|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
What is Government?
In a democratic society, where we hold free elections, and we delegate power over us to our elected representatives, we consent to being governed. When we do not agree with the decisions made by our elected representatives, how should we react? And how DO we react?
If we dosagree with a law (let's be really controversial: Gay Age of Consent. Sex between males of the same sex of any legal age. Men kissing men in public. Banning Books), then what do we do? Do we lobby? Protest? Whine? revolt? What SHOULD we do?
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree that we are consenting to be governed. But, by electing officials, whether it be local (mayors, governors) or national (senators, presidents, prime ministers, whatever), we are selecting an individual who will *represent* us. Therefore, if we don't agree with the law, I think it is our duty to bring it to the official's attention. We should write a letter, send in a phone call, type out an e-mail, as long as it's peaceful. That way, that official is truly *representing* us, because we are keeping him/her up to date on what we think on certain issues.
Also, as their duty to represent us, it's their job to listen to the opinions of the people, and to try and look into the situation, and then see if action is possible. If they don't, they risk votes by the time the next election comes around.
Also, protesting and violence aren't good ways to get a message across, in my opinion. It causes legal problems, and writing a letter or calling gets the message across the same way. Plus, you're not thrown off to the side as some "crazy protestor loonie". 
Therefore, by what I just said, government to *me* is that people select a candidate who is most suitable of representing them and their values and morals. Then, the candidates serve their people and constituents by coming back and getting feedback on certain issues, in order to do their job them better. That's what I think, at least. Other people probably have much different views on what "government" means to them.
Too bad some elected officials don't do some of this stuff, but it's their job.
-Tom 
"Whatever is sought for can be caught, you know,
whatever is neglected slips away."
Oedipus Rex, lines 126-127
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tom, this first off to you...
While I agree with what you said, your point of view is very 'American'. "If you don't like it, write your congressman", etc. This message is often heard in your neck of the woods. Other countries do not have this tradition.
And even if they have, the written politician is often going to disregard your letter as long as it's obvious the opinions behind the letter-writing campaingn aren't strong enough to jeopardize re-election of said politician... Politicians driven by sheer ideology and selfishness aren't common, don't reach high in the power structure and seldom last very long.
But I do agree with what you said though, we should let them know what we want.
Tim, first a tidbit (that I may have shared before, I don't remember): gay age of consent here is the same as hetero age of consent, 15 years old. This seems to be relatively uncommon (and uncommonly LOW as well). In neighbor Finland, my friend Setras tells me it's 16 for heteros and 18 for gays for example. (Yes, I'm all done pouting now, k? ) In the US, it's OK to drive at 16 in many states but to fuck you have to be 18. When can you buy guns?
About the actual TOPIC now, lol: yes, we vote people to govern us. But really, that's twisting it and turning it on its head in my opinion. We're not sheep whom the politicians are to herd around at their leisure. They're elected to IMPLEMENT OUR WISHES. This gets lost all too often, politicians forget THEY are supposed to serve US. Especially in huge bureaucratic structures such as the EU, where politicians are paid huge wages and benefits, DON'T have to pay tax themselves and even have their own (tax-free, of course) stores to shop in.
We should remind them of whom is supposed to look out for whom.
Problem with accomplishing this is altogether too many people are quite content with being herded like sheep. It's really safe, sure the wolves might take one or two, but if I just huddle in at the center of the flock and hide away, it's not likely it'll be me...
So politicians get to do pretty much as they want to, all in the name of democracy.
-Lenny
PS: Ooops. Seems this turned into a bit of a rant. Sorry.
"But he that hath the steerage of my course,
direct my sail."
-William Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet, Act One, Scene IV
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Two great men in this world achieved monumental change within their respective governments (and societies for that matter) ussing a tactic called passive resistance. Normally government will move too slowly, or not at all, to reflect current opinion and majority belief. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. But Ghandi and MLK brought about change that would have been in their lifetimes if they had not been struck down by those that opposed their words. So unless you become the loudest pain in the ass, your lonely little missive will most likely be steam rollered by those who disagree. I wish it were not so.
Hugs, Charlie
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OK, here I go again. Me on my soapbox. Someone is gonna tell me to shut up soon. But I just gotta weigh in on this, even though I've said most of it already.
