Must Read: Greed Syndrome Must Be Cured, Special Report: Japan Knew Tsunami/Nuclear

Reuters - Over the past two weeks, Japanese government officials and Tokyo Electric Power executives have repeatedly described the deadly combination of the most powerful quake in Japans history and the massive tsunami that followed as "soteigai," or beyond expectations.

When Tokyo Electric President Masataka Shimizu apologized to the people of Japan for the continuing crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant he called the double disaster "marvels of nature that we have never experienced before".

Politely, respectfully selfish

But a review of company and regulatory records shows that Japan and its largest utility repeatedly downplayed dangers and ignored warnings — including a 2007 tsunami study from Tokyo Electric Power Cos senior safety engineer.

via Special Report: Japan engineers knew tsunami could overrun plant | Reuters.

It's nice for Japanese lauded for politeness, but how rude is greed that's led to safety lapses causing a nuclear nightmare?

The Japanese built the plant on a known earthquake zone. They built it near the ocean for emergency-water supplies. They knew a large earthquake would hit sooner or later and that it could trigger a tsunami that would overwhelm the plant. They knew what caused the Chernobyl catastrophe and what steps other nations had taken to harden systems. In the face of all that though, the Japanese government left it to a company with a terrible safety record to handle the decisions. That company, Tokyo Electric, the largest utility in the world, chose the cheapest way out for the sake of the bottom line and "externalities" be damned, meaning the people and environment and everything (but the company's and its top investors'/executives' bank accounts at the time) be damned.

Greed kept Japan from using the best safety ideas from around the world: hardened vents, etc.

It's the same Greed Syndrome that kept BP from using the best shutoff valves on the Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico.

It's the same Greed Syndrome that caused Massey Coal to cut corner after corner after suffering so many preventable coal-mining tragedies.

It's the same Greed Syndrome that's allowing all the fracking that's going on around the planet.

It's the same Greed Syndrome that's using depleted uranium right now in attacking Qaddaffi's armored weaponry in Libya.

Greed is evil. There is no way around it. It is the essence of evil. Selfishness is evil, and greed is selfishness on steroids, as it were.

Capitalism is based upon selfishness. That's it's core spirit, it's core mentality. It is an evil ideology. There is no way around it. It too is "essence of evil."

Coercive socialism is also rooted in selfishness; however, voluntary socialism is not necessarily. Voluntary socialism can be other-first for the sake of the whole, which if left unmolested by selfishness, always ends up benefiting every member of the whole, including the one whose initial impetus is wholesomeness-oriented where the "whole" is the whole of humanity and necessarily the whole of existence being manifested in any way, spirit and/or "matter."

Greed is always the reason companies with terrible safety & environmental records end up contaminating the world and/or killing mass numbers of workers, etc. Who pays? The answer is everyone, including the shortsighted-greedy.

Don't assume that because Japan's nuclear-power industry failed to meet even US regulations that the US is immune to nuclear disasters. Existence always ends up slapping down greed, and the US nuclear-power industry is based first on selfishness and greed.

Evil and capitalism, which is evil, and coercion are not in anyone's "enlightened" self-interest. The whole of humanity voluntarily giving and sharing all with all is the only right path out into the future forever. It is the essence of good: righteousness.


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Libertarian Capitalism. Bookmark the permalink.