World peace?

The fact that most of the people who's life's message is one of love end up meeting a violent end seems to make the idea of a global peace seem unattainable, but is their anyone besides myself who thinks that things are slowly moving in that direction? I know that earlier I said that war is inevitable, but I think I was being a tad pessimistic and limited to what I see happening in my own lifetime... The war that can't wait to see is one against commercialism and consumerism (which is a topic that I think a lot of other cultures take issue with against the USA: the global exportation and takeover of an "American" based consumer culture)

 

fuck no. peace is a temporary illusion

the only idea with integrity is power





people that talk all that one love bullshit area fakers on my opinion

delusional

 

also i LOL at all you losers trying to undersand and put labels on islamic terrorism. like your priveledged western ass could understand what its really about

 

I am not trying to put a label on it at all, im just stating whats allready pure fact?

 

Can I add some positivity?

How many people are at war and how many people are at peace?
How many nations are at war and how many nations are at peace

*holds hand up*

Nagh, that is a false war.
A war that is created by some liberal a-hole in America (No offence meant to you - lol.)
Most countries want to buy, sell and trade.
Post people want warmth, food and peace - along with the right to practice their religeon amongst other things.
This isn't a bad thing.

When I hear people moan about "transporting American values abroad."
I look at situations like this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/8177681.stm
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gcYkyx4m47w9hQel5IV07wSIL1ww
I ask myself: What do the vast majority of Nigerians want (or whom ever is being killed for apparently wanting "American/western values".)
I'd say it could be described as "American/western values."
What do the people that kill them want?
What is their argument?
Should Americans/westerners be making that argument for them?

 

What do you mean by false?
Maybe just a miss-labeled one... like the "war on drugs" which is actually a war on SOME drug users/producers.

None Taken

I emphatically agree...

Just to be clear, are you saying that an appreciation for basic human rights is something that the USA is exporting abroad?

Are you familiar with the song lyric, "you can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes you just might find you get what you need"?
I feel that the extreme arrogance of the "privileged western ass" lies in freely exposing people to what they may want, but when they have a need the answer is quite often "nope, sorry, we can't help you, and we're going to make it nearly impossible for you to help yourself... don't take it personally, it's just business"

No, I don't think that other people shouldn't have access to consumer goods, but I do think that the game has been fixed for a long time and that a revolution is needed.

 

peace is possible.

 

"i'd say... harsher punishments for parole violators, stan.

oh, and world peace."

eace:

 

agree.

 

I mean that it is an artificially created "war" that apparently needs fighting, but doesn't really.

In the case of Nigeria, America isn't really "exporting" anything that generally gets said when people say "America is exporting it's values."
Nigeria, for e.g, wants what most other countries want.
It doesn't need some extremists saying they should not have this or that because they see it as "American."
If they have issues with over consumerism...let them deal with it themselves.

I am familiar.
It's a tad cynical...but I can see where you are coming from here.
Have you read any of this?
http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-...dor-kirk-meets-nigerian-commerce-minister-dis
http://www.ustr.gov/trade-agreements/trade-investment-framework-agreements
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=e...rade+and+Investment+Framework+Agreement+&meta=

I can't say I spend a vast amount of time looking at Nigerian/American relations...It was just an e.g of extremists in one part of the world using some peoples naivety and some western prejudices to legitimise what they do.

If America is "exporting" Approx' $43 billion a year... I can fully support that exportation of American values

What I trying to say there, is that Nigerian Islamist extremists seem to use some arguments that even Westerners use.
It legitimises these arguments, even if they are not actually accurate and merely a bias.
I don't think we should help extremists legitimise their arguments by spreading them ourselves.

Perhaps give me some further reading so I can see precisely what you mean. Thanks.

 

Odon, I have to say that I've been a little confused by whatever point you are trying to make with these articles about Nigeria.
What I am saying is that the idea that ANYONE can tell anyone else that their way of living/doing things is wrong, is fucked up. Especially when the reason that they are saying this is because they want more money.
Let's say you take a perfectly happy tribe of people in the Amazon jungle that is slowly developing an electronic and technological connection to the rest of the world and you give them some a satellite and a TV. Have you hurt them? No, but what happens when the satellite breaks down and they have no means to fix it? Sure you can say that they should just deal with it themselves, but they didn't know what they were getting into, they didn't realize that it would take resources that they don't have to keep their new TV inclusive culture running. And even were they to then realize that they are better off developing at their own pace, the psychological damage has already been done. This is the "war" that I speak of, the war of anti globalization.
A World that is linked by technology did not come about because the citizens of the world thought it was a good idea, it came about because a few people with power and money people with realized it was a good way to make more power and money.

 

too many conflicting ideals and cultures for it all to gel in a peaceful way imo.

 

What I was trying to say about Nigeria with the links is that America has trade with them and long standing agreements.
It seemed a little naive of you to say:
"I feel that the extreme arrogance of the "privileged western ass" lies in freely exposing people to what they may want, but when they have a need the answer is quite often "nope, sorry, we can't help you, and we're going to make it nearly impossible for you to help yourself... don't take it personally, it's just business" "

I don't wish to patronise you...just wanted to see what you thought about another reality.
A reality based on not just opinion.

