Another example for bullshit initiatives that can be found is in the ARTE video on 'what is Davos'.
Klaus Schwab, very PR efficiently, visits a 'social entrepreneurial' startup there that, at very low cost can distribute medicine over large distances in poorer parts of the world.
So while this can effectively produce good will, and lower child mortality (which is also a driver of over population (less family planing possible, so better have many children)), it really doesnt scale as effectively. So in essence, It will produce no economic upturn, or interesting job perspectives in those regions.
And the game, if you are a poorer nation (being negatively affected by climate change) is 'get higher GDP quickly' (to then be able to afford counter meassures) or scram.
So if and when this problem becomes structural (think mass migration) 10 whiz kids and their ultra low weight glider wont change migration pressure. It wont even help to structurally alleviate shortcomings under those conditions. Its again - purely fluff.
You call stuff like that 'lighthouse projects' as their impact is mostly to be seen aspirationally.. (You usually also see them as innovation drivers, but if you look at what quality of employees work on f.e. the Microsoft Uplink program (second video), ...ehm... yeah.)
So whats actually happening at the moment is european business communities and governments having to rethink 'foreign aid' as a concept (also, because China is gaining influence in Africa (resources)). So the aim becomes to actually build local economies quicker in f.e. Africa (all growth thats currently 'needed' happens in the developing nations and the second world), so those communities could withstand migration pressures longer (economic difference between certain parts of the developing world and the developed world becomes smaller, thereby reducing migration pressure).
At the same time (if you are europe) you are hardening your military structural defenses, in case that doesnt work out.
But this idea, that you are needed as a european whizkid, to better living conditions in third world countries, is spearheaded by the globalized economic elite, because again - in the developed west you are scheduled for degrowth over the next 80 years. So what to do with peoples aspirations there? The aspirations have to be tunneled into global action (where they can still participate in economic growth), or niche sectors, or you will have ultra nationalist backlashes. (Tea party and worse.) Which also dont help to solve the problem.
So now you are left with extremely atrocious examples of old men PR pushing aspiring lighthouse projects, that do nothing - to inspire young folks to do something.
All of that is compatible with globalized business interests (so you know who is not loosing out here.. ), who have pledged about last year to steer more towards 'stakeholder capitalism' - meaning, if you are Microsoft and mostly are growing in India - produce some low paying bullshit jobs in Germany as well to help with degrowth there not turning into revolts (give people a religious motivation, rather than an economic one (which you could argue also is a religion of sorts - not to get sidetracked here)).
National politics sees those trends, and everywhere around the world (where per capita growth trends are negative) has 'not on my watch' reactions ('can we sit this one out.. '), basically.
This is where the child activists initiative enters.. Which the UN spearheaded.
Klaus Schwab, very PR efficiently, visits a 'social entrepreneurial' startup there that, at very low cost can distribute medicine over large distances in poorer parts of the world.
So while this can effectively produce good will, and lower child mortality (which is also a driver of over population (less family planing possible, so better have many children)), it really doesnt scale as effectively. So in essence, It will produce no economic upturn, or interesting job perspectives in those regions.
And the game, if you are a poorer nation (being negatively affected by climate change) is 'get higher GDP quickly' (to then be able to afford counter meassures) or scram.
So if and when this problem becomes structural (think mass migration) 10 whiz kids and their ultra low weight glider wont change migration pressure. It wont even help to structurally alleviate shortcomings under those conditions. Its again - purely fluff.
You call stuff like that 'lighthouse projects' as their impact is mostly to be seen aspirationally.. (You usually also see them as innovation drivers, but if you look at what quality of employees work on f.e. the Microsoft Uplink program (second video), ...ehm... yeah.)
So whats actually happening at the moment is european business communities and governments having to rethink 'foreign aid' as a concept (also, because China is gaining influence in Africa (resources)). So the aim becomes to actually build local economies quicker in f.e. Africa (all growth thats currently 'needed' happens in the developing nations and the second world), so those communities could withstand migration pressures longer (economic difference between certain parts of the developing world and the developed world becomes smaller, thereby reducing migration pressure).
At the same time (if you are europe) you are hardening your military structural defenses, in case that doesnt work out.
But this idea, that you are needed as a european whizkid, to better living conditions in third world countries, is spearheaded by the globalized economic elite, because again - in the developed west you are scheduled for degrowth over the next 80 years. So what to do with peoples aspirations there? The aspirations have to be tunneled into global action (where they can still participate in economic growth), or niche sectors, or you will have ultra nationalist backlashes. (Tea party and worse.) Which also dont help to solve the problem.
So now you are left with extremely atrocious examples of old men PR pushing aspiring lighthouse projects, that do nothing - to inspire young folks to do something.
All of that is compatible with globalized business interests (so you know who is not loosing out here.. ), who have pledged about last year to steer more towards 'stakeholder capitalism' - meaning, if you are Microsoft and mostly are growing in India - produce some low paying bullshit jobs in Germany as well to help with degrowth there not turning into revolts (give people a religious motivation, rather than an economic one (which you could argue also is a religion of sorts - not to get sidetracked here)).
National politics sees those trends, and everywhere around the world (where per capita growth trends are negative) has 'not on my watch' reactions ('can we sit this one out.. '), basically.
This is where the child activists initiative enters.. Which the UN spearheaded.
Last edited by notimp,