WAY, WAY, WAY OFF TOPIC: thoughts on the return of commercial sail vessels

In recent years there has been a strong interest in a return to using sail-driven vessels for cargo - largely in the interests of reduced environmental impact. Probably one of the most spectacular of those currently under construction is the "Ceiba" - website here (they have quite interesting videos) - and there are a few in operation elsewhere (see here - I'll refer back to one of these shortly). 

This is intended to be a for-profit commercial venture, which such projects have to be if they are going to be a viable option for reducing the impact of commercial mechanically-driven cargo vessels, many of which have appalling fuel characteristics when they are at sea (they change fuel grade when close to land), quite apart from the inherent impact of using fuel rather than wind. 

That is a noble and actually widely desired goal - even mechanically-driven vessels have been looking at using parasails and vertical turbines to gain some advantage from the wind. Traditional rigging clutters decks and makes modern containerised cargo handling impossible.

They've also been looking at air injection to break down boundary layers, which, based on my experience racing small sail dinghies (which used venturi bailers to remove water - which also sicked air if left open when the bilge was dry) as a kid, I KNOW works. I'll come back to this again shortly. 

To simplify considerably, some of the main reasons sail-driven vessels lost out to mechanically-driven vessels was a combination of: 

• greater surety of travel times - mechanically-driven enable schedules to be made and more-or-less kept to; 
• faster travel - cargo ships now travel at up to 30 knots and don't have to worry about the doldrums when crossing the equator; and 
• the lack of rigging enabled the use of shipping containers, which cuts down time in ports and thus shipping charges, as well as also reducing the need for, and thus cost of, skilled and unskilled labour to load and unload.
  

Now, the sail cargo projects that are getting most attention are those using traditional approaches, but at least one (refer to the second link above) is using modern materials (aluminium, which has an extremely energy-intensive manufacture) and containerisation. These do have advantages over timber in terms of strength, but their mining and manufacture causes damage and GHG emissions that are contributing to the climate crisis and environmental damage. 

There are, however, some lessons that can be learned from modern shipping practices, and I would suggest they are the following. 

Firstly, build ships to use containers - perhaps to "10' container", or cube. I've put a cross section below showing how this could be done, but it may need stronger construction techniques than traditional timber - e.g., epoxy reinforced timber, perhaps, or a modest amount of metal work, as is being done with "traditional" construction. 

A double skinned construction could be achieved in a number of ways. As the inner liner would only need to deal with the pressure of a leak, and not the impacts of going over waves (although that would convey a pressure surge), perhaps a plywood material would suffice - but having a cavity that a tank could be put into to use water ballast would add modern sailing knowledge into the mix, just as does using containers, and things like air injection under the hull to break down the boundary layer.

Is it traditional? No. 

Does it allow better use of the advantages of traditional techniques? yes. 

The second suggestion that would enable better use of sail power is cleaner rigging - something which allows space for handling containers, and possibly increased safety by not needing people to aloft as often, something which may incorporate the means to handle 10 t containers, like . . . 

We could also put solar panels on the yard arms to, amongst other things, drive electric bow thrusters or short term electric propulsion for entering / leaving ports etc.

Just a few thoughts aimed at trying to combine the best of traditional with the best of modern . . . 

(And in terms of usage, I'd suggest a vessel like this may be good for archipelagos, much as small planes can be used flexibly. Also, I used to use my blog here for such ideas, but haven't used it for so long I se little point in trying to resurrect it for this.)

Some (mostly) human rights links [Note: Content Warning - reader discretion is advised!] and thoughts - Saturday 29th January, 2022

Some human rights (including significant, relevant links in other fields - such as geopolitics, democracy, or authoritarianism) links: 

• a comment that Russia's statements about Ukraine have not shown how military action would comply with international law (I have a few thoughts here, and there is a good overview in the media here). Also, the UK has accused Russia of wanting to install a puppet regime, and, in a significant indicator of expectations of violence, the US and UK have ordered families of diplomats to leave Ukraine, Australia has called for its citizens to leave, NATO (including the USA) has reinforced forces in eastern Europe, and the USA is threatening to use the Magnitsky Act (which has a history of being effective) against Putin - but the situation is different to when Russia invaded in 2014, and an invasion is less likely to be successful (there are also reports the massed troops have not been organised into combat formations). Furthermore, as Russia points out responses to date have ignored its main concerns, a reminder that "Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter prohibits aggressive war. This renders illegal any aggressive war on the part of Russia. Moreover, article 51 gives all states the right to self-defence on behalf of one. That is, this right authorizes “collective self-defence” by the international community of states against aggressive war"; 
• a call to rethink nuclear weapons strategies (e.g., to a "deterrence only" approach);
  
• a useful reminder that nations are complex and play a wide range of roles (i.e., they're generally neither all good nor all bad) with Russia playing an intermediary role between Iran (which is facing internal unrest over the prospect of talks) and the USA;  
• Ethiopia will lift the state of emergency that was imposed in response to the uprising in Tigray;
  
