Enshittification

 

 

 

It would be interesting to have a crystal ball, but we haven’t so we have to make the best from what information we have. In this essay, I mention climate change and alarmists, but I need to make something quite clear. There is climate change, there has been and there will always be, but carbon dioxide has little influence. From about 1330 to about 1850 there was a climate event called the little ice age, and while it was a cold period, the temperature was variable, but generally colder that today. An ice age can only end with warming and so there has indeed been a warming trend starting in 1850. Nobody knows what will happen from here, some say within 30 years a cooling trend will begin. This follows the record. But as carbon dioxide is the gas of life and the extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has greened the planet, it is clear that the gas is our friend rather than an enemy of the environment or mankind.

 

Enshittification

Some wise individual has coined a new word, a useful word to add to your computer or device dictionary. It’s about the gradual decay of online platforms, but there’s another use for it. You’ll probably guess what I mean as we proceed, because it’s time to talk about Davos yet again.

President Donald Trump, did a welcome hatchet job on the World Economic Forum and the United Nations, which I have to confess, I enjoyed. He also described the enshittification of most western nations caused by the policies and bureaucracy of their governments… in the past you could be forgiven for thinking they were simply incompetent (which they are) but on later reflection, as demonstrated by the president, it has been absolutely purposeful, driven by ideologically. As said by many, ‘Engineered Chaos.’ The same ideology drives a sizable chunk of the populous too, and those people have different politics to Donald Trump; but people like me in the antipodes don’t really know him. We know only the picture the media paints of him… and we are well aware their bias. He won the election and the position of the President of the United States of America demands respect, like the person or not. 

While his hatchet job was a well-planned victory for sanity (few would have said that a year ago about the president), the Davos crowd aren’t going to change their tune quickly or easily. Will Happer visited this country a short time ago and he said that climate change is a dead duck in the US, confirming what President Trump told the Davos crowd that it is all a con. But extreme weather events are the golden goose of climate change alarmists, but there are between 300 and 600 extreme weather events somewhere around the world every day, but we aren’t told that. Nevertheless, the European Union, the World Economic Forum and the United Nations persist with their climate change narrative as do the media and their hangers-on in most countries of the world…essentially because there’s a buck in it. The president didn’t hide his disdain for wind turbines saying that China makes most of the components, but they don’t use wind to generate electricity. They do have a demonstration wind farm that doesn’t make electricity; his opinion is that the people who erect wind farms are stupid. People like Paul Burgess, have worked diligently for years to show the numbers and the folly of renewables, but western governments don’t listen, which is why we see Britian’s enshittification of their electricity cost structure.

One of my old mentors told me that with ideology, facts don’t matter, and the only way to counter their rhetoric is to laugh at them… and that’s happening with AI. I’m new to AI but I had a discussion about the climate change narrative being a cult, but AI has too many files positive about climate change, so it disagreed. I pointed to Al Gore, and asked if he had a hand in causing climate alarm, and the answer was yes. I asked if he had made a lot of money out his claims, and the answer was yes. I asked how many of his claims have actually materialised, and the answer was none. I asked if he had a large following with some followers radical enough to destroy artwork, and the answer was yes. So then, it must be a cult, and AI finally agreed.

Someone else understands that laughter is a good counter for ideology, and AI is playing its part. It’s well known that the British prime minister is unpopular, so the response has been that some bright people are using AI to produce patriotic videos against him. People who bask in their own importance don’t like to be laughed at… and those videos have hit a nerve with him and his cronies. Later, some government agency made a stupid video about the importance of diversity, and a goth girl with purple hair, Amelia, is supposed to be the baddie of the piece. However, the bright people have used AI videos to make her into a latter-day Joan of Arc, rallying the British people against the government and their policies! But at the end of the day, we have to remember that the prime minister is but a stooge, it is the bureaucracy who have a role in the enshittification of the nation, it is them who need to be laughed at too… perhaps with a new set of videos.

New Zealand felt a sense of betrayal when Britian joined the European Common Market, but in the end, it was good for us because we found other markets. But when Brexit came along, I was for Britian leaving Europe, not so much because their betrayal to us, or the issues of the debate, but because the big money boys who control much of the world finances would receive the middle finger, at least for a time. I hadn’t realised quite what the big money boys of Britian and Europe were doing to the world, but President Donald Trump has nailed it and they are in his sights. The detail of it is too complicated for me, but they have been creating money out of fresh air and charging interest on it, with the repayments and interest being in real money… they also clean dirty money from the cartels. So, something needed to be done. He also wants countries to be sovereign, not in some global crockpot run by a bunch of nondescript elites. Unsurprisingly, he’s pulled out sixty-six organisations connected to the United Nations because they don’t enhance the prospects of the USA. There are one hundred ninety-three states belonging to the United Nations, two thirds are classed as ‘developing nations’ and sixty or more are under ‘authoritarian regimes.’ That’s a big voting block that have made policies to suit their particular agendas, many of which are against western democracies and why the president sees them as costly and anti-USA. Any imbalance within the United Nations contributes to the enshittification of the organisation.

