Feel a desperate need for something intelligent?


Paul Wallis, Sydney Media Jam CO2Need something, anything, intelligent to relieve the monotony?Amid the endless fascination of global stupidity, a certain lack of enthusiasm is becoming evident. Maybe there’s something a bit samey about endless disasters and a pole to pole sewer of a planet?

Obviously, your intellect is starving. There is no nutrition to keep it active. Talk about food for thought; where, exactly, would you find it in a place like Earth?

Now the really scary bit  – It’s just possible that having to learn the language of stupidity to communicate with “others” (Other whats, does anyone know?) may be sabotaging your efforts to find the food your mind needs.

There is something almost impossibly mediocre about any situation where futility in communication is the normal state of things. Do people wake up in the morning and say cheerfully, “Hey! Now’s our chance to be futile!” Some don’t, you know. Well, you know now.

Let’s put the no-intellect situation in PR terms so it will be comprehensible to the most unimpressive of intellects and perhaps even penetrate their thick useless hides –

You remember something called “aspirations”? No, of course not. Well, there were such things, years ago, before you useless bastards were born.. There was also something called a credible society, and places where people were allowed to use their minds without having to apologize for it to some jock roadkill PR/media suppository maggot.

Sickening, of course. Imagine billions of people having aspirations and intelligence, sometimes even at the same time. How could you sell it? How do you merchandise intelligence to the point where it might even be noticeable?

It’s a big issue, and people have been avoiding it for years. The language of stupidity is free of any reference to it. Everybody is an ignoramus in good standing, in this language. That’s why you no longer need to listen to at least

Paul Wallis books, sydney media jam

Reading a book may lead someone to suspect you’re intelligent. This book, which can be used as a sort of S&M device, will throw them off the track nicely.

90% of any conversation, because the conversation is as ignorant as the people doing the talking.

It’s inspiring stuff. No issue, theory or fact, however globally or personally lethal, is allowed to be intelligently discussed, described, or comprehended in any meaningful way. The problem of course, is that your mind, down to its last muesli bar of reasons to exist, is  just sitting there like a prisoner, playing its harmonica, and rattling on the bars of social media. It may even be looking at those little tourist brochures for personal oblivion called “trends in modern lifestyles”. Grim indeed.

(You can see why this is being written in PR terms; so that even the dear little gerbils who “manage” modern media imagery will get it. You bloody worthless pig-ignorant peasants, you.)

Meanwhile – Back at your interesting-things-starved mind – It may be digging a tunnel to escape from its prison, but escape to where, you ask? To the wildly exciting blather of the vast amounts of information which will be forgotten in the next 5 seconds? No; that’s not where it wants to go.

The cosmic microwave background – Now, how could you pretend to find something interesting in that. You whimsical soul, you.

Studies by incredibly irritating people have shown that given half an excuse, the human mind defaults to something it’s actually interested in. This is considered by the sages of modern life (aka scum) to be a particularly stupid thing to do, partly because it’s not believed to be possible for anything to be interesting.

Nor is it believed possible for that all embracing demographic called “them” (aka humans) to be intelligent.

That’s the encouraging bit. Your mind can wander away and there’s no chance anybody will go looking for it.  If you find something that actually interests you and saves your mind from eating its foot off in sheer bored frustration, nobody will believe you. You’ll be weird enough to be left alone having fun and staying mentally alive with your interesting thing.

So – Feel a desperate need for something intelligent? You should.


Read a few of my books and claim that they’re interesting. Nobody will believe you, they’ll think you’re a nut, and you can frolic to your heart’s content.

Visualization Skills vs Modern Media – Who’s Winning?


Do you see it?
I see a herd of beautiful wild ponies.
Thanks, Daria.

Visualization is the process of creating your own visions. It’s complex. It’s also hard to learn if you don’t read and don’t have to turn things in to actual thoughts to visualize. Modern media, rather annoyingly, isn’t helping much.

No, this isn’t going to be a series of easy cheap shots at media imagery.  The very obvious doesn’t need elaboration. The stories might be crap, but some of the visual stuff is pretty good, particularly in gaming media.

The problem is that the stories are trying to be visual, not stories. If you remember being read kid’s stories, and having to fill in the gaps when there were no pictures to look at, trying to follow the storyline, it’s as basic as that.

It’s one of the most valuable skills any human being can have, and it’s being suffocated by this damn spoon feeding media. You don’t have to visualize, to the point you lose the skill.

Visualization – The “advertising effect”

Arguably worse is the “advertising effect”. This is the bit where the brain ignores most of what it sees as irrelevant. The absurd overload of imagery drowns out personal visualization. People don’t even get enough time to really take in an image before it’s replaced with another, or more likely a lot of other images.

This is the epitome of unfocused. While your brain is rummaging around in this visual confetti, exactly how much visualization can you do?

The “illiteracy effect” on visualization

What do you see, what don’t you see? What do you WANT to see, or not see? Is visualization sometimes more than visual?

Since most people don’t read anything which requires visualization, the ability to associate ideas, even in the same sentence (Ahem? I hope not) is pretty lousy. The famous, and dull, “What are we talking about now?” is the illiteracy effect in full swing. They aren’t stupid; they literally can’t make the mental associations between two statements put together.

Literature makes readers make associations, of actions, ideas, mental images, and, well, everything involved in what you’re reading. It’s a unique effect. Only music really goes as far in to “figure it out yourself” as literature.

Good visual art creates associations, even the really advanced type of associations, but how much current visual art is really much more than a “Postcard from Whatever” or “Another Endless Pic of Me, This Second in Time” ? The fantastic things that visual art can do are crowded out by the truly banal, most of the time.

So it’s no wonder that people’s visualization skills are pretty shaky. Ask them to visualize a better world, and you’re going to get a rather uncertain response. Ask them to visualize a better life for themselves, which is what they’re supposed to be doing, aspirations and all, and the response will actually get lost in trying to picture itself as anything more than a shopping list, if that. How good would you say people are likely to be in visualizing issues, given this total incompetence in very basic visualizations?’

Visualization? What visualization?

Paul Wallis books, sydney media jam

Isn’t creativity all about visualization? Has to be.