I can see that there is some pressure from the outside world onto - lets say Amazon tribes.
I think that one is a slightly extreme e.g, and I am not quite sure any have a burgeoning technological industry going on in their huts...so I'm not quite sure they are advancing on that by themselves.
But I get what you are saying...I guess...so I'll go with it...
I can't think of any e.gs of places where this has occurred to be honest.
Generally speaking, imo, when people who have not had technology get technology it isn't "big business" that drives this forward...because they generally have to know they are going to make some profit.
So are more reluctant to set up the infrastructure.
It is hardly good business to give somebody a satellite TV and then not leave them the capacity to maintain their 18 month contracts - for e.g.

It generally seems to be driven by a need for communication and education.

What I have seen is that countries with low technology WANT technology - they WANT to be part of the world.
I don't know how strong you anti-globalisation mentality is...but don't just see the pressure coming in one direction, imo.

That is why I think it is an artificial "war"...because most countries DO want technology and to be part of the globalised economy.
The fact YOU might have issue with such concepts doesn't mean their needs to be a "war", imo.

 

So I used the example of the Amazonian tribal people because it is opinion based on physical presence. The first time my parents visited Peru this is what they saw: a tribe that was working hard to develop a tourist trade, but the effects of one benevolent tourist to help them "advance" results in unhappiness. Have you been to Nigeria? Has anyone you know been there? How do you know what the people there want.... because you read it online?
Let me give you another example: the Amish... and since you seems to enjoy reading other people's opinions on the interbone and thinkning that they have more validity than my opinions (once again no offense meant or taken you are free to be deluded in this way) here's a link http://www.time.com/time/columnist/stein/article/0,9565,1118526,00.html. The Amish have been fighting the "war" that I speak of for a long time, unfortunately they seem to be loosing it because the appeal of advertising and consumption is so strong.
Here's another example of the attitude that I have a problem with: http://multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/issues/1987/04/formula.html. Baby formula is a technology that one would think requires no infrastructure, but one would be wrong. This lack of infrastructure didn't stop Nestle.
Once again let me say that I don't have issues with people trying to "advance" but I do have issues with the marketing influences on people and cultures that have no way to defend themselves against it because it comes under the guise of being helpful, good, and advanced. It is a case of the people who HAVE telling the people who HAVE NOT that if they consume more, they will become people who HAVE.
Why do people want to be part of the global economy... I think it is because they have been fucked over by it since it can into being and joining it is a way to try and get some control over it, does that mean it is right? Does that mean it's the only way?
Yes, I used the word war, but what I said was NEEDED was revolution. A word that I think is less connected to violence; their are many ways to "fight" besides fists or bullets.

 

Well, that e.g makes more sense.
You have not really explained how the one benevolent tourist results in unhappiness, though.

No I have not been to Nigeria.
I did say (paraphrase): I see this occurring and wonder what the people want.
You agreed with me, I thought!

The Amish are not your average people who are under pressure from consumerism. They have strict beliefs. Very strict.
Which are now being confronted by modern life...they need to survive economically like everybody else...and they need to communicate.

Having a debate about having cell-phones isn't anybody forcing anything onto them, most people have some form of communication...
I'm sure you do.
If they wish to survive they have to atleast have a modicum of "modern life".
A lot of Amish people recognise this...and want it (through nessecity I admit.)

If your argument centres on Amish people who have issues with nearly every aspect of life...this is not quite a fair e.g.
Crikey they have issues with rubber tyres and women owning business'
Are you saying that is not an extreme disdain for modern life?

I didn't say your opinions didn't have any validity..I did say I thought they seemed a tad naive. I wanted some evidence which you are giving now...So I appreciate that. I better understand your points.

Crikey, not the whole Nestle debate.
You might agree Nestle also marketed their product to Americans and Europeans.
It is called advertising.
If you have a issue with advertising...fair enough.
But, I personally think it unfair of an anti-corporate campaign that pretty much exploited the "third world" to make one company seem evil.
But, I'll agree this a somewhat fair e.g (even though I think there was huge bias and prejudice surrounding the issue.)
I do regonise companies are not all sweetness and light.

I understand we have to look at how our society has turned out and see if any lessons can be learned.
But it does sometimes presume people in other countries are naive and a tad stupid.

I didn't imagine you meant violence hence me putting war into "".

 

I think world peace is a silly idea... war stems from conflict between people and there will always be conflict in the world, one way or another.

 

I don't believe there will ever be world peace. I cant even manage peace in my household with my kids and amongst my siblings and parents..... World peace? nope.

Now, I'm jumping in late, but enjoyed the read. Truly.

This here though...

Was it not evil though? Truly? I mean... I am a huge breastfeeding advocate and I really do have issues with Neslte. Do you really think "it unfair of an anti-corporate campaign that pretty much exploited the "third world" to make one company seem evil"? I don't think it's unfair at all. Even if 50 companies are doing it and the opportunity only arises to exploit one company... then so be it... that is a good thing. In fact, I don't even shop at the Body Shop anymore because Neslte bought it out.

AGain, this is a great read.

 

Not when you are alive, Matty.

 

it's possible
i'd take boring and peaceful over exciting or eventful and violent and painful, if we're defining human existence as a whole
if everyone could and would let go it could happen

 

WTF? Get the fuck outa here