why is patriotism seen as a good thing around the world, paticuly in the USA. I mean it simply means loving the country you were born into above others. This love for your country is simply a way for the government to control you and to encourage you to fall in line with world issues-after all, how could the rulers of your beloved country do wrong? Even if it did do wrong what would it matter? at least it's only happening to another country, and not beloved America. Patriotism is wrong! The whole world should be equal, and people shouldn't be encouraged to show more love for 1 country above others! Paticulaly as in the case of the USA where the leader wasn't even elected (read "stupid white men" by Michael Moore) and is starting wars. OK if this makes no sense i'm blaming it on weed. Love everyone, Si
There's a poiont in your writings, I mean G.W.Bush is starting a war by himself, he seems to be willing to go out and to bomb the shit up, who's paying the bill then? other countries, the UN etc. what mockery against intelectual thinking, pure stupidity. AAAAAAAAARGHRGRH!!!!! How can this be tolerated? doesn't people think anymore? UK and USA owned iraqs oil, then came Saddam who took the oil back to iraq, is it a suprise that UK and USA are atacking there? USA sold iraq nuclear weapons in 1995, I mean Saddams no angel but there's no point to go there and start a war, the world was quite peaceful during the clinton years, there was a sight of peace there, now came bush and the sight is replaced with WWW III, south korea, irag, afghanistan, israel etc. what is the reason behind this frenzy for war?
V Good outline of the nationalism/patriotism debate. Its a little long-winded, though http://www.seop.leeds.ac.uk/entries/nationalism/ Its my opinion that there is little need for the world to still be divided into seperate 'tribes' with 'territories'. For democratic principles to really work, it needs to be on a global scale. National democracy, by definition, simply serves (in theory, anyway) the wishes of people of a paticular country - which is not necessarily whats best for the human race as a whole. A true global democracy, where the elected government must act in the best interests of the majority of the entire human population (in order to secure re-election), is clearly the logical end we should be striving for. Its my opinion that such a change would go a long way towards cutting down the suffering in the world and allow the human race (both scientifically and spiritually) to progress at a much faster rate.
Nice idea, but there's little chance of it to ever become real. People have the urge to controll stuff, being it other people or forces of nature.
I see it happening one day. Not in this lifetime, or the next, but one day. Humanity, its seems, is ever so slowly moving towards logic and liberalism. Some (see Hitler, A) slow this process while others (see Ghandi, M) speed it up, but its clear to see by looking at change over the centuries which direction we're moving in.
Looking trough histroy? All I see is different variations of pyramid form controll, the top being the church or a goverment, information goin' downwards, trough several chanels before reaching the "normal" people. Humans are most comfortable in a tribe like community where decisionc are made together, but when a tribe get's too large it becomes impossible and there has to be an leader selected, everythings working there fine but let's jump to the present there's so much people and property to be controlled that it's too much for a one man to controll so there's more and more leaders selected, one controlling this and the one controlling that but there's too many people in there now, we need to have smaller areas or no areas at all, peace seemed possible during the years when Clinton was the president, all over the world everything was towards peace and unity, then came BUsh and saw devils all around him and now it all sems to go to hell. As long as the world is based on owning things there's no possibility in peace or a world wide democracy, people are driven to be greedy, our culture is based on owning, getting money to get more things etc. don't get me wrong Money's not a bad thing, it's a great way to handle property and to exchance but that's that, it's not the meaning of life, it's not the center of the universe, it doesn't justify anything.
Wow sum1 on grasscity actually knows who che geuvara is! isnt communism a gr8 but usually poorly exucted policy? Love Love Si
Communism will never work anywhere. It's works great on paper and seems like a fair play, but 80% of the people are against it an the idea of it. Even if we'd got a nation full of people willing to go for it it wouldn't take long untill things would go down, fast. ps. people couldn't agree on such amount of things it would take to controll a nation etc. The ideal would be part communism and part democracy. wich we had somewhat achieved in Finnland.
Che Guevara is one of my heroes. I think communism is a great concept, but as put earlier, it is poorly executed, and as humans, we will never be able to create a peftect communist system. When everyone in a community is able to lose ego, and give more than they take willingly, the world will be a much better place. However one must look deeper than what would be great, and look at what is: What is the worlds motive to live? luxury What brings luxury? money What brings money? greed and dertimination P.S. che- hablas espanol? he estudiado para tres anos. si quirres, puedemos hablar en espanol con AIM. gracias, vive che
a perfectly comunist society is not infeasable simply because of greed, but also because of laziness. One of the main reasons communism failed in the U.S.S.R. (I know it was a socialist republic, not truly communist but it is the best example available) is because of laziness. People simply will not do their fair share if they think another will do it for them.
Che - great man. a dude by anyones standards. Communism is like republicanism (but alot better). How u might ask?... Great on paper but fundamentally flawed as it does not take into account the corruptability and flawed nature of humanity. both would work great if we were perfect. But lets not throw communism outta the window just yet, we jsut need to extract all that is good and make that socialist bit of it work and try to fit into a democratic system. capitalist democracy carries with it too great a cost for the world to cope with. so we gotta get something else within our lifetimes... and socialism has to play a part in it somewhere, obviously. Technology should, if developed for peace and not war, see us through all the difficulties and fill the gaps in human will capability. allready gone are the days of outright slavery (mostly), but we still cannot satisfy the needs of everyone. Even in the best run countries today you cannot realistically expect to have even a third of the workforce happy with thie job. and i'm thinking primarily of Factory and Supermarket employees. jobs no one really wants to do, but find themselves doing anyway because of the squeeze of capitalism. and onto: patriotism: patriotism is a step towards zenophobia and zenophobia is a step towards racism. Racism in the genocidal sence of the world. That quite clearly is an unsustainable path that we CANNOT go down. we have to take care not to foget the lessons to be learned from history, esspecially now that in the nuclear age the conssequences are so much more dire, devastating and definate. ever noticed how most really patriotic people act all teritorial and most seem to have sloping foreheads, maybe even be a bit more hairy than most people...? hehe "OOG! I PEED HERE! MY AREA! OOGUG! KEEPUG OUT!" hehe. yeah i think it's time we evolved past that kind of thinking.