OT: Much of our culture is based upon ...

[Randallw]

It is not my intent to offend, and generally I keep my views to my self, but I'm not into self censorship, and after all the topic was already started. Please excuse me if I wander off point.

At the risk of sounding like a socialist I believe the problem is the capitalist mentality. Now I despise May day protestors who are just a bunch of anarchists looking for an excuse to smash things, hiding behind their bandanas in a crowd of naive environmentalists, but also I despise rampant consumerism. If I go shopping I am disgusted at the number of different brands. We do not need 20 different brands of Cornflakes, or dozens of brands of cheese. I see no need to destroy nature needlessly but also I am not a eco nut. If it serves humanity to tear down the forest for a meaningful purpose I could care less about nature. Should, in my lifetime, I leave earth I wouldn't even give it a second look back. This just happens to be a quirk of mine. There is a word for what I see as meaningless attachment to something that has fulfilled its use. The idea is so foreign to me I tell the truth when I say I can never, and I mean never, remember what the word is. I think it starts with sym, but I can simply never remember what it is.

Just this afternoon something about capitalism got to me. I can't say what it was, my memory stinks, but I remember it was an epiphany at what damage Capitalism/Consumerism, does. I don't have a mobile phone (cell phone), I don't have an Ipod, or any of those other wifi things. They are meaningless. I can't say I might not have such things as a mobile phone in future, but I have no need for them at the moment. I never saw a need to buy a DvD player until I was given a $40 one for my birthday. I always knew the day would come I would have to get one but I imagined it would be once video tapes stopped being made.

I actually spend an astonishing amount of time being philosophical. I have mentioned to my family it is impossible for me to be bored as long as I can ponder philosophy in my head. It seems to me people in the modern world are not serious about doing what is necessary. People seem too preoccupied with what I see as "playing" through life. They want to get through life but are not interested in anything but playing along. It seems to be a a matter of making things as easy as possible but never actually doing anything that might be difficult and cause conflict. I foresee little opportunity I could actually carry out the ideas I have, and can even admit I myself am too lazy to do any better. In my mind knowing what needs to be done but not doing it is compatible. I just play along with everyone else in what I see as the social game.

Now I stated previously that I'm not Socialist, but I'll clarify that what I mean is Communist or Greeny. In my way I am Socialist but in the opposite to "Workers of the world unite". I don't believe the state should exist to serve the workers, but all people equally. Bit of a warning here I should point out, what sort of person uses terms like "The State" and "Order" To me Democracy is an outdated ancient greek ideal as abhorent as pederasty (Men and boys). The idea of having two major parties trying to curry favour, promising citizens little gifts so as to buy their vote instead of doing what is necessary is stupid. You have the party in office and the other is reduced to either doing the opposite of what the governemnt says because they're the "opposition" and so therefore must promise the opposite, or they claim "bipartisanship" because they know the topic at hand is dear to the public and would lose them votes otherwise. That's the cynic in me.

Apologies for throwing in the Iraq card, I'm on a roll (sort of like the rock in Raiders of the lost Ark), I'll be brief. What exactly is the problem with the war in Iraq? People claim US, and Australians like me, are being needlessly killed in Iraq. Didn't they free the Iraqis from Saddam, or is it that the Iraqi people are worth less than western lives. I'll grant you it seems not enough force was applied to ensure total victory, myself I believe in applying unstoppable force. Crush the problem with a sledgehammer and it won't be a problem. The activists appear to claim no US soldier should die to help Iraqis?, and others say it is a war to ensure oil supplies. Yeah ok, the west needs oil supplies. I won't say that was the reason, as opposed to freeing the Iraqis, but what exactly is wrong with that?. If your country needs a resource does it not make sense to pursue any means to ensure it. There are 2 reasons for any war, the economic reasons, resources, security, and the tainted idea of living space, and then there is the reason you make up so the people will follow you, like claiming another country launched a cowardly sneak attack after your government has been waging an undeclared economic war cutting off vital resources until the "enemy" has no choice but to fight in the open to ensure the resources they need. Or not telling am "ally" that someone is about to bomb their fleet because you need the ally to get involved, or secretly doing as much as possible to hinder a country and planning to enter the war after the next election while lying barefaced to the elctorate that you want nothing but peace. Or claiming there are WMD Don't get the idea I support one nation rolling over others, I actually support the idea of disbanding all countries and establishing a unified world government, but people use the "oil" card as if it means the government is evil as opposed to doing what they are supposed to do, advance the country as well as possible. You don't elect people to help other countries, you do it to improve yours don't you. Nationalism just forces one human being against another, and all people being equal is practically a crime against humanity. Clearly I don't believe any one should be elected. There is no better form of government you say, and I may well agree with you. It goes back to people wanting it easy, not work to do what is best. People forgive the faults beacuse it pleases them to go on about freedom and human rights.

I'll admit I have many ideas about what could be done to ensure order and prosperity but I am also keenly aware that with my various ailments I am not suited to be given any position of the authority I deem necessary. For a start I'm autistic and am aware of my inability to emphasis with other people. I mean would you want me running a country Also I have no sense of aesthetics. All products should be grey (although I am partial it seems to dark blue/black), why do you need any other colour? I prefer function over design. I have no sense of smell worth mentioning. Flowers are just strange meaningless colored leaves on plants. My taste in art, architecture and sculpture is firmly realism, much as my view on life. Perhaps I'm just a 90 year old man with alzheimers sitting in the retirement home spouting rascist epiphets but the nurses forgive me because I'm old and senile.

