Citizen action - Towards real democracy and better global governance

The menu topics below provide supporting information relating to linked sections of [The Case]

Challenges posed by both 'the authorities' and by citizens

Quite apart from climate-denial politics, the attitude of many ordinary people towards climate change risk seems puzzling, and papers have been published on the issue; for example (Gifford, 2011), (Markowitz, 2012) and (Anon. 2015a).

With all our intelligence as a species, are we doomed to behaving like boiled frogs? (Anon., 2016b). Is our denialism being deliberately encouraged and exploited as a business strategy by pharmaceutical companies? The link below explains the highly 'successful' business marketing concept of "peddle the illness to sell the pill".

The Billion Dollar Deals and How They Changed the World [Power structure]

People need to have faith in the system (Shepherd, 2012).

Australian psychologist Lissa Johnson considers how denialism also impacts democracy (Johnson, 2015a). She asks why, despite the many very obvious major global problems, is there such a complacency over the situation among average citizens, even voting for those who are part of the problem? She refers to a concept called 'system justification' which addresses this conundrum. It turns out that succumbing to feeling disempowered by the system drives some people into self-deception, as a protection against harsh reality.

When first seriously engaging with political issues, the experience of feeling overwhelmed by the sheer intransigence of the status quo is what eventually resulted in the evolving main theme of this website; initially via producing non-commercial purposeful art.

Disempowerment of ordinary citizens [Introduction]

The website identifies the dysfunctionality of the Big 3 political, economic and financial mandates underlying the prevailing dark governance system, and seeks to encourage those who feel disempowered by those with vested interests, and their ilk, to consider participating in constructive and peaceful activities which could lead towards progressive reform of the Big 3 mandates.

Johnson refers to a research study in American politics On who, or what, most influences public policy in the US (Gilens, 2014) (below). The study investigated the extent to which different sets of actors had influence over public policy, and tested prediction theories for each of these sets of actors. The findings of this study help to explain why some people might feel disempowered by the system.

Johnson reports that researcher Irina Feygina investigated ways to overcome system-justifying barriers to change, and found that framing environmental action as "system-sanctioned", by deeming it patriotic and American, did just that (Feygina, 2010).

That some people feel so oppressed that they cannot face reality without the use of sophisticated media reframing techniques being applied is a strong indictment of the level of democracy within the status quo.

We all think that we recognise blatant political propaganda, such as that used by Russia to justify the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. In the west we take the Russian phrase "a special military operation" to mean an illegal unprovoked invasion of a neighbouring nation-state, and we think that Vladimir Putin's later assertion that the application of sanctions against Russia is "akin to declaring war" is totally back to front. But by consistently describing the invasion as unprovoked, the western mainstream media is deliberately playing down the provocative historic role of US policy and the systematic expansion of NATO eastwards (Chomsky, 2022a&b).

The blatant rhetoric/ propaganda, and sheer extent of Russian state media control over its own citizens, became very apparent during the Ukraine invasion, with most Russian citizens appearing to believe what they were being told. Those who did understand, and protested, were firmly stopped.

For example, (Chomsky, 2022b) points out that western mainstream media reporting refers to the 'unprovoked invasion of Ukraine'. It does not refer to a provoked invasion, or to an 'unprovoked invasion of Iraq' by the US.

A research study in American politics by (Gilens, 2014) investigated the extent to which four different sets of actors had influence over public policy, and tested prediction theories for each set. It was found that "economic elites and organized groups representing business interests (Biased Pluralism) have substantial independent impact on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence".^asb

^asb The American spelling is retained in the direct quote. The bracketed item (Biased Pluralism) was added. The bold emphasis on the word 'independent' was added to draw attention to the existence of a number of complicating observed correlations. For example, the preferences of average citizens and economic élites were often found, coincidentally, to be similar^bna, and some "membership groups take stands that are unrelated (pro-life and pro-choice groups) or negatively related (gun owners) to what the average American wants".

^bna But where average citizens happen to have different policy preferences on important matters, such as corporate regulation, tax policy and trade restrictions, from those of economic élites, then their preferences will have little influence.

The theories of Economic-Elite Domination and Biased Pluralism were well-supported by the results, but the results did not support the theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy and Majoritarian Pluralism. However the main factor in the effectiveness of Biased Pluralism groups over Majoritarian Pluralism groups is that the former are far more numerous and much better funded.

Facilitating mass citizen engagement

Of course more can be achieved collectively, in the sense that "many hands make light work". The task could be greatly facilitated through the engagement of a global citizens' collective. In 2021 the first Global Assembly’s presence at COP26 (Anon., 2021A) meant that for the first time, citizens had a seat at the global governance table, marking a significant development in the way the world makes decisions. The Global Assembly is set to become a permanent piece of world governance infrastructure, combining a formal forum of citizens statistically selected to be representative of the global population, and distributed fora organized by local communities (Legendre, É, 2024).

Climate assemblies are taking place at local and national level in many countries, in which statistically representative samples of the population meet to hear expert evidence and deliberate on climate-related topics and make recommendations for governmental authorities to take up (Anon., 2022r), (Anon., 2022s). It remains to be seen as to the likelihood of such recommendations actually being followed up, for a variety of reasons which are discussed throughout the website.

To be effective, global citizen collective action will involve thinking and acting 'outside the box'. Helping to solve the problem of an economy which relies on overconsumption - and particularly of fossil fuels, and which ignores the costs of rigorous sociological and environmental protection in order to maximise profits, will be a challenge.

Citizen initiatives have been referred to at various points throughout the website narrative. It has been observed that such initiatives are blocked by powerful vested interests, because invariably they are perceived to pose a potential threat to economic growth. Only initiatives which support economic growth stand a chance of being taken up. At an individual level this is disempowering, but we are now in such a serious situation that unless we all pull together collectively, with common purpose, urgency and commitment, the answer to such conundrums will become irrelevant.

Young people, whose futures will be significantly affected if global warming is not halted, need to be at the heart of such collective action. They need to be having serious conversations with their families and friends; to raise questions about possible lifestyle changes that could be made. This is obviously particularly relevant for young people from overconsumptive backgrounds.

In view of the powerful grip of those with vested interests, a personal view is that it is important to maintain a distance between the grassroots response of citizens, and the more formalised 'establishment' stakeholder processes (below) which have developed during the last few decades.

Large peaceful public protests convey a measure of the extent of public concern about an issue, but imply that the public believe that the authorities will therefore do something about it.

Unfortunately, regarding ongoing very serious global issues like global warming, the analysis presented on this website shows that it is us who need to take the lead - most urgently by persuading each other to curb our overconsumption. This requires personal action, not protests. Street protests are viewed by the authorities as having the potential for disorder. Those engaging in protests will be noted by the authorities, especially if there is any violent behaviour or damage to property.

Real individual lifestyle changes to reduce personal overconsumption will be far more effective; it is direct action which breaks no laws. The more people recognise this, the more effective it will be.

Citizen efforts need to be, on the one hand, individual and private, but on the other global and collective; united by a common purpose. The quoted phrase "think global, act local" but modified to "think global, act local - but privately" expresses the point.

Additional reasons for favouring informal citizen action include the following. Taking the UK as an example, discussion within formalised citizen assemblies will be in relation to net zero by 2050, which is too slow (What does 'net zero by 2050' really imply? [Power structure]). Like many other nation-states, the UK footprint is artificially low because so many of our manufactured goods are produced in countries like China.

Any formalised agenda will tend to prioritise projects which favour economic growth, such as new technological infrastructure. In general it will tend to discourage any initiatives which would adversely affect the mainstream economy, again such as demand reduction.

There is however something of a paradox regarding citizen action en masse:

To be effective a massive global citizen response is needed, which will require cooperation and organisation, but on the other hand can only work if individuals act freely with genuine democracy, without external coercion or pressure. "United we stand", in the sense of having one voice, but as a collective of independent individuals.

The distinction of many - but independent individuals also needs to maintained in order to reduce the risk of group opposition (below) by the status quo.

It is envisaged that organised citizen meetings would take the form of mutual help and co-operation sessions, through sharing knowledge and experience. The less individuals publicise their actions, the less likely they are to be bothered by anyone. No laws are being broken; their action is peaceful and voluntary. Ideally the first 'the authorities' would know about such citizen action would be when official statistics about the economy prompted an investigation into an unexplained drop in consumption of products and services within better-off population sectors.

