Alcohol

 

The DALI scale

(= Diyanath’s Alcohol Life Impact scale, of course)

 

………………………………………..      Quite      Partially       Partially     Quite

………………………………………….     true          true          untrue       untrue

1.  I can relax fully,

drink in hand or not                00           01              04             06

 

2.  I relax fully when

I have a drink in hand            03            02              01             00

 

3.  I relax fully only when

I have a drink in hand            08            06              02             00

 

4.  I relax fully when

I am tipsy/ quite drink            04           03              02            00

 

5.  I relax fully only when

I am tipsy/ quite drunk           10           08               04           00

 

6.  I enjoy events /am good

fun, drink in hand or not          00          01               04           06

 

7.  I come alive when

I have a drink in hand             03          02               01            00

 

8.  I come alive only with

drink in hand                          08           06              02            00

 

9.  I come alive when

I am tipsy/ quite drunk            04           03             02            00

 

10. I come alive only when

tipsy/ quite drunk                    10           08              04           00

 

 

Interpretation:

Should item 5 or 10 apply, it’s serious indeed:

alcohol hinders us badly – already.

3, 4, 8 or 9 being true

is also quite frightening.

 

If, on the other hand, 1 and 6 apply

we should strive to protect our unimpaired state.

 

A ‘quite true’

on 7 or 2

suggests some restriction

and should serve as warning.

 

 

And what does the total score indicate?

 

 

We have worked out

Without doubt

What a score of 16 means.

So you may do the rest     

 

Beware though,

if your full score

is anywhere more than 4

*****************************************************************

 19 Oct 2012

Negotiating with the alcohol trade

 A huge number of lives will be saved and an unimaginable amount of suffering eased, should the alcohol trade change its ways. There is much talk of the potential for good through voluntary agreements reached with big players controlling this business worldwide. But the results of the deals so far have been, we learn, below par. ‘A waste of time’, is the cry from those who’ve tried long and hard and failed. But why have these attempts not borne much fruit thus far?

 

Maybe the deals were sought by parties with no strong mandate to speak for the (global) public’s good? Or those chosen to speak for the trade weren’t properly picked? Who can really represent such a global giant, to discuss the business practices it will henceforth change? Board members, paid staff, shareholders or ‘experts’ engaged for the negotiation cannot really speak with authority on policy for next year. (Nor really can those they meet with to negotiate, such as those from health agencies or concerned interest groups, be sure they will be involved in following up on what’s agreed.)

 

Voluntarily agreements generally work when they reflect personal commitment. The parties concerned know very well that they can hold the other to account if one should cheat. An unspoken message when two people agree is that the cheat loses face. Even among regular cheats there’d be quite a few who’d find it hard to look in the eye the person they deceive. But with ‘representatives’ and ‘delegations’ it’s another matter altogether. A new spokesperson can always feel free to contest interpretation of earlier text agreed by some another colleague. To make things worse, the people who came when the voluntary deal was sealed may well have left the company by now. This is part of the problem with implementing voluntary codes agreed with mega-corporations of all kinds.

 

The alcohol trade is not the only commercial entity that is aware that it directly kills many of its customers. When discussions are held with trades, to minimize the harm they cause, the underlying sanctity given to human life still counts. That’s because the people who come, representing the trade, are still human persons. The corporation they negotiate on behalf of is also recognized as a person – but of a different kind. It’s a legal, though non-human person. Flesh and blood people are employed by the ‘higher’ non-human person.

 

Humanity, or some few humans, chose long ago to give life and human rights to corporations. A newly created sub-species, called corporations, was conferred rights hitherto enjoyed by living and breathing humans. People trying to persuade the alcohol trade to adopt kinder policies forget that the sub-species was not created quite in the human image. It was only provided legal existence and the power to undertake commerce. Armed with this dispensation, the corporations have taken us over and are steadily escaping effective human control.

To learn how we may partner the alcohol trade in a shared effort for the pubic good, we must first learn how human control can be re-exerted over corporate entities in general. This is difficult, for the corporation now uses humans rather than the other way around. Neither the shareholders, nor the staff, nor indeed governments or any other entity outside it, can influence its abstract core.  Humanity has no real means through which to question or change a corporation’s mode of existence.  Its immutability allows it to mould powerless employees, CEOs, directors and all, to conform to its vision; to use humans as it pleases and spit them out when it chooses, all the while ensuring that other humans get the blame.

 

So let’s face it. The human spirit can no longer reach a multinational corporation at its core.  This is primarily because there are no human owners.  There is only a diffuse and ever-changing collection of shareholders – and indeed staff.  The chief shareholders are in turn other corporate entities. So the corporation belongs to nobody or to humanity at large, to an abstraction.  These corporate entities are pseudo-beings ennobled through the conferment of human rights.  Those who, in their wisdom, gave independent existence and power to such bodies forgot to give them feelings and ethics. But all our negotiations rest finally on feelings and ethics.

 

We have to recapture and tame corporations.  But it may be simpler to kill them all off.  Corporations have already acquired enough life for us to feel squeamish about contemplating their destruction.  But humans have to be liberated, especially those controlled totally by corporations and held blindly in its thrall.  This requires only that we rescind all laws that give to corporations, companies and other such bodies the rights enjoyed by us.  It’s as simple as that. And then we can begin fruitful discussions with the new human owners of the alcohol trade, on how we may together reduce the harm caused globally by their product.

 

 

*****************************************************************

 

Other pages under this tab are

 

Pleasure and alcohol

Alcohol and us

Poverty and alcohol

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>