The inability to visualize mentally is as handicapping as blindness. If you can’t even visualize your own existence, maybe it’s even worse. On a global scale, it’s catastrophic.

If the entire human race doesn’t even have the skills to visualize a sane society, how likely is a sane society? How mindless is mindless enough? Living in a junk shop of a world, being sold crap and crime every 5 seconds, and why would you want a mind? What possible use could it be?

The problem, of course, is that if you can’t visualize a solution to a problem, you’re going to be stuck with that problem for a very long time. Just think how many problems there are in everyone’s lives.

So maybe being mindless isn’t such a good idea. Maybe not being able to visualize is dangerous. The one place people never look for answers is in their own minds. The place is usually a mess, cluttered with “life’s little packaging”. Usually hasn’t been dusted much, either, this place, and there’s often a distinct impression of mouldiness.

The pity of it is that somewhere in that mess is a way to visualize, or at least the remains of the nearly forgotten skills. People may never have visualized at all after childhood. After all, to “live”, all you need to do is recycle whatever you’ve been taught or told, right?

This book is called humor. Humor IS logic. Logic is used for visualization, in many ways. Coincidence?

No thinking at all required. No use of intelligence, either. Any idiot can simply recite information and agree with anything. You could be totally stagnant by 22, and a fossil by 30, and it would make no difference at all in that undemanding little mindset. Life is one big set of quotes from other people.

Of course, you wouldn’t be able to solve problems, either. You can’t visualize solutions outside the information you’re given. Nor can you have the choice or (even the right) to distrust anything you’re told, but that’s OK, too, isn’t it? So the solution is always going to be based on what you’re told, whether it’s right or wrong. You have no options.

So what’s the solution? As an author, saying “read” seems a bit self-serving, but you could do worse. You could try doing something for yourself, too, like doing your own thinking, if only to see if you really can escape from the no options mode.

There is one possible out. Visualization is based on some sort of need, in many cases. You may not even know why you need whatever it is, but it’s a sort of visualization. That pesky need to see clearly is more useful than it looks. If the mind can see, it can think about what it sees. Better option? Better than lost forever in an ocean of bullshit, for sure.

Paul Wallis, Sydney Media Jam, Paul Wallis books

The misuse of the word ‘elite’


Paul Wallis, Sydney Media Jam CO2“Elite” means “ select group that is superior in terms of ability or qualities to the rest of a group or society” according to Google. The way the word elite is used in media, however, is quite different. It means a social elite, without qualifiers, and it’s very misleading, as well as being as fake as this idiotic total failure of a society.

In times past, the word elite meant specialist, highly trained, highly qualified, very experienced, and combinations thereof. Now it means any collection of generic peasants in suits claiming status.

In the military, the word “elite” has never been ambiguous. You don’t hear about “elite” sycophants, slackers, or rear-area recidivists. You only hear about highly trained special forces, crack troops, and truly experienced professionals.

In the arts, elitism is largely despised. Elitism has done very little for the arts except get a few genuine benefactors and a much larger number of self-proclaimed elitists. That’s a very telling fact. Few great artists have been elitists themselves, either. The virtuoso is only a virtuoso because an acknowledged virtuoso calls him or her a virtuoso.

In both the military and the arts, the self-proclaimed elitist is an absurdity. Of no value to the professions, the elitist is at best a 2 dimensional bit of décor, not to be taken seriously for anything.

In our wonderful mainstream media, however, “elites” fester everywhere. You’d swear everybody with a name was a member of some vast class of superior beings. It’s though Wall Street was packed with saints, and politics was some sort of personal ordeal for the spiritually enlightened, rather than two dunghills full of the inevitable trash these sectors create in huge batches.

The WASP elite misnomers

Of particular irritation to me is the apparently interminable references to WASP elites. I’m a WASP. I even drew the picture myself. These so-called elites aren’t real elites, but a blanket term used to describe anything in the public eye. How can anyone, or anything, possibly mistake these tedious little pustules as any sort of elite?

Didn’t know that, eh?

Even more bafflingly, the actual WASP elites were first mentioned as being on the way out. The real WASP elites, of course, are anything but out of business. They’re everywhere. They have trillions of dollars. They own huge amounts of property and equity. They simply have better things to do than run countries or do red carpet events, or waste time in the public eye. (Well, who doesn’t?)

They are, however, also a good example of the misuse of the word “elite”. They exist in any old form, any old way, without much formal structure (entirely unnecessary), and have been categorized as an elite, which they were and are.  The mistake is to portray the useless/insane/downright stupid American management class, usually WASPs, as elites. They’re not the same thing, in so many ways, as the true elites.

It’s the difference between Warren Buffett and some dire little middle manager in a poky little office pretending to be someone. It’s the difference between an actual wasp and a fruit fly. Buffett could be described as an elite group of one, and prove it without even trying. The substandard maggot-droppings managerial wankers couldn’t possibly be described as an elite, even in a sewer.

That’s how far out of whack the use of the word “elite” has become. Even the theory of elites is now well over the cliff in terms of reality. In the UK, the theory of elitism has been dying a well-deserved death since the social disaster of World War 1 and subsequent debacles, of which Brexit is just the latest in a series of catastrophic mismanagement events. The tiresome wastes of tweed now pottering about in British public life claiming to be elites and proving their incompetence with every nanosecond couldn’t be mistaken for a form of life, let alone an elite.

The real British upper class, or what’s left of it, may vote Tory because their accountants say their primitive Thatcherite policies are better tax options. All well and good, but they don’t mix with the Godlike Grocers of Westminster any more than necessary, and briefly. They have nothing in common with these petty-minded, governmentally-inclined shopkeepers.  They certainly don’t run their businesses on the same haphazard, idiotic, basis as the pseudo-elite run Britain.

In America, Old Money dies hard. It’s the nearest thing to an economic elite, in the sense of actual experience in being rich for generations. It forms a sort of elite, if you really can call a collection of out of touch rich people an elite.

In contrast, New Money, which has some claim to respect on the basis of actual achievement, can’t even be bothered being an elite. The status of elite, particularly in its severely devalued modern form, means nothing to them, with good reason.

