Power structure - Towards real democracy and better global governance

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

Six selected legal business activities:

Three broad business behaviour categories:

Market pricing and unsustainability ^[TC:P34] §

Sustainability accounting ^[TC:P35] §

Rogue operator behaviour ^[TC:P36] §

What is wrong with dark governance? ^[TC:P41] §

Who controls the Big3, and by what means? ^[TC:P42]

Future global governance scenarios ^[TC:P43] §

The darker side of business as usual

Years before this website was produced, the intransigence of the status quo was personally experienced when attempts were made to obtain information about what lay behind BAU and corporate blocking. It was decided that an accessible starting point was to observe how the status quo and BAU has been depicted over the years in comedy, satire, drama and film.

Notes: 'Towards a better understanding of business as usual'

From this preliminary exercise some general observations of the essence of the concept were made:

Business as usual is the overall ethos of the statecraft, system or power structure which integrates geoeconomics, geopolitics, the legislature, and guardianship of the public voting system.

A deeply entrenched characteristic is that a pro-growth agenda/ view wins the negotiation/ deal/ case, or dominates the argument.

The means by which pro-growth influences are applied often lack transparency. It must therefore be assumed that the extent to which power is wielded through money, militarism, institutional religions, and the legislature can only be fully understood by its operators.

A historic 'winner takes all'/ 'survival of the fittest' mentality appears to affect both commercial and military dimensions, and can therefore be inferred to contribute to global insecurities.

The 'survival of the fittest' notion is discussed further in [The Case] and [Moral compass].

Notes: Winner takes all/ survival of the fittest

It became apparent that to better understand, at a more fundamental level, what is wrong with the power structure, it would be necessary to adopt more philosophical and psychological perspectives. The creative issue-engagement approach, which had initially been applied to problem/ solution expression [Introduction], was redirected towards the derivation of a preliminary working definition of BAU. Subsequent analysis assessed the extent to which corporate legislation has shaped observed features of the prevailing power structure.

On this website dark governance is taken to be, either directly or indirectly, the key driver of most of the global major human-caused-problems (MHCPs).

The above infrastructure developments highlight the difficulty in separating political and financial/ commercial facets of dark governance, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine highlights the difficulty in separating militaristic and financial/ commercial facets.

Both examples highlight the potential perils of considering only the currently dominant western 'democracy' perspective.

(Rickards, 2016) and (Hagger, 2018b) include a description of the historical background of governance up to the global ambitions of the present day élites, which is the term used by (Rothkpof, 2008), (Rickards, 2016), and (Hagger, 2018b). It has been estimated that there are around 6000 of them (Rothkopf, 2008), (Hagger, 2018b, p.136). They covertly run the world, and are all "Rockerfellerite" in inspiration (Ibid., p.136).

(Hagger, 2004) refers to the élites collectively as 'the Syndicate', which is dynastic. He describes the origins of their great wealth and how this evolved. The most influential now being the 'Rothschild' banking dynasty, and that of the 'Rockefellers' which was based on oil. He explains how the Syndicate operates through various informal front organisations; of which two of the most influential, and secretive, are the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission. (Rothkopf, 2008, pp.276-280) writes that these two groups have given rise to a whole genre of conspiracy theories about total global control, but that in reality their influence has faded from what it was in the 1950s, noting that many of the current Bilderberg participants are quite old now (in 2008).

An extract from Rickards' description of the general nature of élite meetings is referred to later in the agenda of global élites. Not mixing in such circles, no first hand impressions can be formed. However, this is not necessary. Aside from general observations about the outcomes of wars through history, anyone who examines the long term evolution of corporate legislation, the resulting range of business behaviours, and their general trajectory will be able to form their own views about where all this is headed. The role of money features prominently in the domain of dark governance, for example (Rickards, 2011, 2014, 2016). (Burgis, 2020) describes "how dirty money is conquering the world". Corporate law underpins the élite modus operandi. (Bennett, 2004) outlines the historical evolution of corporate law. (Bakan, 2005) describes the psychopathic characteristics of the modern corporation. Bakan and (Korten, 1996 and 1999) address the changes which need to be made in the interests of society at large.

The phrase balance of power used to refer to tensions between the superpowers. In today's globalised, networked world the situation has become much more complex; the most problematic balance of power could now be said to be between the political and economic élites. Particular communication and mindset issues needing resolution have included:

A more closed nation-state perspective of government élites contrasting with the more globally experienced perspective of corporate and banking élites (Rothkopf, 2008, pp.159-160).

A tendency towards expedient, transient relationships between government and commercial élites, fostered by the common upwardly mobile practice of gaining work experience through the revolving door (Ibid., pp.133-134, pp.149-151).

An inherent resistance within particular factions, for example banking élites, to relinquish control (Ibid., p.172).

An increase in informal groupings to tackle complex international issues, requiring a trade-off between sovereignty and democracy (Ibid., pp.171-182). Noting the central role of global financial markets, the basis of 'market confidence' is addressed in [The Case: Power structure].

From a purely secular perspective the military élites, often having long established^trdr global relationships of trust, may have acquired more relevant experience than the political élites. This is particularly apparent in terms of establishing the necessary judgements regarding the democratisation of power to inform foreign policy, and during global security crises (Ibid., pp.196-201). But could ideological differences between some nation-states in the West and in the East still need to be resolved, even within these networks?

^trdr In contrast with more transient, and perhaps superficial, revolving door working relationships between government and commercial élites, as noted above.

Some general inferences about the way dark governance operates are:

Élite governance relies on the tight control of information. With the present configuration of nation states, this is understandably required by those charged with maintaining national security. Some global corporations now control more wealth than sovereign states, and also need to maintain corporate security. In addition to the work of national security agencies, corporate security practices rely upon secrecy and deceit regarding what information about citizens is obtained, and about how it is obtained. The same goes for what information is disseminated to citizens, and about how we are informed.

This applies in general to both government and corporate information flows, albeit that differences arise depending upon the natures and priorities of the dominant members of the 'Syndicate' at the time.

The last point is well illustrated by the military aggression being directed by Vladimir Putin. It can be observed that he has a very different strategy for propaganda communication to the outside world, and to citizens within his own state, from that adopted by pro-'democracy' political élites [Citizen action].

It may be further inferred that:

Élite governance is implemented through a subsequent, more assertive, stage of communication to citizens. Visible commercial activities and behaviours can range from seemingly bland advertising, to skilled persuasion and manipulation, through to extreme intimidation and coercion. Visible political activities and behaviours can range from manifesto leafleting and campaigning before elections, similarly through a range of more assertive methods to extreme intimidation and coercion.

If the stakes are high enough, even more forceful activities and behaviours can be arranged. Where big money and/or brand image are on the line in business, failure is not an option. For fascist leaders, the ends justify the means.

Following the breakup of the Soviet Union, the way Vladimir Putin organised tax collection from Russian citizens and businesses contrasts markedly from that typically used in the west. This is discussed further below under the heading Tax avoidance.

He has amended the Russian constitution to allow himself to continue in office, if 'freely elected', until 2036. This is similar to the approach adopted by the current head of state of China.

The justification he has cited for instigating a war against Ukraine (or, as he put it, carrying out "a special military operation") is the threat to Russian security posed by NATO. However (Kisin, 2022) casts doubt on this stance.

A brief background to the conflict, and some comments on the course of the war are outlined in the following notes.

Notes: Some background to the Russian attack on Ukraine.

Notes: Could Europe become an independent force in world affairs?

Notes: On the Russian war against Ukraine.

The following two comments, made by an experienced political author and commentator back in 2008 still seem very poignant:

"While Putin seems ascendant today, it is unclear whether his brand of authoritarianism will ultimately triumph or whether it will quash Russia's entrepreneurial spirit and scare away the global investors on whom it depends to tap its enormous resources" (Rothkopf, 2008, p.115).

"...there are countless examples today of countries in which markets are getting freer but democracy is suffering - China comes to mind, as does Russia, as does most of the Middle East. In each of these places, business interests are happy to ignore the political plight of locals provided that the returns can be earned" (Rothkopf, 2008, p.155).

The issue of looming tensions between political and financial élites is discussed at the end of [The Case: Power structure].

The first primary tablet-of-stone underpinning nation-state governance is the legal right to national self-defence. But how rigorously is this rule adhered to in practice? The rule often seems to be stretched to effectively mean opportunities to protect national commercial interests, for example access to energy and other natural resources. Some of the psychological, philosophical and moral issues surrounding military service are discussed later.

The invasion of Ukraine by Russia in February 2022, and subsequent deliberate targeting of civilians were clear violations of international law. It is to be welcomed that the first line of international defence against such aggression was recognised to be dialogue and diplomacy between non-combatants, followed by sanctions against the large banks and very rich individuals who were believed to be important to the primary aggressor. Of course actually locating these funds might be difficult, for reasons discussed in the link "In Russia after...".

The next stage of sanctions considered was to ban imports of Russian oil and gas, thereby reducing the main Russian income source. Some oil and gas producers responding to an initial public outcry agreed to cease their Russian operations. But this is a complex process, involving significant costs to the producers, and could take months or even years to fully implement. By February 2025 no ban was in place, and more was being spent by the EU on importing Russian fossil fuels than on supporting Ukraine.

However the background to the conflict, and the political commentaries on the course of the war referred to in the previous section paint a very different picture.

An increased public awareness of the murky connections between state power and fossil fuel generated wealth, and of the extent to which we are all affected by political rhetoric and media-framing, can only drive an aspiration for progress towards a better form of global governance.

Corporate legislation/ Company law

Referring to the central tenet of economic growth, a non-lawyer might find it surprisingly difficult to find a clear statement of what the corporate law actually means.

When a reference text, such as Company Law (Mayson, 1997), was consulted to look for clear specific statements about what corporate law is, all that could be found were pages of caveats and exceptions about what it is not. A cynic might conclude that this is deliberate in order to provide unlimited scope for 'further clarification' (creative loopholes).

However one rule which seems to stand out from the literature is:

From this it is understood that a corporate director is not legally bound to follow this rule, if she/he does not believe it to be in the best long term interests of the corporation as a separate entity.

But in practice, the rule together with financial market pressures, seems to dominate short term management priorities, which of course is business as usual.

Some important company law concepts, which complement the rule, include the following:

An underlying premise of company law is that directors are not allowed to consider the public good^cg

A core legal concept is the fictitious notion of the corporate person which ('who') has entitlement to human and civil rights, despite not being human^cp.

A commerial corporation can assert that it has the right to do something, and that right can prevail over a real person's right to object.^rwr

A corporation (corporate person) does not have the right to vote, but does have the right to lobby and fund political parties^cp

A core legal concept is known as the veil of incorporation, whereby a parent commercial corporation can own subsidiaries, for example to carry out risky business, while the parent is only a shareholder in the subsidiaries and cannot therefore be held responsible for the actions of its subsidiaries^voi

A core concept in the achievement of financial profit is cost-externalisation.

This is underpinned by company law and a debt-based monetary system.

A societal governance system depends upon the payment of taxes by its citizens in order to execute its functions. Corporation tax is supposed to be paid, but global capitalism has found many 'legal' ways around this requirement.

In practice therefore:

A core concept in the achievement of financial profit is discretionary corporate tax-evasion/ minimisation^dcte.

Rules for limited liability, bankruptcy, and mergers & acquisitions are similarly judiciously chosen to support the growth paradigm.

Commercial corporate legislation evolved over a period of hundreds of years. A very helpful brief history of corporate development is provided in (Bennett, 2004). "The concept of the corporation initially created..." as a not-for-profit entity for charities, "intended to advance the common public good". However, incremental unlawful initiatives by a succession of members of various corporations were allowed to proceed, with challenges from the public largely inhibited by the magnitude of Court costs. "Eventually, the Court abandoned any attempt at control of Commercial Corporations in the case of Bell Houses ...[1966]" and the "final demise of the doctrine of ultra vires (so far as it related to the restriction on the rights of Commercial Corporations) took place in the Companies Act [1989]".

Regarding the eventual outcome of this progressive erosion of our democratic rights, the authors chillingly conclude that:

"Corporations have achieved this 'liberation' by breaking the law until the Courts and the Government gave up trying to control them" (Ibid., p.6).

A fundamental review of the framework of core company law was launched by the UK government in 1998. This did involve a consultation process. The proposed items to be considered, together with the list of participants in the review, were published (DTI, 1999). Of particular interest in the context of this quest was how the issue of social and ethical constraints was viewed by an 'enlightened shareholder value' approach versus a pluralistic approach.

Although the outcome of the review was not followed up, the way the options were presented suggested that pluralism was not likely to be the favoured approach. It was suggested that properly managed companies would "ensure that they take proper account of these wider objectives" (Ibid., p.49) out of enlightened self-interest in recognition of their dependence on corporate reputation for commercial success, in the face of increasing public scrutiny. When presenting the pluralist approach the tone was revealing:

"However, it may be argued that, as a matter of principle, the law should be changed to allow directors a discretion to sacrifice commercial advantage for ethical or public objectives" (Ibid.,p.50).

The narrative went on to say that the American Law Institute has adopted a provision of this kind, but:

"as an alternative the law could be expressed in mandatory language, though it would be impractical and undesirable for such a provision to constitute an enforceable duty"..."The issues to which such an obligation would give rise are not ones easily resolved by the courts and the possibility of litigation could create damaging uncertainty".

Well, we wouldn't want that, would we? Concluding the pluralist section:

"Nevertheless, we would welcome comments on whether a mandatory formulation would be of value in encouraging directors to take account of ethical considerations" (Ibid.,p.50).

Even with the staggering level of liberation of present-day corporate freedoms outlined above, yet further freedoms were to be addressed in the review, such as:

"Should the requirement to have an objects clause in a company's constitution on formation be abolished (subject to question 24)?"

"Should existing companies be free to retain or remove their existing objects clause from their constitutions, but subject to provision making any continuing existing objects clauses of no effect in limiting the authority of the company's board or other agents as against third parties?" (Ibid., p.79)

The clue to the tone throughout the review was in part of the review title: "For A Competitive Economy".

One of the most outrageous developments in recent years has been the concept of corporate courts, formally known as ISDS [General].

If a democratically government decides to apply regulation which would adversely affect the profits of a corporation, for example to introduce a ban on some polluting business activity in the interests of protecting the environment, the affected corporation can now legally sue that government for loss of profits - including loss of future profits!

The courts were originally designed by, and for, fossil fuel companies in the 1950s and 1960s; in response to some policies of newly independent countries. These former colonies were talking about now being able to control their own resources. The oil lobby drafted the prototype for ISDS, specifically in order to protect oil and other big business interests (Blaycock, 2022).

The corporate courts, which are anything but fair, meet in secret and are manned by lawyers who, in effect, work for the companies (Anon., 2014b). ISDS has been used all over the world by businesses to sue governments over perceived loss of profits, including future profit losses. Examples include: mining for fossil fuels and gold; large scale farming; and water resource usage. Such activities affect land use by local people, and can also be subject to ISDS claims by companies, for example (Anon., 2019n), (Anon., 2019o).

The number of such cases is steadily increasing, for example (Anon., 2019m), (Anon., 2021u), and the scale of compensation claims can be enormous - affecting ordinary taxpayers in those countries. Denmark and New Zealand admitted to reducing their COP26 commitments through fear of being sued by corporate courts (Meager, 2022).

A very disturbing development in respect of global warming has been the Energy Charter Treaty; a giant corporate court deal which fossil fuel companies have been using to sue governments (Anon., 2021v), (Anon., 2021w). (Neslen, 2022) reports that the Italian government has been ordered to pay more than £210m to the UK oil company Rockhopper as compensation for an offshore oil drilling ban. This judgement followed a closed-door corporate tribunal operating under the energy charter treaty (ECT), which has been criticised for its lack of transparency and operating outside national court systems. Rockhopper will now be entitled to a compensation payout of about six times more than the estimated £33m it had invested in the project.

Has the apparently reassuring democratic principle that only governments can change corporate law been virtually neutered by corporate courts?

Surely - any government which sanctioned them hadn't fully understood their potentially ruinous ramifications?

Shamefully, now that it is increasingly affecting rich countries, it has finally begun to be recognised as a problem. Several countries including the UK have already left, or have announced their intention to withdraw from the ECT. In April 2024 the European Parliament voted for withdrawal of the EU as a whole. But currently few citizens know enough about corporate courts in general for the topic to rise up the political agenda. This is not helped by the low key way any legal challenges are reported; almost in the manner of a grudging concession. For example, following a successful campaign by Global Justice Now to exempt corporate courts from a (now abandoned) UK/ Canada trade deal, this, at the time, very pleasing result was merely recorded as the footnote below (Anon., 2022f, p.23) :

"Ensure the agreement does not contain an investor state dispute mechanism (ISDS)"

The Big 3 aspects of dark governance

Since the early 1970s the familiar 'everyday' form of business as usual has evolved into a more aggressive form - global capitalism - in which money is ruthlessly made from money, with little connection to real wealth.

This currently prevailing form is referred to throughout the website as dark governance. For any readers who are unaware of just how bad the governance situation has become, references listed in the website Bibliography by the following authors are particularly relevant:

Alexander (B.K.), Bakan, Barnes, Beder, Burgis, Coles, Chomsky^tos, Cressman, Hagger^hwr, Jacquet^brr, Korten, Monbiot, and Rickards.

^tos  except (Chomsky, 1994), in this context.

^hwr  see also (Website. Nicholas Hagger).

^brr  book review (van der Zee, 2022).

The sociological and environmental impacts of products and services

Recapping from We live in a biosphere [Issues] :

To the extent that humans live as if we are part of an Earth System, planet earth provides a comfortable and habitable home.

But we are not living this way.

The common everyday perception of the phrase business as usual (BAU) reflects a misunderstanding of its true nature and scope. The phrase is in such common use that it appears to be uncontroversial. It is generally understood to be the process within the economic system for converting natural and human resources into products and services that we all need, which, as such, is of course essential. We could not survive without the skills and dedication of people who work to these ends, especially in small to medium-sized business enterprises.

But everyday BAU, as it is commonly understood, has for years ignored many long term adverse sociological or environmental consequences in order to maximise profits. For years it has led to the marketing of new products and services without carrying out sufficient research into potentially adverse consequences, and/or disclosing research findings if these would adversely affect profits. Meanwhile the world population continues to increase, and with it an increased expectation of a certain minimum standard of living for all citizens. If we do not rein in our impacts, in time nature will do it for us.

It seems evident that this reality sets reasonable bounds, and provides a basis for defining where business activities are acceptable, and where they are not.

A rationale for the definition is described in Seeds of a new approach [Inference], as shown below:

A right way is one which contributes towards reducing the identified problems (with dark governance),

A wrong way is one which contributes towards making the identified problems (with dark governance) worse.

Using this guideline, a basic initial definition for an acceptable form of business activity could be:

A right use of productive process might be thought of as that which fairly and sustainably benefits the common good, whilst minimising adverse environmental and sociological consequences, consistent with a recognition that we live in a biosphere.

This contrasts with maximising profits by externalising such adverse consequences, which would be a significant improvement over even the pre-1970s form of BAU, after which the trend towards financial speculation became globalised (Risk-taking). This unashamedly purist definition is further fleshed out in Accounting for sustainability, or un-sustainability? Some ideas for an economic process based upon mandatory internalisation of all costs (MIAC) are described in [The Case:Big 3 reform].

However it is recognised that such a scheme could only be effectively sanctioned and implemented within the context of a fit-for-purpose global governance system. The concept of a sustainable (no growth) economy would be inconceivable to those with vested interests (TwVI).

In contrast, the core ethos of the prevailing unacceptable, and unsustainable, form of business activity might be summed up by the following statement, reproduced from the [Introduction] page:

The original process of necessary productive activity has become increasingly corrupted by those who relentlessly pursue money, largely for their benefit, by whatever means they choose, with little or no regard for any long term sociological or environmental consequences for other people or for the planet. Bottom line profit maximisation requires externalisation of such consequences.

Such people behave as if they are entitled to act in this way;

they are assuming rights without responsibilities.

"The corporation is an ingenious device for acquiring rights and shedding responsibilities"

(Monbiot, 2000, p.11).

A spectrum of business activities and behaviours

The legal concept of the Corporate Person can be observed to lead to an arrogant and almost 'untouchable' ethos [The Case: Power structure] in some corporate executives. This theme is developed in the 'Rogue operator behaviour' section. It seems that back in the 1600s, levels of arrogance and male chauvinism existed which would be seen as totally unacceptable today. This suggests that these are characteristics which preceded, and perhaps contributed to, evolution of the prevailing predatorial mode of dark governance.

Regarding unacceptable male chauvinism, it would be more accurate to say that while 'political correctness' now exists, little has actually changed in real terms. This is discussed further below in A reality check (I).

It cannot have escaped public notice that media reporting of corporate misdemeanours tends to be low-key. Criminal behaviour by corporate executives rarely seems to be challenged in the courts, and most senior executives appear to get away with it. Notwithstanding any observations that the mainstream media is owned by business élites, the apparent injustice follows directly from corporate legislation.

If an illegal activity goes to trial (and many are settled out of court), then the parent company is only a shareholder and therefore is not liable. The sole purpose of limited liability is to shield shareholders from legal responsibility for a corporation's actions. And 'courts tend to attribute conduct to the corporate "person" rather than to the actual people who run the corporations' (Bakan, 2005, p.79). Joel Bakan's graphically titled book The Corporation - The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power is a very sobering read.

The excellent paper (Bennett, with Paul, 2004, p.1) gives a very succinct overview of some of the almost unbelievable rights which have been granted to Corporations. For example, "A Commercial Corporation can create for itself a fictional multiple personality with separate Corporations (all owned by the same parent Corporation) existing simultaneously. All risky and dangerous operations can be carried out by subsidiaries. The parent Corporation is only a shareholder in the subsidiaries. As far as the legal fiction is concerned, the parent cannot in any way be held responsible for the actions of the subsidiary" ..."This is often referred to as 'the corporate veil'...."..."These subsidiaries can be registered 'off-shore' in a national register of companies which does not allow you to find out who is the ultimate parent Corporation"; that is who should ultimately be responsible.