• the largest incursion to date by mainland China's airforce into Taiwanese airspace;
  
• Chile has shown enlightened implementation of gender equality in its Cabinet appointments; 
• suppression of criticism in Kyrgyzstan and continuing murders of journalists in Mexico; 
• many Australians do not know of our inglorious connections to the Holocaust; 
  
• as Australia's corruption ratings plummet, "Malawi’s president dissolves cabinet over corruption allegations";
• fossil fuel companies have withdrawn from Burma over the junta's human rights record;
  
• an oil spill in Peru blamed on the tsunami caused by a recent Tongan eruption is being cleaned up, but has caused significant environmental damage, and sanctions may be imposed; 
• "long-duration energy storage systems are writing coal’s death certificate"; - but "changes in mindset and boosts in funding are key to achieving a swift transition to a climate-smart economy" (there are no technical blocks); 
• a family of Indian refugees have died of exposure on the US-Canadian border, leading to calls for reform;  
• dozens of refugees are missing, feared drowned, after a human smuggling boat capsized on the way from Cuba to the USA;
• criticism of Europe's border agency at a conference meant to resolve that agency's human rights abuses; 
• Nigerian police continue to commit abuses; 
• a Victoria Police search without suspicion operation has been criticised for missing the fact that poverty is the real problem (I continue to hold that the oath police swear is the cause of a lot of these elitist-favouring problems - that, and the low-level cumulative psychological damage of policing);
  
• the national neolibs will boycott one of the more concerning (Chinese owned, in this instance) social media platforms after the PM's account was hacked (no, apparently it was SOLD - how the **** can that be???!!!) and turned into a CCP propaganda outlet for some time; 
• the national neolib nitwits' proposed enable-religious-discrimination bill "will ‘clog’ [the] court system and deny access to justice";
• the national neolib nitwits are still denying an Indigenous voice through their lip service attempt at formalising an Indigenous Voice to the Parliament;
  
• on reconciliation, "to tell the truth, our flawed emotional logic must be laid bare";  
• a correction that the national neolib nitwits haven't "freed" the Indigenous flag - that "transfer" of copyright was more "a violent appropriation of what Aboriginal people deem to be a symbol of reverence";
  
• after a recent notorious visa case involving a sports "celebrity", a court has found that the visa case a popular refugee family being held in extended (and expensive) detention lacked fairness; 
• the organisers of a sporting event in Australia have been called out for their human rights hypocrisy after T shirts asking where a Chinese female sports player (who criticised a sexual abuser and then disappeared after allegedly recanting) was - an apt question, given the CCP's history and style of suppressing dissent (the organisers recanted, but remain contemptible, IMO - and there are serious questions about the police reportedly involved in this: why are they acting as agents of foreign repression?); 
• the violent bigots who have power in Afghanistan are probably succeeding in their quest for political legitimacy by being included in an international conference to solve the humanitarian crisis that the bigots have created - although the intent is that aid be linked to respect for human rights;
• as Burkina Faso undergoes a military coup, a reflection on why - beyond the internal politics and structure - the UN Security Council "stumbles in responding to coups", and Ghana has "implored" ECOWAS and West African governments to "proactively tackle the underlying causes of military takeovers in the sub-region to avert their increasing effect on security and socio-economic development"; 
• a more easily stored and transported vaccine against COVID - which will be of immense benefit to places like Africa; 
• a sports club has received a token fine for its fans' homophobic abuse, another club's homophobic fans could face hate crimes charges, a hate crimes unit is investigating online homophobic abuse of a player, and a sports organisation has been criticised for setting an effectively transphobic policy; 
• a West Asian airline is allegedly trying to silence its pilots raising safety concerns;  
• a warning to learn from mistakes around other social media when considering using the "meta" verse; 
• how a powerful and honest speech led to Germany facing its history under hitler;
  
• "teaching tolerance in schools cannot avoid controversy";
  
• children of smokers are worse off than children of non-smokers; 
  
• a thoughtful reflection on whether an Australian national identity is outdated; 
• based on what has happened recently, a call for our society to base work on a four day working week.
  

The USA's ludicrous Electoral College system

I think most, if not all, people have made decisions that they either subsequently regret or acknowledge were mistakes. These range from minor (e.g., eating a food type that disagrees with one's digestive system) through moderate (a.g., a job that winds up being moderately frustrating) to major (e.g., moving to another nation that doesn't suit one). 

Sometimes decisions are out of one's hands - for instance, in my teens when my family moved to Queensland (which led to a mixture of good, bad, and indifferent outcomes for me, but suited my adoptive sister well). 

In most cases, when one realises a mistake, one generally remedies that - and thus I moved back to Victoria in my 20s, although my attempt to find something outside of engineering as a career wasn't successful (I trained in several massage techniques, but don't have a business orientation which meant trying to work as a "sole trader" didn't work for me).

And that brings us to the Unexceptional States of America, and it's ludicrous Electoral College "system". 