Everything is an “elite”. Every rock, presumably, is some sort of socially superior being. New Money knows better than that. They deal with this collection of social flotsam on a daily basis, and familiarity has bred well-deserved contempt in practical terms.

…So can we be a bit fussier about the use of the word “elite”? Can we stop elevating every transient hanger-on in a generation of true, proven fools to a status they will never deserve?


The fake society


Paul Wallis, Sydney Media Jam CO2Just when you think stupidity, hypocrisy, and delusion are career assets, they’re not. They’re scripted. Modern fakery must be spontaneous, and basically genetically inherited. You need to be born useless, pig-ignorant, and at least trying to be subhuman to make a career out of it. Result, a fake society.

One thing media does religiously, and very like a religion, is to be fully in tune with whatever lump of rotting meat it’s producing at any given moment. The latest dead fashions must be worn, praised and forgotten, preferably all at the same time.  Humanity comes along for the ride.

Being a fake has been an acceptable career move since “emotional intelligence”, the move to being an obliging little doormat in the workplace. Simultaneously job seekers were being encouraged to take acting classes to do better in interviews. (Like a hiring decision already decided in a phone call four weeks before the interview will be affected by an acting performance.)

The justification, of course, is “fitting in”. This is how a fake society is created. As someone who has never made the slightest attempt to fit in with anyone or anything since birth, I can appreciate that for what it is. Deep spiritual personal cowardice. Kids faking it to get along with other kids goes back to the trees, or more likely back to the Cambrian. Adults doing ridiculous things to fit in to environments they hate is basically normal.

Paul Wallis books, sydney media jam

Creativity can never be fake. Nor can anything productive. A fake society is by definition not creative, and unproductive

Imagine getting along with your predators…. And going to such lengths to do it. Fake people, let alone fake societies, rarely survive. Even fakery has a shelf life, and it’s usually very short.

The fake society is the inevitable result. Fakery itself is fake. For example – There is no such thing as fake news. It’s either news, or it’s not. It’s either real or it’s not. Those too stupid, or too gutless to check deserve whatever they get.

In the same context, there’s either a society or there’s not. From the look of most societies, there shouldn’t be the societies which do exist, let alone the miserable snivelling things pretending to be societies.

Can modern societies really claim to be societies, some sort of organized group of people with a common cause and common interests?


Any pretence of coherent society in that form is long gone.

They’re “real” fake societies, in which paid peasants preach division and hatred of social groups, races, and individuals. These people preach hate and troll because they’re paid to do it. It’s a job. They also do it to compensate themselves for their own fakeries, their own failure to exist on their own terms. Only fake people CAN make fake societies. Nothing is real, nothing is trustworthy, and nothing is believable.

Fake is failure. You can’t even be a real person. It’s not you that’s being successful. It’s a fake person, doing fake things for fake reasons. That which is fake can never be real. Game over, clowns.

So tell me, O noble gutless wonders and non-existent nobodies – What if something real happens to you? How much fake bullshit do you need to stop a bullet, an earthquake, or a hurricane? Let’s find out.

Paul Wallis, Sydney Media Jam, Paul Wallis books

Dismantling the administrative state, or how to prove you know nothing about government


Paul Wallis, Sydney Media Jam CO2The new rocking horse for America’s Least Competent is “dismantling the administrative state”. Given that this idea is coming from people who’ve just spent the last few decades proving they couldn’t run a dunghill, this idea is as banal, impractical, and cynical as you’d expect it to be.

Let’s start with the basics:

  • The money side – Modern societies are revenue-dependent. Nothing is free, in fact. You get precisely nothing for your taxes except the payment of government money to “free market” bozos and their pets. The same “libertarians” who want to dismantle the administrative state are totally dependent on it for government contracts. You don’t get public services for your money; you get jails, and rich, obscene, lobbyists.
  • The legislative side – Legislation is basically a rule book. Why shouldn’t people be able to eat safe food, live in a safe environment, get health care, and at least something for their taxes? That’s not happening now, and hasn’t for years. All modern politicians do is direct public money to corporate interests, and there’s no point pretending it does much else. There’s literally terabytes of information on any subject to prove that. If you don’t have an administration to administer political government decisions, there’s no point in having a political government, because it simply couldn’t govern.
  • The administrative side – The administrative side of government currently reflects the incredible inefficiency of political government. This includes enforcing the rules, managing the use of revenue, and dealing with the endless problems which incompetent political government creates on an hourly basis. Without administration, you’d have total inability to administrate, i.e., total inability to govern. “Bureaucracy” is a measure of inefficiency, not an argument for not having an administrative framework.

Continue reading

The ISS space fungi saga, and some nasty possibilities


Paul Wallis, Sydney Media Jam CO2The net-garbled furore over fungi growing on the ISS space station has been dragging on for a while. The information is detailed, to a point, but not detailed enough, and better still, not official, so nobody has to do anything about it.

There’s a lot of news about the space fungi, and that’s the good news. The other news is that things could get a lot worse, soon, and for the future. Let’s start with the quality of information available. The net takeaway from the “news” is that the fungi are aggressive, there’s a lot of them, and that microorganisms can live in space.

Fun so far, isn’t it? God knows what is growing away, damaging equipment, eating metal… It’d be a good science fiction movie, but this is supposedly real.

The internet has again turned everything in to a mix of fact and what looks very like fiction. (Thanks again, guys, you’re a great help. You could be the Breitbart of science, the way you’re going. Shut up if you’re not sure, and if you are sure, be clear.)

Established facts so far:

  • 200 known organisms can exist in space, including our old friends, the pneumococci.
  • The Soviet Mir space station supposedly had a ferocious mix of bacterial and fungal growths. They grew with exceptional speed and volume.
  • NASA acknowledges the existence of the various microfauna and flora, but isn’t committing to any statements so far, quite rightly.
  • The fungi are an operational problem, and have even managed to block water lines on the ISS. NASA is analysing data.
  • The survivability of fungi isn’t in question. Other tests have proven that some species of Antarctic fungi could effectively “live on Mars”.
  • Pathogen checks have been done on the ISS for the last decade, to deal with human microorganisms in the enclosed environment.
  • They’re very hard/impossible to eradicate.