To be clear, the purpose of this proposed citizen action is not to destroy the economy. It is to begin to do what is practically necessary for the health of all life on our planet. This action has the additional benefit of sending a strong message to 'the authorities' that some citizens are prepared to pay more for non-polluting products and services which do not contribute to the destruction of life on our planet.

If it takes such a message, to cause a tangible depression of the economy, in order to kick-start the necessary dialogue, then so be it.

To kick-start the necessary dialogue with 'the authorities' a mass global engagement of concerned citizens would be necessary, ideally including many 'reducers' (former overconsumers).

Ok, so what can I do? [The Case: Citizen action]

Ok, so what can I do?

Given the consequential implications of major anthropogenic risks which affect the continued habitability of the planet, such as nuclear weapons and climate change, it is hardly surprising if many people adopt a 'there's nothing I can do about it' stance on life. They might believe that it is the role of governments to deal with the risks, but resort to denial when trust/ confidence in corporations and in governments is lacking.

System justification, media framing, and propaganda

If a citizen is genuinely concerned about a situation, but feels powerless to initiate change, a truthful and sustained intent/ attempt to engage with the problem is constructive. This at least can lead to becoming better informed to exercise the democratic right to vote, notwithstanding the inadequacies of the political process. It can also lead to becoming a more discerning consumer, subject to the extent of personal circumstances, as discussed further below.

After making due allowance for the proliferation of fake news and opinion via social media, the large number of quality information sources available in the public domain on serious issues (public lectures, books, documentaries, articles, films, videos, podcasts, blogs...) indicate a high general level of dissatisfaction with the status quo, but also of a high general level of disempowerment to influence change.

Voting system corruption from bribery to force is addressed in [Power structure]. Democracy is discussed further in [Big 3 reform], and later on this page in the link below:

Use of unsavoury methods by 'the authorities'

Notes: Some important environmental books in the 1970s

Notes: On UK government watchdogs

It should be obvious that an economic system which relies on encouraging growth and overconsumption, together with ignoring potential adverse side effects, will be environmentally unsustainable.

The 'green' principle of reducing consumption is nothing new, but what is new is the urgency of the situation now. This is why activists talk about the climate emergency; not that you would know it, given the level of day to day political reporting.

Most of us are in a state of collective denial; many still perhaps feeling deprived for too long from business as usual consumerism and global travel during the pandemic era.

Massive consumption needs massive container ships

Image of a real massive container ship:
MSC Gülsün (Mediterranean Shipping Company) ( Anon., 2019r)

How many full car fossil fuel tank equivalents would be needed to fill up the tanks of a ship like this?

Consumers are often conveniently unaware that reducing the demand for product manufacture (from China, for example) also reduces the demand for energy, and therefore for coal. Perhaps some make the excuse that 'free' trade is necessary for the economy.

Energy is needed at all stages of supplying a product or service: for example during product manufacturing processes; in the transporting of materials to the place of product manufacture (China in this example); and in the transporting of finished goods from China to all the importing countries around the world. Reduced product consumption will reduce the environmental footprint pro rata as less materials are used, especially plastics and other environmentally problematic substances.

There is not enough non-fossil fuel generation capability to meet current and projected demand. Unless we manage to reduce our demand, the energy shortfall will be made up from fossil fuel usage.

This situation looks set to continue, following the immensely disappointing COP26 revelations that China, Russia, and India were not intending to commit even to net zero by 2050. However China is making much better progress on reducing its dependence on fossil fuels than the US, especially since President Trump was re-elected.

Barring a sudden technological breakthrough in mega-scale carbon capture technology, and/or non-fossil fuel energy generation capability, or a major reduction in fossil fuel supply or demand, there is currently little chance of keeping 1.5 (°C) alive.

But even if a breakthrough in mega-scale carbon capture technology became available now, it would take years to implement to the level of absorbing even current emissions.

Many of us are now familiar to the point of being numbed with the concept of '..keeping the global average rise in temperature below 1.5°C..', which sounds reassuringly reasonable and non-threatening, especially when linked to talk of 'net zero by 2050'.

A total increase in global average temperature of 1.5°C doesn't sound that big a deal. But are we even sure what it actually means? For example: do we know what the presumed baseline date and datum level are; over what time period the average is calculated; and what is actually measured?

It would be just too much hassle to look it up.. 'An extreme event won't happen to me'..

Perhaps it is convenient for there to be some confusion about the figure, because there is no doubt that it will be exceeded if we continue on our present greenhouse gases (GHG) combustion trajectory. Indeed since this section was first written, the situation has deteriorated to the point that, as noted above, there is now little chance of keeping 1.5 (°C) alive. But the principle is the same, even as the average number continues to creep upwards.

People sometimes need to be reminded that a global average temperature tells you nothing about the amplitude or frequency of local perturbations - for example today, where you are, right now.

It is therefore necessary to be aware of this if we are to press for remedial action before it gets worse for all of us.

Environmental warning signs [Issues]

We all know that the amplitude and frequency of local weather related phenomena can range from 'inconvenient' to devastating. Such phenomena cannot simply be switched off. It has taken decades to reach the present levels of GHG concentrations, and it would take a very long time for them to fall - even if we stopped adding to them.

Existing corporate law does not require mandatory internalisation of all costs (MIAC) when products are manufactured or services are provided. Therefore companies can - and do - maximise profits by externalising costs. Cutting corners eventually manifests as adverse and/or unwanted consequences; such as human suffering, pollution, global warming, unrecyclable waste, etc..

Until such time that MIAC is a requirement, the best way to reduce such adverse consequences is by reducing the environmental footprints of products and services.

A pragmatic conclusion is therefore that the most overconsuming citizens on the planet must somehow be persuaded to commit to progressively reducing their personal consumption to essentials as a matter of urgency.

It is time to recognise that we cannot afford to wait any longer for the authorities to act on our behalf.

It is not credible that TwVI (those with vested interests) are going to initiate any restraint on consumption, unless they expect to be financially compensated in some way.

Possibilities might include: through increased inflation; some high level deal, or by massively increasing the cost of fossil fuel at the taxpayers' expense. In the latter scenario 'the authorities' could even claim that this was necessary in order to meet the global warming temperature limit. Without full transparency of the economic process and money flows, it would not be possible to verify fair play by those in control.

Reducing fossil fuel demand through increased pricing will increase the prices of all consumer goods. One way or another we will pay financially, which will double the hardship of living more frugally. But if we do not even try to kickstart the necessary 'war footing' level action by the authorities, through our own collective restraint, we are not going to keep within a 1.5(+?) °C limit.

Somehow overconsumers need to be persuaded to choose to voluntarily rein in their fossil fuel energy demand. Since much of this is built-in to the excess products we consume, cutting back on acquiring new 'stuff' will result directly in less energy being expended in product manufacture and distribution. In practice, since China makes so much of our stuff, this will translate to reduced fossil fuel combustion, including coal. The reduced demand sends a message to those with vested interests (TwVI) via the global markets (see below).

If we have to reduce our consumption because of inflation and/or very high energy prices, then while this will obviously still help towards reducing global warming, we will be losing the possibility of acquiring leverage over those with vested interests. If we cannot wait to 'get back to normal' (which will consume more fossil fuels) once the financial pressures ease up, then global warming will continue to rise.

Voluntary frugality is likely to be very unwelcome, judging by how desperate many affluent consumers were to get back to normal after the Covid-19 pandemic restrictions were lifted. The challenge was epitomised by the alacrity with which they resumed their interesting and varied social, cultural, and leisure activities, many with associated travel implications.

For most people, voluntary restraint and choosing to transition to living more frugally by 2030, starting now, will be inconvenient and difficult.

Business as usual depends on its target group of reasonably well-off consumers continuing as before, which only adds to the temptation. Élite investors will not want this citizen-category to go frugal. TwVI depend upon such customers for their returns on investment, which fund future investments, such as in AI.

Perhaps some of us are in denial because what is required of us is just too difficult. But are we being kept in the dark?. While we are all aware of political spin in the media, we may be less aware of our susceptibility to it. It may be observed that pro-economic growth advocates sometimes use a technique, which might be referred to as 'the memorable quotations with selective omissions' technique.