Govern, with the consent of the governed. This mean WE are supposed to be represented by those who agree wth our views. Doesn't always work, but we keep on trying to improve. That is a never ending process.
TomS ...
I agree with all of it except the protest part. Peacful protest, is one form of enacting change or getting your point accross. I may be a kook, but if I am upset enough on an issue I will protest. I just don't employ violence to excersise that right. It's not nessecary.
Without peacful dissent, we are sheep. Do we deserve our fate then? Perhaps.
Lenny ...
Whatever methode you might use to voice your views, in America or elswhere, make yourself heard. This should be a global stradegy. (At least in my dream world hehe) If you don't agree with a leader, get a new one. Best way if you ask me.
charlie ...
So true, but change, no matter how we might wish otherwise, takes time. But we must try. Great examples.
OK, now Im' ranting. My first thought when reading tim's post was, "yes all of that, and more, otherwise we are sheep".
Or are we Muggles?
My best to all.
Kevin
"Be excellent to each other, and, party on dudes"!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I spose this will be seen as ranting from a kid but, Democracy is about a majority rule is it not?? It would seem that Majority rule is just about over, in OZ anyway. We have people who are from fringe groups gaining concessions that are predominately for them alone but supposedly we are a democracy??
A long time ago, some people from ENGLAND didnt like the way things were being run in ENGLAND and so, they came to AMERICA and started a NEW life for themselves. They FOUGHT for their way of life and maybe, they are today, a little obnoxious (heheh no offence) but still, they are where they are because they didnt like how their original home was being run.
If people dont LIKE the way things are being run, they CAN make voice their disapproval and band together and bring about change, look at Poland? In OZ, we never had the luxury of determining our OWN future until over 100 years after first settlement so, we are a little late. We are STILL a LONG way away from the openness the Americans have.
I will say this, if you live in a society where you are a minority and you DONT like it, Move and make your own, just like the Americans did.
People have a habit of changing your direction through life
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I believe it is the result of class warfare. Us "regular folks" seem to lose to the rich sometimes, but lets fight on.
America is not all that free either. People say it is, but it's not. Unless you are a conservative Christian, then opression is what your looking for.
Great point.
Kevin
"Be excellent to each other, and, party on dudes"!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
We seem to fight shy of the global topic and pick on a specific element.
The main thing I wanted to show was the inability to qualify a moral and ethical debate as black and white. This is grey, grey, grey.
Sure, each of us can have views that we express as black and white, but we are, most of us, fortunate to live in a democratic society where we and our forefathers have designed the rules accoridng to the desires and views of the majority, or yes, a vociferous minority.
Notice that no-one has posted here from inside a totalitarian regime. Now I wonder why that could be?
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
We have a law that allows cake to be eaten ONLY with religious approval. (It's a fiction, ok?).
I want this law repealed, and to be free to eat cake any time I wish. You want cake BANNED.
We each have an inalienable right to press for our "required" solution. Now, how do we resolve it?
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...to ban people from eating cake. Yes, it's a fiction. In reality I'd just say it was my god's wishes and that it demands it and let it be at that. But here I'm actually open to debate!
Since I want to stop everyone from eating cake (and have the nerve to call it my 'right' to want this), I must be able to present a strong case why my wish to deny everyone else something should outweigh everyone else's wish to revel in that something. In this instance, eating cake.
If I can't come up with something better than, "because my god (read: me) wants/demands it", then I have lost. I probably won't concede defeat (religious zealots never do), but that won't change the fact I lost...
-Lenny
"But he that hath the steerage of my course,
direct my sail."
-William Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet, Act One, Scene IV
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is more about specific kinds of cakes. "The devil is in the details" so to speak. One group wants cakes banned. Yet another wants cake whenever they want. I myself am more concerned with the fundamental question "What constitutes a cake?" Once we get that done, lets move to the other two.
Odd metaphor to be sure.
-this tastes like cake, yum-
Kevin
"Be excellent to each other, and, party on dudes"!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
Come back to the subject! It so nto about cake, nor type of cake, nor religin. It is about how we as a democratic society, reconcile two diametrically opposed views.
