Search
1000 results for “empire_state_building_lights”
-
Destroying Autocracy – October 09, 2025
Welcome to this week’s “Destroying Autocracy”.
It’s your source for curated news affecting democracy in the cyber arena with a focus on protecting it. That necessitates an opinionated Butlerian jihad against big tech as well as evangelizing for open-source and the Fediverse. Since big media’s journalism wing is flailing and failing in its core duty to democracy, this is also a collection of alternative reporting on the eternal battle between autocracy and democracy. We also cover the cybersecurity world. You can’t be free without safety and privacy.
DA comes out on Thursday and is updated through the end of day on Friday. Then we start over. So take your time in perusing it and check back in over the weekend.
FYI, my opinions will be in bold. And will often involve cursing. Because humans. Especially tech bros. And fascists. Fuck ’em.
The Programmer’s Fulcrum is the future (and smaller) home for a fusion of Symfony Station and Battalion. Its tagline is Devs Defending Democracy, Developing the OMN.
You can sign up now and for 2025 get an email with links to and featured articles for each week’s Symfony Station Communiqué and Battalion “Destroying Autocracy” post along with their featured articles. And you’ll be set with TPF after the fusing.
We are posting on the Fediverse now at @thefulcrum @thefulcrum.dev and original website content will start in 2026.
Featured Item(s)
Open Media Network writes:
A central thesis of Tolkien’s books is that evil provides the means of its own defeat. Sauron forged the One Ring that destroyed him. Shelob impaled herself on Sam’s blade. Smaug exposed his belly to Bilbo and revealed the weak point that brought him down. Tolkien’s world is full of this pattern: the seed of destruction lies buried inside the will to dominate. Power over others always carries its own undoing.
But there’s a second truth, less often spoken. Good must still act. The Ring did not cast itself into the fires of Mount Doom, it had to be carried, inch by inch, through the mud and terror, by two small Hobbits who refused to give up. Shelob could only fall because Sam held his arm firm when it would have been easier to drop the blade. Smaug was slain not by fate, but by the hand that fired the black arrow.
Even when evil weakens itself, the act of courage still has to be taken. The small people still have to step up. And there’s a third lesson here, one that feels painfully relevant to our time: good only loses when it surrenders to hopelessness. Denethor’s despair nearly doomed Minas Tirith.
Frodo would have fallen without Sam’s stubborn love. Bilbo’s small act of faith. In Tolkien’s world, hope is not naïve optimism, it’s an act of defiance.
Join us and become a hobbit in the Open Media Network.
Speaking of OMN, we have an announcement this week:
Announcing The Programmer’s Fulcrum, our retirement project
We start and end with good news to make the middle bearable.
The response to Russia’s War Crimes, Techno Feudalism, and other douchebaggery
The Kyiv Independent reports:
The military branch behind Ukraine’s battlefield apps turns to weapons bureaucracy
Ukraine’s parliament backs creation of cyber forces in first reading
The Christian Science Monitor reports:
How Ukrainian drones are slowing Russia’s advance in the east
The Electronic Frontier Foundation reports:
What Europe’s New Gig Work Law Means for Unions and Technology
Eiffair shares:
Its FOSS News reports:
Wikidata Launches Free Vector Database as Open Alternative to Closed AI Systems
NiemanLab reports:
Nonprofit news is growing strong — especially local nonprofit news, a new report shows
And the Columbia Journalism Review reports:
Heisse reports:
A defeat at the Supreme Court: Google must prepare changes to the Play Store
Nextcloud has:
Nextcloud vs Microsoft interoperability: how open source gets it right
Open letter to EU Member States on the proposed CSA Regulation or “Chat Control” law
Tuta announces:
Europe’s future is at stake: Open letter against Chat Control
Patrick shares the good news that pressure still works:
Citizen Protest Halts Chat Control; Breyer Celebrates Major Victory for Digital Privacy
404 Media reports:
Data Hoarder Uses AI to Create Searchable Database of Epstein Files
Help Us Investigate Book Bans and Educational Censorship Around America
Igalia announces:
Igalia, Servo, and the Sovereign Tech Fund
The Guardian reports:
You won’t believe what degrading practice the pope just condemned
Clever headline.
The Register reports:
Pro-Russia hacktivist group dies of cringe after falling into researchers’ trap
UK slaps ‘strategic market status’ on Google, unlocking power to pry open search
Burning Web shares:
Great Stuff.
Neutral
CyberCultural shares:
What the Internet Was Like in 2000
Homestar Runner 🙂
The Brookings Institute says:
The Guardian reports:
Poynter announces:
Poynter launches AI Innovation Lab to house its growing AI portfolio
CommonsDB is:
Exploring CommonsDB’s role in AI training data
The Evil Empire (AKA Autocracy) Strikes Back
TechCrunch reports:
ICE bought vehicles equipped with fake cell towers to spy on phones
Italian businessman’s phone reportedly targeted with Paragon spyware
Pariah States
The Kyiv Independent reports:
Russia’s digital Iron Curtain descends as Kremlin chokes remaining internet freedoms
IFTAS reports:
Coordinated Pro-Russian Propaganda Network Targeting ActivityPub and ATProto Services
Bleeping Computer reports:
Russian Hacktivists target critical infrastructure, hit decoy plant
North Korean hackers stole over $2 billion in crypto this year
The Columbia Journalism Review reports on:
DarkReading reports:
Chinese Gov’t Fronts Trick the West to Obtain Cyber Tech
China-Nexus Actors Weaponize ‘Nezha’ Open Source Tool
The Register reports:
OpenAI bans suspected Chinese accounts using ChatGPT to plan surveillance
The Columbia Journalism Review reports:
How Anti-Cybercrime Laws Are Being Weaponized to Repress Journalism
Big Media
FAIR reports:
MAGA’s Little Helpers: Sinclair, Nexstar and the Consolidation of Broadcast TV
Poynter reports:
Big Tech
404 Media reports:
Apple Banned an App That Simply Archived Videos of ICE Abuses
CNET reports:
The Hidden Dangers of the Digital ‘Yes Man’: How to Push Back Against Sycophantic AI
The Guardian has:
Way past its prime: how did Amazon get so rubbish?
LitHub has more Cory Doctorow action:
How American Tech Cartels Use Apps to Break the Law
TechDirt reports:
And evidently make the law.
NOYB shares:
noyb win: Microsoft 365 Education may not track school children
Cybersecurity/Privacy
The Electronic Frontier Foundation reports:
Tile’s Lack of Encryption Is a Danger for Users Everywhere
FBI takes down BreachForums portal used for Salesforce extortion
Fuck Salesforce, BTW.
Fediverse
Social Experience Design says:
Welcome to Social coding commons
Hamish Campbell has:
Live at c-base a #fluffy Fediverse conference
Riley Testut reports:
The New Stack reports:
Everything Big Starts Small: Building Open Social Web Apps
The Social Web Foundation has an:
Interview with John O’Nolan about Ghost 6
Connected Places has:
Fedify announces:
Fedify 2.0—the CLI now runs natively on Node.js and Bun, not just Deno
Go To Social announces:
We’ve just made the proper release of v0.20.0 of GoToSocial, aka Sinister Sloth
TechCrunch reports:
Alternative app store AltStore raises $6M, connects with the Fediverse
Mastodon is taking cues from Bluesky with plans for its own starter ‘Packs’
Mastodon has:
Community consultation: new Terms of Service (for mastodon.social and mastodon.online)
It’s cool to join Mastodon but not these two instances.
Trunk & Tidbits, September 2025
Terence Eden explores:
Getting started with Mastodon’s Quote Posts – technical implementation details for servers
NHAM announces:
NHAM Update Opus 10 (Fedi Music Television Edition)
Super awesome.
Castopod announces:
The Official Castopod Plugin Repository
RSS
InEssential explains:
Why NetNewsWire Is Not a Web App
Lighthouse has:
A deep dive into the rss feed reader landscape
Other Slightly Federated Social Media
Azhdarchid has:
TechCrunch reports:
Niko Mara-McKay goes into the nitty-gritty:
Bluesky’s CEO meltdown: How leadership continues to fail its most marginalized users
I have said from day one that Bluesky will become enshittified. But, ATProto has some potential.
And to be fair, some of the leaders of ActivityPub and its largest platform (who value growth over safety) are egotistical pissy ass fucks when they are even slightly criticized.
But we are all fighting technofascism so let’s try to work together on the protocols front at least. Its okay to have debates and disagreements with allies. But treat them like allies when doing so. If they are your friends you can even call them pissy ass fucks. 😉
Speaking of, A New Social announces:
Bounce from Mastodon to Bluesky
Why would you? Although maybe its works with Blacksky, Northsky, or Eurosky.
CTAs (aka show us some free love)
- That’s it for this week. Please share this edition of Destroying Autocracy.
- Follow me on the Fediverse. Or this site via the button in the footer. Or via RSS. Or even our future home in 2026, if you want a head start.
Keep fighting!
Ringleader, Battalion
Reuben Walker
Follow me on the Fediverse#ActivityPub #AI #AltStore #ATProto #Autocracy #BigJournalism #BigTech #Bluesky #Castopod #Democracy #Fascism #Fediverse #fluffy #GoToSocial #IFTAS #Mastodon #NHAM #StopChina #StopIsrael #StopRedAmerica #StopRussia #SupportUkraine #TechnoAnarchism #TechnoFeudalism
-
Destroying Autocracy – October 09, 2025
Welcome to this week’s “Destroying Autocracy”.
It’s your source for curated news affecting democracy in the cyber arena with a focus on protecting it. That necessitates an opinionated Butlerian jihad against big tech as well as evangelizing for open-source and the Fediverse. Since big media’s journalism wing is flailing and failing in its core duty to democracy, this is also a collection of alternative reporting on the eternal battle between autocracy and democracy. We also cover the cybersecurity world. You can’t be free without safety and privacy.
DA comes out on Thursday and is updated through the end of day on Friday. Then we start over. So take your time in perusing it and check back in over the weekend.
FYI, my opinions will be in bold. And will often involve cursing. Because humans. Especially tech bros. And fascists. Fuck ’em.
The Programmer’s Fulcrum is the future (and smaller) home for a fusion of Symfony Station and Battalion. Its tagline is Devs Defending Democracy, Developing the OMN.
You can sign up now and for 2025 get an email with links to and featured articles for each week’s Symfony Station Communiqué and Battalion “Destroying Autocracy” post along with their featured articles. And you’ll be set with TPF after the fusing.
We are posting on the Fediverse now at @thefulcrum @thefulcrum.dev and original website content will start in 2026.
Featured Item(s)
Open Media Network writes:
A central thesis of Tolkien’s books is that evil provides the means of its own defeat. Sauron forged the One Ring that destroyed him. Shelob impaled herself on Sam’s blade. Smaug exposed his belly to Bilbo and revealed the weak point that brought him down. Tolkien’s world is full of this pattern: the seed of destruction lies buried inside the will to dominate. Power over others always carries its own undoing.
But there’s a second truth, less often spoken. Good must still act. The Ring did not cast itself into the fires of Mount Doom, it had to be carried, inch by inch, through the mud and terror, by two small Hobbits who refused to give up. Shelob could only fall because Sam held his arm firm when it would have been easier to drop the blade. Smaug was slain not by fate, but by the hand that fired the black arrow.
Even when evil weakens itself, the act of courage still has to be taken. The small people still have to step up. And there’s a third lesson here, one that feels painfully relevant to our time: good only loses when it surrenders to hopelessness. Denethor’s despair nearly doomed Minas Tirith.
Frodo would have fallen without Sam’s stubborn love. Bilbo’s small act of faith. In Tolkien’s world, hope is not naïve optimism, it’s an act of defiance.
Join us and become a hobbit in the Open Media Network.
Speaking of OMN, we have an announcement this week:
Announcing The Programmer’s Fulcrum, our retirement project
We start and end with good news to make the middle bearable.
The response to Russia’s War Crimes, Techno Feudalism, and other douchebaggery
The Kyiv Independent reports:
The military branch behind Ukraine’s battlefield apps turns to weapons bureaucracy
Ukraine’s parliament backs creation of cyber forces in first reading
The Christian Science Monitor reports:
How Ukrainian drones are slowing Russia’s advance in the east
The Electronic Frontier Foundation reports:
What Europe’s New Gig Work Law Means for Unions and Technology
Eiffair shares:
Its FOSS News reports:
Wikidata Launches Free Vector Database as Open Alternative to Closed AI Systems
NiemanLab reports:
Nonprofit news is growing strong — especially local nonprofit news, a new report shows
And the Columbia Journalism Review reports:
Heisse reports:
A defeat at the Supreme Court: Google must prepare changes to the Play Store
Nextcloud has:
Nextcloud vs Microsoft interoperability: how open source gets it right
Open letter to EU Member States on the proposed CSA Regulation or “Chat Control” law
Tuta announces:
Europe’s future is at stake: Open letter against Chat Control
Patrick shares the good news that pressure still works:
Citizen Protest Halts Chat Control; Breyer Celebrates Major Victory for Digital Privacy
404 Media reports:
Data Hoarder Uses AI to Create Searchable Database of Epstein Files
Help Us Investigate Book Bans and Educational Censorship Around America
Igalia announces:
Igalia, Servo, and the Sovereign Tech Fund
The Guardian reports:
You won’t believe what degrading practice the pope just condemned
Clever headline.
The Register reports:
Pro-Russia hacktivist group dies of cringe after falling into researchers’ trap
UK slaps ‘strategic market status’ on Google, unlocking power to pry open search
Burning Web shares:
Great Stuff.
Neutral
CyberCultural shares:
What the Internet Was Like in 2000
Homestar Runner 🙂
The Brookings Institute says:
The Guardian reports:
Poynter announces:
Poynter launches AI Innovation Lab to house its growing AI portfolio
CommonsDB is:
Exploring CommonsDB’s role in AI training data
The Evil Empire (AKA Autocracy) Strikes Back
TechCrunch reports:
ICE bought vehicles equipped with fake cell towers to spy on phones
Italian businessman’s phone reportedly targeted with Paragon spyware
Pariah States
The Kyiv Independent reports:
Russia’s digital Iron Curtain descends as Kremlin chokes remaining internet freedoms
IFTAS reports:
Coordinated Pro-Russian Propaganda Network Targeting ActivityPub and ATProto Services
Bleeping Computer reports:
Russian Hacktivists target critical infrastructure, hit decoy plant
North Korean hackers stole over $2 billion in crypto this year
The Columbia Journalism Review reports on:
DarkReading reports:
Chinese Gov’t Fronts Trick the West to Obtain Cyber Tech
China-Nexus Actors Weaponize ‘Nezha’ Open Source Tool
The Register reports:
OpenAI bans suspected Chinese accounts using ChatGPT to plan surveillance
The Columbia Journalism Review reports:
How Anti-Cybercrime Laws Are Being Weaponized to Repress Journalism
Big Media
FAIR reports:
MAGA’s Little Helpers: Sinclair, Nexstar and the Consolidation of Broadcast TV
Poynter reports:
Big Tech
404 Media reports:
Apple Banned an App That Simply Archived Videos of ICE Abuses
CNET reports:
The Hidden Dangers of the Digital ‘Yes Man’: How to Push Back Against Sycophantic AI
The Guardian has:
Way past its prime: how did Amazon get so rubbish?
LitHub has more Cory Doctorow action:
How American Tech Cartels Use Apps to Break the Law
TechDirt reports:
And evidently make the law.
NOYB shares:
noyb win: Microsoft 365 Education may not track school children
Cybersecurity/Privacy
The Electronic Frontier Foundation reports:
Tile’s Lack of Encryption Is a Danger for Users Everywhere
FBI takes down BreachForums portal used for Salesforce extortion
Fuck Salesforce, BTW.
Fediverse
Social Experience Design says:
Welcome to Social coding commons
Hamish Campbell has:
Live at c-base a #fluffy Fediverse conference
Riley Testut reports:
The New Stack reports:
Everything Big Starts Small: Building Open Social Web Apps
The Social Web Foundation has an:
Interview with John O’Nolan about Ghost 6
Connected Places has:
Fedify announces:
Fedify 2.0—the CLI now runs natively on Node.js and Bun, not just Deno
Go To Social announces:
We’ve just made the proper release of v0.20.0 of GoToSocial, aka Sinister Sloth
TechCrunch reports:
Alternative app store AltStore raises $6M, connects with the Fediverse
Mastodon is taking cues from Bluesky with plans for its own starter ‘Packs’
Mastodon has:
Community consultation: new Terms of Service (for mastodon.social and mastodon.online)
It’s cool to join Mastodon but not these two instances.
Trunk & Tidbits, September 2025
Terence Eden explores:
Getting started with Mastodon’s Quote Posts – technical implementation details for servers
NHAM announces:
NHAM Update Opus 10 (Fedi Music Television Edition)
Super awesome.
Castopod announces:
The Official Castopod Plugin Repository
RSS
InEssential explains:
Why NetNewsWire Is Not a Web App
Lighthouse has:
A deep dive into the rss feed reader landscape
Other Slightly Federated Social Media
Azhdarchid has:
TechCrunch reports:
Niko Mara-McKay goes into the nitty-gritty:
Bluesky’s CEO meltdown: How leadership continues to fail its most marginalized users
I have said from day one that Bluesky will become enshittified. But, ATProto has some potential.
And to be fair, some of the leaders of ActivityPub and its largest platform (who value growth over safety) are egotistical pissy ass fucks when they are even slightly criticized.
But we are all fighting technofascism so let’s try to work together on the protocols front at least. Its okay to have debates and disagreements with allies. But treat them like allies when doing so. If they are your friends you can even call them pissy ass fucks. 😉
Speaking of, A New Social announces:
Bounce from Mastodon to Bluesky
Why would you? Although maybe its works with Blacksky, Northsky, or Eurosky.
CTAs (aka show us some free love)
- That’s it for this week. Please share this edition of Destroying Autocracy.
- Follow me on the Fediverse. Or this site via the button in the footer. Or via RSS. Or even our future home in 2026, if you want a head start.
Keep fighting!
Ringleader, Battalion
Reuben Walker
Follow me on the Fediverse#ActivityPub #AI #AltStore #ATProto #Autocracy #BigJournalism #BigTech #Bluesky #Castopod #Democracy #Fascism #Fediverse #fluffy #GoToSocial #IFTAS #Mastodon #NHAM #StopChina #StopIsrael #StopRedAmerica #StopRussia #SupportUkraine #TechnoAnarchism #TechnoFeudalism
-
Destroying Autocracy – October 09, 2025
Welcome to this week’s “Destroying Autocracy”.
It’s your source for curated news affecting democracy in the cyber arena with a focus on protecting it. That necessitates an opinionated Butlerian jihad against big tech as well as evangelizing for open-source and the Fediverse. Since big media’s journalism wing is flailing and failing in its core duty to democracy, this is also a collection of alternative reporting on the eternal battle between autocracy and democracy. We also cover the cybersecurity world. You can’t be free without safety and privacy.
DA comes out on Thursday and is updated through the end of day on Friday. Then we start over. So take your time in perusing it and check back in over the weekend.
FYI, my opinions will be in bold. And will often involve cursing. Because humans. Especially tech bros. And fascists. Fuck ’em.
The Programmer’s Fulcrum is the future (and smaller) home for a fusion of Symfony Station and Battalion. Its tagline is Devs Defending Democracy, Developing the OMN.
You can sign up now and for 2025 get an email with links to and featured articles for each week’s Symfony Station Communiqué and Battalion “Destroying Autocracy” post along with their featured articles. And you’ll be set with TPF after the fusing.
We are posting on the Fediverse now at @thefulcrum @thefulcrum.dev and original website content will start in 2026.
Featured Item(s)
Open Media Network writes:
A central thesis of Tolkien’s books is that evil provides the means of its own defeat. Sauron forged the One Ring that destroyed him. Shelob impaled herself on Sam’s blade. Smaug exposed his belly to Bilbo and revealed the weak point that brought him down. Tolkien’s world is full of this pattern: the seed of destruction lies buried inside the will to dominate. Power over others always carries its own undoing.
But there’s a second truth, less often spoken. Good must still act. The Ring did not cast itself into the fires of Mount Doom, it had to be carried, inch by inch, through the mud and terror, by two small Hobbits who refused to give up. Shelob could only fall because Sam held his arm firm when it would have been easier to drop the blade. Smaug was slain not by fate, but by the hand that fired the black arrow.
Even when evil weakens itself, the act of courage still has to be taken. The small people still have to step up. And there’s a third lesson here, one that feels painfully relevant to our time: good only loses when it surrenders to hopelessness. Denethor’s despair nearly doomed Minas Tirith.
Frodo would have fallen without Sam’s stubborn love. Bilbo’s small act of faith. In Tolkien’s world, hope is not naïve optimism, it’s an act of defiance.
Join us and become a hobbit in the Open Media Network.
Speaking of OMN, we have an announcement this week:
Announcing The Programmer’s Fulcrum, our retirement project
We start and end with good news to make the middle bearable.
The response to Russia’s War Crimes, Techno Feudalism, and other douchebaggery
The Kyiv Independent reports:
The military branch behind Ukraine’s battlefield apps turns to weapons bureaucracy
Ukraine’s parliament backs creation of cyber forces in first reading
The Christian Science Monitor reports:
How Ukrainian drones are slowing Russia’s advance in the east
The Electronic Frontier Foundation reports:
What Europe’s New Gig Work Law Means for Unions and Technology
Eiffair shares:
Its FOSS News reports:
Wikidata Launches Free Vector Database as Open Alternative to Closed AI Systems
NiemanLab reports:
Nonprofit news is growing strong — especially local nonprofit news, a new report shows
And the Columbia Journalism Review reports:
Heisse reports:
A defeat at the Supreme Court: Google must prepare changes to the Play Store
Nextcloud has:
Nextcloud vs Microsoft interoperability: how open source gets it right
Open letter to EU Member States on the proposed CSA Regulation or “Chat Control” law
Tuta announces:
Europe’s future is at stake: Open letter against Chat Control
Patrick shares the good news that pressure still works:
Citizen Protest Halts Chat Control; Breyer Celebrates Major Victory for Digital Privacy
404 Media reports:
Data Hoarder Uses AI to Create Searchable Database of Epstein Files
Help Us Investigate Book Bans and Educational Censorship Around America
Igalia announces:
Igalia, Servo, and the Sovereign Tech Fund
The Guardian reports:
You won’t believe what degrading practice the pope just condemned
Clever headline.
The Register reports:
Pro-Russia hacktivist group dies of cringe after falling into researchers’ trap
UK slaps ‘strategic market status’ on Google, unlocking power to pry open search
Burning Web shares:
Great Stuff.
Neutral
CyberCultural shares:
What the Internet Was Like in 2000
Homestar Runner 🙂
The Brookings Institute says:
The Guardian reports:
Poynter announces:
Poynter launches AI Innovation Lab to house its growing AI portfolio
CommonsDB is:
Exploring CommonsDB’s role in AI training data
The Evil Empire (AKA Autocracy) Strikes Back
TechCrunch reports:
ICE bought vehicles equipped with fake cell towers to spy on phones
Italian businessman’s phone reportedly targeted with Paragon spyware
Pariah States
The Kyiv Independent reports:
Russia’s digital Iron Curtain descends as Kremlin chokes remaining internet freedoms
IFTAS reports:
Coordinated Pro-Russian Propaganda Network Targeting ActivityPub and ATProto Services
Bleeping Computer reports:
Russian Hacktivists target critical infrastructure, hit decoy plant
North Korean hackers stole over $2 billion in crypto this year
The Columbia Journalism Review reports on:
DarkReading reports:
Chinese Gov’t Fronts Trick the West to Obtain Cyber Tech
China-Nexus Actors Weaponize ‘Nezha’ Open Source Tool
The Register reports:
OpenAI bans suspected Chinese accounts using ChatGPT to plan surveillance
The Columbia Journalism Review reports:
How Anti-Cybercrime Laws Are Being Weaponized to Repress Journalism
Big Media
FAIR reports:
MAGA’s Little Helpers: Sinclair, Nexstar and the Consolidation of Broadcast TV
Poynter reports:
Big Tech
404 Media reports:
Apple Banned an App That Simply Archived Videos of ICE Abuses
CNET reports:
The Hidden Dangers of the Digital ‘Yes Man’: How to Push Back Against Sycophantic AI
The Guardian has:
Way past its prime: how did Amazon get so rubbish?
LitHub has more Cory Doctorow action:
How American Tech Cartels Use Apps to Break the Law
TechDirt reports:
And evidently make the law.
NOYB shares:
noyb win: Microsoft 365 Education may not track school children
Cybersecurity/Privacy
The Electronic Frontier Foundation reports:
Tile’s Lack of Encryption Is a Danger for Users Everywhere
FBI takes down BreachForums portal used for Salesforce extortion
Fuck Salesforce, BTW.
Fediverse
Social Experience Design says:
Welcome to Social coding commons
Hamish Campbell has:
Live at c-base a #fluffy Fediverse conference
Riley Testut reports:
The New Stack reports:
Everything Big Starts Small: Building Open Social Web Apps
The Social Web Foundation has an:
Interview with John O’Nolan about Ghost 6
Connected Places has:
Fedify announces:
Fedify 2.0—the CLI now runs natively on Node.js and Bun, not just Deno
Go To Social announces:
We’ve just made the proper release of v0.20.0 of GoToSocial, aka Sinister Sloth
TechCrunch reports:
Alternative app store AltStore raises $6M, connects with the Fediverse
Mastodon is taking cues from Bluesky with plans for its own starter ‘Packs’
Mastodon has:
Community consultation: new Terms of Service (for mastodon.social and mastodon.online)
It’s cool to join Mastodon but not these two instances.
Trunk & Tidbits, September 2025
Terence Eden explores:
Getting started with Mastodon’s Quote Posts – technical implementation details for servers
NHAM announces:
NHAM Update Opus 10 (Fedi Music Television Edition)
Super awesome.
Castopod announces:
The Official Castopod Plugin Repository
RSS
InEssential explains:
Why NetNewsWire Is Not a Web App
Lighthouse has:
A deep dive into the rss feed reader landscape
Other Slightly Federated Social Media
Azhdarchid has:
TechCrunch reports:
Niko Mara-McKay goes into the nitty-gritty:
Bluesky’s CEO meltdown: How leadership continues to fail its most marginalized users
I have said from day one that Bluesky will become enshittified. But, ATProto has some potential.
And to be fair, some of the leaders of ActivityPub and its largest platform (who value growth over safety) are egotistical pissy ass fucks when they are even slightly criticized.
But we are all fighting technofascism so let’s try to work together on the protocols front at least. Its okay to have debates and disagreements with allies. But treat them like allies when doing so. If they are your friends you can even call them pissy ass fucks. 😉
Speaking of, A New Social announces:
Bounce from Mastodon to Bluesky
Why would you? Although maybe its works with Blacksky, Northsky, or Eurosky.
CTAs (aka show us some free love)
- That’s it for this week. Please share this edition of Destroying Autocracy.
- Follow me on the Fediverse. Or this site via the button in the footer. Or via RSS. Or even our future home in 2026, if you want a head start.
Keep fighting!
Ringleader, Battalion
Reuben Walker
Follow me on the Fediverse#ActivityPub #AI #AltStore #ATProto #Autocracy #BigJournalism #BigTech #Bluesky #Castopod #Democracy #Fascism #Fediverse #fluffy #GoToSocial #IFTAS #Mastodon #NHAM #StopChina #StopIsrael #StopRedAmerica #StopRussia #SupportUkraine #TechnoAnarchism #TechnoFeudalism
-
Destroying Autocracy – May 08, 2025
Welcome to this week’s “Destroying Autocracy”.
It’s your source for curated news affecting democracy in the cyber arena with a focus on protecting it. That necessitates an opinionated Butlerian jihad against big tech as well as evangelizing for open-source and the Fediverse. Since big media’s journalism wing is flailing and failing in its core duty to democracy, this is also a collection of alternative reporting on the eternal battle between autocracy and democracy. We also cover the cybersecurity world. You can’t be free without safety and privacy.
DA comes out on Thursday and is updated through the end of day on Friday. Then we start over. So take your time in perusing it and check back in over the weekend.
FYI, my opinions will be in bold. And will often involve cursing. Because humans. Especially tech bros. And fascists. Fuck ’em.
Featured Item(s)
Hamish Campbell writes:
The world we live in is shaped, created by 40 years of entrenched pushing of #neoliberalism and #postmodernism, both of which have systematically dismantled radical change and challenge paths that used to exist.
To reclaim our path, we now need to reject the illusions of “common sense” fed to us by the #deathcult and reboot our social view from a place of clarity.
This is where the #hashtags come into use, acting as conceptual tools for navigating, understanding, and breaking free from the mess we’re in.
Decoding the Hashtags: A Roadmap for Social Change
We start and end with good news to make the middle bearable.
The response to Russia’s War Crimes, TechnoFeudalism, and other douchebaggery
The Christian Science Monitor reports on:
Origins of Ukraine’s drone creativity
The Kyiv Independent reports:
Book on Soviet dissidents wins Pulitzer Prize
DarkReading reports:
Countries Begin NATO’s Locked Shields Cyber-Defense Exercise
Euronews reports:
‘We are less protected’ due to AI, says Cambridge Analytica whistleblower on protecting our data
Libre Office announces:
Germany committing to ODF and open document standards
Benjamin Hollon envisions:
The Guardian reports:
OpenAI reverses course and says non-profit arm will retain control of firm
TechCrunch reports:
FTC bans hidden fees for live events and short-term rentals, effective May 12
US DoJ wants Google to sell two of its ad products
MacRumors reports:
Apple Faces Developer Lawsuit After Defying App Store Injunction
404 Media reports:
GlobalX, Airline for Trump’s Deportations, Hacked
Tuta announces:
Bert Hubert has a European:
The Evil Empire Strikes Back
Gizmodo reports:
With Its Destruction of Government Data Silos, DOGE Is Building a ‘Surveillance Weapon’
The Register reports:
India ready to greenlight Starlink – as long as it lets New Delhi censor, snoop
Fascist capitalism at its finest.
Signal chat app clone used by Signalgate’s Waltz was apparently an insecure mess
Unicorn Riot reports:
Pariah States
Micah Flee shares:
The Register reports:
Super spyware maker NSO must pay Meta $168M in WhatsApp court battle
From Russia with doubt: Go library’s Kremlin ties stoke fear
The Kyiv Independent reports:
Poland faces ‘unprecedented’ Russian interference ahead of presidential election, minister says
The Guardian reports:
Pro-Russian hackers claim to have targeted several UK websites
DarkReading reports:
‘Lemon Sandstorm’ Underscores Risks to Middle East Infrastructure
Big Media
The World Association of News Publisher reports:
Media outlets worldwide join call for AI companies to help protect news integrity
Yeah, right.
Big Tech
The Register reports:
Infosec guru Schneier worries corp AI will manipulate us
Futurism reports:
Facebook Allegedly Detected When Teen Girls Deleted Selfies So It Could Serve Them Beauty Ads
Cory Doctorow has:
Mark Zuckerberg announces mind-control ray (again) (07 May 2025)
People wonder why I’m a misanthrope.
Tech Crunch reports:
NSO Group must pay more than $167 million in damages to WhatsApp for spyware campaign
Forbes reports:
200 Million X User Records Released — 2.8 Billion Twitter IDs Leaked
If you are on shitter at this point, you get what you deserve.
Terror
Tech Policy reports:
From Incels to Mercenaries: When Online Hate Becomes Real-World Violence
Cybersecurity/Privacy
404 Media reports:
The Signal Clone the Trump Admin Uses Was Hacked
Senator Demands Investigation into Trump Admin Signal Clone After 404 Media Investigation
The Register reports:
Altman’s eyeball-scanning biometric blockchain orbs officially come to America
RSA Conf wrap: AI and China on everything, everywhere, all at once
The Electronic Frontier Foundation has:
BleepingComputer reports:
Police takes down six DDoS-for-hire services, arrests admins
Fediverse
The Fediverse Report has:
Tim Bray looks at:
Mastodon has:
Coxy has:
Reclaiming the web: Mastodon and the decentralised social movement
Ghost has:
NodeBB asks:
What would cross-posting between instances look like in ActivityPub?
Peertube has:
AlternativeTo reports:
Kagi adds PeerTube video search results, enhanced Assistant UI, and translation upgrades
The Social Web Foundation is:
Reflecting on Our First Year: The Social Web Foundation’s 2024 Annual Report
CTAs (aka show us some free love)
- That’s it for this week. Please share this edition of Destroying Autocracy.
- Follow me on the Fediverse. Or this site via the button in the footer. Or via RSS.
Keep fighting!
Ringleader, Battalion
Reuben Walker
Follow me on the Fediverse#115 #ActivityPub #AI #ATProtocol #Autocracy #BigJournalism #BigTech #Bluesky #deathcult #Democracy #Fascism #Fediverse #hashtags #Mastodon #neoliberalism #NodeBB #Peertube #postmodernism #StopChina #StopIran #StopIsrael #StopRedAmerica #StopRussia #SupportUkraine
-
Destroying Autocracy – May 08, 2025
Welcome to this week’s “Destroying Autocracy”.
It’s your source for curated news affecting democracy in the cyber arena with a focus on protecting it. That necessitates an opinionated Butlerian jihad against big tech as well as evangelizing for open-source and the Fediverse. Since big media’s journalism wing is flailing and failing in its core duty to democracy, this is also a collection of alternative reporting on the eternal battle between autocracy and democracy. We also cover the cybersecurity world. You can’t be free without safety and privacy.
DA comes out on Thursday and is updated through the end of day on Friday. Then we start over. So take your time in perusing it and check back in over the weekend.
FYI, my opinions will be in bold. And will often involve cursing. Because humans. Especially tech bros. And fascists. Fuck ’em.
Featured Item(s)
Hamish Campbell writes:
The world we live in is shaped, created by 40 years of entrenched pushing of #neoliberalism and #postmodernism, both of which have systematically dismantled radical change and challenge paths that used to exist.
To reclaim our path, we now need to reject the illusions of “common sense” fed to us by the #deathcult and reboot our social view from a place of clarity.
This is where the #hashtags come into use, acting as conceptual tools for navigating, understanding, and breaking free from the mess we’re in.
Decoding the Hashtags: A Roadmap for Social Change
We start and end with good news to make the middle bearable.
The response to Russia’s War Crimes, TechnoFeudalism, and other douchebaggery
The Christian Science Monitor reports on:
Origins of Ukraine’s drone creativity
The Kyiv Independent reports:
Book on Soviet dissidents wins Pulitzer Prize
DarkReading reports:
Countries Begin NATO’s Locked Shields Cyber-Defense Exercise
Euronews reports:
‘We are less protected’ due to AI, says Cambridge Analytica whistleblower on protecting our data
Libre Office announces:
Germany committing to ODF and open document standards
Benjamin Hollon envisions:
The Guardian reports:
OpenAI reverses course and says non-profit arm will retain control of firm
TechCrunch reports:
FTC bans hidden fees for live events and short-term rentals, effective May 12
US DoJ wants Google to sell two of its ad products
MacRumors reports:
Apple Faces Developer Lawsuit After Defying App Store Injunction
404 Media reports:
GlobalX, Airline for Trump’s Deportations, Hacked
Tuta announces:
Bert Hubert has a European:
The Evil Empire Strikes Back
Gizmodo reports:
With Its Destruction of Government Data Silos, DOGE Is Building a ‘Surveillance Weapon’
The Register reports:
India ready to greenlight Starlink – as long as it lets New Delhi censor, snoop
Fascist capitalism at its finest.