Unproven facts and fictions:

IS the Mars rover being eaten by fungi? Maybe someone should go find out.

Fungi are eating Mars rovers. (Looked like a natural candidate for Photoshop to me, but some alleged growth patterns are similar to terrestrial fungi. See the Soviet Mir link above for the video at the bottom. Not entirely convincing, but I’m a fungi buff, too, so nice try, even if not true. You need to know quite a bit about fungi to do that.)

The fungi come from space. Maybe so, in fact that’s a theory for the beginning of life on Earth. Even so, you’d have to do some pretty fancy genetic sequencing to prove it, and that’s not happening so far. Space fungi, if they are, could tell us more about biological adaption in space than thousands of years of research. It’d be a real Rosetta Stone for multiple issues. The gene sequencing could also fill in a few blanks, too, maybe?


The fungi use acetic acid to dissolve tungsten? Huh? Acetic acid, aka vinegar, is great for breaking down things, and killing moulds in bathrooms, but tungsten? Fungi use enzymes, and enzymes which destroy metal could be called overkill. They don’t seem to do a lot of that on Earth, either. The other side of this very skeptical view is that there are obvious stains and visible effects on surfaces on the ISS. How? Seems like it’s a subject well worth exploring.

Fungus and fungal problems for the future

OK, so that was 400 or so words of semi-information for you. You’ll notice I’m not too impressed with the standard of information or depth of research. Looks to me like much more work has to go in to analysis, and much less speculation. If this is the real deal, the first case of managing biological hazards in space, kindly take it seriously.

IS the Mars rover being eaten by fungi? Maybe someone should go find out.

Irritating as some of this stuff is, none of it is entirely out of the ballpark. Fungi and some types of algae are the undisputed toughest organisms on Earth. They’ve survived all the major extinctions, every single one. They are incredibly efficient biologically, and can break down practically any type of organic or inorganic material. If anything’s going to survive anywhere, the fungi are prime candidates.

They can live through heat, cold, UV, etc., in fact they’re incredibly well adapted to do just that. If anything’s alive on Mars, nobody in bio science will be too surprised if it’s this range of organisms.

Now the problems:

  • Point(s) of origin, Earth or space, or both? The idea of taking some overachieving, potentially dangerous buts and fungi in to space where they become even worse isn’t appealing. Decontamination methods will need to be developed, and they’ll add to the load of space exploration. (There is absolutely nothing to be said for accumulating vast amounts of toxic contaminants in flight.)
  • Terrestrial microorganisms travelling in space naturally have affinities with Earth-based life. So when away from home, where’s the most likely place for them to set up shop? Anywhere near anything terrestrial, of course.
  • Does this mean humans will take their pathogens with them wherever they go? It might. It might be worse, too; multigenerational fungi and bacteria could become omni-resistant to decontamination, “superbugs”, and progressively more virulent. The trouble with this situation is that humans would make a great vector for just about every known disease. (There is a precedent for this; the housefly. Flies followed humans around the world. There’s no reason to believe microorganisms would object to a free ride, either.)
  • Are our pathogens toxic to other life? Probably, and that’s despite total alien-ness; super aggressive organisms are chemically They don’t have to find a biological dating agency to hook up with something and cause chaos. See what a fungus blight did to potatoes in Ireland during the Famine. Contact with humans could be fatal. Space travel may bring literal tides of microfauna in to space. If so, and the microfauna is dangerous, humans needn’t expect to be thanked for it. After all, we do know how dangerous some of these organisms can be on Earth.
  • Microorganisms are highly adaptive. We also know that these organisms adapt rapidly to any hostile environment. Ironically, we could use fungi as explorers, just to see how they cope with new environments. The obvious issue is that they’ll adapt to any countermeasures as quickly as usual, or perhaps even more quickly. (Why does nobody do generational studies on resistance, to see how the damn things adapt, by the way? Would have saved a lot of trouble with the superbugs.)

Nobody’s even mentioned viruses, yet, a substrate of the likely micro ecology on the ISS. No phages? If not, why not?

So – Is humanity going to emerge from Earth, bringing every known disease and pathogen with it? Or is this going to be another case of just blunder along, bringing plagues with the explorers? Great image for humanity’s first outings in to space, isn’t it?

This is a real challenge. Even if it’s only 1% of the possible problems as outlined, they’re still potentially huge problems.

The cosmic microwave background – Not all that self-explanatory, either. Just have a guess how many fungi could be living in that.

Ironically, some years ago I did a book which included Martian pathogens as part of the storyline, terrestrial microfauna which isolated a Martian colony.

The book, of course, was ignored, as usual. Pity, because it was so much fun to write.To hell with you alleged literati. If you can’t be bothered reading a fun book, I don’t want to know you.

(I can’t begin to tell you what I think of a society which doesn’t read, and usually doesn’t understand what it reads.) Nice to know my storyline has some vindication, though.


Paul Wallis, Sydney Media Jam, Paul Wallis books

The truth about lack of leadership


Paul Wallis, Sydney Media Jam CO2Leadership is a very personal thing. It’s about the person leading. All leaders have different styles. No two great leaders have much in common except their ability to lead. Global leadership is currently at an all-time low. Western leadership not only lacks style; it lacks credibility.

The trouble with leadership is that some people really do need leading. I think the only people who “need strong leaders” are weak followers. They’re lost, unable to take the initiative in any direction. The lack of initiative, at any level, is a symptom of true failure.

You don’t beat problems by waiting for them to hit you like a train. That’s exactly what the world has been doing, for several decades. Intelligent leaders anticipate; the current herd of cattle procrastinate. They digress in to minutiae as the problems breed like bacteria.

You call this leadership?

Rhetoric isn’t leadership; it’s talk.

  • Ideology isn’t leadership; it’s an excuse for what is done.
  • No amount of media hype equates to a single atom of leadership.
  • Leadership means taking responsibility; seen any personal accountability recently?
  • Leadership means personal commitment; seen any sudden outbreaks of personal guts?