In the 1700s, that "system" - and voting on a Tuesday - may have made some sense at that time, although it seems at least several of the USA's "founders" regretted the Electoral College decision within a few years or decades, but it has since then become nothing but an absurdity that is an affront to democracy (along with their version of the filibuster) and shows a mental ineptitude that so undermines the USA's claim to exceptionality that said claim disappears out of sight on a landslide of the world's laughter into a ravine of ridicule. 

In the Aussie vernacular, the USA's Electoral College "system" fails the pub test. Others might term it comedic gold - or comedic cannon fodder. 

It's that bad, these days.

And I've just found someone wrote a book about this: James Michener, who wrote "Presidential Lottery: The Reckless Gamble in Our Electoral System" in 1969 based on his experiences in 1968 as an elector.

In this book, Michener describes the potential and actual problems of this system, including a staggering lack of awareness on the part of US voters of how the Electoral College system functions - which is actually sadly paralleled by too many Australians' ignorance of the role that the imposed agent of the British Monarchy, the Governor-General has - including that laws are NOT laws until the Governor-General signs them . . . and we haven't changed that for reasons including laziness, mental ineptitude, appallingly elitist options for change, and the aforementioned failure to understand the power that the Governor-General and thus the Queen of the United Kingdom has. (Re-labelling the Queen of the United Kingdom as Queen of Australia is a meaningless farce.)

Going back to Michener's book, he comments on the lack of knowledge and confusion:

"Any system which induces such misconception is dangerous"

In his book Michener examines a range of options for changing or eradicating the Electoral College, and the advantages and disadvantages of each. 

The alternatives include direct election - which, in my opinion, is the most democratic and common sense option, although it could be improved by also adopting preferential voting - and an independent electoral  commission. It also does have potential flaws, as Michener discusses, such as populism. These - along with other potential problems discussed in the book - have more recently been laid bare nearly half a century later by the USA's potus45 (and our weaknesses, such as relying on political conventions, need for human rights protections, etc have been laid bare by our Prime Marketer Scott). 

In my opinion, we in Australia need better education on "civics" and human rights protection to deal with such problems (and better mainstream media wouldn't hurt) - and we need to accept and deal with our historical bigotry. One of the people working on our Constitution  (Andrew Inglis Clarke) was well aware of the USA's Bill of Rights and wanted to include something like that, but everyone else wanted to be able to enshrine the bigotry known as the "White Australia" policy and actually contrived to leave him behind when they went on a boat to finalise everything (from Geoffrey Robertson's book "Bad People – and How to Be Rid of Them: A Plan B for Human Rights").

Interestingly, Clarke was one half of the Hare-Clark electoral system, which took a few attempts to be successfully introduced. 

And that raises the last point I wanted to cover about the USA's Electoral College: why hasn't it changed? 

Clarke needed several attempts and then was able to introduce a better way of voting; on the other hand, he was unable to get a Bill of Rights for Australia against the combined bigotry of others. 

The USA has made changes to its various voting systems, and changes to the Electoral College have been proposed (Michener, incidentally, favours improvements over options such as direct election in his book - which suffers from lack of awareness of the effects of discrimination), but no substantive changes to the Electoral College have been made - despite the clear need for improvement. 

Why? 

Some of it may be political circumstances, or the need for "pragmatic" compromises, and some of it may be a misbegotten "pride" in being different, but I suspect it goes further than that: I suspect too many people can see opportunities for them to have political influence, and they're unwilling to risk having to be part of what they possibly consider the "pack of mediocrity" - or, as I would term, the voter, or the everyday or non-elite person.

And changing the USA's system is up to the USA's everyday, non-elite voter - they have to advocate for change, and then vote on that change. 

And until they do, they are contributing to the dis-enfranchisement of themselves and, even more so, others votes that should be equal with theirs - not more or less weighty, equal.

Cross posting: Post No. 2,143 - Fixing avoidable problems after the fact

This originally appeared on my main blog at https://gnwmythr.blogspot.com/2022/01/post-no-2143-fixing-avoidable-problems.html.

*** 

There is a lot of valid criticism of nations trying to do things like "sportswashing" their human rights abuses (distracting the world from the fact they are committing human rights abuses - egregiously so, in some cases - with international sports events), and corporations investing in philanthropic works but getting their money in ways that are damaging, unethical, or unsound. 

The abusive nations I won't cover in this post - they, and those idiots who are duped by their distractions, are repugnant, and morally indefensible. 

However, I do want to briefly consider corporate ethics. 

If we go back a few decades, we had things like widespread advertising of smoking, widespread drinking to excess, highly questionable ethics ("gifts" and other more severe forms of corruption) and misogynistic and other discriminatory abuses that are only now coming to light through the actions of the Me Too, BLM, and other movements. 