Argentina’s President Javier Milei in his 2026 Davos address said, ‘The shift to wokeism, is an increasing dose of socialism that endangers the Western foundations such as individual liberty. The divide between the left and the right has widened with the left shifting their stance from class to the ideology of collectivism, race, gender, and sexuality.’ Anyone outside those boundaries is vilified, and quickly appears in the media. They often cite the ideas of white and male privilege as primary causes of social inequity. This seems to have been cultivated in universities, their grandaunts drift into government services where they have accumulated power beyond the politicians but are largely unaccountable. Which is why government institutions support the left and are blind to the problems of illegal immigrants and their crimes. This extends to portions of the populous also, which evolves to mob mentality and even anarchy… there are signs that someone is rousing and organising the mobs. The outcome is national enshittification.

One of shifts of power… shittification, has come about from accountants; a health professional is no longer in charge of a hospital, an accountant is… and there is a long list of similar examples. Do they have better management skills? No. If shareholders want a corporate to sort out a poorly functioning company, an accountant will do a hatchet job on the workers, always the workers. They hollow out enterprises but hold no accountability. Nowadays it’s necessary to have an accountant to sort out your taxes, otherwise the tax department will be on your back… accountants have a relationship with the tax office. A competent manager is usurped by an accountant because ‘they count beans better and know the rules of finance’. Rule upon rule has been put in place for compliance, not trusting the person on the street to use common sense. But an accountant isn’t interested that a man on a shovel can’t physically work that shovel constantly for eight hours, he has to rest and at least pee. So, an accountant will put the work out to contract, which is no cheaper but the accountant-manager doesn’t have the worry about personnel problems. Contractors will tick the box on their job sheet, but do not look around at what else needs done at the same time, which leads to the demise of initiative, pride in one’s work, and common sense - the gradual enshittification of nearly everything.

By now you will know what the word means.

 

 

 

 

A Question of Nationality

 

A Question of Nationality

Somehow, it’s become common in most western nations, for straight talking to be interpreted as hate speech where it’s quite possible that prosecution follows. Ironic though that the delegates sitting on the United Nations’ benches just sat glumly when President Trump told the European nations, ‘Your countries are being ruined by migration.’ None of them were brave enough to censure him… at least to his face.

Mass migration was one of the fears predicted by the climate change alarmists, saying the rising oceans were going to swap some countries; so far, there’s been no dangerous sea level rise, but mass migration has happened just the same! The so-called reasons, bad and unfortunate as those things are, aren’t new or different to the past; their countries have been volatile for a long time but there has been no mass exodus. The estimated demographic of migrants flowing into Britain are; 68% adult males, 21% adult women and 11% are children under 18 years old. Why aren’t they all women and children? Why aren’t the men behind fixing the problems they have run away from? Fixing their own country’s problems, may well the answer. Or some unified intervention perhaps? It could be said that young men go ahead and prepare for their families… well isn’t it dangerous to remain for women and children. And families are only going to make the situation more difficult for Britain and Europe.

Consider these quotes from UN officials regarding climate change, ‘It’s a pity we have to dismantle capitalism to fight climate change.’ And, ‘Nations will need to cede their sovereignty to properly fight against climate change.’ Another quote from some professors in a USA university, ‘The way to bring down economies is to flood them with people on welfare.’ And one more observation: The British voted for Brexit, something the European Union didn’t really expect to happen. If Britian was to make a success of being out of the European Union, would other counties want to go their own way too? So as far as the leadership of the European Union is concerned, would they want Britian to be successful?

There’s always been criticism of capitalism, which I’ll get back to, but since 1940. there’s also been a slow move to globalism, a bit like boiling a frog. Dismantling capitalism would mark the demise of democracy as we know it… and that is happened more quickly because the bureaucrats have taken the power away from politicians. There are a number of stakeholders who are pushing the globalisation or world government barrow. It’s led by the United Nations and World Economic Forum but many others have different but similar agendas; one that’s been about for years, and more people are aware of is the Fabian Society; with a wolf in sheep’s clothing as their logo. They too have a number of objectives, but basically a change to social democracy by stealth… which is the antithesis of democracy. But a move to socialism is gaining popularity, gaining a solid foothold in western democracies.