Signal chat app clone used by Signalgate’s Waltz was apparently an insecure mess
Unicorn Riot reports:
Pariah States
Micah Flee shares:
The Register reports:
Super spyware maker NSO must pay Meta $168M in WhatsApp court battle
From Russia with doubt: Go library’s Kremlin ties stoke fear
The Kyiv Independent reports:
Poland faces ‘unprecedented’ Russian interference ahead of presidential election, minister says
The Guardian reports:
Pro-Russian hackers claim to have targeted several UK websites
DarkReading reports:
‘Lemon Sandstorm’ Underscores Risks to Middle East Infrastructure
Big Media
The World Association of News Publisher reports:
Media outlets worldwide join call for AI companies to help protect news integrity
Yeah, right.
Big Tech
The Register reports:
Infosec guru Schneier worries corp AI will manipulate us
Futurism reports:
Facebook Allegedly Detected When Teen Girls Deleted Selfies So It Could Serve Them Beauty Ads
Cory Doctorow has:
Mark Zuckerberg announces mind-control ray (again) (07 May 2025)
People wonder why I’m a misanthrope.
Tech Crunch reports:
NSO Group must pay more than $167 million in damages to WhatsApp for spyware campaign
Forbes reports:
200 Million X User Records Released — 2.8 Billion Twitter IDs Leaked
If you are on shitter at this point, you get what you deserve.
Terror
Tech Policy reports:
From Incels to Mercenaries: When Online Hate Becomes Real-World Violence
Cybersecurity/Privacy
404 Media reports:
The Signal Clone the Trump Admin Uses Was Hacked
Senator Demands Investigation into Trump Admin Signal Clone After 404 Media Investigation
The Register reports:
Altman’s eyeball-scanning biometric blockchain orbs officially come to America
RSA Conf wrap: AI and China on everything, everywhere, all at once
The Electronic Frontier Foundation has:
BleepingComputer reports:
Police takes down six DDoS-for-hire services, arrests admins
Fediverse
The Fediverse Report has:
Tim Bray looks at:
Mastodon has:
Coxy has:
Reclaiming the web: Mastodon and the decentralised social movement
Ghost has:
NodeBB asks:
What would cross-posting between instances look like in ActivityPub?
Peertube has:
AlternativeTo reports:
Kagi adds PeerTube video search results, enhanced Assistant UI, and translation upgrades
The Social Web Foundation is:
Reflecting on Our First Year: The Social Web Foundation’s 2024 Annual Report
CTAs (aka show us some free love)
- That’s it for this week. Please share this edition of Destroying Autocracy.
- Follow me on the Fediverse. Or this site via the button in the footer. Or via RSS.
Keep fighting!
Ringleader, Battalion
Reuben Walker
Follow me on the Fediverse#115 #ActivityPub #AI #ATProtocol #Autocracy #BigJournalism #BigTech #Bluesky #deathcult #Democracy #Fascism #Fediverse #hashtags #Mastodon #neoliberalism #NodeBB #Peertube #postmodernism #StopChina #StopIran #StopIsrael #StopRedAmerica #StopRussia #SupportUkraine
-
Destroying Autocracy – May 08, 2025
Welcome to this week’s “Destroying Autocracy”.
It’s your source for curated news affecting democracy in the cyber arena with a focus on protecting it. That necessitates an opinionated Butlerian jihad against big tech as well as evangelizing for open-source and the Fediverse. Since big media’s journalism wing is flailing and failing in its core duty to democracy, this is also a collection of alternative reporting on the eternal battle between autocracy and democracy. We also cover the cybersecurity world. You can’t be free without safety and privacy.
DA comes out on Thursday and is updated through the end of day on Friday. Then we start over. So take your time in perusing it and check back in over the weekend.
FYI, my opinions will be in bold. And will often involve cursing. Because humans. Especially tech bros. And fascists. Fuck ’em.
Featured Item(s)
Hamish Campbell writes:
The world we live in is shaped, created by 40 years of entrenched pushing of #neoliberalism and #postmodernism, both of which have systematically dismantled radical change and challenge paths that used to exist.
To reclaim our path, we now need to reject the illusions of “common sense” fed to us by the #deathcult and reboot our social view from a place of clarity.
This is where the #hashtags come into use, acting as conceptual tools for navigating, understanding, and breaking free from the mess we’re in.
Decoding the Hashtags: A Roadmap for Social Change
We start and end with good news to make the middle bearable.
The response to Russia’s War Crimes, TechnoFeudalism, and other douchebaggery
The Christian Science Monitor reports on:
Origins of Ukraine’s drone creativity
The Kyiv Independent reports:
Book on Soviet dissidents wins Pulitzer Prize
DarkReading reports:
Countries Begin NATO’s Locked Shields Cyber-Defense Exercise
Euronews reports:
‘We are less protected’ due to AI, says Cambridge Analytica whistleblower on protecting our data
Libre Office announces:
Germany committing to ODF and open document standards
Benjamin Hollon envisions:
The Guardian reports:
OpenAI reverses course and says non-profit arm will retain control of firm
TechCrunch reports:
FTC bans hidden fees for live events and short-term rentals, effective May 12
US DoJ wants Google to sell two of its ad products
MacRumors reports:
Apple Faces Developer Lawsuit After Defying App Store Injunction
404 Media reports:
GlobalX, Airline for Trump’s Deportations, Hacked
Tuta announces:
Bert Hubert has a European:
The Evil Empire Strikes Back
Gizmodo reports:
With Its Destruction of Government Data Silos, DOGE Is Building a ‘Surveillance Weapon’
The Register reports:
India ready to greenlight Starlink – as long as it lets New Delhi censor, snoop
Fascist capitalism at its finest.
Signal chat app clone used by Signalgate’s Waltz was apparently an insecure mess
Unicorn Riot reports:
Pariah States
Micah Flee shares:
The Register reports:
Super spyware maker NSO must pay Meta $168M in WhatsApp court battle
From Russia with doubt: Go library’s Kremlin ties stoke fear
The Kyiv Independent reports:
Poland faces ‘unprecedented’ Russian interference ahead of presidential election, minister says
The Guardian reports:
Pro-Russian hackers claim to have targeted several UK websites
DarkReading reports:
‘Lemon Sandstorm’ Underscores Risks to Middle East Infrastructure
Big Media
The World Association of News Publisher reports:
Media outlets worldwide join call for AI companies to help protect news integrity
Yeah, right.
Big Tech
The Register reports:
Infosec guru Schneier worries corp AI will manipulate us
Futurism reports:
Facebook Allegedly Detected When Teen Girls Deleted Selfies So It Could Serve Them Beauty Ads
Cory Doctorow has:
Mark Zuckerberg announces mind-control ray (again) (07 May 2025)
People wonder why I’m a misanthrope.
Tech Crunch reports:
NSO Group must pay more than $167 million in damages to WhatsApp for spyware campaign
Forbes reports:
200 Million X User Records Released — 2.8 Billion Twitter IDs Leaked
If you are on shitter at this point, you get what you deserve.
Terror
Tech Policy reports:
From Incels to Mercenaries: When Online Hate Becomes Real-World Violence
Cybersecurity/Privacy
404 Media reports:
The Signal Clone the Trump Admin Uses Was Hacked
Senator Demands Investigation into Trump Admin Signal Clone After 404 Media Investigation
The Register reports:
Altman’s eyeball-scanning biometric blockchain orbs officially come to America
RSA Conf wrap: AI and China on everything, everywhere, all at once
The Electronic Frontier Foundation has:
BleepingComputer reports:
Police takes down six DDoS-for-hire services, arrests admins
Fediverse
The Fediverse Report has:
Tim Bray looks at:
Mastodon has:
Coxy has:
Reclaiming the web: Mastodon and the decentralised social movement
Ghost has:
NodeBB asks:
What would cross-posting between instances look like in ActivityPub?
Peertube has:
AlternativeTo reports:
Kagi adds PeerTube video search results, enhanced Assistant UI, and translation upgrades
The Social Web Foundation is:
Reflecting on Our First Year: The Social Web Foundation’s 2024 Annual Report
Bem Werdmuller shares:
TechCrunch reports:
Instagram Threads is getting video ads
Sigh.
Other Slightly Federated Social Media
The Fediverse Report has:
Bluesky has:
Finally some (small) progress on decentratiztion.
Arxiv features:
Self-moderation in the decentralized era: decoding blocking behavior on Bluesky
CTAs (aka show us some free love)
- That’s it for this week. Please share this edition of Destroying Autocracy.
- Follow me on the Fediverse. Or this site via the button in the footer. Or via RSS.
Keep fighting!
Ringleader, Battalion
Reuben Walker
Follow me on the Fediverse#115 #ActivityPub #AI #ATProtocol #Autocracy #BigJournalism #BigTech #Bluesky #deathcult #Democracy #Fascism #Fediverse #hashtags #Mastodon #neoliberalism #NodeBB #Peertube #postmodernism #StopChina #StopIran #StopIsrael #StopRedAmerica #StopRussia #SupportUkraine #Threads
-
Destroying Autocracy – May 08, 2025
Welcome to this week’s “Destroying Autocracy”.
It’s your source for curated news affecting democracy in the cyber arena with a focus on protecting it. That necessitates an opinionated Butlerian jihad against big tech as well as evangelizing for open-source and the Fediverse. Since big media’s journalism wing is flailing and failing in its core duty to democracy, this is also a collection of alternative reporting on the eternal battle between autocracy and democracy. We also cover the cybersecurity world. You can’t be free without safety and privacy.
DA comes out on Thursday and is updated through the end of day on Friday. Then we start over. So take your time in perusing it and check back in over the weekend.
FYI, my opinions will be in bold. And will often involve cursing. Because humans. Especially tech bros. And fascists. Fuck ’em.
Featured Item(s)
Hamish Campbell writes:
The world we live in is shaped, created by 40 years of entrenched pushing of #neoliberalism and #postmodernism, both of which have systematically dismantled radical change and challenge paths that used to exist.
To reclaim our path, we now need to reject the illusions of “common sense” fed to us by the #deathcult and reboot our social view from a place of clarity.
This is where the #hashtags come into use, acting as conceptual tools for navigating, understanding, and breaking free from the mess we’re in.
Decoding the Hashtags: A Roadmap for Social Change
We start and end with good news to make the middle bearable.
The response to Russia’s War Crimes, TechnoFeudalism, and other douchebaggery
The Christian Science Monitor reports on:
Origins of Ukraine’s drone creativity
The Kyiv Independent reports:
Book on Soviet dissidents wins Pulitzer Prize
DarkReading reports:
Countries Begin NATO’s Locked Shields Cyber-Defense Exercise
Euronews reports:
‘We are less protected’ due to AI, says Cambridge Analytica whistleblower on protecting our data
Libre Office announces:
Germany committing to ODF and open document standards
Benjamin Hollon envisions:
The Guardian reports:
OpenAI reverses course and says non-profit arm will retain control of firm
TechCrunch reports:
FTC bans hidden fees for live events and short-term rentals, effective May 12
US DoJ wants Google to sell two of its ad products
MacRumors reports:
Apple Faces Developer Lawsuit After Defying App Store Injunction
404 Media reports:
GlobalX, Airline for Trump’s Deportations, Hacked
Tuta announces:
Bert Hubert has a European:
The Evil Empire Strikes Back
Gizmodo reports:
With Its Destruction of Government Data Silos, DOGE Is Building a ‘Surveillance Weapon’
The Register reports:
India ready to greenlight Starlink – as long as it lets New Delhi censor, snoop
Fascist capitalism at its finest.
Signal chat app clone used by Signalgate’s Waltz was apparently an insecure mess
Unicorn Riot reports:
Pariah States
Micah Flee shares:
The Register reports:
Super spyware maker NSO must pay Meta $168M in WhatsApp court battle
From Russia with doubt: Go library’s Kremlin ties stoke fear
The Kyiv Independent reports:
Poland faces ‘unprecedented’ Russian interference ahead of presidential election, minister says
The Guardian reports:
Pro-Russian hackers claim to have targeted several UK websites
DarkReading reports:
‘Lemon Sandstorm’ Underscores Risks to Middle East Infrastructure
Big Media
The World Association of News Publisher reports:
Media outlets worldwide join call for AI companies to help protect news integrity
Yeah, right.
Platformer shares:
Big Tech
The Register reports:
Infosec guru Schneier worries corp AI will manipulate us
Futurism reports:
Facebook Allegedly Detected When Teen Girls Deleted Selfies So It Could Serve Them Beauty Ads
404 Media reports:
Well, Well, Well: Meta to Add Facial Recognition To Glasses After All
Cory Doctorow has:
Mark Zuckerberg announces mind-control ray (again) (07 May 2025)
People wonder why I’m a misanthrope.
Tech Crunch reports:
NSO Group must pay more than $167 million in damages to WhatsApp for spyware campaign
Forbes reports:
200 Million X User Records Released — 2.8 Billion Twitter IDs Leaked
If you are on shitter at this point, you get what you deserve.
Terror
Tech Policy reports:
From Incels to Mercenaries: When Online Hate Becomes Real-World Violence
Cybersecurity/Privacy
404 Media reports:
The Signal Clone the Trump Admin Uses Was Hacked
Senator Demands Investigation into Trump Admin Signal Clone After 404 Media Investigation
The Register reports:
Altman’s eyeball-scanning biometric blockchain orbs officially come to America
RSA Conf wrap: AI and China on everything, everywhere, all at once
The Electronic Frontier Foundation has:
BleepingComputer reports:
Police takes down six DDoS-for-hire services, arrests admins
Germany takes down eXch cryptocurrency exchange, seizes servers
Fediverse
The Fediverse Report has:
Tim Bray looks at:
Mastodon has:
Coxy has:
Reclaiming the web: Mastodon and the decentralised social movement
Ghost has:
NodeBB asks:
What would cross-posting between instances look like in ActivityPub?
Peertube has:
AlternativeTo reports:
Kagi adds PeerTube video search results, enhanced Assistant UI, and translation upgrades
The Social Web Foundation is:
Reflecting on Our First Year: The Social Web Foundation’s 2024 Annual Report
Bem Werdmuller shares:
Bonfire has:
Slow Software for a Burning World
TechCrunch reports:
Instagram Threads is getting video ads
Sigh.
Other Slightly Federated Social Media
The Fediverse Report has:
Bluesky has:
Finally some (small) progress on decentratiztion.
Arxiv features:
Self-moderation in the decentralized era: decoding blocking behavior on Bluesky
CTAs (aka show us some free love)
- That’s it for this week. Please share this edition of Destroying Autocracy.
- Follow me on the Fediverse. Or this site via the button in the footer. Or via RSS.
Keep fighting!
Ringleader, Battalion
Reuben Walker
Follow me on the Fediverse#115 #ActivityPub #AI #ATProtocol #Autocracy #BigJournalism #BigTech #Bluesky #deathcult #Democracy #Fascism #Fediverse #hashtags #Mastodon #neoliberalism #NodeBB #Peertube #postmodernism #StopChina #StopIran #StopIsrael #StopRedAmerica #StopRussia #SupportUkraine #Threads
-
Destroying Autocracy – April 3, 2025
Welcome to this week’s “Destroying Autocracy”.
It’s your source for curated news affecting democracy in the cyber arena with a focus on protecting it. That necessitates an opinionated Butlerian jihad against big tech as well as evangelizing for open-source and the Fediverse. Since big media’s journalism wing is flailing and failing in its core duty to democracy, this is also a collection of alternative reporting on the eternal battle between autocracy and democracy. We also cover the cybersecurity world. You can’t be free without safety and privacy.
DA comes out on Thursday and is updated through the end of day on Friday. Then we start over. So take your time in perusing it and check back in over the weekend.
FYI, my opinions will be in bold. And will often involve cursing. Because humans. Especially tech bros. And fascists. Fuck ’em.
Featured Item
Heydonworks shares:
AI can’t do spite. 😈
We start and end with good news to make the middle bearable.
The response to Russia’s War Crimes and other douchebaggery
The Kyiv Independent reports:
Moscow Metro website displays appeal from recently hacked Ukrainian Railways
EuroNews reports:
Help us develop non-English/Chinese AI models, Japan asks EU
French antitrust watchdog fines Apple €150 million over data collection tool
The Reframe has:
404 Media reports:
Open Source Genetic Database Shuts Down to Protect Users From ‘Authoritarian Governments’
EuroNews reports:
Google’s AI feature on hold in most EU member states due to ‘strict rules’
Reuters reports:
Elon Musk must face fraud lawsuit over disclosure of Twitter stake
He’s not allowed to fuck over rich people.
Tech Policy reports:
The UK announces:
Foreign Influence Registration Scheme implementation
Gaël Duval shares:
Practical Payment Solutions for Murena and /e/OS Users
That’s surveillance and Google-free Android if you aren’t familiar.
Geo Coop reports:
Worker-Owned News Outlets Are Changing the Media Industry
The Wrap has:
In Praise of Laurene Powell Jobs, Owner of The Atlantic, Superhero of Signalgate
Neutral
The Guardian reports:
Data protection bill leaves room for governmental abuse, campaigners warn
Open Source Initiative reports on:
Overcoming barriers to Open Source procurement in the European Union
The Evil Empire Strikes Back
TechDirt reports:
The Real Cost Of DOGE: Musk’s Government Cuts Creating Massive New Expenses
NBC News reports:
Denied, deported, detained: U.S. border incidents have travelers thinking twice
Pariah States
The Next Web reports:
The day a Russian missile hit a Ukrainian tech giant
BleepingComputer reports:
North Korean hackers adopt ClickFix attacks to target crypto firms
The Register reports:
North Korea’s fake tech workers now targeting European employers
DarkReading reports:
Israel Enters ‘Stage 3’ of Cyber Wars With Iran Proxies
Big Media
Tech Policy reports on:
Technology, Democracy, and Power: Journalism’s Role in a Time of Crisis
The Guardian reports:
‘I can’t cope with it any more’: newsrooms scramble to retain audiences amid the big switch-off
Big Tech
Tech Policy reports:
Where Does Trump’s Takeover of the FTC Leave the Regulation of Big Tech?
The Verge reports:
It’s the moment of truth for Zuckerberg’s Trump bet
Epicenter reports:
EU Commission Undermines eIDAS Protections, again!
Pivot to AI reports:
AI in the enterprise is failing over twice as fast in 2025 as it was in 2024
Cybersecurity/Privacy
The Register reports:
UK threatens £100K-a-day fines under new cyber bill
Fediverse
The Fediverse Report has:
We Distriube reports:
TechCrunch reports:
A new security fund opens up to help protect the fediverse
Emelia Smith has:
Open-source tools needed for the future of decentralized moderation
Moving Beyond the False Dichotomy for Federation Management
The Nexus of Privacy shares:
More notes on Organizing, Mutual Aid, and Activism on decentralized social networks
Ghost has an announcement:
Funkwhale announces:
Steven Berson has:
Other Slightly Federated Social Media
TechCrunch reports:
Beyond Bluesky: These are the apps building social experiences on the AT Protocol
Mark Cuban backs Skylight, a TikTok alternative built on Bluesky’s underlying technology
CTAs (aka show us some free love)
- That’s it for this week. Please share this edition of Destroying Autocracy.
- Follow me on the Fediverse. Or this site via the button in the footer. Or via RSS.
- Or follow Battalion on Bluesky.
Keep fighting!
Ringleader, Battalion
Reuben Walker
Follow me on the Fediverse#110 #ActivityPub #AI #ATProtocol #Autocracy #BigJournalism #BigTech #Democracy #Diaspora #Fascism #Fediverse #Ghost #Mastodon #StopChina #StopIran #StopIsrael #StopRedAmerica #StopRussia #SupportUkraine
-
Destroying Autocracy – April 3, 2025
Welcome to this week’s “Destroying Autocracy”.
It’s your source for curated news affecting democracy in the cyber arena with a focus on protecting it. That necessitates an opinionated Butlerian jihad against big tech as well as evangelizing for open-source and the Fediverse. Since big media’s journalism wing is flailing and failing in its core duty to democracy, this is also a collection of alternative reporting on the eternal battle between autocracy and democracy. We also cover the cybersecurity world. You can’t be free without safety and privacy.
DA comes out on Thursday and is updated through the end of day on Friday. Then we start over. So take your time in perusing it and check back in over the weekend.
FYI, my opinions will be in bold. And will often involve cursing. Because humans. Especially tech bros. And fascists. Fuck ’em.
Featured Item
Heydonworks shares:
AI can’t do spite. 😈
We start and end with good news to make the middle bearable.
The response to Russia’s War Crimes and other douchebaggery
The Kyiv Independent reports:
Moscow Metro website displays appeal from recently hacked Ukrainian Railways
EuroNews reports:
Help us develop non-English/Chinese AI models, Japan asks EU
French antitrust watchdog fines Apple €150 million over data collection tool
The Reframe has:
404 Media reports:
Open Source Genetic Database Shuts Down to Protect Users From ‘Authoritarian Governments’
EuroNews reports:
Google’s AI feature on hold in most EU member states due to ‘strict rules’
Reuters reports:
Elon Musk must face fraud lawsuit over disclosure of Twitter stake
He’s not allowed to fuck over rich people.
Tech Policy reports:
The UK announces:
Foreign Influence Registration Scheme implementation
Gaël Duval shares:
Practical Payment Solutions for Murena and /e/OS Users
That’s surveillance and Google-free Android if you aren’t familiar.
Geo Coop reports:
Worker-Owned News Outlets Are Changing the Media Industry
The Wrap has:
In Praise of Laurene Powell Jobs, Owner of The Atlantic, Superhero of Signalgate
Neutral
The Guardian reports:
Data protection bill leaves room for governmental abuse, campaigners warn
Open Source Initiative reports on:
Overcoming barriers to Open Source procurement in the European Union
The Evil Empire Strikes Back
TechDirt reports:
The Real Cost Of DOGE: Musk’s Government Cuts Creating Massive New Expenses
NBC News reports:
Denied, deported, detained: U.S. border incidents have travelers thinking twice
Pariah States
The Next Web reports:
The day a Russian missile hit a Ukrainian tech giant
BleepingComputer reports:
North Korean hackers adopt ClickFix attacks to target crypto firms
The Register reports:
North Korea’s fake tech workers now targeting European employers
DarkReading reports:
Israel Enters ‘Stage 3’ of Cyber Wars With Iran Proxies
Big Media
Tech Policy reports on:
Technology, Democracy, and Power: Journalism’s Role in a Time of Crisis
The Guardian reports:
‘I can’t cope with it any more’: newsrooms scramble to retain audiences amid the big switch-off
Big Tech
Tech Policy reports:
Where Does Trump’s Takeover of the FTC Leave the Regulation of Big Tech?
The Verge reports:
It’s the moment of truth for Zuckerberg’s Trump bet
Epicenter reports:
EU Commission Undermines eIDAS Protections, again!
Pivot to AI reports:
AI in the enterprise is failing over twice as fast in 2025 as it was in 2024
Cybersecurity/Privacy
The Register reports:
UK threatens £100K-a-day fines under new cyber bill
Fediverse
The Fediverse Report has:
We Distriube reports:
TechCrunch reports:
A new security fund opens up to help protect the fediverse
Emelia Smith has:
Open-source tools needed for the future of decentralized moderation
Moving Beyond the False Dichotomy for Federation Management
The Nexus of Privacy shares:
More notes on Organizing, Mutual Aid, and Activism on decentralized social networks
Ghost has an announcement:
Funkwhale announces:
Steven Berson has:
Other Slightly Federated Social Media
TechCrunch reports:
Beyond Bluesky: These are the apps building social experiences on the AT Protocol
Mark Cuban backs Skylight, a TikTok alternative built on Bluesky’s underlying technology
CTAs (aka show us some free love)
- That’s it for this week. Please share this edition of Destroying Autocracy.
- Follow me on the Fediverse. Or this site via the button in the footer. Or via RSS.
- Or follow Battalion on Bluesky.
Keep fighting!
Ringleader, Battalion
Reuben Walker
Follow me on the Fediverse#110 #ActivityPub #AI #ATProtocol #Autocracy #BigJournalism #BigTech #Democracy #Diaspora #Fascism #Fediverse #Ghost #Mastodon #StopChina #StopIran #StopIsrael #StopRedAmerica #StopRussia #SupportUkraine
-
Destroying Autocracy – April 3, 2025
Welcome to this week’s “Destroying Autocracy”.
It’s your source for curated news affecting democracy in the cyber arena with a focus on protecting it. That necessitates an opinionated Butlerian jihad against big tech as well as evangelizing for open-source and the Fediverse. Since big media’s journalism wing is flailing and failing in its core duty to democracy, this is also a collection of alternative reporting on the eternal battle between autocracy and democracy. We also cover the cybersecurity world. You can’t be free without safety and privacy.
DA comes out on Thursday and is updated through the end of day on Friday. Then we start over. So take your time in perusing it and check back in over the weekend.
FYI, my opinions will be in bold. And will often involve cursing. Because humans. Especially tech bros. And fascists. Fuck ’em.
Featured Item
Heydonworks shares:
AI can’t do spite. 😈
We start and end with good news to make the middle bearable.
The response to Russia’s War Crimes and other douchebaggery
The Kyiv Independent reports:
Moscow Metro website displays appeal from recently hacked Ukrainian Railways
EuroNews reports:
Help us develop non-English/Chinese AI models, Japan asks EU
French antitrust watchdog fines Apple €150 million over data collection tool
The Reframe has:
404 Media reports:
Open Source Genetic Database Shuts Down to Protect Users From ‘Authoritarian Governments’
EuroNews reports:
Google’s AI feature on hold in most EU member states due to ‘strict rules’
Reuters reports:
Elon Musk must face fraud lawsuit over disclosure of Twitter stake
He’s not allowed to fuck over rich people.
Tech Policy reports:
The UK announces:
Foreign Influence Registration Scheme implementation
Gaël Duval shares:
Practical Payment Solutions for Murena and /e/OS Users
That’s surveillance and Google-free Android if you aren’t familiar.
Geo Coop reports:
Worker-Owned News Outlets Are Changing the Media Industry
The Wrap has:
In Praise of Laurene Powell Jobs, Owner of The Atlantic, Superhero of Signalgate
Neutral
The Guardian reports:
Data protection bill leaves room for governmental abuse, campaigners warn
Open Source Initiative reports on:
Overcoming barriers to Open Source procurement in the European Union
The Evil Empire Strikes Back
TechDirt reports:
The Real Cost Of DOGE: Musk’s Government Cuts Creating Massive New Expenses
NBC News reports:
Denied, deported, detained: U.S. border incidents have travelers thinking twice
The Electronic Frontier Foundation reports:
Site-Blocking Legislation Is Back. It’s Still a Terrible Idea.
The Next Web reports:
European tech warns Trump tariffs will hit both hardware and software
Pariah States
The Next Web reports:
The day a Russian missile hit a Ukrainian tech giant
BleepingComputer reports:
North Korean hackers adopt ClickFix attacks to target crypto firms
The Register reports:
North Korea’s fake tech workers now targeting European employers
DarkReading reports:
Israel Enters ‘Stage 3’ of Cyber Wars With Iran Proxies
The Verge reports:
Microsoft employee disrupts 50th anniversary and calls AI boss ‘war profiteer’
Big Media
Tech Policy reports on:
Technology, Democracy, and Power: Journalism’s Role in a Time of Crisis
The Guardian reports:
‘I can’t cope with it any more’: newsrooms scramble to retain audiences amid the big switch-off
Big Tech
Tech Policy reports:
Where Does Trump’s Takeover of the FTC Leave the Regulation of Big Tech?
Practically non-existent.
Robots.txt Is Having a Moment: Here’s Why We Should Care
The Verge reports:
It’s the moment of truth for Zuckerberg’s Trump bet
Epicenter reports:
EU Commission Undermines eIDAS Protections, again!
Pivot to AI reports:
AI in the enterprise is failing over twice as fast in 2025 as it was in 2024
Cybersecurity/Privacy
The Register reports:
UK threatens £100K-a-day fines under new cyber bill
BleepingComputer reports:
CISA warns of Fast Flux DNS evasion used by cybercrime gangs
DarkReading reports:
Minnesota Tribe Struggles After Ransomware Attack
Fediverse
The Fediverse Report has:
We Distriube reports:
TechCrunch reports:
A new security fund opens up to help protect the fediverse
Emelia Smith has:
Open-source tools needed for the future of decentralized moderation
Moving Beyond the False Dichotomy for Federation Management
The Nexus of Privacy shares:
More notes on Organizing, Mutual Aid, and Activism on decentralized social networks
Ghost has an announcement:
Funkwhale announces:
Steven Berson has:
Other Slightly Federated Social Media
The Fediverse Report has:
TechCrunch reports:
Beyond Bluesky: These are the apps building social experiences on the AT Protocol
Mark Cuban backs Skylight, a TikTok alternative built on Bluesky’s underlying technology
Rudy of Blacksky fame shares:
An internet of many autonomous communities
CTAs (aka show us some free love)
- That’s it for this week. Please share this edition of Destroying Autocracy.
- Follow me on the Fediverse. Or this site via the button in the footer. Or via RSS.
- Or follow Battalion on Bluesky.
Keep fighting!
Ringleader, Battalion
Reuben Walker
Follow me on the Fediverse#110 #ActivityPub #AI #ATProtocol #Autocracy #BigJournalism #BigTech #Democracy #Diaspora #Fascism #Fediverse #Ghost #Mastodon #StopChina #StopIran #StopIsrael #StopRedAmerica #StopRussia #SupportUkraine
-
Destroying Autocracy – April 3, 2025
Welcome to this week’s “Destroying Autocracy”.
It’s your source for curated news affecting democracy in the cyber arena with a focus on protecting it. That necessitates an opinionated Butlerian jihad against big tech as well as evangelizing for open-source and the Fediverse. Since big media’s journalism wing is flailing and failing in its core duty to democracy, this is also a collection of alternative reporting on the eternal battle between autocracy and democracy. We also cover the cybersecurity world. You can’t be free without safety and privacy.
DA comes out on Thursday and is updated through the end of day on Friday. Then we start over. So take your time in perusing it and check back in over the weekend.
FYI, my opinions will be in bold. And will often involve cursing. Because humans. Especially tech bros. And fascists. Fuck ’em.
Featured Item
Heydonworks shares:
AI can’t do spite. 😈
We start and end with good news to make the middle bearable.
The response to Russia’s War Crimes and other douchebaggery
The Kyiv Independent reports:
Moscow Metro website displays appeal from recently hacked Ukrainian Railways
The Register reports:
Ukraine’s techies a ‘pillar of support’ for national economy after Russian invasion
EuroNews reports:
Help us develop non-English/Chinese AI models, Japan asks EU
French antitrust watchdog fines Apple €150 million over data collection tool
Google’s AI feature on hold in most EU member states due to ‘strict rules’
The Reframe has:
404 Media reports:
Open Source Genetic Database Shuts Down to Protect Users From ‘Authoritarian Governments’
Big Tech Backed Trump for Acceleration. They Got a Decel President Instead.
This would be funny if it only impacted these c^nts.
Reuters reports:
Elon Musk must face fraud lawsuit over disclosure of Twitter stake
He’s not allowed to fuck over rich people.
Tech Policy reports:
The UK announces:
Foreign Influence Registration Scheme implementation
Gaël Duval shares:
Practical Payment Solutions for Murena and /e/OS Users
That’s surveillance and Google-free Android if you aren’t familiar.
Geo Coop reports:
Worker-Owned News Outlets Are Changing the Media Industry
The Wrap has:
In Praise of Laurene Powell Jobs, Owner of The Atlantic, Superhero of Signalgate
The Electronic Frontier Foundation reports:
Judge Rejects Government’s Attempt to Dismiss EFF Lawsuit Against OPM, DOGE, and Musk
Neutral
The Guardian reports:
Data protection bill leaves room for governmental abuse, campaigners warn
Open Source Initiative reports on:
Overcoming barriers to Open Source procurement in the European Union
The Evil Empire Strikes Back
TechDirt reports:
The Real Cost Of DOGE: Musk’s Government Cuts Creating Massive New Expenses
NBC News reports:
Denied, deported, detained: U.S. border incidents have travelers thinking twice
The Electronic Frontier Foundation reports:
Site-Blocking Legislation Is Back. It’s Still a Terrible Idea.
The Next Web reports:
European tech warns Trump tariffs will hit both hardware and software
Pariah States
The Next Web reports:
The day a Russian missile hit a Ukrainian tech giant
BleepingComputer reports:
North Korean hackers adopt ClickFix attacks to target crypto firms
The Register reports:
North Korea’s fake tech workers now targeting European employers
DarkReading reports:
Israel Enters ‘Stage 3’ of Cyber Wars With Iran Proxies
The Verge reports:
Microsoft employee disrupts 50th anniversary and calls AI boss ‘war profiteer’
Big Media
Tech Policy reports on:
Technology, Democracy, and Power: Journalism’s Role in a Time of Crisis
The Guardian reports:
‘I can’t cope with it any more’: newsrooms scramble to retain audiences amid the big switch-off
Big Tech
Tech Policy reports:
Where Does Trump’s Takeover of the FTC Leave the Regulation of Big Tech?
Practically non-existent.
Robots.txt Is Having a Moment: Here’s Why We Should Care
The Verge reports:
It’s the moment of truth for Zuckerberg’s Trump bet
Epicenter reports:
EU Commission Undermines eIDAS Protections, again!
Pivot to AI reports:
AI in the enterprise is failing over twice as fast in 2025 as it was in 2024
Cybersecurity/Privacy
The Register reports:
UK threatens £100K-a-day fines under new cyber bill
BleepingComputer reports:
CISA warns of Fast Flux DNS evasion used by cybercrime gangs
DarkReading reports:
Minnesota Tribe Struggles After Ransomware Attack
Fediverse
The Fediverse Report has:
We Distriube reports:
TechCrunch reports:
A new security fund opens up to help protect the fediverse
Emelia Smith has:
Open-source tools needed for the future of decentralized moderation
Moving Beyond the False Dichotomy for Federation Management
The Nexus of Privacy shares:
More notes on Organizing, Mutual Aid, and Activism on decentralized social networks
Ghost has an announcement:
Funkwhale announces:
Steven Berson has:
Other Slightly Federated Social Media
The Fediverse Report has:
TechCrunch reports:
Beyond Bluesky: These are the apps building social experiences on the AT Protocol
Mark Cuban backs Skylight, a TikTok alternative built on Bluesky’s underlying technology
Rudy of Blacksky fame shares:
An internet of many autonomous communities
CTAs (aka show us some free love)
- That’s it for this week. Please share this edition of Destroying Autocracy.
- Follow me on the Fediverse. Or this site via the button in the footer. Or via RSS.
- Or follow Battalion on Bluesky.
Keep fighting!
Ringleader, Battalion
Reuben Walker
Follow me on the Fediverse#110 #ActivityPub #AI #ATProtocol #Autocracy #BigJournalism #BigTech #Democracy #Diaspora #Fascism #Fediverse #Ghost #Mastodon #StopChina #StopIran #StopIsrael #StopRedAmerica #StopRussia #SupportUkraine
-
Oh You, European Simpletons! Prevent Death Cult From Getting Nuclear Bombs!
Abstract: A world war between oligarchic democracy and futuristic tyrannies is in process. If oligarchic democracy does not win, tyranny will, or whatever is left after copious nuclear exchanges.
The 2026 conflict with Iran has vindicated the technological prowess of the Iranian military while highlighting a civilizational threat: the “Death Cult” of Shia fundamentalism. Rooted in 13 centuries of remorse and self-flagellation over the Battle of Karbala, this ideology is characterized as inherently suicidal and martyrological.
Providing such a regime with nuclear weapons is an existential threat to Europe, as the cult’s ultimate desire is to be “nuclear bombed” to achieve martyrdom.
Drawing parallels to Japan’s 1930s Bushido-driven expansion and the eventual “surprise” of Pearl Harbor, the text critiques European “simpletons” and “headless chickens” for their passivity and colonial guilt.