Many companies are not stupid: they know bad publicity harms them (reduced income, possibly legal costs, etc), so they started seeking, some years ago, to avoid doing the wrongdoing that exposed them to the bad publicity that hurt their profits. Some time after that they realised that "being proactively good" (i.e., inclusive, corporate social responsibility, etc) actually had direct benefits - it boosted their profits, and thus they went from doing unbridled harm through damage minimisation to anti-wrongdoing. 

This has been aided by investors/shareholders and customers setting expectations that go beyond price and immediate quality, and there are companies providing independent assessments of how ethical companies, or who are specialising in ethical superannuation, banking, investment, etc. 

In some cases, however, no matter what the company does, they cannot make up for the harm they do - and the environmental damage caused by fossil fuel companies fits into that category, in my opinion. 

(Incidentally, I am satisfied that the company I work for is doing good - sustainable water & wastewater [which is where I work], solar power, community skills building, CSR, etc.) 

Some companies are somewhere between the two - it is a grey area whether the good they are doing offsets the harm, and that is also affected by whether they are genuine in their caring (or perhaps how genuine they are). 

All of this also applies to individuals: 

• instead of just ensuring you are recycling, perhaps you should reduce using plastic in the first place, and buy goods made from recycled plastic when no plastic-free options are available (my partner is excellent at this); 
• instead of focusing on buying green power, build houses that aren't effectively tents (which is how Australian houses have been described); and 
• instead of focusing on charitable giving, get involved in preventing or fixing the problems that create poverty and other needs for assistance - for instance, be anti-racist.
  

Above all else, think deeply:

are you minimising or fixing problems that you should not be creating in the first place?

I have a few thoughts here that are worth considering, also. 

Notice: possibly ads coming

I have got to the stage where it is worth my while considering advertisements on this blog. I'd rather not, but this gives me a greater possibility of being able to focus on my blogging. This is a bit of prior notice so you can think about this.

Some thoughts on the Russia-Ukraine crisis

When hitler seized power in Germany in the 1930s, one of the praises he received was along the lines of "he got the trains to run on time" - or that might have been mussolini. I'm not interested enough to invest the effort in checking a detail of either despot's life. (Nnngh - I can't leave it unchecked: it was mussolini - see here. hitler built - or expanded, rather - the autobahn.)

The point is that they initially seemed to make the mundane aspects of life better. 

However, if that is all an autocrat / despot does, then over time people will begin to wonder if the loss of personal freedom is worth the price. Thus, despots eventually have to seek grander and grander "distractions": in mussolini's case, the establishment of an Italian empire that was portrayed as a "re-establishment" of the centuries past Roman empire; with hitler, it was about German nationalism / patriotism and undoing the perceived harshness of the Versailles Treaty - a harshness perceived by not only Germans, but a harshness predicated on the harshness of the treaty to end the Franco-Prussian  war of 1870-71, and the savagery of World War (part) One. 

(Side note: I've just watched a video which refers to the Russo-Japanese  war of 1905 as "World War Zero". The history periodical my adoptive parents bought me when I was young showed some disturbing photos from that war and the (Second) Boer  War, and it was then that I started realising the savagery that some humans were capable of. Later, a documentary on the Indian  Rebellion left me with nightmares, as it further emphasised that deplorable capability.) 

If despots cannot find an external conflict (a "diversionary  war") to focus on, as Argentina did by invading what they term the Malvinas (see here, here, here, and here), leading to the United Kingdom's ultimately successful Falklands  War, as the USSR did - to some extent (it was also an ideologically driven contest / conflict) - with the Cold War, and King Henry V of England did in 1415 with an attempted invasion of France, then they will have to implement increased repression. 

As a variation on that, Xi Jinping of the CCP has directed what is described as a campaign against corruption (also suspected of being partly a cover for purges which have created a succession crisis and left Xi vulnerable if he leaves power, but corruption has also been genuinely a problem in need of constructive attention), although tensions with the USA (particularly over the South China Seas - and China's claims there pre-date the communists rise to power) help.

Tensions with the USA also help the despot kim ⅓ in North Korea - and the bombastic displays of missile launches are probably as much for domestic consumption as external.

kim ⅓ faces succession problems as well, problems that also plagued stalin, amin, hussein, mugabe, and other despots.

Russian President Putin appears to have also been considering, if not succession, at least what could happen after he leaves power - for instance, laws have been passed granting him life-long absolution (my term).

Putin has also been very focused on his image - largely successfully, within Russia. Elections within Russia are often criticised for not being fair (with considerable validity, in my opinion - see here, for instance), but they are of some significance, and Putin has to put effort into winning them (perhaps one way or another?). And recent polls show a decline in Putin's approval ratings. 

Given that, is the current escalation of the war between Russia and Ukraine in eastern  Ukraine at least partly a political ploy to distract internal (Russian) dissatisfaction? 

Maybe. 

If true, does this reduce the risk of war? No. 

In any case, enforcing one's will over others in any way is wrong - doing so through violence, at the expense of others, is UTTERLY unacceptable. Putin's threat - no matter why it is there - exists, and must be dealt with . . . effectively.

