By their deeds ye shall know them

We are aware of our conscious thoughts but not more. The subconscious processes continue regardless of any filters that may be imposed later. Their hidden nature and sheer volume makes them powerful determinants of our actions. Evidence suggest these are in fact more powerful.

Thoughts, seen as functional dynamics, can be scaled up to wider society where ideations become its members and entire thought structures represent what has been called cultural memes. In principle the affinity relationships causing customs to grow or to shrink hold at the lower as well at the higher end of the spectrum. Underneath it all the subconscious still reigns.

Since filtering by the conscious mind leaves so much unseen, can its counterpart be identified nevertheless? As its very nature precludes direct observation we need to ascertain its presence and from that deduce an influence.

The first step focuses on the act of filtering. If the end result is in harmony with the remainder, what has become visible holds no surprises. On the other hand, if the filtering prevents contrary sentiments from coming to the fore, there is a dissonance between what is seen and what is not. In most cases the complexity of ideational constructs virtually ensures the latter.

At the higher end of the scale suppose certain people perform some actions over a period of time with intermediary results. Because cognitive processes do not stop, an ongoing evaluation takes place which includes the subconscious. Nor will the subconscious have disappeared if the results are in line with the original intent. Which begs the question, what do those outcomes really tell us about their initiators? Let's consider three examples.

The Australian government imposed what has been called an 'alcopop tax', raising the price of pre-mixed alcoholic beverages supposedly to stem teenage binge drinking. Critics dismissed it as mere revenue gathering and predicted an increase in alcohol consumption. A few months into this policy and security firms and nightclubs do in fact notice more intoxicated behaviour. Spirits are now consumed straight. If drunkenness had been a problem before, it is even more so now.

What were the policy makers thinking? The general public reads about their intent, but they all are aware of the result. Our conscious, well-behaved mind tells us letting your hair down is bad. Yet our subconscious toys with the idea of breaking rules. As we mature (for want of a better word) our memories hark back to a wild youth, chuckling as we tell each other those stories. The alcopop tax - catharsis for our rulers.

Second example. Speed limits on our roads are lowered on a continual basis. Accidents due to speeding (actually, due to insufficient skills at higher speeds) are with us as ever, and the much-touted government line "every k over is a killer" sits comfortably with our abysmal record in science education. The lower the limit the more frustrated drivers get, the more likely they are to break the law and the recriminations keep coming. At the same time no-one facilitates the raising of skills.

Who doesn't get a thrill from speed? The more confined you are the more you want to break out especially if you play the role of supervisor. From carnivals to roller coasters the escapes are there for all to see. Speed limits - another candidate for a catharsis.

The third example is the age-old bugbear of puritans, pornography. Whether ever so reluctantly revealed from the ruins of ancient Pompeii, or certain paintings behind thick drapes in monasteries, or the modern-day offerings on the internet, erotic visuals have always sent delicious tickles tip-toeing down the spines of the suppressed. The moralists' response? Censorship.

Rather than removing the exuberant nastiness from this world, naked humans kept coming. All censorship ever did was to push the purveyors towards more bullet-proof schemes to circumvent the restrictions. It always has been an art form, if not in execution then certainly in delivery. Not even the most cantankerous denier could fail to spot the relationship. So much so that the heavier the cloak of righteousness the greater the opportunity to practice one's black art underneath.

Judge people by their deeds, not words - it's nothing new. And the more deeds there are, the better to judge them with.

When not racist is racist

One of the more fascinating aspects of human activity systems is their tendency to produce opposites at the extreme end of a spectrum. Some intense intent A to avoid Z causes Z after all.

In the West we have become very careful to steer clear of any hint of racism, so much so that often measures are evoked which in fact lead to exactly that kind of sentiment. The lead-up to the current outcry against Indian taxi drivers in Queensland, Australia, is one example.

In order to be seen absolutely non-discriminatory towards foreign students the rules governing employment in the taxi industry had been largely suspended and as a consequence students from India availed themselves of the opportunity to drive taxis to supplement their income during their studies here.

