Work is about wellbeing, a job is about profit

W

ork is integral to a person’s wellbeing. A job is not.

Work is something you choose to do; a job something to which you are directed to by another and so the matter of choice is no longer yours.

Therein is a small, but critical and significant difference.

Freedom is about choice and so as your freedom to choose goes, so does you actual freedom.

“Jobs, jobs, jobs,” has been the mantra of most, if not all, in their bid to secure public validation for personal political ambitions.

Everyone from the Prime Minister down chants what is a social more with the success of a society, or the government, being measured by the number of jobs created within that same society.

The drive and need to create jobs is further evidence of our social obedience to a way of life that has drawn its sustenance from the brutal mechanics of the Industrial Revolution and for centuries now has seen profit prioritised ahead of the welfare of people.

Our allegiance to the idea of jobs is evidence of what was at first a flirtation and then an affair to become a habitual way of life that meshes cleanly with the fundamentally contradictory consumerist idea that we can grow infinitely on a finite planet.

Jobs are intimately and intricately entangled with the growth economy, whereas work brings with it more ancient connotations; connotations that are about the provision of essentials; helping us find what we need, rather than want; jobs have a sense of mass production about them; work has an artisan affiliation, allowing for personal expression and a sense of satisfaction and fulfilment that is rarely experienced in our money driven society.

Jobs and our insistence on their creation, from the upper echelons of society, is about maintenance of the modern status quo, whereas work is about the ancient human need to contribute to your community and within that repair and rebuild your sense of self.



Confucius - "Choose a job you
love and you never work
another day in your life".

The difference between having work to do and a job is subtle, but such that it is a damning significance; a contrast that can distort human values to drive people to pursue ideas that would not have normally have attracted them.

Yes, jobs are the salvation of the modern profit-driven world and yes, jobs erode peoples’ expansive thinking and embrace of the other, while work does not until circumstances turn it into a job.

It was Confucius who said: “Choose a job you love, and you will never have to work a day in your life.”

And through a different prism: “Love the work you do and you will never have worry about finding a job.”

Our communities would be emotionally sounder and richer places if the emphasis was on work rather than finding jobs.

Fearfully trying times from which we have learned little

W

orld War One was a fearfully trying time.

Interestingly, the pacifists among us are finding the four year-long recognition of that disturbing and pointless societal conflict equally trying, but for different and yet similarly damning reasons.

World War One was meant to be the war
that ended all wars - that was most
certainly the case for millions of people,
but not the world, rather it was just
the beginning of damnable fearful times.

Not for a second is the commitment and bravery of those involved in that war questioned, but it seems fatefully futile that thousands of young Australians travelled to places they had never heard of and died in droves.

Long has our desire to fight and the causes of war troubled me and almost without exception the initial disputation that escalated to become war, bringing death a destruction of unimagined extremes, can be traced to the intellectual and emotional immaturity of just a few people.

Subsequently, most any philosophical thoughts about war and its causes interest me and these notes by U.S. scientist and author, Peter Turchin, caught my eye. He said: “This is not to argue that wars are good. I hope that the humanity will eventually evolve to the point where we can abolish wars and all the misery they cause. But when we do it, we will still need an engine of creative destruction to prevent runaway accumulation of power and wealth by the few, and to weed out dysfunctional societies that lost their ability to cooperate.”

Much can be read into Turchin’s observations, but it is the final observation - dysfunctional societies that lost their ability to cooperate – which was bad enough 100 years ago, but is now even worse as democracies are now becoming oligarchies in which inequality prevails and societal dysfunction is afoot.

Some see Shiva as the God of destruction whose task is to clear away the old to make room for the new.

One commentator says, “The present culture of war does neither. Rather is maintains a paradigm of continual struggle for control amongst the power elite that leaves in its wake nothing but death and destruction.

“The so-called value of war as an expression of creative destruction is to ignore the pain of the mother who, standing among the rubble of her former home, holding the lifeless body of her youngest child in her arms, the disillusionment of the soldier who returns to an empty future, crippled in mind or body.”

‘War, what is it good for? Absolutely nothing!” he writes, quoting the song.