We conclude that a “Just War”—aimed at flipping the regime and defanging the Revolutionary Guard—is necessary to preserve planetary civilization, asserting that Europe’s survival is incompatible with a nuclear-armed theocracy in Tehran.
No mercy should be shown because the ultimate enemy is in the Kremlin, bristling with nukes, and deserves the same treatment. Not because we want to punish, but because we want to survive.
Europe pretended to have learned well the main lessons from Nazism. However, Europe still has to pass the final exam, and cannot ask Washington to pass in its stead.
***
***
In the 2026 Iran War, Iranian military technology has performed remarkably well. Already in 2025, one could see Iranian missiles coming down in Haifa extremely close to Israeli anti-missile batteries, a remarkable feat. In 2026, high precision strikes, including on US military installations, showed that this was no fluke.
Iran was a centerpiece to civilization for at least 7,000 years… But unfortunately, like much of Middle Earth, with its hydraulic problems, all too often ended with regimes which were more dictatorial than in Europe. The dichotomy has become more obvious since Muslim Arabs conquered Persia… Which counter-attacked with its own variant of Islam, the Shia (initially that simply meant the “Party” of Ali and his sons).
All over the world, simpletons who do not know enough have not enough imagination to realize that a Death Cult like the Shia sh*t on humanity because the Shia’s dream is to kill as many as possible while dying as martyrs (yes, I lived in Iran!)
That’s why they beat themselves bloody with chains, or cut their heads with razors or knives as in the accompanying picture in Lebanon. Shia faithful tend to hate (much of early) Islam because it conquered Persia, killed Ali, Hussein… And yet they are Muslims, so they hate themselves and beat themselves bloody.
So why would we want the Death Cult to have nuclear bombs? Granted, there are lots of Nazis around who want to annihilate Israel, and half a dozen nuclear bombs over Israel would do it. So, understandably the Nazis and those obsessed with Judaism, would be happy for Iran to have nuclear bombs.
HOWEVER, the first bombings done by the Shia Death Cult were in France… Rather curious, as France harbored the Ayatollah Khomeni (probably as an anti-US maneuver)… But here we see the beating bloody with chain behavior re-merge…
So the Shia Death Cult will kill anyone, especially themselves. With nuclear bombs of course they will try to destroy Paris…
Last, not least: this is a World war, in its early stages. Fighting Iran is fighting Putin, while pretending not to. Fortunately, this time France and Britain are not fighting alone while the USA pretends to have better things to do (as in WW1 and WW2).
Yes, don’t believe the propaganda of Shia and Putinists: not only is most of the French Navy in the area, but France is actually running out of missiles because it fired so many of them in this war against Iran… A special government meeting was convened to solve the missile crisis. They are specifically running out of MICA air to air missiles…
Europeans have been going around like headless chickens looking for their brains, claiming disingenuously that having a nuclear death cult in Iran is none of their business. However an Iranian missile reached Diego Garcia, in the middle of the Indian Ocean… where the missile was destroyed by a US ship.
It does not take much imagination, even for mental retards, to substitute London for Diego Garcia, and a nuclear warhead to replace the conventional warhead. Differently from the USA, which has thousands of ballistic missile interceptors at any moment. Wait until the Shia have maneuvering hypersonic high precision nuclear warheads targeting Paris and London… We will use MAD, Mutual Assured Destruction, and the Europeans chuckle because, in their racist blindness, they know nearly nothing about Fundamentalist Shia…
In particular they do not know at all that what the Shia wants to do is to be nuclear bombed!
The USA is the world’s greatest producer of hydrocarbons. Europeans decided to stop production (explicit laws forbidding it were passed in France and Britain. Meanwhile the lunatic Germans stopped their perfect nuclear industry and are building 50 (fifty) gas power plants… In the name of ecology (it turned out wind and sun don’t work during those icy foggy winter nights, a great discovery of modern German science… So now Germany is going to buy gas overseas, in the hope of a future deal with the Kremlin…) The USA gets no oil from the Middle East, but profits hugely from high hydrocarbon prices.
Europeans should be most concerned about Middle East hydrocarbon flow…But… Right now the Red Sea traffic has been reestablished, because Trump made the Houthis an offer which they could not refuse. However, that’s delicate and depends upon US carriers looming in the distance. After suffering a fire for 30 hours, the super carrier Gerlad Ford, largest in the world, had to retreat to Crete… Meanwhile Ethiopia has been wondering aloud why, with a population of 140 millions, it can’t get access to the Red Sea anymore after a war, and for just 50 kilometers. Tanks are gathering…
All Europeans can say is that colonial rule was bad, and, like the Shia lunatics who accuse themselves of having caused the death of Husayn 1346 years ago, the Europeans accuse themselves, and colonialism, of having caused the post-colonial chaos, not realizing that they were supposedly gone and colonialism dead, when the chaos grew.
If the Shia Death Cult gets nukes, so will its natural enemies: all non Shia Arab countries, plus Turkey and thus Azerbaijan, their natural enemies Armenia and Georgia, plus all Central Asian more or less Muslim and certainly militarily prestigious Central Asian republics… Etc.
Europe has a brain problem.
Iran treacherously killed hundreds of US and French soldiers and citizens, inflicting in particular attacks in Paris some of them on the ground of religion, attacking the oldest French religion still practiced today (Judaism). The French president at the time did not want to go to war, thus the author of the bombings, the Iranian theocracy, was obscuri zed. So France and the USA had plenty of reasons to evoke casus belli. So, of course does Israel.
So, although a war to preempt way way way worse, a nuclear holocaust, it is also a JUST WAR.
We not only have to eliminate terrorist regimes, especially with nuclear capability, real or potential, but we may as well TRAIN with the Mollahs.
No doubt millions of Iranians share my opinions, hence the excellent work of the Mossad…
***
Meanwhile, congratulations to Donald Trump for finding the appropriate answer to a young Politically Correct Japanese journalist, who accused Trump of having made a surprise attack, without having consulted… Japan… Resulting in Japan being “confused”. Trump replied with Pearl Harbor:
Trump: “We went in very hard, and we didn’t tell anybody about it because we wanted surprise. If I go and tell everybody about it, there’s no longer a surprise… Who knows better about surprise than Japan? Okay, why didn’t you tell me about Pearl Harbor? Right? You believe in surprise, I think, much more so than us”.
Europe should believe in European civilization, much more than the USA or even China. But it doesn’t. When Trump was confronted with the notion of surprise by the impudent, idiotic and historically unaware Japanese journalist, Prime Minister Takaichi, sitting next to Trump could not believe what her compatriot had dared to utter so idiotically.
She felt that Trump was probably going to retaliate with Pearl Harbor, a surprise attack while Japan and the USA were negotiating to find out under which circumstances California oil would start to flow to Japan again. Pearl Harbor was a real treachery, and inconceivably stupid. Immediately after the surprise attack on Hawai’i, Admiral Yamamoto, who led the Japanese Navy, observed “I am afraid that all we have achieved is to wake up a sleeping giant.”
Yamamoto, who had studied at Harvard, was against making war on the USA, because he knew victory was impossible. However many of his colleagues in the military junta in power were culturally imbued with Bushido, a form of death cult. :
Bushido (武士道, “the way of the warrior”) is the ethical code characteristic of Japan’s samurai class. It emphasized virtues like loyalty (忠義 chūgi), honor (名誉 meiyo), courage (勇 yū), benevolence (仁 jin), respect (礼 rei), honesty (誠 makoto), and self-discipline. These drew from influences like Zen Buddhism, Confucianism, and Shinto. And also from the Feudal structure of Japan, where warlords became everything around 800 CE. Thus “loyalty” was often simply groveling submission to a Lord erected into the ultimate cosmic principle.
Texts like the Hagakure (early 18th century), which is found two feet away in a nice red book, as I write these lines, famously state: “The way of the samurai is found in death.” This meant meditating daily on mortality to achieve mental freedom, transcend fear, and act decisively without any attachment to life.
Seppuku, self disembowelment, was viewed by Bushido Fundamentalists as preferable to a life of shame. An example of shame was supposedly retreating in battle (although that happened plenty).
In 1931, a rogue Japanese army manipulated by two colonels who had set up a false flag incident, launched the conquest of China. In the next decade the Japanese high command took ever more criminal power in Japan, in complete violation of the Constitution, culminating with the idiotic and self-defeating decision to attack everybody around (the Chinese, the French, the US, the UK, Philippines, Indonesia, South East Asia… In this order…). The rogue junta reengineered Bushido as a death cult to be applied to foreigners…. Killing at least 50 millions of them (most of them Chinese).
What could be the ultimate rationale for this raging Bushido imperial expansion? There was the hope that the Americans would reveal themselves not quite Bushido material… Enabling the Japanese conquest of the entire so-called co-prosperity sphere”.
However, the Americans were natural Bushido material (no surprise: after all, the Americans had conquered (the better part of) North America).
But then the fanatical generals reasoned, even if we fail completely and miserably, we will destroy European power in the area, and pose as liberators (something sorely needed after what had happened in Korea).
That approach, of camping Japan as a liberation machine, indeed did work… Meager consolation… However the fanatical Japanese generals had not anticipated that the USA would grab European power, and use it on their own account.
Thus, in the end, the Bushido fanatics ensured the success of their ultimate enemy, the one identified when the US “Black Ships” had shown up in Tokyo Bay. US Commodore Matthew Perry’s squadron on July 8, 1853 arrived, a terrifying sight, belching black smoke and sailing without sails or wind, with explosive shells. They delivered a “letter” (truly an ultimatum) to end Japan’s isolation (a 220 years Shogun policy). The US got what they wanted, and the US ultimatum was the catalyst for Japan’s forced modernization: it contributed to the fall of the Tokugawa shogunate, the Meiji Restoration (1868), and Japan’s rapid industrialization to avoid colonization… And save its civilizational variant..
The situation with Iran is very similar. However, nowadays, it’s the fate of the planetary civilization which is at stake. But do Europeans still know what their civilization was all about, and that it must be defended? Apparently no. And no, European civilization was not just Islamo-Judeo-Christian…none of those three instituted the social reforms of the Greco-Romans: they hitched a ride on them.
European civilization had much in common with India (well, civilization was Indo-European and the bridge was… Iran…), but also European civilization had much in common with the greatest civilization of Asia: it was like them, only much more so… For the good and simple reason that the Great European Steppe provided a freeway from Hungary to Korea…
In the past the most idealistic of our predecessors wanted a world government. The European colonial empires provided a sort of partial world government… Until German and Italian craziness blew it all up. Now a world government is a must, not a choice, as I argued with DAD.
The DAD approach has to proceed from the worst regimes to the less bad. As is done in Venezuela apparently, so far, successfully. In Russia, the best approach, obviously that of Trump, is to flip the government: doing as in Venezuela, but with a nuclear superpower.
In Iran, a flip is also imaginable: after all, there is an army, and the Revolutionary Guard is the equivalent of the SS in Nazi Germany. But there the SS had just 12 years, whereas in Iran the Revolutionary Guard had 47 years… In any case, the Death Cult itself has to be completely defanged and domesticated: our home, domus, is Earth and there is no space for Death Cults. By the way, the Romans hunted the Druids for centuries: the Druids hid in the forests and mountain redoubts, they had sympathizers… But they, and their death cult, were, ultimately, hunted down and eradicated by the Roman army. The same Roman army could eradicate the Christians: although also to some extent a death cult, Christianism was also many other things, not just keen to see martyrs die, and this is why it could not be eliminated..
Europe’s medium term survival is not compatible with the rule of a Death Cult bristling with nukes in Teheran. If Europe cannot figure that, what can it figure? Is Europe itself becoming a Death Cult, unwilling to ensure its own survival, presiding over its own death, thus explaining that sympathy incited France to harbor Ayatollah Khomeini?
Patrice Ayme
: .
Covered with their own guilty blood, accusing themselves to have caused the death of Husayn, more than 13 centuries ago. Can we trust those maniacs to accuse us of crimes we never committed to? Most probably! If confronted that way, Shia will often pretend that “guilty” aspect is collective/regretful sorrow for the broader community’s historical failure to aid Imam Husayn ibn Ali, his family and a tiny group of followers—not individual culpability today. But the line is thin and a sub-ideology in the Qur’an recommends lying to defend the Faith…
(Matam, latmiya for chest-beating, zanjir-zani for chain-beating on the back, or tatbir for striking the head with blades/swords: it’s a whole semantics out there for the name of the bloody rose, Shia style…)
Self-flagellation is an expression of remorse and guilt for not having saved Imam Hussein more than 1345 years ago. Yes, more than 13 centuries ago, Husayn, grandson of the Prophet was killed in the Battle of Karbala in 680 CE..The Umayyad caliph Mu’awiya I (r. 661–680) had nominated his son Yazid as his successor. Yazid’s nomination was contested by the sons of a few prominent companions of Muhammad, including Husayn, son of the fourth caliph Ali. Umayyad caliph Yazid I’s army of at least 4,000 and perhaps as much as 30,000 (from those joining certain victory) confronted at most a few hundred Husayn’s followers. Husayn refused to submit to Yazid. He was submitted to a long and gory death, including many members of his family, down to a son in his lap.
#DAD #DeathCult #Europe #history #Iran #Israel #MAD #Martirdom #MiddleEast #nuclearWeapons #PearlHarbor #politics #Shiah #Trump #war -
Oh You, European Simpletons! Prevent Death Cult From Getting Nuclear Bombs!
Abstract: A world war between oligarchic democracy and futuristic tyrannies is in process. If oligarchic democracy does not win, tyranny will, or whatever is left after copious nuclear exchanges.
The 2026 conflict with Iran has vindicated the technological prowess of the Iranian military while highlighting a civilizational threat: the “Death Cult” of Shia fundamentalism. Rooted in 13 centuries of remorse and self-flagellation over the Battle of Karbala, this ideology is characterized as inherently suicidal and martyrological.
Providing such a regime with nuclear weapons is an existential threat to Europe, as the cult’s ultimate desire is to be “nuclear bombed” to achieve martyrdom.
Drawing parallels to Japan’s 1930s Bushido-driven expansion and the eventual “surprise” of Pearl Harbor, the text critiques European “simpletons” and “headless chickens” for their passivity and colonial guilt.
We conclude that a “Just War”—aimed at flipping the regime and defanging the Revolutionary Guard—is necessary to preserve planetary civilization, asserting that Europe’s survival is incompatible with a nuclear-armed theocracy in Tehran.
No mercy should be shown because the ultimate enemy is in the Kremlin, bristling with nukes, and deserves the same treatment. Not because we want to punish, but because we want to survive.
Europe pretended to have learned well the main lessons from Nazism. However, Europe still has to pass the final exam, and cannot ask Washington to pass in its stead.
***
***
In the 2026 Iran War, Iranian military technology has performed remarkably well. Already in 2025, one could see Iranian missiles coming down in Haifa extremely close to Israeli anti-missile batteries, a remarkable feat. In 2026, high precision strikes, including on US military installations, showed that this was no fluke.
Iran was a centerpiece to civilization for at least 7,000 years… But unfortunately, like much of Middle Earth, with its hydraulic problems, all too often ended with regimes which were more dictatorial than in Europe. The dichotomy has become more obvious since Muslim Arabs conquered Persia… Which counter-attacked with its own variant of Islam, the Shia (initially that simply meant the “Party” of Ali and his sons).
All over the world, simpletons who do not know enough have not enough imagination to realize that a Death Cult like the Shia sh*t on humanity because the Shia’s dream is to kill as many as possible while dying as martyrs (yes, I lived in Iran!)
That’s why they beat themselves bloody with chains, or cut their heads with razors or knives as in the accompanying picture in Lebanon. Shia faithful tend to hate (much of early) Islam because it conquered Persia, killed Ali, Hussein… And yet they are Muslims, so they hate themselves and beat themselves bloody.
So why would we want the Death Cult to have nuclear bombs? Granted, there are lots of Nazis around who want to annihilate Israel, and half a dozen nuclear bombs over Israel would do it. So, understandably the Nazis and those obsessed with Judaism, would be happy for Iran to have nuclear bombs.
HOWEVER, the first bombings done by the Shia Death Cult were in France… Rather curious, as France harbored the Ayatollah Khomeni (probably as an anti-US maneuver)… But here we see the beating bloody with chain behavior re-merge…
So the Shia Death Cult will kill anyone, especially themselves. With nuclear bombs of course they will try to destroy Paris…
Last, not least: this is a World war, in its early stages. Fighting Iran is fighting Putin, while pretending not to. Fortunately, this time France and Britain are not fighting alone while the USA pretends to have better things to do (as in WW1 and WW2).
Yes, don’t believe the propaganda of Shia and Putinists: not only is most of the French Navy in the area, but France is actually running out of missiles because it fired so many of them in this war against Iran… A special government meeting was convened to solve the missile crisis. They are specifically running out of MICA air to air missiles…
Europeans have been going around like headless chickens looking for their brains, claiming disingenuously that having a nuclear death cult in Iran is none of their business. However an Iranian missile reached Diego Garcia, in the middle of the Indian Ocean… where the missile was destroyed by a US ship.
It does not take much imagination, even for mental retards, to substitute London for Diego Garcia, and a nuclear warhead to replace the conventional warhead. Differently from the USA, which has thousands of ballistic missile interceptors at any moment. Wait until the Shia have maneuvering hypersonic high precision nuclear warheads targeting Paris and London… We will use MAD, Mutual Assured Destruction, and the Europeans chuckle because, in their racist blindness, they know nearly nothing about Fundamentalist Shia…
In particular they do not know at all that what the Shia wants to do is to be nuclear bombed!
The USA is the world’s greatest producer of hydrocarbons. Europeans decided to stop production (explicit laws forbidding it were passed in France and Britain. Meanwhile the lunatic Germans stopped their perfect nuclear industry and are building 50 (fifty) gas power plants… In the name of ecology (it turned out wind and sun don’t work during those icy foggy winter nights, a great discovery of modern German science… So now Germany is going to buy gas overseas, in the hope of a future deal with the Kremlin…) The USA gets no oil from the Middle East, but profits hugely from high hydrocarbon prices.
Europeans should be most concerned about Middle East hydrocarbon flow…But… Right now the Red Sea traffic has been reestablished, because Trump made the Houthis an offer which they could not refuse. However, that’s delicate and depends upon US carriers looming in the distance. After suffering a fire for 30 hours, the super carrier Gerlad Ford, largest in the world, had to retreat to Crete… Meanwhile Ethiopia has been wondering aloud why, with a population of 140 millions, it can’t get access to the Red Sea anymore after a war, and for just 50 kilometers. Tanks are gathering…
All Europeans can say is that colonial rule was bad, and, like the Shia lunatics who accuse themselves of having caused the death of Husayn 1346 years ago, the Europeans accuse themselves, and colonialism, of having caused the post-colonial chaos, not realizing that they were supposedly gone and colonialism dead, when the chaos grew.
If the Shia Death Cult gets nukes, so will its natural enemies: all non Shia Arab countries, plus Turkey and thus Azerbaijan, their natural enemies Armenia and Georgia, plus all Central Asian more or less Muslim and certainly militarily prestigious Central Asian republics… Etc.
Europe has a brain problem.
Iran treacherously killed hundreds of US and French soldiers and citizens, inflicting in particular attacks in Paris some of them on the ground of religion, attacking the oldest French religion still practiced today (Judaism). The French president at the time did not want to go to war, thus the author of the bombings, the Iranian theocracy, was obscuri zed. So France and the USA had plenty of reasons to evoke casus belli. So, of course does Israel.
So, although a war to preempt way way way worse, a nuclear holocaust, it is also a JUST WAR.
We not only have to eliminate terrorist regimes, especially with nuclear capability, real or potential, but we may as well TRAIN with the Mollahs.
No doubt millions of Iranians share my opinions, hence the excellent work of the Mossad…
***
Meanwhile, congratulations to Donald Trump for finding the appropriate answer to a young Politically Correct Japanese journalist, who accused Trump of having made a surprise attack, without having consulted… Japan… Resulting in Japan being “confused”. Trump replied with Pearl Harbor:
Trump: “We went in very hard, and we didn’t tell anybody about it because we wanted surprise. If I go and tell everybody about it, there’s no longer a surprise… Who knows better about surprise than Japan? Okay, why didn’t you tell me about Pearl Harbor? Right? You believe in surprise, I think, much more so than us”.
Europe should believe in European civilization, much more than the USA or even China. But it doesn’t. When Trump was confronted with the notion of surprise by the impudent, idiotic and historically unaware Japanese journalist, Prime Minister Takaichi, sitting next to Trump could not believe what her compatriot had dared to utter so idiotically.
She felt that Trump was probably going to retaliate with Pearl Harbor, a surprise attack while Japan and the USA were negotiating to find out under which circumstances California oil would start to flow to Japan again. Pearl Harbor was a real treachery, and inconceivably stupid. Immediately after the surprise attack on Hawai’i, Admiral Yamamoto, who led the Japanese Navy, observed “I am afraid that all we have achieved is to wake up a sleeping giant.”
Yamamoto, who had studied at Harvard, was against making war on the USA, because he knew victory was impossible. However many of his colleagues in the military junta in power were culturally imbued with Bushido, a form of death cult. :
Bushido (武士道, “the way of the warrior”) is the ethical code characteristic of Japan’s samurai class. It emphasized virtues like loyalty (忠義 chūgi), honor (名誉 meiyo), courage (勇 yū), benevolence (仁 jin), respect (礼 rei), honesty (誠 makoto), and self-discipline. These drew from influences like Zen Buddhism, Confucianism, and Shinto. And also from the Feudal structure of Japan, where warlords became everything around 800 CE. Thus “loyalty” was often simply groveling submission to a Lord erected into the ultimate cosmic principle.
Texts like the Hagakure (early 18th century), which is found two feet away in a nice red book, as I write these lines, famously state: “The way of the samurai is found in death.” This meant meditating daily on mortality to achieve mental freedom, transcend fear, and act decisively without any attachment to life.
Seppuku, self disembowelment, was viewed by Bushido Fundamentalists as preferable to a life of shame. An example of shame was supposedly retreating in battle (although that happened plenty).
In 1931, a rogue Japanese army manipulated by two colonels who had set up a false flag incident, launched the conquest of China. In the next decade the Japanese high command took ever more criminal power in Japan, in complete violation of the Constitution, culminating with the idiotic and self-defeating decision to attack everybody around (the Chinese, the French, the US, the UK, Philippines, Indonesia, South East Asia… In this order…). The rogue junta reengineered Bushido as a death cult to be applied to foreigners…. Killing at least 50 millions of them (most of them Chinese).
What could be the ultimate rationale for this raging Bushido imperial expansion? There was the hope that the Americans would reveal themselves not quite Bushido material… Enabling the Japanese conquest of the entire so-called co-prosperity sphere”.
However, the Americans were natural Bushido material (no surprise: after all, the Americans had conquered (the better part of) North America).
But then the fanatical generals reasoned, even if we fail completely and miserably, we will destroy European power in the area, and pose as liberators (something sorely needed after what had happened in Korea).
That approach, of camping Japan as a liberation machine, indeed did work… Meager consolation… However the fanatical Japanese generals had not anticipated that the USA would grab European power, and use it on their own account.
Thus, in the end, the Bushido fanatics ensured the success of their ultimate enemy, the one identified when the US “Black Ships” had shown up in Tokyo Bay. US Commodore Matthew Perry’s squadron on July 8, 1853 arrived, a terrifying sight, belching black smoke and sailing without sails or wind, with explosive shells. They delivered a “letter” (truly an ultimatum) to end Japan’s isolation (a 220 years Shogun policy). The US got what they wanted, and the US ultimatum was the catalyst for Japan’s forced modernization: it contributed to the fall of the Tokugawa shogunate, the Meiji Restoration (1868), and Japan’s rapid industrialization to avoid colonization… And save its civilizational variant..
The situation with Iran is very similar. However, nowadays, it’s the fate of the planetary civilization which is at stake. But do Europeans still know what their civilization was all about, and that it must be defended? Apparently no. And no, European civilization was not just Islamo-Judeo-Christian…none of those three instituted the social reforms of the Greco-Romans: they hitched a ride on them.
European civilization had much in common with India (well, civilization was Indo-European and the bridge was… Iran…), but also European civilization had much in common with the greatest civilization of Asia: it was like them, only much more so… For the good and simple reason that the Great European Steppe provided a freeway from Hungary to Korea…
In the past the most idealistic of our predecessors wanted a world government. The European colonial empires provided a sort of partial world government… Until German and Italian craziness blew it all up. Now a world government is a must, not a choice, as I argued with DAD.
The DAD approach has to proceed from the worst regimes to the less bad. As is done in Venezuela apparently, so far, successfully. In Russia, the best approach, obviously that of Trump, is to flip the government: doing as in Venezuela, but with a nuclear superpower.
In Iran, a flip is also imaginable: after all, there is an army, and the Revolutionary Guard is the equivalent of the SS in Nazi Germany. But there the SS had just 12 years, whereas in Iran the Revolutionary Guard had 47 years… In any case, the Death Cult itself has to be completely defanged and domesticated: our home, domus, is Earth and there is no space for Death Cults. By the way, the Romans hunted the Druids for centuries: the Druids hid in the forests and mountain redoubts, they had sympathizers… But they, and their death cult, were, ultimately, hunted down and eradicated by the Roman army. The same Roman army could eradicate the Christians: although also to some extent a death cult, Christianism was also many other things, not just keen to see martyrs die, and this is why it could not be eliminated..
Europe’s medium term survival is not compatible with the rule of a Death Cult bristling with nukes in Teheran. If Europe cannot figure that, what can it figure? Is Europe itself becoming a Death Cult, unwilling to ensure its own survival, presiding over its own death, thus explaining that sympathy incited France to harbor Ayatollah Khomeini?
Patrice Ayme
: .
Covered with their own guilty blood, accusing themselves to have caused the death of Husayn, more than 13 centuries ago. Can we trust those maniacs to accuse us of crimes we never committed to? Most probably! If confronted that way, Shia will often pretend that “guilty” aspect is collective/regretful sorrow for the broader community’s historical failure to aid Imam Husayn ibn Ali, his family and a tiny group of followers—not individual culpability today. But the line is thin and a sub-ideology in the Qur’an recommends lying to defend the Faith…
(Matam, latmiya for chest-beating, zanjir-zani for chain-beating on the back, or tatbir for striking the head with blades/swords: it’s a whole semantics out there for the name of the bloody rose, Shia style…)
Self-flagellation is an expression of remorse and guilt for not having saved Imam Hussein more than 1345 years ago. Yes, more than 13 centuries ago, Husayn, grandson of the Prophet was killed in the Battle of Karbala in 680 CE..The Umayyad caliph Mu’awiya I (r. 661–680) had nominated his son Yazid as his successor. Yazid’s nomination was contested by the sons of a few prominent companions of Muhammad, including Husayn, son of the fourth caliph Ali. Umayyad caliph Yazid I’s army of at least 4,000 and perhaps as much as 30,000 (from those joining certain victory) confronted at most a few hundred Husayn’s followers. Husayn refused to submit to Yazid. He was submitted to a long and gory death, including many members of his family, down to a son in his lap.
#DAD #DeathCult #Europe #history #Iran #Israel #MAD #Martirdom #MiddleEast #nuclearWeapons #PearlHarbor #politics #Shiah #Trump #war -
Oh You, European Simpletons! Prevent Death Cult From Getting Nuclear Bombs!
Abstract: A world war between oligarchic democracy and futuristic tyrannies is in process. If oligarchic democracy does not win, tyranny will, or whatever is left after copious nuclear exchanges.
The 2026 conflict with Iran has vindicated the technological prowess of the Iranian military while highlighting a civilizational threat: the “Death Cult” of Shia fundamentalism. Rooted in 13 centuries of remorse and self-flagellation over the Battle of Karbala, this ideology is characterized as inherently suicidal and martyrological.
Providing such a regime with nuclear weapons is an existential threat to Europe, as the cult’s ultimate desire is to be “nuclear bombed” to achieve martyrdom.
Drawing parallels to Japan’s 1930s Bushido-driven expansion and the eventual “surprise” of Pearl Harbor, the text critiques European “simpletons” and “headless chickens” for their passivity and colonial guilt.
We conclude that a “Just War”—aimed at flipping the regime and defanging the Revolutionary Guard—is necessary to preserve planetary civilization, asserting that Europe’s survival is incompatible with a nuclear-armed theocracy in Tehran.
No mercy should be shown because the ultimate enemy is in the Kremlin, bristling with nukes, and deserves the same treatment. Not because we want to punish, but because we want to survive.
Europe pretended to have learned well the main lessons from Nazism. However, Europe still has to pass the final exam, and cannot ask Washington to pass in its stead.
***
***
In the 2026 Iran War, Iranian military technology has performed remarkably well. Already in 2025, one could see Iranian missiles coming down in Haifa extremely close to Israeli anti-missile batteries, a remarkable feat. In 2026, high precision strikes, including on US military installations, showed that this was no fluke.
Iran was a centerpiece to civilization for at least 7,000 years… But unfortunately, like much of Middle Earth, with its hydraulic problems, all too often ended with regimes which were more dictatorial than in Europe. The dichotomy has become more obvious since Muslim Arabs conquered Persia… Which counter-attacked with its own variant of Islam, the Shia (initially that simply meant the “Party” of Ali and his sons).
All over the world, simpletons who do not know enough have not enough imagination to realize that a Death Cult like the Shia sh*t on humanity because the Shia’s dream is to kill as many as possible while dying as martyrs (yes, I lived in Iran!)
That’s why they beat themselves bloody with chains, or cut their heads with razors or knives as in the accompanying picture in Lebanon. Shia faithful tend to hate (much of early) Islam because it conquered Persia, killed Ali, Hussein… And yet they are Muslims, so they hate themselves and beat themselves bloody.
So why would we want the Death Cult to have nuclear bombs? Granted, there are lots of Nazis around who want to annihilate Israel, and half a dozen nuclear bombs over Israel would do it. So, understandably the Nazis and those obsessed with Judaism, would be happy for Iran to have nuclear bombs.
HOWEVER, the first bombings done by the Shia Death Cult were in France… Rather curious, as France harbored the Ayatollah Khomeni (probably as an anti-US maneuver)… But here we see the beating bloody with chain behavior re-merge…
So the Shia Death Cult will kill anyone, especially themselves. With nuclear bombs of course they will try to destroy Paris…
Last, not least: this is a World war, in its early stages. Fighting Iran is fighting Putin, while pretending not to. Fortunately, this time France and Britain are not fighting alone while the USA pretends to have better things to do (as in WW1 and WW2).
Yes, don’t believe the propaganda of Shia and Putinists: not only is most of the French Navy in the area, but France is actually running out of missiles because it fired so many of them in this war against Iran… A special government meeting was convened to solve the missile crisis. They are specifically running out of MICA air to air missiles…
Europeans have been going around like headless chickens looking for their brains, claiming disingenuously that having a nuclear death cult in Iran is none of their business. However an Iranian missile reached Diego Garcia, in the middle of the Indian Ocean… where the missile was destroyed by a US ship.
It does not take much imagination, even for mental retards, to substitute London for Diego Garcia, and a nuclear warhead to replace the conventional warhead. Differently from the USA, which has thousands of ballistic missile interceptors at any moment. Wait until the Shia have maneuvering hypersonic high precision nuclear warheads targeting Paris and London… We will use MAD, Mutual Assured Destruction, and the Europeans chuckle because, in their racist blindness, they know nearly nothing about Fundamentalist Shia…
In particular they do not know at all that what the Shia wants to do is to be nuclear bombed!
The USA is the world’s greatest producer of hydrocarbons. Europeans decided to stop production (explicit laws forbidding it were passed in France and Britain. Meanwhile the lunatic Germans stopped their perfect nuclear industry and are building 50 (fifty) gas power plants… In the name of ecology (it turned out wind and sun don’t work during those icy foggy winter nights, a great discovery of modern German science… So now Germany is going to buy gas overseas, in the hope of a future deal with the Kremlin…) The USA gets no oil from the Middle East, but profits hugely from high hydrocarbon prices.
Europeans should be most concerned about Middle East hydrocarbon flow…But… Right now the Red Sea traffic has been reestablished, because Trump made the Houthis an offer which they could not refuse. However, that’s delicate and depends upon US carriers looming in the distance. After suffering a fire for 30 hours, the super carrier Gerlad Ford, largest in the world, had to retreat to Crete… Meanwhile Ethiopia has been wondering aloud why, with a population of 140 millions, it can’t get access to the Red Sea anymore after a war, and for just 50 kilometers. Tanks are gathering…
All Europeans can say is that colonial rule was bad, and, like the Shia lunatics who accuse themselves of having caused the death of Husayn 1346 years ago, the Europeans accuse themselves, and colonialism, of having caused the post-colonial chaos, not realizing that they were supposedly gone and colonialism dead, when the chaos grew.
If the Shia Death Cult gets nukes, so will its natural enemies: all non Shia Arab countries, plus Turkey and thus Azerbaijan, their natural enemies Armenia and Georgia, plus all Central Asian more or less Muslim and certainly militarily prestigious Central Asian republics… Etc.
Europe has a brain problem.
Iran treacherously killed hundreds of US and French soldiers and citizens, inflicting in particular attacks in Paris some of them on the ground of religion, attacking the oldest French religion still practiced today (Judaism). The French president at the time did not want to go to war, thus the author of the bombings, the Iranian theocracy, was obscuri zed. So France and the USA had plenty of reasons to evoke casus belli. So, of course does Israel.
So, although a war to preempt way way way worse, a nuclear holocaust, it is also a JUST WAR.
We not only have to eliminate terrorist regimes, especially with nuclear capability, real or potential, but we may as well TRAIN with the Mollahs.
No doubt millions of Iranians share my opinions, hence the excellent work of the Mossad…
***
Meanwhile, congratulations to Donald Trump for finding the appropriate answer to a young Politically Correct Japanese journalist, who accused Trump of having made a surprise attack, without having consulted… Japan… Resulting in Japan being “confused”. Trump replied with Pearl Harbor:
Trump: “We went in very hard, and we didn’t tell anybody about it because we wanted surprise. If I go and tell everybody about it, there’s no longer a surprise… Who knows better about surprise than Japan? Okay, why didn’t you tell me about Pearl Harbor? Right? You believe in surprise, I think, much more so than us”.
Europe should believe in European civilization, much more than the USA or even China. But it doesn’t. When Trump was confronted with the notion of surprise by the impudent, idiotic and historically unaware Japanese journalist, Prime Minister Takaichi, sitting next to Trump could not believe what her compatriot had dared to utter so idiotically.
She felt that Trump was probably going to retaliate with Pearl Harbor, a surprise attack while Japan and the USA were negotiating to find out under which circumstances California oil would start to flow to Japan again. Pearl Harbor was a real treachery, and inconceivably stupid. Immediately after the surprise attack on Hawai’i, Admiral Yamamoto, who led the Japanese Navy, observed “I am afraid that all we have achieved is to wake up a sleeping giant.”
Yamamoto, who had studied at Harvard, was against making war on the USA, because he knew victory was impossible. However many of his colleagues in the military junta in power were culturally imbued with Bushido, a form of death cult. :
Bushido (武士道, “the way of the warrior”) is the ethical code characteristic of Japan’s samurai class. It emphasized virtues like loyalty (忠義 chūgi), honor (名誉 meiyo), courage (勇 yū), benevolence (仁 jin), respect (礼 rei), honesty (誠 makoto), and self-discipline. These drew from influences like Zen Buddhism, Confucianism, and Shinto. And also from the Feudal structure of Japan, where warlords became everything around 800 CE. Thus “loyalty” was often simply groveling submission to a Lord erected into the ultimate cosmic principle.
Texts like the Hagakure (early 18th century), which is found two feet away in a nice red book, as I write these lines, famously state: “The way of the samurai is found in death.” This meant meditating daily on mortality to achieve mental freedom, transcend fear, and act decisively without any attachment to life.