Consider the current range of problems, which now extend to even such basics as water, land use and generational futures:

  • Would you run your family on the basis of no water, no housing, no healthy environment, and not even a clear path to a future for your kids? That’s what the current “leadership” is doing, very badly.
  • Would you raise your family in a sewer, with a sewer as the future? It’s happening on a truly colossal scale. The sheer scale of global contamination of all kinds is raging unchecked.
  • Would you train your family to believe that failure is the norm? The mere idea of the public interest is now the synonym for losers.

The disorganized mess which global civilization has become is the epitome of failure of leadership at all levels. Instead of focusing on the obvious big issues, and charging in in a coordinated way with all guns blazing, the odd squeak is heard.

Instead of ferocious all-out counters to rampant crime, corruption and political excess at the expense of the public, a few clichés trundle out, and nothing – meaning absolutely nothing – is done. It’s endemic.

Paul Wallis books, sydney media jam

Leadership HAS to be creative. You have to create solutions and plan achievements. This book is about putting people in touch with their own creativity.

The social leadership is now just about giveaways from the public purse to anyone or anything that happens to be able to freeload at any given time. Privatization was never about economic efficiency; prices have been rising and quality of life deteriorating ever since it began. Free enterprise built the modern economy; freeloading is destroying it, and it’s from the top, not the welfare class.

Deregulation is fine, for people who break laws. For everyone else, it’s just an opportunity to get ripped off. Another meaningless myth from pseudo-leadership with no ideas, just greed, as its raison d’etre. Even a game of football has rules, but not a society? Come off it.

Pollution is poisoning the world. Instead of being exterminated like it deserves, mindless subservience to greed is the excuse for a toxic mix of chemicals covering the entire planet. No leadership at all on this subject.

Leadership failure as a science

The failures are everywhere:

Instead of properly managing child sex abuse, it’s become an industry, and abusers, who’ve committed actual crimes, are protected by religions. It’s OK for people to pay to have their kids abused. Is that leadership, as you know it?

American ValhallaInstead of acknowledging problems and major economic disasters, like the finance sector’s highly destructive practices a la 2008, etc., they’re running things. No accountability. They should have got 20 years in jail; they’re still doing dangerous deals with ridiculous levels of credit. Again, see any leadership?

The failures are so systemic they can now be called a science. Every issue, every problem, becomes a job creation for people determined not to solve it. They get paid billions for achieving nothing, and usually doing more damage.

A real science would measure achievement. This science of leadership failure measures lack of achievement, and pays itself more to keep right on failing.

Why the failure of global leadership?

This routine failure to deal with ANY problems is no coincidence. I’m not going to mention the “usual scum” by name. There’s no need. Every failure eventually exposes itself as a failure of intellect as much as a failure of courage or even basic skills. The crashed corporation, the failed state, the symptoms of failure are always the same.

This book is about national problems. The leadership could be from anyone who understands those problems. Don’t hold your breath.

When the truly incompetent are in charge, this is what happens. Leadership is failing because it has incentives to fail. Every pathetic weakling in any sort of leadership role benefits from being the one in charge. Their actual leadership is horrendously ineffectual, but they have the influence. That influence translates in to “success”, like the idiot gambler who loses millions, but is holding everyone else’s money.

Gambling, in fact, is a good analogy. Everyone knows that wins are rare, and most gamblers lose. The psychosis of gambling, much like politics, is based on the theoretical chance of winning and the illusions of winning.

The illusions are deadly. To be appointed Head Idiot is a win. To be in front of cameras is a win. To be in charge of a herd of rich fools is a win. The ego rewards and the inevitable, endless escapes from blame are wins. Failed leadership, lacking real success, has to claim success in these ways.

The gambler is always looking for the big win that will put everything right. In lieu of that, the chance to win is the excuse for more failures and stupid moves. No need for in-depth psychology here; failure supports its own delusions. Therefore, it perpetuates itself.

Leadership can’t be based on failure. Illusions can’t be successes.  To progress, achievement, not non-achievement, is required.

Can you lead yourself? Leadership is based on oneself; if you can lead yourself, you can lead others. You might take a bit of convincing, but that means you may be honest enough to be a real leader.

The image of power and the exercise of power have very little in common. Any fool can portray the image. Very few have ever exercised power in its greatest form, the power to transform the world. Of those few, some did so despite leadership, rather than because of it.

Since the 19th century, the world has been transformed in the face of ancient tyrannies, mindless hatreds, festering crime, and putrescent people of all kinds. The real leadership came from basic human aspirations, in many cases.

Those aspirations are dangerous things. They sometimes follow aspiring fools, “just do their jobs” in aspiring atrocities, and take Great Leaps Forward in to hellish years of misery.

Many disasters, in fact, are caused by aspirations with no real guidance. The other role of leaders is as guides. Leaders are supposed to understand the risks, know how to dodge them, and look out for dangerous situations.

So failed global leadership means the Great Dung Cart of Humanity isn’t getting steered. It can crash in to anything and everything, and usually does. The aspirations can’t really control anything, just create a direction for movement towards whatever fulfils it, however illusory or downright false.

“Heroic” leadership?

Historically, some leaders have been actually heroic. Heroism, however, can be a pretty difficult necessity. I think most heroic leaders would agree that:

  • Being heroic is all well and good, but it also gets in the way of doing the rest of the job, which is much more mundane and demanding.
  • Being heroic and doing something useful are basically the same thing.
  • They didn’t intend to be “heroic” as such; they just needed to get a job done.
  • They led because they had to; it’s not unusual for previously invisible people to take charge when nobody else will.
  • Their view of their own bravery is very different to that of others. Real leadership is done on a very subjective, unavoidably honest, level. Hard work can’t be done on a fictional basis.
  • If being heroic meant moving a mountain of shit with a teaspoon to dig people out, they did it. They often did it because nobody else would.

This book is about how an ideology can lead. Where it leads tells you everything you need to know about this type of leadership.

There’s a common factor here – Leaders get on with it. Non-leaders don’t. You don’t actually have to be a hero to lead; you just need to be willing to do the tough jobs, and credible enough to get people to follow you.

Another facet, “inspiration”, is also important. If you can inspire others to lead, you’re a leader of leaders, and useful. In the current totally demotivational circus of non-leadership, that’d be very useful.