So considering that, it is time we stopped remembering, recognizing and celebrating what was, and spending untold millions of dollars building myths from events we should never have been a part of and turned our gaze toward today, tomorrow and to our children’s, their children’s future without war..

It has been our addiction to growth, answered through our exploitation of fossil fuels that has enriched the world’s elites, worsened inequality and entrenched societal dysfunction making war a constant recurrence.

Endorsement of Harper plan suggests government can't see Australia's troubles

A

ny understanding of what troubles the world appears to escape Australia’s Federal Government.



Resource depletion and
 environmental concerns demand
 we slow our consumption, become
 poorer in a managed way and so
 work fewer hours every day.

Rather than be the solution to all our social problems, our prevailing market system is actually the cause.

The Harper Competition Review, which followed the election of our coalition Government and has been orchestrated by economists who are oblivious to what is happening in the world, or who have chosen to ignore realities, and yet makes recommendations that take us deeper into the difficulties that threaten humanity.

The “Harper Review” as it is known, wants to lift market restrictions to put consumer interests first, but actually ignores them completely.

It claims its proposals put consumers' interests ahead of commercial interests, firing new market opportunities. That is not true.

Contraction rather than expansion is what needed, if the world is, and by implication Australia, and so Shepparton, is to avoid a collision of circumstances, ranging from resource depletion and catastrophic climate disruption.

Consumers actually need an outbreak of sanity combined with an equally generous helping of good sense to help them understand that in a world facing energy, resource and climate constraints, they need to be building a world in which they live with less rather than more.

The implication there of course, is that rather than extending retail trading hours, we should be structuring our communities so lifestyles can be similar, although different, and trading hours significantly shorter.

The ills of the world can be attributed to many things, but it is difficult to argue that the market system, so lionized by so many, is not the root cause.

Our developed nations are simply too wealthy making consumption of energy and resource-rich goods and services extreme, and consequently pushing the world into serious ecological debt.

Rather than adopting the Harper Review plan of extending trading hours and effectively allowing a laissez-faire approach, we should be discussing and moving toward reducing and limiting times for traditional business.

Instead of a 24/7 arrangement for retail businesses, our communities should be looking to move in the opposite direction, that is a four-hour trading day, no overtime and no double shifts, but not including public services or primary producers.

Such a change would shift the emphasis away from simply making money and gathering “stuff” to allow people time in their communities to bond with those around them and build resilience in their neighbourhoods.

With just four hours on the job, people would live closer to their work and so would be able to walk or cycle, eliminating the need for road transport, making a significant difference to personal costs and easing the worsening of human damage to earth’s ecological systems, along with being far more resource efficient.

The GV Community Fund and Slap Tomorrow have worked together to bring author, teacher, editor and environmentalist, Kerryn Higgs to talk about aspects of this and her new book, “Collision Course: Endless Growth on a Finite Planet” in Shepparton at the Harder Auditorium on April 29 at 6:30 for 7:00pm.

Tickets at $10 for the event can be bought at Collins Booksellers at 262 Maude St, Shepparton, or from Andrea McNab at the GV Community Fund at 5832 8221.

Public art is a good idea, but the proposed new SAM is a bad idea

W

hen is a good thing a bad idea?

The idea of building a new art museum in Shepparton ticks all bar one of the boxes and interestingly that last box is the biggest of all and the one that really matters.



An artist's impression of what is proposed for 
Shepparton - a new SAM at Victoria Park Lake.

Yes, a new art museum for the city is a wonderful idea for art is at the heart of everything we do and so to celebrate and recognise its importance through the creation of the beautiful lake-side proposed complex suggests a coming of age for the city.

Everything about the idea appears to be as it should, except for its timing.

A collision of world events suggest the city’s interest and emphasis should be about building resilience, entrenching what exists and underscoring the strengths of our culture to ensure we can arrive as unscathed as possible through the unfolding challenges.

Like many others, I endorse the importance of emphasizing art, but rather than committing our resources to create something new, we should be exploring every avenue to use what exists, even if that demands some changes to our behaviour.