Seppuku, self disembowelment, was viewed by Bushido Fundamentalists as preferable to a life of shame. An example of shame was supposedly retreating in battle (although that happened plenty).
In 1931, a rogue Japanese army manipulated by two colonels who had set up a false flag incident, launched the conquest of China. In the next decade the Japanese high command took ever more criminal power in Japan, in complete violation of the Constitution, culminating with the idiotic and self-defeating decision to attack everybody around (the Chinese, the French, the US, the UK, Philippines, Indonesia, South East Asia… In this order…). The rogue junta reengineered Bushido as a death cult to be applied to foreigners…. Killing at least 50 millions of them (most of them Chinese).
What could be the ultimate rationale for this raging Bushido imperial expansion? There was the hope that the Americans would reveal themselves not quite Bushido material… Enabling the Japanese conquest of the entire so-called co-prosperity sphere”.
However, the Americans were natural Bushido material (no surprise: after all, the Americans had conquered (the better part of) North America).
But then the fanatical generals reasoned, even if we fail completely and miserably, we will destroy European power in the area, and pose as liberators (something sorely needed after what had happened in Korea).
That approach, of camping Japan as a liberation machine, indeed did work… Meager consolation… However the fanatical Japanese generals had not anticipated that the USA would grab European power, and use it on their own account.
Thus, in the end, the Bushido fanatics ensured the success of their ultimate enemy, the one identified when the US “Black Ships” had shown up in Tokyo Bay. US Commodore Matthew Perry’s squadron on July 8, 1853 arrived, a terrifying sight, belching black smoke and sailing without sails or wind, with explosive shells. They delivered a “letter” (truly an ultimatum) to end Japan’s isolation (a 220 years Shogun policy). The US got what they wanted, and the US ultimatum was the catalyst for Japan’s forced modernization: it contributed to the fall of the Tokugawa shogunate, the Meiji Restoration (1868), and Japan’s rapid industrialization to avoid colonization… And save its civilizational variant..
The situation with Iran is very similar. However, nowadays, it’s the fate of the planetary civilization which is at stake. But do Europeans still know what their civilization was all about, and that it must be defended? Apparently no. And no, European civilization was not just Islamo-Judeo-Christian…none of those three instituted the social reforms of the Greco-Romans: they hitched a ride on them.
European civilization had much in common with India (well, civilization was Indo-European and the bridge was… Iran…), but also European civilization had much in common with the greatest civilization of Asia: it was like them, only much more so… For the good and simple reason that the Great European Steppe provided a freeway from Hungary to Korea…
In the past the most idealistic of our predecessors wanted a world government. The European colonial empires provided a sort of partial world government… Until German and Italian craziness blew it all up. Now a world government is a must, not a choice, as I argued with DAD.
The DAD approach has to proceed from the worst regimes to the less bad. As is done in Venezuela apparently, so far, successfully. In Russia, the best approach, obviously that of Trump, is to flip the government: doing as in Venezuela, but with a nuclear superpower.
In Iran, a flip is also imaginable: after all, there is an army, and the Revolutionary Guard is the equivalent of the SS in Nazi Germany. But there the SS had just 12 years, whereas in Iran the Revolutionary Guard had 47 years… In any case, the Death Cult itself has to be completely defanged and domesticated: our home, domus, is Earth and there is no space for Death Cults. By the way, the Romans hunted the Druids for centuries: the Druids hid in the forests and mountain redoubts, they had sympathizers… But they, and their death cult, were, ultimately, hunted down and eradicated by the Roman army. The same Roman army could eradicate the Christians: although also to some extent a death cult, Christianism was also many other things, not just keen to see martyrs die, and this is why it could not be eliminated..
Europe’s medium term survival is not compatible with the rule of a Death Cult bristling with nukes in Teheran. If Europe cannot figure that, what can it figure? Is Europe itself becoming a Death Cult, unwilling to ensure its own survival, presiding over its own death, thus explaining that sympathy incited France to harbor Ayatollah Khomeini?
Patrice Ayme
: .
Covered with their own guilty blood, accusing themselves to have caused the death of Husayn, more than 13 centuries ago. Can we trust those maniacs to accuse us of crimes we never committed to? Most probably! If confronted that way, Shia will often pretend that “guilty” aspect is collective/regretful sorrow for the broader community’s historical failure to aid Imam Husayn ibn Ali, his family and a tiny group of followers—not individual culpability today. But the line is thin and a sub-ideology in the Qur’an recommends lying to defend the Faith…
(Matam, latmiya for chest-beating, zanjir-zani for chain-beating on the back, or tatbir for striking the head with blades/swords: it’s a whole semantics out there for the name of the bloody rose, Shia style…)
Self-flagellation is an expression of remorse and guilt for not having saved Imam Hussein more than 1345 years ago. Yes, more than 13 centuries ago, Husayn, grandson of the Prophet was killed in the Battle of Karbala in 680 CE..The Umayyad caliph Mu’awiya I (r. 661–680) had nominated his son Yazid as his successor. Yazid’s nomination was contested by the sons of a few prominent companions of Muhammad, including Husayn, son of the fourth caliph Ali. Umayyad caliph Yazid I’s army of at least 4,000 and perhaps as much as 30,000 (from those joining certain victory) confronted at most a few hundred Husayn’s followers. Husayn refused to submit to Yazid. He was submitted to a long and gory death, including many members of his family, down to a son in his lap.
#DAD #DeathCult #Europe #history #Iran #Israel #MAD #Martirdom #MiddleEast #nuclearWeapons #PearlHarbor #politics #Shiah #Trump #war -
Colombia, ELN and UN Hypocrisy
By: Antonio García, First Comandante of the ELN
On January 22, the UN condemned the violence unleashed in El Catatumbo, reproducing the biased version that blames the ELN for the entire conflict, despite the fact that there are at least two parties involved: the ELN and the so-called 33rd Front of the extinct FARC. In reality, there are many more actors involved, given that the 33rd Front collaborates with – and is protected by – the National Army, which receives its orders from the Pentagon and the US intelligence services.
A few days earlier, on January 13, the same UN, through its Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, asked the Colombian government and the ELN to restore the bilateral ceasefire, which has been suspended since August 2024.
“I call on the parties to establish a new ceasefire as soon as possible, with a robust monitoring and verification mechanism and a sufficiently broad scope to improve the security of conflict-affected communities,” Guterres said.
We are talking about the same UN that has done nothing to pressure Israel to stop the 15-month campaign of genocide and war of extermination of the Palestinian people. Within the same UN, a ceasefire was vetoed four times in the Security Council. The UN that had nothing to do with the current ceasefire, between the Zionist entity and the Palestinian resistance. That did not lift a finger when the Zionists bombed civilian buildings in Lebanon for more than 50 days, or when they tried to occupy the south of the country.
In 1999, NATO dropped 27,000 tons of bombs and missiles over 78 days to “liberate Yugoslavia.” In the face of that massacre, the UN maintained a complicit silence, endorsing the “humanitarian intervention” of the then government of Bill Clinton.
The UN that approved the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and the invasion of Iraq in 2003, which left more than a million civilians dead, with a toll of one million dead for each war. The UN that approved the invasion and bombing of Libya in 2011, which destroyed the state forever, leaving it in the hands of warlords, all at the service of the interests of the Collective West.
The UN protests against Russia’s military alliance with North Korea, but remains silent in the face of Kiev’s military alliance with the United States and all of NATO, with the massive transfer of money and weapons for the war against Russia.
It is silent in the face of the policy of encirclement, attacks, sanctions, blockade, freezing and theft of Russian assets that exceed 300 billion dollars.
The UN has said nothing related to the 800 US bases of which a significant percentage surround Russia, ranging from the Baltic countries to Turkey, through Africa, Asia and Latin America; bases that in West Asia have served to support the aggressions against Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Yemen and the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The Security Council witnessed yet another dark page in which the United States used the veto arbitrarily and shamefully, and for the fourth time in a row, since the start of the Israeli war on Gaza more than four months ago.
The League of Nations, the prototype of the UN, founded in 1920 after World War I, was never able to prevent the rise of Nazism and prevent World War II. There is a reason why former U.S. Senator Henry Cabot Lodge once characterized the League of Nations as “a diabolical creation with an angelic name.”
After that war, the League of Nations temporarily disappeared, re-emerging again in 1946 as the United Nations (UN) with headquarters in New York and thus became an unconditional ally and subordinate of North America, endorsing with its silence or consent the invasions of the United States to Panama (1918, 1920, 1925, 1958, 1989), Cuba (1917-1933), Dominican Republic (1965-1966), Cuba (1917-1933), Honduras (1919, 1924-1925), Philippines (1948, 1924-1925), Russia (1918-1922), Yugoslavia (1999), Guatemala (1920, 1954, 1966-1967), El Salvador (1932), Iran (1946, 1954), Greece (1946-1947), Vietnam (1960-1975), Egypt (1956), Lebanon (1958, 1982-1984), Laos (1962, 1971-1973), Cambodia (1969-1975), Grenada (1983-1984), Somalia (1992-1994), Afghanistan (2002-2021), Iraq (1958, 1990, 2003-continues to this day).
The League of Nations was the materialization of the international order imposed on the victors of World War I: the old European empires. At the same time, the UN represents the international order because of the victor of World War II: the American empire, which sealed its victory by dropping two atomic bombs on Japan. The law of the victor, and never that of the vanquished.
The liberal global institutionality, which emerged after the Second World War, has become completely innocuous and has entered into absolute bankruptcy.
The recent history of Palestine, Lebanon, Yemen, West Asia, and Eastern Europe testifies that only resistance — and not pacts with outdated institutions — is capable of creating changes in the global order. In a world dominated by power, weakness invites exploitation; The capacity for resistance is the only language that the powerful and their institutions understand. Resistance is not simply an option, it is a necessity, a guarantee of survival.
The lies of the media matrix will be defeated by the truth. In the future, the truth awaits us all.
https://insurgenciaurbana-eln.net/colombia-eln-y-la-hipocresia-de-la-onu/
https://abolitionmedia.noblogs.org/?p=14223
#AntonioGarcía #colombia #eln #southAmerica #un #usImperialism
-
Colombia, ELN and UN Hypocrisy
By: Antonio García, First Comandante of the ELN
On January 22, the UN condemned the violence unleashed in El Catatumbo, reproducing the biased version that blames the ELN for the entire conflict, despite the fact that there are at least two parties involved: the ELN and the so-called 33rd Front of the extinct FARC. In reality, there are many more actors involved, given that the 33rd Front collaborates with – and is protected by – the National Army, which receives its orders from the Pentagon and the US intelligence services.
A few days earlier, on January 13, the same UN, through its Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, asked the Colombian government and the ELN to restore the bilateral ceasefire, which has been suspended since August 2024.
“I call on the parties to establish a new ceasefire as soon as possible, with a robust monitoring and verification mechanism and a sufficiently broad scope to improve the security of conflict-affected communities,” Guterres said.
We are talking about the same UN that has done nothing to pressure Israel to stop the 15-month campaign of genocide and war of extermination of the Palestinian people. Within the same UN, a ceasefire was vetoed four times in the Security Council. The UN that had nothing to do with the current ceasefire, between the Zionist entity and the Palestinian resistance. That did not lift a finger when the Zionists bombed civilian buildings in Lebanon for more than 50 days, or when they tried to occupy the south of the country.
In 1999, NATO dropped 27,000 tons of bombs and missiles over 78 days to “liberate Yugoslavia.” In the face of that massacre, the UN maintained a complicit silence, endorsing the “humanitarian intervention” of the then government of Bill Clinton.
The UN that approved the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and the invasion of Iraq in 2003, which left more than a million civilians dead, with a toll of one million dead for each war. The UN that approved the invasion and bombing of Libya in 2011, which destroyed the state forever, leaving it in the hands of warlords, all at the service of the interests of the Collective West.
The UN protests against Russia’s military alliance with North Korea, but remains silent in the face of Kiev’s military alliance with the United States and all of NATO, with the massive transfer of money and weapons for the war against Russia.
It is silent in the face of the policy of encirclement, attacks, sanctions, blockade, freezing and theft of Russian assets that exceed 300 billion dollars.
The UN has said nothing related to the 800 US bases of which a significant percentage surround Russia, ranging from the Baltic countries to Turkey, through Africa, Asia and Latin America; bases that in West Asia have served to support the aggressions against Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Yemen and the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The Security Council witnessed yet another dark page in which the United States used the veto arbitrarily and shamefully, and for the fourth time in a row, since the start of the Israeli war on Gaza more than four months ago.
The League of Nations, the prototype of the UN, founded in 1920 after World War I, was never able to prevent the rise of Nazism and prevent World War II. There is a reason why former U.S. Senator Henry Cabot Lodge once characterized the League of Nations as “a diabolical creation with an angelic name.”
After that war, the League of Nations temporarily disappeared, re-emerging again in 1946 as the United Nations (UN) with headquarters in New York and thus became an unconditional ally and subordinate of North America, endorsing with its silence or consent the invasions of the United States to Panama (1918, 1920, 1925, 1958, 1989), Cuba (1917-1933), Dominican Republic (1965-1966), Cuba (1917-1933), Honduras (1919, 1924-1925), Philippines (1948, 1924-1925), Russia (1918-1922), Yugoslavia (1999), Guatemala (1920, 1954, 1966-1967), El Salvador (1932), Iran (1946, 1954), Greece (1946-1947), Vietnam (1960-1975), Egypt (1956), Lebanon (1958, 1982-1984), Laos (1962, 1971-1973), Cambodia (1969-1975), Grenada (1983-1984), Somalia (1992-1994), Afghanistan (2002-2021), Iraq (1958, 1990, 2003-continues to this day).
The League of Nations was the materialization of the international order imposed on the victors of World War I: the old European empires. At the same time, the UN represents the international order because of the victor of World War II: the American empire, which sealed its victory by dropping two atomic bombs on Japan. The law of the victor, and never that of the vanquished.
The liberal global institutionality, which emerged after the Second World War, has become completely innocuous and has entered into absolute bankruptcy.
The recent history of Palestine, Lebanon, Yemen, West Asia, and Eastern Europe testifies that only resistance — and not pacts with outdated institutions — is capable of creating changes in the global order. In a world dominated by power, weakness invites exploitation; The capacity for resistance is the only language that the powerful and their institutions understand. Resistance is not simply an option, it is a necessity, a guarantee of survival.
The lies of the media matrix will be defeated by the truth. In the future, the truth awaits us all.
https://insurgenciaurbana-eln.net/colombia-eln-y-la-hipocresia-de-la-onu/
https://abolitionmedia.noblogs.org/?p=14223
#AntonioGarcía #colombia #eln #southAmerica #un #usImperialism
-
For no particular reason, I’ve been thinking about how Palpatine’s Empire worked from the time it was declared, through the time the Senate was dissolved. That’s 19 years, and the Empire seemed pretty bad even with the Senate still in place. So how did Palpatine do things that subverted the Senate, and why did he need to worry about the Senate, at least for the first almost two decades of his reign?
Palpatine’s Toolbox
Palpatine’s status as Emperor meant he never needed to worry about being reelected. It was so important to stabilize the galaxy after the Clone Wars and the treasonous assassination attempt by the Jedi that it was best for galactic security to have a stabilizing influence in the executive branch. So Palpatine can’t be voted out.
Palpatine was also granted special powers during the Clone Wars that were never revoked. This seems to revolve around control of the military, meaning he can spend a whole lot and has direct control over its structure. The Republic didn’t have a standing military until the Clone Wars, they had Judicial Enforcement agents and the cooperation of local sector military, which were limited in size. Palpatine’s now got a standing military that can grow generationally and is just assumed to be part of the government, specifically under control of the executive/imperial branch.
It’s possible that the Senate retained the ability to amend what Palpatine could do with the military, not entirely unlike the USA’s War Powers act, where the President can order the military to take action for up to 60 days, but at that time, if the President is waging a war, it needs to be declared by Congress. There may not be a time limit on Palpatine’s powers, but there may be Senatorial oversight where they can vote to override something he’s committed the military to do.
In the United States, according to the Constitution, Congress gets to declare war, the President gets to command troops. Because of global conflicts like the World Wars, the President’s ability to act and react militarily unofficially expanded to allow for military deployment without actually declaring war. Also keep in mind that after World War II, the military had nukes, and the President controlled the military, meaning that, while unlikely, the President could maybe even nuke someone if they framed it as “not a war.” Instead of just being in control of the military in war time, the President now had organizations like the NSA and the CIA who are additional aspects of “national security.”
Neither the Korean War nor the Vietnam War were actually, technically, wars, and the War Powers act was a means of keeping the President from doing things like, I don’t know, sending troops into Cambodia to undermine North Vietnam’s supply lines which led to the Khmer Rouge killing about two million people. But both the President and the Emperor can get a lot done in the time between ordering military action and the response of the Congress/Senate to reign in that power. Also, it’s probably worth looking at the bit about the President potentially nuking someone without getting approval to declare war when thinking about Palpatine.
Structures and Power Blocks
It is also important to look at the structure of the galaxy and how that played into Palpatine’s abilities and influence. The galaxy in Star Wars has these broad categories:
- Deep Core
- Core Worlds
- Colonies
- Inner Rim Territories
- Expansion Region
- Mid Rim Territories
- Outer Rim Territories
- Unknown Regions
- Wild Space
We’ve got a few of these that “don’t count” when looking at the big picture. Wild Space is out there without much knowledge regarding the region. The Unknown Regions are broadly mapped but with little contact with any of the worlds inside it, from the Galactic Empire’s point of view. The Deep Core is a bunch of densely packed systems at the center of the galaxy that are just kind of there, and a pain to get to due to a massive black hole in the middle of the galaxy. But it’s a good place to hide things if you have mapped a hyperspace route to that place.
The Core Worlds are the oldest, most established worlds in the Empire. These are the wealthiest and most influential sectors. What that means from a galactic political standpoint is that if you keep turmoil from coming to the Core Worlds, it’s really easy for the Core Worlds to act like there isn’t any turmoil. This is where you have places like Alderaan, Corellia, Kuat, and Chandrila. If Palpatine loses these, he loses the money and the means of production. For example, Kuat and Corellia are major shipyards.
The Colonies, Inner Rim, and the Expansion region are all very similar to the Core by Palpatine’s time, wealthy compared to the rest of the galaxy except the Core, and fairly comfortable. The main difference is that the social pecking order of who’s important goes from Core, to Colonies, to Inner Rim, to Expansion region. Even though the galaxy is organized into a Republic just prior to Palpatine’s transformation of it into an Empire, there are a lot of Core Worlds that retain symbolic noble titles, and that fades a bit the further out you go.
The Mid Rim was the edge of the Republic for a long time. This is the region that is usually pretty comfortable but is more prone to dealing with uprisings and pirate raiders. In other words, this is the region of the Empire that you control by making sure they feel like they need the military watching over them because what’s beyond the Mid Rim is scary and dangerous.
For a lot of the Outer Rim’s existence, very few systems were part of the Republic or the Empire. You may have powerful sector-wide governments, but nothing centralized, and varying degrees of living conditions. This is the region where the Republic and later the Empire could buy goods and services that weren’t produced under the enlightened law of galactic society. “Hey, it’s not up to us to worry about if this was made by enslaved sentients, we’re just conducting trade with part of the galaxy we don’t control.”
You have some of the wealthier parts of the Outer Rim trying to get in on the official structure of galactic government, so you had places like Eriadu, where Tarkin is from, joining up, while still kind of doing things their own way, i.e. holding on to a military larger than the Republic allowed. The galaxy knows a lot of locations in the Outer Rim, and they only control the parts of it that are beneficial to officially control and allow the rest to do whatever they may do that is still conducive to trade with the Republic/Empire.
More of the Outer Rim was officially part of the Republic, and then the Empire, after the Clone Wars. Lots of military outposts were consolidated, lots of areas were incorporated either into the Republic or the CIS during the Clone Wars to keep resources or strategic locations from the other side, and in the end, obviously, whatever the Republic or the CIS annexed ends up being part of the Empire. The Outer Rim has lots of resources, less traditional wealth, and very little power on the galactic stage, because so many regions of the Outer Rim are isolated from one another. These are the people that get exploited the most by the rest of the galaxy. Places like Mon Cala or Eriadu manage to get some degree of official recognition earlier in galactic history, but people like the inhabitants of Ryloth get dumped on hard.
Another thing that’s part of the Outer Rim is the Corporate Sector, a region of space where the Empire lets the corporations run things “for the good of trade.” They are part of the Empire, but don’t have to play by its rules, so long as they provide value to the Empire and don’t cause trouble outside of their sphere of influence. This is where Canto Bight is located, and even in the New Republic era, it was still run by the corporations. The Corporate Sector was part of the Separatists during the Clone Wars, but mainly so they could sell to both sides, a proud tradition it continued through the Galactic Civil War and the First Order-Resistance War. Corporations are not your friends; they just want your money or your labor.
Strategy
That means Palpatine’s political strategy is to keep the Core Worlds, Colonies, Inner Rim, and Expansion regions rich and comfortable, keep the Mid Rim afraid of everything that isn’t the above region of the galaxy, and keep the Outer Rim from having much political leverage to complain about their exploitation. That also means you don’t want to crack down on the Hutts, Black Sun, or the Pykes too hard, because you need them to scare the Mid Rim and destabilize the legitimate power bases of the Outer Rim. You need to keep enough of a military presence in the Mid Rim that they appreciate it, but you don’t use it effectively enough to make them feel like it’s done doing its job.
All of this is great, except that the Senate can still overrule you if they stay unified, and if you play up their regional differences, they start feeling too independent. How do you manage that? Well, thankfully, the other aspect of the special powers granted during the Clone Wars to Palpatine was the installation of Regional Governors. These are people that aren’t elected, they’re appointed by the Chancellor/Emperor, and they get to make big regional decisions that stand unless formally rescinded by the Senate. This “streamlines” the operation of the galaxy to ensure that debate and petty differences don’t keep the galaxy from working as a well-oiled machine.
Most of the regional governors just need to do enough so that Palpatine doesn’t need to worry about getting something to pass in the Senate, but not enough to get the Senate to revisit the decisions the Regional Governors have made. That also means that if those Regional Governors make a decision that screws over one little, tiny system within a sector, who’s going to worry about correcting that? You just need to make sure those tiny little systems don’t add up too fast, before they get used to the idea that they weren’t screwed over, it’s just the status quo being maintained.
Palpatine’s Toolbox, Revisited
So, by the time the first Death Star was created, Palpatine had the following assets:
- A government-wide security agency that nobody thinks much about until it’s used (the ISA)
- An organization that suppresses religious thought that doesn’t align with the religious thoughts of the Emperor (the Inquisition)
- The ability to restructure the military to make sure the right people are in the right positions
- The ability to deploy the military if doing so is relatively quick and decisive
- The ability to spend a ton of money on the military without anyone looking at exactly where that money goes, just the total amount spent
- Appointed positions across the galaxy that can directly implement the Emperor’s will, as long as they do so at a pace that doesn’t rouse the Senate to action
- A scary border where you can convince a significant portion of your population that whatever is past that border needs to be constrained by government power
All of that is powerful out of the gate, but it’s understandable that you don’t want to play your hand too early. If you tell the comfortable part of the galaxy that they aren’t special, they might be able to see that they have more solidarity with the Mid and Outer Rims. If you make the Mid Rim too safe, the Mid Rim might join with the comfortable folk and decide that maybe you don’t need a huge military, and it’s time to start reigning in the budget and revisiting those special powers you’ve had since the Clone Wars.
Compounded Efforts Over Time
On the other hand, after almost twenty years of work, you have a security agency that can kill, imprison, and torture anyone you need on a concentrated scale. You have everyone important in the military chain of command that’s loyal to you and not the government at large. You have a military that has been building and recruiting on a scale larger than you did during the Clone Wars, and as long as you keep the spending spread out, it’s hard for any one branch of the military to be impeded. You have external factors like the Hutts that know exactly how much they can get away with to keep the population scared of them. You have regional governors that can implement your will in a manner that people have become accustomed to for almost two decades, to where locals look to them before their normal political structures for support.
Once you have all of that in effect long enough that people are used to you having that authority, and they know they can’t oust you from office, it becomes pretty easy to just remove one branch of government, because they’ve been ineffective and functionally unimportant for decades. People are almost relieved that a non-functioning thing has suddenly changed, because maybe if you get rid of something that doesn’t work, whatever comes next will be better.
Transitioning a Republic to an Empire
I would really hate to see an executive officer of a government that couldn’t be removed from office or censured in any real way, assisted by appointed government officials that can declare their will to be law outside of the structure of representative government, being able to use the threat of prosecution, incarceration, or death to cow their political adversaries. It would be terrible if there were some kind of protocol detailing an important aspect of their plans to consolidate power that people were desperate to inform others about, which managed to get ignored or suppressed whenever it came close to being exposed. It would be tragic if people that are comfortable ignored the threat that individual posed and took no action, or if part of the population were to be so controlled by their fears of the other that they don’t care what that absolute power means for the good of everyone. It would be devastating if laws began to favor the singular sanctioned religion approved by the singular head of government.
Anyway, I’m glad I felt like writing about Star Wars today and not politics. Can you imagine if Star Wars were political?
https://whatdoiknowjr.com/2024/07/13/the-completely-apolitical-story-of-palpatines-rise-to-power/
#AllianceToRestoreTheRepublic #CloneWars #ConfederationOfIndependentSystems #CoreWorlds #Disney #Empire #ff0000 #InnerRim #MidRim #Movies #OuterRim #Politics #Rebellion #SpoilersThisIsAboutTrump #StarWars
-
For no particular reason, I’ve been thinking about how Palpatine’s Empire worked from the time it was declared, through the time the Senate was dissolved. That’s 19 years, and the Empire seemed pretty bad even with the Senate still in place. So how did Palpatine do things that subverted the Senate, and why did he need to worry about the Senate, at least for the first almost two decades of his reign?
Palpatine’s Toolbox
Palpatine’s status as Emperor meant he never needed to worry about being reelected. It was so important to stabilize the galaxy after the Clone Wars and the treasonous assassination attempt by the Jedi that it was best for galactic security to have a stabilizing influence in the executive branch. So Palpatine can’t be voted out.
Palpatine was also granted special powers during the Clone Wars that were never revoked. This seems to revolve around control of the military, meaning he can spend a whole lot and has direct control over its structure. The Republic didn’t have a standing military until the Clone Wars, they had Judicial Enforcement agents and the cooperation of local sector military, which were limited in size. Palpatine’s now got a standing military that can grow generationally and is just assumed to be part of the government, specifically under control of the executive/imperial branch.
It’s possible that the Senate retained the ability to amend what Palpatine could do with the military, not entirely unlike the USA’s War Powers act, where the President can order the military to take action for up to 60 days, but at that time, if the President is waging a war, it needs to be declared by Congress. There may not be a time limit on Palpatine’s powers, but there may be Senatorial oversight where they can vote to override something he’s committed the military to do.
In the United States, according to the Constitution, Congress gets to declare war, the President gets to command troops. Because of global conflicts like the World Wars, the President’s ability to act and react militarily unofficially expanded to allow for military deployment without actually declaring war. Also keep in mind that after World War II, the military had nukes, and the President controlled the military, meaning that, while unlikely, the President could maybe even nuke someone if they framed it as “not a war.” Instead of just being in control of the military in war time, the President now had organizations like the NSA and the CIA who are additional aspects of “national security.”
Neither the Korean War nor the Vietnam War were actually, technically, wars, and the War Powers act was a means of keeping the President from doing things like, I don’t know, sending troops into Cambodia to undermine North Vietnam’s supply lines which led to the Khmer Rouge killing about two million people. But both the President and the Emperor can get a lot done in the time between ordering military action and the response of the Congress/Senate to reign in that power. Also, it’s probably worth looking at the bit about the President potentially nuking someone without getting approval to declare war when thinking about Palpatine.
Structures and Power Blocks
It is also important to look at the structure of the galaxy and how that played into Palpatine’s abilities and influence. The galaxy in Star Wars has these broad categories:
- Deep Core
- Core Worlds
- Colonies
- Inner Rim Territories
- Expansion Region
- Mid Rim Territories
- Outer Rim Territories
- Unknown Regions
- Wild Space
We’ve got a few of these that “don’t count” when looking at the big picture. Wild Space is out there without much knowledge regarding the region. The Unknown Regions are broadly mapped but with little contact with any of the worlds inside it, from the Galactic Empire’s point of view. The Deep Core is a bunch of densely packed systems at the center of the galaxy that are just kind of there, and a pain to get to due to a massive black hole in the middle of the galaxy. But it’s a good place to hide things if you have mapped a hyperspace route to that place.
The Core Worlds are the oldest, most established worlds in the Empire. These are the wealthiest and most influential sectors. What that means from a galactic political standpoint is that if you keep turmoil from coming to the Core Worlds, it’s really easy for the Core Worlds to act like there isn’t any turmoil. This is where you have places like Alderaan, Corellia, Kuat, and Chandrila. If Palpatine loses these, he loses the money and the means of production. For example, Kuat and Corellia are major shipyards.
The Colonies, Inner Rim, and the Expansion region are all very similar to the Core by Palpatine’s time, wealthy compared to the rest of the galaxy except the Core, and fairly comfortable. The main difference is that the social pecking order of who’s important goes from Core, to Colonies, to Inner Rim, to Expansion region. Even though the galaxy is organized into a Republic just prior to Palpatine’s transformation of it into an Empire, there are a lot of Core Worlds that retain symbolic noble titles, and that fades a bit the further out you go.
The Mid Rim was the edge of the Republic for a long time. This is the region that is usually pretty comfortable but is more prone to dealing with uprisings and pirate raiders. In other words, this is the region of the Empire that you control by making sure they feel like they need the military watching over them because what’s beyond the Mid Rim is scary and dangerous.
For a lot of the Outer Rim’s existence, very few systems were part of the Republic or the Empire. You may have powerful sector-wide governments, but nothing centralized, and varying degrees of living conditions. This is the region where the Republic and later the Empire could buy goods and services that weren’t produced under the enlightened law of galactic society. “Hey, it’s not up to us to worry about if this was made by enslaved sentients, we’re just conducting trade with part of the galaxy we don’t control.”
You have some of the wealthier parts of the Outer Rim trying to get in on the official structure of galactic government, so you had places like Eriadu, where Tarkin is from, joining up, while still kind of doing things their own way, i.e. holding on to a military larger than the Republic allowed. The galaxy knows a lot of locations in the Outer Rim, and they only control the parts of it that are beneficial to officially control and allow the rest to do whatever they may do that is still conducive to trade with the Republic/Empire.
More of the Outer Rim was officially part of the Republic, and then the Empire, after the Clone Wars. Lots of military outposts were consolidated, lots of areas were incorporated either into the Republic or the CIS during the Clone Wars to keep resources or strategic locations from the other side, and in the end, obviously, whatever the Republic or the CIS annexed ends up being part of the Empire. The Outer Rim has lots of resources, less traditional wealth, and very little power on the galactic stage, because so many regions of the Outer Rim are isolated from one another. These are the people that get exploited the most by the rest of the galaxy. Places like Mon Cala or Eriadu manage to get some degree of official recognition earlier in galactic history, but people like the inhabitants of Ryloth get dumped on hard.
Another thing that’s part of the Outer Rim is the Corporate Sector, a region of space where the Empire lets the corporations run things “for the good of trade.” They are part of the Empire, but don’t have to play by its rules, so long as they provide value to the Empire and don’t cause trouble outside of their sphere of influence. This is where Canto Bight is located, and even in the New Republic era, it was still run by the corporations. The Corporate Sector was part of the Separatists during the Clone Wars, but mainly so they could sell to both sides, a proud tradition it continued through the Galactic Civil War and the First Order-Resistance War. Corporations are not your friends; they just want your money or your labor.
Strategy
That means Palpatine’s political strategy is to keep the Core Worlds, Colonies, Inner Rim, and Expansion regions rich and comfortable, keep the Mid Rim afraid of everything that isn’t the above region of the galaxy, and keep the Outer Rim from having much political leverage to complain about their exploitation. That also means you don’t want to crack down on the Hutts, Black Sun, or the Pykes too hard, because you need them to scare the Mid Rim and destabilize the legitimate power bases of the Outer Rim. You need to keep enough of a military presence in the Mid Rim that they appreciate it, but you don’t use it effectively enough to make them feel like it’s done doing its job.
All of this is great, except that the Senate can still overrule you if they stay unified, and if you play up their regional differences, they start feeling too independent. How do you manage that? Well, thankfully, the other aspect of the special powers granted during the Clone Wars to Palpatine was the installation of Regional Governors. These are people that aren’t elected, they’re appointed by the Chancellor/Emperor, and they get to make big regional decisions that stand unless formally rescinded by the Senate. This “streamlines” the operation of the galaxy to ensure that debate and petty differences don’t keep the galaxy from working as a well-oiled machine.
Most of the regional governors just need to do enough so that Palpatine doesn’t need to worry about getting something to pass in the Senate, but not enough to get the Senate to revisit the decisions the Regional Governors have made. That also means that if those Regional Governors make a decision that screws over one little, tiny system within a sector, who’s going to worry about correcting that? You just need to make sure those tiny little systems don’t add up too fast, before they get used to the idea that they weren’t screwed over, it’s just the status quo being maintained.
Palpatine’s Toolbox, Revisited
So, by the time the first Death Star was created, Palpatine had the following assets:
- A government-wide security agency that nobody thinks much about until it’s used (the ISA)
- An organization that suppresses religious thought that doesn’t align with the religious thoughts of the Emperor (the Inquisition)
- The ability to restructure the military to make sure the right people are in the right positions
- The ability to deploy the military if doing so is relatively quick and decisive
- The ability to spend a ton of money on the military without anyone looking at exactly where that money goes, just the total amount spent
- Appointed positions across the galaxy that can directly implement the Emperor’s will, as long as they do so at a pace that doesn’t rouse the Senate to action
- A scary border where you can convince a significant portion of your population that whatever is past that border needs to be constrained by government power
All of that is powerful out of the gate, but it’s understandable that you don’t want to play your hand too early. If you tell the comfortable part of the galaxy that they aren’t special, they might be able to see that they have more solidarity with the Mid and Outer Rims. If you make the Mid Rim too safe, the Mid Rim might join with the comfortable folk and decide that maybe you don’t need a huge military, and it’s time to start reigning in the budget and revisiting those special powers you’ve had since the Clone Wars.
Compounded Efforts Over Time
On the other hand, after almost twenty years of work, you have a security agency that can kill, imprison, and torture anyone you need on a concentrated scale. You have everyone important in the military chain of command that’s loyal to you and not the government at large. You have a military that has been building and recruiting on a scale larger than you did during the Clone Wars, and as long as you keep the spending spread out, it’s hard for any one branch of the military to be impeded. You have external factors like the Hutts that know exactly how much they can get away with to keep the population scared of them. You have regional governors that can implement your will in a manner that people have become accustomed to for almost two decades, to where locals look to them before their normal political structures for support.
Once you have all of that in effect long enough that people are used to you having that authority, and they know they can’t oust you from office, it becomes pretty easy to just remove one branch of government, because they’ve been ineffective and functionally unimportant for decades. People are almost relieved that a non-functioning thing has suddenly changed, because maybe if you get rid of something that doesn’t work, whatever comes next will be better.
Transitioning a Republic to an Empire
I would really hate to see an executive officer of a government that couldn’t be removed from office or censured in any real way, assisted by appointed government officials that can declare their will to be law outside of the structure of representative government, being able to use the threat of prosecution, incarceration, or death to cow their political adversaries. It would be terrible if there were some kind of protocol detailing an important aspect of their plans to consolidate power that people were desperate to inform others about, which managed to get ignored or suppressed whenever it came close to being exposed. It would be tragic if people that are comfortable ignored the threat that individual posed and took no action, or if part of the population were to be so controlled by their fears of the other that they don’t care what that absolute power means for the good of everyone. It would be devastating if laws began to favor the singular sanctioned religion approved by the singular head of government.