One could look at wars, Northern Ireland, Cake, Book Burning, anything where two diametrically opposed views seek to prevail.
What is happening is the discussion is going into deliberate side alleys in order to bamboozle. Come back to the topic. It's worthy of real thought. Or can you not solve it?
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
warren c. e. austin
|
 |
Likes it here |
Location: Toronto, Ontario, CANADA
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 247
|
|
|
As I see the issue is once elected how do we who voted for them, control how they behave on our behalf.
Seems to me that four years, sometimes five, is an awful long time to have to wait in order to make changes, especially if once elected they appear to bloddy well do what ever they want; this contrary to whatever they might have said in order to get elected.
Which brings us back to the question of passive dissent.
You can be bloody well sure that if I can not make an appointment to see, and sit down and talk with my Member of Parliament (once elected you'd be surprised to learn just how busy they are, and how they just couldn't possibly be able to sit and listen to everyone of their consituents), and if too I'm unable to speak with him personally when ever I want (within reason), then you can be very sure I'll so whatever I can to see he never spends another term sitting in his Parliamentary chair; but that still doesn't address how to get him to listen to "my" point of view in the mean time, not does, or will it, guarantee whether the turkey that replaces him when he's defeated at the next poll, will listen either.
I'm not sure how it wporks anymore in Great Britain, but I do know that in the U.S., and by extenstion now in Canada (because their political machinery has warped everything good that did function in prior years), the "Party" dictates just what the policy is going to be, and in order to vote you must register and declare how you intend to vote in order to register; a bit odd that, which gives rise to thoughts of "so much for the confidential ballot" in the first place. They are trying to implement this in Canada now; fortunately it's being resisted, although it is now the responsibility of the individual to ensure their entitlement to vote (and has been for a least two federal elections here) whereas it used to be the responsibility of the outgoing Governement to ensure the enumeration of the population for the next poll. I would like to see a return of that fiduciary responsibility to the hands of the Government, but I know it will never happen; there's no potential for abuse, or influence poeddling, if they do; and that's just not the American (and lately Canadian) way.
So back to passive dissent, and demonstrations. It seems the only things any modern-day democratic government does listen to are issues covered by the "media", which because of their own agenda, is not always in the public interest, after all sweetness and light, happiness, goodwill to all men, food on the table, roofing ove everyone's head, clothing on their back's, et al ad nauseum doesn't sell newspapers or fund Television- and Radio-time; only misery and dispair, murder and such violent death (whether sponsored by war or anger), abhorrent behaviours (especially a good quick-and-dirty "pederast" cover story), celebrity carryings-on, public-figure sex and money scandals, etc., do; or, if not the "media" then some tin-pot "special interest group", in truth representing very few of the general public at large, but because they have embraced some "motherhood" issue, in the name of their theological fervour, have one way or another garnered enough attention to have it assumed they do in fact represent all people, all of the time, and should be then able to dictate terms regarding how things should be done.
I could go on and on, and on, but what's the point. We the electorate, have lost control of the election process; it's now controlled by corporate financial interest, who bay and large don't give a rat's ass about the little people; their only concern is to protect the sources of their wealth, and this purposefully, at the expense of the implied, and increasingly de facto, servitude and enslavement of the increasingly impoverished majority.
There is going to be a revolution, one on a global scale this time, not just national; unfortunately I won't be alive to see it, but my grand-children will, and it's going to be very bloody, with a tremedous toll in life, and probably set human-kind a good two centuries, or more, when it happens; and quite frankly it can't happen too so.
Only through such a catastophic (and catharitic) event will social justice ever again prevail in our society.
Never before in world history, have so very few controlled the destiny of so many; never has so very few ever accumulated so much wealth at the expense of everyone else's dignity.
Warren C. E. Austin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
warren c. e. austin
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: Toronto, Ontario, CANADA
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 247
|
|
|
Control of so many, resting in the hands of the very few:
GE Capital Corp.
Through sundry operating division of this "holding" corporation, lies control of for example:
1) Microsoft
GECC owns all non-voting preferential shares and some 50 % of the common stock - having acquired this control, early in the 1980's through their Software Publishing Corp., subsidiary) when they made de facto billionaires of Gates, Allen, and the other one whose name I can never remember - although operating control remained in the hands of the original triumvirate, which was part of the deal when the stock was sold.