Not only were they not tested on their knowledge of local streets but sometimes even their ability to drive a car needed to be questioned. Over the years the problems increased to the point where local taxi drivers - whether Anglo-Saxon, Asian or Indian for that matter - protested against the unfair practices which in turn impacted on their own employment conditions. The resultant publicity led to the general perception that Indian drivers are to be avoided.

As usual the perception is grounded in reality, but it is the generalisation derived from so many shared experiences that causes concern. Compared to world events the issue is minor, but it was considered noteworthy by Thaindian News informing Indians in Thailand and the story was picked up by news services in India itself.

In terms of system dynamics the steadily growing radius of conceptualisation can be observed to gradually extend the awareness of the system’s members but not further.

Racism is a phenomenon that lacks a sufficient cognitive reach to understand the consequences of a limited perception. As the system evolves these consequences become part of its knowledge base and avoidance measures are the result. They in themselves can be seen as a system which grows and becomes more and more influential. In the absence of mitigating factors however the measures become counterproductive. When the backlash sets in the very thing they opposed is given sustenance and attains a viable status within the wider context.

In other words, another system is born and quite possibly finds support in the previous set of notions that gave rise to the entire development in the first place. From racism to liberalism and back to racism.

In a fundamental sense this demonstrates how dangerous the obsession with an ideal can be. As nice as a perfectly clean world would be, some dirt is necessary to keep it moderately clean.

About the In-between

The other day James Graham Ballard died. He was known for his visions of dystopia, drawn from his own experiences of societies that succumb to the vagaries of fate.

He was one of a growing group of intellectuals concerned with the effects of politics, culture and power and what kind of environment they could produce if left to their own devices.

There is no doubt such exercises are worthwhile, and in the hands of a writer like Ballard these landscapes are indeed evocative.

Yet most of them concentrate on the result, the endpoint of a road travelled in a dream-like state from which the awakening is as sudden as it is destructive. For all their lessons, are those visions realistic?

Take The Drought, a future where pollutants have produced a film across the world's oceans that prevents evaporation. There is no more rain.

If pollutants are produced by industry, and industry relies on the multitudinous opportunity available in an essentially functioning world, then a reduction in resources - especially water - would surely diminish the effectiveness of industry and hence the spread of that water-resistant membrane.

Long before the planet awakes to an accomplished drought the signs would impinge upon the consciousness of people no matter how blind they would have been otherwise. Responses emerge, measures will be taken.

Far from dismissing the significance of potential disasters, the lead-up has its own dangers, and they are very real.

Factors such as the nature of those signs, who interprets them, what kind of power resides in those who perceive them, and to what extent do oppositions manifest - they all form a mixture which in itself creates precarious scenarios.

Any system exists because by and large it has settled itself into a state of interdependence with its environment. Change any one component and the effects are situated within the same mutuality that allowed the system to perform in the first place. The over-riding effect of the change is not so much derived from one component's nature, but the wider dynamics that result from a destroyed status-quo. It is here that the more real danger lies.

Nor is such a shift of concern a matter of convenience, not wanting to think about what a world-wide drought would mean for example.

In principle the interrelationships between pollution, industry and the oceans (even assuming that film was possible) are a function of complex systems, and so their step-by-step mitigating effects will play themselves out regardless of our judgmental interpretation of them.

As potentially pro-active beings humans have the capacity to abstract and think through the possibilities on offer. To put it mildly, it makes sense to use this capacity and consider any signs in terms of their perceived meaning by a particular demographic, culture or religion.

In the face of the current challenges it is not good enough to resort to more of the same; as if money spent so far should be augmented by even larger sums, as if already coercive governance should increase its pressure even more, as if one demographic's status inviting the allocation of resources should inevitably be cemented even further within a society's perception of itself.

All those responses belong to conventional situations. They become useless if not dangerous if applied to a newly emerging realm of the unfamiliar, a space where the possible gets redefined and where the impossible becomes part of existence.

East and West

Barack Obama visits Europe and gets the opportunity to speak with many of the world's leaders at the G20 summit about the economy. Next on the list is the gathering of NATO and the topic is America's foray into Middle Eastern entanglements. After this experience he lands in Turkey where he told them what they wanted to hear.