The only certainty in life is change, and if these schemes dreamt up by the likes of the Fabians are by stealth, globalisation and one world government has an ‘air of them and us’ about it. Not a happy place for all… especially with Marxism in the mix. Certainly, the current situation in the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, isn’t making for happy places. Flying the national flag is ‘threatening’. Free speech is evaporating and there is a two-tier policing and justice feel. President Trump’s telling off of the UK prime minister said it all. Even language has been weaponised, but this time it’s in order to embarrass ethnic English, Scotch, Welsh and Irish about past historical events, but those who bellyache, should look at their own history. There’s also racism and different forms of bigitory.

One good thing about the climate alarmism is there’s a renewed consciousness about the environment, but few have cottoned on to two wider issues. Carbon dioxide isn’t a pollutant of threat, and it’s been said that if third world nations want living standards on par with, say, USA, it would require the resources of seven planets. Perhaps that’s just a phrase to show there would be a problem with natural resources. It’s resources, natural or otherwise, where capitalism has its problems. Healthy economies thrive on growth, and growth cannot continue by harvesting resources unabated; this is one of the reasons to dismantle capitalism. But, at what cost and why does socialism have to be the solution? Socialism has never been gentle.

Of course, the globalists are aware of this, hence United Nations’ Agenda 30 for which the western nations have all signed up to. Concerning resources their strategy is a ‘circular economy’, a totally different way of doing things. Detractors say it is the ‘you will own nothing and be happy’ theory, which might be the draconian version of it, but possible. It is strong on recycling and repurposing; it hasn’t been tried, so trust among nonbelievers isn’t high. It is an attempt to address a real problem though. Talking about trust, a reasonable thinker could look at all that is going on in the world, and judge it as all as a huge, purposeful distraction; because in less than five years, 2030 will be here, with it, Agenda 30, and if the strategy is the boiling frog syndrome, too much knowledge will make their imposition of it, all the harder.

There’s more than one way to skin a cat! It’s plain from what we see in Britian and Europe, that mass migration of cultures to another has failed. As a failed experiment it should be stopped, and because the experiment has been wholly purposeful, whatever has been put in place should be easy enough undo. But do you think the British government or the European Union, the bureaucracy or judiciary want it stopped? The United Nations (if it deserves to be retained) should have a role. The populous of Britian and Europe complain that the migrants receive better treatment that their own people, which is true… but if the migrants don’t have food and shelter, they will simply take it, they are there in numbers, and the chaos would make conditions worse. When people become refugees, it is proper for them to go to like cultures and the United Nation’s should have had a role in that; it has always had the responsibility to quell whatever problems there are in those volatile regions, but instead, they a facilitating the entry to countries that they want to deplete of revenue and nationality.

If Socialism was so good, why did all of those countries exit USSR? Why did the people of Hong Kong resist their take over? Why is there a South Korea? Countries formed because of their shared ethnic values; despite historical mistakes, people should take pride in their ethnicity; that way people live in a relatively comfortable peace… take the conflicts that are going on right now, what a waste of resources and human life. Socialism has never cared about human life… the end result is all that matters.

There’s powerful merit in the idea of national identity… sovereignty; it has served us well for centuries. Nevertheless, we do have to be conscious of resources… and perhaps there is a case for lifting poor countries out of poverty, but by how much? And who is to say? The more progress they make, the more resources they will need… what about rich countries? Is there a case for dismantling the throwaway/consumer culture and take back the jobs that technology has taken away? Are we prepared for manual work? And can the welfare culture survive, when humans again become a resource; everyone will need to be productive?

It doesn’t matter if it’s the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, the World Bank, a bunch of oligarchs, big corporates, the European Union, Fabians, the Musim Brotherhood or political parties, if they have an agenda, or an ideology… just stop! Somehow, left alone things have a developed pretty well; evolution. When imposing a new or different system, even with the best of intentions, there are always unforeseen outcomes, usually bad, and some of the intentions are usually seen as nefarious by others and when that happens, no good results.

We have but four years to change their minds.

 

 

 

What They Won't Talk About at COP#)

 

 

 

What Won’t be Talked About at COP30

 

Somewhere in the Amazon forest, there’s climate hand-wringing going on, which will continue long after the talkfest because against the tide, some politicians have plucked up the courage to take their foot off the net zero pedal. Gwynne Dyer (ODT 13.11.25) was still waxing lyrical about the old ‘1.5°C above pre-industrial revolution levels’ narrative. But the narrative lack wisdom, and is easily dispelled through simple logic, without involving complicated science. Let’s ask a simple question, ‘When exactly, is pre-industrial revolution?’ The industrial revolution is said to have occurred between 1750 and 1850, and for sure, since 1850 the planet has warmed somewhat. But blaming carbon dioxide is glossing over some important facts. 1750, was towards the tail end of the 1330 – 1850 little ice age. So, the start point of the ‘pre-industrial revolution’ myth must be somewhere in the middle of an ice age! Why would anyone think the planet’s best or safest temperature would be only 1.5°C above the middle of an ice age? Yes, some may say the little ice age wasn’t worldwide, but we do know that during that period the Thames river was frozen over, our two West Coast glaciers reached the sea, and Argentina’s glaciers were bigger back then. And there another key question, ‘How do ice ages end, if it isn’t with warming?’