1) NBC (National Broadcasting Corporation)
GECC's "silent" ownership of Microsoft is what spawned their joint sponsorship or msn.com and msnbc.com, which in of itself is an intersting conflict of interest.
3) TRW Financial Services
CVS (Credit Validation Services)
Equifax
The three largest credit reporting agencies in the U.S., with influence world-wide.
4) Compac Holdings, Nrl, NV
This is the parent holding corporation for the World Banking comunity"s SWFTE Network (the electronic funds transfer exchange that basically makes international commerce possible; the company that initially spawned CHARGEX, now Visa International, and subsequently created MasterCard International, to provide competition (very few consumer's are even aware that they are one and the same company when they apply for and receive the two "different" credit-cards); Air-miles Holdings, NV - that ubiquitos and innocuous little company that sponsors so many of those incentive programmes everyone, every where, lines up to subscribe to, and who inventories each users buying habits, including precise details of what and when, all of which is then easily cross-pollinated to other data-bases (within their combine) for comparison.
5) Software Publishing Corp.
Founded in the 1970's, went on buying spree during the 1980's, picking up amongst others Ashton-tate (the creator's of d-BASE, although it's presently licenced to Broland) and Microsoft (see above). It is SPC's ownership of so many patented software processes that gives Microsoft the competative advantage over third-party vendors. When Microsoft has needed to put the brakes on development of something somewhwere, SPC is the one that quietly buys the company and puts them out-of-business.
Does anyone see a pattern here? Software development and design, the purpose of which is to control the desk-tops (and servers) of world-wide computing; linked to credit-reporting agencies; linked in turn to credit-vendors and financial tansaction networks; linked clandestingly to consumer buying incentive programmes (which in turn report that buying behaviour); all linked to one company which is the parent of a considerable "media" combine. I have only just lightly touched on their considerable holdings.
Interesting, eh; but, what's even more interesting is that GECC somehow maintains their considerable "low" profile, with neary a mention of it during past FTC and FCC hearing and Anti-trust matters. I have to wonder why - or do I really, after all we are talking big bucks here, very big bucks; dollars that have the ability to influence governments everywhere to ensure their anonimity.
This is just "one" combine; I know of at least two others, one of which is controlled by the fanatical religious-right, and which makes GECC almost pale in comparison.
Do I think that "democratic" elections have ever really mattered. Yes, once upon a time, in a gallaxy far, far away, but not in the here and now they don't, and haven't for a very, very long time.
Warren C. E. Austin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My metaphor was to illustrate the point that these views are NOT diametrically opposed. Or at least that need not be the case. On both fronts, maybe I am just a dreamer, but I do believe their can be found, common ground.
I see very few issues, (maybe the 'Right to Life' movement) that will never have a common ground. If any group, is so closed minded not to at least engage in intellient debate, then that group truly has no interest in the common good. Only the version they wish to impose on the rest. That is a sad position to take.
I would love the opportunity to debate/discuss either issue to see if you and I could find common groud. Would be fun.
To Warren .....
I can't allow myself to be that pessmistic about things. If we take your view (and I believe it's quite possible) then we will create the future you predict. Change has never come without effort, ever. We, you and I, can make the smallest change. Your right in some ways things look bleak. The worst is those that cannot even see that much.
But those of us who do recognize what is wrong, are the ones who must try to change it.
You know the quote: "Even a waterfall begins with one drop, look what comes from that".
Sure I'm a dreamer .... Kevin
"Be excellent to each other, and, party on dudes"!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
warren c. e. austin
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: Toronto, Ontario, CANADA
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 247
|
|
|
"Even a waterfall begins with one drop, look what comes from that"
THE POWER OF ONE
Great movie and even more remarkable novel.
Also a truly worth sentiment, and to some degree quite possibly true if orchestrated in the correct manner.
I'll concede that maybe on the subject of "Government" I seem to be a bit of a pessimist; and my difficulties twenty-five years ago whence I served at the pleasure of the Crown notwithstanding, it is because of that service, and the abuses I then witnessed (and witness today largely because I understand the arena in which the game is played), and can never ever reveal as I continue to be bound by the Official Secrets Act, that I feel as I do.