Seen anyone inspiring lately? Mediocrity is now the substitute for success. Fools, frauds, and failures are portrayed as leaders. They’re not. The world will have to raise the bar, a lot, to achieve any real leadership.



Paul Wallis, Sydney Media Jam, Paul Wallis books

Where’s the last place people look for anything? In their own minds.



In a culture so utterly devoid of real substance, it’s fascinating that materialism is still the default value system. Gizmos come and go, useless toil comes and goes, and the mind barely acknowledges its own existence.


The reality you experience is largely external. It, and its mainly useless values, are brought in to the mind and stacked up like groceries. The external defines the possible. The internal is some sort of spectator, baffled by everything and inflicted with everything. It’s absurd. It’s like surgically grafting yourself on to a YouTube ad, or anything else you can take or leave.

Everything is focused externally. It’s hard to avoid. After all, in its own obnoxious way, the external is relevant. The question is where and when does it stop being relevant?

People have been answering that question, vaguely or not, for millennia. The pity of it is that all this effort apparently hasn’t made the point – This Means You.

The “world” vs the mind

I have very little time for the idea of “emotional intelligence”. It’s a tautology, to start with. It also demands conformity with a set of “everybody does it” behaviours. A better approach would be “unique intelligence”, which is also very close to a tautology, but at least of use to individuals as a reference point. Every human being is unique. There aren’t any others. Why, then, the difficulty in simply acknowledging the inevitable differences? Even within yourself?

This is an off the rack world. It’s now truly pathetic. The tedious, grindingly banal and avoidable crap is spewed out like some omni-vomit. What right does this failed catalogue of an El Cheapo “civilization” have to dictate anything to anyone? Do you take orders from a Twinkie? You might as well.

Paul Wallis books, sydney media jam

This book is all about creative ideas. Nobody has yet died of reading it, but it’s a pretty tough call for those not familiar with working with ideas. “Passive voice”, eh?


It’s also a type of life experience pollution. From the staggeringly no-fun conveyor belt of what is now pseudo-childhood through the cement bags nailed to the head of teenage life, it just gets worse. Every damn pile of external garbage will be piled in to the storage zone, vaguely remembered for decades after.

The 20s throw people in to the ridiculous vacuum of careers and mindless acquisition. If you’re incredibly lucky, you may have a good relationship to share the insanity with. The 30s make it worse and often very hard to manage. You hit the 40s, in which Stone Age people were virtual athletes, and modern humans are train wrecks with life’s luggage piling up. And so on.


How could this substandard Rube Goldberg existence possibly work at all? There’s no room in people’s lives for themselves, their talents, or their individuality. You get crowded out of yourself, in effect.

Looking for something? Try your mind.

Pavlov’s dog had it easy. Humans have thousands of bells ringing all the time. Each bell generates a reaction, usually a conditioned reflex which is barely conscious. The reflexes can be wrong. They may relate to something which is truly unthinking. The human mind barely gets a chance to assess and evolve its own perspectives on these micro-dominoes happening all the time.

The fact is that people work better on their own terms. For over a decade now, I’ve been saying “Fit jobs to people, not people to jobs”. The same applies to the mind.

The human mind, if it ever gets a chance to get out of the bassinet before being swamped by ennui and mundane crap, can do better. A lot better.

Imagine a genuinely rational response to anything:

  • Do I like it?
  • Do I want to avoid it?
  • Is there a better way?
  • Does it need to be done at all?
  • What are the better things to do?

These aren’t material values, although they often transfer to physical acts. The fact is that most people’s lives are governed by the avoidable and the unavoidable. The unavoidable, however, is often inexcusable. It’s something you don’t want to do, be with, associate with, etc.

If your mind could get a word in edgewise, the advice about the unavoidable would be very straightforward: Forget it, I hate it. I’ve got better things to do and see. This advice would be backed up with genuine loathing, disgust, and quite reasonable disdain.

Now – Imagine 7.6 billion humans doing things they don’t want to do, in an environment where their minds are screaming for release. Fun place to be, eh? Stress through the roof, neuroses, wars, greed, et al of Nothing Land.

This is where “unique intelligence” can do a lot. Fortunately, the real inner person in everyone is strictly DIY. Nobody else has that frame of reference. There are ways out. As many ways as there are people.

Start a de-cluttering exercise, beginning with every damn thing you’ve always hated and despised. Respect yourself. If you want to believe in anything, start with yourself. It’s far better to believe in something you know, trust and understand. You’ll be a lot happier, and a lot more independent… And nobody can stop you.


The dying religions and their rotting corpses


Paul Wallis, Sydney Media Jam CO2I don’t usually knock religions. I know that for millions of people living in poverty and unbelievable squalor, religion gives them the only hope they have. I have to respect that. On that basis is this article written.

The utter betrayal of humanity by its religions is no minor thing. The fanatics, the pedophiles, the corruption and the total failure of religions to achieve their missions are inexcusable. Like politics, religion is now a simple executive task for plodders, a corporate business with no redeeming features. That’s not good enough.

The Abrahamic religions, Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, no longer represent anything but political power. Communities live in misery. The message they’re given is nothing but excuses to hate. Spiritual life is the mere recital of doggerel, and the demand for money.

The greatest betrayal of religion

The greatest betrayal is simple enough –  The hope is given of a better existence. The fact is given of unredeemed poverty, tyrannical conformity. With this obscenity comes an ugliness of small, petty minds unworthy to mention any god, let alone claim to be experts.

Beliefs are supposed to mean something. In the Golden Age of Meaninglessness, you get a brochure, not a meaningful belief.

Cowering behind scriptures, the religions spread their hate and filthy horrors in the material world. Ancient hatreds, thousands of years old in some cases, infest the world. The resulting spiritual cowardice of the religions is extraordinary. No issue is permitted to intrude on this festival of failure, whether it’s the total mismanagement of human affairs or the hideous, poisoned world in which humanity exists.

If the original gods have gone, the gods of greed, crime, malice and the Great God of Endless Excuses remain. Tell the Devil he’s out of a job; the religions have done what no incarnation of evil could ever do. Those who live in this world need no hell, no Purgatory, and certainly no more smug fools making life worse every second of every day.