I can agree with only people who really need them having mobile phones. I feel the same way about the idiosyncracies of a piece of paper that is more than 200 years old, out of date, a lie when it was written (Tell the slaves all people are equal) and promises weapons to people when the only people who need weapons are armed forces, police and perhaps country farmers.

I know some people have a more delicate temperament so, again, I apologise. I know Narf in particular, as much as I consider him a friend and respect he started this thread, holds a contradictory viewpoint to myself. Sorry for that.

PS. Hey, you know how Truman defeated Dewey and Truman famously held up that paper claiming he'd lost. The reason was because the paper held a poll to find out who would win. Problem was they did a phone poll and of course the people who could afford a phone were supporting Dewey, instead of the majority of poorer people who were intending to vote for Truman.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

Life is meeting people with contradictory viewpoints.

I'm going to say something radical here, and that is that nearly any government can work, so long as the people in charge care about doing the right thing.

Democracy is just a relatively peaceful way of changing the people in charge.

To add to that, all governments are essentially democracies. The only real difference is the violence with which the change is effected.

That is another reason for the bearing of arms; so that change can be effected.

And, lastly, one persons' honest, faltering best means more, in my opinion, than anothers' confident, successful half-effort.

I like to think of the United States constitution as one of those things. With all its problems, it was better than much that came before and building toward that ideal has solved, to a significant extent, some rather large problems.

And, practically, the person who tries their best and does not manage to match the challenge will, in the long run, out-do any lazy rabbit, to refer to a well-known story.

It is rare for such a person to never overcome their challenge, if it is within their power.

[capnq]

Randallw said: I feel the same way about the idiosyncracies of a piece of paper that is more than 200 years old, out of date, a lie when it was written (Tell the slaves all people are equal)

This common misconception is a pet peeve of mine. "All men are created equal" was never intended to be the statement of egalitarianism that it's commonly interpreted as today. It was a direct denial of the Divine Right of Kings. A less ambiguous wording would be something like "everyone is equal in the eyes of the Creator".

[narf poit chez BOOM]

Which makes slavery undesirable - after all, enslaving someone you love is abhorrent.

[AgentZero]

When it comes to mobile phones, I see no reason why everyone shouldn't have one. But none of them should have ringtones anymore. Stick it on vibrate, put it in your pocket and stop abusing my ears with your horrid taste in "music". </endrant>

And cell phone etiquette should be taught in elementary schools with a baseball bat wrapped in barbed wire. I can't count how many times I've been sitting in a lecture and someone's phone goes off and they run out the door, or worse yet, answer it in class. You're in class to learn, and nothing in your life is that important, so sit down, shut up and turn the phone off. </endrant2>

When it comes to all that political malarky, I'm thoroughly apolitical. I really just don't care anymore. Political parties in democracies across the globe have become so focused on the lowest common denominator that there's no difference between them anymore. On voting day it comes down to whether you prefer the sound of "Tax Hike" or "Temporary Income Adjustment". All the same [censored] at the end of the day.

Set up a dictatorship (Irish blood prevents me from suggesting a monarchy) for all I care. Nothing will change, except we won't have to put up with the mind-numbing amount of *****ing, back-stabbing, and mud-slinging of today's politics. Oh, and political commentators will be out of a job. And hey, if it gets rid of Bill O'Reilly, that can't help but be a good thing, right?

[narf poit chez BOOM]

The only thing a dictatorship will change is make the back-stabbing literal rather than figurative.

Also, the whole country will loose its rights a lot faster.

That may just be important to you.

[capnq]

AgentZero said: When it comes to mobile phones, I see no reason why everyone shouldn't have one.

Why should anyone who doesn't need one pay for one?

Winston Churchill said: Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried.

[Suicide Junkie]

capnq said:
Why should anyone who doesn't need one pay for one?

That's my biggest issue, bills for stuff that should be 1/100th the price these days.

[AgentZero]

capnq said:
Why should anyone who doesn't need one pay for one?

Given how little time the average person spends actually in the home in today's society, one could ask the same question of the ubiquitous land line. Why pay for something that's only going to be available for use 3-4 hours a day, when you can pay roughly the same amount and have the same service available to you, with the added benefit of being free from geographic constraints.

Them crazy Europeans are catching on quickly, and on the other side of the pond, the land line is quickly disappearing in favour of the mobile phone. Hell, I lived for Ireland for 6 years and only had a land line for that last 2, and only then because it came bundled free with my internet connection.

As for dictatorships, you only run into problems with them when the egomaniac in charge starts taking people's complaints as personal insults & reacts accordingly. The ideal solution would be an apathetic dictatorship that dispassionately rule with the best interest of the state/nation/world in mind. Of course, humans aren't too good at that, but I've found a little company that's got some pretty good ideas about how to deal with that problem. They go by the name of Cyberdyne Systems....

[narf poit chez BOOM]

I prefer apathetic democracies to apathetic dictatorships.