Much of what presently happens at the city’s offices in Welsford St could be, thanks to modern technology, undertaken and completed almost anywhere in the city. It is not essential to have all administrative staff at Eastbank.

Yes, keep the customer/ratepayer contact people, the Mayor’s office, the council chambers, and any other pieces of the operation vital to the daily public operation of the city.

The Shepparton Art Museum (SAM) already has space in the building and so the area cleared of relocated administrative staff could easily be incorporated into a restructured art museum.

With costs far below that of what is proposed near Victoria Park Lake, SAM and the existing library building could connected to create a beautiful centre of the city-community facility that would answer our civic needs.

Yes, the new SAM is a good idea, but its timing is bad for rather than such wonderful physical city enhancements, the city should be acknowledging the changes that are settling upon because of global warming and along with that playing its part in cutting the world’s carbon dioxide emissions by at least 80 per cent with a decade or two.

Building a new, stand-alone art museum that oozes embedded energy is contrary to an efficient and sustainable city future.

Yes, let us use what we have, modifying what exists, provide the services we want and need and yet do it thoughtfully in terms of our carbon dioxide emissions.

Yes, despite the opinions of the doubters, skeptics and others, we have changed our climate system, subsequently the benign weather that once was is gone and we are quickly moving into an era in which we will need every resource we can gather.

Friends discuss Shepparton's future

S

hepparton’s future was recently discussed among a group of friends.



Shepparton at play.

Most came to the conversation with substantially different values and ideas about how the place should proceed, but all, with some caveats, were guardedly optimistic about the city’s future.

Naturally, all saw the city’s potential, or otherwise, through personal prisms, be that adherence to an ideology that favours growth, in all its forms; a steady “as she goes” view that is about consolidation of existing strengths; or what might be considered a Luddite view, being something of a retreat from modernity to a more localized community that builds its resilience.

One fellow said the Goulburn Valley, and Shepparton in particular, had benefitted from the “accident of birth”, saying it had long been fortunate in that many with an entrepreneurial spirit had been born here.

“We need more of them,” he said.

True, but the “entrepreneurial spirit” of last century, as appropriate as it was then, is no longer what is needed and although that same endeavour is still essential the circumstances in the world suggest a redirection – a new “spirit”.

The neo-liberals of the world see growth as the solution to every human dilemma, while many others, however, see our insistence on bigger, better and faster as the root of our troubles.

Personally, pessimism prevails as I peer into the darkness of the future through the neo-liberal blinkers of our present governments, State or Federal.

One in the group placed his faith in technology, mentioning the unexpected arrival of the motor car and how it rid London’s streets of near knee-deep horse manure.

That, he argued, was a wonderful example of how technology leap-frogged a problem and opened the world to new vistas.

The Shepparton of yesteryear.

Technophiles face not just an issue of too much horse manure, but a spiralling world population pressing relentlessly for more stuff, creating a world in which resources of all kinds are becoming fewer, rarer and so increasingly expensive.

And so what does this mean for Shepparton?

Many obvious needs arise, but primary among these is leadership.

We can lament the performance of State and Federal Governments, but that which can have the biggest immediate impact on our lives is what happens at municipal level.

Shepparton needs to be directed and built to survive what is evolving in the 21^st Century and not what was happening several decades ago.

Present leadership in the City of Greater Shepparton appears to be in disarray with divisiveness instead of the critically needed collaboration, cohesion and cooperation.

Shepparton needs, rather than the present vacuum, leaders who are acutely aware that we face serious energy and resource constraints and so those same people need to act with a bold plan to build a city that will endure.

Art is fundamentally good, but when is it s bad idea?

The proposed new multi-million dollar Shepparton Art Museum (SAM) will not be affected by our changing climate, or that can only be assumed if notice is to be taken of the “business case” that articulates the wonderful benefits a new SAM will bring to the city and area.

New South Wales firm of Simon McArthur and Associates produced a more than 30 page document affirming the practicality of the idea, but not once mentioned any environment or associated climate difficulties.

Eager to keep the conversation alive, I wrote the following and in submitting to The News, was politely told that is wouldn’t be given space, unless I choose to use as one of my regular fortnightly columns.

 

When is a good thing a bad idea?