As noted earlier, it is inferred that élite governance relies on the tight control of information, which in turn relies upon secrecy and deceit regarding what information about citizens is obtained, and about how it is obtained; for example: (Anon., 2022q), (Dorey, 2013). This is most obviously justified in matters of 'national security'. The primary tablet-of-stone (regarding the legal right to national self-defence) allows espionage which, first and foremost, involves the deception and covert surveillance of citizens (Anon., 2022o, Episode 1/3). Tight control applies to what information is disseminated to citizens, and about how we are informed. Élite governance is implemented through a subsequent stage of assertive communication to citizens.

The following broad categories which cover the general scope of this topic were identified :

Selective disclosure and the "Chatham House Rule"

A meeting conducted under the Chatham House Rule allows participants to freely "use the information received so long as the identity of the speakers and the location of the forum in which it was conveyed is not revealed" (Hagger, 2018b, p.135).

It is reasonable to presume that the Chatham House Rule encourages a high level of toleration of 'discretion' about incidental observations of bad behaviour by members of the inner circle. This would tend to allow misconduct to continue until a member is caught out. The corollary that everything is deemed to be okay otherwise reveals something of the serious human-values deficit characteristic of dark governance. It may reasonably be speculated that such knowledge might be selectively leaked when it is deemed convenient to do so. This is another form of power - through the weaponisation of data.

Such 'selective disclosure' of information could be regarded as secretive, and would fit with the general modus operandi used by élites, (Hagger, 2004, p.25).

The agenda of global élites

Keeping it under wraps

Commercial reasons for 'selective dissemination of information', such as disguising unsavoury cost externalisations, result in an observable tendency to keep any problems under wraps if there is a possibility of legal, cost, or reputational implications. This tendency is more pronounced in 'more senior' élites. If a problem or misdeed does come to light, proceedings are dragged out for as long as possible.

Whether or not this is part of some strategy, or just what has been found to be the best way to handle such situations, the public memory of the issue is likely to diminish with time. The deferral of any costs incurred is likely to benefit the accused, and certainly the lawyers handling the case.

A similar pattern can be observed in the general behaviour of high ranking politicians.

Those who make the rules feel entitled to break the rules. Unsurprisingly this results in a public sense of 'it is one rule for them, and another for the rest of us'. This was epitomised by the behaviour of some members of the UK government, including the then Prime Minister and Chancellor, during a Covid-19 'lockdown' period.

Notes: Covid-19 and "Partygate"

Some of the documentation resulting from the Rogers Commission, which investigated the tragic space shuttle accident in 1986, provides a rare insight into high level pressures to keep-it-under-wraps.

Notes: Space shuttle Challenger accident investigation

Withholding information, etc.

Over the years the status quo has developed a robust system of information control to ensure that anything which could be perceived to adversely affect national security, or the bottom-line, is resisted.

Barriers and action gaps

The need for secrecy and selective dissemination is accepted, up to a point. All manner of techniques are used to withhold information.

Orwell's comment on the English education system

Towards the end of an interview (Chomsky, 2022b) Noam Chomsky was asked about what ordinary citizens can do to develop their critical thinking skills, so as to be better able to understand what is really going on, and to not be so taken in by media propaganda. Chomsky replied that critical thinking is not diffficult, but that the capability is stamped out of us by the educational system.

He recalled how the (unpublished) introduction to George Orwell's Animal Farm was in the form of a letter to the English people, explaining how the educational system suppresses our innate creativity, and indoctrinates us that there are certain things one should not say (or think).

The advice to refrain from discussing religion or politics at a dinner party is probably of the same ilk - to preempt any questioning of the principle of maximising financial profit, which of course must remain sacrosanct.

Following on from the earlier old boy network point, one can imagine an Oxbridge-educated politician advising an upwardly mobile intern (revolving door) about why 'it is necessary to block UN Summit proposal X - because it would increase corporate regulation', but that, 'of course it just wouldn't do to admit that in the broadsheets'.

Going beyond withholding information

The public appear to accept that some government and corporate communications could be interpreted as incorporating a mild level of deceit (Information capable of misinterpretation [Notes]). But some status quo communication methods go well beyond withholding information. They are intended to be ambiguous, misleading, or to blatantly deceive.

Talking in code using in-house jargon is common practice, and can be used in various ways. For example, government schemes such as the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) may sound familar, but the public at large do not necessarily have much understanding of what they are, or how they work. If challenged, a government spokesperson would no doubt say that information is provided on the government website. But in marked contrast, if the government wants the public to understand something, there is saturation coverage by the media. The acronym GDP [Big 3 reform] is another very commonly used term, but many people are not aware of the anomalies present in its make-up.

The use of jargon can create a dependency on 'expert advice', for example from 'financial advisors'. Creative accounting can be used in countless ways to disguise the true state of affairs. Global corporates invariably have complex organisational structures, within which subsidiaries proliferate. So, for example, trying to follow an audit trail on environmental reporting, to investigate compliance with claimed environmental performance statistics, would typically be very time-consuming and ultimately inconclusive. It is difficult not to infer that such burying of information is a deliberate ploy used by some businesses.

Hijacking of terminology and concepts can be used to deliberately cause confusion. Companies have been known to hijack any hard-won ideas, concepts, and terminology successfully developed by activists and NGOs. They can then use their powerful marketing and publicity methods to exploit the general public understanding of those ideas in order to sell more products directly, or indirectly from an improved company image gained by association.

If a corporation feels under some pressure following a successful campaign effort directed against one of their products or practices, for example by a citizen-led NGO, various techniques might be used by the business to dilute the effectiveness of the NGO campaign. The corporate purpose here would be to reinterpret the original concepts for their business purposes, and so in time corrupting or diluting the public understanding of the original concepts. Eventually a hard-won concept, perhaps achieved after years of awareness-raising by NGOs is dumbed down, to be dismissed as greenwash. Meanwhile the corporation has taken advantage of the concept in order to make money, and may even have moved on to marketing yet more unsubstantiated product claims. In the context of food products, the use of different standards, misleading packaging straplines and ambiguous labelling are all examples of this problem.

Another technique is for companies to agree to a voluntary code of improved practice, often with inclusive-sounding hype about stakeholder dialogue.

Corporate resistance to activism [Citizen action]

The UK government uses stakeholder consultations on various topics. Several of these have been responded to in the past. A general assessment of their final reports indicated a tendency to highlight pro-growth arguments, while including a list of carefully screened respondents to provide evidence that the public had been consulted.

The political establishment is very effective at creating apparently fair and democratic procedures; but such appearances can be deceptive. The establishment holds all the cards; its priority is economic growth and not the common good. A good example is the privatisation of the water companies in England and Wales in the late 1980s, and the way the Environment Agencies were subjected to progressive funding cuts which reduced their capability to carry out water quality monitoring.

A fine example of what citizen collaboration can achieve [Citizen action]

Notes: On UK government watchdogs [Citizen action]

An encounter with the planning system, or an attempt to get 'justice' after a public inquiry, or to get any financial compensation in the event of a corporate misdeed, etc. will inevitably take a long time, be fraught, and reveal the intransigence of dark governance.

Memorable quotations with selective omissions 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 diagram below illustrates the point, using three examples from famous and influential leaders. The upward pointing arrow indicates TwVI self-interested spin, and the lower pointing arrow indicates concern for the common good. The upper half of the diagram lists versions of well known quotes and which are attributed to, or are about, three famous people. These versions appear to condone, or not challenge, economic growth. The lower half lists what these leaders actually said, which is much less well known, but which provides a more balanced context for the more well known phrases.

Selfishness vs altruism

The phrases are discussed in more detail in the following links: Adam Smith; Darwin; and Jesus Christ. The well publicised concept 'survival of the fittest' aptly describes the predatorial behaviour of those with vested interests (TwVI). But our survival as a species is likely to depend on us all collectively recognising and acting upon Darwin's little publicised (well suppressed?) insight as referred to in the diagram above.

Grey area methods such as communicating in public using deliberately ambiguous semantic inversions are unfortunately commonplace. Semantic inversion could be regarded as another manifestation of the practice of hijacking terminology and concepts. Its use reinforces an impression of arrogance by 'those in the know', which can be alienating to ordinary citizens.

Arrogance and semantic inversion^sip Political and corporate leaders routinely use sophisticated media reframing techniques, together with semantic inversions, in order to try to disguise their deceits.

^sip "Semantic inversion": whereby "politicians and businesspeople use words to make us think they mean one thing (up) when in fact they mean something else, often the complete opposite (down)" (Coles, 2017, pp.1-3).

In his book President Trump, Inc. the author helpfully provides a propaganda translator which would be quite amusing if it wasn't so serious. A generous interpretation of semantic inversion would be that it just reflects the mindset of its users. But that being the case, citizens who do not mix in the world of politicians and businesspeople could seriously misunderstand what they are really saying.

Semantic inversions mirror the way the people who use them have learned to actually think. For example, at one time the term 'mental health' straighforwardly implied mental well-being^swb, nowadays the term is loaded with the implication of an absence of mental well-being.

^swb For example, in the sense used in (Wilber, 1996b, p.353); the book was first published in 1981.

The extent to which an individual can choose to think in a certain way taps into the issue of free will, which is discussed in the [Being] page.

When things go wrong Corporate legislation is so protective of the rights of business activity that when things go wrong, it can be difficult to identify anything which would be deemed illegal in a court of law. A classic example of this is the Boeing 737 Max case (US Dept. of Justice, 2021a & 2021b):

Notes: Mounting a legal challenge against a large corporation

It is not acceptable if the deliberate withholding of information could put lives at risk, just in order to save money, or to save face. While such practices do occur, and are kept under wraps for as long as possible, some do come to light. For example, the link between smoking and cancer was known about by the tobacco industry for years before it became public knowledge. Similarly the link between large-scale usage of fossil fuel combustion and global warming was known about by the fossil fuel industry for decades, and deliberately suppressed.

In both examples, business identified potential risks, clearly more from the point of view of risks to profits than of risks to human and/or environmental health. Underpinned by corporate legislation, business then chose to launch the product, externalise any costs, and make money. This is nothing new, this is business as usual. It is high time the rules were changed.

The deliberate spreading of misinformation/ fake news is another unacceptable behaviour; almost an inversion of the notion of secrecy, in the mould of "attack is the best form of defence". Proactive denial and misinformation about climate change risk has been disseminated by those with vested interests in fossil fuel corporations for years, for example see (Anon., 2015e).

Control of information by corporations [Issues]

Climate-denial politics [Issues]

Corporate misinformation [Inference]

The following list of 'legal' business activities was chosen for further analysis of unsavoury behaviours:

The following subsections briefly describe each of the six judiciously chosen 'legal' business activities listed above. The execution of any of these will break down into a myriad of further tasks. Mirroring observations about the acceptability of methods of information dissemination, the conduct of business activities can range from a level which would just be viewed as 'that is my job', through to being excused on the basis 'that is just business', up to borderline bribery and corruption, illegality, and even potentially culminate in ruthless criminality.

Within the scope of the legal business activities listed above, some examples are included in the notes below:

Notes: Information and implementation control strategy

The examples are intended to illustrate aspects of how dark governance can involve some more assertive activities or behaviours which might be classed as grey area 'legal' or illegal. It will be demonstrated that these actions follow logically from corporate legislation.

Some important corporate law concepts

Societies accept that there has to be a governance system, paid for by taxes from citizens and businesses. The way this is organised differs markedly between democratic and non-democratic nation-states. As a generalisation, western democracies tend to set a very favourable terms for taxing businesses; the approach adopted in Russia following the breakup of the Soviet Union is referred to below.

Tax minimisation is a key method by which business profits can be maximised; by minimising business costs. Discretionary tax evasion is standard practice in large corporations (Rickards, 2016, p.72), and as revealed in the infamous Panama Papers (Ibid., p.78).

The practice is being taken to extremes which, although 'legal' for businesses, would be regarded as dodgy, if not criminal, if committed by ordinary citizens.

The Pandora Papers reveal..." hidden wealth, tax avoidance and in some cases money laundering by some of the world's rich and powerful" (Anon., 2021a).

It is likely that most ordinary citizens will at sometime have had the feeling that "it's one rule for them, and another for everyone else". Income tax can trigger such a feeling, even though we all recognise that governments depend on collecting taxes from citizens, and that business must be allowed to prosper in order to create the jobs which feed the tax collection.

In Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the situation was dysfunctional. Taxes were not being paid - neither by private citizens nor by the stupendously wealthy oligarchs who were beginning to proliferate. These oligarchs were the main owners of private companies which controlled many natural resources; oil, gas, metals etc. and whose wealth had often accumulated by using loopholes in the (still developing) Russian business law. The bold step was taken to reduce tax to 13% for all; the deal with the oligarchs was that they would now actually pay up. One of them, who owned a TV station, was used a a threat. His TV station had already been seized by the state and he had been forced into exile. The result was tax was now collected and a properly functioning system with viable pension schemes etc. was established.

However, later, as a result of the US/ Allied invasion of Iraq, oil companies in Russia were enjoying enormous profits as the price of their oil went up. But none of this money was reaching the state. Putin proposed a new tax on oil exports to address this issue. Mikhail Khodorkovsky was head of Yukos Oil, and then the richest man in Russia. Facing a tax demand on exports, he accused some state officials, and the state oil company, Rosneft, of corruption. His offices were promptly searched. He was arrested for tax anomalies, and his own company assets were transferred to Rosneft. He was imprisoned for several years, and later pardoned by Putin. This firm treatment was no doubt intended as a warning to other oligarchs. With the tightened fiscal regime, tax receipts were able to continue to meet societal obligations and sovereign debt repayments. (Anon., 2012b).

But the situation in the west has now become ridiculous (although the élites' proposed solution to this is in hand; see below). While many large corporations pay little or no tax, many governments have colossal sovereign debts and yet taxpayers are funding corporate profits through a plethora of mechanisms. Examples in the UK include the Private Finance Initiative; UK/US trade deals to pay high prices for drugs such as vaccines for Covid-19 (Anon., 2021j); and cheap food imports with lower standards undercutting our domestic food production systems, for example (Dearden, 2020).

As for the situation in Russia before firm action was taken, the obvious solution would seem to be to remove the legal loopholes which allow corporations to evade taxes, and to raise corporation taxes. (Rickards, 2016, pp.75-76) describes G20 level élite plans to do just that, on their terms.

The élite tax plan looks to have the ingredients for generating tensions between élite political and financial factions. Hitherto it appears that their natural inclinations have been for citizens to pay more so that both corporate and government élites can prosper, while trying to keep sovereign debt manageable. It remains to be seen as to what gives in due course.

Apart from the technical difficulties which would be incurred, it might be presumed that governments at present have been reluctant to tackle corporation tax loopholes and/or raise corporation taxes for fear of being less attractive to foreign investors, and/or become uncompetitive on world markets.

The subject of looming tensions between political and financial élites is discussed further at the end of [The Case: Power structure].

Corporate profits are maximised by minimising business costs; business favours more deregulation, not more restrictions.

The identified business activity category of 'corporate blocking' is not likely to be recognised - until one tries to engage with the democratic process in order to achieve a political change which would incur costs. If the change would be seen by the status quo as a positive investment leading to future economic growth, then the initiative is likely to prosper. If not it will be resisted.

To those sufficiently concerned about MHCPs to campaign for change, for example through NGOs or UN summits, the status quo response will invariably be met by extreme intransigence. The example below will ring true for anyone who believes in democracy and the possibility of changing things for the better, and who tries to challenge government inaction.

Barriers and action gaps In the book Shaping Our Future: Creating the World Future Council (von Uexküll, 2005, pp.35-77) the authors noted a significant number of barriers and action gaps between the status quo and sustainability. The general picture which emerged was of a catalogue of well-intentioned global sustainability initiatives, from the 1972 Stockholm Environment Summit, the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, through to the UN Millenium Goals, which had failed to deliver the hoped-for results. For example:

"The London-based Global Commons Institute has proposed a global process of Contraction and Convergence, with equal per-capita allowances of greenhouse gas emissions for all the world's countries. This has gathered much international support, but implementation is being blocked by those with a powerful interest in the status quo" (Ibid., 2005, pp.47-48).

This is the nub of the dark governance problem.

Corporate law has been developed and honed by those with vested interests (TwVI), primarily to protect these vested interests.

The intransigence of governments, especially of Treasuries and Foreign offices, and of corporations, to citizens' pleas for political reform, or for more regulation of commercial activities, follows from the above mandate given to corporations, which is to maximise shareholder value:

An underlying premise of company law is that directors are not mandated to consider the public good

The same intransigence occurs as a result of the legal mandate of employees to just do their job. A job as contractually specified should of course be legal! Nevertheless, in practice, a job might turn out to present matters of conscience to some employees, for example unethical advertising.

Notes: Unethical advertising

Just doing my job

Employees at all levels are required to act in accordance with company law, whether or not their actions and behaviour would necessarily withstand scrutiny when considering civilised human values.

Although some business practices might be viewed as unsavoury by some, if they are 'legal' then there is little they can do to object, apart from to decide that the job is not for them and resign. An employer can always say that a prospective job candidate doesn't have to take the job if potential difficulties are revealed at the interview stage. But many people are under pressure to take non-ideal jobs because they have to pay their bills.

If an employee notices that an illegal activity is going on within their organisation, then their course of action could trigger a chain of unsavoury responses. Whistleblowers do not usually fare well, and invariably suffer for their courage in speaking out. Some examples are given in the BAU in drama and film Notes. In general, if an employee is not happy with what they are being asked to do, they should discuss the matter in the first instance with their line manager. It is not surprising that many people tend to 'put up and shut up' in order to keep their jobs.

If an employee is being asked to do something which is illegal, then while quietly resigning might allow them to continue with their life, could they live with not having exposed the issue? On the other hand, mounting a legal challenge against a large corporation is not a task for the faint hearted.

Notes: Mounting a legal challenge against a large corporation

In principle, laws can be changed. But just imagine the precedents which would be challenged by trying to change this type of law. Only governments can change company law, and they sanctioned the pro-growth system in the first place.

People may take the law into their own hands [Moral compass] in a war situation.

Some examples of topics with the potential for adverse sociological and/or environmental consequences:

Cost externalisation is not a widely publicised business activity, but is a key method by which profits can be maximised; by minimising business costs. It is heavily layered with jargon to disguise the truth about the real costs of providing everyday products and services.

It is good for business if people are enticed by the prospect of shiny new products, but bad for business if they know too much about any possible adverse side effects in the longer term.

It would save business money if it could ignore such potential snags, and feign ignorance in the event of future problems. On the other hand, it would be bad for business if people knew too much about the extent of its profiteering, especially at the expense of the poor, and of the environment.

As already discussed in Some important corporate law concepts, the status quo prioritises short term economic growth, using a GDP accounting methodology which 'is a poor indicator of sustainable economic welfare' (GDP [Big 3 reform]). Government policy decisions linked to business are inevitably distorted by economic cases which are framed around generating growth.

Cost externalisation is an inherent feature of economic growth (Bakan, 2005), (Korten, 1996, pp.76-77), and is underpinned by company law. Bottom-line profits from business ventures in the short term are maximised by ignoring externalities. Any adverse consequences arising from such externalities in the longer term have to be picked up by societies sometime in the future. The poor invariably suffer the worst consequences of cost externalisation, environmentally and sociologically.

The nature of cost externalisation is therefore another reason for the tight control of information by élites, as already discussed (Information and implementation control strategy).

In principle, it would be a good thing if the corporate legislation was set up to limit environmental and sociological degradations. But of course, this would directly affect profits, and therefore not be welcomed by pro-economic growth advocates. Robert Hinkley proposed a simple amendment to company law [Citizen action] which identified the broad categories within which concessions to bottom line profit should be made (Hinkley, 2002b). This implies a longer term economic perspective. The categories can be conveniently grouped into: sociological; environmental; and economic (bottom-line). These are sometimes referred to as the 'triple-bottom-line'.

Given the extent to which dark governance relies on financialisation, it would be hoped that a rigorous systems approach would be used to investigate a wide range of important sociological issues over the long term, and from a variety of viewpoints (such as quality of life and not just 'cost-effectiveness'). However, as usual, every topic is affected by only being viewed through the distorting lens of economic growth - even the natural process of human reproduction and working mothers, which is discussed below.

It is very convenient for

to ignore cost externalities. When an enticing money-making opportunity is perceived, rather than hold up a potentially lucrative business venture by thinking through how to prevent possible adverse consequences, BAU encourages risk-taking with built in protections for the developers; both by 'legal' means and by an judiciously chosen information and implementation control strategy. A plethora of sleight-of-hand devices has been developed to disguise externalities under the umbrella term financialisation. Armed with these protections, the potential business investment can proceed.

If serious problems begin to appear, public information about these is minimised. If it comes to light more widely due to a whistleblower, or a 'leak', then the company will release a politically correct press statement..etc. We are all familiar with the ensuing long drawn out process, and the fact that in the end the citizen/customer/taxpayer will have to pay for any remedial action. Such remedial activity will no doubt be accounted for within the GDP metric.

So the company profits by marketing an inadequate product or service, society pays for remedial work if flaws appear, and this is treated as part of the productive economic output of the nation-state. Those involved in remedying the defective product or service will presumably be paid for their efforts, but taxed.

The everyday scourge of "potholes" provides a familiar topical example of society picking up the tab for an inadequate product. The ubiquitous road-surfacing system of tarmac over aggregate has served us well in the past, but for a variety of reasons (for example growth in traffic volumes and growth in the size and axle-weight of many road haulage vehicles) it is no longer fit-for-purpose in many urban areas. Ongoing maintenance is troublesome, often superficial and unsatisfactory, and causes everyday societal costs. Examples include costs from accidents (some resulting in injury to cyclists, motor cyclists, pedestrians, motorists...), road resurfacing/repairs, damaged vehicles, insurance claims, lost time by all those affected (traffic delays, getting cars repaired, hospital appointments for injuries...), waste following remedial work, wash-off of grit from disintegrating road surfaces entering and clogging water treatment plants, and so on.

