And, maybe, it is not too late.

eclipse

If no one pays attention, then no change happens.

I have a severe dislike of ineffective, illogical movements. Change also happens without anyone paying attention.

I too dislike illogical movements, but what is logical to one, may be illogical to another, it's all about perspective, of which, I am not reciting my own viewpoints, merely my observations of world events.

Lookee here. I've had a twenty-plus years as a civil servant. I've seen laws and regulations that were useful and needed. I've also seen private members' bills that are plainly stupid. You don't want to wake the sleeping beast that is public democracy in this country. There are just as many stupid leaders as smart ones. Do you know what the end result of a successful protest is? A bloody commission. After the commission exhausts all sources of funds for public consultation and state dinners, they write a report. If our duly elected leaders deem the protest valid, they write up new legislation. Sometimes it's good, sometimes it's very, very bad. I've seen the result of en-masse government policy change, and I've seen a lot of people get hurt in the process. I don't trust revolution in the hands of our publicly elected leaders.

Now, the author of this rant, as far as I can tell, is blaming unfettered wealth on the spiritual poverty of the nation. First of all, the wrong target has been selected. Second of all, how would you legislate it? Don't you dare give the government the idea they can tax a new source of funds... the very drivers of new industry and innovation in our nation! Our stupid government would drive North America in to spiralling poverty.

I'll re-iterate the part of this rant I agree with. Where in there do I mention spirituality at all?

Here:

Protests work when those who govern us are making a serious error in judgement. When it comes to North America's spiritual health, however, THERE'S NO-ONE IN CHARGE

I would agree that it is good for each of us to re-evaluate our priorities, live noble lives, and connect to people in a genuine way. I would also agree that in North America at least, these higher ideals tend to be drowned out by the cacophony of a media-driven consumerism. It's a fight to live a great life....If our society is sick, it's by accident. If we want to make it well, it must be by individual choice and action.

We have power, as individuals, to affect national change. The internet helps. I have other ideas, but I don't think you are prepared to listen.

Excellent points!! I was just making sure I wasn't misunderstanding you, jgnat. Now I see where you are coming from. Please do not dimiss me so easily, I am always willing to listen to what others have to say.

-e

jgnat

but what is logical to one, may be illogical to another, it's all about perspective, of which, I am not reciting my own viewpoints, merely my observations of world events.
Pure logic is not a matter of perspective. Black can't be black and white too. When debating North American events, it pays to have perspective, and a healthy check for cause and effect. I listed a whole bunch of assumptions at the beginning of this thread. Care to take on any of them?
Right away I would like to limit any debate to events in North America. I don't think the same trends we see here are a world-wide phenomenon.
eclipse

Pure logic is not a matter of perspective. Black can't be black and white too. When debating North American events, it pays to have perspective, and a healthy check for cause and effect.
I respectfully disagree, I have seen where someone can present a perfectly logical fact, and someone else will deem it illogical...I am just stating what I observe.
I read your entire post where you took apart the paragraph, and broke it down. Very interesting perspectives, of which many I agree with. I too shy away from radical, fanatical view points..and I am not in agreement with yoism entirely. But I respect their viewpoints, and the vision that they have...
I am ignorant about the political side of them, and how they will endeavor to bring about the changes they speak of...so I can neither debate about that, nor form an opinion on it.
You seem to have the energy to fight what you prioritize as necessary to protect your american way of life, and I respect that...(again, just an observation, and I can be wrong, and am not afraid to be corrected.)
me personally, I am just an observer, and prefer to just live & let live.
I just want to say that I read what you wrote, I listened and I learned.
If you feel you have to pick apart everything I say and have to dissect it, by all means, knock yourself out, but I just think there are bigger fish to fry out there than me, and you certainly have the intelligence and the knowledge to do so...I am nobody...just an outsider looking in...
best regards, -e
jgnat

