A sad day for all
-
The city of Dallas, still reeling from its own recent tragedy, shone red, white and blue Thursday night in solidarity with victims of the massacre in Nice, France.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dallas-solidarity-nice_us_578856a3e4b08608d333f285?section=
-
Yes James. Indeed a say day for humanity.
I have just learned on the massacre and after looking at some of the images feel quite sickened.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3691019/Several-people-injured-truck-crashes-crowd-Bastille-Day-celebrations-Nice.html -
It's really hard to imagine what they are going through right now. I'm afraid they fear there is nothing they can do about that constant targeting. It's painful to hear that they are being taken advantage of that easily.
-
Throughout the years many tens of thousands of innocents have died in the name of patriotism, nationalism, freedom, religion, money et al...
A 'war' of any kind is just organized theft - be it of land, property, minds or life.
Any rational human being who can chant, 'God is great",' as you do something like this, is more than doubly moronic.
He was clearly deluded, or brain-washed.If there is a god, then surely 'he' will NOT be at all pleased with the perpetrator's actions - which go against almost every mainstream religious or basic ethical code.
But if god is in any way pleased with the perpetrator's actions, then that is most surely a god who is not worthy of rational 'worship' - and should be eschewed.
Alternatively, if there is no god at all, then their entire action is futile in respect of any 'favor' it might attract to them in a supposed after-life.
But however, in any case, their action might foment hatred and division - and to me that's obviously what these guys [like many before them] wish for.
It has nothing to do with religion, ethnicity, race, color etc - it has all to do with gaining power.We [our leaders especially] need to maintain a firm resolve.
We must do something - whatever that is [suggestions welcome...]To quote Edmund Burke, the 18th century Irish politician:
@unknownuser said:
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
-
TIG's post reminds me of Imagine. A live John Lennon version was circulating on FB this week.
-
@tig said:
Throughout the years many tens of thousands of innocents have died in the name of patriotism, nationalism, freedom, religion, money et al...
A 'war' of any kind is just organized theft - be it of land, property, minds or life.
Any rational human being who can chant, 'God is great",' as you do something like this, is more than doubly moronic.
He was clearly deluded, or brain-washed.If there is a god, then surely 'he' will NOT be at all pleased with the perpetrator's actions - which go against almost every mainstream religious or basic ethical code.
But if god is in any way pleased with the perpetrator's actions, then that is most surely a god who is not worthy of rational 'worship' - and should be eschewed.
Alternatively, if there is no god at all, then their entire action is futile in respect of any 'favor' it might attract to them in a supposed after-life.
But however, in any case, their action might foment hatred and division - and to me that's obviously what these guys [like many before them] wish for.
It has nothing to do with religion, ethnicity, race, color etc - it has all to do with gaining power.We [our leaders especially] need to maintain a firm resolve.
We must do something - whatever that is [suggestions welcome...]To quote Edmund Burke, the 18th century Irish politician:
@unknownuser said:
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
TIG,
You say, "We [our leaders especially] need to maintain a firm resolve". I think this might well be the root of our problems. We vote in clowns under a so called Representative Democracy system whereby these clowns are bought and paid for by corporate power where they kowtow to these entities for the duration of their term in power.
The only way I can see to stop this madness is for we the electorate to rule ourselves using the Direct Democracy system
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy.Direct Democracy may not be a perfect system, probably no perfect system exists but at least with Direct Democracy the electorate have an ongoing recourse to enforce their initial wishes at the time of the election.
Does anyone think that Bush if he had to call a people's referendum in the USA before bombing Iraq he would have got the 'go ahead' from the USA electorate? I somehow doubt it.
The argument put forward against Direct Democracy by career politicians is that government would grind to a halt. This probably would have been the situation before the age of instant communication but today citizens can exercise their franchise with a simple press of their index finger on their mobile phones.
The bottom line for me is that I want be be fully involved in my country's governance on an ongoing basis not once every 4 or 5 years. I have great faith in the ability of the 'audience' to get reach the correct decision at least 90%+ of the time. http://www.howtogetonanytvgameshow.com/who-wants-to-a-millionaire/what-is-the-success-rate-of-ask-the-audience-on-who-wants-to-b-e-a-millionaire-in-non-us-countries
A simple way to look at it might be to compare your country to a limited company. The shareholders vote for a Company Chairman and Company Directors at an AGM (annual general meeting), they in turn employ managers to run the company from day to day.
If the shareholders see that things are going against their wishes they have the power to get rid or the directors and replace them with directors that puts the train back on track via a snap EGM (extraordinary general meeting).