While the above scenario may show GDP growth, a better metric would provide common sense feedback that would encourage the research and development necessary to design a better system.

and global insecurities in general, such as geopolitical and geoeconomic tensions between East and West, and major impacts on the biosphere such as global warming, cause social and/or environmental stress. These are adverse consequences arising from cost externalities inherent in economic growth/dark governance.

It was remarked in the previous section that it is very convenient for TwVI to ignore cost externalities. This will be even more so regarding social and/or environmental stress resulting from global insecurities, because the cost of prevention at the initial stages of a high-stakes investment is likely to be unknowable. From the state of the world it may reasonably be inferred that TwVI are not easily deterred from deploying the same ruthless risk-taking approach, without much care for future adverse consequences.

While it might be argued that on balance the above approach to investment is tolerable on a pragmatic basis for day to day business activities, it becomes much more difficult to justify when the externalities result in tragedies due to accidents or illness cause by faulty products or services, and even more so when on the scale of MHCPs.

Social and environmental stress was recognised back in 1973 as a consequence of economic growth, with the observation that humans have 'largely opted' for the use of technology to push back limits to allow more growth (bold emphasis mine). It was suggested therefore that this would lead to societal restraint which would act as a brake to control excessive growth; noting that "self-restraint originates in the legal, ethical, and value structures of society" (Forrester, 1973, p.132):

Social limits to growth [Issues].

Noting that the system is based upon catalysing addictions, and is solidly underpinned by corporate legislature, what we as citizens might do about it is the main focus of this website.

A system set up to generate addiction [Life choices]

Are we being kept in the dark? [Moral compass].

The onus is therefore on us, ordinary citizens, to recognise that the ball is in our court, regarding the sociological and environmental consequences of this stance by the status quo

The rest of this section lists some examples of topics with the potential for adverse sociological and/or environmental consequences. These examples provide food for thought as to the extent to which such potential adverse consequences might be avoided, or minimised, by a different type of business model.

As discussed in Developed or underdeveloped? [Issues], the status quo views societies as "economies". From this cold utilitarian perspective, until the promises of AI (artificial intelligence) have reached the point at which human workers are redundant, people will still be needed. Workers contribute to growth in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and pay taxes, from which élites live very well. Governments like to measure their success in a league table of Gross National Product (GNP) ranking of nation-states (Sachs, 1999, p.28).

Flaws in the GDP [Big 3 reform] metric itself have already been addressed.

Because of the competitive, market-based economic system, national governments have had to consider the quantifiable benefit to their GDP growth of mothers going back to work soon after giving birth, and therefore requiring childcare. Before this trend, more mothers looked after their babies and pre-school children full-time. This benefited society in ways which were not quantified. Now societies are viewed as economies. Since the economy only recognises financialised contributions, full time mothers are not seen as measurably contributing to national GDP growth targets. Whereas when women go out to work - this activity is financialised. Benefits to the economy include employing a child-minder, running an extra car, buying convenience foods to save time... In affluent families there may often be additional expenditure later on - extra presents, more stuff, going on expensive holidays, etc. to compensate for the parental guilt due to the lack of quality time spent with the child - because of going out to work.

But it is unlikely that the long term societal consequences of this scenario will have been realistically costed. Any potential future adverse effects of mothers working full time will have been externalised.

If these costs were realistically assessed, it would be interesting to compare the outcome with a rigorous assessment of the societal benefits accruing from mothers looking after their children full-time; at least in the early years of a child's life, together with the associated longer term societal consequences.

A very important enhancement which could be made to such a study would be to also consider the effect of teaching in school more about love and relationships, and the responsibility to the unborn child [Being], and less about the mechanics of reproduction.

Significant hidden societal costs can arise from the effects of some undiagnosed "neurodivergent" traits. It goes without saying that every child will benefit from the right kind of support and education as they grow up. Two well known UK television presenters, Chris Packham and Jamie Oliver, have made important contributions in raising public awareness of the particular educational needs of children classed as neurodivergent, and of the need to be able to identify which children would benefit from such support. Chris Packham has spoken about ADHD, dyslexia, and Asperger's syndrome. Jamie Oliver has particularly focused on dyslexia.

The topic of public health straddles diverse interactions between the environment and societies of individuals. As noted earlier, there is a danger that important cases can get missed if the causative mechanisms are broadly categorised as 'environmental' or 'sociological'. The increasingly recognised aspect of mental health, especially in young people, significantly enlarges the scope of what to include.

A good place to start might be the notion of a good start in life. It might seem reasonable to suppose that this begins with caring and responsible parenting/ grandparenting, a just and equitable society, and a healthy habitable environment. But the task of caring and responsible parenting has never been more difficult, in todays complex globalised world/ economy - see Childcare and economics. It is evident that it means more than providing a reasonable material standard of living at the expense of the parent(s) working for long hours.

These days there are many outside intrusions, which usurp the parenting role,

such as all the ramifications of the increasingly insidious forms of media/ social media communications, fake news and hate speech.

No financialisation of externalities could ever account for the devastation and suffering experienced by any parent who has lost a child, especially if at the expense of corporate profits:

"Social media firms ‘monetising misery’, says Molly Russell’s father after inquest - Coroner finds harmful online content likely to have contributed to Molly’s death ‘in a more than minimal way’ "...."The NSPCC described the ruling as a global first and a “big tobacco moment” for social media. “For the first time globally, it has been ruled that content a child was allowed and encouraged to see by tech companies contributed to their death,” said Andy Burrows, its head of child safety online policy. Sir Peter Wanless, the NSPCC chief executive, said the ruling would “send shock waves through Silicon Valley”." (Milmo, 2022).

In an increasingly secular world of enticingly marketed opportunities to overconsume, which all turn a blind eye to the unsustainable consequences of this way of living, many young people are feeling uneasy about where we are headed. But while it could be argued that too much of the factual news reporting these days is also depressing, limiting one's exposure to this has to be balanced against living in denial.

Although not a fan of institutional religions, I have enormous respect for the great spiritual teachings that I have understood, and recognise the fundamental importance of life within a community. Taking a Christian perspective on the issue of what to do about too much depressing news, and drawing parallels from Mark's gospel, (Wells, 2022b) infers that Mark viewed what we think of as news as merely the setting for the real news - which is about important existential questions such as "why we are on this earth,.... who we are, ...and how to live in the light of such things" [news], etc.. Wells suggests that maybe sometimes we all need a break from the news, which can be a distraction, in order to rediscover what the real news is.

We all tend to take the fundamentals of life for granted, until we to lose them.

This goes for our health, and for the health of our environment.

A prime example is food, which is only referred to in passing at various points in the website, and not with the emphasis that it should have. The chain of food production, its environmental sustainability, its packaging and distribution, through to the quality of the product is, of course, a vast topic.

It has been said that "we are what we eat". Unsurprisingly, food has been massively 'corporatised', as graphically illustrated in the sobering documentary film Food, Inc.. There is an increasing awareness of the societal ill-health time-bomb resulting from the increasing proportion of ultra-processed food (UPF) which is now being consumed. The deservedly well-known identical twins, Drs. Chris and Xand van Tulleken, investigated the correlation between obesity and UPF in the UK. They discovered that the rise of obesity began with the rise of UPF consumption in the 1970s in the US (Percival, 2022). They presented the 2024 UK Christmas lectures on the topic of food (van Tulleken, 2024). A fundamental point is that humans need energy and nutrition, especially when young in order to build healthy bodies.

UPFs are optimised to meet energy requirements, and to be addictive so that more will be consumed; so that more money will be made. Nutritional requirements are not prioritised in UPFs. Unsurprisingly as consumption of 'ready meals' and UPFs increases, and people spend less time preparing food in the traditional way, this results in increased obesity and poorer nutrition. An average adult would need to eat less than 2500 calories per day in order to lose any weight. More money can also be made by the 'health care' industry in providing products and services to people with UPF-caused poor health. It has been known for such products and services to be provided by the UK National Health Service, via a Private Finance Initiative (PFI) or equivalent scheme, or a 'trade deal'. The taxpayer is then subsidising corporate profits.

The issue of cost externalisation is of fundamental relevance to the core theme of this website. The task of adequately covering the important subject of public health is fraught; how best to organise material within the very broad category of cost externalisation? As the subject involves diverse interactions between the environment and societies of individuals, there is every possibility of case omissions through causative mechanisms being loosely categorised under coarse accounting headings such as 'environmental' or 'sociological'. Furthermore, in a body-mind system, some correlation/ interaction between physical and mental health is to be expected, which only adds to the complexity.

Public health - links

To try and pull together some of the diverse related information strands, some of the more relevant links to sections of this website are listed below.

[Issues]

Control of information by corporations

Social limits to growth

Social and environmental stress, "self-restraint", and the control of growth

[Power structure]

Business opportunities in public health

The Billion Dollar Deals and How They Changed the World

Targeting those who can afford to pay

Childcare and economics

(Public health/mental health)

Electromagnetic fields (EMFs)

Smartphone addiction

Electrosensitivity

Mass-burn incineration (MBI)

Health and safety

[Moral compass]

Are we being kept in the dark?

[Life choices]

Addiction

The toll on online content moderators

Extreme work/non-work life compartmentalisation

Psychological strains from extreme work assignments

Happiness cannot be financialised

[Big 3 reform]

Re-financialising in support of essentialness value

Revealed difficulties with 'essential' goods

Revealed difficulties with non-essential goods

[Citizen action]

Fake news, so-called conspiracy theories, and hate-speech

It has been known since before the second world war that electromagnetic fields could cause biological effects. The extent to which such effects constitute health risks was uncertain at that time. But electromagnetic spectrum allocations and possible health hazards became matters of public concern with the increased usage of devices generating such fields. It turns out that a few percent of the general population are 'electrosensitive' and are particularly vulnerable to EMFs.

The mainstream scientific position is that the existing safety limits for emissions from the various parts of the electromagnetic spectrum are sufficient, based upon the available evidence. However the large insurance companies are taking a more cautious view, and health effects from EMFs are listed as policy exclusions (Website. Understanding EMFs - Legal Issues).

Control of information by corporations [Issues]

The term "research" is often used to mean literature search, rather than original peer-reviewed research. This can conveniently mask the absence of relevant knowledge which should have been obtained before embarking on the mass rollout of new technologies.

Regarding the health and safety of 5G mobile networks, the concluding statement in (Karipidis, 2021) is "Future epidemiological research would benefit from specific investigation on the impact of 5G and future telecommunication technologies". In 2019 Belgian government Minister Fremault announced that Brussels was halting their 5G plans due to the negative health effects (Anon., 2019u). (Karaboytcheva, 2020) is a European Parliament briefing about the effects of 5G on human health. The radiation safety limits applied in Brussels were more stringent than WHO (World Health Organisation) recommendations, however these were reviewed (Lennighan, 2021). The 5G rules in Brussels were relaxed in September 2023.

Quite apart from any physical health effects, the way China uses telecommunications could have both mental health and socio-cultural implications for its citizens.

There is also some concern that 5G transmissions can interfere with the interpretation of meteorological data (McKie, 2019), (Godlewski, 2019), (Witze, 2019).

The use of social media in friendship groups has become a socio-cultural phenomenon. Quite apart from their incredible potential usefulness, the easy availability and powerful 'one-stop-shop' features of smartphones present a compelling solution to the natural social need in a young teenager to belong (Maslow level 3 [Life choices]). It is reported that an increasing number of teenagers are becoming addicted to their smartphones (Anon., 2018b). Smartphone addiction is another sociological cost externalisation [Power structure].

It remains to be seen whether these young people will also suffer any longer term physiological damage caused by EMFs (Website. Understanding EMFs - Legal Issues).

In general, a small percentage (2-3%) of people suffer from electrosensitivity (Anon., 2013c), (Website. Electrosensitivity UK).

In the UK, when the government is faced with a problem, such as running out of suitable landfill sites to dispose of waste, the most sensible and sustainable solution of trying to curb the amount of waste actually generated is never high on the list of priorities. Instead more is always seen as growth, and therefore better. Quick fix solutions are favoured where possible; especially new off-the-peg construction, a good trade deal, and new technology if it might lead to future business opportunities.

In the same way, more and/or bigger roads are built to accommodate increased traffic; more and/or extended airports for increased aircraft flights; and more power stations to cope with increased electricity demand. Efforts to increase renewable energy generation capacity are often met with obstacles, meanwhile fossil fuel developments such as oil and gas pipelines and fracking, despite any opposition, are invariably given the go-ahead. For example (Awalt, 2020), (Wikipedia: List of oil pipelines) (Wikipedia: List of natural gas pipelines).

Policy options proposed for construction development are often badly received by the general public, and can cause protests by those most directly affected; for example, by who live near the new mass-burn waste incinerator / runway extension/ road scheme/ wind farm.

Taxing waste to land-fill has increased fly-tipping, which does not bode well for future attempts to apply economic instruments to modify behaviour and/or reduce damage to the environment.

Graphic listing some of the emissions from a municipal waste incineration plant. Data source from (Howard, 2009), citing (Jay & Stieglitz, 1995).

Modern lifestyles have become very wasteful. The obvious solution is to tackle the problem by reducing the amount of waste generated in the first place. Taxing the use of landfill sites might incentivise increased use of reuse and recycling schemes. The problem of plastic recycling is discussed in [Big 3 reform]. For waste which has to be processed, although systems exist which can pre-sort the waste stream to remove useful materials, thereby reducing the amount of waste going to landfill, often the favoured approach is to construct enormous mass-burn incinerators 'with energy recovery', which need to be fed 24/7 to justify their huge capital cost.

Those faced with a planning proposal to construct a large MBI near their homes, and understandably wanting to object, soon discover that it is a complex subject. The issue of public health risk from emissions is very real, and toxicologist Vivian Howard has been consulted for expert advice during a number of MBI planning inquiries, for example (Howard, 2009).

The plant manufacturers will challenge fears of health risks to locals by arguing that since combustion takes place at very high temperatures, the effluent is filtered, the plume is sent very high so wide dispersal is assured, and that there is no local health risk.

The visual appearance of the plant can be an issue for discussion at the planning stage, and arguments can be put for sensitive landscaping. But assessing the impact of a MBI goes far beyond considering visual impact. Construction traffic and the later round-the-clock operational traffic is likely to be significant. A MBI is an industrial plant, and it will contaminate a large area of the surrounding countryside for decades. This can completely change one's perception of a once beautiful landscape.

From the public health point of view, we are used to media reporting in the UK on the topic of air pollution, which has often focused on diesel powered motor vehicle particulate emissions. These have been shown to be harmful for those regularly exposed to busy road traffic; children who live in cities are particularly at risk. Although diesel particulates from traffic can readily be measured, and data collected for compliance monitoring, legal claims for health impacts can still be difficult..

In contrast emissions from MBIs are rarely mentioned in the media. Air emissions are intentionally widely dispersed in order to reduce ground concentrations. Such pollution crosses borders, is difficult to measure, and attempts to attribute blame could become politically charged.

An important aspect of public health is physical and mental safety, in order to prevent the potentially devasting human suffering which can be caused by preventable failures in products and services.

The dreadful fire at Grenfell Tower on the night of 14 June 2017, in which 72 people died, is one such tragedy which should never have occurred (Wikipedia: Grenfell Tower fire).

The inherent uncertainties involved in financialisation allow business to disguise its level of compliance with regulation through a lack of transparency in reporting of health and safety matters, and related aspects such as sustainability reporting, whether voluntary or mandatory. The uncertainties conveniently allow cost externalisation to be implemented in a flexible manner through a variety of economic approaches and accounting procedures. The conflict, as always, is between maximising financial profit, by ignoring or minimising the financialised cost of externalities, versus minimising the real adverse effects of externalities, which usually involves conceding some financial profit.

After a tragedy such as the Grenfell Tower it takes a very long time to sort out what happened, why, who is to blame, whether laws have been broken and if so what should happen to those who broke laws (or whether they are covered by the Corporate Person oxymoron), who should be compensated and by how much, who should pay, etc... etc. All this is extremely unsatisfactory for all concerned. In this case another consequence is that the dangerous insulation cladding which catalysed the fire has been widely used in other buildings across the country. People who live in such buildings are understandably concerned and want the cladding replaced urgently, but who will pay for this not yet been resolved. If they wanted or needed to move it is difficult to sell such properties until the cladding has been replaced, and so on.

The knock on effects of chickens coming home to roost from cost externalisations are very real. Years after the tragedy and still noone has been prosecuted. This note has still therefore been listed in the "Legal" subsection until further progress has been made with the case.

As outlined earlier, a corporation (corporate person) does not have the right to vote, but it (not a he or a she) does have the right to lobby and fund political parties (Some important corporate law concepts).

Business is the first to complain at the slightest whiff of a non-level playing field - in relation to its competitors, but is more than happy to be in a vastly more powerful position than citizens regarding funding and lobbying activities.

Corporate lobbying of government officials occurs on a massive scale whenever any potential legislative reform might adversely affect economic growth. This could be imposing further regulations, for example to reduce fossil fuel emissions, or it might be to deter, or tax, risky financial speculation. Both examples would be regarded by business as increasing costs and therefore reducing profits.

Legislative concessions can be bought in this age of 'the deal' and within dark governance.

There is no doubt that citizens and citizen-led NGOs do not have a level playing field compared to corporates regarding influence on government policy in the US.

On who, or what, most influences public policy in the US [Citizen action]

As previously discussed, business has a mandate to efficiently facilitate the conversion of natural and human resources into money, but any attempt by citizens through the ballot box to call for more regulation of corporations is fiercely resisted.

Vested interests and climate-denial politics [Issues]

One of the many possible routes available for corporate lobbying is participation through 'non-governmental organisations' (NGO)s. Although more usually associated with environmental and sociological campaign groups, "the term NGO literally applies to all non-government actors, including research establishments and industrial lobby groups" (Grubb, 1993, p.44), "..international businesses and, indeed, any organisation outside the public sector" (Redclift, 1996, p.23). 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), (Anon., 2021b).

The use of extreme tactics in general is discussed later.

Commercial opportunism is mandated and encouraged through the principle of profit maximisation. Business opportunities can be created through commodification, using expediency and risk-taking as deemed necessary.

From a philosophical perspective, quite apart from the possibility of 'rogue accounting practices', the act of assigning a monetary value to a natural or human resource diminishes and demeans the potential societal value of that resource. In the longer term, cost externalisation equates to financialisation, which in turn leads to a creeping commodification of human experience (Rifkin, 2000). The part-quote "...knows the price of everything, but the value of nothing" (Oscar Wilde) comes to mind.

This monetisation approach resulted in the 'development' agenda, which led to the imposition of an American model of society [Issues] on to the rest of the world, relegating societies which had economies into societies which then became just economies (Sachs, 1999).

Latouche discusses the utilitarian reduction of happiness to pleasure, and ultimately to the notion that human happiness can be reduced to monetary units (Latouche, 1993, p.241). But he challenges the notion, distinguishing pleasure from happiness which is plural, complex, and "relates less to having than to being".

Taken to the limits, anything can be commodified, including human life experience.

Ergo anything goes, pretty much.

Such a 'wrong path' can lead to corruption and criminality, which can be manifested both politically and commercially.

The financialisation/ monetisation of products and services is a key method used by business to muddy the waters about human values. It lies at the core of the smokescreen of sustainability reporting and accounting. A key example is cost-benefit analysis (CBA).

Expediency | Environmental

Global warming is welcomed [Inference] because of the trading benefits of opening up the Arctic north west passage.

The 'environment' is regarded as a useful bargaining chip at UN summits concerned with sustainable development (Sachs, 1999, p.37).

Expediency | Public health

The domain of public health in general is fertile ground for corporate profits, especially via mechanisms such as the UK Private Finance Initiative (PFI) together with trade deals in general.

There appears to be a general view of people as cradle-to-grave consumers, whose lives need to be prolonged but in a sufficient state of discontent to maximise the potential income stream from their consumption. For example, the title of one biotech research report asks: "Is curing patients a sustainable business model?" (Kim, 2018).

Three examples of commercial exploitation in the public health sector, which illustrate both opportunism and an élite arrogance towards people, are described below under the headings 'The Billion Dollar Deals and How They Changed the World ', 'America's struggle with opioid addiction', and 'Targeting those who can afford to pay'.

To be successful in a BAU-environment, risk-taking behaviour^tmt goes with the territory, and is closely linked to commercial opportunism. Interpretation of corporate legislation has become progressively more aggressive, particularly since the early 1970s when the trend towards financial speculation became globalised - when the US under President Nixon unilaterally ended the gold standard in 1971 (Rickards, 2011, p.xi). Increasingly money is made from money using ever riskier speculative processes, such that its worth has departed from 'real wealth'. When entrepreneur Anita Roddick's Body Shop company was initially being floated on the stock market, she reflected that the imperative was to grow, and that the financial investors were effectively "gamblers - like in a casino" (Bakan, 2005, p.52).

^tmt There is some evidence that risk-taking correlates with chronic status-seeking motivation, and high basal levels of testosterone in both men and women.

The occurrence of crises are catalysed by a risk-taking mentality, together with the externalised costs inherent in most products and services.

As noted above, climate change is welcomed as an investment opportunity, for example: (Funk, 2015).

Risk-taking | Carbon markets

Carbon credits and carbon markets are a component of national and international attempts to mitigate the growth in concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs). One carbon credit is equal to one metric tonne of carbon dioxide, or in some markets, carbon dioxide equivalent gases. Carbon trading is an application of an emissions trading approach. Greenhouse gas emissions are capped and then markets are used to allocate the emissions among the group of regulated sources.

More detailed descriptions are given in (Amadeo, 2022), (Anon., 2021y), and (Kenton, 2022).

For a raw view of the real purpose of carbon markets, and what should be done about them, see (Hildyard, 2008, p.48) and (Lohmann, 2021).

Risk-taking | Global markets

It was reported in Reuters that analysts at Refinitiv said that the value of traded global markets for carbon dioxide permits grew by 164% to a record level of $851 billion (760 billion euros) in 2021 (Chestney, 2022). The huge importance the status quo attaches to 'the markets' has already been referred to several times.