But not everyone there desires joining the European Union for the same reason. The secular part would appreciate membership for the political openness and its pragmatic opportunities. On the Islamic side the largely cosmopolitan mantle draped over a medieval religion bestows useful advantages. It is questionable whether either side cares too much about the deeper factors influencing the affects such a move would produce. The same goes for the US.

We have arrived at a junction in time when historical currents can well up from distant pasts.

Human affairs proceed along timelines that are relevant to the scales they represent. Comparisons can be drawn between a human life and the existence of a society or civilisation or culture. One is measured in decades, others in centuries, and cultures need millennia.

On that broad canvas the world of today offers three cultures that have several things in common. They managed to keep their long-term memory, they achieved self-knowledge, they are still active, and they possess mass. From east to west these are, China, India and Europe.

Each one of these can draw on thousands of years of history, each one of these can use their own glories and disasters to interpret the present, and they all are powerful enough to influence the planet through the mental resources coming from ancient sagas, generations of experience and intellectual achievements.

Just as the individual addresses a problem more effectively with a sound memory, so do societies deal with issues at their scale depending on their ability for recall. Lack of experience, forgetfulness, or the wilful burying of inconvenient events impoverish one's knowledge base. Without content to be processed wisdom cannot emerge.

When in the near future oil runs out, when the effects of climate change overtake the contemporary plans of everyone, when the scarcity of resources impacts on standards everywhere, then the sheer drama which accompanies the destruction of the status quo will make itself felt. The aspirations, indeed obsessions, of so many interest groups are bound to join the stirred mix of smaller nations in which the multitude of incoherences add to the chaotic scenario.

When disaster strikes one does not call upon children to save the situation. Similarly, at the level of global humanity it takes the maturity of age to bring order into chaos.

Europe, India and China fulfill the equation. Even in geometric terms a triangle makes for stability, and a council of three strikes a useful balance between variance and homogeneity.

At the moment Islamic extremism enthralls our minds and holds our resources to ransom. Yet against the dangers building on the horizon they should be a mere thorn in the side at worst, an interesting interlude at best. Failing nations unable to leave their traditional shackles behind should hardly be a concern for that part of humanity which is capable of perceiving the future. Nor is it for the US to tell Europe whether ambiguous Turkey should or should not enter its realm.

A triumvirate of great minds has better things to do than enmesh itself in the inconsolable minutiae of the naïve.

And even in a space station the thoughts from a Parzival, a Mahabharata, or a Confucius have something to say.

A dose of reality

When protesters shout about burning effigies of bankers and around 15,000 people gather in Frankfurt, several thousand in Berlin, and in London the crowd is estimated at up to 35,000, all to make a point ahead of the G20 meeting, it should be time to think about what point this could be.

The financial crisis seems evident enough, but consider the headlines crowding yesterday's Daily Telegraph page and the picture is somewhat bewildering. Trillion-dollar deals abandoned just when our minds are getting used to rivers of money sluiced with abandon, suggestions to return to the gold standard, China seen as the world's saviour, extremists gaining ground, and dire warnings all around - it's a hotchpotch of the old and the new leading to the realisation that perhaps the leading minds at a recent conference at the Columbia Centre in the US got one thing right: we don't really know what's going on. "Reshaping capitalism" has become one common theme though, but do we understand what depths such a concept can reach? George Soros already argued for reconstruction back in 1997 but his rationalism is a far cry from what can be heard today, now that the pressure is on. Left-wing militants expecting our entire planet to be one country within months, a self-professed witch, a senior lecturer indulging herself in menstruation and the origins of art... that's news as of today, at least in the UK.

In his article George Soros talks about recognising certain fundamentals that give society its structure and hence its stability, fundamentals which go beyond money and riches and even transcend culture and religion.

Let's do one better and talk about the real basics around which living systems turn. The principles that govern human activity systems in general regardless of time and place, the ones that determine what happens along their time lines through history.

