I have been listening to this recently on Audible. It's not a bad book/listen.
One thing that seems to pop up a lot is that the British when backing out of a colony, effectively letting it go back to self management, have ended up with human nature taking over and the local people fighting amongst themselves. They go from a colonial dictatorship, to a true democracy at transition of control, and then human nature ends up in a dictatorship almost immediately once the British leave.
What is it with people! Why is it that when left to our own decisions we end up with one person taking control?
The book also mentions other colonies such as ours that ended up being a good example, but for others its almost like the fundamental beliefs of the people end up ruining it for them.
The thing here, is that we were already British, used to a democratic monarchy. A lot of other colonies, were a conglomeration of different tribes, not used to being one country.
One of the other sort of success stories is India, apart from the separation of Pakistan, that didn't go so well.
I think I was listening to the history of Zimbabwe last night, before I fell asleep, and it was a bit sad that it was a good country and then when it was handed over it became a dictatorship, reverting to the old way of thinking.
Which makes me despair a bit for areas of the world where their way of thinking has sent them into continuous struggles with each other. Even if you help them, their lowest common denominators will tear them down, intentionally or not. There will be someone that wants it their way and bring down the rest of their society that was pretty much okay with the way things were.
I am not really familiar with the history, but this book even touched on how the IRA were affected by 'terrorism' after the WTCs. It made terrorism such an obviously destructive thing that the idea of the IRA using it made people see them or themselves in a different light.
You are right though. We are lucky that we have mostly come from democracies and think that way. But so have other countries. I keep recalling Venezuela where their govt called for Socialism to get them out of strife, but what it really was was a dictatorship, but by the time it was in place it was too late to avoid it.
Select to expand quotedecrepit said..
The thing here, is that we were already British, used to a democratic monarchy. A lot of other colonies, were a conglomeration of different tribes, not used to being one country.
One of the other sort of success stories is India, apart from the separation of Pakistan, that didn't go so well.
I was reading 'End of Empires' and it painted the extraction from India as a disaster. I think even in the creation of 'India' it involved a lot of small conflicts to take control from some ruler here or there, to then try and unify them.
Some people paint the British (or the French, or the Portuguese, or any other colonial power...) as dastardly invaders, but the reality of a lot of the places beforehand was not necessarily great.
Pulling out of India wasn't done well, but I think India it's better off now than it was before the British.
As I see it, the main problem with humanity, is it's evolution, survival of the fittest doesn't make for totally peaceful people.
Starts with family first, then tribe first, then country first. Then empire first, until it all gets too big, unsustainable and self destructs.
America seems to be going into that last stage, without really having an empire.
Seems Chimps have the same problem, but Bonobos somehow avoided it, they found free love instead.
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..
Which makes me despair a bit for areas of the world where their way of thinking has sent them into continuous struggles with each other. Even if you help them, their lowest common denominators will tear them down, intentionally or not. There will be someone that wants it their way and bring down the rest of their society that was pretty much okay with the way things were.
Are you talking about Zimbabwe or seabreeze forums
Select to expand quotedecrepit said..
Seems Chimps have the same problem, but Bonobos somehow avoided it, they found free love instead.
"Evolutionary Advantage:
In the wild, where competition for mates is fierce, males who can copulate and ejaculate quickly have a higher chance of successfully passing on their genes. This is especially true in chimpanzees, where the entire process of approach, penetration, and ejaculation can take as little as 6 seconds."
Select to expand quoteremery said..decrepit said..
Seems Chimps have the same problem, but Bonobos somehow avoided it, they found free love instead.
"Evolutionary Advantage:
In the wild, where competition for mates is fierce, males who can copulate and ejaculate quickly have a higher chance of successfully passing on their genes. This is especially true in chimpanzees, where the entire process of approach, penetration, and ejaculation can take as little as 6 seconds."
But gorillas went the other way. Why is that?
Select to expand quotedecrepit said..
...
Starts with family first, then tribe first, then country first. Then empire first, until it all gets too big, unsustainable and self destructs.
I feel a bit disappointed these days. In my early career I used to think that it was all about performing well and doing a good job. The last 20 years though I have seen way too much politics in the workplace where performance doesn't seem to matter and people fall over themselves to stab each other in the back and get ahead. I can't believe how many political games I have seen.