Anyway, I’m glad I felt like writing about Star Wars today and not politics. Can you imagine if Star Wars were political?
https://whatdoiknowjr.com/2024/07/13/the-completely-apolitical-story-of-palpatines-rise-to-power/
#AllianceToRestoreTheRepublic #CloneWars #ConfederationOfIndependentSystems #CoreWorlds #Disney #Empire #ff0000 #InnerRim #MidRim #Movies #OuterRim #Politics #Rebellion #SpoilersThisIsAboutTrump #StarWars
-
For no particular reason, I’ve been thinking about how Palpatine’s Empire worked from the time it was declared, through the time the Senate was dissolved. That’s 19 years, and the Empire seemed pretty bad even with the Senate still in place. So how did Palpatine do things that subverted the Senate, and why did he need to worry about the Senate, at least for the first almost two decades of his reign?
Palpatine’s Toolbox
Palpatine’s status as Emperor meant he never needed to worry about being reelected. It was so important to stabilize the galaxy after the Clone Wars and the treasonous assassination attempt by the Jedi that it was best for galactic security to have a stabilizing influence in the executive branch. So Palpatine can’t be voted out.
Palpatine was also granted special powers during the Clone Wars that were never revoked. This seems to revolve around control of the military, meaning he can spend a whole lot and has direct control over its structure. The Republic didn’t have a standing military until the Clone Wars, they had Judicial Enforcement agents and the cooperation of local sector military, which were limited in size. Palpatine’s now got a standing military that can grow generationally and is just assumed to be part of the government, specifically under control of the executive/imperial branch.
It’s possible that the Senate retained the ability to amend what Palpatine could do with the military, not entirely unlike the USA’s War Powers act, where the President can order the military to take action for up to 60 days, but at that time, if the President is waging a war, it needs to be declared by Congress. There may not be a time limit on Palpatine’s powers, but there may be Senatorial oversight where they can vote to override something he’s committed the military to do.
In the United States, according to the Constitution, Congress gets to declare war, the President gets to command troops. Because of global conflicts like the World Wars, the President’s ability to act and react militarily unofficially expanded to allow for military deployment without actually declaring war. Also keep in mind that after World War II, the military had nukes, and the President controlled the military, meaning that, while unlikely, the President could maybe even nuke someone if they framed it as “not a war.” Instead of just being in control of the military in war time, the President now had organizations like the NSA and the CIA who are additional aspects of “national security.”
Neither the Korean War nor the Vietnam War were actually, technically, wars, and the War Powers act was a means of keeping the President from doing things like, I don’t know, sending troops into Cambodia to undermine North Vietnam’s supply lines which led to the Khmer Rouge killing about two million people. But both the President and the Emperor can get a lot done in the time between ordering military action and the response of the Congress/Senate to reign in that power. Also, it’s probably worth looking at the bit about the President potentially nuking someone without getting approval to declare war when thinking about Palpatine.
Structures and Power Blocks
It is also important to look at the structure of the galaxy and how that played into Palpatine’s abilities and influence. The galaxy in Star Wars has these broad categories:
- Deep Core
- Core Worlds
- Colonies
- Inner Rim Territories
- Expansion Region
- Mid Rim Territories
- Outer Rim Territories
- Unknown Regions
- Wild Space
We’ve got a few of these that “don’t count” when looking at the big picture. Wild Space is out there without much knowledge regarding the region. The Unknown Regions are broadly mapped but with little contact with any of the worlds inside it, from the Galactic Empire’s point of view. The Deep Core is a bunch of densely packed systems at the center of the galaxy that are just kind of there, and a pain to get to due to a massive black hole in the middle of the galaxy. But it’s a good place to hide things if you have mapped a hyperspace route to that place.
The Core Worlds are the oldest, most established worlds in the Empire. These are the wealthiest and most influential sectors. What that means from a galactic political standpoint is that if you keep turmoil from coming to the Core Worlds, it’s really easy for the Core Worlds to act like there isn’t any turmoil. This is where you have places like Alderaan, Corellia, Kuat, and Chandrila. If Palpatine loses these, he loses the money and the means of production. For example, Kuat and Corellia are major shipyards.
The Colonies, Inner Rim, and the Expansion region are all very similar to the Core by Palpatine’s time, wealthy compared to the rest of the galaxy except the Core, and fairly comfortable. The main difference is that the social pecking order of who’s important goes from Core, to Colonies, to Inner Rim, to Expansion region. Even though the galaxy is organized into a Republic just prior to Palpatine’s transformation of it into an Empire, there are a lot of Core Worlds that retain symbolic noble titles, and that fades a bit the further out you go.
The Mid Rim was the edge of the Republic for a long time. This is the region that is usually pretty comfortable but is more prone to dealing with uprisings and pirate raiders. In other words, this is the region of the Empire that you control by making sure they feel like they need the military watching over them because what’s beyond the Mid Rim is scary and dangerous.
For a lot of the Outer Rim’s existence, very few systems were part of the Republic or the Empire. You may have powerful sector-wide governments, but nothing centralized, and varying degrees of living conditions. This is the region where the Republic and later the Empire could buy goods and services that weren’t produced under the enlightened law of galactic society. “Hey, it’s not up to us to worry about if this was made by enslaved sentients, we’re just conducting trade with part of the galaxy we don’t control.”
You have some of the wealthier parts of the Outer Rim trying to get in on the official structure of galactic government, so you had places like Eriadu, where Tarkin is from, joining up, while still kind of doing things their own way, i.e. holding on to a military larger than the Republic allowed. The galaxy knows a lot of locations in the Outer Rim, and they only control the parts of it that are beneficial to officially control and allow the rest to do whatever they may do that is still conducive to trade with the Republic/Empire.
More of the Outer Rim was officially part of the Republic, and then the Empire, after the Clone Wars. Lots of military outposts were consolidated, lots of areas were incorporated either into the Republic or the CIS during the Clone Wars to keep resources or strategic locations from the other side, and in the end, obviously, whatever the Republic or the CIS annexed ends up being part of the Empire. The Outer Rim has lots of resources, less traditional wealth, and very little power on the galactic stage, because so many regions of the Outer Rim are isolated from one another. These are the people that get exploited the most by the rest of the galaxy. Places like Mon Cala or Eriadu manage to get some degree of official recognition earlier in galactic history, but people like the inhabitants of Ryloth get dumped on hard.
Another thing that’s part of the Outer Rim is the Corporate Sector, a region of space where the Empire lets the corporations run things “for the good of trade.” They are part of the Empire, but don’t have to play by its rules, so long as they provide value to the Empire and don’t cause trouble outside of their sphere of influence. This is where Canto Bight is located, and even in the New Republic era, it was still run by the corporations. The Corporate Sector was part of the Separatists during the Clone Wars, but mainly so they could sell to both sides, a proud tradition it continued through the Galactic Civil War and the First Order-Resistance War. Corporations are not your friends; they just want your money or your labor.
Strategy
That means Palpatine’s political strategy is to keep the Core Worlds, Colonies, Inner Rim, and Expansion regions rich and comfortable, keep the Mid Rim afraid of everything that isn’t the above region of the galaxy, and keep the Outer Rim from having much political leverage to complain about their exploitation. That also means you don’t want to crack down on the Hutts, Black Sun, or the Pykes too hard, because you need them to scare the Mid Rim and destabilize the legitimate power bases of the Outer Rim. You need to keep enough of a military presence in the Mid Rim that they appreciate it, but you don’t use it effectively enough to make them feel like it’s done doing its job.
All of this is great, except that the Senate can still overrule you if they stay unified, and if you play up their regional differences, they start feeling too independent. How do you manage that? Well, thankfully, the other aspect of the special powers granted during the Clone Wars to Palpatine was the installation of Regional Governors. These are people that aren’t elected, they’re appointed by the Chancellor/Emperor, and they get to make big regional decisions that stand unless formally rescinded by the Senate. This “streamlines” the operation of the galaxy to ensure that debate and petty differences don’t keep the galaxy from working as a well-oiled machine.
Most of the regional governors just need to do enough so that Palpatine doesn’t need to worry about getting something to pass in the Senate, but not enough to get the Senate to revisit the decisions the Regional Governors have made. That also means that if those Regional Governors make a decision that screws over one little, tiny system within a sector, who’s going to worry about correcting that? You just need to make sure those tiny little systems don’t add up too fast, before they get used to the idea that they weren’t screwed over, it’s just the status quo being maintained.
Palpatine’s Toolbox, Revisited
So, by the time the first Death Star was created, Palpatine had the following assets:
- A government-wide security agency that nobody thinks much about until it’s used (the ISA)
- An organization that suppresses religious thought that doesn’t align with the religious thoughts of the Emperor (the Inquisition)
- The ability to restructure the military to make sure the right people are in the right positions
- The ability to deploy the military if doing so is relatively quick and decisive
- The ability to spend a ton of money on the military without anyone looking at exactly where that money goes, just the total amount spent
- Appointed positions across the galaxy that can directly implement the Emperor’s will, as long as they do so at a pace that doesn’t rouse the Senate to action
- A scary border where you can convince a significant portion of your population that whatever is past that border needs to be constrained by government power
All of that is powerful out of the gate, but it’s understandable that you don’t want to play your hand too early. If you tell the comfortable part of the galaxy that they aren’t special, they might be able to see that they have more solidarity with the Mid and Outer Rims. If you make the Mid Rim too safe, the Mid Rim might join with the comfortable folk and decide that maybe you don’t need a huge military, and it’s time to start reigning in the budget and revisiting those special powers you’ve had since the Clone Wars.
Compounded Efforts Over Time
On the other hand, after almost twenty years of work, you have a security agency that can kill, imprison, and torture anyone you need on a concentrated scale. You have everyone important in the military chain of command that’s loyal to you and not the government at large. You have a military that has been building and recruiting on a scale larger than you did during the Clone Wars, and as long as you keep the spending spread out, it’s hard for any one branch of the military to be impeded. You have external factors like the Hutts that know exactly how much they can get away with to keep the population scared of them. You have regional governors that can implement your will in a manner that people have become accustomed to for almost two decades, to where locals look to them before their normal political structures for support.
Once you have all of that in effect long enough that people are used to you having that authority, and they know they can’t oust you from office, it becomes pretty easy to just remove one branch of government, because they’ve been ineffective and functionally unimportant for decades. People are almost relieved that a non-functioning thing has suddenly changed, because maybe if you get rid of something that doesn’t work, whatever comes next will be better.
Transitioning a Republic to an Empire
I would really hate to see an executive officer of a government that couldn’t be removed from office or censured in any real way, assisted by appointed government officials that can declare their will to be law outside of the structure of representative government, being able to use the threat of prosecution, incarceration, or death to cow their political adversaries. It would be terrible if there were some kind of protocol detailing an important aspect of their plans to consolidate power that people were desperate to inform others about, which managed to get ignored or suppressed whenever it came close to being exposed. It would be tragic if people that are comfortable ignored the threat that individual posed and took no action, or if part of the population were to be so controlled by their fears of the other that they don’t care what that absolute power means for the good of everyone. It would be devastating if laws began to favor the singular sanctioned religion approved by the singular head of government.
Anyway, I’m glad I felt like writing about Star Wars today and not politics. Can you imagine if Star Wars were political?
https://whatdoiknowjr.com/2024/07/13/the-completely-apolitical-story-of-palpatines-rise-to-power/
#AllianceToRestoreTheRepublic #CloneWars #ConfederationOfIndependentSystems #CoreWorlds #Disney #Empire #ff0000 #InnerRim #MidRim #Movies #OuterRim #Politics #Rebellion #SpoilersThisIsAboutTrump #StarWars
-
How Brands Exploit “Green” Certification
Brands and businesses may be tempted to exploit “green” certifications to garner a larger market share at the expense of integrity.
Around 400 #ecolabels 🏆 claim to provide #consumers with choice ⁉️ Yet they’re unreliable in holding #corporates to account for widespread #deforestation and #humanrights abuses and #greenwashing #Boycottpalmoil 🌴🪔🔥 ⛔️#Boycott4Wildlife @palmoildetect https://wp.me/pcFhgU-8Y6
Share to BlueSky Share to Twitter#Brands and giants of #FMCG may be tempted to exploit “green” certifications like #FSC, MSC and #RSPO to reassure consumers. Yet ecolabels have deep flaws in enforcement of standards. #ecocide #greenwashing #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife @palmoildetect https://wp.me/pcFhgU-8Y6
Share to BlueSky Share to TwitterWritten by Dr Arne Nygaard, professor at the School of Communication, Leadership and Marketing at Kristiania University College, Norway. His primary research interests include sustainable supply chains, greenwashing, geopolitical risk and strategic uncertainty, economic contracts and incentives, sustainability and green marketing, technology, and entrepreneurship. Originally published under Creative Commons by 360info™, read the original.
Analyses conducted in the study indicate that while certifications can help prevent greenwashing, they can also contribute to eco-opportunism […] the theory of eco-opportunism warns that this can lead to free riding and greenwashing, where products are falsely advertised as sustainable but fail to meet certified standards.
Nygaard, A. (2023). Is sustainable certification’s ability to combat greenwashing trustworthy? Frontiers in Sustainability, 4, Article 1188069. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2023.1188069
As the global fight against climate change intensifies, certifications have become crucial tools for industries to address environmental, business and social challenges. Sustainability certifications promote eco-friendly practices, protect human rights and boost the credibility of environmentally responsible brands.
But although certifications often enhance the perceived value of sustainable products and services, challenges remain.
There are concerns about greenwashing and free riding plus the inability of certification systems to adapt to changes and failing to incentivise the adoption of newer, more sustainable technologies.
At the supermarket, a shopper carefully studies a label, thinking, “This product has a certification. Must be environmentally friendly. I’ll buy it.” And like that shopper, millions around the world make that same decision every day.
Greenwashing, where companies falsely claim eco-friendly credentials without meeting required standards, is a significant issue. Similarly, free riding allows businesses to benefit from the positive image of certifications without genuinely implementing sustainable practices.
The number of sustainability certifications has surged globally in recent years. The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) reports that more than 400 certifications now cover sectors such as food, agriculture, energy, environment, health and social responsibility.
Consumer awareness
This growth reflects increasing consumer awareness of sustainability and the desire of companies to showcase their commitment to eco-friendly practices.
Certifications serve as essential market signals, enabling businesses to distinguish themselves by adhering to recognised environmental and social standards.
Some of the internationally recognised certifications include the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for green buildings, the Forest Stewardship Council for sustainable forestry and the Fair Trade certification, which ensures that products meet strict social, environmental and labour criteria.
Another key example is the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil certification, which promotes the production of palm oil in a way that minimises environmental harm, protects biodiversity and ensures fair treatment of workers and local communities.
Certifications typically involve third-party evaluations to assess compliance with criteria such as environmental and economic impact or fair labour practices.
Despite widespread adoption, certifications face growing scrutiny.
For instance, consumer demand for eco-friendly products has led to companies charging higher prices for green products. While many consumers are willing to pay this premium, it can create perverse incentives for companies to engage in greenwashing.
Certifications, intended to assure consumers of a product’s environmental and social standards, can paradoxically encourage companies to exploit these authentications for profit.
When businesses realise they can charge a premium for eco-labelled goods, the temptation to stretch the truth or manipulate the certification increases.
Erosion of trust
Greenwashing erodes consumer trust and devalues the certifications of genuinely sustainable products.
As more companies exploit these eco-friendly claims without verification, it becomes harder for consumers to differentiate between authentic and deceptive environmental practices, potentially undermining the credibility of certification systems.
This highlights the urgent need for stronger mechanisms to mitigate these risks, ensuring that certification systems are not only effective but also resilient against exploitation.
Certification bodies can tighten standards, increase transparency and implement stronger verification processes to reflect evolving sustainability standards and prevent misuse. Additionally, independent audits and greater rigour throughout the supply chain would hold companies accountable for their claims.
Investigation into the root causes of greenwashing is necessary to understand how and why companies manipulate sustainable claims.
One key issue is that certification processes often focus on specific criteria and may not capture the broader environmental or social impacts of a product.
Selective compliance
A company may meet the minimum requirements for certification in one area, such as reducing carbon emissions, while ignoring other important sustainability factors such as labour conditions or biodiversity conservation.
This selective compliance allows companies to appear more sustainable than they truly are, feeding into the cycle of greenwashing.
Consumers can be educated on how to critically evaluate certification labels to avoid falling prey to greenwashing tactics.
By reinforcing certification systems with robust monitoring and compliance mechanisms, the credibility of sustainable products can be preserved, and the integrity of genuine sustainability efforts can be upheld.
Non-governmental organisations and activist groups play a critical role in developing and implementing certification systems. These organisations provide valuable input during the creation of sustainability standards and help monitor compliance, ensuring that certification systems remain credible.
For example, the Forest Stewardship Council certification system for responsible forestry was developed in 1993 with input from environmental NGOs such as Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund.
NGOs advocate for higher sustainability standards, while certifications give them leverage to hold businesses accountable. By working together, NGOs and certification bodies can drive meaningful change toward a more sustainable future.
The interaction between state institutions, laws, and certification systems is also vital to ensuring the credibility and effectiveness of sustainability efforts.
Governments often set baseline sustainability requirements, while certification systems provide an additional layer of accountability. A clear example is the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil certification now used in 21 countries.
Resistance to change
One challenge facing certification bodies is internal structural inertia. This refers to resistance to change, preventing the adoption of innovative green technologies.
This occurs when certification bodies become too rigid in their processes, policies, or standards, making it difficult for them to quickly adapt to new environmental paradigms.
For example, the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design initially focused on energy efficiency in buildings but was slow to incorporate newer technologies like green roofs or biophilic design which enhance sustainability.
Similarly, in the agricultural sector, government certification systems such as the United States Department of Agriculture Organic can be slow to recognise advancements in vertical farming or aeroponics, even though these methods significantly reduce land use, water consumption, and pesticide reliance.
This type of institutional resistance can delay the transition to more sustainable practices, as certification bodies may cling to outdated standards that fail to incentivise the latest green technologies.
To stay relevant and support ongoing environmental progress, certification organisations can work to overcome structural inertia and actively seek ways to update their standards in response to new innovations.
By updating their standards to reflect these disruptive technologies, certification systems can stay relevant and effective, driving sustainability across industries and supporting innovation while addressing evolving environmental challenges.
However, certifications, while essential tools for promoting sustainable practices, face limitations. Greenwashing, free-riding, and institutional inertia can undermine their value, posing challenges for businesses and consumers alike.
As markets evolve, certifications risk becoming obsolete unless they adapt to new environmental and technological challenges.
Nygaard, A. (2023). Is sustainable certification’s ability to combat greenwashing trustworthy? Frontiers in Sustainability, 4, Article 1188069. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2023.1188069
Dr Arne Nygaard is a professor at the School of Communication, Leadership and Marketing at Kristiania University College, Norway. His primary research interests include sustainable supply chains, greenwashing, geopolitical risk and strategic uncertainty, economic contracts and incentives, sustainability and green marketing, technology, and entrepreneurship. Originally published under Creative Commons by 360info™, read the original.
ENDS
Read more about greenwashing associated with certified “sustainable” palm oil and other commodities
Finance giants fuel $8.9 trillion deforestation economy
Forest 500 report shows 150 of the world’s largest financial institutions invested nearly $9 trillion in deforestation-linked industries. Support EUDR!
Investigation by Bloomberg exposes that despite being RSPO members, #SOCFIN plantations in #WestAfrica are the epicentre of #humanrights abuses, sexual coercion, environmental destruction, and #landgrabbing. Operating in #Liberia, #Ghana, #Nigeria, and beyond, SOCFIN’s…
The Indigenous Malaysian concept of ‘Badi’: respecting the land and wildlife
The Indigenous Semai #indigenous people of #Malaysia can teach us a lot about how to protect people, planet and biodiversity. The Indigenous concept of #badi is not superstition or taboo, it’s about respecting…
Family Ties Expose Deforestation and Rights Violations in Indonesian Palm Oil
An explosive report by the Environment Investigation Agency (EIA) details how Indonesia’s Fangiono family, through a wide corporate web, is linked to ongoing #deforestation, #corruption, and #indigenousrights abuses for #palmoil. Calls mount for…
Rivers are still people in South East Asia despite court showdown
Healthy rivers are essential for community wellbeing. India and Bangladesh legally recognise rivers as natural persons with rights and powers. Take action!
Load more posts
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.
Take Action in Five Ways
1. Join the #Boycott4Wildlife on social media and subscribe to stay in the loop: Share posts from this website to your own network on Twitter, Mastadon, Instagram, Facebook and Youtube using the hashtags #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife.
Enter your email address
Sign Up
Join 3,172 other subscribers2. Contribute stories: Academics, conservationists, scientists, indigenous rights advocates and animal rights advocates working to expose the corruption of the palm oil industry or to save animals can contribute stories to the website.
Mel Lumby: Dedicated Devotee to Borneo’s Living Beings
Anthropologist and Author Dr Sophie Chao
Health Physician Dr Evan Allen
The World’s Most Loved Cup: A Social, Ethical & Environmental History of Coffee by Aviary Doert
How do we stop the world’s ecosystems from going into a death spiral? A #SteadyState Economy
3. Supermarket sleuthing: Next time you’re in the supermarket, take photos of products containing palm oil. Share these to social media along with the hashtags to call out the greenwashing and ecocide of the brands who use palm oil. You can also take photos of palm oil free products and congratulate brands when they go palm oil free.
https://twitter.com/CuriousApe4/status/1526136783557529600?s=20
https://twitter.com/PhillDixon1/status/1749010345555788144?s=20
https://twitter.com/mugabe139/status/1678027567977078784?s=20
4. Take to the streets: Get in touch with Palm Oil Detectives to find out more.
5. Donate: Make a one-off or monthly donation to Palm Oil Detectives as a way of saying thank you and to help pay for ongoing running costs of the website and social media campaigns. Donate here
Pledge your support#BoycottPalmOil #Boycott4wildlife #BoycottPalmOil #brandCertification #Brands #consumers #corporates #corruption #deforestation #ecocide #ecolabels #FMCG #FSC #greenwashing #HumanRights #OrangutanLandTrust #PalmOil #palmOilDeforestation #RSPO #RSPOGreenwashing
-
How Brands Exploit “Green” Certification
Brands and businesses may be tempted to exploit “green” certifications to garner a larger market share at the expense of integrity.
Around 400 #ecolabels 🏆 claim to provide #consumers with choice ⁉️ Yet they’re unreliable in holding #corporates to account for widespread #deforestation and #humanrights abuses and #greenwashing #Boycottpalmoil 🌴🪔🔥 ⛔️#Boycott4Wildlife @palmoildetect https://wp.me/pcFhgU-8Y6
Share to BlueSky Share to Twitter#Brands and giants of #FMCG may be tempted to exploit “green” certifications like #FSC, MSC and #RSPO to reassure consumers. Yet ecolabels have deep flaws in enforcement of standards. #ecocide #greenwashing #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife @palmoildetect https://wp.me/pcFhgU-8Y6
Share to BlueSky Share to TwitterWritten by Dr Arne Nygaard, professor at the School of Communication, Leadership and Marketing at Kristiania University College, Norway. His primary research interests include sustainable supply chains, greenwashing, geopolitical risk and strategic uncertainty, economic contracts and incentives, sustainability and green marketing, technology, and entrepreneurship. Originally published under Creative Commons by 360info™, read the original.
Analyses conducted in the study indicate that while certifications can help prevent greenwashing, they can also contribute to eco-opportunism […] the theory of eco-opportunism warns that this can lead to free riding and greenwashing, where products are falsely advertised as sustainable but fail to meet certified standards.
Nygaard, A. (2023). Is sustainable certification’s ability to combat greenwashing trustworthy? Frontiers in Sustainability, 4, Article 1188069. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2023.1188069
As the global fight against climate change intensifies, certifications have become crucial tools for industries to address environmental, business and social challenges. Sustainability certifications promote eco-friendly practices, protect human rights and boost the credibility of environmentally responsible brands.
But although certifications often enhance the perceived value of sustainable products and services, challenges remain.
There are concerns about greenwashing and free riding plus the inability of certification systems to adapt to changes and failing to incentivise the adoption of newer, more sustainable technologies.
At the supermarket, a shopper carefully studies a label, thinking, “This product has a certification. Must be environmentally friendly. I’ll buy it.” And like that shopper, millions around the world make that same decision every day.
Greenwashing, where companies falsely claim eco-friendly credentials without meeting required standards, is a significant issue. Similarly, free riding allows businesses to benefit from the positive image of certifications without genuinely implementing sustainable practices.
The number of sustainability certifications has surged globally in recent years. The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) reports that more than 400 certifications now cover sectors such as food, agriculture, energy, environment, health and social responsibility.
Consumer awareness
This growth reflects increasing consumer awareness of sustainability and the desire of companies to showcase their commitment to eco-friendly practices.
Certifications serve as essential market signals, enabling businesses to distinguish themselves by adhering to recognised environmental and social standards.
Some of the internationally recognised certifications include the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for green buildings, the Forest Stewardship Council for sustainable forestry and the Fair Trade certification, which ensures that products meet strict social, environmental and labour criteria.
Another key example is the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil certification, which promotes the production of palm oil in a way that minimises environmental harm, protects biodiversity and ensures fair treatment of workers and local communities.
Certifications typically involve third-party evaluations to assess compliance with criteria such as environmental and economic impact or fair labour practices.
Despite widespread adoption, certifications face growing scrutiny.
For instance, consumer demand for eco-friendly products has led to companies charging higher prices for green products. While many consumers are willing to pay this premium, it can create perverse incentives for companies to engage in greenwashing.
Certifications, intended to assure consumers of a product’s environmental and social standards, can paradoxically encourage companies to exploit these authentications for profit.
When businesses realise they can charge a premium for eco-labelled goods, the temptation to stretch the truth or manipulate the certification increases.
Erosion of trust
Greenwashing erodes consumer trust and devalues the certifications of genuinely sustainable products.
As more companies exploit these eco-friendly claims without verification, it becomes harder for consumers to differentiate between authentic and deceptive environmental practices, potentially undermining the credibility of certification systems.
This highlights the urgent need for stronger mechanisms to mitigate these risks, ensuring that certification systems are not only effective but also resilient against exploitation.
Certification bodies can tighten standards, increase transparency and implement stronger verification processes to reflect evolving sustainability standards and prevent misuse. Additionally, independent audits and greater rigour throughout the supply chain would hold companies accountable for their claims.
Investigation into the root causes of greenwashing is necessary to understand how and why companies manipulate sustainable claims.
One key issue is that certification processes often focus on specific criteria and may not capture the broader environmental or social impacts of a product.
Selective compliance
A company may meet the minimum requirements for certification in one area, such as reducing carbon emissions, while ignoring other important sustainability factors such as labour conditions or biodiversity conservation.
This selective compliance allows companies to appear more sustainable than they truly are, feeding into the cycle of greenwashing.
Consumers can be educated on how to critically evaluate certification labels to avoid falling prey to greenwashing tactics.
By reinforcing certification systems with robust monitoring and compliance mechanisms, the credibility of sustainable products can be preserved, and the integrity of genuine sustainability efforts can be upheld.
Non-governmental organisations and activist groups play a critical role in developing and implementing certification systems. These organisations provide valuable input during the creation of sustainability standards and help monitor compliance, ensuring that certification systems remain credible.
For example, the Forest Stewardship Council certification system for responsible forestry was developed in 1993 with input from environmental NGOs such as Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund.
NGOs advocate for higher sustainability standards, while certifications give them leverage to hold businesses accountable. By working together, NGOs and certification bodies can drive meaningful change toward a more sustainable future.
The interaction between state institutions, laws, and certification systems is also vital to ensuring the credibility and effectiveness of sustainability efforts.
Governments often set baseline sustainability requirements, while certification systems provide an additional layer of accountability. A clear example is the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil certification now used in 21 countries.
Resistance to change
One challenge facing certification bodies is internal structural inertia. This refers to resistance to change, preventing the adoption of innovative green technologies.
This occurs when certification bodies become too rigid in their processes, policies, or standards, making it difficult for them to quickly adapt to new environmental paradigms.
For example, the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design initially focused on energy efficiency in buildings but was slow to incorporate newer technologies like green roofs or biophilic design which enhance sustainability.
Similarly, in the agricultural sector, government certification systems such as the United States Department of Agriculture Organic can be slow to recognise advancements in vertical farming or aeroponics, even though these methods significantly reduce land use, water consumption, and pesticide reliance.
This type of institutional resistance can delay the transition to more sustainable practices, as certification bodies may cling to outdated standards that fail to incentivise the latest green technologies.
To stay relevant and support ongoing environmental progress, certification organisations can work to overcome structural inertia and actively seek ways to update their standards in response to new innovations.
By updating their standards to reflect these disruptive technologies, certification systems can stay relevant and effective, driving sustainability across industries and supporting innovation while addressing evolving environmental challenges.
However, certifications, while essential tools for promoting sustainable practices, face limitations. Greenwashing, free-riding, and institutional inertia can undermine their value, posing challenges for businesses and consumers alike.
As markets evolve, certifications risk becoming obsolete unless they adapt to new environmental and technological challenges.
Nygaard, A. (2023). Is sustainable certification’s ability to combat greenwashing trustworthy? Frontiers in Sustainability, 4, Article 1188069. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2023.1188069
Dr Arne Nygaard is a professor at the School of Communication, Leadership and Marketing at Kristiania University College, Norway. His primary research interests include sustainable supply chains, greenwashing, geopolitical risk and strategic uncertainty, economic contracts and incentives, sustainability and green marketing, technology, and entrepreneurship. Originally published under Creative Commons by 360info™, read the original.
ENDS
Read more about greenwashing associated with certified “sustainable” palm oil and other commodities
Finance giants fuel $8.9 trillion deforestation economy
Forest 500 report shows 150 of the world’s largest financial institutions invested nearly $9 trillion in deforestation-linked industries. Support EUDR!
Investigation by Bloomberg exposes that despite being RSPO members, #SOCFIN plantations in #WestAfrica are the epicentre of #humanrights abuses, sexual coercion, environmental destruction, and #landgrabbing. Operating in #Liberia, #Ghana, #Nigeria, and beyond, SOCFIN’s…
The Indigenous Malaysian concept of ‘Badi’: respecting the land and wildlife
The Indigenous Semai #indigenous people of #Malaysia can teach us a lot about how to protect people, planet and biodiversity. The Indigenous concept of #badi is not superstition or taboo, it’s about respecting…
Family Ties Expose Deforestation and Rights Violations in Indonesian Palm Oil
An explosive report by the Environment Investigation Agency (EIA) details how Indonesia’s Fangiono family, through a wide corporate web, is linked to ongoing #deforestation, #corruption, and #indigenousrights abuses for #palmoil. Calls mount for…
Rivers are still people in South East Asia despite court showdown
Healthy rivers are essential for community wellbeing. India and Bangladesh legally recognise rivers as natural persons with rights and powers. Take action!
Load more posts
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.
Take Action in Five Ways
1. Join the #Boycott4Wildlife on social media and subscribe to stay in the loop: Share posts from this website to your own network on Twitter, Mastadon, Instagram, Facebook and Youtube using the hashtags #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife.
Enter your email address
Sign Up
Join 3,172 other subscribers2. Contribute stories: Academics, conservationists, scientists, indigenous rights advocates and animal rights advocates working to expose the corruption of the palm oil industry or to save animals can contribute stories to the website.
Mel Lumby: Dedicated Devotee to Borneo’s Living Beings
Anthropologist and Author Dr Sophie Chao
Health Physician Dr Evan Allen
The World’s Most Loved Cup: A Social, Ethical & Environmental History of Coffee by Aviary Doert
How do we stop the world’s ecosystems from going into a death spiral? A #SteadyState Economy
3. Supermarket sleuthing: Next time you’re in the supermarket, take photos of products containing palm oil. Share these to social media along with the hashtags to call out the greenwashing and ecocide of the brands who use palm oil. You can also take photos of palm oil free products and congratulate brands when they go palm oil free.
https://twitter.com/CuriousApe4/status/1526136783557529600?s=20
https://twitter.com/PhillDixon1/status/1749010345555788144?s=20
https://twitter.com/mugabe139/status/1678027567977078784?s=20
4. Take to the streets: Get in touch with Palm Oil Detectives to find out more.
5. Donate: Make a one-off or monthly donation to Palm Oil Detectives as a way of saying thank you and to help pay for ongoing running costs of the website and social media campaigns. Donate here
Pledge your support#BoycottPalmOil #Boycott4wildlife #BoycottPalmOil #brandCertification #Brands #consumers #corporates #corruption #deforestation #ecocide #ecolabels #FMCG #FSC #greenwashing #HumanRights #OrangutanLandTrust #PalmOil #palmOilDeforestation #RSPO #RSPOGreenwashing
-
How Brands Exploit “Green” Certification
Brands and businesses may be tempted to exploit “green” certifications to garner a larger market share at the expense of integrity.
Around 400 #ecolabels 🏆 claim to provide #consumers with choice ⁉️ Yet they’re unreliable in holding #corporates to account for widespread #deforestation and #humanrights abuses and #greenwashing #Boycottpalmoil 🌴🪔🔥 ⛔️#Boycott4Wildlife @palmoildetect https://wp.me/pcFhgU-8Y6
Share to BlueSky Share to Twitter#Brands and giants of #FMCG may be tempted to exploit “green” certifications like #FSC, MSC and #RSPO to reassure consumers. Yet ecolabels have deep flaws in enforcement of standards. #ecocide #greenwashing #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife @palmoildetect https://wp.me/pcFhgU-8Y6
Share to BlueSky Share to TwitterWritten by Dr Arne Nygaard, professor at the School of Communication, Leadership and Marketing at Kristiania University College, Norway. His primary research interests include sustainable supply chains, greenwashing, geopolitical risk and strategic uncertainty, economic contracts and incentives, sustainability and green marketing, technology, and entrepreneurship. Originally published under Creative Commons by 360info™, read the original.
Analyses conducted in the study indicate that while certifications can help prevent greenwashing, they can also contribute to eco-opportunism […] the theory of eco-opportunism warns that this can lead to free riding and greenwashing, where products are falsely advertised as sustainable but fail to meet certified standards.
Nygaard, A. (2023). Is sustainable certification’s ability to combat greenwashing trustworthy? Frontiers in Sustainability, 4, Article 1188069. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2023.1188069
As the global fight against climate change intensifies, certifications have become crucial tools for industries to address environmental, business and social challenges. Sustainability certifications promote eco-friendly practices, protect human rights and boost the credibility of environmentally responsible brands.
But although certifications often enhance the perceived value of sustainable products and services, challenges remain.
There are concerns about greenwashing and free riding plus the inability of certification systems to adapt to changes and failing to incentivise the adoption of newer, more sustainable technologies.
At the supermarket, a shopper carefully studies a label, thinking, “This product has a certification. Must be environmentally friendly. I’ll buy it.” And like that shopper, millions around the world make that same decision every day.
Greenwashing, where companies falsely claim eco-friendly credentials without meeting required standards, is a significant issue. Similarly, free riding allows businesses to benefit from the positive image of certifications without genuinely implementing sustainable practices.
The number of sustainability certifications has surged globally in recent years. The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) reports that more than 400 certifications now cover sectors such as food, agriculture, energy, environment, health and social responsibility.
Consumer awareness
This growth reflects increasing consumer awareness of sustainability and the desire of companies to showcase their commitment to eco-friendly practices.
Certifications serve as essential market signals, enabling businesses to distinguish themselves by adhering to recognised environmental and social standards.