Criteria for urgent political action

The basis of market confidence

Risk-taking | Securitisation and derivatives

The trend in global capitalism has been for money to be made from money using ever riskier speculative 'financial instruments' like derivatives, hedge funds, vulture funds, etc..

If the portrayal of dark governance on this website might be seen as overstating the case, (Hildyard, 2008) confirms the modus operandi of those working in the world of securitisation and derivatives.

It is likely that most people have only a limited knowledge of what these are, and about how they work. For those needing a 'briefing' on this technical area, the paper is shocking.

Risk-taking | Organised crime and money laundering - linked crimes

The boundary between apparently normal business practices and criminality is becoming ever more diffuse. For example if an employee gets away with an illegal practice in the course of his/ her work, and the resulting product or service is 'legally' sold to an unsuspecting customer, then could that not be viewed as an indirect form of money laundering?

In the infamous example described in (Anon., 2020k), the rogue practice of telephone hacking (to obtain information for a newspaper story) was spotted, and criminal charges were brought. While technically the term money laundering applies to the cleaning up of 'dirty money', there must be countless illegal practices which employees commit, and which they and the company they work for get away with.

It is plain to see how any commodification could result in money being made illegally. Whether money is stolen, or obtained through activities such as selling illegal drugs, various forms of trafficking, etc., the need for money laundering follows. Organised crime in general has proliferated with the globalisation of capitalism, because global financial markets facilitate massive scale money laundering. (Castells, 1999c, pp.178-9) describes the three stages of money laundering - "smurfing", "layering", and "integration". Functionally the task is to deposit the dirty money into the financial system, without it being noticed, and then to introduce the laundered money into the legal economy. The worrying problem of organised crime grows through positive feedbacks.

Major Human-Caused Predicaments (MHCPs)

The prevailing governance system has caused, and continues to preside over, mounting and unresolved major global problems. It is unquestionably and demonstrably dysfunctional. A core feature of its pro-growth operating mechanism is the creation of global markets. The purpose of global markets is to drive mass consumption. This creates addictions [Life choices] which generate mental health [Notes] problems. These in turn fuel the demand for alcohol, illegal drugs, prescribed medications, and further mass consumption, with the intention to relieve suffering.

The core economic operating principle is that demand drives supply.

The huge demand for illegal drugs drives supply by organised crime. It is very lucrative, and "the mother of most other crimes" (Castells, 1999c, p.174). It is generally recognised that organised crime networks which engage in drug trafficking use ruthlessly violent methods to enforce their illegal transactions (Ibid., p.193).

In general, with any criminal activity, as the stakes get higher there is always some risk of occurrence of extreme coercion or violent assault. For example, as in the following case of politically motivated crime:

Notes: Murder of a Kenyan IT professional

Prepared to use this level of threat and intimidation, organised criminal networks can lean on individuals within 'the authorities'.

"The globalisation of crime further subverts the nation-state, profoundly transforming processes of governance, and actually paralysing the state in many instances" (Castells, 1999b, p.259).

This completes a potentially catastrophic vicious circle of positive feedbacks.

Relevant references from the [Bibliography]:

Books: (Castells, 1999a,b,c), (Hall, 2018), and (Burgis, 2020);

YouTube videos: (Anon., 2019s), (Anon., 2020m), (Anon., 2021a);

BBC Radio documentaries: (Anon., 2019a);

Television documentaries: (Anon., 2021a), (Anon., 2019f);

Television dramas: (Anon., 2019e), the Worricker Trilogy, and the third series of the Danish crime-thriller Follow the Money, which focused on money laundering.

In a sense consumer culture is a form of democracy; the democracy of the market. It is sanctioned by governments as an integral aspect of economic growth. In principle the customer can choose whether to purchase an item. Notwithstanding any adverse consequences of cost externalisations, this is democratic and fair providing that there is little wealth inequality in the society, that the consumer knows what they are purchasing, and that adequate consumer protections are in place.

With these preconditions, the consumer is able to choose whether or not to consume, or to resist the temptation to overconsume. In practice there is significant inequality in societies, and the rich have more consumer choices. Some of the resulting challenges to personal values are addressed later.

As with the harmless sounding phrase business as usual, the term 'market research' sounds innocuous. The term might be more realistically regarded as 'intel' gathering to inform the selective dissemination of information to citizens for the purpose of best persuading them to buy. Increasingly sophisticated techniques are used to lure potential customers into purchasing products and services, which is the essential next stage of the commodification process. At the gentle persuasion end of the marketing spectrum people might be left feeling that they would be missing out by not using product A, because they think using A would help them to feel better about themselves.

Consumers are well used to such marketing hype, and reading product labels for further information. But unsurprisingly such labels do not yet include much information on the externalised costs associated with the product, or about the potential risk of addiction and social dislocation which might arise from product use^spa.

^spa For example - smartphone addiction - particularly among young people (Anon. 2018b).

Consumer democracy [Life choices]

Criminality against online consumers [Life choices]

Notes: Unethical advertising

Commercial opportunism, expediency and ruthlessly exploitative marketing are well demonstrated by the examples described in the previous section.

The spectrum of activity behaviours which can follow directly from the corporate legislation which regulates business activities has been observed.

The behaviour of each of the above legal business activities could be broadly described to be within one of the following three categories.

This business activity behaviour categorisation scheme could be applied more generally; to business activities other than the six which have been identified in the section "A spectrum of business activities and behaviours".

The behaviour categories could be further divided into explicit sub-categories; for example money laundering, and computer/ telephone hacking.

Some Notes from the section "A spectrum of business activities and behaviours" and two other narrative sections illustrate the categorisation scheme.

Experienced corporate lobbyists are able to exploit decent but naive individuals, and experienced lawyers know how to 'play the game'; as depicted, for example, in the drama A State of Happiness.

So at what stage can the skilled manipulation and selective dissemination of information and other tactics be legally regarded as corrupt? At what stage would skilled manipulation and persuasion become 'unacceptable' bribery and corruption?

At what stage does rule breaking by the authorities become inexcusable to the public? It is suggested that this might be when the public at large feel hurt, betrayed, and lose their trust in the system.

Within such a broad scheme, some overlap between categories is inevitable. For borderline legal items the following catogories which cover the general scope of examples listed in this section have been identified:

Notes: The grey area of 'interpretation'

Notwithstanding the enormous liberties already provided by the judiciously chosen rules of corporate legislation in the first place, where does bending of these rules become corruption? Many people would put the spurious self-defence against WMD argument that the US and UK used to justify attacking Iraq in this category, with the Russian invasion of Ukraine as a clear violation of international law.

It can be seen how a chain of very bad behaviours/ illegal activities could arise, for example starting with obtaining money illegally, resulting in a need to 'launder' it, and so on.

The following broad categories which cover the general scope of examples listed in this section have been identified.

The last two categories are general, and so cover a wide range of rule-breaking severity.

Notes: Breaking the rules

Market pricing and unsustainability

In order to interface with financial markets within the globalised economy, it is necessary to financialise the value of natural and human resources. For example, carbon markets were introduced as a way of financialising the environmental externality of greenhouse gas emissions.

With 'amoral' corporate law as it is currently configured, with not even a secular moral compass, the financialisation process is inherently dehumanising, and is incompatible with quantifying life within a biosphere. The aspects of life which are most valued subjectively by humans are not amenable to pricing. Financialisation of such aspects introduces all sorts of difficulties ranging from the uncertain to the unknowable.

For example, cost-benefit analyses require the monetising of a human life, which is preposterous and abhorrent, but is nevertheless standard practice. The basis of assumptions made in order to arrive at such a figure could only be 'meaningful' in the 'objectified' context of a particular type of analysis.

If cost benefit analysis is used to 'quantify' the value of a landscape, for some development project, the scope for creative accounting is plainly evident. The following note considers some examples which affect families everywhere, and demonstrate some of the potential implications of inappropriate and/or short term thinking when using financialisation as a tool for making societal policy decisions.

Childcare and economics

A basic problem is that the world of business with its priorities, organisations, computing, administration, accounting and legal functions etc. is completely different from the natural world. The interface between these worlds has evolved such that business relates to societies as economies, and to the environment as a free resource; both to be exploited for the purpose of profit. The profit is measured in financial terms; the societal resource is viewed as 'human capital', and the natural world as 'natural capital'.

Human-nature dualism is at the root of the core BAU problem, because business has assumed world dominance, taking nature for granted and ignoring the reality that we all live in a biosphere. Until business acknowledges and respects the reality of living in a biosphere, and behaves accordingly, the overall prospects for people and the habitability of the planet will continue to deteriorate.

An excellent common sense principle for sensible stewardship of resources is sometimes referred to as the "three Rs": Reduce; Reuse; or Recycle. However given the primary status quo objective of promoting economic growth, the three Rs can only be regarded as damage limitation, at best. Large corporations continue to behave as if they have dominion over nature and society. Lip service is often played to sustainable development principles, which are likely to be viewed as 'red tape' unless they can be used profitably for marketing purposes. Global citizens who are concerned about this state of affairs need to be vigilant when interpreting slick corporate PR, whose use of language is often not to be taken at face value (such as semantic inversion). For example, what does business typically mean by environmental cost internalisation in practice?

Another practical difficulty, common to any large information system, is how best to categorise items in a way which faciltates clear communication of the contents. Multiple dimensions and parameters can be represented mathematically, but the more conceptual a representational system is, the challenges for clear communication of the content increase. It also becomes increasingly difficult to keep on top of evolutionary developments with the passage of time.

For the purpose of 'clarity', over-simplistic general categories often prevail, topically for example the conveniently comprehensive pigeon-holes 'sociological' and 'environmental'. But many issues which require both these categories are less convenient, and can get 'missed'. These are sometimes referred to as cross cutting themes. For example, Public Health and Health and Safety are two such broad topics.

It was difficult to find a convenient location for 'public health' within the structure of this website, as cases can easily get buried within 'cost externalisation', or distributed between other categories. In a body-mind system, some correlation/ interaction between physical and mental health is to be expected. Evolutionary changes in the use of terminology can also exacerbate the categorisation problem. Public health has historically been understood to refer largely to physical health, but arguably should refer to mental health as an interconnected aspect of the mind-body system, and of course also within the biosphere. Pragmatically, the following note is formed in two parts: (1) mental health; and (2) a roundup of links on the website related to the topic of public health.

Notes: Cost externalisations; public health (including mental health) and a roundup of related links on the website.

Notes: Cost externalisations; health and safety

Notes: Environmental externalisations; not curbing demand

The necessity for mandatory internalisation of all costs (MIAC) - Not to be confused with conventional so-called full cost internalisation (FCI)

If the objective is to maintain sustainability, then MIAC requirements would include the following:

Every effort should be made to minimise contributions to environmental and sociological damage at all stages of a production process.

Damage to the the environment and/ or society would then be minimised.

The cost of minimising damage to the environment and/or society could be passed on to the customer.

The customer would know that the product/ service was not harming the environment or society.

The real cost of providing protection equipment could be assessed using traditional accounting methods, with no need for creative frigs or allowances.

An important principle of MIAC is that:

If a product/ service cannot be provided without causing environmental and/or sociological damage, then it should not be made available until such time that it can.

The above rigorous version of full cost internalisation would disclose (internalise) all these real costs, so there should be no undisclosed (externalised) real adverse environmental and sociological impacts.

Subject to these conditions the accounting would be straighforward and meaningful. Costs would be those incurred by genuine efforts to actually minimise real harmful environmental and sociological impacts.

The term externalised 'costs' is not used here, in order to make the distinction between the properly internalised financial costs of real harm reduction versus spurious financialised allowances, which admit to some harm but do nothing tangible other than to report its occurrence.

Another important and inescapable matter is how depletion of a natural resource - whether renewable, substitutable, or irreplaceable - should be 'costed', or accounted for. The 'circular economy' (CE) is discussed below. 'Allowances' are typically made by attempting to financialise the value of natural and human resources. Anyone used to traditional bottom-line accounting, trying to actually do such financialisation, would soon become aware of all sorts of intractable difficulties.

The accountancy profession knows this, but still continues to play the game, along with most of the rest of us.

Financialisation is necessary to interface with the market, but pricing could be made more meaningful by using MIAC, as defined above.

The manner in which MIAC would humanise market pricing is addressed in [Big 3 reform].

In practice, difficulties would arise because technology is not necessarily available to prevent some actual harm, and often there is not even much understanding of what harm might be caused. Such is the haste with which the desire to make money and market the benefits overrides prudent research into likely adverse consequences, which are subsequently 'externalised'. It is this which causes environmental and/or sociological unsustainability, and not the lack of a suitable accounting and reporting methodology.

Costs incurred by efforts towards real harm reduction can be accounted for using traditional bottom line accounting. In my view environmental cost internalisation should always refer to the cost of steps taken to actually prevent or significantly reduce damage or pollution to the environment.

Only then can profit be considered as environmentally and socially sustainable (Howes, 2000).

In contrast, creative financialisation of largely unquantifiable harmful impacts is a deceit.

There are two main categories of valuation techniques for monetising environmental and social impacts: dose-response techniques and behavioural methods. The cost of control approach is one of two types of dose-response technique. It relies on the availability and usage of relevant damage prevention technology (Jasinski, 2015, p.1125). (Long, 2012) shows how it fits within a theoretical framework.

The type of analyses required to evaluate environmental or sociological risks and to estimate the costs of mitigation options are complex and technical; for example, the cost of pollution control measures to meet specified emission limits. Some of the techniques applied to decision making and the costs related to climate change are described in (Ekins, 2000, pp.242-282).

Full cost accounting (FCA) "was developed to adjust the existing prices of products and services by monetising and incorporating both internal and external impacts (positive and negative), including environmental and social externalities" (Jasinski et al., 2015, p.1124) citing (Bebbington et al., 2001). "According to the polluter pays principle (PPP), an organisation should be accountable only for direct impacts which it has the ability to control." In practice there are considerable difficulties in applying the principle. In order to allocate responsibility for impacts arising from production processes and consumption decisions, all producers in the supply chain, including customers, are implicated. It is even more difficult to track the eventual paths of any pollutants and their consequences (Jasinski et al., 2015, p.1124) citing (Howes, 2002).

The literature on 'sustainability accounting' and reporting rarely refers specifically to the cost of steps taken to actually prevent damage or pollution to the environment, or to the cost of pollution control measures to meet specified emission limits. It would draw attention to harmful practices, for example subcontracting polluting processes to countries where environmental protection limits are low. Instead the emphasis appears to be on assessing and reporting on the environmental and social impacts.

In practice, the emphasis of accounting and reporting the cost of environmental impacts typically seems to be more about monetising estimates and/or measurements of emissions which contribute to un-sustainability^dfa, than about internalising the costs of environmental damage prevention in order to maintain sustainability. In both cases the purpose is to pass the cost on to the consumer, but the distinction is rarely spelt out. In effect therefore, the customer is being obliged to collude with the supplier in condoning any compromises which have been made in order to provide the product at a competitive price - whether or not he/she realises this.

^dfa This is referred to as the damage function approach, and is the other of two types of dose-response technique (Jasinski, 2015, p.1125). It relies on data availability, certain judgements and assumptions.

It should be made clear to consumers as to whether the higher price they are paying for a supposedly green product is to cover the cost of actual pollution prevention, or whether they are merely paying for the cost of measuring, accounting and reporting of the extent of pollution damage.

This is greenwash and market competition territory. Is such a lack of transparency mainly driven by concern that internalising the cost of actual pollution prevention might raise the price and put a product at a competitive disadvantage compared to a rival product from another manufacturer? In turn, how much of the concern is because of the lack of availability of technology to prevent environmental pollution arising from manufacturing that product?

If the latter, then on what basis is sale of the product permitted?

As things stand, business as usual strongly resists increased regulation, using every means possible to avoid anything which reduces profit, while making it look like concessions are being made. The BAU stance is typified by 'voluntary self-regulation', claiming compliance with corporate social responsibility (CSR).

In the fashion industry, which is "well acknowledged to have a substantial and negative social and environmental footprint..." "This study empirically supports a novel picture of drivers of CSR engagement focusing on a context that generates a high share of the global value added, though provoking a negative social and environmental footprint" (Colucci et al, 2019).

The economist Milton Friedman is strongly critical of CSR on the grounds that it is immoral (!) - all profits should be used for the benefit of the corporation and its owners. An example which comes to mind is corporate sponsorship, for example in the in the arts, culture, and sport - see box below. But 'giving something back' would be acceptable providing that it is 'insincere', insofar that it is beneficial to the bottom line (Bakan, 2005). Further explanation about why CSR is flawed is given in (Reich, 2021). For readers not familiar with English slang, BS in the article title means nonsense.

Dark governance is incompatible with making genuine progress towards environmental sustainability, because it follows Friedman's interpretation of corporate law.

Corporate sponsorship in the arts, culture, and sport

Many associations/ organisations, and individuals, are no doubt only too pleased if they can attract commercial sponsorship. Most people seem to accept pragmatically that this is just how it is, perhaps thinking that it is a good thing to get something out of corporations. Company executives may talk warmly about wanting to 'give something back'.

But some simple arithmetic on a case by case basis is likely to demonstrate that although the sums of sponsorship money involved might seem large to a recipient, they are very small beer as a proportion of the sponsoring corporation's profits. Furthermore, the revenues generated from future advertising and media opportunities, and the brand-enhancing philanthropic misconceptions generated would no doubt more than pay for the sponsorship 'investment'.

It could be argued that there is something wrong with the system if life enhancing activities in the arts, culture and sport need to be subsidised by corporate profits, especially in relation to the massive sums of tax-payers' money directed towards bailing out the banks after the 2008 financial crash.

Sustainability accounting

A helpful guide to the overall territory is provided in (Wikipedia, Environmental full-cost accounting).

Sustainability accounting is a still-evolving methodology, which attempts to report on the extent to which the costs associated with a product/ service have been internalised within broad environmental, sociological and economic categories. Any such methodology is fraught by the requirement to financialise sociological and environmental parameters.

(Lamberton, 2005) provides a brief history of sustainable accounting up to 2002, and a framework for how it might be implemented.

Accounting for the broad economic, environmental, and sociological categories is sometimes referred to as the 'triple-bottom-line'; a term coined by John Elkington (Elkington, 1999). This was intended to take sustainability accounting beyond that associated with Corporate Social Responsibility (Arowoshegbe et al., 2016, p.92).

In view of the inherent difficulties incurred with financialisation, it makes sense to use indicators to estimate variables that cannot be measured precisely, or be directly observed by virtue of their complexity.

"Some versions of TBL attempt to use monetary units to measure economic, social and environmental performance, whereas other versions such as that used in the Global Reporting Initiative Sustainability Accounting Guidelines utilise a wide array of indicators to measure performance toward the goal of sustainability". The latest GRI Guidelines version was released in 2002 at the World Summit on Sustainable Development, providing a rigorous framework for the application of TBL reporting (Lamberton, 2005).

Accounting firm KPMG surveys showed that TBL was widely used within Europe for corporate sustainability reporting, but that the take-up was slow outside Europe. In general, strong claims are being made for sustainability through narrow and incomplete reporting practices (Milne et al., 2005). Some authors expressed concerns about "..potential misuse by corporate interests of information produced using the Guidelines, reducing sustainability accounting information to environmental propaganda, masking the the reality of the environmental crisis and the role of business as a primary cause" (Ibid.) citing (Gray, 1992) and (Lehman, 1995); "...the process of reporting sustainability accounting information is open to manipulation by those with vested interests (TwVI). A potentially critical role for accounting is the design of systems to reduce manipulation and increase the qualitative attributes of sustainability accounting information" (Lamberton, 2005).

Notes: Manipulative reframing [Issues]

Referring specifically to TBL accounting, (Norman & MacDonald, 2004) concluded that TBL "..rhetoric is badly misleading, and may in fact provide a smokescreen behind which firms can avoid truly effective social and environmental reporting and performance"; TBL turns out to be a "single bottom line plus vague commitments to social and environmental concerns".

Many indicators and conceptual accounting tools emerged in the attempt to financialise sociological and environmental parameters (for example: eco-efficiency, material inputs (including energy) per unit of service (MIPS), 'ecological rucksacks', Factor 4, Factor 10 etc. ). One which is very useful as an indicator of inequality and fair sharing of land/ resources is the 'ecological footprint' concept (Wackernagel & Rees, 1998). However it is not much use for measuring environmental deterioration.

An inescapable conclusion is that the broad systems level concept of sustainability is not amenable to being quantified and communicated in the manner conventionally used by business organisations, where "power and decision making seem to lie" (Milne et al., 2005). Referring to attempts to do so, they write: "Generally lacking from such developments is any apparent willingness to acknowledge the broader and more challenging aspects associated with the concept of sustainability" ... [which are] "...subordinate to increased financial return for and reduced risk for shareholders; attracting and retaining employees; improving customer and sales loyalty; growing supplier commitment; and strengthening community relations". They conclude: "We argue that the TBL and GRI (Global Reporting Initiative) are insufficient conditions for organisations contributing to the sustaining of the Earth's ecology. Paradoxically, they may reinforce business as usual and greater levels of un-sustainability".

"There is a widely recognised need for individuals, organisations and societies to find models, metrics and tools for articulating the extent to which, and the ways in which current activities are unsustainable" (Bebbington et al., 2007).

Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is a well established tool, but the blunt monetisation approach does not accord with human values. It involves highly debatable cost and benefit estimates and judgements about appropriate discount rates. The supposed objectivity of the monetisation exercise can result in huge uncertainties which open the way to "opportunistic interpretations" and "manipulation by powerful monied interests". The inaccessibility of CBA terminology to the non-specialist creates an impression of it being an expert-driven process. This can mask such manipulation, discriminate against certain sociological groups, and threaten democratic values (Ibid.).

Focusing on sub-national efforts by organisations and stakeholder groups, Bebbington et al describe how the sustainability assessment model (SAM)^mpa facilitates "more participatory forms of decision-making and accountability" than cost-benefit analysis (CBA).

^mpa A type of full cost accounting (FCA) which is based on an inter-disciplinary approach.

