What about our jobs?

I recall long ago, a very much younger Michael McKenny attended a
meeting concerning the safety of nuclear energy. It was one of the most
astonishing experiences of my life. The reason for that was that during
the question and answer period one of the nuclear scientists in the
audience, putting aside the issue of the safety of atomic power plants,
asked what was to him the more important question,

"What about our jobs?"

As I now ponder upon the issue of the continuation of humans, of the
transition of the human species from a presentient to a sentient stage
of existence, this question to me seems one very fundamental.

I see no real reason why humanity has hitherto avoided becoming one
relatively harmonious entity. The intellectual and practical resources
existed a century ago, and, within certain contexts, much longer than
that.

As I see it, those individuals in positions of influence and power
perceiving threats to the continuation of the paradigms permitting such
influence and power have quite determidly opposed the sentience of the
human species. If the end of the Cold War rendered NATO obsolete and
massive armaments industries unnecessary, the response was otherwise
than an offering of thanks for such a beneficial historical event.

"What about our jobs?"

So, NATO planners and armaments manufacturers brainstormed on ways and
means to perpetuate their existence and retain their market share of
global GDP. The history of the end of the 20th Century and the start of
the 21st is written in the blood and fear of their success.

So, the question of the survival of humanity is now asked in the
context of this reality. What about the jobs of the vast systems of
military and security personnel, what about the enormously lucrative
profits of armaments manufacturers and other businesses serving the
very vast military and security establishment? What about the nature of
organizations such as NATO to be concerned about survival above all
else, even the very survival of the human species?

The question is asked in this rudimentary manner. The answer, one that
must satisfy the very individuals benefiting so personally from so
deleterious a priority on their positions, may now be considered. We
do not require the unleashing of well considered chess moves by those
so adept at envisioning threats to their jobs and keeping in mind the
series of variant responses.

We need some means to address their priority permitting them to cease
playing such games with humanity's future.

Michael McKenny February 26, 2008 C.E. 


Solarguard UN and USA


 
Solarguard Homepage