It is worth noting that: 

• Ukraine's borders have changed over time, with Crimea only having been incorporated in 1954 (and grabbed back, possibly in part at least, as a diversionary war); 
• the USSR had a tradition, under stalin, of creating borders that cross ethnic boundaries - thus the legacy of fighting over Nagorno-Karabakh between Armenia and Azerbaijan; 
• ethnically, eastern Ukraine is more Russian than Ukrainian; 
• most Ukrainians seem to want democracy - and western Ukrainians seem to want closer ties to "the West"; 
• all modern nation-states want to preserve their territorial integrity as a fundamental part of their existence;
• would eastern Ukraine want to secede from Ukraine to join Russia if a fair and fee referendum was held? Had there been discrimination against Russians in eastern Ukraine before this conflict? (A referendum now would be meaningless - there has been too much blood spilt);
  
• Russia appears have interfered in Ukraine's internal politics; 
• there are persistent  concerns that NATO's expansion eastwards is contrary to an agreement made at the the USSR was dissolved, although NATO says that agreement was limited to the context of the former soviet satellite state East Germany.
  

This is unquestionably a complex situation. For more on this, I suggest the following videos from the Caspian Report: 

• "Legitimacy of Ukraine's new government" (2014); 
• "Ukraine's crisis and strategic importance" (2014); 
  
• "Russia's leverages on Ukraine" (2014); 
• "Russia-Ukraine standoff in Kerch Strait" (2018); 
• "Ukraine and Russia preparing for a new war" (April, 2021);
  
  
• "Why Russia wants to restore the Soviet borders" (July, 2021); and
  
  
• "Finland and Sweden consider NATO membership" (January, 2022).
  

Some (mostly) human rights links [Note: Content Warning - reader discretion is advised!] and thoughts - Saturday 22nd January, 2022

Some human rights (including significant, relevant links in other fields - such as geopolitics, democracy, or authoritarianism) links: 

• "in an act of climate barter, Jordan is gearing up to provide solar energy to Israel in exchange for desalinated water";
  
• there is only limited time available to salvage the Iran nuclear deal;
• an interesting video on having more than two parties, including commentary that Europe's multiplicity of choice results in more stability than the USA's binary choices - and criticism of the blocking of voting reforms in the USA by two nominally Democrat Senators; 
• a very US-focused video on SLAPPs and anti-SLAPP measures, and one on the limitations of HIPAA; 
• a call for international law to recognise climate refugees; 
• Ukraine, currently being menaced by Russia, has experienced a major cyberattack - which some groups in Russia are noted for committing; 
• "70 people have been killed after an airstrike by the Saudi-led coalition hit a detention centre in northern Yemen"; 
  
• the CCP's head, Xi Jinping, has established himself as leader, but by doing so (particularly in the way he has), has created a situation where a succession crisis is inevitable, and may play out badly for him - thus compelling him to stay in power; 
• other nations are allowing the CCP to forcibly return people to mainland China;  
• an opinion that the IoC was partly responsible for the debacle of the app for the sporting event in China - where the CCP has threatened legal action against any athletes who speak out on ANYTHING that doesn't kow tow to the CCP;
  
• Sudan's military continues to appear move towards reimposing its autocratic rule by violently  suppressing dissent - at the expense of foreign aid, although their words suggest support for civilian government; 
• more calls for the junta to allow elections in Mali; 
• protests against suppression of free speech in Angola;
  
• a jailed Vietnamese journalist has been given a human rights award; 
• the catholic sect's pope has "vowed justice" for abuse victims of the church he now heads - abuse which also was reportedly enabled by his still living predecessor;
  
• the digital trail of a recent mass murderer has exposed "the violent fantasies of the ‘manosphere’";
• the misogynistic violent extremists who have power in Afghanistan have responded violently to women calling for rights;
  
• "research by the Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right (CARR) uncovered a “foul trove of racial hatred” on [social media platforms] and amongst the gaming community";
  
• the use of biometrics by Greece's police is undermining human rights; 
• a legal case has been launched against the use of facial recognition technology ("there is little evidence that the technology reduces crime, critics say. It also often fails to identify darker-skinned persons and women accurately, and its use is problematic in the absence of a data protection law in India, digital rights activists say") in India;
• a caution that aid to address Afghanistan's massive and growing humanitarian crisis "must be disentangled from concepts of political legitimacy"; 
• an opinion that "the torture of asylum seekers has twisted our perceptions of right and wrong"; 
• Australia has failed to meet an obligation under the international anti-torture convention; 
• calls to ban an abusive Bangladesh unit from peacekeeping; 
  
• "the United Nations (UN) has [reportedly] commended Nigeria for being the first country in Africa to successfully secure conviction for piracy";
  
• a criticism of changes in recent years at SBS (to this criticism I'll add SBS's aggressive harvesting of personal information, which is why I use neither their app nor their online viewing options); 
• "White Man’s Media: Legacy media in the US and UK frames and conditions our thinking and actions" - the first in a series to come; 
• "the appointment of a long-time friend to Rupert Murdoch as chair of the ACCC is dubious, given potential conflicts of interest";
• the national neolib government is putting workers at risk again; 
• more allegations of corruption (or, at the very least, unfairness and possibly arbitrariness) by the national neolibs;
  
• an opinion from the USA that "Hospital Greed Is Destroying Our Nurses";
  
• a thoughtful (and evidence-informed) reflection on why (some) mass protests fail; 
• a new theory on the causation of vigilante violence; 
• Russia is the latest government to ban cryptocurrencies.
  