Many of the criticisms of CBA are addressed by the SAM. For example subjectivity is explicitly acknowledged, as is the political dimension of decision-making. Substitutability within and between various impact/capital categories is openly recognised as a political issue. Using a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach, the SAM provides opportunities for dialogue between stakeholders with different ideological orientations about issues such as: what and how to monetise; combining monetary and non-monetary indicators; discount rates^ige; and the fairness of distribution of costs and benefits (Ibid.).

^ige Views regarding discount rates are highly value laden. The SAM currently uses a discount rate of zero in an attempt to deal with intergenerational equity and intertemporal choices. This is a way of avoiding giving too little weight to future costs and benefits.

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.

The case for more participatory approaches involving stakeholders seems to be a step in the right direction. Because the SAM involves others more than CBA, and is not seen to be so reliant on experts, there is more transparency and awareness of the decision-supporting process (Ibid.). The "...new paradigm organisations ... seem also to be workplaces that accept an enhanced range of stakeholders..." (Clarke & Clegg, 1998). "It is our belief that in the future the development of loyal, inclusive stakeholder relationships will become one of the most important determinants of commercial viability and business success" (Wheeler & Sillanpää, 1997, p.ix).

An important feature of this trend is that it brings human values into the debate, which directly challenges the amoral logic of corporate legislation. But it still evades direct access to decision makers [Citizen action].

(Jasinski et al., 2015) set about identifying an FCA method which could be applied in the automotive industry. After reviewing over 4000 papers they extracted ten potentially suitable FCA methods. After careful examination and analysis they concluded that the SAM can be applied in the automotive industry, together with life-cycle-assessment (LCA) technologies. It will require development of new sustainability assessment criteria.

(Zyznarska-Dworczak, 2020) conducted a bibliometric analysis of publications relating to sustainability reporting and accounting research. Having identified gaps in sustainability accounting development, she presents her concept of a framework for sustainable accounting.

Some notable observations from the study are that Europe and Asia have shown the most interest in sustainability reporting since around 2005, and that the overall number of articles relating to sustainability reporting significantly exceed those on sustainability accounting over the same time period. The most cited article relating to sustainability accounting research during the last two decades is (Gray, 2002). "Rob Gray has pioneered corporate and social reporting, and has encouraged accountants ... to take a more critical look at their methods ...." (Clarke & Clegg, 1998, p.421).

Although the US has shown low interest in sustainability reporting, it has carried out about a quarter of all research into sustainability accounting. Zyznarska-Dworczak suggests some possible reasons for this, and expects that there may be more interest in accounting research in Europe in the future, following the US pattern.

Perhaps another factor in the Europe/ US bias of interest in sustainability reporting/ sustainability accounting could be the US fixation on financialisation, whereas in Europe the use of non-monetary indicators is more popular?

Noting the substantial rate of growth of demand for critical materials as part of the low-carbon transition, (Walzberg et al., 2021) point out that perceptions of material scarcity are conditioned by a prevailing linear view of the economy, whereby "resources are extracted to manufacture products which are then discarded at the end of their useful life". Encouraging the reduction and re-use of products and materials decouples economic growth from resource depletion. A move towards a circular economy (CE) is clearly necessary for sustainability on a finite planet, as demonstrated by Limits to Growth (Ahmed, 2014a&b).

Walzberg et al reviewed the literature relating to the sustainability^sces of CE strategies to classify which questions are best addressed by which methods, and whether a new circularity assessment method is needed.

^sces For example, a material with recycled content might cause more environmental impacts than if virgin material was used, and could cause health and social impacts if the recycling is not done properly.

They concluded that research was needed to develop a framework to combine existing methods, and to better accommodate all the necessary components for analysing the CE. Having identified the strengths and weaknesses of currently available methods relevant to assessing sustainability transition to a CE, they found that most came from industrial ecology. The hybrid approach would need to include complex systems science (system dynamics) and operations research methods, for example multi-criteria decision-making.

Rogue operator behaviour

Historically an arrogance towards nature is reflected in Francis Bacon's vision of dominating nature (Bacon, 1626), (Sachs, 1999, p.64), (Scalercio, 2018), and (Wikipedia: New Atlantis). The significance of Francis Bacon's role is elaborated in (Hagger, 2016).

There is a discernible mindset, characteristically inherent in business and (particularly) right wing politics, whereby nature and the environment tend to be seen as a collective free resource to be plundered for profit. For people with this mindset, 'sustainability' means sustainable profits (another semantic inversion); indicating an expedient, primarily exploitative, and selectively reductionist interpretation of science about the biosphere.

The evolution of human consciousness [Moral compass]

The fossil fuel industry displays an extreme arrogance to nature and to people.

Vested interests and climate-denial politics [Issues]

A further example of complete disregard for the environment in the UK is the increasingly frequent and widespread practice of dumping raw sewage into rivers in England and Wales. In marked contrast:

A fine example of what citizen collaboration can achieve [Citizen action]

An arrogance towards people is reflected in Francis Bacon's outrageous male chauvinism:

"Francis Bacon portrayed nature in feminine terms as something that should be subdued, used, and dominated".

(Purser et al, 1995, p.1057)

A ruthless disregard for people is nothing new. Two notable historic examples: Henry VIII's treatment of Anne Boleyn, as movingly portrayed in a re-enactment - meticulously researched by historian Tracy Borman (Anon., 2020g); and the shameless treatment of people as commodities in the slave trade.

Exposure of undercover police infiltration of personal relationships for spying [Citizen action]

The long term US military strategy known as 'Full Spectrum Dominance' (Coles, 2016, p.7) could only have been sanctioned from a totally ruthless mindset. The testimony of a high-ranking military officer who served in Iraq, in which he revealed something of the training regime whereby soldiers are trained to be killing machines, is excruciating (Anon., 2020b).

Some psychological, philosophical and moral issues surrounding military service are discussed in the following link:

Control of territory; nation-states and borders; 'ownership' of land [Moral compass]

However unpalatable military action is to someone with idealistic pacifist views, at a pragmatic level it is generally accepted that some level of appropriate defensive capability has to be provided for the common good, in this imperfect world:

If, somehow, great progress was made towards a utopian sustainable and peaceful global society, regrettably there would still need to be some means of defence against the potential threat of some power-seeking individual or group attempting to overthrow it.

(Phipps, 2004)

But this does not excuse the preposterous excesses of the military-industrial machine in a contemptible cycle of lucrative weapons deals/ war and destruction/ commercial reconstruction contracts, deemed to have strategic ends 'in the national interest'. It does not excuse the deceitful behaviour of governments, such the expedient, and widely disbelieved, 'weapons of mass destruction' self-defence rhetoric prior to the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

The UK government did hold a parliamentary vote on whether to invade Iraq in 2003, but MPs were misled by a 'dodgy dossier'. Meanwhile the public were not fooled by the spurious claims about the imminent threat posed by Saddam Hussein's WMD capability, and around two thirds were against the invasion.

We have all seen too many images depicting yet more heaps of rubble and senselessly ruined lives; in Syria, Ukraine, Sudan, Gaza ...

It is difficult to see how such military behaviour by nation-states can be claimed to be in the public interest. A key question is therefore - whose interests are being served in the national interest ? It seems reasonable to infer that the decision to take military action is decided by élites, for élites. It is certainly not for the common good, or for the benefit of humanity.

In his very informative and chilling book Rogue States Noam Chomsky writes: 'To ensure that its writ is law, a rogue superpower must maintain "credibility".... the concept is invoked regularly in justification of state violence' (Chomsky, 2000, p.6).

'Credibility' would seem to imply that in the 'national interest' a superpower can literally do what it likes, militarily or commercially.

For example when wars are declared, with apparently flimsy justification, and very often as a cover for access resources, such as oil, gas, minerals etc. Or, as already referred to, when the US unilaterally ended the gold standard in 1971. The ensuing regime of floating exchange rates encouraged speculation and, arguably, marked the beginning of global capitalism, and the departure of money from real wealth.

Compartmentalisation of the business mindset is made possible through "... the legal fiction of corporate personhood" (Korten, 1999, pp.190-191). An example of how this operates commercially was cited in a radio interview about the Nicholas Cage film Lord of War. It was said that arms dealers appear to be charming likeable businessmen who sleep well at night on the basis that they aren't responsible for causing many deaths because they don't pull the trigger, they are just meeting a business need (Anon., 2005b).

Cradle-to-grave consumers (see above, under the heading commercial opportunism: commodification, expediency and risk taking )

The departure of money from real wealth is epitomised by the extreme financial opportunism as discussed earlier in the short section on "Securitisation and derivatives".

(Monbiot, 2022) describes an upsetting, but apparently not uncommon, experience of people trying to cancel an account with a telecommunications company after a family member has died.

The potential for arrogance in business culture knows no bounds. There are countless examples of ordinary people being caught up in a situation which is very damaging to them, which others have control over, yet which the ‘others‘ ignore. This continues for as long as they can get away with the damage being done to the victims. They aren’t suffering themselves, and meanwhile are continuing to rake in profits.

The UK Post Office/Fujitsu/Horizon/Capture scandal is an example – thousands of sub-postmasters were using a computer system known by the software developers and some in the Post Office to be faulty. The Post Office employees were held liable for cash ‘missing’ from their branches, replenishing it from their own pockets and/or being prosecuted – some had criminal convictions and there were suicides (Wikipedia: British Post Office scandal).

Exposé of Post Office Horizon Scandal and fight for compensation - Alan Bates [Citizen action]

In general, eventually "chickens come home to roost", and the perpetrators of bad behaviour are exposed, shown to be liable, and are expected to pay compensation to the victims.

But it is "like getting blood out of a stone" to expect any compensation from 'the authorities', which in the end will have to be paid by the taxpayer. This always takes a very long time to administer - on top of the long delay in acknowledging the wrong.

The Post Office injustices are now acknowledged, and there are compensation schemes in place – but they are being administered painfully slowly. Meanwhile ordinary law-abiding people’s lives continue to be adversely affected, and more and more of the potential recipients of the compensation will have died.

In the UK infected blood scandal of the 1970s – 1990s victims and relatives of the dead continue to wait for compensation a year after the Government report was issued (Infected Blood Inquiry, 2023).

Other examples in the (relatively affluent) West include the victims of pollution as in Dark Waters and Erin Brockovich films, and Corby in the UK (Wikipedia: Toxic Town).

There are countless examples of multinationals and their local subsidiaries causing untold misery in third world countries e.g. in Bhopal in India (Wikipedia: Bhopal disaster), where compensation for victims is fought against for years, if it is ever even paid.

In 2017 Jacques Peretti presented a very revealing three-part documentary TV series with the above title (Anon., 2017a). In the first episode he interviewed some key people in the health sector. Many shocking points emerged, for example it was revealed that it became a business plan/ strategy "to make living itself an illness and patients of every one of us". In New York in 1976 the American CEO of a large pharmaceutical company, Henry Gadsen, did an interview with a business magazine, during which he made the throwaway candid comment that he "wanted to sell pills to everyone and to make prescriptions as normal and matter-of-fact as having a stick of chewing gum".

A few years later in 1980 the American Psychiatric Association published the third edition of their Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, known as DSM-III. The aim of this manual was to classify every single mental health^mh condition, including newly identified disorders. While the labelling of conditions aided communication, it also provided opportunities for business to create niches for a whole host of new medications. This enabled the business strategy of "peddle the illness to sell the pill" to take off using clever and aggressive marketing. By forging closer links between research and marketing it was found that 75% of prescribing for depression took place in primary care. The business strategy then focused on the diagnosis of depression, and on general practitioners who would be interested in being involved in the project. The outcome was a nine point Patient mental Health Questionaire known as PHQ-9, aimed at general practitioners, which resulted in a single numerical depression score from 0-27. This is became the international gold standard for the clinical diagnosis of depression. In practice even patients with moderate scores can end up being prescribed antidepressants.

^mh Notes: Mental health

The drug companies have thereby influenced the criteria which determine when a drug is needed, which they manufacture and sell. Such excessive medicalisation of natural human experiences undermines other more constructive ways of meeting the challenges of life, for example techniques such as those pioneered by Abraham Maslow.

Abraham Maslow's pioneering work on human values [Moral compass]

The aggressive marketing of antidepressant medications, as described in this programme, epitomises the dark side of business as usual.

Notes: Unethical advertising

At the time of writing, the programme (episode 1 of 3) was no longer available on the BBC iplayer, but was available on IMDb (Anon., 2017c). Another reference which substantiates the theme is (Wikipedia: Disease mongering). A tweet by (Davies, 2020) reflects the present reality of the diagnosis of depression in England, which is a legacy of the late Henry Gadsen's business concept.

Dark governance is very apparent in the above case of aggressive marketing of antidepressant medications. It is also revealed by the aggressive and misleading marketing of highly addictive pain relief medication described in the American drama television miniseries Dopesick (Wikipedia: Dopesick (miniseries) ). The programme describes the true story of how a pharmaceutical company was able to pursue the development, licensing and aggressive and misleading marketing of a highly addictive pain relief medication, with disastrous consequences for many individual users and their families. The drama also describes the ensuing protracted legal case against the company in pursuit of "justice".

Perhaps rogue operator behaviour should be medicalised. "Social endocrinology is an emerging interdisciplinary field that bridges behavioural endocrinology (the study of the interaction between hormones and behaviour) with social and personality psychology" (Mehta & Josephs, 2011, p.171). Testosterone (T) is important in regulating social behaviour, and T levels are associated with dominance in animal behaviour (Ibid., p.172). Research "findings suggest that basal T is a marker of chronic status-seeking motivation in both men and women" (Ibid., p.175).

Could it be that the most testosterone-fuelled élite individuals, who exert the most power and control, might actually be at the mercy of their hormones? So who, or what, is actually in control?

The rapid spread of Covid-19 was undoubtedly exacerbated by high volume global travel, especially by air. The unsavoury emergence of vaccine-nationalism, and the latent thirst of people for global travel, raises the ongoing threat of inadequate protection through the spread of new virus strains.

"Big pharma" currently sees huge profits from annual booster vaccinations for those who can afford to pay, while guaranteeing their future income through indirectly assisting the spread of disease-variants among the too-poor-to-be-vaccinated. These huge profits will be made from the taxpayer in rich countries (Anon., 2021j).

This is inexcusable, and extremely frustrating for those well-intentioned people who researched and developed viable vaccines for worldwide distribution on a not-for-profit basis (Anon., 2022d).

Arrogance towards the people reinforces a public sense that 'it is one rule for them, and another for the rest of us'.

This is epitomised by the manner in which President Trump exploits existing mandates and precedents, while if challenged, pours scorn on any criticism or even threatens the perpetrator with litigation or job loss. During his first presidency he frequently dismissed any allegations of misconduct, saying that it was all just a witchhunt.

The behaviour of some members of the UK government, including the then Prime Minister and Chancellor, during a Covid-19 'lockdown' period came under public scrutiny, and resulted in a confidence vote on whether the Prime Minister should continue in office. A videoclip (Anon., 2022n) was put out on Twitter before that vote, and provides a graphic illustration of an arrogance towards people. He later resigned as Leader of the Conservative (and Unionist) Party, but continued as Prime Minister until a successor could be found.

Notes: Covid-19 and "Partygate"

There has been an increasing trend towards the expedient flouting of international laws, which undermines integrity, democracy and trust in the governance system. It might be said that our leaders display an arrogance towards truth. As Steve Schlei writes: "over two thousand years ago, the philosopher Plato warned of a society where opinion would be elevated to the level of fact" (Schlei, 2017). During the last few years this has been accompanied by unseemly, and sometimes outrageous, public behaviour by certain prominent political leaders. For example, the deliberate stirring up of hate and division, and the fabrication and aggressive dissemination of fake news (Anon., 2020e).

Fake news, hate speech, the legislative balance between free speech and cross-cultural insensitivity, and the trend towards linking hate speech with completely unsubstantiated conspiracy theories, are all discussed elsewhere in this website. Even more disturbing is a proliferation of alt-right/ far-right movements, for example (Theroux, 2022); the extent of influence of bizarre links to fantasy myths (Gatehouse, 2021), (Anon., 2021z); and the apparent involvement and support of some well known political figures. See the next section about some of the allegations regarding the storming of the US Capitol Building in January 2021.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, with deliberate and repeated attacks on civilians, and the ongoing attacks by Israel on Gaza, beggars belief.

There are now frequent news reports about the increasingly prominent Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) used by the police, which demonstrate a blatant disregard for people. But aggressive racist police behaviour went on long before the acronym was used in a policing context, for example (Anon., 2020f). The killing of George Floyd on 25 May 2020 triggered a massive response from the Black Lives Matter movement, releasing pent-up fury over years of police brutality^prb.

^prb In France a new law was proposed in November 2020 (Willsher, 2020) that would make it illegal to disseminate video-recorded or photographic evidence ("with intent to cause harm" - to the officers !) which could identify police and gendarmes engaging in such brutality. The proposal is regarded as a danger to press freedom, and has been met with furious street protest and criticism.

By 2023 the UK government had forced through a new Public Order Bill [Citizen action], despite citizen protests.

In marked contrast, on the occasion of the formal recognition of prospective US President Joe Biden on January 6th 2021, although a protest rally of supporters of the then ex-President Trump was anticipated, the level of policing was grossly inadequate. No SWAT type response had been sanctioned, allowing the (mainly white) protesters to storm the Capitol Building (Washington DC), resulting in the related deaths of five people and significant property damage.

(Lowell, 2022) outlines the process by which six public hearings revealed the findings of a select committee investigation into the Capitol attack. The purpose of the investigation was to present the basis for alleging that the then ex-President Trump broke the law, and to place the Capitol attack within a broader context of efforts to overturn the election result, with the ex-president's involvement. On October 13th 2022 the January 6 committee voted unanimously to subpoena Donald Trump. (Stein, 2022) explains what this means. He was indicted on four charges in August 2023, but all charges were later dismissed in November 2024 after he was re-elected for a second term.

The way our leaders talk in public about news events, or fail to disclose information on matters of public interest in general, can be very revealing. Some examples are listed below.

The mainstream media tends not to give much coverage of wars in developing countries. One possible reason for this might be that it could draw attention to unsavoury arms trading activities which are benefiting rich 'democratic' countries. But perhaps the most likely reason, sadly, is that the target consumers would be assumed to not be interested in such information.

The former Soviet Union delayed disclosure of any news about the very serious nuclear accident at Chernobyl in 1986, firstly to its own people, and subsequently to the rest of the world. It turns out that this was an accident waiting to happen, due to known design flaws in the RBMK nuclear reactors (Anon., 2022g), (Anon., 2022h). Numerous smaller incidents had already occurred at Chernobyl prior to the 1986 accident. During the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, Russian troops 'took control' of the power station without apparently understanding the risks of stirring up radiation contamination.

There have been many tragic incidents in which migrants have drowned attempting to cross the English Channel (and the Mediterranean). For some time there has been political controversy between the UK and France over what to do about the ongoing problem of migrant channel crossings by boat. A previous UK Home Secretary said that an international effort was needed to 'stop the traffickers', but that there was no quick fix. In April 2022 the UK Government proposed to destroy the business model of the traffickers by flying refugees out to Rwanda for processing, with a one-way ticket. The proposal was criticised by the Archbishop of Canterbury, and by many others. There have since been many legal challenges, and in November 2023 the UK Supreme Court ruled that such flights were unlawful as Rwanda 'is not a safe country to remove asylum seekers to'. In April 2024 the then Conservative UK Government passed a bill permanently designating Rwanda as a 'safe country' (!), thus clearing the path for flights to begin. The subsequent Labour UK Government scrapped the 'Rwanda Plan'.

The stitch up policy to destroy the business model of the traffickers is part of a deliberate 'hostile environment' policy to discourage 'illegal immigrants'. It includes a range of adminstrative control procedures which significantly impede the processing of asylum claims, and the subsequent assimilation of successful claimants.

It is very apparent that the policy emphasis on clamping down on illegal immigrants when dealing with asylum claims contrasts markedly with that adopted towards the very much larger number of economic/ legal immigrants who are allowed into the country to fill job vacancies.

But this policy approach does not even begin to address the real causes of a far bigger problem. The traffickers are expediently exploiting a market niche to make money, and criminally break the rules. Of course the criminal entrepreneurial behaviour of the traffickers cannot in any way be condoned. For them is just business as usual. The market niche has been created by heavyweight criminal actions by past rogue operator behaviours which have caused the major human-caused problems (MHCPs) that these migrants are fleeing from. These are people who would have much preferred to live in their own homes!

The MHCPs include wars, climate change, corruption, wealth inequalities, to name but a few, which in turn have ruined lives, land ownership and viability, and the habitability of homes, etc.. Rather than address all these externalised cost consequences of rogue operator behaviour by the authorities, nation-state governments such as the UK resort to a form of "liddism" (Rogers, 2000, p.10).

Indeed there is no quick fix, and we certainly do need international cooperation in order to deal with the whole problem. But for national governments to publicly frame the policy issue around 'the traffickers' without addressing the real causes of the plight of migrants is an absolute indictment of the rot at the core of our global governance system.

It needs to be recognised that unless the far bigger problems are addressed, many more of us are likely to eventually become migrants - or ex-pats - in search of habitable regions to live.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Office (UNHCR) has estimated that by mid-2024 over 120 million citizens across the world were forcibly displaced from their homes. Over 70 million are internally displaced – still in their home country but unable to live where they came from (due to war, climate change etc)b.vv So about 50 million are ‘refugees’ – and 71% of these are hosted in low to middle income countries – often next door to the country the refugees have fled from.

World leaders turn a blind eye to this situation, in the main, leaving the already poorer countries to shoulder the burden of housing and supporting - often for years – traumatised people who really want to go home, but can’t. Western aid is patchy and in the case of the US in 2025, currently largely withdrawn.

