You're a good person SN.
Printable View
You're a good person SN.
This has opened up a whole other can of worms SN, but I'll take a crack at it.
I've always been, and forever shall be, a firm believer that nothing is forever in place, that if a company is corrupt through and through, it will eventually be taken down and something wholly better will take its place. What needs to happen, in order for this downfall is for free spirited and brave folks, such as yourself, to really get your voice out there and take a stand on issues you truly believe in. If you think McDonald's is horrible, then by all means stop going there and also do some research into your intentions so that you can back your position up entirely. To take it a step further, use the media, which if done correctly can be used solely for the spreading of ideas, and write an editorial about your beliefs. Circulate them and allow for the exchange of new and radical thoughts to begin to penetrate the world at large. It may start out as only just a few whispers in the shadows, but if what you say has truth to it, which I think it certainly does, it will resonate and grow.
Global natural disasters, in my opinion, make it easier for the world to take because there is no one who can be at fault, no good guy and bad guy situation. Nature is a force we cannot control and thus, for that brief instant, we are reduced to being human and not to trying to identify ourselves as something else in order to stand out, using status, power and the like to try and get ahead. Sure, it is human ambition which leads us to strive for the top, but we also have deep rooted compassion that can swell out when we see that no great responsibility is needed, and no great war needs to be fought, and thus we can just help without fearing being on the wrong side.
I fear, the great tragedies that occur globally mostly happen because of indifference and a lack of being responsible and self-aware. People suffer in Africa, but since it is such a tangled web of political red tape and corperate monopoly, it seems like just helping cannot answer the question. What needs to happen, I believe, is a drastic simplification of the world, not even in terms such as socialist, democrat, republican, but instead for us all to realize that we are all human beings first and foremost and we should help each other get by, regardless of the situation, who's at fault or the circumstances.
As for the situation as wealth, I feel that if used correctly and wisely, the wealthy can greatly alter the course of the world. If they give money to charity or use their clout to alter situations they believe in, perhaps there will be a drastic shift in how our world seems to spin. If you are born into a wealthy family, don't view it as a disgrace per se, but perhaps as an opportunity to change the world.
That being said, you don't need wealth or power to change the world, you need fresh ideas, trust, compassion, honor and an open mind as well as a potentially thick skin because criticism is usually the first step toward change and if you cannot hold out long enough, you'll be swept away before you can do any good. Believe in yourself, find people who strengthen you and strengthen them in return. We are the generation of hope and new ideas I believe, and we will fix this world as best we can if we work together and don't get too discouraged too soon.
Take care all.
You know what sucks? To have Firefox crash while you write a very long post. Anyway, leaving all the historical crap to a side, I believe it is preety complicated to fight against the alienating construction done in modern society. I mean, look at all the advertisments everywhere, it's like the perfect way to create a society of mindless zombies. And most of the people I know that don't like society, do not really seem to be ready to change it, because they have dogmatic ideas being blindly followed. How can someone attempt to change the world into something different when most of the people who wish so are a group of dogmatic sheep? "Hey, look, Marx said that, it has to be right". Argh.
Wow, look, I just made a simplified version of a long post full of pedantic quotes from German Romanticism.
Anyway, as I was typing before Firefox crashed, I do know people who attempt to deliver the message. Songwriters, for example. Here in Spain we have quite a variety of songwriters, and well, most of the ones I know never really got to deliver much of the message because, when getting into the market, they didn't sell much for not being commercial. Of course, not like the companies promoted them. Well, I know one who has been succesful, mainly because he has been singing since the sixties, and those where different times, with different music. I mean, just compare The Beatles to Britney Spears. By the way, in case you are interested or curious, here are some songs by a Spanish songwriter that never sold much, but is very good.Oh, and it's a legal link, actually, it's from the singer's official site. I recommend "todo_eres_tu.zip", "auxi_va.zip" and "rapto.zip" (I can translate the lyrics, if someone likes them).
But well, I am starting to get off topic. I just wonder if there is a way to communicate such a thing. Of course, many have done it, but they are oftenly considered to be in some superior orb or something. Take Hölderlin, for example. How many people have read Hölderlin? He is one of my favourite thinkers. Or a better known example...Marx. OK; how many people have ACTUALLY read Marx? Same thing. If you try to make an intellectual revolution, be ready to be read by intellectuals.
For me, it would be great to have people like Noam Chomsky to be known by the average person, something beyond student discussions.
Of course, then you have someone who has gotten to be known, who is Michael Moore. But to be quite frank, he does deliver the message, yet also gets sensationalistic, wich is a double bladed weapon: you do deliver the message and people listen to it, but it looses credibility with the way it is exposed.
they said that there could be after shocks for a week a month or even a year that could kill alot more people.did you know that we are fighting pretty close over seas to mount armageddonQuote:
There are rumours going around my neighborhood that it is the beginning of the tribulation, which is the Christian phropesy (Don't know if I spelled it right) of the end of the world and where Christ comes back.
