Political Philanthropy

When people act corruptly as though such actions are normal, they are evil and must urgently be stopped. All current governments are evil.  That is why they cannot be trusted. All parents are either fools or victims of ignorance and/or cruelty. All children are victims of evil governments.  Many are also victims of foolish and/or cruel parents, or at least ignorant ones. Political history has much in common with formula fiction .  The corrupt have always gained power unjustly and maintained it through cruelty. Affluence and political influence in Australia have often been the result of gambling . All corrupt practices are gambles. Giving public money away to the rich is corrupt . Giving public money away to encourage gas production is corrupt . Giving public money away to support coal mining is corrupt . Failing to acknowledge a blatant conflict of interest is corrupt . Giving public money to self-indulgent pursuits while under-funding essential public services is corrupt . While quite

With the COP26 global climate summit apparently happening quite soon in Scotland, where is the political philanthropy associated with the preparations, and who is supplying it? Perhaps you are doing so. What do you already know about the climate of political philanthropy? How do you question assumptions of various sorts, and for what reasons? What are your assumptions about political philanthropy? What are your assumptions about climates? What is your usual approach to questioning assumptions, including your own? Clarity is especially important when contentious politics is frequently mistaken for non-contentious science. To say the Earth is flat is politically contentious not because it is ridiculous but because some people either still believe it to be true or they are being paid to say it is true. The physical shape of the Earth is certainly not scientifically contentious. The ridiculous is easily addressed through the satirical presentation of ridicule. The dangerous is not quite

While there is often a great deal of difficulty involved in humanely removing disreputable persons from the public sphere, and particularly from public office, the same does not necessarily apply to community experiences. Quality citizen journalism is a community experience.  It contributes to the public sphere by identifying and communicating the boundaries of communities.  It mainly does so through the expression of appropriate personal boundaries. How clearly do you distinguish between secrecy and privacy, and how do you know? How clearly do you distinguish between autonomy and conformity, and how do you know? How clearly do you distinguish between reasonable expressions of autonomy and unreasonable ones? How clearly do you distinguish between reasonable expressions of conformity and unreasonable ones? What do you do when someone has an inaccurate view about you? How do you usually distinguish between credible theories, incredible ones and discredited ones? How do you usually dist

How do you tell whether your philanthropy is real or not ? How thoroughly do you question yourself about reality, politics, philanthropy, and yourself? What do you believe you need to know at present, and why?  How reasonable is your authentic self, and how do you know? And how do you attempt to maintain ethical authenticity with adequate consistency? How do you identify possibilities for the improvement of something? How do you assess the usefulness of originality? How do you distinguish between a skill and a talent?  How are you involved in events to prevent suffering and other problems? How do you know when changes in routine and/or the consumption of substances and/or experiences of ill health cause people to behave unreasonably? How do you distinguish between your political philanthropy and your other philanthropy? When, if ever, has your reputation been sullied by other people's ill-informed opinions and outrageous biases? Philanthropic activities always cause resentment.

The highly artistic and suitably scientific twitter account associated with the second Age of Enlightenment is usually locked. Just as the first Age of Enlightenment could only be experienced in parallel to the ordinary world of mortals, at least by suitably qualified contributors, the same applies to the second Age of Enlightenment. How do you usually interpret twitter ?  Most people will never be adequately enlightened.  Indeed, they will do everything in their power to remain ignorant.  They are not even interested in the public interest . How do you know when your perceptions take you into a more enlightened world than the one most people perceive themselves to inhabit? What is your acquaintance with real philanthropy ? What is your acquaintance with enlightenment more generally?

Perhaps you think it is unnecessary, or even unhealthy, to learn about political truth. How do you usually try to educate yourself about pleasantness and unpleasantness? How carefully do you distinguish between philanthropic intentions, business intentions, political intentions and other intentions?   It is always wise to think about important matters carefully, and accurately, before entering important discussions on those matters. That is a basic statement of fact for any good philanthropist, and any good investor, to acknowledge. There is nothing greedy about investing in suitably pleasant certainties in philanthropic ways. Politics, like religion and philosophy, reflects claims about certainty and uncertainty, pleasantness and unpleasantness, and the necessary and unnecessary. Perhaps you regard politics, religion and philosophy as unnecessary. But where do you locate wisdom, particularly about politics? Good manners form the basis of mutually beneficial pleasantness, of course.