To give you but one example, and I break no oaths discussing this as it was widely been reported in the Canadian Media of the time:
Premier Robarts of Ontario (on his way out, designated successor anointed, swan-song begun) approved the transfer of 200 Millions worth of Crown-land on University Avenue in the heart of downtown Toronto to the then enginue Developer Gerard Moog; the purpose was to underwite the building of the "new" Ontario Hydro Headquarters; the land he transfer title to was the aging 40-story granite tower wihich at that time housed Ontario Hydro; the new offfices to arise immediately north of and adjacent to the older building. Knowing this was patently fraudulent, Robarts insited that his successor never have to be faced with having to view the completed structure from his second-floor Parliamentary Office, and thus be able to avoid all embarassment over any ensuing controversy. Sure enough once completed the north-north-east face of the build which in reality was a mirrored concave surface precisely inter-reflected light to such a degree that a person standing from any position on the south face of the Legislature situated in-line with the Premiers second-floor office window, cannot see this 34-floor building, as the trick of the light maked it virtually dissappear on the horizon, and it is only from that one particular stance that this phenomenon occurs. Justly so, as in addition to transferring 200 Millions in land, the Crown paid almost 450 Million to build it, and will not own it for about another 60-or-so years, with the taxpayer having to foot the bill for annual floor-rental of a hundred-grand or there-a-bouts for each floor that it occupies.
Nice work if you can get it.
In addition to the office tower the plaza on which it sits also encompasses a retail shopping mall, subway station and medical centre, all paying floor-rentals, but not to the public purse.
When this became known in the media, neither Robarts, nor his successor's government were affected to any any decernable degree; in fact the electorate return him to power three years later, calling hima visionary; of this was the same turkey who as Robarts Minister of Education ten-years earlier, opened a "new" open-concept middle-school in Toronto's east-end, calling it a great leap forward in education, and promptly named it after himself.
Go figure.
Regarding other areas of life, I continue to be optimistic, but it is getting harder, and harder with each pasing day, as I view the excesses which we as a society in geneneral put ourselfs through, and the extent that the little people have become serfs to the greater glory of someone else's pursuit of wealth. It is for this latter reason that I have so much mistrust for the religious fervour of the so-called evangelical groups in general, and the Moral Majority in particular, especially allowing that they are the "one" of two other combines I mention in my earlier "post" that Microsoft and GE Captial Corporation pales beside in comparison.
Warren C. E. Austin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No Message Body
"Be excellent to each other, and, party on dudes"!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
warren c. e. austin
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: Toronto, Ontario, CANADA
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 247
|
|
|
... read all about it.
I written everything I experienced in my ten-years of government service in a light-weight tome, titled simply "The Diary of a Debased Debaucher Solely in the Service of his Queen".
Both my publishers and Lawyers have it, with the powers that be knowing that it exists; and, should you actually be young enough you may even get to read it; but not for probably another 25-years, or so; and that's only if the government of the day doesn't slap a "D-Notice" on it and prohibit it's publication on grounds of interferring with "National Security", or not being in the "Public Interest, or For the Common Good" when that time comes. On the other hand, the latter contingency is covered, with arrangements having already been made to have it published outside of Canada, if necessary.
By the way, it's not a "kiss and tell" type of affaire; although I could probably provide a sequel that would singe the short and curleys of anyone that might chance reading it. Incidentially, my children and hiers will never profit from it, as a Foundation, I established for these purposes holds copyright, with all profits directed to Provincial Children's Aid Societies, should they still exist, and Hunger and Shelter Relief should they not.
Believe me when I tell you that American politicans are mere babes in the woods when it comes to the art of graft; the British and French having invented, with Canadians much later and subsequently re-designing, the table that Yanks have been pushing their two-dollar bills under all these years.
Warren C. E. Austin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
 |
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
No Message Body
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
No Message Body
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
Writing your congressman is a long proven tradition, and sometimes YOUR congressman will indeed listen, but gaining the sway of the legislature is another matter.