Some of the internationally recognised certifications include the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for green buildings, the Forest Stewardship Council for sustainable forestry and the Fair Trade certification, which ensures that products meet strict social, environmental and labour criteria.
Another key example is the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil certification, which promotes the production of palm oil in a way that minimises environmental harm, protects biodiversity and ensures fair treatment of workers and local communities.
Certifications typically involve third-party evaluations to assess compliance with criteria such as environmental and economic impact or fair labour practices.
Despite widespread adoption, certifications face growing scrutiny.
For instance, consumer demand for eco-friendly products has led to companies charging higher prices for green products. While many consumers are willing to pay this premium, it can create perverse incentives for companies to engage in greenwashing.
Certifications, intended to assure consumers of a product’s environmental and social standards, can paradoxically encourage companies to exploit these authentications for profit.
When businesses realise they can charge a premium for eco-labelled goods, the temptation to stretch the truth or manipulate the certification increases.
Erosion of trust
Greenwashing erodes consumer trust and devalues the certifications of genuinely sustainable products.
As more companies exploit these eco-friendly claims without verification, it becomes harder for consumers to differentiate between authentic and deceptive environmental practices, potentially undermining the credibility of certification systems.
This highlights the urgent need for stronger mechanisms to mitigate these risks, ensuring that certification systems are not only effective but also resilient against exploitation.
Certification bodies can tighten standards, increase transparency and implement stronger verification processes to reflect evolving sustainability standards and prevent misuse. Additionally, independent audits and greater rigour throughout the supply chain would hold companies accountable for their claims.
Investigation into the root causes of greenwashing is necessary to understand how and why companies manipulate sustainable claims.
One key issue is that certification processes often focus on specific criteria and may not capture the broader environmental or social impacts of a product.
Selective compliance
A company may meet the minimum requirements for certification in one area, such as reducing carbon emissions, while ignoring other important sustainability factors such as labour conditions or biodiversity conservation.
This selective compliance allows companies to appear more sustainable than they truly are, feeding into the cycle of greenwashing.
Consumers can be educated on how to critically evaluate certification labels to avoid falling prey to greenwashing tactics.
By reinforcing certification systems with robust monitoring and compliance mechanisms, the credibility of sustainable products can be preserved, and the integrity of genuine sustainability efforts can be upheld.
Non-governmental organisations and activist groups play a critical role in developing and implementing certification systems. These organisations provide valuable input during the creation of sustainability standards and help monitor compliance, ensuring that certification systems remain credible.
For example, the Forest Stewardship Council certification system for responsible forestry was developed in 1993 with input from environmental NGOs such as Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund.
NGOs advocate for higher sustainability standards, while certifications give them leverage to hold businesses accountable. By working together, NGOs and certification bodies can drive meaningful change toward a more sustainable future.
The interaction between state institutions, laws, and certification systems is also vital to ensuring the credibility and effectiveness of sustainability efforts.
Governments often set baseline sustainability requirements, while certification systems provide an additional layer of accountability. A clear example is the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil certification now used in 21 countries.
Resistance to change
One challenge facing certification bodies is internal structural inertia. This refers to resistance to change, preventing the adoption of innovative green technologies.
This occurs when certification bodies become too rigid in their processes, policies, or standards, making it difficult for them to quickly adapt to new environmental paradigms.
For example, the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design initially focused on energy efficiency in buildings but was slow to incorporate newer technologies like green roofs or biophilic design which enhance sustainability.
Similarly, in the agricultural sector, government certification systems such as the United States Department of Agriculture Organic can be slow to recognise advancements in vertical farming or aeroponics, even though these methods significantly reduce land use, water consumption, and pesticide reliance.
This type of institutional resistance can delay the transition to more sustainable practices, as certification bodies may cling to outdated standards that fail to incentivise the latest green technologies.
To stay relevant and support ongoing environmental progress, certification organisations can work to overcome structural inertia and actively seek ways to update their standards in response to new innovations.
By updating their standards to reflect these disruptive technologies, certification systems can stay relevant and effective, driving sustainability across industries and supporting innovation while addressing evolving environmental challenges.
However, certifications, while essential tools for promoting sustainable practices, face limitations. Greenwashing, free-riding, and institutional inertia can undermine their value, posing challenges for businesses and consumers alike.
As markets evolve, certifications risk becoming obsolete unless they adapt to new environmental and technological challenges.
Nygaard, A. (2023). Is sustainable certification’s ability to combat greenwashing trustworthy? Frontiers in Sustainability, 4, Article 1188069. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2023.1188069
Dr Arne Nygaard is a professor at the School of Communication, Leadership and Marketing at Kristiania University College, Norway. His primary research interests include sustainable supply chains, greenwashing, geopolitical risk and strategic uncertainty, economic contracts and incentives, sustainability and green marketing, technology, and entrepreneurship. Originally published under Creative Commons by 360info™, read the original.
ENDS
Read more about greenwashing associated with certified “sustainable” palm oil and other commodities
Finance giants fuel $8.9 trillion deforestation economy
Forest 500 report shows 150 of the world’s largest financial institutions invested nearly $9 trillion in deforestation-linked industries. Support EUDR!
Investigation by Bloomberg exposes that despite being RSPO members, #SOCFIN plantations in #WestAfrica are the epicentre of #humanrights abuses, sexual coercion, environmental destruction, and #landgrabbing. Operating in #Liberia, #Ghana, #Nigeria, and beyond, SOCFIN’s…
The Indigenous Malaysian concept of ‘Badi’: respecting the land and wildlife
The Indigenous Semai #indigenous people of #Malaysia can teach us a lot about how to protect people, planet and biodiversity. The Indigenous concept of #badi is not superstition or taboo, it’s about respecting…
Family Ties Expose Deforestation and Rights Violations in Indonesian Palm Oil
An explosive report by the Environment Investigation Agency (EIA) details how Indonesia’s Fangiono family, through a wide corporate web, is linked to ongoing #deforestation, #corruption, and #indigenousrights abuses for #palmoil. Calls mount for…
Rivers are still people in South East Asia despite court showdown
Healthy rivers are essential for community wellbeing. India and Bangladesh legally recognise rivers as natural persons with rights and powers. Take action!
Load more posts
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.
Take Action in Five Ways
1. Join the #Boycott4Wildlife on social media and subscribe to stay in the loop: Share posts from this website to your own network on Twitter, Mastadon, Instagram, Facebook and Youtube using the hashtags #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife.
Enter your email address
Sign Up
Join 3,172 other subscribers2. Contribute stories: Academics, conservationists, scientists, indigenous rights advocates and animal rights advocates working to expose the corruption of the palm oil industry or to save animals can contribute stories to the website.
Mel Lumby: Dedicated Devotee to Borneo’s Living Beings
Anthropologist and Author Dr Sophie Chao
Health Physician Dr Evan Allen
The World’s Most Loved Cup: A Social, Ethical & Environmental History of Coffee by Aviary Doert
How do we stop the world’s ecosystems from going into a death spiral? A #SteadyState Economy
3. Supermarket sleuthing: Next time you’re in the supermarket, take photos of products containing palm oil. Share these to social media along with the hashtags to call out the greenwashing and ecocide of the brands who use palm oil. You can also take photos of palm oil free products and congratulate brands when they go palm oil free.
https://twitter.com/CuriousApe4/status/1526136783557529600?s=20
https://twitter.com/PhillDixon1/status/1749010345555788144?s=20
https://twitter.com/mugabe139/status/1678027567977078784?s=20
4. Take to the streets: Get in touch with Palm Oil Detectives to find out more.
5. Donate: Make a one-off or monthly donation to Palm Oil Detectives as a way of saying thank you and to help pay for ongoing running costs of the website and social media campaigns. Donate here
Pledge your support#BoycottPalmOil #Boycott4wildlife #BoycottPalmOil #brandCertification #Brands #consumers #corporates #corruption #deforestation #ecocide #ecolabels #FMCG #FSC #greenwashing #HumanRights #OrangutanLandTrust #PalmOil #palmOilDeforestation #RSPO #RSPOGreenwashing
-
How Brands Exploit “Green” Certification
Brands and businesses may be tempted to exploit “green” certifications to garner a larger market share at the expense of integrity.
Around 400 #ecolabels 🏆 claim to provide #consumers with choice ⁉️ Yet they’re unreliable in holding #corporates to account for widespread #deforestation and #humanrights abuses and #greenwashing #Boycottpalmoil 🌴🪔🔥 ⛔️#Boycott4Wildlife @palmoildetect https://wp.me/pcFhgU-8Y6
Share to BlueSky Share to Twitter#Brands and giants of #FMCG may be tempted to exploit “green” certifications like #FSC, MSC and #RSPO to reassure consumers. Yet ecolabels have deep flaws in enforcement of standards. #ecocide #greenwashing #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife @palmoildetect https://wp.me/pcFhgU-8Y6
Share to BlueSky Share to TwitterWritten by Dr Arne Nygaard, professor at the School of Communication, Leadership and Marketing at Kristiania University College, Norway. His primary research interests include sustainable supply chains, greenwashing, geopolitical risk and strategic uncertainty, economic contracts and incentives, sustainability and green marketing, technology, and entrepreneurship. Originally published under Creative Commons by 360info™, read the original.
Analyses conducted in the study indicate that while certifications can help prevent greenwashing, they can also contribute to eco-opportunism […] the theory of eco-opportunism warns that this can lead to free riding and greenwashing, where products are falsely advertised as sustainable but fail to meet certified standards.
Nygaard, A. (2023). Is sustainable certification’s ability to combat greenwashing trustworthy? Frontiers in Sustainability, 4, Article 1188069. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2023.1188069
As the global fight against climate change intensifies, certifications have become crucial tools for industries to address environmental, business and social challenges. Sustainability certifications promote eco-friendly practices, protect human rights and boost the credibility of environmentally responsible brands.
But although certifications often enhance the perceived value of sustainable products and services, challenges remain.
There are concerns about greenwashing and free riding plus the inability of certification systems to adapt to changes and failing to incentivise the adoption of newer, more sustainable technologies.
At the supermarket, a shopper carefully studies a label, thinking, “This product has a certification. Must be environmentally friendly. I’ll buy it.” And like that shopper, millions around the world make that same decision every day.
Greenwashing, where companies falsely claim eco-friendly credentials without meeting required standards, is a significant issue. Similarly, free riding allows businesses to benefit from the positive image of certifications without genuinely implementing sustainable practices.
The number of sustainability certifications has surged globally in recent years. The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) reports that more than 400 certifications now cover sectors such as food, agriculture, energy, environment, health and social responsibility.
Consumer awareness
This growth reflects increasing consumer awareness of sustainability and the desire of companies to showcase their commitment to eco-friendly practices.
Certifications serve as essential market signals, enabling businesses to distinguish themselves by adhering to recognised environmental and social standards.
Some of the internationally recognised certifications include the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for green buildings, the Forest Stewardship Council for sustainable forestry and the Fair Trade certification, which ensures that products meet strict social, environmental and labour criteria.
Another key example is the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil certification, which promotes the production of palm oil in a way that minimises environmental harm, protects biodiversity and ensures fair treatment of workers and local communities.
Certifications typically involve third-party evaluations to assess compliance with criteria such as environmental and economic impact or fair labour practices.
Despite widespread adoption, certifications face growing scrutiny.
For instance, consumer demand for eco-friendly products has led to companies charging higher prices for green products. While many consumers are willing to pay this premium, it can create perverse incentives for companies to engage in greenwashing.
Certifications, intended to assure consumers of a product’s environmental and social standards, can paradoxically encourage companies to exploit these authentications for profit.
When businesses realise they can charge a premium for eco-labelled goods, the temptation to stretch the truth or manipulate the certification increases.
Erosion of trust
Greenwashing erodes consumer trust and devalues the certifications of genuinely sustainable products.
As more companies exploit these eco-friendly claims without verification, it becomes harder for consumers to differentiate between authentic and deceptive environmental practices, potentially undermining the credibility of certification systems.
This highlights the urgent need for stronger mechanisms to mitigate these risks, ensuring that certification systems are not only effective but also resilient against exploitation.
Certification bodies can tighten standards, increase transparency and implement stronger verification processes to reflect evolving sustainability standards and prevent misuse. Additionally, independent audits and greater rigour throughout the supply chain would hold companies accountable for their claims.
Investigation into the root causes of greenwashing is necessary to understand how and why companies manipulate sustainable claims.
One key issue is that certification processes often focus on specific criteria and may not capture the broader environmental or social impacts of a product.
Selective compliance
A company may meet the minimum requirements for certification in one area, such as reducing carbon emissions, while ignoring other important sustainability factors such as labour conditions or biodiversity conservation.
This selective compliance allows companies to appear more sustainable than they truly are, feeding into the cycle of greenwashing.
Consumers can be educated on how to critically evaluate certification labels to avoid falling prey to greenwashing tactics.
By reinforcing certification systems with robust monitoring and compliance mechanisms, the credibility of sustainable products can be preserved, and the integrity of genuine sustainability efforts can be upheld.
Non-governmental organisations and activist groups play a critical role in developing and implementing certification systems. These organisations provide valuable input during the creation of sustainability standards and help monitor compliance, ensuring that certification systems remain credible.
For example, the Forest Stewardship Council certification system for responsible forestry was developed in 1993 with input from environmental NGOs such as Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund.
NGOs advocate for higher sustainability standards, while certifications give them leverage to hold businesses accountable. By working together, NGOs and certification bodies can drive meaningful change toward a more sustainable future.
The interaction between state institutions, laws, and certification systems is also vital to ensuring the credibility and effectiveness of sustainability efforts.
Governments often set baseline sustainability requirements, while certification systems provide an additional layer of accountability. A clear example is the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil certification now used in 21 countries.
Resistance to change
One challenge facing certification bodies is internal structural inertia. This refers to resistance to change, preventing the adoption of innovative green technologies.
This occurs when certification bodies become too rigid in their processes, policies, or standards, making it difficult for them to quickly adapt to new environmental paradigms.
For example, the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design initially focused on energy efficiency in buildings but was slow to incorporate newer technologies like green roofs or biophilic design which enhance sustainability.
Similarly, in the agricultural sector, government certification systems such as the United States Department of Agriculture Organic can be slow to recognise advancements in vertical farming or aeroponics, even though these methods significantly reduce land use, water consumption, and pesticide reliance.
This type of institutional resistance can delay the transition to more sustainable practices, as certification bodies may cling to outdated standards that fail to incentivise the latest green technologies.
To stay relevant and support ongoing environmental progress, certification organisations can work to overcome structural inertia and actively seek ways to update their standards in response to new innovations.
By updating their standards to reflect these disruptive technologies, certification systems can stay relevant and effective, driving sustainability across industries and supporting innovation while addressing evolving environmental challenges.
However, certifications, while essential tools for promoting sustainable practices, face limitations. Greenwashing, free-riding, and institutional inertia can undermine their value, posing challenges for businesses and consumers alike.
As markets evolve, certifications risk becoming obsolete unless they adapt to new environmental and technological challenges.
Nygaard, A. (2023). Is sustainable certification’s ability to combat greenwashing trustworthy? Frontiers in Sustainability, 4, Article 1188069. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2023.1188069
Dr Arne Nygaard is a professor at the School of Communication, Leadership and Marketing at Kristiania University College, Norway. His primary research interests include sustainable supply chains, greenwashing, geopolitical risk and strategic uncertainty, economic contracts and incentives, sustainability and green marketing, technology, and entrepreneurship. Originally published under Creative Commons by 360info™, read the original.
ENDS
Read more about greenwashing associated with certified “sustainable” palm oil and other commodities
Finance giants fuel $8.9 trillion deforestation economy
Forest 500 report shows 150 of the world’s largest financial institutions invested nearly $9 trillion in deforestation-linked industries. Support EUDR!
Investigation by Bloomberg exposes that despite being RSPO members, #SOCFIN plantations in #WestAfrica are the epicentre of #humanrights abuses, sexual coercion, environmental destruction, and #landgrabbing. Operating in #Liberia, #Ghana, #Nigeria, and beyond, SOCFIN’s…
The Indigenous Malaysian concept of ‘Badi’: respecting the land and wildlife
The Indigenous Semai #indigenous people of #Malaysia can teach us a lot about how to protect people, planet and biodiversity. The Indigenous concept of #badi is not superstition or taboo, it’s about respecting…
Family Ties Expose Deforestation and Rights Violations in Indonesian Palm Oil
An explosive report by the Environment Investigation Agency (EIA) details how Indonesia’s Fangiono family, through a wide corporate web, is linked to ongoing #deforestation, #corruption, and #indigenousrights abuses for #palmoil. Calls mount for…
Rivers are still people in South East Asia despite court showdown
Healthy rivers are essential for community wellbeing. India and Bangladesh legally recognise rivers as natural persons with rights and powers. Take action!
Load more posts
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.
Take Action in Five Ways
1. Join the #Boycott4Wildlife on social media and subscribe to stay in the loop: Share posts from this website to your own network on Twitter, Mastadon, Instagram, Facebook and Youtube using the hashtags #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife.
Enter your email address
Sign Up
Join 3,172 other subscribers2. Contribute stories: Academics, conservationists, scientists, indigenous rights advocates and animal rights advocates working to expose the corruption of the palm oil industry or to save animals can contribute stories to the website.
Mel Lumby: Dedicated Devotee to Borneo’s Living Beings
Anthropologist and Author Dr Sophie Chao
Health Physician Dr Evan Allen
The World’s Most Loved Cup: A Social, Ethical & Environmental History of Coffee by Aviary Doert
How do we stop the world’s ecosystems from going into a death spiral? A #SteadyState Economy
3. Supermarket sleuthing: Next time you’re in the supermarket, take photos of products containing palm oil. Share these to social media along with the hashtags to call out the greenwashing and ecocide of the brands who use palm oil. You can also take photos of palm oil free products and congratulate brands when they go palm oil free.
https://twitter.com/CuriousApe4/status/1526136783557529600?s=20
https://twitter.com/PhillDixon1/status/1749010345555788144?s=20
https://twitter.com/mugabe139/status/1678027567977078784?s=20
4. Take to the streets: Get in touch with Palm Oil Detectives to find out more.
5. Donate: Make a one-off or monthly donation to Palm Oil Detectives as a way of saying thank you and to help pay for ongoing running costs of the website and social media campaigns. Donate here
Pledge your support#BoycottPalmOil #Boycott4wildlife #BoycottPalmOil #brandCertification #Brands #consumers #corporates #corruption #deforestation #ecocide #ecolabels #FMCG #FSC #greenwashing #HumanRights #OrangutanLandTrust #PalmOil #palmOilDeforestation #RSPO #RSPOGreenwashing
-
RAIL: Great Western Railway to be nationalised in December as south Wales services brought into public ownership
Great Western Railway (GWR), which runs services between London Paddington and south and south-west England and south Wales, will be nationalised on 13 December, the Department for Transport has announced.
It will become the eleventh operator to be brought into public ownership under the Government’s programme to reform the rail network, with the transfer forming part of the wider move towards a unified Great British Railways structure.
Three operators will remain in private hands after the change — Avanti West Coast, CrossCountry and East Midlands Railway, though CrossCountry is expected to follow into public ownership on 17 October next year.
A Department for Transport spokesperson said the move was “another significant moment” for the Government’s public ownership programme, adding that it brought “a simpler, more reliable network under Great British Railways a step closer.”
“The Government is delivering on its commitment to bring services back into public ownership and put passengers, not shareholders, at the heart of our railways,” the spokesperson added.
A Great British Railways train sporting the new Union Flag livery powers through the countryside — part of the UK Government’s rebranding of publicly owned rail services.The process does not involve the Government buying GWR outright. Instead, FirstGroup’s management contract is being allowed to expire, with the operation folding into a separate Government-owned entity known as DfT Operator — the same vehicle already used for LNER, Northern, Southeastern, TransPennine Express, South Western Railway and others.
GWR will be the twelfth company to join it once Govia Thameslink Railway transfers at the end of this month and Chiltern Railways follows in September. Great British Railways, which will ultimately replace the separate operator brands, is headquartered in Derby and expected to launch in 2027.
GWR said its priority throughout the transition would be “maintaining a punctual, reliable service for customers while continuing to support regional growth and connectivity across our network.” Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander has previously warned that renationalisation will not necessarily result in lower fares, with the focus instead on improving services and infrastructure.
The GWR nationalisation is the latest step in the creation of Great British Railways — though the Union Flag branding unveiled for the new national operator last December will not appear on local trains serving south-west Wales until later in the decade.
The announcement carries a particular twist for FirstGroup, which currently operates GWR and is set to lose the franchise to the state in December — while simultaneously building a new commercial foothold on the same Paddington corridor through its open access brand, Lumo.
A Lumo train on the East Coast Main Line. Lumo is operated by FirstGroup. Picture: LumoLumo has confirmed a December 2027 launch for a new direct Carmarthen to London Paddington service, calling at Llanelli, Gowerton, Cardiff, Newport, Severn Tunnel Junction and Bristol Parkway, running five return journeys a day using five new Hitachi trains on order.
Because Lumo operates as an open access operator rather than a franchised one, it falls outside the nationalisation programme — meaning FirstGroup stands to lose GWR to the state while retaining a commercial presence on the very same route through a different vehicle, effectively competing with a publicly-owned operator it previously ran itself.
The route has a long history. The original proposals were submitted by Grand Union Trains, which secured regulatory approval in 2022 following a battle with GWR, which had opposed the application. Grand Union subsequently sold its rights to the route to FirstGroup in 2024.
GWR cautioned that new services should not be detrimental to existing services or to future services already agreed, and said it would continue working with industry partners to develop services in the best interests of passengers and taxpayers. Carmarthenshire County Council had thrown its support behind the original Grand Union proposals, arguing a direct London connection would bring significant economic benefits to west Wales.
The Lumo service will give passengers at Carmarthen, Llanelli and Gowerton a genuine alternative to GWR on the London route for the first time — though it will not serve Milford Haven or Pembroke Dock directly.
Rail campaigners have also been pressing for funding clarity from the Welsh Government over a direct Milford Haven to London service, a commitment made by Welsh Labour ahead of this week’s Senedd election alongside a pledge of £50 million for Pembrokeshire rail upgrades. Transport for Wales is separately pursuing direct services between west Wales and Bristol Temple Meads, potentially serving Milford Haven, Swansea, Neath, Carmarthen and Bridgend from September 2026.
The broader question of what public ownership means for the region’s longer-term rail ambitions — including the £14 billion metro vision for Swansea and west Wales — remains to be seen as Great British Railways takes shape.
Our rail coverage
Lumo to launch direct Carmarthen to London Paddington service in December 2027 — with stops at Llanelli and Gowerton
The full story of how the route went from Grand Union proposal to FirstGroup reality.Transport for Wales wants to run trains to Bristol — and it could mean direct services from Milford Haven, Swansea and Carmarthen
New direct services to Bristol could transform connectivity across west Wales.Campaigners demand funding answers as Labour pledges direct Milford Haven to London train service
Rail campaigners question where the money will come from for Wales’s £14 billion rail pipeline.Union flag rail designs unveiled — South West Wales impact comes later
What Great British Railways branding means for trains in our region.£14bn metro dream for Swansea — but will West Wales finally get its share?
#DepartmentForTransport #DfT #featured #GreatBritishRailways #GreatWesternRailway #LondonPaddington #Lumo #nationalisation #rail #renationalisation
The long-term vision for rail investment across the region. -
Can AI Rid the NHS of its Awful Internal Politics and Bullying Culture?
The National Health Service is one of Britain’s greatest achievements. It is also one of Britain’s most spectacularly confusing organisations. The NHS can simultaneously save your life, lose your referral, reorganise your department, send you fourteen contradictory emails about mandatory training, and then ask whether you enjoyed the experience via a patient satisfaction survey designed by someone who has clearly never met a patient.
To work in the NHS is to enter a strange parallel universe where everyone is catastrophically overworked, permanently stressed, drowning in bureaucracy and yet somehow still expected to attend a “Wellbeing Away Day” featuring stale flapjacks and a PowerPoint presentation entitled Resilience In Challenging Times.
At the centre of this glorious chaos sits a problem that NHS staff have discussed quietly for decades and more openly in recent years: the toxic culture that exists inside parts of the organisation. Bullying. Cliques. Internal politics. Careerism. Protectionism. Petty empire-building. Passive aggressive email warfare. Endless managerial jargon deployed like chemical weapons. Entire departments operating like medieval courts where survival depends less on competence and more on knowing which Deputy Assistant Associate Director currently hates which Senior Operational Lead.
The NHS contains some of the finest people in Britain. It also occasionally resembles a sixth form college run by Kafka.
So the question arises: can Artificial Intelligence help rid the NHS of its awful internal politics and bullying culture?
The optimistic answer is yes. The realistic answer is “possibly, but only if the NHS itself actually wants to change”. Which is rather different.
Because AI may be capable of analysing millions of medical scans in seconds, but even the most advanced supercomputer may struggle to understand why Sandra from Workforce Planning has not spoken to Keith from Estates since “the incident with the microwave in 2014”.
The NHS Culture Problem
Before discussing AI, it is important to establish something uncomfortable: the NHS does not merely suffer from isolated examples of bullying. In some places, bullying has become structurally embedded into management culture.
This does not mean every hospital is toxic. Many departments are excellent. Many managers are decent people trying to survive impossible circumstances. But there are recurring themes across the service:
- Senior staff protected despite repeated complaints.
- Whistleblowers quietly sidelined.
- Promotion systems based on politics rather than competence.
- Layers of management creating confusion and blame shifting.
- Staff terrified to speak openly.
- “Wellbeing initiatives” replacing actual accountability.
- Endless restructures which somehow produce more managers but fewer functioning printers.
The NHS is uniquely vulnerable to this because it combines several dangerous ingredients.
First, it is huge. Vast organisations naturally develop bureaucracy and internal power struggles. The NHS employs well over a million people. Any institution that size eventually develops factions, tribes and miniature empires. Some NHS Trusts resemble independent city-states loosely connected by logos and acronyms.
Second, there is little real competition. In private industry, catastrophically dysfunctional cultures eventually damage profitability. In the NHS, failure is often absorbed into another restructure, another review, another “transformation programme”, or another committee with the word “strategic” in its title.
Third, NHS management culture frequently rewards risk avoidance over effectiveness. If something goes wrong, the safest strategy is often to ensure somebody else can be blamed first. This creates extraordinary levels of defensive behaviour.
Hence the famous NHS phenomenon where:
- nobody made the decision,
- everybody attended the meeting,
- seventeen people approved the paperwork,
- and yet somehow the project still exploded.
Fourth, emotional exhaustion changes behaviour. Staff working under constant pressure become less patient, less tolerant and more tribal. Departments begin fighting each other for resources like survivors in a post-apocalyptic film.
The result is a culture where politics flourishes because people are stressed, frightened and exhausted.
Which is precisely where AI enthusiasts enter the room waving graphs and talking about “data-driven optimisation”.
The Great AI Fantasy
There is currently a fashionable belief that AI can solve institutional dysfunction simply by introducing objectivity.
The theory goes something like this:
Humans are biased and political. AI is rational and data-driven. Therefore AI can eliminate favouritism, bullying and inefficiency.
Unfortunately, this is the sort of thinking usually developed by someone who has never attended an NHS management meeting involving a disputed parking allocation.
Technology does not magically remove politics. Humans still control the technology.
If a toxic organisation implements AI badly, the AI merely automates the toxicity more efficiently.
An NHS manager who already uses spreadsheets to target disliked employees will happily use predictive analytics instead.
A bullying department with AI becomes:
“Good morning Susan. According to our new machine learning behavioural assessment platform, your facial expression during yesterday’s Teams meeting indicated suboptimal enthusiasm.”Wonderful. Now the oppression comes with dashboards.
So AI is not inherently liberating. It depends entirely on how it is deployed.
That said, AI genuinely could improve several areas where NHS politics and bullying currently thrive.
Removing Administrative Weapons
One of the most poisonous aspects of NHS culture is the use of bureaucracy as a weapon.
Staff are buried under:
- mandatory forms,
- duplicated reporting systems,
- endless compliance exercises,
- contradictory guidance,
- incomprehensible procurement processes,
- and enough meetings to qualify as a hostage situation.
Bureaucracy creates power. People who control the process gain influence over everyone else.
This is where AI could make a real difference.
AI systems could automate huge amounts of administrative work:
- rota management,
- appointment scheduling,
- document processing,
- referral sorting,
- incident categorisation,
- HR workflows,
- procurement analysis,
- transcription,
- and routine compliance tasks.
That matters because bureaucracy often enables bullying.
A manipulative manager can currently:
- selectively delay approvals,
- “lose” requests,
- manipulate scheduling,
- bury staff in paperwork,
- or exploit procedural complexity.
When processes become transparent and automated, some of that power disappears.
An AI-driven leave approval system, for example, cannot quietly reject Karen’s annual leave because Karen once criticised Sharon’s flipchart presentation during a governance workshop.
Well, theoretically.
Of course, the NHS being the NHS, there is always a risk the AI leave system would itself become sentient and resign after three weeks.
AI and Recruitment
Recruitment in the NHS is often bizarre.
Job descriptions are frequently written in a dialect only understood by HR professionals and woodland spirits.
A typical NHS vacancy may require:
- “stakeholder engagement experience”,
- “dynamic leadership capability”,
- “evidence of transformational delivery”,
- and “advanced Microsoft Excel competency”.
The actual job turns out to involve apologising to angry consultants while trying to locate a functioning stapler.
Internal politics heavily influence recruitment. Favouritism exists. So do informal networks. Some people seem mysteriously immune from consequences despite leaving operational devastation behind them like managerial hurricanes.
AI could improve recruitment by:
- anonymising applications,
- identifying competency patterns,
- analysing actual performance outcomes,
- and reducing subjective bias.
Potentially, this could reduce “jobs for mates” culture.
But again, caution is required.
AI systems learn from historical data. If the NHS historically promoted aggressive empire-builders with PowerPoint addictions, then AI may conclude these are ideal leadership traits.
Imagine the horror:
“The algorithm has identified that the optimal NHS executive candidate uses phrases like ‘strategic oversight’ forty-seven times per hour and owns at least three lanyards.”This is how civilisations collapse.
Detecting Bullying Patterns
One genuinely promising area is pattern analysis.
Bullying often becomes visible only when large amounts of information are examined together.
AI systems could identify:
- departments with unusually high turnover,
- sickness patterns,
- grievance clusters,
- exit interview trends,
- abnormal complaint rates,
- or recurring behavioural concerns involving specific managers.
Currently, many toxic managers survive because complaints remain fragmented. Each individual case appears isolated. AI could detect systemic behaviour invisible to humans.
For example:
- a manager whose staff repeatedly transfer out,
- whose departments show elevated stress leave,
- whose teams underperform,
- and whose exit interviews contain identical concerns.
That pattern matters.
The NHS has historically been poor at connecting such information. AI could make organisational denial much harder.
Which is precisely why some managers may quietly dislike it.
Because toxic systems survive through ambiguity.
AI thrives on pattern recognition.
An algorithm does not care that someone is “well connected”.
The Endless Middle Management Problem
The NHS has developed a remarkable ability to generate management structures of astonishing complexity.
You may encounter:
- assistant deputy associate directors,
- transformation leads,
- programme facilitators,
- pathway integration officers,
- strategic improvement partners,
- and somebody called Nigel whose actual purpose remains unknown despite twenty-two years of service.
Now, not all management is unnecessary. Large organisations require coordination. Hospitals cannot simply operate on vibes and biscuits.
But NHS management often multiplies because bureaucracy multiplies.
AI could flatten some structures by automating reporting, forecasting and coordination work.
This could reduce opportunities for political empire-building.
Unfortunately, there is a catch.
Middle management rarely votes for its own extinction.
Therefore, the likely NHS approach would be:
- introduce AI,
- retain all existing managers,
- create additional AI oversight managers,
- establish an AI governance board,
- launch an AI transformation steering committee,
- and hire consultants to explain the AI to the AI committee.
Within six months the administrative burden would probably double.
Can AI Make Decisions More Objective?
Possibly.
One reason bullying flourishes is inconsistency.
Rules apply differently depending on:
- personality,
- status,
- friendships,
- seniority,
- and political alliances.
AI-driven systems could create more standardised approaches to:
- disciplinary procedures,
- rota allocation,
- workload distribution,
- performance monitoring,
- and escalation processes.
Transparency reduces manipulation.
However, there is a danger in excessive algorithmic management.
Healthcare is human. Staff are human. Circumstances vary enormously.
A purely data-driven NHS could become monstrous.
Imagine explaining to a nurse:
“Unfortunately the Compassion Efficiency Matrix indicates you exceeded acceptable emotional engagement thresholds during bereavement support interactions.”There is already too much dehumanisation in parts of the NHS. AI must not worsen it.
The goal should not be replacing human judgement.
The goal should be preventing human pettiness from masquerading as judgement.
The Real Problem: Leadership
Here is the uncomfortable truth.
The NHS does not primarily suffer from a technology problem.
It suffers from a leadership and accountability problem.
AI cannot fix executives who tolerate bullying because confronting it is politically inconvenient.
AI cannot fix boards obsessed with targets while ignoring staff culture.
AI cannot fix cowardice.
And there is often cowardice involved.
Toxic managers survive because:
- they deliver short-term numbers,
- know the right people,
- create fear,
- or manipulate process effectively.
The NHS frequently promotes people based on operational aggression rather than emotional intelligence.
Some managers rise because they are effective in crisis environments. The problem is they continue behaving like battlefield commanders during ordinary operations.
Staff burnout then becomes inevitable.
AI may expose this behaviour more clearly, but exposure alone changes nothing unless leadership acts.
The NHS has produced endless reports identifying cultural failures. The issue is rarely lack of information.
The issue is institutional reluctance to confront unpleasant truths.
The Bullying Feedback Loop
One reason NHS culture can become toxic is because bullied people sometimes become bullies themselves.
A newly promoted manager enters an environment where:
- aggression is normalised,
- emotional detachment is rewarded,
- and vulnerability is punished.
Eventually they adapt.
After enough years inside dysfunctional structures, some staff stop recognising the dysfunction entirely.
This explains the astonishing NHS phrase:
“Well, that’s just how it is.”Few sentences are more dangerous.
AI cannot directly change this psychology. But it may reduce some conditions that sustain it:
- overwork,
- administrative overload,
- chaotic scheduling,
- and operational confusion.
Reducing stress matters.
People with functioning lunch breaks are generally less likely to launch passive aggressive email offensives at 23:47 regarding printer toner allocation.
Whistleblowing and Fear
Whistleblowing remains one of the NHS’s greatest failures.
Staff who raise concerns often fear:
- career damage,
- ostracism,
- reputational attacks,
- or managerial retaliation.
AI systems could help by creating:
- anonymous reporting analysis,
- pattern tracking,
- automated escalation,
- and independent evidence monitoring.
This could reduce opportunities for complaints to disappear mysteriously into procedural black holes.
Because currently there are NHS complaints processes so labyrinthine that archaeologists may one day discover unresolved grievances from the Blair administration.
Transparency is the enemy of toxic politics.
AI can improve transparency.
But again, only if leaders genuinely want it.
A determined organisation can manipulate any system.
The Consultant Problem Nobody Wants To Mention
There is also a longstanding divide between clinical and managerial cultures.
Some clinicians distrust management entirely.
Some managers resent clinicians.
Each group often believes the other has:
- too much influence,
- too little accountability,
- and absolutely no understanding of reality.
This creates tribalism.
AI could potentially reduce conflict by improving operational visibility and evidence-based planning.
But AI could equally worsen tensions if implemented badly.
Doctors already drowning in administrative systems may react poorly to:
“Please complete the AI-enhanced reflective behavioural optimisation module.”At which point somebody will throw a Lenovo ThinkPad through a window.
The Fantasy of Pure Rationality
There is a broader philosophical issue here.