Now I think its just part of human nature and without anyone keeping an eye on them, people will do what it takes to get ahead, except maybe preferring to take the easy path instead of working hard.
It is a bit of worry though that a lot of countries out there could have been or even were really well run, but due to some person's personal desire they have turned into poorly run dictatorships.
Select to expand quotePugwash said..FormulaNova said..
Which makes me despair a bit for areas of the world where their way of thinking has sent them into continuous struggles with each other. Even if you help them, their lowest common denominators will tear them down, intentionally or not. There will be someone that wants it their way and bring down the rest of their society that was pretty much okay with the way things were.
Are you talking about Zimbabwe or seabreeze forums
You could read between the lines and see how this can apply to lots of things 
I was really expecting a full analysis of Israel and Palestine by now! It is a very complex topic and just looking at it on the surface does not do it justice.
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..
I was reading 'End of Empires' and it painted the extraction from India as a disaster. I think even in the creation of 'India' it involved a lot of small conflicts to take control from some ruler here or there, to then try and unify them.
Some people paint the British (or the French, or the Portuguese, or any other colonial power...) as dastardly invaders, but the reality of a lot of the places beforehand was not necessarily great.
Root issue being that around back end of the 20th century having colonies started to have poor optics - rather than creating a viable pathway to transition from colonial rule to local governance, most colonial countries just dumped their colonies and 'gave them independence' without the support to implement that. (Australia also guilty with PNG).
Select to expand quoteCH3MTR4IL5 said..FormulaNova said..
I was reading 'End of Empires' and it painted the extraction from India as a disaster. I think even in the creation of 'India' it involved a lot of small conflicts to take control from some ruler here or there, to then try and unify them.
Some people paint the British (or the French, or the Portuguese, or any other colonial power...) as dastardly invaders, but the reality of a lot of the places beforehand was not necessarily great.
Root issue being that around back end of the 20th century having colonies started to have poor optics - rather than creating a viable pathway to transition from colonial rule to local governance, most colonial countries just dumped their colonies and 'gave them independence' without the support to implement that. (Australia also guilty with PNG).
Ahh, there's an interesting discussion.... Is PNG really capable of having a similar democracy to Australia? Even with hand-holding, would it survive or end up very tribal?
TBH I don't know how their government works and won't google it as it will probably ruin the surprise.
Select to expand quoteCH3MTR4IL5 said..FormulaNova said..
I was reading 'End of Empires' and it painted the extraction from India as a disaster. I think even in the creation of 'India' it involved a lot of small conflicts to take control from some ruler here or there, to then try and unify them.
Some people paint the British (or the French, or the Portuguese, or any other colonial power...) as dastardly invaders, but the reality of a lot of the places beforehand was not necessarily great.
Root issue being that around back end of the 20th century having colonies started to have poor optics - rather than creating a viable pathway to transition from colonial rule to local governance, most colonial countries just dumped their colonies and 'gave them independence' without the support to implement that. (Australia also guilty with PNG).
We can see the exact same issue happening in Australia with regard to Gaza. Bad optics are driving our government to make bad policy.
Free free Palestine right, thats the good optic driving the policy. What's the viable transition to local governance. Easy, just politely ask Hamas to lay down their arms and live in peace, oh and return the hostages too. Should happen soon now Albo has asked for it.
It's fashionable to hate on the colonial patriarchal environmentally destructive western culture. Take it a step further and we see that western culture has judeo/Christian roots. It's easy to dismiss those beliefs as ignorant or primitive or even stupid but the facts are those beliefs have shaped Western culture and Western culture has delivered the best living standards and human rights record in all of history.
Scoff all you like at the above but refugees/asylum seekers or illegal immigrants (whatever their circumstances are) flock to countries with a judeo/Christian culture often passing through countries with a similar culture to the ones they left.
I remain rather surprised that India hasn't fallen apart since its establishment in 1948. Before the East India Company came along and defeated the various kingdoms it wasn't united and it still has several different languages. That gives rise to two separate ideas in my mind. The first is that a polytheistic system like Hinduism is more culturally attuned to democratic rule because it doesn't have a single source of authority but a multiplicity of gods to pray to. Some people favour one, some people favour another but they don't insist that everybody pray to exactly the same God.