Such a system is situated in reality, which is to say it exists within its environment with its own vagaries, and success or otherwise depends on the system's flexibility and resourcefulness to deal with them. A simple system, if it survives, needs to devote all of its resources just to maintain itself, and the conditions are as harsh as its surrounds. It can be done, as the existence of indigenous people around today's world attests. However, the more complex the system the more buffer zones there are and the less immediate any negative effects from the outside will be. This comes at a cost: complex systems require more maintenance and place a higher demand on the intellectual capabilities of its members. Complex systems also feature a higher degree of variety and are better placed to confront changes in their surrounds.

Agrarian economies are more prone to falter during natural disasters than industrialised ones, and the more varied the industry in general the more assured the survival of the whole in the face of this or that downturn.

One factor that is often forgotten is time. It plays a significant role in the current malaise as I have argued elsewhere and it should be considered in more detail.

Usually the focus is on leisure, and it has grown into a considerable one. Time seen as a functional element without value-laden connotations however allows a more comprehensive view.

A complex, varied society permits the creation of niches that are largely removed from the immediacy of confrontational demands. If we consider the temporal path of a society in terms of standard time increments (rather like the clock ticks of a computer that allocate definite time periods to its processes) all of the society's dynamics span a given number of increments. The life cycle of any given dynamic can be measured against those of others on that basis, and they all form the wider system.

Different time spans impose their own constraints. For example, the construction of a bridge will interfere with dynamics of a smaller duration (such as travelling to and from work) and for that reason alone the system's resources will need the capacity to address the difference.

In the case of niches (activities that are not in immediate contact with the generality of their environment) a difference in time can mean the growth of activities that not only sit aside the common contingencies but whose effects on the system as a whole demonstrate a similar disengagement, at least for a certain period. Yet sooner or later their existence will impact on the rest, and the nature of the impact as well as the elapsed time influence the status of the host.

Regardless of their scale and type, there comes a point when the host responds. A couple of people spreading graffiti around their street won't change council policy, but by the time entire suburbs are affected the response sets in. In addition, at that point the practice will have grown into a sub-culture that changes the rules of the game considerably.

In principle, nothing has changed in the respective dynamics from the very start (whether in the mind of a bored kid or in the basic attitude of council members), but the difference in time lines impacts on the economy in the end.

As the financial crisis has shown, despite the decades-long existence of particular banking practices it is only now that their full nature has come to the fore - and the reaction ranges from the alarmed to the ridiculous.

Monetary adventurism is not the only threat; there are number of others waiting in the wings, all answering to similar dynamics of precarious transparency, the swallowing of resources, and delayed impact. Separate niches have grown and eventually influence their society, at which point they can't be separated any longer. Here are some of them.

The idea that everyone is equal and it is only a question of money to alleviate disparities has progressed from the small to the global radius. While opportunities need to be provided, the reality of an over-arching culture has been disregarded in favour of an evangelical idealism. Billions of dollars are poured into places like Africa without the desired effect.

The obsession with illegal drugs - the very definition a function of an ideological moralism rather than a pragmatic perspective - has created world-wide cartels and militant armies that have greater financial clout than many smaller nations. Mexico is torn apart by gangs that are financed by consumers in the US across the border. America's answer? Thousands of more soldiers and another few hundred million dollars in military hardware. At the same time a similarly predisposed attitude opened the way for many of their legal counterparts to play havoc with public health.

Although the emancipation of women has opened the doors to many opportunities denied in past ages (and enriched society), the ideological side of feminism has made demands on society without supplying the means to address them. For example, in Australia the Medicare safety net was designed to protect individuals from the often prohibitive costs of medical treatment, but over the past four years IVF costs under that scheme have risen 57 percent to $79 million. Women want babies, but at what cost?

Christian culture, in its ever-lasting war against the human eros, has swung from one craze to another. Gays, adultery, masturbation, and now anything to do with the young. Entire police forces have been created to assuage the spectres of moralists and once again the heaviest punishments are reserved for those who run foul of what is termed 'decency'. The hysteria led to the case of a 14-year-old girl in New Jersey who posted naked pictures of herself on MySpace and is now charged with child pornography facing up to 17 years in jail. Consider the sheer costs involved for everyone, and that includes the taxpayer. What should have been dismissed out of hand or at most invited a slap on the bottom has been turned into an international spectacle.