The well publicised concept 'survival of the fittest' aptly describes the predatorial behaviour of TwVI. But our survival as a species is likely to depend on us all collectively recognising and acting upon Darwin's 'little publicised' insight that:

"Selfish individuals might out-compete altruists within groups, but internally altruistic groups out-compete selfish groups"

If our planet is to remain habitable, we all need to care more about each other, and to recognise the interdependencies of all life on earth. It is evident that global warming and environmental deterioration have been largely caused by overconsumption, and that it is 'privileged consumers' who are most in a position to take the initiative regarding voluntary frugality. In a sense this revisits the contraction and convergence concept, but this time pitched at an individual level.

If you are overconsuming, then you:

Practical guides on more sustainable living, reduced resource use, and green consumerism have been around since the 1990s. Some examples: (Elkington & Hailes, 1988), (Weizsäcker, 1997), (Wackernagel & Rees, 1998), (Elkington & Hailes, 1998), (Korten, 1999, pp.243-281). What has changed now is the urgency of the situation.

But perhaps because overconsumption and easy travel have become so normalised in affluent sectors of modern societies, most people appear to have simply never thought about such matters. If they have, they are probably already doing more than the average citizen. Today if challenged, a 'travel-a-holic' might respond with a comment like "So do you expect us to just sit around all day at home then?"

(Monbiot, 2006) raised the important issue of "love miles" in the context of the ethical dilemma of flying in order to visit friends and partners and relatives on the other side of the planet, and the significant environmental consequences of doing so. Regarding personal mobility more generally, the love miles concept raises the difficult issue of our need to be physically with our loved ones, and yet increasingly our lifestyles appear to require ever more travel in order to do our work, our leisure, and to be with our families.

Given the problem with our ongoing reliance on fossil fuels, with today's communication technology it might be asked what is the justification for individuals having to physically be here, there, and everywhere? Many overconsumers at least have some choice over their work locations and lifestyles, and therefore the amount of consequentially essential travel (Beuret, 2019), (Murphy, 2020).

Every stage in the process of creating and delivering products and services requires energy.

Most of it still comes from fossil fuels.

To address the global warming issue and aim for real zero by 2030, and not merely net zero by 2050, the immediate priority is to reduce our consumption of oil, gas, and coal per se.

It will take a very long time for atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases to fall - even if we stopped adding to them. But things will get far worse if we continue as at present. Therefore the sooner we stop adding yet more greenhouse gases the better. Practically this must start by progressively reducing consumption of products and services to essentials only.

In the absence of a mandatory internalisation of all costs^MIAC for all products and services, which would minimise all adverse environmental impacts, as a broad guideline it is fair to assume that the aggregate damaging effects correlate with the level of consumption.

Those of us around the world who are overconsuming could choose to make a voluntary commitment to work towards restricting personal consumption of products and services to essentials only, starting now. Such a personal sacrifice is likely to be extremely unwelcome, but it seems logical, and fair, that the primary burden of responsibility for direct citizen action should fall on those of us who are fortunate enough to be in a position to consume more than we strictly need, and who have been choosing to do so.

Apathy and denial about securing the necessary commitment could be eased by having serious conversations among friends and families about the urgency of the situation.

Every overconsumer can make useful reductions in their personal consumption habits. It is important to take that first step and do something. Motivationally it could be viewed as a big step up from recycling.

Overconsumers who genuinely commit to reduce their consumption to essentials only by 2030 are referred to as citizen-reducers or reducers, on this website.

While the initial focus should be on minimising overconsumption, in due course the emphasis could shift to more specific reductions, such as switching to less damaging versions of essential products and services.

Choosing to purchase good quality products which are built to last, with an eye to repair rather than replacement, in preference to buying cheaper currently fashionable items, may seem like winding the clock back. But becoming a more discerning consumer, in the principled lifestyle choice sense, rather than in the sense of being able to afford the best (which might be how some very wealthy citizens interpret it) can be helpful.

Depending upon their disposable income, and level of discernment, very wealthy citizens could make significant reductions in their footprints. Beneficial lifestyle shifts might include activities which foster an increased appreciation of the natural world, such as rambling, and meditation.

Decluttering and lifestyle simplification requires time and effort, and is less glamorous than globe-trotting. But many who choose to spend their own time doing life-enhancing low ecological footprint (Wackernagel & Rees, 1998), social, cultural, and caring activities at home or locally, such as art, music, drama, volunteering/ helping and caring in the community, etc. have found such pursuits to be rewarding in a different way.

As expressed in the following extract from a 'poem' The End of the Dividend [Purposeful art]:

Looking at the state of the world it is very understandable that many young people feel badly let down by the system, and by their parents' generation.

"Can't stop looking at this picture of a new Royal Caribbean cruise ship. My son just described it as 'human lasagne'. Absolutely my idea of hell." (Stephens, 2022) [Bibliography]

There is no doubt that the older generation has overconsumed, and continues to do so. But many activists have tried for decades to change the 'promote economic growth regardless of the environmental and sociological cost' ideology of our leaders.

Young people need to have a key role in the process. Initially it is their future which is at stake, and many are showing signs of stress about it. They need to understand what they are up against, and how to face it. They are skilled at using social media; if mass voluntary frugality is to be effective this message needs to go viral.

And it is not easy.

Corporate law has been honed (stitched up), largely for the benefit of a relatively small number of obscenely rich and powerful élites, over the last several hundred years (as described in Evolution of corporate legislation [Power structure]).

This website describes an attempt to understand and explain what we are all up against, and to suggest what we might actually do about it. The hope is that the overwhelming sense of disempowerment in the face of all this, which is felt by many ordinary citizens, and especially by many young people, can be overcome. While our influence via the mainstream democratic voting system has been systematically undermined by dark governance, it has been replaced by 'consumer democracy' (see next section), albeit increasingly via the internet. Ordinary citizens who are fortunate enough to have sufficient disposable income do have some influence by being more discerning consumers.

For those who are fortunate enough to be able to afford to consume, or overconsume, 'people-power' can be significantly reclaimed by choosing to refrain from overconsumption.

Consumer democracy [Life choices]

But as noted earlier, subject to our personal circumstances many of us could become more discerning consumers, in the principled lifestyle choice sense.

Discernment can be developed by becoming better informed about human impacts on the biosphere in general, and particularly about those involved in the supply chains for the products and services to be 'consumed'. This includes the environmental and sociological standards and human values applicable at the various stages of production and distribution.

There will be a spectrum of personal circumstances and values which affect an individual citizen's interpretation of what being a discerning consumer means, and how committed he/she might be to the notion. Not all people who could afford to overconsume necessarily do so. Others might be only too aware of the issues, but can barely afford to make ends meet anyway. Yet others cannot consume much for many possible reasons, for example: poverty, lack of freedom, suffering through incapacity or various forms of exploitation and atrocities committed by others against them..etc. None of these citizens could be regarded as contributing much to environmental unsustainability. Their situation or plight obliges us all to consider how we might help them.

This can translate into principled lifestyle choices which minimise adverse environmental impacts and resist adverse sociological and cultural trends, for example (Taylor, 2020), (Website. Less Stuff More Joy).

It is particularly important to massively reduce our fossil fuel energy consumption, non-essential travel, and to minimise the use of non-essential products which contain plastic, including cosmetics and fashion clothing.

Consumer decisions involving significant capital expenditures such as for domestic renewable energy systems and transport can become complicated, because we are in a period of transition towards renewables. Mainstream media messages advising consumers, at the first hint of a gas and/or electricity price rise, to switch their energy supplier to 'get the best deal' serve only to demonstrate government hypocrisy on 'net zero by 2050', and the real priorities of business.

Some previous UK government schemes to subsidise the take-up of solar panels and heat pumps were promising but were not sustained. Schemes like grants for roof insulation have tended to encourage opportunist contractors who can leave householders with a legacy of problems.

The short-termism of

does not serve consumers well during such periods of infrastructural transition. It takes time for new businesses to tool-up, and for employees to gain competency and experience. Systems using devices such as heat pumps, solar thermal, solar pv, etc. all need to be serviced. This can be a problem in the early years of introducing a new renewable energy technology.

Although many new companies have appeared in recent years, with promising sounding products and services, often they will only service equipment that they have also installed. So if one has had equipment for some time it becomes more difficult to find anyone who can supply spare parts, or provide servicing (especially when one's local contractor went out of business during the pandemic).