BTW, the words 'Direct Democracy' frightens the shit out of career politicians. Surely that should be reason enough to push for and adopt it.
-
My problem is that there appears to be a 'ruling' class. Basically a group of like minded thieves basically. When we elect a representative for our particular area, we are said to be electing an individual to represent US. Bottom line though is that these people for the most part will represent the party they are in and that is a fact I am uncomfortable with. Our representative SHOULD do just that, defend the rights of the electorate but they do not. I requested help from the local MP MR FabricHunt. His response when I asked for help to get treatment from the NHS, "It is not in MY best interests to represent you". The party chairman and the ombudsman stated that "It is entirely the choice of the sitting mp to represent or not and their decision is final". No matter who we elect, we have NO chance if helping US embarrasses the government or the party.
-
@mike lucey said:
once every 4 or 5 years.
That is basically what people want... A despotic regime that frees their minds and labour from taking the matters into their hands.
@mike amos said:
My problem is that there appears to be a 'ruling' class. Basically a group of like minded thieves basically.
We choose these people so they can choose for us and we choose to believe they will choose to defend us.
@mike lucey said:
The argument put forward against Direct Democracy by career politicians is that government would grind to a halt. This probably would have been the situation before the age of instant communication but today citizens can exercise their franchise with a simple press of their index finger on their mobile phones.
There are even more things that can be thrown at people that defend direct democracy. Examples:
- If you could vote by mobile phone/online, what if your identity is stolen, hacked, pirated?
- If you put matters into the hands of people do you trust the wisdom of masses of people wich have not the formal education of well trained politicians (one of the arguments of defenders of monarchy)
- What about the minorities rights? (wich is exactly what democracy is there to defend in what politicians is concerned)
There are more but I really think every one of the arguments can be rebated. All except one:
What about the influence of the media? If power shifts sides from politicians to the people as true democracy means, then people who controld the mind of the people are the new rules: This means mass media, wich get's me really scared as they, without votes, can influence the world way of thinking right now, with much greater efficacy than politicians do.
Overall though, I believe there's only 2 things that can grant us freedom and peace, and those things can't be ruled: they're tolerance and culture.
Unfortunatelly there's not much of both in the world.
-
@jql said:
- If you could vote by mobile phone/online, what if your identity is stolen, hacked, pirated?
JQL,
I often hear arguments about voting by phone / online. These arguments are normally put forward by politicians. My answer is simply that I do a lot of transactions via the phone and online. I bank online, I pay bills online I book services online and I buy products online. Yes, my identity could be hacked and my bank account could be cleaned out but I think there is probably more chance of my house being broken into.
If I were to regularly vote in referendums a simple double check system would be to publish the votes using a reference code. The voter can then look up their reference code and be sure that their vote is per their wishes.
@jql said:
- If you put matters into the hands of people do you trust the wisdom of masses of people which have not the formal education of well trained politicians (one of the arguments of defenders of monarchy)
I feel that there is far more expertise on all subjects in the mass population when compared to politicians. Currently the two leading politicians in Ireland are ex-school teachers ..... I rest my case.
@jql said:
- What about the minorities rights? (which is exactly what democracy is there to defend in what politicians is concerned)
Its the overall population of countries that take care of the minority groups in the country. Current day politicians only seem to be interested in taking care of the bankers!
@jql said:
There are more but I really think every one of the arguments can be rebated. All except one:
What about the influence of the media? If power shifts sides from politicians to the people as true democracy means, then people who controlled the mind of the people are the new rules: This means mass media, which get's me really scared as they, without votes, can influence the world way of thinking right now, with much greater efficacy than politicians do.
When you say, "If power shifts sides from politicians to the people", I think you may be missing my point. 'Power' should remain with the 'People' at all times. There should be no difference in politicians aims the aims of the 'People'.
After all they are suppose the be serving the People.I don't worry too much about the influence of the (establishment) media, newspapers, state controller TV / radio and big TV networks. The Net has countered this with alternative 'information givers' also these sites offer the readers the ability to have their say also.
@jql said:
Overall though, I believe there's only 2 things that can grant us freedom and peace, and those things can't be ruled: they're tolerance and culture.
Unfortunately there's not much of both in the world.
I agree that tolerance is important but there are times when we have to stand up and be counted through force if need be.
Culture is also important but the 'new culture' of Corporate Power I see encompassing the World is not a culture I would embrace.