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
The time was right for them.... Agreed, they were blindingly carismatic and commanded HUGE followings.... but, would we know their names today if they acted alone?
I think not...
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
Here you can have all the freedom you are able to afford.
Justice applies to this as well....
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
I thought this was about government and representation...
Morals and ethics are another matter... and incidently, a foreign concept to the vast majority of politicos.
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
And if I want cake, I'll have cake...
By the way.... what kind of cake is it?
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
Why???
Can't we talk about cake if we want???
Cake is a good thing to talk about isn't it?
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
No Message Body
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
The whole topic is one of government, though others have migrated it into morals and ethics (absent from almost all politicians).
The concept of "my wanting thing A and your wanting thing B, and things A and B being impossible at the same time or location" is one that a government has to resolve. And we, as those who empower the government, have our desire to be represented to the fullest.
Very few posters here have addressed the initial line of my first post, by the way.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
No Message Body
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pardon my broken record ... hehe
You first start, by writing you elected official. That by itself will probably never be enough. The next step is to try to get folks with like-minded views to do the same. This shows the politician that a voting block is concerned with the issue. If a politician is not at the end of a term limit, he may then take this to heart.
If that fails to create change, then an assessment of the political 'lay of the land' is needed.
1. Are other groups writing letters, running protests elswhere.
Then you only need to sway the opinion of your locally elected representative. Go back to the first part and try harder, maybe include a peacful protest.
2. If the issue seems to be generally regarded as a 'correct position' but no one is talking about it.
Then someone, somewhere, has to be the person that gets that discussion started. You might be the first to protest. Or the first to curculate information. If most people think you are have a correct position, they have likely not been aware of the subject and should (hopefully), rally around your cause.
3. If you are completly outnumbered within the general population, and only a few seem on your side.
These are the tougest issues to deal with. It takes much stronger will, more determination, and generally more time than we like.
This is what "WE" have all faced within issues of sexuality and other related "acceptable predjudice" in the past, and are still working on today.
This takes changing minds. Communication is your best if not only tool. Talking to people, passive resistance, peacful protest can all be VERY difficult. Many have gone before us on these and other issues.
Should we not take the next step of the journey?
Or, should we leave it for others because it's just to hard.
We now come to what I concider the true question of courage.
Do I have what it takes to make a change.
I think we all do.
Thanks for listening.
*Kevin climbs down off the soapbox*
"Be excellent to each other, and, party on dudes"!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
 |
On fire! |
Registered: March 2012
Messages: 2344
|
|
|
i want to elect HOPPERGRASS as president of the world......hehehe
peace
tim...of USA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No Message Body
"Be excellent to each other, and, party on dudes"!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No Message Body
"Be excellent to each other, and, party on dudes"!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
smith
|
|
On fire! |
Registered: January 1970
Messages: 1095
|
|
|
that your question is not being answered to your satisfaction because there is no answer. We just had a pre-election here in the rural county where I live. The HUGE topic of discussion is the rumblings of building an international airport at the edge of the county. Yet, only 30% of the registered voters turned out. There are pros and cons for both sides but hardly anyone knows and, obviously, only 30% of them even care. It would totally change the way of life here.
What should we do? What CAN we do if people don't care enough to read, to study, to find out the truth and vote accordingly?
Changing voter apathy is going to mean politians actually saying what they mean and doing what they say and, that I'm afraid, will only happen in a parallel universe.
One of the saddest elections here is the superintendent of schools. Each of them, for as long as I've been aware, have done a good job but when someone's child can't read, it's HIS fault, so out he goes. No one looks beyond the test scores.
Discuss.....Be informed......Talk......Yes.
Whine? Revolt? Um.....No.
I can't answer you because I have no answer.
smith
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Your right, that's why I went door to door today to solicit votes, get people to vote by absentee ballot if they will be away. And (I guess to some of you), making a general pest of myself.
It won't fix it, but it helps, I hope.
Peace out .....
Kevvy
(Just once for you)
"Be excellent to each other, and, party on dudes"!
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
The "books" thread raises a topic 
Some opinions... 
Are you guys tryin to get me riled up ...... hehe 
Your right Ashley but ... 
I ate the cake. There is no more. You can't have it! 