The other idea is that continuity of rule is important. India had a couple of centuries under the Raj and the East India Company. South Africa also had a long period of continuous rule by the colonisers. The other colonies in Africa had only very short periods; not much more than 1900 to 1960 to develop the institutions of government. Racists will say that it is something inherent to Africans, but then you have to look at the West Indies colonies that became countries. They seem to have remained democratic, more or less, after a couple of centuries of being run under the British system. Without deep roots perhaps democratic government is more fragile.
Maybe it's cricket?
Although they were all out to get rid of the Raj, I think most Indians preferred unification, and as you say the institutions of Govt were already in place.
Also interesting they've hung on to English as the lingua franca, and are crazy about cricket.
But Pakistan. Nuts about cricket and also nuts about the one true God and it's run by the military, with occasional elections
Select to expand quoteMr Milk said..
The other idea is that continuity of rule is important. India had a couple of centuries under the Raj and the East India Company. South Africa also had a long period of continuous rule by the colonisers. The other colonies in Africa had only very short periods; not much more than 1900 to 1960 to develop the institutions of government. Racists will say that it is something inherent to Africans, but then you have to look at the West Indies colonies that became countries. They seem to have remained democratic, more or less, after a couple of centuries of being run under the British system. Without deep roots perhaps democratic government is more fragile.
Maybe that's the key. Have democracy in place long enough that it displaces any existing tribal politics and people forget what it was like when they had their own tribe to be part of.
Select to expand quotecammd said..
Scoff all you like at the above but refugees/asylum seekers or illegal immigrants (whatever their circumstances are) flock to countries with a judeo/Christian culture often passing through countries with a similar culture to the ones they left.
Yeah, that's the thing that bugs me. When people move somewhere for a new start and safety and then bring their old beliefs with them.
I sort of worry with Australia at the moment. Most would agree that the Australian culture that most people like is a bit of a lazy one where we are not that aggressive and hating on each other. Yet, with a huge wave of immigration over a number of years is there going to be a chance for the new migrants to aclimitize to the way people already here think?
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..cammd said..
Scoff all you like at the above but refugees/asylum seekers or illegal immigrants (whatever their circumstances are) flock to countries with a judeo/Christian culture often passing through countries with a similar culture to the ones they left.
Yeah, that's the thing that bugs me. When people move somewhere for a new start and safety and then bring their old beliefs with them.
I sort of worry with Australia at the moment. Most would agree that the Australian culture that most people like is a bit of a lazy one where we are not that aggressive and hating on each other. Yet, with a huge wave of immigration over a number of years is there going to be a chance for the new migrants to aclimitize to the way people already here think?
The government hasn't slowed immigration at all, still feeding the massive demand on housing and looking for ways to solve the problem by taxing hard working succesful Australians more. I havent looked into the details but chalmers is making noises about extra 2% tax for assets over 5M. I read something about taxing unused spare bedrooms. WtF slow the immigration, and if not why not.
I think it's deliberate, I think the establishment, libs and labs, dont have Australians best interest at heart.
Select to expand quotecammd said..
The government hasn't slowed immigration at all, still feeding the massive demand on housing and looking for ways to solve the problem by taxing hard working succesful Australians more. I havent looked into the details but chalmers is making noises about extra 2% tax for assets over 5M. I read something about taxing unused spare bedrooms. WtF slow the immigration, and if not why not.
I think it's deliberate, I think the establishment, libs and labs, dont have Australians best interest at heart.
I don't think it's deliberate. I think it's just easy to bring more people in and then let the next guy worry about it.
People think governments are supposed to be clever, but they aren't because they are made up of regular people with regular goals.
Some guy somewhere will have a target of making sure that there are enough people working in order to pay for pensions and costs as people age.
Someone else somewhere will have a goal of making housing more affordable for young people.
The second one will be 'too hard' and politically risky. The first one will be easy, just import more people to cover the issue in the short term.
A third person will be wondering why the birth rate is declining. They will know that its the cost of living and a large part of that is housing, but that become a complex problem to solve so no one will.
When you think you know what you want
But you don't have what you want
And you blame people who have what you want
They've taken what you have
They have things on a plate
And you don't have what you want
And you want what you need, nothing more
But you blame people for taking what you have
And you think they have it on a plate
And all you have is what you think
Then you think, well, what shall I do?
What shall I say?
What shall I do?
What shall I say?
Who are they?
What do they want?
This is my place, my land
My friends, my hands, my love, my life
I don't need others here
I don't want others here
What shall I do?