In general it is worth getting a competent installation with a contractor who has been operating in the sector for some years. It may not be cheap to start with, but it will probably be more satisfactory, and cheaper in the long run; and save a lot of hassle.

Cost externalisations are invariably built in to most of the products we buy. We are unlikely to be aware of the ramifications of this unless we are 'discerning consumers', and/or we become aware of an adverse consequence associated with a product for some reason; for example if we have read something about it, or perhaps it has been recently highlighted in the media.

Revealed difficulties with 'essential' goods [Big 3 reform]

Revealed difficulties with non-essential goods [Big 3 reform]

These links are part of a study into an environmentally and sociologically sustainable economic system, which would require the mandatory internalisation of all costs (MIAC)

As soon as a citizen attempts to shop in a discerning manner, difficulties will arise. For example trying to purchase cosmetics or household goods which do not contain plastic, microplastic, or plastic/ packaging is almost impossible. It is now integral to many commonly used materials, which are no longer what they appear to be. For example, 'wipes' are very widely used, and are available in many different forms.

The TV documentary series War on Plastic (Anon., 2019h) publicised the fact that wipes might look like paper, but are often strengthened with plastic (Anon., 2021f), (Anon., 2021h). These cause problems in sewage treatment plants and rivers; wipes, which should never have been put in the sewage system anyway, can be found lining river banks through the disgraceful practice of discharging untreated sewage into UK rivers (Anon., 2021i), (Bullough, 2022).

Clothing now often contains plastic fibres. Since it is a consumer market, if there is enough consumer pressure, either by consumer boycotts or bad publicity through consumer-led campaigning, companies will adapt. This is frustrating, but is the present day reality after years of clever marketing and BAU. We also have the problem that product labelling is often deliberately unhelpful.

For some people, it may be necessary to adopt a different attitude towards consumption.

Notes: Refraining from being an overconsumer [Life choices]

It could be argued that an aspect of being a discerning consumer is to resist the 'amorality' underlying corporate sponsorship in the arts, culture, and sport (see below).

Become an activist

There may come a point where a concerned citizen reaches such a level of frustration that she/he really wants to try to influence change of the system.

'Doing' in the present context refers to responding to everyday life situations which require a principled decision to action . An example might be to become better informed about some social or environmental issue.

'Activism' in this context refers to a more focused commitment to tackle a specific problem, and which requires political engagement.

The usual starting point would be when a citizen becomes sufficiently concerned about a specific issue to want to do something about it. The adage 'every journey begins with a single step' is certainly applicable. Perhaps the most important first step is to try to quietly address the problem at a personal level. Subsequently, during conversation, difficulties and/or solutions may get discussed more widely, which can lead to a campaign by like-minded citizens who are also concerned about that issue. A project might start with researching information and developing ideas for subsequent communication. This might be via publishing a campaign newsletter; an article for a magazine, or for the press. It might take the form of peaceful direct action such as: attending or organising a campaign march; writing to an MP; or perhaps discussions with an employer. Information dissemination might be via social media; a blog; or even a website...

(Patel, 2022) discusses "ways in which the best campaigning organizations in the world effect change in democratic societies, how a citizen can engage with others who are like-minded, and how vibrant and participative action by the people makes democracy better and more responsive."

Individuals having relevant official responsibilities, or those in the fortunate position of being able to do something through their expertise/ occupation, can in principle make progress on understanding problem issues and perhaps on implementing possible solutions (see below).

The potential usefulness of scenario analysis and computer modelling has already been mentioned.

If an employee is uncomfortable with some aspect of his/her work assignment, for example arising from a personal internal values conflict, then in the first instance the matter should be discussed with his/her line manager, as for any other matter. If the matter cannot be so resolved, the scope and effectiveness of a legal expression of passive resistance to the employer is limited, since "he who pays the piper calls the tune".

This is discussed further in the following link:

Conflicted values in the workplace [Life choices]

Whistle-blowing is discussed in the following link:

Just doing my job [Power structure]

Most MHCPs, for example environmental degradation, have been building up over a long time. Even when such problems are reported in the mainstream media, the news is unwelcome and depressing, and tends to cause denial to set in. The problems continue to worsen, but without people really becoming aware of them (Anon., 2016b).

Despite an uphill communication struggle, enormous efforts have been made over the years by dedicated citizens from all walks of life to initiate a great many innovative and constructive proposals^cpbc for potential solutions to human-caused problems. Important contributions have been made by concerned citizens, campaigners, authors, NGOs.. towards tackling MHCPs. Some of these have influenced the agendas of International Institutions. (UNEP, 2022) lists some significant milestone UN events during the period 1972-2022. Significant conferences on the environment and sustainable development are outlined in (Website. "United Nations Conferences | Environment and sustainable development").

^cpbc Some examples of important contributions and excellent initiatives by concerned citizens are listed in the [Notes] below.

Political engagement is all about communication; initially between citizens of like mind, and ultimately with decision-makers. Chatting/ meeting/ networking can start at protests, campaigns, conferences. Opportunities for direct access to decision-makers^gtd for meaningful dialogue is much more difficult.

^gtd See (Oxford Research Group, 1999), (Elworthy, 1997) on the topic of gaining direct access to decision makers.

Corporate PR through stakeholder dialogue has become very slick. At first sight this does provide opportunities for citizens to discuss issues with corporate representatives. But dialogue means two-way communication, and corporations make sure that they obtain useful information from and about citizen-stakeholder groups. Corporate influencers carefully control the presentation of information to citizen-stakeholders, and to the media in general.

The following extract about stakeholder dialogue is taken from
The sustainability assessment model (SAM) [Power structure] :

"Open dialogue between stakeholders requires a significant commitment of time and energy from participants. There can be some reluctance to openly discuss values and politics, especially by managers. Partipants may have fears and suspicions about the political nature of process; that it might be used as window dressing to legitimise predetermined answers; and that stakeholders might have been carefully screened beforehand. The limits of a 'politics of consensus' can also become apparent."

TwvI are masters of power and control. Through carefully screened stakeholder style participation, citizens to be 'educated' to see things as the TwVI want them to be seen. A large citizens' collective so-organised and trained in collaboration with 'the authorities' is controllable, including the timescale over which such an education programme to be rolled out. It makes for better public relations than policing mass protests. If this scenario seems rather manipulative, it is very mild compared with what is happening in China^[PS]

Campaigners just need to be aware of the above perspective, especially if they are participating in stakeholder-style consultations, presentations, workshops or programmes.

Global citizen action

Think global, act local - but privately

Some campaigners might become convinced that they need to get into electoral politics in order to have more influence.

This section introduces some of the methods used by governments and corporations to acquire and control information about citizens, and how that information may be used.

Information and implementation control strategy [Power structure].

Some examples: state surveillance of particular citizen groups in the US (Anon., 2022q); undercover infiltration of citizen groups in the UK, for example (Dorey, 2013); and as described in the link below about a shocking UK case covering the period 1960-2011, which has recently come to light in a television documentary. Between 1960 and 2011, undercover police were active in infiltrating protest groups and organisations, with the remit to spy on members and report back. Some of these officers entered into relationships with women in these groups, some even fathering children.

Exposure of undercover police infiltration of personal relationships for spying.

It is reasonable to infer that the purpose of undercover infiltration of citizen groups is ultimately for 'the authorities' to be in a better position to deliberately manipulate public opinion; in the above example to disrupt/ prevent protests as the police saw fit, or for 'the authorities' to influence public voting behaviour (Anon., 2019j).

It is often assumed that NGOs all work for the common good, for example charities, campaign groups etc.. However NGO is a generic term, and unfortunately many exist which masquerade as citizen-represented operations, but are actually well-funded corporate front-NGOs which seek to manipulate public opinion for commercial gain. (Beder, 1997) provides more information on this type of PR activity. (Gilens, 2014, p.575) shows that, in comparison with mass-based interest groups, organised groups which represent business interests in the US are "far more numerous and active; they spend much more money; and they tend to get their way" regarding US policy (discussed below).

Lobbying by citizen-led non-governmental organisation (NGO)s and private citizens to try to influence change by normal democratic means, for example towards environmental sustainability - in comparison with the relentless and massive corporate lobbying effort - is like David versus Goliath.