"Fit and proper person" . . . a brief musing

In the society I've grown up and live in, "fit and proper" is a requirement for people in many public office positions - and, much as with "merit-based  employment", on the surface, it sounds reasonable. 

But, also as with "merit-based employment", dig a little deeper, and there  are  problems - most notably, in the context of this post, prejudice, including "unconscious  bias". 

The decision as to what is meritorious depends on the person making the decision, and thus reflects their worldview. To such a person, it may be acceptable to skip attending a child's birthday party in order to do some overtime, and that doing otherwise is not meritorious - thus, such a person's view of merit in that instance may actually be sexist, given that women are generally the ones doing the bulk of the child care. To put this another way, the view of "merit" is subjective. 

Another assumption around merit relates to university qualifications. 

Now, as a preliminary comment, my experience is that a lot of decisions around university degrees appear to be for convenience (managerial laziness, perhaps? Or human resources overload?), and without actually considering what is required for a position. In my case, for instance, because of decades of on-the-job training and experience (and some courses), I have a lot of skills that were not in my original degree. My experience of graduates - for some decades now - with the same degree is that they also may lack adequate competency in the skills I have, and in fact subsequent degrees have been developed that are what I would seek for someone to replace me (although they would be missing some other skills).
(There are other flaws associated with tertiary qualifications - see, for instance, here.)

More to the point, in terms of this post, is that such assumptions tend to rule out people  from  poorer  backgrounds, where lack of money and, in the worst cases, a forced focus on survival needs, means being able to attend uni (and this is without considering the costs of doing so [I would never go to Uni again, when I look at the debts courses leave students with] ) is not an option - but that doesn't mean the person is lacking in intelligence, application, or potential ability: they could well be capable of learning many of the skills on-the-job, and then perhaps do their degree study (with a little help) while they work. 

In fact, in my opinion one of the crimes of poverty is that it robs society of an enormous field of talent and human potential. 

The other aspect I will touch on here is straight out bigotry. 

Having developed a set of principles, there is plenty of evidence that they will be assessed unfairly - ranging from the historic reluctance to hire women on the false premise that they all want children or that having children will impede their potential to contribute to the company, to actions lumped together under "glass  ceiling". Some of the evidence includes people changing their names to seemingly Anglo names, which led to improved chances of being interviewed. 

So the flaws of "merit-based employment" include: 

• being subjective (perhaps arbitrary could apply?); 
• being influenced by cultural (things were not always this way, incidentally) and unconscious bias (perhaps that could be indirect  discrimination?); and 
• being potentially prone to bigotted implementation (e.g., see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here). 

Those flaws also apply to the concept of "fit and proper", but what I particularly want to cover is an aspect of the second dot point - "cultural and unconscious bias": the focus of "fit and proper" on financial matters. 

My experience is that the most important factor (sometimes the only factor of any real world import) as things currently are seems to be the requirement for "fit and proper" people to be free of what the elites and some middle class of society see as financial "flaws" such as bankruptcy.

Now, there may be issues around unknown problems, such as an undeclared bankruptcy or undeclared prison sentences, in that the person becomes vulnerable to blackmail, but someone never having been bankrupted is no indication that they will not suffer from unconscious bias and similar problems. 

And as far as the prison sentences and other crimes go (even if they are in the areas of the position being considered), if they've done their time, they've paid society's imposed punishment and should not be subject to further punishment. And if people have concerns about whether jailing will prevent future crimes (and there are some areas I have such concerns - child abuse, violent misogyny, and violent extremism [including hate crimes] ), then society needs to consider whether it wants to consider punishment, or start moving more towards the Norwegian model of rehabilitation (where appropriate - the evidence suggests it may not be feasible with child sexual abusers, and doing so with the other two categories I raised my concerns about may also be difficult). 

In terms of those being considered for public office, I want to know that, for instance, police will not  be  biased, judges will not fail to recognise the death-dealing nature of misgendering, and legislators will not  favour  their  mates. 

Those are aspects relating to the character of the people involved - and they are flaws that are not necessarily going to be noticed by those who have the same flaws, unless those people become better people themselves. 

Properly acknowledging the importance of non-financial aspects of "fit and proper" would be an excellent first step towards that.