Just as with finance, there are a number of self-generated aspects of Western culture that have been allowed to flourish and no thought given as to their effects on us all. And just as with finance, under certain pressures those costs engulf us all.

Whether the calls for stringing up bankers remain a joke or not, there were times when actual people were indeed lynched and the enraged mob vented its fury on the enemies of society. All it takes is some pressure and the public's gaze turned just so.

Griffithgate: the no-show

Think of a gangster movie you have seen: do crims ever go to the police to complain?

Of course not. It's not just a clever trick by the director to spin the plot along; even in real life the last thing a shady character wants is to have their affairs placed under scrutiny by the law.

By now there exist several provocations that under ordinary circumstances would have seen Griffith University take me in court. There were the remarks made about some lecturers which prompted such a threat for defamation and bullying (see Griffithgate: let's ask the experts) but nothing happened despite having repeated the very same action. There were the disparaging statements communicated to the university's lawyers Minter Ellison, again with no response. The letters to that firm's clients, quietly passed over (see The first thing we do...). Letters to other lawyers (Griffithgate: the next phase), yet more personal attacks (And a Merry Christmas to you too, Griffith!), and the publication of my own version of the vice chancellor's welcome to students (Griffithgate: the latest). All of these were made known to a considerable number of their staff but nothing happened.

Indeed, why would someone like Ian O'Connor, Griffith's vice chancellor, drag the affair into the public arena and see all those shenanigans brought into the light? As we know, crims tend not to do such things.

I am well aware of a not insignificant disadvantage to myself when writing those letters and emails. For most people it is hard to believe a university can act in such a way, and the doubt would most likely be applied to me. And yet, the actions did take place and they are a considerable blot on any institution's character. Ian O'Connor knows this; others around him know this; hence the reluctance.

It's such a pity. Apart from the relatively small radius the affair as such represents, the wider issue is the general awareness of the Otoom model itself, prevented by a couple of incompetents. Its usefulness has been shown through the predictions about the Iraq war for example and confirmed by two major reports, one by the Americans and one by the British; the comments about Europe (The social Europe: a formal view); the outlook towards the year 2050 (2050: The Age of the Silverback); the comments about the current economic crisis (The Wall Street story), already starting to be confirmed the more details about its origins come to light; and many others too numerous to mention here.

Such a pity. But don't get me wrong - I hold no such sentiments for that couple of dills at Griffith.

The hidden face of ownership

A father has two sons: one is musically gifted, not the other. Who should get the guitar?

Surely the instrument ought to go to him who can make use of it.

The concept of ownership changed over time. With an evolving formality came a symbolism standing in for the original notion of a more direct relationship. The latter still exists, even if not always acknowledged. The functionality of the object behind the symbol cannot be erased through a transference of meaning; against the reality of the former the substitution remains superficial.

If symbolism is allowed to rule what constitutes ownership becomes sidetracked towards the trivial.

True ownership does not present itself through imaginary perception. It lives and activates itself through the relationship between subject and object, and the relationship has to be a fulfilling one.

The superficial view does not reach beyond the trivial and does not recognise the absence of a meaningful nexus.

Descend from the abstract to the tangible and apply the principle to like scenarios. Extend its scope across society, across enterprises. Replace the guitar with machinery, exchange it for a corporation, an estate; include land and territory. Let the family become a nation and all the people within it.

If a mere instrument is not worth arguing about (although a musician may see things differently), once we arrive at the larger scale the sheer magnitude gives substantial weight to any such relationship.

What is technology, what is a corporation worth in the hands of the dilettante; what becomes of a land falling into the custody of the less accomplished?

True ownership is not some artifact that waits for a higher provenance to be bestowed. While it exists for the taking it requires the will to be grasped and pressed into service. Only those to whom the significance of the act is obvious possess the will to use it for their ends; no-one else does it for them.

In that sense societies define themselves and live to enjoy or otherwise their fruits. Not to know, not to understand their own role condemns them to servitude.

In the end serfdom is an act of negative will.