Those with vested interests can use some very unsavoury methods to resist citizen activism. For example: the deliberate creation of doubt to feed citizen denial (Anon., 2020i); and lobbying of politicians with misinformation (Anon., 2021b). In 2015 a particularly chilling book launch lecture was given by Clive Hamilton (an author and professor of public ethics), during which he explained how the (then) Australian government was actively suppressing environmentalists, branding them as eco-terrorists, or worse (Sydney Environment Institute, 2017). (Deller, 2016) gives a review of the book Hamilton was launching; she concludes with the remark "... I hope someone can produce a companion volume, explaining how the state in Western democracies has sought to help corporations achieve their goal of delaying effective action on climate change mitigation". (Readfearn, 2016) describes the lengths one far-right Australian Senator went to deny climate science.

The manipulation of public opinion about global warming by TwVI in order to feed citizen denial are discussed in Vested interests and climate-denial politics [Issues]. The extent to which sophisticated techniques are used by large corporations to influence public opinion, and oppose increased environmental regulation, is quite shocking (Beder,1997). For example: 'astroturfing' - "the instant manufacturing of public support for a point of view in which either uninformed activists are recruited or means of deception are used to recruit them" - adapted from (Ibid., page 32).

This sounds rather like the technique portrayed later in (Anon., 2019j) in order to bias the overall outcome of a national referendum on whether or not the UK chould remain in the EU. The technique involved data-mining and social media to target those who would not normally vote. Following a three-year investigation into the firm Cambridge Analytica, which collapsed in 2018, (Waterson, 2020) reports that "Cambridge Analytica did not misuse data in EU referendum, says watchdog". However, the carefully worded statements by the investigators are revealing. For example, "In a letter to MPs the information commissioner said that although there was no evidence of law breaches to justify enforcement action, Cambridge Analytica’s activities “confirms my earlier conclusion that there are systemic vulnerabilities in our democratic systems” " (Ibid.).

In the light of such corporate PR techniques, it is not unreasonable to infer that in a similar way to exploiting citizen denial, corporations are also likely to exploit citizen activism.

It might be speculated that it would be a corporate win:win:win ploy to make money, obtain useful information about citizens (and voters), and to control the mode of dialogue, for example as used in Stakeholder processes (discussed above).

But instead of real face to face dialogue, and real individual letter writing to decison-makers, why not make it easier for citizens to assuage their pro-activist inclinations by creating social media and clicktivism ?

A particularly insidious way that corporations resist activism by citizens which would actually result in governments trying to do the right thing, is by suing those governments for loss of future profits! This process is implemented through "Corporate Courts".

Corporate courts [Power structure]

Citizen activism against Corporate Courts [Power structure].

We have entered an era of fake news in which so-called conspiracy theories are given equal weight in some media to quality journalism. But even the concept of a conspiracy theory [Inference] has now been commandeered to signify a short narrative which can make wild assertions, sometimes with potentially damaging associations, and which is presented in a falsely authoritative manner as factual information.

As already discussed, extremely unsavoury tactics are increasingly being used, both by radical activists and by authorities and/or their agents, to seed general public misinformation, and also for electioneering purposes.

Escalations of violence result in authorities resorting to ever more extreme forms of "liddism" (Rogers, 2000, p.10) style law enforcement, for example to the extent that the police become militarised and authorised to use SWAT^aosw. Once US-style SWAT or similar tactics are deployed it is clear that the authorities have regressed to exercising primitive violent control, and that the possibility of civilised dialogue has broken down. This poisons society and is in the interests of no-one. Many examples of extreme manipulation and/or coercion are reported around the world wherever political corruption exists. Some of these are discussed further in [Power structure].

As soon as any violence occurs, the trust of citizens in the authorities about who instigated the violence is questioned. Was it started by ordinary citizens; aggressive citizen protesters; or by provocative aggression by agents controlled by the authorities (so-called rent-a-mob tactics)?

It can be very difficult to establish the facts in such situations. Any photographic or video evidence of aggressive acts which can be obtained is potentially valuable^fbve. This approach to campaigning might lead to petty infantile disputes over the authenticity and interpretation of images provided as evidence. But even this would still be a form of dialogue, which would be much better than an escalation to violence.

^fbve In France a new law was proposed in November 2020 (Willsher, 2020) that would make it illegal to disseminate video-recorded or photographic evidence which could identify police [Power structure] and gendarmes engaging in such brutality.

Public Order Bill In a similar vein in summer 2022 the UK government attempted to push through a "National Security Bill", which would significantly limit the right to protest, and curtail other freedoms in the name of 'law and order' (Bychawski, 2022). Despite citizen protests, legislation attached to a new Public Order Bill was forced through in 2023 - using statutory instruments. The Bill sought to address the 'serious disruption caused by a small minority of protestors' by severely limiting the actions allowed during demonstrations. Some of the more extreme government measures were successfully challenged (May 2024) by Civil Liberties groups as they were added to the Bill despite being previously rejected by Parliament.

Some reported actions by 'the authorities' appear excessive, but the reader does not know the full story. (Anon., 2025d) reports that police raided a Quaker meeting house in London and that six female supporters of an activist group Youth Demand were arrested. The group said that the meeting was "an opportunity to share plans for non-violent civil resistance actions" due to take place in April.

The standards of some behaviour in public is now simply appalling. Some recent examples of bad behaviour by the public include: hate speech and trolling on social media; contravention of coronavirus restrictions by citizens, for example large rowdy parties; and alleged violence and property damage by Black Lives Matter protestors (which pales into insignificance compared with atrocities committed by the authorities, such as bombing Iraq/ Syria).

Some examples of bad behaviour by authority figures and politicians over just a few years include: contravention of coronavirus restrictions by some UK government officials (travel by Dominic Cummings and Westminster SNP MP Margaret Ferrier); "Partygate"); the UK Tory government attempting to prorogue parliament during the Brexit negotiations, and to break international law over the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement; outragous electioneering tactics (data-mining etc) prior to the UK referendum on membership of the EU; alleged interference by other governments in the 2016 US elections; very aggressive conspiracy theory/ fake news/ hate speech by Donald Trump during the 2016 US election campaign; a completely dysfunctional first US presidential debate between then President Trump and the then prospective Democrat candidate Joe Biden; the conduct of the Chinese government over Hong Kong... etc.. Further such examples could no doubt be cited for more recent time periods.

Aggressive tactics in combination with public frustration at status quo-intransigence are likely to lead to impassioned exchanges, and increase the chances of peaceful political protests escalating to violence at which point a line is crossed.

If peaceful expressions of protest, or Gandhian-style passive resistance, become politically charged to the extent that the authorities invoke special legal powers then the point has been made. The campaign/ protest should be called off, long before anyone gets hurt, or property is damaged.

If ordinary citizens had a better appreciation of the extent to which the status quo has limited the room for manouvre for legitimate protest, and of the true urgency and seriousness of the situation, they might be more tolerant of the type of mildly socially disruptive behaviour by activists, such as that carried out by Extinction Rebellion (known as XR).

However, members of the general public appear to have a low threshold of annoyance at such protests. Where stunts interfere with civic infrastructure such as the road transport network, inevitably there is some risk that innocent civilians might be harmed, for example if the stunt incurred a delay to a patient receiving emergency medical treatment. If such a tragedy occurs, the focus of public interest will be on that, not on the campaign, which is counter productive at every level.

But to have to cause citizens some inconvenience in order to get their attention is a sad indictment of the situation. Also, in general, mild attention-grabbing stunts are no match for the enormously well-funded corporate PR machine. The pro-growth lobby can command greater resources for media reframing messages than pro-sustainability activists. Corporate lobbying fuels the increased use of social media by activists, which is then countered by fake-news - generated by proponents of the status quo; and so the erosion of democracy goes on.

The trend towards increasingly heavy-handed policing of citizen protests has been discussed above. Citizen dissent at oppressive governance is problematic for all the above reasons.

On a more positive note, the link between denial, virtue, and the power of collective action is addressed in an inspirational podcast by (Wells, 2021b).

Suitably empowered citizens could actively encourage trusted élite individuals to move towards more enlightened, human values-based, government policies/ business models. Examples of projects could include: calling for greater transparency in relation to government and business practices; voting systems; and products/ services throughout supply chains. Trusted élite collaboration with citizen-based NGOs could be explored.