Its easy to moan and groan, as I am doing here. So here is what I propose for my neck of the woods.
a. Eliminate the Political Party System. As elected politicians serve the Party before their electorate.
b. In Ireland we have 15 Ministers, Finance, Health, Social Protection, Industry etc etc. I would like to see individuals putting themselves forward for elections. The best man / woman would be elected on their policies / abilities.
c. As these 15 individually elected Ministers sit around the Government Table and come up with compromise policies as would have to be the case they then put the various options to the people for final approval via referendums. If an agreed number of citizens want a further voting options put on the table to be put before the People this should be implemented also.
d. Each Minister would be required to get approval of over 50% of the electorate each year in order to hold the post. If he /she is deemed 'not performing' as per their initial policies they get kicked out and a new person, possibly the runner up in the initial election take over the reins.
JQL, 'Group Knowledge' has very high correct answer / decision rates and the bigger the group the more times it hits on the correct answer / decision.
I believe we now have the technology to use the knowledge / ability of the total electorate and should be doing now. Politicians and the People should be working in partnership on an ongoing basis.
-
Mike,
I think you missed the fundamental point that I'm agreeing with you, apart from that, the only aspect we differ is that:
-
I don't believe the power is in the people, though the people might still believe it. The power isn't even in polititians imho, it's in finance. People who have power and use it for other then their interests are scarce;
-
I am truly afraid of mass media and the way it flattens opinions and manipulates things and I don't believe it's easy to find real information in the internet or anywhere else.
-
Culture is the most important aspect as it's only through culture that you can filter information and decide on what to do with respect to your context. Unfortunatelly the culture your talking about is not true culture as true culture is about creation not exploitation.
I agree with everything else and my fake arguments of the last post are nicelly answered by yourself.
-
-
@jql said:
Mike,
- I don't believe the power is in the people, though the people might still believe it. The power isn't even in politicians imho, it's in finance. People who have power and use it for other then their interests are scarce;
Its good to debate and question the status quo. To elaborate a little further on what I believe to be the situation.
Yes, the power is currently not in the hands of 'We The People' as we have handed it over to the Central Bankers via facilitating politicians. However, the ultimate ownership of power is 'The People'. They must they retake same by whatever means is needed to achieve this objective. This has been done in the past in many countries, the most famous being the French Revelation where a King parted company with his head.
The 'amusing' thing about the Central Banker's is that they will eventually through their unregulated greed cause the financial system to implode. I think we are seeing the beginning of this currently, Venezuela with inflation of target to hit 1600% soon.
Revolution: The Risk/Reward Ratio
https://goldsilver.com/news/revolution-the-risk-reward-ratio/@jql said:
- I am truly afraid of mass media and the way it flattens opinions and manipulates things and I don't believe it's easy to find real information in the internet or anywhere else.
The mass media which is under the control of the Central Bankers keeps the common man placid but if push comes the shove I feel it will not be able to placate the common man as he will eventually realise he is being fed BS.
@jql said:
- Culture is the most important aspect as it's only through culture that you can filter information and decide on what to do with respect to your context. Unfortunately the culture your talking about is not true culture as true culture is about creation not exploitation.
There is a natural tendency for man to look after the common interests of his neighbours. If they are doing well, he in turn will do well. Currently this is not happening when he see 1% of the World population owning and controlling 50% of the World's wealth. The penny will drop eventually and natural 'culture' will become the norm ..... I hope!
The top 1% now owns half the world's wealth
http://fortune.com/2015/10/14/1-percent-global-wealth-credit-suisse/@jql said:
I agree with everything else and my fake arguments of the last post are nicely answered by yourself.
Thank you for the compliment. I have been studying the situation since the crash of 2008 as it has had a seriously detrimental effect on my finances. The quicker we get some form of proper regulation back into the financial system as it was prior the Reagan / Thatcher the quicker we will attain a fair and balanced society with the Central Banker's under some sort of controlled environment.
What does the parasite consume when he kills his host and cannot find another? Nothing as he dies also! This does not normally happen in the 'natural' World as hosts and parasites retain an equilibrium. The equilibrium between the 1% and the 99% is currently way out of balance.
-
"What does the parasite consume when he kills his host and cannot find another? Nothing as he dies also! This does not normally happen in the 'natural' World as hosts and parasites retain an equilibrium."
A perfect analogy.
-
I have to say, that for the first time in a long time I have come across a thread on the internet that actually makes me feel that are are still in existence some people with rational minds.
It is rare to even see a thread like this allowed to exist, for fear it may express an opinion that others may not agree upon.
And rarer still is it to see individuals exchanging ideas instead of hurling insults or myopic rhetoric.
I think this what our world needs more of... Places for reasonable people to rationally discuss and exchange ideas, no trendy social media or instant messages... They don't have to be like-minded, just willing to listen to one another.