You don't think they're human
You don't think they're right
You don't think they've got a point of view
You don't think they suffer too
You don't understand their language
What they feel
what they feel
What they feel, they want
You all might be similar but that don't mean
To you, you just think, "Well, hey guys
You got your own place
It might be a war zone
It might be in the sand
It might be underwater
But that's where you're born and going to stay and that's where you oughta be
Not here
Not here
Not here
Not here
Not here
Not here
What shall I do?
What shall I do?
What shall I do?
What shall I say?
I don't get it
I don't want it
I just want my country
What shall I do?
What shall I say?
If you can't survive where you are
You shouldn't come here, look around
And think this is the place where you can find a new life
Because here, I got a life here that's good
And the more people that come and take a piece of that life
The less of that life there is for me
The less there is to go round
The less there is for my children, my family
And I want a bit more, I need a bit more, I love a bit more
I want a bit more, I need a bit more, I love a bit more
I want a bit more, I need a bit more, I love a bit more
I want a bit more, I need a bit more, I love a bit more
What shall I do?
What shall I do?
What shall I say?
Select to expand quoteBrent in Qld said..
When you think you know what you want
But you don't have what you want
And you blame people who have what you want
They've taken what you have
They have things on a plate
And you don't have what you want
And you want what you need, nothing more
But you blame people for taking what you have
And you think they have it on a plate
And all you have is what you think
Then you think, well, what shall I do?
What shall I say?
What shall I do?
What shall I say?
Who are they?
What do they want?
This is my place, my land
My friends, my hands, my love, my life
I don't need others here
I don't want others here
What shall I do?
You don't think they're human
You don't think they're right
You don't think they've got a point of view
You don't think they suffer too
You don't understand their language
What they feel
what they feel
What they feel, they want
You all might be similar but that don't mean
To you, you just think, "Well, hey guys
You got your own place
It might be a war zone
It might be in the sand
It might be underwater
But that's where you're born and going to stay and that's where you oughta be
Not here
Not here
Not here
Not here
Not here
Not here
What shall I do?
What shall I do?
What shall I do?
What shall I say?
I don't get it
I don't want it
I just want my country
What shall I do?
What shall I say?
If you can't survive where you are
You shouldn't come here, look around
And think this is the place where you can find a new life
Because here, I got a life here that's good
And the more people that come and take a piece of that life
The less of that life there is for me
The less there is to go round
The less there is for my children, my family
And I want a bit more, I need a bit more, I love a bit more
I want a bit more, I need a bit more, I love a bit more
I want a bit more, I need a bit more, I love a bit more
I want a bit more, I need a bit more, I love a bit more
What shall I do?
What shall I do?
What shall I say?
?si=s6hPXNVX9MbYTjwG
You could play that to homeless families in parks so they realise wanting a safe place to live is just selfishness and greed.
Glad it's going to live rent free in your brain for the next few days.
Happy weekend Breezers.
So, Cammd, how are you going to fix the labour shortage?
Who's going to look after our ageing population?
And a bunch of other issues related to not having people to actually do the work?
Select to expand quoteD3 said..
So, Cammd, how are you going to fix the labour shortage?
Who's going to look after our ageing population?
And a bunch of other issues related to not having people to actually do the work?
I am not Cammd, but I will respond anyway...
What labour shortages? Workers in an economy are based on supply and demand. In lean times there is way too much supply and not enough demand. In boom times there is a heap of demand but not enough supply.
A good government needs to manage this balance so that in good times there are almost enough people. In lean times they need to balance it so that there is almost enough jobs.
When times are good then wages normally go up as demand for workers increase. It seems a lot of employers now want cheap workers and boom times at the same time. Sometimes you just cant create a viable business because you cannot afford to pay what the market demands. Its all good now, but when times become tough, where are all these people going to get jobs?
Right now I think we have a lot of shortages that really aren't shortages. Unless you are talking about ride-share and food delivery driver shortages?
If the birth rate was higher, there would be more people around in the future to look after ageing people. Right now, people don't want to have any/many kids because of the costs and housing is a huge part of that. Stopping housing being a perk for the people that already own homes is a good start. Right now we have very wealthy people on paper because they own a few houses. This is not really that productive for the economy.
I think its sort of funny that people that migrate to Australia turn around and also don't want to have big families, which I am guessing is because they have seen how expensive housing is here.
