but challenged for salient reasons).

Otherwise back to life, back to reality. It is time to change the system overall and institutions are one of the most powerfully intrusive and controlling determinants of our lives affecting all of us (did you recently have to pay Council Tax, complete car paperwork, mortgage, bond papers, etc?). They impact negatively overall because even if you get what you need done reasonably quickly, there are the continuous renewals and updating so as to increase revenue (they charge more for the service/goods afterwards) and the instilled fear of having to deal with 'paperwork' or worse still, 'Official' paperwork. The very large corporations and multinationals income and profit in many cases exceeds the GNP's (Gross National Products) of a large number of nations today and most supply institutions globally with both goods and services (some of the ‘services’ are mercenaries masquerading as peacekeepers or advisors), so they too are institutions in themselves (although some are as large and complex as governments).

We have allowed ourselves to be brainwashed and made compliant by being told that having controls in place ensures all the good things happen as opposed to the bad and it's for our own protection against deliberate and unforeseen disasters of any kind. It is for 'us'. But who benefits and who accepts it as a fait accompli? The very powerful message sent by institutions to the population, the rest of us, is ‘we know best… we have the correct answers’. Who ordained the questions and provided the answers? Because from the start the dice was not thrown in our favour but rather theirs so they could implement their agendas at our (the taxpayer or consumer's) expense. These moribund edifices have long passed their sell-by dates and there needs to be a complete rethink of what is needed, and for what reasons, at what cost, and for whose benefit.

Institutions in whichever form and however named are an essential cog in our machine and will remain until we re-examine the fundamentals of our existence and change the basis of what passes for civilized society from all out uber consumption to availability and sustainability. Otherwise these same institutions proclaimed as being for our benefit will continue to rule our lives and force us to march to the piper's tune. Their drive for expansion and ever increasing income makes us all slaves who run just to stand still financially as costs increase but real incomes do not. We are feeding monsters that drive us to produce and make us feel stressed and guilty at the same time because we think we are letting down others (society) if we do not play our part. These were put into place for us. It is time to call them to heel and time for us to decide what they do and dictate how they behave. After all, we are the paymasters.

Last Updated