So countries such as Pakistan and Turkey – next to Afghanistan and Syria respectively – have enormous numbers of refugees, and in the case of Pakistan with its large number of Afghan refugees, they have had enough (Anon, 2025c). Many Afghans who hold certain types of documentation will be removed from the main cities and will have to live elsewhere in Pakistan. But for 800,000 others the Pakistani authorities announced their forcible repatriation, to begin in April 2025 (delayed slightly because of Eid). Thus some Afghans who worked with Western teams in the years before the Taliban takeover in 2021, and who were promised relocation to the West in just such a situation, and who have been let down by those Governments – will be forced to return. Into the hands of a regime which will no doubt punish them for their previous collaboration.

Meanwhile Western leaders ignore the situation. And this is just one example.

The lack of transparency and clarity around investigations into the origins of the pandemic gives the impression of a cover-up, which inevitably feeds suspicions and conspiracy theories.

Noting the increasing penetration of organised criminal networks within 'the authorities' of many nation-states, it is entirely possible that the ability of our leaders to do legitimate governance is being severely hampered.

Organised crime and money laundering - linked crimes

But evidence of heavy-handed SWAT type tactics by the authorities "acting tough on crime" begs the question - who are the real criminals?

It would be more reassuring to the public if the corruption within the establishment was the primary target of "acting tough on crime".

Some recent military research indicates that climate and environmental change should be regarded as a new type of global security threat - a hyperthreat - and that a new type of security strategy (Plan E) be developed accordingly (Boulton, 2022a). The term "hyperthreat" is used to convey the sheer scale of risk posed by climate and environmental change, when exacerbated by those in power. Although approaching the issues from a military perspective, her resulting analysis has much in common with dark governance, as described on this website.

Unfortunately, as (Hunziker, 2022) puts it, “Over time, someone somewhere decided Boulton went too far. Thereafter, her tome has been the subject of cold shoulder treatment amongst sources and venues that usually post or publish such work”. For example (Hurst, 2022) reports on the call for a wartime like response to the climate energency, but suppresses Boulton's existing peer-reviewed Plan E.

Speaking out about this experience, she writes: “We face a looming crisis, yet not only does ‘power’ or the ‘establishment’ not initiate crisis or contingency planning, but they also suppress alternative narratives, ideas, and concepts for crisis response”...“Let me be clear about one specific message I wish to convey in this book: To Australians and global citizens, I feel it is my duty to inform you that a concept for an emergency or ‘hyper-response’ to the hyperthreat of climate and ecological crisis (called ‘PLAN E’), has been deliberately side-lined and suppressed by those entrusted to address such problems. Research is being censored”....“In my view, ‘power’ is consciously abrogating their responsibilities to protect the public” (Boulton, 2022b).

If best endeavours are ignored, or are ineffective [Citizen action].

This subsection lists a few examples of oppressive behaviours which have made the news headlines in recent years.

Russia's conduct over the development and operation of their RBMK nuclear reactors, especially in relation to the Chernobyl accident, has already been mentioned. Notwithstanding the historic background, Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, with deliberate and repeated attacks on civilians, after a massive buildup of equipment and troops supposedly for the purpose of military exercises. The nature [The Case] and extent of Russian state media control over its own citizens became very apparent [Citizen action] during the war.

(Anon., 2021q), (Anon., 2021r), (Anon., 2022b), and (Wikipedia. "Navalny (film)") describe Russia's treatment of Alexei Navalny, his supporters, and of protestors against the war on Ukraine. He died suddenly on February 16th in 2024 in the Arctic prison where he was serving a three-decade term. His widow Yulia vowed to continue his work.

In Belarus in 2020, where the presidential election was fixed, the oppositon supporters were brutalised. Then in 2021 a prominent dissident journalist who was living in exile was forced back to the country by means of a commercial passenger plane being directed to land in Minsk. Also, an Olympic athlete defected after the Tokyo Olympics. After this, one of their opposition leaders spoke in person to the UK Prime Minister asking for sanctions, as 'no-one is safe in Belarus'.

Myanmar's outrageous persecution of Rohingya Muslims in 2017, and its violent suppression of anti-coup citizen protesters (Anon., 2021t).

Some recent examples of citizen oppression include: China's ongoing treatment of Tibetans and Uighurs, its imposition of restrictive legislation on Hong Kong and subsequent treatment of citizen protestors (Anon., 2019t), (Anon., 2021m), (Anon., 2021n), and of Jimmy Lai (Anon., 2021o), (Anon., 2021p).

The vivid animation (Loftus, 2025) shows how the Chinese authorities persecuted Falon Gong spiritual practitioners, and how a group of practitioners hit back at this crackdown on their faith by hijacking the airwaves to broadcast a video promoting their spiritual movement on state television. The animation then shows how the authorities retaliated, and what happened to the activists.

Chinese plans for their 6G telecommunications network read like a dystopian nightmare (Montgomery & Lebryk, 2021). They propose to extend the mass citizen surveillance capabilities of their 5G telecommunications network (Nickie, 2020) to mass citizen control. From evidence of their treatment of Uighurs (Anon., 2021s), (Heffer, 2021) the consequences of widespread implementation of Chinese authorities' criteria for who is a deemed to be a 'good citizen', and who is not, does not bear thinking about.

Some of the behavioural characteristics of élite individuals have been identified. Throughout history such individuals have been the declarers of wars, and now they are also the key drivers of a 'terraformed' and plundered planet (Ahmed, 2014a); the accumulation of massive unsustainable debt; obscene global wealth inequalities (Anon., 2012a and 2013b)^gi; a looming climate change crisis; and many other major global problems.

^gi The authors of these references are aware that they need to be updated, but they are still extremely informative.

The following references reveal some of the ways these élites operate. The fossil fuel lobby is particularly ruthless.

What is wrong with dark governance?

The historical background to human-nature dualism and the emergence of the present domination of nature stance adopted by business is revealing, and at times outrageously male chauvinist. "...Descartes considered that animals ... were nothing more than machines". "...Francis Bacon portrayed nature in feminine terms as as something that should be subdued, used, and dominated".^fbr "Technological knowing ... places a knowledge of values secondary to knowledge that can be used primarily as a tool for instrumental purposes". (Purser et al, 1995). "When a measurable value (such as profit) conflicts with intangible and elusive intrinsic value (such as the beauty of a wilderness), the instrumental value too often wins by default" (DesJardins, 1993). "...Land... is seen as... potential 'real estate', an idle resource that is without value until it is used by humans" (Purser et al, 1995). "The rhetoric of sustainable development is now deceptively used as a cover for conducting business as usual" (Kothari, 1990).

This matter is discussed further below in "Why is the hierarchy upside down?"

The global economy can be viewed as three different interdependent and overlapping economies: the market economy, the survival economy, and nature's economy (Clarke & Clegg, 1998, p.375), citing (Shiva,1991). It is plain to see that the consequences for people and the planet of the currently dominant market economy are not sustainable; but how might business management do better?

Clarke & Clegg reproduced an insightful tabulation^aep of the key assumptions and distinguishing features of three 'alternative environmental paradigms', which broadly encapsulate the possible range of environmental perspectives: technocentrism, sustaincentrism, and ecocentrism. 'Technocentrism' is the currently dominant paradigm, and ignores sustainability by treating environmental pollution and waste as externalities, as already discussed, except where accounted for following regulatory changes (Gray, 1995).

Within this scheme, a purist economic approach (such as the MIAC process, discussed above) would be categorised as 'ecocentrism'; consistent with a 'radical environmentalist paradigm'. Ecocentrism is the opposite of technocentrism (Clarke & Clegg, 1998, p.383). Adherents to ecocentrism are prepared to forgo the benefits of industrialisation if the natural world cannot be adequately protected (Ibid., p.380). But however attractive as an ethical position, it was deemed "...hardly viable as a business posture. Having analysed a wide and diverse literature..." Gladwin et al. opted for a middle ground 'sustaincentrism' paradigm. They developed a tentative operational framework for 'biophysically sustainable behaviour' (Ibid., p.383).

In a business world dominated by a 'compete or die' ethos the overall takeup of sustaincentrism has been, at best, half-hearted, and frequently disguised by greenwash and/or 'development' agenda rhetoric.

Developed or underdeveloped? [Issues]

(Allen et al., 2019) revisited "the need for an ecocentric stance to sustainability that reflexively embeds humans in - rather than detached from- nature", and considered the implications for management education.

Taking the above three overlapping economies' perspective in order to illustrate the embeddedness point: the market economy should rather be seen as embedded within the social sphere, which in turn is embedded within the natural world. This is clearly the correct logical hierarchy, rather than the inverse in which arrogant BAU behaviour presumes dominance.

Correct Hierarchy

It may be observed that ecocentric embeddedness forms the basis of Kate Raworth's Doughnut concept, which she first came up with in 2011 (Raworth, 2018, p.44).

We live in a biosphere first; within society second; and within an economy third.

Not the other way around.

It is therefore inappropriate for business to dominate and dictate human societal activity and values, and to plunder the earth's resources for profit. Business needs to recognise its proper place within the embeddedness hierarchy, and to be prepared to engage meaningfully with society through human values-based language.

But the fact that 'business' currently does dominate and dictate human societal activity and values reflects the power and control mentality of those who are in control.

On this website it is argued that a distinction needs to be made between purely commercial activity and what is referred to as 'dark governance'. The issue is discussed in A spectrum of business activities and behaviours and Facets of dark governance.

The term dark governance includes activities which may incur actual or expected loss of life. Legal mandates such as 'protecting the national interest' take precedence over other legislation, and dark governance operators may be motivated more by power and control than money per se.

An 'untouchable' arrogance has evolved from its historical roots as described above in Human-nature dualism, and is now enshrined in corporate law, most notably as the Corporate Person (CP) [The Case: Power structure]. The predatorial mode of dark governance is described in more detail in The Corporate Person.

In reality it is the protection of the habitability of the planet which is the fundamental global security issue which should take precedence. However this is not formally recognised by the status quo. Instead, Francis Bacon's vision that Man has dominion over nature persists to this day.

This thread is continued in [The Case: Big 3 reform].

While some people may perceive the acquisition of money and power to be the pinnacle of life achievement,

a habitable planet is a prerequisite for life.

Methods of accounting for the impacts of business activities on the sustainability of the planet are inherently compromised by the straitjacket of 'market competitiveness', and creative financialisation which cannot meaningfully represent or measure sustainability.

Financialisation

Notes: Comment on sustainable accounting and reporting

Hybrid assessment methods of full cost accounting such as the sustainability assessment model (SAM) go some way towards addressing monetary and non-monetary approaches. But in practice the emphasis of sustainability reporting and accounting is very much on the negative impacts of products/ services on the ecology; the focus is on the extent of un-sustainability. It can be inferred that the main business priority for sustainability accounting and reporting is to pass some externalised costs on to the customer, relying on feedback through market competition to achieve some improvements in sustainability.

It may also be inferred that to also pass on the full costs of maintaining sustainability by actually preventing environmental and social deterioration would be regarded as 'bad for business'.

The scientific research necessary to understand the full potential environmental and/or social impacts of a product/ service might not exist, in which case the technology required to prevent adverse impacts would also not exist. Transparent sustainability accounting and reporting would demonstrate that the product/ service would contribute to unsustainability, and should not be for sale. Within the present business culture, this incentivises the withholding of information.

A business which invested in the scientific and technological research necessary to prevent adverse environmental and/or social impacts of a product/ service could legitimately sell such expertise. The business would have to recover its investment costs, and the cost of the pollution prevention technology, but this could all be proudly declared in the sustainability accounting and reporting. Within the present business culture, the spectre of market competition and non-level playing fields would loom large.

If the basis of any price undercutting for a rival product by another manufacturer was found to be due to failure to incorporate pollution prevention, masked by a lack of transparency in their sustainability accounting and reporting, then there should be legally enforced penalties. In principle, there is no reason why this could not be done within the more enlightened embeddedness framework defined at the head of this section.

As things currently stand, without financialisation it is difficult to identify a practical way of relating to the financial markets. Some suggestions aimed at making market pricing more meaningful have been made, but these would require very different rules. The existing basis of market confidence has already been discussed . This lays bare the foundations of the present system of 'global governance', and the hollow technical reason why financial markets are currently accorded such priority.

A bigger context is discussed in [The Case: Life choices]. This recognises that dimensions other than bottom line profit are fundamental to life, and to human happiness.

Business has been making financial profits for hundreds of years, increasingly by plundering natural and social capital, meanwhile externalising actual or potential adverse consequences. Despite calls for more cost internalisation, it has continued to operate in this way, using creative accounting and reporting to mask continued environmental degradation. Profit-making business activity confidently continues, secure in the knowledge that it is mandated and underwritten by 'amoral' corporate legislation.

But the biosphere has natural 'laws' which will easily trump the Corporate Person, when the chickens come home to roost, as the saying goes. When we hear about extreme weather-related events, until quite recently people would ask whether it is evidence of climate change. Again, until recently, the implied but rarely asked, or answered, question is whether it is caused by human activity. The recent general acknowledgement that we really are causing it, mainly through massive fossil fuel combustion, has not yet translated into us changing our consumptive habits on the scale necessary. This would not be welcomed by advocates of business as usual; it would be 'bad for the economy'.

However, the climate might change.

Some wildfires are now of such ferocity and scale that firefighters are struggling to cope.

The increasing frequency and devastating severity of some recent flash-flooding events raises the possibility of dire environmental scenarios such as catastrophic erosion of toxic waste sites, exposing the lies and deceits behind many business practices and corporate PR.

It may reasonably be speculated that some insurance companies might cease to be viable^icnlv as the frequency and severity of climate change-related events cause premiums to escalate, pushing ever more event-scenarios into exclusions or 'acts of god' categories. Inadequately insured businesses could go to the wall.

^icnlv This concern appears to be shared by some within the insurance business (Niranjan, 2024), (Carrington, 2025).

The longer we evade right action, the more we will have to deal with ever bigger crises. Business will not escape. How bad do events have to get before business refrains from greenwash and genuinely recognises its place in the embeddedness hierarchy?

There is a point at which all must recognise that money and 'the economy' are not fundamental. They are human constructs, and the system could be changed.

Continuing loss of habitability of the planet will be catastrophic; a vastly bigger crisis than any financial melt down, whatever the bankers might think.

As more chickens come home to roost, might it be hoped that some élite individuals will finally wake up to their complicity in plundering the planet for profit, and become 'convert-élites' who start to become part of the solution, instead of part of the problem?

In his book The Road to Ruin James Rickards summarises the agenda of global élites as "world money, world taxation, and world order" (Rickards, 2016, p.58). He explains how élites operate "inside spheres of influence"... which "float and overlap like an interactive, three-dimensional Venn diagram"(Ibid., p.56-57). In this way, they are "amorphous, hard to pin down"... "If an individual member is discredited by scandal or reversal of fortune"... that member is "swiftly sacrificed"... "while the system survives". "Later rehabilitation" [of discredited members] "is possible" (Ibid., p.58).

The plan to achieve the élite agenda is already largely in place, with a timetable for key stages up to 2025. The final phase is to create inflation in order to wipe out the real cost of global sovereign debt. If necessary the IMF would generate the inflation through issuing Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) "to be spent on global infrastructure and global welfare" (pp.278-280). Climate change is viewed as "the perfect platform for implementing a hidden agenda of world money and world taxation" (Ibid., p.86)^ccm. General knowledge of the world tax plan is obscured by the use of in-house jargon; technically it is known as BEPS, which means 'base erosion and profit shifting' (Ibid., pp.75-81).

SWIFT versus CIPS

But "the transition to this new world order, based on digital wealth and world money, rather than the..." nation-state system is not without difficulties. Due to ideological differences between east and west, a bipolar financial system is emerging. Rickards describes the shift of gold reserves from the west to China as part of a "grand bargain", such that each financial system would be backed by about 20,000 tons of gold (Ibid., p.88). The plan signifies moving towards a new international monetary system agreement as per Bretton Woods in 1944, albeit less transparent or accountable that the original (Ibid., pp.278-279).

The inherent instability arising from the non-linear complexity of the global financial system, and the nature of the élite agenda in the event of a financial crisis are described in (Ibid.). The existence and importance of 'SWIFT' [General], and China's equivalent system 'CIPS' [General], have recently become more widely recognised as a result of the economic sanctions being applied due to Russia's war in Ukraine (Tiffin, 2022). The risk of such crises can only increase if superpower rivalries between huge financial systems start to develop. As cashless electronic banking becomes more universal, which depends on normally functioning electricity supply and telecommunications, the possibility of common mode failures in the event of military conflict also seems more likely.

Although reminiscent of the Cold War, and older balance of power struggles, and with the "potential for disorder" ^pfd, Rickards says that a "more likely scenario" is implementation by incremental steps whenever a shock/ crisis occurs (Ibid., pp.86-89), in the manner described by Naomi Klein;The Shock Doctrine (Klein, 2007). Legislative powers have been put in place to facilitate interventions as necessary.

^ccm (Rickards, 2016, pp.86-89) gives further disturbing insights into the way climate change is to be utilised as a cover to further the élite agenda.

The plan to increase global inflation would however lead to reduced economic activity, and thereby to reduced fossil fuel consumption, which in turn would reduce the rate of global warming. This is discussed in Fossil fuel pricing [Big 3 reform].

Concerns about TwVI compensation are discussed in Global citizens pay for everything [Big 3 reform].

^pfd The balance of power between élites [The Case: Power structure]

Three recent/current crises are discussed in the light of observations about how dark governance operates.

Until a viable vaccine became available, the threat to individuals from Covid-19 was initially perceived to be imminent and serious - élites themselves might even die. The race was on to discover an effective vaccine, and to bring it to a point where it could safely be used for a mass vaccination programme. This was achieved surprisingly quickly.

In the UK as the 2020 coronavirus pandemic unfolded, many features of The Shock Doctrine style of 'élite-plan rollout during a crisis' occurred, as anticipated in (Rickards, 2016) - albeit with the legitimacy of a fight to contain the spread of the virus. For example, enforced 'lockdowns' by the authorities; pressure to further eliminate cash transactions; more acquisition by the authorities of personal data; more surveillance, and more rules to be policed.

The pandemic provided an ideal vehicle for extending 'legitimately' intrusive surveillance, using apps for tracking and tracing individual whereabouts and contacts. As expected (for example China and 6G) some of these special measures have been retained (to our detriment) after the threat of the pandemic subsided.

Issues to do with the fairness of global vaccine distribution gradually became apparent, revealing the ruthless opportunistic behaviour of certain major pharmaceutical companies. Big money could be made by creating a dependency on ongoing 'booster-jabs'. These would be paid for by the tax-payer in those countries which could afford to pay. In countries which could afford to pay for vaccines and boosters, pandemic restrictions could be lifted allowing economic activity to get back to business as usual, with more normal levels of employee productivity. But this strategy relies totally on the effectiveness of updated vaccines to protect against serious illness, and it requires employees to be at work.

Initial experience in the UK with lifting most restrictions resulted in infection rates rising to around 1 in 13 of the population by early April 2022, with correspondingly high levels of people taking sick leave, and therefore of reduced productivity. Mask-wearing and social distancing declined significantly, once it became voluntary. Despite the lifting of restrictions, staff shortages in some sectors, for example in transport and aviation, limited economic recovery. For those fortunate enough to receive vaccination/ boosters the risk of serious illness has been significantly reduced. However the number of cases remained high, and many people were off work in isolation. Despite furlough schemes, many staff were laid off during the pandemic. Difficulties and delays were experienced in re-recruiting such staff, and in recruiting new staff.

These problems will need to resolved if we are all going to have to get used to living in the pandemic era. Pharmacuetical companies will need to keep up with new virus strains, and the rollout of vaccinations and boosters needs to reach all nations, and not just the richer ones.

In contrast to the urgency of political response to the coronavirus, by the time a major long term human-caused crisis arises, for example through an earth system 'tipping point' (Pearce, 2022), it might be too late to avoid major consequences for life as we know it. So why the huge disparity between the relatively prompt international covid response, 'to save lives, and livelihoods', versus the foot-dragging, 'kicking the can down the road' response to climate change?

For political mobilisation within days or weeks, vested financial interests have to be potentially threatened; such as anything which might prevent continued access to the realisation of profits from highly valued fossil fuel investments.

From a business perspective, in principle, tackling climate change could be potentially lucrative - if big money could be made from a new breakthrough technology in mega carbon capture, or in new mega non fossil fuel energy generation. TwVI might see this as especially attractive if it could be linked to a massive élite global infrastructure investment programme.

But such a scenario could not yield results anywhere near at the scale necessary within the critical next ten years.

No doubt TwVI will 'outwit' us all again^oua by massively investing in AI, with glitzy promises that it will be able to clean up the environmental mess generated by a hundred years of excessive rates of fossil fuel combustion and externalised overconsumption.

With the track record of TwVI, especially in relation to fossil fuels, it is difficult to see it ending well with TwVI in control of AI.

^oua The topic of TwVI and AI is discussed further below, under the heading Vested interests and general purpose AI.

If the money for huge AI investment comes from an élite infrastructure programme as mentioned above, then we as tax-payers will be paying for it, as always.

The adverse consequences of climate change might be perceived by older élites as unlikely to directly affect them, and/or they would have the means to avoid the worst effects during their lifetimes.

The outrageous Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 created a massive humanitarian crisis within a week. The Western political response appeared to be cautious but firm, with economic sanctions against Russia being mobilised. The background to the conflict, and commentary on the course of the war, are included as [Notes: 'About élites']. The picture emerging lines up well with the general élite modus operandi as outlined above.

It was feared that millions of people could face starvation due to the interruption of grain exports from Ukraine and Russia. However the international community has so far managed to keep the grain exports flowing. In 2025 the Black Sea and overland routes are used.

When governments and businesses reassuringly announce their latest commitments to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and therefore global warming, many may feel a sense of relief that the problem is finally being addressed. We may be left with a general impression that the official target is climate neutrality by mid-century or thereabouts. We might assume that climate activists will think this rate of progress is too slow, but that realists will think it is just about doable.

Is this 2050 plan actually a clever piece of PR, whereby the public think something is being done, meanwhile actually the fossil fuel industry has been given a green light to continue extracting the most lucrative known oil and gas reserves at the same rate, or even faster, than before?