 

The little ice age was caused by four known climate-related cycles reaching their minimum at roughly the same time; Wolf, Spöres. Maunder and Dalton. The cold was further compounded by more than usual volcanic activity which sometimes blocked the sun. When those events passed after 520 years, slow natural warming from the sun occurred, which reduced sea ice and snow cover, and therefore, the amount of reflected heat, which allowed further warming.  The climate change lobbyists, erroneously attribute atmospheric carbon dioxide from fossil fuels as the sole cause. Carbon dioxide is a critical gas; around 1850, atmospheric carbon dioxide was at a historical low, barely enough to support plant growth, which is why poverty and disease reigned in the UK and elsewhere. The records are available. Food shortages, disease and superstition are symptoms of scant food production and cold. Without doubt, its cold that is the enemy of humanity. Since 1900, the rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased the world’s green vegetation by 30%, the equivalent of three Amazon forests, and since 1900 nature herself, has released four times more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than human activity. The litmus test of carbon dioxide’s usefulness, is that world life expectancy has doubled and crop yields are at historical highs. It’s also known that as the oceans warm, they release carbon dioxide, but not necessarily by the sun alone; ocean warming also comes from the ocean’s volcanic activity; fissures and volcanoes; there are about a million of them. Any human cause of warming is most likely from land use… cutting forest and scrubland, bared soils and the heat-island effect of towns and cities.

 

COP30 is bound to talk about sea level rise and how much compensation can be squeezed out of the west. Charles Darwin showed how coral atolls grow, and sure enough, Tuvalu, one nations seeking compensation, has grown 8% over the last forty years. Going back 12,000 years, there was a big block of ice over the northern hemisphere that was, in places, a mile thick. To understand this, think of a raw egg, without its shell, but with the thin membrane underneath the shell. This represents the planet; it’s crust and molten core. Push down on it and it will bulge somewhere else. Ok, back to the northern hemisphere; the weight of the ice pushed the crust down, causing some of the southern hemisphere to rise in sympathy. When the ice disappeared, there has been a slow rebound and still, parts of Canada and Europe are rising, which means some of the southern hemisphere is sinking in sympathy. Remember the one million fissures and volcanoes under the ocean? The Icelandic Laki fissure eruption of 1783/84 spewed up fourteen cubic kilometres of lava - its gas resulted in the death of 6 million. Nobody knows how many of the million undersea fissures and volcanoes are active at once but their eruptions will alter the sea level to some extent. And then there’s geological activity of erosion on the land. For example, our Southern Alps are made of greywacke; metamorphosed sandstone, which means it was once a mountain in Gondwanaland, the mountain eroded to sand, which lay on the ocean floor; the Pacific plate. For 25-30 million years the Pacific plate has been subducting under the Australasian plate, thus ‘cooking’ the sandstone and pushing it up to form the Alps… and they too are eroding about as fast as they are growing… which is how the Canterbury plains formed. The rivers carry the eroded material seaward. Gravity and extreme weather events are the forces that reduce mountains to peneplains; flat and featureless land. So where do the eroded mountains and other land features go? Either into the sea to eventually to be recycled by tectonic plate movement, or to add to the land; all of which alters the sea level. Sea ice melt cannot raise the sea level because it is already in the sea but ice and snow melt on land can. When someone suggests that sea levels are rising, it’s simplistic to say the cause is solely a minor greenhouse gas. But observationally and uncannily, there seems to be a sort of equilibrium. What must be understood about the geology of this planet, is that extreme weather events and geology go hand in hand and floodplains are often the result; they are fertile areas, ideal for growing food, but sooner or later they will flood again, which should raise a red flag for proposed infrastructure. But somehow, the COP30 lobbyists have forgotten that the geological processes of the planet, although slow, will continue relentlessly, as they always have.

 

When governments try to mitigate climate change with net zero policies, it’s important to know from what to what, and for what outcome … it’s far too complicated to be certain. Additionally, there are ‘unpredictable anomalies’ like the Laki eruption which changed the climate for two years; the Tongan undersea eruption, which loaded the stratosphere with moisture that caused flooding around the world; silt-makers like cyclone Gabriel with the aftermath of excellent crops, random heatwaves, cold spells, droughts, all of which may have widespread or local effects, but they do not necessarily signal climate change. Such anomalies have always been.  So, when the United Nations, COP30 and governments propose net zero policies, someone needs to ask the question.