The history of religions as actual arguments and practice is baffling:

  • The Christian idea of “man has no free will” is a case in point. If that were the case, is god a mere cheat sheet? If everything is preordained, what is the point of it? How do be fruitful and multiply apply to serial abuses by the clergy? Is anything really being done about it? No.
  • Islam was at one point the most progressive, enlightened religion in the world. More actual progress in the sciences was achieved by the original Islamic civilization than perhaps any other than the Chinese. Now, it’s at war with itself and the world, based on truly ancient hatreds, money, and current power politics.
  • Judaism was the foundation of the monotheistic religions. It has an unmatched record of genuine scholarship. Now, it seems dogmatic and insular. How are scholarship and dogmatic insularity reconciled? Not well, it seems. Even with good reasons in the course of history, Judaism of all religions should know that scholarship and dodging real issues with scriptural conveniences can’t work.

The religions can’t have it both ways. You’re given the privilege of teaching, and you start wars? You persecute the students, and only slavishly reciting the messages of hate permits them to graduate? This isn’t religion; it’s incompetence at best, blatant hypocrisy on average, and genocide at worst.

How many damn fools does it take to find a god? Far too many, apparently. Even the basics are ignored. The only reason religions have lasted so long in their hypocritically righteous stupor is by a curious, if appropriate, fact. Religions have survived not by their official pomposity, but by the work of their people who are rarely acknowledged, or more often ruined by their work.

In South America, the first to raise the issue of the slaughter and extermination of the natives was a Jesuit. Yes, a Jesuit, supposedly one of the most dogmatic, ferociously conventional forms of Catholicism. This poor man simply told the truth. Was he thanked? Hardly. Not for about 300 years, when modern history caught up with the facts.

We had a friend who was a refugee from communist Hungary. He wanted to practice his religion. When he came to Australia, he was astonished. In his home town, the priests were actual social workers, the real Christianity of the dim and misunderstood European past. He went back to communist Hungary, rather than worship in Australia. All he could see were priests going through the motions; there was no Christianity as he understood it.

There are endless stories of religion failing to live up to its tasks. The religions are dying of themselves. They’ve polluted themselves with the very thing they were supposed to cure. When the Romans became Christianized, there was an exchange of values. The Christians became Romanized. The most corrupt, venal society passed on its genes to those least able to understand them, the (relatively) simple Christians practicing their then much less complex faith.

The great betrayals of religion

Paul Wallis books, sydney media jam

This book is all about creative ideas. Nobody has yet died of reading it, but it’s a pretty tough call for those not familiar with working with ideas. “Passive voice”, eh?

The pattern has repeated often enough. Martin Luther went to Rome, went back to Germany, and planted the Reformation in the minds of Europeans based on the corruption of Rome as he saw it. The Inquisition created its own worst enemies out of its centuries of injustice. The net effect of the two religious forces was a century of war.

There is not, and never has been, any Scripture which condones injustice. Injustice is a plague on this world which everyone knows all too well.

There is no Scripture which condones abuse of believers. How many believers of different religions are abused on a daily basis, either by deprivation of needs or actual physical abuse? Hundreds of millions, directly or indirectly.

There is no Scripture which permits the abuse of children. Now pedophiles are betraying the children of worshippers, and the churches cringe behind lawyers, rather than addressing an actual issue. This is now discovered to be a universal problem with many religions.

Jesus, Mohamed and Moses were opponents of tyranny, physical and spiritual. Now their religions support tyranny, act corruptly, uphold the miseries of human life, and demand respect? It’s not likely to be forthcoming. The message of hate is failing.

Perhaps fittingly the religions also betray themselves. It’s hard to imagine any more thorough way of bringing religion in to disrepute than the usual evasive business of every religion every day.

Where and when does it end? Soon enough, apparently. The religions are losing their believers, and their practitioners. There is no longer a use for beliefs which aren’t even practiced by their most fanatical adherents.

Maybe the hope which all these people have will come true. If so, it won’t be as the result of the maniacal hatreds promoted by the religions. It won’t be because some simpering coward in a cassock refused to see the truth. It won’t be because some damn animal uses god as excuse for atrocities.

The hope will come from recognition of the irreconcilable differences between the true messages of the religions and the vermin who pervert those messages. When the hopeful leave the rotting corpses of the religions and simply pursue their hopes, the religions, and their obscenities, will be truly dead.




The problems get bigger and the minds keep getting smaller


Paul Wallis, Sydney Media Jam CO2When you think of all the possibilities for human advancement in to a species almost worth calling intelligent, it’s a grim picture. The minds managing the most crucial issues aren’t anywhere near the kind of thinking required to solve problems and get ahead of them.

We could have had Star Trek by now or something like it if it wasn’t for the seemingly endless reduction of everything to tinier and tinier fractions of the big ideas.  The big ideas are too big for the small minds.

I wish this was intellectual snobbery at work. Sadly, it’s not. It’s observation, and the observations truly stink. It’s easy to denigrate anyone or anything on the basis of what they don’t do. It’s far too easy for my tastes. It’s also off target.

For example:

Wanderlaugh, Paul Wallis books, Amazon

My books are set in the England of the immortals, not some dreary little off license. Wonder why? No.

The subject is ending world hunger. The result in terms of actual thinking is a catfight over everything but practical issues. I’ve been watching starving people all over the world for decades, and absolutely nothing has changed.

Meanwhile, imagine the thinking required to obstruct ending world hunger. It can’t be rational, it can’t be even coherent, yet people continue to starve for no good reason. Apply this lack of mental cohesion to:

  • Pollution
  • Health
  • Education
  • Housing
  • Quality of life
  • Unprecedented levels of parasitic crime
  • Human aspirations in general

This is why we have unheard-of levels of technology and unheard-of levels of imbecility at the same time. Nothing is impossible, and yet nothing, or near enough to nothing, gets done.