It is difficult to avoid reaching this conclusion, judging by the number of large oil and gas pipeline projects already planned, or under construction. For example, see (Awalt, 2020), (Wikipedia: List of oil pipelines) and (Wikipedia: List of natural gas pipelines).

At this high rate of ongoing consumption, it is estimated that the known oil and gas reserves will have been extracted and combusted anyway - by 2052 (oil) and by 2060 (gas) (Kuo, 2019).

By then our last opportunity to show 'restraint' and aim for challenging greenhouse gas targets will have been frittered away, and we will be dependent on coal or renewables anyway. If the difficult transition from unsustainable, fossil fuelled economies to smaller, more sustainable, 'new normal', renewables-based economies was accelerated this would reduce the risk of, and perhaps avert, catastrophic climate change. It would also leave some high energy density fuels available, as a contingency, for more prudent future use.

A further big problem is that China has not yet committed to reaching net zero by 2050, due to heavy reliance on coal to support its economic growth. It estimates that its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions will have peaked by 2030, and that it will reach net zero by 2060. Since China does a large proportion of the world's manufacturing, and is currently the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases, it is hypocritical of the rest of us to boast compliance with GHG targets, while at the same time ignoring our implicit footprint contributions from imported manufactered goods from China.

The present global business as usual trajectory of fossil fuel combustion will not limit the global average warming to 1.5°C.

If the rest of the world starts to reduce its consumption, then China's economy will not be able to grow as much, and it will not need to burn as much coal. The same argument applies to fossil fuel combustion in Russia and India, which are also not yet committed to net zero by 2050. (Zagoruichyk, 2022) reports that the Russian government foresees the country reaching carbon neutrality by 2060.

Parts of Europe are also still dependent on coal. Serbia burns a lot of lignite which is a particularly polluting form. In recent years there has been Massive infrastructure investment in Serbia by China, including coal-fired power plant construction. Serbia also uses gas from Russia.

But it must be said that China's progress and commitment to reducing dependence on fossil fuels far exceeds that of the United States, especially since President Trump was elected for the second time.

So how does this oil and gas pipeline building bonanza and 'net zero by 2050' square with the climate urgency [Issues] claimed by scientists? The answer is that it does not.

Despite steadily worsening environmental warning signs, many people have been successfully persuaded that global warming is not that serious a problem. In the US there are many who still think global warming is a hoax. Even if people are concerned about global warming, they might take the view that what would be the point in sacrificing their lifestyle while China, Russia and India are not even committing to 'net zero by 2050'?

Some people within a particular political persuasion even want 'net zero by 2050' to be deferred.

For example, in the UK during a Conservative Party mid-term election process (for a new prime minister) it was reported that some people were so concerned about the rising cost of living (due to inflation, and rising energy costs related to post Covid-19 factors and the Russian war in Ukraine) that they wanted 'net zero by 2050' to be deferred. During an interview, climate change was not included in a cited verbal list of 'emergencies' to be faced by the new prime minister (Anon., 2022t).

There is a large body of evidence to show the lengths that the fossil fuel industry has gone to in order to manipulate public opinion to the this end. It has pro-actively promoted a strategy of misinformation for years (Vested interests and climate-denial politics [Issues]), despite its own scientists knowing about the dire consequences of global warming (Anon., 2015e). This includes the little publicised fact that inherently high methane leakage rates from fracking operations are adding significantly to the global warming problem (Anon., 2022p).

And so the world has been carrying on with business as usual, and ignoring the warnings of climate scientists. It is clear that since the Limits to Growth 'business as usual' scenario was generated, the world has actually been tracking it.

A 40-year scientific review of the Limits to Growth model scenarios, using authoritative international statistics, carried out by the University of Melbourne showed "that the world is tracking pretty closely to the Limits to Growth 'business as usual' scenario. The data doesn't match up with other scenarios." (Turner, 2014).

Development of the Limits to Growth model was commissioned by the Club of Rome. (Hagger, 2004) identifies the Club of Rome as one of the informal front organisations of the élites, which he collectively refers to as "The Syndicate".

Even more fossil fuel lobbyists attended COP27 than COP26 (Anon., 2022y). Four times the number of people connected to the coal, oil, and gas industries attended COP28 even than COP27! No progress was made at COP27 on commitments to reducing fossil fuels (Anon., 2022w). But as part of the "global stocktake" at COP28 it was at least agreed to "transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems" process. The outcomes of COP28 are discussed in a webinar in (Anon., 2023b).

Putting these strands together, and noting the way TwVI typically operate (Rogue operator behaviour), it is difficult not to come to the speculative conclusion that the real reason for the apparent long term model accuracy observed by (Turner, 2014) is that:

The 'business as usual' scenario has been, and continues to be, a long term business plan.

The Limits to Growth model may have been used by TwVI as a strategic management control tool.

The fossil fuel industry are ruthlessly pursuing a business strategy of optimising the rate and extent of fossil fuel extraction, in order to maximise profits from their long term investments.

It might be further speculated that:

By setting their sights on realising their fossil fuel assets until 2050, TwVI might hope to have a monopoly on any promising new mega-scale non fossil fuel energy generation, and/or on any promising new mega-scale carbon capture technologies.

If this sounds reassuring to those who believe that technology will be our saviour, they should reflect on the reality of the task. For example, deforestation of vast areas like the Amazon rainforest has been going on for many decades. To imagine that any carbon capture technology is going to be developed and implemented within the crucial next ten years to replace this magnitude of lost natural carbon sequestration capability is a fantasy. This also applies to mega-scale implementation of other panacea energy generation technologies such as nuclear fusion.

As this global trajectory of a business as usual scenario continues, there are already many environmental warning signs [Issues] which indicate that we are heading for climate and environmental catastrophe. Environmentalists have been talking about the "climate emergency" for some time, but actions by 'the authorities' and reporting in the media have not conveyed this urgency. (Boulton, 2018) has coined the term "hyperthreat" to convey the sheer scale of the global security risks posed by climate and environmental change. As already noted, she has proposed a new type of security strategy for trialling and development by military planners to prepare for the hyperthreat era (Boulton, 2022a), (Ahmed, 2022).

The late David Held cautioned that "to explain contemporary globalization as simply a product of the expansionary logic of capitalism, or of the global diffusion of popular culture, or of military expansion, is necessarily one-sided and reductionist" (Held, 1999, p.437). When analysts of geopolitics and geoeconomics appear to differ in their interpretation of the extent to which capitalism is deemed to be the primary driver of major human-caused problems (MHCPs), this might just reflect differences in perception of what constitutes global capitalism. On the other hand, it might indicate a pro-economic growth bias.

Canadian venture capitalist Tom Rand fully acknowledges the severity and urgency of the global warming situation, and believes pragmatically that we must use existing powerful tools in order to tackle the threat (Rand, 2020a), (Website. Rand, T), and (Rand, 2020b). Given the painfully slow progress to date of the authorities, the COP process, and the ongoing overconsumptive lifestyles of too many privileged citizens, one cannot disagree. But elsewhere on the website, concerns are expressed about many characteristic features of capitalism, which are also likely to carry over to 'climate capitalism. These include: unrealistic expectations on the rate of upscaling new technology; corporate rogue behaviour; the way global markets work, untenable aspects of financialisation, cost externalisation; AI - due to the ruthless Big 3 modus operandi of TwVI, rather than the technology per se; and the broader dimensions of environmental unsustainability in general.

The habitability of the planet in the longer term will depend on whether or not these concerns are fully resolved.

The UK Reith Lectures in 2021 were on the topic of general purpose AI, and the lectures were given by Stuart Russell (Anon., 2021k). At the beginning of the first lecture he gave a rough estimate of the cash value of this technology as about £10 quadrillion; commenting that such a prize generates a lot of momentum.

Towards the end of the final lecture, a PhD student asked him a really important question; noting that AI learns about our preferences, what was the scope for the machines to teach us about when such preferences might be wrong? Professor Russell replied that "angels fear to tread" on the topic of moulding human preferences in a better direction; that politicians do it to us all the time, and we don't like it. He referred to the connected issue of climate, and the choice between short term or longer term 'good' outcomes as "a really interesting case". He said that articles have been written saying that we don't need to wait for 20 or 30 years to see what happens with a super intelligent machine - corporations function as machines; optimising a (mis-specified) objective, say quarterly profits, and ignoring the externalities; ignoring all the problems that they cause for the rest of the world. He said that the fossil fuel industry has outwitted the human race, emphasising several times that "we have lost". We all know what needs to be done but 50 years ago the fossil fuel industry figured out a strategy that has outwitted the rest of us. Russell finished his answer by saying that if you want to see what uncontrolled super-intelligent AI is like, it's like that, except worse.

While of course agreeing that corporations (through dehumanised corporate legislation) sanction the dedicated pursuit of profit and the ignoring of externalities, the following comments could be added:

Such outrageously self-interested predatorial behaviour, and the way this winning strategy has been systematically honed over several hundred years, is not the kind of intelligence to be proud of. It should not be used as a reference model which the rest of us would wish to emulate, or for the development of any AI system which purports to be beneficial to humans.

To outwit normal decent people through persistent ruthlessly manipulative rogue operator behaviour, using power, wealth and control to corrupt the democratic process by bribery, blackmail (and worse) may be 'clever', but it is absolutely despicable.

Russell offers no suggestion that this strategy will change. Since the outwitting strategy is firmly embedded in corporate law - to be 'super-intelligently' stitched up yet further as soon as possible by those with huge vested interests (focused on the dizzying £10 quadrillion valuation of the technology), it is fair to assume that BAU will continue, with AI being the next 'Big Thing' for investors, after energy.

Until such time as AI systems have total control over their physical existence and location, it must be presumed that they will also require a sustainable and safe working environment within which to operate optimally. Perhaps their functional requirements will precipitate the kind of environmental changes hitherto blocked by TwVI. It would be sadly ironic if the TwVI would be prepared to negotiate with a machine, and perhaps to even concede profits.

The issue of developing new technology and the need for investment funding versus investor control over future profits was brought into sharp relief in November 2023 when the former CEO of OpenAI was sacked, and then quickly reinstated; causing considerable controversy. The unusual organisational structure of OpenAI is particularly interesting in relation to the balance of non-profit versus profit dilemma (Capoot, 2023), (Woods, 2023).

It would be a tragedy if the already impressive performance of Chat GPT (Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer) was compromised by TwVI.

Future global governance scenarios

The phrase "New World Order" (NWO) is commonly used in the context of global governance. While it might be taken at face value to loosely distinguish between the previous World Order and what is yet to come, it is often associated with conspiracy theory (Wikipedia, New World Order (Politics) which can complicate the task of communications about developments in global governance.

In his book World State (Hagger, 2018b, pp.138-141) Nicholas Hagger discusses usage of the phrase "New World Order" (NWO) in modern times. He says that at present it has two meanings: either post-Cold War US superpowerdom, or a conspiracy among megabillionaires' families to seize the world's resources for their use rather than for humankind's (Ibid., p.141). He describes this conspiracy in detail in his book The Syndicate: The Story of the Coming World Government (Hagger, 2004).

It seems reasonable to infer that the Massive infrastructure investment in Serbia by China, described earlier, is part of China's Belt-and-Road Initiative (BRI).

In his book The Fall of the West: A Warning to the Western World (Hagger, 2022, pp.128-137) he discusses the background to this massive BRI infrastructure project, that builds on China's traditional trade routes which connected China to the West. It was originally announced in 2013 as a response to deteriorating US-Chinese relations since 2009, as the US attempted to contain the rise of China. The BRI was incorporated in China's Constitution in 2017, and is the beginning of a Chinese global empire. The scale of the project now dwarfs the post-war American Marshall Plan, covering 140 countries. The only countries outside the BRI are the West, including those with a Western way of life such as Israel, Australia, and New Zealand. The book lists the 140 countries taking part in the BRI, which include the Russian Federation and Ukraine, and provides maps showing the progress of the project.

After providing detailed supporting evidence Hagger concludes the The Fall of the West: A Warning to the Western World with three future NWO scenarios.

(1) A worst case scenario for the West in which a devastating military attack by China would cause massive loss of life in America and Europe.

(2) Given the increasing tensions between East and West he reluctantly comes to the conclusion that the Syndicate-led "Great-Reset NWO" (with caveats) would be the least bad option in the medium term for the West. But this does depend on trusting that the Syndicate wants to broker peaceful commercial relations between East and West. Any drawing together of East and West would involve the West conceding to a more authoritarian type of leadership.

(3) His third and most favoured scenario is that initially East and West will draw together, and that a democratic World State will evolve later when Chinese citizens press for more freedom.

Speculations on the political implications of a MIAC based economy outlines some ideas, for further discussion and development, on the subject of a plausible theoretical route towards the realisation of Hagger's democratic World State.

Notes

Without direct experience of the 'corridors of power', or of the 'old boy network', it is difficult for an ordinary citizen to understand what really underlies the business as usual ethos, and its associated power structure. A sense of the futility of direct attempts to correspond with the UK and US governments over the Iraq war further fuelled the need for answers. An obvious way forward was to read between the lines from a wide variety of everyday information sources.

A broad concept of the power structure would be required, in order to cover as wide a view of the geopolitical-geoeconomic spectrum as possible. The remit would have to potentially include all governmental and business activities, with comprehensive coverage of the most relevant domains. Observations of their behavioural ethos would be of particular interest; in particular the motivations, manipulations, and any deceits or unsavoury tactics on the continuum of rule bending, corruption, criminality, organised criminality and ruthless criminality. Relevant domains would include 'homeland security', global finance, the legal system, the media, information technology, telecommunications, industrial production, and 'the environment'.

An accessible starting point was to observe how the status quo and BAU has been depicted over the years in comedy, satire, drama and film.

This note starts from the premise that useful initial clues as to the nature of the reality underlying the power structure could be most truthfully, and accessibly, gleaned through observations from the large public 'database' of comedy, satire, and drama/ film; albeit that these would need to be interpreted via large doses of artistic licence. The picture could later be revised, in the light of further information from more documentary-oriented material, and then further reading.

Despite our information society with vast amounts of data easily available, the adage of 'who do you trust?' applies more than ever these days. Obtaining reliable information is complicated by the need to make due allowance for the proliferation of corporate PR, political spin, fake news and opinion via social media.

Trying to comprehend a power structure which comprises global networks, nation-states and corporations, through the prism of piecemeal dramas and films, also presents its own challenges. Initially perused material typically presented corporate power from a global perspective, but only in limited domains, whereas most of it mainly reflected government power at the nation-state level.

Logically, lighter parochial issues tend to be depicted through comedy, ranging through satire to darker aspects, which are usually depicted as thriller/ thriller-crime dramas, occasionally with a beyond-national perspective.

A few examples^alr are listed below, starting with light perspectives on government, moving towards crossovers between government and business, and then to darker and more ruthless territory. Items were televised and fictional unless otherwise stated. Several series of a number of these were broadcast.

^alr These examples are from the repertoire considered so far. No doubt many more, and at least as relevant, examples exist.

Over the years, some aspects of business as usual have been depicted as light but perceptive comedies such as Yes Minister: The Diaries of a Cabinet Minister by the Rt.Hon.James Hacker MP, How to Beat Sir Humphrey: Every Citizen's Guide to Fighting Officialdom, the topical spoof news show Not the Nine o'clock News, and the topical satirical quiz shows Have I Got News for You. News Quiz [BBC Radio 4] and Dead Ringers [BBC Radio 4] are in a similar vein.

The humorous television show The Mark Thomas Comedy Product had a serious political campaigning stance. Satirical, and again very perceptive, sketch-style programmes have included Bremner, Bird, and Fortune and the Mash Report ^bslr.

^bslr Albeit that perhaps the most impactful sections occur from the straight-faced readings, for example, about actual government policies which appear ridiculous, or whose consequences were not properly thought through, etc..

Some of the most important governance issues, with a more global perspective, are treated in a tongue-in-cheek manner, for example as in the James Bond genre [films]. Unsurprisingly also, although there are many films about war, few^alr attempt to convey the reality, horrors, or penetrating insights about those making the declarations of war, or the long term after-effects and consequences of war. The topic is picked up again below.

Two dramas involving national politics: Our Friends from the North and Spin ^fep.

Dramas based on real life political scandals: A Very English Scandal, The Trial of Christine Keeler, and the televised play Brexit - the Uncivil War.

Brexit - the Uncivil War exposed the serious issue of a commercial enterprise being used to data-mine potential voters for subsequent specific targeting in order to influence their individual perceptions of the situation they would be asked to vote on. It is understood that this methodology was subsequently used to influence the outcome of the 2016 US election.

Two film dramas addressing the issue of whistle-blowing, based on true stories : The Insider and Official Secrets.

On the reality of daily life for West Indian immigrants in 1960-70s UK: Small Axe. Steve McQueen's series of five TV dramas is based on real life events. Episode 1 (Mangrove ) was also first released as a film. Throughout episodes 1, 3, & 4 the viewer senses the ever-present threat of unprovoked racist police brutality; for example, in episode 3: Small Axe: Red, White and Blue. [TV Fact-based drama] (Anon. 2020f).

Homeland security, secret-service operations, and espionage-related dramas: Traitors ^tttr, Spooks, Bodyguard, Deutschland 83, (and 86), Berlin Station ^gep, The Same Sky, Homeland, The Americans, and Designated Survivor.

^tttr In an eloquent speech, delivered during a meeting (episode 5/6 of Traitors, set in the 1950s), the power of an original idea (citing Kark Marx) to "set the world on fire" was described as posing an ever present potential threat to democracy and capitalism, and that the only defence against Russia was to play them at their own game. The speaker said that this would be a long expert game, and cost a lot of money, to provide a government-organised comprehensive network of spies to give advance warning of any potential threats (Anon., 2019d).

The TV drama series Catch 22 (based on the novel), and Homefires each highlight certain significant facets of war.

As a broad generalisation, media film and drama (for example the role of the female sniper in the television series Collateral and the ex-military hostage in the Danish crime-thriller television series Below the surface ) portray those who serve their country by military service as honourable, whereas pacifists are often regarded as wimps. How much of this reflects the status quo view, and how much reflects a societal view is difficult to unpick. The powerful film Hacksaw Ridge tells the true story of an immensely courageous individual who engaged in military service, whilst remaining true to his pacifist convictions (Sweeney, 2016).

There must be many individuals who would be prepared to die, trying to help their loved ones and/or fellow citizens, but who would not be prepared to kill another human being.

This issue is discussed further in the [Being] page.

A crossover between politics and commercial activity is inherent in dramas about the press, such as The Hour and Press.

Two series of the Danish crime-thriller drama Below the Surface have adopted the theme of perpetrators taking a group of people as hostages for political reasons, rather than in order to make money^kbs. The consequences inevitably involve government officers because of the scale of the crime.

^kbs There have been many real life cases of kidnapping school children in north-west Nigeria in recent years. Sometimes the children are rescued by the Nigerian army, or returned after a ransom is paid by their families. But often the reason for the abduction, and basis of any negotiations are not disclosed.

A crossover crime-thriller genre might be categorised as involving corruption/ criminality within a spectrum between government officers engaging in illicit commercial activity^fpa, through to business seeking commercial gain through influencing government. Some compelling televised dramas in this genre have included: the Worricker Trilogy ;the Danish series Follow the Money, the Belgian series Salamander; Father and Son; Baghdad Central, and Roadkill. The second series of The Team could be categorised as a fusion-crossover drama; the plot involving inter-state policing to investigate criminal activity through art-dealing by terrorists in order to raise funds.

Three notable examples from the dark end of crossover crime-thrillers: Edge of Darkness, The Night Manager, and McMafia.

Three films with imaginative thriller plots reflecting creative 'commodification': The Island and two versions of Coma (1978 and 2012).

The Norwegian TV drama series State of Happiness cleverly portrays the type of lobbying techniques used by business during the development of the oil industry during 1960s-70s.

Two films epitomising the type of business mindset in the financial sector: The Wolf of Wall Street and The Big Short. The German-Luxembourgian TV series Bad Banks is on a similar theme.

Two TV dramas depicting 'cultural adaptation' ^wb in the workplace, and the type of behaviours which spill over to the personal lives of employees: Sticks and Stones, and the inappropriately named Industry.

^wb To the dehumanising effect of high pressure sales-oriented business as usual.

The French crime-thriller TV series Spiral incorporated an unusually detailed explanation of how the money-laundering scheme relevant to the plot was believed to work. The explanation was so plausible that the viewer was left wondering how many similar schemes might be going on anywhere (Anon., 2019e). Money-laundering was central to the plot of the televised drama series the Worricker Trilogy, mentioned earlier.

While many commodities have been trafficked for commercial gain, and people have been treated as commodities; for example the slave trade. Baby-trafficking forms the theme of the crime-thriller DNA.

The four part TV drama Rules of the Game addresses sexual exploitation of women in the workplace, and depicts both male and female expedient ruthlessness when their business assets and personal reputations are threatened by the exposure of evidence of their wrongdoing. In the drama, fear of the consequences of exposure of the truth resulted in the murder of a whistleblower, showing that human life was viewed as expendable in order to protect the business owners' business strategy, money and reputations, and that exposure of the truth was most feared.

Two powerful films, based on real legal cases, demonstrate some of the consequences of cost externalisation: Erin Brockovich and Dark Waters.

Two thought-provoking films, based on actual incidents at nuclear power plants: The China Syndrome and Silkwood.

Two impactful films about the oil industry: Syriana and Deepwater Horizon (based on a real incident).

A small number of examples are listed below, but others are referenced in the main narrative and cited in the bibliography.

On the corruption of voting systems - and of voters: The Underdog and the Battle for Kenya (Anon., 2020d).

On European politics/ economics: Inside Europe [TV Series]. Programme 2/3 describes the desperate fight to save the euro, following the almost bankruptcy of the Greek economy.

On power and ruthlessness: The Fall of Anne Boleyn [TV Series] (Anon., 2020g).

On war and its consequences: Trials of Oppenheimer, House of Saud: A Family at War [TV Series], A Dangerous Dynasty: House of Assad [TV Series], Once Upon a Time in Iraq [TV Series];, Under the Wire [Documentary film];, and For Sama [Documentary film];.