Unsurprisingly some powerful élite individuals (the key drivers of dark governance) can experience extreme internal human values conflicts. They cope with these conflicts by compartmentalising their lives between work and not-work. The robustness of this type (i) coping strategy, and the ruthlessness of some type (ii) behaviours can be intimidating.

Coping strategies adopted by corporate executives [Life choices]

It is hoped that, in response to changing conditions, some of these élite individuals might yet recognise their responsibilities as citizens, which accrue from their assumed rights over people and planet. They might conclude that it is in their best interests to turn away from their previous roles, and begin to genuinely try and become part of the solution, rather than part of the problem.

Untenable internal-values conflicts for élite individuals? [Life choices]

The era of naive public gratitude for corporate PR which claims to 'give something back' using Corporate Social Responsibility [Power structure] rhetoric needs to pass. The situation is now far too serious.

Corporate sponsorship in the arts, culture, and sport [Power structure]

To genuinely become part of the solution means exactly that. So what sort of contribution could a genuine 'convert-élite' individual realistically be expected to make? It would seem unlikely that she/he would be welcome in her/his previous assignment; making resignation obligatory: "If you aren't with us, you're against us".

As noted earlier, in principle most individuals have some choice about the type of work they do.

An individual resigning from an élite executive role in order to work in a less cost-externalised field might beneficially impact the planet directly, and also indirectly if the new work was paid less generously; thereby reducing the temptation to overconsume.

Such an individual is more likely to be able to afford to resign his/ her employment than an 'average' citizen.

He/she would also reap some benefit from a reduction of conflicted values from the work switch. A win:win:win.

Convert-élites who are genuinely committed to reducing their addiction to power, wealth, and control can expect to face some difficulties.

A convert-élite individual might choose to enter electoral politics. All sectors within the Big 3 need reform, and could benefit from such expertise. The electoral system and Big 3 dominated business models need to be transformed.

Ex-corporate élite individuals who choose to go into electoral politics, could become more involved in enlightened statecraft, with heart-driven human values at the core. Although they are constrained to discretionary or voluntary 'self'-regulation by current corporate legislation, the bar could be raised by such individuals who might be able to push for mandatory legislative reforms.

There have been many calls for combining knowledge of economic theory and regulation to internalise the externalities of the market system (Meadows, 2005, p.258). Similarly in the case of corporate law there is a wide spectrum of professional views between pro-enlightened shareholder value and pro-pluralism.

Unfortunately, well-intentioned moderates are no match for ruthless operatives such as TwVI (those with vested interests) - who could choose to refrain from hiding behind corporate personhood, and come out to head-up more enlightened types of organisation/ corporation, with heart-driven human values at the core.

Convert-élites would know how to play the game, and be well aware of the usual fate of whistleblowers. However, as part of 'walking their new talk' they might choose to expose the shady methods used to swing deals. Perhaps they could initiate some kind of truth and reconciliation process whereby it was conceded that it would be in the interests of all, as part of public trust-building, to move towards much greater transparency of business activities.

Unfortunately, once outside the fold, the convert would face the same intransigence as the rest of us; nation-state electoral politics, corporate law, and market competition. Her/his expertise would therefore probably be best utilised in an advisory role, but no doubt hampered by Non Disclosure Agreements etc..

In a manner slightly analogous to the poacher-turned-gamekeeper concept, convert-élite individuals could reverse the 'revolving door', to directly help citizen-based NGOs. With their work-ethic, expertise, contacts, and executive experience they could make immensely valuable contributions towards repairing some of the damage that dark governance has caused.

Ex-corporate élite individuals could choose to directly help citizen-based NGOs to: gain access to decision-makers; publicly confirm and acknowledge the extent of the dark governance problem, (using mainstream and social media); run educational workshops to assist citizens with greener lifestyle planning, and to help citizen-engagement with the issues by giving guidance on how to cut through the corporate PR machine.

Poacher-turned-gamekeeper deployments are not uncommon; some examples: youth gang criminals becoming youth-workers after serving prison sentences, ex-drug addicts running rehab centres and help groups, convicted computer hackers becoming IT security advisers, and power-sharing after the Northern Ireland Troubles.

It is recognised that some convert-élites might appear to co-operate with a more enlightened agenda, but in reality use it as convenient cover while actually carrying on much as before. But this would be little different from what has been happening for years anyway (revolving door etc.).

As noted earlier, some campaigners might become convinced that they need to get into electoral politics in order to have more influence. The next priority becomes self-promotion as a potential candidate. A candidate's energy and time then has to be divided between the election campaign, and addressing the originating issue. If successfully elected, in order to get things done, the rules of the game regarding networking, the 'right' contacts, money and power, soon become apparent.

Towards a better understanding of business as usual (BAU)' [Power structure]

Spotlight on democracy [Big 3 reform]

At some point an aspiring politician will invariably be obliged to choose between getting more power and influence for his/her agenda, or becoming resigned to the likelihood that the agenda will not materialise. A similar pattern arises in careers outside politics. Other things being equal, an ambitious and malleable yes-man will tend to become more 'successful' than an otherwise technically competent and honourable professional who is not prepared to sacrifice his/her soul in order to 'get on'. Or, to put it more diplomatically, "conformity with the system is rewarded". This remark was made by Noam Chomsky's interviewer Wladislaw Jachtchenko, in the context of indoctrination, and the establishment in general (Chomsky, 2022b, at approx 44' into the referenced video).

Most capable individuals will be more than keen to accept enticing salaries, and often our brightest young people are attracted to careers in the City. Important factors favouring success then include malleability and the mental toughness to commit to the 'amorality' of business. In my view, the so-called 'Peter principle', whereby an employee tends to 'rise to his level of incompetence' in terms of promotion reveals more about managerial criteria than about the competence of the employee; 'competency' being assessed primarily on performance against the bottom line.

It can be readily observed, from the state of the world, that for those politicians who attain élite power and influence, such influence does not translate into effective action for addressing the MHCPs. Often such politicians promote aspirational solutions for the problems of the world - but only after they have retired from Office.

What is it about the BAU system which renders them largely impotent while in Office?^rob

Unfortunately this seems to be the norm, given dark governance and human nature in general. It is soon observed that the odds are heavily stacked against those who are trying to do genuinely good work for society and/or for the environment, because the remedies usually involve impeding economic growth. And history shows that economic growth has always taken precedence; even over mainstream science.^obmt

Great perseverance and inventiveness need to be sustained in order to stand any chance of making progress towards tackling the

. Ongoing creative engagement can hope to systematically reveal more about the reasons for lack of progress. Such revelations can be consolidated by responsible use of networking by many peaceful means.

Notes: Peacebuilding and conflict prevention

This section outlines several cases which, irrespective of the extent of resolution of the problem, deserve further study on multiple fronts. In general, at some level, they demonstrate (a) a falling short, or outright bad behaviour, by 'the authorities'; (b) resolve, courage, and perseverance by the victim(s) in bringing the wrong to light; (c) credit to those who support the victim(s) in doing so; and (d) inspiration to fellow citizens who might need to follow their example.

In general type (a) aspects of a case are described in [Power structure: Rogue operator behaviour] or elsewhere within [Citizen action: Become an activist], and types (b) - (d) aspects are outlined in this subsection.

Certain cases break new ground through a creative approach to challenging the "liddist" (Rogers, 2000, p.10) tendences of 'the authorities', and/or laying the foundations for dealing with one of the MHCPs.

Some cases particularly highlight the effect of type (a) shortcomings on ordinary people; or on the biosphere.

This is an inspirational example of what dedicated citizens can achieve; at their own initiative, albeit in their own time, and at their own expense. (Bullough, 2022) describes how an academic (H) and a detective (S), both retired and neighbours, each using his respective professional expertise, collaborated to investigate the decline in water quality of the river near their homes, and the observable drastic effect on local widlife. Their complementary skills led to investigating what the various UK Environment Agencies (EA)s were (not) doing.

They uncovered widespread excessively frequent and routinely unreported (which is illegal) discharges of raw sewage into rivers. Since privatisation of the water industry in England and Wales in the late 1980s, EA monitoring budgets had been progressively reduced, as surmised in the note below about UK government watchdogs. A recently retired EA inspector described it as "... death by a thousand Tory cuts...". Even if prosecuted, the fines are not a sufficient deterrent to the water companies. It is far more cost-effective for them to continue to pollute as they see fit.