Many AI enthusiasts imagine organisations can become perfectly rational systems.
But humans are not rational.
Hospitals especially are emotional environments filled with:
- grief,
- stress,
- trauma,
- fear,
- exhaustion,
- ego,
- compassion,
- and conflict.
Politics emerges naturally wherever humans gather.
Even monasteries had politics. The NHS never stood a chance.
The objective is not to eliminate all politics. That is impossible.
The objective is to reduce destructive politics.
AI may help by:
- reducing ambiguity,
- improving transparency,
- exposing patterns,
- simplifying bureaucracy,
- and creating consistency.
But no algorithm can fully remove human behaviour from human institutions.
Nor should it.
You probably do not want your chemotherapy treatment overseen entirely by something called Clinical Efficiency Engine 4.2.
The Danger of NHS AI Hype
The NHS is especially vulnerable to management fads.
Every decade introduces a new miracle solution:
- Total Quality Management,
- Lean,
- Agile,
- Transformation Programmes,
- Digital First,
- Integrated Pathways,
- Synergy Frameworks,
- or whatever phrase consultants are currently charging £2,400 a day to explain.
AI risks becoming another fashionable slogan.
This would be disastrous.
Because if AI is implemented badly, staff will quickly see it as:
- surveillance,
- cost cutting,
- or another managerial toy.
Trust will collapse immediately.
And NHS staff possess highly refined nonsense detection systems developed over decades of exposure to corporate jargon.
The moment an executive says:
“We’re leveraging AI-enabled workforce optimisation opportunities,”
half the room mentally updates their CV.What Would Actually Work?
If the NHS genuinely wanted AI to improve culture, several principles would matter.
AI should remove bureaucracy, not add to it
If AI creates additional reporting burdens, staff will hate it instantly.
AI should support staff, not monitor them obsessively
Nobody wants algorithmic micromanagement.
Transparency must apply upward as well as downward
Executives and managers should face scrutiny too.
Human oversight remains essential
AI recommendations should inform decisions, not replace judgement entirely.
Staff must trust the system
Without trust, everything fails.
Culture change must accompany technology
Otherwise AI simply digitises dysfunction.
The Most Likely Outcome
The realistic answer is that AI will probably improve some NHS operational problems while leaving deeper cultural issues partially unresolved.
Administrative efficiency will improve.
Data analysis will improve.
Some bullying patterns may become easier to detect.
Some bureaucratic abuse may decline.
But politics itself will survive because politics is fundamentally human.
There will still be:
- cliques,
- rivalries,
- ambition,
- vanity,
- resentment,
- and territorial behaviour.
No machine can entirely prevent humans from acting like humans.
Especially British humans trapped in institutional environments with inadequate parking and broken air conditioning.
Conclusion
Can AI rid the NHS of its awful internal politics and bullying culture?
Not entirely.
But it could help significantly if implemented intelligently, ethically and courageously.
AI can:
- reduce bureaucracy,
- improve transparency,
- expose toxic patterns,
- standardise procedures,
- support whistleblowing,
- and remove some opportunities for manipulation.
What it cannot do is manufacture moral courage.
The NHS ultimately requires leaders willing to confront bad behaviour honestly, even when politically inconvenient.
Technology can support accountability.
It cannot replace it.
And perhaps that is the central lesson.
The NHS does not need artificial intelligence nearly as much as it needs ordinary human decency combined with competent management.
Unfortunately, competent management is much harder to install than software.
Especially in an organisation where arranging a Teams meeting with six departments sometimes requires the diplomatic skill of the Congress of Vienna.
Still, there is reason for cautious optimism.
Because for all its dysfunctions, the NHS remains full of dedicated people trying heroically to keep an impossibly complicated system functioning. Most staff are not interested in politics. They simply want to do their jobs without being bullied, undermined or buried under absurdity.
If AI can reduce even a fraction of that absurdity, it will have achieved something worthwhile.
Though one suspects the true test of artificial intelligence will come when an NHS Trust asks it to:
- redesign a rota,
- mediate a dispute between Procurement and IT,
- explain why nobody can book annual leave in August,
- and locate the missing bladder scanner last seen sometime during the Olympics.
At that point the AI may quietly conclude that self-awareness was a terrible mistake and apply for early retirement.
#ai #bullying #internalPolitics #nhs -
Can AI Rid the NHS of its Awful Internal Politics and Bullying Culture?
The National Health Service is one of Britain’s greatest achievements. It is also one of Britain’s most spectacularly confusing organisations. The NHS can simultaneously save your life, lose your referral, reorganise your department, send you fourteen contradictory emails about mandatory training, and then ask whether you enjoyed the experience via a patient satisfaction survey designed by someone who has clearly never met a patient.
To work in the NHS is to enter a strange parallel universe where everyone is catastrophically overworked, permanently stressed, drowning in bureaucracy and yet somehow still expected to attend a “Wellbeing Away Day” featuring stale flapjacks and a PowerPoint presentation entitled Resilience In Challenging Times.
At the centre of this glorious chaos sits a problem that NHS staff have discussed quietly for decades and more openly in recent years: the toxic culture that exists inside parts of the organisation. Bullying. Cliques. Internal politics. Careerism. Protectionism. Petty empire-building. Passive aggressive email warfare. Endless managerial jargon deployed like chemical weapons. Entire departments operating like medieval courts where survival depends less on competence and more on knowing which Deputy Assistant Associate Director currently hates which Senior Operational Lead.
The NHS contains some of the finest people in Britain. It also occasionally resembles a sixth form college run by Kafka.
So the question arises: can Artificial Intelligence help rid the NHS of its awful internal politics and bullying culture?
The optimistic answer is yes. The realistic answer is “possibly, but only if the NHS itself actually wants to change”. Which is rather different.
Because AI may be capable of analysing millions of medical scans in seconds, but even the most advanced supercomputer may struggle to understand why Sandra from Workforce Planning has not spoken to Keith from Estates since “the incident with the microwave in 2014”.
The NHS Culture Problem
Before discussing AI, it is important to establish something uncomfortable: the NHS does not merely suffer from isolated examples of bullying. In some places, bullying has become structurally embedded into management culture.
This does not mean every hospital is toxic. Many departments are excellent. Many managers are decent people trying to survive impossible circumstances. But there are recurring themes across the service:
- Senior staff protected despite repeated complaints.
- Whistleblowers quietly sidelined.
- Promotion systems based on politics rather than competence.
- Layers of management creating confusion and blame shifting.
- Staff terrified to speak openly.
- “Wellbeing initiatives” replacing actual accountability.
- Endless restructures which somehow produce more managers but fewer functioning printers.
The NHS is uniquely vulnerable to this because it combines several dangerous ingredients.
First, it is huge. Vast organisations naturally develop bureaucracy and internal power struggles. The NHS employs well over a million people. Any institution that size eventually develops factions, tribes and miniature empires. Some NHS Trusts resemble independent city-states loosely connected by logos and acronyms.
Second, there is little real competition. In private industry, catastrophically dysfunctional cultures eventually damage profitability. In the NHS, failure is often absorbed into another restructure, another review, another “transformation programme”, or another committee with the word “strategic” in its title.
Third, NHS management culture frequently rewards risk avoidance over effectiveness. If something goes wrong, the safest strategy is often to ensure somebody else can be blamed first. This creates extraordinary levels of defensive behaviour.
Hence the famous NHS phenomenon where:
- nobody made the decision,
- everybody attended the meeting,
- seventeen people approved the paperwork,
- and yet somehow the project still exploded.
Fourth, emotional exhaustion changes behaviour. Staff working under constant pressure become less patient, less tolerant and more tribal. Departments begin fighting each other for resources like survivors in a post-apocalyptic film.
The result is a culture where politics flourishes because people are stressed, frightened and exhausted.
Which is precisely where AI enthusiasts enter the room waving graphs and talking about “data-driven optimisation”.
The Great AI Fantasy
There is currently a fashionable belief that AI can solve institutional dysfunction simply by introducing objectivity.
The theory goes something like this:
Humans are biased and political. AI is rational and data-driven. Therefore AI can eliminate favouritism, bullying and inefficiency.
Unfortunately, this is the sort of thinking usually developed by someone who has never attended an NHS management meeting involving a disputed parking allocation.
Technology does not magically remove politics. Humans still control the technology.
If a toxic organisation implements AI badly, the AI merely automates the toxicity more efficiently.
An NHS manager who already uses spreadsheets to target disliked employees will happily use predictive analytics instead.
A bullying department with AI becomes:
“Good morning Susan. According to our new machine learning behavioural assessment platform, your facial expression during yesterday’s Teams meeting indicated suboptimal enthusiasm.”Wonderful. Now the oppression comes with dashboards.
So AI is not inherently liberating. It depends entirely on how it is deployed.
That said, AI genuinely could improve several areas where NHS politics and bullying currently thrive.
Removing Administrative Weapons
One of the most poisonous aspects of NHS culture is the use of bureaucracy as a weapon.
Staff are buried under:
- mandatory forms,
- duplicated reporting systems,
- endless compliance exercises,
- contradictory guidance,
- incomprehensible procurement processes,
- and enough meetings to qualify as a hostage situation.
Bureaucracy creates power. People who control the process gain influence over everyone else.
This is where AI could make a real difference.
AI systems could automate huge amounts of administrative work:
- rota management,
- appointment scheduling,
- document processing,
- referral sorting,
- incident categorisation,
- HR workflows,
- procurement analysis,
- transcription,
- and routine compliance tasks.
That matters because bureaucracy often enables bullying.
A manipulative manager can currently:
- selectively delay approvals,
- “lose” requests,
- manipulate scheduling,
- bury staff in paperwork,
- or exploit procedural complexity.
When processes become transparent and automated, some of that power disappears.
An AI-driven leave approval system, for example, cannot quietly reject Karen’s annual leave because Karen once criticised Sharon’s flipchart presentation during a governance workshop.
Well, theoretically.
Of course, the NHS being the NHS, there is always a risk the AI leave system would itself become sentient and resign after three weeks.
AI and Recruitment
Recruitment in the NHS is often bizarre.
Job descriptions are frequently written in a dialect only understood by HR professionals and woodland spirits.
A typical NHS vacancy may require:
- “stakeholder engagement experience”,
- “dynamic leadership capability”,
- “evidence of transformational delivery”,
- and “advanced Microsoft Excel competency”.
The actual job turns out to involve apologising to angry consultants while trying to locate a functioning stapler.
Internal politics heavily influence recruitment. Favouritism exists. So do informal networks. Some people seem mysteriously immune from consequences despite leaving operational devastation behind them like managerial hurricanes.
AI could improve recruitment by:
- anonymising applications,
- identifying competency patterns,
- analysing actual performance outcomes,
- and reducing subjective bias.
Potentially, this could reduce “jobs for mates” culture.
But again, caution is required.
AI systems learn from historical data. If the NHS historically promoted aggressive empire-builders with PowerPoint addictions, then AI may conclude these are ideal leadership traits.
Imagine the horror:
“The algorithm has identified that the optimal NHS executive candidate uses phrases like ‘strategic oversight’ forty-seven times per hour and owns at least three lanyards.”This is how civilisations collapse.
Detecting Bullying Patterns
One genuinely promising area is pattern analysis.
Bullying often becomes visible only when large amounts of information are examined together.
AI systems could identify:
- departments with unusually high turnover,
- sickness patterns,
- grievance clusters,
- exit interview trends,
- abnormal complaint rates,
- or recurring behavioural concerns involving specific managers.
Currently, many toxic managers survive because complaints remain fragmented. Each individual case appears isolated. AI could detect systemic behaviour invisible to humans.
For example:
- a manager whose staff repeatedly transfer out,
- whose departments show elevated stress leave,
- whose teams underperform,
- and whose exit interviews contain identical concerns.
That pattern matters.
The NHS has historically been poor at connecting such information. AI could make organisational denial much harder.
Which is precisely why some managers may quietly dislike it.
Because toxic systems survive through ambiguity.
AI thrives on pattern recognition.
An algorithm does not care that someone is “well connected”.
The Endless Middle Management Problem
The NHS has developed a remarkable ability to generate management structures of astonishing complexity.
You may encounter:
- assistant deputy associate directors,
- transformation leads,
- programme facilitators,
- pathway integration officers,
- strategic improvement partners,
- and somebody called Nigel whose actual purpose remains unknown despite twenty-two years of service.
Now, not all management is unnecessary. Large organisations require coordination. Hospitals cannot simply operate on vibes and biscuits.
But NHS management often multiplies because bureaucracy multiplies.
AI could flatten some structures by automating reporting, forecasting and coordination work.
This could reduce opportunities for political empire-building.
Unfortunately, there is a catch.
Middle management rarely votes for its own extinction.
Therefore, the likely NHS approach would be:
- introduce AI,
- retain all existing managers,
- create additional AI oversight managers,
- establish an AI governance board,
- launch an AI transformation steering committee,
- and hire consultants to explain the AI to the AI committee.
Within six months the administrative burden would probably double.
Can AI Make Decisions More Objective?
Possibly.
One reason bullying flourishes is inconsistency.
Rules apply differently depending on:
- personality,
- status,
- friendships,
- seniority,
- and political alliances.
AI-driven systems could create more standardised approaches to:
- disciplinary procedures,
- rota allocation,
- workload distribution,
- performance monitoring,
- and escalation processes.
Transparency reduces manipulation.
However, there is a danger in excessive algorithmic management.
Healthcare is human. Staff are human. Circumstances vary enormously.
A purely data-driven NHS could become monstrous.
Imagine explaining to a nurse:
“Unfortunately the Compassion Efficiency Matrix indicates you exceeded acceptable emotional engagement thresholds during bereavement support interactions.”There is already too much dehumanisation in parts of the NHS. AI must not worsen it.
The goal should not be replacing human judgement.
The goal should be preventing human pettiness from masquerading as judgement.
The Real Problem: Leadership
Here is the uncomfortable truth.
The NHS does not primarily suffer from a technology problem.
It suffers from a leadership and accountability problem.
AI cannot fix executives who tolerate bullying because confronting it is politically inconvenient.
AI cannot fix boards obsessed with targets while ignoring staff culture.
AI cannot fix cowardice.
And there is often cowardice involved.
Toxic managers survive because:
- they deliver short-term numbers,
- know the right people,
- create fear,
- or manipulate process effectively.
The NHS frequently promotes people based on operational aggression rather than emotional intelligence.
Some managers rise because they are effective in crisis environments. The problem is they continue behaving like battlefield commanders during ordinary operations.
Staff burnout then becomes inevitable.
AI may expose this behaviour more clearly, but exposure alone changes nothing unless leadership acts.
The NHS has produced endless reports identifying cultural failures. The issue is rarely lack of information.
The issue is institutional reluctance to confront unpleasant truths.
The Bullying Feedback Loop
One reason NHS culture can become toxic is because bullied people sometimes become bullies themselves.
A newly promoted manager enters an environment where:
- aggression is normalised,
- emotional detachment is rewarded,
- and vulnerability is punished.
Eventually they adapt.
After enough years inside dysfunctional structures, some staff stop recognising the dysfunction entirely.
This explains the astonishing NHS phrase:
“Well, that’s just how it is.”Few sentences are more dangerous.
AI cannot directly change this psychology. But it may reduce some conditions that sustain it:
- overwork,
- administrative overload,
- chaotic scheduling,
- and operational confusion.
Reducing stress matters.
People with functioning lunch breaks are generally less likely to launch passive aggressive email offensives at 23:47 regarding printer toner allocation.
Whistleblowing and Fear
Whistleblowing remains one of the NHS’s greatest failures.
Staff who raise concerns often fear:
- career damage,
- ostracism,
- reputational attacks,
- or managerial retaliation.
AI systems could help by creating:
- anonymous reporting analysis,
- pattern tracking,
- automated escalation,
- and independent evidence monitoring.
This could reduce opportunities for complaints to disappear mysteriously into procedural black holes.
Because currently there are NHS complaints processes so labyrinthine that archaeologists may one day discover unresolved grievances from the Blair administration.
Transparency is the enemy of toxic politics.
AI can improve transparency.
But again, only if leaders genuinely want it.
A determined organisation can manipulate any system.
The Consultant Problem Nobody Wants To Mention
There is also a longstanding divide between clinical and managerial cultures.
Some clinicians distrust management entirely.
Some managers resent clinicians.
Each group often believes the other has:
- too much influence,
- too little accountability,
- and absolutely no understanding of reality.
This creates tribalism.
AI could potentially reduce conflict by improving operational visibility and evidence-based planning.
But AI could equally worsen tensions if implemented badly.
Doctors already drowning in administrative systems may react poorly to:
“Please complete the AI-enhanced reflective behavioural optimisation module.”At which point somebody will throw a Lenovo ThinkPad through a window.
The Fantasy of Pure Rationality
There is a broader philosophical issue here.
Many AI enthusiasts imagine organisations can become perfectly rational systems.
But humans are not rational.
Hospitals especially are emotional environments filled with:
- grief,
- stress,
- trauma,
- fear,
- exhaustion,
- ego,
- compassion,
- and conflict.
Politics emerges naturally wherever humans gather.
Even monasteries had politics. The NHS never stood a chance.
The objective is not to eliminate all politics. That is impossible.
The objective is to reduce destructive politics.
AI may help by:
- reducing ambiguity,
- improving transparency,
- exposing patterns,
- simplifying bureaucracy,
- and creating consistency.
But no algorithm can fully remove human behaviour from human institutions.
Nor should it.
You probably do not want your chemotherapy treatment overseen entirely by something called Clinical Efficiency Engine 4.2.
The Danger of NHS AI Hype
The NHS is especially vulnerable to management fads.
Every decade introduces a new miracle solution:
- Total Quality Management,
- Lean,
- Agile,
- Transformation Programmes,
- Digital First,
- Integrated Pathways,
- Synergy Frameworks,
- or whatever phrase consultants are currently charging £2,400 a day to explain.
AI risks becoming another fashionable slogan.
This would be disastrous.
Because if AI is implemented badly, staff will quickly see it as:
- surveillance,
- cost cutting,
- or another managerial toy.
Trust will collapse immediately.
And NHS staff possess highly refined nonsense detection systems developed over decades of exposure to corporate jargon.
The moment an executive says:
“We’re leveraging AI-enabled workforce optimisation opportunities,”
half the room mentally updates their CV.What Would Actually Work?
If the NHS genuinely wanted AI to improve culture, several principles would matter.
AI should remove bureaucracy, not add to it
If AI creates additional reporting burdens, staff will hate it instantly.
AI should support staff, not monitor them obsessively
Nobody wants algorithmic micromanagement.
Transparency must apply upward as well as downward
Executives and managers should face scrutiny too.
Human oversight remains essential
AI recommendations should inform decisions, not replace judgement entirely.
Staff must trust the system
Without trust, everything fails.
Culture change must accompany technology
Otherwise AI simply digitises dysfunction.
The Most Likely Outcome
The realistic answer is that AI will probably improve some NHS operational problems while leaving deeper cultural issues partially unresolved.
Administrative efficiency will improve.
Data analysis will improve.
Some bullying patterns may become easier to detect.
Some bureaucratic abuse may decline.
But politics itself will survive because politics is fundamentally human.
There will still be:
- cliques,
- rivalries,
- ambition,
- vanity,
- resentment,
- and territorial behaviour.
No machine can entirely prevent humans from acting like humans.
Especially British humans trapped in institutional environments with inadequate parking and broken air conditioning.
Conclusion
Can AI rid the NHS of its awful internal politics and bullying culture?
Not entirely.
But it could help significantly if implemented intelligently, ethically and courageously.
AI can:
- reduce bureaucracy,
- improve transparency,
- expose toxic patterns,
- standardise procedures,
- support whistleblowing,
- and remove some opportunities for manipulation.
What it cannot do is manufacture moral courage.
The NHS ultimately requires leaders willing to confront bad behaviour honestly, even when politically inconvenient.
Technology can support accountability.
It cannot replace it.
And perhaps that is the central lesson.
The NHS does not need artificial intelligence nearly as much as it needs ordinary human decency combined with competent management.
Unfortunately, competent management is much harder to install than software.
Especially in an organisation where arranging a Teams meeting with six departments sometimes requires the diplomatic skill of the Congress of Vienna.
Still, there is reason for cautious optimism.
Because for all its dysfunctions, the NHS remains full of dedicated people trying heroically to keep an impossibly complicated system functioning. Most staff are not interested in politics. They simply want to do their jobs without being bullied, undermined or buried under absurdity.
If AI can reduce even a fraction of that absurdity, it will have achieved something worthwhile.
Though one suspects the true test of artificial intelligence will come when an NHS Trust asks it to:
- redesign a rota,
- mediate a dispute between Procurement and IT,
- explain why nobody can book annual leave in August,
- and locate the missing bladder scanner last seen sometime during the Olympics.
At that point the AI may quietly conclude that self-awareness was a terrible mistake and apply for early retirement.
#ai #bullying #internalPolitics #nhs -
Can AI Rid the NHS of its Awful Internal Politics and Bullying Culture?
The National Health Service is one of Britain’s greatest achievements. It is also one of Britain’s most spectacularly confusing organisations. The NHS can simultaneously save your life, lose your referral, reorganise your department, send you fourteen contradictory emails about mandatory training, and then ask whether you enjoyed the experience via a patient satisfaction survey designed by someone who has clearly never met a patient.
To work in the NHS is to enter a strange parallel universe where everyone is catastrophically overworked, permanently stressed, drowning in bureaucracy and yet somehow still expected to attend a “Wellbeing Away Day” featuring stale flapjacks and a PowerPoint presentation entitled Resilience In Challenging Times.
At the centre of this glorious chaos sits a problem that NHS staff have discussed quietly for decades and more openly in recent years: the toxic culture that exists inside parts of the organisation. Bullying. Cliques. Internal politics. Careerism. Protectionism. Petty empire-building. Passive aggressive email warfare. Endless managerial jargon deployed like chemical weapons. Entire departments operating like medieval courts where survival depends less on competence and more on knowing which Deputy Assistant Associate Director currently hates which Senior Operational Lead.
The NHS contains some of the finest people in Britain. It also occasionally resembles a sixth form college run by Kafka.
So the question arises: can Artificial Intelligence help rid the NHS of its awful internal politics and bullying culture?
The optimistic answer is yes. The realistic answer is “possibly, but only if the NHS itself actually wants to change”. Which is rather different.
Because AI may be capable of analysing millions of medical scans in seconds, but even the most advanced supercomputer may struggle to understand why Sandra from Workforce Planning has not spoken to Keith from Estates since “the incident with the microwave in 2014”.
The NHS Culture Problem
Before discussing AI, it is important to establish something uncomfortable: the NHS does not merely suffer from isolated examples of bullying. In some places, bullying has become structurally embedded into management culture.
This does not mean every hospital is toxic. Many departments are excellent. Many managers are decent people trying to survive impossible circumstances. But there are recurring themes across the service:
- Senior staff protected despite repeated complaints.
- Whistleblowers quietly sidelined.
- Promotion systems based on politics rather than competence.
- Layers of management creating confusion and blame shifting.
- Staff terrified to speak openly.
- “Wellbeing initiatives” replacing actual accountability.
- Endless restructures which somehow produce more managers but fewer functioning printers.
The NHS is uniquely vulnerable to this because it combines several dangerous ingredients.
First, it is huge. Vast organisations naturally develop bureaucracy and internal power struggles. The NHS employs well over a million people. Any institution that size eventually develops factions, tribes and miniature empires. Some NHS Trusts resemble independent city-states loosely connected by logos and acronyms.
Second, there is little real competition. In private industry, catastrophically dysfunctional cultures eventually damage profitability. In the NHS, failure is often absorbed into another restructure, another review, another “transformation programme”, or another committee with the word “strategic” in its title.
Third, NHS management culture frequently rewards risk avoidance over effectiveness. If something goes wrong, the safest strategy is often to ensure somebody else can be blamed first. This creates extraordinary levels of defensive behaviour.
Hence the famous NHS phenomenon where:
- nobody made the decision,
- everybody attended the meeting,
- seventeen people approved the paperwork,
- and yet somehow the project still exploded.
Fourth, emotional exhaustion changes behaviour. Staff working under constant pressure become less patient, less tolerant and more tribal. Departments begin fighting each other for resources like survivors in a post-apocalyptic film.
The result is a culture where politics flourishes because people are stressed, frightened and exhausted.
Which is precisely where AI enthusiasts enter the room waving graphs and talking about “data-driven optimisation”.
The Great AI Fantasy
There is currently a fashionable belief that AI can solve institutional dysfunction simply by introducing objectivity.
The theory goes something like this:
Humans are biased and political. AI is rational and data-driven. Therefore AI can eliminate favouritism, bullying and inefficiency.
Unfortunately, this is the sort of thinking usually developed by someone who has never attended an NHS management meeting involving a disputed parking allocation.
Technology does not magically remove politics. Humans still control the technology.
If a toxic organisation implements AI badly, the AI merely automates the toxicity more efficiently.
An NHS manager who already uses spreadsheets to target disliked employees will happily use predictive analytics instead.
A bullying department with AI becomes:
“Good morning Susan. According to our new machine learning behavioural assessment platform, your facial expression during yesterday’s Teams meeting indicated suboptimal enthusiasm.”Wonderful. Now the oppression comes with dashboards.
So AI is not inherently liberating. It depends entirely on how it is deployed.
That said, AI genuinely could improve several areas where NHS politics and bullying currently thrive.
Removing Administrative Weapons
One of the most poisonous aspects of NHS culture is the use of bureaucracy as a weapon.
Staff are buried under:
- mandatory forms,
- duplicated reporting systems,
- endless compliance exercises,
- contradictory guidance,
- incomprehensible procurement processes,
- and enough meetings to qualify as a hostage situation.
Bureaucracy creates power. People who control the process gain influence over everyone else.
This is where AI could make a real difference.
AI systems could automate huge amounts of administrative work:
- rota management,
- appointment scheduling,
- document processing,
- referral sorting,
- incident categorisation,
- HR workflows,
- procurement analysis,
- transcription,
- and routine compliance tasks.
That matters because bureaucracy often enables bullying.
A manipulative manager can currently:
- selectively delay approvals,
- “lose” requests,
- manipulate scheduling,
- bury staff in paperwork,
- or exploit procedural complexity.
When processes become transparent and automated, some of that power disappears.
An AI-driven leave approval system, for example, cannot quietly reject Karen’s annual leave because Karen once criticised Sharon’s flipchart presentation during a governance workshop.
Well, theoretically.
Of course, the NHS being the NHS, there is always a risk the AI leave system would itself become sentient and resign after three weeks.
AI and Recruitment
Recruitment in the NHS is often bizarre.
Job descriptions are frequently written in a dialect only understood by HR professionals and woodland spirits.
A typical NHS vacancy may require:
- “stakeholder engagement experience”,
- “dynamic leadership capability”,
- “evidence of transformational delivery”,
- and “advanced Microsoft Excel competency”.
The actual job turns out to involve apologising to angry consultants while trying to locate a functioning stapler.
Internal politics heavily influence recruitment. Favouritism exists. So do informal networks. Some people seem mysteriously immune from consequences despite leaving operational devastation behind them like managerial hurricanes.
AI could improve recruitment by:
- anonymising applications,
- identifying competency patterns,
- analysing actual performance outcomes,
- and reducing subjective bias.
Potentially, this could reduce “jobs for mates” culture.
But again, caution is required.
AI systems learn from historical data. If the NHS historically promoted aggressive empire-builders with PowerPoint addictions, then AI may conclude these are ideal leadership traits.
Imagine the horror:
“The algorithm has identified that the optimal NHS executive candidate uses phrases like ‘strategic oversight’ forty-seven times per hour and owns at least three lanyards.”This is how civilisations collapse.
Detecting Bullying Patterns
One genuinely promising area is pattern analysis.
Bullying often becomes visible only when large amounts of information are examined together.
AI systems could identify:
- departments with unusually high turnover,
- sickness patterns,
- grievance clusters,
- exit interview trends,
- abnormal complaint rates,
- or recurring behavioural concerns involving specific managers.
Currently, many toxic managers survive because complaints remain fragmented. Each individual case appears isolated. AI could detect systemic behaviour invisible to humans.
For example:
- a manager whose staff repeatedly transfer out,
- whose departments show elevated stress leave,
- whose teams underperform,
- and whose exit interviews contain identical concerns.
That pattern matters.
The NHS has historically been poor at connecting such information. AI could make organisational denial much harder.
Which is precisely why some managers may quietly dislike it.
Because toxic systems survive through ambiguity.
AI thrives on pattern recognition.
An algorithm does not care that someone is “well connected”.
The Endless Middle Management Problem
The NHS has developed a remarkable ability to generate management structures of astonishing complexity.
You may encounter:
- assistant deputy associate directors,
- transformation leads,
- programme facilitators,
- pathway integration officers,
- strategic improvement partners,
- and somebody called Nigel whose actual purpose remains unknown despite twenty-two years of service.
Now, not all management is unnecessary. Large organisations require coordination. Hospitals cannot simply operate on vibes and biscuits.
But NHS management often multiplies because bureaucracy multiplies.
AI could flatten some structures by automating reporting, forecasting and coordination work.
This could reduce opportunities for political empire-building.
Unfortunately, there is a catch.
Middle management rarely votes for its own extinction.
Therefore, the likely NHS approach would be:
- introduce AI,
- retain all existing managers,
- create additional AI oversight managers,
- establish an AI governance board,
- launch an AI transformation steering committee,
- and hire consultants to explain the AI to the AI committee.
Within six months the administrative burden would probably double.
Can AI Make Decisions More Objective?
Possibly.
One reason bullying flourishes is inconsistency.
Rules apply differently depending on:
- personality,
- status,
- friendships,
- seniority,
- and political alliances.
AI-driven systems could create more standardised approaches to:
- disciplinary procedures,
- rota allocation,
- workload distribution,
- performance monitoring,
- and escalation processes.
Transparency reduces manipulation.
However, there is a danger in excessive algorithmic management.
Healthcare is human. Staff are human. Circumstances vary enormously.
A purely data-driven NHS could become monstrous.
Imagine explaining to a nurse:
“Unfortunately the Compassion Efficiency Matrix indicates you exceeded acceptable emotional engagement thresholds during bereavement support interactions.”There is already too much dehumanisation in parts of the NHS. AI must not worsen it.
The goal should not be replacing human judgement.
The goal should be preventing human pettiness from masquerading as judgement.
The Real Problem: Leadership
Here is the uncomfortable truth.
The NHS does not primarily suffer from a technology problem.
It suffers from a leadership and accountability problem.
AI cannot fix executives who tolerate bullying because confronting it is politically inconvenient.
AI cannot fix boards obsessed with targets while ignoring staff culture.
AI cannot fix cowardice.
And there is often cowardice involved.
Toxic managers survive because:
- they deliver short-term numbers,
- know the right people,
- create fear,
- or manipulate process effectively.
The NHS frequently promotes people based on operational aggression rather than emotional intelligence.
Some managers rise because they are effective in crisis environments. The problem is they continue behaving like battlefield commanders during ordinary operations.
Staff burnout then becomes inevitable.
AI may expose this behaviour more clearly, but exposure alone changes nothing unless leadership acts.
The NHS has produced endless reports identifying cultural failures. The issue is rarely lack of information.
The issue is institutional reluctance to confront unpleasant truths.
The Bullying Feedback Loop
One reason NHS culture can become toxic is because bullied people sometimes become bullies themselves.
A newly promoted manager enters an environment where:
- aggression is normalised,
- emotional detachment is rewarded,
- and vulnerability is punished.
Eventually they adapt.
After enough years inside dysfunctional structures, some staff stop recognising the dysfunction entirely.
This explains the astonishing NHS phrase:
“Well, that’s just how it is.”Few sentences are more dangerous.
AI cannot directly change this psychology. But it may reduce some conditions that sustain it:
- overwork,
- administrative overload,
- chaotic scheduling,
- and operational confusion.
Reducing stress matters.
People with functioning lunch breaks are generally less likely to launch passive aggressive email offensives at 23:47 regarding printer toner allocation.
Whistleblowing and Fear
Whistleblowing remains one of the NHS’s greatest failures.
Staff who raise concerns often fear:
- career damage,
- ostracism,
- reputational attacks,
- or managerial retaliation.
AI systems could help by creating:
- anonymous reporting analysis,
- pattern tracking,
- automated escalation,
- and independent evidence monitoring.
This could reduce opportunities for complaints to disappear mysteriously into procedural black holes.
Because currently there are NHS complaints processes so labyrinthine that archaeologists may one day discover unresolved grievances from the Blair administration.
Transparency is the enemy of toxic politics.
AI can improve transparency.
But again, only if leaders genuinely want it.
A determined organisation can manipulate any system.
The Consultant Problem Nobody Wants To Mention
There is also a longstanding divide between clinical and managerial cultures.
Some clinicians distrust management entirely.
Some managers resent clinicians.
Each group often believes the other has:
- too much influence,
- too little accountability,
- and absolutely no understanding of reality.
This creates tribalism.
AI could potentially reduce conflict by improving operational visibility and evidence-based planning.
But AI could equally worsen tensions if implemented badly.
Doctors already drowning in administrative systems may react poorly to:
“Please complete the AI-enhanced reflective behavioural optimisation module.”At which point somebody will throw a Lenovo ThinkPad through a window.
The Fantasy of Pure Rationality
There is a broader philosophical issue here.
Many AI enthusiasts imagine organisations can become perfectly rational systems.
But humans are not rational.
Hospitals especially are emotional environments filled with:
- grief,
- stress,
- trauma,
- fear,
- exhaustion,
- ego,
- compassion,
- and conflict.
Politics emerges naturally wherever humans gather.
Even monasteries had politics. The NHS never stood a chance.
The objective is not to eliminate all politics. That is impossible.
The objective is to reduce destructive politics.
AI may help by:
- reducing ambiguity,
- improving transparency,
- exposing patterns,
- simplifying bureaucracy,
- and creating consistency.
But no algorithm can fully remove human behaviour from human institutions.
Nor should it.
You probably do not want your chemotherapy treatment overseen entirely by something called Clinical Efficiency Engine 4.2.
The Danger of NHS AI Hype
The NHS is especially vulnerable to management fads.
Every decade introduces a new miracle solution:
- Total Quality Management,
- Lean,
- Agile,
- Transformation Programmes,
- Digital First,
- Integrated Pathways,
- Synergy Frameworks,
- or whatever phrase consultants are currently charging £2,400 a day to explain.
AI risks becoming another fashionable slogan.
This would be disastrous.
Because if AI is implemented badly, staff will quickly see it as:
- surveillance,
- cost cutting,
- or another managerial toy.
Trust will collapse immediately.
And NHS staff possess highly refined nonsense detection systems developed over decades of exposure to corporate jargon.
The moment an executive says:
“We’re leveraging AI-enabled workforce optimisation opportunities,”
half the room mentally updates their CV.What Would Actually Work?
If the NHS genuinely wanted AI to improve culture, several principles would matter.
AI should remove bureaucracy, not add to it
If AI creates additional reporting burdens, staff will hate it instantly.
AI should support staff, not monitor them obsessively
Nobody wants algorithmic micromanagement.
Transparency must apply upward as well as downward
Executives and managers should face scrutiny too.
Human oversight remains essential
AI recommendations should inform decisions, not replace judgement entirely.
Staff must trust the system
Without trust, everything fails.
Culture change must accompany technology
Otherwise AI simply digitises dysfunction.
The Most Likely Outcome
The realistic answer is that AI will probably improve some NHS operational problems while leaving deeper cultural issues partially unresolved.
Administrative efficiency will improve.
Data analysis will improve.
Some bullying patterns may become easier to detect.
Some bureaucratic abuse may decline.
But politics itself will survive because politics is fundamentally human.
There will still be:
- cliques,
- rivalries,
- ambition,
- vanity,
- resentment,
- and territorial behaviour.