Unfortunately, most of what is available is either flashy nonsense or places for people who think the same to ferment and harden their views.
Nothing will change as long as people only wish to hear their own voice, or take a simple way out.
Things must change, for the path this species has chosen is dangerous and unsustainable.
I know in my heart that technology and the Internet hold the potential for mankind to redeem itself, but it is up to honest and rational people to find that path before it is cut off by those unscrupulous individuals who's interests it would deny.
Change will come as it always does.
Change can come as catastrophe or an enlightened endeavor.
I hope that someone with the skills and resources can find a way for such a place to exist, to that reason get finally get a toehold over greed.
Thanks for giving me the hope that this may one day be possible. -
I think there are some fundamental ideas on quotes below that we all show on the most part of our lives and that are exactly what's keeping human kind behind in terms of undertanding each other and acting upon that:
@unknownuser said:
I hope that someone with the skills and resources can find a way for such a place to exist, to that reason get finally get a toehold over greed.
Thanks for giving me the hope that this may one day be possible.1 - People hope someone will come with a greater truth or a revelation so strong that it will solve all things. People tell us that each of our religion's central character held that truth.
The most dangerous statement of them all is that solution is always on someone else. This notion prevents us to take action. To command. But it is I that should be the solution! I am not willing though...
A few people thought differently... we all know their myths very well, or we think we do.
All those characters are dead and the mass media of religion manipulated their truth for ages, in different forms each age until they had their way and attained their objectives. Objectives wich were often (or always) far away from the original truth and became enfabulated truth and much closer to rules they could impose on people.
That's what I fear about mass media - It tells the "truth".
I don't believe in any god but I know they exist. I hate all religions and love all people therefore I love all gods.
@mike lucey said:
There is a natural tendency for man to look after the common interests of his neighbours. If they are doing well, he in turn will do well. Currently this is not happening when he see 1% of the World population owning and controlling 50% of the World's wealth. The penny will drop eventually and natural 'culture' will become the norm ..... I hope!
2 - The natural tendency is for man to protect himself. There's no other tendency in life.
A greater state of civilization will only be attained when humanity and every human being understands that only by guaranteeing that the other is as good as you are you can guarantee that you are as good as the other.
If you cause pain you will always fear pain, if you give love you will probably receive love though if you don't have confidence in your neighbour you will always be afraid of giving love and exposing yourself to pain.
Only by breaking this cycle and only when true understanding of the other arises will we aknowledge the need to that "un"natural tendency for man to look for his neightbours interests.
@mike lucey said:
Thank you for the compliment. I have been studying the situation since the crash of 2008 as it has had a seriously detrimental effect on my finances.
3 - You are proof of the above statement 2. When you needed to protect yourself your concern for the well being of the world was greater.
Truth is revolution only happens when every people of a group feels threatened by that group.
There are too many people with a confortable position so the revolution won't happen soon.
Also, we seem to still own the means to avoid risking our position. We won't act.
-
SketchUcation has always been a great place to bounce around thoughts and ideas and be assured that there would be constructive feedback.
As regards the state of the World currently when it comes to inequality I have some hope that because its now so easy for folks to fully see whats happening in all parts of the World it will not be too long before the masses shout 'STOP'.
The cloak and dagger, smoke and mirrors financial stuff that has been going on over the past 100 years is now plainly visible to anyone that takes the time to read and research the subject, just a little.
When sufficient numbers of people fully understand the corrupt financial system I think we may see a movement to rectifying matters.
-
"Our constitution does not copy the laws of neighbouring states; we are
rather a pattern to others than imitators ourselves. Its administration
favours the many instead of the few; this is why it is called a
democracy. If we look to the laws, they afford equal justice to all in
their private differences; if no social standing, advancement in public
life falls to reputation for capacity, class considerations not being
allowed to interfere with merit; nor again does poverty bar the way, if
a man is able to serve the state, he is not hindered by the obscurity of
his condition. The freedom which we enjoy in our government extends also
to our ordinary life. There, far from exercising a jealous surveillance
over each other, we do not feel called upon to be angry with our
neighbour for doing what he likes, or even to indulge in those injurious
looks which cannot fail to be offensive, although they inflict no
positive penalty. But all this ease in our private relations does not
make us lawless as citizens. Against this fear is our chief safeguard,
teaching us to obey the magistrates and the laws, particularly such as
regard the protection of the injured, whether they are actually on the
statute book, or belong to that code which, although unwritten, yet
cannot be broken without acknowledged disgrace.Thucydides
History of the Peloponnesian WarAbout democracy,
Advertisement