Notes: On UK government watchdogs

The exceptionally well-researched case, based on expert analysis of data obtained from "Environmental information requests" (EIRs) was irrefutable. H & S had an opportunity to submit their findings to a parliamentary Environment Audit Committee inquiry into the state of rivers in England and Wales (Anon., 2021i). Major official investigations followed.

It turns out that the poor ecological state of rivers is becoming a big problem generally. Two different types of river problem are addressed in an uplifting television documentary presented by (Bonnin, L. and Adepitan, A., 2025). Liz Bonnin outlines the largest dam removal project in US history, which aims to resuscitate the River Klamath in northern California. She describes how the dams had destroyed the local eco-system, which had a profound impact on members of the local indigenous tribes, such as the Yurok and the Karuk, who have lived alongside the 254 miles of the Klamath for thousands of years. Now, after decades of campaigning, the dams are being demolished. The lost electricity generation has been replaced by other renewables.

Ade Adepitan introduces the mega-engineering project which is under way to stop human waste ending up in the Seine, which has long been deemed too toxic to swim in. The incentive to carry out this cleanup was when Paris won the bid to hold the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games, but at least it is being done.

The two projects described are pioneering, and could serve as models for similar schemes around the world. The Canadian example shows what can be done when people recognise that we live in a biosphere, and we need to co-operate with nature.

This scandal is described in:

Arrogance in business culture which directly affects ordinary people’s lives [Power structure]

It was the subject of excellent BBC Radio documentaries but finally came to wider public knowledge due to an ITV drama (Wikipedia: Mr Bates vs The Post Office).

The context for this bad behaviour by 'the authorities' is discussed in:

Use of unsavoury methods by 'the authorities'

The scandal is the subject of a 2025 3-part ITV documentary series (Anon, 2025a).

Some of the women, from widely disparate groups, each having been abandoned after several years by their ‘partners’ eventually managed to piece together their very similar stories and expose the set-up.

The concept of the betrayal and the audacity with which it was felt justifiable to completely disrupt these women’s lives indicates rogue operator behaviour on the part of the ‘trusted’ police, but also bravery and stoicism on the part of the women, several of whom were prepared to appear in the documentary in order to highlight this situation.

The all female legal representation of the victims deserve great credit for their excellent work on this case. This sets a high bar for what can be achieved in spite of a very flawed justice system.

A general critique of rogue operator behaviour is presented in:

Arrogance towards people [Power structure]

This clever and effective campaign achieved what some might have believed to be impossible! Despite the first past the post system, with electoral boundaries having been carefully optimised over the years.

Various campaign groups did a detailed analysis of the candidates in each of the 650 seats being contested. Tactical voting was advocated for anyone who wished to see the country change hands after 14 years of Conservative-led government. It was acknowledged that in most seats there were only two viable candidates, and voters were advised, by visiting the relevant websites, which candidate to vote for if they wanted to deny the Tories another term in Government. In many cases this meant voting for a constituent’s non-preferred party, but enough did this to achieve a ‘Labour landslide’ and oust the Tories (Mortimer, 2024).

A Proportional Representation system would obviate the need for tactical voting. This has been resisted so far in the UK on the basis of fears of hung governments, coalitions etc. seen in other countries. But there is a growing movement calling for PR.

This clever campaign promises to be the perfect counter to the increasingly aggressive conflict-oriented SWAT mentality of 'the authorities' in dealing with public protests, as discussed in the following link.

Bad public behaviour,
citizen protests and
Special Weapons And Tactics (SWAT)

Background Turkey’s main Opposition leader, the Mayor of Istanbul, was arrested (March 2025) on spurious charges in advance of a planned ballot of approximately 1.75 million Party members. The ballot would have named him as the CHP party’s rival to President Erdogan in the next Presidential election (due in 2028 – but the Opposition think it may be called earlier).

Following Ekrem Imamoglu’s arrest and imprisonment, riots and street protests resulted in over 1800 arrests (including journalists).. But a quieter demonstration of support for Mr Imamoglu was staged when the CHP decided to open the ballot to all citizens. Makeshift polling stations were set up and 15 million people queued to vote for him to be their candidate. They were peaceful, so not arrested, but the action showed the world (though not ordinary Turkish citizens – their broadcasting and news outlets are State controlled) the strength of feeling about the (political) arrest.

The undeniably peaceful approach adopted for Turkey’s ballot for Opposition candidate described in (Anon, 2025b) offers the exciting possibility to usurp the aggressive conflict oriented SWAT mentality of 'the authorities'. It almost dilutes even the word "protest" to a gentle polite expression of a citizen's personal free-will choice.

Powerful geopolitical journalism The BBC's Europe editor, Katya Adler, spotlights geopolitically potentially very significant developments in the Balkans (Adler, 2025a,b).

Massive infrastructure investment in Serbia by China [Power structure]

Caring for people The actor Michael Sheen has raised awareness of the loan shark driven debt trap which besets many ordinary citizens in the community of his youth. He sought expert advice on the 'buying bundles of debt' tactic used in the US subprime mortgages scandal - which triggered the 2008 global financial crash. With his own money he then paid for a bundle of debts of around 900 citizens in his community, and paid off the debt.

He joined the Fair Banking for All Campaign to urge the government to pass a new law that would create genuine alternatives for individuals resorting to payday loans or loan sharks because they cannot get a loan from a high-street bank (Sheen, 2025).

The Manchester Credit Union also supports the campaign for The Fair Banking Act, which would require banks and financial institutions to offer fairer services to all, regardless of income or credit score. It aims to tackle the ‘poverty premium’ – the extra costs people on low incomes pay simply because the system isn’t built with them in mind.

A spectrum of business activities and behaviours [Power structure]

As the MCU say, "it’s time for a financial system that works for everyone."(Chadwick, 2025).

Caring for people Actor Rose Ayling-Ellis has already achieved a great deal in raising awareness of some of the realities of living with deafness. Despite her profound hearing loss, she won the BBC Strictly Come Dancing competition in 2021. Rose embarked on a project (Anon., 2025e), (BAFTA, 2025) to discover whether a village community of elderly people could learn British Sign Language (BSL), and benefit from it. Elderly people often suffer from loneliness and isolation for a variety of reasons, and a loss of hearing with age does not help. The results to date have been dramatically positive.

Powerful nature journalism Those of us who do not have seriously impaired hearing perhaps take our good fortune for granted, and maybe we are unaware of how precious the sense of hearing can be. Quietly spoken ornithologist Seán Ronayne lives in Ireland, and is deeply concerned about the progressive loss of native bird species. Some have been driven to extinction, and many are on the endangered list. He has embarked on a personal mission to obtain sound recordings of the songs of every species of bird in Ireland. The television documentary (Ronayne, 2025) presents a delightful and, at times moving, account of his project.

Despite great dedication and persistence from many citizen activists, activism invariably struggles to make much headway on tackling the MHCPs. To the extent that reform is actually implemented, it often appears to correlate with some technological breakthrough which offers the prospect of money being made, or is perceived by the government of the day to be a vote-winning opportunity. Under such conditions certain citizen-initiatives might then be picked up.

If activism cannot be turned to a commercial or a party-political advantage, but becomes so effective that it is perceived by the status quo to be a threat, then the government of the day, and/or their agents, can be expected to retaliate.

In oppressive regimes citizen activism is handled very firmly. Some examples:

Oppressive and dictatorial regimes [Power structure].

More generally, now even the last bastion of democracy - the right to peacefully protest - is being increasingly resisted, restricted or outlawed by the authorities.

Bad public behaviour, citizen protests and Special Weapons And Tactics

Voting systems are subject to corruption, including in the West. Some examples: in the UK (Anon., 2019j); in the US (by big money) (Cressman, 2016), (Rothkopf, 2008, pp.81-85); in Kenya (Anon., 2020d).

Ultimately the authorities have a legal mandate to 'protect the national interest'/ maintain law and order, using force if necessary:

The language of force [The Case: Big 3 reform].

Eventually, through relentless activist commitment, the corruption and/ or ruthless short-termism of some high ranking corporate and government executives may come to light. But unfortunately, as a consequence of their misguided and irresponsible executive decisions, a great deal of long term environmental and sociological damage can occur in the meantime.

