Ruling the world (not at all please)

The world has some common challenges that must be seen to!

We have now seen the IPCC in action leading us through the challenge of global warming. This is not going well for many reasons: questions about data and also basic assumptions that have not been answered, disagreement about carrying the costs, division between rich and poor countries, a sneaking lack of transparency as to people’s roles.

The work by the WHO to control the swine-flu (epidemic) had faults including the lack of evidence proving a pandemic, with lack of transparency and accountability: who did what and what commercial interests did they have? The Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation is drawing criticism on a general basis – what are the side effects of vaccination programs, how much vaccine can the human immune system take before it breaks down. Some nations have forced programs where you have to take a number of vaccines or else… US children must have 33 injections with 10 different vaccines .

Many other areas could be part of such international panels – and the UN already have several bodies – the world of finance surely needs an overseer – water management seems to be a big question looming – and what about poverty? What about use and ownership of the world’s resources?

We must tread carefully, especially when we are divided about basic facts – all human thinking is wishful thinking – there is not always one truth. World panels are anti-democratic by nature and should be used with care and have strong requirements about neutrality and transparency. Systemic bias, politics, commercial interests and hidden agendas are also factors to consider.

The world should be ruled by locals where they are, but maybe the panels can recommend a useful trick or two? Good advice is often taken!

The principles of Economics Nobel Prize winner Elin Ostrom in CPR (Common Pool Resources) should also be taken into account. That would be an innovation: CPR on a global scale.

Leave a Reply