The idea of building a new art museum in Shepparton ticks all bar one of the boxes and interestingly that last box is the biggest of all and the one that really matters.

Yes, a new art museum for the city is a wonderful idea for art is at the heart of everything we do and so to celebrate and recognise its importance through the creation of the beautiful lake-side proposed complex suggests a coming of age for the city.

Everything about the idea appears to be as it should, except for its timing.

A collision of world events suggest the city’s interest and emphasis should be about building resilience, entrenching what exists and underscoring the strengths of our culture to ensure we can arrive as unscathed as possible through the unfolding challenges.

Like many others, I endorse the importance of emphasizing art, but rather than committing our resources to create something new, we should be exploring every avenue to use what exists, even if that demands some changes to our behaviour.

Much of what presently happens at the city’s offices in Welsford St could be, thanks to modern technology, undertaken and completed almost anywhere in the city. It is not essential to have all administrative staff at Eastbank.

Yes, keep the customer/ratepayer contact people, the Mayor’s office, the council chambers, and any other pieces of the operation vital to the daily public operation of the city.

The Shepparton Art Museum (SAM) already has space in the building and so the area cleared of relocated administrative staff could easily be incorporated into a restructured art museum.

With costs far below that of what is proposed near Victoria Park Lake, SAM and the existing library building could connected to create a beautiful centre of the city-community facility that would answer our civic needs.

Yes, the new SAM is a good idea, but its timing is bad for rather than such wonderful physical city enhancements, the city should be acknowledging the changes that are settling upon because of global warming and along with that playing its part in cutting the world’s carbon dioxide emissions by at least 80 per cent with a decade or two.

Building a new, stand-alone art museum that oozes embedded energy is contrary to an efficient and sustainable city future.

Yes, let us use what we have, modifying what exists, provide the services we want and need and yet do it thoughtfully in terms of our carbon dioxide emissions.

Yes, despite the opinions of the doubters, skeptics and others, we have changed our climate system, subsequently the benign weather that once was is gone and we are quickly moving into an era in which we will need every resource we can gather.

Events highlight need for a civil society

George Orwell, metaphysics and the idea of a civil society crammed my thoughts as matters of the past week swept into focus.

Orwell, writing in the early 30s about a hanging Burma, erased any personal doubts about a state executions.

His words; words first read more than 20 years ago, live with me today - he wrote:

“It is curious, but till that moment I had never realized what it means to destroy a healthy, conscious man. When I saw the prisoner step aside to avoid the puddle, I saw the mystery, the unspeakable wrongness, of cutting a life short when it is in full tide. This man was not dying, he was alive just as we were alive. All the organs of his body were working — bowels digesting food, skin renewing itself, nails growing, tissues forming — all toiling away in solemn foolery. His nails would still be growing when he stood on the drop, when he was falling through the air with a tenth of a second to live. His eyes saw the yellow gravel and the grey walls, and his brain still remembered, foresaw, reasoned — reasoned even about puddles. He and we were a party of men walking together, seeing, hearing, feeling, understanding the same world; and in two minutes, with a sudden snap, one of us would be gone — one mind less, one world less.”

The execution by firing squad of Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran may seem remote from those of us here in the Goulburn Valley, but it is not as the killing of these two men damns us all and is simply a further example of how our civil society has become somewhat threadbare; worsening as we wander into the embrace of a strange vulgarity.

Yet, many of us can casually discount what is ahead for Chan and Sukumaran arguing that they knew the risks, they were aware of the consequences and so should pay the price. This, many say, has nothing to do with us and so is not our responsibility – wrong!

At this juncture metaphysics enters the equation and bound by philosophical realities, we must look to the ultimate causes of anything, in this case the execution of Chan and Sukumaran.

Was their attempt to smuggle drugs simply spontaneous and poorly thought through rash behaviour or was it the sinister manifestation of an ailing society that has not only failed these men, but now intends to camouflage and hide the trouble by executing them?

A good and decent society brings with it demands of civility that exceed what exists and although Chan and Sukumaran maybe guilty as charged, each of us needs to remember that they are a product of this society; a society we helped create.