No machine can entirely prevent humans from acting like humans.
Especially British humans trapped in institutional environments with inadequate parking and broken air conditioning.
Conclusion
Can AI rid the NHS of its awful internal politics and bullying culture?
Not entirely.
But it could help significantly if implemented intelligently, ethically and courageously.
AI can:
- reduce bureaucracy,
- improve transparency,
- expose toxic patterns,
- standardise procedures,
- support whistleblowing,
- and remove some opportunities for manipulation.
What it cannot do is manufacture moral courage.
The NHS ultimately requires leaders willing to confront bad behaviour honestly, even when politically inconvenient.
Technology can support accountability.
It cannot replace it.
And perhaps that is the central lesson.
The NHS does not need artificial intelligence nearly as much as it needs ordinary human decency combined with competent management.
Unfortunately, competent management is much harder to install than software.
Especially in an organisation where arranging a Teams meeting with six departments sometimes requires the diplomatic skill of the Congress of Vienna.
Still, there is reason for cautious optimism.
Because for all its dysfunctions, the NHS remains full of dedicated people trying heroically to keep an impossibly complicated system functioning. Most staff are not interested in politics. They simply want to do their jobs without being bullied, undermined or buried under absurdity.
If AI can reduce even a fraction of that absurdity, it will have achieved something worthwhile.
Though one suspects the true test of artificial intelligence will come when an NHS Trust asks it to:
- redesign a rota,
- mediate a dispute between Procurement and IT,
- explain why nobody can book annual leave in August,
- and locate the missing bladder scanner last seen sometime during the Olympics.
At that point the AI may quietly conclude that self-awareness was a terrible mistake and apply for early retirement.
#ai #bullying #internalPolitics #nhs -
Can AI Rid the NHS of its Awful Internal Politics and Bullying Culture?
The National Health Service is one of Britain’s greatest achievements. It is also one of Britain’s most spectacularly confusing organisations. The NHS can simultaneously save your life, lose your referral, reorganise your department, send you fourteen contradictory emails about mandatory training, and then ask whether you enjoyed the experience via a patient satisfaction survey designed by someone who has clearly never met a patient.
To work in the NHS is to enter a strange parallel universe where everyone is catastrophically overworked, permanently stressed, drowning in bureaucracy and yet somehow still expected to attend a “Wellbeing Away Day” featuring stale flapjacks and a PowerPoint presentation entitled Resilience In Challenging Times.
At the centre of this glorious chaos sits a problem that NHS staff have discussed quietly for decades and more openly in recent years: the toxic culture that exists inside parts of the organisation. Bullying. Cliques. Internal politics. Careerism. Protectionism. Petty empire-building. Passive aggressive email warfare. Endless managerial jargon deployed like chemical weapons. Entire departments operating like medieval courts where survival depends less on competence and more on knowing which Deputy Assistant Associate Director currently hates which Senior Operational Lead.
The NHS contains some of the finest people in Britain. It also occasionally resembles a sixth form college run by Kafka.
So the question arises: can Artificial Intelligence help rid the NHS of its awful internal politics and bullying culture?
The optimistic answer is yes. The realistic answer is “possibly, but only if the NHS itself actually wants to change”. Which is rather different.
Because AI may be capable of analysing millions of medical scans in seconds, but even the most advanced supercomputer may struggle to understand why Sandra from Workforce Planning has not spoken to Keith from Estates since “the incident with the microwave in 2014”.
The NHS Culture Problem
Before discussing AI, it is important to establish something uncomfortable: the NHS does not merely suffer from isolated examples of bullying. In some places, bullying has become structurally embedded into management culture.
This does not mean every hospital is toxic. Many departments are excellent. Many managers are decent people trying to survive impossible circumstances. But there are recurring themes across the service:
- Senior staff protected despite repeated complaints.
- Whistleblowers quietly sidelined.
- Promotion systems based on politics rather than competence.
- Layers of management creating confusion and blame shifting.
- Staff terrified to speak openly.
- “Wellbeing initiatives” replacing actual accountability.
- Endless restructures which somehow produce more managers but fewer functioning printers.
The NHS is uniquely vulnerable to this because it combines several dangerous ingredients.
First, it is huge. Vast organisations naturally develop bureaucracy and internal power struggles. The NHS employs well over a million people. Any institution that size eventually develops factions, tribes and miniature empires. Some NHS Trusts resemble independent city-states loosely connected by logos and acronyms.
Second, there is little real competition. In private industry, catastrophically dysfunctional cultures eventually damage profitability. In the NHS, failure is often absorbed into another restructure, another review, another “transformation programme”, or another committee with the word “strategic” in its title.
Third, NHS management culture frequently rewards risk avoidance over effectiveness. If something goes wrong, the safest strategy is often to ensure somebody else can be blamed first. This creates extraordinary levels of defensive behaviour.
Hence the famous NHS phenomenon where:
- nobody made the decision,
- everybody attended the meeting,
- seventeen people approved the paperwork,
- and yet somehow the project still exploded.
Fourth, emotional exhaustion changes behaviour. Staff working under constant pressure become less patient, less tolerant and more tribal. Departments begin fighting each other for resources like survivors in a post-apocalyptic film.
The result is a culture where politics flourishes because people are stressed, frightened and exhausted.
Which is precisely where AI enthusiasts enter the room waving graphs and talking about “data-driven optimisation”.
The Great AI Fantasy
There is currently a fashionable belief that AI can solve institutional dysfunction simply by introducing objectivity.
The theory goes something like this:
Humans are biased and political. AI is rational and data-driven. Therefore AI can eliminate favouritism, bullying and inefficiency.
Unfortunately, this is the sort of thinking usually developed by someone who has never attended an NHS management meeting involving a disputed parking allocation.
Technology does not magically remove politics. Humans still control the technology.
If a toxic organisation implements AI badly, the AI merely automates the toxicity more efficiently.
An NHS manager who already uses spreadsheets to target disliked employees will happily use predictive analytics instead.
A bullying department with AI becomes:
“Good morning Susan. According to our new machine learning behavioural assessment platform, your facial expression during yesterday’s Teams meeting indicated suboptimal enthusiasm.”Wonderful. Now the oppression comes with dashboards.
So AI is not inherently liberating. It depends entirely on how it is deployed.
That said, AI genuinely could improve several areas where NHS politics and bullying currently thrive.
Removing Administrative Weapons
One of the most poisonous aspects of NHS culture is the use of bureaucracy as a weapon.
Staff are buried under:
- mandatory forms,
- duplicated reporting systems,
- endless compliance exercises,
- contradictory guidance,
- incomprehensible procurement processes,
- and enough meetings to qualify as a hostage situation.
Bureaucracy creates power. People who control the process gain influence over everyone else.
This is where AI could make a real difference.
AI systems could automate huge amounts of administrative work:
- rota management,
- appointment scheduling,
- document processing,
- referral sorting,
- incident categorisation,
- HR workflows,
- procurement analysis,
- transcription,
- and routine compliance tasks.
That matters because bureaucracy often enables bullying.
A manipulative manager can currently:
- selectively delay approvals,
- “lose” requests,
- manipulate scheduling,
- bury staff in paperwork,
- or exploit procedural complexity.
When processes become transparent and automated, some of that power disappears.
An AI-driven leave approval system, for example, cannot quietly reject Karen’s annual leave because Karen once criticised Sharon’s flipchart presentation during a governance workshop.
Well, theoretically.
Of course, the NHS being the NHS, there is always a risk the AI leave system would itself become sentient and resign after three weeks.
AI and Recruitment
Recruitment in the NHS is often bizarre.
Job descriptions are frequently written in a dialect only understood by HR professionals and woodland spirits.
A typical NHS vacancy may require:
- “stakeholder engagement experience”,
- “dynamic leadership capability”,
- “evidence of transformational delivery”,
- and “advanced Microsoft Excel competency”.
The actual job turns out to involve apologising to angry consultants while trying to locate a functioning stapler.
Internal politics heavily influence recruitment. Favouritism exists. So do informal networks. Some people seem mysteriously immune from consequences despite leaving operational devastation behind them like managerial hurricanes.
AI could improve recruitment by:
- anonymising applications,
- identifying competency patterns,
- analysing actual performance outcomes,
- and reducing subjective bias.
Potentially, this could reduce “jobs for mates” culture.
But again, caution is required.
AI systems learn from historical data. If the NHS historically promoted aggressive empire-builders with PowerPoint addictions, then AI may conclude these are ideal leadership traits.
Imagine the horror:
“The algorithm has identified that the optimal NHS executive candidate uses phrases like ‘strategic oversight’ forty-seven times per hour and owns at least three lanyards.”This is how civilisations collapse.
Detecting Bullying Patterns
One genuinely promising area is pattern analysis.
Bullying often becomes visible only when large amounts of information are examined together.
AI systems could identify:
- departments with unusually high turnover,
- sickness patterns,
- grievance clusters,
- exit interview trends,
- abnormal complaint rates,
- or recurring behavioural concerns involving specific managers.
Currently, many toxic managers survive because complaints remain fragmented. Each individual case appears isolated. AI could detect systemic behaviour invisible to humans.
For example:
- a manager whose staff repeatedly transfer out,
- whose departments show elevated stress leave,
- whose teams underperform,
- and whose exit interviews contain identical concerns.
That pattern matters.
The NHS has historically been poor at connecting such information. AI could make organisational denial much harder.
Which is precisely why some managers may quietly dislike it.
Because toxic systems survive through ambiguity.
AI thrives on pattern recognition.
An algorithm does not care that someone is “well connected”.
The Endless Middle Management Problem
The NHS has developed a remarkable ability to generate management structures of astonishing complexity.
You may encounter:
- assistant deputy associate directors,
- transformation leads,
- programme facilitators,
- pathway integration officers,
- strategic improvement partners,
- and somebody called Nigel whose actual purpose remains unknown despite twenty-two years of service.
Now, not all management is unnecessary. Large organisations require coordination. Hospitals cannot simply operate on vibes and biscuits.
But NHS management often multiplies because bureaucracy multiplies.
AI could flatten some structures by automating reporting, forecasting and coordination work.
This could reduce opportunities for political empire-building.
Unfortunately, there is a catch.
Middle management rarely votes for its own extinction.
Therefore, the likely NHS approach would be:
- introduce AI,
- retain all existing managers,
- create additional AI oversight managers,
- establish an AI governance board,
- launch an AI transformation steering committee,
- and hire consultants to explain the AI to the AI committee.
Within six months the administrative burden would probably double.
Can AI Make Decisions More Objective?
Possibly.
One reason bullying flourishes is inconsistency.
Rules apply differently depending on:
- personality,
- status,
- friendships,
- seniority,
- and political alliances.
AI-driven systems could create more standardised approaches to:
- disciplinary procedures,
- rota allocation,
- workload distribution,
- performance monitoring,
- and escalation processes.
Transparency reduces manipulation.
However, there is a danger in excessive algorithmic management.
Healthcare is human. Staff are human. Circumstances vary enormously.
A purely data-driven NHS could become monstrous.
Imagine explaining to a nurse:
“Unfortunately the Compassion Efficiency Matrix indicates you exceeded acceptable emotional engagement thresholds during bereavement support interactions.”There is already too much dehumanisation in parts of the NHS. AI must not worsen it.
The goal should not be replacing human judgement.
The goal should be preventing human pettiness from masquerading as judgement.
The Real Problem: Leadership
Here is the uncomfortable truth.
The NHS does not primarily suffer from a technology problem.
It suffers from a leadership and accountability problem.
AI cannot fix executives who tolerate bullying because confronting it is politically inconvenient.
AI cannot fix boards obsessed with targets while ignoring staff culture.
AI cannot fix cowardice.
And there is often cowardice involved.
Toxic managers survive because:
- they deliver short-term numbers,
- know the right people,
- create fear,
- or manipulate process effectively.
The NHS frequently promotes people based on operational aggression rather than emotional intelligence.
Some managers rise because they are effective in crisis environments. The problem is they continue behaving like battlefield commanders during ordinary operations.
Staff burnout then becomes inevitable.
AI may expose this behaviour more clearly, but exposure alone changes nothing unless leadership acts.
The NHS has produced endless reports identifying cultural failures. The issue is rarely lack of information.
The issue is institutional reluctance to confront unpleasant truths.
The Bullying Feedback Loop
One reason NHS culture can become toxic is because bullied people sometimes become bullies themselves.
A newly promoted manager enters an environment where:
- aggression is normalised,
- emotional detachment is rewarded,
- and vulnerability is punished.
Eventually they adapt.
After enough years inside dysfunctional structures, some staff stop recognising the dysfunction entirely.
This explains the astonishing NHS phrase:
“Well, that’s just how it is.”Few sentences are more dangerous.
AI cannot directly change this psychology. But it may reduce some conditions that sustain it:
- overwork,
- administrative overload,
- chaotic scheduling,
- and operational confusion.
Reducing stress matters.
People with functioning lunch breaks are generally less likely to launch passive aggressive email offensives at 23:47 regarding printer toner allocation.
Whistleblowing and Fear
Whistleblowing remains one of the NHS’s greatest failures.
Staff who raise concerns often fear:
- career damage,
- ostracism,
- reputational attacks,
- or managerial retaliation.
AI systems could help by creating:
- anonymous reporting analysis,
- pattern tracking,
- automated escalation,
- and independent evidence monitoring.
This could reduce opportunities for complaints to disappear mysteriously into procedural black holes.
Because currently there are NHS complaints processes so labyrinthine that archaeologists may one day discover unresolved grievances from the Blair administration.
Transparency is the enemy of toxic politics.
AI can improve transparency.
But again, only if leaders genuinely want it.
A determined organisation can manipulate any system.
The Consultant Problem Nobody Wants To Mention
There is also a longstanding divide between clinical and managerial cultures.
Some clinicians distrust management entirely.
Some managers resent clinicians.
Each group often believes the other has:
- too much influence,
- too little accountability,
- and absolutely no understanding of reality.
This creates tribalism.
AI could potentially reduce conflict by improving operational visibility and evidence-based planning.
But AI could equally worsen tensions if implemented badly.
Doctors already drowning in administrative systems may react poorly to:
“Please complete the AI-enhanced reflective behavioural optimisation module.”At which point somebody will throw a Lenovo ThinkPad through a window.
The Fantasy of Pure Rationality
There is a broader philosophical issue here.
Many AI enthusiasts imagine organisations can become perfectly rational systems.
But humans are not rational.
Hospitals especially are emotional environments filled with:
- grief,
- stress,
- trauma,
- fear,
- exhaustion,
- ego,
- compassion,
- and conflict.
Politics emerges naturally wherever humans gather.
Even monasteries had politics. The NHS never stood a chance.
The objective is not to eliminate all politics. That is impossible.
The objective is to reduce destructive politics.
AI may help by:
- reducing ambiguity,
- improving transparency,
- exposing patterns,
- simplifying bureaucracy,
- and creating consistency.
But no algorithm can fully remove human behaviour from human institutions.
Nor should it.
You probably do not want your chemotherapy treatment overseen entirely by something called Clinical Efficiency Engine 4.2.
The Danger of NHS AI Hype
The NHS is especially vulnerable to management fads.
Every decade introduces a new miracle solution:
- Total Quality Management,
- Lean,
- Agile,
- Transformation Programmes,
- Digital First,
- Integrated Pathways,
- Synergy Frameworks,
- or whatever phrase consultants are currently charging £2,400 a day to explain.
AI risks becoming another fashionable slogan.
This would be disastrous.
Because if AI is implemented badly, staff will quickly see it as:
- surveillance,
- cost cutting,
- or another managerial toy.
Trust will collapse immediately.
And NHS staff possess highly refined nonsense detection systems developed over decades of exposure to corporate jargon.
The moment an executive says:
“We’re leveraging AI-enabled workforce optimisation opportunities,”
half the room mentally updates their CV.What Would Actually Work?
If the NHS genuinely wanted AI to improve culture, several principles would matter.
AI should remove bureaucracy, not add to it
If AI creates additional reporting burdens, staff will hate it instantly.
AI should support staff, not monitor them obsessively
Nobody wants algorithmic micromanagement.
Transparency must apply upward as well as downward
Executives and managers should face scrutiny too.
Human oversight remains essential
AI recommendations should inform decisions, not replace judgement entirely.
Staff must trust the system
Without trust, everything fails.
Culture change must accompany technology
Otherwise AI simply digitises dysfunction.
The Most Likely Outcome
The realistic answer is that AI will probably improve some NHS operational problems while leaving deeper cultural issues partially unresolved.
Administrative efficiency will improve.
Data analysis will improve.
Some bullying patterns may become easier to detect.
Some bureaucratic abuse may decline.
But politics itself will survive because politics is fundamentally human.
There will still be:
- cliques,
- rivalries,
- ambition,
- vanity,
- resentment,
- and territorial behaviour.
No machine can entirely prevent humans from acting like humans.
Especially British humans trapped in institutional environments with inadequate parking and broken air conditioning.
Conclusion
Can AI rid the NHS of its awful internal politics and bullying culture?
Not entirely.
But it could help significantly if implemented intelligently, ethically and courageously.
AI can:
- reduce bureaucracy,
- improve transparency,
- expose toxic patterns,
- standardise procedures,
- support whistleblowing,
- and remove some opportunities for manipulation.
What it cannot do is manufacture moral courage.
The NHS ultimately requires leaders willing to confront bad behaviour honestly, even when politically inconvenient.
Technology can support accountability.
It cannot replace it.
And perhaps that is the central lesson.
The NHS does not need artificial intelligence nearly as much as it needs ordinary human decency combined with competent management.
Unfortunately, competent management is much harder to install than software.
Especially in an organisation where arranging a Teams meeting with six departments sometimes requires the diplomatic skill of the Congress of Vienna.
Still, there is reason for cautious optimism.
Because for all its dysfunctions, the NHS remains full of dedicated people trying heroically to keep an impossibly complicated system functioning. Most staff are not interested in politics. They simply want to do their jobs without being bullied, undermined or buried under absurdity.
If AI can reduce even a fraction of that absurdity, it will have achieved something worthwhile.
Though one suspects the true test of artificial intelligence will come when an NHS Trust asks it to:
- redesign a rota,
- mediate a dispute between Procurement and IT,
- explain why nobody can book annual leave in August,
- and locate the missing bladder scanner last seen sometime during the Olympics.
At that point the AI may quietly conclude that self-awareness was a terrible mistake and apply for early retirement.
#ai #bullying #internalPolitics #nhs -
Can AI Rid the NHS of its Awful Internal Politics and Bullying Culture?
The National Health Service is one of Britain’s greatest achievements. It is also one of Britain’s most spectacularly confusing organisations. The NHS can simultaneously save your life, lose your referral, reorganise your department, send you fourteen contradictory emails about mandatory training, and then ask whether you enjoyed the experience via a patient satisfaction survey designed by someone who has clearly never met a patient.
To work in the NHS is to enter a strange parallel universe where everyone is catastrophically overworked, permanently stressed, drowning in bureaucracy and yet somehow still expected to attend a “Wellbeing Away Day” featuring stale flapjacks and a PowerPoint presentation entitled Resilience In Challenging Times.
At the centre of this glorious chaos sits a problem that NHS staff have discussed quietly for decades and more openly in recent years: the toxic culture that exists inside parts of the organisation. Bullying. Cliques. Internal politics. Careerism. Protectionism. Petty empire-building. Passive aggressive email warfare. Endless managerial jargon deployed like chemical weapons. Entire departments operating like medieval courts where survival depends less on competence and more on knowing which Deputy Assistant Associate Director currently hates which Senior Operational Lead.
The NHS contains some of the finest people in Britain. It also occasionally resembles a sixth form college run by Kafka.
So the question arises: can Artificial Intelligence help rid the NHS of its awful internal politics and bullying culture?
The optimistic answer is yes. The realistic answer is “possibly, but only if the NHS itself actually wants to change”. Which is rather different.
Because AI may be capable of analysing millions of medical scans in seconds, but even the most advanced supercomputer may struggle to understand why Sandra from Workforce Planning has not spoken to Keith from Estates since “the incident with the microwave in 2014”.
The NHS Culture Problem
Before discussing AI, it is important to establish something uncomfortable: the NHS does not merely suffer from isolated examples of bullying. In some places, bullying has become structurally embedded into management culture.
This does not mean every hospital is toxic. Many departments are excellent. Many managers are decent people trying to survive impossible circumstances. But there are recurring themes across the service:
- Senior staff protected despite repeated complaints.
- Whistleblowers quietly sidelined.
- Promotion systems based on politics rather than competence.
- Layers of management creating confusion and blame shifting.
- Staff terrified to speak openly.
- “Wellbeing initiatives” replacing actual accountability.
- Endless restructures which somehow produce more managers but fewer functioning printers.
The NHS is uniquely vulnerable to this because it combines several dangerous ingredients.
First, it is huge. Vast organisations naturally develop bureaucracy and internal power struggles. The NHS employs well over a million people. Any institution that size eventually develops factions, tribes and miniature empires. Some NHS Trusts resemble independent city-states loosely connected by logos and acronyms.
Second, there is little real competition. In private industry, catastrophically dysfunctional cultures eventually damage profitability. In the NHS, failure is often absorbed into another restructure, another review, another “transformation programme”, or another committee with the word “strategic” in its title.
Third, NHS management culture frequently rewards risk avoidance over effectiveness. If something goes wrong, the safest strategy is often to ensure somebody else can be blamed first. This creates extraordinary levels of defensive behaviour.
Hence the famous NHS phenomenon where:
- nobody made the decision,
- everybody attended the meeting,
- seventeen people approved the paperwork,
- and yet somehow the project still exploded.
Fourth, emotional exhaustion changes behaviour. Staff working under constant pressure become less patient, less tolerant and more tribal. Departments begin fighting each other for resources like survivors in a post-apocalyptic film.
The result is a culture where politics flourishes because people are stressed, frightened and exhausted.
Which is precisely where AI enthusiasts enter the room waving graphs and talking about “data-driven optimisation”.
The Great AI Fantasy
There is currently a fashionable belief that AI can solve institutional dysfunction simply by introducing objectivity.
The theory goes something like this:
Humans are biased and political. AI is rational and data-driven. Therefore AI can eliminate favouritism, bullying and inefficiency.
Unfortunately, this is the sort of thinking usually developed by someone who has never attended an NHS management meeting involving a disputed parking allocation.
Technology does not magically remove politics. Humans still control the technology.
If a toxic organisation implements AI badly, the AI merely automates the toxicity more efficiently.
An NHS manager who already uses spreadsheets to target disliked employees will happily use predictive analytics instead.
A bullying department with AI becomes:
“Good morning Susan. According to our new machine learning behavioural assessment platform, your facial expression during yesterday’s Teams meeting indicated suboptimal enthusiasm.”Wonderful. Now the oppression comes with dashboards.
So AI is not inherently liberating. It depends entirely on how it is deployed.
That said, AI genuinely could improve several areas where NHS politics and bullying currently thrive.
Removing Administrative Weapons
One of the most poisonous aspects of NHS culture is the use of bureaucracy as a weapon.
Staff are buried under:
- mandatory forms,
- duplicated reporting systems,
- endless compliance exercises,
- contradictory guidance,
- incomprehensible procurement processes,
- and enough meetings to qualify as a hostage situation.
Bureaucracy creates power. People who control the process gain influence over everyone else.
This is where AI could make a real difference.
AI systems could automate huge amounts of administrative work:
- rota management,
- appointment scheduling,
- document processing,
- referral sorting,
- incident categorisation,
- HR workflows,
- procurement analysis,
- transcription,
- and routine compliance tasks.
That matters because bureaucracy often enables bullying.
A manipulative manager can currently:
- selectively delay approvals,
- “lose” requests,
- manipulate scheduling,
- bury staff in paperwork,
- or exploit procedural complexity.
When processes become transparent and automated, some of that power disappears.
An AI-driven leave approval system, for example, cannot quietly reject Karen’s annual leave because Karen once criticised Sharon’s flipchart presentation during a governance workshop.
Well, theoretically.
Of course, the NHS being the NHS, there is always a risk the AI leave system would itself become sentient and resign after three weeks.
AI and Recruitment
Recruitment in the NHS is often bizarre.
Job descriptions are frequently written in a dialect only understood by HR professionals and woodland spirits.
A typical NHS vacancy may require:
- “stakeholder engagement experience”,
- “dynamic leadership capability”,
- “evidence of transformational delivery”,
- and “advanced Microsoft Excel competency”.
The actual job turns out to involve apologising to angry consultants while trying to locate a functioning stapler.
Internal politics heavily influence recruitment. Favouritism exists. So do informal networks. Some people seem mysteriously immune from consequences despite leaving operational devastation behind them like managerial hurricanes.
AI could improve recruitment by:
- anonymising applications,
- identifying competency patterns,
- analysing actual performance outcomes,
- and reducing subjective bias.
Potentially, this could reduce “jobs for mates” culture.
But again, caution is required.
AI systems learn from historical data. If the NHS historically promoted aggressive empire-builders with PowerPoint addictions, then AI may conclude these are ideal leadership traits.
Imagine the horror:
“The algorithm has identified that the optimal NHS executive candidate uses phrases like ‘strategic oversight’ forty-seven times per hour and owns at least three lanyards.”This is how civilisations collapse.
Detecting Bullying Patterns
One genuinely promising area is pattern analysis.
Bullying often becomes visible only when large amounts of information are examined together.
AI systems could identify:
- departments with unusually high turnover,
- sickness patterns,
- grievance clusters,
- exit interview trends,
- abnormal complaint rates,
- or recurring behavioural concerns involving specific managers.
Currently, many toxic managers survive because complaints remain fragmented. Each individual case appears isolated. AI could detect systemic behaviour invisible to humans.
For example:
- a manager whose staff repeatedly transfer out,
- whose departments show elevated stress leave,
- whose teams underperform,
- and whose exit interviews contain identical concerns.
That pattern matters.
The NHS has historically been poor at connecting such information. AI could make organisational denial much harder.
Which is precisely why some managers may quietly dislike it.
Because toxic systems survive through ambiguity.
AI thrives on pattern recognition.
An algorithm does not care that someone is “well connected”.
The Endless Middle Management Problem
The NHS has developed a remarkable ability to generate management structures of astonishing complexity.
You may encounter:
- assistant deputy associate directors,
- transformation leads,
- programme facilitators,
- pathway integration officers,
- strategic improvement partners,
- and somebody called Nigel whose actual purpose remains unknown despite twenty-two years of service.
Now, not all management is unnecessary. Large organisations require coordination. Hospitals cannot simply operate on vibes and biscuits.
But NHS management often multiplies because bureaucracy multiplies.
AI could flatten some structures by automating reporting, forecasting and coordination work.
This could reduce opportunities for political empire-building.
Unfortunately, there is a catch.
Middle management rarely votes for its own extinction.
Therefore, the likely NHS approach would be:
- introduce AI,
- retain all existing managers,
- create additional AI oversight managers,
- establish an AI governance board,
- launch an AI transformation steering committee,
- and hire consultants to explain the AI to the AI committee.
Within six months the administrative burden would probably double.
Can AI Make Decisions More Objective?
Possibly.
One reason bullying flourishes is inconsistency.
Rules apply differently depending on:
- personality,
- status,
- friendships,
- seniority,
- and political alliances.
AI-driven systems could create more standardised approaches to:
- disciplinary procedures,
- rota allocation,
- workload distribution,
- performance monitoring,
- and escalation processes.
Transparency reduces manipulation.
However, there is a danger in excessive algorithmic management.
Healthcare is human. Staff are human. Circumstances vary enormously.
A purely data-driven NHS could become monstrous.
Imagine explaining to a nurse:
“Unfortunately the Compassion Efficiency Matrix indicates you exceeded acceptable emotional engagement thresholds during bereavement support interactions.”There is already too much dehumanisation in parts of the NHS. AI must not worsen it.
The goal should not be replacing human judgement.
The goal should be preventing human pettiness from masquerading as judgement.
The Real Problem: Leadership
Here is the uncomfortable truth.
The NHS does not primarily suffer from a technology problem.
It suffers from a leadership and accountability problem.
AI cannot fix executives who tolerate bullying because confronting it is politically inconvenient.
AI cannot fix boards obsessed with targets while ignoring staff culture.
AI cannot fix cowardice.
And there is often cowardice involved.
Toxic managers survive because:
- they deliver short-term numbers,
- know the right people,
- create fear,
- or manipulate process effectively.
The NHS frequently promotes people based on operational aggression rather than emotional intelligence.
Some managers rise because they are effective in crisis environments. The problem is they continue behaving like battlefield commanders during ordinary operations.
Staff burnout then becomes inevitable.
AI may expose this behaviour more clearly, but exposure alone changes nothing unless leadership acts.
The NHS has produced endless reports identifying cultural failures. The issue is rarely lack of information.
The issue is institutional reluctance to confront unpleasant truths.
The Bullying Feedback Loop
One reason NHS culture can become toxic is because bullied people sometimes become bullies themselves.
A newly promoted manager enters an environment where:
- aggression is normalised,
- emotional detachment is rewarded,
- and vulnerability is punished.
Eventually they adapt.
After enough years inside dysfunctional structures, some staff stop recognising the dysfunction entirely.
This explains the astonishing NHS phrase:
“Well, that’s just how it is.”Few sentences are more dangerous.
AI cannot directly change this psychology. But it may reduce some conditions that sustain it:
- overwork,
- administrative overload,
- chaotic scheduling,
- and operational confusion.
Reducing stress matters.
People with functioning lunch breaks are generally less likely to launch passive aggressive email offensives at 23:47 regarding printer toner allocation.
Whistleblowing and Fear
Whistleblowing remains one of the NHS’s greatest failures.
Staff who raise concerns often fear:
- career damage,
- ostracism,
- reputational attacks,
- or managerial retaliation.
AI systems could help by creating:
- anonymous reporting analysis,
- pattern tracking,
- automated escalation,
- and independent evidence monitoring.
This could reduce opportunities for complaints to disappear mysteriously into procedural black holes.
Because currently there are NHS complaints processes so labyrinthine that archaeologists may one day discover unresolved grievances from the Blair administration.
Transparency is the enemy of toxic politics.
AI can improve transparency.
But again, only if leaders genuinely want it.
A determined organisation can manipulate any system.
The Consultant Problem Nobody Wants To Mention
There is also a longstanding divide between clinical and managerial cultures.
Some clinicians distrust management entirely.
Some managers resent clinicians.
Each group often believes the other has:
- too much influence,
- too little accountability,
- and absolutely no understanding of reality.
This creates tribalism.
AI could potentially reduce conflict by improving operational visibility and evidence-based planning.
But AI could equally worsen tensions if implemented badly.
Doctors already drowning in administrative systems may react poorly to:
“Please complete the AI-enhanced reflective behavioural optimisation module.”At which point somebody will throw a Lenovo ThinkPad through a window.
The Fantasy of Pure Rationality
There is a broader philosophical issue here.
Many AI enthusiasts imagine organisations can become perfectly rational systems.
But humans are not rational.
Hospitals especially are emotional environments filled with:
- grief,
- stress,
- trauma,
- fear,
- exhaustion,
- ego,
- compassion,
- and conflict.
Politics emerges naturally wherever humans gather.
Even monasteries had politics. The NHS never stood a chance.
The objective is not to eliminate all politics. That is impossible.
The objective is to reduce destructive politics.
AI may help by:
- reducing ambiguity,
- improving transparency,
- exposing patterns,
- simplifying bureaucracy,
- and creating consistency.
But no algorithm can fully remove human behaviour from human institutions.
Nor should it.
You probably do not want your chemotherapy treatment overseen entirely by something called Clinical Efficiency Engine 4.2.
The Danger of NHS AI Hype
The NHS is especially vulnerable to management fads.
Every decade introduces a new miracle solution:
- Total Quality Management,
- Lean,
- Agile,
- Transformation Programmes,
- Digital First,
- Integrated Pathways,
- Synergy Frameworks,
- or whatever phrase consultants are currently charging £2,400 a day to explain.
AI risks becoming another fashionable slogan.
This would be disastrous.
Because if AI is implemented badly, staff will quickly see it as:
- surveillance,
- cost cutting,
- or another managerial toy.
Trust will collapse immediately.
And NHS staff possess highly refined nonsense detection systems developed over decades of exposure to corporate jargon.
The moment an executive says:
“We’re leveraging AI-enabled workforce optimisation opportunities,”
half the room mentally updates their CV.What Would Actually Work?
If the NHS genuinely wanted AI to improve culture, several principles would matter.
AI should remove bureaucracy, not add to it
If AI creates additional reporting burdens, staff will hate it instantly.
AI should support staff, not monitor them obsessively
Nobody wants algorithmic micromanagement.
Transparency must apply upward as well as downward
Executives and managers should face scrutiny too.
Human oversight remains essential
AI recommendations should inform decisions, not replace judgement entirely.
Staff must trust the system
Without trust, everything fails.
Culture change must accompany technology
Otherwise AI simply digitises dysfunction.
The Most Likely Outcome
The realistic answer is that AI will probably improve some NHS operational problems while leaving deeper cultural issues partially unresolved.
Administrative efficiency will improve.
Data analysis will improve.
Some bullying patterns may become easier to detect.
Some bureaucratic abuse may decline.
But politics itself will survive because politics is fundamentally human.
There will still be:
- cliques,
- rivalries,
- ambition,
- vanity,
- resentment,
- and territorial behaviour.
No machine can entirely prevent humans from acting like humans.
Especially British humans trapped in institutional environments with inadequate parking and broken air conditioning.
Conclusion
Can AI rid the NHS of its awful internal politics and bullying culture?
Not entirely.
But it could help significantly if implemented intelligently, ethically and courageously.
AI can:
- reduce bureaucracy,
- improve transparency,
- expose toxic patterns,
- standardise procedures,
- support whistleblowing,
- and remove some opportunities for manipulation.
What it cannot do is manufacture moral courage.
The NHS ultimately requires leaders willing to confront bad behaviour honestly, even when politically inconvenient.
Technology can support accountability.
It cannot replace it.
And perhaps that is the central lesson.
The NHS does not need artificial intelligence nearly as much as it needs ordinary human decency combined with competent management.
Unfortunately, competent management is much harder to install than software.
Especially in an organisation where arranging a Teams meeting with six departments sometimes requires the diplomatic skill of the Congress of Vienna.
Still, there is reason for cautious optimism.
Because for all its dysfunctions, the NHS remains full of dedicated people trying heroically to keep an impossibly complicated system functioning. Most staff are not interested in politics. They simply want to do their jobs without being bullied, undermined or buried under absurdity.
If AI can reduce even a fraction of that absurdity, it will have achieved something worthwhile.
Though one suspects the true test of artificial intelligence will come when an NHS Trust asks it to:
- redesign a rota,
- mediate a dispute between Procurement and IT,
- explain why nobody can book annual leave in August,
- and locate the missing bladder scanner last seen sometime during the Olympics.
At that point the AI may quietly conclude that self-awareness was a terrible mistake and apply for early retirement.
#ai #bullying #internalPolitics #nhs -
slivers
dreaming… a random bit
** in the ending of The Daily Post’s Weekly Photo Challenges from WordPress, here’s your Sunday Weekly Photo Prompt: travel **
medicine buddha mantra: Tayata Om Bekandze Bekandze Maha Bekandze Radza Samudgate Soha
health, wealth, and prosperity: Om Vasudhare Svaha
Rate this:
#7thAvenue #advertisement #april22 #avenues #billboards #blueSkies #buildings #city #cityDwellers #cityLiving #cityscapes #cloud #clouds #collage #dailyPost #earthDay #empireStateBuilding #goldenHour #liveCollage #livecollage #manhattan #newYorkCity #nyc #photography #postaday #seventhAvenue #skyscrapers #slivers #streets #timesSquare #weeklyPhotoChallenge