In the case of human hunger, you can have sophist/regressionist arguments like:

“Why end world hunger? There are too many people. Maybe starvation will make people breed more responsibly.” This load of self-satisfied/we’re so superior (you’re not) crap can actually be considered a rational viewpoint in some areas of gaga land. The fact that population pressures have never been addressed competently at all in most countries, of course, is neither mentioned nor factored in to existing situations. It’s the starving people’s fault.

And so on. Every single damn problem on Earth is fixable, and the chances of them getting fixed are exactly zip or less.

The problem that has to be fixed first is the total lack of objectivity. Small minds have small aspirations. To be head idiot is enough. To preside over adoring morons is sufficient. To do anything, however, is likely to be a very modest attempt at meeting a random selection of “achievements”, however banal.

The randomness with which problems are seen and addressed is one of the big issues. There’s no system. Imagine a type of scientific research where bits of a subject are researched on a “whatever” basis. Consider basic human daily issues. You get fabulous deodorants, but no broad spectrum disease prevention. You get driverless cars, but no working traffic system which maximises movement.

In this case the thinking isn’t just small minds doing small things badly. There’s no thinking at all. Even the idea of systemic progress and development barely exists outside science fiction. The theory and mechanics of them are there, in everything from town planning to economics, but not much really happens.

Paul Wallis books, sydney media jam

This book is all about creative ideas. Nobody has yet died of reading it, but it’s a pretty tough call for those not familiar with working with ideas. “Passive voice”, eh?

Humanity just blunders on through a maze of avoidable disasters, and the thinking is no more advanced than the next election or next funding episode. The problems have become gigantic in direct proportion to the smallness of the minds supposedly there to solve them.

The lack of trust in government is based on this observation. Globally, most governments are despised with a contempt they thoroughly deserve.  Those who do nothing/have done nothing aren’t expected to do much. In fact, merely saying that you’ll do something is enough to give you far more credibility than you deserve.

Why such small minds?

It’s interesting, if infuriating, to note that in the past small-mindedness was seen as such. Now, it’s pretty normal. What has happened in the last 100 years or so to cause this degeneration of human thinking in to a slopfest of mediocrity?

A theory:

Environmental factors: If people are raised in a bland, sterile old kitchen sink environment like most cities, their perceptions are based on looking at very dull, unimaginative things. This lack of environmental stimulus has to have some effect, and very low levels of thinking are pretty predictable.

Life models: In the past you could discover a new world. Now, you can discover a new fast food chain. Again, no challenges, no stimuli, no thinking.

A life based on trivia and intrusive problems: The change from self-motivation to force-fed, unspeakably dull lives of paying bills and dodging bullets of various kinds is very mentally time consuming. How brilliant are you supposed to be, if your next phone bill is towering over the horizon, forcing you to stop thinking about everything else.

Half-arse social models: You could be forgiven for thinking that everything is a shop window. The two dimensional nature of human life is basically a commercial. That’s supposed to create a functional society? No. It’s supposed to create the image of a society which has never existed, like a cheap visual teddy bear. There’s no life and commitment to anything in the real society, just a collection of meaningless selfies.

The illusion of personal advancement: Personal advancement has de-evolved in to a collection of possessions and status role playing. The actual people usually aren’t particularly advanced, or even interesting. They’ve been promoted from plodders to paragons, and their thinking is still that of plodders. As people, they haven’t advanced at all; they’ve simply become more smug and insular about the artificial exterior image of themselves. Add to this the Pecking Order of Peasants/ Right to Patronize ingrained in every status promotion, and you get boring, boorish bullshit artists banging their tin drums of the few thoughts they can understand themselves.

The illusion of wealth: Let’s not denigrate wealth for being wealth. It is what it is. Wealth is fun, if you happen to have it. It’s an escape from the problems lack of wealth causes, as the old saying goes. It’s also a sort of insidious personal hallucination. It doesn’t make you somebody else. Your mind, lucky you, is the same accumulation of whatever put your personality together. You can be a billionaire outside, and a pauper inside. No amount of money cures emotional, intellectual, or any other kind of internal poverty. Quite the opposite; you have to hide outside yourself to avoid the issues. You may be the life of the party; too bad about the corpse inside, eh?

(Can’t resist quoting one of my favorite stories: Nathan Rothschild had a furious visitor, a Lord Something, who barged in to his office and demanded to speak with him. Rothschild told him to take a chair, he’d be with him in a minute. Lord Something exploded and asked if Rothschild knew who he was. Rothschild said, “Take two chairs.” A good working example of what I mean.)

Inferior quality insanity: Insanity used to be interesting. Now it’s just another middle class trade. It’s predictable, if ugly, dull, if noisy. The small minds don’t even go insane with any great level of gusto or achievement. Some minds benefit from the spark of stimulus that makes them brilliant. Small minds don’t. They simply become more passionate about very trivial, very boring, things. They don’t even create their own insanity; they copy it from something else. How else do you go insane and become fanatical about tired old ideas, religions, pedantic absurdities, and theories about the sewer of hideous non-facts that make up modern life?

Not all that sorry to take a little time to build a case, but this is the real killer scenario in the saga of small minds vs problems:

Real achievement is based on real thinking. The progress from bashing rocks together to electronics and gene management is based on that process.

To advance, humanity needs people who can do that thinking. There’s no future in thinking which only goes backwards or sideways. Non-progressive thinking simply stirs up the existing sewage.

Small minds can’t, and won’t, handle big ideas. They don’t have the range or the capacity to even understand the macro issues, let alone work on them. The small thinking is more likely to run away than to deal with issues. (See the last 30 years for details.) They’re scared of the big problems and frightened of the responsibilities.

Regression always totally fails. There are countless examples throughout modern and ancient history of small-minded attempts to turn back the clock and oversimplify to the point of madness the most complex situations. None of the regressive societies has ever survived. Tyranny, maniacal fanaticism, and all the clichés of the past, have died out in a flurry of failures.

The moral of the story is simple enough: Find the minds that can solve the problems, and preferably get ahead of the problems. Stop looking for obliging idiots and start looking for thinkers. No amount of fake news, fake people and fake logic can solve what’s coming.

Paul Wallis, Sydney Media Jam, Paul Wallis books

Users please note: Amazon A-store is being discontinued by Amazon in July 2017. Some graphic image links on this blog for older articles may not work.