I respectfully disagree, I have seen where someone can present a perfectly logical fact, and someone else will deem it illogical...I am just stating what I observe.
Then you and I are not ready to have a reasonable debate. I've barely skimmed the surface of logic studies, but the ten pages I got through convinced me that the very foundation of logic is that in a well structured argument there can only be one right answer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic
Who cares if someone deems it illogical? Opinions are cheap. Truths are hard-won. Opinion-holders have to prove it! This style of reason, by the way, does not suit television very well. It's much cheaper and faster to install a microphone on the street and gather a dozen opinions. But do those opinions mean anything?
You seem to have the energy to fight what you prioritize as necessary to protect your american way of life, and I respect that...(again, just an observation, and I can be wrong, and am not afraid to be corrected.)
(smile) first of all, I'm Canadian.
If you feel you have to pick apart everything I say and have to dissect it, by all means, knock yourself out...
Again, this is part of having a logical debate. I see you haven't been exposed to the style, so I will agree to go fry bigger fish. That quote certainly did raise the ire in me, and bring some interesting thoughts to the fore. I thank nvrgbck for that.
eclipse

So sorry jgnat, my apologies for forgetting that you are in Alerta!
greendawn

I find jgnat's comprehensive analysis interesting but I also agree that modern society has become too unspiritual and money centred for its own good. Greedy and inhospitable are the words that describe it best.
I am myself tired of this culture and sometimes associate with the rainbow people who abandoned this set up of materialism/consumerism and find their happiness by being in nature, through human companionship and being out of the rat race: what car do you have, how much money in the bank, what's your income like, do you dress up with expensive prestigious brands, do you keep up with the latest fashion etc
eclipse

Then you and I are not ready to have a reasonable debate. I've barely skimmed the surface of logic studies, but the ten pages I got through convinced me that the very foundation of logic is that in a well structured argument there can only be one right answer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic
Who cares if someone deems it illogical? Opinions are cheap. Truths are hard-won. Opinion-holders have to prove it! This style of reason, by the way, does not suit television very well. It's much cheaper and faster to install a microphone on the street and gather a dozen opinions. But do those opinions mean anything?
OK, I think you have made some wrong assumptions. When I speak about ''opinions'', I was not refering to the random surveys taken by television interviewers on the street. Those opinions hold no weight, they have no power, they are meaningless. They are for entertainment purposes only. I was thinking of GOVERNMENT'S opinions, POLITICIAN'S opinions. People who have power and wealth at their arsenal, who can enforce change.
Assuming I am not wanting a ''reasonable'' debate is, IMHO,a low blow, and an incorrect assumption.
#1. I am not disagreeing with you.
#2. I was merely stating that others may disagree with you.
#3.I agree with the foundation of Logic.
I was merely stating that other people are not logical, but may wholeheartedly believe that they hold a position of logic.
One person who comes to mind is George W Bush, a person with almost absolute power, and who believs His opinions and viewpoints are logical, correct and true.
Why do you have to debate with me?
I have read and respected your view points.
If disagreeing with you means that you feel that we can't debate, then does that mean you only debate with people who agree with you?
I am thinking that you will probably reply, ''No, of course not!''.
So then why did you make these comments, and why did you feel the need to instruct me as though I am ignorant about logic? Just letting you know that your comments do come across as condescension. If you did not mean to be condescending, then I will take your word for it.
e - I respectfully disagree, I have seen where someone can present a perfectly logical fact, and someone else will deem it illogical...I am just stating what I observe.
jgnat - Then you and I are not ready to have a reasonable debate. I see you haven't been exposed to the style, so I will agree to go fry bigger fish.
I am not a debater, never wanted to be, I never enjoyed it. I would NOT make a good politician. You seem to be very knowledgable about the world of politics, whereas I have no first hand knowlege.
I prefer a mutually respectful exchange of ideas.
I understand that the world does NOT work this way, I am only stating my preference, which is neither right nor wrong, it just is my viewpoint, and the last time I checked, I am allowed to have one, aren't I?
respectfully, -eclipse
flipper

nvrgnbk- Amen brother! And elect Al Gore president, John Edwards vice president. Take back our earth. Peace out. Mr. Flipper

And, maybe, it is not too late.

Share this