Some (mostly) human rights links [Note: Content Warning - reader discretion is advised!] and thoughts - Saturday 15th January, 2022

Some human rights (including significant, relevant links in other fields - such as geopolitics, democracy, or authoritarianism) links: 

• "humans alive today are witnessing the beginning of the first mass extinction in 65 million years. What does biodiversity loss mean for us and the environment?"; 
  
• thousands of Kazakhs have been arrested for protesting against fuel costs, where the Kazakh president has made inane comments about defeating "a coup" - with Russian troops . . . and the use of violent criminals, along the lines of what Assad did in Syria; 
• "legacy of the “Dark Side” - the costs [not only financial] of unlawful US detentions and interrogations post-9/11"; 
• a criticism of the USA's hypocrisy / double standards (my words) on international treaties; 
• "the 1^st February 2021 coup d’état has intensified deadly conflict and ended [Burma]’s decade-old peace process involving its many ethnic armed groups. The Tatmadaw now faces a mix of new and reinvigorated adversaries, some of whom have begun to unite behind a collective vision for a genuine federal state" - and recommendations on what should be done about that;
  
• ECOWAS has closed borders and imposed sanctions on Mali over the coup leaders' continuing delays of elections (and the USSRussia and CCP have stopped the UN's Security Council being decent enough to do the same);
  
• modern dictators in South and Central America are using hitler's abuse of democratic processes approach;
• the misuse of social media to stay in power by dictators - and their continuing use of purges; 
• as Biden is criticised for not doing enough to defend democracy (and concerns are pointed out about democracy / human rights in Brazil, Turkey, Belarus, and Cambodia), an opinion piece pointing out the losses of the extreme right, and calling for "consistent, genuine, and inspiring liberal democratic politics"; 
• "capitalism is compatible with democracy only if democracy is in the driver’s seat. But the absence of democracy doesn’t strengthen capitalism. It fuels despotism"; 
  
• a defence of boycotts as an essential part of democracy (I am disappointed the ALP was critical of the boycott being discussed);
  
• despite the slant of the words used in this article, it boils down to the neolibs actually protecting privacy - and the ALP's criticism of that is disappointing; 
• "“Biggest cyber breach in history” as techs scramble to be heard above Omicron din";
  
• German police have misused a COVID app - and Bulgaria's surveillance has breached European human rights convention; 
• "a deadly decision: The [US] Supreme Court [has struck] down OSHA's vaccine-or-testing mandate";
  
• tensions continue between the USA and Russia over Ukraine - with concerns on the risk of war, possibly with a "false flag" operation;
  
• "why reconciliation agreement between Germany and Namibia has hit the buffers"; 
• "a landmark trial to examine state-sponsored torture during the Syrian civil war" in a German court "has found a Syrian former army colonel guilty of crimes against humanity, handing him a life sentence";
  
• "UN calls for $5 billion in aid for Afghanistan to 'avert catastrophe' in 2022" - and there are other places in need as well, such as Tigray, where aid was suspended after Ethiopian air raids, South Sudan, a land of plenty facing famine because of war, and the ineptly run North Korea; 
• the staggering extent of the abuse of refugees in Libya; 
  
• violence in the Sahel may extend into West Africa;
  
• "vulnerable people in Australia are being considered “acceptable collateral losses” and has called upon the government “to recognise and remember that we’re human”"; 
• "following unanimous parliamentary approval in 2021, conversion "therapy" is now illegal in Canada"; 
•  more homophobia in sport has been called out; 
• "transgender people who start their hormones as teenagers have “far better” mental health than if they wait until adulthood, new research says";
  
• "minority and indigenous peoples’ rights defenders urge African states to address marginalisation grievances";
  
• a move from invisibility to visibility for one person with a disability; 
• "after stalling for almost a decade, Indonesia's House of Representatives is expected to debate a bill on sexual violence next Tuesday";
  
• "one of Egypt’s last independent human rights organisations has closed down . . . citing government persecution"; 
• an opinion that a culture of corruption is "engulfing" the national neolib government;
  
• many MPs have now completed their "respectful workplace" training - although I wonder if it will work with some of them (Recommendations 5 and 6 include "First Nations people, people from CALD backgrounds, people with disability, and LGBTIQ+ people"), and a notorious idiotic senator from Qld has demonstrated her need for such training by claiming she is too old to harass anyone;
• the loooooong history of conspiracy fantasies.
  

Some (mostly) human rights links [Note: Content Warning - reader discretion is advised!] and thoughts - Saturday 8th January, 2022

Some human rights (including significant, relevant links in other fields - such as geopolitics, democracy, or authoritarianism) links: 

• an assessment of how various nations/blocs have been approaching the topic of human rights in cyberspace - and some thoughts on transhumanism and human rights; 
• Canada has shown decency towards women and LGBTIQ+ refugees from Afghanistan; 
• Senegal has decided to leave its anti-LGBTIQ+ hate at the current level;
  