And in the end the citizen pays for any remedial action, either as a customer through increased bills to the offending company, or as taxpayers if that company is bankrupted by the cost of carrying out the necessary improvements, and has to be taken into public ownership.

Global citizens pay for everything [Big 3 reform]

The general state of rivers - referred to in the previous section - serves to illustrate bad business behaviour in the water industry. Newspaper headlines about the UK's biggest water company taken from just two articles written over a decade apart set the scene: "Thames Water pays no corporation tax on £1.8bn turnover" (Rankin, 2013) and "Why is Thames Water in so much trouble?" (Anon., 2025e).

The public are told that top company executives have to be paid such enormous amounts of money in order to attract the calibre of people necessary to do the job. But the plain fact is that these highly paid executives are not getting the job done. And to be fair, it is not the fault of any one individual. As argued at length throughout this website, the Big 3 political, economic and financial mandates have been honed over generations to define and protect the modus operandi of governments and businesses.

A governance system which allows an important utility and public service company like Thames Water to asset strip and under-invest over such a long time period, and on such a large scale, cannot be regarded as fit for purpose. The rights without responsibilities presently assumed by rogue operators cannot be justified.

Meanwhile, political decisions like whether to privatise (less government regulation), or to nationalise (more government regulation), rumble on (Spotlight on democracy [Big 3 reform], "...a kind of social contract" [Big 3 reform] ).

In short, the balance is now completely skewed in favour of those with vested interests.

Unsurprisingly the business priorities and objectives to 'get the job done' do not correspond closely with what the customers think they should be. It does not need rocket science to recognise that the much glorified worldly success of a small percentage of the global population (the 'élites') is not being fairly shared by the rest of the population, and the habitability of the planet is steadily deteriorating. The élites are addicted to having their cake and eating it; it is all take and no give.

What can happen when economic growth with externalities is persistently prioritised over the needs of the public, or what is necessary for the ongoing habitability of the planet, should be plain for all to see.

While rogue operator behaviour is protected by rogue legislation, like the Corporate Person, and cost externalities are allowed, those who create these problems will continue to get away with it.

Rogue operator behaviour [Power structure]

This is why citizen activism needs to focus on reform of the 'Big 3' political, economic and financial mandates.

Ideas for pilot studies linked to Big 3 reform

To revisit an initiative for a short corporate law amendment, as originally proposed in 2002 by Robert Hinkley.

In 2002 Robert Hinkley proposed the following change to the wording of corporate law (Hinkley, 2002a&b):

"The specific change I suggest is simple: add twenty-six words to corporate law and thus create what I call the 'Code for Corporate Citizenship', Directors and officers would still have a duty to make money for shareholders,

...but not at the expense of the environment, human rights, the public safety, the communities in which the corporation operates or the dignity of its employees".

Rebecca Spencer's briefing Corporate Law and Structures - Exposing the roots of the problem describes some key areas of concern, and suggests some of the questions to be addressed in future changes to company law (Spencer, 2004). Daniel Bennett with Helena Paul have described some of the key tenets of corporate law, and a brief history of how these evolved from an early concept of the corporation created in England as non-for-profit for charities (Bennett, 2004). Both David Korten (Korten, 1999, pp.184-200) and Joel Bakan (Bakan, 2005, pp.161-167) have proposed ways to reclaim the rights and freedoms of living people over those of corporations.

Some important corporate law concepts [Power structure]

Only governments can change company law. Because company law is similar internationally, the prevailing nation-state based governance system massively complicates and enlarges the task of any fundamental legislative changes.

To establish a citizen-led watchdog system to monitor the actions of 'the authorities' in order to hold them to account for both legal and non-binding commitments made, for example regarding EU Climate Law, and the COP Paris Agreement.

It may be that an initial assessment using monitoring systems which are already in place will show that the existing reporting arrangements are adequate, and that a more pressing need is to expand the number of people available to investigate what is holding up progress. This could lead to a better understanding of flaws in the existing system, which will be necessary to determine where improvements need to be made. An initial assessment may indicate where more project specific monitoring is necessary, for example regarding the implementation of new green technologies in order to achieve climate neutrality by 2050.

Regarding climate laws and litigation, a number of websites already provide good reporting about civil society developments such as citizens taking governments to court for not developing adequate climate plans, and/or about them not upholding their commitments. For example CLN (Website. Climate Litigation Network) works with local partners to bring litigation to force governments to adopt Paris-aligned climate plans. There are now over 100 cases against governments around the world.

Being able to take these cases relies on the climate commitments being enshrined in law. Climate neutrality by 2050 means achieving net zero greenhouse gas emissions for EU countries as a whole, mainly by cutting emissions, investing in green technologies and protecting the natural environment. One of the listed objectives (Website. European Climate Law) is to "Create a system for monitoring progress and take further action if needed".

(Website. Climate Framework Laws Info-Matrix) provides an overview of national climate laws in Europe.

(Website. Net Zero Scorecard) tabulates whose net zero goals are in law globally.

The pdf report (World Bank, 2020) provides a global framework of climate laws.

Notes

Reading The Doomsday Book was an early personally formative influence, as noted in the [Introduction]. One notable reference in Taylor's book was Rachel Carson's now famous and influential book Silent Spring (1962), in which she wrote about the adverse effect new pesticides, especially DDT, were having on birds and animals (Taylor, 1970, p.127). The insecticide DDT (dichloro-diphenyl-trichloro-ethane) is a cumulative toxin in food chains.

This led on to reading the book Environmental Solutions (Ehrlich et al, ed. Pole, 1972) - a collection of contributions from prominent environmentalists "in an effort to go one step further than the prophets of doom"..."who have awakened public opinion...given such momentum to the popular environmental movement". It was timed to coincide with the UN Conference on the Human Environment, Stockholm 1972. Two of the papers were written for submission to the Stockholm conference. The 'environmental movement' had existed for many years (Wikipedia, Environmental Movement), but general public awareness of severe environmental degradation and of other MHCPs increased significantly during the 1960s through a variety of information sources and initiatives (Wikipedia, Timeline of history of environmentalism).

It is all too common for citizens to assume that some government agency is monitoring compliance/ protecting the public interest in a particular area, only to discover from a newspaper or documentary that the situation has been found to be a shambles by an undercover investigative journalist. Then typically the best that can be expected is that the culprit makes a bland public statement about their normally impeccable record, and/or the relevant 'lip-service' watchdog/ agency is obliged to try to provide assurance that it will follow it up and do everything it can to make sure that things improve.

The concerned citizen is left thinking - why isn't the agency doing its own undercover work/ random inspections? Or perhaps they are, and know that they have problems but don't want to openly admit it, in all probability because the problems have arisen through funding cuts to the agency.

Today, after years of learning about the modus operandi of the status quo, the above observation just seems to be symptomatic of what is to be expected. While this particular realisation doesn't change anything, it is possible to be less distracted by hand-wringing, and more able to focus effort towards that which might effect change.

More recent examples include: the UK monitoring of raw sewage in our rivers (Anon. (2021i); Suspicious activity reports (SARs) - issued by banks investigating money laundering (Anon. (2019f); NHS performance targets; etc..

Founder and Director of the Oxford Research Group, Scilla Elworthy, describes how non-competitive, non-violent power can respond effectively when confronted by the abuse of power (Oxford Research Group, 1999), (Elworthy, 1997).

The campaigning organisation World Resisters' International celebrated its centenary year in 2021. (Anon., 2021k) includes an article highlighting notable achievements by its members over this period, and a directory listing over 1400 national and international organisations covering the breadth of the peace movement.

Innovative and constructive concepts, tools, and methodologies have included: life choices/consumption (Elkington & Hailes, 1998), (Korten, 1996), (Korten, 1999); environmental footprinting (Wackernagel, 1998); social and environmental indicators (Macgillivray, 1995a), (Macgillivray, 1995b), (DETR, 1998), (DETR, 1999), indexes of sustainable economic welfare, for example (Jackson, 1997); the Triple-bottom-line (Elkington, 1999), and the Contraction & Convergence mechanism (Meyer, 2000).

In principle, taken together these could form the basis of a generalised Contraction & Convergence policy, utilising a wide range of footprinted sustainability indicators, which could be used to monitor the progress of individual nation-states towards sustainability.