Not really, Har Megiddo is in northern Israel. Anyway, Megiddo and the surrounding Esdraelon plains have been an important military location for most of recorded history. It's been estimated that more battles have been fought at Megiddo than any place in the world. In fact, the first recorded battle in history (of course there were ones prior, but no records exist) took place there around 1460 BC, when Pharoh Thutmose III attacked the Canaanite fortress there.
You're right. We can't prevent tsunamis from happening, but we could have prevented all of the above.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marick
[q=Resha][qq=me]Don't trust the Indian government - they've promised 550 million, but the last time a big natural disaster hit, they mismanaged international relief funds big time, and nearly got Vajpayee kicked out of office instead of voted out.[/qq]You seem down on them. But this time there won't be any international relief funds; they're not accepting any (yet). They said that they have enough resources, and then some to give as aid, too.[/q]
Things look different when you've been a citizen. Have you been a citizen? I didn't think so.
At least international response is so big this time they're not going to have a chance to fsck things up. And with a new administration this time around, who knows - they just might do their job. It was the poor majority who voted them in, after all.
About the whole society gig. The only practical manner by which one can change society is through manipulating the rules of the existing infrastructure already in place. The most effective manner is simply pressing "reset", but that is an option not really available to anyone. All the governments in place are really nothing more than successful conspiracies by a handful of people to maintain regional power. If you can manage a conspiracy of people such that they all obtain high level positions in several world governments, only then can you actually begin to change the way society works on a scale that you seem to be hoping for. It is simple to change the world and its future, but it is difficult to alter society and its future.
And use Notepad next time. ;)
"About the whole society gig. The only practical manner by which one can change society is through manipulating the rules of the existing infrastructure already in place. The most effective manner is simply pressing "reset", but that is an option not really available to anyone. All the governments in place are really nothing more than successful conspiracies by a handful of people to maintain regional power. If you can manage a conspiracy of people such that they all obtain high level positions in several world governments, only then can you actually begin to change the way society works on a scale that you seem to be hoping for. It is simple to change the world and its future, but it is difficult to alter society and its future."
I disagree with you there, but that's the beauty of debate, the differences of opinion can be more easily teased out.
I've always believed and will continue to do so, that each person has a profound influence on the way society works and if just one person decides that they want to alter it, even slightly, it is well within their power to do so. Though we have a finite lifespan, we all possess an almost limitless wealth of potential and an infinite imagination to create new ideas that can drastically change things up. I was watching a 60 Minutes piece on the two young men who created "Google" and after watching that believed even more that if you have the means, put forth the effort and are given the opportunity, anyone can change society. The question though is, for better or worse?
To get back on topic, I read in several recent articles in Time Magazine, The New Yorker, The Houston Chronicle, and The NY Times that if America reduced its military funding by even 5% and used those funds to increase aid abroad, we'd produce something close at a half billion dollars in relief for those hit hardest by this disaster, by AIDS in Africa, and even for homeless in Middle East and Asia. Make you think, what if we just tried it?
Take care all.
D----,
I'm not sure we disagree as much as you think - I think change is possible, and that it takes very few people or hours to do so. Come to think of it, I suppose you could change society simply by controlling the appropriate channels - rather than governments, control media outlets instead. I didn't say that earlier. Are you at odds with my proposed methods for such change, then? I take it from your 60 Minutes Google citation that is the case...
It's a known fact that if you cut a sliver off the defense budget, we'd end up with a crapton of money. Defense spending in the Bush era is what erased the budget surplus to begin with. That being said, I doubt it will be implemented. I'm not a government expert, but is there a way to force a popular vote on such an issue?
I suppose it's just a difference in phrasing things. I believe people can change anything, themselves, the world, the future, society itself, while from your posts I sensed that you agreed with that except for the society bit. I posted the little thing about "Google" because they fundementally changed the way society surfs the net and through my eyes, anyone can do that. That's the difference I gather, but we're more together than in disagreement to be sure.
I'm not sure if you can ask for a vote on how the government works directly, but I believe we can petition our local Senate or House of Rep member with these thoughts and that they can in turn sign a petition, but of course, that hinges on whether your Congressperson shares your ideas in the first place. There are probably other ways to go about it as well, but that's the quickest route to the best of my knowledge, though it's none too quick in actuality either.
Otherwise, we can just hope that the government decides to do this itself, or else come next election, we as a country realize that we must make a batter effort abroad or else run the risk of further alienation.
Take care all.
ya i dont care they are not the enemy we should not be fiting them they are just hcinese ppl so why is US goverment sending troops to fite them? they just made a flood i dont care we should be fiting the terrerists!
We're not fighting them. They're more than just Chinese people. No troops were sent to fight. They didn't make the flood, nature did. This changed nothing in the current war.
I don't quite understand your post Sephy.
Troops are being sent to give aid and help salvage the situation after this natural disaster, not to fight in any conflict, at least to the best of my knowledge.
Take care all.
ya but i dont care what have the chinese ppl done for me oh nothing so let them die their are to many of them anyways and now they all die so it is good more food for me!!
I'm going to give the advice that good ol Mom gave us all at one time or another: Just ignore him. Your better off that way. :)