• as an example of the harm done by the Newtonian worldview of right wingers, this article shows that Japan and North Korea normalising relations (based on Japan apologising and North Korea returning abductees) in around 2014 was stopped by right wingers in Japan - much as "hawks" several times stopped a formal peace treaty on the Korean peninsula after the active phase of the still-continuing Korean War; 
• another example of the harm done by right wingers is this - the securitisation mindset that the evil  John  Howard introduced; 
• in a rare joint statement, more commitments against nuclear weapons by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council . . . which China has within days tried to undermine; 
  
• Iran is threatening retaliation against #45 and others over the killing two years ago of one its military leaders by the USA unless there is a "fair" international trial
  (a "fair" trial is likely impossible - for a start, any insistence on sharia law, for instance would be unacceptable: the ICC is the only "fair" international venue for trial of individuals, but the USA will not give up one of it's own for any international trial.
  Any retaliation by Iran, however, is unlikely to involve missiles as their current material suggests [they don't have the range/orbital capacity, although that may change eventually, and I doubt North Korea would want the risk of allowing Iran to use its locale/submarines and missiles - apart from the certainty of a US response, it would anger China, which North Korea still depends on for many of its survival needs],
  but might involve a "dirty" bomb [they have expertise at violent extremism [terrorism] and some nuclear materials] against US interests, but unlikely on continental US territory or Hawaii. If that is so, I hope those in possible target areas will be properly protected [travel warnings etc may be issued], and that the international community effectively manages the situation with Iran [which might require an attack of rationality - or at least management of its RWNJ "hawks" on the part of the USA].
  Subsequent drone attacks also raise the possibility of less severe responses);
  
• "On International Treaties, the United States Refuses to Play Ball" - because it hypocritically expects other nations to give up a little of their national sovereignty for the greater good, but continues its elitist refusal to do so itself (which is shooting itself in the foot again, much as it did during part of the Cold War);
• the USA has "excluded Ethiopia, Mali and Guinea from a US-Africa trade agreement" over human rights breaches; 
• also from the USA, "one year after the violent assault on the US Capitol, Americans remain deeply concerned about the health of their democracy and about a third say violence against the government can sometimes be justified"; 
• "the recent rise in coups in Africa reflects a waning regional and international willingness to enforce anti-coup norms. Reversing the trend requires incentivising democracy and consistently imposing real costs on coup makers";  
• the recent resignation of Sudan's civilian PM has been attributed to the military coup leaders reneging on an agreement; 
  
• an opposition MP in Tunisia, currently experiencing a suppression of democracy that has been likened to a coup, has been kidnapped; 
• US President Joe Biden has spoken powerfully in support of democracy and against #45 on the anniversary of #45's attempted insurrection; 
• criticism of Australia's "leaders" for following the mob instead of constructive, positive leadership;
  
• a state of emergency has been declared in Kazakhstan over violent, fatal  protests  against rising fuel prices - and Russian and other troops have arrived;
  
• the CCP has successfully used intimidation and fear to close another news outlet in Hong Kong, in its continuing campaign to silence dissent - and Western businesses continue to be cowards on China's human rights abuses; 
• the European Union's border agency has claimed a legal action against it is inadmissible - without addressing the serious allegations made - and sought costs against activists, continuing a practice which saw the European Parliament decide "not to discharge the agency's 2019 budget, the European Parliament highlighted that "charging civil society with excessively high legal fees has a chilling effect on civil society's access to justice in the field of access to documents" "; 
• concerns about an "anti-woke" backlash in Europe;
  
• Ethiopia is abusing Tigrayan refugees who have been returned from other nations; 
• South Africa's President (and government generally) is facing a challenge to properly address "damning" findings by a state commission of inquiry into corruption; 
  
• Nigeria - currently struggling against violent extremists and criminals - is missing nearly 90,000 AK47s (!);
  
• a soldier in the German army has been arrested for allegedly threatening the government over pandemic containment measures;  
• more reports on Afghan families being forced to sell children;  
• an example of the damage done by child sexual abuse;
  
• an award shows the growing awareness in Portugal of racism; 
• the "alleged creator of app ‘selling’ Muslim women [has been] arrested in India"; 
• three murderers of a black man in the USA have been sentenced to life in prison - two without parole. The judge's remarks were powerful, and included a comment to the families that sentencing doesn't always heal, and should be seen as an exercise in accountability;
  
• an encouraging report on those white people who reject racism despite being raised in the midst of white supremacism - because of empathy, strength of character, being outsiders in other ways, being touched by a story, or relationships;
  
• "There Can Be No Masters at The Table of Human Rights . . . Archbishop Desmond Tutu said, “I am not interested in picking up crumbs of compassion thrown from the table of someone who considers himself my master. I want the full menu of rights”"; 
• the "human rights of elderly and disabled people [are] ‘not fairweather luxuries’";
  
• anti-union arrests in Cambodia may be in breach of human rights laws; 
  
• short-sighted bias in rejecting applications for academic grants; 
  
• "the BMI's really old, non-medical and racist origins"; 
  
• the COVID crisis is continuing, in many forms.
  

 On journalism: 

• recent reports that NASA had hired a bunch of theologians were wrong.