How do you turn that around, or do you keep importing people from poorer countries where they can just fill our shortage of people?
Select to expand quoteD3 said..
So, Cammd, how are you going to fix the labour shortage?
Who's going to look after our ageing population?
And a bunch of other issues related to not having people to actually do the work?
Stop abortion on demand for a start, that's and extra 80000 people in Australia each year.
Ah yes, force 80,000 women to endure unplanned pregnancies.
So in maybe we can have som extra teachers or aged care workers in 20 to 25 years time?
Solid plan.
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..D3 said..
So, Cammd, how are you going to fix the labour shortage?
Who's going to look after our ageing population?
And a bunch of other issues related to not having people to actually do the work?
I am not Cammd, but I will respond anyway...
What labour shortages? Workers in an economy are based on supply and demand. In lean times there is way too much supply and not enough demand. In boom times there is a heap of demand but not enough supply.
A good government needs to manage this balance so that in good times there are almost enough people. In lean times they need to balance it so that there is almost enough jobs.
When times are good then wages normally go up as demand for workers increase. It seems a lot of employers now want cheap workers and boom times at the same time. Sometimes you just cant create a viable business because you cannot afford to pay what the market demands. Its all good now, but when times become tough, where are all these people going to get jobs?
Right now I think we have a lot of shortages that really aren't shortages. Unless you are talking about ride-share and food delivery driver shortages?
If the birth rate was higher, there would be more people around in the future to look after ageing people. Right now, people don't want to have any/many kids because of the costs and housing is a huge part of that. Stopping housing being a perk for the people that already own homes is a good start. Right now we have very wealthy people on paper because they own a few houses. This is not really that productive for the economy.
I think its sort of funny that people that migrate to Australia turn around and also don't want to have big families, which I am guessing is because they have seen how expensive housing is here.
How do you turn that around, or do you keep importing people from poorer countries where they can just fill our shortage of people?
Your comments about labour supply and demand could be right for industry. I honestly don't know.
We have things that need to be built, we have schools that need teachers, we have people who need to be looked after, more than we apparently need Construction and trades.
Full time roles
Select to expand quoteD3 said..FormulaNova said..D3 said..
So, Cammd, how are you going to fix the labour shortage?
Who's going to look after our ageing population?
And a bunch of other issues related to not having people to actually do the work?
I am not Cammd, but I will respond anyway...
What labour shortages? Workers in an economy are based on supply and demand. In lean times there is way too much supply and not enough demand. In boom times there is a heap of demand but not enough supply.
A good government needs to manage this balance so that in good times there are almost enough people. In lean times they need to balance it so that there is almost enough jobs.
When times are good then wages normally go up as demand for workers increase. It seems a lot of employers now want cheap workers and boom times at the same time. Sometimes you just cant create a viable business because you cannot afford to pay what the market demands. Its all good now, but when times become tough, where are all these people going to get jobs?
Right now I think we have a lot of shortages that really aren't shortages. Unless you are talking about ride-share and food delivery driver shortages?
If the birth rate was higher, there would be more people around in the future to look after ageing people. Right now, people don't want to have any/many kids because of the costs and housing is a huge part of that. Stopping housing being a perk for the people that already own homes is a good start. Right now we have very wealthy people on paper because they own a few houses. This is not really that productive for the economy.
I think its sort of funny that people that migrate to Australia turn around and also don't want to have big families, which I am guessing is because they have seen how expensive housing is here.
How do you turn that around, or do you keep importing people from poorer countries where they can just fill our shortage of people?
Your comments about labour supply and demand could be right for industry. I honestly don't know.
We have things that need to be built, we have schools that need teachers, we have people who need to be looked after, more than we apparently need Construction and trades.
Full time roles
I am very cynical about this whole thing. I wonder how much depth someone goes into to find out if these vacancies really exist?
I returned from OS in April and caught an Uber home. The driver was telling me that he studied here and then did a masters or similar in Computer Science. Yet he couldn't get a job since being made redundant on the first one after a few months.
I can only offer my experience in IT where lots of jobs are advertised all over the place and often have unrealistic expectations for qualifications against the wages they want to pay.
You would think it would be easy wouldn't you... if there are 6843 positions in construction available, let that number of people in for those jobs and check that number again. I wonder if it would fill those aparent roles or something else.