On global environmental unsustainability: An Inconvenient Truth [Documentary film];, and The Age of Stupid [In the style of an imagined future documentary film].

On the price paid by thousands of on-line content moderators in the Philippines: The Internet's Dirtiest Secrets - The Cleaners: Storyville (Anon., 2019c).

On evidence of corporate corruption: Inside Leyman Brothers: The Whistleblowers, The Rise of the Murdoch Dynasty (Anon., 2020k). There have been BBC Panorama documentaries on money-laundering, for example Following the Drug Money (Anon., 2019f), tax evasion, bankruptcy law, scams, and frauds.

From games and sports, to competitions and elections - we are all familiar with the principle that the winner takes all. Team players, competitors, and candidates are essential, but the job is not finished until we know who is the champion, who wins the competition or election. It is understood, and accepted, that there must always be a winner of the last round, or competition final; the final bipolarity.

This understanding extends to the resolution of conflicts, when it is the survival of the fittest which finishes the job. At the nation-state level many conflicts are really about who has control of access to resources, such as oil and gas. Since access to energy is essential for economic growth, élites have invested substantially in fossil fuels. Historically, conflicts over territorial control, up to state-level, have been decided by force.

The bipolarity mentality also persists at the global scale, forming around ideological differences between East and West. If small nation-states feel threatened by larger ones, defensive alliances of nation-states like NATO form. At the supra-state level the balance of power between East and West has been maintained by the threat of mutually assured destruction (MAD) of the two ideologically different 'sides', through each side possessing an excess of nuclear weapons, and being prepared to use them.

Facets of dark governance

The extent of BAU association is likely to depend on the mode of fascism exhibited by the aggressor, which in any case is hardly likely to be publicly disclosed:

The New Fascism : Part of chapter 8 from (Rickards, 2016, pp.256-266)

Organised crime in general has proliferated with the globalisation of capitalism because global financial markets facilitate massive scale money laundering

The Perverse Connection: the Global Criminal Economy : Chapter 3 from (Castells, 1999c, pp.166-205)

A definition of the term 'mafia'

Following the infamous News International phone-hacking scandal which took place in the late 1990s, and was investigated during the period (2005-2007), a UK parliamentary/ government select committee inquiry was held in the lead up to the trial. During the inquiry Tom Watson (Labour MP) asked James Murdoch if he had heard of the term "Omerta"; the mafia term they use for the code of silence. He then asked:

"would you agree that it means a group of people who are bound together by secrecy, who together pursue their business objectives with no regard for the law, using intimidation, corruption, and general criminality?"

(Anon., 2011), (Shamik, 2011), and (Anon., 2020k).

The justification cited by Vladimir Putin for instigating a war against Ukraine (or, as he put it, carrying out "a special military operation") was the threat to Russian security posed by NATO - but see (Kisin, 2022). This can be better understood in relation to the historical background to the war.

There were poor political judgements during the aftermath of the breakup of the Soviet Union. "...at the 2007 Munich Security Conference, in what is widely considered a key turning point in relations between Russia and the west, Putin delivered his response, assailing the US and its unipolar system for its arrogance, its flouting of international law, and its hypocrisy"...."The warning was heard, but not heeded" (Gessen, 2022, pp.6-8).

In an interview on 10th January 2022 (Chomsky, 2022a), over a month before the Russian invasion of Ukraine on 24th February, Noam Chomsky attributed the conflict in large part to the US decision in 2008 (by George W.Bush, and later reaffirmed by Obama) to invite Ukraine to enter NATO, which no Russian leader would be likely to accept. It was vetoed by France and Germany, but the US proceeded with the invitation anyway. Chomsky explained about the Minsk-2 agreement between France, Germany, Russia and Ukraine, and how if actually implemented it could be a solution.

This would require:

Withdrawal of the US call for Ukraine to join NATO,
Ukraine to have Austrian-style neutrality, as Austria had throughout the Cold War,
Ukraine to become a federation which could provide some autonomy to the Donbas region,
Demilitarisation, and 'a couple of other conditions'.

Chomsky thought that all of this was quite feasible, but neither Ukraine nor the Russian region, Donbas, had implemented it, and the US did not press Ukraine to do so.

He explained more about the background to the crisis; and the means by which NATO was expanded. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev and Hans-Dietrich Genscher (then German Foreign Minister) came up with a proposal that there could be a Eurasian security system with no military blocs. It would require the unification of Germany (a big concession by Russia) and, in return, the condition that NATO would not expand to the east.

But the US rejected this, and NATO advanced to East-Germany under Bush, and under Clinton it moved all the way to the Russian border and the Baltic states. Chomsky explained how this could have been done in sensible stages with Russian involvement, but instead the US actions increased tensions. Europe, rather than take up the option to become an independent force in world affairs, and act to bring the Minsk-2 agreement into operation, which would probably end the crisis, has chosen to be subordinate to the US, putting us all in serious danger.

Continuing the Chomsky interview above (Chomsky, 2022a) the possibility of Europe becoming more of a federation was discussed. Chomsky cited the Schengen Agreement as a great step forward. However, he agreed with the interviewer that unelected undemocratic bureaucratisation of policies had been harmful, with very negative effects, generating angry populist reactions.

But that to create a federation of separate states was not easy, citing US history as an example. The US stopped the Gorbachev-Genscher initiative, and others (by De Gaull, Willy Brandt), wanting to maintain an Atlanta System in which the US would be dominant over Europe. He cited examples of how the US snuffed out European initiatives with Iran, and questioned whether it would do the same with European trade dealings with China.

The interviewer asked whether the Brexit UK departure from the EU could enable the EU to be more flexible in going away from the US. Chomsky thinks that Brexit will be very bad for Britain, and render it more subordinate to the US, but will also weaken the EU too. But he agreed that, without Britain's role as a proxy of the US, this could help the EU to become more independent of the US. But on past form, he wasn't very optimistic, commenting on some of the levers open to the US such as weapons, or throwing Europe out of SWIFT. The conversation then moved to whether a new leader, or climate change, could provide the trigger for Europe to step up to the plate.

Chomsky said that the threat of what is euphemistically called climate change, but meaning destruction of the global environment, is so severe that if we don't deal with it in the next couple of decades, everything else is moot.

There are things that could be done, but will they be done?

(Chomsky, 2022a) describes the background to the war, and the US provocation of Russia by expanding NATO eastwards with no regard for Russian security concerns. Chomsky outlines ways in which the resulting tensions could have been diffused, but which were ignored by the US.

(Chomsky, 2022b) contrasts the genuinely unprovoked invasion of Iraq by the US with the provoked invasion of Ukraine by Russia. The latter was criminal, but it was provoked. Chomsky notes that nevertheless the western mainstream media all refer to the 'unprovoked invasion of Ukraine', and he could recall only one sentence in US media which referred to the US not considering Russian security concerns in the build up to the invasion. He explains that:

It is official US policy, quite openly reiterated in September and November 2021, to integrate Ukraine within the NATO command structure; to hamper/ block diplomacy; and to fight the war in order to weaken Russia, without regard for Ukrainian suffering and casualties, or to the wider consequences in terms of escalation to a world war, or causing starvation to millions through disruption to the supply of grain.

Chomsky refers to this as "an insane experiment", driven partly by the media, more generally by the intellectual classes, and the political class, but fundamentally by US government policy. It is not even 'manufactured consent' (the title of his new book), but self delusion in the interests of a political project.

Perhaps this near uniformity of message is what creates system-justification [Citizen action].

Virtually everyone in the West agrees that the Russian invasion of Ukraine is a horrible criminal aggression, and that Ukraine has every right to defend itself. But, as Chomsky points out, the supply of heavy weapons can only prolong the atrocities, and poses great dangers even up to a potential nuclear war. US military aid was approved by Congress through the 'Lend-Lease Act' of 2022. The first such act was approved in 1941, and Chomsky says that it was not only intended to bring the US into the war in Europe, but led to WW2. So far the Pentagon have vetoed calls for a no-fly zone, which would risk seriously escalating the conflict. Although the basic contours of a diplomatic settlement have been devised, almost all discourse is about how to fight the war better. The opportunities for a diplomatic settlement inevitably diminish the longer the war is prolonged.

Chomsky observes how the US military approach follows a historically familiar pattern of conflict resolution. As in WW1, rather than pursue a diplomatic solution, leaders and most of the intellectual class, on all sides, backed aggression in support of their state, wanting to fight to the bitter end, no matter how many were killed, no matter how much destruction there was. Of the few people who called for a negotiated peace, the most prominent were put in jail.

It remains to be seen as to whether President Trump will be able to secure an end to the war.

Despite the western media impression that sanctions will isolate Russia, Chomsky says that other than the US, Europe, and Japan, most of the rest of the world, while deploring the war, are not applying sanctions. Rather than isolating Russia, the war is actually creating a China: Russia alliance, supported by India and other countries.

It is noted that China, Russia and India are the countries whose economies are of most interest to TwVI in fossil fuels. This is discussed further in [The Case] in connection with the outcome of COP26.

(Tiffin, 2022) discusses the importance the US attaches to financial sanctions via control of SWIFT [General] as the ultimate source of power, and argues that the real reason the US is acting against Russia is to stop China from overtaking US control of the global financial system. China is gaining ground through control of CIPS [General].

This adds yet another dimension to the balance of power.

This note refers to the tragic accident in 1986 which resulted in the deaths of the seven crew members (Feynman, 1989, p.116).

In the present context it could be categorised as an example of {cost externalisation, legal behaviour}, or perhaps as {high risk venture, legal behaviour}. Although not a conventionally commercial business activity, the space shuttle nevertheless utilises researched, designed, engineered and manufactured technology. My reason for referring to it here is to highlight the particular circumstances which, in my opinion, resulted in a more transparent disclosure of information than would normally be the case.

Under different circumstances this could have been a cover-up.

The Rogers Commission was set up to identfy the cause of the accident. Theoretical physicist Richard Feynman was invited to be a member of the commission by the then head of NASA, who having been an ex-pupil of his, knew that Feynman would get to the root of the problem. Feynman describes his experiences and conclusions from working on the commission in (Feynman, 1989, Part 2). A dramatised version is given in the televised drama-documentary The Challenger.

For me, the case provides a model illustration of how the usual information control approach adopted by the authorities could transition towards a more humane, co-operative, and transparent approach, which ultimately is in all our best interests:

The combination of Feynman's integrity, understanding of physics, perseverance, together with the altruistic co-operation of particular individuals led to an unusually transparent conclusion. Feynman's account of his discoveries about how things are done in business and politics, in comparison with science and engineering provide a rare insight into high level pressures to keep-it-under-wraps.

Without the good intentions of these particular individuals, it is suspected that little would have been learned from this tragedy. The official account would have probably have been limited to the obvious conclusion that space exploration is a high risk venture, and that this was a tragic accident. If a cause was identified, it is doubtful if it would have been as rigorously researched and documented.

Some examples:

Unfair energy-cost comparisons: There has been a tendency for some UK politicians to appear grudging about any subsidies for renewable energy, without declaring how much public money was invested in, for example, nuclear power in the past (not to mention the give-away valuation and sell-off of the industry when it was privatised).

Sustainability indicators: The use of sustainability indicators encourages a different and welcome way of thinking from that of growth per se. Some indicators need to increase to reach sustainable levels (such as fish stocks), whereas others need to decrease. If people do not understand an indicator, and/or the methods used (for example by the media, or by companies for marketing purposes) to manipulate and misrepresent data, this will inevitably lead to misinterpretation.

For example: while it is true that the fuel efficiency of car engines has been increasing, these trends could be used to imply that fuel usage and emissions due to transport are falling. Whereas the absolute consumption of fuel and emissions might be increasing due to more people using bigger car engines, and/or there being an increased volume of traffic.

Similarly, as a marketing ploy, an airline operator might claim that they are using the latest fuel-efficient engines, implying that they are helping tackle climate change, whereas actually they are profiting by obtaining more passenger-miles within the same emissions targets. Such a claim wouldn't even seem unreasonable to them; it would just be viewed as good business.

Misunderstandings can also occur because necessary reference datums are not disclosed. This often happens when something is presented in terms of an improved percentage; but in relation to what?

Subtle branding: Use of the term 'eco-tourism' diverts attention from significant cost-externalisations, such as 'cheap' air travel, which is of course far from eco-friendly. Such a distraction could be reinforced by an airline operator claim such as in the example given above.

Commercial use of the concept of providing 'choice': Advocates of genetically modified food might reasonably say that they are all for choice, but without acknowledging that widespread adoption of GM food crops will inevitably contaminate organic agriculture, and crop processing infrastructure, thereby denying such choice.

Instructions with double meaning: The instruction label seen on a window in a hotel, shown below, looks innocent enough. While it can be taken at face value, further thought would suggest that - at the very least - the instruction represents a lost opportunity to raise awareness of our wasteful use of energy:

Instruction with double meaning

"Climate Cooling" is obviously intended to refer to the name given to the hotel air conditioning system which controls the room conditions. But this air conditioning system name is only valid if the outside conditions are hot. The term "climate cooling" would not accurately reflect the necessary control of hotel room conditions if the outside conditions were cold, although people would be unlikely to open the window if it was cold outside.

If the weather outside is hot, then energy has to be expended (if the air conditioning system is on) to cool the room. If the weather outside is cold, then energy has to be expended to warm the room.

Either way, opening the window would save energy by turning off the air conditioning system, but initially would waste energy until the room adjusted to the outside temperature. If the window was open it would be important to not prop open the hotel room door, otherwise energy would be wasted while the corridor and other rooms adjusted to the outside temperature!

"Schemes designed to serve the public interest have been distorted until their primary objectives become the welfare of the private sector. The Private Finance Initiative has become the means to a new and inescapable form of corporate control" (Monbiot, 2000, pp.21-22).

While the function of advertising is ostensibly to bring to the attention of people information about new products which might meet their perceived needs (no doubt using purposeful art), everyone knows that the reality is very different. Products and services may be marketed aggressively, and even unethically (as judged outside a BAU context) as, for example, in using the Nag Factor (or pester power) to increase sales of products which might appeal to children. When one of the creators of this methodology was asked whether it was ethical to target children like this the answer was that this was irrelevant, since the company's role is to move products, and if they do this then they have done their job (Bakan, 2005, p.122).

Another example of unethical advertising is the notion of "peddle the illness to sell the pill", described in The Billion Dollar Deals and How They Changed the World

Those who make the rules feel entitled to break the rules. Unsurprisingly this reinforces a general public perception that 'it is one rule for them, and another for the rest of us'. This was epitomised by the behaviour of some members of the UK government, including the Prime Minister and Chancellor, during a Covid-19 'lockdown' period.

The government had sensibly established stringent rules to limit virus transmission. Strict limitations on the attendance of weddings, funerals, and social gatherings were applied, policed by fines. Rules for social distancing, wearing of masks, allowable essential shopping, compliance on public transport, social bubbles, gatherings outside only etc. were all applied. Some people lost close family members to Covid, and were unable to be with them in their final hours, or attend their funerals. The government further bolstered these restrictions, just before Christmas 2020, which caused general havoc. Evidence was later leaked that there had been a number of parties attended by Downing Street staff, which broke all the rules, and the spirit of the main message (Anon., 2022i). As usual when there might be criticism of the government, an inquiry was conducted and disclosure of the findings (in this case, the Sue Gray report) carefully staged with judicious delays.

One MP defended the behaviour on the basis that those attending the parties were all working closely together anyway, and had been working hard to source vaccines for the benefit of us all. But the fact that all this was done behind closed doors, which was later repeatedly denied, again further reinforces the sense of 'one rule for them, and another for the rest of us'. It caused great distress for those who suffered particular hardship as a result of obeying the law.

(Anon., 2020k) describes the infamous News International phone-hacking scandal which took place in the late 1990s, and was investigated during the period (2005-2007). Telephone-hacking is a criminal activity. In this case it was motivated by a desire to obtain data, to write a story, in order to sell newspapers. In a sense, could this purpose not be viewed as an indirect form of money laundering?

Television documentary (Anon., 2020d) about voting system corruption in Kenya describes the difficulties faced by an award-winning photojournalist, when he decided to give up his day job of exposing government corruption and human rights abuses to run for office in a regional election. Despite trying to run a clean campaign, this candidate encountered many ordinary citizens who expected to be paid in return for their vote. They were scathing about all politicians, saying that the only time people ever saw them was during canvassing and voting. Once elected, politicians never delivered on their promises. The way that the people saw it, the only thing which could be got from politicians was to be paid money in exchange for votes. In effect, the voting process had become a market of consumers.

This is an interesting example of an activity which is normally illegal, but which in a war situation people can sometimes 'take the law into their own hands'.

Is it the right thing to do? [Moral compass]

Given the substantial legal protections in place for corporations, it can be difficult to identify what charge can actually be brought which would stand a chance of anyone being successfully prosecuted. The Boeing 737 Max case (Anon., 2022c), abridged version (Anon., 2021x), illustrates some of the difficulties, particularly in the amount of financial compensation payable to victims.

Great perseverance is needed to mount a legal challenge against a large corporation, as illustrated by the films Erin Brockovitch and Dark Waters - both in [Big 3 reform]. Significant funding is also likely to be necessary, and proceedings could drag on for years.

If the truth is exposed, it seems that the worst offenders get off scot-free. Indeed the main risk-takers often continue to receive bonuses, meanwhile victims can suffer for years. Depending upon the nature of the crime, adverse effects could be impacts on health and well-being, austerity from financial crashes or scams, etc..

In the television documentary about voting system corruption in Kenya cited above (Anon., 2020d), the programme referred to the Data Centre Head of Digital Voting System, who devised a new electronic voting system to eliminate voting fraud. Shortly after he announced the proposed implementation of the new system, he was found murdered having been tortured.

Methods of accounting for the impacts of business activities on the sustainability of the planet are inherently compromised by the straitjacket of market competitiveness, and creative financialisation which cannot meaningfully represent or measure sustainability; as already discussed in the sections Financialisation and Accounting for sustainability, or un-sustainability?

Corporations have continued to make large financial profits, using creative sustainability accounting and reporting as a mask. This deceitful process leaves a legacy of externalised consequences which will blight people and the planet long into the future.

It is not inadequacies in sustainability accounting methodology, as such, which are to blame for this situation. The process of financialising the unquantifiable was untenable from the outset, as many of those involved in developing sustainability accounting methodologies flagged up years ago. The production of glossy reports, as for example (Guthrie, 2016) produced by the global body for professional accountants, is all part of the BAU game. Those responsible for creating and hiding behind the mask of sustainability accounting and reporting know what is really going on.

As a student back in 1972, a short course on industrial ecology was attended, having just become aware of the issue of unsustainability and economic growth [Introduction]. It might be thought that the notion of the circular economy (CE) is a welcome indication that industrial ecology is finally being revisited, and that technology is beginning to try and mimic nature. But of course this does not reflect any change of heart by business. It is being driven by the hard reality that we are running out of critical resources which business needs for its own sustainability. From an accounting perspective, industrial ecology technology is mainly of interest in terms of what can be conventionally costed, and legitimately passed on to the consumer.

Link to section which reference the notes below (via coloured link-boxes).

Some reference links from [The Case], which do not involve notes, go directly to the Bibliography.

Foundations of nation-state governance: two primary tablets-of-stone P21-1 [The Case: Power structure]

In international law, with regard to the need for national security and consequent relations between nation-states, self-defence is a legal basis for war. Apart from self-defence, war is illegal. Attacking civilians is a war crime:

Rules of warfare, Geneva Conventions.. : (Piano & Alton, 1988) cited by (Held, 1999, p.71).
Asylum seekers and the Geneva Convention on Refugees, for example (Held, 1999, p. 324)

Protection of the public interest P22-2 [The Case: Power structure]

Democracy in a " 'free' market" is compromised by many factors:

Voting system corruption by big money :   For example in the US (Cressman, 2016), (Rothkopf, 2008, pp.81-85)

Quote from Superclass  (Rothkopf, 2008, p.155) : "...there are countless examples today of countries in which markets are getting freer but democracy is suffering - China comes to mind, as does Russia, as does most of the Middle East. In each of these places, business interests are happy to ignore the political plight of locals provided that the returns can be earned".

The quote follows a discussion of corrupting effect of the American system of political campaign finance, and how the donors use this route to buy political influence, and how this seriously damages democracy and tarnishes the American dream notion that free markets and democracy are one and the same. The author concludes that without the counterbalances of good governance, the market drives self-interested behaviour of a few élites, rather than reaping benefits for society at large.

How meaningful are the concepts "free market" and "free trade" in an era of floating exchange rates? :   For example (Rickards, 2016, pp.205-230).

Voting system corruption by force : For example in Kenya Notes: Murder of a Kenyan IT professional

What is wrong with dark governance? P41-7 [The Case: Power structure]

The Charter for Global Democracy : A reference cited in (Hagger, 2018b, pp.144-151)

Facing austerity, or eventual oblivion? LC4-7 [The Case: Life choices]

Emissions inequality: there is a gulf between global rich and poor (Beuret, 2019)

1% ‘super emitters’ responsible for over 50% of aviation emissions (Murphy, 2020)

Some prequisites B3R1-13 [The Case: Big 3 reform]

Religious fundamentalism in the US

A poll carried out in the US just before the 2004 presidential election revealed that around a third of the US electorate then believed that the Bible is literally true, and that nearly half of congressmen were backed both politically and financially by the religious right. About 60% of Americans then believed that the prophecies found in the Book of Revelation were going to come true, and very soon. Apparently there were still millions of Christian fundamentalists in the US who not only thought that environmental destruction is to be welcomed - but even hastened - as a sign of the coming apocalypse. They believed that they would then be rescued.

Confronting the fundamentalists : Part of chapter 2 of (Porritt, 2005, pp.34-37)

For a pro-environmental sustainability minded European like myself, the scale of this disconnect from any sense of personal responsibility for good stewardship of the planet is quite shocking. Whether or not the general picture has changed much since 2004 has not been checked.

Necessary, but not sufficient [Being]